No, This Guy Didn't Invent The iPod 30 Years Ago

from the try-again dept

Two and a half years ago, we wrote about the claims of Kane Kramer, a guy who claimed to have invented the iPod thirty years ago, and was talking to lawyers to see if he had a case against Apple. As we explained at the time, Kramer did not invent the iPod at all. He created a very early digital music player, that had much less functionality that couldn't store more than a few minutes of music, which never got anywhere in the marketplace, and for which all of his patents had long expired. To say that he had invented the iPod would be like saying that the first guy who threw a block of ice in a box "invented" the air conditioner.

Yet, here we go again, as the DailyMail in the UK is claiming that Apple has admitted that this guy did, in fact, invent the iPod. However, again, that's not true at all. What happened was that Apple had him provide some evidence in its dispute with Burst.com (which was eventually settled). Basically, what Apple was doing wasn't admitting that Kramer "invented the iPod" but was showing that there was plenty of prior art (including Kramers) that predated Burst's highly questionable patents.

That doesn't mean that Kramer invented the iPod. It just means that his work predated Burst's claim of a monopoly on some specific technology that it claimed Apple infringed. That's a long way from "inventing the iPod." Besides, there were plenty of digital music players prior to the iPod. In fact, the real revolution around the iPod wasn't the fact that it was a digital player, but that it was the first digital player that had significant storage and could carry large collections of music at once -- something that Kramer's player never could do. So, please, can we stop repeating this myth that he somehow invented the iPod. He didn't.

Filed Under: history, invention, ipod, kane kramer
Companies: apple

Apple Sued Yet Again For Patent Infringement Over iTunes/iPod

from the promoting-what-kind-of-progress,-exactly? dept

Apple has been sued over and over again by companies claiming to hold patents on some of the most basic concepts found in Apple's iTunes and iPod offerings. However, given Apple's seeming willingness to pay up to settle such suits, it really shouldn't be a surprise that more companies are coming up with even more ridiculous patents to sue over. The latest is from a company named ZapMe which claims to hold a couple of patents that it says covers iTunes and the iPod. Of course the company is demanding an injunction and damages, though it seems unlikely that a court would ever grant an injunction. As for the patents themselves one was granted back in 2006 and the other came earlier this week. The newer patent is actually a "continuation" patent, a process that has been widely abused by some patent holders to adjust older patents to make sure they cover newer technologies. The Patent Office has been trying to put some limits on continuations, but a court recently wouldn't allow them to put the new rules in place. Take a read through the patent itself and explain, please, how this possibly served the purpose of furthering innovation?

Filed Under: continuation patents, ipod, itunes, patents
Companies: apple

Bill Gates Damns Zune With Faint Praise

from the the-anti-Jobs dept

By now, most people are aware of the "reality distortion field" that surrounds Steve Jobs. Folks attending his keynotes or product launches talk about how it's almost a religious experience, where he really does make you feel like the latest iPod nano is the greatest device ever invented. It's no secret that Bill Gates has a rather different personality -- but it's still quite bizarre to see the level of faint praise Gates gives the Zune as its second generation launches:

"For something we pulled together in six months, we are very pleased with the satisfaction we got.... It was just so-so on the software side. I'm sure a year from now we'll do even better."

He does insist that the satisfaction was "superhigh," but satisfaction and passion are two very different beasts. Of course, this fits right in with how Microsoft has attacked this problem from the beginning: designing the product by committee, rather than coming up with something that they can be passionate about. When even your CEO can't show much passion about your products (especially when those products are up against Steve Jobs' latest products), you've got a problem.

Filed Under: bill gates, ipod, steve jobs, zune
Companies: apple, microsoft

New iPods Demonstrate BLS BS

from the inflation,-deflation,-whatever dept

The obvious response to folks complaining about the iPhone price cut is that of course the price was going to be cut, because it's a tech item, and the cost of technology invariably marches lower. Yes, technology is a constant deflationary force, not just because prices of it keep dropping, but because the quality of any given item tends to rise over time. We've made this point in the past, that inflation statistics have a hard time dealing with tech items, because the measures only look at price and have a difficult time adjusting for quality improvements. As economist Russ Roberts notes, the new iPod Classic is not just $50 cheaper than the original, it holds 40 times as much data. In other words, doing a like-for-like comparison between the original iPod and the new one vastly understates the amount of progress that was made in such a short time. What's more, while it's easy to note the data storage comparisons, how do you quantify the addition of video playback or pictures? It's pretty difficult. So while inflation statistics serve a purpose, it's important to recognize that there's often a lot more at work than just price changes.

Filed Under: inflation, ipod
Companies: apple

Apple Announces New iPods, Cue Fanboy Frenzy, Navel-Gazing

from the ihype dept

Apple refreshed its iPod line today, announcing the long-expected touchscreen iPod among other things. The event was pretty wide-ranging, with a lot to chew on. The biggest early news was the announcement that iPhone owners will be able to create ringtones from songs they've purchased from the iTunes Music Store... for an additional 99 cents on top of the cost of the downloaded track. Perhaps this is an attempt by Apple to throw a bone to disgruntled record companies, but it's likely to call attention to legions of mobile handsets other than the iPhone that will let user set MP3s and other types of audio files as ringtones for free. Apple also sliced the price of the 8GB iPhone by $200, to $399 -- indicating that demand has slowed as demand among diehard Mac fans and other early adopters has been filled. The price cut is probably also a reaction to the iPod Touch, which appears to be an iPhone without any phone, and a similar 8GB model of it has been priced at $299. This may prove to be an attractive alternative to the iPhone for many users, since it has a fairly similar feature set, outside cellular connectivity, including WiFi web browsing -- but comes at a lower upfront cost, plus without the need for a long-term contract with AT&T.

Perhaps the most curious announcement, though, was news of an Apple partnership with Starbucks. iPhone and iPod Touch users will eventually see an extra icon on their screen when they're within range of a WiFi-enabled Starbucks. The application it leads to will allow them to see what songs are playing in the store, and buy them from the iTMS, and they can also access the iTMS without having to pay usage fees for the hotspot. On the face of it, it's a pretty underwhelming offering, just like all of Starbucks' previous attempts at digital music downloads, and the fact that Steve Jobs claimed Apple had been working on it for two years is hardly reassuring. Despite Jobs' contention that the service is "very cool", it's hard to see it selling more iPods, or making much money on its own.

Filed Under: iphone, ipod, itunes
Companies: apple, at&t, starbucks, t-mobile

Another iPod Listener Struck By Lightning

from the is-it-a-message? dept

It's happened again: Aaron points us to a story about an iPod listener in Canada who was struck by lightning, suffering major injuries in the process. This isn't the first time someone has been listening to an iPod before getting struck, although it bears repeating that there's nothing about an iPod (or a mobile phone for that matter) that would actually attract lightning (unless you think that God doesn't like iPod listeners, though that can't be demonstrated through science). In this case, the iPod listener happened to be sitting underneath a tree, which probably had a little more to do with it. Doctors think that perhaps the headphones may have caused the electricity to move towards the head, exacerbating the injuries, although the slim chances of this happening to someone probably doesn't justify the cost of getting bluetooth headphones.

Filed Under: ipod, lightning