Join the Talk | 70,016 members - 273,060 posts Advertise | Have a scoop? Tip us!

Google axed Android multitouch at Apple’s request

10 February 2009 by Chris Davies


Worth Reading?

NoYes

+7 [9 votes]


Multitouch support was dropped from the Android platform, and therefore the T-Mobile G1, after Apple requested it not be included.  That’s the latest rumor, apparently confirmed by an unnamed Android team member, who described the arrangement as an attempt by Google to avoid the IP aggression we’ve recently seen between Apple and Palm.

While the G1’s capacitive touchscreen certainly recognizes multitouch input – as recent hacks have demonstrated – and earlier builds of Android code included what’s believed to be Google-written, but subsequently disabled, multitouch support, the functionality did not ship in the released device.  At the time, this was generally put down to Google’s ambitious launch schedule, promising an Android device by the end of 2008, and that lack of timing meaning that multitouch fell by the wayside.  However it now looks as though its omission was purposeful, with Google prioritizing their good working relationship with Apple – and, some might say, common foe in Microsoft – over the handset’s eventual capabilities.

The unnamed source also confirmed the rumors that Intel is expending great efforts in supporting Android netbook development, suggesting that the chipset company is keen to be further involved in open-source budget ultraportable hardware.  While Intel’s specific plans are unknown, the Android team member revealed that there are many different Android-based netbooks – as well as other, non-phone and non-netbook hardware – in development at present.

  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Slashdot
  • SphereIt
  • Technorati
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere News
  • email
  • NewsVine
  • StumbleUpon
  • FriendFeed
  • Live
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • Wikio
  1. Even though my phone is rooted so i have multi touch in the browser. This is B.S. Google is holding back on their handsets to please patent hungry apple? Don't agree with that move what so ever
  2. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jrbourque898 View Post
    Even though my phone is rooted so i have multi touch in the browser. This is B.S. Google is holding back on their handsets to please patent hungry apple? Don't agree with that move what so ever
    Would you want to deal with lawsuits and break "relations" with a huge company where there is potential in pulling in $$$
    Working with Apple and not licensing anything under Apple while working around patents for you for free, for their gain is a smart move.
  3. Link doesn't work
  4. aye, the link has been butchered, go here.

    I agree, this seems plausible. Google heavily develops for the iPhone, they have alot to lose to make apple their enemy...
  5. Thanks for the heads-up on the link Should work now...
  6. Quote:
    Originally Posted by gbk1 View Post
    Would you want to deal with lawsuits and break "relations" with a huge company where there is potential in pulling in $$$
    Working with Apple and not licensing anything under Apple while working around patents for you for free, for their gain is a smart move.
    I agree. I’m not happy about Google’s decision to stifle a feature like this, but it is certainly understandable. They are a business with long-term goals and like running a marathon, it’s all about pace and endurance; not sprinting ahead just to be ahead in the early sectors.
  7. I say Apple is evil and full of sh*t, this proves it more then ever.

    I usually get flamed (and most likely will right now) but this is clear evidence of Apple patenting a very broad spectrum covering touch screens and they will sue anyone whom uses any technology similar or the same. I could see if Google had opened the source for Apple's multi-touch system and implemented their code but they didn't that isn't the case and this is purely a clear case of patent trolling.

    Just because Apple patented any process which involves putting more then one finger on a capacitive screen everyone is hostage to yet another frivolous patent which stifles innovation.


    http://w2.eff.org/patent/wp.php

    This crap needs to end, all these damn software patents and crippling innovation and the progression of technology.
  8. From a business standpoint, this was a good preliminary move by Google. We see the fruits of that now, even as Apple and Palm are in a war of words over multi-touch, the G1 is never mentioned in any of the controversy.

    However, now having come to light certain details about the patents Apple has been awarded, I think now would be prime time for Google and OHA to add certain multi-touch features to the OS and give access to multi-touch to developers to be incorporated into further application development. You see, in reality, the patents which Apple was recently awarded are very limited: they have not, and indeed, cannot patent gestures like pinching to zoom. This was in the original brief submitted by Apple for patent, but was not included in the final patents awarded to them based on that brief (likely on the grounds that such gestures had been in use long before Apple incorporated them into the iPhone).

