Comments on: The iPhone Nano closer than you think?

By: iPhone Nano? | the technologist

iPhone Nano? | the technologist — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 07:04:37 +0000

[...] The above image is a composite of artist concepts based on the recent Apple patents, taken from this article on Hrmph.com, which details the patents themselves as well as further speculation surrounding exactly what the iPhone Nano might look like and what the potential downgrades in features would represent. [...]

By: dallas

dallas — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 19:32:46 +0000

Really guys, there is nothing to see here. I would be very surprised if this comes about anytime soon? Why would Apple de-value their own iPhone brand by dropping a cheep-o iPhone nano? THis doesn’t make sense. The patents are for one reason- prevention. Apple (Microsoft, IBM, etc.) has to write hundreds and thousands of patents every year just to cover themselves from patent trolls. That is all this is. Protection.

Sorry, guys.

By: Sobre el rumor del iPhone Nano en iPhoneros.com

Sobre el rumor del iPhone Nano en iPhoneros.com — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 08:34:57 +0000

[...] Via: Hrmpf. [...]

By: Brian

Brian — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 02:28:55 +0000

This doesn’t seem to be too user friendly. I would love to see Apple produce a lower price phone/ipod but I’m not so sure this one would be the one.

Just a note to people who think you can’t right-click on a Mac, you can. Any three button mouse works, or hold down the Control key and click.

By: Albert

Albert — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 01:44:47 +0000

Wow. Now that’s just dumb.

t was already a risky step forcing people to “trust” iPhone’s predictive text… now they have to force you to trust it (it’s a slightly different system… you see the predictions onscreen) as well as use a new input method. People are definitely going to be turned off by that, no matter how nice the phone looks. It’s just like the whole “There’s no right click on Macs” thing. People don’t want to approach and learn something radically new or different, at least not without a lot of hesitation.

But in comparison to the right click thing, this is big. This is fundamentally changing the way you use the device, and I don’t think many people will be too happy with that.

Not only is there no keypad, but there’s no softkeys. I imagine the Prev/Next buttons will act as those, but then what about music playback? Isn’t this thing supposed to have an iPod in it?

I mean, I’m all for Apple being different, but that different? No touchscreen, fine, at least make it cheap, but give it a regular keypad for goodness’ sake.

I’ll be sticking with Sony Ericsson. Lets hope the next iPod is touchscreen.

By: E. A. Waters

E. A. Waters — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 01:35:48 +0000

Regarding the abstract nature of Apple’s patent language: The goal of a good patent attorney is to get each patent granted with the broadest possible language. This can be quite useful in future patent infringement suits.

By: Marc

Marc — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 13:40:32 +0000

There’s no particular significance to having Jobs’s name on the patent. Jeff Bezos’s name is on all Amazon patents, too.

Patent law requires that the names of all inventors be on the patent application, and you’re an inventor if you were involved in even a minor way with the idea. If the patent is challenged (or if the company tries to enforce it in court) and it turns out that an inventor was omitted (challengers can get all kinds of internal documentation via discovery motions to cast doubt on the patent’s accuracy), then bye-bye patent.

So in practice, anybody who would have been in meetings where the patent was discussed, and who might have made any comments whatsoever that could be interpreted as having contributed to the idea gets his name on the patent.