The idea of "a way of using menus to navigate through songs on a digital music player" was based on similar preexisting products. The patent should never have been issued. To Apple, Creative, MS or anyone. Songs are just files. The iPod is just a small computer with a file system and a Menu driven GUI interface. The basic form has existed ever since the first GUI interfaces. This is another example of the Patent Office screwing up and leaving it to litigation to clean up their mess.

to beat a dead horse, its been around longer than that

DOS and PRODOS took advantage of a tiered menu system for the system software, so its been around since the CLI has existed (and i would contend my iPod is a CLI, not a GUI)

should we be surprised... i think not

TRO

Ironic they make this announcement the day after they release a blatant iPod ripoff product.

creative media players have always been pieces of $#!%. just because they can't come up with an elegant product to compete with the ipod is no reason why apple should be punished. if creative has to resort to a lawsuit, then they're basically admitting that they suck, and that their research and development teams are creatively and aesthetically bankrupt. don't even get me started on their piss poor excuse for software. ipod is successful because of itunes-- ipod + itunes. even if creative came up with a decent device, their software is so buggy that it becomes an ultra pain in the ass to sync the damn device. also, forget using a single piece of software to sync your device AND play back music on your computer. creative's media software crashes so much that it makes microsoft products feel solid. i used both a creative mp3 player and their mediasource software before i got my ipod. my experience was so miserable that i will never buy a creative-branded product again.

If Apple couldn't protect the Mac OS I don't see how Creative can protect something which is just a type of hierarchal menus.

Not hardly. Intentional. They're itching for a fight, which is beyond me. Why do you pick a fight with someone who has $5 Billion in the bank, loves to get into lawsuits, and is going to kick your a$$ collectively?

And I have to laugh. The two companies going after Apple: Creative + Real.

Neither are really creative!

Guess Creative has finally realized that it can't go toe-to-toe with Apple in the marketplace with any hope of success. So now it has a two-pronged strategy:

1) Sue

2) Copy the iPod wherever it can get away with it (see Creative latest mp3 player, just released- it tries VERY hard to look like its running the iPod's UI), and then use your own bogus lawsuits as leverage against Apple when it inevitably sues you for copying the iPod

Poor Creative. Such a bunch of little bi-tches.

This reminds me so much of NTP's (I think that's the name) attempt to extort RIM over the BlackBerry. Can't make a better product (or in that case, can't make a product), no problem, we'll use a BS patent that never should have been issued to make some bank.

It doesn't matter if the approach existed with a computer OS – this patent was granted for using the approach on a portable media player.

Most interestingly, I read (on a competing Mac site forum) that the nature of the patent prohibits Creative from pursuing the manufacturer of such a device, but only the users. This leads me to think that Mr. Sim is actually blowing smoke, probably trying to affect his company's stock value. What an arse.

Had a Creative mp3 player for about a year now. Works great. Long battery life, FM (sorry for all you folks that live in radio wasteland...we have some a great college station and even a better one from the high school), and not a scratch on it!

Quote

Guest wrote:
Had a Creative mp3 player for about a year now. Works great. Long battery life, FM (sorry for all you folks that live in radio wasteland...we have some a great college station and even a better one from the high school), and not a scratch on it!

And that can only mean one thing... TMO's "Asshat of the Year" issue!! Nominees are:

1. Jason Tomczak for proving that the torsion caused by the bending of his fat ass can scratch an iPod Nano.

2. Rob Glaser for whining because he and his stupid compnay just aren't relevant.

3. Sim Wong Hoo (which means "Adam Curry" in Korean) for making the Dell DJ Doody look good.

Please cast your vote before midnight Texas time, December 31, 2005. The winner will be announced during halftime of the Rose Bowl on January 4, about 10 minutes after USC rests its starters after securing a 3rd straight national championship.

Apple ripped off Xerox for the Lisa and subsequently the MAcintosh, Apple ripped off its name from the Beatles. It's business practices are highly restrictive in the iTunes sector. It is not at all surprising that Creative now says that Apple ripped off its interface. Apple sicks!

Yeah, right.

Any other urban myths you'd like to dredge up, even though every one has been proven false many times?