fahadqureshi
Apr 26, 02:01 PM
i think the word app store in it self is generic, mainly since app is just short for application which is just another word for a program. but then again most people didn't use the word app or even applications widely enough until apple started using it, and instead used the more generic 'program'.
The only trademark apple is entitled to should be iAppstore especially since they chose to call their book store iBookstore instead of just 'Book Store'
Everyone should just blame Microsoft for having a "Add or Remove Programs" instead of a "Add or Remove Applications" in their control panel. :rolleyes:
that way applications or apps would have been a more generic term.
The only trademark apple is entitled to should be iAppstore especially since they chose to call their book store iBookstore instead of just 'Book Store'
Everyone should just blame Microsoft for having a "Add or Remove Programs" instead of a "Add or Remove Applications" in their control panel. :rolleyes:
that way applications or apps would have been a more generic term.
FubsyGamr
Sep 20, 07:40 PM
Does anti-static have anything to do with it not being a lint magnet?
I have no idea haha.
I was also looking at some 3g Leather Cases (those are my favorite style) is there any reason they wouldn't work with my 4g? For example, this one looks good:
http://www.amazon.com/DLO-HipCase-Leather-Folio-touch/dp/B000WOIFO2
but would my 4g fit in there?
I have no idea haha.
I was also looking at some 3g Leather Cases (those are my favorite style) is there any reason they wouldn't work with my 4g? For example, this one looks good:
http://www.amazon.com/DLO-HipCase-Leather-Folio-touch/dp/B000WOIFO2
but would my 4g fit in there?
FireStar
Oct 30, 01:14 PM
I need a case too :(
I'm looking for a case that can protect from drops/falls and shocks. Screen cover is not necessary, because if the case doesn't come with one I can always buy a separate screen protector.
right now I'm looking at stuff like this case listed on amazon (http://www.amazon.com/Touch-MiniSuit-Diamond-Generation-Chain/dp/B0043L2LRW/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top#productPromotions)
but I don't feel safe with just some random generic case, so does anyone have any recommendations? I've heard otterbox offers good cases with drop/shock protection, but there are none for the itouch 4g right now.
For price, as low as possible, but I would be willing to shell out 30 for a good case (like otterbox!)
oh and did I mention that drop/shock protection is important? :D
any recommendations are good
thx guys
Switcheasy. Not much out yet though. Sad face. :(
I'm looking for a case that can protect from drops/falls and shocks. Screen cover is not necessary, because if the case doesn't come with one I can always buy a separate screen protector.
right now I'm looking at stuff like this case listed on amazon (http://www.amazon.com/Touch-MiniSuit-Diamond-Generation-Chain/dp/B0043L2LRW/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top#productPromotions)
but I don't feel safe with just some random generic case, so does anyone have any recommendations? I've heard otterbox offers good cases with drop/shock protection, but there are none for the itouch 4g right now.
For price, as low as possible, but I would be willing to shell out 30 for a good case (like otterbox!)
oh and did I mention that drop/shock protection is important? :D
any recommendations are good
thx guys
Switcheasy. Not much out yet though. Sad face. :(
LOLaMac
Mar 25, 10:31 PM
It's pretty astounding, little more than a year later, that this is even possible on a tablet device, and to this degree of ease and sophistication. Compare the growth and advancement from January 2010 to March 2011.
You're not getting the point.
The iPad is (sort of) good for playing two minute time wasters....as a "real" gaming machine, it's pretty sub-par. Crappy specs, no controller of any sort (sorry, but touch screen input is horrible in almost all cases). The ability to hook it up to my TV, when I already have a dedicated, much more powerful machine, with a much greater selection of games, a greater selection of more complex, games, is underwhelming, to say the least.
One day, maybe. But for right now, color me unimpressed.
You're not getting the point.
The iPad is (sort of) good for playing two minute time wasters....as a "real" gaming machine, it's pretty sub-par. Crappy specs, no controller of any sort (sorry, but touch screen input is horrible in almost all cases). The ability to hook it up to my TV, when I already have a dedicated, much more powerful machine, with a much greater selection of games, a greater selection of more complex, games, is underwhelming, to say the least.
One day, maybe. But for right now, color me unimpressed.
0815
Apr 26, 02:00 PM
Every company should give up all their trademarks. I must say, Apple brought the name "AppStore" to fame and obviously others try to catch some of the 'good name' that comes along with it .... but than, I just looked on dictionary.com (in the hope to sort of proof that App is not a real world) but it has an entry in there and I recommend everyone to check it out:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/app : "computerese shorthand for application, attested by 1992."
so bottom line: yes others try to ride on the name recognition that apple has created for it (because before that, nobody had any 'good' associations with the name) - but unfortunately they choose a not very specific name for it.
