Showing posts with label Apple. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Apple. Show all posts
11:32 AM

Microsoft licenses Palm patents to stay out of the patent-infringement-lawsuit craze

Entering text into a Palm OS device using Graf...Image by ilamont.com via Flickr
Microsoft recently took action to keep itself out of the patent infringement lawsuit frenzy that has been sweeping through the tech industry like the latest fad in a posh high school. The tech behemoth has licensed 74 Palm patents in a move that is logical yet seems to escape the collective minds of executives at all of Microsoft's biggest competitors.

The patents relate to basic smart phone technology and were licensed from Acacia Research Corp. and Access Co. Ltd., a Japanese company that in 2005 bought PalmSource, who was behind the Palm OS that made Treos king of the smart phone market in Palm's glory days. Some of these very same patents are already involved in a pending lawsuit Acacia filed in march in federal court in Tyler, Texas against Apple, RIM, Samsung, Motorola and other smart phone makers. The tech company that is notably NOT mentioned in that lawsuit is Microsoft.

'By focusing on efficiently licensing patented innovations from other companies, we're free to develop great software and we're able to provide our partners and customers [intellectual property] peace-of-mind,' said David Kaefer, general manager of intellectual property and licensing at Microsoft.

There are so many patents currently in the court system between the big tech companies, and centering around smart phones, that it is not even worth it to break them down here. It is worth noting that all the companies have been involved in patent suits, and most have both been sued as well as suing others.

What is interesting is that according to The Wall Street Journal, Acacia is 'a company that specializes in licensing intellectual property on behalf of rightsholders at universities and other companies—and often suing those companies that refuse such deals.'
Also interesting to me is that the company that is the loudest whiner in the 'you stole my idea' fad, is Apple. Yet they too have been sued for infringing on patents.

If you look at Palm's patents, technically no smart phone has the right to exist without Palm's say so. Palm has a patent on idea of a PDA integrated with a phone, which is what all smart phones are. There are also several other Palm patents that cover the basic operation of a smart phone.

In reality, I think all tech companies steal ideas from each other. They take their competition's innovations and build and improve upon them. I am not so sure that is a bad thing. That's the spirit of competition and it keeps our gadgets in a continual state of improvement. Of course it is bad for the company whose innovations are made to look obsolete by a competitor's improvement on it. But that company's innovation was likely based upon another. It is a vicious cycle but I personally think the consumer gains a lot from it, and I do not think the tech companies really lose as much as they claim to.

Source: Wall Street Journal Online article




Enhanced by Zemanta

7:48 PM

Ping: Apple's new social network is the Genius "Feature" rebranded

 I have used Apple's new integrated iTunes social network for five minutes and already I think it's useless junk. Here are several reasons why you shouldn't waste your time.
  1. It's just another gimmick to get you to buy music like the Genius "feature." 
  2. I won't buy music from iTunes. I refuse to pay Apple extra money to remove the restrictions from music I paid for that has no business being there in the first place. I can buy the same song with no DRM shackles from Amazon or any of a number of other music stores for less money. The two songs I did buy from Apple with the DRM, will not play on either of my computers even though it says it is authorized on both. It's not even worth the aggravation of going through their pain in the ass tech support for iTunes to get it fixed. 
  3. If my friends, let alone strangers, care what music I like, they'll look on my Facebook profile or just ask me.
  4. I searched for Blues Traveler and it couldn't even find it. There's no excuse for that. They sell Blues Traveler's music in the iTunes store! How, in the name of the Holy Lord Jobs could iTunes possibly be confused by that?! It's like going into a bakery and picking up Wonder Bread from their shelf, and having the checkout clerk go "what's this?" If it was an obscure band I could understand it but Blues Traveler has had a few hits. Besides, like I said, they sell Blues Traveler's music in the very same store that claims to not know what it is. Yes, I checked my spelling. Not like it's a complicated phrase. Blues Traveler was the only thing I searched for and then I just left in disgust.
  5. I'm not going to take the time to search for all my music just to rate it and/or review it. 
  6. There's no real interaction with other people, other than seeing what they listen to. That's not social networking. 
    Enhanced by Zemanta

    6:54 AM

    Slate Article: Is Something Rotten at Apple?

    an article from Slate Magazine.

    This is an article from Slate about the problems people are having with connecting to the supposed 3G network, or even just holding onto a phone call. It doesn't display right but I don't know what I can do to fix that. This was emailed to me and I forwarded it to my blog by email.

    I've been telling people the iPhone is junk since it first came out. Now they just proved me right. Macs are still the far superior best though. I'm still a Mac zealot and always will be. I'm just not in love with Apple and I'm not an ignorant follower that just believes in hype and spends too much money on something just so I can say I have one.

