> It's a pretty common opinion nowadays...
Apple is not the worst of the bunch. You have nothing to qualify that statement other than a hand-waving gesture.
The undisputed #1 king of patent trolls is former Microsoft CTO Nathan Myhrvold's company Intellectual Ventures and its various holding companies that sue anyone and everyone with patents that contain no technology but do contain lots of language that's very lawsuit friendly as the claims are sweepingly broad. Recently they tried to sue a large number of small developers that were using "in app purchasing" technology.
Number two is Microsoft who is extorting upwards of $15 per Android phone sold from a number of vendors as part of their "fair licensing" program even though zero Microsoft code is used in those phones.
Number three would be Oracle if only they could get better lawyers and a more agreeable jury.
Apple has been fighting to push back at the tide of design violations put forward by companies like Samsung and others. If you can name even one instance of where Apple has directly sued a small company over a technology patent I would be surprised.
You seem to have absolutely no idea what Microsoft was up to "even back in the day" because it was far worse than anything Apple has ever done. Remember the bait-and-switch with OS/2? The pricing scheme where DOS was $60 and the very same DOS + Windows was $30? Where companies like Dell had to pay a license fee on every machine sold regardless of if it was sold with Windows or not? The way they would switch up Windows to "break" other competing applications like WordPerfect and Lotus 1-2-3?
You seem to have forgotten that it was an arms-length Microsoft deal that enabled SCO to turn zombie and threatening hundreds if not thousands of companies that were simply using Linux, not even developing their own software.
The reason you're completely mystified is because you haven't done any research.
Apple is not the worst of the bunch. You have nothing to qualify that statement other than a hand-waving gesture.
The undisputed #1 king of patent trolls is former Microsoft CTO Nathan Myhrvold's company Intellectual Ventures and its various holding companies that sue anyone and everyone with patents that contain no technology but do contain lots of language that's very lawsuit friendly as the claims are sweepingly broad. Recently they tried to sue a large number of small developers that were using "in app purchasing" technology.
Number two is Microsoft who is extorting upwards of $15 per Android phone sold from a number of vendors as part of their "fair licensing" program even though zero Microsoft code is used in those phones.
Number three would be Oracle if only they could get better lawyers and a more agreeable jury.
Apple has been fighting to push back at the tide of design violations put forward by companies like Samsung and others. If you can name even one instance of where Apple has directly sued a small company over a technology patent I would be surprised.
You seem to have absolutely no idea what Microsoft was up to "even back in the day" because it was far worse than anything Apple has ever done. Remember the bait-and-switch with OS/2? The pricing scheme where DOS was $60 and the very same DOS + Windows was $30? Where companies like Dell had to pay a license fee on every machine sold regardless of if it was sold with Windows or not? The way they would switch up Windows to "break" other competing applications like WordPerfect and Lotus 1-2-3?
You seem to have forgotten that it was an arms-length Microsoft deal that enabled SCO to turn zombie and threatening hundreds if not thousands of companies that were simply using Linux, not even developing their own software.
The reason you're completely mystified is because you haven't done any research.