So while it is in my opinion a poor move by Amazon and others admitting that they havent anything good otherwise to offer and need to ride on the success of Apple - it does not seem to be illegal.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/app : "computerese shorthand for application, attested by 1992."
so bottom line: yes others try to ride on the name recognition that apple has created for it (because before that, nobody had any 'good' associations with the name) - but unfortunately they choose a not very specific name for it.
So while it is in my opinion a poor move by Amazon and others admitting that they havent anything good otherwise to offer and need to ride on the success of Apple - it does not seem to be illegal.
AhmedFaisal
Apr 11, 10:08 PM
Learned how to drive with stick shift, normal since it's Germany and stick shifts are the norm. Drove stick until I started working in sales. Had to drive a car from the fleet that was a stick for about a year. Nothing turns you off driving stick more than having a job where you drive all day in heavy city traffic. Switched to DCTs ever since.
Funny, in Germany it was tough for a long time to get topline engines or sports cars with automatic. Volkswagen was notorious for that. It was virtually impossible to get an AWD Diesel with Automatic for a long time.
Funny, in Germany it was tough for a long time to get topline engines or sports cars with automatic. Volkswagen was notorious for that. It was virtually impossible to get an AWD Diesel with Automatic for a long time.
twoodcc
Dec 19, 06:24 PM
Too bad we can't get an occational mention on the front page of this here website! ARN, are you out there, hint, hint... I'd write something to post on the front page but I'm not a good writer :D
yeah that would help. but i think if we keep new threads and posts going in here then people will see it with forum spy and get more people involved. i mean just the little we've been posting here in the last few has gotten more people going. just look at me, you, scifrog, and others who really started stepping it up.
mc68k stepped it up also, but he's been active on here more in the past than we have (not to take anything away from him).
we just need 4JNA to come back!
yeah that would help. but i think if we keep new threads and posts going in here then people will see it with forum spy and get more people involved. i mean just the little we've been posting here in the last few has gotten more people going. just look at me, you, scifrog, and others who really started stepping it up.
mc68k stepped it up also, but he's been active on here more in the past than we have (not to take anything away from him).
we just need 4JNA to come back!
Veg
Feb 25, 02:00 PM
http://i884.photobucket.com/albums/ac50/tadziodlu/IMG_1442.jpg
arkitect
Mar 22, 01:00 PM
I don't believe any was born gay, that's my opinion. I believe you make the choice in your life, just like you make the choice on what career you want and college you desire to go to. I have friends that were once married (guy/girl) and then divorced because they liked their sex better. So now they are openly gay and happy.
The only choice these friends of yours made was to try and fit in with straight culture.
They were always gay. They chose to be straight… and that never works out.
I have back and forth e-mails with them stating they consider it a choice. One of my friends is a writer for Lesbians and spoke in front of congress on this issue 2 years ago. I was with her and she even stated that it was a choice to become a lesbian and it's now America's choice to accept it for all for choose this path.
Colour me sceptic.
Back and forth with emails confessing they chose to be gay? Oh come on.
FYI, I made a choice about my career… tonight's dinner, my brand of underwear… I did not choose to be gay. No more than you made a choice to be (I assume) straight. Or… did you… which brings me back to your gay/straight switching friends. Perhaps time to do some more emailing? Talk things over with them? No need to be so deep in that dark closet.
The only choice these friends of yours made was to try and fit in with straight culture.
They were always gay. They chose to be straight… and that never works out.
I have back and forth e-mails with them stating they consider it a choice. One of my friends is a writer for Lesbians and spoke in front of congress on this issue 2 years ago. I was with her and she even stated that it was a choice to become a lesbian and it's now America's choice to accept it for all for choose this path.
Colour me sceptic.
Back and forth with emails confessing they chose to be gay? Oh come on.
FYI, I made a choice about my career… tonight's dinner, my brand of underwear… I did not choose to be gay. No more than you made a choice to be (I assume) straight. Or… did you… which brings me back to your gay/straight switching friends. Perhaps time to do some more emailing? Talk things over with them? No need to be so deep in that dark closet.
yg17
Mar 24, 12:42 PM
You're twisting the argument. Guy + Girl have the possibility to make baby (if they're sterile that's an isolated case). Guy + Guy or Girl + Girl will never be able to have sexual intercourse and have children. Marriage today to most people is nothing more than a loosely binded formal contract, since it can be terminated at any time with little to no repercussions.
