The New Apple i Phone

[shepherdboy]

I just watch the full (1 hour plus) presentation of the soon to be release (June 2007) Apple i Phone. What a technological marvel. It does it all. Music,Pictures,Internet, and of course mobil phone. The spec's on this thing looks like borrowed alien technology. There is nothing on the market currently or fourth coming that can even come close to this new device. I hear the patented technology is well protected from copy cats and people who would seize the new multi touch format and re engineer it. I know PC's rule the planet in numbers, but for highly skilled computing, the newer iMac are light years ahead in everything from multi media to just being better at user friendly. If you currently own or have seen an Apple iPod this is the next step in evolution for the Internet, multi media, mobil phone and so on. I give it a perfect 10! Just my 2 cents

 

[Annie]

I just watch the full (1 hour plus) presentation of the soon to be release (June 2007) Apple i Phone. What a technological marvel. It does it all. Music,Pictures,Internet, and of course mobil phone. The spec's on this thing looks like borrowed alien technology. There is nothing on the market currently or fourth coming that can even come close to this new device. I hear the patented technology is well protected from copy cats and people who would seize the new multi touch format and re engineer it. I know PC's rule the planet in numbers, but for highly skilled computing, the newer iMac are light years ahead in everything from multi media to just being better at user friendly. If you currently own or have seen an Apple iPod this is the next step in evolution for the Internet, multi media, mobil phone and so on. I give it a perfect 10! Just my 2 cents

Funny, I was just talking today to a friend, he's so excited about this. When I said, 'too exspensive', he replied, '$$$ for blackberry; $$$ for ipod, I think 80 something or other; $$$ for razer phone; and Safari! It's a bargain!'

Well since I have none of those, I just saved another $600, but for those that do employ all that, now it's 'all in one.'

 

[sitarro]

Funny, I was just talking today to a friend, he's so excited about this. When I said, 'too exspensive', he replied, '$$$ for blackberry; $$$ for ipod, I think 80 something or other; $$$ for razer phone; and Safari! It's a bargain!'

Well since I have none of those, I just saved another $600, but for those that do employ all that, now it's 'all in one.'

Apple has never been in the business of doing cheap, they leave that to everyone else. Apple is about innovation, ease of use, beautiful intelligent intuitive design that in the long run is less expensive. Their fans are legendary but not that easy to please(check the MAC Rumors site to see how very critical they are of every new release).

The innovations in this latest creation do not come easily or cheap, this thing took years and hundreds of exceptional minds to design and produce. The miniturization, the touch screen controls, the vivid colors and sharpness of the big screen, the ambient light sensors that set the power used to preserve battery life, the 2 gig camera, extraordinary phone features, the scrolling feature for the ipod and the internet searching, the google maps, widgets, ridiculously thin, full internet abilities, able to pick specific voice mails, syncs with computer to download your address book........the list is unbelievable even for Apple.

With all that said, you can drop thousands on a ring that does nothing, 15 grand for a Rolex watch that doesn't tell time any better than a Timex, or 600 dollars for a Mont Blanc pen that doesn't write any better than a Bic throw away.

I doubt that I will get one, don't really have the want or need for that kind of device (not big on small, I would rather a 20" portable) but I do see technology that I am sure will be used in a full size computer that will be controlled with your fingers directly on the screen and I love that.

 

[theHawk]

Too bad Apple is about to get sued big time. Cisco already trademarked the name i-phone several years ago.

 

[90K]

I think about getting a cell phone sometimes but I really can't justify having one. I see other people who are wrapped around them and it controls their life and every move. I think back a mere 15 years ago and how we survived withot cell phones and yet today if you don't have one you are completely outta touch....I don't think and so my life is so much easier and less stressful. I see it as this you can't reach me via land line or email then it ain't important.

 

[shepherdboy]

Too bad Apple is about to get sued big time. Cisco already trademarked the name i-phone several years ago.

The jury is still out if Cisco even has a case. It would be very uncharacteristic for Apple not check to see if that name was already licensed and in use.

