MobileInfocenter

Xerox Graffiti Lawsuit to be Reconsidered

The Associated Press is reporting that a U.S. appeals court today revived the Xerox vs. Palm, 3com patent dispute over the Graffiti handwriting-recognition technology. The case first came to court in 1997 and has been tied up in the legal system ever since. The dispute is responsible for Palm ceasing use of the Graffiti input system and moving on to Graffiti 2.

Xerox first filed the suit in April 1997 against U.S. Robotics, then the owners of Palm Computing, alleging that Palm's Graffiti handwriting recognition software infringed a Xerox United States patent relating to computerized recognition of handwriting.

graffiti and unistrokes caseXerox's input technology is called Unistrokes and was patented in 1997. The patent in question is U.S. Patent No. 5,596,656, which covers unistroke touch screen input symbols. The lawsuit is against Palm as well as its former parent company, 3Com.

Xerox originally filed for its patent in October of 1993. The first handhelds running the Palm OS, the Pilot 1000 and Pilot 5000, were released in April of 1996 by U.S. Robotics. These included Graffiti.

A summary judgement was last issued in May 2004 in Palm's favor. Judge Michael A. Telesca of the United States District Court for the Western District of New York held that the Xerox patent was invalid. The court stated "The prior art references anticipate and render obvious the claim," or that the unistroke system was not a unique invention.

Today's ruling opens the case back up again for reconsideration and further appeals. The court said that the judge had erred in ruling that the Xerox patent was invalid. Palm has taken the position that Xerox was not the first to invent the technology.

Related Articles:

Article Comments

 (61 comments)

The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. PalmInfocenter is not responsible for them in any way.
Please Login or register here to add your comments.

Start a new Comment Down View Full Comment Thread

G1 is better than G2 -- Palm should have at least licensed it

adamsmark @ 6/8/2006 4:07:28 PM # Q
I would have been willing to pay for G1 on my Palm handheld. Palm should have settled or else licensed the darn thing. Of course, so much time has passed, now I'm mostly a Treo user--no input issues here. Just hope the courts get some sense on this issue.

RE: G1 is better than G2 -- Palm should have at least licensed it
hkklife @ 6/8/2006 4:40:29 PM # Q
My ABSOLUTE dream Palm device would be (essentially) a TX with 4gb of flash onboard, a high capacity, removable battery and a cellular data radio (no voice)/BT/Wi-fi AND Graffiti 1.

Instead of candy-colored Zire cases and cradles of questionable quality/value, Palm should have licensed G1 and offered it as a ROCK-SOLID plugin to OS 5.x users. I'd have gladly paid $20 for it and even paid as much as $40 to regain that functionality.

G1 is still the most efficient (once you get used to it) stroke sequence for inputting data into a keyboard-less device. There are times on the Treo when I'd still rather bang out a few words via Graffiti vs. having to fumble with the keyboard (I have very fat thumbs).

One of the main reasons I switched to a Treo was to get around fussing with G2--the G1 hack is so unstable on the TX and TealScript is a bloated mess that doesn't provide seamless G1 functionality.



Pilot 1000-->Pilot 5000-->PalmPilot Pro-->IIIe-->Vx-->m505-->T|T-->T|T2-->T|C-->T|T3-->T|T5-->TX

RE: G1 is better than G2 -- Palm should have at least licensed it
joad @ 6/8/2006 5:45:06 PM # Q
Amen. I've come over to a Treo myself the last few years, but still would love to be able to use G-"one" with Grafitti Anywhere instead of Garbage2. Especially when I'm doing a *LOT* of writing - I find the keyboard about *half* as efficient as simple Grafitti "One."

Here seem to be our options because of this stupid lawsuit:
1) buy a third-party semi-functional replica of G1, or
2) Hack over the patched G1 libraries to a G2 device, or
3) screw up our handwriting even further by dyslexically mixing in the G2 strokes (which mix me up when I'm working with G1 machines).