If I am sterile and get married to someone of the opposite gender (and know I'm sterile before getting married), there is still no possible way to make a baby. Isolated case? The percentage of the population who are gay and the percentage who are sterile are probably very similar.
If I am sterile and get married to someone of the opposite gender (and know I'm sterile before getting married), there is still no possible way to make a baby. Isolated case? The percentage of the population who are gay and the percentage who are sterile are probably very similar.
PowerFullMac
Jan 12, 02:21 PM
I think Front Row itself is a bit crippled... I cant even play music in the main menu or when I watch a photo slideshow, exept that default crap!
MacSA
Aug 29, 11:55 AM
I assume that was *before* the mac pro shipped? I'd expect dropping sales before that, but you're not saying they've continued to drop after the Pro release? And are you including iMacs as part of desktop machines?
ALL desktop machines......
Apple posted their 3rd Quarter 2006 financial results today.
http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060719164004.shtml
Apple posted revenue of $4.37 billion and a net quarterly profit of $472 million or $.54 per diluted share. For reference, the year-ago quarter brought in $3.53 billion in revenue, net profit of $320 million or $.37 per diluted share.
Analysts expected Apple to earn 44 cents per share, on average, within a range of 40 cents to 49 cents, on revenue of $3.68 billion, according to Reuters Estimates.
Apple shipped 1,327,000 Macintosh computers and 8,111,000 iPods during this quarter which represents a 12% growth in Macs and 32% growth in iPods year-over-year.
- 75% of Macs sold during the quarter used Intel processors.
- 2nd highest quarterly sales and earnings in Apple's history
- International sales accounted for 39 percent of the quarter’s revenue.
- iPod continued to earn a US market share of over 75 percent
- Desktops: 529,000, down 14% from previous quarter
- Portables: 798,000, up 60% from previous quarter
- iPods: 8,526,000
ALL desktop machines......
Apple posted their 3rd Quarter 2006 financial results today.
http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060719164004.shtml
Apple posted revenue of $4.37 billion and a net quarterly profit of $472 million or $.54 per diluted share. For reference, the year-ago quarter brought in $3.53 billion in revenue, net profit of $320 million or $.37 per diluted share.
Analysts expected Apple to earn 44 cents per share, on average, within a range of 40 cents to 49 cents, on revenue of $3.68 billion, according to Reuters Estimates.
Apple shipped 1,327,000 Macintosh computers and 8,111,000 iPods during this quarter which represents a 12% growth in Macs and 32% growth in iPods year-over-year.
- 75% of Macs sold during the quarter used Intel processors.
- 2nd highest quarterly sales and earnings in Apple's history
- International sales accounted for 39 percent of the quarter’s revenue.
- iPod continued to earn a US market share of over 75 percent
- Desktops: 529,000, down 14% from previous quarter
- Portables: 798,000, up 60% from previous quarter
- iPods: 8,526,000
barmann
May 2, 08:59 PM
Haha so many mad fanboys. " APL Y U RUIN MY OSX"
I think its a neat trinket, deleting apps this way, but nothing major worth over analyzing.
I was under the impression an Apple fanboy is someone who applauds whatever move Apple makes to lead us into a brighter future .
Besides, the new feature doesn't delete apps, only applets, if that . ;)
I think its a neat trinket, deleting apps this way, but nothing major worth over analyzing.
I was under the impression an Apple fanboy is someone who applauds whatever move Apple makes to lead us into a brighter future .
Besides, the new feature doesn't delete apps, only applets, if that . ;)
roadbloc
Apr 1, 10:13 AM
Guess why they are the only two removable apps?
http://cl.ly/5gbA/img.png
Were them two apps downloaded via the Mac App Store by any chance?
http://cl.ly/5gbA/img.png
Were them two apps downloaded via the Mac App Store by any chance?
saxon48
Mar 22, 04:08 PM
Phew. Killing the Classic would be a terrible mistake. The death of an icon right there.
bentoms
Nov 15, 09:56 AM
Maybe this is why the Xserve release dates have been put back?
shartypants
Mar 25, 09:02 PM
Awesome! I can't wait! I like how the iPad becomes a different screen for the game.
Apple OC
Apr 23, 12:27 AM
Sorry, I just don't buy it. Isolated examples dependent upon a very rare set of circumstances that the average user won't encounter. I *do* believe your experience, you're very well versed when it comes to tech and no doubt well-treavelled, but this is just too much of a stretch. Yes, it's possible. But it's also possible to gain the same information in much more common and easier ways, instead of the super-spy scenario. I'm not sure how your terrorist cell example applies to anything relevant (or dangerous) for the average, everyday person.
