APPLE is a great example how the Free-Market is suppose to work.

[crazy dav0]

while i like my apple products ... they're VERY overrated @ the same time

 

[dirtylicious]

[h1]Nokia sues Apple for patent infringement
[/h1]
Nokia is suing Apple over 10 patents the Finnish phone maker says it owns related to wireless handsets.

The largest handset maker in the world is suing the maker of one of the most popular, the iPhone, because, according to a statement released by Nokia Thursday, Apple has refused to license any of the patents in question. All iPhone models dating back to the original introduced in 2007 are infringing, according to Nokia.

"The basic principle in the mobile industry is that those companies who contribute in technology development to establish standards create intellectual property, which others then need to compensate for," said Ilkka Rahnasto, Vice President, Legal & Intellectual Property at Nokia. "Apple is also expected to follow this principle. By refusing to agree appropriate terms for Nokia's intellectual property, Apple is attempting to get a free ride on the back of Nokia's innovation."

Nokia says it has spent more than $60 billion (40 billion Euros) on R&D related to wireless technology. The 10 patents it accuses Apple of violating are related to making phones able to run on GSM, UMTS, and wireless LAN. They include patents on wireless data, speech coding, security, and encryption, according to Nokia.

Apple did not respond immediately to a request for comment.

 

[los yankees]

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

[h1]Nokia sues Apple for patent infringement
[/h1]
Nokia is suing Apple over 10 patents the Finnish phone maker says it owns related to wireless handsets.

The largest handset maker in the world is suing the maker of one of the most popular, the iPhone, because, according to a statement released by Nokia Thursday, Apple has refused to license any of the patents in question. All iPhone models dating back to the original introduced in 2007 are infringing, according to Nokia.

"The basic principle in the mobile industry is that those companies who contribute in technology development to establish standards create intellectual property, which others then need to compensate for," said Ilkka Rahnasto, Vice President, Legal & Intellectual Property at Nokia. "Apple is also expected to follow this principle. By refusing to agree appropriate terms for Nokia's intellectual property, Apple is attempting to get a free ride on the back of Nokia's innovation."

Nokia says it has spent more than $60 billion (40 billion Euros) on R&D related to wireless technology. The 10 patents it accuses Apple of violating are related to making phones able to run on GSM, UMTS, and wireless LAN. They include patents on wireless data, speech coding, security, and encryption, according to Nokia.

Apple did not respond immediately to a request for comment.

Because of this, it wont get very far.

 

[justscoreda100]

Originally Posted by Los Yankees

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

[h1]Nokia sues Apple for patent infringement
[/h1]
Nokia is suing Apple over 10 patents the Finnish phone maker says it owns related to wireless handsets.

The largest handset maker in the world is suing the maker of one of the most popular, the iPhone, because, according to a statement released by Nokia Thursday, Apple has refused to license any of the patents in question. All iPhone models dating back to the original introduced in 2007 are infringing, according to Nokia.

"The basic principle in the mobile industry is that those companies who contribute in technology development to establish standards create intellectual property, which others then need to compensate for," said Ilkka Rahnasto, Vice President, Legal & Intellectual Property at Nokia. "Apple is also expected to follow this principle. By refusing to agree appropriate terms for Nokia's intellectual property, Apple is attempting to get a free ride on the back of Nokia's innovation."

Nokia says it has spent more than $60 billion (40 billion Euros) on R&D related to wireless technology. The 10 patents it accuses Apple of violating are related to making phones able to run on GSM, UMTS, and wireless LAN. They include patents on wireless data, speech coding, security, and encryption, according to Nokia.

Apple did not respond immediately to a request for comment.

Because of this, it wont get very far.





explain?

 

[devildog1776]

This is a free market props topic... Not apple vs the world thread...

For all the haters who hate apple because it's "overpriced" obviously can't afford one. More people are switching over to the dark side, butmicrosoft has a sturdy consumer who will purchase anti spy/firm/spam etc to keep their machine somewhat operational.

