Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Media (Apple) Businesses Media Apple

Apple Quashes pBop 69

Posted by pudge from the oops dept.
mojotunes writes "The pBop (nee pPod) MP3 player mentioned on Slashdot a while back has been officially pulled by its creator StarBrite Solutions, apparently because of legal pressure from Apple. Well, duh. Who didn't see that coming?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Quashes pBop More

Apple Quashes pBop

Comments Filter:

  • not a very helpful link... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MatrixBandit ( 709610 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @05:20AM (#8619870) Journal
    It's funny how the the slashdot article is actually longer than the original source.
    Seriously, does anyone have any useful links on this, as to exactly how they were infringing on Apple, and not just the obvious speculation?

  • History Repeating (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Trurl's Machine ( 651488 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @06:52AM (#8620061) Journal
    Reading similar stories, I always have the same feeling of deja vu. First Apple introduces some new gagdet or a new user interface concept. Then it gets immediate bashing from both pro-Apple and anti-Apple camps - how ugly, dysfunctional and stupid it is! Then we see an avalanche of various clones of the new Apple gizmo for Linux or Windows. And finally we hear a common outrage when Apple sends its famous "cease & desist" letters and the avalanche indeed ceases and desists. We have had that with Aqua, Dock, iTunes etc. - now we have it with the iPod...
    • I don't think anyone ever bashed the interface on the iPod. It's the mp3 player that my mother was able to figure out in less than two mins.

      • Re:History Repeating (Score:5, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 20, 2004 @10:49AM (#8620885)
        For example, CmdrTaco had following to say about the iPod: "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." [slashdot.org] Other trolls on the same page were about the same... so there you go. The experts had spoken, the iPod was truly "lame", while the superior ultra-compact Nomad was the way to go.
        • it's because most geeks have no concept of style, or even an understanding that other people have a concept of style.
        • Heres my favourite quote [slashdot.org]:

          "The LCD display is too small, it remains to be seen what the power consumption or usability of the backlight is, the four buttons (five, actually, I suspect) are likely insufficient, and probably rather modal. I dare not imagine how badly they've ginnied up the volume control. Apple's support for ID3 is woefully insufficient on iTunes and on iPod. (so is everyone else's, more's the pity)"

    • Re:History Repeating (Score:5, Interesting)

      by CptTripps ( 196901 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @08:59AM (#8620407) Homepage
      Put yourself in their shoes. Every time they 'invent' something, about 6mos later, someone copies it (this time EXACTLY) and the world is amazed when Apple sues them over it. Remember the eMachines 'iMac' clone back on 2000? Remember the operating system that Microsoft copied back in 1983?

      Can you blame them?

    • The Peoples' Hate Affair with Apple (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Crash Culligan ( 227354 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @09:56AM (#8620644) Journal
      Then it gets immediate bashing from both pro-Apple and anti-Apple camps - how ugly, dysfunctional and stupid it is! Then we see an avalanche of various clones of the new Apple gizmo for Linux or Windows. And finally we hear a common outrage when Apple sends its famous "cease & desist" letters and the avalanche indeed ceases and desists.

      Yeah... says something, doesn't it?

      So the sequence is:

      1. Apple creates something
      2. People claim that the design [sucks | is ugly | is useless | is stupid | won't sell | clashes with my duvet]
      3. The thing in question sprouts wings and takes off (metaphorically)
      4. People copy the crap out of it
      5. Apple sends in the lawyers
      6. People stop copying
      ...right?

      Step 1 is natural; they design stuff. Step 3 isn't guaranteed, but they seem to come up with quite a few hits, now don't they? Step 4 is also quite natural; if one of something is good, then a copy of it will work almost as well with a fraction of the effort! Step 5 is natural given step 4; if they don't protect their designs, then everybody will make money off of the popular ones. And step 6 is natural because, hey, lawyers are involved.

      That leaves step 2: people saying that Apple's designs are bad. It farts liberally in the face of step 3, so it must have something to do with step 1: the fact that Apple made it.

      And now I'm scratching my head and wondering why.

      What does Apple do that makes them so evil that people will decry their products without even a second glance? Why do certain journalists feel the need to predict its imminent downfall for verging on 30 years? How do so many become so thoroughly programmed to be so hostile?

      And no, I don't have the answer. That's why I'm asking.

      • Re:The Peoples' Hate Affair with Apple (Score:5, Insightful)

        by oneofthemany ( 763344 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @10:15AM (#8620731)
        Good question, I suspect that apple get no more criticism for its new products than any other company, it just tends to be that apple's launches are higher profile and so, as a consequence, is the criticism.

        Perhaps another answer is that apple takes more risks with its products and produces genuinely 'different' things, and new 'different' things are (almost) always challenged before they are accepted.

      • Re:The Peoples' Hate Affair with Apple (Score:5, Interesting)

        by justMichael ( 606509 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @11:36AM (#8621166) Homepage
        I think the reasons that Apple takes a beating are:

        1) People fear that which they do not understand.

        2) The Mac doesn't have any software for it, it can't be any good.

        3) You can't walk into just any store and buy/get help with an Apple product or software.

        4) The percieved high price of Apple products.

        Now, I could be way off, these are just my perceptions.

        Personaly I felt the same way. Up until OS X, I never liked the pre Aqua UI, still don't.

        I started watching OS X when it first came out, when OS X got strong (about 10.2) I decided it had matured enough. I just happened to be in the market for a portable, I bought a PowerBook when they first started shipping 1GHz. Never looked back.

        There are still 2 things I do on my Windows box; Play games and my Finances. I already had my games for the PC and I don't want my Financials on a portable machine.

