• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1431 year ago

    Give him his due, he managed to convince one single country that the colour of a text message matters 😂

      • Gray
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        For real, if google didn’t completely screw up messaging every single year it wouldn’t be as big of a deal.

          • Gray
            link
            fedilink
            English
            21 year ago

            Hangouts was already the iMessage competitor. Video, voice, high res photos and videos, etc with SMS fallback. But as usual google kills every good product they create.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1311 year ago

    As a mobile app developer, I lost count of how many times Android would implement something New And Shiny, and then Apple would come along, sometimes years later, implement that same thing for iOS and declare and market it as Magical and Revolutionary. Usually the iOS one would be a better one, because they’d let Android work most of the bugs out, but I don’t recall too many things that Apple did that had never been seen before.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      52
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Not to mention in the early years, all of the logic you’d see from iPhone enthusiasts who would convince themselves that they didn’t need X or Y feature from Android and in fact iOS is better without it anyways because it just works, only for Apple to turn around and implement it a couple months or years later anyways.

      Basic features like the notification shade, quick actions, home screen widgets, etc. I saw a lot of people happily claim they were better off without these things.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 year ago

      This is so true.

      For 10 years (2011 to 2021) I carried both an Android phone (personal) and an iPhone (work provided). Both phones were updated about every 2 years.

      Over those years I’ve watched IOS get closer and closer to Android. The funny thing is Android has also been creeping towards IOS in some areas, though that is to a lesser extent than the other way around.

      In recent years they’ve gotten pretty close to each other in basic functionality.

      I still prefer Android, but IOS is much less annoying to use than it was a decade ago.

  • roofuskit
    link
    fedilink
    881 year ago

    Steve Jobs was full of shit and killed himself with his own over confidence.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      281 year ago

      If he’d made it to Covid times, he would have died from Covid after injecting bleach and horse dewormer failed to alleviate the illness.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      51 year ago

      The guy had no furniture in his house because he couldn’t find any that met his expectations.

      I think there’s an occasional lesson to draw from his uncompromising nature, focus on customer experience, and marketing talent. But he was clearly a pile of shit as a human being.

  • cthonctic
    link
    fedilink
    751 year ago

    And in the end the lying salesman died because of snakeoil therapy. I wish more stories had such a happy ending.

    • phillaholic
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      They both are. Woz wanted to create hobbyist boards without even casing. Jobs was the one that pushed for commercial use. Separately they probably wouldn’t have had anywhere near the impact as they did together. At best Woz would be Linus Torvalds.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    38
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Rich coming from a person who implied Apple innovated, when all they really did was be the first ones to assemble a consumer product out of already invented tech.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    38
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    As a PocketPC (WinMo) user before the iPhone even existed, I take offense to the claim.

    They pioneered capacitive touchscreen for ease of use, but I had ditched dumb phones years before iPhone.

    Note XDA refers to the old Windows Mobile XDA phone and then became an Android community. I was there for that transition and none of us were very impressed with the iPhone, but understood that it would be something for the tech illiterate would eat up.

    When Android came out, we went from Custom Roms for WinMo to Custom ROMs for Android.

    • Marxism-Fennekinism
      link
      fedilink
      English
      19
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Not just Windows Mobile, but Blackberry OS, Palm OS, Symbian, not to mention the madlads hacking Linux onto feature phones (which eventually gave us PostMarketOS). iOS was actually very underwhelming when it came out, was(is) explicitly function over form and basically had(has) “it looks pretty and feels sleek” as its only selling points. Didn’t even have third party apps whereas most of its contemporaries had them for ages by then.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    331 year ago

    I thought I was in “!android” not “!IHateApple”.

    Whatever you think of Steve Jobs, Android is better off for having competition

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      461 year ago

      No idea, iPhone fanatics act like smartphones and apps didn’t exist before the iPhone… I mean maybe the idea of central app store that forbids installation of applications from other sources?

      • BaroqueInMind
        link
        fedilink
        261 year ago

        I mean maybe the idea of central app store that forbids installation of applications from other sources?

        You mean like a Linux repository that existed before Apple “invented” the concept and renamed it an app store?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        121 year ago

        Didn’t we all end up just stealing a lot of todays shit from Xerox PARC anyway?

        Fuck the slide to unlock discussion, let’s talk about representing hierarchies of files in a file system as folders in a graphical environment and why the thing that shows our position on a screen is a slanted arrow.

      • exscape
        link
        fedilink
        -201 year ago

        I certainly don’t take their side… but smartphones DIDN’T exist before the iPhone. Which phone would you say that was? BlackBerry?
        Most people think of smartphones as a big touchscreen, and the iPhone was first, being released on June 29 2007, whereas the first Android phone was released over a year later in September 2008.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          131 year ago

          Dude a Nokia with Symbian was a smartphone… and that was in a couple of years before the iPhone was even being designed…

        • LucasWaffyWaf
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Mate I own a pre-iphone smart phone. What are you on about?

          If you really wanna go back far enough, the first handheld, portable device which had both phone and computer technologies in one package dates as far back as the mid 90s. Touch screen and all. The term smartphone would first be coined in 1995. Heaps of other touch screen devices that could do phone calls, SMS, and had a suite of apps would come out in later years as PalmOS and later Pocket PC/Windows Mobile came to fruition in the late 90s/early 2000s. The iPhone was just iterating off technology and features already being seen in smartphones at the time, just in a sleeker, smoother, simpler manner with a capacitive touch screen rather than the resistive touch screens of most common devices at the time. Heck, the iPhone wasn’t even the first phone with a capacitive touch screen.

