Techrights Recommends An Apple Boycott 542
walterbyrd writes with a quote from an article at Techrights: "Given the latest actions from Apple we cannot help recommending that people buy nothing from Apple. Boycott the company for being a threat to the IT landscape and also to common sense."
More from the article: "...Apple has been working hard to embargo — not just sue — the competition. Apple disregards the notion of fair competition..."
Give me a break (Score:4, Insightful)
Could this be any more biased? Why is Slashdot posting this crap?
The article claims that "Apple fan sites celebrate Apple patents," but all he does is link to one site, Patently Apple. That site exists to track Apple patent applications "in search of future features and secrets," as the site puts it [patentlyapple.com]. It's not celebrating patents; it's just reporting on them in hopes of predicting upcoming product plans.
It also repeats the old troll meme about PARC, claiming that "Apple disregards the notion of fair competition, which takes a lot of nerve for a company that built itself on knockoffs (e.g. Xerox PARC)." Overlapping windows and pulldown menus did come from PARC, but Apple is the one who invented the File-Edit-View-Window-Help standard menu layout, the phrase "cut-and-paste," and several other common GUI paradigms that are taken for granted today. Not to mention that many of those Xerox PARC employees went on to work on the Macintosh project at Apple!
If we're throwing around knock-off accusations, Android used to look like this [imgur.com] until the iPhone came out, and then Android suddenly started looking and behaving a lot more like iOS, right down to the pinch-zoom gestures that originated with the iPhone. For crying out loud, Samsung outright stole Apple's icon artwork and used it in their stores [allthingsd.com]. TechRights, of course, ignores all this. It's no surprise at all that Apple is going to try to hinder competitors' efforts to ride the coattails of its design work. It went through this before with Windows in the 1980s and only lost its court case against Microsoft because of a previous licensing agreement.
Obnoxious Android fanboyism has reached a fever pitch. Android fanboys are now officially more annoying than Apple fanboys. They've adopted this idea that they are freedom fighters and that their tribe is under threat from evil. It's embarrassing and is a resurrection of the worst elements of the desktop Linux movement from 10 years ago.
Exploring the rest of the site, it calls itself "a progressive site which supports software freedom and advocates digital diversity through standardisation." Most of its stories are anti-Microsoft, pro-Linux, and present a one-sided view of tech news that's intended to rile up its readers (not unlike Slashdot, to be honest). It also claims to be against monopolies but says nothing about Google's monopoly in web advertising nor the fact it's using its monopoly revenues to pump a new market with a free product (Android), just like Microsoft did with Windows and Internet Explorer in the 1990s. For some reason, Android advocates
For crying out loud, Techrights' Twitter account is called @boycottnovell. Boycott Novell is associated with Roy Schestowitz, an infamous Usenet troll who spams the advocacy newsgroups with pro-Linux news links and used to astroturf Slashdot with multiple accounts.
If nerds on Tech Rights and Slashdot want to boycott Apple, go ahead. None of them were using Apple products anyway--they are Linux advocacy sites. Apple wouldn't even notice [seekingalpha.com].
Can we get some actual tech news? Or is Slashdot forever lost to its current role of flamboyant baiting for ad views? Ugh.
Re:Give me a break (Score:4, Insightful)
Should be: "For some reason, Android advocates who trashed Microsoft for the same behavior ignore it when it comes from a multibillion dollar advertising company that happens to push Linux."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Should be: "For some reason, Android advocates who trashed Microsoft for the same behavior ignore it when it comes from a multibillion dollar advertising company that happens to push Linux."
Wow, I'm sorry you and the above got modded down so much.
Your comments aren't over rational and contain no foul language...yours, particularly, contains nothing remotely like a personal attack. (The GP does discuss one person directly, but in a brief and mostly objective way.)
Re:Give me a break (Score:4, Interesting)
"For crying out loud, Samsung outright stole Apple's icon artwork and used it in their stores."
Calling bullshit on that. It looks like the background decor, not the samsung stand, in a larger store. In one place, in sicily.
Apple's design work is not extraordinary enough that they should be able to get away with claiming rights over the 'rounded rectangle'.
This recent round of getting competitors products banned from sale in various countries is sickening. Call it a failure in the patent systems, the legal systems, whatever, but it's sickening. If you can't see that then you might want to take the apple stickers off your eyeballs. They are not the only company guilty of mass abuse of the legal system to avoid competition, but they have been behaving like total assholes.
And no, I don't own an android or iOS device, I'm not invested in either.
Re:Give me a break (Score:5, Funny)
Calling bullshit on that. It looks like the background decor, not the samsung stand, in a larger store. In one place, in sicily.
Not to mention, there are also three icons for McDonald and three icons for Google TV.
Thankfully, there are not too many fanboys of McDonald/Google TV on here, otherwise we'd be hearing conspiracy theories about how Samsung wants to go into the cheap silicon-based fast food business in Italy using the super popular Google TV logo.
Re: (Score:3)
Bush
Re:Give me a break (Score:5, Informative)
Nothing is created in a vacuum, there is always inspiration drawn from what already exists. Bizarrely companies think that they shouldn't have to acknowledge this but at the same time retain full and exclusive rights to their stuff and prevent anyone from doing something similar. The degree to which this is enforced varies from not at all in fashion to a sometimes in music (unless you actually sample someone else) to in any way at all with corporate branding.
The brightly lit white Apple stores look like the similarly minimal and bright shops they have had in Japan for ages. In fact Steve Job's trademark polo neck clothing came about because he visited a factory in Japan where the workers wore uniforms. He wanted Apple employees to do the same but they resisted, so he decided to just do it himself and asked a Japanese designer to come up with one for him. She sent him 100 black polo neck tops.