If ur a techie the switch is hard because the machines are totally different inside and the learning curb is a challenge to most.

Anyway ..... Apple > microsoft

 

[philly035]

Originally Posted by Los Yankees

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

[h1]Nokia sues Apple for patent infringement
[/h1]
Nokia is suing Apple over 10 patents the Finnish phone maker says it owns related to wireless handsets.

The largest handset maker in the world is suing the maker of one of the most popular, the iPhone, because, according to a statement released by Nokia Thursday, Apple has refused to license any of the patents in question. All iPhone models dating back to the original introduced in 2007 are infringing, according to Nokia.

"The basic principle in the mobile industry is that those companies who contribute in technology development to establish standards create intellectual property, which others then need to compensate for," said Ilkka Rahnasto, Vice President, Legal & Intellectual Property at Nokia. "Apple is also expected to follow this principle. By refusing to agree appropriate terms for Nokia's intellectual property, Apple is attempting to get a free ride on the back of Nokia's innovation."

Nokia says it has spent more than $60 billion (40 billion Euros) on R&D related to wireless technology. The 10 patents it accuses Apple of violating are related to making phones able to run on GSM, UMTS, and wireless LAN. They include patents on wireless data, speech coding, security, and encryption, according to Nokia.

Apple did not respond immediately to a request for comment.

Because of this, it wont get very far.




Also from the article:

"There are companies that are patent trolls, that don't participate in the creation of technology, or they secretly acquire them. Nokia's not one of these companies. They're pretty up front about the patents they own," noted Jason Schultz, director of the Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic at UC Berkeley School of Law. "They're probably not trying to put Apple out of business...but force Apple to play the same game that every other phone company has to play."

Apple analyst Gene Munster thinks Nokia is looking to extract a royalty payment of 1 to 2 percent of every iPhone sold from Apple, which would be about $6 to $12 per phone. With 34 million iPhones sold to date, that would be $204 million to $408 million in back payments Apple would have to pay if Nokia were successful in court. There's also the added risk of something called "willful infringement." Basically, if Apple were to be found in violation they'd have to pay three times the amount of whatever the judgment won by Nokia.

Apple could settle out of court, or they could try to show that Nokia either doesn't own the patents or that they're not valid in this case, both of which would be difficult, said Schultz.

"Invalidating 10 patents is a lot, that's like running the Boston Marathon. It's really hard to do. You might get one, two or even five," he said. "But 10 is a lot."

Because of this, it WILL get very far. I'm guessing they settle out of court but Apple owes a nice chunk of change.

 

[justscoreda100]

People who dont buy macs are mad because they cant afford them

thats laughable
Might as well say that people who buy macs have the intelligence level of a 7 year old

Honestly, I think you should go with whatever floats your boat. Im just not going to shell out an extra $300 for a computer just because of its brand.

Any real techie knows that what matters most within a computer is the hardware. Most modern day operating systems are easy to use. The difference between thetwo is that you can do a lot more on a PC then you can on a Mac.

 

[ph3n0m3n0n]

Originally Posted by devildog1776

This is a free market props topic... Not apple vs the world thread...

For all the haters who hate apple because it's "overpriced" obviously can't afford one. More people are switching over to the dark side, but microsoft has a sturdy consumer who will purchase anti spy/firm/spam etc to keep their machine somewhat operational.

If ur a techie the switch is hard because the machines are totally different inside and the learning curb is a challenge to most.

Anyway ..... Apple > microsoft

Pretty much saying your goal is to get ripped off. Who goes in to pay MORE for essentially the same thing?

 

[boys noize]

Question for PC users:

What exactly is it you guys claim that PC's can do "more" of? The only thing that seems even remotely valid is the point made on games andthat's not even because Mac's "can't run games." It's easier to upgrade the components of a PC so your gaming experience will be thatmuch better but there's definitely a way to play most any game on a Mac. So what else can a Mac not do that a PC can?

