Page 4 of 18 FirstFirst 12345678914 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 359
  1. #61  
    Quote Originally Posted by finngirl View Post
    "FWIW, an independant research firm reserached the PALM IP and valued it at $1.5 billion alone, but, of course, you won't believe that either - or you will assign some sort of bias to their research, I'm sure - anything to justify your perception of what you seem to believe is "reality". "

    I read this when it was first published (that the IP was valued at $1.5B). When HP/Palm agreed to a deal for $1.2B, it was the first time I began to wonder just how much they valued the smart phone biz.

    I mean if the IP alone is $1.5B, shouldn't the phone business add on something?

    This is one of the reasons why I am suspicious about HP's consumer phone plans.
    Quite honestly, HP and PALM have to e very careful about what they say publically prior to the shareholder vote. If they do anything to even hint the the current buyout price is undervalued (like announcing a new smartphone, new products for WebOS, etc...), the shareholders can vote this down and the deal won't happen.

    Its my firm opinion that HP wants to be in the smartphone market, big time. Of the 3.25billion cell phones in use, only 200 million of them are smartphones - that is a HUGE market to get a piece of, and they won't take a backseat in pursuing it, IMO.

    The IP was valued high, and that independant company suggested a higher buyout value for PALM, based on it and then WebOS, but, like all such research studies, they are only as good as the paper they are written, and, in reality, PALM felt the best deal was the one HP offered.

    The next month or so should be very interesting, once the shareholder vote is finished tomorrow.

    "The more I learn, the more I realize just how little I really do know!" -Albert Einstein

  2. #62  
    Quote Originally Posted by clutch1222 View Post
    Interested article from the guys over at Tom's Hardware.

    HP Buys Palm? - 8 Reasons Why Apple Should Fear HP/Palm - Tom's Guide

    Anyone one want to contribute 8 reasons why they should not?
    i can give you a few.

    1. Superior management
    2. like 20 billion in cash reserves.
    3. enormous brand loyalty, and a brand ecosystem that integrates all it's products.
    4. a pipeline of market leading products, in growth areas, that are in high demand.
  3. #63  
    Quote Originally Posted by LCGuy View Post
    Now, you can call me to task, however, when you post illogical and grossly incorrect general presumptions like "1500 useless patents" when, in fact, you havent taken this information and researched it first, that tells me that you have a biased and emootionally based opinion, and that's a futile discussion for me, and anyone who enters into it with you.
    You started the illogical and grossly incorrect general presumptions by saying

    I believe Apple, and Mr. Jobs has taken sincere notice of the HP buyout of PALM for one reason, or, should I say over 1500 reasons: IP. PALM's IP. (PS, if you are wondering why Apple didn tbuy PALM for its IP, the FTC would NEVER have approved it - that would have created an entity that would have legal monopolistic control over the entire mobile device market)
    My respond to you was "what patents does palm own that are so valuable that would make the new iPhone 4 better?" All I got from you was a lot of tap dancing and you didn't answer the question. I'll ask again...Name ONE patent that Palm owns that would make the new iPhone 4 better.

    FWIW, an independant research firm reserached the PALM IP and valued it at $1.5 billion alone, but, of course, you won't believe that either - or you will assign some sort of bias to their research, I'm sure - anything to justify your perception of what you seem to believe is "reality".

    Yep, "1,500 useless patents" - if you say so!
    So what if some company said that Palm is worth $1.5 billion. What does that mean to Apple? Apple has their own engineering staff and Steve Jobs and John Ives to come up with whatever they need to be dominant in the cell phone market. Guess what? They are extremely successful with just one cell phone model in the cell phone market. They are about to sell more iPhone 4 phones in the next week than Palm has sold in the past year. All without any of those Palm patents that you think are so valuable to Apple.

    Those patents may be valubale to HP, but they are of no use to Apple. It's like a Ford Taurus is valuable to someone that has a unreliable piece of crap like HP currently in the cell phone market. Whereas, someone currently driving a Ferrari (Apple) is not going to waste their time buy a Ford Taurus (Palm's patents) when they already drive something better than a Taurus.

    PS... your comment about the FTC "laughing about Apple for being so paranoid" was at best, irrational, as the FTC doesnt provide opinions on such matters. They are there to make sure that business sectors have a fair and competitive environment, and that's all. Just FYI...
    You're absolutely right about the FTC. If Apple were going to buy Nokia, I could see the FTC stepping in. BUT, Palm is a has been. They are not a market leader or innovator in anything cell phone related and that's why I made the comment.

