Phone Storage Woes, Maybe

Read this article and then come back.

Nougat something or other, I don’t remember the article title.

Sorry… I used to be a teacher. Here, let me summarise for you:

Google is making Android updates go faster. This means less interruptions for updates. It also means more storage space is used on your phone.

“This will use more space on your phone’s internal storage.”

So, my thought? If phone manufacturers, and software developers are going to use more of our storage space, then I think they need to give us more storage space. Like, make a 64gb Nougat phone similarly priced as a 32gb Marshmallow phone. It’s not our fault the Android OS takes up so much space. Don’t tell me it’s a 32gb phone but the OS takes up half the storage space!

This has always irked me. But seeing as hard drives are generally cheap, it’s never been that big of a deal for me. Especially now with my 3TB hard drive!

The real problem with an OS taking up so much space comes into play mostly just with phones and tablets. SSD’s are still pretty expensive, so manufacturers put the smallest chips possible in their phones. The phones with more storage cost more primarily because of the storage increase. And this is a problem for two reasons:


Look at Apple. They have a 16gb iPhone… iOS literally takes up almost half of the storage space. It’s fairly similar for Android and Windows, but neither are so big as to render half of your storage unavailable to you. Until now. That is. Android will soon be so big (it’s going to have 2 system partitions) that a 16gb or even a 32gb storage chip will be left with only enough room for a few apps, some songs, and maybe 1 downloaded map (I’m not the only one who pre-downloads maps, right?). Bigger OS, less space for your stuff… on your phone.


They’ve been playing this game for a while. There’s the technical aspect of system software needing storage space so of course it’s going to take up space on your SSD which means you won’t really have the amount of storage it says on the box because thats just how it works. But there’s also the side each one of these companies is exploiting. “The new and improved iDroid Phone, with 128gb of storage!” Only, you find out the OS, system files, recovery partitions, and backup storage takes up half of that so you only have 64gb of storage space available to you. You notice that you don’t have the amount of space you thought you were going to get and you complain. “C’mon! Every idiot knows the system files takes up storage space! Get with the program grandma!”


Wait… I said there were only two. Oh well: THREE! another problem with all of this is that the industry doesn’t think of it as a problem. Microsoft got in deep water one year when a new Version of Windows was set to take up 10gb of hard drive space. With a 3TB hard drive, that’s not a problem. But with the 80-120gb hard drives of the time being normal (but quickly jumping to 320gb and beyond on newer PCs) 10gb of storage space lost to the system files was huge. Especially when mp3’s, video games, and other software quickly ate up storage. Microsoft made the next version “lighter” and has since kept the required system space as small as possible, for fear of backlash. Yet, Android is proposing a system that will take up more space on your phone. The benefit? You don’t have to wait 15 minutes for the phone to update. You know, because Android users don’t ever sleep, so the phone can’t update overnight or anything… It’s just strange that people don’t know, or they don’t seem to care about how much space Android takes up and how companies like Google just play off the ignorance of their customers. “That 16gb phone run out of space? You should upgrade to the newest phone with 64gb of storage. That’ll be $299.99. C’mon, it’s only 200 bucks. You can swing that every six months, right? ūüėČ 

My plan has always been one that is very simple. I think what phone manufactress should do is put two SSD’s into their phones. One just big enough for the OS, system files, recovery partition, and maybe a little extra space for updates. Then the other SSD would be just for my stuff. A whole 64gb chip just for my apps, music, games, pictures, videos, and whatever else I want to put on my phone. We can already move many apps to an SD card shoved into our phone. And I can’t believe that having two “drives” in a phone would be any more difficult than doing it on a desktop. You’d just have to write the software to take advantage of the setup.

Ok. Rant over. I think that was a rant. It started out as a comment to the above article. But the app wouldn’t let me post the comment for some reason. So, WordPress to the rescue!

