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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
We can discuss in the feedback thread since I feel this is getting close to breaking Rule 6.
I don’t think this post needs mod action, you are all grown-ups (or should at least, act like grown-ups here), but I would still like to encourage less low effort posts in the future.
Is it low effort though? There’s an entire generation that wasn’t around for the introduction of the iPhone and may have no idea this quote even existed.
Android currently has an image problem with this generation. To say the two are not related and chalking it up to “low effort” is, in itself, low effort.
This isn’t even a Steve Jobs quote, it’s a Picasso quote.
I’d say posting a screenshot of a quote and a title is pretty low effort. Write a sentence or two of your own thoughts in the text box when you submit something, it’s not that hard.
Awesome, with low post counts and users on Lemmy, and an upvote system that mimics Reddits - your shit out of luck with whatever agenda for keeping lemmy “small” or however you pictured it in your mind.
The upvotes have spoken and the community wants to see this type of information.
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.
“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.
“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.
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.
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.
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.
I’m not saying that devices described by fiction are patentable based on the description in the fiction. But, those descriptions could be used to prove that the ‘invention’ is too obvious to be patentable. Page 7 of this document from the USPTO going over what ‘prior art’ is suggests that fiction can be used as prior art.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Just as novel as the whole graphical desktop concept which they claim to be the ones who invented it but always forget to state that Steve Jobs stole it from Xerox? By Steve’s words, everything Apple does today is a “stolen product”.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
What’s the key combo for right click on macos, if your track pad and mouse aren’t working? No one knows… Or can tell me. They always say “jUsT gEt aNothER mOUse”… Yeah dickhead, I’m on a plane, what’s the key combination?
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.
Guy at work literally laughed when I said iOS totally ripped off android navigation, thought Apple did that, pulled up a YT vid of when gesture navigation started, he walked away with his head down.
Then of course I followed him around going on about restricted Bluetooth for years, NFC chips they couldn’t use, how long ago the first Google wallet came out, and of course, how I can move my icons out of the way so I can actually see my wallpaper, which is too advanced for the apple devs LOL.
But agreed, iPhones are half descent now, great hardware, just wish people could actually use it the way they wanted to .
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.
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.
Go on? About what? Low IQ dipshits that attempt to politically pander to other low IQ dipshits that dont take 11 secs to do any research by calling an FDA approved human prescribed drug “horse dewormer”? What’s there to go on about?
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
5. Engage respectfully: Harassment, flamebaiting, bad faith engagement, or agenda posting will result in your posts being removed. Excessive violations will result in temporary or permanent ban, depending on severity.
6. Memes are not allowed to be posts, but are allowed in the comments.
7. Posts from clickbait sources are heavily discouraged. Please de-clickbait titles if it needs to be submitted.
8. Submission statements of any length composed of your own thoughts inside the post text field are mandatory for any microblog posts, and are optional but recommended for article/image/video posts.
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.
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.
Give him his due, he managed to convince one single country that the colour of a text message matters 😂
Obligatory fuck iMessage lock-in.
Did it to themselves
For real, if google didn’t completely screw up messaging every single year it wouldn’t be as big of a deal.
Nobody uses SMS anymore, it’s 2023
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.
Gmail? Photos? Drive?
Hangouts didn’t have the next work effect, unlike Whatsapp
He’s the guy that *invented” rounded corners
Reminder that Steve Wozniak is the true Apple genius.
He’s also the guy that carries an Android in his pocket for all his fun stuff!
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.
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.
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.
removed by mod
I thought I was in “!android” not “!IHateApple”.
Whatever you think of Steve Jobs, Android is better off for having competition
Literally true
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.
Yeah Steve, you really showed us Windows and Android users. Fuckin’ nerd.
I was kind of hoping that these kinds of posts would stay at reddit where they belong.
We can discuss in the feedback thread since I feel this is getting close to breaking Rule 6.
I don’t think this post needs mod action, you are all grown-ups (or should at least, act like grown-ups here), but I would still like to encourage less low effort posts in the future.
Is it low effort though? There’s an entire generation that wasn’t around for the introduction of the iPhone and may have no idea this quote even existed.
Android currently has an image problem with this generation. To say the two are not related and chalking it up to “low effort” is, in itself, low effort.
This isn’t even a Steve Jobs quote, it’s a Picasso quote.
I’d say posting a screenshot of a quote and a title is pretty low effort. Write a sentence or two of your own thoughts in the text box when you submit something, it’s not that hard.