    Tell me where you got this info where Jobs said, "Gee, we can't buy Palm because the FTC wouldn't allow it."

    Or, Jobs setting in his office all scared saying "If we don't get those patents before HP from Palm, we are f*****!"

    I just made up those two statements like you made up the whole story about Apple and the FTC.

    Bottom line, show anyone a Palm Pre or the iPhone 4 and see which one they would buy. Yeah, those 1500 patents have gotten Palm far with the Palm Pre. While Apple not having those patents has caused them to struggle in the cell phone market. Keep dreaming...

    By the way, Nokia is way more important in the cell phone industry than Palm. Guess what? Apple has been accused of using some of Nokia's patents in a lawsuit that Nokia has against Apple.

    Nokia sues apple over patents - The Inquirer

    Hm, I couldn't find any articles stating that Apple has used any of Palm's patents without their permission. Doesn't that sorta backup my statement that Palms patents are useless to Apple?
  4.    #64  
    [QUOTE=SoFly;2523281]You started the illogical and grossly incorrect general pmptions by saying



    My respond to you was "what patents does palm own that are so valuable that would make the new iPhone 4 better?" All I got from you was a lot of tap dancing and you didn't answer the question. I'll ask again...Name ONE patent that Palm owns that would make the new iPhone 4 better.



    So what if some company said that Palm is worth $1.5 billion. What does that mean to Apple? Apple has their own engineering staff and Steve Jobs and John Ives to come up with whatever they need to be dominant in the cell phone market. Guess what? They are extremely successful with just one cell phone model in the cell phone market. They are about to sell more iPhone 4 phones in the next week than Palm has sold in the past year. All without any of those Palm patents that you think are so valuable to Apple.

    Those patents may be valubale to HP, but they are of no use to Apple. It's like a Ford Taurus is valuable to someone that has a unreliable piece of crap like HP currently in the cell phone market. Whereas, someone currently driving a Ferrari (Apple) is not going to waste their time buy a Ford Taurus (Palm's patents) when they already drive something better than a Taurus.[Quote]

    way to go! Well, I can answer what patents does iphone want that palm has... But I can tell you which patented tech palm has that apple has... That nice new front facing camera that is so ground breaking on iphone 4 and evo.

    why has palm not said anything.... Maybe they had their hands full try to survive. But I bet you htc and apple didn't see the hp purchase of palm coming. Soon hp will own those patents... And apple , htc will be paying $$$$$ for using them. Taurus... LOL. You are so consumed with apple greatness... You are either in denial..or can't accept the fact the game is about to change...big time. I know...speculation. So lets see what happens...in say 6 months. These post will be archived... And we will see how much $$$ apple will be forking out to use palm technology. If $0... Than at least know that palm patented many innovative tech features..
    http://forums.precentral.net/palm-ge...e-patents.html

    [Quote]
    You're absolutely right about the FTC. If Apple were going to buy Nokia, I could see the FTC stepping in. BUT, Palm is a has been. They are not a market leader or innovator in anything cell phone related and that's why I made the comment.

    Tell me where you got this info where Jobs said, "Gee, we can't buy Palm because the FTC wouldn't allow it."

    Or, Jobs setting in his office all scared saying "If we don't get those patents before HP from Palm, we are f*****!"

    I just made up those two statements like you made up the whole story about Apple and the FTC. [Quote]

    Bottom line, show anyone a Palm Pre or the iPhone 4 and see which one they would buy. Yeah, those 1500 patents have gotten Palm far with the Palm Pre. While Apple not having those patents has caused them to struggle in the cell phone market. Keep dreaming...

    By the way, Nokia is way more important in the cell phone industry than Palm. Guess what? Apple has been accused of using some of Nokia's patents in a lawsuit that Nokia has against Apple.

    [url= sues apple over patents - The Inquirer[/url]

    Hm, I couldn't find any articles stating that Apple has used any of Palm's patents without their permission. Doesn't that sorta backup my statement that Palms patents are useless to Apple?
    Last edited by clutch1222; 06/24/2010 at 06:34 PM. Reason: edit
  5.    #65  
    @ sofly.... Yes , I know I **** up quotes on post... But I'm busy and no time to correct. Check out the link for info on palm patents
  6. #66  
    Quote Originally Posted by clutch1222 View Post
    @ sofly.... Yes , I know I **** up quotes on post... But I'm busy and no time to correct. Check out the link for info on palm patents
    This will be fun...