    Inasmuch as the multi-touch features do not infringe on the very limited patents recently awarded to Apple, there should be no legitimate case against Google and OHA for incorporating them. Does this mean Apple will not blow some smoke? Certainly not. Though they too have their relationship with Google to consider.
  9. The real question is whether or not Google will remove the multi-touch software hooks from the Android codebase in subsequent releases.

    And if you guys think Apple is bad....sheesh...you should deal with some other companies. Honeywell, I'm looking squarely in your direction.
  10. No multi-touch kind of kills the device and possibly the platform for me.. Not only are there a number of application developers and development firms that have multi-touch games and apps in progress that now much be scrapped, but now the platform is just not capable of performing like it needs to to become a serious mobile platform.. I mean.. no Tap Tap Revenge.. not cool...

    This is going to cost the devs that were hopeful, sitting waiting for multi-touch a lot of time and probably money, and i doubt their discouragement from that experience will permit the format change from apple to android any longer.

    When you start limiting a platform from achieving what has widely become accepted in the PDA/smartphone world as the future and the new normal, you definitely start limiting the longevity of that platform as well.

    I am going to go back to work now.. sit and check the market every once in a while for the apps that for months now haven't come, and won't be coming today...

    The question becomes.. When these limited functionality paid apps start dropping, will the be written extemely well and make the android platform retain the mark of mediocrity, or will they be just as fail crazy and buggy as the rest of the platform and applications for it and let any idea of an Android Phone become the new razor....? I think netbooks, sure I'll buy an andoird netbook.. but when it has been beaten and abused for so long now in this market.. no thanks..

    I need to see some exciting impressive stuff pretty soon or I will be hitting up ebay to get rid of this thing.. I still get excited about the game and all releases I see for other phones.. All i get excited about concerning G1 is updates to FIX my broke ass $400 phone, and when an app that is worth installing drops; not buying, not using, but merely installing...

    OK I FEEL BETTER NOW SORRY. JUST BUMMED TO HEAR THAT. I AM STILL PROBABLY RIGHT BUT.. I LIKE MY PHONE. HOPEFULLY THE DEVS WILL COME THROUGH FOR US.
  11. Thank you JesusFreke: JF1.41 RC 33
  12. Apple is becoming very so much like MICROSOFT!!!!!
    mo⋅nop⋅o⋅ly [muh-nop-uh-lee]


    –noun, plural -lies. 1. exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices. Compare duopoly, oligopoly. 2. an exclusive privilege to carry on a business, traffic, or service, granted by a government. 3. the exclusive possession or control of something. 4. something that is the subject of such control, as a commodity or service. 5. a company or group that has such control. 6. the market condition that exists when there is only one seller. 7. (initial capital letter) a board game in which a player attempts to gain a monopoly of real estate by advancing around the board and purchasing property, acquiring capital by collecting rent from other players whose pieces land on that property.
  13. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Fare View Post
    aye, the link has been butchered, go here.

    I agree, this seems plausible. Google heavily develops for the iPhone, they have alot to lose to make apple their enemy...
    I would say that Apple has even more to lose if they were to piss off Google. Imagine Google Maps, Gmail, Google Earth, Search, etc. suddenly not working on any iPhone. People would be pissed and be dropping the iPhone like it was radioactive.
  14. If that's true, that's really disappointing. Google is big enough that it doesn't need to defer to Apple's wishes. To the person who pointed out that Google develops a lot of apps for iPhone and wouldn't want to make an enemy of Apple, I point out that Google could just as easily say, "hey, we write lots of apps for iPhone, so if you don't back down, we're not gonna allow iPhone to use any of our stuff." Google is the one with the cool services that iPhone wants to leverage.

