Google: Some Apple Inventions Have Become So Ubiquitous That They Should Be Shared
Options
System
Posts: 446
Google: Some Apple Inventions Have Become So Ubiquitous That They Should Be Shared
Apple has patented a huge number of inventions since it started developing the iPhone, including some key interface design concepts, that have since then b...
Comments
-
FU*K Google! They can't think of anything original on their own.
-
Screw google these patents are a big part of why apple has grown so much, take them away and google and any other person can make their own iPhone and sell it. It's google fault they didnt think of these things earlier an now they want apple to suffer of their mistakes NO!!!
-
Derek Covatch, and user "no" and any other who disagrees on Google's stance need to understand some key points in techniques, methods, and schematics of innovation.
COMPETITION is the KEY to development. The world jumps when the rest of the world is jumping. For example, the great space endeavor came to spawn the first extra-orbital object sent by man. Wars have brought newer and stronger weapons as countries or alliances fought against each other. The same phenomenon is apparent in technology or basically any other industry capable of advancement.
If Apple and other businesses were to release these patents, newer, better phones and computers would explode on the market. Without patents, competition increases as corporations and companies are in constant struggle to outmatch their competitive rivals. Competition is an inevitable factor in business. Using it towards the public's advantage would greatly catalyze the technological revolution we live in. It is pure logic. In which situation would the end result be obtained faster?
*A: Apple working towards a mobile camera capable of being fixed on a phone with optical zoom capable lenses, with better aperture and lenses capable of matching 12MP perfectly?
*or B: Apple working with Samsung, Nokia, Sony, and many others causing a chain of relative, interdependent companies working with and simultaneously against each other in terms of trying to surpass each other?
Yes, I do understand the profit loss Apple or other companies would receive if patents disappeared. I would not, myself, release patents either. Companies would not be able to hold exclusive technology and only the most competitive and brilliant would reach the top of the economical kingdom. This occurrence is known as corporate greed or greed for money in the economic system.
However, users need to shut off their bias propensity of loving a company who doesn't know who you are, and as words put it, "doesn't give a **** about you except for your money." Yes, I am referring to "fanboys" of any such, not just Apple Fanboys but Samsung or Android Fanboys also. Fanboys need to realize the destruction of patent laws would, in return, give them faster and more sufficient devices.
- Sincerely,
a person who actually thinks once in a while. -
Patent laws in the US and most of the world are in place to protect the inventor of new ideas from having those ideas stolen for a period of time. After that, they become public domain and anyone is free to use them. Google knows this but pretends "everything is free so steal" is the new rule. If patents have no use, then the laws first need to be revoked, putting the US at a huge disadvantage to the rest of the world.
Further, it is normal for a patent to take 2-3 years to be approved because of the way the process is designed. It amazes me when BLOGGERS announce that "Apple was just granted..." when the paperwork (that means the invention of the idea) actually occurred years ago. Any competitor that copies that invention during the "patent pending" process knows full well that if the patent is approved, they then will be reactively be fined or blocked from future infringement of the patent until it expires.
The Google/Motorola patent portfolio is now pulling even stranger logic by suddenly claiming that they own exclusive rights to open access standards (WiFi) in Europe which prevents Apple from selling pretty much any of its products. Yet they claim "bullying" when Apple sues to enforce very basic exclusive inventions.
-
@ Cody... You sign it "a guy who thinks clearly once in a while"
Obviously this is not one of those times.
The lawsuits are based on the fact that these companies want to copy innovation, not make their own. If you release the patents, EVERY company will produce a clone and chinese knockoffs will run rampant. Why would any company put millions of dollars of R&D into a new device when someone can simply wait and copy it the second it's released. Not wholly, but partly, it is the patents that are driving R&D. If your competitor has something everyone loves, you either copy it, or you try and make something better. The trying to make something better is the driving force of technology. Your off your rocker if you think the companies would work together to develop better technology.
"Fanboys need to realize the destruction of patent laws would, in return, give them faster and more sufficient devices."
This would give you nothing but iPhones knockoffs being sold for $5 at the flea market. Where would the money come from to develop these faster more sufficient devices you suggest, if the companies paying for R&D can't recoup their cost in sales?
While you are a quite the abolitionist to "corporate greed", I would say that your ideology seems awfully marxist in thinking.
