Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On 8/30/2012 9:06 PM, Daniel J. Matyola wrote: So, if Porsche comes out with a new car that has a unique shape, is it alright if GM copies that unique shape and sells cars to compete with the new Porsche? Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola I do know something of precedent law, and the broad strokes that it will sometimes paint with. Allowing a company to patent the shape of a product is dangerous because that precedent can then be applied to other products (cars, toothbrushes, microwave ovens, etc) Daniel, at your spare time please have a look at last version of Honda Insight and Toyota Prius... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Darren, you did nothing wrong. You truly did not. So you don't have any reasons whatsoever to feel like this. Please reconsider. On 8/31/2012 12:51 AM, Darren Addy wrote: To the entire PDML community: Please accept my sincerest apologies for starting this thread (or, more correctly now, these threads). As penance, I would force myself to read each message it contains except for the fact that it would make me want to slit my wrists (more than I already do). I'd also like to thank DagT for his generous contributions of pearls before swine in these threads. Now, if you'll pardon me, I'm off to acquaint myself with the PDML unsubscribe option. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On 31 August 2012 04:06, Daniel J. Matyola danmaty...@gmail.com wrote: So, if Porsche comes out with a new car that has a unique shape, is it alright if GM copies that unique shape and sells cars to compete with the new Porsche? If you too closely copy a work of literature or art then wouldn't there be a breach of copyright? Patent protection as well would be something of a belt 'n' braces situation. OTOH, perhaps big corporations prefer to litigate patent infringements over copyright infringements. regards, Anthony -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Joe, Thanks for the link. I'm weak on my old radio commercials and the Pepsi jingle is beyond my knowledge. I enjoyed the story of your dad's career. It really was a different time. Regards, Bob S. On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 11:13 PM, Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com wrote: We are jiving to it here. Good ol' Johnny Fosdick's Orchestra backing up Anita Bayer's vocals. Of course, it's an iMac I'm running it through. :-) Try this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxTnEbOjVCgfeature=player_detailpage The previous URL was for my replaying it. On Aug 30, 2012, at 18:42 , Bob Sullivan wrote: Joe, Something's buggy with that Utube video...if I had a blue screen of death, it would have appeared. It was a full stop. Regards, Bob S. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Don't be silly, Darren. This is an epic thread(s). I will even point out here the other thread noting that Apple was mostly the loser in the Japanese version of all this. I may start a separate Gmail account. On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Bob Sullivan rf.sulli...@gmail.com wrote: Joe, Thanks for the link. I'm weak on my old radio commercials and the Pepsi jingle is beyond my knowledge. I enjoyed the story of your dad's career. It really was a different time. Regards, Bob S. On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 11:13 PM, Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com wrote: We are jiving to it here. Good ol' Johnny Fosdick's Orchestra backing up Anita Bayer's vocals. Of course, it's an iMac I'm running it through. :-) Try this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxTnEbOjVCgfeature=player_detailpage The previous URL was for my replaying it. On Aug 30, 2012, at 18:42 , Bob Sullivan wrote: Joe, Something's buggy with that Utube video...if I had a blue screen of death, it would have appeared. It was a full stop. Regards, Bob S. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
on 2012-08-29 16:03 DagT wrote OK, I think my last word here is that my work is helping small firms protect their inventions. that explains it! thanks for a good conversation, Dag; you obviously have much more depth than me in this area, and a lot more riding on it professionally; it has kept me on my toes to respond to you, and i will remember your points -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 27, 2012, at 07:21 , Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 2:26 AM, Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com wrote: ... That lasted for a while, then Apple addressed the costs by coming out with their own (or purchased) fonts design called TrueType that gave damn near the quality of Adobe's system. ... Fascinating stories. Joe, a good friend at Apple invented TrueType (one of his eighteen or nineteen patents at Apple related to the technology of typography in the digital world). We had lunch just this past Saturday. He retired about a decade ago, sat around for two years, realized he was bored, and went back to work at a company that designs and develops font and typographic tools (name escapes me). Still doing what he loves. I wrote my whole piece trying to come up with the rendering process Adobe used. Still can't think of it. Too lazy tonight to look it up. Spilled coke on my big comfortable keyboard tonight. Rinsed it out to get rid of the stickies. It sits inverted on the dish-rack. Tomorrow it will go in the oven real low for the day. Then we'll see. Anyway, my recollection is that TrueType was a method of minutely smoothing what was once lumpy pixels. As opposed to Adobe's vector drawing formula. It's been so long since I had to even think about it. Ya gotta let go of some of what you knew to make room for FaceBook timelines and Netflix streaming. Gagh. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 27, 2012, at 09:33 , John Sessoms wrote: The part that mattered and y'all kind of missed was the and don't touch anything else kid. I really was a kid, not yet old enough to drive. It was very unusual someone my age would even be allowed inside the computer room. Not only was I allowed in, I was allowed to do something, a very VERY minor something, with the computer. I wasn't even particularly interested in computers. If you can't take it apart to see how it works, what good is it? I already understood enough about the grown-up world to know THEY were never going to let me do that. It was just the least boring place for me to wait around until my dad decided to quit work and I could catch a ride home. I don't remember what they used the computer for, although I'm sure I was told at some time or another. It was an insurance company, so it must have had something to do with keeping track of the money. It's called Actuarials. How the companies crunch all the statistical know data about peoples frailties, accident rates, death rates, broken down by the block you live on, so they know what to charge everyone and cover known and unknown claim rates, still making enough profit to buy the largest buildings in all large cities so their name is placed up in the air for all to see. Joseph who's Dad worked for Liberty Mutual in Boston and Hopkinton Mass for 30 years. The very same company who cancelled me after one $300.00 accident. Bastards. I've only been involved in 4 accidents in my 55 years of driving. One that was my fault, I think. Not sure, really, I nodded off on the way home from my second job at 2 AM on a one way street in San Francisco in 1969. I was driving the timed lights. Apparently I entered the intersection as the light turned green. A taxi entered in a late yellow. Light was red when he T-boned me in my '64 MGB. Seatbelt saved me. Repaired the 'B' and painted it white. Never liked the baby blue the factory used. From: Daniel J. Matyola Yes, I also worked with computers that had punch cards in the 1960s. Dull Boring work. As I result, I lost my chance to get in on the ground floor. My four math courses in college were with John Kemeny, then head of the Math Department, and later President, of Dartmouth College. He told us he was working on a computer programing language, and was seeking student volunteers. Our response was that we didn't want to get involved with computers that gave you paper cuts, and anyway, we had our slide rules; who needed computers? Kemeny went on to develop BASIC, which was (and perhaps still is) patented by the college. It took 20 years before I finally became involved with computers; by that time, BASIC had gone through numerous iterations and improvements. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Aug 25, 2012, at 20:10 , John Sessoms wrote: From: Daniel J. Matyola My first computer was an Apple ][. Great computer. I loved it. I learned Basic, Pascal, Assembler and even a bit of machine language programing on it. It certainly wasn't plug -and-play, but it was designed for computer hobbyists, and most of them loved it. Dan Matyola My first computer was an IBM System 360. I learned to place the cards in the card reader Face down nine edge first, AND DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING ELSE KID! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 27, 2012, at 19:47 , William Robb wrote: On 27/08/2012 6:55 PM, Tom C wrote: What I'm against is a world where we only have Fords, Apple iPads, Apple smart phones, Samsung TV's, Frigidaire refrigerators,,, you get my drift, to choose from, and from what I can see that's the kind of world Apple would like it to be. Precedent law would say that the first company to patent the 3 box car design will have the market in sedans and coupes to themselves, and if the are smart they could patent the pick up truck shape and be the only car maker allowed to sell vehicles in the USA. That's how stupid allowing Apple to patent the rectangle with rounded corner shape is. It's not 'stupid' if the shape of the corners has a specific reason inherent to the functioning of the screen or the safety of the user. You can prick your fingers on sharp corners. Apple was trying to protect us from ourselves! :)) We can only hope that it's Nissan or Toyota, and not one of the Big 3 that gets to the patent office first, or we are guaranteed to have to live with crappy vehicles forever. Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com “ The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.” — Kevan Olesen -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 28, 2012, at 10:04 , Larry Colen wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 7:17 AM, Charles Robinson wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 5:13 AM, Larry Colen wrote: I will agree that the goatse zoom is a clever idea, but being software should not be patentable. …but being software, should not be patentable? Did you really just say that? Yes I did. I am firmly opposed to the concept of software patents. Mathematical formulas are not patentable. Sentence constructions are not patentable. All patent portfolios do is block smaller companies out of the marketplace. Unfu*kingbelievable. No point in writing a book then. It's just words. Doesn't 'do' anything. Mathematicians get credit globally when they come up with solutions as yet not written down. Slap Cadillac trim, badges and design elements on your Lotus and you've got big problems. If you forward or repeat this email in it's entirety and unchanged, I'll sue your ass down to Tijuana! Joseph McAllister Pentaxian -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 28, 2012, at 10:47 , P. J. Alling wrote: To even be allowed to argue patent law you are required to be a combination of scientist engineer and lawyer, to hear the case apparently not. My Mom's grandfather's firm spent 9 years trying to find a way for the Wright Brothers to patent their airplane. They and all others trying to attain gliders or powered aircraft had never bothered to patent their toys. Eventually, they all flew. By the time many others had built planes with flapping sections of the wing (ailerons) to bank L R. The Wrights were therefore only able to patent their original wing warping controls. Spent years then trying to sue all others for patent infringement. Never won a case. They also never ever built another plane commercially, and were unable to stop all others from building planes with ailerons for roll control. Their moments of glory were cut short when during a demonstration of their aircraft for the Army in Washington DC, the planed crashed and killed the Lieutenant along for the ride. Sad end. Spent all that time trying to patent a less than optimal control method. But they are in the Air and Space Museum. :-) It's not that life is too short, it's that you're dead for so long.. — Anon Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 30, 2012, at 12:49 AM, Joseph McAllister wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 10:04 , Larry Colen wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 7:17 AM, Charles Robinson wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 5:13 AM, Larry Colen wrote: I will agree that the goatse zoom is a clever idea, but being software should not be patentable. …but being software, should not be patentable? Did you really just say that? Yes I did. I am firmly opposed to the concept of software patents. Mathematical formulas are not patentable. Sentence constructions are not patentable. All patent portfolios do is block smaller companies out of the marketplace. Unfu*kingbelievable. No point in writing a book then. It's just words. Doesn't 'do' anything. There's a difference between patent and copyright. Software patents are like patenting using a color to describe someones mood in a song. Mathematicians get credit globally when they come up with solutions as yet not written down. Yes, but mathematicians can use other people's proofs as part of their own. Slap Cadillac trim, badges and design elements on your Lotus and you've got big problems. I dunno. Are they both still owned by GM? If you forward or repeat this email in it's entirety and unchanged, I'll sue your ass down to Tijuana! Joseph McAllister Pentaxian -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Den 30. aug. 2012 kl. 09:49 skrev Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com: On Aug 28, 2012, at 10:04 , Larry Colen wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 7:17 AM, Charles Robinson wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 5:13 AM, Larry Colen wrote: I will agree that the goatse zoom is a clever idea, but being software should not be patentable. …but being software, should not be patentable? Did you really just say that? Yes I did. I am firmly opposed to the concept of software patents. Mathematical formulas are not patentable. Sentence constructions are not patentable. All patent portfolios do is block smaller companies out of the marketplace. Unfu*kingbelievable. And untrue. We use patents the opposite way, to get into markets dominated by larger companies (or make them but the ringt for a good price). DagT -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 28, 2012, at 11:32 , Tom C wrote: The look and feel is different. Apple makers a big deal of that. I'm not saying it's better; just harder to base a lawsuit on. Even with the gesture related controls. Is it right to patent the fact that spreading your fingers means get larger and pinching them means shrink. Is there another gesture that makes more sense? Maybe dialing clock-wise to indicated expand, and anti-clock-wise to shrink? I believe those gestures were all first patented for the notebook computers when Apple placed a trackpad by shifting the keyboard up next to the screen. They shortly (after the patent was given) assigned these gestures to the electrostatic pad a few at a time to control movement on the screen. one finger, two, three, four, tap once or twice or three times, fingers and tapping, and finally, pinch and spread with two or more fingers. When Apple went down this road, Microsoft was pushing tiny little trackballs stuck in the crack at the edge of the keyboard. Oh yes, that was after Apple placed a trackball between the keyboard and the front edge of the computer, Hmm Power Book, Powerbook Duo. The Japanese makers placed a little red tipped dick in the middle of the keyboard for the user to stroke instead. :-) PULLLEASE! Credit where credit is due… (of course, I disavow any errors historical or hysterical in this message) Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com “ It is still true, as was first said many years ago, that people are the only sophisticated computing devices that can be made at low cost by unskilled workers!” — Martin G. Wolf, PhD -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Den 30. aug. 2012 kl. 09:35 skrev Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com: On Aug 27, 2012, at 19:47 , William Robb wrote: On 27/08/2012 6:55 PM, Tom C wrote: What I'm against is a world where we only have Fords, Apple iPads, Apple smart phones, Samsung TV's, Frigidaire refrigerators,,, you get my drift, to choose from, and from what I can see that's the kind of world Apple would like it to be. Precedent law would say that the first company to patent the 3 box car design will have the market in sedans and coupes to themselves, and if the are smart they could patent the pick up truck shape and be the only car maker allowed to sell vehicles in the USA. That's how stupid allowing Apple to patent the rectangle with rounded corner shape is. It's not 'stupid' if the shape of the corners has a specific reason inherent to the functioning of the screen or the safety of the If he was right it would be stupid, but Bill has obviuosly neither seen the patents nor the court decision but base his statement on popular belief. Which is not a good base for his arguments. DagT -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Or the $9.99 monthly phone from AARP with the big numbers and green screen. Yeah. I can use it! I've never had my glasses on when my burner rings. By the time I get them on, it has stopped ringing… On Aug 28, 2012, at 13:04 , Daniel J. Matyola wrote: You can buy those old clunkers at Walmart and a few other places, and there may be leftovers at mobile phone shops, but go to the mall and see what people, especially young people, are buying: iPhones and knock-offs of the iPhone. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 28, 2012, at 14:31 , steve harley wrote: on 2012-08-28 12:48 DagT wrote In the about 20 years I have been discussing this with people who are opposed to software patents nobody has ever found a fair definition. If you cannot forbid what you cannot define. :-) that's easy — let them get the patent, but if something is implemented in software, it can't be held to violate the patent The screen gestures are pretty much software driven. Strokes interpretred on screen by s/w reading it. Sari is local software that gets all it's smarts from the 'cloud'. No phone service, no Sari. Well, until now. She's supposed to work on the latest iOS and even on an iMac or MacBook. Rumors… -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 28, 2012, at 14:43 , DagT wrote: Which is very unfair for those who have great ideas. You know the circuitry for making efficient car engines? It may easily be duplicated by software if it is not already. Some millions of dollars research just to give it away to the competitor. Why bother making clean engines? But we want them, so have make people do the research if they don´t get anything back? Ever see the movie about the laid off GM employee who cobbled together the first delayed timer wiper system? He pitched it to GM. They said they weren't interested. But they put it as an option on all their cars the next year. Never did any research, just used factory made components to clean it up from the model. Took the inventor years and years to win in court. Big bucks. IIRC he either died just before he won, or shortly there after. IIRC he di dget the satisfaction he deserved. