Live data from Hacker News

Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

joshondesign.com

141–150 of 177 posts

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#141
post #40
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way I read this article, It is less about building new smartphone but more about the next technology shift that is going to change the direction. Basically, as oft repeated Ford statement goes, 'if you asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horse'. So, at this point, smartphone business is settling into a faster horse business. So, I would really expect the next big thing to be not a be an iPh…

> So, I would really expect the next big thing to be not a be an iPhone but something utterly different. Neural implants, anyone? Google Glass seems like a good candidate.

Yep, augmented + wearable tech seems like the future

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#142
post #117
post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Most things"? Haven't we just learned that if you make a smart phone that looks like a smart phone (rounded rectangle, button below screen) you can (and will) be sued? I suppose the fact that stuff like that is the area where big legal battles are fought, does imply that a lot of the "hard" patents (radio spectrum/coding, noise cancellation, audio encoding etc) are indeed covered by FRAND patents, though. It still s…

No. The argument re "rounded rectangles" (actually a meme invented by people like yourself) is about trade dress, which in the US is covered by a design "patent", which is not the same thing as a technical patent. This is not difficult to understand. To this day the level of denial around Samsung blatant imitation of the iPhone is staggering.

> To this day the level of denial around Samsung blatant imitation of the iPhone is staggering.

The problem is that I can't think of any other design that a modern smartphone would have other than "piece of glass encased in plastic/metal, with maybe a button underneath". As far as I can see the screen is the phone, and given that constraint there isn't really anywhere else to go.

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#143
post #24

I was at UIQ back when the iPhone "happened". It really was as pivotal for the industry as he says. I quipped that the iPhone made us irrelevant and Android made us redundant. I was surrounded by people with strong ambition and vision, at UIQ, Symbian, at our owners Motorola and Sony Ericsson, who wanted to build the iPhone and knew how to build the iPhone long before the iPhone was announced and before they knew any…

Well they do have that "Special Projects" division.. I'm sure they'll be cooking up something nice for 2014.. at least I hope so

It depends on whether upper management gives special projects the importance they need or not. Almost every large company has a research division, but in most, it is the playground where they keep the guys that are too smart and competent to fire, but that have ideas too radical for main divisions' heads to accept.

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#144
post #29

I was at UIQ back when the iPhone "happened". It really was as pivotal for the industry as he says. I quipped that the iPhone made us irrelevant and Android made us redundant. I was surrounded by people with strong ambition and vision, at UIQ, Symbian, at our owners Motorola and Sony Ericsson, who wanted to build the iPhone and knew how to build the iPhone long before the iPhone was announced and before they knew any…

UIQ3 was amazing, and my M600i had the greatest keyboard on any phone ever. Thanks for making the OS for one of my favourite smartphones :)4

I miss that keyboard, I really do prefer physical keyboards to software ones.

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#145
post #121
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. The argument re "rounded rectangles" (actually a meme invented by people like yourself) is about trade dress, which in the US is covered by a design "patent", which is not the same thing as a technical patent. This is not difficult to understand. To this day the level of denial around Samsung blatant imitation of the iPhone is staggering.

I'm not sure what (who?) "people like myself" are referring to, but you are indeed right -- while Apple tried to sue on the basis of what I believe is fair to sum up as "something looking like a smart phone (granted the natural technical progression to larger and better touch screens)" -- they only won an injunction for "something that looks confusingly like an iPhone". I still think that's a rather silly ruling -- a…

By 'people like you' I mean those that continue to perpetuate the meme in an incorrect and dismissive manor.

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#146
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. The argument re "rounded rectangles" (actually a meme invented by people like yourself) is about trade dress, which in the US is covered by a design "patent", which is not the same thing as a technical patent. This is not difficult to understand. To this day the level of denial around Samsung blatant imitation of the iPhone is staggering.

> To this day the level of denial around Samsung blatant imitation of the iPhone is staggering. The problem is that I can't think of any other design that a modern smartphone would have other than "piece of glass encased in plastic/metal, with maybe a button underneath". As far as I can see the screen is the phone, and given that constraint there isn't really anywhere else to go.