I am by no means a fan of big companies and what they do to my savings or lack there-of; but, you are gravely mistaken if you think technology would grow faster by dropping patents.
Russia and the US raced to put the first man in space. They raced to put the first man on the moon. Could they have done it quicker if they worked together. Most definitely. But, if they were working together would there have ever been a race to get there? Competition is what drives us to push beyond our limits. -
You, sir, are a moron.Derek Covatch, and user "no" and any other who disagrees on Google's stance need to understand some key points in techniques, methods, and schematics of innovation.
COMPETITION is the KEY to development. The world jumps when the rest of the world is jumping. For example, the great space endeavor came to spawn the first extra-orbital object sent by man. Wars have brought newer and stronger weapons as countries or alliances fought against each other. The same phenomenon is apparent in technology or basically any other industry capable of advancement.
If Apple and other businesses were to release these patents, newer, better phones and computers would explode on the market. Without patents, competition increases as corporations and companies are in constant struggle to outmatch their competitive rivals. Competition is an inevitable factor in business. Using it towards the public's advantage would greatly catalyze the technological revolution we live in. It is pure logic. In which situation would the end result be obtained faster?
*A: Apple working towards a mobile camera capable of being fixed on a phone with optical zoom capable lenses, with better aperture and lenses capable of matching 12MP perfectly?
*or B: Apple working with Samsung, Nokia, Sony, and many others causing a chain of relative, interdependent companies working with and simultaneously against each other in terms of trying to surpass each other?
Yes, I do understand the profit loss Apple or other companies would receive if patents disappeared. I would not, myself, release patents either. Companies would not be able to hold exclusive technology and only the most competitive and brilliant would reach the top of the economical kingdom. This occurrence is known as corporate greed or greed for money in the economic system.
However, users need to shut off their bias propensity of loving a company who doesn't know who you are, and as words put it, "doesn't give a **** about you except for your money." Yes, I am referring to "fanboys" of any such, not just Apple Fanboys but Samsung or Android Fanboys also. Fanboys need to realize the destruction of patent laws would, in return, give them faster and more sufficient devices.
- Sincerely,
a person who actually thinks once in a while.
First of all, you could not be MORE wrong. Sure, healthy competition is good for the consumer because it generally results in lower prices for equal technology, but from a development standpoint, consumers better hope there are always patent laws in place.
I'll paint you a picture: You have 2 companies. We'll call them "Apple" and "Google".
Apple, in it's recent history, had become globally dominant in the smartphone market. It attained this success by designing well-built, stable, easy-to-use-for-everybody phones and OS software. In creating these devices and software, Apple actually CAME UP WITH NEW IDEAS that really caught on with consumers. Using some degree of forethought, Apple PATENTED these technologies and intellectual properties to protect THEIR IDEAS.
Then, Google decides it wants to jump in the phone-and-OS business too. While they come up with a few ideas on their own, they generally copy what they can. Their build quality is "good" at best, far short of Apples quality standards. Their "OMGSUPERCOOL" dessert-names OS is flashy but unstable and generally unreliable.
So, they demand the courts make Apple's technology and ideas free for everybody to use. Google, Windows, and Blackberry all adopt knock-offs of iOS, and Samsung, Nokia, HTC, LG, and other manufacturers rip off most of what set the iPhone apart.
Consumers rejoice! They can have "iClones" for $99.99, free with a 2-year contract. ZOMG everybody is happy.
But then....
Advancement STOPS. OS's become stale and dated. All phones generally look and feel the same, and nobody is advancing with new ideas.
Why?
Because they have ABSOLUTELY no reason to do so. While you try to paint profiting in a negative light (money-hungry Apple "doesn't care about you, just your money". BTW, neither does Google, Samsung or ANYBODY else in the smartphone business), that is why companies are in business.
PERIOD. Profit is the ONLY reason companies operate. Anybody trying to tell you differently is BULLSHITTING you, straight-up.
So, back to our story. Apple, the only company REALLY making strides forward, stops doing so. Without protection for their ideas, anything they invent will just be handed out to everybody else, who can sell phones at $99.99 because they didn't have to pay the bright minds who ACTUALLY INVENTED THE TECHNOLOGY, they just ripped it off and used it themselves. With no reason to continue to press forward, Apple bows out of the phone game. Further advances all but cease, and the phone market becomes stagnant.