Poetic justice on Xerox for pulling this #$%#! in the first place - I hope Palm eats their lunch if indeed Hawkins had prior art. It's just sick that the only way I can legitimately Graffiti "One" is by purchasing a Pocket PC or using a years-old Palm.

RE: G1 is better than G2 -- Palm should have at least licensed it
Scott R @ 6/8/2006 7:23:16 PM # Q
Hawkins won't have prior art because Hawkins & Co. did indeed steal the idea from Xerox. IMO.

Hawkins improved upon Xerox's idea to be sure and I'm not sure that I think that Xerox should have been given a patent for the Unistrokes concept, but based on quite a bit of online research I did years ago and posted in PDABuzz's forums (now lost), I could find no evidence of Hawkins' Graffiti pre-dating Xerox's Unistrokes.

http://Tapland.com
- Tapwave Zodiac News, Reviews, & Discussion -

RE: G1 is better than G2 -- Palm should have at least licensed it
adamsmark @ 6/8/2006 8:59:53 PM # Q
What about short hand? I can't imagine single strokes to be new.

RE: G1 is better than G2 -- Palm should have at least licensed it
Wollombi @ 6/9/2006 12:43:02 AM # Q
This is really little different from the Creative vs. Apple suits. We have a company (in this case Xerox) that can't remain viable or compete, so they sue whichever company seems a successful and vulnerable target to try to get a piece of the pie.

And we thought Palm was mismanaging things....

_________________
Sean

There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.

RE: G1 is better than G2 -- Palm should have at least licensed it
Wollombi @ 6/9/2006 12:45:12 AM # Q
To add on to that, Xerox should be slapped with sanctions for initiating such a frivolous lawsuit in the first place.

"Patenting" the so called unistrokes (little different from shorthand) makes about as much sense as "patenting" a hierarchical organization/menu system.

_________________
Sean

There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.

RE: G1 is better than G2 -- Palm should have at least licensed it
dagwud @ 6/9/2006 12:27:20 PM # Q
Hawkins won't have prior art because Hawkins & Co. did indeed steal the idea from Xerox. IMO.

They don't have to "have" prior. They have to "prove" it.

That is, it doesn't matter if Graffiti was created after the Unistrokes patent was awarded. What matters is whether or not prior art exists that demonstrates that the concept was publically known before Xerox applied for the patent. If that's the case, then patent is invalid.

--
PalmPilot Pro (1997) -> III (1998) -> Vx (1999) -> m500 (2001) -> m515 (2002) -> ???

RE: G1 is better than G2 -- Palm should have at least licensed it
Scott R @ 6/9/2006 5:55:52 PM # Q
I don't disagree. Joad stated that he hopes Hawkins "had" prior art, which implied that the prior art was work that Hawkins had done pre-Unistrokes. As others have suggested, I view Unistrokes much like shorthand. It was a great idea to take that concept and implement it on a PDA. While it may have been an original idea *to use it on a PDA*, I don't think it was an original idea *in general*. And I don't think Xerox should have been awarded a patent for it. That said, when you look at some of the really silly patents that have been filed over the last couple of years, Unistrokes looks like a worthwhile invention in comparison.

http://Tapland.com
- Tapwave Zodiac News, Reviews, & Discussion -
RE: G1 is better than G2 -- Palm should have at least licensed it
dagwud @ 6/10/2006 11:58:24 AM # Q
The problem with reading "implication" into an online comment is that it requires "assumption." And we all know what those can do.

Having said that and having reread joad's comments, you may very well have been right about the inference that Hawkins had stuff of his own. But we'd have to ask joad to be certain.

As for silly patents - did you hear about the kid in St. Paul who patented methods for swinging side-to-side on playground swings?

--
PalmPilot Pro (1997) -> III (1998) -> Vx (1999) -> m500 (2001) -> m515 (2002) -> ???

