Posted on 06/25/2012 8:17:09 AM PDT by SmokingJoe
You still don't get it, and probably never will. You simply have blinders on. The touchscreen tablet is different than desktop or laptop computers. The whole idea of a touchscreen tablet, is that it doesn't need an attached keyboard and gives the user more mobility in accessing a computer. Lack of having a keyboard is not a shortcoming, but is an intended feature inherent in the design of a touchscreen tablet. This is where Apple is smart. They built the machine as it is intended to be used. For those who desire a hybrid tablet/laptop, one can add features to achieve that. Nothing wrong in Microsoft creating a hybrid machine for those who desire using a tablet as a laptop. I have no beef with that.
However, Microsoft will be producing a hybrid tablet/laptop with a keyboard that only works in one orientation, and not the other. By definition, that is a shortcoming. Pure and simple. Not that it matters to a lot of people if they wish to use only one orientation, but it is still defined as a shortcoming in design. Now if they made the detachable cover able to detach and then connect in the other orientation, then there would be no shortcoming. Getting you to see what is in front of their face is like teaching a young child. Eventually some get it when they grow up.
So you know, and no one else, including the experts blogging out there, know. Microsoft personally told you. So big shot, what is the pricing structure for various Surface configurations? What are the dates of release to the public for sale? Do you have a working model in your hands, and will you tell us how your trial runs are working out? We're waiting... (sound of crickets)... inquiring minds want to know. Until it's released, it's just vaporware, just like your thinking.
Oh I'm not raining on Microsoft's parade. Not at all. I'm raining on yours, as you spew lies - not even half-truths, just bald-faced lies. At least Microsoft is coy and hiding information. You simply lie. And I'm not an Aplebot, as I enjoy using many different products from many different manufacturers. And I do have more experience than you.
Have you ever worked with machine language on PDP-8s and PDP-11s, or IBM OS/360 and up? Ever code job entry subsystem exits controlling the thousands of jobs running on a mainframe daily? Ever been responsible for starting up a new datacenter from scratch? Building a citywide network for the first time on Cisco routers when they first came out? Interfaced local law enforcement databases to state and national crime databases, on a mix of old and new platforms? Helped integrate police, fire, and paramedic systems in a new 911 center? Test new wireless communication methods? A lot of what I did, was using PCs, IBM and Microsoft products.
If I were an Aplebot, I would have worked at Apple. Had my chance, even bumped shoulders with Andy Hertzfeld (co-inventor of the Mac) and others in the 1970s. (Andy showed me how to build a printer interface for a buck and a half, writing it on the inside of a matchbook cover.) But I was primarily interested in non-Apple platforms. Unlike you, I believe in truth and not just a lemming-like hypnotic following of a sales pitch for a yet-to-be-released product.
Lies, that is all you know how to do. I didn't say steal, I said Microsoft copied Apple. Who knows if they are licensing the technology from Apple. Apple holds many patents in this area, Microsoft has none. Apple demonstrated their new magnetically detachable cover for the iPad 2 in 2011. Microsoft demonstrated a magnetically detachable cover (with keyboard), that attached and detached just like Apple's the year before ("click...click...click"). Microsoft even copied the same talking points as Steve Jobs used in his demonstration the year before. That's copying!
Microsoft simply is copying the work of others, while Apple is the pioneer.
For instance, patent US6030229 filed by Apple in 1998 and issued in 2000 for "an electromagnetic detachable connector".
US7311526 filed in 2005 and issued 2007 for "magnetic connector for electronic device".
US7351066 filed in 2005 and issued in 2008 for "electromagnetic connector for electronic device".
US7641477 filed in 2008 and issued 2010 for "electromagnetic connector for electronic device".
US7645143 filed in 2009 and issued 2010 for "magnetic connector for electronic device".
US7762817 filed in 2008 and issued in 2010 for "system for coupling interfacing parts".
US7901216 filed in 2009 and issued 2011 for "magnetic connector for electronic device"
US7997906 filed in 2010 and issued 2011 for "techniques for coupling interfaces parts using moveable magnetic elements".
US8087939 filed in 2011 and issued 2012 for "magnetic connector for electronic device".
US8177560 filed in 2011 and issued 2012 for "magnetic connector for electronic device".
This is a mere fraction of the patents issued to Apple for their pioneering work in magnetic catches. Let's see you list Microsoft's patents for magnetic catches. If you can't, it stands to reason that Microsoft is copying someone. Guess who...
Hahahahahaha!
That the biggest joke I ever heard.
First of all, Microsoft is VASTLY moire innovative than Apple will ever be.