-Diggs out

OMG! Crap Old Technology is Coming Soon! Thanks Out-of-Date Articles

The person or website to develop this type of software implementation will be a hero in my book.

I can’t tell you how many times I have been reading an article on a website such as Engadget, C|Net, Wired, or Gizmodo and found articles which seem to be relevant to the information I’m reading, but turn out to be old, outdated, useless articles about stuff which has already been resolved, released, or beaten to death by every blogger on the Internet.

This system is outdated in itself. When an article is written it is given markers such as categories and tags. These markers are used to make article suggestions. Mostly, these article suggestions serve the same purpose as the article title (which rarely relates to the actual content of the article, sort of like my blog). They’re only there to make you read more of the website’s stuff and get them lots of hits, and increase their ratings, and get them more money. Very rarely do these articles have anymore information you could use. I constantly notice these articles are much older than the one I just read. Older article means older information. Older information in the technology world means outdated information.

The part which strikes me particularly odd is how these articles are dated. Yet, when a newer article comes out these old articles linger. Why? They’re outdated. Some articles will be updated with information as it becomes available, but usually this is an official statement by the company the article is about. Basically they write a scathing review of some companies alleged actions and then wait to hear from the company. That’s guilty until proven innocent. Kind of backwards.

Each of these articles should have some sort of timeline feature. Something that allows 1 article to be written if that’s all which is needed. But then, also allow for a type of “update” to the article to be written later, with the older article still in tact, in a sense, but with the new, updated information placed at the forefront. This would alleviate the number of redundant articles that are posted while also placing the important information about a topic all together. Then, these (very specific topics) could be linked together with categories and tags.

For example:

Let’s say the iCandy 6 was released about 5 months ago and rumors are beginning to spread about the iCandy 6X. So naturally, every iTechnology blogger is hemorrhaging “facts” they’ve uncovered about the new device. You know, things like a 10 times faster processor, a camera that can see into your soul, a microphone that can hear your grandpa fart from two rooms over, and a battery that can be recharged with goats blood. So, writes their article about the features this revolutionary fondle phone will finally get. Then, just 8 days later, everyone’s favorite sun-ripened tech giant announces the iCandy 6X+. They don’t give you what promised, but you buy it anyway because, let’s face it, they own you and your digital content and the only escape you have is found in your medicine cabinet.

Now, when goes to write more information about the actual product they don’t create a brand new article. Instead they amend their previous article. They add the actual specs, the actual names, and the actual release dates. This new information is displayed right up front, but with the original article. It’s all on the same page; pictures, links, and everything. Now, the only place you have to go to read about the upcoming and then real release of your favorite thing for the next 2 months is just one page. Every time there is an update, it can be placed on this page.

This works with more than just a single product as well. Let’s say TootyFruity and Singsing are getting ready to sue each other. So, naturally must defend their mother country from the attacks of the ne’er-do-wells who are only out to copy the masters of the rectangle and alphabetized icons. The article would be “Singsing attacks our mommy. We throw our pacifiers at them!” Then, as the case develops they would not write new articles. They would amend the main article. Now, again, you only have to go to one place to get all the information on this specific story.

Doesn’t that sound better?

Yes, Google will sort things by date for me, but that doesn’t help me much when I’m reading an article already. Not to mention, I can’t search with Google if I don’t know what I’m looking for. (at least I don’t think Google has perfected time travel yet)

Oh, and “hubs” are stupid. They’re still unorganized and full of outdated articles.

Windows Phone 8 and the Coming Apocalypse

I just bought the Nokia Lumia¬†900, a Windows Phone running version 7.5 of the Microsoft mobile OS; affectionately called Mango. Today I learned Apollo, that’s the code name for Windows Phone version 8, will not be installed on my phone. No matter how much I want it, I won’t get an update to WP8. I will however get an upgrade to WP 7.8.¬† What does this mean? It means I will get some visual enhancements as well as a few new features, but nowhere near the functionality of a Windows Phone 8 device. And let me tell you: I… am… furious…ly… annoyed by the idiots who keep acting like this is a big deal.

