Lighten up, it's a joke.
Lighten up, it's a joke.
And that was just one of MANY Android devices.
HTC, Motorola, LG, etc....
After the quick frenzy of this occasional apple upgrade, the numbers will go back to being Android heavy.
Samsung's the only one turning a decent profit though. And a lot of that market is selling low-end smartphones to be used as dumb phones. One company is building the next generation computing platform, the others are just selling handsets even if some are trying to create a cargo-cult facsimile of an ecosystem (like Samsung with their Samsung S-Cloud and what not.)
Galaxy S3 did not have 9 million preorders. Samsung confirmed it took just under 2 months to sell 10 million.
It was reported as such, which I assume GP was talking about : Samsung S3: 9 million pre-order new Galaxy phone.
We're talking about the first 24 hours here, US only and directly from consumers. Galaxy S3's 9 million pre-orders was over a longer period, worldwide and pre-orders by carriers. You're comparing apples and lemons.
The dustbin of history is littered with "superior" solutions. Implementation is everything.
The story of too many of the "open" projects :
* someone creates something worthwhile
* it becomes very popular
* some douchebag says: "I'll make something exactly like this, except it will be better because it's OPEN."
* nothing of value is produced
* Lather, rinse, repeat
It's also why I wear my phone in a holster even though I know it's not "cool".
All kidding aside though, it's not about aesthetics alone. If you're going to holding something in your hands for an extended period of time it needs to feel right and it needs to be solid and sturdy.
I disagree. If the Google model wins not only will we end up with a system where device support is non-existant, app quality is low and letting developers make money is a low priority (the current state of Android "ecosystem"), and we'll all end up paying for it all by trading away our privacy and our data because that's the real priority and reason Android was ever even developed. I prefer the Apple way because I think it'll end up creating a much better (if not exactly ideal) environment for both end users and developers. Of course if a third path should open my opinion might change but that doesn't look likely any time soon.
ALL remaining parties are "corporate shills" by the way. The true free as in speech alternatives died at the hands of the Android juggernaut.
So Amazon would be the ultimate underdog since despite huge revenues they make relatively little profit ? That makes no sense. These are both huge companies, used to getting their way. There are no underdogs here.
However, in the worst case the interview should have cleared up any question of motive.
That's the bad part: it did.
"But if things weren’t quite clear to the detectives at the start, they certainly were by the time they wrote up the case file. It states: "There is no evidence at this stage that this is anything other than a foolish comment posted on Twitter as a joke for only his close friends to see."
But they didn't want to appear to be soft on terrorism or whatever and so rather than make the judgement they knew to be correct they threw an innocent man into the legal system. Gutless.
Like you would sit at your job and say "hey, some guy threatened to blow up my building, via a tweet... I am so sure this is not credible that I am willing to literally bet my (and many others') life that it isn't credible. I think i will willfully ignore it, and tell everyone that contrary to what THEY might think, there is no threat." Come on.
Nobody thought it was a threat until the media got interested and then suddenly nobody dared to let the poor guy go. This despite the fact they were all professionals who should be able to distinguish between a threat and a bad joke. If you're not ready to make those calls you shouldn't be in a job where you have to think at all.
- The airport manager "reported it to his superior, who rated it "non credible" as a threat"
- Airport police then "waited two days before passing on the investigation to their colleagues at Doncaster police station" (bet they were worried, huh ?)
- The police thought it was a joke : "[the case file ] states: "There is no evidence at this stage that this is anything other than a foolish comment posted on Twitter as a joke for only his close friends to see.""
- But of course by then the media were interested so : "With Paul Chambers out on bail and "huge public and media interest" (as a further statement put it) no doubt causing jitters higher up the pecking order, South Yorkshire police turned to the CPS for a "decision on disposal""
Once in legal system the guy's goose was cooked.
Ultimately, this boils down to patenting "scroll with one finger or pinch-to-zoom with two"
No, scroll with one, or gesture with two, where gesture is any operation that follows 2 or more simultaneous inputs.
Your argument seems to be that it's okay for Apple to patent the combination of these very basic and natural actions and gestures because this isn't that hard to design around?
I don't care about patents. We could throw away the whole patent system tomorrow and it's be no skin off my back. It wouldn't change the fact Samsung is copying Apple here. But as long as we are operating within this system you have to apply its rules consistently and that means you can't just throw out cases because you don't like the claimant because that's just arbitrary. That's what I'm doing: arguing within the logic of an illogical system.
Yeah I confused myself there. This one is the scrolling patent, then there are separate bounce and pinch patents.
The saddest part of this story is that it could've been stopped before it began: the manager who discovered the tweet, the airport police, the police, none of them thought there was a credible threat but rather than assume responsibility they decided to pass the buck to someone else effectively pushing the case further and further up the chain.
For those following along at home, this is what happens when a lawyer does describe a pinch to zoom gesture :
"1. A method, comprising: detecting at least two first contacts on a display surface of a multi-touch-sensitive display device; detecting a first motion associated with the at least two first contacts, wherein the first motion corresponds to a multi-touch gesture; adjusting a parameter of a graphical object in accordance with the first motion; detecting a breaking of the at least two first contacts; after detecting the breaking of the at least two first contacts, detecting at least two second contacts on the display surface; detecting a second motion associated with the at least two second contacts, wherein the second motion corresponds to the multi-touch gesture and the at least two second contacts are detected within a pre-determined time interval after the breaking of the at least two first contacts is detected; and continuing to adjust the parameter of the graphical object in accordance with the second motion.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein adjusting the parameter is a non-linear function of a displacement of the first contacts during the multi-touch gesture.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the parameter comprises a magnification of the graphical object.
Simple, right ?!