>""piece of glass encased in plastic/metal, with maybe a button underneath"" That isn't what the design patent says. It's far more nuanced.

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#147
post #65
post #64

Curious that the article doesn't mention the word "patents" once. That's what stops you from even starting to build a Smartphone of your own - you'd violate dozens of patents and be sued into oblivion. The only reason manufacturers are able to do it now is because they all have portfolios of their own and are in a state of cold war with everyone else.

Most things needed to make a smartphone is covered by FRAND patents. Software patents are of course a problem for anyone working in the software industry, so that's not limited to smartphones.

"Most" is not enough. If you have a single not-FRAND patent for Samsung, one for Apple and one for Nokia that you are allegedly violating (even if you're not), then consider your product dead before arrival.

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#148
post #65
post #64

Curious that the article doesn't mention the word "patents" once. That's what stops you from even starting to build a Smartphone of your own - you'd violate dozens of patents and be sued into oblivion. The only reason manufacturers are able to do it now is because they all have portfolios of their own and are in a state of cold war with everyone else.

Most things needed to make a smartphone is covered by FRAND patents. Software patents are of course a problem for anyone working in the software industry, so that's not limited to smartphones.

Yes, there are hundred of thousands of FRAND patents that will cost "only" a small percentage (1%-5%) of the product's selling price to license each.

Anyway, no, the patents don't stop you from making a phone for yourself. Nobody will sue you if you do that.

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#149
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. The argument re "rounded rectangles" (actually a meme invented by people like yourself) is about trade dress, which in the US is covered by a design "patent", which is not the same thing as a technical patent. This is not difficult to understand. To this day the level of denial around Samsung blatant imitation of the iPhone is staggering.

> To this day the level of denial around Samsung blatant imitation of the iPhone is staggering. The problem is that I can't think of any other design that a modern smartphone would have other than "piece of glass encased in plastic/metal, with maybe a button underneath". As far as I can see the screen is the phone, and given that constraint there isn't really anywhere else to go.

The thing is that people had been building smartphones since before the iPhone, and none of them looked anything like that. Buttons. Everywhere. The fact that the iPhone form factor is now considered self-evident is a demonstration of Apple's design strength, not of how obvious the form factor is.

Don't forget that to make that form factor work, you need a whole software stack that is able to replace the physical buttons adequately. You need an on-screen keyboard capable of at least equalling a physical keyboard. You need to have virtual buttons that are easy to use. You're going to be doing a lot of scrolling on that tiny screen, so you're going to need some pretty good graphics routines. To make that scrolling anything other than an awful experience you're going to need low-latency right from the capacitive input right through to the content actually moving on the screen. Not easy, especially with the chip used in the original iPhone.

Think about Android. If Android had have been first to market, and they had actually undergone the post-iPhone transformation without the iPhone being present (because don't forget, it was originally going to be a phone with a physical keyboard), they would have released a touch-screen phone with Android 1.0 on it. Android 1.0 was awful. Battery life was rubbish, graphics performance was pathetic, even the keyboard was full of fail. If that had have been the defining capacitive screen smartphone, we may have decided that touchscreen phones were not the right direction.

It took Google, with a large chunk of the smartest engineers on the planet, about 4 years to ge to a point where Android was truly competitive with iOS. It took about 5 years for Microsoft to get Windows Phone to the same place.

Without the software engineering effort, the capacitive screen was not an obvious solution. The fact that Apple invested in that effort made the benefits obvious to everyone, but this was not the case pre-2007.

Re: Why You Can't Build a Smartphone

#150

From the article: > Small to medium businesses will use apps on standard devices like iPads I used to get lunch at a Specialty's sandwich place in SF. You could place your order at the counter (to a human, who would mess it up) or use their iPad app at the self-service counter (this got the order right every time). The iPad app worked well, but it was a source of bemusement to me that the self-service counter was jus…

You can lock down iPads via the Ease of Access feature. Apple uses it to lockdown iPads in their stores, for example. The restaurant didn't have them properly configured, although it is an oddly termed feature in the settings.
Post reply on HN