x5315 Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 It's True http://www.apple.com/iphone I've already made my fake picture. I'm the one on the right. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TetsuoShima Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 Looks like it won't be called that for long... Cisco has had iPhone as a brandname for over 5 years and have sued Apple over it. (Trivia: Apple recently changed it's official name from 'Apple Computer', to just plain 'Apple') Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vektram Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 Interesting. Looks like Cisco is pretty angry. http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=2786473 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiggy Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 I am very surprised that Apple Computers have been able to change their name to Apple..................although Apple are huge Apple Records which was fouded in the 1960's used that brand name. Here is their logo design from 2006...........the record company is still active. Apple Records signed up lesser known bands such as the Beatles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x5315 Posted January 13, 2007 Author Share Posted January 13, 2007 I am very surprised that Apple Computers have been able to change their name to Apple..................although Apple are huge Apple Records which was fouded in the 1960's used that brand name. Here is their logo design from 2006...........the record company is still active. Apple Records signed up lesser known bands such as the Beatles. not quite. Apple Corp is run by the families of the Beatles members. But think Apple Corps is different to Apple Incorporated. Record label is different to Selling Music , hardware and software. So it's all slightly different. Another thing i noticed is that the Beatles were available on the iTunes music store. Me thinks that this may be part of the deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurion Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 [yt=380,305]FhMy2AILFac[/yt] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wahaha Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 So.... it's basically a PDA that makes calls. BORING. I'm not even impressed by cell phones, let alone this thing. And who the hell wants to watch TV on a 16-bit resolution screen?? Come on. Not to mention the bandwidth these networks have in the US is more constricted than a constipated amoeba. You want to see real phones and broadband networks, goto Japan. They do that isht the right way. America has no sense when it comes to technology, or anything else. I can't believe they'll try to make money off this thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raven3x7 Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Record label is different to Selling Music , hardware and software. hmm i don't see the difference. In fact there was a lawsuit by Apple Records against Apple Computers but i don't really remember the outcome. I guess they struck a deal. What i really can't understand is that Apple knew that iPhone was a Cisco trademark. They even were negotiating with them. What do they expect to gain from all of this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurion Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Not to mention Apple has given so much emphasis to the three-in-one aspect of the device, yet they go and name it iPhone... Go figure! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorunNova Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 I'll wait until they release the iDamnedNearEverything... or iSpoon, for short. "SPOOOOOOOOOOON!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Megalith Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Wasnt the ispoon a medieval torture implement, guess apple would be bein sued by the ghost of Torquemada. Oh and i must add nobody expects the Spanish inquisition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 If I just go and copyright i* does that mean I can go and ask Apple for a lot of money because I own root? To be honest, I don't really get what the big deal is - other than the fact it's a big deal. GASP! An item that can be mobile phone, internet accesser and music player! IF ONLY SOMEONE HAD THOUGHT OF IT BEFORE! Now, Apple have managed to build much more user friendly technology than possibly all their rivals... but the prevalence of their brand has grown to the point where I won't buy it specifically because hearing about iPods in EVERY SINGLE TV AND COMIC has just pushed me over the edge. I have now murdered over 500 iPod users and I'll triple that number before they take me down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wahaha Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 I know the next tech item that wil kick this iphone to the grave. The Optimus OLED keyboard. LCD screens in each key that can be animated and can display multiple language symbols on the keys. Now THAT is Fkin innovation! And about damn time. Although it looks like the resolution on the keys could have been improved a bit more. Just like the slackers who put 16-bit screens in cell phones that have 2Mp 32-bit cameras. What the F, and you want people to watch TV on it? I'm sick of low resolution junk. http://www.artlebedev.com/everything/optimus/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 I wouldnt touch a IPod or any other apple product, the Ipod has had battery problems for years, Also had one and I hate having to use itunes, also this Iphone is just becasuse there starting to loss ground to the mobile phone market and want a slice of that. Who on earth makes a phone like this that aint got 3G on it.....not to mention paying £250 - £300 for a phone!! [br]Posted on: January 15, 2007, 10:27:39 AMI wouldnt touch a IPod or any other apple product, the Ipod has had battery problems for years, Also had one and I hate having to use itunes, also this Iphone is just becasuse there starting to loss ground to the mobile phone market and want a slice of that. Who on earth makes a phone like this that aint got 3G on it.....not to mention paying £250 - £300 for a phone!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFMF Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 neomaster - you double poster! You're worse than the spam bots! :D But yes i agree - i would never by an apple product either. They seem to have some major issues and the same technology can be found in other, better products. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 lol it came up with a error when i posted the first ...HONEST ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFMF Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 From the looks of things, Apple aren't that bothered about the lawsuit Apple bullish over Cisco iPhone lawsuit Apple is not worried about the suit and believes it will win if taken to court. We think Cisco's trademark lawsuit is silly," Natalie Kerris, Apple's director of music public relations, told PC Advisor's sister title Macworld. "There are already several companies using the name iPhone for VoIP [voice over IP] products, and we believe Cisco's US trademark registration is tenuous at best." So much arguing over nothing ::) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TetsuoShima Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 This is basically typical Apple behaviour and that's one of the reasons why I'll never buy anything Apple... (Apple is like Microsoft, but only 10x worse...) They want to have it all for free and have other pay for it andwhile they're at it, push everybody else out of the market by unfair competition (ex. iPod and iTunes and proprietary DRM). It's logical that several companies use iPhone for their VOIP products, since iPhone is exactly that, most likely they either pay for the use or Cisco doesn't deem them enough of a threat to sue them, which is their privilege as rightholders over the trademark and does not mean that another company can take that as a sign that they don't have to pay when asked by the holder. Cisco (or the company they bought that originally had it), has been using this since the first half of the 90's. If Apple doesn't lose this case, then all trademark are up for grabs. Then again, a lot of laws are so flawed that maybe they only have to stick to the letter of the law and not the spirit, in which case they stand a chance. The only region where they have a viable case is in Europe, where Cisco only recently started using the name, so Apple can argue that they started using the name to make sure they could keep the trademark when Apple would introduce their phone (if a trademark is not used for a certain period of time (after registering) it becomes void). Trademarks are extremely valuable in todays market and companies spend a lot of money protecting them. Though personally I don't understand the recent craze for i... products... Why don't I introduce an iBox (what's in it will be a surprise), I bet it's going to be a big hit... :-\ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now