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 28, 2012, at 20:39 , William Robb wrote: Consider for a moment that when I was a mere teenager, a person pulling up beside you at a red light and making a deflating O gesture was an indication you had a flat tire. I doubt hardly anyone one the road these days has learned that spreading your finger from a balled fist every second means someone is telling you you've left your turn signals on. Even truckers are oblivious to this sign. *•*•*•* -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Den 30. aug. 2012 kl. 10:31 skrev Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com: On Aug 28, 2012, at 14:31 , steve harley wrote: on 2012-08-28 12:48 DagT wrote In the about 20 years I have been discussing this with people who are opposed to software patents nobody has ever found a fair definition. If you cannot forbid what you cannot define. :-) that's easy — let them get the patent, but if something is implemented in software, it can't be held to violate the patent The screen gestures are pretty much software driven. Strokes interpretred on screen by s/w reading it. It depends how you phrase it. The first ting they could have done was to patent the sensor being able to detect the finger movements and if necessary tell how it was used and the method for interpreting the detected movements. It would have the same effect for Samsung. DagT -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Ytes, I heard that story. I also heard another one where the inventor sold the invention to an even larger firm, who won over the first. There is always dangerous for the inventor to hold the invention too much to himself. It is better to own a little of something big than to own everything of what becomes nothing. DagT Sendt fra min iPad Den 30. aug. 2012 kl. 10:39 skrev Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com: On Aug 28, 2012, at 14:43 , DagT wrote: Which is very unfair for those who have great ideas. You know the circuitry for making efficient car engines? It may easily be duplicated by software if it is not already. Some millions of dollars research just to give it away to the competitor. Why bother making clean engines? But we want them, so have make people do the research if they don´t get anything back? Ever see the movie about the laid off GM employee who cobbled together the first delayed timer wiper system? He pitched it to GM. They said they weren't interested. But they put it as an option on all their cars the next year. Never did any research, just used factory made components to clean it up from the model. Took the inventor years and years to win in court. Big bucks. IIRC he either died just before he won, or shortly there after. IIRC he di dget the satisfaction he deserved. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On 2012-08-30 3:03, Joseph McAllister wrote: Anyway, my recollection is that TrueType was a method of minutely smoothing what was once lumpy pixels. As opposed to Adobe's vector drawing formula. It's been so long since I had to even think about it. Ya gotta let go of some of what you knew to make room for FaceBook timelines and Netflix streaming. Gagh. TrueType character forms are composed of a set of vectors on (IIRC) a 2048 x 2048 coordinate grid, like a lot of font description languages. One place TT gets it's umph is that it also includes a robust hinting language to take care of things like the lumps that happen when that huge grid is transformed to a much smaller one on the output device. It also helps the font designer do things like make sure that the vertical stems in all of the letters end up the same width, regardless of where they fall in the mapping of the character coordinate system to the page coordinate system. -- Doug Lefty Franklin NutDriver Racing http://NutDriver.org Facebook NutDriver Racing Sponsored by Murphy -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Any complex software is going to be very difficult to port from a PC to a MAC. Changes in PC software architecture make it difficult enough to move from one platform to the next if Microsoft didn't maintain support for older methods. Apple drops support and things stop working. often requiring a total re-write, sometimes a re-design of core functionality. This is not trivial, and you know for 10% of the market it's just not often worth it. On 8/27/2012 5:26 AM, Joseph McAllister wrote: On Aug 25, 2012, at 15:27 , Brian Walters wrote: Quoting Bob Sullivan rf.sulli...@gmail.com: Darren, Some of us still hold a grudge on Apple. We remember our first Apple PC's and how everything Apple cost 2X what the IBM machines cost, how nothing - printer, disc drives, monitors, memory had to be Apple or it wouldn't work! Thanks, Bob. I've also got a long memory. I was trying to frame a reply along those lines and you've saved me the trouble :-) Those of us who have used Pentax all our lives, for whatever reason, lens compatibility, rugged and innovative products, should know better. Apple would not be where they are today if they didn't provide compatibility with the hardware tools their customers wanted or needed to do their work. Even today though, with a pant-load of software capable of easily porting PC programs to Macs, a large percentage of companies don't bother. They are running the same hardware, idiots. Port! I think it's because so many liked to fiddle as kids, so they went to the dark side and got PCs. So they could. Now that they are older, these kids are scared they can't learn anything new, so they shy away from Apple. While they were sneering at us, Apple stock sold for $13 a share. Whose sneering now? The first use I got out of my first Apple Product, a ][+, was writing CP/M code to make my Epson Printer listen to the Apple. Pretty simple really. About two lines of hex to tell the computer that is was attached to something other than a line printer. I learned Wozniac's method of writing data to floppy disks, and would repair friends disk with errors by printing out all the code on the disk, finding where the error was by following the sectors sequentially as they jumped around all over the directory, mapping it (tedious!) until I discovered what was missing, or garbled, and repairing it. When Apple computers (Mac) went to 48, then 64 bit processes, I gave up on that endeavor. When the Mac came out in 1984, it was shortly followed, thanks to Adobe selling Jobs the font technology used by Apple Laser Printers, which put tens of thousands of printers and font designers working at home. Desktop Printing became a buzzword in those years. That was the only time I can think of that for a year or two you had to buy an Apple printer to do the job. Soon HP and Brother came out with similar printers, which ALL cost too much because of the very high per unit prices Adobe charged Apple and the others to use ROMs running their patented font drawing software whose name I cannot think of now. That lasted for a while, then Apple addressed the costs by coming out with their own (or purchased) fonts design called TrueType that gave damn near the quality of Adobe's system. Apple gave those away, followed by most all fonts being converted into TrueType. This took the wind out of Adobe's profit column. They had saved enough money to buy Aldus and it's PageMaker layout program, which put me out of a job in the Aldus division that was troubleshooting PageMaker 4.0 against Microsoft Windows version 3.0, (which was really vers. 1.1 which indicated how far behind in the GUI movement they were, so they renamed it 3.0) that was taking forever to get out of Alpha. Alpha, Beta, back to Alpha kept a paycheck in my pocket. My team was kept busy by designing a little text editor for PageMaker while we waited on Gate's boys and girls to get their shit together. We called it Ted. We gave it rudimentary graphical capabilities which gave me a few more weeks as we built a series of graphics showing what it could do to be used in promotion. But I digress. Apple's concept practically from the start, especially when Jobs was at the helm, was to sell products that, even though complex and innovative in their design, made few demands on their users. They just worked Plug and Play etc. One paid a price for this, of course. In return, Apple Mac users never had to open their equipment or learn how it went together. Some did of course. I made many friends and grew a decent client list as an Apple Consultant after starting one of the first Apple clubs in Fredericksburg, VA in 1980, called the Rappahanock Apple Group. Our newsletter, a dot matrix gem, was mastheaded the RAG. I still have the plaque they gave me when I moved away to come to Seattle in 1988. When I was let go at Aldus/Adobe, I went into business as a consultant. Never got rich. Made a few bucks selling and installing
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
... Any complex software is going to be very difficult to port from a PC to a MAC. ... The first work I did as a software development engineer in the private sector (after NASA/JPL) was to design and implement a multi-platform development system which ran on Mac OS, Windows, OSF/Motif, HP/UX and OS/2 platforms. This was necessary because the products (chemical information management systems for research scientists) was too complex to do well with a 'port' and required the rare quality of both a PhD research chemist combined with a commercial grade software engineer to develop. Building a platform that ran on all platforms the same way, from the app development perspective, was the solution to delivering to a broad spectrum of OS users efficiently (and profitably). On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 6:39 AM, P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote: Any complex software is going to be very difficult to port from a PC to a MAC. Changes in PC software architecture make it difficult enough to move from one platform to the next if Microsoft didn't maintain support for older methods. Apple drops support and things stop working. often requiring a total re-write, sometimes a re-design of core functionality. This is not trivial, and you know for 10% of the market it's just not often worth it. On 8/27/2012 5:26 AM, Joseph McAllister wrote: On Aug 25, 2012, at 15:27 , Brian Walters wrote: Quoting Bob Sullivan rf.sulli...@gmail.com: Darren, Some of us still hold a grudge on Apple. We remember our first Apple PC's and how everything Apple cost 2X what the IBM machines cost, how nothing - printer, disc drives, monitors, memory had to be Apple or it wouldn't work! Thanks, Bob. I've also got a long memory. I was trying to frame a reply along those lines and you've saved me the trouble :-) Those of us who have used Pentax all our lives, for whatever reason, lens compatibility, rugged and innovative products, should know better. Apple would not be where they are today if they didn't provide compatibility with the hardware tools their customers wanted or needed to do their work. Even today though, with a pant-load of software capable of easily porting PC programs to Macs, a large percentage of companies don't bother. They are running the same hardware, idiots. Port! I think it's because so many liked to fiddle as kids, so they went to the dark side and got PCs. So they could. Now that they are older, these kids are scared they can't learn anything new, so they shy away from Apple. While they were sneering at us, Apple stock sold for $13 a share. Whose sneering now? The first use I got out of my first Apple Product, a ][+, was writing CP/M code to make my Epson Printer listen to the Apple. Pretty simple really. About two lines of hex to tell the computer that is was attached to something other than a line printer. I learned Wozniac's method of writing data to floppy disks, and would repair friends disk with errors by printing out all the code on the disk, finding where the error was by following the sectors sequentially as they jumped around all over the directory, mapping it (tedious!) until I discovered what was missing, or garbled, and repairing it. When Apple computers (Mac) went to 48, then 64 bit processes, I gave up on that endeavor. When the Mac came out in 1984, it was shortly followed, thanks to Adobe selling Jobs the font technology used by Apple Laser Printers, which put tens of thousands of printers and font designers working at home. Desktop Printing became a buzzword in those years. That was the only time I can think of that for a year or two you had to buy an Apple printer to do the job. Soon HP and Brother came out with similar printers, which ALL cost too much because of the very high per unit prices Adobe charged Apple and the others to use ROMs running their patented font drawing software whose name I cannot think of now. That lasted for a while, then Apple addressed the costs by coming out with their own (or purchased) fonts design called TrueType that gave damn near the quality of Adobe's system. Apple gave those away, followed by most all fonts being converted into TrueType. This took the wind out of Adobe's profit column. They had saved enough money to buy Aldus and it's PageMaker layout program, which put me out of a job in the Aldus division that was troubleshooting PageMaker 4.0 against Microsoft Windows version 3.0, (which was really vers. 1.1 which indicated how far behind in the GUI movement they were, so they renamed it 3.0) that was taking forever to get out of Alpha. Alpha, Beta, back to Alpha kept a paycheck in my pocket. My team was kept busy by designing a little text editor for PageMaker while we waited on Gate's boys and girls to get their shit together. We called it Ted. We gave it rudimentary graphical capabilities which gave me a few more weeks as we built a series of graphics showing what it could do to be
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
If I remember correctly, the inventor approached each of the Big Three automakers, with his system. He didn't want to sell the right to use his idea, but interest them in buying components, from a factory he was going to finance on the basis of having the contracts. This would have been much more profitable for him his investors and partners, and the start of his own business as a parts manufacture/supplier. He didn't actually receive satisfaction, since what the courts gave him was a royalty on each unit manufactured. By the way he wasn't the first to develop a delayed wiper system, just the first to do it with electrical components. All of the major auto manufacturers were working on systems to produce a similar results, however theirs were pneumatic systems drawing vacuum directly off the engine. IIRC. On 8/30/2012 4:39 AM, Joseph McAllister wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 14:43 , DagT wrote: Which is very unfair for those who have great ideas. You know the circuitry for making efficient car engines? It may easily be duplicated by software if it is not already. Some millions of dollars research just to give it away to the competitor. Why bother making clean engines? But we want them, so have make people do the research if they don´t get anything back? Ever see the movie about the laid off GM employee who cobbled together the first delayed timer wiper system? He pitched it to GM. They said they weren't interested. But they put it as an option on all their cars the next year. Never did any research, just used factory made components to clean it up from the model. Took the inventor years and years to win in court. Big bucks. IIRC he either died just before he won, or shortly there after. IIRC he di dget the satisfaction he deserved. -- Don't lose heart, they might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthly search. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On 30/08/2012 2:24 AM, DagT wrote: Den 30. aug. 2012 kl. 09:35 skrev Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com: On Aug 27, 2012, at 19:47 , William Robb wrote: On 27/08/2012 6:55 PM, Tom C wrote: What I'm against is a world where we only have Fords, Apple iPads, Apple smart phones, Samsung TV's, Frigidaire refrigerators,,, you get my drift, to choose from, and from what I can see that's the kind of world Apple would like it to be. Precedent law would say that the first company to patent the 3 box car design will have the market in sedans and coupes to themselves, and if the are smart they could patent the pick up truck shape and be the only car maker allowed to sell vehicles in the USA. That's how stupid allowing Apple to patent the rectangle with rounded corner shape is. It's not 'stupid' if the shape of the corners has a specific reason inherent to the functioning of the screen or the safety of the If he was right it would be stupid, but Bill has obviuosly neither seen the patents nor the court decision but base his statement on popular belief. Which is not a good base for his arguments. I do know something of precedent law, and the broad strokes that it will sometimes paint with. Allowing a company to patent the shape of a product is dangerous because that precedent can then be applied to other products (cars, toothbrushes, microwave ovens, etc) -- William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
So, if Porsche comes out with a new car that has a unique shape, is it alright if GM copies that unique shape and sells cars to compete with the new Porsche? Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola I do know something of precedent law, and the broad strokes that it will sometimes paint with. Allowing a company to patent the shape of a product is dangerous because that precedent can then be applied to other products (cars, toothbrushes, microwave ovens, etc) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 30, 2012, at 1:18 AM, DagT wrote: Den 30. aug. 2012 kl. 09:49 skrev Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com: On Aug 28, 2012, at 10:04 , Larry Colen wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 7:17 AM, Charles Robinson wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 5:13 AM, Larry Colen wrote: I will agree that the goatse zoom is a clever idea, but being software should not be patentable. …but being software, should not be patentable? Did you really just say that? Yes I did. I am firmly opposed to the concept of software patents. Mathematical formulas are not patentable. Sentence constructions are not patentable. All patent portfolios do is block smaller companies out of the marketplace. Unfu*kingbelievable. And untrue. We use patents the opposite way, to get into markets dominated by larger companies (or make them but the ringt for a good price). DagT Dag, I will agree that there are good and worthwhile uses of patents. And will even admit that there are cases where you can convince me that software patent may give the little guy some added protection. My experience, however, has been of the power money feedback loop, where laws and the system is changed to benefit those with money, giving them more power to make more money. There are too many things which are patented, that shouldn't be, and far too many patent trolls. Overall the whole patent system seems to be doing far more harm than good. I will concede that it would be possible to devise a set of conditions where doing something in software is indeed patentable, but that would almost certainly end up being a case where doing something in software is just a special case of something that is otherwise patentable. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
