Software News

from the they-move-quickly dept. New submitter kc67 sends this report from ABC: "Five years after the iPhone originally launched in 2007, T-Mobile will finally start carrying it. It might not be as buzz-worthy as when Verizon finally got the iPhone back in 2011, but it's going to be a pretty big deal for T-Mobile subscribers next year, when the carrier starts selling Apple products. ... T-Mobile USA CEO John Legere said while speaking at the Deutsche Telekom conference Thursday that it will carry the iPhone and will offer it in a different way. 'What was missing? A certain number of customers wouldn't come to the store if we didn't have the iPhone,' Legere said. 'We worked very, very hard for a deal that made sense for us.'"

This is only a preliminary invalidation, not the end of the road for this patent. Many patents that survive of this State (partially or totally). This is just the start of a process within the USPTO.

(Relevant Post debate Mac rumors in this respect, this is not my post, but relevant to this discussion): http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=16445804&postcount=39 [macrumors.com]

People - a preliminary invalidation is a non-event. Each patent initially almost always request is rejected. It is the way that the patent examiner pushes the load on the inventor. They reject, you appeal, they reject, you appeal, patent issues.

Normally the results to an initial patent application are really weak and easy to overcome.

The review process is the same way. The patent examiner is placed in the position of the person trying to overturn the patent. That's because the other party to communicate with is the inventor original and obviously going to push for the maintenance of the application. So to do proper due diligence, the examiner should find reasons to refute the patent and then there is an appeal and then possibly another invalidation and another appeal and then keeps the patent probably in some form.

In short... nothing to see here... move along.

I don't know the actual percentage, but bet 99.9% of all patents requested a re-examination receive a preliminary invalidation. And I don't think that the Patent Office may refuse to make a re-examination of a patent.

Full discussion here: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1503872&page=1 [macrumors.com]

View the original article here

I think they've figured that out - they just don't care. The DoD isn't really that big.

Consider: the DoD, by their own claims, has about 3 million employees worldwide.

So far this year, Apple has sold over 120 million iPhones.

Thus, even if the DoD bought an iPhone for every one of their employees, that would only increase Apple's sales figures by 2.5%. Is that worth the expense of creating another phone model, manufacturing it, and then keeping it in manufacture?

Before you answer that, consider this: what percentage of those DoD employees actually work in a position where they're not allowed to bring in a phone with a camera? Of those in such positions, how many of them actually work in a place where that requirement is enforced? From my own experience, only the most secure facilities actually try to keep out cell phone cameras - many facilities that in theory don't allow them in do allow them in practice.

My guess would be that a high estimate would be 20% - which would then have Apple creating another model and manufacturing it for a potential 0.5% increase in sales - but that's assuming that everyone in the DoD who potentially needs such a phone gets one, and that they all get one in the course of one year. If, say, the DoD were to follow a more normal course and buy them over the course of three years or so, that comes an increase of less than 0.2%.

The simple fact is, the market that 'needs' a lack of a camera is tiny.

View the original article here

Well that was fast. Little more than two months after Apple launched the iPhone 5 in nine countries, the Cupertino, Calif.-based software corporation offers its latest smartphone free of any carrier obligations. Pricing starts at $649 for the 16GB model and tops $849 for the 64GB version.
The models that Apple offers are actually unlocked GSM units, meaning that using either of the three available versions on a CDMA network such as Verizon Wireless is not possible. For the advantage of owning a carrier-free iPhone 5 prospective buyers have to shell out an additional $450 for the equivalent version available at major US carriers such as AT&T, Sprint or Verizon.
How does Apple's Pricing stack up to the Competition?
The obvious choice for a cheap and unlocked smartphone is the Google Nexus 4. By comparison the LG-made device is available for purchase for $349 in 16GB trim, a whopping $300 less than the equivalent iPhone 5. Does it make sense to purchase Apple's device instead? After the Nexus 4 ships again, around the start of 2013 that is, no.
The unlocked Samsung Galaxy S III in 16GB trim is available for purchase for under $600, and it comes with a microSD card slot as well. Capacity can be extended by 64GB for less than $50. By comparison Apple charges $849 for the 64GB iPhone 5.
On the Windows Phone 8 front there is one major option worth considering -- the HTC Windows Phone 8x which runs for little more than $650. The handset can be purchased at a similar price as the iPhone 5, yet it is only available in black and in 16GB trim. The Nokia Lumia 920, although a better choice on paper, is not available except locked on AT&T.
However, Apple has internal competition from Verizon Wireless which also sells an unlocked iPhone 5, albeit at lower cost. Over at the big red the smartphone runs from $199.99 for the 16GB model and goes up to $399.99 in 64GB trim.
Add the cost of the Early Termination Fee into account, which equates to $350 for what Verizon labels as an "Advanced Device", and you've got yourself a global 16GB iPhone 5 for $549.99 (add $100 for the 32GB model and $200 for the 64GB one). That's a BetaNews top tip!
Who wants It?
By nature unlocked, carrier-free, smartphones target prepaid users rather than postpaid customers, the latter of which have the advantage of subsidized devices. In the United States there are more than 100 million prepaid subscribers, and with the carrier-free iPhone 5 Apple simply taps into the large userbase. The sole limitation, however, is the GSM connectivity which may hinder the smartphone's success with CDMA prepaid subscribers.
In Europe prepaid and postpaid are almost neck and neck, an even more favorable scenario for an unlocked iPhone 5. But locally smartphone fans have an even wider selection of unlocked high-end devices compared to the United States. Pricing will surely not help the iPhone 5 as Cupertino, Calif.-based corporation sells it for EUR679 for the base model in Germany or EUR729 in Italy, whereas Android and Windows Phone devices are cheaper.
Personally I could purchase a Galaxy S III for two-thirds of the unlocked iPhone 5 price. Add a few more Euros and instead of buying Apple's device one could get two Nexus 4s. But for prepaid Apple fans it might just be the perfect smartphone.

View the original article here