    Google is in a position to behave more like Wal-Mart (although I hate to hold them up as an example of good behavior, because they're a horrible comopany) -- basically, they say, "do it our way or don't play with us."
  15. there must be a motive.

    yes, you both are right in that Apple has as much to lose as Google does, but what does Google really have to gain from having a multi-touch android device...right now? If Google is in it for the long haul, they have more to gain from not engaging in frivolous cases making unwated enemies while they "build up" and establish an overwhelming powerful stance in the gadget world (with apps, services and OS/hardware). I believe Google will provide multi-touch at some point, when they have more to gain than to lose by doing so.

    Google is immensly powerful, I don't think it's from making bad decisions...
  16. Quote:
    Originally Posted by mlevin View Post
    If that's true, that's really disappointing. Google is big enough that it doesn't need to defer to Apple's wishes. To the person who pointed out that Google develops a lot of apps for iPhone and wouldn't want to make an enemy of Apple, I point out that Google could just as easily say, "hey, we write lots of apps for iPhone, so if you don't back down, we're not gonna allow iPhone to use any of our stuff." Google is the one with the cool services that iPhone wants to leverage.

    Google is in a position to behave more like Wal-Mart (although I hate to hold them up as an example of good behavior, because they're a horrible comopany) -- basically, they say, "do it our way or don't play with us."
    Wrong. Count the number of iPhones. From either giants view, there is too much to lose if they leverage their perceived value against the other giant.

    Also - They would never break for that reason, they may hate eachother in the end, they may not be as helpful in future app development, but they will not give up each-other's service. Google gets an additional 20 million eyes and counting from apple's iPhone alone (google is in the business of eyes) (random guess at the # but they sold 7mil units in 4th quarter so..) And apple gets to ride the web wave that google is piloting through the 21st century with dozens of new "features" for their devices and more.. If some CEO made the decision to brush off one or the other, they would be quickly removed and the position reversed.

    It would be like if the US suddenly said they won't do business or let its citizens do business with the UK any more because the UK would let us say "Jolly Ho You Cracky Dannigans!"
  17. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Nativex View Post
    Apple is becoming very so much like MICROSOFT!!!!!
    mo⋅nop⋅o⋅ly [muh-nop-uh-lee]


    –noun, plural -lies. 1. exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices. Compare duopoly, oligopoly. 2. an exclusive privilege to carry on a business, traffic, or service, granted by a government. 3. the exclusive possession or control of something. 4. something that is the subject of such control, as a commodity or service. 5. a company or group that has such control. 6. the market condition that exists when there is only one seller. 7. (initial capital letter) a board game in which a player attempts to gain a monopoly of real estate by advancing around the board and purchasing property, acquiring capital by collecting rent from other players whose pieces land on that property.
    Even though Google give you somewhat a feeling of choice in their services, aren't all of us G1 users making GMail their primary email now? Pretty soon cloud computing is going mainstream and we all will be sucked in the Google Environment. To make sure, or pretty damn sure, Google makes their services as compatible with as many file types/programs there is.

    How about Google for monopoly? I wouldn't mind. No one else here is complaining. What does that say about us? (Google fanboys?)
    I like Apple's UI tho, using Macdroid 2.33


    Stock
    --------
    GOOG = 390 (+/-)
    AAPL = 99 (+/-)
    MSFT = 19 (+/-)
  18. I posted this information on Google intentionally leaving it out months ago. While I obviously agree that, now that they know the extent of the patents Google should open up what they legally can...


    Everyone here is missing a critical part of this. Google didn't leave it out because Apple warned them, they left it out intentionally to boost Apple.

    Google CEO Eric Schmidt is ON THE APPLE BOARD. Until he isn't, we will never, ever see anyone budge on the multi-touch at Google.



    The only hope at this point is for Apple to back down on the scope of their claims.
    Or that people in the open source community defy Google and start releasing the Android dev kit with multi-touch. But that is far less ideal because none of the android built-in apps will come with multi-touch awareness so this will continue to set us back.


