http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/ Engadget Comments for Engadget Podcast 186 - 03.05.2010 http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 5th 2010 4:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/for interested: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBbGKwWQedM]]>Mar 5th 2010 9:55PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.palm.com/us/company/careers.html

They've got two marketing positions open right now!

I was checking out who's in charge of marketing at Palm and they've got this former-Yahoo! person there. Hmmm, anyone notice how Yahoo! is doing? They just got overtaken by Facebook in terms of traffic. Ha ha.

http://www.palm.com/us/company/management-team/mitic-katie.html

Maybe she's too smart for her job with her Harvard and Stanford education to see what the Engadget editors see as the way to really market their phone. Actually selling the phone on features rather than trying to sell a creepy woman or sell completely offensive hetero-normative gender stereotypes (at least it is to me as someone who's LGBT). What's she going to let Verizon do next? Sell the Pre as a white man's phone and the Pixi as a person of color's phone? Come on!]]>Mar 6th 2010 12:52PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/07/first-ipad-ad-premieres-during-the-oscars/

Then this HP ad:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3MSjwUrxT0

And now this Pixi ad:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBKzy01Xh8g


]]>Mar 8th 2010 2:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 5th 2010 4:44PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/
I'm pretty sure the courier news broke after they recorded the podcast.]]>Mar 5th 2010 4:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 5th 2010 4:54PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Well you could record an additional segment and your awesome producer could tack it to the beginning or the end. I heard the podcast live and seeing the courier news makes me so excited wanted to hear your guys thoughts on it ASAP. The statement above was not supposed to sound negative.]]>Mar 5th 2010 4:58PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 5th 2010 5:09PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 5th 2010 4:53PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 5th 2010 5:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 5th 2010 5:17PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/
Good point that all cars work the same way, yet underneath the hood, each components have their own patents. My point exactly...

They give out patents on mechanics and engineerings, not human interface.
I don't think any automaker has patent on a way people open car door. The way you steer left on your steering wheel to drive left.

I don't know the specifics about Apple patents but they are so broad that they actually prevents any future innovations.

That is why other countries don't give out stupidly broad patents.

]]>Mar 5th 2010 5:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 5th 2010 6:00PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/yea, the 20 year thing has probably passed on the regular way of opening car doors.
btw that apple's unlock-sliding thing is so stupid court should just ban apple from creating new patents... the fookers should suffer for &^$# like that...
]]>Mar 5th 2010 6:39PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/
You really hit the nail on the head with the validity period of these patents. When basic fundamental OS parts that are generally used on many many different generations of smart electronic devices, from pc's to smartphones, suddenly pops up in a completely different form factor device, you have to ask yourself if this is still something worth protecting and worth slowing down the market over.

Anyway, thanks for the breakdown Nilay, in the pod cast and the article. It made things a lot clearer to me.]]>Mar 5th 2010 5:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Seriously? The QWERTY remote is a big deal? Who doesn't use a universal remote in their living room these days? Last thing I want is another remote on the coffee table. Harmony 1 FTW!
]]>Mar 5th 2010 6:28PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 5th 2010 7:08PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 8th 2010 3:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Obvious patent: a patent that covers a method or implementation that would be inferred as the most efficient/simple-to-implement method or implementation by the piece of technology it is being implemented in.

Examples: a mouse, which records a single point's motion in 2D space, infers that a single point being displayed on the screen to represent it is the best implementation of the mouse in software. Therefore, a, "cursor" is an obvious implementation of a mouse input on a screen.
A keyboard contains multiple buttons representing different letters. It infers that the keys of the keyboard should display the corresponding letter in the focussed document/area when pressed. Therefore, displaying letters in response to corresponding input from the keyboard is an obvious implementation of document writing with a keyboard.
A touch-screen device contains very few input methods (in the case of the iPhone, there is an ambient light detector, a touch screen and a sound input). If you want to use the touch-screen to move the software from a locked state to an unlocked state, it infers one of two things: a single or multiple static input points unlock the software, or; a motion on the touch-screen that unlocks the software. I consider both of these, "obvious" implementations, as unlocking with a touch-screen infers that the touch-screen has to be... touched. Though thus far my opinion has been accurate (as far as I can see at least - feel free to find a flaw in my logic), it might be a much simpler case for HTC to create/push an update that uses another, non-infringing method of unlocking, two of the most effective (and dare I say obvious?) methods having been pointed out above: using (a) static point(s) to unlock, instead of a motion on the touch-screen, or; using sound input from the user to unlock the screen. You might argue that the latter is difficult to implement accurately or securely, but this isn't about difficulty, it's about obviousness.]]>Mar 5th 2010 9:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 5th 2010 10:09PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 6th 2010 12:41AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 8th 2010 8:30AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 6th 2010 12:48AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 6th 2010 3:04AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 6th 2010 7:45AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 6th 2010 8:09AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/
If there's a chance in the future, I'd love to hear a segment going into more detail.]]>Mar 6th 2010 8:09AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 6th 2010 9:41AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 7th 2010 12:02AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 7th 2010 4:15AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/engadget-podcast-186-03-05-2010/Mar 8th 2010 7:33AM