Re:Give me a break (Score:4, Informative)
Nothing is created in a vacuum, there is always inspiration drawn from what already exists. Bizarrely companies think that they shouldn't have to acknowledge this but at the same time retain full and exclusive rights to their stuff and prevent anyone from doing something similar.
Funny you should mention: Samsung sued several companies because they supposedly copied their phones. Yeah, Samsung!
Re: (Score:3)
Argh, mod point where art thou? The "Techrights" blog entry is definitely full of holes, promoting lies and substituting emotion for any attempt at proof for his claims.
Re:Give me a break (Score:5, Insightful)
but says nothing about Google's monopoly in web advertising nor the fact it's using its monopoly revenues to pump a new market with a free product (Android),
I was with you till here. In what way is Google leveraging its search engine de-facto monopoly to push android? I am unaware of any way in which Android is unfairly pushed. You can get google apps for any of the major phone OSes, and they dont sell Android at Google.com.
You were on a roll, but thats just too much of a stretch.
Re:Give me a break (Score:4, Informative)
That is not illegal.
What was illegal is that Microsoft was using its Windows monopoly and its pre-installed state to unfairly gain dominance in another area: internet browsers. By preinstalling IE on Windows, they ensured that every single computer that was purchased from an OEM had IE already on it.
The fact that IE was free was never an issue; MS got hit for Windows Media player in Europe, and removed it from the stock install, but they kept it free-- thats not illegal.
Re: (Score:2)
damn, thanks for the links and the research.
Re: (Score:2)
Yea, I never agreed with everything on Techrights and hasn't read it recently. That being said, it is funny that the server version of Windows 7 is called Windows Server 2008 R2 (look up the support lifecycle of both!). I still remember when they were the first to cover the MS-Nokia-Elop fiasco (even mentioned it in this thread [ycombinator.com]. AFAIK last time Slashdot posted an article from what was then called Boycott Novell was years ago.
Re:Give me a break (Score:5, Informative)
To add:
In EU stores, the Samsung tablets are advertised by the floor sales people as "The Samsung iPad, it's better because it has flash" - part of the Samsung sales training. Seen it in multiple places in a couple of countries.
Samsung is betting of the same marketing principles used by the following "well known" bands: Powasonic, Panascanic, Sunny, SQNY, Nokla & Adibas and let's not forget the "famous" aPad & ePad Android tablets. Their frigging lawyers could not tell apart a iPad and a Galaxy Tab. http://www.geek.com/articles/gadgets/judge-holds-up-ipad-2-and-galaxy-tab-in-court-samsung-lawyers-cant-tell-the-difference-20111014/ [geek.com]
Re:Give me a break (Score:5, Interesting)
Here in Australia, they're marketing it as "The tablet that Apple tried to stop".
Re: (Score:3)
And generic drugs in the US advise you to compare the active ingredients of the brand name. There is nothing wrong with comparative marketing outside of the minds of companies with monopoly hard-ons and their fanboys.
Re:Give me a break (Score:5, Insightful)
Please stop perpetuating this myth. There was no mad rush to change Android after the iPhone was announced. [arstechnica.com] Feel free to look up Dianne Hackborn yourself; her word should carry a lot more weight than a picture carefully crafted by some Apple apologist.
Oh God, please stop repeating Jobs tiring drivel. It serves no purpose, and only make you look like a tool. Let Apple do their own dirty marketing. Apple has no noble agenda, they're fighting increasingly dirty to protect their bottom-line, abusing the patent system to hinder competition, attempting to subvert the work of W3C [arstechnica.com] threatening the very openness of the web.
Their actions are hurting the industry. Yet, you can still find people on a technical forum like this feeling the need to support their actions, modded +5 Insightful no less. I'm appalled.
Re:Give me a break (Score:4, Insightful)
I've got no beef against Ms. Hackborn in particular, but it's clear that she has a dog in this hunt. Take her words with as big a grain of salt as you would from someone that works at Apple.
In any case, the fact that Samsung is copying design elements when making its tablet is unrelated to Android. Samsung's own lawyers couldn't differentiate the two devices in court at a distance of 3m. http://apple.slashdot.org/story/11/10/14/2051219/samsung-lawyer-fails-to-differentiate-ipad-and-galaxy-tab-in-court [slashdot.org]
But putting aside the practical matters (i.e., whether any boycott could even be reasonably mustered), would an Apple boycott really help matters? Let's consider that until Apple got into the iPod business, the music players were all pretty uninspiring. Apple made that a viable bit of industry. The iTunes music store brought us prices for mainstream music that were effectively unheard of previously, and for those of us that were interested in buying digital music instead of finding, er...alternate sources, it finally gave us a place to go.
The iPhone is remarkable mainly in the power it wrested away from the telecoms. Now Samsung can show up and say, "This is the phone we designed. Take it or leave it." Previously, the specs would have been given to Samsung and they would have done the best they could with very little latitude of their own.
Apple disrupts markets. Maybe they shouldn't be such dicks about it after they've wedged themselves into a space, but they're making markets that either don't exist or exist only as a poorly exploited niche.
Re: (Score:3)
Can you tell the difference between a JooJoo [wikipedia.org] and an iPad?
That thing came out before the iPad, and it had been discussed on slashdot for years before either were released thanks to all of Fusion Garage's problems (and the fact that it runs Linux). Not that I think they should have a claim either. "Screen without a keyboard" is not a non-obvious design or improvement, and similar devices had been tried several times before and failed. Technology not there, lacking Apple's brand and marketing team, etc.