    Integrated Handheld Data Device Having a Sliding Form Factor

    Filed November 30th, 2001

    On the outside, this gizmo would have looked a little like a Radio Shack TRS-80 Pocket Computer from the early 1980s. Pull it apart, though, and–hey, there’s a PalmPilot in there! The idea looks both ingenious and unwieldy, which presumably helps explain why it never resulted in a product.
    Yea, I could see Jobs beating someone to death with that contraption if they presented it to him as the next iDevice.


    Wireless Phone With Removable Personal Information Manager

    Filed May 29th, 1998

    This curio–patented years before the first real Palm-based phone appeared–was for a StarTac-esque clamshell cell phone with a PDA you could pull off and use separately. The connection between the two halves was in the form of a PC Card connector on the handset part, allowing you to also plug the phone into your laptop’s PC Card slot and use it as a wireless modem.
    Or, just wait until technology gets better to where you have everything in one device, like the...iPhone.


    Integrated Joypad for Handheld Computer

    Filed February 5th, 2001

    People like to play games on PDAs, even though PDA controls aren’t nearly as good for gameplaying as a joystick. Solution: Let folks unscrew the tip from the stylus and then screw it into the PDA to create a minuscule joystick. Clever! But you gotta think that the chances were high that you’d leave the pointing tip screwed into the PDA when you put in your pocket, thereby risking poking yourself. Or maybe you’d just lose the tip altogether…
    We know what Jobs thinks about a stylus. Which is why people play games on the iPhone using a touch interface and seeing all the games on the App store, seems that was the better solution.


    System for and Method of Conferencing With a Handheld Computer Using Multiple Media Types

    Filed May 30th, 2002

    This patent involves a Webcam-equipped, multimedia-enabled PDA that permitted for videoconferencing and WebEx-like online meetings. Neat–and probably a tad ahead of its time given that the patent dates to 2002, before the dawn of 3G broadband and modern smartphones. Even in 2010, I’m not sure if we have anything quite this ambitious.
    Apple has FaceTime.


    Wall Mount Cradle For Personal Digital Assistants

    Filed September 29th, 2000

    Back in 1995, when I met with Palm to see its first, then-unreleased PDA, executives explained a vision of a world in which people would have multiple networked docking cradles situated in various places around their home, and would go around plopping PDAs into them. I forget precisely what the benefit was supposed to be. But this patent for a wall-mounted PalmPilot dock may have been residual evidence of that unfulfilled dream.
    All I have to say is LOL!! Talk about a waste of cradles.


    Non-Rigid Mounting of a Foldable Display

    Filed January 18th, 2001

    Another Palm-based phone patent that dates from the years before Palm made phones, utilizing a concept that went nowhere. (I’m beginning to understand why it bought Handspring, thereby acquiring the Treo.) This one looks like a typical “candybar” model. Inside, though, it has a folding screen–an idea which is perennially popular in patents but never seems to amount to much in real life.
    Eh. As they said in the snippet, it's a technology that more than one company has patented in various ways. Nothing unique to Palm.


    Moveable Display Device for Three-Dimensional Image Creation

    Filed November 29th, 2001

    I can’t quite tell from the patent just what Palm had in mind here. You move the little screen–which may or may not be a Palm OS PDA–around on the big screen, which can tell where the little one is. And a filter lets the little screen display images with a 3D effect. I suspect they were trying for some new breakthrough category of gizmo, but decided it just wasn’t working.
    I don't know what to say of it.


    Movable Display Device

    Filed November 29th, 2001

    A variant on the 3D display idea, filed with the U.S. Patent Office on the same day. The big screen folds up, the little one slides around on top of it, and they communicate with each other. Application: unclear. At least to me.
    Unclear to me too. Definitely not worth $1.5 billion just in case there may be a use for it in the future. Which most likely there won't be.


