MSU Red Cedar Message Board

Do you realize the irony of accusing me of emotional investment then going on a childish, angry rant? My hate overrides my memory? Melodramatic much? Someone's lost their grip, but it's not me. In fact, a majority of the angry, insulting posts in this thread are in defense of Apple. People are free to argue any side, of course. I don't hate Apple. They make good products. But the culture of fanboyism (in any regard) can cloud people's judgment and inhibit sane discussion.

In 2007 LG accused Apple of copying their Prada phone (http://techcrunch.com/2007/02/12/lg-says-apple-copied-prada-phone/, http://www.techshout.com/gadgets/2007/16/lg-officially-accuses-apple-iphone-for-copying-prada-concept-design/, http://www.mobilemag.com/2007/02/12/apple-iphone-copied-lg-prada-not-other-way-around/). They didn't follow through with lawsuits, probably because there wasn't substantial evidence to back up the claim. The point is that while Apple was the first to put out such a package in the iPhone, it's not like nobody else was developing similar products that wouldn't compete with them in the future.

You can keep deflecting the conversation (first it was patents, then innovation, then market share, then profits...). But Apple is leading the pack in anti-competitive litigation. The patent system is broken, many in law and industry agree on this. Once Google starts ramping up lawsuits, it's going to be ugly for everyone, mostly consumers.

Don't really see how anybody thinks this is good for future innovation and competition. But if having Apple products gives you a false sense of superiority and technological insight, so be it. I'm cool with the products I use.

The first HID's were available in 1991 on a BMW 7 series. I'm not sure about the other but I'm sure Mercedes has had a lot of patents and innovations but in modern terms their cars are not particularly innovative at all. In fact the engine in the C250 vs that in the BMW 328 (directly competing cars) is at least a generation behind in technology.

1st iPhone intoduced late June 2007

1st Android phone (HTC Dream) introduced late Oct 2008

So who copied who?

LG Prada. Announced December 2006. Released March 2007.

Yea I know. The carrier/number of models point is so unbelievably clever that I had to wait for Trevor. It certainly couldn't have been that I was away from the board.

Please go ahead an tell me what is so innovative about Android and/or any of the phones available that explains the market share increase. I'm dying to know. I must be missing out.

You are confusing my light hearted comments about innovation to mean that only Apple innovates. I don't think there has been anything particularly innovative in the mobile space since the first iPhone. Which, even if some want to discount it, was incredibly innovative and brought on the current mobile environment. Pretty much everything since - including Android and the phones that run it are a derivative.

The bottom line is that Android is good, there are a couple good Android options. Those few options are no more or no less better and no more or no less innovative than the iPhone/iOS. If Apple has been awarded patents for mobile related items, then they would be completely stupid to just sit on those. They aren't "trolling" by trying to protect that. They aren't being pussies. They are running a business.

They better have been the very first company in history to have those things or else it doesn't count. Taking an existing concept (even if remotely related), bringing it to market, and making it massively popular doesn't count.

Name one single thing Apple brought to market before anyone else.

I'll wait.

Look, people. Apple is not a great company in the programming department - you can see it with Siri, which is completely based on voice recognition and tying it into it's interface. Meanwhile, the Android voice recognition on the EVO, which as been around for 2 years, is much more accurate. They are a very good marketing and legal company. They know how to manipulate the legal system and consumers to their advantage which is DEFINITELY not a new thing. They are great at what they do.

However, people fail to see the danger of Apple taking over. They are very proprietary and control how your products work very tightly. They dictate how you can use your electronics and that's a scary thought to me.

I never said they did. But maybe my definition of innovation is loose.

I'm not the one who said Apple has NEVER innovated anything. Which is absurd. So I'm just assuming that your stance on innovation must be a hard line - and that is to say that the thing being invented never existed before in any form. First video game? It needs to be THE VERY FIRST. So sorry, Nintendo doesn't count. They just changed the form factor.

Which IMO is an absurd stance to take. But I could be putting words in your mouth.

I was hoping to confirm my assumption on your stance by seeing the great things you thought were true innovation.

I've never once bashed Apple. I just don't blindly support them (despite owning many of their products). Apple is not the be-all end-all company so many Apple supporters think they are, that's all.

The one button mouse.

Yes, mobile phones existed before the iPhone. Yes, tablet computers existed in various forms before the iPad. Yes, computers existed before the Apple II. Even though those things already existed in some form - when Apple brought their version to market, they were all game changers. It's mind blowing anyone could think otherwise. Doesn't mean EVERYTHING they do is game changing. But they've changed plenty of game in their time.

Ok.