 

[shepherdboy]

I think about getting a cell phone sometimes but I really can't justify having one. I see other people who are wrapped around them and it controls their life and every move. I think back a mere 15 years ago and how we survived without cell phones and yet today if you don't have one you are completely outta touch....I don't think and so my life is so much easier and less stressful. I see it as this you can't reach me via land line or email then it ain't important.

Yea I can agree with part of your statement, but the work place has really accelerated its communication needs and the flow of information in the business world demands a cell phone for continuing and changing information to meet the customers needs. What ever happen to my two cans and the wire between them that was my tree house phone.

 

[sitarro]

Apple should get rid of that silly name anyway. It certainly is not merely a phone and the name doesn't do it justice.

 

[manu1959]

The jury is still out if Cisco even has a case. It would be very uncharacteristic for Apple not check to see if that name was already licensed and in use.

apple stole the apple records logo and name wtf do they care about cisco....

i will never own anything they make

 

[theHawk]

The jury is still out if Cisco even has a case. It would be very uncharacteristic for Apple not check to see if that name was already licensed and in use.

They do have a case. Apple was in negotiations with Cisco about use of the name. Cisco assumed that when Apple was revealing their new phone they would live up to their end of the bargain....they didn't. Lawsuit filed the next day.

 

[theHawk]

apple stole the apple records logo and name wtf do they care about cisco....

i will never own anything they make

Umm, Cisco is a way bigger company than Apple. 80-90% of internet equipment is Cisco. Trust me you're using Cisco if your reading this.

 

[sitarro]

apple stole the apple records logo and name wtf do they care about cisco....

i will never own anything they make

Being a huge Beatle fan who watched them first appear on Ed Sullivan's show on our black and white TV I have to say that besides Yoko, Apple Corp. was one of the worst things to happen to the Beatles. A great idea in concept it quickly became a monster that helped destroy the group. The original logo, a Granny Smith Apple was an idea of McCartney who took it directly from a very famous painting by Belgian Surrealist Rene' Magritte, "Son Of Man", which he had aquired. Magritte died in 1967. Apple Corp. was formed in 1968.

The Beatles broke up in 1970, dissolved their partnership in 1975 and most od Apple Corp.'s divisions died at the same time. Neil Aspinall, the Beatles former road manager, has kept Apple Corp. alive since.

Apple Computers began in 1976 and it's original logo was a complicated drawing of Sir Isaac Newton under an apple tree with the famed apple about to fall on his head. It was soon replaced by a stylistic rainbow colored apple with a bite taken out of it by designer Rob Janoff. This design was replaced by Steve Jobs when he returned to Apple in 1999. It is now basically the same shape but with a solid color. It is said to be one of the most recognized brand symbols in the world. It's easy to see why Neil Aspinall would want to sue Apple Inc. for some easy money since the company he runs is such an incredible failure despite having the most famous musical groups of all time backing it.

It's just a little hypocritical for Apple Corp. to give anyone crap about stealing logos when their logo is almost a direct copy of one in a very famous painting.

I'm sorry that you refuse to own anything Apple makes manu, you are missing out on some wonderful products. Obviously Apple wasn't copying Apple Corp. originally, it had to do with Isaac Newton and gravity. They have gone on to release groundbreaking ideas such as the Newton that although was a commercial loser has proven to be a couple of decades ahead of it's time(palm pilot). The Macintosh is obviously another reference to an apple.

 

[theHawk]

Cisco already has an iPhone:


http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Sate...455701&pagename=Linksys/Common/VisitorWrapper

 

[sitarro]

Cisco already has an iPhone:


http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Sate...455701&pagename=Linksys/Common/VisitorWrapper

That is exactly what I mean, why would Apple want to denigrate their beautiful creation by using the same name as that telephony thing by cisco? Cisco even calls it's own last century crap a phony. That is a telephone, what Apple has created is much more and deserves another name.

