The idea that Apple 'doesn't want apps to talk to each other' is just a lie made up to malign apple.
Apple built the URL launching system and the pasteboard which together allow apps to safely transfer arbitrary amounts of data to other apps and transfer control.
What they haven't done, is dictate how apps should interact with each other - they've left that open to developers to negotiate with each other.
Ink has taken these facilities and used them to build higher level functionality that takes this negotiation out of the equation for the supported workflows. As an OS vendor, this is exactly what Apple wants people to do with the technologies they provide.
CLAIMS
The ornamental design of an electronic device, substantially as shown and described.
The picture clearly shows more than just two attributes and is a key part of the exhibit.
I make no secret of defending Apple against false accusations. They are in no way a flawless company, but the mindless pile on of inaccurate statements helps nobody.
This sounds like an apology. Openness is just not a high enough priority for them. It's just not their goal to release an open device otherwise they wouldn't have released this.
It's their goal to do whatever it takes to compete aggressively and if openness can win them PR, they'll do it, but it isn't a goal in itself.
Well, I see that people have figured out why I'm quitting AOSP.
There's no point being the maintainer of an Operating System that can't boot to the home screen on its flagship device for lack of GPU support, especially when I'm getting the blame for something that I don't have authority to fix myself and that I had anticipated and escalated more than 6 months ahead.
So much for all that noise from Google about 'openness'. The detractors were right.
This document proves that the meme is false and that Apple did not attempt to protect 'rounded corners'.
Apple asserted a design patent that protects the overall appearance of the iPhone - the 'trade dress'. Rounded corners are one of many attributes that describe the appearance of the iPhone. If you copy enough attributes - as the court ruled that Samsung did, you have copied the appearance.
Taking a single element out of context is a lie that Samsung originated, designed to give the appearance that Apple attempted to protect a ridiculously broad concept which the documents show that they did not do.
Fair enough - however there is no evidence of how far up the stack that data goes - accelerometers do sudden movement sensing on-chip - not via the CPU.
It's not an Amazing find at all, given that apple has built a relatively sophisticated UI for it.
It's public facing precisely because people are concerned about this kind of data collection. This way you can make an informed choice about what apps can see about you and what to send to apple.
- Whether this information is collected at all
- which specific apps can access it
- whether apple can receive an anonymized copy of it to improve their maps
The data is stored securely on your device and you can see it delete it.