Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:What goes around comes around... (Score 1) 446

by fwoop (#41396807) Attached to: Motorola Seeks Ban On Macs, iPads, and iPhones

You either misunderstand or misrepresent what Apple has patented there. They haven't patented a method to bounce a display. They patented a method to give feedback when a scrolling operation reaches the end in a way that doesn't obstruct the display and is obvious for the user to understand. Samsung is free to bounce whatever they want on their phones and tablets, as long as it isn't for giving feedback to the user that they scrolled to the end of the scroll area.

Likewise, apple is free to not copy google's innovations, namely voice prompts for siri. *chomps on popcorn*

Comment: Re:Inherent bias? (Score 5, Informative) 149

by fwoop (#41346527) Attached to: Apple Wins Again — ITC Rules They Didn't Violate Samsung Patents
The ITC is inherently biased for US companies when it comes to bans. A ban can be rejected if it is deemed to hurt the US economy, so there is almost no way a foreign firm can ever ban a US company's products. In fact, I am not sure this has ever been carried out.

Comment: Re:Alliances (Score 3, Interesting) 9

by fwoop (#40572977) Attached to: Yahoo and Facebook Resolve Patent Dispute
Too late. Facebook is expanding their online ad presence outside of facebook, so if you ever gave facebook your age/gender/etc, they'll use that to target ads to you even if you're not logged into facebook. This is starting with Zynga but will go beyond zynga. I'm frankly quite surprised, in this age of privacy concern, that no one has raised a red flag. But I find privacy concern is more about following fads rather than actual privacy.

Comment: Re:Oh, for fuck's sake! (Score 1) 696

by fwoop (#40508411) Attached to: Sale of Galaxy Nexus Banned in the US

Hmm, so just because Apple are ahead of the competition, you think they shouldn't (attempt) to stop other people copying them...?

Apple compete by researching and designing their own products. They just want others to do the same.

And if you are going to let a companies actions to protect its research and development stop you purchasing a new Macbook Pro (and iPad?), then thats your call. Just don't pretend is for "righteous" reasons.

So will Apple reimburse google after copying android vertical notifications?

Comment: Re:EU vs Everybody (Score 1) 119

by fwoop (#40077479) Attached to: EU Offers Google Chance To Settle Prior To Anti-Trust Enquiry
Walk into a department store with computers running windows and you'll see microsoft displaying ads for Bing. Then Microsoft used their monopoly to push their IE product, instant messaging, and a plethora of other products. Can we expect investigations into Microsoft? How about apple for itunes, amazon used their dominance to push the kindle fire. Keep in mind, these products often resulted in other companies go out of business. Why focus on Google? Your point is the rules can change, for no apparent reason, and companies can find themselves in hot water... at least certain companies? This seems like 3rd world-style governance.

Comment: Re:Prepare for a worse experience... (Score 3, Insightful) 119

by fwoop (#40077053) Attached to: EU Offers Google Chance To Settle Prior To Anti-Trust Enquiry
This is similar to how costco works. They have control over the retail space, and their goal is to make the shopping experience great for consumers.. That means dirt cheap, at the expense of suppliers. Suppliers go out of business, that's the point. So costco offers cheap ink refills, potentially putting companies like HP out of business. HP hates Costco. Lots of suppliers hate Costco, lots of company hates Costco, but consumers love Costco. Because only consumers matter. The difference here is competitors are using regulators instead of the market place to compete.

Comment: Re:Taxes suck. (Score 1) 345

Looks like Microsoft is joining up on the PR front to tag team google in the media: http://falkvinge.net/2012/03/02/how-microsoft-pays-big-money-to-smear-google-audaciously/. I long ago stopped responding to all the bogus claims against google. The myriad of bullshit is astounding, and it's too much to go through. Perhaps that is what the PR onslaught against google had in mind: throw everything and see what sticks, much like Oracle's lawsuit.

Comment: Re:Most vital lesson learnt: Hire the right person (Score 1) 201

by fwoop (#39754479) Attached to: Google Developer Testifies That Java Memo Was Misinterpreted
I'm like you, however I notice many fellow engineers feel free to make legal statements in email all the time, even when lawyers tell them to shut up, they persist, even get mad someone's telling them to shut up. I can only conclude such people are autistic. Yes they may make great engineers. They just need to be babysat.

Comment: Re:Cest la vie (Score 1) 42

by fwoop (#39691227) Attached to: German Court Upholds Ban On Push Email In Apple's iCloud, MobileMe
...as are Apple's lawsuits against companies like HTC over multitouch. And now Motorola has a huge billion dollar war chest thanks to Google. Yes, I think Apple is getting exactly what it deserves. Apple can make this all go away tomorrow by ... gasp ... negotiating with Google and Android hanset manufacturers and coming to a licensing agreement, and letting the free market decide. Imagine that, billions spent on innovation vs lawyers. The alternative of living by the sword is dying by the sword.

Comment: Re:Yet ANOTHER Government Agency (Score 1) 137

by fwoop (#38702170) Attached to: FTC Expands Its Google Antitrust Investigations
And yet look at how far SOPA got. And look at the age of that article, and the fact that Obama hasn't been back since 2007, and you realize that now Google is perceived as a political liability, and is vastly outnumbered in Washington compared to the entertainment industry. Actually he came to the computer history museum last September just down the street from Google and he didn't go to Google. But he did visit Facebook last year. These days it's just cool to hate Google and being close to Google is political suicide. Because Google makes a lot of money.

This is what the FTC probe ended with:

"“The company also publicly stated its intention to delete the inadvertently collected payload data as soon as possible. Further, Google has made assurances to the FTC that the company has not used and will not use any of the payload data collected in any Google product or service, now or in the future. This assurance is critical to mitigate the potential harm to consumers from the collection of payload data. Because of these commitments, we are ending our inquiry into this matter at this time."
Big deal.

Comment: Re:Completely unsurprising (Score 1) 137

by fwoop (#38702024) Attached to: FTC Expands Its Google Antitrust Investigations
Even so, how does Google know that the current user is (a) a facebook user and (b) has Katy Perry as one of his/her friends. Facebook doesn't share that information with Google. Facebook wants a walled garden vs giving users what they want. Google now knows who is in your circles and can give you better results as such for the entire internet as well as your circle of friends. Already there are bloggers who have written about how useful the new search is.

And if you think this is evil, then will you say the same when Facebook does the same thing? When Microsoft does the same thing? Facebook is going public and you can be sure they will expand into general search, what do you think they'll do with all the information they have on their users? Especially given the low margins of facebook advertising compared to search advertising, it's only a matter of time until Facebook gets into search and leverages their social data. If anything, Google is guilty of pioneering this new way of searching. Users want this. They wanted Google providing search results using Twitter data then Twitter refused to share data with Google, so Google created their own network to give users what they want. I don't see a problem here.

Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.

Working...