    I'm really hoping that all the myriad of prior art out there (I've posted the link to the TED multi-touch demos and other patents before apple) causes Apple to ease up on their claims.
    Jeff Han full demo of multi-touch with pinching zoom, flick motions, etc.
    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcKqyn-gUbY"]YouTube - Multi-touch interface (from Adobe TED)[/ame]
    Several Universities have multi-touch patents loooong before Apple or fingerworks.
    A few references here too.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-touch
  19. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Nativex View Post
    Apple is becoming very so much like MICROSOFT!!!!!
    mo⋅nop⋅o⋅ly [muh-nop-uh-lee]


    –noun, plural -lies. 1. exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices. Compare duopoly, oligopoly. 2. an exclusive privilege to carry on a business, traffic, or service, granted by a government. 3. the exclusive possession or control of something. 4. something that is the subject of such control, as a commodity or service. 5. a company or group that has such control. 6. the market condition that exists when there is only one seller. 7. (initial capital letter) a board game in which a player attempts to gain a monopoly of real estate by advancing around the board and purchasing property, acquiring capital by collecting rent from other players whose pieces land on that property.
    The problem is that you are yelling monopoly at a patent. The patent although quickly becoming the basis for user interface for an entire industry, it is not yet the standard or at all the basis for said industry. Apple's user base is still tiny in terms of PC and PDA use worldwide, but they are the trend, they are the popular, they offer the premium product for 3x the price - but a trend is a trend, and we are in economic down turn right now.. 3x the price isn't worth it right now.. Apple won't sit where they are long.. All of their software innovation comes from linux or 3rd party, doesn;t it make more sense that linux would take a leap instead of apple? Most especially considering that a dual core 2.6 with 4gb and non integrated video for linux costs $500 and for apple it costs $3000...

    I don't know.. all speculation really but.. just don't think they can be considered at all monopolistic, or at all "the future". You pay them too great a compliment.
  20. Like everything else, profits rule over progress.
  21. It"s ok guys and gals apple needs something to have that we dont and since our phone is just better all around( copy and paste, 3.2 camera, keyboard, awsome look, removable battery, sd cards....shall i stop there). I bet its hard for those apple guys to sleep knowing there is a G1 out there.....love it
  22. Quote:
    Originally Posted by joshtheitguy View Post
    ...
    Just because Apple patented any process which involves putting more then one finger on a capacitive screen everyone is hostage to yet another frivolous patent which stifles innovation.
    ...
    This crap needs to end, all these damn software patents and crippling innovation and the progression of technology.
    You say it stifles innovation but you haven't invented anything. If/when you do, and someone takes your idea and puts it in their product, you'd be pissed and demanding royalties; it was your money, nights, weekends, and time away from your family that made the technology possible, and you should see some sort of compensation for it. Go watch Flash of Genius for inspiration.

    Google is free to license Apple's (or any other company's) technology for use in their products; they had already done so with NavTech/NAVTEQ until a falling-out occurred. Google opted not to, much like Google was free to use a J2ME implementation for Android but instead opted to potentially fork Java by using the Dalvik VM, presumably because they don't want to pay royalties for things (note that abundance of open source technology used at Google, including the Linux kernel and the Python language).

    You can hate Apple for whatever puerile reasons you have, but all companies patent things -- including precious Google, who tried to patent delivering ads to users based on their geolocation and customer behavior, something that another company put the kabosh on due to prior art. Google has, however, patented a data center in a shipping container, something seems pretty self-explanatory but Google will not doubt enforce that patent should another company put a data center in a shipping container and call it a day.
  23. This is all a Bull. Apple is scared that Google Android is taking over. Only thing lacking is Multi touch. Its just matter of time some one comes out with a Nice looking phone.

    APPLE STOPE BING SCARED AND SUCH A BITCH AND LET ANDROID HAVE MULTI TOUCH.

    This is also very unfair to all the other industry as well. Just cause of Apple Patent you have wait for Apple to come up with muti touch. Imagine every peach of technology you own is only patent and made by 1 Company.

    There is hundred of application to Multi touch and now its not possible NO THANKS TO APPLE.

    I my self own a Macbook and love but Apple come on give it up plz!
  24. The way I see it, HW < SW < Content. Apple may have the HW and SW, but Google has the content, and in the end, that's what gets users addicted.

    Google is biding its time to get their content (GoogleMaps, Gmail) entrenched in all mobile phone platforms. Once that's accomplished, they will be free to write their own ticket.