Re:Give me a break (Score:5, Informative)
That site exists to track Apple patent applications "in search of future features and secrets," as the site puts it [patentlyapple.com]. It's not celebrating patents
Did you even look at the site? Their slogan, which you can't miss because it's in the page header, is "Celebrating Apple's Spirit of Invention. They Imagine. They Explore. They Inspire and Invent." It's hard to interpret that as not celebrating Apple's patents, in the context of a site which exists to list Apple's patents...
Re: (Score:3)
Android fanboys are now officially more annoying than Apple fanboys.
Well, to be fair, I'd say that the two types of fanboy are officially equally annoying. However, Android fanboys have 75% of the market by unit, where Apple doesn't even hit 20%.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty suspect you can't even point out one thing that is a "lie"
The "stole icons" claim with the AllThingsD link is a well-known lie. That's just one, I'm sure you can find more.
Re:Crying wolf without a wolf (Score:5, Insightful)
Nothing, but it's also not wrong or illegal or morally wrong to point it out either.
The gate swings both ways.
Some of the Apple haters on here are just embarrassing, and are doing more to hurt their "cause" than help it. I mean, it's their choice to define themselves by hating a company, but much of the vitriol is getting silly. I may not be a personal fan of Android (although I have used some good Android handsets and can see why people like it) I'm not frothing about how Samsung and Google are some sort of Machiavellian evil for making things that people want to buy.
I think a lot of it stems from a feeling of sour grapes, that in the era of declining Microsoft dominance they were sure that "their" time (of Linux! On the Desktop!) would come, and that instead of year on year growth for Linux desktop/laptop marketshare, the eroded Windows share went to Apple instead, and then the entry into the phone market (predicted to be a *massive failure*) and the re-ignition of the tablet market (again, predicted to be a massive flop) was just rubbing salt in the wounds.
Certainly, Apple is no angel and has done some stupid things, but in the mind of an Apple Hater - defining themselves by their assured belief that Apple can Only Do Evil(tm), they forget many of the positive things Apple has done for the industry and consumers at large since its return from the brink of death.
Boycotts (Score:5, Insightful)
Are boycotts ever really effective anymore? There's too much clout huge companies carry with their flashy advertising to reach consumers that are willing to break principle. People are not principled enough to rigourously hold to boycotts. I tell people not to bother with them, and focus on positive buying instead of negative buying. Don't avoid buying what you don't want to support, try to actively spend your available spending money with people and companies who support your vision of the world.
Re: (Score:3)
The trick is to get other corporations to join the boycott. When advertisers started to pull their ads from the News Of The World it was forced to shut down pretty much instantly. If say Google decided to pull it's apps, YouTube iOS support and all other iOS tailored web sites we might see some results. Or how about Visa refusing to process Apple payments? We can only dream of course.
I wish the EU had followed through on its threat to force manufacturers to allow removal and replacement of batteries (for sa
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
People are not principled enough to rigourously hold to boycotts.
It might have something to do with people not agreeing with your boycott, rather than a general lack of principles.
Re: (Score:2)
Make them understand that buying Apple is uncool and destroys progress.
Hipsters stop buy Apple stuff.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry, but I know a number of people who have grown up using PCs (some of them even Apple haters), then moved on to a Mac for whatever reason (certain program they needed was only available through Apple, etc.) and now won't go back simply because their Macbook Pro makes that much more sense to them.
So really, I'm sure that in a lot of cases people aren't using Apple products just because they look cool, hipster or no.
Boycott in the favor of? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
N9?
Not that I'll be getting one any time soon, but ther seem OK. It's just a shame that (hardware-power-wise) they're a good year behind Samsung and Apple. Pretty though, and apparently a good user experience.
Lack of keyboard kills it for me though, they should have put the 950 on sale to the general public too.
Re: (Score:2)
You also can't get much more stable than tiny iterations of the same thing leading to something fairly intuitive and stable. Both iOS and Android may be a full generation or two ahead in terms of user interface, but Apple's too much of an asshat and Android updates are non-existent on most handsets.
There is no reason why an An
Re: (Score:2)
So long as I don't try to encrypt removable storage it is plenty secure though.
You still can, just use the stronger Device Password & Device Key option, like you should anyway.
Both iOS and Android may be a full generation or two ahead in terms of user interface
Not for long. RIM is already a generation ahead in terms of UI on their tablet. (They've been ahead of iOS on notifications and a few other things on phones basically forever :) ) The BB10 phones in 2012 should put BB phones well ahead of iOS and (current) Android phones in terms of UI sometime this coming fall. [Well, I think they're ahead now (I love the OS7 UI, the 9900 is about the best smartphone I'
Re: (Score:2)
You've got the Nokia N9, and... well, apparently HP is actually still pushing out updates to webOS on a semimonthly basis, so maybe pick up a Pre 3 off of eBay? Maybe a BBX device if RIM ever pulls its head out of its collective ass? Symbian is still going to be around for at least another 4 years, so why not an N8, E7, or 701?
Re: (Score:2)
Theres always blackberry.
Re:Boycott in the favor of? (Score:4, Funny)
OH! Or Jitterbug!!! [greatcall.com]
Re:Wrong (Score:5, Informative)
Is the bulk of your claim that if you install Darwin on your phone, you essentially have a mostly-working iOS install, and that Objective-C is better than Java?
As far as I know, the first is not true, and the second is at least a questionable claim, given that language preferences vary so much.
Android may not be the best imaginable mobile OS, but it's certainly a lot more open than iOS.
Not about language preferences (Score:2, Insightful)
On the first point, since Android is open source and I can't download all of that source either I see no reason why the partial codebase of iOS does not qualify.
Where can I download Moto-Blur?
the second is at least a questionable claim, given that language preferences vary so much.