RE: G1 is better than G2 -- Palm should have at least licensed it
joad @ 6/11/2006 6:34:58 AM # Q
I claim no deep knowledge of the timeline of Mr. Hawkin's work. I do know there's not much new under the sun, but acknowledging that would put a lot of patent office employees into the bread line.

If "unistroke" is essentially shorthand, then WTF is Xerox claiming they invented again?

This stuff reminds me of the story of WR Grace getting a patent on well-known properties of the neem tree. Apparently some of this corporate coddling is finally reversing: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/745028.stm



RE: G1 is better than G2 -- Palm should have at least licensed it
dagwud @ 6/12/2006 10:32:49 AM # Q
I have difficulty with the "Unistrokes is essentially shorthand" argument. Shorthand is a collection of methods of replacing words or phrases with a single stroke. Unistroke is a single-stroke method of making a letter.

Does anyone outside of the court room know what Hawkins & Co. actually submitted as evidence of prior art to invalidate the Unistrokes patent?

--
PalmPilot Pro (1997) -> III (1998) -> Vx (1999) -> m500 (2001) -> m515 (2002) -> ???

RE: G1 is better than G2 -- Palm should have at least licensed it
Scott R @ 6/12/2006 10:47:29 PM # Q
"I have difficulty with the "Unistrokes is essentially shorthand" argument. Shorthand is a collection of methods of replacing words or phrases with a single stroke. Unistroke is a single-stroke method of making a letter."

True, but then what Xerox was attempting to do was essentially patenting either:
a) A specific custom alphabet. If that's OK to patent, Hawkins & Co. wouldn't have been infringing on that because their specific alphabet (Graffiti) was quite different than the example alphabet provided in the Unistrokes patent application.
or, b) Any and all single-stroke alphabets used in computer applications. I think that this is what they're arguing that they've got a patent to. But in that case, it could be argued that this patent is too broad and should not have been granted, because it would cover electronic systems which interpret cursive letters.

As I said before, I have a great deal of respect for the work that the Xerox folks did, I think that this was the right approach for the time (and even the best approach for today's non-thumbboard-based input methods), but I have trouble accepting it as a patentable idea. And while I have a feeling that Hawkins stole the idea from them and deserves some public disgrace for it, I also believe that he made real improvements to Xerox's concept. Great read here: http://www.yorku.ca/mack/GI97a.html

http://Tapland.com
- Tapwave Zodiac News, Reviews, & Discussion -

RE: G1 is better than G2 -- Palm should have at least licensed it
hkklife @ 6/12/2006 11:21:19 PM # Q
Scott;

Thanks for the link. That's an old but still informative (albeit rather blandly written), interesting read.


Pilot 1000-->Pilot 5000-->PalmPilot Pro-->IIIe-->Vx-->m505-->T|T-->T|T2-->T|C-->T|T3-->T|T5-->TX

RE: G1 is better than G2 -- Palm should have at least licensed it
dagwud @ 6/13/2006 9:47:58 AM # Q
Given that Xerox has a history of coming up with great ideas and then sitting on them (the GUI, mouse, WYSIWYG editor, and laser printer come to mind), I'm not sure that "stealing" from Xerox is worthy of public disgrace.

Public accolade, maybe.

--
PalmPilot Pro (1997) -> III (1998) -> Vx (1999) -> m500 (2001) -> m515 (2002) -> ???

RE: G1 is better than G2 -- Palm should have at least licensed it
tompi @ 6/16/2006 3:56:43 PM # Q
This is really little different from the Creative vs. Apple suits. We have a company (in this case Xerox) that can't remain viable or compete, so they sue whichever company seems a successful and vulnerable target to try to get a piece of the pie.

Well, it's no wonder that companies like Palm and Apple are successful, given that they spend virtually nothing on their own research and instead create products by copying other people's ideas, cutting lots of corners, and rushing the result to market. The technical shortcomings of their products are then papered over with styling and marketing.

And you can see the consequences of that to this day: the problems Palm has had with the evolution of PalmOS are a direct consequence of that kind of business strategy.