Consumers are sad.
Thanks, Google!
-
cody is retarded... apple is not stopping anyone from discovering NEW technology... but what they created with their money is rightfully Theirs to make money with.... why would that stop anyone from making anything that can surpass apples tech? why do they need to USE apples Technology to create new and better technology??? absolutley retarded!
-
The concept is companies working for you, not you mainly working for the company.
*Their profit will be decreased, but at your advantage.
*We won't all have the same boring phones, companies would be in a constant struggle for new innovations and efforts of creativity. People don't want to get more sick when they're already sick, they try to get better. People don't just stand around when they're bored, they try to do fun things. Same thing applies here.
*Knock offs wouldn't be a problem. Like music, the best music gets up in the charts, the ones that don't are virtually negligible on the popularity scale. Likewise, the popular and best phones will be up on the charts, with the knockoffs being still where they are, off the charts. -
IBM created the first portable computer in 1975. It was a computer with a Keyboard and a screen attached to it. Thanks to this, you fanboys have Macbooks. Without innovation being shared this retarded company called Apple would never have gained momentum and created an iPhone. Get your heads out of your asses and see this for what it is. Competition. Google is slaughtering Apple in form factor of its OS. What this will do is force Apple to create a better product for the people who want iPhone, in order to stay near par to Android. Without Android, you guys are screwed. Apple won't let you theme, widget, or access the root of a device. You think you will ever be given any truly free features if there is not a company that Apple will have to keep up to? I guarantee if Apple kills android, iOS wont be far behind.
-
Cody .. your missing the point. You keep shooting yourself in the foot.The concept is companies working for you, not you mainly working for the company.
*Their profit will be decreased, but at your advantage.
*We won't all have the same boring phones, companies would be in a constant struggle for new innovations and efforts of creativity. People don't want to get more sick when they're already sick, they try to get better. People don't just stand around when they're bored, they try to do fun things. Same thing applies here.
*Knock offs wouldn't be a problem. Like music, the best music gets up in the charts, the ones that don't are virtually negligible on the popularity scale. Likewise, the popular and best phones will be up on the charts, with the knockoffs being still where they are, off the charts.
Look at your last sentence .......
"Knock offs wouldn't be a problem. Like music, the best music gets up in the charts, the ones that don't are virtually negligible on the popularity scale. Likewise, the popular and best phones will be up on the charts, with the knockoffs being still where they are, off the charts."
This is why you need the patents.
Apple makes the best music, makes money on the music, reaches top of the chart in week 1 of its release.
Google says. Wow Apple great Job. There are no laws to protect your music, so I copied your music, put my name on it and my sales sticker. I just sent it to Walmart and am charging people 20% less for it. Thanks!!!!!!
Samsung says. Wow Apple great job!. Wish I paid attention like Google. Week 2 and Google is on the charts at #1 and yours is on the bottom. Guess I will copy it too. Sorry Google, Were going to sale it for 30% less.
Apple in week 3 has spent what little money they made in week 1 to make a new song. Everyone says OMG a new song by Apple. Its awesome!!!! Apple reaches #1 again. Google and Samsung in Week 2 copy it and sales it for less.
Week 4 no new song ....
Week 5 no new song ... everyone asks... when's Apple coming out with a new song? Google and Samsung asks same thing .... Apple holds news conference. Apple Claims bankruptcy.... No new songs for anyone.....
Why? because Google and Samsung were allowed to copy all their music and sale it for less. Apple ran out of money. Couldn't pay their writers, studio artist, and heating bill. So Apple had to close down.
Google says ... well let me tryI have money from the music I copied from Apple. They make a song ... its Okay ... people like it all right ... they buy it .... Though its only so so it still makes #1 because thats all there is left. Samsung says .. we'll its making money .. they copy it .. sale it for less... This repeats over and over until google Surrenders and only Samsung is left..
Samsung has no one left to copy. China comes in with substandard music that stops playing half way through the song and emits lead vapors into the air killing your pets and making your baby a vegetable. They are copying everything from the past year and selling it for 90% less.... China gets everyones money and Wins.
...
.....
.......
