I can admire Apple’s business practices in a bloodless sort of way. You have to admit, they’re brilliant at manipulating their customers, gaming the legal system and justifying the worst abuses. If any other company attempted similar maneuvers, they’d be skewered by the media and hipsters.
But Apple is cool. They’re so cool, they have a guaranteed customer base. They have such cool products, I’d be tempted to buy in.
And yet, they are such despicable people. I suppose I shouldn’t say that. After all, I don’t know anyone in charge of the company. And for all I know, their lawyer team consists of robots who merely go into action at the prompting of any number of particular combinations of words or phrases that even slightly resemble a product Apple has, is, may conceivably devise in the next thousand years, comes up in any print, speech, or rumor. Perhaps the process is so automated they can’t even stop themselves.
1984, the sequel.
At least this latest example provides perfect evidence for my distrust of the so-called “jury of peers.” I doubt they were all scientists or computer engineers. Surely I’m not the only one who remembers the CSI phenomenon of criminal trials?
Look, in the aggregate, people are stupid.
“The intelligence of that creature known as a crowd is the square root of the number of people in it.” ― Terry Pratchett
It’s just the way it works. That doesn’t mean you have any right to give into the easy way, and just go along with what others have decided for you.
Right there, of course, is the real issue I have trouble with. Some Apple fans (not all, I’ll freely admit) are nothing more than slavering pets of the company. They do as they’re told and never question a thing—including whether or not they really need Apple’s products. I, for example, have survived just fine my entire life, without ever once buying an Apple-branded anything.
Not even a smart phone. (Honestly, I have.)
As my brother put it: “Apple wants to control our fingers now.” (Note, he does have a smart phone, a Samsung.) Apple abuses the system. They just do. And it gets to me that they don’t even need to do so. They have good products and could decide on their own.
But now customers are that much more limited—because really, how many makers of smart phones are there? And they get fewer and fewer. Notably, Samsung was Apple’s primary competitor, and I find their actions extremely problematic.
I’m pretty sure, once upon a time, we actually enforced our anti-trust laws.
You do remember that happened to Microsoft, right? And it was for seemingly less of a violation than what Apple appears to be doing. But Apple is cool. I hate that I keep going to that response, but it does seem to be the only thing going for it.
Look, these so-called patent violations are effectively meaningless in my mind. Patents hold no real value anymore, given how specific they are and how often they’re sold. Given Apple’s trademarking of their app images (for email, time, weather, etc), I’m not particularly convinced of the value of a trademark either.
The government is for sale everyone! Just be rich.
(I think this might be the only time I’ve had any sympathy for the Occupiers—although I’m pretty sure they mostly used Apple)
- Jury Awards Apple $1.05 Billion in Damages Against Samsung for Patent Violations (shoppingblog.com)
- Samsung calls court decision ‘a loss for the American consumer’ (digitaltrends.com)
- Apple vs Samsung Decision Likely to Lead to More Patent Wars (socialbarrel.com)
Q. How many unique ways can you make a smartphone? Hint: they have to be rectangular to be usable.
A. Approx. 1