on 2012-08-27 3:26 Joseph McAllister wrote When the Mac came out in 1984, it was shortly followed, thanks to Adobe selling Jobs the font technology used by Apple Laser Printers, which put tens of thousands of printers and font designers working at home. Desktop Printing became a buzzword in those years. That was the only time I can think of that for a year or two you had to buy an Apple printer to do the job. Soon HP and Brother came out with similar printers, which ALL cost too much because of the very high per unit prices Adobe charged Apple and the others to use ROMs running their patented font drawing software whose name I cannot think of now. i think you mean Desktop Publishing, and of course PostScript is the page description (and font-drawing) language; i was in on the ground floor of the movement, abandoning software development for a while, and producing books magazines, then working in prepress shops; PostScript printers were expensive, but for what they enabled they were affordable; for years the masters for Zymurgy magazine and all the books of the Association of Brewers (my second DTP job) were made on a LaserWriter Plus, and then a Newgen 400dpi printer, at huge cost-savings That lasted for a while, then Apple addressed the costs by coming out with their own (or purchased) fonts design called TrueType that gave damn near the quality of Adobe's system. Apple gave those away, followed by most all fonts being converted into TrueType. it did impact Adobe, but at the time PostScript fonts still competed well with TrueType and there was not a wholesale conversion to TrueType; it was years before prepress companies were comfortable accepting jobs using Truetype fonts; Adobe still doesn't produce TrueType fonts, and its catalog of PostScript-based fonts is still the gold standard, though many of the fonts are licensed from other foundries which do produce TrueType versions, it matters little in the end because OpenType is agnostic to TrueType and PostScript -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
From: Joseph McAllister On Aug 27, 2012, at 09:33 , John Sessoms wrote: The part that mattered and y'all kind of missed was the and don't touch anything else kid. I really was a kid, not yet old enough to drive. It was very unusual someone my age would even be allowed inside the computer room. Not only was I allowed in, I was allowed to do something, a very VERY minor something, with the computer. I wasn't even particularly interested in computers. If you can't take it apart to see how it works, what good is it? I already understood enough about the grown-up world to know THEY were never going to let me do that. It was just the least boring place for me to wait around until my dad decided to quit work and I could catch a ride home. I don't remember what they used the computer for, although I'm sure I was told at some time or another. It was an insurance company, so it must have had something to do with keeping track of the money. It's called Actuarials. How the companies crunch all the statistical know data about peoples frailties, accident rates, death rates, broken down by the block you live on, so they know what to charge everyone and cover known and unknown claim rates, still making enough profit to buy the largest buildings in all large cities so their name is placed up in the air for all to see. It was hospital insurance, what grew into today's health insurance nightmare. Back then you could afford insurance and if you had to go into the hospital the insurance would actually pay your hospital bills. Would Actuarials be something that affected hospital bills? Joseph who's Dad worked for Liberty Mutual in Boston and Hopkinton Mass for 30 years. The very same company who cancelled me after one $300.00 accident. Bastards. I've only been involved in 4 accidents in my 55 years of driving. One that was my fault, I think. Not sure, really, I nodded off on the way home from my second job at 2 AM on a one way street in San Francisco in 1969. I was driving the timed lights. Apparently I entered the intersection as the light turned green. A taxi entered in a late yellow. Light was red when he T-boned me in my '64 MGB. Seatbelt saved me. Repaired the 'B' and painted it white. Never liked the baby blue the factory used. The company my dad worked for changed a lot from the time my dad worked there. It changed a lot while he was still working there. I think he couldn't live with some of the changes in the way they did business and that's part of what killed him. His job was his life. I'm currently paying an additional $300 a year for automobile insurance. My car inexplicably rolled backwards into a tree damaged the rear bumper hatch. Insurance company said my rates wouldn't go up as long as the damage was under $1800. The adjuster's estimate came in at $1756. I took the car to the shop recommended by the insurance company and he accepted the adjuster's estimate. Fast forward 4 months to when my insurance was due for renewal. I see a $150+ jump in my premium. WTF? The answer is the shop who did the repairs didn't like rear hatch the adjuster had found and ordered another. The other hatch brought the total to $1802. No one from the shop or the insurance company consulted me at the time. They're telling me I'll have to pay the increased rates for another 5 years (7 years total). I've been with Allstate ever since I first got auto insurance ( 40 years), but every time I think about this shit I get angry all over again. It is probably going to make me change carriers. I had to take a week long defensive driving course before I could get my Army driver's license. They taught us to wait at least 3 seconds after a light turned green before starting into the intersection. I get idiots blowing the horn at me a lot because I don't just jack-rabbit out into intersections. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
From: Joseph McAllister On Aug 28, 2012, at 10:04 , Larry Colen wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 7:17 AM, Charles Robinson wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 5:13 AM, Larry Colen wrote: I will agree that the goatse zoom is a clever idea, but being software should not be patentable. ?but being software, should not be patentable? Did you really just say that? Yes I did. I am firmly opposed to the concept of software patents. Mathematical formulas are not patentable. Sentence constructions are not patentable. All patent portfolios do is block smaller companies out of the marketplace. Unfu*kingbelievable. No point in writing a book then. It's just words. Doesn't 'do' anything. Books don't get patented, they're copyrighted. So does software. The software patent crap is just to give corporations one more weapon they can use to quash competition. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
on 2012-08-30 6:42 Doug Franklin wrote On 2012-08-30 3:03, Joseph McAllister wrote: Anyway, my recollection is that TrueType was a method of minutely smoothing what was once lumpy pixels. As opposed to Adobe's vector drawing formula. It's been so long since I had to even think about it. Ya gotta let go of some of what you knew to make room for FaceBook timelines and Netflix streaming. Gagh. TrueType character forms are composed of a set of vectors on (IIRC) a 2048 x 2048 coordinate grid, like a lot of font description languages. [typography geek alert] TrueType uses splines (curves) much like PostScript, except the splines are quadratic as opposed to PostScript's Bézier splines; so neither uses vectors except insofar splines are a superset of vectors; in both types of fonts, hinting simply corrects the pixels when rendering to low resolution device (not really smoothing the pixels, just choosing different pixels for a better result); modern OS's also do literal smoothing of fonts by anti-aliasing (blurring the edges) and subpixel rendering (exploiting the spatial relationship of RGB components of a pixel) when rendering type to a display the grid you mention constrains only the control points of the splines, the splines themselves (the edges of the glyph that is drawn) are constrained only by the resolution of the output device -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Den 30. aug. 2012 kl. 18:06 skrev William Robb: On 30/08/2012 2:24 AM, DagT wrote: Den 30. aug. 2012 kl. 09:35 skrev Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com: On Aug 27, 2012, at 19:47 , William Robb wrote: On 27/08/2012 6:55 PM, Tom C wrote: What I'm against is a world where we only have Fords, Apple iPads, Apple smart phones, Samsung TV's, Frigidaire refrigerators,,, you get my drift, to choose from, and from what I can see that's the kind of world Apple would like it to be. Precedent law would say that the first company to patent the 3 box car design will have the market in sedans and coupes to themselves, and if the are smart they could patent the pick up truck shape and be the only car maker allowed to sell vehicles in the USA. That's how stupid allowing Apple to patent the rectangle with rounded corner shape is. It's not 'stupid' if the shape of the corners has a specific reason inherent to the functioning of the screen or the safety of the If he was right it would be stupid, but Bill has obviuosly neither seen the patents nor the court decision but base his statement on popular belief. Which is not a good base for his arguments. I do know something of precedent law, and the broad strokes that it will sometimes paint with. Allowing a company to patent the shape of a product is dangerous because that precedent can then be applied to other products (cars, toothbrushes, microwave ovens, etc) I think at least you shouldn´t mix utility patents and design patents. They represent two very different things, different laws. In this case we are talking about three different software patents and four design patents. The latter has nothing to do with software or how it works. Only with design, how it looks. http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/25/breaking-down-apples-1-billion-courtroom-victory-over-samsung/ DagT -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
From: Daniel J. Matyola So, if Porsche comes out with a new car that has a unique shape, is it alright if GM copies that unique shape and sells cars to compete with the new Porsche? Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola I do know something of precedent law, and the broad strokes that it will sometimes paint with. Allowing a company to patent the shape of a product is dangerous because that precedent can then be applied to other products (cars, toothbrushes, microwave ovens, etc) If it truly is a unique shape, no it would not be alright. What Apple is presenting in the iPhone is not however a unique shape. It's the same bullshit they used when they sued Microsoft all those years ago claiming exclusive rights to Graphical User Interfaces. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Den 30. aug. 2012 kl. 21:03 skrev John Sessoms: From: Joseph McAllister On Aug 28, 2012, at 10:04 , Larry Colen wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 7:17 AM, Charles Robinson wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 5:13 AM, Larry Colen wrote: I will agree that the goatse zoom is a clever idea, but being software should not be patentable. ?but being software, should not be patentable? Did you really just say that? Yes I did. I am firmly opposed to the concept of software patents. Mathematical formulas are not patentable. Sentence constructions are not patentable. All patent portfolios do is block smaller companies out of the marketplace. Unfu*kingbelievable. No point in writing a book then. It's just words. Doesn't 'do' anything. Books don't get patented, they're copyrighted. So does software. The software patent crap is just to give corporations one more weapon they can use to quash competition. Oh well, if you say so. I´m not going to repeat myself :-) In Europe we are just as unhappy by the US patent system as you are, but experience tells us that the problem is related to at least these points: 1. The triple damages and system which makes it possible to making a living from suing people, without taking the risk of having to pay the other parties costs if you loose. So you get trolls. 2. That there is almost no way for third party to object to stupid patents. So you get stupid patents, especially in the software area. 3. That the patent law requires that the invention is useful, not technical. So people patent non-technical stuff like business methods etc. We have software patents too, but we don´t have many problems with them. Oh well, I think I´m going to kill a stupid US patent application tomorrow, but to do that I will have to file a third party observation in Germany, so I´ll stop here :-) DagT -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
on 2012-08-30 2:21 Joseph McAllister wrote I believe those gestures were all first patented for the notebook computers when Apple placed a trackpad by shifting the keyboard up next to the screen. They shortly (after the patent was given) assigned these gestures to the electrostatic pad a few at a time to control movement on the screen. one finger, two, three, four, tap once or twice or three times, fingers and tapping, and finally, pinch and spread with two or more fingers. as your afterthought noted, Apple laptops' keyboards were shifted from the start, because they used trackballs before trackpads; but it was 2005 (11 years after Apple's first laptop with a trackpad) before Apple purchased the technology that put multi-touch gestures into their trackpad and iPhone (got the dates from wikipedia, but i worked with every generation of Apple laptop and recall Apple's multi-touch announcement and how the new gestures didn't work on older trackpads) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
If they could, they would. To take the wind out of Porsche's sales they'd have to build a vehicle that was equal or better than the original. Producing a car that looked like a Porsche model, and selling it for a lot less to attract buyers, would soon be revealed to by a piece of junk. IMHO On Aug 30, 2012, at 11:06 , Daniel J. Matyola wrote: So, if Porsche comes out with a new car that has a unique shape, is it alright if GM copies that unique shape and sells cars to compete with the new Porsche? Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola I do know something of precedent law, and the broad strokes that it will sometimes paint with. Allowing a company to patent the shape of a product is dangerous because that precedent can then be applied to other products (cars, toothbrushes, microwave ovens, etc) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 30, 2012, at 5:15 PM, Joseph McAllister wrote: If they could, they would. To take the wind out of Porsche's sales they'd have to build a vehicle that was equal or better than the original. Producing a car that looked like a Porsche model, and selling it for a lot less to attract buyers, would soon be revealed to by a piece of junk. IMHO IMHO, even if they could -- and they can -- they wouldn't. Copies never do well in the automotive world, and they cast bad aspersions on the copycat. And a vehicle that was equal to or better than the original would be just as costly. Paul On Aug 30, 2012, at 11:06 , Daniel J. Matyola wrote: So, if Porsche comes out with a new car that has a unique shape, is it alright if GM copies that unique shape and sells cars to compete with the new Porsche? Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola I do know something of precedent law, and the broad strokes that it will sometimes paint with. Allowing a company to patent the shape of a product is dangerous because that precedent can then be applied to other products (cars, toothbrushes, microwave ovens, etc) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 30, 2012, at 11:24 , Larry Colen wrote: Unfu*kingbelievable. And untrue. We use patents the opposite way, to get into markets dominated by larger companies (or make them but the ringt for a good price). DagT Dag, I will agree that there are good and worthwhile uses of patents. And will even admit that there are cases where you can convince me that software patent may give the little guy some added protection. My experience, however, has been of the power money feedback loop, where laws and the system is changed to benefit those with money, giving them more power to make more money. There are too many things which are patented, that shouldn't be, and far too many patent trolls. Overall the whole patent system seems to be doing far more harm than good. I'm sure there are a few or more amongst us who have thought of some thing or method to make doing a task easier, better, stronger, etc., only to give up patenting it, or even presenting it because of the expense of filing and proving a patent application. No matter how cost saving or clever it is, don't present it to your supervisors if you've pissed them off recently. Me did. Most of use have at one time or another signed a document when hired that basically says anything you think of or build becomes the property of the company. Me too. Do not show a possible manufacturer of a device your prototype, made at great expense of steel, springs, threads and set screws. They can and will turn it out in weeks made from plastic, distributing it for pennies to accompany the product you hope to improve. Me three. Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com “ Nature is considerably more creative and inventive than humankind. Without Nature there isn't any humankind. Without humankind, Nature is fine.” -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Thanks Steve. I was counting on someone to know what I did not remember. On Aug 30, 2012, at 11:26 , steve harley wrote: on 2012-08-27 3:26 Joseph McAllister wrote When the Mac came out in 1984, it was shortly followed, thanks to Adobe selling Jobs the font technology used by Apple Laser Printers, which put tens of thousands of printers and font designers working at home. Desktop Printing became a buzzword in those years. That was the only time I can think of that for a year or two you had to buy an Apple printer to do the job. Soon HP and Brother came out with similar printers, which ALL cost too much because of the very high per unit prices Adobe charged Apple and the others to use ROMs running their patented font drawing software whose name I cannot think of now. i think you mean Desktop Publishing, and of course PostScript is the page description (and font-drawing) language; i was in on the ground floor of the movement, abandoning software development for a while, and producing books magazines, then working in prepress shops; PostScript printers were expensive, but for what they enabled they were affordable; for years the masters for Zymurgy magazine and all the books of the Association of Brewers (my second DTP job) were made on a LaserWriter Plus, and then a Newgen 400dpi printer, at huge cost-savings That lasted for a while, then Apple addressed the costs by coming out with their own (or purchased) fonts design called TrueType that gave damn near the quality of Adobe's system. Apple gave those away, followed by most all fonts being converted into TrueType. it did impact Adobe, but at the time PostScript fonts still competed well with TrueType and there was not a wholesale conversion to TrueType; it was years before prepress companies were comfortable accepting jobs using Truetype fonts; Adobe still doesn't produce TrueType fonts, and its catalog of PostScript-based fonts is still the gold standard, though many of the fonts are licensed from other foundries which do produce TrueType versions, it matters little in the end because OpenType is agnostic to TrueType and PostScript Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
