[rsanchez1]

If Apple turns around and sues Google using this patent, I think it will be time to unplug completely and join the people in the mountains looking to escape EM radiation.

And really, they had to add CRT displays to the patent? Seriously Apple, CRT? Did Apple figure out a magical new way of getting "retina" resolution with a millimeter-long tube that can somehow feed the entire field-of-vision of the person wearing it? Come on.

[davidw]

> If Apple turns around and sues Google using this patent, I think it will be time to unplug completely and join the people in the mountains looking to escape EM radiation.

Or you could just get rid of your Apple crap and get a nice Linux machine (if indeed, you haven't already). It's a pretty good system for hackers and the inquisitive.

[fpgeek]

I believe part of the point is that if Apple's patent abuse continues unchecked, there won't be options like nice Linux machines...

[silon3]

On that day, I retire to the mountains...

[taligent]

Yes because Linux only come onto the market this week and hasn't been around for 20+ years without a lawsuit from Apple. Or how about the fact that at one stage Apple had their own Linux distribution (MkLinux) and contributes a lot of core technologies used in Linux e.g. CUPS, WebKit.

[fpgeek]

Motorola, HTC and Samsung were all making smartphones long before Apple was. IIRC, they are all now being sued by Apple over, among other things, at least one feature that their smartphones had before the iPhone was even announced. So how's that previous history working out for them?

I'll also highlight my assumption: Apple's patent abuse continues unchecked. In other words, Apple's software patent assaults are delivering positive results without blowback. If that continues, why wouldn't they extend that to new areas? Wouldn't you expect them to attempt to maximize the return on their patents? If not, why not?

Now I'll admit I don't think it is likely that Apple's abuse will continue unchecked. I expect Apple's competitors to build their patent arsenal (e.g. notifications) and successfully hit back and eventually create a stalemate. But if they can't or don't, I'd expect Apple to see how far they can push things (just like any other corporation).

[taligent]

What are you talking about ? I was talking about Apple going after Linux.

[fpgeek]

So was I. You're asserting that vendors selling "nice Linux machines" (or at least nice machines that run Linux well once you install it) aren't among Apple's competitors? Since when?

To take just one example: the ultrabooks that Apple could easily try to go after with their "wedge" design patent, can run Linux, too, not just Windows. And that's clearly a form factor many people consider nice. Granted, this is a different area of competition than smartphones, but I specifically talked about Apple extending their patent assaults to new areas if their patent abuse remained unchecked.

Do you think Apple extending their legal strategy like that wouldn't have an impact on the availability of nice hardware to run Linux on? It seems obvious to me that it would. After all, there's more than one way to go after Linux.

[_djo_]

If you read the actual patent, the references to CRTs are in the parts where Apple describes existing Head/Helmet-Mounted Displays, of which some do use CRT displays. All of Apple's drawings show LEDs or OLEDs being used.

And as I said before, I see nothing in this patent that applies to Google Glass.

[ctdonath]

He went away from the basement and left this note on his terminal: "I'm going to a commune in Vermont and will deal with no unit of time shorter than a season." - Tracy Kidder, "The Soul of a New Machine"

[taligent]

I take it you couldn't be bothered to read the article.

If you did you would have noticed that Apple is projecting stereoscopic 3D images using two displays. Does Google do anything at all similar to that ?

No. Case closed.