    This reminds me of how M$FT took over the IBM PC. They did whatever they needed to do to make DOS the dominant OS on the PC platform, and the rest is history. At that time, it was M$FT's SW vs IBM's HW, and SW won. This time it will be Google's content vs Apple's SW, and I think content will win out in the end.
  25. Maybe Google should disable/prevent multi-touch functions in GoogleMaps until they are allowed to include the feature in their own OS?

    Limit their applications to the functional restrictions (requests) place upon their OS by Apple.
  26. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Wrytch View Post
    Maybe Google should disable/prevent multi-touch functions in GoogleMaps until they are allowed to include the feature in their own OS?

    Limit their applications to the functional restrictions (requests) place upon their OS by Apple.
    Yes, and when you get an incorrect bill you should self-immolate outside that business's office. That'll show 'em!

    It makes absolutely no business sense to hold a grudge and intentionally damage your product on a competitor's platform.

    I'm quite surprised (and saddened) that none of you have thought that Google would out-Apple Apple by inventing something better than multitouch, patenting it, and offer Apple to license its patent.
  27. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Wrytch View Post
    Maybe Google should disable/prevent multi-touch functions in GoogleMaps until they are allowed to include the feature in their own OS?

    Limit their applications to the functional restrictions (requests) place upon their OS by Apple.
    I thought GoogleMaps is an API that Apple wrote their own code for the iPhone. Don't know if Google can do anything to shut down multi-touch.

    What's puzzling is why the GoogleMaps code on the G1 isn't open sourced. I wish they would release the code so we could get multi-touch on it like the browser in JF 1.41-RC33 (thanks JF & Luke!)
  28. Well, I for one am not frothing at the mouth for multi-touch features, but at least this explains why Google did not include it even when the hardware was capable. I'm a self-proclaimed google whore so I trust in the all mighty GOOG to do the right thing.

    Apple (hate it or love it) will always be around like the macs are. Their fanboys are always going to be just a little annoying to talk to, but just knowing that Google is slowly taking over everything makes it all better.
  29. Quote:
    Originally Posted by nuc70 View Post
    This is all a Bull. Apple is scared that Google Android is taking over. Only thing lacking is Multi touch. Its just matter of time some one comes out with a Nice looking phone.

    APPLE STOPE BING SCARED AND SUCH A BITCH AND LET ANDROID HAVE MULTI TOUCH.

    This is also very unfair to all the other industry as well. Just cause of Apple Patent you have wait for Apple to come up with muti touch. Imagine every peach of technology you own is only patent and made by 1 Company.

    There is hundred of application to Multi touch and now its not possible NO THANKS TO APPLE.

    I my self own a Macbook and love but Apple come on give it up plz!
    ...Now THAT is speculation lol.. Scared.. I would say they are posturing but.. wow..

    Anyways..
    @@Icky
    @@Icky

    Right now google has been using eyeball tracking tech to see where peoples vision is drawn... Wouldn't that turn into a great "input device"?

    Just the twitch of a pupil and flick of an eyebrow to get to your favorite site lol.. No but seriously that will be fun to play with as we start seeing cameras put on the user side of the phone, passing 6mp, etc...
  30. Quote:
    Originally Posted by ickyfehmleh View Post
    Yes, and when you get an incorrect bill you should self-immolate outside that business's office. That'll show 'em!

    It makes absolutely no business sense to hold a grudge and intentionally damage your product on a competitor's platform.

    I'm quite surprised (and saddened) that none of you have thought that Google would out-Apple Apple by inventing something better than multitouch, patenting it, and offer Apple to license its patent.
    I was joking, but do like the comment by ickyfehmleh about the defeatist view many seem to have. Not sure where the feeling that the G1 has to chase iPhone is coming from.

    icky is absolutely correct that spiteful retaliation has no place in development/business because the consumers suffer and progress stalls.
  31. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Wrytch View Post
    I was joking, but do like the comment by ickyfehmleh about the defeatist view many seem to have. Not sure where the feeling that the G1 has to chase iPhone is coming from.
    Grown men/woman cry over their cars and defend their preferences. Pride in ownership of a cool gizmo. Very 'humanly' natural to be defensive about this kind of stuff.