    Keyboard Sled With Rotating Screen

    Filed June 20th, 2004

    Call it the Pepper Pad Fallacy: The notion that people like the idea of using QWERTY keyboards that have been split in two. This keyboard would have required a Palm OS PDA with a rotating user interface; the patent also covers a non-split variant and one for gameplay, with a tiny joystick and gaming buttons.
    We all know Apple would never release a product like that.


    Segmented Keyboard for Portable Computer System

    Patent filed December 30th, 2004

    This looks strikingly like Apple’s new iPad Keyboard Dock, but it’s really a folding keyboard a la Think Outside’s famous Stowaway. You have to be kind of nerdy to use a folding keyboard. You have to be kind of nerdy to love numeric keypads. You have to be really nerdy to want a folding keyboard with a companion numeric keypad.
    Apple has the keyboard with a dock attachment for the iPad and a bluetooth version for the iPhone and iPad.


    If those were the best patents that Palm has to offer, then LOL at them. Now, I see why Apple had no reason to buy Palm. Thanks, Clutch1222, for that article. Proved me right even more.

    So, looks like you and LC Guy have 1,490 more patents to go thru for you to convince me that Apple lost out buy not buying Palm because those 10 did not convince me.
  7. #67  
    SoFly, I don't think those are the best patents, engadget did an article where they had a few select patents not mentioned in your post, some are pretty broad and would be trouble for aple or many other touchscreen device makers

    things like using a touchscreen dial interface, or the ringer switch.

    I wouldn't take that articles lack of depth as prood of anything other than just that.

    patents like palms are as much to ensure that you won't get sued as they are for suing. They make a company think twice before filing there own claim against you.
  8. #68  
    Quote Originally Posted by windzilla View Post
    SoFly, I don't think those are the best patents, engadget did an article where they had a few select patents not mentioned in your post, some are pretty broad and would be trouble for aple or many other touchscreen device makers


    I wouldn't take that articles lack of depth as prood of anything other than just that.

    LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!! So many times over.

    engadget did an article where they had a few select patents not mentioned in your post, some are pretty broad and would be trouble for aple or many other touchscreen device makers
    Stop repeating the same crap!

    As I have said more than once, how are these patents going to help the iPhone 4 be better than what it already is TODAY when being compared against the Palm Pre?????????

    things like using a touchscreen dial interface, or the ringer switch.
    Last time I checked, the iPhone has a touchscreen dial interface along with every other phone that has a touchscreen. There is also a ringer switch on the side of the iPhone. So, I don't know how you think Palm owns the patents on those.

    If they are so much trouble for other device makers why were these patents not incorporated in the Palm Pre? If they are so valuable, why is the Palm Pre considered a laughing joke in the cell phone market?

    Bottom line, what good are all these patents if people are not buying the product? Yet, Apple has no problem getting people to buy hundreds of thousands of a device sight unseen without using any of those Palm patents.
    Last edited by SoFly; 06/24/2010 at 08:02 PM.
  9.    #69  
    Quote Originally Posted by SoFly View Post
    This will be fun...



    Yea, I could see Jobs beating someone to death with that contraption if they presented it to him as the next iDevice.




    Or, just wait until technology gets better to where you have everything in one device, like the...iPhone.




    We know what Jobs thinks about a stylus. Which is why people play games on the iPhone using a touch interface and seeing all the games on the App store, seems that was the better solution.




    Apple has FaceTime.




    All I have to say is LOL!! Talk about a waste of cradles.




    Eh. As they said in the snippet, it's a technology that more than one company has patented in various ways. Nothing unique to Palm.




    I don't know what to say of it.




    Unclear to me too. Definitely not worth $1.5 billion just in case there may be a use for it in the future. Which most likely there won't be.




    We all know Apple would never release a product like that.




    Apple has the keyboard with a dock attachment for the iPad and a bluetooth version for the iPhone and iPad.


    If those were the best patents that Palm has to offer, then LOL at them. Now, I see why Apple had no reason to buy Palm. Thanks, Clutch1222, for that article. Proved me right even more.

    So, looks like you and LC Guy have 1,490 more patents to go thru for you to convince me that Apple lost out buy not buying Palm because those 10 did not convince me.
    way to avoid the primary patent that was approved in 2002 ... spin spin... laughing. BS artist.

