The whole thing started with him labeling the app as if it is from CBC, brand name, logo and all. I think that's a pretty serious case of infringement, and CBC's attitude most likely stems from that.
59 karma · joined November 28, 2010
None of those are charging for the access. And I think that is the only reason for CBC's aggressive approach.
And then: "The court is of the opinion that Apple's minimalistic design isn't the only technical solution to make a tablet computer," Brueckner-Hoffmann explained, "other designs are possible."
I'm not a lawyer, so I might get laughed out here, but this just seems like a ridiculous claim. Other designs are possible, that much is true. You can make a car with 5 wheels and the engine in the passenger's seat too, doesn't mean there's going to be a market for it. My common sense might be too common, but I hope this gets thrown out at higher levels of the court.
Edit: To clarify, I own neither, and I am not interested in either, I just found the situation too absurd not to chime in.
A ridiculous game to play, don't you think?
Because of users like this, Microsoft is where it is. Any big revamp, and they'll just get millions of confused customers who suddenly can't make sense of the most basic functionality. It is Microsoft's own doing that they made their users get used to interfaces like this, but it's not as easy as just scraping it and throwing up something new.
It's also easy to forget that Windows has a userbase 10 times its nearest competitor (which is to say this brings in challenges which competitors might not face).
(I hope no one is offended by my quite flimsy grasp of medicine and the human body)