    • 520
      link
      fedilink
      121 year ago

      Apparently the whole concept of a touchscreen only device, including the UI, according to Apple at the time.

        • 520
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          Can fictional products be used as prior art against real world patents though? The entire idea of patents is to protect something someone made work in the real world.

          • snooggums
            link
            fedilink
            61 year ago

            “The whole concept of a touchscreen device…” is something that prior fictional examples prove false. They did not come up with the concept, but they did implement a prior concept.

            “Nobody thought of it” and “nobody made it before” are two different things. Apple even pretended the second was true when they weren’t even first to market on several of their products.

            • 520
              link
              fedilink
              -21 year ago

              “The whole concept of a touchscreen device…” is something that prior fictional examples prove false. They did not come up with the concept, but they did implement a prior concept.

              But that didn’t come from a patent filing, that was my commentary on how they behaved. Patent filing language is much more precise for this reason.

                • 520
                  link
                  fedilink
                  21 year ago

                  exactly! That tablet you saw in Star Trek TNG is not an implementation, as it’s not a real device.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            31 year ago

            My understanding is that patents are to protect novel new ideas. If something’s already bean described in fiction, what innovation is protected by the patent?

            So, I’d think “it’s a tablet” wouldn’t be patentable because that was described in Star Trek. But, "screen technology blah that makes tablets practical "would be patentable.

            Neat post on related topic: https://fia.umd.edu/answer-can-science-fiction-stories-be-used-to-demonstrate-prior-art-in-patent-cases/

            • 520
              link
              fedilink
              2
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              My understanding is that patents are to protect novel new ideas. If something’s already bean described in fiction, what innovation is protected by the patent?

              The implementation in the real world. Fiction does not tend to go into how these machines work beyond that which is needed for the narrative. You won’t get enough information from such a book or TV show to be able to build something similar yourself, which is usually what you need for a patent.

                • 520
                  link
                  fedilink
                  1
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Fiction can only be used as prior art when what you see (or read about) is all there is to it, such as rounded corners.

                  It makes sense for fiction to be used as prior art in something like the rounded corners case, as the prop in question basically was an implementation of that patent in real life. Even though it isn’t housing any real electronics, the plastic casing itself still exists, and simply putting some electronics inside doesn’t make it a sparkly new invention.

                  It works less well when there are details in the implementation that aren’t covered in said fiction or hand waved away with The Force or something. The sliding doors in Star Trek would be an example, as although the doors are seen to slide, you can still patent a mechanism that makes this effect possible.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Patents protect the details of achieving an invention, not the idea for an invention itself (thereby allowing multiple different approaches to serving a market). Most courts are likely to rule that an electronic tablet is a market segment, rather than an invention. But listing out all the electronics and software needed to build one and or the industrial processes and machinery to build one at scale might be granted a patent. Fiction virtually never produces any such detail.

          • phillaholic
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            Not exactly, patents have to be specific, not generic, and Apple purchased the company that invented multi-touch.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -25
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The iPhone was a novel concept as a whole. I think that’s undeniable. There was nothing like it at the time.

        edit: found the iPhone haters and their revisionist history. The iPhone changed everything. When it was announced, nothing like it existed. Before the iPhone, google was working on a blackberry clone, for instance.

          • phillaholic
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            Why do you suppose both those companies fell off the face of the earth right after the iPhone came out? How many 12 year olds had them? The paradigm clearly shifted after the iPhone came out.

        • 520
          link
          fedilink
          9
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          There were a bunch of products that had elements of the iPhone in them, but the iPhone was the first to bring a lot of them together into a technology that made the world shit it’s pants.

          The problem for Apple is, you cannot really patent nor copyright bringing together existing elements like that. Hence they had to rely on stupid sounding lawsuits on the tiniest things they actually had the patents for.

  • IHeartBadCode
    link
    fedilink
    181 year ago

    In the end Samsung would owe Apple around $500 million in US courts and Apple lost (a value I’m not even going to sit here and add up) in international courts.

    The whole US snafu was largely seen around the world as American protectionism. As for Apple and Google, Apple saw their case wasn’t as slam dunk internationally and decided to settle with Google in 2014.

    Really though, once Steve Jobs died, the momentum for litigation dropped precipitously. Only Jobs was willing to go thermonuclear.

    • phillaholic
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      The Samsung lawsuits were kinda different. Samsung has a long history of flat out copying competitors. There are ample examples of icons being taken and reused, and all of their previous phones were clones of blackberry and windows phone. Once they stopped doing that they actually started finding their own UI language and make great products.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    18
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Great artists steal… and can get away with it. If you can’t get away with it, your not a great artist.

    He forgot to finish the sentence.

  • phillaholic
    link
    fedilink
    English
    31 year ago

    That top quote doesn’t mean what you think it means.

    The bottom lacks vital context. Eric Schmidt, former CEO of Google was on the Apple board during the development of the iPhone and iPad and was privy to insider information all awhile pivoting Android from a blackberry rip off to exactly what Apple was doing. It’s similar to the Xerox thing back in the 80s where people think Jobs is being a hypocrite about ripping off their GUI when Bill Gates did it too. Apple paid Xerox in stock to see it, Microsoft just took it. Not illegal, but Jobs was pissed.