ASUS ready to unleash patent wardogs against its rivals

[cesrai]

Do you honestly believe that Intel doesn't know what those pins do?

Intel knows what the pins do, they just didn't tell them what they do.

 

@Slick fix your site it was down a half hour ago.

[mr moose]

Intel knows what the pins do, they just didn't tell them what they do.

 

@Slick fix your site it was down a half hour ago.

 

I am trying to find the article I read that claimed what I posted, until I find where I fucked up I'll assume I read something wrong. 

 

Having said that my original point still stands, Intel designed both the socket and the chip, they know what all the pins do and thus it is not possible for Asus to patent the use of them.  

 

This is the usuall disclaimer Intel has in their data sheet for the socket 2011:

 

All Reserved (RSVD) signals must not be connected. Connection of these signals to VCC,

VTTA, VTTD, VCCD, VCCPLL, VSS, or to any other signal (including each other) can result in

component malfunction or incompatibility with future processors. See Chapter 8,

"Processor Land Listing," for a land listing of the processor and the location of all

Reserved signals.

 

[cesrai]

I am trying to find the article I read that claimed what I posted, until I find where I fucked up I'll assume I read something wrong. 

 

Having said that my original point still stands, Intel designed both the socket and the chip, they know what all the pins do and thus it is not possible for Asus to patent the use of them.  

 

This is the usuall disclaimer Intel has in their data sheet for the socket 2011:

If you read my previous posts you will know that I don't agree with ASUS, they can't patent the socket but they did all the research and reverse engineering so maybe they get to keep the name.

[mr moose]

If you read my previous posts you will know that I don't agree with ASUS, they can't patent the socket but they did all the research and reverse engineering so maybe they get to keep the name.

 

For sure they'll keep the name, they could easily trade mark that name.  I am more interested to know what intels official position on all this is.

[Briggsy]

For sure they'll keep the name, they could easily trade mark that name.  I am more interested to know what intels official position on all this is.

 

I am interested too. The extra pins could very well have been intended for a future product (highly unlikely), but unless the OC socket and the socket used by intel engineers for testing have the same pin count, Asus may have a wobbly leg to stand on against other board partners. This is likely already the case, for Asus to publicly come out and talk legal action.

[cDNA]

Guys, it's not just a few pins on a socket that make the difference, it's also all the work in motherboard design and microcode that makes the difference. Asus might have patented their socket but other manufacturers didn't just add pins to their socket hoping for the same results... They probably worked on the technology as well.

I'm not saying it's cool to steal an idea like that but you can't say that because they also have extra pins they stole all the work.

[cesrai]

Guys, it's not just a few pins on a socket that make the difference, it's also all the work in motherboard design and microcode that makes the difference. Asus might have patented their socket but other manufacturers didn't just add pins to their socket hoping for the same results... They probably worked on the technology as well.

I'm not saying it's cool to steal an idea like that but you can't say that because they also have extra pins they stole all the work.

I don't get your point.

[Hirad123]

Guys, it's not just a few pins on a socket that make the difference, it's also all the work in motherboard design and microcode that makes the difference. Asus might have patented their socket but other manufacturers didn't just add pins to their socket hoping for the same results... They probably worked on the technology as well.

I'm not saying it's cool to steal an idea like that but you can't say that because they also have extra pins they stole all the work.

That doesn't mean jack in court. They copied the patented socket,  it is they legal obligation to pay Asus for it or cease production.

[Admire]

If this is a hardware patent, then im completely okay with it. Patent trolls are for software patents which luckily doesn't exist in the EU, and for really stupid things like round edges. If Asus for instance is claiming that nobody would be allowed to add extra pins in the socket for anything beside what Nvidia is doing, then I would be opposed to that.

[Builder]

Good for ASUS. They did it first, they own this technology.

Every company should do the same in a situation like this, it's only logical.

It's not like they're gonna loose. ASUS patented that pin layout. If anybody copies it, they're in the wrong.

Go ASUS! Destroy, decimate and dominate them!

Go for it Asus. go for it is all i say.

 

They developed the tech, they have the right to do what they want with it lol

Destroy them ASUS!

Tbh I hate this patent thing. I think when you invent some new technology you shouldn't want to keep it to yourself you should be like "Hey, I invented this new awesome stuff, anybody wanna have it and play around with it?". Why can't we people work together to achieve greater things.