Why don't just take a look at the number of patents granted by the US Patent Office in the last few year eh?
2010[2]
5866 patents to IBM, headquartered in Armonk, New York
4518 patents to Samsung Electronics Co., headquartered in Suwon, Korea
3086 patents to Microsoft Corporation, headquartered in Redmond, Washington,
2551 patents to Canon Kabushiki Kaisha, headquartered in Tokyo, Japan
2443 patents to Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd., headquartered in Kadoma, Osaka, Japan
2212 patents to Toshiba Corporation, headquartered in Tokyo, Japan
2130 patents to Sony Corporation, headquartered in Tokyo, Japan
1652 patents to Intel Corporation, headquartered in Santa Clara, California
1488 patents to LG ELECTRONICS INC., headquartered in Seoul, Korea
1480 patents to Hewlett-Packard, headquartered in Palo Alto, California
Where is Apple?
Nowhere to be found!
2008[4]
4169 patents to IBM, headquartered in Armonk, New York
3502 patents to Samsung Electronics Co., headquartered in Daegu, Korea
2107 patents to Canon Kabushiki Kaisha, headquartered in Tokyo, Japan
2026 patents to Microsoft Corporation
1772 patents to Intel Corporation, headquartered in Santa Clara, California
1575 patents to Toshiba Corporation, headquartered in Tokyo
1475 patents to Fujitsu Limited, headquartered in Tokyo
1469 patents to Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd., headquartered in Kadoma, Osaka, Japan
1461 patents to Sony Corporation
1422 patents to Hewlett-Packard, headquartered in Palo Alto, California
Apple is AWOL again!
2007[5]
3125 patents to IBM, headquartered in Armonk, New York, USA
2723 patents to Samsung Electronics Co., headquartered in Daegu, Korea
1983 patents to Canon Kabushiki Kaisha, headquartered in Tokyo, Japan
1910 patents to Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd., headquartered in Kadoma, Osaka, Japan
1864 patents to Intel Corporation, headquartered in Santa Clara, California
1637 patents to Microsoft Corporation
1519 patents to Toshiba Corporation, headquartered in Tokyo
1476 patents to Micron Technology, headquartered in Boise, Idaho
1466 patents to Hewlett-Packard, headquartered in Palo Alto, California
1455 patents to Sony Corporation
Apple is still missing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_top_United_States_patent_recipients
For the latest year, 2011...
“ IBM wins most patents for 19th straight year; Microsoft only other U.S. company in top 10
Microsoft is the only other U.S. company to make the top 10 list of patent winners, according to IFI Claims Patent Services
IBM retained its patent crown for 2011, topping the list of patent winners for the 19th year in a row. The only other U.S. company to make the top 10, Microsoft fell from third place to sixth place, according to data from IFI Claims Patent Services.
Big Blue secured 6,180 patents last year, up nearly 5% from 5,896 in 2010. Samsung Electronics was the second most prolific patent winner, with 4,894 patents received in 2011, followed by Canon (2,821), Panasonic (2,559), Toshiba (2,483), Microsoft (2,311), Sony (2,286), Seiko Epson (1,533), Hon Hai Precision Industry (1,514), and Hitachi (1,465).
HP (1,308) and Intel (1,244) fell out of the top 10 and landed 14th and 16th, respectively, in IFI’s list of the top 50 U.S. patent assignees.”
Apple?
“* Apple moved up in the rankings to No. 39 (676 patents) after breaking into the top 50 for the first time in last year's list, when it debuted at No. 46.”
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2012/011112-ibm-patents-254787.html
Chortle!
Apple is not even on the same planet as Microsoft when it comes to innovation. Microsoft Research has been one of the most innovative research labs on the planet for decades, coming up with soe of the most bleeding edge technologies ever:
Microsoft Research celebrates 20 years of crazy innovation
http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/28/microsoft-research-celebrates-20-years-of-crazy-innovation/
Your brain is really fried. Having trouble staying on topic? Scraping the bottom of the barrel because your feelings are hurt because I tell you to tell the truth? You sound like Jar Jar Binks, you're "moire" innovative? What kind of baby talk is that?
We were talking about the Surface and iPad. You can't respond to various rebuttals showing your concocted lies. The iPad is a real product, has been out several years, in it's 3rd generation. Surface is a dog and pony show until you're allowed to ride it. No one knows if that dog will run.
We were talking about the magnetic cover and how Apple pioneered it, and Microsoft copied it the next year later (yet to be released). And I let it be known to you that Apple is the innovator here, holding many patents for magnetic catches for electronic devices. I suggested you find a single patent that Microsoft holds in this area, and you could find none. NONE. That confirms my statement that Apple is a pioneer in this area. Microsoft is a laggard in this area. PERIOD.