That has nothing to do with it. The fact is Objective-C make code injection incredibly easy, which means it's much easier to hook into and modify specific parts of existing applications.
It's not about language preference, it's ab
Re:Wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually it is (check out Darwin sometime).
Darwin != iOS. Please point me to build instructions so I can make a new ROM for an iDevice which does NOT contain the iCal application. Hm?
Unlike Andorid the shell of a CarrierIQ system that shipped with iOS was never enabled, and did not contain ... (snip)
How do you know? Were you legally able to investigate this? Or did Steve whisper this into your ears?
FWIW, the cydia thing is totally uncomparable to the Android custom ROM scene. You obviously haven't looked into it and hence you are talking out of your buttocks.
When you stop and think about it it's pretty dumb to have to install a custom ROM
When you stop and think about it it's pretty dumb to make uninformed remarks about things you have demonstrated to have no knowledge on.
Re: (Score:3)
When you stop and think about it it's pretty dumb to have to install a custom ROM
When you stop and think about it it's pretty dumb to make uninformed remarks about things you have demonstrated to have no knowledge on.
Come on, he is right! It's dumb to have to install a custom ROM because the one you get by default is bloated with crap. It's dumb as well that there's no real official channel to get it (you should trust the "Android scene"... frankly, what's that???). But it's even more dumb to not being able to install alternative ROMs at all, like for the iOS platform. Please don't make a competition of who's the looser: Apple platform is evil and closed, but make no mistake, Android isn't so much better at this game.
Re:Wrong (Score:5, Informative)
I suppose that's why it's awesome that iOS is open-source
Actually it is (check out Darwin sometime).
Most of iOS is not open source. The versions of Darwin atop which particular Mac OS X releases are built are; the versions of Darwin atop which particular iOS releases aren't - maybe a particular Darwin release is "close enough" to the Darwin in a particular iOS release, but, even then, it doesn't include the low-level ARM support isn't there in xnu, and a lot of the higher-level stuff isn't open source even in Mac OS X (good luck finding the source to Foundation - not Core Foundation, but Foundation - or AppKit or UIKit).
Re:Wrong (Score:4, Informative)
iOS is NOT an open source. Many parts are "sourced" by Apple from the open source community and they are pretty much forced to release them under various licenses, also some other unimportant libraries are made open, but that doesn't mean that you can just configure&make the OS on the spot.
Unlike Android the shell of a CarrierIQ system that shipped with iOS was never enabled
Really? It looks even worse, Apple and not the carrier has chosen to install it. Why? It is burried inside the OS for an unknown purpose. It is there.
Android is shipping with active key-loggers
Again, that CIQ software is NOT installed in Android by Google, it is put there by those carriers. You can still update your device to clean OS quite effortlessly even compile your own Android ICS build (from real open source repositories). On the other hand iOS features CarrierIQ spyware as a permanent part buried inside your phone under unknown conditions, it might be tracking you or not, some GUI switches might not be telling the whole story here.
iOS is far easier then Android thanks to the use of Objective-C in applications
ObjC is not that friendly or easy, it sports some weird syntax, slow code (compared to plain C), incompatible outside iOS and it crashes iOS apps. App crashing is common on iOS, even Microsoft solved crashing in the late 90'.
You misunderstand Cydia, can modify base OS (Score:2, Interesting)
You can't easily modify the base OS. HUGE difference.
That's exactly what much of Cydia does for you. Many things there are components that modify the base OS. That's what I mean my having the power to easily modify parts of the system instead of needing to replace the whole OS. Code injection is far more powerful since you do not need to replace wholesale. I don't have to choose which mod to download, I can just download system enhancements that I feel would be useful.
If you think about it, it's really
Apple not alone (Score:4, Insightful)
What about the other patent/IP assholes, such as Microsoft, Sony, and Oracle? Why target just one?
Re: (Score:3)
Last year in my classrooms the most common computing device were netbooks (except on exam days when the TI-30 series came out). This year about a third of the students are sporting iPads, with the rest bringing co
In other words (Score:5, Insightful)
This is how the system works. Ask T. Edison.
Re:In other words (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually Edison shamelessly ripped off other people's intellectual property all the time. The most famous example was "Le Voyage dans la lune", a French special effects laden film he stole and sold in the US with the original producers not seeing a penny.
The idea of patents seems good but the reality is they are mostly used to stifle legitimate competition and leech license fees from things other people made themselves. When there are legitimate license fees they tend not to be based on patents anyway because patents expire, e.g. CDDA and Dolby certification.
"Apple not a Producer" - really? (Score:4, Insightful)
This article is 100% troll.
Apple is as much a producer as anyone, and there are lots of arguments to be made that they are for more producers currently of innovations in hardware and software than many other companies.
I find the patent activities Apple is engaging in absurd and evil also. But the whole industry is doing the same thing all over, Apple's actions just get elevated above others because it brings page views and Apple Haters push an anti-Apple agenda whenever possible.
The solution is not to boycott Apple, for that helps no-one - the solution is to continue to battle absurd software patents however it is possible to do so.
Re: (Score:3)
The solution is not to boycott Apple, for that helps no-one - the solution is to continue to battle absurd software patents however it is possible to do so.
I'm on the fence about this comment. Yes a boycot of Apple doesn't solve the underlying problem, but it would send a clear message about HOW to fight your patent battles. For the most part the vast majority of the mobile patent wars have been about extracting licensing agreements between vendors. Apple on the other hand took their fight to a whole new level by actively getting products banned in some markets. This is now not only a war between manufacturers, but a war on choice for consumers.
By boycotting A
The problem is companies hit Apple first... (Score:4, Insightful)
For the most part the vast majority of the mobile patent wars have been about extracting licensing agreements between vendors.