    Front facing camera for video conferencing. Did you see that patent? Its on ypur new glorius Iphone 4... along with"improved" multitasking... etc.

    with out any other distractions.... respond to that one patent that is one of iphone $ most innovative features.. thank you for making youself look like... fill in the blank.
    pathetic elitest Iphan. Knock it all you want.. but when palm patented the front facing camera in 2002.... Apple was not even in the smartphone market. Palm could not go after the goliath APPLE... But HP will get paid $$$$

    Way to monday morning qb . IOS 4 is closed... controlled and simpke to use for users like you who need to keep it simple.
  10.    #70  
    Quote Originally Posted by SoFly View Post
    LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!! So many times over.



    Stop repeating the same crap!

    As I have said more than once, how are these patents going to help the iPhone 4 be better than what it already is TODAY when being compared against the Palm Pre?????????



    Last time I checked, the iPhone has a touchscreen dial interface along with every other phone that has a touchscreen. There is also a ringer switch on the side of the iPhone. So, I don't know how you think Palm owns the patents on those.

    If they are so much trouble for other device makers why were these patents not incorporated in the Palm Pre? If they are so valuable, why is the Palm Pre considered a laughing joke in the cell phone market?

    Bottom line, what good are all these patents if people are not buying the product? Yet, Apple has no problem getting people to buy hundreds of thousands of a device sight unseen without using any of those Palm patents.
    Apple fans fall back on the same weak point... apple sells. Shamwow sells, magic jack sells, george foreman grill sells millions on infomercials. Does it make it a better product ..no... it proves that the large % of population will buy anything if otys packaged and ad placed right. Who gives a crap how many sells? Yes, apple sells luxury items that has its qualities... but it is limited... basic... so easy a caveman can use it. That is what it is good for.

    Do you know anything about patent laws? they are good for recuping $$$ of dollars from companies that take your idea and use it on thier products. So , that is what any patent is good for.. to protect your investment in an idea. HP will make them pay... and yes, Apple did not see this coming.
  11. #71  
    Quote Originally Posted by SoFly View Post
    LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!! So many times over.



    Stop repeating the same crap!

    As I have said more than once, how are these patents going to help the iPhone 4 be better than what it already is TODAY when being compared against the Palm Pre?????????



    Last time I checked, the iPhone has a touchscreen dial interface along with every other phone that has a touchscreen. There is also a ringer switch on the side of the iPhone. So, I don't know how you think Palm owns the patents on those.

    If they are so much trouble for other device makers why were these patents not incorporated in the Palm Pre? If they are so valuable, why is the Palm Pre considered a laughing joke in the cell phone market?

    Bottom line, what good are all these patents if people are not buying the product? Yet, Apple has no problem getting people to buy hundreds of thousands of a device sight unseen without using any of those Palm patents.
    said with good humor:

    if you take them away the iphone 4 cannot dial like a regular phone and thus becomes less useful than the pre for making phonecalls.

    lolololol to you Mr. Happypants.
    Last edited by windzilla; 06/24/2010 at 11:52 PM.
  12. #72  
    Quote Originally Posted by clutch1222 View Post
    Apple fans fall back on the same weak point... apple sells. Shamwow sells, magic jack sells, george foreman grill sells millions on infomercials. Does it make it a better product ..no...
    Selling is the ONLY thing that matters. It's a consumer product. This isn't philanthropy. Palm is a for profit business. It's in the articles of incorporation. The point is not to say "we're a better product." The point is to sell the most. Betamax was better then VHS. Playstation 3 is better then xbox 360 hardware wise. Neither sells well. And though you may not know, shamwow's, magicjacks and george foreman grills do great business. They sell out on QVC as well, and the home shopping network. and Target and the as Seen on tv store and Walmart, and Macys, etc. You can laugh but the reality is Billy Mays is a multimillionaire cause he sold a good product that people like. Ron Popeil is may be the most successful salesmen in history cause he sell a product that resonates with ton of people. There is no honor in making something that few people want. The premise that there is something wrong with these products is naive. Many are hugely successful. And trust me Palm would much rather have the sales then just a bunch of people claiming, "but it's better."