Let me enlighten you:

Every time¬†Apple put out an update to iOS, the older models have NEVER received¬†all the features of the newest device. NEVER! iPhone 4S¬†gets Siri. Siri is not a hardware upgrade for the 4S. It is basically a piece of software, or app if you will, which adds a new type of functionality. Why couldn’t all the iPhone models get Siri? If they all got Siri, Apple wouldn’t have an impressive reason for people to buy the 4S. Do I smell marketing? That’s all it was. Even still, not too many people were upset about it. Even the all-powerful¬†Woz¬†stated that the Siri software was much better before Apple purchased it. But still, nobody cares. Even if you just bought the iPhone 4S¬†and all of a sudden Apple shows off the iPhone 5 with all these features and functionality upgrades you wouldn’t get because you only have the iPhone 4S and there’s nothing you can do but take the phone back and buy the new one when it comes out NOBODY would care!

Why do people care when Microsoft does it?

In this article, a man writes an e-mail to Nokia’s Stephen Elop¬†and AT&T’s Ralph de la Vega threatening to drop AT&T, Nokia, and Microsoft from his life. Why? Because his new Nokia Lumia¬†900 Windows Phone will not get an update to WP8. Instead, as I said before, the Lumia¬†will get the 7.8 update. Oh, poor, poor me with my Nokia Lumia¬†900 with no upgrade path to WP8. Damn you Microsoft and Nokia. Damn you all to hell!


You want to know the difference between Windows Phone 8 and Windows Phone 7.8? Here it is: hardware. That’s really it. Right now Microsoft has very strict device specs for the Window Phone 7 family. Manufacturers must keep to these or they don’t get the license for Windows Phone 7. The same holds true for Windows Phone 8. The new Windows Phone 8 devices will have different hardware specs, and as such they have the software to utilize the new hardware features. If you have a Windows Phone 7 device you wouldn’t be able to use any of those features anyway, so why would you want that software on your phone? And what exactly does this guy expect? Is Nokia supposed to take his phone, install an NFC chip, a couple or processor cores, and an SD card slot, and then give it back with that functionality? As if! Apple didn’t take people’s old iPhones and install a Retina display in them. If you wanted a Retina display, Siri, or any of the other upgrades on the newer iPhone 4S then you had to buy the newer iPhone 4S.That’s just the way it is. And that’s always going to be the way it is.

When I bought my first Android phone from AT&T, the HTC¬†Aria, I was annoyed¬†by the news of MUCH¬†better phones being announced¬†for the very near future. The HTC Evo 4G, the Motorola Droid X, etc, etc. Was I mad, livid even, to the point of yelling out in frustration at the drizzling sky while the camera backs away, spinning to show my grief and confusion about “why, oh why is this happening to me”? No. That’s what happens. You buy a car, and a better car comes out. You buy the best computer and it’s outdated in a week. You finally shell out for that awesome phone everyone is talking about and your favorite fruits release a new one.¬†Welcome to¬†the universe of technology! Companies make new, better¬†devices all the time. OR would you prefer: Welcome to the world of business! Companies put out new devices to make more money all the time.

Either way, that’s how it works. You save your money, finally buy the item you always wanted, and something better comes out.¬†The other option would be to¬†save your money and¬†wait. If the newer device comes out you hold off and save a little more money so you can buy the new one. But if you save and wait and save and wait you’ll never make that purchase and never get anything. You’re always going to risk ending up with an outdated device especially when making a technological purchase.

So, get over it Luke! They are giving you most of the upgrades with Windows Phone 7.8. But since your Lumia 900 doesn’t have a bigger screen, or an NFC chip, a multiple core processor, or an expansion slot for an SD card you won’t get those updates. What good would they be to you anyway? Think about it before you get so damn upset.