I'm pretty sure your average FBI agent's iPhone (assuming they carry around iPhones) that has been cleared for use (and very likely modified) by the FBI can be stripped right down forensically and will have revealed absolutely nothing.
The average user who is *not* a secret agent really has nothing to be in up in arms about, provided they haven't just knocked off a bank or killed someone.
for all your defending of this feature ... can you give me even one positive reason this is good for the average person that out-weighs the negative ones ... just one
I'm pretty sure your average FBI agent's iPhone (assuming they carry around iPhones) that has been cleared for use (and very likely modified) by the FBI can be stripped right down forensically and will have revealed absolutely nothing.
The average user who is *not* a secret agent really has nothing to be in up in arms about, provided they haven't just knocked off a bank or killed someone.
for all your defending of this feature ... can you give me even one positive reason this is good for the average person that out-weighs the negative ones ... just one
steadysignal
May 3, 01:15 PM
It's a dialogue box for christ sake. :rolleyes:
+1 (but it doesnt matter to the hater).
+1 (but it doesnt matter to the hater).
kelving525
Sep 30, 02:48 PM
So, did you keep it?
Just curious ... I'm on the fence here, really just waiting to see what else comes out in the next few weeks.
Yes, I'm still using the case. It's the only case that feels nice from what I saw in Best Buy.
Just curious ... I'm on the fence here, really just waiting to see what else comes out in the next few weeks.
Yes, I'm still using the case. It's the only case that feels nice from what I saw in Best Buy.
steadysignal
May 2, 07:35 PM
sounds kookie.
paul4339
Apr 26, 01:42 PM
Amazon could have just used "AppShop" to avoid this issue, but no, of course not.
they should use Amazon App Jungle: an un-curated mess. ;)
they should use Amazon App Jungle: an un-curated mess. ;)
chubad
Jan 1, 07:16 PM
This year is a tough one so far. Weak rumors at best. Apple has really stepped up the secrecy and plugged the leaks. Like others have said it will either be insanely great or insanely disappointing. To tell you the truth, unless some better sourced rumors surface I think it may very well be a disappointing keynote.:(
I hope I'm wrong.
I hope I'm wrong.
Mike84
Apr 26, 02:29 PM
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
Trademark is having property rights in a trade name. Apple, or any other company, can file to protect a trademark they have been using and the USPTO decides if it is too generic to be an actual trademark. I suggest you learn about the process of how trademarks.
"How does a mark qualify for federal registration?
To register a trademark with the PTO, the mark's owner first must put it into use " in commerce that Congress may regulate." This means the mark must be used on a product or service that crosses state, national or territorial lines or that affects commerce crossing such lines--for example, a catalog business or a restaurant or motel that caters to interstate or international customers. Even if the owner files an intent-to-use (ITU) trademark application (ITU applications are discussed in the previous set of questions), the mark will not actually be registered until it is used in commerce."
Source: http://www.inc.com/articles/1999/10/14646.html
Also, take a look at the Lanham Act, which is pretty important when it comes to trademark law ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanham_Act <-- particularly Subchapters I and II.
Just because you use a mark does not mean you have been granted the trademark rights in it.
So, as you can see Apple does not have the trademark to App Store. Therefore, your argument fails on that premise alone.
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
Trademark is having property rights in a trade name. Apple, or any other company, can file to protect a trademark they have been using and the USPTO decides if it is too generic to be an actual trademark. I suggest you learn about the process of how trademarks.
"How does a mark qualify for federal registration?
To register a trademark with the PTO, the mark's owner first must put it into use " in commerce that Congress may regulate." This means the mark must be used on a product or service that crosses state, national or territorial lines or that affects commerce crossing such lines--for example, a catalog business or a restaurant or motel that caters to interstate or international customers. Even if the owner files an intent-to-use (ITU) trademark application (ITU applications are discussed in the previous set of questions), the mark will not actually be registered until it is used in commerce."
Source: http://www.inc.com/articles/1999/10/14646.html
Also, take a look at the Lanham Act, which is pretty important when it comes to trademark law ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanham_Act <-- particularly Subchapters I and II.
Just because you use a mark does not mean you have been granted the trademark rights in it.
So, as you can see Apple does not have the trademark to App Store. Therefore, your argument fails on that premise alone.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий