http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/ Engadget Comments for Apple vs. Google gets personal: 'Steve Jobs simply hates Eric Schmidt' (video) 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/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/Apple : -1

He doesn't want anyone else using multi touch? What an asshole!]]>Mar 16th 2010 6:24AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/If you(yourself) created anything(a phone theme, YouTube video, ect), and someone else took that, and claimed it as their own creation, wouldn't you be pissed?
I'm sure this whole story is a hell of a lot more complex than that, but you get the drift(or maybe not).]]>Mar 16th 2010 6:28AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/Mar 16th 2010 6:32AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/problem 2: imagine EVERYONE forcing it's way of interface to be "their own". one car manufacturer has a steering weel. one a handlebar. one a joystick. one.. uhm.. a touchscreen? .. one .. buttons?

for usabilities sake, such patents should NEVER be allowed. i want to pick up a phone and know how to handle it to do a call in seconds. if each one has to handle input completely different because of fear of suing, it's a usability nightmare and hurts the customers massively.

i'm happy that a mouse works the same on a mac, on windows, on linux. as does a keyboard. as does a screen. as do buttons, textboxes, etc.]]>Mar 16th 2010 6:32AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/It looks more and more like history is just going to repeat itself for Apple. Good times!]]>Mar 16th 2010 6:33AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/Mar 16th 2010 6:37AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/Maybe apple only did touch to avoid being sued by the guy that owns the patent on the number pad for normal phones :p]]>Mar 16th 2010 6:44AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/So you also think it's time for the original car maker to sue all vehicles with 4 wheels and a steering wheel into oblivion? You can patent anything, but don't be surprised when this "anything" patent turns out to be invalid.]]>Mar 16th 2010 6:46AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
If one company ownz everything. It's bad for consumer. Fanboy however, don't agrees.]]>Mar 16th 2010 6:53AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
There are many prior art examples of multitouch and associated gestures, the Microsoft Surface being one of them. Apple's multitouch patents are BS.]]>Mar 16th 2010 7:01AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
Microsoft: 50

Cause we all know that Microsoft is the real winner in all this]]>Mar 16th 2010 7:05AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/Mar 16th 2010 7:09AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
Why would Apple have the patent then if they didn't invent it.

People keep saying Apple didn't invent multitouch. Where's the freaking proof?

More importantly if whatever obscure company you point to did develop why didn't they go get a patent.

Bottom line is that steve jobs may be a douche but he's 100% right in this matter. And he has the law on his side when it comes to this matter.

The android fanboys and the Apple haters will just have to admit that Apple has won this round.]]>Mar 16th 2010 7:10AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
Please read: http://www.ee.udel.edu/~westerma/main.pdf

There is plenty of info around the web in the edu arena if you want to look from back to the early 80s.]]>Mar 16th 2010 7:14AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
You really expect me to go digging thru 363 pages of some random PDF file from the Univ of Delaware...

Umm yeah okay...I'll get back to you on that one.

Say YOU'RE RIGHT.

Lets say this random guy invented...umm again I ask why didn't he patent it?

And okay so he didn't patent it. That's his decision. Apple comes along and DOES patent it. Hence they have the legal right to do whatever the freak they want to do with it.

Especially if they developed it in a way that's significantly different to that man you're referring to.

Again this is my opinion. I'm just sick of you Apple haters raking Apple over the coals for simply suing another company. Apple is in the busines to MAKE MONEY. Not to foster goodwill from a bunch of tech geeks who hate them anyways will ALWAYS hate them.]]>Mar 16th 2010 7:18AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
Anyone that hates CrApple is all right by me.]]>Mar 16th 2010 7:19AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/Wether it was right or wrong to award a patent for it, is irrelevant. Fact is, that's was awarded.
For the majority of you, pray that you never create anything, because it seems that until you do, you'll never understand the concept of IP.]]>Mar 16th 2010 7:24AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
Is there any room for me in this fantasy land you've created?]]>Mar 16th 2010 7:24AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/Hating?