You are like a petulant child, who when they are told Santa Claus isn't really bringing a pony on Christmas, decides to go postal. Good luck with that. Maybe someday you'll get that pony. Meanwhile, us grownups will use what is currently available, and offer constructive criticism for what is not.
Chuckle!
For a guy that claiam to have worked in IT for..what was it, 50 years(yeah right. If you've worked in IT for 50 years, I am Mother Theresa too. You are a clueless as a worm! LOL!), you don't seem to know much do ya?
It's called SPECS for the Surface talet, that were relsaed by Microsoft themselves, and it states:
Windows RT
OS: Windows RT
Weight: 676 g
Thickness: 9.3 mm
Display: 10.6” ClearType HD Display
Battery: 31.5 W-h
Ports: microSD, USB 2.0, Micro HD Video, 2×2 MIMO antennae
Features: Office Home & Student 2013 RT, Touch Cover, Type Cover, VaporMg Case & Stand
Possible configurations: 32 GB, 64 GB
Windows 8 Pro
OS: Windows 8 Pro
Weight: 903 g
Thickness: 13.5 mm
Display: 10.6” ClearType Full HD Display
Battery: 42 W-h
Ports: microSDXC, USB 3.0, Mini DisplayPort Video, 2×2 MIMO antennae
Features: Touch Cover, Type Cover, Pen with Palm Block, VaporMg Case & Stand
Possible configurations: 64 GB, 128 GB
http://thenextweb.com/microsoft/2012/06/19/here-are-the-specs-of-microsofts-surface-tablets/
https://www.microsoft.com/surface/en/us/about.aspx
Now what you sould e looking at is the FEATRURES list. In addition to the Touch Cover, Type Cover, Pen with Palm Block, VaporMg Case & Stand, you will notice that the Windows RT version has Office Home & Student 2013 RT listed, whereas the Pro version DOES NOT.
Why?
Because Microsoft made it clear that while the RT version will ship with Office Home & Student 2013 RT included, the Pro version, won't. You are going to have to pay for it if you want one.
In effect, everything Microsoft has listed as FEATURES, comes already bundled with the Surface tablet. What is not listed, you gotta get for yourself. Get it, Oh Dumb One?
And 0bama is not a Muslim loving, illegal alien loving, America-hating leftist either.
All anyone has to do is look at your postng record on the Microsoft Surface thread.
Chuckle
“I'm raining on yours”
You are? Is that what it is?
It's funny, I feel as dry wqrm and happy as ever, and its been a really great day here in New York.
Let me know what you start your real “raining on my parade “will ya? Like Dennis Healey’(a British politician)said after being attacked by Geoffrey Howe, Howe's attack “ felt like being savaged by a dead sheep”. Thats exactly how I feel about your “attacks”, they are so pathetic, ineffective and ineffectual, they leave me in stitches.
And so far, I have been having great fun taking you apart.
“And I'm not an Aplebot”
Bill Maher just claimed he wasn't in the tank for the Democratic Party too.
“If I were an Aplebot, I would have worked at Apple”
Most Applebots DON'T work for Apple. Apple couldn't possibility employ all the Applebot crazies that keep posting garbage on the internet every day. After all, Apple only employs only approx 64,000 people, whereas the Applebots number in the millions. Plus most Applebots are pretty stupid anyways.
Naaaaah!
We are talking about this quote of yours, from your post # 104, and I quote :”Microsoft simply is copying the work of others, while Apple is the pioneer”
You will notice that my post # 105 was in direct response to hat quote of yours.
But hey if you want to talk about the Surface versus the iPad, bring it on! The surface's highly innovative, 3 mm thin Touch Cover is vastly more innovative than the dumb piece of plastic cover of the iPad. How about that?
I know far more than you. I'm also smarter. I'm using products and talking about their features. You're looking at a sales brochure for a product not yet released, and talking about how great the ride feels. In your dreams. When Microsoft displays the Surface in their stores for the general public to touch and use, only then will I know if the ride is great or not.
And I didn't say I worked in IT for 50 years. You are simply full of crap, with your lies again. I said I've "worked with computers for nearly 50 years now (started in the mid-1960s)". I had a fascination with electronics while in elementary school, building my own radios and gadgets, including building my own analog computer with potentiometers and switches, and was one of a few elementary students allowed to be taught in electronics labs alongside much older high school students. My adult brother-in-law was currently working for EDS on mainframe computers, so I had an early exposure to computing. I did not begin my formal work in IT and computers until 1971. I still have paper-tape punched rolls containing my programs from those early days.
