You thought that was an ad hominem attack? I guess your perspective is so different from my own, you don't even understand what things look like from mine. No, I wasn't attacking you. I was expressing pity. From my perspective, your claims/arguments totally flopped. Every thing you attempted to prove, I found evidence to the contrary. (And whining about Wikipedia impresses nobody.)
I was going to write up another commentary in which I took apart your last message, but I decided that I didn't like the way it made me feel.
You demonstrate you do not even understand what innovation, invention, or design are.
I can tell what they are not. Taking credit for the work of others and claiming it as your own. Patent trolling, and rent seeking are also not what I would consider "innovation", at least not the sort of innovation I find admirable.
Looking through some of your posting history I get a couple of impressions. You are a big big big Apple fan, (and therefore seemingly lack objectivity when analyzing your paramour) and I also suspect you make a lot of money off of Apple.
As Mark Twain noted, "You tell me whar a man gits his corn pone, en I'll tell you what his 'pinions is."
You may think i'm hard on Apple, but you haven't heard what I think of Microsoft. As bad of an opinion as you believe me to have regarding Apple, I can assure you that what I think of Microsoft is much worse. :)
The Woz I like. I have no respect for Bill Gates and Co.
Referring to me as "a small insect" is certainly an ad hominem attack on me. There is no doubt. Expressing gratuitous pity when none is deserved or needed is intended to belittle me in the eyes of others reading this thread is also an ad hominem attack. You are very weak on debating techniques, aren't you? People who rely on Wikipedia for their facts do not know much about it. It is not considered an authority for any purpose in any college and is not accepted in any research papers and will get any student who uses it a down grade because Wikipedia changes from day to day, as non-experts edit it according to biases they hold. Sorry, that is just the way it is. You call it "whining" and that also is an ad hominem. You just cannot recognize it when you use it.
You then attack me with "facts not in evidence" claiming that I "make a lot of money off of Apple." That also is a scurrilous ad hominem attack, attributing pecuniary motives for my posting and my arguments with you on FR. I have numerous times rebutted that claim on FreeRepublic by others on here, and I think you have seen them.
Taking credit for the work of others and claiming it as your own.
Is something YOU have not shown or proved. . . and in fact is another "fact not in evidence." Apple has cited all previous patents and work that lead up to their patents, otherwise they would be invalidated. YOU simply do not understand how patents work, what they mean, how they are granted, or, apparently what they are. I stand on what I have told you because I DO understand patents, patent law, and the state of this particular patent, which you obviously do not have a clue about.
YOUR opinions are based on ignorance, lies, and myth.