“As the iPhone celebrates its 10-year anniversary this year, it’s easy to take for granted all the big (and little) things that went into making the game-changing device a reality,” Mark Spoonauer writes for Tom’s Guide. “And while the mercurial and inspiring Steve Jobs certainly had a lot of influence over the iPhone’s design and features, dozens of engineers, designers and others gave rise to the handset — and its successors — through a series of truly impressive innovations.”
“Brian Merchant’s The One Device chronicles this journey, from the birth of multitouch and the cramming of OS X into a 3.5-inch slab of glass to the arrival of the App Store (no, it wasn’t there at the phone’s 2007 launch),” Spoonauer writes. “I had an opportunity to chat with Merchant about the iPhone and its evolution, and there are plenty of surprises.”
10 things you didn’t know about the iPhone here.
MacDailyNews Take: We think we knew, but had forgotten, airplane bathroom doors inspired slide to unlock and we absolutely love that 1980s video game classics like Pac-Man and Donkey Kong inspired UI elements like Bas Ording’s iconic iOS “rubber band” (or inertial scrolling) effect!
Jobs personally hired Bas Ording who designed the magnifier effect on icons. Bas later invented the bounce effect which I thinkis so cool. It was revolutionary but then that browser/spy company stole it.
Even Isaac Newton couldn’t patent the bounce effect, it does not pass the test for patent ability. A patent must be:
– Of patentable subject matter.
There was a time software was not patentable, that’s not the case now, but it should still be.
Mathematical equations are not patentable still.
– Novel.
A bouncing effect is not new. Not even in Newton’s day. Heck not even in Adam’s day.
-Non Obvious
It’s obvious how to do it.
-Useful
Many things that are not appropriate for patent are covetable by trademark, trade dress, or copywrite.
You sure whine about Apple a lot.
The comment was about patenting. Did you see the A word in my post?
Um, yes, the A word is in every one of your posts, applecynic, or maybe you should change your name to applewhiner because all you do is whine, whine, whine (verb: give or make a long, high-pitched complaining cry or sound).
Sorry, didn’t know you were at that “awkward age”. There’s 2 As for you. I figure you don’t get those often.
Nice deflection. Continue your whining, whiner.
No deflection. “Bounce” is not patentable!
Very apt. The MDN king of deflection and hit and run comments. Guess truth is just too hard to face when all you care about is saving face. And yes, he whines about Apple way TOO much …
What truth dear Jabroni, I did not refer to Apple and “Bounce” is not patentable.
You have a bad habit of deflection and only caring about WHAT YOU WROTE. On the flip side of the fair engagement coin you totally and consistently IGNORE other opinions. Grow up, junior …
@GeoB
You imply that I should be defending things I didn’tsay.
Who else’s words would I be defending against a direct rebuttal of my own words?
Don’t worry, stay with it, you’re doing great. English as a second language is difficult!
Nice try, deflection commander …
When it is appropriate and fair, then you can comment on whining, applewhiner. In this case, however, applecynic’s post is well-reasoned and an appropriate forum response.
If people get too sensitized and sound off at everything, then their inputs are rightly disregarded. Don’t be one of those people, applewhiner.
Gee, another INSTANT FAKE COWARD POSTER of the day!
Applewhiner is correct. Applecynic is a notorious Apple whiner and a deflection artist incapable of a fair discussion. You can leave now FAKE poster …
Could it be any more obvious that applecynic posted this reply? Pathetic.
Wrong again numbnuts!
I don’t stop to that level.
You don’t stop on what level?
Stoop to that level…
Guess you’ll remember this misspelling episode of yours the next time you correct and admonish someone else.
RINO, remember now?
Fair enough… Really wish we could edit.
Cool …
It’s likely Apple didn’t properly patent it’s iOS UI well enough, so it was fair game for anyone to use. Google was smart enough to patent-protect its PageRank algorithm so no company can take it away. Practically anything Apple does with its hardware can easily be duplicated without much trouble by other manufacturers except for the A-series processor. At one point only Apple had 3D touch, but I think now there are Android smartphones that do the same thing. I guess Apple wasn’t able to patent that action.
Apple has basically become a hardware developer for Android manufacturers to copy. It’s possible it works both ways but I don’t follow all the things that Android OS may have had before iOS.
