Apple part II

I have been working on other items recently but this is just too ridiculous.

Original Story: Reddit & The Guardian

So apparently the U.K. Court that ruled that Samsung is not infringing on technological and (or)  design patents has ordered Apple to revise the statement on Apple's website.  Because, and I quote, the statement was "non-compliant" with the Court order.  Apparently the judges, Lord Justice Longmore, Lord Justice Kitchin and Sir Robin Jacob, were a little irritated with Apples behavior.  One justice went so far as saying to Bloomberg that Apple's older statement was "a plain breach of the [court] order."

But it gets soooooo much better, three things specifically.

1.) Apple in all of its snide glory added this little bit of code (seen below) that according to the Reddit thread is a revamp of the previous code enlarging the iPad banner on the UK homepage which displaces the link to the judgement statement, forcing a user to scroll down to see the link.  I realize that this is not a huge deal, however the original link appeared, in newspaper parlance, 'above the fold'.  Now, you have to go searching for the link.  Essentially when Apple could be a horses ass about the situation they wanted you to find the statement but not anymore.

2.) The UK Homepage is evidently (according to Reddit) not even visible as Apple's homepage in the UK if you just type in Apple.com.  Instead it forwards you to a country-less Apple homepage that doesn't require the link to Apple's statement.  Which is just supremely flaunting the court order.  To see the actual statement you have to directly travel to Apple.com/uk.

3.)  According to the Guardian's report Apple's lawyer stated in open court that Apple, one of the worlds largest TECHNOLOGY company, couldn't update their website for FOURTEEN days!!!  Really?  Is that a public statement that you really want to make, even if you are just being an ass?  "I'm sorry Lords and Sir my client, the operator of one of the largest internet based purchasing systems can not update some simple HTML and CSS for fourteen days. Why? oh, I didn't really expect you to ask me that..."

Hey Apple, how about you whine a little more... [edited]

Original Article: Here

First some disclosures; If you were to ask me who makes the best commercially available computers I would say Apple.  They make quality machines, no questions about it.  But by the same token, If you asked me who overcharges for the machines they make I would have a list of three companies Apple, Sony, Alienware (Dell).  I have owned several iPods and an iPhone.  I jail-broke my iPhone (I often void warranties), and feel no guilt or shame about it.  Lastly I own several Samsung products, not a phone or tablet, but I do own some items.

<Deep Breath>

Some of you may have noticed in the news recently, aside from the political kerfuffles, there has been a lot patent/IP litigation going on.  I'm not a IP lawyer (yet) but it really bothers me how companies have decided to use the patent system to wage market share micro-wars.  If I understand the system correctly the entire idea behind a patent is as follows - I create some really great way of making a new product, or I create a brand new way to make an old product better that is novel and non-obvious.  In exchange for full disclosure on how I made said product I am given a legal monopoly on my new product for x amount of years (I believe the time varies depending on the type of product).

For reasons not pertinent to this writing this is a great system when it works.

Now to Apple.

In the picture below (from Techrepublic) is the Compaq TC1105.  Looks familiar doesn't it?  Vaguely like a silver version of the original iPad?  So why isn't Apple suing Compaq for patent registered design infringement?  Probably because this piece of techno-history was developed about five years before the original iPad, was built on Windows XP and Apple had absolutely nothing to do with it.  Oh, it also came with a detachable keyboard.

Compaq TC1105

You can say that this product was a failure and none of  Windows' partners could figure out how to successfully market this beast (I personally owned a Toshiba version).  You would be correct.  You can also say that the Compaq/HP/Toshiba version had to use a stylus.  Again you would be correct.  However electrical-capacitance touch screens have existed for quite a while (the first paper I found is here.)  Solid State Drives (aka SSD) were developed in the 80's by IBM, Amdahl, Cray, and Sharp. The other various items included in the iPad were developed by all sorts of other companies.  My point is - At best Apple simply remixed a bunch of other peoples technology added their admittedly beautiful designs and found a amazingly powerful marketing strategy.  This doesn't deserve or warrant a patent, it wasn't new and it wasn't non-obvious.  So much so that before any of this technology was actual reality TV shows like StarTrek had touch pads all over the place... and it was named PADD...How lazy can Apple get?

Picard using the PADD... hmmmmm

Now Apple has sued everyone under the sun for infringing on a patent and registered designs that was just rejected by the US patent office and they are being a child about losing the cases in the UK (see above).  In conclusion could everybody please stop drinking Apples Kool-aid?  Or at least slow down?  They are just one step from being the little kid who stomps off and pouts when they don't get their way.  Grow up Apple.

[someone pointed out that the suit was in regards to a registered design not a patent, but I think the argument still stands, and there is a lot of patent suits going on as well]