What is funny is Apple is the one that made i a prefix that means something. All of the less creative imitators and "money for nothing" rip offs(those that register names in an attempt to squeeze money out of people that actually produce something) have jumped on the use of it. That is how Cisco aquired the use of that name and they are pussies for using it in order to ride on Apples coat tails. They know full well that if it has an i in front of it, it is thought to be an Apple product(with that it gets credit for being a well built, creatively designed product which cisco obviously isn't capable of) by most of the buying public.

 

[theHawk]

Cisco is not the type of company that is out to hype up some product to the mass market morons that buy whatever crap looks and sounds cool. The name iphone was originally trademarked in 1993 by a small company(bought out later by Cisco). Whether or not its "creative" by Cisco is irrelevant, I'm simply saying they have a pretty good case when it goes to court.

 

[sitarro]

Cisco is not the type of company that is out to hype up some product to the mass market morons that buy whatever crap looks and sounds cool.

You mean like PS3, Microsoft's zzzZune and Vista, Harry Potter?

The name iphone was originally trademarked in 1993 by a small company(bought out later by Cisco).

I knew about that, this is what Cisco is saying....

http://apple.slashdot.org/apple/07/01/11/1745216.shtml

"The day after Apple announced its iPhone, Cisco sued over the name. Mark Chandler, Cisco's SVP and General Counsel, has posted an explanation of the suit on his blog: 'For the last few weeks, we have been in serious discussions with Apple over how the two companies could work together and share the iPhone trademark. ...I was surprised and disappointed when Apple decided to go ahead and announce their new product with our trademarked name without reaching an agreement. It was essentially the equivalent of "we're too busy."' What did Cisco want? '[We] wanted an open approach. We hoped our products could interoperate in the future.'"

Whether or not its "creative" by Cisco is irrelevant, I'm simply saying they have a pretty good case when it goes to court.

If it goes to court, this is just more press for a product that isn't even expected on the market till June. By the time the case is ready for court wouldn't it be a big new story to announce the real name with all of the extra features that are actually available for a lower price than was expected?

 

[sitarro]

How interesting, it would seem that Cisco could have nothing but bullshit going for them and Jobs knew it before Tuesday, should be interesting and the court case will just keep it in the press for free...... these guys aren't beginners in marketing strategies.


http://blogs.zdnet.com/Burnette/?p=236

Ed Burnette

Software, gadgets and games

January 12th, 2007
Cisco lost rights to iPhone trademark last year, experts say
Posted by Ed Burnette @ 12:35 pmCategories: General


An investigation into the ongoing trademark dispute between Cisco and Apple over the name "iPhone" appears to show that Cisco does not own the mark as claimed in their recent lawsuit. This is based on publicly available information from the US Patent and Trademark office, as well as public reviews of Cisco products over the past year. The trademark was apparently abandoned in late 2005/early 2006 because Cisco was not using it.

According to Jay Behmke, a partner at CMPR who specializes in trademark law,

The Cisco iPhone trademark was registered 11/16/1999 (Reg. No. 2293011). In order to keep a trademark registration active, you have to file a Declaration of Use on or before the sixth anniversary of the registration date, in which you state, under penalty of perjury, that you have been using the trademark continuously during that period. The sixth anniversary would have been 11/16/2005.

Cisco did not file the Declaration of Use by 11/16/2005, which if they had been using the trademark would seemingly have been easy to do. However, the USPTO gives you an extra six months grace period, if you pay an extra fee. This grace period would have expired 5/16/2006. Cisco filed a Declaration of Use on 5/4/2006 which kept their registration active. Had they not filed, their registration would have been canceled.

With the Declaration, you are required to file a copy of a label or other packaging showing the trademark in use. Cisco filed a picture of the box for the Linksys iPhone.



A cropped version of the picture filed by Cisco is shown above. You can find the full image on the USPTO web site. The picture shows a box for the Linksys CIT200 Cordless Internet Telephony Kit, with a sticker showing the word "iPhone™" affixed to the back, outside the shrink wrap. The front of the box is not shown, but it doesn't appear that the word iPhone appears anywhere else on the box.