I happen to think that Xerox is wrong in this case: their patent should be held invalid because there is plenty of prior art. Nevertheless, it also seems pretty clear that much of the Palm Pilot (including Graffiti, but also meany other features) were copied from Xerox and other companies, and Palm deserves little sympathy for their plight.

RE: G1 is better than G2 -- Palm should have at least licensed it
Gekko @ 6/16/2006 8:58:00 PM # Q

you will use a thumboard and like it!

Reply to this comment

Graffiti Died along with PDAs

Gekko @ 6/8/2006 11:10:20 PM # Q

PDAs are dead as so is Graffiti. Welcome to 2006.



RE: Graffiti Died along with PDAs
halcyon @ 6/9/2006 12:33:19 AM # Q
But the insanity of our patent system lives on and on.

RE: Graffiti Died along with PDAs
Wollombi @ 6/9/2006 1:05:00 AM # Q
As an example of that absurdity:

Here is the story:
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2178

And here is the patent:
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6368227.html

_________________
Sean

There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.

RE: Graffiti Died along with PDAs
adamsmark @ 6/9/2006 2:04:50 AM # Q
Hey, Gekko,

My T3 still works (I'm just waiting for Palm to improve on it).

RE: Graffiti Died along with PDAs
mikecane @ 6/9/2006 8:49:35 AM # Q
>>>PDAs are dead as so is Graffiti.

This comment from someone who is basically using a PDA that has a PHONE duct-taped onto it. Feh.

RE: Graffiti Died along with PDAs
hkklife @ 6/9/2006 10:06:51 AM # Q
Sad to say, Mike/Gekko/everyone else, right now (2005-6ish) is a rather distressing period of time...there are no honestly compelling PDAs on the market and I STILL consider smartphones to be in their infancy.

It's really about assigning one's own personal likes & dislikes & must-have features and seeing what particular device(s) entail the fewest number of compromises/trade-offs.

The passing of Graffiti without an official PEEP from Palm/PalmOne on the mattmer reeks of the company being completely indifferent towards retaining one of the hallmarks of the original "zen". To cripple the POS gestalt by removing the one form of stylus-based handwriting "reconition" that had caught on (sorry Newton fans) amongst average non-techie types was really the beginning of the end for Palm. Well, that and the Cobalt debacle and the m500 fiasco and Palm's horribly delayed adoption of multimedia...

Also worrying has been the utter lack of a sincere attempt from ANYONE (3rd party software companies like Dataviz, Handmark, TealPoint etc) to license the Unistroke libraries from Xerox and/or pay them royalties from a G1 plugin

So now it's either get your HVGA & wi-fi on a TX but be saddled with missing features & G2 or sign your soul away to the carriers for a Treo that's more sluggish & less capable as a PDA than the 3-year old T3. Sigh...

Pilot 1000-->Pilot 5000-->PalmPilot Pro-->IIIe-->Vx-->m505-->T|T-->T|T2-->T|C-->T|T3-->T|T5-->TX

RE: Graffiti Died along with PDAs
SeldomVisitor @ 6/9/2006 1:15:22 PM # Q
Good lord, the "swinging side to side" patent is REAL!

-- http://tinyurl.com/rhjal

Giggle.

RE: Graffiti Died along with PDAs
rmhurdman @ 6/9/2006 4:17:11 PM # Q
---Quote---
Lastly, it should be noted that because pulling alternately on one chain and then the other resembles in some measure the movements one would use to swing from vines in a dense jungle forest, the swinging method of the present invention may be referred to by the present inventor and his sister as "Tarzan" swinging. The user may even choose to produce a Tarzan-type yell while swinging in the manner described, which more accurately replicates swinging on vines in a dense jungle forest. Actual jungle forestry is not required.
-------

I laughed out loud. At least someone still has a sense of humour.

RE: Graffiti Died along with PDAs
Gekko @ 6/9/2006 5:15:19 PM # Q

There's no reason to buy/manage/charge/carry/sync/fight/fumble with 2+ devices when ONE Smartphone can do it all.