        BTW: I NEVER thought I would see the word "duvet" used on Slasshdot ;)
      • Maybe there is still hope for this world, and most of those people reject because it is made by Apple, not because it is new ;-)

      • Re:The Peoples' Hate Affair with Apple (Score:5, Insightful)

        by JGski ( 537049 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @02:28PM (#8622111) Journal
        Apple strives for an elite, artistic aesthetic standard, and on top of that much (I won't say all) of their technology matches that aesthetic. They have excellent industrial design. They think about the user experience (unlike many Windows & Linux developers).

        For USians in particular, our history doesn't lend itself to adulation of the elites or of people that are perceived to have airs of being the elite. There is a grudging acknowledgment, once Apples has proven its products, that appeals to the practical appreciation of the technology, but there's a subcurrent of feelings of inadequacy which manifests itself when companies like Microsoft boldly state that they invented when it's obvious Apple was there first. The Microsoft appeal is probably at least partly "yeah it sucks, but Windows is one of the boys, at least - not prissy or artsy dilettante".

        Beyond the outward cultural aspect, there is also the personal demons element. Apple (due to Steve's personality and reality-distortion-field) sort of acts like the smart, popular and good looking kid who knows exactly how smart, popular and good looking he is - yeah, that triggers all sorts of adolescent insecurities, even with people how haven't been adolescents for decades. Apple seems to seduce and some folks feel unconfortable with being seduced like that. (I happen to like but I'm a bit of hedonist! :-) )

        Watching how Mr. Bill, and Microsoft in general, respond to things Apple leads me to think that these factors are at play. I'd put many Linux folks who hate Apple into the same bucket though, only in different proportions. Rationally Apple is Unix and a closer cousin now, most of the issues raised always seems to be more emotional than rational. (The proof will come from how people reply/moderate this I guess :-) )

      • Re:The Peoples' Hate Affair with Apple (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Midnight Thunder ( 17205 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @04:16PM (#8622743) Homepage Journal
        That leaves step 2: people saying that Apple's designs are bad. It farts liberally in the face of step 3, so it must have something to do with step 1: the fact that Apple made it.

        It is well known that any design that stands out enough is going to create a reaction. The more it stands out, the greater the reaction. The only thing is that this draws from both ends of the spectrum: those who say it is the worst thing ever and those who say it is the greatest. You can't please everyone, and it is foolish to think you can. Your average PC maker causes no reaction, simply because they produce the same stuff as the other company. Only the absurd and the different stand out.
        • I suppose you are also making a connection with apples work=Art, as art is supposed to get a reaction, positive or negative, or is is not good art. Is that why everyone is so simply *meh...* with MS? Because they have not approached their design as art? It would also explain why the kind of people who tend to have a major taste for art are more drawn to Apple products...
      • people dislike apples's designs at first because they "think different," so it takes a while for people to get used to the new thing at which point they realize it is a good idea and copy it.
      • Here's my experience with that situation. I used to be a PC nut. I'd build them, fix them, play games on them. When people would say that macs were better, I'd laugh at them. I had played around with one before, and because it didn't have a command line, I wrote it off as useless. Besides, it was more expensive, and you couldn't get any software for it. So whenever I heard someone say 'Apple' I'd begin my rant on how Macs were "overpriced, no software, expensive to fix, blah blah blah". All the same
      • It farts liberally in the face of step 3

        Somebody please mod that funny.
      • Because the people that hate whatever it is are all Windoze faggots... and they have as much integrity as Billy Gates. But what would you expect from Gates, his father's a lawyer.
      • I have the answer. It's in the title of a song from Hotlegs (the group who would later become 10cc, in case you ever heard of them):

        You Didn't Like It Because You Didn't Think Of It.

        Step 2 comes from industry journalists, I promise you, not the 'people' as a whole. (Anyone else who derides Apple has simply been reading too much John Dvorak.) The reason they're journalists is that their own originality and inventiveness is in their ass; otherwise, they might be sharing in the role that Apple plays every
  • Um, me? First I've heard of teh product.

  • it's hardly a copy (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 20, 2004 @02:27PM (#8622106)
    the pPod was hardly a copy, at least not functionaly. all it had going for was the "look" of iPod. it's basically an mp3 player with a skin that looked like an iPod - not an emulated iPod, as it seems to be implied.

    didn't play AAC. doesn't work with iTMS. etc. etc.

    i'm surprised it got as much coverage as it did.

    • Techie vs. Designer (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Baumi ( 148744 ) on Sunday March 21, 2004 @02:54AM (#8626015) Homepage
      Sure, from a technical POV you're right - it's still the same old PDA underneath and it doesn't play anthing it didn't play before. However, not only software engineers spend (or should spend) ages perfecting their part of the product, designers do the same thing.
      And if you asked a product designer, they probably wouldn't care whether it can play back AACs or all the other stuff: It has the same look & feel, it uses exactly the techniques and designs perfected by the people who came up with the iPod.

      There's more to a device than just its functionality - the failure to understand that is exactly what has lead to a flood of software with unintuitive UIs.
    • You're right; it really only got coverage because of speculation that it was going to be quashed by Apple.
    • This is one of the reasons why Apple stops things like this: it appears to be Apple-endorsed, but it doesn't live up to the actual product. It's at best a pale shadow of the real thing, so in addition to copying the design they spent R&D on, it dilutes the brand.
  • I have to wonder how much of Apple's continued pressure had to do with the fact that Starbright was copying Apple's interface design AND making a profit off it at $15 dollars a pop.
    Apple after all expends a great deal of money and effort researching design and interfaces for their products. Should other companies be permitted to proft from them? I don't think so.
    Should other companies be able to use another companies' intellectual property in ways that:
    A. Aren't profitting directly from the creator's ha

Slashdot Top Deals

"jackpot: you may have an unneccessary change record" -- message from "diff"

Close