To the entire PDML community: Please accept my sincerest apologies for starting this thread (or, more correctly now, these threads). As penance, I would force myself to read each message it contains except for the fact that it would make me want to slit my wrists (more than I already do). I'd also like to thank DagT for his generous contributions of pearls before swine in these threads. Now, if you'll pardon me, I'm off to acquaint myself with the PDML unsubscribe option. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 30, 2012, at 11:43 , John Sessoms wrote: From: Joseph McAllister On Aug 27, 2012, at 09:33 , John Sessoms wrote: The part that mattered and y'all kind of missed was the and don't touch anything else kid. I really was a kid, not yet old enough to drive. It was very unusual someone my age would even be allowed inside the computer room. Not only was I allowed in, I was allowed to do something, a very VERY minor something, with the computer. I wasn't even particularly interested in computers. If you can't take it apart to see how it works, what good is it? I already understood enough about the grown-up world to know THEY were never going to let me do that. It was just the least boring place for me to wait around until my dad decided to quit work and I could catch a ride home. I don't remember what they used the computer for, although I'm sure I was told at some time or another. It was an insurance company, so it must have had something to do with keeping track of the money. It's called Actuarials. How the companies crunch all the statistical know data about peoples frailties, accident rates, death rates, broken down by the block you live on, so they know what to charge everyone and cover known and unknown claim rates, still making enough profit to buy the largest buildings in all large cities so their name is placed up in the air for all to see. It was hospital insurance, what grew into today's health insurance nightmare. Back then you could afford insurance and if you had to go into the hospital the insurance would actually pay your hospital bills. Yes, I remember that. Having a child did not put a family in the poorhouse. Would Actuarials be something that affected hospital bills? Only in that if you have insurance these days, the hospitals et al can charge much higher rates to cover the percentage of non-paying customers, which in turn raised the rates everyone paid for their insurance. Joseph who's Dad worked for Liberty Mutual in Boston and Hopkinton Mass for 30 years. The very same company who cancelled me after one $300.00 accident. Bastards. I've only been involved in 4 accidents in my 55 years of driving. One that was my fault, I think. Not sure, really, I nodded off on the way home from my second job at 2 AM on a one way street in San Francisco in 1969. I was driving the timed lights. Apparently I entered the intersection as the light turned green. A taxi entered in a late yellow. Light was red when he T-boned me in my '64 MGB. Seatbelt saved me. Repaired the 'B' and painted it white. Never liked the baby blue the factory used. The company my dad worked for changed a lot from the time my dad worked there. It changed a lot while he was still working there. I think he couldn't live with some of the changes in the way they did business and that's part of what killed him. His job was his life. I'm currently paying an additional $300 a year for automobile insurance. My car inexplicably rolled backwards into a tree damaged the rear bumper hatch. Insurance company said my rates wouldn't go up as long as the damage was under $1800. The adjuster's estimate came in at $1756. I took the car to the shop recommended by the insurance company and he accepted the adjuster's estimate. Fast forward 4 months to when my insurance was due for renewal. I see a $150+ jump in my premium. WTF? The answer is the shop who did the repairs didn't like rear hatch the adjuster had found and ordered another. The other hatch brought the total to $1802. No one from the shop or the insurance company consulted me at the time. They're telling me I'll have to pay the increased rates for another 5 years (7 years total). I've been with Allstate ever since I first got auto insurance ( 40 years), but every time I think about this shit I get angry all over again. It is probably going to make me change carriers. I had to take a week long defensive driving course before I could get my Army driver's license. They taught us to wait at least 3 seconds after a light turned green before starting into the intersection. I get idiots blowing the horn at me a lot because I don't just jack-rabbit out into intersections. My father was dedicated to Liberty Mutual, because when he returned after WW II, jobs were scarce because of the sudden cutback in production. His depression jobs between 1931 and being inducted into the Army in 1943 were soda jerk, stocking and undergarment sales, and finally a Pepsi Cola deliveryman, promoted to regional sales director out of Omaha, driving a 38 Chevy painted red white and blue whose horn played the whole Pepsi Jingle (you can probably hum it, can't you? Pepsi-Cola hits the spot, 12 full ounces that's a lot, twice as much for a nickel too, Pepsi-Cola is the drink for you.**) Liberty hired him as a Safety Engineer and so started the clean air revolution as he climbed stack
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 30, 2012, at 12:05 , steve harley wrote: on 2012-08-30 6:42 Doug Franklin wrote On 2012-08-30 3:03, Joseph McAllister wrote: Anyway, my recollection is that TrueType was a method of minutely smoothing what was once lumpy pixels. As opposed to Adobe's vector drawing formula. It's been so long since I had to even think about it. Ya gotta let go of some of what you knew to make room for FaceBook timelines and Netflix streaming. Gagh. TrueType character forms are composed of a set of vectors on (IIRC) a 2048 x 2048 coordinate grid, like a lot of font description languages. [typography geek alert] TrueType uses splines (curves) much like PostScript, except the splines are quadratic as opposed to PostScript's Bézier splines; so neither uses vectors except insofar splines are a superset of vectors; in both types of fonts, hinting simply corrects the pixels when rendering to low resolution device (not really smoothing the pixels, just choosing different pixels for a better result); modern OS's also do literal smoothing of fonts by anti-aliasing (blurring the edges) and subpixel rendering (exploiting the spatial relationship of RGB components of a pixel) when rendering type to a display the grid you mention constrains only the control points of the splines, the splines themselves (the edges of the glyph that is drawn) are constrained only by the resolution of the output device Damn Steve, now you filled my head up with the correct explanation. I will work hard to forget it as soon as possible so I can hit YouTube tonight. Thanks! If it doesn’t excite you, This thing that you see, Why in the world, Would it excite me? —Jay Maisel Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
on 2012-08-30 7:39 P. J. Alling wrote Any complex software is going to be very difficult to port from a PC to a MAC. some is very hard, but some very complex software has for years been relatively smoothly maintained on Windows, OS X, Linux, Solaris, etc. Changes in PC software architecture make it difficult enough to move from one platform to the next if Microsoft didn't maintain support for older methods. Apple drops support and things stop working. often requiring a total re-write, sometimes a re-design of core functionality. This is not trivial, and you know for 10% of the market it's just not often worth it. i assume you're talking about Apple's Carbon API, which was designed to help Mac OS 9 apps run on OS X; Carbon has finally just been deprecated after 12 years, but it was no surprise; extricating software from legacy dependencies is indeed a stormy passage (i'm rewriting several thousand lines of Frontier code in Python at the moment), but most big cross-platform apps have navigated beyond Carbon successfully i do think it's amazing how far back Microsoft's support goes, but Microsoft hasn't (yet) faced the kind of desperate situation that Apple solved with Carbon; developers nowadays see multiple platforms as a fact of life, and deal with a must faster pace of change in iOS, Android, and web APIs; some examples of apps developed concurrently for four platforms are Dropbox, Evernote, Chrome, 1Password, Google Earth ... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Joe, Something's buggy with that Utube video...if I had a blue screen of death, it would have appeared. It was a full stop. Regards, Bob S. On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com wrote: On Aug 30, 2012, at 11:43 , John Sessoms wrote: From: Joseph McAllister On Aug 27, 2012, at 09:33 , John Sessoms wrote: The part that mattered and y'all kind of missed was the and don't touch anything else kid. I really was a kid, not yet old enough to drive. It was very unusual someone my age would even be allowed inside the computer room. Not only was I allowed in, I was allowed to do something, a very VERY minor something, with the computer. I wasn't even particularly interested in computers. If you can't take it apart to see how it works, what good is it? I already understood enough about the grown-up world to know THEY were never going to let me do that. It was just the least boring place for me to wait around until my dad decided to quit work and I could catch a ride home. I don't remember what they used the computer for, although I'm sure I was told at some time or another. It was an insurance company, so it must have had something to do with keeping track of the money. It's called Actuarials. How the companies crunch all the statistical know data about peoples frailties, accident rates, death rates, broken down by the block you live on, so they know what to charge everyone and cover known and unknown claim rates, still making enough profit to buy the largest buildings in all large cities so their name is placed up in the air for all to see. It was hospital insurance, what grew into today's health insurance nightmare. Back then you could afford insurance and if you had to go into the hospital the insurance would actually pay your hospital bills. Yes, I remember that. Having a child did not put a family in the poorhouse. Would Actuarials be something that affected hospital bills? Only in that if you have insurance these days, the hospitals et al can charge much higher rates to cover the percentage of non-paying customers, which in turn raised the rates everyone paid for their insurance. Joseph who's Dad worked for Liberty Mutual in Boston and Hopkinton Mass for 30 years. The very same company who cancelled me after one $300.00 accident. Bastards. I've only been involved in 4 accidents in my 55 years of driving. One that was my fault, I think. Not sure, really, I nodded off on the way home from my second job at 2 AM on a one way street in San Francisco in 1969. I was driving the timed lights. Apparently I entered the intersection as the light turned green. A taxi entered in a late yellow. Light was red when he T-boned me in my '64 MGB. Seatbelt saved me. Repaired the 'B' and painted it white. Never liked the baby blue the factory used. The company my dad worked for changed a lot from the time my dad worked there. It changed a lot while he was still working there. I think he couldn't live with some of the changes in the way they did business and that's part of what killed him. His job was his life. I'm currently paying an additional $300 a year for automobile insurance. My car inexplicably rolled backwards into a tree damaged the rear bumper hatch. Insurance company said my rates wouldn't go up as long as the damage was under $1800. The adjuster's estimate came in at $1756. I took the car to the shop recommended by the insurance company and he accepted the adjuster's estimate. Fast forward 4 months to when my insurance was due for renewal. I see a $150+ jump in my premium. WTF? The answer is the shop who did the repairs didn't like rear hatch the adjuster had found and ordered another. The other hatch brought the total to $1802. No one from the shop or the insurance company consulted me at the time. They're telling me I'll have to pay the increased rates for another 5 years (7 years total). I've been with Allstate ever since I first got auto insurance ( 40 years), but every time I think about this shit I get angry all over again. It is probably going to make me change carriers. I had to take a week long defensive driving course before I could get my Army driver's license. They taught us to wait at least 3 seconds after a light turned green before starting into the intersection. I get idiots blowing the horn at me a lot because I don't just jack-rabbit out into intersections. My father was dedicated to Liberty Mutual, because when he returned after WW II, jobs were scarce because of the sudden cutback in production. His depression jobs between 1931 and being inducted into the Army in 1943 were soda jerk, stocking and undergarment sales, and finally a Pepsi Cola deliveryman, promoted to regional sales director out of Omaha, driving a 38 Chevy painted red white and blue whose horn played the whole Pepsi Jingle (you can probably hum it, can't you? Pepsi-Cola
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
We are jiving to it here. Good ol' Johnny Fosdick's Orchestra backing up Anita Bayer's vocals. Of course, it's an iMac I'm running it through. :-) Try this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxTnEbOjVCgfeature=player_detailpage The previous URL was for my replaying it. On Aug 30, 2012, at 18:42 , Bob Sullivan wrote: Joe, Something's buggy with that Utube video...if I had a blue screen of death, it would have appeared. It was a full stop. Regards, Bob S. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
From: Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com To the entire PDML community: Please accept my sincerest apologies for starting this thread (or, more correctly now, these threads). As penance, I would force myself to read each message it contains except for the fact that it would make me want to slit my wrists (more than I already do). I'd also like to thank DagT for his generous contributions of pearls before swine in these threads. Now, if you'll pardon me, I'm off to acquaint myself with the PDML unsubscribe option. Hold on there a second buddy! You can't bring your ball to the game and then just up and decide to leave! Actually it's generated some interesting discussion. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Den 29. aug. 2012 kl. 07:25 skrev DagT li...@thrane.name: Den 29. aug. 2012 kl. 00:18 skrev steve harley: on 2012-08-28 if i were deciding how such a company should protect its work, i would treat it as a trade secret, not as a patent You obviously haven´t been involved in cases where employs steal ideas and start competing firms. Believe me, it has been tried and didn´t work. But I forgot the most important part. Patents are about sharing. You give information in return for protection. The word Patent itself means Open and the system was made to avoid secrecy. So the advanced seismic algorithm may be used for acoustic studies of blod circulation (the math is quite similar) without any licensing, and hjelp saving lives and saving research money. Because, in realitet you cannot patent algorithms as such. They have to be put in a context, some use or technical problem. DagT -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
on 2012-08-28 23:25 DagT wrote Den 29. aug. 2012 kl. 00:18 skrev steve harley: So now you find definitions that suit your principle rather than look at the problem. Why would you not allow a technical method for improving engines to be patentable? Note that the patent clams would have to be enabling so it would not simply be an idea. from a quick look at the problem you presented, it seemed you were describing ideas, not methods; with your clarification i'm not sure i can imagine well enough a method that translates to software in the way you describe; it sounds like it would have to be a new method to be implemented in software, though it may indeed using the same _idea_ but i acknowledge i am just doing a quick analysis, and i'm an amateur with an informed opinion, not a researcher in intellectual property issues; your counterexamples are certainly challenging Another thing is, of course, that we in Norway have found lots of new oil resources the past few months. Mostly due to software developed by seismic companies where the sensors themselves are well known. Why would they make these investments of the next (mostly likely US) company could just use the same idea. Our economy is certainly dependent on partially software relates, very complex, inventions. if i were deciding how such a company should protect its work, i would treat it as a trade secret, not as a patent You obviously haven´t been involved in cases where employs steal ideas and start competing firms. Believe me, it has been tried and didn´t work. they are not perfect, i agree, but they aren't useless either; i've signed many non-disclosures and obeyed them; i've even turned down full-time jobs when an overly broad non-compete meant i'd have to screw a part-time client in the same industry; it is perhaps an inherent problem with the free market concept that ideas flow more freely than capital, and any fix will be ugly No, your theory works for small software inventions, but those are not the complete picture. You need a better definition. i think your point is not disputing my definition, but rather returning to the question of whether some or all software should be patentable No, I am simply looking for a definition. In fact, I do agree regarding small purely software inventions, but their complex relatives really need patents. That is why it is difficult. i think it boils down to your desire for, as you stated, a fair definition; i think the problem on your side is one of defining what you mean by fair — if you can do that, you might have your answer (and the fact that it has to meet your definition of fair is why you cannot accept others' definitions); from my perspective it is much simpler because i think it's fair enough to simply disallow any software patent Another thing is, of course, that computer programs may be implemented as hardware... if you mean as firmware, or as a configuration of an integrated circuit, it's still software if it is a description (loosely speaking) of inputs, outputs and a logical sequence; and if you are talking about specific computer programs, they are covered by copyright (copyright laws, at least in the US, are also flawed, but i don't object in principle to software copyrights) No, it is very possible to make a machine that perform logical sequences. yes it is, but i was trying to parse your proposition into something that made sense; i'd be interested if you can describe a software patent that can be meaningfully implemented in a machine; and you can copyright the sequence, and patent the machine, but you can't patent the sequence Copyright is not effective as you loose any protection by simply rephrasing the code, not reinventing it. it is effective enough from my point of view (too effective in some ways, e.g. shrink-wrap licenses with arcane restrictions) Anyway, there are some very strange things in the US copyright law. i totally agree and i appreciate your perspective — it sounds as if you work in areas where software patents are effective (if still imperfect) incentives, whereas i, though i am a software developer, am mainly considering impacts on the evolution of software as a cultural phenomenon; my position is that on balance the patent system works against the ideal of incentives for innovation in the area of software; i think the software market may naturally have enough incentives, and if it doesn't, some system other than patents may better solve the problem -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