That was true, but that pact was broken when vendors starting deciding RAND patents in various standards did not apply to Apple and they were allowed to shake down Apple for extra money above the payments the rest of the industry was making.
So if we are truly going to try and nip problems with agreements forming, Apple is not the company to go after (remember in the Samsung suit they even offered to sell a license to Samsung for use of some the patents they had, which Samsung declined).
By boycotting Apple you would send a message that this shit is not on
Boycots against any company are foolish because it's a very poor way to send any message. The signal is lost in a vast sea of noise of purchases. As noted, Apple isn't even the most egregious player here....
The real thing to do is to attack the power that patents have over foolish aspects of computing they should not. Even if you could succeed against Apple other companies would continue to abuse them the same way. It's not even like Apple is a company with pure patent troll play as we are seeing these days.
Attack flaws in the patent system and you wipe out ALL bad abuses of patents across ALL companies.
Reality is for real people. (Score:2, Informative)
But unique products?
Before the iPhone there was nothing really like it.
Before the iPad there was nothing really like it.
They are not wholly new inventions but they are a leap beyond what was before them.
Good products? Good quality? Good support?
Sales figures (and Consumer Reports) say yes to all of them. You merely claim they are bad while ignoring that everyone else is far worse (Generally, there are some exceptions).
Anecdotally, good support is 100% YES. Because instead of helping friends/family with te
Ignoring the other heads. (Score:2, Insightful)
The ghost of the reality distortion is stronger in this one than any I have seen.
Well all I am doing here is telling you what will actually help the problem.
Talk about reality distortion - your solution to the Hydra is to cheerfully attack only one head while ignoring the others snaking towards your back.
And yet, you would claim I am the one who is blind...
Attack Apple exclusively and ignore the other blatant evils all around, yes I can see why that makes perfect sense... ...to an Apple Hater. With patente
Too many boycotts (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't use apple products because I don't believe in their "walled garden" philosophy. I was a big fan of apple back in the old hypercard and basic days when apple wanted to bring their users CLOSER to the computing experience and really make their users more powerful.
But apple has done a complete 180 on that and won't ever come back to it. so for that reason, I won't buy their products. It isn't a boycott.
People need to stop thinking anyone gives a damn what they think about anything. Because the reality is that in the real world people just don't care. Corporations don't care. Politicians don't care. Your next door neighbor doesn't care. And they have every right to not care.
That said, you have the same right. So rather then trying to get some frothy public action thing together with promises to buy again if they change their ways. Just quietly buy what you believe in and let the marketing people figure out why sales dropped. Nothing preachy or pretentious. Just buy what you believe.
Apple products make lots of people happy. Good for them. They're welcome to it. I won't be one of them and wish one and all well.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't use apple products because I don't believe in their "walled garden" philosophy.
I hear this argument a lot, and it still doesn't make sense. iOS has a walled garden approach, sure, but the majority of Apple products are Macs. We're not discussing iPhones here. OS X have major parts of the OS as open source, you have as much "tinkering" control over your computer as most other linux flavors, you are free to download and install software from where ever you want, Apple has no control of what you can run or can remotely uninstall / block or in other ways control what you do, there are gr
Re: (Score:3)
Apple products make lots of people happy. Good for them. They're welcome to it.
No, it's not good for them, and they don't even know it. They're funding the elimination of their choices in the future. For that reason alone we should all be telling everyone who will listen not to buy Apple products. They're hardly the worst company out there, I'd put much more effort into keeping someone from buying a Vaio than a Macbook, but that doesn't mean they don't work counter to the interests of humanity.
Re: (Score:3)
So rather then trying to get some frothy public action thing together with promises to buy again if they change their ways. Just quietly buy what you believe in and let the marketing people figure out why sales dropped.
Fuck that. Speaking out is a good thing to do. If people aren't interesting then they can just ignore it. People who are will benefit from the message.
Boycott is not necessary (Score:3)
If Apple decides that it is time to stop innovating their products (or successfully copying and integrating other people's designs in them, as some see it) and start suing and doing other dirty tricks instead, they would have already lost more than half the battle. Trying to squash competition has never worked well in the long run, and trying to squash it with dirty tricks has worked even worse.
Apple cannot realistically threaten the rest of the industry long term. They aren't that big, their products aren't that pervasive and they simply cannot afford a wide enough product range to compete with everyone. Even if they could become the new Microsoft, in a decade or so everyone would have been tired enough of them to switch to something else.
Besides, boycott may be counterproductive -- Apple left on its own can well generate more bad will than Apple pestered by boycotts. So, instead of recommending a boycott, inform your readers about the problems Apple is creating and help them make informed and rational decisions about their purchases. And if they decide Apple is good for them, then let them have it -- it is their choice, after all.
Won't work because it won't sway Apple users (Score:2, Insightful)
Joe Average will stop reading that article halfway the summary. It doesn't do a good job explain why an Apple boycott would be called for to a public that is immensely pro-Apple. Targeting non-Apple users with this is pointless since they won't buy Apple anyway, so your core audience is Apple users.
And if an Apple user starts reading this at all (which is not a given - the title alone might scare him away) he will be going into it with "my Apple products all work, are easy to use and look nice; I don't want
Embargo! (Score:2)
Who run Bartertown?
Seriously though I don't use Apple products anyway so I guess I'm already there.
Who cares? (Score:2, Insightful)
If you want to be a fanboi, at least become one about something that matters - maybe people in your life? But devoting energy to things like this article proposes is simply a waste of precious time. A computer is a computer; a phone is a phone. You get one and you use it. It's not like any of them are particularly special. I don't see anyone obsessing over their toaster like this...