    Quote Originally Posted by clutch1222 View Post
    Who gives a crap how many sells?
    The board of directors, the investors, the employees whose jobs depend on there being profits from sales, R&D that can't make new products without profits from sales, employees with 401ks full of Palm stock that drops with weak sales, the consumers dependent on sales for growth of a platform and developer support, updates, more apps. second, third, and fourth versions of products. You live in an unrealistic fantasy world were you get something for "a better product." The reality is the "better product" is the one that does sell. And the one that doesn't sell get's the company stock dropping from $17 to $5 and sold.
  13.    #73  
    Quote Originally Posted by blackmagic01 View Post
    Selling is the ONLY thing that matters. It's a consumer product. This isn't philanthropy. Palm is a for profit business. It's in the articles of incorporation. The point is not to say "we're a better product." The point is to sell the most. Betamax was better then VHS. Playstation 3 is better then xbox 360 hardware wise. Neither sells well. And though you may not know, shamwow's, magicjacks and george foreman grills do great business. They sell out on QVC as well, and the home shopping network. and Target and the as Seen on tv store and Walmart, and Macys, etc. You can laugh but the reality is Billy Mays is a multimillionaire cause he sold a good product that people like. Ron Popeil is may be the most successful salesmen in history cause he sell a product that resonates with ton of people. There is no honor in making something that few people want. The premise that there is something wrong with these products is naive. Many are hugely successful. And trust me Palm would much rather have the sales then just a bunch of people claiming, "but it's better."


    The board of directors, the investors, the employees whose jobs depend on there being profits from sales, R&D that can't make new products without profits from sales, employees with 401ks full of Palm stock that drops with weak sales, the consumers dependent on sales for growth of a platform and developer support, updates, more apps. second, third, and fourth versions of products. You live in an unrealistic fantasy world were you get something for "a better product." The reality is the "better product" is the one that does sell. And the one that doesn't sell get's the company stock dropping from $17 to $5 and sold.
    LOL @ you. yes sold.. to the largest tech corp in the world. So how doeas that affect me negatively? not at all, it actually makes WEBOS future stronger. DO you think I care if Palm made it or not.. not really. All i cared about is that their work with WEBOS contunies.. and it will , stronger and better then ever.
    Yes...If I was a company.. I would be very concerned about sales. But , im a consumer... So i dont care if APPLe sells 3 million IPADS...I think its an overpriced ipod, consumption device designed and marketed towards simple people. Thats why it sells millions... a non tech savy user can be satisfied with how unproductive it is. Its a nice ereader and web browser.. for $500.
    Palms stock dropped from $17 to $3 dollars for several reasons. Palms scale compared to APPLE and Google's is one of them, timing. marketing failures etc. I love how you contribute it solely to the quality of the product. GOOGLE is paying manufacturers to put android on their phones... so its growing in popularity.. but does that make it better than WEBOS.. No. They have deeper pockets and bigger scale than Palm did. Thats all changing soon.
    Listen... I think the best thing that happened to palm was their stock dropping to $3 and then them being bought by HP. Because HP can take webos and put the $$ behind it and has the scale to bridge both consumer and business.

    I am a consumer... at the end of the day.. I want competition, options and Bang for Buck. Palms failure to go it alone does not affect me one bit.... Keep on bashing palm and webos for as long as you can... because your time is limited. Wasn't palm pre and webos going to be doomed? what happened to all of the posts about palm disappearing....
    Here is one thing i know for certain... you elitist ifans wont shut up until the next WEBOS phone and tablet's performance shuts you up. The only reason you keep trolling these threads is because you know webos has a very bright future... and your waiting for news on new devices as bad as we are... so you can realize right away when your IOS has been bested. HP has the scale and resources to make it happen. They are already on a shopping spree buying up tech that will give us consumers OPTIONS. Options is something apple users are not interested in... only 16gb or 32gb? really?? Spoon fed control from your hero Steve Jobs. Yes 200k apps... that can be and will be easily ported to webos.
    You have a simple... locked down and controlled iphone. millions of other consumers who need it simple... love apple products. I support 200 users... everyone of them that buys apple products say the same thing" its easy to use". The #1 reason the like apple and will pay $$$ to buy it. Thats not to say that there is a % of users that are tech savy... just that the large majority buy cause its simple, popular, social status ( pimpin @ starbucks as Steve Jobs Promotes) etc. I do not relate to that niche. I honestly believe that WEBOS is the Better OS. Cards and gesture = genuis
    Last edited by clutch1222; 06/25/2010 at 02:03 AM. Reason: sp
  14.    #74  
    @ black Magic.... love that stuff makes my tires nice and shinny. and its cheaper than Armor all
  15. #75  
    iPhone applications aren't easily ported to WebOS. Aside from many games, most applications need to be rewritten from scratch.
  16. #76  
    Quote Originally Posted by clutch1222 View Post
    way to avoid the primary patent that was approved in 2002 ... spin spin... laughing. BS artist.