Sent from my Nokia Lumia 900 Windows Phone.*

A phone I won’t be giving up any time soon.

*this post was not really sent from my Windows Phone… although that would have made this more compelling, I already wrote the article before thinking about it. Oh well.

How Much Suck Could Windows 8 Suck if We Knew What We Were Talking About?

Microsoft began touting Windows 8 quite some time ago. It frustrated me for two reasons: they had no finished product to actually display. It was like looking at a very colorful, tablet version of Window Phone 7. Sure, it looked cool, but it was basically just a concept being shown as if it were ready to shove out the door. What else are you supposed to think when Microsoft has actual tablets running (what appears to be) Windows 8? Now that I love it already (partly because it is different, and partly because it’s not Apple) I have to wait for it to actually become a reality. The waiting makes me angry.

The other reason I became frustrated with the first few screen shots and previews of Windows 8 was the idea that one operating system could actually be placed on desktops and tablets alike. Even now, Windows 7 has multiple flavors, including a version to place on devices used for specific purposes such as point-of-sale or kiosks. And from the buzz on the web you might gather Windows 8 will have between 6 and 10 different versions… presumably that means there will be a tablet-optimized version (perhaps the version made for mobile chips?). Even still, it just didn’t sit right with me and many other people.

When the earliest preview came out I got my hands on it. It didn’t work out well for me. I did get to see some parts of the new OS, but overall I just didn’t have the hardware to run it. One thing I did like very much was the Start button. Not it’s functionality, but the look of the button itself. It was a very simple, black window logo. Unfortunately, clicking on it took you back to the Start Screen instead of opening up the Start Menu. As the OS was completely useless to me because of my hardware limitations I did not miss the Start Menu.

Then I got the Windows 8 Consumer Preview. O. M. G. I don’t have a fancy, multi-touch tablet to test Windows 8 CP; just some old Core 2 Duo machine technically made for Windows XP, but compatible with Windows Vista (remember Vista?). The PC runs fine, except for an issue with my video card (which doesn’t have Windows 7 drivers either), but it’s a desktop. I expect it to work like a desktop. The Start Screen is fancy, useful, and clean. The Metro UI is snappy and quite intuitive (I assume it would be more so if I had a tablet to use it on: sometimes the mouse movements seem unnatural, but with a finger I believe they would make sense). You can get to a desktop mode, which resembles (and I suppose also functions) just like a Windows 7 desktop. There’s just one thing… no Start Button. Why is this a problem? How am I supposed to get to my programs? Am I really expected to swipe around the Start Screen with my mouse? The Ribbon aside, the desktop looks the same, works the same, acts the same, feels the same yet lacks a certain usability because you cannot get to your freakin’ programs! I don’t see how this is going to work… at least for people like me…

I teach (what I call) Computer Sciences at a private middle school. We learn about the Microsoft Office software, mostly, but also delve into other areas such as content creation, desktop publishing, digital multimedia, and even HTML programming. I didn’t realize until just this morning how lazy my students are; and possibly what this means for Windows 8. We just upgraded to Windows 7 computers (brand new this time around) this year. In the past we had Windows XP machines (which were much easier for me to customize for new users, clone, etc.). The teachers had been in charge of teaching computer class for some time now, and most of the elementary teachers still teach the class themselves (grades 2-5). To make things easier on everyone we placed shortcuts for all the programs we would be using (Office, IE, My Documents, My Computer, My Network, and some other programs we had) onto the Desktop. I don’t like having icons cluttering up my desktop, but these kids do. After all, what’s the alternative?

To open a program without a shortcut on the Desktop they have to open the Start Menu, click on All Programs, find and open¬†the program’s folder, and can then finally click on the program icon to open up the program. That’s like a ga-gillion steps! many of them asked if they could place the icons on their desktop and I refused to let them. After all, Windows 7 has the “Pin to Taskbar” feature which I just love. I tried to get them to use this, at least for the programs I needed them to use for their project. Some of them just wanted those icons on their Desktop, though, regardless of how messy and disorganized it looks (although I am beginning to think they put them out there just so they can play with them; moving them around and rearranging them all the time).