on 2012-08-29 1:16 DagT wrote Den 29. aug. 2012 kl. 07:25 skrev DagT li...@thrane.name: But I forgot the most important part. Patents are about sharing. You give information in return for protection. good point, i agree patents _can_ promote sharing and give incentives for it, but i guess i'd say that while they may do that somewhat in the software world, there is much evidence that the process is faulty; and you pointed out that it's hard to keep trade secrets anyway i think open source, at a minimum, shows that other methods can also promote sharing and create commerce for those who innovate; it's not perfect either, but perhaps we could say we need more innovation in our methods for rewarding innovation ;? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Den 29. aug. 2012 kl. 19:11 skrev steve harley: on 2012-08-28 23:25 DagT wrote No, your theory works for small software inventions, but those are not the complete picture. You need a better definition. i think your point is not disputing my definition, but rather returning to the question of whether some or all software should be patentable No, I am simply looking for a definition. In fact, I do agree regarding small purely software inventions, but their complex relatives really need patents. That is why it is difficult. i think it boils down to your desire for, as you stated, a fair definition; i think the problem on your side is one of defining what you mean by fair — if you can do that, you might have your answer (and the fact that it has to meet your definition of fair is why you cannot accept others' definitions); from my perspective it is much simpler because i think it's fair enough to simply disallow any software patent Well, then you think software as program lines, but that is not as simple as it sounds. The reason was illustrated previously (I cut out some text here :-) but anyway I am also putting myself in the position of the peoples who make the rules, as I sometimes have the job to bend them. Unless you get a clear definition it is impossible to make an effective rule. Bad rules turn out very expensive for the people with the least money. Another thing is, of course, that computer programs may be implemented as hardware... if you mean as firmware, or as a configuration of an integrated circuit, it's still software if it is a description (loosely speaking) of inputs, outputs and a logical sequence; and if you are talking about specific computer programs, they are covered by copyright (copyright laws, at least in the US, are also flawed, but i don't object in principle to software copyrights) No, it is very possible to make a machine that perform logical sequences. yes it is, but i was trying to parse your proposition into something that made sense; i'd be interested if you can describe a software patent that can be meaningfully implemented in a machine; and you can copyright the sequence, and patent the machine, but you can't patent the sequence We did play a bit with that in my job. Heres a link to a toy: http://www.trademarkfactory.no Heres a link to the patent: http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=WONR=2007133087A2KC=A2FT=DND=3date=20071122DB=EPODOClocale=en_EP As you can see the patent is both a one armed bandit with exchangeable signs and a software invention :-) But that is a crued example, the more elegant is that you can make microchips with burned in, non-changeable, circuitry performing logical tasks. Actually, many gear systems may be described as electronics, hydraulics or or software. The technological implementation is not related to the invention. Copyright is not effective as you loose any protection by simply rephrasing the code, not reinventing it. it is effective enough from my point of view (too effective in some ways, e.g. shrink-wrap licenses with arcane restrictions) Copyright is related to the written code text, no matter what is describes or if it works. Anyway, there are some very strange things in the US copyright law. i totally agree and i appreciate your perspective — it sounds as if you work in areas where software patents are effective (if still imperfect) incentives, whereas i, though i am a software developer, am mainly considering impacts on the evolution of software as a cultural phenomenon; my position is that on balance the patent system works against the ideal of incentives for innovation in the area of software; i think the software market may naturally have enough incentives, and if it doesn't, some system other than patents may better solve the problem OK, I think my last word here is that my work is helping small firms protect their inventions. In many cases patents are the only was to get investors, and also the only way to compete with large firms who otherwise simply copy their ideas. Either by themselves or by making alliances with others. As I think Steve Jobs said small firms are better at finding great ideas as they have to find new fields not dominated by the large ones. That is why Apple, and many others, simply buy these small firms instead of trying to do it themselves (and many small firms want this). So we use it as a tool to help the small ones. The reason why I usually don´t say to traditional programmers that they should file patent applications is simple: Software patents have uncertain validity, as it is difficult to find out what is known already. So their value is limited. That is, however, in Europe. A representative for Microsoft ones said that the reason why they filed so many patent is as a defensive precaution agains US patent trolls. It´s a lot cheaper than getting
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Den 29. aug. 2012 kl. 19:45 skrev steve harley: on 2012-08-29 1:16 DagT wrote Den 29. aug. 2012 kl. 07:25 skrev DagT li...@thrane.name: But I forgot the most important part. Patents are about sharing. You give information in return for protection. good point, i agree patents _can_ promote sharing and give incentives for it, but i guess i'd say that while they may do that somewhat in the software world, there is much evidence that the process is faulty; and you pointed out that it's hard to keep trade secrets anyway i think open source, at a minimum, shows that other methods can also promote sharing and create commerce for those who innovate; it's not perfect either, but perhaps we could say we need more innovation in our methods for rewarding innovation ;? For inventions with limited need for investments open source is great, but if it requires investment in hardware and/or time you may have problems funding it without some protection and copyright isn´t enough. Anyway: the easiest way to avoid at least part of the problem is to publish any invention or idea you make and keep your files. Then you can invalidate any patents filed later, and the trolls don´t want you to do that. :-) DagT -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On 8/28/2012 10:33 AM, Bob W wrote: this is simply not true. I had a couple of smartphones for years before the iPhone. They ran Windows Mobile and synced perfectly with Outlook on my desktop, and had pretty much all the functionality I have now on my Android phone. In fact, they synched far better than the Android. The advantages of the newer stuff are better wifi (wireless sync is good) and better internet. But the older phones had good operating systems for their day and for the technology available back then, like needing a stylus for screen touching. B Indeed. I used to have a QTek 8100 (if I am not mistaken) which by the way I bought back in Norway during my visit to the Great Jostein :-). It did not have touch interface but beside that it was just perfect. It just worked. It could last 2-3 days on one charge (granted it did not have GPS or WiFi, but back the phones were mostly phones) and it was nice and compact. I still regret the day I sold it to a friend who convinced me to do so :-(. Then I had another cell phone by O2 which was brought to me from Singapore. Beside abysmal battery life (seemed like a known h/w at the time) it was just as good. As for the rest. I think that it all started with Apple's Newton (in terms of PDA, handwriting recognition and other things novel) and then was continued by Palm Pilot, which by the way (as the story has it) was designed by one of the founders having a wooden mockup that they carried along the day in order to see what could be pocketable and how comfortable it was. I also had Handsrping Visor device which was cool due to its modules and I did have a cell phone module for it. Beside being bulky it actually was very nice. So that with all due respect Apple iPhone wasn't pioneering. It was a well designed device that really based itself on a solid legacy of other devices of related or similar nature naturally having added its own share of goodness. That does not say that Apple suck or whatever, just putting things in a bit of perspective over time here. But like I said, Bob is quite right. Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 27, 2012, at 05:29 , Doug Franklin wrote: TK? Talent Keyhole Wikipedia posting re: Sensitive Compartmented Information. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitive_Compartmented_Information Which has a section on TK. Designations I recall from my years are TS/SSBI when I was secluded for ten+ months in the colony as suits with dark glasses searched out everyone I played with from age 10 to age 33, including my parents, girlfriends, relatives, neighbors (and the Haight too!). I was read into TSC/UMBRA/TK/BYEMAN/. I had no knowledge of what it meant other than TK refers to the compartment were in, KH-11 and it's modern equivalents (12? 13?) the satelittes we were controlling/using. Basically Hubbels pointed down. Hubbel could be pointed down if needed, as the KH series probably could be pointed out, if the scientific community had the dollars to take them away from their primary mission, an unlikely thing. In barcode and printed code as part of the border of every image (if I still had one I'd look to see) were the restrictions afforded to the image, plus the LAT/LONG of the aim point or aim strip, the angle from verticle, the exact UT, and a bunch of other stuff. The cover sheet illustrated in the article looks quite familiar. One thing that was kept from us worker bees was who we were doing this work for, other than the US of course. Our paychecks came from one place, our location was a cover, all materials we used arrived in plain white tractor-trailers or on military planes into Andrews AFB, neither method came directly from it's point of origin. The movement, care and feeding of the birds was handled by the Air Force. Other services were seen in the hallway from time to time. Long after I had left that all behind me, working, we thought, for the CIA, it was revealed we worked for an unknown at the time department now known as the NRO. The unusual thing about our facility was it was built to be one big compartment. Nothing could get in or out as far as sound or signal. Two cutouts were for the front doors (common security looking guards 24/7) and the loading dock, both of which were actually outside of the concrete and multi layered copper core of the building. Over time, locks started growing on some areas or rooms, cyber and card swipe types as newer more restricted parts of the system were folded in. Innitially, we were only taking pictures. After 4 or 5 years, signal intel was incorporated into the body of the satellites. Now I'm confident they are decoding my keystrokes as I type this. Well, maybe decyphering it as it whizzes through the Internet. Google searching these days tells you more about what TK was all about than I ever knew, including the KH series of imaging satellites. I was there for the first KH-11 launch in '76, moved on after -90A launch in '87. Note on this Wikipage the sharp increase in on-orbit life these tanks had starting in 1984. Don't know why. It may have orbited unuse for some years (these things were frequently lost by going into safe mode, taking weeks sometimes to get them talking again. But ten years! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KH-11_Kennan Like the Hubbell, these things were manuevered by braking 4 spinning gyroscopes, each on a different plane. I think it used a small disk brake or two on each gyro. There were one or two spares for each plane. There was fuel onboard, but I don't know if used for gross changes in direction or as pressure to form the air bearings of the gyros. I do know that these were very nimble, capable of changing by quite a few degrees of pointing angle and settling to 100% stability in just a few seconds. All using the gyros. When they ran out of usable gyros (for whatever reason) they were junk. Note that as soon as the NRO laid claim to ownership in 1996 the de-orbits were never again mentioned. Harumph. A highly degraded sample image from 400-500 miles away taken in 1999. Really, you could see whether a person was wearing a jacket or not, long sleaves or short, shoes, sandals, or barefoot - in 1987. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d5/Zhawar_Kili_Al-Badr_Camp.jpg -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Den 28. aug. 2012 kl. 09:33 skrev Bob W p...@web-options.com: And this is because before the iPhone, every single cellphone out there was an utter piece of junk. Terrible UI's; hard to sync to address books; this is simply not true. I had a couple of smartphones for years before the iPhone. They ran Windows Mobile and synced perfectly with Outlook on my desktop, and had pretty much all the functionality I have now on my Android phone. In fact, they synched far better than the Android. The advantages of the newer stuff are better wifi (wireless sync is good) and better internet. But the older phones had good operating systems for their day and for the technology available back then, like needing a stylus for screen touching. B Well, I had two HTC Windows Mobile phones at work befor switching to iPhone and don't want to express my experience with them in writing. Both mechanically and in software/UI they s Synching with outlook was in fact easier with iPhone 4. Even our anti-Apple guy responsible for the data system gave up HTC this summer. About one year after everyone else. DagT -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 27, 2012, at 6:36 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: And this is because before the iPhone, every single cellphone out there was an utter piece of junk. This is completely untrue. Terrible UI's; hard to sync to address books; dozens of models from each manufacturer, all different in pointless ways. The Blackberrys could at least access email, but they had a UI straight out of the line-oriented past. I had a succession of palm based smartphones, starting with IIRC the Kyocera 6135. Each one better than the last. The biggest problem I had with my last treo was that my eyes were getting weak and the display, being many years old, was too small for my aging eyes to read the text when the font was small enough to put sufficient amounts on it. Apple presented a new thing: a general purpose computer with a phone builtin. It had an elegant and well considered UI that folks could actually use. They re-thought and redefined the entire product category. I'm sorry but for me the iPhone user interface is an unusable piece of crap, only slightly better than the original macintosh. When the iPhone came out it was simply not an option because there was no way that I'd switch to ATT cell service. When the iPad Touch came out, I really wanted to like it. There were a lot of really cool things about that piece of shiny. Unfortunately the user interface was completely unusable. I played with friend's iPhones and iPad touches and tried to do things with them, and they simply didn't work. The original Motorola Droid was the first smartphone to give me what I wanted in a smart phone. Unfortunately, the current iteration of the Droid does not have a user replaceable battery, or I would have one of those rather than the Galaxy S3 I recently bought. I will agree that the goatse zoom is a clever idea, but being software should not be patentable. Even if goatse zoom were taken off my S3, that would not make it noticeably, if at all less usable. Patenting round corners is patently ridiculous. I'd actually rather my phone didn't have quite so round sides as that makes it a lot harder to use the bubble level software. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 28, 2012, at 5:13 AM, Larry Colen wrote: I will agree that the goatse zoom is a clever idea, but being software should not be patentable. …but being software, should not be patentable? Did you really just say that? -Charles -- Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
If they were so good, why did they abandon those designs and begin to imitate the iPhone? I also like diversity. We can have it, if companies develop their ideas and dare to be different. The problem is that, once the iPhone came out, the competition found it easier and safer to follow what Apple was doing, instead of developing innovative new products that would be different from, and competitive with, the iPhone. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 3:33 AM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: this is simply not true. I had a couple of smartphones for years before the iPhone. They ran Windows Mobile and synced perfectly with Outlook on my desktop, and had pretty much all the functionality I have now on my Android phone. In fact, they synched far better than the Android. The advantages of the newer stuff are better wifi (wireless sync is good) and better internet. But the older phones had good operating systems for their day and for the technology available back then, like needing a stylus for screen touching. B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
13. Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
From: Daniel J. Matyola danmaty...@gmail.com If they were so good, why did they abandon those designs and begin to imitate the iPhone? I also like diversity. We can have it, if companies develop their ideas and dare to be different. The problem is that, once the iPhone came out, the competition found it easier and safer to follow what Apple was doing, instead of developing innovative new products that would be different from, and competitive with, the iPhone. Dan Matyola There's only so many ways to make a hand-held computer/telephone that makes sense. Shape-wise, size-wise, all the ergonomics. Why don't you sit down and try to think of the way you would do it if you were dreaming it up from scratch? What shape would your screen be? Circle, square, rectangle? What approximate size would it be? Something that fits easily in the palm of your hand? What you want it to be fat and chunky or thin and slim? Would you want it to have sharp pointed corners that poked you in your pocket or is rounded corners better? How would you access applications on the phone? If not little pictures on the screen how would you do it? Apple didn't invent anything that was so special and unique. It was a nice invention, but largely the parameters regarding size, shape, usability were dictated to Apple by the human form, not Apple genius. iOs, Windows, Linux... all icon-based. All use rectangular screens, all have icons, mouse, keyboards for input. So think outside the box... what would you do differently that sets your product apart from your competitors in a major way? Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 6:13 AM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote: I'm sorry but for me the iPhone user interface is an unusable piece of crap [...] When the iPad Touch came out, I really wanted to like it. [...] Unfortunately the user interface was completely unusable. I played with friend's iPhones and iPad touches and tried to do things with them, and they simply didn't work. Well no single UI, or any technology really, is going to suit _everyone_. There is some evidence though, that you are in the vanishingly small minority on this one, Larry. :-) My parents are technopeasants. Their VCR blinked 12:00 for decades. The entire personal computer revolution swirled around them but they missed the first four decades of it. So when I delivered the version one iPad to them on the day that it became available, this represented the first time that they had had a computer in front of them let alone actually *use* one. Today I exchange email with them, they surf the web for medical information, lookup the weather and watch the Royal goings-on on Youtube. (I hope they haven't seen the naked Prince yet!) They grumble about the touch display a bit (so I added the keyboard stand for them), but I'm greatly relieved I never had to teach them how to use a mouse. By the way, my mother is 91, my father 89. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: 13. Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