So, Mother Theresa, are you feeling like the worm you are?
Hasn't happened, won't happen. You're doing a great job displaying a penchant for being cantankerous, petulant, obstinate, quarrelsome and testy, showing irritation over trifling annoyances. No one else cares what you are writing. No one else cares what you are saying about me. It doesn't matter. You're only tearing yourself down. I have all the time in the world, being retired and working if I feel like it. So keep it coming, and keep looking like a fool.
The Surface isn't worth the irritation until it is a released product. Then, and only then, will it be worth all the speculation. Until then, try trumpeting real products that actually work.
You will notice that my post # 105 was in direct response to hat quote of yours.
You are obfuscating the discussion, cherry-picking a portion of my statement and throwing in extraneous information not related to the rebuttal.
Here's a few sentences from my rebuttal:
"Microsoft even copied the same talking points as Steve Jobs used in his demonstration the year before. That's copying!
Microsoft simply is copying the work of others, while Apple is the pioneer.
For instance, patent US6030229 filed by Apple in 1998 and issued in 2000 for "an electromagnetic detachable connector"...
So again, I was correct in saying we were talking about the Surface and iPad. Your response had nothing that was a direct response. Your brain is fried.
Joe, NOWHERE does it say that the Surface COMES WITH all of that... these are merely features. Do you expect us to believe that Microsoft is going to ship both of these products with TWO keyboard covers???? In the presentation they said that the Type covers and Touch covers were options for the purchaser to choose.
My understanding has always been that options are purchased separately! Do you expect Microsoft to have bundled versions of each of these with some bundles with Type covers in Pink, White, black, etc. . . and some bundles with Touch covers? It would be a stocking nightmare for retailers!
I am a businessman. I would set this up so that a customer buys the basic unit... and then buys the accessories he wants to go with it. NOT force everyone to buy everything with every Surface sold. Most people won't need the Pen with Palm block, for example. It would go into a drawer, never to be used. Some would prefer to just have the basic tablet, no keyboards at all. It IS about choice, isn't it?
But, bottom line, Joe... Microsoft is a business. They will be looking to maximize profits. Selling the accessories AS accessories will do that. Giving them away unnecessarily, will not.
I told you I'm not an Applebot, but believe what you want to believe. It doesn't matter. You believe most Applebots are pretty stupid. Your loss. I always keep my eyes open for a good deal. Like buying Apple stock when it was in the teens, and watching it split over the years doubling my holdings. I own stocks in lots of tech companies, but Apple stock is quite the performer. Another reason why I'm retired and only work when I feel like it. So how's your Microsoft stock? Oh, you didn't buy any? Stuck on stupid?
OPTIONS, Joe... options. Words mean things in the real world, Joe. That's where I and Roadcat live. Realville.
"Options" equal "choices" which WILL, as I said, be sold separately!
Microsoft Patents:
Apple Patents:
Microsoft had only three hardware patents out of 40 patents with 37 software or algorithm patents comprising the rest... they patent every step of every change they make in their OS, or other software! Microsoft is patenting itty-bitty fractional pieces of their total products. "Optimizing XOR-based codes"??? C'mon, give me a break. Exclusive OR codes?? That kind of stuff has been around for years!!!
On the other hand, Apple received 34 patents of which 15 were software related, of those, nine had to do with hardware they manufacture, and the balance with specific software such as GarageBand, Aperture, iMovie, etc., that Apple publishes.
Of the remaining 19 patents, all were HARDWARE patents, either UTILITY (15) or DESIGN (4) patents, which take a lot more effort than coming up with a variation of an algorithm.
That is why Microsoft has far more "innovation" than does Apple if you are merely counting patents. . .
I would be inclined to look at the potential SALABLE hardware products patented. . . Microsoft 3, Apple 19. I'd say the clear winner in the innovation department is Apple.
Oh, one more thing...
That cover I have on my iPad 2 is leather, not plastic. And it's actually a quite clever invention by Apple. It's detachable, and can prop up the iPad in seven different positions between landscape and portrait orientations. How many positions can the kickstand on Surface handle? Answer: two. As a matter of fact, the lead article from Information Week that this thread stems from, notes a shortcoming on page two.
"The stand does look ideal for landscape-mode viewing. But how well will it work in portrait mode?"
All through out this thread, you denied the fact that anyone uses portrait mode. However, the author of the article felt it important enough to mention working in portrait mode, and raised concerns about this shortcoming of the kickstand. So you really don't know much, not even about the article you posted. Real smart. Not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.