    but eventually, maturity will set in.
  32. My wife supports multi-touch, not sure I'm worried about the phone.
  33. Ya' know, all this fuss about multi-touch is a little puzzling to me. All of this can't possibly come from everyone's burning desire to be able to zoom in on photos with a pinch, can it? (BTW, Apple does not own that one) I really don't think, as has been said on this thread, that if multi-touch never makes it to Android (and lemme tell ya', that is a very unlikely conclusion to all of this), it'll be the end of the platform, or that there's nowhere to go from there. That is simply untenable, not to mention ridiculous.

    There is so much more to the Android platform than this. There's more to the Android platform than anything that Apple can muster with the iPhone and their self-imposed regulations on cross-platforming. Android is a platform for connectivity and application development and execution. It has potential far beyond the G1 or even mobile phones for that matter. In the very near future we will see Android on MIDs and netbooks. We will see Android in many embedded systems. Before long, Android will be in our living rooms, kitchens, cars, restaurants, hotel rooms, "you are here" terminals at the mall; the horizons for this platform are enormous. Oh, and we will see a bevy of smartphones based on Android this summer from multiple handset makers and cell carriers. Do we think for a moment that the inability to zoom in on pictures with a pinch (without making poor Apple vewy vewy angwy anyway) is going to hold back this platform? Can we really imagine multi-touch not becoming a part of this platform as time goes on?

    Also, there are applications of multi-touch beyond what Apple has patented that many developers can and will take advantage of in the very likely event that Google allows developers to begin to take advantage of the capacitive touch capabilities (again, with time. Let things surrounding the multi-touch controversy cool down a little and little by little multi-touch capabilities will creep into Android; likely from third party developers first as Google begins to allow it).

    Anyway, just my thoughts. We are not chasing Apple, people. Google is a company of innovators and Android is the ultimate platform for innovation; both by Google and, most especially, for third-party devs.
  34. #1. Multitouch is seriously overrated.

    #2. This is not news. This was asked as a question at the G1 launch event and they said that the G1 was certainly multi-touch capable but it was not included as a feature due to IP reasons. Did anybody actually watch the launch event?
  35. google needs to quit being apples bitch
  36. Just found that HP, adobe, microsoft, blackberry, palm, sony and most netbook manufacturers all have or will soon have multi-touch devices of some sort. Put your pants back on google!
  37. Quote:
    Originally Posted by happyandyv View Post
    Just found that HP, adobe, microsoft, blackberry, palm, sony and most netbook manufacturers all have or will soon have multi-touch devices of some sort. Put your pants back on google!
    Just found? Where have you been?!
  38. It my not be that important but still. It is obvious that the g1 is mt capable. multi touch is sitting in the g1's code but cannot be implemented because of google and apple's relationship.

    google needs to leak the info on how to include multi touch, someone else needs to make an application or an update file out of it. That way, google doesn't infringe, g1 users get the feature that their phones were designed with.

    The g1 had multi touch capabilty from the get go. that fact is enough for me to justify mass infdrigement of apple's patent.
  39. here's a slightly dated multi-touch video for inspiration / mood-lightening purposes.

    if you like that, check out the photosynth video. very cool. TED is a great site.
  40. Quote:
    Originally Posted by gbk1 View Post
    Just found? Where have you been?!
    goggeling for product pages, reviews, and pixies. Where else?
  41. Please. I don't buy a word of this.

    The demonstration clearly showed that the multitouch system was not implemented correctly - it took shortcuts that would have made it unfeasible for some applications (even though it worked fine for others).

    Google nixed it because it wasn't ready, not because of Apple. Get over yourself with these rumors.
  42. Quote:
    Originally Posted by G1FTW View Post
    It my not be that important but still. It is obvious that the g1 is mt capable. multi touch is sitting in the g1's code but cannot be implemented because of google and apple's relationship.

    google needs to leak the info on how to include multi touch, someone else needs to make an application or an update file out of it. That way, google doesn't infringe, g1 users get the feature that their phones were designed with.