If you look at windows 8, it follows the interface that was on the Zune. It's a collection of panels: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Windows_8_start_screen.png Each panel has aspects of an icon and a small window. It's big advantage may be that's it's different from iOs. Even before this judgement, Samsung had comitted to building phones based on Win 8. On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Tom C caka...@gmail.com wrote: From: Daniel J. Matyola danmaty...@gmail.com If they were so good, why did they abandon those designs and begin to imitate the iPhone? I also like diversity. We can have it, if companies develop their ideas and dare to be different. The problem is that, once the iPhone came out, the competition found it easier and safer to follow what Apple was doing, instead of developing innovative new products that would be different from, and competitive with, the iPhone. Dan Matyola There's only so many ways to make a hand-held computer/telephone that makes sense. Shape-wise, size-wise, all the ergonomics. Why don't you sit down and try to think of the way you would do it if you were dreaming it up from scratch? What shape would your screen be? Circle, square, rectangle? What approximate size would it be? Something that fits easily in the palm of your hand? What you want it to be fat and chunky or thin and slim? Would you want it to have sharp pointed corners that poked you in your pocket or is rounded corners better? How would you access applications on the phone? If not little pictures on the screen how would you do it? Apple didn't invent anything that was so special and unique. It was a nice invention, but largely the parameters regarding size, shape, usability were dictated to Apple by the human form, not Apple genius. iOs, Windows, Linux... all icon-based. All use rectangular screens, all have icons, mouse, keyboards for input. So think outside the box... what would you do differently that sets your product apart from your competitors in a major way? Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: 13. Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 28, 2012, at 9:56 AM, Tom C wrote: There's only so many ways to make a hand-held computer/telephone that makes sense. Shape-wise, size-wise, all the ergonomics. Why don't you sit down and try to think of the way you would do it if you were dreaming it up from scratch? If you look at the array of Samsung phones available immediately before the iPhone launch, you'd have Samsung's answer. Post iPhone, they all turned into sleek little glass tablets. Not so the year before. Not even close! -Charles -- Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 28, 2012, at 7:17 AM, Charles Robinson wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 5:13 AM, Larry Colen wrote: I will agree that the goatse zoom is a clever idea, but being software should not be patentable. …but being software, should not be patentable? Did you really just say that? Yes I did. I am firmly opposed to the concept of software patents. Mathematical formulas are not patentable. Sentence constructions are not patentable. All patent portfolios do is block smaller companies out of the marketplace. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Oh yeah I forgot Windows Mobile. But still is sleek and glass patentable? Tom C. On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Tom C caka...@gmail.com wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 9:56 AM, Tom C wrote: There's only so many ways to make a hand-held computer/telephone that makes sense. Shape-wise, size-wise, all the ergonomics. Why don't you sit down and try to think of the way you would do it if you were dreaming it up from scratch? If you look at the array of Samsung phones available immediately before the iPhone launch, you'd have Samsung's answer. Post iPhone, they all turned into sleek little glass tablets. Not so the year before. Not even close! -Charles Your comparing Apples to Oranges. Aside from Blackerry/RIM was there a smartphone before the iPhone? Like I said Apple sacrificed a huge slice of it's potential customer base by entering contracts with Cingular/ATT as the exclusive US carrier for 4 years! I'd venture the Android market would only be half it's size had that not occurred. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Oh yeah I forgot Palm. Frankly the Windows phone slightly tempted me. Palm never did. On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Tom C caka...@gmail.com wrote: Oh yeah I forgot Windows Mobile. But still is sleek and glass patentable? Tom C. On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Tom C caka...@gmail.com wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 9:56 AM, Tom C wrote: There's only so many ways to make a hand-held computer/telephone that makes sense. Shape-wise, size-wise, all the ergonomics. Why don't you sit down and try to think of the way you would do it if you were dreaming it up from scratch? If you look at the array of Samsung phones available immediately before the iPhone launch, you'd have Samsung's answer. Post iPhone, they all turned into sleek little glass tablets. Not so the year before. Not even close! -Charles Your comparing Apples to Oranges. Aside from Blackerry/RIM was there a smartphone before the iPhone? Like I said Apple sacrificed a huge slice of it's potential customer base by entering contracts with Cingular/ATT as the exclusive US carrier for 4 years! I'd venture the Android market would only be half it's size had that not occurred. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On 8/27/2012 10:47 PM, William Robb wrote: On 27/08/2012 6:55 PM, Tom C wrote: What I'm against is a world where we only have Fords, Apple iPads, Apple smart phones, Samsung TV's, Frigidaire refrigerators,,, you get my drift, to choose from, and from what I can see that's the kind of world Apple would like it to be. Precedent law would say that the first company to patent the 3 box car design will have the market in sedans and coupes to themselves, and if the are smart they could patent the pick up truck shape and be the only car maker allowed to sell vehicles in the USA. That's how stupid allowing Apple to patent the rectangle with rounded corner shape is. We can only hope that it's Nissan or Toyota, and not one of the Big 3 that gets to the patent office first, or we are guaranteed to have to live with crappy vehicles forever. Few remember that Polaroid patented the process of osmosis in photography and got a judgement against Kodak with it. Kodak, didn't even have to reverse engineer how Polaroid SX70 film worked, they produced it for them, so they took those intimate details and produced a product that did exactly the same thing in completely different ways with one exception to produce an almost identical result. So the fact that Apple can patent rounded corners doesn't surprise me at all. To even be allowed to argue patent law you are required to be a combination of scientist engineer and lawyer, to hear the case apparently not. -- Don't lose heart, they might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthly search. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
No. Never trust what forum people claim to be patented. Usually them haven't even seen the patent :-) DagT The Evil European Patent Attorney Sendt fra min iPad Den 28. aug. 2012 kl. 19:32 skrev Tom C caka...@gmail.com: Oh yeah I forgot Windows Mobile. But still is sleek and glass patentable? Tom C. On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Tom C caka...@gmail.com wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 9:56 AM, Tom C wrote: There's only so many ways to make a hand-held computer/telephone that makes sense. Shape-wise, size-wise, all the ergonomics. Why don't you sit down and try to think of the way you would do it if you were dreaming it up from scratch? If you look at the array of Samsung phones available immediately before the iPhone launch, you'd have Samsung's answer. Post iPhone, they all turned into sleek little glass tablets. Not so the year before. Not even close! -Charles Your comparing Apples to Oranges. Aside from Blackerry/RIM was there a smartphone before the iPhone? Like I said Apple sacrificed a huge slice of it's potential customer base by entering contracts with Cingular/ATT as the exclusive US carrier for 4 years! I'd venture the Android market would only be half it's size had that not occurred. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
The look and feel is different. Apple makers a big deal of that. I'm not saying it's better; just harder to base a lawsuit on. Point noted. I knew that's what you were saying. :) It's only superficially different, is my minor point. And how is the iPhone interface that much different than a Windows or Mac desktop? Not a heck of a lot, that's why everyone (except Larry... sorry Larry... smiley) knew how to instantly use it. You have icons on a display screen, you click on them, and they do things. Even with the gesture related controls. Is it right to patent the fact that spreading your fingers means get larger and pinching them means shrink. Is there another gesture that makes more sense? Maybe dialing clock-wise to indicated expand, and anti-clock-wise to shrink? The Apple vs. Apple Records decades long litigation shows that Apple is not an innocent party. They'll copy and imitate the same as any other company of it's in their best interest. There's a ton of cars on the market with the look and feel of a Honda Accord or Toyota Camry. It seems to me that Apple's trying to pull a coup and they hope the judges and juries are stupid enough or non-tech savvy enough to buy it and grant them patents on concepts that are essentially in the domain of humanity. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: 13. Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Tom C There's only so many ways to make a hand-held computer/telephone that makes sense. Shape-wise, size-wise, all the ergonomics. Why don't you sit down and try to think of the way you would do it if you were dreaming it up from scratch? What shape would your screen be? Circle, square, rectangle? What approximate size would it be? Something that fits easily in the palm of your hand? What you want it to be fat and chunky or thin and slim? Would you want it to have sharp pointed corners that poked you in your pocket or is rounded corners better? How would you access applications on the phone? If not little pictures on the screen how would you do it? Apple didn't invent anything that was so special and unique. It was a nice invention, but largely the parameters regarding size, shape, usability were dictated to Apple by the human form, not Apple genius. iOs, Windows, Linux... all icon-based. All use rectangular screens, all have icons, mouse, keyboards for input. So think outside the box... what would you do differently that sets your product apart from your competitors in a major way? Paper-tape reader? B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Den 28. aug. 2012 kl. 19:04 skrev Larry Colen: On Aug 28, 2012, at 7:17 AM, Charles Robinson wrote: On Aug 28, 2012, at 5:13 AM, Larry Colen wrote: I will agree that the goatse zoom is a clever idea, but being software should not be patentable. …but being software, should not be patentable? Did you really just say that? Yes I did. I am firmly opposed to the concept of software patents. Mathematical formulas are not patentable. Sentence constructions are not patentable. All patent portfolios do is block smaller companies out of the marketplace. It is very easy to be opposed to the concept of software patents but it is difficult to define them and to avoid them. Also, it wouldn´t necessarily help to forbid them :-) First: A large part of the problem is outside the patent system. The triple damages system in makes it possible to make a living from owning patents without using them. This is why you have patent trolls in the US, but they are rare in Europe where you only get compensation for lost income. Second: you need to define what software patents are. In the US, a patented invention should be new and useful. In Europe there should be a technical effect. This way we avoid business methods and other problematic patents. Third: and why do we still have some software patents in Europe? Because it is difficult to define technical effect. The Babbage computer was purely mechanical, http://www.computerhistory.org/babbage/ but was it patentable to make it perform some movements related to logic but not others? Or another question: it is patentable make a gear shift under certain conditions, but that could also be an algorithm and it would be unfair to the inventor to let someone make a cheap computer do the same. In the about 20 years I have been discussing this with people who are opposed to software patents nobody has ever found a fair definition. If you cannot forbid what you cannot define. :-) DagT The Evil European Patent Attorney -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Daniel J. Matyola If they were so good, why did they abandon those designs and begin to imitate the iPhone? they didn't abandon those designs. Mobile phone shops are full of phones that are clearly not imitating the iPhone, and just as full of people buying them. Some mobile phones - some, but not all - obviously are jumping on the iPhone bandwagon, but it's a long way from that to saying that other designs have been abandoned. As far as the software and usability goes, these things leap-frog each other, and always have done. Innovation and creativity thrive by stealing other people's ideas and building on them. Think of the Beatles and the Beach Boys. Picasso said Good artists borrow. Great artists steal. Guess what? Steve Jobs said that too. B I also like diversity. We can have it, if companies develop their ideas and dare to be different. The problem is that, once the iPhone came out, the competition found it easier and safer to follow what Apple was doing, instead of developing innovative new products that would be different from, and competitive with, the iPhone. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 3:33 AM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: this is simply not true. I had a couple of smartphones for years before the iPhone. They ran Windows Mobile and synced perfectly with Outlook on my desktop, and had pretty much all the functionality I have now on my Android phone. In fact, they synched far better than the Android. The advantages of the newer stuff are better wifi (wireless sync is good) and better internet. But the older phones had good operating systems for their day and for the technology available back then, like needing a stylus for screen touching. B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 28, 2012, at 11:32 AM, Tom C wrote: There's a ton of cars on the market with the look and feel of a Honda Accord or Toyota Camry. It seems to me that Apple's trying to pull a coup ... I think you misspelled coupe. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 28, 2012, at 11:32 AM, Tom C wrote: The look and feel is different. Apple makers a big deal of that. I'm not saying it's better; just harder to base a lawsuit on. Point noted. I knew that's what you were saying. :) It's only superficially different, is my minor point. And how is the iPhone interface that much different than a Windows or Mac desktop? Not a heck of a lot, that's why everyone (except Larry... sorry Larry... smiley) knew how to instantly use it. I knew how to use it. It is just clunky and awkward. Kind of like insert name here and [his/her] [camera | humor | love life]. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
You can buy those old clunkers at Walmart and a few other places, and there may be leftovers at mobile phone shops, but go to the mall and see what people, especially young people, are buying: iPhones and knock-offs of the iPhone. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: they didn't abandon those designs. Mobile phone shops are full of phones that are clearly not imitating the iPhone, and just as full of people buying them. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung) (was Re: PDML Digest, Vol 76, Issue 243)
on 2012-08-28 11:30 Tom C wrote Your comparing Apples to Oranges. Aside from Blackerry/RIM was there a smartphone before the iPhone? Palm Treo and other Palm phones -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung) (was Re: PDML Digest, Vol 76, Issue 243)
I had Palm phones for several years. Calling them smart is overly generous. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 5:24 PM, steve harley p...@paper-ape.com wrote: on 2012-08-28 11:30 Tom C wrote Your comparing Apples to Oranges. Aside from Blackerry/RIM was there a smartphone before the iPhone? Palm Treo and other Palm phones -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung) (was Re: PDML Digest, Vol 76, Issue 243)
on 2012-08-28 15:33 Daniel J. Matyola wrote I had Palm phones for several years. Calling them smart is overly generous. i had Palms (without phones) for several years and they were quite smart; they reminded me of stuff, showed me what stars were overhead, let me work with OPML outlines … -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On 28/8/12, Tom C, discombobulated, unleashed: Oh yeah I forgot Palm. Frankly the Windows phone slightly tempted me. Palm never did. I ran Palms for a few years until the day I was waiting a decade for: the first iPhone. 24th of November 2007 here in the UK. Got one the very first day. Haven't looked back. I used to say that if i was marooned on a desert island with a choice of either the MacBook Pro or the iPhone, I'd choose the MBP. Now it's the other way around! -- Cheers, Fanboy ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche -- http://www.cottysnaps.com _ PS cottysnaps.com will be coming to an end soon - I'm handing over to the next generation. Stef is building a website for his sports photography using Freeway Express, with a view to starting a business. All good things.. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Which is very unfair for those who have great ideas. You know the circuitry for making efficient car engines? It may easily be duplicated by software if it is not already. Some millions of dollars research just to give it away to the competitor. Why bother making clean engines? But we want them, so have make people do the research if they don´t get anything back? Another thing is, of course, that we in Norway have found lots of new oil resources the past few months. Mostly due to software developed by seismic companies where the sensors themselves are well known. Why would they make these investments of the next (mostly likely US) company could just use the same idea. Our economy is certainly dependent on partially software relates, very complex, inventions. No, your theory works for small software inventions, but those are not the complete picture. You need a better definition. Another thing is, of course, that computer programs may be implemented as hardware... DagT Den 28. aug. 2012 kl. 23:31 skrev steve harley: on 2012-08-28 12:48 DagT wrote In the about 20 years I have been discussing this with people who are opposed to software patents nobody has ever found a fair definition. If you cannot forbid what you cannot define. :-) that's easy — let them get the patent, but if something is implemented in software, it can't be held to violate the patent -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Steve Cottrell I used to say that if i was marooned on a desert island with a choice of either the MacBook Pro or the iPhone, I'd choose the MBP. Now it's the other way around! you think the Macbook would choose you? B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung) (was Re: PDML Digest, Vol 76, Issue 243)