I’m sure if Apple actually does have some laser-based measuring ability in the next iPhone, every flagship Android smartphone will have it six months from the iPhone’s release. That’s probably something that can’t be patented, so Apple can’t prevent it from happening. It’s too bad Apple can’t come up with some specialized iPhone tech that can’t be easily copied.
I’m always thinking about why Apple with all of its money can’t put some specialized tech in the iPhone that other companies can’t afford to copy, but I suppose that would hurt profit margins too much.
It also falls under the competitor defense of “Well it’s an obvious solution” when in hindsight everything is. What is a patent but taking disparate combinations of things and making something new out of it? And it’s not only the culture dumbing down in regards to blithely defending patents it’s the doofus Justice bench spinning their own logic.
Well, yes, patents are difficult to get. They should be. It’s a legal monopoly to an idea for 20 years.
The general test of novelty is if it’s obvious to one “skilled in the art”.
Before Apple’s 3D Touch, Android had a long press ‘gesture’. In Apple’s current implementation of 3D touch it differs very little in result excepting the ‘undo’ when you release pressure.
Long press is nothing more than a timing thing. Comparing that to 3D Touch is ludicrous.
Gesture and result are similar enough to make them comparable.
Apple patented it lots. Lucy Koh refused to include myriad patents in the huge screw-up that was the Samsung v Apple court case years ago. Total disaster for the legal system, for patents, and for Apple. Total success for rip-off artists, like Samsung and, I might add, Google.
I’m sure I can find this on the inter-web somewhere, but what was it that Steve Jobs said “and we patented the heck out of this thing” or something like that. Was that iPhone?
Yep. In his speech when he unveiled the iPhone. But hack (judge) Lucy Koh was instructed (bribed) to rule in Scamscum’s favor and invalidated decades of patent law.
On the Siri thing, it’s the opposite. The user is usually the one cursing at Siri.
“A scaled-down version of OS X, which would later become iOS, won out. The software team was let by Scott Forstall …”
A guy with this kind of talent and experience was let go??? …
I just started reading Merchant’s book, and I appreciate that he covers many of the background developers of the iPhone. I suspect it will provide great detail of its creation. The book is tainted by a palpable hatred of Steve Jobs: in the just first few chapters, the author has railed several times against the acclaim bestowed upon Jobs. I am hopeful that what may prove to be a marvelous chronicle won’t be minimized by a personal war against one man.
The palpable hatred of Steve Jobs, which existed before his death, has been transmuted into a palpable hatred of Tim Cook. I hypothesise that, in psychological terms, this CEO personal hatred is a simple transference effect; i.e. the root of the hatred is for Apple itself and all it represents. I predict a similarly disrespectful treatment of any Apple CEO who succeeds Tim Cook. The disrespect already dwells in the ranks of Apple’s other CEOs like Gil Amelio and the Pepsi salesman.
The post-mortem deification of Steve Jobs is a huge con job. He was vilified in life, yet receives hosannas in death as a rhetorical device to besmirch the current CEO. We live in a universe of armchair quarterbacks blessed with 20-20 hindsight and access to the internet where they amass their stupid opinions into a statistical statement as shaky as MLB all-star voting.
The real question has always been NOT who is responsible for Apple’s fall from grace, but why people have always hated Apple. They hated Apple when it was an upstart, when it became a contender, when it drew even with industry stallions, and when it won outright like Secretariat.
I think people hate a winner who comes from behind to defeat the horses they themselves had bet on, and continues to stymie them in every race. I think people who hate Apple hate that Apple wins despite what people think, despite being lame, despite not being first out of the gate, always able to make up lost ground despite the favourites’ head start, through some kind of chicanery that is patently unfair. Apple is a horse of a different colour, and markets consider that somehow shady.
What the f*ck is your point?!?!?!
My point is that people trashing Tim Cook are really trashing Apple. Why was that so hard to grasp?
Botty, myself and others, don’t want to use the word trash, have consistenly been disappointed with TC performance as CEO.
For you to say we trash all of Apple along with him is a stretch and unfair, sorry …
Reduzir estresse. E’, realmente, uma otima recomendacao. http://tirlyam.teatrbratsk.ru/content/marilia-mendonca-aparece-mais-magra-ao-perder-8kg-e-faz-tratamento-contra-flacidez
Sorry, the guy you’re looking for is not here.