I know a ton of things PC's can't do software wise and I also know that if we're talking build-quality, each Mac model is engineered to perfectionwhile I can't say the same about any of these third-party PC producers. I'm more than willing to pay a bit more for a computer built like the new27" iMac or for a unibody Macbook Pro or for a touchpad Magic Mouse... Who else does it better in that respect?

 

[chris boshs neck]

I bought a Mac because I got fed up windows crashing, dying, getting viruses ect ect

Had my macbook pro for over 2 years and still works like the day I got it...... OS X is light years better for everyday use, windows 7 looks nice though. Thereis a reason why when ppl use macs they dont switch back

 

[justscoreda100]

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Question for PC users:

What exactly is it you guys claim that PC's can do "more" of? The only thing that seems even remotely valid is the point made on games and that's not even because Mac's "can't run games." It's easier to upgrade the components of a PC so your gaming experience will be that much better but there's definitely a way to play most any game on a Mac. So what else can a Mac not do that a PC can?

I know a ton of things PC's can't do software wise and I also know that if we're talking build-quality, each Mac model is engineered to perfection while I can't say the same about any of these third-party PC producers. I'm more than willing to pay a bit more for a computer built like the new 27" iMac or for a unibody Macbook Pro or for a touchpad Magic Mouse... Who else does it better in that respect?

A pc can do anything a Mac can do plus run more applications and actually be customized.

You right about Mac offering unique hardware configurations, but except for the iMac and the touchpad you can build the exact same hardware configuartions for a cheaper price on a PC. As time passes you'll see 27in all in one PC's and even touchpad mouses. But lets be real those are novelty items and arenot needed in order to have a good computing experience.

 

[JayDean03]

"trust me my dude, as a person who works with computers for a living.. PCs will always be better than Macs (and yes i have used Macs before so no biashere)."

Apple ftw

 

[boys noize]

Originally Posted by JustScoreda100

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Question for PC users:

What exactly is it you guys claim that PC's can do "more" of? The only thing that seems even remotely valid is the point made on games and that's not even because Mac's "can't run games." It's easier to upgrade the components of a PC so your gaming experience will be that much better but there's definitely a way to play most any game on a Mac. So what else can a Mac not do that a PC can?

I know a ton of things PC's can't do software wise and I also know that if we're talking build-quality, each Mac model is engineered to perfection while I can't say the same about any of these third-party PC producers. I'm more than willing to pay a bit more for a computer built like the new 27" iMac or for a unibody Macbook Pro or for a touchpad Magic Mouse... Who else does it better in that respect?

A pc can do anything a Mac can do plus run more applications and actually be customized.

You right about Mac offering unique hardware configurations, but except for the iMac and the touchpad you can build the exact same hardware configuartions for a cheaper price on a PC. As time passes you'll see 27in all in one PC's and even touchpad mouses. But lets be real those are novelty items and are not needed in order to have a good computing experience.

I disagree that they're novelty items. Having used a Mac touchpad and having to revert to using a PC's touchpad, it's like night anday. Completely different user experience. Have you seen/heard about the HP Envy touchpad?

 

[inine5]

Originally Posted by chris boshs neck

I bought a Mac because I got fed up windows crashing, dying, getting viruses ect ect

seriously, what do you guys do to your computers to get all this bad stuff happening?

There is a reason why when ppl use macs they dont switch back
alot of people say this but i don't totally buy into it that cuz it's better.... i see it more as it costs money to be switching back andforth and if you've already spent so much for a mac and moved all your stuff to the mac and bought all the apps you need for a mac, you might as well stickwith the mac.....

 

[questlife]

Originally Posted by 13saldana13

Originally Posted by milestailsprowe

Mac's have a illusion that make it seem they have the greatest product when they dont. They have great commercials and word on the street. Apple products have no clear advantage over most products besides its can also be used as a fashion accessory.

