Comments for counternotions

Comment on For whom the API tolls? by Cadillac88

Cadillac88 — Sun, 06 May 2012 13:37:00 +0000

We’ll find out in the next day or two about API’s and copyrights once the jury comes back with the results of their deliberations in the oracle vs google suit. I think? The case seems pretty straight forward for the most part except for the JS weirdness. In retrospect, oracle should have kept him on board for a while longer.
On the equally strange objective-j, are you saying that if java goes down the tubes for google that google might find itself better off just switching to it’s rip-off of Apple’s cocoa?

Comment on For whom the API tolls? by John K Evans

John K Evans — Sat, 05 May 2012 18:55:04 +0000

So good to have you writing again on this site; I’d put you under “check once in a blue moon.” After all, nothing till now since February of last year.

I follow a number of tech writers, yet find so few that write cogently, with clear and compelling insight into their topics, not just regurgitating another writer’s work or restating the obvious.

Your insight is always fresh and gives me pause to rethink or think anew. That makes it worth waiting for that blue moon.

Comment on For whom the API tolls? by Kontra

Kontra — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 05:59:54 +0000

As I indicated above, just how far this API copyrightability issue can impact any industry reliant on digital computing is hard to imagine, since derivations are so deep and pervasive.

Comment on For whom the API tolls? by rd

rd — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 03:29:48 +0000

Oh, I forgot about Cocoa.
GnuStep was strict OpenStep clone
but then it has continued to copy new Cocoa APIs
without Apple batting an eye. Apple even allowed
Obj 2.0 to be integrated with gcc 4.6.
WebObjects has several clones.
EOF as well. I am sure there other IOS API
Microsoft has copied wholesale in their Window Phone.

Comment on For whom the API tolls? by rd

rd — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 03:10:38 +0000

Software programs are copyrightable.
Code is copyrightable.
Design is copyrightable.
Yet Language and API is not copyrightable.
Even GNU allows copying of headers for sake of compatibility
but Java has no need for compatibility where as
LibC needs to compatible otherwise you would still be paying
AT&T and have no compatibility.
But then again Fair Use and EULA complicate the matter.

So it just comes to whether clean room implementation
is really allowed for example BIOS which definitely had API
but IBM was unable to stop it.

Comment on Why Apple doesn’t do “Concept Products” by Why Apple doesn’t do “Concept Products” « Oh look! A shiny sparkly thingy!

Sun, 08 Apr 2012 08:38:00 +0000

[...] http://counternotions.com/2008/08/12/concept-products/ Propagate:TwitterTumblrDigg Tagged Apple [...]

Comment on The Unbearable Inevitability of Being Android, 1995 by PaulaT

PaulaT — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 13:11:27 +0000

For me, I like Android compare to iPhone or blackberry. It gives me everything I need, especially my job requires frequent email check.

Comment on Apple Store strategy: “Position, permission, probe” by Ami

Ami — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 11:25:43 +0000

Yeah, the Dell employees… sneered at you as if you were bothering them.. I bought a Dell online instead… and it went bezerk a couple years later.. no one could fix it.. bad processor.. screw Dell.. .. my slogan for Dell is “NEVER AGAIN”

Comment on Author interview: “Punching In” at the Apple Store by LG 47LW450U 47-inch Widescreen Cinema Full HD 1080p 3D 100Hz LED TV + Freeview | 1080P 3DTV Reviews

Thu, 19 Jan 2012 20:15:20 +0000

[...] Author interview: “Punching In” at the Apple Store « counternotions – Since you've been a long-time “Apple fan” and Mac user, did you always know that Apple would be one of the companies in your project? No, I went into the project with a fairly open plan about what companies I would apply … [...]

Comment on Strategic shortcomings of Pre in the post-iPhone era by Fallacy of volume and revenue: The iPhone difference « David's Blog

Fallacy of volume and revenue: The iPhone difference « David's Blog — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 19:06:04 +0000

[...] The most amazing trick Apple has performed over the last six years has been the unflinching fiscal discipline to introduce new products into new markets to establish new platforms while maintaining remarkably profitable margins. Apple hasn’t carved out 3/4 of the digital music market by inundating it with cheap devices. Neither has it elected to chase after market share by peddling $49 “iPhone nanos” at Radio Shack. As can be seen above, the iPhone is an extremely profitable product which fuels its own R&D that keeps it a generation ahead of its potential rivals. In iPhone charts, third parties see not just the number of units sold but more importantly, a competently managed, profitable, growing ecosystem with which they can reliably associate, whereas any discussion of Pre’s prospects must necessarily include Palm’s dismal financial outlook. [...]