Do you get it Now Cody? Endgame is a loss for everyone.... -
There are no Apple fanboys in this discussion. This discussion is about the driving force of development. Cody is saying that without patent laws things would develop faster, better, and cheaper. The rest of are simply pointing out how his marxist thinking is backwards. the rest of us are pointing out, thats its competition that drives development. Not Copying. So your missing the point of the article and the discussion. So.... get your head out of your ass sir..... If Apple could have merely copied IBM key for key, circuit for circuit, then we would still have a 1975 IBM. Its the need to make better because you can't copy that drives development. Google is stating above that they want to copy Apple. They are coming straight out and saying they can't make better without copying Apple. I don't care if its Google copying apple, apple copying google. X cutting off its leg to copy Y. Its all copying. Copying leads to stagnation.BCSC said:IBM created the first portable computer in 1975. It was a computer with a Keyboard and a screen attached to it. Thanks to this, you fanboys have Macbooks. Without innovation being shared this retarded company called Apple would never have gained momentum and created an iPhone. Get your heads out of your asses and see this for what it is. Competition. Google is slaughtering Apple in form factor of its OS. What this will do is force Apple to create a better product for the people who want iPhone, in order to stay near par to Android. Without Android, you guys are screwed. Apple won't let you theme, widget, or access the root of a device. You think you will ever be given any truly free features if there is not a company that Apple will have to keep up to? I guarantee if Apple kills android, iOS wont be far behind.
Google wants multi gestures? How about instead of a pinch to shrink and spread of 2 fingers to zoom, you make a circle with one finger clockwise or counterclockwise to control zoom functions.... very efficient and not part of the patent. -
Then i guess Apple invented the notification drawer or the integration of social content. If Apple would follow what they teach they wouldnt steal from the other companies as well like microsoft and nokia.
-
Btw multitouch gestures has existed before Apple showcased them on the Iphone.
-
But the way your analogy works as an analogy doesn't work full way in real life. Like Beats by Dre for example. Sure knock offs are made, with the official product being a weak output already, but that doesn't mean they would stop making more products of headphones. Which is why they continue to make better ones.Duh! said:
Cody .. your missing the point. You keep shooting yourself in the foot.The concept is companies working for you, not you mainly working for the company.
*Their profit will be decreased, but at your advantage.
*We won't all have the same boring phones, companies would be in a constant struggle for new innovations and efforts of creativity. People don't want to get more sick when they're already sick, they try to get better. People don't just stand around when they're bored, they try to do fun things. Same thing applies here.
*Knock offs wouldn't be a problem. Like music, the best music gets up in the charts, the ones that don't are virtually negligible on the popularity scale. Likewise, the popular and best phones will be up on the charts, with the knockoffs being still where they are, off the charts.
Look at your last sentence .......
"Knock offs wouldn't be a problem. Like music, the best music gets up in the charts, the ones that don't are virtually negligible on the popularity scale. Likewise, the popular and best phones will be up on the charts, with the knockoffs being still where they are, off the charts."
This is why you need the patents.
Apple makes the best music, makes money on the music, reaches top of the chart in week 1 of its release.
Google says. Wow Apple great Job. There are no laws to protect your music, so I copied your music, put my name on it and my sales sticker. I just sent it to Walmart and am charging people 20% less for it. Thanks!!!!!!
Samsung says. Wow Apple great job!. Wish I paid attention like Google. Week 2 and Google is on the charts at #1 and yours is on the bottom. Guess I will copy it too. Sorry Google, Were going to sale it for 30% less.
Apple in week 3 has spent what little money they made in week 1 to make a new song. Everyone says OMG a new song by Apple. Its awesome!!!! Apple reaches #1 again. Google and Samsung in Week 2 copy it and sales it for less.
Week 4 no new song ....
Week 5 no new song ... everyone asks... when's Apple coming out with a new song? Google and Samsung asks same thing .... Apple holds news conference. Apple Claims bankruptcy.... No new songs for anyone.....
Why? because Google and Samsung were allowed to copy all their music and sale it for less. Apple ran out of money. Couldn't pay their writers, studio artist, and heating bill. So Apple had to close down.
Google says ... well let me tryI have money from the music I copied from Apple. They make a song ... its Okay ... people like it all right ... they buy it .... Though its only so so it still makes #1 because thats all there is left. Samsung says .. we'll its making money .. they copy it .. sale it for less... This repeats over and over until google Surrenders and only Samsung is left..