And then, again just this morning, I remembered something which should have been apparent the first time I did it. When the students are asked to open a program or file which is not on their Desktop or pinned to the Taskbar, their Google training takes over and they search for this file/program. In Windows 7 you can open the Start Menu and just start typing (and you don’t even need to touch the mouse). You will perform a quick search of the Start Menu, control panel,¬†and recently opened files among other items. In Windows 8 you can do the same thing right from the Start Screen. When you’re on the Start Screen you just start typing and you can find whatever you are looking for. Laziness, it seems, may have won this round.

After giving it some more thought I have decided maybe the lack of a Start Menu isn’t as bad as we thought. Kids these days don’t want to work for something. If they know the name of the program and they can just start typing that name to make it appear in front of them… why not? The only concern I have¬†(besides the fact technology is making it easier to be lazy) is that my students already believe they saved their documents to Word (“Where did you save your document, Susie?” “In Word.” “What folder did you save it in?” “What’s a folder?” *sigh*). They do not understand what a “file” is, nor do they understand how to work with them. They try to “open” pictures with Word instead of inserting pictures into Word documents. They never pay attention to where they save work, rather they just type in a name and hit the save button, believing, once again, they have saved the work to the program they were using. When they switch computers they cannot find their work (which probably wasn’t saved to their network folder, if they can even remember what that is or where it’s located). They don’t have to use computers the way I had to use computers. File structure means nothing to them. They expect to open an “app”, use it, save their work to it, and have their work appear the next time they go to use it again. They have no concept of file types or extensions, either. I try to weave this information into my lessons, but it is difficult to do for this iGeneration. It absolutely frustrates me to no end!

But at least I’m not as livid about the disappearance of the Start Menu anymore. That’s good, right?

Microsft Don’t Need to Steal

I just love it when people start talking about how Microsoft stole everything from Apple. It helps me find all the idiotic fools in the world. I call them fools because they obviously don’t know the meaning of the word “stole” nor do they understand how innovation works.

To steal something is to take it without asking, and most often calling it your own. Stealing is breaking the law. If Microsoft really stole everything from Apple then they are breaking the law. All Apple has to do is charge them with theft and take them to court. If they did indeed steal from Apple, a judge or jury of peers would find Microsoft guilty and they would all go to jail.

However, this has not happened. I can’t recall one story about a person from Microsoft stealing anything from Apple and getting arrested, fined, jailed, or convicted of theft. Most people believe Microsoft stole Windows from Apple, when in fact Apple stole the windowed GUI from Xerox. Yet, still no one was arrested…

And that brings us to the nature of innovation. Invention is creating something new. Most often, invention involves making something which solves a problem. This is usually a new type of device, however, it can consist of parts of other devices. Innovation is taking something which has already been invented and changing it, altering it, or using it in new ways. Nowadays, big busisnesses don’t do too much inventing. The majority of R&D money goes towards innovating. There is still plenty of inventioning going on. It’s just not as important as it used to. Most of the big machines and types of electronics have already been invented. Now, we’re trying to make things less expensive, make machines more energy efficient, and make electronics more powerful.

Actually, there are three things these fools don’t understand. The third thing: businesses have money. I’m not talking about how that rich guy whose kid plays soccer with your kid buys treats and equipment for the team and takes everyone out for pizza after every game. I’m talking about real money. Enough money for Microsoft to say, “hey, Apple already has this patented. So, Let’s pay them to use the patent and then we will be able to mess with and innovate news things. We’ll just keep paying for the patent because we have lots of money. No prob!”