    Is Something Rotten at Apple?
    E-mail problems, flaky iPhones, and broken Macs. What's Steve Jobs to do?
    By Farhad Manjoo
    Posted Monday, Aug. 25, 2008, at 5:40 PM ET

    In its ubiquitous TV ads, Apple claims that its new iPhone is twice as fast as the original version and just half the price. Neither is true. The half-price fib has been obvious for some time: When you add the price of AT&T's required two-year contract, the new phone costs slightly more than the old phone. In a lawsuit filed last week, an iPhone owner na med Jessica Alena Smith argues that Apple hasn't been honest about the phone's speed, either. Smith, echoing thousands of complaints logged on Apple's Web site, says that her iPhone rarely connects to AT&T's fast 3G network, instead staying fixed to the pokey EDGE service that was the bane of the first iPhone. Smith's iPhone doesn't just fail on tasks like downloading e-mail and surfing the Web, she says. It also drops many of her voice calls.

    Smith lives in Birmingham, Ala., but I've had the same problem with my iPhone 3G in cell-tower-rich San Francisco—more dropped calls than I've ever had on a cell phone (including on the original iPhone) and terribly spotty 3G service. Last month, I raved about the great third-party programs available on the iPhone's fantastic built-in App Store. But I've since soured on that system, too. As many iPhone owners have noticed, the phone often mysteriously refuses to load these apps, rendering them useless. Smith is asking a judge to grant her lawsuit class-action status. I hope it's approved. Apple has reluctantly acknowledged flaws in the iPhone and has quietly promised to correct them, but there's no sign that it's taking the complaints very seriously. The lawsuit might be just the kick it needs to fix the world's broken iPhones.

    But the company's troubles go beyond the iPhone. Last month, Apple launched MobileMe, a $100-per-year online service that aimed to sync documents and e-mail across computers and Internet devices. MobileMe failed spectacularly in its opening weeks, with some users reporting losing years of saved e-mail. In a widely circulated post, Techcrunch's Michael Arrington claimed last week that Apple's PCs aren't doing so well either. Arrington, a longtime Apple fan, says he's had four new Macs break in different ways—one refused to connect to Wi-Fi networks, one suffered a keyboard flaw, and two shut down mysteriously.

    Is something rotten at App! le? Is it "flailing badly at the edges," as Arrington argues? Is it possible that Steve Jobs' reality distortion field is finally weakening—that the scales have fallen from our eyes and we're now seeing that Apple's products are just as flawed and prone to failure as any other hardware?

    Well, not really. As Apple fans point out, people still love Apple. Last week the American Customer Satisfaction Index, an annual survey of consumers' feelings about major brands, gave Apple a record score of 85 points out of 100 in the personal-computer cat! egory. Apple scored 10 points higher than Dell, 12 points higher than Hewlett-Packard, and 13 points higher than Gateway. Apple has led the category for five years straight. Claes Fornell, who directs the survey, told Computerworld that even though customers know that Apple's products aren't perfect, "Apple has an almost Teflon-like quality. Its problems don't really seem to matter to consumers." So much for the death of the reality distortion field.

    Why don't consumers seem to care about Apple's problems? For one thing, Apple gets more press than any other company in tech, and both its successes and failures tend to dominate the Silicon Valley blogosophere. It registers as big tech news when a high-flying blogger like Arrington gets a few unlucky Macs, but such difficulties probably don't filter down to most customers. Years of savvy brand advertising and a string of genuinely great p! roducts have helped Apple build up a well of good-feeling; as a result, people are more willing to overlook the company's occasional failures. Besides, many Apple products still beat their rivals, hands down. You may hate Apple for selling you an iPod with a battery that dies, but what are you going to do when you go looking for a new music player—get a Zune? Not likely.

    What's troubling, though, is Apple's tendency to milk this advantage—when it does screw up, it prefers secrecy over full disclosure, and it expects customers to quickly forgive any slight. Its response to the MobileMe meltdown was a classic example. For several days after the site's rocky launch, Apple refused to disclose what had gone wrong. It wouldn't say why MobileMe was down, and it wouldn't say when MobileMe would be fixed. Only after the New York Times' David! Pogue and the Wall Street Journal's Walter Mossberg published critical columns did Apple change its tune. Two weeks after MobileMe's launch, the company put up a blog documenting the service's status. Last week, it gave all users a credit for two months of MobileMe service.

    Apple is dealing with iPhone problems in much the same way—grudgingly. Apple-focused blogs recently reported that Jobs fired off one-line e-mail replies to two different customers upset about iPhone difficulties; in each case, he said Appl! e was working on the problems. And an Apple spokeswoman told USA Today that Apple would issue a software patch to improve "communication with 3G networks." But that's it: The company won't say why the phone's failing to load apps or connect to 3G, it won't say how serious the problems are, and it won't say what, if anything, customers can do to resolve the problems until it issues a fix.