Samsung has no one left to copy. China comes in with substandard music that stops playing half way through the song and emits lead vapors into the air killing your pets and making your baby a vegetable. They are copying everything from the past year and selling it for 90% less.... China gets everyones money and Wins.
...
.....
.......
Do you get it Now Cody? Endgame is a loss for everyone....
They main driving factors in business is:
*Survival
*Competition
*Desire
-Survival is staying in the market, catching up with the competition.
-Competition is intertwined with survival ( as all 3 are intertwined with each other ), competition is more than just staying alive in the market.
-Desire, desire is basically the drive. The drive for money... to stay in the market... to beat the market.
No one's going to sit around with a sum of money decreasing as more knockoffs or near copies are hitting the market. The inherent human desire is to want more. -more money-
-Apple is going to lower their prices if the competition lowers theirs, or at least improve the product. Everyone here assumes that companies will resort to sitting around or keeping items at the same prices while competition lowers theirs. BUT, that is not the case. The economic world is dynamic. It follows the path of revolution. Farmers switch to better vehicles why? To keep up with competition, farmers don't sit around when profit is at stake. Those who do so fail, those who don't strive for the better.
You stated, "This repeats over and over until google Surrenders and only Samsung is left..
Samsung has no one left to copy."
- With no one to copy, companies would be forced to create new ideas, that is the point. Survive or die. To keep the good ideas and spawn greater ones. Companies create better phones when they have to, without competition they wouldn't have to release the newest technology. There would be no (little) economical pressure.
Why do schools teach knowledge to children? Why do schools educate children? To share the knowledge for what greater purpose? -For us to improve and be the better future of the world.
If schools had patents and only shared the basics a 5th grader would know and kept Advanced Physics to themselves, we would have a technological slow-down.
There is a reason patents only last a few years. They are only a few years because the restraint that they put slows progress. Patents are designed to protect the company, corporation, or inventor at-hand. However, for the general and public, the removal of quite many, but not all, of them would bring us at a greater advantage.
I am just a user, if I worked in any of these companies, I would be against myself. Why this hypocrisy? It is not hypocrisy, however, it is making money in the cold world of business. -
People need to understand that both methods do make money, but the method in my use works better for the consumers, not the companies (opposite of current method).
-My solution is to hand-pick, selectively remove certain standard patents that are needed for progress and innovation while reducing the length of a patent from years to several months.-
This would keep the stability of the current structure, the security of new businesses and independent entrepreneurs, and an increase of competition which causes better and newer products being released at a slightly quicker rate, all the while, in turn, giving consumers cheaper and efficient products. -
-
Cody,
In part I can actually agree with you this time. The length of time a patent last needs to be minimized. Months is not realistic as it takes years to develop a product. However here is where your numbers are wrong. For applications filed on or after June 8, 1995, utility and plant patents are granted for a term which begins with the date of the grant and usually ends 20 years from the date you first applied for the patent subject to the payment of appropriate maintenance fees. Design patents last 14 years from the date you are granted the patent.
So, 14 years is way too long in the technological world we live in. So yea, this is excessive and can slow things down if the patent really locks down all aspects of an idea. I ran into this with a product that has never reached the market, but there is a patent on it. Guy who has the patent never released the product. It was written very well, and though my idea was not identical, it is close enough that I would have to pay a royalty to this guy. Sad thing is it would save a lot o lives in hospitals ands not on the market. So trust my I sympathize with those trying to develop new products.
Unfortunately you can't hand-pick certain patents. As with any law, it has to apply to all. You can't just say because X makes more money than Y, and Y is struggling, we will let Y use some of X's stuff. That's basically communism. It didn't work for the USSR. It wasn't working for China. When China started adopting capitalism tactics, they quickly grew to where they are today.
So ... Like I said I do agree with your last arguments in part. However I would probably be a little more conservative and say utility and plant patents perhaps lasting 3-5 years and design patents lasting 1-2 years upon public release with a condition that the product has to be released within a year of said patent being granted to the entity filling it. If the entity does not release the product in the given time frame, then they void all rights to said patent. -
Please do not take it personal ... in my humble opinion, if you treat another person as "retarded", "stupid" or "moron" these insults directly and personally to them, always be friendly and polite, this is part of the game, do not insult or you'll be also insulted, if you disagree, put your opinion using solid arguments instead of insults, which is the attitude of rude people...