And that’s really what’s going on. Apple doesn’t have to license patents. They do it to make money. If they don’t want Microsoft to have a patent of theirs, they don’t have to license it to them. Microsoft doesn’t just go around stealing ideas and products. They buy ideas and products, pay licensing fees for patents, and purchase companies. As a matter of fact, Apple does the same thing. So does Google, 3M, and to some extent the US government.

Bottom line, if Microsoft was “stealing” everything from Apple, they would be taking legal action against Microsoft. Even if Microsoft began using Apple patents without asking, they could just throw the money Apple’s way and continue their research uninterrupted. Because they have that much money. So, Apple-lovers, stop you’re whining. Apple is letting Microsoft have the ideas. The Mother-Company is selling off it’s ideas directly to the company you accuse of stealing them.

5 Companies – One Product?

I was reading this article just minutes ago. Actually, I was scrolling down the page looking at the titles throughout the article. (It was a really long and rather old article, btw.) Then, I got to my favorite part: the comments. I find the comments to be more informational than most articles I read. I also find them to be simultaneously frustrating and hilarious. First you get the “professional’s” point of view, and then you get view points from people who actually know what they are talking about (for the most part). These are people who have been using the products for years. They have been in the fox hole. They have taken hits and won battles. The war is far from over, and the fun continues through web-news article comments.

Now, every so often I read a comment I do not like. Why? You would probably guess that I am a conservative know-it-all who thinks I know more than you because I went to Harvard, have two Ph. D’s , and have studied civics for the last 25 years. Well, 25 years ago I was 3. So, no, I¬†have not been studying¬†civics since I was 3 years old. And if you know me you know I did not go to Harvard. (Who would want to anyway?) To top it off, I don’t even know what civics is. Here is the comment, for reference:

“And yet another OS that has mimicked webOS “cards”. How could palm and hp drop the ball so bad.”
J McDouche

The reason I did not like his comment is the fact that pattents and copyrights have all but staggered the development of some pretty cool technology over the last few years. Don’t believe me? I don’t care. And I’m not gonna waste my time explaining it because it’s just too difficult for the average person to understand.

So here’s the lowdown: Apple makes something. Tech ‘r Us makes something that is similar to Apple’s. Apple sues Tech ‘r Us for stealing their intelectual information (because heaven forbid someone else¬†use icons to signify applications). Apple usually wins because they are paying off the courts they have more money than the little companies they pick on. So, this technology which usually isn’t being used in any sort of phenominal way, just sits on Apple’s devices with no further development. This technology does not enjoy the fruits of innovation. Sure, maybe Apple ripped everything off of Palm is the first to put this all together, and we count that as innovation, but let’s be honest: Apple, and companies like them, stiffel innovation by taking “intellectual property” too seriously.

For example: Apple sues HTC, Samsung, and a few other smartphone companies for, among other reasons, arranging icons in columns and rows… W…T…F…?!? Are you kidding me? Now, watching things like this happen how can anyone say Apple is legally and logically protecting property? I saw a cell phone company arrange their icons differently. Besides being confusing, it was utterly disgusting to look at. And I’m not even going to mention how Apple is a big, giant chicken; sueing the cell phone hardware manufacturers who just so happen to be running the Android OS, instead of sueing the developers of the Android OS which supposedly infringes on their intellectual property. (oops, did I mention that?) Why would they do such a thing? Oh ya, because Google is the developer of Android and sueing them could be bad for business, cost a lot of money, and it’s not really certain just how things will turn out. At least Apple is pretty sure they can beat a smaller company like HTC into submission (although, they only won a handfull of the suits they brought towards HTC, Samsung, etc.).

I was thinking about this “intellectual property” nonsense and began to develope my own plan for fixing the world of patents, copyright, and intangible property. I began thinking about my computer class.