Truth, they're not innovative at all. All they do is take others ideas and put them in a marketable and fashionable form, then they become the most succesful because everyone is on board with them. I swear if I was a director of an electronics company (that has enough money), APPLE would not stay at the top for long, it's so simple too. They stopped caring when they blew up earlier this decade.

this is false. Apple is VERY innovative with their products. They put alot of time and care into EVERY product they release. If you are buying anew mac, you are getting most of the best tech thats available at the time it was made. I personally would never own a mac desktop. theres just so many thingsmy windows desktop can do. Ive had it for 3 years and its still up to date, because i can upgrade it with ease. Not the same with an Imac. Apples laptops areGREAT products hardware wise. I know people that still use Powerbooks theyve purchased brand new. They are just reliable. And with a notebook thats what imlooking for. i NEED my pc. I WANT a mac.

 

[kneesh]

Mac's barely let you (customize) do anything to it.

Do they claim to be Open Source?

 

[questlife]

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Question for PC users:

What exactly is it you guys claim that PC's can do "more" of? The only thing that seems even remotely valid is the point made on games and that's not even because Mac's "can't run games." It's easier to upgrade the components of a PC so your gaming experience will be that much better but there's definitely a way to play most any game on a Mac. So what else can a Mac not do that a PC can?

I know a ton of things PC's can't do software wise and I also know that if we're talking build-quality, each Mac model is engineered to perfection while I can't say the same about any of these third-party PC producers. I'm more than willing to pay a bit more for a computer built like the new 27" iMac or for a unibody Macbook Pro or for a touchpad Magic Mouse... Who else does it better in that respect?

stream freely with my xbox 360, ability to install digital tv tuners, home theatre pcs, video games, upgrading your components when I want to, and not to mention all the great software that will probably never end up on the mac. Macs are great but i could neverhave a mac only home. also i own a Zune80 which doesnt work on macs.


also, there are no viruses or spyware on the mac because most of it is developed for the windows platform. it would be pointless for them to create thesemalicious programs for a platform that has less than 10% market share. guarantee if everyone had macs, it would be a different story.

 

[offbad]

Originally Posted by QuestLife

Originally Posted by 13saldana13

Originally Posted by milestailsprowe

Mac's have a illusion that make it seem they have the greatest product when they dont. They have great commercials and word on the street. Apple products have no clear advantage over most products besides its can also be used as a fashion accessory.

Truth, they're not innovative at all. All they do is take others ideas and put them in a marketable and fashionable form, then they become the most succesful because everyone is on board with them. I swear if I was a director of an electronics company (that has enough money), APPLE would not stay at the top for long, it's so simple too. They stopped caring when they blew up earlier this decade.

this is false. Apple is VERY innovative with their products. They put alot of time and care into EVERY product they release. If you are buying a new mac, you are getting most of the best tech thats available at the time it was made. I personally would never own a mac desktop. theres just so many things my windows desktop can do. Ive had it for 3 years and its still up to date, because i can upgrade it with ease. Not the same with an Imac. Apples laptops are GREAT products hardware wise. I know people that still use Powerbooks theyve purchased brand new. They are just reliable. And with a notebook thats what im looking for. i NEED my pc. I WANT a mac.

mmm i don't know. battery manager (IBM/Thinkpad)? chiclet keyboarding (sony)? switchable graphics(sony)? LED backlighting(sony)?
all mimed. i'm sure i'm forgetting something else.

though the magnetic charger is definitely cool.

uh huh, and i know myself i've got a dell latitude laptop from 2001 that is in perfect working condition. it runs CS4 on XP Pro.

 

[supraturbo619]

Originally Posted by QuestLife

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Question for PC users:

What exactly is it you guys claim that PC's can do "more" of? The only thing that seems even remotely valid is the point made on games and that's not even because Mac's "can't run games." It's easier to upgrade the components of a PC so your gaming experience will be that much better but there's definitely a way to play most any game on a Mac. So what else can a Mac not do that a PC can?

