subject:"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)

2012-08-30 Thread Larry Colen


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)

2012-08-30 Thread Doug Franklin


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)

2012-08-30 Thread P. J. Alling

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)

2012-08-30 Thread Godfrey DiGiorgi

 ... 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)

2012-08-30 Thread P. J. Alling

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)

2012-08-30 Thread 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)


--

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)

2012-08-30 Thread 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)

-- 
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)

2012-08-30 Thread Larry Colen


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)

2012-08-30 Thread John Sessoms


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)

2012-08-30 Thread 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.


--
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)

2012-08-30 Thread John Sessoms


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)

2012-08-30 Thread Paul Stenquist


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)

2012-08-30 Thread Darren Addy

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)

2012-08-30 Thread Bob Sullivan

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)

2012-08-30 Thread Tom C

 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)

2012-08-29 Thread DagT

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)

2012-08-29 Thread steve harley


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)

2012-08-29 Thread 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 ;?


--
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)

2012-08-29 Thread DagT

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.

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

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)

2012-08-29 Thread DagT

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)

2012-08-29 Thread Boris Liberman


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)

2012-08-29 Thread Joseph McAllister


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)

2012-08-28 Thread Charles Robinson

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)

2012-08-28 Thread Bruce Walker

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)

2012-08-28 Thread Steven Desjardins

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)

2012-08-28 Thread Charles Robinson

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)

2012-08-28 Thread P. J. Alling


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)

2012-08-28 Thread Bob W

 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)

2012-08-28 Thread Bob W

 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)

2012-08-28 Thread steve harley


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)

2012-08-28 Thread steve harley


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)

2012-08-28 Thread Steve Cottrell

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)

2012-08-28 Thread Bob W

 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)

2012-08-28 Thread Steve Cottrell

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)

2012-08-28 Thread Steven Desjardins

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)

2012-08-28 Thread Steve Cottrell

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)

2012-08-28 Thread steve harley


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)

2012-08-28 Thread William Robb


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)