The thing with patents is that under a capitalist system the alternative is far, far worse for the consumer and even the companies involved. Patents were invented to halt the dangerous and destructive practice of maintaining trade secrets among industries which made it impossible for new competition to arise and as a result forced the consumer into consuming identical commodities packaged up by different companies all working together behind the scenes to screw us over. 

 

Things are largely the same now, but it's much easier to innovate these days as a result of patents because now instead of harboring a trade secret you can patent your innovation, which publicizes it for the common good of knowledge and learning and inspiring other inventions down the line, while maintaining your exclusive right to that specific implementation of a technology for a certain period of time. We get the knowledge, they get the cash. Without patents, they ALL get the cash, and we get fucked. Most businesses, unfortunately, do what's best for their bottom line, and you have to make it somehow better for a company's bottom line to revoke all their rights to exclusive use of a design and publicize how their features function instead of keeping it a complete secret. Patents meet them halfway, open source is for those that don't think patents go far enough.

 

Until you can devise a system better than patents that still forces or encourages companies to publicize their innovations you don't really have a leg to stand on.

 

That doesn't mean jack in court. They copied the patented socket,  it is they legal obligation to pay Asus for it or cease production.

I think it's an interesting non sequitur that NEARLY everyone here has this attitude when it's Asus, (aka the Apple of PC enthusiasts) but when actual Apple fans say stuff like "I'm all for this! You patented it, it's your technology! Now go get 'em, Apple! It's only logical to destroy those that copied your technology!" we get flamed the fuck out and are called fanboys. 

 

Which isn't, of course, to say that I don't love Asus, I use their parts whenever possible and will forever desire a ROG board. ()

[Hirad123]

I think it's an interesting non sequitur that NEARLY everyone here has this attitude when it's Asus, (aka the Apple of PC enthusiasts) but when actual Apple fans say stuff like "I'm all for this! You patented it, it's your technology! Now go get 'em, Apple! It's only logical to destroy those that copied your technology!" we get flamed the fuck out and are called fanboys. 

 

Which isn't, of course, to say that I don't love Asus, I use their parts whenever possible and will forever desire a ROG board. ( )

But that's not what's happening with apple. Samsung didn't steal their technology, from my understanding apple wanted money because they claimed samsung stole the "appearance" or look and feel of the phone. Sure galaxy phones look like Iphones but so does every other phone on the entire freakin market. How are they supposed to differentiate when it's basically become a standard to have 1-3 buttons at the bottom of a rectangular shaped screen. Why was apple targeting samsung? Others were doing it as well. Nobody really stole apples technology. And you can't even compare apple and Asus. Sure apple's products are top tier in terms of engineering but the Imac and macbooks are mostly priced high for those who will buy them regardless of the specs. Asus' pricing is fair and they really do offer top of line parts on all series from mainstream to high end. And also about the patent thing, Asus didn't sue anybody when all the other manufacturers follwed them and started using digitally controlled power, nor did they sue anybody when EVERYONE started using separated audio pcb's because they understand that digitally controlled power and using higher end audio isn't something they can keep for themselves, it isn't really a technology they can keep exclusive to themselves. Whereas this OC socket was patented and founded by them under their branding and belongs to Asus.  Asus has been copied for a long time and they now have the chance to do something about it. 

 

EDIT: Don't take this the wrong way I'm not flaming you or any apple fans just trying to defend my argument lol

[Sauron]

I think it's an interesting non sequitur that NEARLY everyone here has this attitude when it's Asus, (aka the Apple of PC enthusiasts) but when actual Apple fans say stuff like "I'm all for this! You patented it, it's your technology! Now go get 'em, Apple! It's only logical to destroy those that copied your technology!" we get flamed the fuck out and are called fanboys. 

 

Which isn't, of course, to say that I don't love Asus, I use their parts whenever possible and will forever desire a ROG board. ( )

 

There is a fundamental difference between asus and apple here though: asus actually invented this technology and patented a technical implementation of a device they created. Apple's copyright claims have mostly been based on aesthetics and functionalities that rely more on software and looks than anything else. The way code works is different from the way hardware works: you can achieve pretty much the same thing in a variety of different ways without two lines of code being the same, whereas hardware will hardly ever function in the exact same way without significant design prallelism. Looks are also not something you can define with precision; you can patent measures and materials in that exact configuration, but not the "concept of a thin touch screen phone". The reason for which a lot of people here get frustrated at apple's lawsuits is that in fact they hardly ever invented anything: Jobs himself once admitted that he copied others and tried to make a better version of what they made, which makes all of their claims seem hypocritical to say the least.

