Holy cow, who is this pillock?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| skelband Aug 10, 2011 7:26 PM EDT |
So, let's get this straight.
Apple produce a tablet which is black and has round corners.
It is notable for the actual lack of any design features whatsoever which many people think is a good thing.
However, what is remotely innovative about it? So someone else comes along and makes a tablet that is black and has round corners and they are guilty of copying? Will someone tell these people that most smartphones and tablets available at the moment are black and have rounded corners? |
| tracyanne Aug 10, 2011 7:38 PM EDT |
@skellband, may I introduce you to Ken Hess. |
| djohnston Aug 11, 2011 12:43 AM EDT |
There are so many flaws in Hess's arguments. Yes, I actually read it. Worse yet, I'm commenting on it. Right off the bat, he makes the mistake of saying Apple is protecting patents, when the argument is over something unique to the EU, called Community Design. Community Designs have both registered and unregistered forms. Second, a German judge for the district of Düsseldorf is not the ruling of the EU. Next, the "cool or revolutionary" design Mr. Hess refers to are a few drawings of a generic looking device. http://www.scribd.com/doc/61944044/Community-Design-000181607-0001 I'll stop there, except to say that Ken has hit new lows with this article. I don't know what's more unfortunate. The fact that he gets paid to write materials with such shallow substance, that someone may actually believe what he writes or that I spent ten minutes of my time reading his fluff piece and commenting on it here. |
| tracyanne Aug 11, 2011 1:03 AM EDT |
Quoting:ten minutes of my time reading his fluff piece and commenting on it here. At least you didn't contribute to increasing his popularity by arguing with him on zdnet |
| r_a_trip Aug 11, 2011 3:57 AM EDT |
@djohnston. I'm thankful you went in and brought us valuable recon. It saves us all the agony of not knowing if Hess did or didn't write anything useful. Alas it is again something of low quality, but we wouldn't have known if it wasn't for your summary. Those "design" drawings are hilarous though. Maybe apart from the aspect ratio, these are as generic as you could possibly draw a tablet. Since the drawings don't mention the dimensions, it could even be a generic desription of a device with a screen of any size, like a monitor/tv or even a remote control. It stings a little to see that the Old EU can be just as dense as the USA when it comes to protection for intellectual works. Even worse, I didn't even know we had something called Community Designs before Apple used this piece of manure to commit a tort against Samsung. |
| hkwint Aug 11, 2011 4:39 AM EDT |
Yeah, the article really sucks. Mr Hess is a proponent of patents and opponent of "software patent polution", though he calls himself "anti patent guy"? What a joke! And secondly, he says the "EU decided something". Like mentioned by DJohnston, it's only a lower German court which decided Samsung _MAY_ infringe patents (so nobody agreed on anything!), and while the court has not investigated it, it temporarily blocked Samsung devices from Germany. Without hearing Samsung or giving Samsung a chance to defend themselves. If Apple is found wrong, they will have to pay damages to Samsung. Seems SJVN royally screwed up and KHess is 'reusing' the drivel SJVN wrote. Mr. Hess: Please don't believe everything your colleague SJVN writes. From time to time he writes good articles, but his last one is really, really lame as in contrary to what SJVN claims, there's NO DECISION made at all, and the EU is NO INVOLVED in ANY way. Do your own research! And write an article about how lame the article of SJVN is. |
| phsolide Aug 11, 2011 11:52 AM EDT |
Can someone give the North American/USA audience a definition of "pillock"? I mean, I snickered when I read the title of the discussion, and I guessed the "pillock" was either Enderle or Hess, but I'm just a parochial mid-continent North American: I've got no clue about the connotations of "pillock". Like, what's the difference between being "gormless" and being a pillock? What's the difference between "pillock" and "bollock", that sort of thing would help. |
| skelband Aug 11, 2011 12:48 PM EDT |
@phsolide: "pillock" In the UK, while "pillock" may have a strict dictionary definition that I'm not aware of, colloquially it is used to refer to someone that is deliberately seen to be dense, like a loud, arrogant and overly-opinionated person. It is not usually assumed to be obscene or very offensive, rather a term of derision. One might equate it to the term "dick", but far, far less offensive. |
| jdixon Aug 11, 2011 1:22 PM EDT |
> ...colloquially it is used to refer to someone that is deliberately seen to be dense, like a loud, arrogant and overly-opinionated person. An opinionated oaf, then. > One might equate it to the term "dick", but far, far less offensive. Closer than you might imagine. From dictionary.com: slang ( Brit ) a stupid or annoying person [C14: from Scandinavian dialect pillicock penis] The same source defines gormless (an alternative form of gaumless, apparently) as: –adjective Chiefly British Informal . lacking in vitality or intelligence; stupid, dull, or clumsy. |
| Koriel Aug 11, 2011 1:26 PM EDT |
Here this should be of some use to our American colonials http://www.peevish.co.uk/slang/ As to a lower German court decision affecting the rest of Europe what absolute twaddle. Only a complete twat would come to that conclusion the guy must be a dunderheid. But then the world is full of bawheids :) |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!