I had to press the reset button once a week. It hung up a lot. I had to carry around extra batteries. The only reason I survived is by backing it up to my computer every day, so I could sync the memory back into the phone every time it fritzed out. Twice I had Verizon give me a replacement for a phone less than 2 years old. It was fairly well designed for its time; it just didn't perform as it was supposed to. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 5:38 PM, steve harley p...@paper-ape.com wrote: on 2012-08-28 15:33 Daniel J. Matyola wrote I had Palm phones for several years. Calling them smart is overly generous. i had Palms (without phones) for several years and they were quite smart; they reminded me of stuff, showed me what stars were overhead, let me work with OPML outlines … -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On 28/8/12, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: you think the Macbook would choose you? Now that is an interesting question! I was watching Terminator 3 (The Rise of the Machines) again last night with Stef -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche -- http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung) (was Re: PDML Digest, Vol 76, Issue 243)
I lost my cell phone and got a Palm Pixi from Amazon for $50 since it has been discontinued. It was using the OS that HP developed (helped palm develop?). It might have been pretty good if it had some develop cycles. On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Daniel J. Matyola danmaty...@gmail.com wrote: I had to press the reset button once a week. It hung up a lot. I had to carry around extra batteries. The only reason I survived is by backing it up to my computer every day, so I could sync the memory back into the phone every time it fritzed out. Twice I had Verizon give me a replacement for a phone less than 2 years old. It was fairly well designed for its time; it just didn't perform as it was supposed to. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 5:38 PM, steve harley p...@paper-ape.com wrote: on 2012-08-28 15:33 Daniel J. Matyola wrote I had Palm phones for several years. Calling them smart is overly generous. i had Palms (without phones) for several years and they were quite smart; they reminded me of stuff, showed me what stars were overhead, let me work with OPML outlines … -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung) (was Re: PDML Digest, Vol 76, Issue 243)
On 28/8/12, Steven Desjardins, discombobulated, unleashed: I lost my cell phone and got a Palm Pixi from Amazon for $50 since it has been discontinued. It was using the OS that HP developed (helped palm develop?). It might have been pretty good if it had some develop cycles. Mrs has a Palm Pre 2 and so far so good. She doesn't like the screen- only option of the iPhone, preferring a tactile keypad like a Blackberry, but didn't like the Blackberrys (go figure!) but the Palm is fast enough, slides open to reveal a keyboard and it hook up to the wifi and is 3G, actually it's quite a cute little thing. The WebOS system is slightly clunky but there's quite a few apps available and it works. http://cdn.pocketnow.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/palm-pre-2.jpg -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche -- http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
on 2012-08-28 15:43 DagT wrote Which is very unfair for those who have great ideas. that's a sweeping statement to which i will withhold my response, but your individual points below are thought provoking … You know the circuitry for making efficient car engines? It may easily be duplicated by software if it is not already. Some millions of dollars research just to give it away to the competitor. Why bother making clean engines? But we want them, so have make people do the research if they don´t get anything back? it seems to me that this example is about an alternative implementation of an idea rather than a method; patents aren't intended to protect ideas Another thing is, of course, that we in Norway have found lots of new oil resources the past few months. Mostly due to software developed by seismic companies where the sensors themselves are well known. Why would they make these investments of the next (mostly likely US) company could just use the same idea. Our economy is certainly dependent on partially software relates, very complex, inventions. if i were deciding how such a company should protect its work, i would treat it as a trade secret, not as a patent No, your theory works for small software inventions, but those are not the complete picture. You need a better definition. i think your point is not disputing my definition, but rather returning to the question of whether some or all software should be patentable Another thing is, of course, that computer programs may be implemented as hardware... if you mean as firmware, or as a configuration of an integrated circuit, it's still software if it is a description (loosely speaking) of inputs, outputs and a logical sequence; and if you are talking about specific computer programs, they are covered by copyright (copyright laws, at least in the US, are also flawed, but i don't object in principle to software copyrights) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On 28/08/2012 12:32 PM, Tom C wrote: Is it right to patent the fact that spreading your fingers means get larger and pinching them means shrink. Is there another gesture that makes more sense? Consider for a moment that when I was a mere teenager, a person pulling up beside you at a red light and making a deflating O gesture was an indication you had a flat tire. -- William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Den 29. aug. 2012 kl. 00:18 skrev steve harley: on 2012-08-28 15:43 DagT wrote You know the circuitry for making efficient car engines? It may easily be duplicated by software if it is not already. Some millions of dollars research just to give it away to the competitor. Why bother making clean engines? But we want them, so have make people do the research if they don´t get anything back? it seems to me that this example is about an alternative implementation of an idea rather than a method; patents aren't intended to protect ideas So now you find definitions that suit your principle rather than look at the problem. Why would you not allow a technical method for improving engines to be patentable? Note that the patent clams would have to be enabling so it would not simply be an idea. Another thing is, of course, that we in Norway have found lots of new oil resources the past few months. Mostly due to software developed by seismic companies where the sensors themselves are well known. Why would they make these investments of the next (mostly likely US) company could just use the same idea. Our economy is certainly dependent on partially software relates, very complex, inventions. if i were deciding how such a company should protect its work, i would treat it as a trade secret, not as a patent You obviously haven´t been involved in cases where employs steal ideas and start competing firms. Believe me, it has been tried and didn´t work. No, your theory works for small software inventions, but those are not the complete picture. You need a better definition. i think your point is not disputing my definition, but rather returning to the question of whether some or all software should be patentable No, I am simply looking for a definition. In fact, I do agree regarding small purely software inventions, but their complex relatives really need patents. That is why it is difficult. Another thing is, of course, that computer programs may be implemented as hardware... if you mean as firmware, or as a configuration of an integrated circuit, it's still software if it is a description (loosely speaking) of inputs, outputs and a logical sequence; and if you are talking about specific computer programs, they are covered by copyright (copyright laws, at least in the US, are also flawed, but i don't object in principle to software copyrights) No, it is very possible to make a machine that perform logical sequences. Copyright is not effective as you loose any protection by simply rephrasing the code, not reinventing it. Anyway, there are some very strange things in the US copyright law. DagT -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 25, 2012, at 15:27 , Brian Walters wrote: Quoting Bob Sullivan rf.sulli...@gmail.com: Darren, Some of us still hold a grudge on Apple. We remember our first Apple PC's and how everything Apple cost 2X what the IBM machines cost, how nothing - printer, disc drives, monitors, memory had to be Apple or it wouldn't work! Thanks, Bob. I've also got a long memory. I was trying to frame a reply along those lines and you've saved me the trouble :-) Those of us who have used Pentax all our lives, for whatever reason, lens compatibility, rugged and innovative products, should know better. Apple would not be where they are today if they didn't provide compatibility with the hardware tools their customers wanted or needed to do their work. Even today though, with a pant-load of software capable of easily porting PC programs to Macs, a large percentage of companies don't bother. They are running the same hardware, idiots. Port! I think it's because so many liked to fiddle as kids, so they went to the dark side and got PCs. So they could. Now that they are older, these kids are scared they can't learn anything new, so they shy away from Apple. While they were sneering at us, Apple stock sold for $13 a share. Whose sneering now? The first use I got out of my first Apple Product, a ][+, was writing CP/M code to make my Epson Printer listen to the Apple. Pretty simple really. About two lines of hex to tell the computer that is was attached to something other than a line printer. I learned Wozniac's method of writing data to floppy disks, and would repair friends disk with errors by printing out all the code on the disk, finding where the error was by following the sectors sequentially as they jumped around all over the directory, mapping it (tedious!) until I discovered what was missing, or garbled, and repairing it. When Apple computers (Mac) went to 48, then 64 bit processes, I gave up on that endeavor. When the Mac came out in 1984, it was shortly followed, thanks to Adobe selling Jobs the font technology used by Apple Laser Printers, which put tens of thousands of printers and font designers working at home. Desktop Printing became a buzzword in those years. That was the only time I can think of that for a year or two you had to buy an Apple printer to do the job. Soon HP and Brother came out with similar printers, which ALL cost too much because of the very high per unit prices Adobe charged Apple and the others to use ROMs running their patented font drawing software whose name I cannot think of now. That lasted for a while, then Apple addressed the costs by coming out with their own (or purchased) fonts design called TrueType that gave damn near the quality of Adobe's system. Apple gave those away, followed by most all fonts being converted into TrueType. This took the wind out of Adobe's profit column. They had saved enough money to buy Aldus and it's PageMaker layout program, which put me out of a job in the Aldus division that was troubleshooting PageMaker 4.0 against Microsoft Windows version 3.0, (which was really vers. 1.1 which indicated how far behind in the GUI movement they were, so they renamed it 3.0) that was taking forever to get out of Alpha. Alpha, Beta, back to Alpha kept a paycheck in my pocket. My team was kept busy by designing a little text editor for PageMaker while we waited on Gate's boys and girls to get their shit together. We called it Ted. We gave it rudimentary graphical capabilities which gave me a few more weeks as we built a series of graphics showing what it could do to be used in promotion. But I digress. Apple's concept practically from the start, especially when Jobs was at the helm, was to sell products that, even though complex and innovative in their design, made few demands on their users. They just worked Plug and Play etc. One paid a price for this, of course. In return, Apple Mac users never had to open their equipment or learn how it went together. Some did of course. I made many friends and grew a decent client list as an Apple Consultant after starting one of the first Apple clubs in Fredericksburg, VA in 1980, called the Rappahanock Apple Group. Our newsletter, a dot matrix gem, was mastheaded the RAG. I still have the plaque they gave me when I moved away to come to Seattle in 1988. When I was let go at Aldus/Adobe, I went into business as a consultant. Never got rich. Made a few bucks selling and installing telecommunications systems, hawking First Class BBS s/w out of Toronto for a few years in Seattle, turning the Downtown Business Users Groups (dBUG)'s single line BBS in 1989 into a 22 line BBS by 1994. Big thick cable of 2-pair dropped into my house, with room inside of it for 48 lines. Sadly the local switch could not handle any more connections. I was voted off the board of directors in 1995 because they did not believe the club needed to transition to a something called
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 25, 2012, at 20:10 , John Sessoms wrote: From: Daniel J. Matyola My first computer was an Apple ][. Great computer. I loved it. I learned Basic, Pascal, Assembler and even a bit of machine language programing on it. It certainly wasn't plug -and-play, but it was designed for computer hobbyists, and most of them loved it. Dan Matyola My first computer was an IBM System 360. I learned to place the cards in the card reader Face down nine edge first, AND DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING ELSE KID! Not that you owned John! Where I worked 1975 to 1988 we had 6 IBM 360s. Not mine, but there they were. In the early 90's they were replaced by 3 IBM 3090s. Lord knows what they use now. For my departments equipment to be controlled by those beasts, the 360s, we had to program a PDP-11 switch panel, telling it to read a box of 80 col cards which then printed a paper tape which we ran through the reader which in turn told the PDP-11 to read a data cassette tape, which loaded the data telling it (PDP-11) it had a 9 reel to reel it could run to set itself up to accept the communications coming from the 360s and what to do with that data. The data was digital imagery coming into the building from the high frequency dishes out back that was being sent by one of two or three KH-11 satellites via repeating satellites that bounces the signals off stations in, for one, Alice Springs, AUS. The 360's decoded the security the data stream was encoded with, then split the data into four synched streams, each one writing one forth of each frame to one of four Laser Image Reconstructors (LIR) which used a 5 watt green laser beam hitting a chunk of some stressed out stuff that controlled the brightness of that beam that hit one of the sides of a 48 facet crystal 56,000 rpm air supported spinner which wrote the data one line at a time, 2780 lines per inch onto Kodak BW super film (had no name, just WOW!) as it ran though the machine. 150 feet of film was exposed in almost satellite-link real time by each of the four LIRs. We had no hard drives yet, so we dealt in real-time with a backup of eight 70mm, 48 track, 4400 feet of tape wound on Pyrex glass reels spinning at incredible speeds to capture the data from a 15 to 35 minute pass. Only four tape recorders were needed for full resolution capture, the other four were recording only one in seven bits, for later satellite distribution to our allies in Britain, France, Canada, Australia, etc., as well as to the troops in the field who manned trailers capable of receiving, exposing, and processing the images (project ITACLES). The full res. stuff would be hand delivered within 6 hours, if troops anywhere in the world needed the better res., in vacuum sealed 24 by 10 packages. Our Allies never saw that film. It was TS TK NOFORN. By the time I left there, technology had advanced to the point where the IBM 3090s fed the data directly to a single LIR capable of writing the entire pass to film. This saved us lots of time. The previous setup needed machines that could read the barcodes on the films, cut the quarters of images out, then sonically weld them together using a horn shaped uhf feed to melt the edges of the pieces of film after they were cut, overlapped by a sixteenth of an inch, and pressed together. Flapping and slicing and sscree four times and you had a full frame image. Good times! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Aug 27, 2012, at 5:26 AM, Joseph McAllister wrote: On Aug 25, 2012, at 15:27 , Brian Walters wrote: Quoting Bob Sullivan rf.sulli...