RE: Graffiti Died along with PDAs
dagwud @ 6/15/2006 9:53:58 AM # Q
I laughed out loud. At least someone still has a sense of humour.

Sense of humor? I'm more impressed by the creative lesson that the dad came up with in helping his son apply for the patent.

There's no reason to buy/manage/charge/carry/sync/fight/fumble with 2+ devices when ONE Smartphone can do it all.

Reasons? Perhaps not. But there are plenty of preferences and opinions that validate not owning an all-in-one item.

--
PalmPilot Pro (1997) -> III (1998) -> Vx (1999) -> m500 (2001) -> m515 (2002) -> ???

Top 10 reasons to use separate PDA + cellphone (avoid smartphone)
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 6/15/2006 11:16:38 PM # Q
>>>There's no reason to buy/manage/charge/carry/sync/fight/fumble with 2+ devices when ONE Smartphone can do it all.

Reasons? Perhaps not. But there are plenty of preferences and opinions that validate not owning an all-in-one item.

Top 10 reasons to use separate PDA and cellphone instead of an all-in-one smartphone:

1) Screen size. Separate PDAs typically have bigger, better screens than smartphones. Smartphones with bigger screens tend to be huge, dorky-looking bricks that are too large to carry everywhere. The screen size advantage conferred by having a separate PDA makes it easier to deal with for anything other than the most basic PIM tasks. Reading large amounts of email, reading ebooks, surfing the Internet, watching videos, balancing checkbooks, viewing photos, remote desktop access, etc are a pain in the a$$ to do on most smartphones.

2) Redundancy. Lose your smartphone and you lose access to a lot of information. Lose just a cellphone or just a PDA and you still have the other, likely with your contacts + schedule, etc.

3) Ease of upgrading. With seperates it's easy to upgrade more frequently to obtain any hot new PDA or cellphone features.

4) Looks. Most smartphones (besides the Samsung i500) are too geeky-looking to be used in public without experiencing severe embarassment + shame. (And will the Treo lineup EVER lose its external antenna?)

5) Flexibility. On occasions where the minimum size/weight of equipment is needed, with separates the PDA can be left at home.

6) Selection. With separates, users have the choice of literally hundreds of standalone cellphones and dozens of PDAs and can decide on the perfect combination to meet needs/style preferences. With smartphones, users are limited to whatever gruel is being served up in their local cellphone carrier's Stalag.

7) Phone performance. The cellphone component of most smartphones is woefully inadequate. Unintelligible sound quality, poor reception, absense of profiles, feeble battery life, crappy speakerphone, missing high speed data, useless camera, frequent crashes and a number of other nightmares are common on smartphones and are uncceptable to individuals who rely on their cellphones as an essential business tool. This is one of the reason why many individuals with Treos ironically also carry traditional, trustworthy cellphones. Doesn't having to carry TWO phones more or less defeat the whole point of carrying a smartphone?

8) PDA performance. Fast high end CPUs, dedicated video processors, dual expansion slots, dual Wi-Fi/Bluetooth wireless, etc are features lacking in smartphones.

9) Expense. Break your featurephone and you can replace it for just a few pesos. Break your smartphone and your wallet will be singing the blues. Plus you're stuck with having neither phone nor PDA while you wait to get it replaced.

10) Games. While standalone PDAs can make good gaming systems, smartphones just don't cut it for those interested in mobile gaming. Small screen + small buttons = small fun on smartphones.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Bottom line: smartphones are - by definition - a compromise trading features and ease of use for the debatable "advantage" of carrying a single device. When properly executed (Samsung i500) the smartphone compromises are potentially acceptable to those of us who demand more of our equipment. When poorly executed or sloppily constructed (Treo 600) the smartphone compromise is an exercise in frustration.