    The g1 had multi touch capabilty from the get go. that fact is enough for me to justify mass infdrigement of apple's patent.
    Where have you been? It's been implemented in JF's releases for weeks now.
  43. Having been involved on the ODM, CEM and chip mfr side of the high tech business, I think we're all getting upset about nothing in our control.

    This has been going on for the last 25 years. Someone claims a patent, someone gets around it.... Someone blatantly violates it and then goes to court... Settlement normally forces a reasonable royalty.

    Give it a few months and I'm sure we'll see Samsung or Palm get around it and Apple threaten to sue - it will go to court - and it will get settled.... Along with a proper revenue/royalty method to pay off Apple... Then you will see the original designers who may have "stale" patents come out of the wood work to sue Apple.

    Someone will get around the patent, with likely a better way then the written up patent - or someone may not and violate it - forcing Apple's hand to settle.

    Us hyping about monopoly isn't going to address this. If anything Apple has a significant patent portfolio, but so does Google. I see a settlement out of this within a few months. Likely it's down to how much will Google pay - and vice versa how much will Apple pay for Google patents they think they may not be violating.

    In 25 years, none of these issues has presented a major product from shipping - it's how clever you are to get around the patent legitimately or can you trump the patent with something better. That has been Silicon Valley's legacy for years.
  44. Quote:
    Originally Posted by NPS_CA View Post
    In 25 years, none of these issues has presented a major product from shipping - it's how clever you are to get around the patent legitimately or can you trump the patent with something better. That has been Silicon Valley's legacy for years.
    So-long multi-touch, Hellllo holotouch! :P
  45. I am not surprise why Google didn't include multi-touch.
  46. my G1 isnt rooted, so i dont have multi-touch and won't until i decide to root. But I wll say this, I'd rather the G1 focus on getting the damn flashplayer than multi-touch capability. If denying us OTA update peepz multi-touch means quicker flash then go for it google and android!!
  47. Quote:
    Originally Posted by jdigz View Post
    my G1 isnt rooted, so i dont have multi-touch and won't until i decide to root. But I wll say this, I'd rather the G1 focus on getting the damn flashplayer than multi-touch capability. If denying us OTA update peepz multi-touch means quicker flash then go for it google and android!!
    I agree with this, because I know I'll get my rooted version well before most people get their ota's. So yeah do it google!
  48. Quote:
    Originally Posted by deserttopping View Post
    here's a slightly dated multi-touch video for inspiration / mood-lightening purposes.

    if you like that, check out the photosynth video. very cool. TED is a great site.
    i don't care what anyone says


    that fool sounds 100% like kip from napoleon dynamite
  49. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mason_S View Post
    Ya' know, all this fuss about multi-touch is a little puzzling to me. All of this can't possibly come from everyone's burning desire to be able to zoom in on photos with a pinch, can it? (BTW, Apple does not own that one) I really don't think, as has been said on this thread, that if multi-touch never makes it to Android (and lemme tell ya', that is a very unlikely conclusion to all of this), it'll be the end of the platform, or that there's nowhere to go from there. That is simply untenable, not to mention ridiculous.

    There is so much more to the Android platform than this. There's more to the Android platform than anything that Apple can muster with the iPhone and their self-imposed regulations on cross-platforming. Android is a platform for connectivity and application development and execution. It has potential far beyond the G1 or even mobile phones for that matter. In the very near future we will see Android on MIDs and netbooks. We will see Android in many embedded systems. Before long, Android will be in our living rooms, kitchens, cars, restaurants, hotel rooms, "you are here" terminals at the mall; the horizons for this platform are enormous. Oh, and we will see a bevy of smartphones based on Android this summer from multiple handset makers and cell carriers. Do we think for a moment that the inability to zoom in on pictures with a pinch (without making poor Apple vewy vewy angwy anyway) is going to hold back this platform? Can we really imagine multi-touch not becoming a part of this platform as time goes on?

    Also, there are applications of multi-touch beyond what Apple has patented that many developers can and will take advantage of in the very likely event that Google allows developers to begin to take advantage of the capacitive touch capabilities (again, with time. Let things surrounding the multi-touch controversy cool down a little and little by little multi-touch capabilities will creep into Android; likely from third party developers first as Google begins to allow it).