As a last thing, asus has earned the respect they get through consistent and excellent quality in their products, not through cool looks and marketing (although the looks are usually there when needed). They also appeal to a more educated audience, rather than the random dude that heard his friend say apple was the best.

 

Not bashing you, just pointing that out. (and those rog motherboards are so sexy ^^)

[Builder]

As a last thing, asus has earned the respect they get through consistent and excellent quality in their products, not through cool looks and marketing (although the looks are usually there when needed). They also appeal to a more educated audience, rather than the random dude that heard his friend say apple was the best.

Well no shit code works differently! It's not exempt from being unique though. If you people would actually look at what Apple was suing over, you'll see it was much more than just "look and feel." There are specific technologies that they created that were infringed by Google et al and everyone here seems to think this is about rounded corners! This is what frustrates me about this forum.

 

And the fact that your last paragraph exempts the possibility of Apple actually having consistent and excellent quality in their products and having the looks too doesn't really help, even though price aside there are few people that would argue with Apple quality.

 

Whereas this OC socket was patented and founded by them under their branding and belongs to Asus.  Asus has been copied for a long time and they now have the chance to do something about it. 

 

EDIT: Don't take this the wrong way I'm not flaming you or any apple fans just trying to defend my argument lol

You guys just don't get it, do you? Apple has been copied from the very start. Why do you think Microsoft payed them oodles of money for Windows? Apple looked at Xerox's idea, perfected it, and then Microsoft stole it. Of course, they paid for it eventually, but it's simply not the case that that was the first time Apple was copied from.

[Sauron]

And the fact that your last paragraph exempts the possibility of Apple actually having consistent and excellent quality in their products and having the looks too doesn't really help, even though price aside there are few people that would argue with Apple quality.

 

Apple does make some high quality products, but most of them are VERY overpriced for what they are. Take something like the iPhone: until it's 6th iteration (iphone 5) the screen was so brittle it would get the "spider-web" cracks for a 30ish cm fall if it hit on the screen while the competition was already using gorilla glass and had been doing so for a couple of years, and yet the iphone was still priced like it was made of gold. Overall, apple falls behind a lot of the competition in terms of quality per $$$ and therefore does not qualify for the "respect earning" by my definition.

 

I don't really know what exactly apple sued everyone else for, I am willing to back off on that statement if necessary, however what has reached my ears from media points in the "looks and feel" direction more than anything else. And again, Jobs himself admitted to stealing ideas, it feels hypocritical to say the least that they would be so keen on defending THEIR ideas. Besides, apple sues someone extremely often, whereas asus doesn't have a lot of lawsuits to their name. I think you misunderstood that part about the code: if I write "hello" and patent it, if someone writes "ciao" (Italian for hello) I have no right to sue him even if the meaning is the same.

[Builder]

Apple does make some high quality products, but most of them are VERY overpriced for what they are. Take something like the iPhone: until it's 6th iteration (iphone 5) the screen was so brittle it would get the "spider-web" cracks for a 30ish cm fall if it hit on the screen while the competition was already using gorilla glass and had been doing so for a couple of years, and yet the iphone was still priced like it was made of gold. Overall, apple falls behind a lot of the competition in terms of quality per $$$ and therefore does not qualify for the "respect earning" by my definition.

 

I don't really know what exactly apple sued everyone else for, I am willing to back off on that statement if necessary, however what has reached my ears from media points in the "looks and feel" direction more than anything else. And again, Jobs himself admitted to stealing ideas, it feels hypocritical to say the least that they would be so keen on defending THEIR ideas. Besides, apple sues someone extremely often, whereas asus doesn't have a lot of lawsuits to their name. I think you misunderstood that part about the code: if I write "hello" and patent it, if someone writes "ciao" (Italian for hello) I have no right to sue him even if the meaning is the same.