TVoR
Copyright, 2006

RE: Graffiti Died along with PDAs
SeldomVisitor @ 6/16/2006 6:09:08 AM # Q
RE: Graffiti Died along with PDAs
dagwud @ 6/16/2006 1:28:57 PM # Q
Regarding the top 10 list, I think it could be argued that only 2, 7 & 9 are quantifiable reasons, and 2 & 9 are somewhat redundant. The other 7 have value based upon individual preference.

And that's my point. Solid reasons that apply to everyone may be few, but there are plenty of reasonable justifications. They have varying worth depending on the individual.

Long before I had a relative whose treo lost a fight with a toilet, I had difficulty with the loss of everything should a smartphone die.

However, if they ever release a Treo with an HVGA screen and no thumbboard....

(Yeah, I know. I've said that before.)

--
PalmPilot Pro (1997) -> III (1998) -> Vx (1999) -> m500 (2001) -> m515 (2002) -> ???

Banned for speaking the truth???
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 6/16/2006 4:30:56 PM # Q
-- http://discussion.treocentral.com/showthread.php?t=33796

Giggle.

I love how those dumba$$ kiddies banned you because you... because you... because you... wait a minute - you didn't do anything to get banned.

Tee hee! Snort!

TVoR

RE: Graffiti Died along with PDAs
SeldomVisitor @ 6/16/2006 7:34:09 PM # Q
Life in the big city!

And after the fact, of course, I was an easy target for the liar ("SeldomVisitor had a lot of login IDs here!" - paraphrase) who banned me and a cast of thousands spread throughout the discussion boards.

Hey! It's PALM's site - they can do any darn thing they want!

RE: Graffiti Died along with PDAs
Gekko @ 6/16/2006 8:54:03 PM # Q

>Top 10 reasons to use separate PDA and cellphone instead of an all-in-one smartphone

the mass market wants smartphones, not pdas. check the sales data. the trend is clear. pdas are dead.


MicroPCs + powerful featurephones = the REAL future
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 6/16/2006 10:07:06 PM # Q
the mass market wants smartphones, not pdas. check the sales data. the trend is clear. pdas are dead.

That was a self-fulfilling prophesy. Repeat it enough times and it just might come true.

Ultimately, the compromise between screen size and device size/weight will limit the popularity of true smartphones. Even the most cleverly-designed smartphones will have screens that are too small to comfortably us as PDAs, while smartphones are too large to carry everywhere.

I (and the bigger brains at Palm) envision a future much more different than the simplistic "Treo in every pot" world you naively appear to believe in.

1) Size matters™. The mass market will NOT accept big, heavy smartphones. For flipphones, the Samsung i500 is the ideal form factor (minus the external antenna), while a light version of Pat Horne's infamous Treo 800g would be the ideal design for a candybar phone form factor.

http://churchoflivingfaith.com/images/treo800big.jpg

2) Most users actually don't need their phones to be very smart. If a phone ships with a proprietary, intuitive suite of apps covering basics like email, SMS, web browser, video playback, MP3 playback, Word documents, PDF viewer, photos, calendar, contacts and memos it will fulfill the needs of most consumers. The average Joanne will not want to have to hunt around finding apps to load onto their phone to make it more useful. With just a little more work on the power + integration of apps on featurephones they will be just as good as true smartphones in the eyes of the average consumer. This is the dirty little secret that the makers of PalmOS and Windows Mobile don't want people to know.

3) Laptops running REAL WINDOWS and REAL WINDOWS APPLICATIONS are exponentially more useful to consumers than any smartphone. Laptops will soon be available running REAL WINDOWS and REAL WINDOWS APPLICATIONS in form factors not much bigger than traditional PDAs like the Zodiac 2, VZ90, TH55. Once these become less expensive, consumers will finally have the ideal situation: tiny, full-featured "featurephones" providing the essentials and tiny micro PCs running REAL WINDOWS and REAL WINDOWS APPLICATIONS. The new Sony Vaio UX50 (no irony with the name...) hints at what will be coming in 2006-07:

http://www.engadget.com/2006/06/08/unboxing-the-sony-vaio-ux50/

http://hdvforever.com/blog/ux50.wmv

4) Palm will attempt to get a piece of the low end of the market with a PalmTop™ Internet/Wi-Fi/entertainment tablet. This strategy has 2 fatal flaws: 1) it's 2 years too late and 2) it doesn't run the only OS that matters - REAL WINDOWS.