Try searching for a few key words like...pinch or zoom. Try looking at the index and checking out basically every gesture that the iphone and macbook multitouch trackpads support.

Try earning your knowledge by doing even 5 minutes of research instead of being an imbecile.]]>Mar 16th 2010 7:24AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
Proof? what about http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcKqyn-gUbY public display of multi touch and gestures long before Apple came up with the iPhone and filed the patent.

BTW Apple knows this (they didn´t include any multitouch patent in the lawsuit against HTC as they were sure it would be invalidated)]]>Mar 16th 2010 7:25AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
http://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_han_demos_his_breakthrough_touchscreen.html

got presented around 1.5 years before the iphone. sure was "inspiring" for the ui.

oh, and, ever seen startrek (next generation especially)?]]>Mar 16th 2010 7:28AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
Google seems be the next Sun microsystems. They kinda has the same philosophy about software and went about it the same way v. Msft then as google is going after Apple now...sun built the same sort of alliances around java and open source. Sun too had some great years, but they failed because business cannot run for free. In search google has a much stronger market than Sun, but people are missing the point that ALL of Apple's market share in the US comes from 1 carrier. They have a huge addressable market still. Google is mostly cashing in on windows mobile's failure. The best thing Apple can do in the US us to put the iPhone on Verizon and other networks.]]>Mar 16th 2010 7:37AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/Mar 16th 2010 7:45AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/I don't understand why so many people need to defend the poor fruit company. It's not your loss if Android devices are sold with multitouch.

I don't give a damn about the billions of $ Apple invested in development, and neither about their stupid patent. Their iphone was first indeed, it still sells pretty well, that's enough.
I don't care if it's their legal right to sue or not.

I care about my options when it's about purchasing a good quality smartphone.
I want multitouch, but no sir, I don't want nothing that begins with an "i", for several reasons.

There's a saying: be careful what you wish for, because it might just come true!]]>Mar 16th 2010 7:45AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
The absolutely infruriating thing about you android fanboys/Apple haters is that you guys have claimed for years on end that "multitouch isn't important" and that it doesn't stack up to features like "cut and paste" or "multitasking" which you've also been bitching about for years on end with the iPhone and now the iPad.

Yet when an android device finally has it you guys are all of sudden making up nonsense about how others invented it and pointing to random obscure bullshit presentations that do NOTHING to change the fact that Apple was the FIRST to patent it.

Hence Apple has the legal right to defend themselves in this matter.

If the roles were reversed you guys would be championing Google. And you would have every right to do so. And I as an Apple supporter just want the law to be followed. If Apple doesn't own the patent then they should lose.

Plain and simple. I'm trying to be fair. It's you guys who are biased against Apple who are making it personal.]]>Mar 16th 2010 7:51AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/i just remembered the scene in Men in Black (II?) where will smith drives a car with a playstation controller for a steering wheel. classic]]>Mar 16th 2010 7:55AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
Steve

-Sent from my iPhone]]>Mar 16th 2010 7:58AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/Indeed he did and his company was. There are many examples already in this comment section now showing other previous examples of multitouch tech in play. I guess the question remains as to the patentability of touch gestures, which I disagree with no matter which company does it. The strength of the product is on its execution not the patent. Clearly apple have a strong product with the iphone. ]]>Mar 16th 2010 8:06AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/Mar 16th 2010 8:12AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/That's one novel interpretation of patent law you have, there...

First to patent means virtually nothing if you can't back it up. I could file a patent tomorrow for "a system for making snarky comments on Internet message boards" and odds are I'd be the first to patent it, and it would be granted. However, defending it in court would be another matter.

