If you think that Android devices are just clones of the iPhone, and that it gives Apple just cause to strike first, I'm not even going to bother writing a real response.
Android is not "just a clone" but it's clear that they decided to aggressively clone the iphone's features. If you don't think that's obvious, you missed what Android looked like 6 months before the iphone debut and 6 months after.
Now whether those features are protectable as IP or not is another matter but if they are it's no surprise that Apple would want to enforce such protections.
Aggressively clone as in...? A top statusbar? A touchscreen? A virtual keyboard? A grid layout of applications? Custom applications? Hate to break it to you, but iOS wasn't the first to do any of those, Android included most of them before the iPhone announcement (from the little that we know of its development at Google beginning in 2005), and the first Android phone (G1) didn't resemble the iPhone more than any other smartphone on the market. Most people that I knew were comparing it to the Sidekick when it first released.
"Hate to break it to you, but iOS wasn't the first to do any of those"
I'm not making any claim that (1) iOS was first for any of those or that (2) whatever claims Apple is making are protectable or not or (3) whether google violates those claims or not.
What I'm saying is that: (a) some claims and protections have been granted, (b) it's Apple's right to protect them until/unless these protections are overturned/invalidated, and (c) I have no sympathy for people violating legitimate claims. This whole sub-thread is about "striking first" makes Apple a bully which is total bullshit. They're striking first because they're the person getting copied, that's how the dynamic works.
"the first Android phone (G1) didn't resemble the iPhone more than any other smartphone on the market. Most people that I knew were comparing it to the Sidekick when it first released."
That's rich, every review of the G1 I can find compares it directly with the iphone. Custom time limit a google search.
Plenty of handsets had full touch-screens before the iPhone came out. The only difference being that the iPhone decided to ditch any hardware keyboard option. Oh wait, what's that on the knockoff? A hardware keyboard option, and almost every other button from the pre-release prototype as well.
Please. The arguments are childish now. Every manufacturer takes inspiration from devices on the current market. Apple included. Only they decided to go and start suing everyone left and right.
So... what's your point, really? What's wrong with taking a successful product, and making a similar product to compete with it? Android may have quickly morphed into something more iPhone-like in the wake of the initial iPhone launch, but why is that seen as "cheating"? Why is "clone" a bad word? I think it's a great word. You don't like Apple's walled-garden approach? Fine, now you have competition, alternatives, and choice.
And hell, it's not like Android has been playing catch-up to iOS in the years since. There are some pretty awesome things in the base Android system that you still can't do on iOS (accounts manager, overriding the default app for just about any stock Android app, removable storage, etc.), or things that Android had first (multitasking), or things that aren't even in a stable iOS release yet (proper notifications) that Android has had for quite a while.
Now whether those features are protectable as IP or not is another matter but if they are it's no surprise that Apple would want to enforce such protections.
I just don't buy that world view. Yes, Apple is required to do whatever it takes to legally increase shareholder value. But in this case, it just amounts to an attempt at stifling competition. It's bad for the other companies, and it's bad for the end customers. Hell, it could be bad for Apple, too, if there's an import ban.
"What's wrong with taking a successful product, and making a similar product to compete with it?"
Zero. I'm very thankful that Android exists and webOS and WP7, competition is good.
"But in this case, it just amounts to an attempt at stifling competition."
I think it's a bit myopic to look at only this. You have to ask yourself the very important question of whether the iphone would even exist to be copied if there were no protections to keep people from copying too closely. If not, then there's a good argument that we'd all be much worse off.
We don't have to ask ourselves. Apple products are cloned everyday, particularly in Asia. Yet Apple is still killing it, even in China. How can this be!?
It turns out it is hard to successfully clone Apple products. And even with a perfect clone, you still have to compete with their incredible brand and consumer loyalty.
Apple does not need our protection. Small businesses do. Unfortunately they are the real victim of the patent system.