    Front facing camera for video conferencing. Did you see that patent? Its on ypur new glorius Iphone 4... along with"improved" multitasking... etc.

    with out any other distractions.... respond to that one patent that is one of iphone $ most innovative features.. thank you for making youself look like... fill in the blank.
    pathetic elitest Iphan. Knock it all you want.. but when palm patented the front facing camera in 2002.... Apple was not even in the smartphone market. Palm could not go after the goliath APPLE... But HP will get paid $$$$

    Way to monday morning qb . IOS 4 is closed... controlled and simpke to use for users like you who need to keep it simple.
    Ha! You make yourself look like a fool. Do you seriously think that Palm was the first manufacturer to ever patent the capability to have video conferencing on a phone? AT&T actually had a phone on the market that you could actually buy that had video conferencing on it. Came out well before 2002. There were other phones in Japan that have been out over the years that had video conferencing capability that came out well before 2002. GO RESEARCH AND LOOK IT UP!

    So, by your logic, AT&T and the other phone manufacturers should have went after Palm way back in 2002 for trying to patent something that has already been accomplished. More importantly if that patent was so valuable, why didn't the Palm Pre come out with that technology in 2009, a whole 7 years after they patented it? There have been hundreds of phones in Japan and Europe that do what Apple's FaceTime does.

    Yeah, HP getting paid by Apple. You are so stupid. I feel sorry for you. You obviously don't have a clue how patents work.
  17. #77  
    Quote Originally Posted by clutch1222 View Post
    Apple fans fall back on the same weak point... apple sells. Shamwow sells, magic jack sells, george foreman grill sells millions on infomercials. Does it make it a better product ..no... it proves that the large % of population will buy anything if otys packaged and ad placed right. Who gives a crap how many sells? Yes, apple sells luxury items that has its qualities... but it is limited... basic... so easy a caveman can use it. That is what it is good for.

    Do you know anything about patent laws? they are good for recuping $$$ of dollars from companies that take your idea and use it on thier products. So , that is what any patent is good for.. to protect your investment in an idea. HP will make them pay... and yes, Apple did not see this coming.
    Dude, you're missing the one point about stuff selling well. Anything will sell if it is dirt cheap. Like shamwow, magic jack, etc.

    iPhone is not in the same category. Those phones are minimum $200 to purchase one. It's not a free flip phone. People are lining up to pay alot of money for a device that they can get another device for free. Or, go to Verizon and get any number of Android or Blackberry devices for buy one get one free. People actually PAY $200 for the iPhone because they really want it. They don't have to give them away or cheap price for huge sales. Shamwow, etc would NOT sell if they were not dirt cheap.

    Most people are concerned about the VALUE for their dollar and they get more VALUE for their dollar spending $200 on an iPhone than they would getting any old cheap, free flip phone, or the Palm Pre which is like $50 on AT&T and still not selling.

    As I have already said, Palm was not the first company to ever have a video camera on a cell phone. So, you are so wrong. More importantly there are more than one way to do the same thing. Example, the iPod with the click wheel. Apple patented the click wheel, BUT there are tons of MP3 players out there that do the same thing that the original iPod does, which is play music. They just use a different way of controlling the MP3 player that is not a click wheel interface similar to the iPod. Just like there is more than one way to to get a mobile device to do video.

    Apple's way of FaceTime is nothing like that patent from Palm. Totally different. Do you not notice that Apple's version has the ability to use the back or front cam and flip back and forth seamlessly? Apple released an actual product that works. Palm has a wet dream called a patent that they couldn't get into production after having 8 years to get a product out using it.
    Last edited by SoFly; 06/25/2010 at 07:30 AM.
  18. #78  
    A few comments here, and then Im out of this, because when people start calling eachother "stupid" and saying things like "you are making a fool out of yourself", and post with condescending tones, this forum, which is supposed to be a place where people can post their opinions (as in OPINing), and not be subject to personal degradations and attacks (when one becomes emotionally involved, that is their first line of defense), will have turned into a personal shouting match, where everyone is trying to comnpare the size of thier.... brain.. each one claiming thiers is bigger .

