it was a remark because he said apple deserves to lose millions of dollars because he said so, imo Nintendo and Apple, have similar design philosophies (business practices differ). They design to appeal to a larger group of people with some unique/Gimmicky (depending on perspective) while having hardware that is not really close to cutting edge.

No, it's not. With Android it's crap, good or great and everything in between. For instance, I want a phone with a game pad, Sony have the Xperia Play, Apple have... nothing. Or maybe someone wants a small phone because they don't like carrying something as large as most modern smartphones. They could go for an Xperia Mini or maybe a Galaxy Mini 2. With Apple, again, nothing in this range. Or maybe some guy wants a large tablet sized phone 'cos he has a small "package", he could go for Galaxy Note. Once again, Apple have nothing in this range. He could go for an iPad, but then he wouldn't have a phone. How about a keyboard? Andoid: Maybe a Droid 4 or Xperia Pro. Apple... hmmm....

So yeah, it's not the same choice the other manufacturers give you.

However developers have said that's why they're developing apple more. Because everything is standardised so it's easy to know what to spec your application for both externally and internally.

Again sort of like the difference between console and PC. Obviosly there's benefits to both. 

Were arguing internal specs. 

The Play is not top tier. I don't think it has above 2.3. Could be wrong.

Fuck!

Oh well, I still think you're cool.

Yeah, it has both positives and negatives but his point that Apple's choices are the same as other phone manufacturers is just not true.

From what I've read, Apple's iOS and marketplace is just much easier to make money on than Android/Google PlayStore for developers due to the standardisation of the hardware and the fact that people are simply more likely to spend money on the App Store. However, having that extra choice of hardware is just generally better for consumers. The console vs PC comparison rings true.

The only thing that should be copyrightable is direct code in this case.

If you can copy something using your own work... well good.

It's a user interface, not a fictional character or mascot.

Look at the Fashion Industry, where something like 80% of the industries goal is to "Copy someone elses look."

While the other 20%'s job is mostly,  "Innovate somethign new off someone elses look."

In specs it's the same story though. You don't only have 3 categories and with Android devices (and WP7 devices) you have a lot of choices so you can choose a phone that meets your direct needs. With Apple you only have a choice of old, not so old and current. No real customisation and no selecting based on your individual needs.

The Play isn't top tier. I have one and it's showing its age a bit. Control pad is still quite nice for games and they did try updating to 4.0 but couldn't get the control pad drivers to work with the new OS. The disadvantage of having lots of devices for a single OS, lol.

We were arguing on internal specs and their ability to run current apps and games.

My iPhone is also jail broken, so I have plenty of customization options.

Iphones also have plenty of optional cases that contain Bluetooth slide out qwerty keyboards and /or game pads.

The options are most certainly there for all iPhone users.

Yes. Everybody read above. This guy gets it.

You can't patent "look and feel". Apple lost against MS when they tried and Xerox lost against Apple when they tried. I guess the jurors today were stupid or  Mac fans, or stupid Mac fans.