    Contrast Apple's response to how other major tech firms handled recent failures. As Adam Engst, editor of the Mac newsletter TidBits, points out, when Netflix suffered shipping delays earlier this month, it issued an immediate, clear explanation and apology and automatically credited customers' accounts. Netflix customers raved about how the company handled the p roblem. VoilĂ : The company turned a tech failure into a PR win. Google accomplished something similar when Gmail died for a few hours on Aug. 11. Within hours of noticing the problem, Google put out a statement on its blog explaining what had gone wrong—the post was titled, "We feel your pain, and we're sorry"—and the steps it had taken to prevent a future failure.

    Apple's strategy for dealing with complaints stems from a companywide emphasis on secrecy. Tight lips work well for Apple, building suspense among loyalists and the press about upcoming products and burnishing its reputation as a company that leads rather than follows. But as it expands into new, highly complex businesses—phones, set-top boxes, "cloud computing" ser! vices—Apple is sure to make more mistakes. As Jobs wrote in an internal e-mail to employees, the MobileMe screw-up happened because the company was trying to do too much at the same time (the system launched on the same day as the new iPhone) and because "we have more to learn about Internet services."

    What's more, Apple's customer base is widening beyond longtime Mac fanatics—people who give the company a pass because they regard it as an underdog. The Mac's market share is growing rapidly, suggesting that lots of Windows users are switching. Last month, millions of people waited in line for the iPhone not because it was emblazoned with the Apple logo, but because they'd heard it was the best phone on the market. Combine that with the fact that the iPhone and MobileMe are vital to people's lives in a way that, say, an iPod isn't, and you've g! ot a recipe for customer dissatisfaction. You may be willing to overlo ok Apple's silence about a dead battery on your MP3 player. But if the company continues to stonewall people whose phones cut off every five minutes, Steve Jobs better get ready for some marches on Cupertino.

    Farhad Manjoo is Slate's technology columnist and the author of True Enough: Learning To Live in a Post-Fact Society.

    Article URL: http://www.slate.com/id/2198535/

    Copyright 2008 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive Co. LLC

    2:19 PM

    Vista Runs Better on a Mac

    Macs run Vista better than PCs
    Apple spanks competition in unlike-for-like test
    By Stewart Meagher: Thursday, 17 April 2008, 10:15 AM
    POPULAR MECHANICS has published a shootout between similarly-specced Macs and PCs using popular benchmarking tools and user feedback and has come to a (not very) surprising conclusion.
    Glen Derene from PM also used a number of 'real world' tests to find out how the machines. "We tested two all-in-one desktops and two laptops - one Mac and one PC per category - and assembled a panel of testers with a range of experience and preference that ran the gamut from expert users to my wife's stepfather, who, by his own account, had never actually turned on a computer.
    "Our testers were asked to set up the computers right out of the box and explore the machines through everyday tasks such as Web surfing, document creation, uploading photos, downloading Adobe Acrobat files and playing music and movies through Media Center and Front Row."
    In all fairness, the test was aimed, not at the likes of our readership (before you start getting your slide rules out and shouting at us about the iniquity of the whole thing) but at the average Joe user with little or no interest in pootling about in the inner workings of his operating system, or over-clocking his toaster.
    We'll hand you back over to Glen for his conclusion:
    "In both the laptop and desktop showdowns, Apple's computers were the winners. Oddly, the big difference didn't come in our user ratings, where we expected the famously friendly Mac interface to shine. Our respondents liked the look and feel of both operating systems but had a slight preference toward OS X.
    "In our speed trials, however, Leopard OS trounced Vista in all-important tasks such as boot-up, shutdown and program-launch times. We even tested Vista on the Macs using Apple's platform-switching Boot Camp software... and found that both Apple computers ran Vista faster than our PCs did.
    "Simply put, Vista proved to be a more sluggish operating system than Leopard. Our PCs installed some software faster, but in general they were slower in our time trials. Plus, both PCs showed weaker performance on third-party benchmarks than the Macs. Our biggest surprise, however, was that PCs were not the relative bargains we expected them to be. The Asus M51sr costs the same as a MacBook, while the Gateway One actually costs $300 more than an iMac.
    "That means for the price of the Gateway you could buy an iMac, boost its hard drive to match the Gateway's, purchase a copy of Vista, and still save $100."
    Let's not forget that Popular Mechanics also reckons its readers like to build particle accelerators and spaceships in their garages. u
    L'Inq
    Popular Mechanics