'ware the Triads (Score:3)
Gold :)
From my cold dead hands (Score:3)
You can pry my MacBook from my cold dead hands.
Fix the patent system. If you want to boycott companies that 'abuse' it then you'll end up boycotting all technology companies. Good luck with that luddite strategy. Every mobile phone maker is suing every other mobile phone maker. This is a systemic problem, not a localized one. If any of these companies try to take the moral high ground they will be put out of business. We should attack the root of the problem, the patent system, rather than the end result of the problem.
If Apple was nothing but a patent troll then I would understand the argument. But if Apple was nothing but a patent troll they wouldn't have any products to boycott.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Apple behaviour is pretty disgusting and, I'd join the embargo 'BUT' damn I've always found their gear to be overhyped and overpriced and basically always gone else where. I'll think you'll find that this is pretty much the trend with the majority of computer geeks.
For what it's worth I vow never to buy an Apple product ;D.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple behaviour is pretty disgusting and,
Thats like getting mad at some fellow at gettysburg because he fired his rifle.
Everyones firing off shots, I think its a bit much to go after Apple like theyre the sole bad actor in the IP wars.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:twitter, I like you (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:twitter, I like you (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:twitter, I like you (Score:4, Insightful)
Someone really needs to mention that there is often an issue of FRAND (fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory) patents. Companies that hold patents that they want to have adopted by a standards organization will usually agree to FRAND licensing of those patents. However, it appears this system is fraying around the edges. Companies, like Nokia and Samsung, will offer terms to some companies and then when dealing with Apple insist on cross licensing with Apple's patents that are not encumbered by FRAND terms.
Personally, I'm not convinced that patents have ever been an optimal idea for society going back as far as James Watt's steam engine. But given the reality of the legal system that is in place, I think it is rather dishonest for many of these companies to act as though they are victims when they are attempting to ignore that they had agreed to license in a non-discriminatory fashion.
So if we are going to start down this road, I think companies holding FRAND patents who have clearly failed to honor the terms as they had agreed, should be stripped of those patents. Also, instead of extending patents to ever new areas (business method, software, design) those "innovations" should be rolled back in recognition of what disasters they have become.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't see how fair and reasonable come in to this specific case. That has already been used to determine a price which is available to other customers. The non-discriminatory part of the obligation means Samsung (in this case) is required to offer that same price to Apple, i.e. not discriminate depending on the customer. If I understand what little I have read, Samsung refuses to accept that option from Apple so Apple has no deal to close until Samsung lives up to the FRAND obligation they agreed to in or
Re:twitter, I like you (Score:5, Insightful)
That has already been used to determine a price which is available to other customers. The non-discriminatory part of the obligation means Samsung (in this case) is required to offer that same price to Apple, i.e. not discriminate depending on the customer.
The people who are using these patents are all inside a particular group that share patents. So, as I said I above, if I want to use your patents, I have to let you use mine. All of the people using these patents agree this arrangement. All members of the group get value from using each others patents. There is no discrimination going on within the group.
Apple is the company that doesn't want to join the group and share it's patents. Which is perfectly fine--Apple has that right. But they cannot claim that they should receive the same benefits as those who share their patents. Those patents from other people have value and those are part of the "fee" for using the patents. If Apple does not want to contribute their patents, then they should have to pay the equivalent cash value.
For example, if I join the local supermarket's "grocery club," I give them something of value--namely information about me and my shopping habits. They, in return, give me a discount on the groceries that I buy. What you're saying is that you should be able to get the same discounts but you shouldn't have to join the "grocery club" and give them your personal information.
The patents that are being shared are part of the value that Samsung is receiving for it's patents. If Apple doesn't want to share, then it falls to Samsung to come up with a cash equivalent.
Re:twitter, I like you (Score:5, Funny)
That's why an iPad looks like a scaled-down flatscreen TV ... And yes, Apple should have full rights to protect their greatest creative investment and one of the landmark inventions of the century: the rectangle with round squares! Next: the iWheel. It looks like an iPad. But it has no corners! Amazing!
Re:Counter-proof (Score:5, Insightful)
It's amusing that you think the "Haters" will just not let people use what they find suits them best, when that is precisely Apple's strategy (not letting people just use what they find suits them best) and the reason the majority of "Haters" exist.
Re:Apple does not block choice. (Score:5, Informative)
You seem to have forgotten that Apple is only suing Samsung, not other tablet makers.
Erm, Apple had also sued HTC over phones, with the same modus operandi - seeking a ban on device sale rather than e.g. royalties and damages. They have also sued Motorola (over Xoom and Droids). [businessinsider.com]
Re:Apple does not block choice. (Score:4, Interesting)
I like how you ignore all the evidence that Apple is evil.
Has it ever occurred to you that people who hate Apple and Apple products are rational and have good reasons?
Maybe you are irrational too? We all irrational beings. (Human beings are irrational.) When you claim to be rational and put words into our mouths you come across the wrong way. You might not agree with the vocal minority but they still perceive a problem. If you do not consider those problems, that's fine. Do not pretend to yourself that others are irrational because you merely disagree with what we say.
I hate Apple because they have ruined software for me. On my desktops or servers download Windows freeware or open source software and get good quality software that does not necessarily track or spy on me. I can install whatever I want. The products in the App stores are ridiculously commercial - it's so obvious to me that they just want to grab your money. There is so much trash in the stores. Why the hell should I have to jailbreak the device to get it to do what I want? When a product is so caustic to my consumer rights, why would I want to partake? The device is mine, I can do whatever I want. This business model of creating walled gardens and limiting innovation and competition has infected the technology industry. Now Microsoft and every phone carrier wants to do it too.