Let’s say a teacher from another school visits my computer class. She’s heard good things about my computer lab, the curriculum, my games, the technology I use, and the innovating way I use technology. There’s obviously someone talking me up out there, ’cause I don’t do anything terribly interesting. Even still, this teacher wants to see what’s up. Her school could use some new ideas. So she visits my classroom and sees some contingencies she likes, some projects she thinks her kids would enjoy, and some technology (she actually has) being used in new ways. After she has watched my classes all day, taken her notes, and liked what she saw, she asks if she can borrow some of my ideas…

If, at this point in time, I tell her “no way” unless she wants to pay me for them, her computer classes will continue to be bland, uninteresting, uninformative, and not the least bit educational. Her students will become bored, and tire her into letting them play games on the Internet, when they should be learning about Internet safety instead.

However, if I let her use some of my ideas, it’s possible her class will be come more educational, informative, and fun for her students. They will learn more about technology, be more excited about technology and using it properly. The students may even want to learn more, and play games less. All I would ask for is credit for my ideas and credit for showing her other readily available lessons.

But this would never work with patents and copyright. This would require companies like Apple to allow others to use their techniques and simply give them credit (not payment). You would put certain limitations on this:

  1. Point one: certain items would be considered common sense (such as the representation of apps with icons, and the sorting of apps and files in lists, and columns and rows).¬†Companies would just have to get over it. Once something has permeated the landscape as much as pinch-to-zoom it’s just too common place for a company to assume control of it’s placement in devices. Everything does pinch-to-zoom and similar¬†gestures and if you can figure out how to do it on your device, then go ahead, you don’t owe anyone anything.
  2. This takes us to the second part: The true innovators get the credit for developing the technology or software. Everyone else gets to copy them if they can figure it out for themselves. You can’t tell me Apple and Microsoft have teams which would never come to the same conclusions or create the same technology without ever knowing what the other company is doing. That’s just stupid. Now tell me that HTC, Samsung, Apple, Google, Microsoft, RIM, Nokia, and Palm/HP (who all have separate developer teams) would never end up with similar technologies as each other and that’s just insane. It may be a form of copying, but if I develop a program, and someone else develops a similar program all on their own, who am I to say their hard work should be for nothing. And if this new guy creates a better program than me? That pushes me to innovate. Sueing him because I’m jealous causes his better tech to suffer and fall wayside.
  3. The third point: the true innovators are writers of¬†sci-fi. Apple didn’t develop the iPad, Star Trek developed the iPad. Apple didn’t make a lot of the product you buy. They made a lot of the products you buy shinier. And somehow that means they are innovators in the mobile space? I don’t think so. Just about every technology we have and wish to have in the future is already a real item in sci-fi somewhere. The bad dude from the original Tron movie had screens and a keyboard in his desk. Years later,¬†Microsoft builds the Surface. Microsoft cannot be credited with the concept, but they can be credited with the device they produced, and the software which makes it work.
  4. Last Point: Give credit where credit is due. Even though a company might not be the one to come up with the technology, if they are the first to make it real, then they get credit for doing so. No stealing. If two companies are working on the same tech and one comes out with it first, they get credit. However, if one company shows off their tech in a ridiculous, unfinished form, and another company then releases a finished product, this second company would obviously get the credit for having a useable product first.

Now, I know some people are thinking, “the only way to know who had it first is to show it to someone and have them record the date and time and we already have something like that it’s called the patent office.”

My response: STFU, fool! Patents for physical devices or parts thereof are fine as long as something is to be done about it. Then, if I spend my own time and money making something from scratch that you just so happen to have patented recently, I should be able to go on with my device. Why? I’m not copying you. I did my own research. I did my own work. You’re not telling people what you’re doing so how am I supposed to know? Why should I suffer because you got their first? Everyone knows you got to it first, so why can’t I have a go at it now? You think because you built it and patented it you own the idea forever? Like no one else on the planet could have thought about what you did? You’re the only original thinker on the planet?


If people worked together more, we’d probably have flying cars by now. Or at least cars which run above 50mpg… oh wait, we had those once. I wonder what happened to those?