I know a ton of things PC's can't do software wise and I also know that if we're talking build-quality, each Mac model is engineered to perfection while I can't say the same about any of these third-party PC producers. I'm more than willing to pay a bit more for a computer built like the new 27" iMac or for a unibody Macbook Pro or for a touchpad Magic Mouse... Who else does it better in that respect?

stream freely with my xbox 360, ability to install digital tv tuners, home theatre pcs, video games, upgrading your components when I want to, and not to mention all the great software that will probably never end up on the mac. Macs are great but i could never have a mac only home. also i own a Zune80 which doesnt work on macs.


also, there are no viruses or spyware on the mac because most of it is developed for the windows platform. it would be pointless for them to create these malicious programs for a platform that has less than 10% market share. guarantee if everyone had macs, it would be a different story.

You can do all that on a Mac.

Install Windows XP/Vista/7 via Bootcamp on your Mac and you have the best of both worlds.

The beauty of sharing hardware architecture with Windows based machines.

Hackintoshes are very popular, so it works both ways.

You can't run Mac only software like Final Cut Pro on a PC.

 

[supraturbo619]

And this stuff about innovation:

Apple made the first viable consumer personal computer.

Apple made the first widely used GUI based operating system.

Mac had a mouse and desktop when MS-DOS was still using terminal commands.

 

[boys noize]

Just something random I remembered. One of the first computer games I've ever played was on a Macintosh. I was like four years old and I remember playingthis game with dungeons and monsters in it

I remember chess too. Keep in mind this was back when MS-DOS was poppin.

 

[icykicks79]

thats just crazy.... steve jobs doin it big

 

[mr monday niight]

i'll stay outta this one

 

[questlife]

Originally Posted by SupraTurbo619

Originally Posted by QuestLife

Originally Posted by Boys Noize

Question for PC users:

What exactly is it you guys claim that PC's can do "more" of? The only thing that seems even remotely valid is the point made on games and that's not even because Mac's "can't run games." It's easier to upgrade the components of a PC so your gaming experience will be that much better but there's definitely a way to play most any game on a Mac. So what else can a Mac not do that a PC can?

I know a ton of things PC's can't do software wise and I also know that if we're talking build-quality, each Mac model is engineered to perfection while I can't say the same about any of these third-party PC producers. I'm more than willing to pay a bit more for a computer built like the new 27" iMac or for a unibody Macbook Pro or for a touchpad Magic Mouse... Who else does it better in that respect?

stream freely with my xbox 360, ability to install digital tv tuners, home theatre pcs, video games, upgrading your components when I want to, and not to mention all the great software that will probably never end up on the mac. Macs are great but i could never have a mac only home. also i own a Zune80 which doesnt work on macs.


also, there are no viruses or spyware on the mac because most of it is developed for the windows platform. it would be pointless for them to create these malicious programs for a platform that has less than 10% market share. guarantee if everyone had macs, it would be a different story.

You can do all that on a Mac.

Install Windows XP/Vista/7 via Bootcamp on your Mac and you have the best of both worlds.

The beauty of sharing hardware architecture with Windows based machines.

Hackintoshes are very popular, so it works both ways.

You can't run Mac only software like Final Cut Pro on a PC.

hackintoshes are not for the average consumer. and my desktop cost me 800 dollars to build. and again, i upgraded it when needed. To buy an imacwith comparable specs would be around 1500. and if u need to fun Final Cut Pro, of course u are going to use a mac, but the amount of pc programs people NEEDthat are not on mac are countless. and what would be the poiint of paying all that money for a mac just to install windows on it to do what you needed?

 

[kneesh]

I love reading about the history of Apple Inc./Macintosh.

The Lisa was first introduced onJanuary 19, 1983 at a cost of $9,995 US ($21,482.26 in 2008 dollars). It was the first commercially sold personal computer to have a GUI. It used a Motorola 68000 CPU at a 5 MHz clock rate and had 1 MB RAM. However, several years prior to this, research had been going on at Xerox PARC to create a new way to organize everything on the screen, today known as the desktop.