A search of product reviews of the CIT200 shows no mention of the word iPhone [1]. The first mention appeared in December 2006 when Cisco unveiled a series of new products bearing the iPhone name. It was not until then that the CIT200 was rebranded under the iPhone moniker [2].

Tom Keeting, CTO of TMC Labs writes:

In fact, this seems to be true since the Linksys CIT200 and the Linksys CIT310, (both of which I reviewed) are now called the iPhone and were only recently renamed on December 18th. Specifically, each Linksys/Cisco product is called the Cordless Internet Telephony Kit or iPhone for short. The PDF manuals still reference the old name, such as this manual for the CIT200 and I couldn't find a single reference to the word "iPhone" in the manual even though I see "iPhone®" with the registered trademark throughout their website. I guess they missed that. Time to re-print/convert those PDFs!

This information indicates that Cisco did not actively offer a product named "iPhone" between 1999 and December 2006. But they knew Apple was interested in the name because Apple had approached them and negotiations were ongoing. Jay Behmke writes:

If Cisco didn't launch a product using the iPhone name, their trademark registration would be canceled and they would have no bargaining chips with Apple. So in order to keep the trademark active, they had to file the Declaration of Use, and start selling a product under that trademark.

It is possible that the Declaration of Use is defective, as there was no continuous use, and the sample that Cisco submitted was for a product not released until 7 months later. The fact that the Declaration of Use was submitted only days before the deadline expires gives me the impression that they were scrambling to get a product to market, and had to file the Declaration before the product was ready.

If Apple can prove in federal court that the Declaration of Use contained misstatements of fact, i.e. that there was no continuous use, then Cisco's registration can be canceled. This could clear the way for the next company in line for the iPhone trademark, Ocean Telecom Services LLC (widely regarded as a front company for Apple). It could also explain why Apple decided not to sign the agreement Cisco proposed. Behmke:

Without the registration, Cisco and Apple would still have a trademark dispute to resolve, but Cisco will have a harder time proving that it has valid trademark rights.

Cisco acquired the trademark when it purchased Infogear in 2000. Ironically, Infogear was granted the trademark after it was abandoned by its previous owner, a company called "Cidco".

Notes:

[1] Reviews of the CIT200, which do not mention "iPhone":

Linksys CIT200 Skype phone review (October 10, 2005)
Linksys debuts cordless Skype VoIP handset (October 11, 2005)
Linksys CIT200 Internet Telephony Kit review (January 11, 2006)
Linksys CIT200 cordless Skype handset (April 11, 2006)
Amazon listing for CIT200 (January 12, 2007)
[2] The Cisco/Linksys iPhone launch in December 2006:

Introducing the iPhone—But Not from Apple (December 18, 2006)
iPhone launched… but not by Apple (December 18, 2006)
Related articles:

Apple vs. Cisco over iPhone
Cisco on brink of losing iPhone name in Europe

 

[liberalogic]

I just watch the full (1 hour plus) presentation of the soon to be release (June 2007) Apple i Phone. What a technological marvel. It does it all. Music,Pictures,Internet, and of course mobil phone. The spec's on this thing looks like borrowed alien technology. There is nothing on the market currently or fourth coming that can even come close to this new device. I hear the patented technology is well protected from copy cats and people who would seize the new multi touch format and re engineer it. I know PC's rule the planet in numbers, but for highly skilled computing, the newer iMac are light years ahead in everything from multi media to just being better at user friendly. If you currently own or have seen an Apple iPod this is the next step in evolution for the Internet, multi media, mobil phone and so on. I give it a perfect 10! Just my 2 cents

Great, another thing to make me feel socially, economically, and technologically inferior. Can't we just be happy with what we have?

 

[manu1959]

Umm, Cisco is a way bigger company than Apple. 80-90% of internet equipment is Cisco. Trust me you're using Cisco if your reading this.

apple is on my shit list not cisco

 

[Annie]

apple is on my shit list not cisco

We disagree on something! The sky still there? I love my G5!