Think Apple was first to do multitouch, pinch-to-zoom, etc? see: Microsoft Surface]]>Mar 16th 2010 8:13AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/Mar 16th 2010 8:29AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
It's good to copy. I own a patent. When i've made enough success out of it and someone copies it, I'll go ahead and invent something else... That's creativity... make them follow you, not crying over spilled milk. Apple move ahead and do something new, then we know you're creative.]]>Mar 16th 2010 8:31AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
In my opinion they are all so big now they can afford to run loads of lawsuits all the time even if there is just a low prospect of winning.]]>Mar 16th 2010 8:44AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
Cactus is right. The U.S. patent system works on first to INVENT. No one cares in the slightest if you were the first to patent. Almost all U.S. patent cases try to prove prior art, meaning the invention was invented before the party that is attempting to patent it invented it. TheLionOfAzzelle actually thinks he knows what he is talking about though. It's cute.]]>Mar 16th 2010 8:45AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
You can patent it first but if it already existed you can't make your claim hard. Otherwise I could create something and make it open source and free for everyone to use. Then you could file a patent for my creation and say: "hey, it's all mine now and everyone must pay to use it".]]>Mar 16th 2010 8:47AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/Amen]]>Mar 16th 2010 9:03AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
//Geek Speak

Every Seen Tron? I'm sure Dillinger's touch screen keyboard had multitouch, and that was 1982. OMG! Maybe Encom holds the original patent, or maybe the MCP now works for apple and just transferred the patent to their company, that MCP sure is tricky.

//Geek Speak is now over.]]>Mar 16th 2010 9:04AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
Don't be evil....

]]>Mar 16th 2010 9:04AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/Mar 16th 2010 9:06AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
So you saying "*If* Apple created it" has no weight in the real world.



]]>Mar 16th 2010 9:23AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
There's a very simple answer to this. The patent system in the USA is VERY broken. The simple fact that (At least some of Apple's) patents were issued in the first place is evidence of that. Not to mention Amazon's patent of a "one-click purchase". The fact that SOME courts still have a bit of sanity left does counter this effect, but the net of it all is that we do need SERIOUS patent reform, or innovation will move out to other countries...

As far as "Mr. Jobs angrily told Google executives that if they deployed a version of multitouch he would sue", couldn't that be considered extortion? I mean they don't hold the patent on multitouch (they do hold one for a particular kind of screen, but that screen is already in use, so they are threatening to sue for A unless B where A and B are unrelated)... So basically all that threat is saying, is "If you try to compete with us, we'll throw you so much legal trouble that you'll wish you never did", even though they don't have a legal base to do so (considering the exact wording of the threat). To me, that tells me two things. One, Jobs is scared. Not that Apple will die, but that he may be proven wrong IF (and that's a big if) Android overtakes the iPhone. Second, he's pissed that others are going to get credit for developing things. In Apple, every design decision gets credited to Jobs (Or at least that's how their PR works)... Sure, it makes for a more consistent environment, but it also lets the public think Jobs is really that important. Having an outside company pull off the same --if not better-- result would make him personally look bad (in his eyes at least)...]]>Mar 16th 2010 9:24AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
Well, we do know what an ass Steve is, but I'm not sure that you don't have to be to achieve the kind of success he has. Bill Gates was similar in a lot of ways with MS dealing with Netscape in the '90s; if you have the kind of vision that those two did you hav e to be fine with fucking whoever messes with you or gets in your way.

This is unfortunate as well, as two of my favorite tech companies are increasingly moving in directions I don't really like. Linux and a dumbphone may have to happen next for me.]]>Mar 16th 2010 9:28AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
And this is where you're completely wrong. It doesn't matter how 'obscure' or 'random' (dating back to the 70's & 80's) multitouch technologies are. The fact that prior art DOES exist means that any broad patents they have on the concept are invalid, and WON'T stand up in court.]]>Mar 16th 2010 9:28AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
PC Fanboys -1
Apple Fanboys 1]]>Mar 16th 2010 9:30AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
Steve Jobs is such an unbelieveable douchey cry baby. My next phone will not be an iPhone just because of him.]]>Mar 16th 2010 9:42AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/Oh, is someone taking credit for INVENTING multi-touch? That's the argument? Well in that case: I invented it. Seriously, go ask you mom, she'll tell you.]]>Mar 16th 2010 9:42AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/Mar 16th 2010 9:55AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
@dave95

Regardless of who did what when, patents are rarely about something (like a gesture) but a unique method of doing that something.

