patentAbuse

The Nexus line really saved Android -- it was always the excuse (the best word I can think of) when other devices had update, performance, or security issues. "Well it isn't Android, it's Samsung/HTC/Motorola/Sony/etc, because my Nexus...". It was a critical line.

Google may have killed the Nexus line by making the 9 and 6 so uncompelling, but I doubt it was intentional. They're just a company that has a chronic difficulty prioritizing customer service. Further I don't really think it's "high expectations" to demand that voice functionality works (again, this stuff gets you in serious trouble with regulators. If this were raised to the FTC and/or CRTC, you can bet Google would find a fix extremely quickly).

This is a terrible precedent Google is setting, and it is going to cause considerable harm if it gains traction: It's one thing to stop upgrading "older" devices, but quite another to actually break critical, regulated functionality. The Google employee who decided this was a "small" issue apparently doesn't realize that the inoperation of basic voice functionality of cellular devices is the fuel for fat, deserved lawsuits.

I have a Nexus 5, have no interest in the Nexus 6, and could easily think "Oh well...upgrade", but as the old saying goes -- first they abandoned the Nexus 4, and I didn't speak up...

I have a similar story, but the outcomes differ significantly.

When we were planning some new office space for a move, some of the staff wanted open concept, while others wanted their own space with privacy. It was a tough conversation given that a moral air was added to it -- one where those who favored open concept were collaborative and selfless, while those who wanted a private space were selfish and insular.

Regardless, we designed a new office space that had both (it was designed for significant growth): An open area, similar to what was trending in the "startup world" (cargo culting), and private areas (not quite private offices, but tall private cubicle walls on all sides, strong sound abatement, no concern that someone is creeping behind you, etc).

We moved and let people pick their spots essentially anonymously. Every single one chose a private area, with the majority selecting the most private area which ended up being assigned by a random drawing. Indeed, it struck me that the person who was the most outspoken about open concept and all that jazz was the one who complained the most about others intruding in their quiet zone (they complained about music, loud conversations between peers, etc).

That site is so absolutely terrible I created an account just to post a link to the actual patent (something patentlyapple goes out of its way not to do).

https://www.google.ca/patents/US20130235222

Simply incredible that they take the figures from the patent and then watermark them.

It seems that the concerns of the GoPro camp are not that Apple is going to start extorting with the patent, but rather that Apple has shown specific interest in GoPro's market, specifically noting it several times in their patent application.