Apple bans benign applications and implements the ideas themselves. They have no respect for other's "intellectual property". They used Nokia patents without licencing.
Apple made iTunes which is HORRIBLE software. They are responsible for QuickTime which is worse. They install lots of junk like Bonjour. Apple are quite happy to take OSS software like KHTML = OSS, Apple kernels = Derived from OSS and then sell it in a ridiculously priced device that takes away user freedom.
I can develop on it for free, I don't have to pay anyone to start programming. On an Apple product I have to pay Apple for this right to write code for my [b]own device[/b].
Food for thought.
Re:Apple does not block choice. (Score:5, Informative)
I hate Apple because they have ruined software for me.
On my desktops or servers download Windows freeware or open source software and get good quality software that does not necessarily track or spy on me.
On my desktop (well, laptop, really) I can download Mac OS X freeware or open-source software and get good quality software that does not necessarily track or spy on me.
I can install whatever I want.
Same here.
I can develop on it for free, I don't have to pay anyone to start programming. On an Apple product I have to pay Apple for this right to write code for my own device.
OK, so what you really mean is "...because they have ruined smartphone and tablet software for me". I can and do develop, on my Mac, for free, software that runs on Mac OS X.
Re:Apple does not block choice. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Enjoy this while you can. How long before Apple reproduces the iPhone market model on the Mac ?
Somewhere between a week and 7 or so billion years (unless they manage to reproduce it after the Sun turns into a red giant).
(I.e., no, I do not adhere to one group's conventional wisdom that it's inevitable that they'll do it.)
Re:Apple does not block choice. (Score:5, Informative)
parent = AC = troll.
But i'll bite:
http://opensource.apple.com/ [apple.com]
And Bonjour = Zeroconf, Avahi which also gets installed by the Linux distros and they are amazing tools - just yesterday did some Avahi magic and made a 15year old network Laser printer (DEC LN14) discoverable.
Also Chrome & the Android browser are using Apple's WebKit (forked from KHTML, open source and downloadable from the above link).
Re:Apple does not block choice. (Score:5, Insightful)
How about HTC? Might not be tablet makers, but why limit yourself to tablet makers?
You can always tell the haters by the way they distort reality in any way possible (or frankly impossible) to make Apple the worst in any given comparison.
I wonder where the term Reality Distortion Field comes from.
Apple was one of the big players heavily pushing HTML-5
By banning Flash...
shipped the very first Intel macs with Bootcamp
While trying hard to make it impossible to run Mac OS X on any non-Apple device...
Re:Apple does not block choice. (Score:5, Informative)
I'm not sure how they could make it *easier* let alone "trying hard to make it impossible" as you claim.
Perhaps by not writing code that specifically checks if it's running on Apple hardware and refuses to load parts of the OS if it isn't?
Apple did go to some lengths to make it hard running OS X on vanilla x86 systems. Like, AES-encrypting various system kexts and making it impossible to dump the memory of DSMOS driver to get the decryption keys.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Apple does not block choice. (Score:4, Insightful)
Interesting your choice of the word "ban" there. Not simply "refused to include in iOS on performance grounds".
Well they certainly banned Flash [wsj.com] for developing apps.
They stated from the outset that Flash was a dog for performance, especially on mobile devices. Adobe belatedly agreed with them. Everyone's happy.
Everybody's happy? I think not. Adobe did end up changing from Flash to HTML5 for mobiles, but this was because it is hard to push Flash as a platform for mobile applications when the elephant in the room is that it will not work on iOS. Adobe lost the war to Apple, plain and simple. And losers tend not to be all that happy.
Re: (Score:3)
I hate flash as much as the next guy, but HTML5 has worse performance for all but the simplest of animations where it is, at best, comparable. And "refusing to include" is the same as "banning". They gave end users no way at all from installing the flash software on their own devices - if that isn't a ban then what is?
And yes they do try and stop OS X from being installed on other devices. The Hackintosh crowd is currently small enough to escape their attention but how many independent hardware manufacturers are there that ship PCs running OS X and that haven't been sued out of existence by Apple?
Ban: "never"
Refusing to include: "performance sucks, so we're not shipping it - perhaps if it were to improve, it might be included..."
(Ban suggests an immovable position).
Your second point is just silly - the licensing on OS X is what prevents independent hardware manufacturers from selling OS X boxes, but that is no different from, say, the GPLv3 preventing people like Tivo from selling boxes with "Tivi-ised" GPLv3 software.
What the home user does is not really relevant here - and Apple doesn't really car
Re: (Score:3)
I don't usually use GPLv3, but i do get where they are coming from. What good is source if you need an unreleased bit to compile it? also what good is the compiled source if it still needs to be signed to run on a device?
that is like saying: "here is the manual to the car, but in order to get the blind bolt off that allows you to change the tires you will need the special tool that we built for doing that and will only sell to licensed dealers that sign an NDA and prevent photos of it from being taken. Once
Re:Apple does not block choice. (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, by your own words, you can always tell... their exaggerations and lies.
You do know that Apple hasn't ONLY sued or otherwise sought to block Samsung right? HTC and Motorola are among those sued or attacked by Apple as well. And you have to realize that either others will follow or others have already done back-room settlements with Apple already.
I'm not going to say that "...all others are angels in the business while Apple is the devil" because that just wouldn't be true. There are no innocents here. However, when you see any given party simply going TOO FAR, you have to stand up and say something about it. Apple simply goes too far. If it were Samsung doing this (and not just defensively to give Apple a taste of its own medicine) I have little doubt the majority here would be rallying behind a boycott of Samsung.
I own Apple gear. I like it. I don't like what the company is doing, however. It's as simple as that. I won't own an iPhone or an iPad, though -- I have less use for them as I get more out of an Android device.