    1. All of my posts on this topic are conjecture - much based on my own personal research into the PALM IP and the market in general. You will see the words "I think" or "My opinion is" or "IMO" throughout my posts because, these are my thoughts, and anyone/everyone is entitled to think differently. And, Hey, I could be wrong, too!!! I have been, in fact, recently! If you chose to disagree with me and provide logic to that end, I will competely respect that, and if your logic prevails over my own, I WILL change my opinion - no egos here, on this end, for sure - but, integrating opinions and fan boy enthusiasm does not logic make!

    2. Regarding PALM's IP - there are over 1500 patents dating back to the early 90's. NOT easy to find, because they are under various names PALM and the suisidaries had. Nevertheless, they are there, and many of them are quite valuable, as I saw it, and, as that independant firm did, and, quite recently, even Mark Hurd, CEO of HP when he said one of the main reasons they bought PALM was for thier IP.

    3. SoFly - lets get this straight - Im not here to convince you of anything, much less share my own due dilligence with you. You can take my opinion for what its worth, or not, I couldn't really care less - if you would like to discuss a patent, fine, but, not with the predetermined intent of showing how worthless it is because Apple didn't buy Palm, and that's why it is of no consequence; That is where you are at, and we are completely opposed to one-another on that, and, IMO, the basis of your rationale is weak. Truth is, no one really knows, and to judge by what has happened or hasnt happened in the market can be just as misleading as Apple saying they have true multitasking (sorry, just had to...).

    4. In general, if anyone believes that Apple is NOT paying attention to this acquisition, I firmly believe - it is my sincerest opinion, that they are deluding themself - this is an incredibly powerful combination, with all of the right elements, and, if it plays out right, could spell a significant change to the mobile industry, with HP/Palm's contributions providing influence in ways that Apple can't and didnt think of - WebOS is so intuitive, and so cleverly designed and developed, that it has that possibility, IMO.

    In summary, and conclusion - anyone who posts as if they "know it all, and everyone else is stupid" because they disagree with him/her and his/her logic, and "doesnt know how patents work" etc.. obviously has his/her own agenda, and is not worth responding to - because, that's how emotional enthusiasm works - it is never possible to convince an non-open mind with predetermined ideas that they are emotionally loyal to, to entertain ideas that he/her didn't think of to begin with, so, even trying is a waste of time!

    Last edited by LCGuy; 06/25/2010 at 08:11 AM.
    "The more I learn, the more I realize just how little I really do know!" -Albert Einstein

  19. #79  
    Quote Originally Posted by windzilla View Post
    said with good humor:

    if you take them away the iphone 4 cannot dial like a regular phone and thus becomes less useful than the pre for making phonecalls.

    lolololol to you Mr. Happypants.
    Do you not know that companies can't patent broad categories of something?

    To give you a good example. Imagine if Ford tried to patent the automobile since they were the first to mass produce an automobile called the Model T. Meaning a device that has an internal combustion engine, 4 wheels, and a compartment to hold passengers.

    With your logic only Ford could make automobiles and no one else. BUT, that is not the case. Anyone can sell an automobile. They just can't use something that Ford developed that is unique to Ford.

    Just like there is more than one way to have a touch screen keypad to dial on a cell phone.
  20. #80  
    LCGuy,

    I think I gave a very good analogy of Palm's patents value to Apple.

    I don't know you from Adam, but I am going to assume that if you lived in the suburbs in a nice house, good schools, etc. Would you go out and buy a house in the hood that is crime ridden and a huge drug problem? No, you wouldn't because you are not poor and can afford to live where you currently do.

    I look at Apple's performance in the cell phone market which is spectacular and I look at Palm's performance in the cell phone market which is horrible. I come to the conclusion that Palm's patents are not valuable to Apple. Just like a crack house in the hood would not be of value to you.

    A patent is only valuable if it is something that you don't want a competitor to copy because you ONLY want consumers to buy the product from you. That is not the case with Palm. Very, very, very few people are buying Palm products with those 1,500 patents that Palm owns. So, if they are not helping Palm to sell a lot of phones, how are they going to be valuable to Apple when Apple sells a TON of cell phones without Palm's patents?

    I don't know how much simpler it needs to be said about the value of Palm's patents to Apple.
Page 4 of 18 FirstFirst 12345678914 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions