Why Apple Denied the Google Latitude App 308
awyeah writes "A recently revealed Apple patent looks remarkably similar to the functionality of Google Latitude, which Apple relegated to WebApp status earlier this year. Obviously if Apple is working on their own version of Google Latitude (or owns the IP rights to this functionality), they'd be hesitant to put an app with the same functionality on their devices from another company."
Re:I Smell Patent War (Score:3, Informative)
You mean raises the question. Begging the question is a form of logical fallacy which basically means that you are assuming something is true/false in order to prove that it's true/false.
Re:The evil of a closed platform (Score:5, Informative)
It's been pointed out before that Apple doesn't crackdown on jailbreakers
You mean besides bricking jailbroken phones?
Re:Times change (Score:3, Informative)
The big difference is really that Apple does pretty much everything on its own turf - its own OS, running on its own hardware. Microsoft's empire, on the other hand relies on third-party 'partners' and OEMs. And Microsoft has abused those relationships time and time again - and has had the power to destroy companies if they don't behave the way Microsoft tells them to.
Apple does shitty things, but isn't in a position of direct power over other companies - Apple plays with its own toys.
Re:The evil of a closed platform (Score:3, Informative)
The assheadness always had a lot to do with the CEO... Apple was open when the designes came from Wozniak he always opted for open system, they then closed everything with the Mac, guess who was at the helm. :-(
Apple again became more open when the CEO was ousted, and now they have become more and more closed again.
As much as I love their OS and their computers, but their attitude becomes worse and worse every year
Re:Fundamental principle (Score:2, Informative)
No manufacturer has the right to prohibit person A from installing on a device he owns software written by person B: any legal or technological measures to this end are immoral,
Hmmm, so it's immoral that Windows software can't natively run on Linux? Should the developers of Linux be forced to make Windows .EXE applications compatible, and vice versa?
Fail troll is fail.
The parent was talking about purposefully prohibiting the running of software that would otherwise run. Obviously if there are technical limitation (such as the fact that the software was designed for a different OS) that's an entirely different situation.
The issue here is not that there's a technical limitation stopping the software from being run, but rather, there's an arbitrary block put in place by the developers of the OS.
Re:Times change (Score:3, Informative)
They're not even close to the same thing. For one thing, if your hard drive crashes, you can restore from a Time Machine backup drive, but your System Restore checkpoint was destroyed along with the rest of your data. For another, because SR uses the same disk, it is very limited in terms of how far back the backups go.
Yes, the concept of rolling back to a previous version is the same, but then again, the concept of checkpoints/snapshots/restore points has been around for at least a couple of decades in the database world. The way that these tools provide that functionality is pretty radically different.
Re:disgusting (Score:3, Informative)
Good luck on keeping any American tech corporation in business.
I completely disagree (Score:3, Informative)
I can distribute any Windows application I want to whomever I want in a multitude of ways to choose from with or without involving a third party in doing so. Is Microsoft open? No, but in that sense, it's a hell of a lot more open than Apple is.
Actually Apple's vetting process for developers is just as stupid as it is for apps. I paid my $99 to Apple to join their developer program. They demanded documentation that I was who I said I was. I sent them some more paperwork in addition to what I had already filled out. Then they demanded that I send them notarized documentation of my identity, I shit you not. It's not like I have a very common name or have been the victim of ID theft in the past. It's not like I've ever had a problem establishing who I was with anyone in the past.
After several months of trying to satisfy them, I finally said to hell with it, I want my $99 back, and told them that I'll be developing on non-Apple platforms from now on.
So yeah, I would completely disagree with your assertion that anyone can submit apps to the app store. Aside from the obvious (TFA that this submission is about), Apple makes you jump through as many hoops before you can even get to the point where you can submit an app.