(Here's where I get modded down) Thankfully, Steve Jobs is gone. It's a chance for Apple to become something else. Some might say something betters... others might say something worse, but definitely something different. Personally, I hope they attempt to conquer the business enterprise. Getting something with some *NIX in the kernel on the business desktop might finally result in some interesting things. Then again, it'd also make it the large target for viruses and malware that it never really has been before. (Malware has been extremely targeted these days. If Lockheed switched to Apple, the next break-in will focus on Apple gear and OSes.) This would suck for Apple and for Microsoft but it would be good for all the rest of us.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
you are shitting me right? 128k Mac from 1984 pissed you off how?
Re:twitter, I like you (Score:5, Funny)
Rounded rectangles (Score:5, Informative)
Your comment was posted in a rounded rectangle. Please stop that you are violating Apple's patents.
Interestingly, this was one of Steve Jobs' early contributions. There was famously an argument when they were designing the first Macs (having licensed the windowing system from Xerox PARC) - he insisted on including rounded rectangles in the design. His head designer (whose name I forget - Parkhurst?) could not figure why he wanted rounded rectangles. Jobs took him outside, and showed how every rectangular road sign was a rounded rectangle.
Which shows that all things old are new again. It's worth noting that nobody ever patented rounded rectangles on road signs - it was just a useful design, not a 'world-shaking invention' in the world view of that time.
Re: (Score:3)
Bill Atkinson
http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Round_Rects_Are_Everywhere.txt [folklore.org]
Re:Rounded rectangles (Score:5, Funny)
And here's me all this time thinking it was because mac users werent safe to be left unsupervised with sharp corners.
Re:Rounded rectangles (Score:4, Insightful)
I think there is something to do with perception. In fact, if you look at most large highway signs (everywhere I've lived), the actual sign board is still the full rectangle; only the painted outline is rounded. And the rounded windows certainly look better.
Re:Effective Anymore? (Score:4, Informative)
21,000 domains left, 20,000 signed up. At best that protest has cost them some petty cash they didn't give a damn about anyway.
Interesting, I was the opposite (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Patent fight not the only reason (Score:5, Informative)
DRM
Funny as Apple/Jobs pushed music labels to release their music DRM free
Locking hardware to software
They also do that with a reason and not the "evil" they want to rape our babies kind of thing. With Apple they are so obsessed with user experience (and they don't suck at it) that they want to control every aspect. And hate that vertical approach but it works for them. If I look how different the experience is between my android smarthphone and iPad I find it hard to criticize them.
Pushing of proprietary standards
Hilarious. You are aware of the fact that they favored pushing HTML5 instead of the proprietary stuff like Flash. You are aware they are on of the driving force like open standard as OpenCL.
Being the middle-man
Because bandwidth, processing cost, support are all free.
Being secretive about developer revenues
Can you tell me where apple advertises with the fact that IOS is as lucrative. Can I tell you something as a developer who also built mobile applications and also have android devices. If the IOS market is so bad, you don't want to know which graveyard the Android market is.
As someone calling bullshit on the fact that Samsung didn't copy icons or look and feel. Look at KIES, look at the use of sunflower as an icon for the photo picture. Not like the telephone symbol as a photographer I never seen the sunflower as a mental model for a photograph.
For me people may buy and boycott what they want but damn there is so much FUD these days on sites like slashdot it isn't even funny anymore.
Wow, every point wrong! (Score:4, Insightful)
Download music from iTunes, and you can only play it on a limited number of computers (try it and you'll find out).
Nope, been unencrptyted now for many years (and with iTunes Match Apple will even give you a nice 256kb DRM-free audio file of everything you ever ripped from a CD).
So that was totally wrong.
Locking hardware to software.
This was a particularly amusing error because you almost had a point! If only you had reversed it.
But in fact Apple does not lock hardware to software at all. Apple, for example, shipped bootcamp with the first Intel Mac.
Pushing of proprietary standards.
Like the industry standard HTML5?
Or the industry standard video codec h.264?
Or forcing the music industry to drop DRM?
Apple has not pushed proprietary standards since AppleTalk.
Being the middle-man.
I can download music from anywhere and load it on an iPhone.
Free apps pay nothing to Apple.
I can put any number of PDF's on a iPhone, or read Kindle books with which not one cent went to Apple...
"A" middle man? Sure. THE middle man? Not even close.
Being secretive about developer revenues.
Good good man, Apple is the only company that trumpets loudly how much they are paying developers! There is nothing secret about it whatsoever.
Is it hard to find out how much any one developer makes? Yes, unless they tell you. You are claiming that I should simply be able to ask Apple exactly how much money every app made, and you are claiming that breathtaking invasion of MY privacy as an App developer is LESS EVIL?
How about you tell us how much you make. Or are you being secretive?
And, if you google around, I'm sure you'll find many other reasons to dislike Apple.
Indeed you will, each of them more baseless than the last.
The sad thing is there are perfectly valid reasons to be be upset with Apple, why can't people complain about them more often in a wider forum?
Re: (Score:2)
Somethings Apple may be fighting in court may be "theirs" but the problem is that they seem to be fighting everything. The Android style notification bar seems to have found its way to iOS. There are things that may be worth fighting for and things that may be too stupid to defend.
There is a problem in the federal judiciary in the United States aging as there has been a confirmation crisis running f
Stop lying (Score:3)
Let's all pick on THE innovative company who is simply going after others for copying their intellectual property,
Apple is only innovative in it's ways to restrain free trade, because Apple cannot compete otherwise. Apple's patents, and lawsuits, are frivolous bullshit, and we both know it.