As for the sci-fi did it first claims, that isn't prior art, prior art would be someone making a glass capactive touch screen and a series of algorithims for determining input and a method for translating that into software responses. A patent could call another patent and then extend on that in unique ways, does Google have one of them even, anyone else, nada.

Surface doesn't do that it uses a camera. Star trek didn't do that it keyed in a computer graphic. Apple isn't suing for that anyway so all the arguments presented on this thread are null anyway.

fingerworks made it, Apple bought it. If someone made it prior using the METHOD then perhaps prior art, no one is speaking up though. Maybe I go swipe Google anything except search cause everything except search Google bought, yeah might get me a code rip of GEarth call it GWorld cause they didn't make it and there's prior earths and who could own an earth that spins anyway, been round for 1000 years yeah and I saw it on a show way before 3D graphics anyway, yeah, Google would be such ass if they sued me, I'd clean em up.

The lawsuit is over serious stuff not pinch and zoom anyway, low level OS stuff that came from NeXT and ol'mateys NeXT did invent and patent a bunch o stuff only the ongoing n00b land that is engadget barely demonstrates a knowledge of the industry pre xbox.

To the fine fellow who says screw them, I'd take it anyway it's dumb laws. Love the two sides of that coin, mind if I come over and take your car and burn your house, no probs eh, it's a dumb ass idea that you might own it.

Thing is, don't get me wrong, I think patents as a whole are crap, everything is invented by everyone. Anyone is this thread even with the obvious cluelessness will have thought up plenty novel things, talked about them, It's all one big mush. BUT if we are going to fight like infants over systems that are at best make believe anyway at least fight within them or just call it all for what it is.

In the big end of town Eric Scmidt is a n00b. Sure he's got some good techie cred but he invented nothing of note himself, just an engineer doing his bits in the big puzzle. Never even put his own money on the table to risk it over trying to make a go of it, just catching the coat tails of Google, Novell and Sun's founders who were the real cool people. Jobs with both Pixar (didn't start) and NeXT (did start) put down the risk and nearly lost it all to make it. Respect for him -as well- as an actual founder who put his money on the table. Gates as well, respect. Serg and Larry, respect, nice algorthims, thanks and what did they recently say, slowly selling out to go do their own things, no wonder their cool engine as been taken over by coat tail sniffer and nobody Mr. Schmidt who evidently is all emotional cause he was there the whole time while people actually DID stuff and he did nothing and got lucky.

Don't be evil is the most bleedingly obvious statement you could make to intend bad with. What has Google, or more so Eric done to create ANY fanbois with, heck the precious Android was made by someone else and bought, the phone made by someone else, this XML inventor, paid up to have script writers use his cred in the tech community to create "sides"

the whole thing is freAkin spin made up to give the ol' fanbois something to lather up over, make em think there is something to have allegience to. Brand loyalty 101 you bunch of pavlovian dogs, get a brain please.

All hail Scmhidt who wants to release an OS so he can spy on yer freakin keystrokes and sell more ads. He's tuned Google into the spam king of the world and everything they buy and release is geared to take your data to sell ads back at you. The Google DNS service, fer pete's sake people...

/end pointless yet poignant rant]]>Mar 16th 2010 9:58AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/Mar 16th 2010 10:06AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/16/apple-vs-google-gets-personal-steve-jobs-simply-hates-eric-sc/
Apple's patent BS is sickening... Palm's webOS openly flaunts the use of multitouch because they know Apple is in violation of a dozen of their patents for handheld devices. Apple claims the moral high ground with android, when they're afraid of Palm's IP? Ugh. Jobs makes me sick. ]]>Mar 16th 2010 10:29AM