I doubt that it will matter and yes, it's dumb
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| caitlyn Jul 10, 2012 3:43 PM EDT |
To quote from the article:
Quoting:Mike Elgan has published a passionate article "Why the ‘Boycott Apple’ Movement is Dumb" on Cult of Mac. I agree with Mike most of the time, but this time I do not.I would paraphrase the above: Swapnil Bhartiya has published a passionate article. I agree with Swapnil a lot of the time but this time I do not. I'll add that I respect Swapnil and he argues his points well. I just think that Mike Elgan's points make more sense in the real world. Please don't interpret this as a defense of Apple's tactics or actions. It's not that at all and a lot of Swapnil's points also make sense. It's just that boycotts rarely work and that Apple is by no means the only offender or the worst offender. |
| kingttx Jul 10, 2012 4:15 PM EDT |
@caitlyn: I respect you but I have to disagree with you. The #boycottapple trend may indeed not have a big impact on Apple's attitude, but I maintain it does serve two purposes: first, to bring together like-minded people who believe Apple's business practices border on monopolistic (the bad kind) and allow them to at least air out grievances that otherwise barely get noticed or get shouted down by Apple lovers; and, two, to hopefully bring this closer to the forefront where either Apple or lawmakers must take notice and start cleaning up this mess of our patent environment. Further, to say Apple isn't the only one...well, there will *always* be another offender. That doesn't mean Apple shouldn't capture its share of the limelight. I don't think we would have said the same thing when MS was being scrutinized for many similar practices. |
| caitlyn Jul 10, 2012 4:20 PM EDT |
Apple is monopolistic? What do they have a monopoly on? As far as I can tell, unlike Microsoft, the correct answer is absolutely nothing at all. |
| kingttx Jul 10, 2012 4:30 PM EDT |
I did say "borders" and with good reason. In fact, the author makes it perfectly clear: "Apple did not sue Samsung asking 'hey that feature infringes upon our stupid patent remove it from your product'. They called for a compelete ban. That's even more infuriating. It's like BMW gets Mercedes cars banned because the icon of 'horn' on Merc's steering wheel looked like that of BMW." Even though Apple copies with impunity, they will sue to ban anyone who comes within a mile of their own. |
| skelband Jul 10, 2012 5:22 PM EDT |
> What do they have a monopoly on? Black rectangles with rounded corners, apparently. |
| gus3 Jul 10, 2012 6:29 PM EDT |
Quoting:What do they have a monopoly on?Pretentious jerks who want to spend their allowances on products that show the world what sheeple they are. But I wouldn't call that monopoly "criminal." |
| tracyanne Jul 10, 2012 6:44 PM EDT |
No What I would call criminal is stealing other people's ideas, a well documented claim made by Steve Jobs, and then patenting those ideas, then suing the originator of the idea when said originator attempts to market their version of the idea. |
| gary_newell Jul 10, 2012 7:29 PM EDT |
The whole patent thing is ridiculous. The way the companies have to keep buying up patents to "protect" themselves from being sued and then using the patents to do just that to someone else. Apple are bad but they aren't the only ones. Look at Oracle's ridiculous court case against Google. My favourite story about Apple was when they were trying to sue creative labs for the menu creative labs had installed on the zen micro and then subsequently lost the case because it was creative labs who had invented the menu and Apple had in fact infringed on their patent. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!