Compare ALL of the UK's leading phone recyclers - Envirofone, Mazuma Mobile & Fonebank
I just got a new Iphone 4S. The old Iphone was given to my kids. That’s the first time ever that I had a good use for an old phone. Usually you don’t know what to do with them. These guys have a great business model for a problem all of us have. And I find it amazing that every time you get a new phone your old one looks… well…. OLD.
I never really thought much of this but did kind of see it comming. Once nice thing about Andriod is that you have so many choices in your hardware, but it’s proving to be a nightmere for your cell phone provider:
Androids Big Problem: Multiple phone manufacturers with one or more carriers apiece, simultaneously supporting more than one active version of the operating system. One can’t help but think that Microsoft has handled Windows platform transitions better than this, but then again, Windows doesn’t have to appease the interests of carriers and manufacturers.
Now, an intensive 12-month study by mobile communications analysis firm WDS Global has come up with a quantifiable metric for the cumulative effects of platform fragmentation on carriers, and subsequently on consumers, based on estimates of 2011 Android smartphone shipments: The frustration from customers who have been unable to resolve their hardware and software issues through customer support, and end up returning their phones for replacement, ends up costing U.S. carriers a combined total of $2 billion annually.
Contrary to numerous reports, the WDS report published yesterday did not say that Android-based smartphones were more susceptible to hardware failures or problems. In fact, the report explicitly states, “Android devices are no easier, nor more difficult, to troubleshoot than a comparative product from an alternate OS vendor.” What the report states is that Android smartphones (excluding tablets), by virtue of the multiplicity of versions actively in the market, incur more carrier costs with respect to time spent conducting customer support, coupled with the wide array of brands both large and small that carriers find themselves supporting.
“At the point-of-sale many consumers (and retailers alike) are assuming a degree of consistency across Android devices that in some cases doesn’t exist,” reads the WDS report. “Even migrating from one Android device to the next can bring about problems as consumers’ expectations for performance are dismantled by a different hardware build and by potentially resource-hungry operator and manufacturer overlays.”
See the Original Story here
When I first saw the Iphone I thought, wow I wonder if they patented that feature. It’s really cool.
Well it looks like they did and now they have been granted the patent for it.
Of course Google and everyone else will try to find prior work, but if the patent is upheld go buy Apple’s stock. It’s bound to millions (if not billions) in usage fees from every other smartphone maker.
After all they all use that feature right?
Give this quick read and you’ll see what I mean:
Apple has once again flexed its technological muscle and it has major implications for the rest of the smartphone market. Last week, Apples patent application for its slide to unlock feature was approved by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Simply put, Apple now has exclusive control over the slide to unlock feature, namely the bar that appears on a smartphone that must be physically pushed from left to right to access the phone. The grant of this patent raises a lot of questions about why patents are awarded and how technology companies seek competitive advantages over each other.
Before delving into the implications of the slide to unlock patent, it is important to look at what the patent covers. The USPTO approved Apples slide to unlock patent, No. 8046721, which lays out the specifics of the slide to unlock mechanism. The highlights include control over a method of unlocking a hand-held electronic device, the method detecting a contact with the touch-sensitive display at a first predefined location, and the method moving the unlock image on the touch-sensitive display in accordance with movement of the contact. In simpler terms, the patent covers unlock features that have a preset location to initiate the unlocking mechanism, that have a predetermined drag route, and that are part of a hand-held device.
A prominent question stemming from the grant of the slide to unlock patent is whether it should have been granted at all. To qualify for patent protection, a process or machine must pass five requirements: patentable subject matter, novelty, utility, nonobviousness, and disclosure/enablement. The two most interesting requirements, and in this case the only potentially controversial ones, are the novelty and nonobviousness requirements. The novelty requirement involves a determination of whether an ordinary viewer would see the machine as a new machine rather than as a modification of an existing machine (which is commonly referred to as the prior art). Nonobviousness requires that the differences between the machine and the prior art not be obvious at the time the applied-for machine was invented to a person having ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
See the Original Story here
If you’ve ever wondered about the future of computing then just watch a toddler. Almost without exception they seem to figure out an Iphone or Ipad, yet they can’t even get stared with a PC. That speaks volumes about where the future of computing is going.
Trust me in a few years we will all be using these touch screen interfaces and telling these toddlers about the good ‘ol days when we used to use ‘mice’.
