A much more complete look at how Android has copied iPhone is revealed in this recently awarded Apple patent.

I think Apple’s battle with Samsung, HTC and Motorola is nearing an end, and they won’t like the result.  Without this feature Android has nothing to offer.

http://tinyurl.com/Copy-Cat-Killer-Patent

(May be difficult reading, but bear with it).

I forgot to point out that June quarter 2011 (results announced in July), was the only quarter of the last 5 that I think Apple beat its internal estimates.

Gregg Thurman - 27 December 2011 05:41 PM

A much more complete look at how Android has copied iPhone is revealed in this recently awarded Apple patent.

I think Apple’s battle with Samsung, HTC and Motorola is nearing an end, and they won’t like the result.  Without this feature Android has nothing to offer.

http://tinyurl.com/Copy-Cat-Killer-Patent

(May be difficult reading, but bear with it).

I forgot to point out that June quarter 2011 (results announced in July), was the only quarter of the last 5 that I think Apple beat its internal estimates.

While I think this is another noteworthy multitouch patent, the litigation will take several years..

pats - 27 December 2011 06:22 PM

Gregg Thurman - 27 December 2011 05:41 PM

A much more complete look at how Android has copied iPhone is revealed in this recently awarded Apple patent.

I think Apple’s battle with Samsung, HTC and Motorola is nearing an end, and they won’t like the result.  Without this feature Android has nothing to offer.

http://tinyurl.com/Copy-Cat-Killer-Patent

(May be difficult reading, but bear with it).

I forgot to point out that June quarter 2011 (results announced in July), was the only quarter of the last 5 that I think Apple beat its internal estimates.

While I think this is another noteworthy multitouch patent, the litigation will take several years..

The import injection won’t.  This is the clearest sample of Apple technology that everyone has copied.  It is essential to the iPhone and did not exist prior to the iPod/iPhone/iPad (original patent filings 2004).

I was always super curious as to how the other smart phone manufacturers were so fast in introducing touch screens, when it took Apple quite a long time to pioneer it.  They cheated!

Google’s consciously decided business strategy, “Steal & Litigate” may prove wise.  Reap ten years of success until and if the courts stop you.

Here’s another great patent application from Apple. Hydrogen batteries.

Apple’s latest patent seems to carry the technology even further, suggesting that some day soon, hydrogen batteries will be lighter and more energy efficient than today’s portable electricity storage, potentially giving mobile electronics a charge for weeks at a time.

zulu - 27 December 2011 06:47 PM

I was always super curious as to how the other smart phone manufacturers were so fast in introducing touch screens, when it took Apple quite a long time to pioneer it.  They cheated!

No they didn’t. They innovated the proven MSFT way.

macglenn - 27 December 2011 07:30 PM

Google’s consciously decided business strategy, “Steal & Litigate” may prove wise.  Reap ten years of success until and if the courts stop you.

Three years max, and we’re done.

Gregg Thurman - 27 December 2011 07:51 PM

macglenn - 27 December 2011 07:30 PM

Google’s consciously decided business strategy, “Steal & Litigate” may prove wise.  Reap ten years of success until and if the courts stop you.

Three years max, and we’re done.

And why wouldn’t damages equal all of Apple’s phone profits for the intervening years, since the Android sales that should have been iPhone sales will outnumber actual iPhone sales? (I’m a bit naive/ ignorant about the law)

Or would politics overrule the law, since this would put the competition out of business.

As a one-time owner of a Kodak instant picture camera, I have seen a patent case remove a product from the face of the earth. Polaroid’s victory was brutal, but this wasn’t a large percentage of Kodak’s revenue, so it was more like an amputation than a death sentence for Kodak.

This seems very telling to me concerning Android vs. iOS activations.  Appears that iOS clobbered Android if you do the math as the 3rd commenter did.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/316223-android-had-a-jolly-good-christmas-with-3-7-million-activations?source=yahoo

qualitywte - 28 December 2011 06:19 AM

This seems very telling to me concerning Android vs. iOS activations.  Appears that iOS clobbered Android if you do the math as the 3rd commenter did.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/316223-android-had-a-jolly-good-christmas-with-3-7-million-activations?source=yahoo

In fact here is that commenter’s math:

Actually, your math is a little off, and it’s worse than that for Google. Their 3.7 million activations were over TWO days, Christmas Eve and Christmas day, and the combined 6.8 million Android and iOS activations were on Christmas day alone. So, assuming that Android had 2 million of their 3.7 million activations on Christmas day (a fair guess), then iOS had 4.8 million activations that day to Android’s 2 million. In other words, Andy Rubin went out of his way to clarify that Android got clobbered in activations.

ChicagoBob - 28 December 2011 08:55 AM

qualitywte - 28 December 2011 06:19 AM

This seems very telling to me concerning Android vs. iOS activations.  Appears that iOS clobbered Android if you do the math as the 3rd commenter did.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/316223-android-had-a-jolly-good-christmas-with-3-7-million-activations?source=yahoo

In fact here is that commenter’s math:

Actually, your math is a little off, and it’s worse than that for Google. Their 3.7 million activations were over TWO days, Christmas Eve and Christmas day, and the combined 6.8 million Android and iOS activations were on Christmas day alone. So, assuming that Android had 2 million of their 3.7 million activations on Christmas day (a fair guess), then iOS had 4.8 million activations that day to Android’s 2 million. In other words, Andy Rubin went out of his way to clarify that Android got clobbered in activations.

Bob, you beat me to it.  You gotta love someone that reads between the lines, and ferrets out the real meaning of numbers.

What I like about the observation is that iPhone is gobbling up all the profits, and now its taking Android’s only real talking point - share.

Andy Rubin’s number are Google activations. These do not include Kindle Fire or B&N Nook Color. But the combined 6.8M does include those non-Google Android activations.

Brad Hutchings (Bosco) - 28 December 2011 11:22 AM

Andy Rubin’s number are Google activations. These do not include Kindle Fire or B&N Nook Color. But the combined 6.8M does include those non-Google Android activations.

Do you have a source for your assertion?  Google’s activation numbers have never been defined clearly and this allows them to make claims which are difficult to substantiate using other sources.  for such an “Open Company” who ” does no evil”  why can’t they tell me a shareholder what they include inI their activation numbers.

Actually, pats, Andy Rubin of Google has defined what their activation numbers mean. It’s much more conservative than you pretend. It’s basically Android phones and tablets with a wireless contract licensed to use Google apps.

Brad Hutchings (Bosco) - 28 December 2011 12:23 PM

Actually, pats, Andy Rubin of Google has defined what their activation numbers mean. It’s much more conservative than you pretend. It’s basically Android phones and tablets with a wireless contract licensed to use Google apps.

Sorry if I don’t get a warm feeling from Andy.  While I think Android OS is extremely successful penetrating the mobile OS market, Google has done a terrible job of providing financial information to the average shareholder.  Google’s activation rate is a great headline number which we can all tweet about, but it tells me android activations are on a nice growth path, but when I bump that number against other sources like the sales data from the major phone manufactures it doesn’t match up.  As far as Android and their flagrant use of other’s IP.  On the surface it looks like Google copied many of the iPhone innovations and if you look back over the original Android designs vs what was released once they caught wind of the iPhone it was clear where the idea came from.  Wether the courts will find the same result is TBD, and I think the title of the thread assumes an outcome which I consider unlikely, but Google stole some ideas from Apple which defined the iPhone and I think that the court will side with Apple at least on a number of these areas.