Now you devolve to ad hominem attack, Diogenes, giving the lie to your screen name which implies a search for honesty. Good luck with that. Using ad hominem is the sign of the side of the lack of factual argument. If you lack facts, you attack the opponent. We have been discussing transparent multitouch screens on mobile digital devices. Prior to the iPhone, they simply did not exist. You can dance all you like, but facts are on my side on this discussion. You use Wikipedia. Good luck with that as well. Patents and patent law side with Apple as do case law. . . and me. YOU simply don't know what you are talking about, as demonstrated your statements about having to "look up" things. Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source for anything.
For example, I find it amusing that the Wikipedia article gives more attention to the fewer than 3 million Microsoft multitouch devices than it does to the over 2 Billion Android and 1. 1 billion iOS devices that use multitouch screens. That is evidence of preferential editing by people with agendas.
You have an agenda to find Apple and me lying about anything. . . to assign a negative intent to their claim. It does not exist nor do they need to do that. Apple has thousands of patents in their name. . . yet you somehow need to deny that simple fact to claim that Apple never invents anything. That is your desperate need to prove your false and irrational agenda of non-innovation by Apple. You demonstrate you do not even understand what innovation, invention, or design are.
It indicates no such thing. You read a lot into the Wikipedia article, which states:
"Additionally, Apple also holds several patents related to the implementation of multi-touch in user interfaces,[25] however the legitimacy of some patents has been disputed.[26] Apple additionally attempted to register "Multi-touch" as a trademark in the United States—however its request was denied by the United States Patent and Trademark Office because it considered the term generic.[27]"
Apple's patents were challenged in the lawsuit Apple brought against Samsung. Samsung claimed the patent wasn't valid and also challenged it by Samsung with the FTC. Both venues denied the validity of Samsung's challenges. Now Samsung is appealing, but those appeals are based on errors of law, not factual issues. The factual issues were decided by the jury in one case, and by the entire FTC board in the other. Sorry. BZZZT! Challenging the validity of a patent in trial is SOP. Means nothing. Samsung brought up the same issues you bring up and Apple won. YOU lose.
I just don't have the heart to keep doing this to you.
You have no case and you are doing nothing to me. You do it to yourself, Diogenes.
“Responding to you is now beginning to feel as if I am torturing a small insect. There are some real howlers in your commentary, but I just don’t have the heart to keep doing this to you.”
*****************************************************************************************************
Dude, you are WAY over your intellectual head here as you try your foolish “duel” with Swordmaker. Swordmaker has you by a minimum of one or two standard deviations in basic IQ...and it shows. You’re simply making yourself look foolish. I’m surprised Swordmaker has the patience to deal with your silliness & ignorance.