Apple does not sue people extremely often. I've got no idea where that came from out of you. Jobs never "admitted" to stealing ideas, he did however quote Picasso in saying "good artists copy, great artists steal." You seem to think a single utterance of what amounts to the 1980s version of a retweet has dictated and currently dictates Apple's entire strategy.

 

Indeed, iPhones have ALWAYS used gorilla glass. That's part of the creation story of the iPhone. 

 

Also I'm not quite sure what you're referring to with iPhones, I have the luck of the devil I guess, but I drop mine everyday, (it keeps the doctor away) and I've owned every S version since the 3GS. Never had a screen break once.

[Sauron]

Also I'm not quite sure what you're referring to with iPhones, I have the luck of the devil I guess, but I drop mine everyday, (it keeps the doctor away) and I've owned every S version since the 3GS. Never had a screen break once.

 

You ARE extremely lucky. I know dozens of people whose iphones cracked for a small fall. I was not aware they used gorilla glass (I'm not doubting you, but could you link a source for personal information?), but I had excluded it simply because of all these broken screens I kept seeing while it rarely happened to the competition which boasted gorilla glass.

 

here's an example of what I mean (you can find more by typing "broken iphone" in google images):

 

 By August 2011, Apple and Samsung were litigating 19 ongoing cases in nine countries; by October, the legal disputes expanded to ten countries.^[5][6] By July 2012, the two companies were still embroiled in more than 50 lawsuits around the globe, with billions of dollars in damages claimed between them.^[7] 

source- wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._v._Samsung_Electronics_Co.,_Ltd.

 

And that's just samsung. Of course samsung did their part in counter-sueing, I'm not necessarily defending them.

 

In my opinion (an i say imo to avoid any claims of slander), Apple over the years has stolen dozens of ideas. There's even a tek syndicate video (which you probably have seen already) which shows how they really haven't invented most of their "innovative products" but rather have copied someone else's idea.

 

I don't really want to start an argument over this, if you disagree with what I wrote that's fine, just say so and we'll agre to disagree.

[Builder]

In my opinion (an i say imo to avoid any claims of slander), Apple over the years has stolen dozens of ideas. There's even a tek syndicate video (which you probably have seen already) which shows how they really haven't invented most of their "innovative products" but rather have copied someone else's idea.

So you bring up a single case, assert that there are many more, (which there are, I'll give you, but they're all over the same dispute) and then as corroborating evidence give me a link to a bunch of PC enthusiasts that claim Apple hasn't invented anything?

 

And yes, I have seen that video. It only goes skin deep though, and they were trying as hard as possible not to give people points, they said unibody didn't count because it's wasteful, (the way Apple does it it's not) they didn't even mention multitouch (IIRC) or any of the numerous technological achievements they've conquered below the surface.

 

But I know all of that. That video was not made to convince Apple users that Apple never invented anything, because we know better than that, and they know we know better than that. Videos like that one are made for Wintel fanboys to jack off to. (just so you know, I'm not necessarily putting you in that group)

 

And I get labeled as an Apple fanboy too, regardless of my several page essay on the virtues of the open source movement and Unix's journey from the 20th to 21st centuries. I'm platform independent. Sure, I like Apple's stuff, but tons of hackers do. Just read http://usesthis.com or http://news.ycombinator.com for a while and you'll see what I mean.

[mr moose]

Guys, it's not just a few pins on a socket that make the difference, it's also all the work in motherboard design and microcode that makes the difference. Asus might have patented their socket but other manufacturers didn't just add pins to their socket hoping for the same results... They probably worked on the technology as well.

I'm not saying it's cool to steal an idea like that but you can't say that because they also have extra pins they stole all the work.

 

Not too sure what you are trying to say either, however the extra pins on the socket (from what I've read) are just extra Vsupply to sure up the CPU under over clock (as the extra pins bypass internal CPU Voltage regulation under load), it's technically not that much different from adding extra phases.  

 

 

 

 

And the technology is patent pending, it is not patented yet, which means two things:

 

1. it may still get rejected for not being unique ort new enough or it may get rejected because Intel already own the IP.

2. other companies are allowed to produce it and sell it while the patent is pending, but if the patent is approved they might have to pull product and cease production.

 

Right now there is no case to answer, and based on the speculation I linked to earlier, the fact that Intel own all the IP to the socket and what the pins do Asus's position seems a little precarious.