Palm realized far too late that the PalmOS library is actually of little value to most consumers. Nokia is about to take maemo to the next level and is big enough to turn it into a dominant "pseudo-smartphone" OS. Once Nokia, Motorola and Sony Ericsson start firing their big guns later this year, Palm won't know what hit them. And bumping RAM up to a 512 MB NAND flash chip in 2007 to create a "Treo 750" won't cut it. Palm is fcuked unless it can sucker a company like Motorola into buying them out.


TVoR

RE: Graffiti Died along with PDAs
AdamaDBrown @ 6/16/2006 10:20:38 PM # Q
the mass market wants smartphones, not pdas. check the sales data.

Check it yourself. Standard PDAs still outsell smartphones. There may come a day when that's not the case, but "dead?" I think not.

RE: Graffiti Died along with PDAs
Gekko @ 6/16/2006 10:38:13 PM # Q

false, captain.

Banned for speaking the truth???
SeldomVisitor @ 6/19/2006 7:06:40 AM # Q
TreoCentral is "cracking down" now - and The Good Guys are leaving:

-- http://discussion.treocentral.com/showpost.php?p=1024971&postcount=45

Is DStrauss around here?

His politics stink but the on-topic stuff he writes is good stuff! (giggle)

Treocentral is out of control. Pathetic.
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 6/19/2006 3:37:21 PM # Q
TreoCentral is "cracking down" now - and The Good Guys are leaving:

-- http://discussion.treocentral.com/showpost.php?p=1024971&postcount=45

Is DStrauss around here?

His politics stink but the on-topic stuff he writes is good stuff! (giggle)

I left Treocentral a LONG time ago as soon as it became obvious that the "moderators" there were almost all hypocritical dumba$$ kiddies on a powertrip. Remember their schizophrenic stand over the posting of hacked Treo files, unlocking the Treo, etc.?

Most of the wittier posters (like purpleX and her cousins) and those of us involved in hacking the Treo either left in disgust or were banned. Your own banning was especially ridiculous, hengeem.

I know some VERY BAD PEOPLE who were going to take down the Treocentral site a while back, but later decided to relent. In retrospect, maybe it's now time for those VERY BAD PEOPLE to "unleash Hell", Gladiator-style. If it happens, I WON'T be holding them back this time...


TVoR

Treocentral et al
SeldomVisitor @ 6/19/2006 3:57:16 PM # Q
There is no need - TreoCentral will take down itself.

Treocentral alread pointless
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 6/19/2006 4:01:08 PM # Q
TreoCentral will take down itself.

It already did. YEARS ago.

Things are not looking good in the PalmOS world:

PalmStation imploded.
PDABuzz imploded
Brighthand is an embarassment that should be put out of its misery.
ClieSource was sacrificed so that 1src might live, only to see that site parasitized and slowly killed off by presence of the likes of Jeff Kirvin/Dr Opinion, dumba$$ moderators and the dozen or so kiddies that hung on Kirvin's every word like it was manna from heaven.

I know a number of people that are planning for a Doomsday scenario by downloading versions of EVERY possible app they think they might ever need in the future along with the corresponding cracks/patches/keygens.

Micheal Mace (PalmSources former Chief Competitive Officer) as an interesting discussion going on his blog site about how developers are seeing sales nosedive:

http://mobileopportunity.blogspot.com/2006/06/why-are-mobile-application-sales.html


TVoR

Reply to this comment
Start a New Comment Thread Top View Full Comment Thread
Achtung! Only the first 50 comments are displayed within the article.
    Click here for the full story discussion page...