Yes Picasso, famous artists who paints pictures like everyone else… hmm, perhaps the quote doesn’t mean what everyone assumes it does.
Alright smartass, it effectively became his quote when he referenced and repeated it and applied it to his specific industry.
This generation may also have no awareness of the Picasso quote either, ya pedantic smartass.
Awesome, with low post counts and users on Lemmy, and an upvote system that mimics Reddits - your shit out of luck with whatever agenda for keeping lemmy “small” or however you pictured it in your mind.
The upvotes have spoken and the community wants to see this type of information.
What did Android steal from Apple? Headphone jacks?
Apparently the whole concept of a touchscreen only device, including the UI, according to Apple at the time.
Like the computers in Star Trek TNG?
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.
Not exactly, patents have to be specific, not generic, and Apple purchased the company that invented multi-touch.
“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.
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.
Patents are about implementation, not concepts.
exactly! That tablet you saw in Star Trek TNG is not an implementation, as it’s not a real device.
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/
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.
Inventions need to be non-obvious (35 U.S.C. 103: Conditions for patentability; non-obvious subject matter) in order to be patentable. Prior art can be used to show that an invention is obvious. The prior art doesn’t need to rise to the level of detail contained in a patent to be prior art.
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.
I’m not saying that devices described by fiction are patentable based on the description in the fiction. But, those descriptions could be used to prove that the ‘invention’ is too obvious to be patentable. Page 7 of this document from the USPTO going over what ‘prior art’ is suggests that fiction can be used as prior art.
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.
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.
Windows mobile and palm had existed for years before iphone.
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.
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.
Just as novel as the whole graphical desktop concept which they claim to be the ones who invented it but always forget to state that Steve Jobs stole it from Xerox? By Steve’s words, everything Apple does today is a “stolen product”.
This is blatant HTC and Palm erasure.
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?
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.
You mean like a Linux repository that existed before Apple “invented” the concept and renamed it an app store?
removed by mod
It’s just a worse version of an already existing idea.
now you’re Think Different™
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.
Dude a Nokia with Symbian was a smartphone… and that was in a couple of years before the iPhone was even being designed…
The handspring visor phone launched in 2000 was arguably the first smartphone.
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.
BTFO
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.
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.
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.
Oh shit they have widgets now? Still no app drawer though I bet.
Yes we have an app drawer now lol (I use an iPhone as my secondary phone).
App drawer is there, too
Ayy they caught up. Do the icons still forcibly tile to home?
Yes and no, I think there is an opt-out toggle.
Ay alright, catching up!
Yes. I remember being argued down that “we don’t need copy and paste! That’s not an important feature!”. Smh
I remember this!
Right click!? Two mouse buttons are way too confusing for Mac users!
What’s the key combo for right click on macos, if your track pad and mouse aren’t working? No one knows… Or can tell me. They always say “jUsT gEt aNothER mOUse”… Yeah dickhead, I’m on a plane, what’s the key combination?
Windows it’s shift+f10.
Oh man I forgot about that one! 😂😭
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.
Guy at work literally laughed when I said iOS totally ripped off android navigation, thought Apple did that, pulled up a YT vid of when gesture navigation started, he walked away with his head down.
Then of course I followed him around going on about restricted Bluetooth for years, NFC chips they couldn’t use, how long ago the first Google wallet came out, and of course, how I can move my icons out of the way so I can actually see my wallpaper, which is too advanced for the apple devs LOL.
But agreed, iPhones are half descent now, great hardware, just wish people could actually use it the way they wanted to .
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.
And in the end the lying salesman died because of snakeoil therapy. I wish more stories had such a happy ending.
He had the rare treatable pancreatic cancer, and he didn’t treat it because he didn’t believe in modern medicine.
Goes to show how stupid supposedly smart people are.
Steve jobs and Elon musk are basically the same character.
Say what you will about Jobs, I don’t think he wanted to genocide anyone.
Steve Jobs was full of shit and killed himself with his own over confidence.
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.
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.
Dont embarrass yourself with the horse dewormer stuff.
Oh please do go on.
Go on? About what? Low IQ dipshits that attempt to politically pander to other low IQ dipshits that dont take 11 secs to do any research by calling an FDA approved human prescribed drug “horse dewormer”? What’s there to go on about?
Dude, go into your local Tractor Supply, they have the stuff that is literally horse dewormer locked up. Give you two guesses as to why.
And? That’s relevant how?
Because people are literally taking horse dewormer. A compound meant specifically for horses.