@gmail.com: Darren, Some of us still hold a grudge on Apple. We remember our first Apple PC's and how everything Apple cost 2X what the IBM machines cost, how nothing - printer, disc drives, monitors, memory had to be Apple or it wouldn't work! Thanks, Bob. I've also got a long memory. I was trying to frame a reply along those lines and you've saved me the trouble :-) Those of us who have used Pentax all our lives, for whatever reason, lens compatibility, rugged and innovative products, should know better. Apple would not be where they are today if they didn't provide compatibility with the hardware tools their customers wanted or needed to do their work. Even today though, with a pant-load of software capable of easily porting PC programs to Macs, a large percentage of companies don't bother. They are running the same hardware, idiots. Port! I think it's because so many liked to fiddle as kids, so they went to the dark side and got PCs. So they could. Now that they are older, these kids are scared they can't learn anything new, so they shy away from Apple. While they were sneering at us, Apple stock sold for $13 a share. Whose sneering now? The first use I got out of my first Apple Product, a ][+, was writing CP/M code to make my Epson Printer listen to the Apple. Pretty simple really. About two lines of hex to tell the computer that is was attached to something other than a line printer. I learned Wozniac's method of writing data to floppy disks, and would repair friends disk with errors by printing out all the code on the disk, finding where the error was by following the sectors sequentially as they jumped around all over the directory, mapping it (tedious!) until I discovered what was missing, or garbled, and repairing it. When Apple computers (Mac) went to 48, then 64 bit processes, I gave up on that endeavor. When the Mac came out in 1984, it was shortly followed, thanks to Adobe selling Jobs the font technology used by Apple Laser Printers, which put tens of thousands of printers and font designers working at home. Desktop Printing became a buzzword in those years. That was the only time I can think of that for a year or two you had to buy an Apple printer to do the job. Soon HP and Brother came out with similar printers, which ALL cost too much because of the very high per unit prices Adobe charged Apple and the others to use ROMs running their patented font drawing software whose name I cannot think of now. That lasted for a while, then Apple addressed the costs by coming out with their own (or purchased) fonts design called TrueType that gave damn near the quality of Adobe's system. Apple gave those away, followed by most all fonts being converted into TrueType. This took the wind out of Adobe's profit column. They had saved enough money to buy Aldus and it's PageMaker layout program, which put me out of a job in the Aldus division that was troubleshooting PageMaker 4.0 against Microsoft Windows version 3.0, (which was really vers. 1.1 which indicated how far behind in the GUI movement they were, so they renamed it 3.0) that was taking forever to get out of Alpha. Alpha, Beta, back to Alpha kept a paycheck in my pocket. My team was kept busy by designing a little text editor for PageMaker while we waited on Gate's boys and girls to get their shit together. We called it Ted. We gave it rudimentary graphical capabilities which gave me a few more weeks as we built a series of graphics showing what it could do to be used in promotion. But I digress. Apple's concept practically from the start, especially when Jobs was at the helm, was to sell products that, even though complex and innovative in their design, made few demands on their users. They just worked Plug and Play etc. One paid a price for this, of course. In return, Apple Mac users never had to open their equipment or learn how it went together. Some did of course. I made many friends and grew a decent client list as an Apple Consultant after starting one of the first Apple clubs in Fredericksburg, VA in 1980, called the Rappahanock Apple Group. Our newsletter, a dot matrix gem, was mastheaded the RAG. I still have the plaque they gave me when I moved away to come to Seattle in 1988. When I was let go at Aldus/Adobe, I went into business as a consultant. Never got rich. Made a few bucks selling and installing telecommunications systems, hawking First Class BBS s/w out of Toronto for a few years in Seattle, turning the Downtown Business Users Groups (dBUG)'s single line BBS in 1989 into a 22 line BBS by 1994. Big thick cable of 2-pair dropped into my house, with room inside of it for 48 lines. Sadly the local switch could not handle any more connections.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On 2012-08-27 6:19, Joseph McAllister wrote: TS TK NOFORN. I know what TS and NOFORN are, but what's TK? -- Doug Lefty Franklin NutDriver Racing http://NutDriver.org Facebook NutDriver Racing Sponsored by Murphy -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Yes, I also worked with computers that had punch cards in the 1960s. Dull Boring work. As I result, I lost my chance to get in on the ground floor. My four math courses in college were with John Kemeny, then head of the Math Department, and later President, of Dartmouth College. He told us he was working on a computer programing language, and was seeking student volunteers. Our response was that we didn't want to get involved with computers that gave you paper cuts, and anyway, we had our slide rules; who needed computers? Kemeny went on to develop BASIC, which was (and perhaps still is) patented by the college. It took 20 years before I finally became involved with computers; by that time, BASIC had gone through numerous iterations and improvements. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Aug 25, 2012, at 20:10 , John Sessoms wrote: From: Daniel J. Matyola My first computer was an Apple ][. Great computer. I loved it. I learned Basic, Pascal, Assembler and even a bit of machine language programing on it. It certainly wasn't plug -and-play, but it was designed for computer hobbyists, and most of them loved it. Dan Matyola My first computer was an IBM System 360. I learned to place the cards in the card reader Face down nine edge first, AND DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING ELSE KID! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
Long ago in a place far away I took a computer course to learn Fortran. I was convinced that I needed it for my physics degree. I groused about all this other stuff they were trying to teach me, different computer languages, Touring machines, computers in general. Funny how valuable that proved to be. The instructor was a Electical Engineering post doc. Friends majoring in EE told me that he had just finished wiring up a computer full of transistors the size of 2 giant blackboards used in the classroom... then some physicist developed integrated circuit chips, all the transistors in one tiny chip. Regards, Bob S. On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Daniel J. Matyola danmaty...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, I also worked with computers that had punch cards in the 1960s. Dull Boring work. As I result, I lost my chance to get in on the ground floor. My four math courses in college were with John Kemeny, then head of the Math Department, and later President, of Dartmouth College. He told us he was working on a computer programing language, and was seeking student volunteers. Our response was that we didn't want to get involved with computers that gave you paper cuts, and anyway, we had our slide rules; who needed computers? Kemeny went on to develop BASIC, which was (and perhaps still is) patented by the college. It took 20 years before I finally became involved with computers; by that time, BASIC had gone through numerous iterations and improvements. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Aug 25, 2012, at 20:10 , John Sessoms wrote: From: Daniel J. Matyola My first computer was an Apple ][. Great computer. I loved it. I learned Basic, Pascal, Assembler and even a bit of machine language programing on it. It certainly wasn't plug -and-play, but it was designed for computer hobbyists, and most of them loved it. Dan Matyola My first computer was an IBM System 360. I learned to place the cards in the card reader Face down nine edge first, AND DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING ELSE KID! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 2:26 AM, Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com wrote: ... That lasted for a while, then Apple addressed the costs by coming out with their own (or purchased) fonts design called TrueType that gave damn near the quality of Adobe's system. ... Fascinating stories. Joe, a good friend at Apple invented TrueType (one of his eighteen or nineteen patents at Apple related to the technology of typography in the digital world). We had lunch just this past Saturday. He retired about a decade ago, sat around for two years, realized he was bored, and went back to work at a company that designs and develops font and typographic tools (name escapes me). Still doing what he loves. -- Godfrey godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Daniel J. Matyola Yes, I also worked with computers that had punch cards in the 1960s. Dull Boring work. As I result, I lost my chance to get in on the ground floor. My four math courses in college were with John Kemeny, then head of the Math Department, and later President, of Dartmouth College. He told us he was working on a computer programing language, and was seeking student volunteers. Our response was that we didn't want to get involved with computers that gave you paper cuts, and anyway, we had our slide rules; who needed computers? Kemeny went on to develop BASIC, which was (and perhaps still is) patented by the college. It took 20 years before I finally became involved with computers; by that time, BASIC had gone through numerous iterations and improvements. you haven't missed much. I learnt Basic on my first programming course, alongside Cobol and Pascal, in about 1981. I recently had to write an Excel VBA macro at work, having not done any real programming (ie used in a professional environment, subject to change control and all the usual programming-in-the-large considerations) for many years, and it really is very, very similar to the various primitive forms of BASIC I've used in various workplaces over the years. There is something knocking around called True BASIC http://www.truebasic.com/, which purports to be a sort of fundamentalist's BASIC, stripped of the barnacles it has acquired over the years. I'm not a fan of BASIC. It's one of those things that amateurs think is easy to do until they shoot themselves metaphorically in the head. A disciplined professional programmer can make it work well enough, but even the best of us make mistakes and it's too easy for them to slip through BASIC's rather feeble defences. B Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Aug 25, 2012, at 20:10 , John Sessoms wrote: From: Daniel J. Matyola My first computer was an Apple ][. Great computer. I loved it. I learned Basic, Pascal, Assembler and even a bit of machine language programing on it. It certainly wasn't plug -and-play, but it was designed for computer hobbyists, and most of them loved it. Dan Matyola My first computer was an IBM System 360. I learned to place the cards in the card reader Face down nine edge first, AND DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING ELSE KID! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
I also learned BASIC in the early 1980s. By then it was passe. I quickly shifted to PASCAL and assembler. I suspect that learning and using BASIC in 1960 might have been a much different situation, however. At that time, it was revolutionary, and if I had 20 more years of computer experience than I do, I might actually be marginally competent by now. Instead, I'm still as much of a hacker when it comes to computers as I am when it comes to cameras. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Daniel J. Matyola Yes, I also worked with computers that had punch cards in the 1960s. Dull Boring work. As I result, I lost my chance to get in on the ground floor. My four math courses in college were with John Kemeny, then head of the Math Department, and later President, of Dartmouth College. He told us he was working on a computer programing language, and was seeking student volunteers. Our response was that we didn't want to get involved with computers that gave you paper cuts, and anyway, we had our slide rules; who needed computers? Kemeny went on to develop BASIC, which was (and perhaps still is) patented by the college. It took 20 years before I finally became involved with computers; by that time, BASIC had gone through numerous iterations and improvements. you haven't missed much. I learnt Basic on my first programming course, alongside Cobol and Pascal, in about 1981. I recently had to write an Excel VBA macro at work, having not done any real programming (ie used in a professional environment, subject to change control and all the usual programming-in-the-large considerations) for many years, and it really is very, very similar to the various primitive forms of BASIC I've used in various workplaces over the years. There is something knocking around called True BASIC http://www.truebasic.com/, which purports to be a sort of fundamentalist's BASIC, stripped of the barnacles it has acquired over the years. I'm not a fan of BASIC. It's one of those things that amateurs think is easy to do until they shoot themselves metaphorically in the head. A disciplined professional programmer can make it work well enough, but even the best of us make mistakes and it's too easy for them to slip through BASIC's rather feeble defences. B Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Aug 25, 2012, at 20:10 , John Sessoms wrote: From: Daniel J. Matyola My first computer was an Apple ][. Great computer. I loved it. I learned Basic, Pascal, Assembler and even a bit of machine language programing on it. It certainly wasn't plug -and-play, but it was designed for computer hobbyists, and most of them loved it. Dan Matyola My first computer was an IBM System 360. I learned to place the cards in the card reader Face down nine edge first, AND DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING ELSE KID! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
The part that mattered and y'all kind of missed was the and don't touch anything else kid. I really was a kid, not yet old enough to drive. It was very unusual someone my age would even be allowed inside the computer room. Not only was I allowed in, I was allowed to do something, a very VERY minor something, with the computer. I wasn't even particularly interested in computers. If you can't take it apart to see how it works, what good is it? I already understood enough about the grown-up world to know THEY were never going to let me do that. It was just the least boring place for me to wait around until my dad decided to quit work and I could catch a ride home. I don't remember what they used the computer for, although I'm sure I was told at some time or another. It was an insurance company, so it must have had something to do with keeping track of the money. From: Daniel J. Matyola Yes, I also worked with computers that had punch cards in the 1960s. Dull Boring work. As I result, I lost my chance to get in on the ground floor. My four math courses in college were with John Kemeny, then head of the Math Department, and later President, of Dartmouth College. He told us he was working on a computer programing language, and was seeking student volunteers. Our response was that we didn't want to get involved with computers that gave you paper cuts, and anyway, we had our slide rules; who needed computers? Kemeny went on to develop BASIC, which was (and perhaps still is) patented by the college. It took 20 years before I finally became involved with computers; by that time, BASIC had gone through numerous iterations and improvements. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Aug 25, 2012, at 20:10 , John Sessoms wrote: From: Daniel J. Matyola My first computer was an Apple ][. Great computer. I loved it. I learned Basic, Pascal, Assembler and even a bit of machine language programing on it. It certainly wasn't plug -and-play, but it was designed for computer hobbyists, and most of them loved it. Dan Matyola My first computer was an IBM System 360. I learned to place the cards in the card reader Face down nine edge first, AND DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING ELSE KID! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of John Sessoms The part that mattered and y'all kind of missed was the and don't touch anything else kid. I really was a kid, not yet old enough to drive. It was very unusual someone my age would even be allowed inside the computer room. Not only was I allowed in, I was allowed to do something, a very VERY minor something, with the computer. I wasn't even particularly interested in computers. If you can't take it apart to see how it works, what good is it? I already understood enough about the grown-up world to know THEY were never going to let me do that. It was just the least boring place for me to wait around until my dad decided to quit work and I could catch a ride home. I don't remember what they used the computer for, although I'm sure I was told at some time or another. It was an insurance company, so it must have had something to do with keeping track of the money. My first job in computing was working for a small company which sold cigarettes and tobacco (with names like Bob's Black Bogey) from railway station kiosks. They took on raw trainees because they didn't have to pay very much, and in fact they paid me so little that I received a state pension book which topped up my pay to dole levels. They took me on because I lived close enough to the office to be able to walk there, and not spend money on fares. Anyway, they'd had the same computer since the 1970s, an ICL 1901T with 24-bit words. It didn't have an operating system, just an 'Exec' which loaded programs from paper tape, and wrote messages to a teleprinter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICT_1900_series#Executive. I had to support a purchase ledger system written in PLAN (the assembler for the machine), which had been developed in the early 60s. Part of the difficulty of the job was that there was no documentation (is there ever?) and that the lady who used to operate it all had retired and gone to live in Australia, so unavailable to help. I couldn't, in my youthful naivety, believe that someone of retirement age could have grasped computing of such complexity. They explained that in fact she'd started working there as the cleaner, and that after she'd finished she used to read the operating manual for the computer. She eventually persuaded them that she could operate the machine, so they promoted her from cleaner to operator. From there she taught herself to program and eventually to look after the system. When I say there was no documentation, actually there was a flowchart. Hand drawn, as they all were back then, it extended over many, many sheets of paper which when unfolded covered 4 desks placed next to each other. The rectangles were about half the size of the normal ones from flowchart templates, and they were packed together very, very tightly indeed. I never succeeded in grasping the full structure (I use the term loosely) of the system because luckily a year after I joined the company was taken over by a multinational brewer and I went to work in a modern IT department, with computer screens and an operating system and stuff like that. That early training has been invaluable though. I work with another guy now who has been around even longer than I have, and you can see sometimes that the younger people think we're dinosaurs who can't possibly fathom the complexities of their crappy little SQL statements, but it's a pleasure to see their astonishment when we show that we're not entirely a waste of oxygen. B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 08:46:04AM +0100, Bob W wrote: From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Boris Liberman On 8/25/2012 8:43 PM, Bob W wrote: Google, the Big Man? Apple's the biggest company in the world at the moment. B Let me rephrase, your honour. Google - the big man of Android ecosystem. Hasn't Apple set out on a lawful crusade (pun intended) to wipe off and out the Android infidels? I doubt it. I don't think Apple gives a shit about Android. Apple is a hardware company and is doing what it can to reduce competition in the hardware market. What Apple's strategy is toaday may be debatable. But Steve Jobs made it very clear that his intention was to do everything he could to bury Google. I see the suit against Samusung as just part of this overall objective. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Jury verdict is for Apple (vs Samsung)
On 26/08/2012 9:30 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: On 8/26/2012 10:36 PM, William Robb wrote: Lawyers are paid sharks who will find any means possible to an end that is profitable for their client, executives are paid to protect their corporate interests and make money (shareholder value). Pragmatism plays a very small part in their roles. Well, yes but if a pair shark sees that they cannot really win the trial and by doing so enhance their resume with yet another loud win, they'd probably be more cautious. Of course you can parry by the notion that paid sharks always pretend to be sure of certain victory, but here I think experience and common sense of executives will come in handy. Handy perhaps, but don't forget ego and hubris will trump common sense and decency every time. This is a situation where Apple may win the battle, but it might cost them the war, so to speak. -- William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.