    Anyway, just my thoughts. We are not chasing Apple, people. Google is a company of innovators and Android is the ultimate platform for innovation; both by Google and, most especially, for third-party devs.
    you sir are a very very optimistic person when it comes to android. almost too optimistic.
  50. Quote:
    Originally Posted by jdigz View Post
    my G1 isnt rooted, so i dont have multi-touch and won't until i decide to root. But I wll say this, I'd rather the G1 focus on getting the damn flashplayer than multi-touch capability. If denying us OTA update peepz multi-touch means quicker flash then go for it google and android!!
    Flash is up to Adobe -- not Google.
  51. Interestingly enough I was just reading about this on an article I Found on Hacker News, http://daringfireball.net/2009/02/apple_google_palm

    To sum it up the source that claims the same thing from a source over at Apple, they also say they didn't include a 3.5mm headphone jack because Apple asked them not to do to another patent they have on that .

    I found the 2nd part hard to believe, but no official multitouch didn't surprise me, this OS is still in beta, a very stable and well built beta but beta nonetheless. They'll give us multitouch eventually i presume, if not no worries.

    As for Apples patents, well let's see how they hold up when they go against Palm who have some very interesting patents of their own that the iPhone is in clear violation of .( read an article about it once, you can probably find it somewhere on digg if you're interested )

    I also agree with everyone else saying that punishing Apple over the multitouch patent is just a bad business move, especially considering who Apple and Google are really against, the guys over at Microsoft.
  52. I saw the same thing about the 3.5mm jack over at Engadget. http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/10/f...ng-multitouch/

    I can almost believe the first part of the rumor. But one has to wonder about the validity when you look at the larger picture. First the fact that Apple would supposedly ask HTC and/or Google to leave a 3.5mm headphone jack off of the phone brings everything about the rumor into question. And, it's doubtful that Apple really has a patent on a 3.5mm jack on phones. I've owned phones before the iPhone came out that had 3.5mm jacks.

    Then when you take into account that the new iPhone and Windows Mobile sync offered by Google is Microsoft's Exchanged licensed by Google. So trying to say that Google would leave it off of the G1 because of warm fuzzy feelins for Apple, and hatred of MS doesn't hold up. If Google really hated MS they wouldn't license Exchange to offer it to the general public for free.

    I'm not saying that Apple maybe didn't ask Google to leave multitouch out of Android, but it seems less likely when you consider addtional information.
  53. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Logic View Post
    Interestingly enough I was just reading about this on an article I Found on Hacker News, http://daringfireball.net/2009/02/apple_google_palm

    To sum it up the source that claims the same thing from a source over at Apple, they also say they didn't include a 3.5mm headphone jack because Apple asked them not to do to another patent they have on that .

    I found the 2nd part hard to believe...
    The notion that any company could ask another company not to include something standard like a 3.5mm jack is laughable.

    The fact that someone actually believes Apple did this takes the laughable notion to a much, much higher level of lol -- possibly over 9,000 lolmeters per millisecond.

    If only one could find a way to harness the stupidity of the internet and convert it into clean energy, humanity would be set for a lifetime.
  54. Quote:
    Originally Posted by ickyfehmleh View Post
    The notion that any company could ask another company not to include something standard like a 3.5mm jack is laughable.

    The fact that someone actually believes Apple did this takes the laughable notion to a much, much higher level of lol -- possibly over 9,000 lolmeters per millisecond.

    If only one could find a way to harness the stupidity of the internet and convert it into clean energy, humanity would be set for a lifetime.
    roflmoa at this quote and the people who believe this article as well.
  55. Just remember there was a patent on the mouse as well

    http://inventors.about.com/library/i...use_patent.htm
Join AndroidCommunity Forums

Android Phone Accessories


T-Mobile G1 Accessories
Palm Pre Accessories
iPod Touch Accessories
Advertise with SlashGear
Free Tech Support at SlashGear Forums

© 2009 Android Community. Part of R3 Media Network

Contact | Advertising | About Us