

Miguel de Icaza on Samsung v Apple - esolyt
https://plus.google.com/105179816987111146812/posts/bSMQYbMya82

======
magicalist
> _Despite all the outrage around patents being bad, at the end of the day,
> what is clear is that Android products that did not set out themselves to
> copy everything Apple had did not find themselves in trouble_

Is that clear, or is he just being cute? Are there any android products that
aren't currently "in trouble"?

And if legal trouble is the only criteria we need here, what does Apple's
settlement with Nokia mean about Apple?

> _I would love an Android with bouncy scrolling_

Well that just about sums up how stupid the situation is. Sorry, bouncy
scrolling. Apple has a 20 year monopoly on you. Nevermind how you're
implemented! We don't need pesky implementation details, just knowing that
you're a rubber-banding scrolling view on a computing device with touch
sensitive display is enough.

> _It is clearly possible to create fresh new OS that does not copy the
> iPhone. Windows Phone, the Palm Pre and Blackberry's new OS show that it is
> possible._

Saurik summed this up perfectly earlier today:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4430302>

People who say this haven't actually tried these phones or they're practicing
some powerful cognitive dissonance (or they're fans of the "they're copycats,
so I'm just happy they lost" legal approach).

The utility patents that Samsung lost on today weren't magical iphone-making
ones, they were things like pinch to zoom. Those other phones "copy" these
things too, they just happen to have patent licensing for historical
reasoning, or a reasonable threat of serious mutual destruction.

> _I agree that many software patents set the bar too low, and I think we
> should work towards making that bar useful, instead of outright dismissing
> the whole thing._

People really don't seem to remember that software patents did not exist not
too long ago. They are a legal fiction of only the last decade or two, and the
sooner the supreme court takes them back on and shuts them down, the better.

Ars has a good take on it, when the EFF started their campaign for at least
reforming the software patent system:

[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/06/opinion-eff-
shoul...](http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/06/opinion-eff-should-call-
for-the-elimination-of-software-patents/)

Bilski was our last chance, but they ruled narrowly. Hopefully next time...

Edit: Incidentally, Apple had plenty of protections here _without the utility
patents_. There could be no such thing as software patents and Samsung would
still have been handed a very large bill for their products. Bullshit patents
are not necessary for trademark, trade dress, and copyright protection.

~~~
Someone
_"Are there any android products that aren't currently "in trouble"?"_

Apple's message is that it only pursued Samsung because they so blatantly
copied them. I think they have a good point on the copying part; IMO, it was
more than 'being inspired by the iPad'. Only time will tell whether the former
is true.

And yes, I agree that it would be better if patents on how things look and
feel would not have played a role in this case.

~~~
gcp
_Apple's message is that it only pursued Samsung because they so blatantly
copied them._

That's what they say, but realistically Samsung is the most successful Android
vendor and thus the biggest threat to Apple.

The lawsuit found the Nexus S to be at fault. That's a device running
_vanilla_ Android, co-developed with Google.

Let's not pretend this is "only" about Samsung's designs vs Apple's designs.
They won win patents that would cause all Android devices to infringe, as far
as I can tell.

~~~
jccc
> That's what they say, but realistically Samsung is the most successful
> Android vendor and thus the biggest threat to Apple.

I think it would be helpful to consider how it is that Samsung became the most
successful Android vendor.

~~~
bornhuetter
By making great phones. Lets not pretend here that Samsung copying the
sunflower icon for the photo app and having a connector that looks like the
apple one had a major impact on anyone's sales.

Edit: downvotes... you guys honestly think that the reason why Samsung has
been successful is because of touchwiz? Most people don't even _like_
Samsung's modifications to stock Android. It was stupid of them to make the
changes they did, and they deserve a fine, but it certainly didn't help them
much in terms of sales.

~~~
richworks
You are right though. Even though Touchwiz was an abomination compared to the
smooth and slick iOS, Samsung's Galaxy S phone was a step ahead in every
direction compared to the iPhone. At the time, it was the thinnest, lightest
and the most powerful phone. Not the mention, the gorgeous display it had.
Samsung innovated on every platform except the homescreen UI (sadly, many
people don't see this).

But above all, their marketing and advertising strategy was unparalleled. I
saw a Galaxy ad literally on every road, every TV show, every soccer match and
what not! The success was not surprising given how much they effort they put.

------
Newky
This is slightly off topic, but I don't really understand Miguel de Icaza.

He is a "free software programmer" according to Wikipedia, and I really value
his contributions to both the GNOME and MONO projects.

I am not trying to in anyway put down his acheivements but his comments on
social media (G+ and twitter) are often about ordering truckloads of Apple
products.

Was there a falling out with the Gnome project or why is he such an avid
supporter of the Apple brand? Perhaps its just a case that he has moved on
from his free software roots. I appreciate that his company xamarin are
working solidly on Mono which is open source, but a number of their products
are not open source such as Mono Touch and Mono for Android.

I'm not saying that he shouldn't be allowed to sell software but I am curious
what has caused this shift in philosophy or perhaps his involvement with the
free and open source software was simply about producing code rather than the
free principles behind it.

~~~
gcp
People can contribute to Free Software without holding mindsets that are so
extreme in one end as those of rms. Perhaps de Icaza has just gradually
shifted his views to the other end.

~~~
Newky
I completely agree, I have just read that Icaza was awarded the "Advancement
of Open Source Software" a while back. I'm just curious as someone who has
made such commitments to the open source and also to the Linux eco system, can
use another platform so enthusiastically.

~~~
i386
Since when does becoming an advocate for open source make that advocacy
exclusive?

~~~
Newky
Thats not what I'm saying nor am I criticizing him for it. From prior
experience, when I make something I can use on a daily basis, I would find it
hard to use something different.

Also being an advocate for open source software would make it more difficult
to transfer to being a closed source software user. I'm not saying its not
possible or wrong, I just feel his case is a curious one.

He is effectively a self proclaimed Apple fanboy on Twitter etc, and I would
like to know more about the circumstances.

~~~
batista
> _From prior experience, when I make something I can use on a daily basis, I
> would find it hard to use something different._

Well, I think he feels that Gnome failed to build something he can use on a
daily basis. Back in 1998 it was all about overtaking Windows and building the
platform for the future. That didn't pan out that well -- Windows are still
dominant, and OS X is more prevalent and useful as a desktop system than Gnome
is. Nowadays Gnome is bleeding developers (GTK, the very core toolkit of Gnome
has like 1 maintainer) and mainstream distros even think of switching away
from it.

You tend to get disappointed from such outcomes.

------
cageface
_Despite all the outrage around patents being bad, at the end of the day, what
is clear is that Android products that did not set out themselves to copy
everything Apple had did not find themselves in trouble._

Not yet. You're naive if you think Apple is done going after Android.

------
notatoad
Didn't apple recently win a sales injunction against google over the galaxy
nexus, because it included a search box on the homescreen that dared to search
multiple sources of content at the same time? That seems to disprove Miguel's
point that if you don't blatantly rip off apple, you have nothing to fear.

------
mrich
A sane voice. Trademark/copyright is enough to protect your product, only in
rare cases should a patent be awarded for an algorithm (think RSA).

~~~
darkestkhan
There shouldn't be any patents for algorithms - algorithms are math, and math
is not patentable.

~~~
radarsat1
Mechanical diagrams are also math.

~~~
jlgreco
Algorithms and mechanical diagrams are both math in the same way that the
Pythagorean Theorem and a picture of some triangles are both math.

