But it leaves a bad taste in the mouth if one never stops trying to imitate one feature after another, year by year. Especially if done uninspired without bringing anything new or unique. And it makes it utterly worse if it is copied with poor craftmenship.

Sound like Microsoft's product strategy. 

Sorry, It is my duty as the official DC Smart@$$ to post cr@p like this instead of adding anything of value to a thread.

I'll be going now. Bye. 

there was no theft involved.

If you would please watch the video you will find that his action include copying text 1:1 which I consider theft.

I send him a note about it at that time. He does not worry and just continued. No wonder, he actually advertises such sort of "idea finding": http://web.archive.org/web/20070128092405/http://blog.nagarsoft.com/2006/10/31/keep-an-eye-on-the-competition-with-updatepatrol/

The only difference is that he is at least so "clever" now to slightly adjust and rearrange the text he takes from other websites (as demonstrated in above screenshots and in the video).

but that you were trying to justify your attacks.

Of course, what else would you expect?

You may understand that I defend my accusations. This is known as a discussion.

Wraith, I don't know what it takes to explain to you that I do not want you as a PhraseExpress user if you do not like to use it for whatever reason. I kindly ask to read my above postings again.

If you are truly wondering exactly what I meant about how your behavior can hurt your company, and you wonder why wraith808 feels the way he does, then read this and take a little advice from a very intelligent businessman that I used to work for many years ago:

What should I do about an unethical competitor?

[...] Above all, don’t badmouth your competitor, even if it’s badmouthing you. Customers will think less of you if you do. That’s an iron rule in my company. [...]

When you point your finger at someone else, that's one finger pointing at them, giving them negative attention. But at the same time, that same hand is pointing 3 fingers of negative attention at yourself.

And in the Opera example, I want to point out that there is a big difference between Opera casually stating that they had tabs first, and representatives of their company chasing down Mozilla employees and Firefox developers all over the internet and bad mouthing them in public, calling them thieves, and then arguing with what could be potential customers about how right they are to act so atrociously.

Opera would never do that. Opera has more class than that.  (AOL, on the other hand, does not)

Now, do you want to be like Opera or whine like AOL? (Note that AOL did not gain any new customers by doing this, nor did GMail lose any. It actually had the opposite effect, driving more away from AOL, over to GMail.)

Actually app, Opera has been accused of being whiners before: http://my.opera.com/haavard/blog/microsoft-antitrust

I hear your arguments, but it still feels like you guys are more whiners, than champions of open standards. Especially where it concerns "unbundling".

and even if you win this it would not clear up teh problem with sites that adhere to IE (activex et al) to function as they do now.

Note that this isn't an isolated comment. Guys from ars technica's forum to other tech forums lambasted Opera for this.

That's why the FAQ was made in the first place. In fact, Opera IMO had valid intentions too and although they didn't call MS thieves, the seed was sown and most of the internet community feel like Opera was deliberately attacking MS.

I'd also like to point out that although I haven't read about the whole discussion (by your wording it seems BartelsMedia is chasing and posting this issue in several forums but outside of a slight comment of Andrea, I'm not sure how serious the accusation is) at least from his last few posts in this split topic, I don't see him calling his competitor a thief or bad mouthing them. He started inquiring and pointing to evidence and then the legal issue was raised so as a rebuttal he pointed out how he might consider the other person's actions as theft.

I know it's a semantical issue but I thought I'd just clarify how he didn't originally brought out the definitive accusation of theft in this split topic and appeared to be legitimately interested in clarifying the intentions of the other person to ensure that there was no ethical possibility of theft. That's all. (Although he would later be more firm in his statements of theft but I assume that's because he feels the other person intentionally avoided replying to him time and time again.)

Sorry for sounding biased again. I really am not trying to pick any sides. I just hate feeling like people are seemingly potshooting each other due to a misunderstanding. In this case, I feel like BartelsMedia even prior to the legal discussion already pointed out that it was a case of ethics yet as he also pointed out:

I wonder why so many ride on the patent thing because I never said the slightest about violating a patent.

Everybody can see that the program itself is not stolen. I would never claim that and it is not the case.

It is his version history that has too many congruences over the years to make us saying it is a "coincidence".

Believe me, if I felt that Andrea was seemingly misinterpreted, I'd have spoken out too. It's just that it seems that everyone understood that he didn't want to address this issue any further and so I don't feel how he is being misunderstood in any portion of his replies here. Again, if I'm wrong, I apologize. My intentions are just to clarify and I constantly point this out because I know this is a sensitive heated issue and emotions could easily dull the context between each of our intentions in our replies.

Perhaps to let you know that I wasn't just ignoring you?  Just leaving the conversation?  *sigh*

app103, I wonder how you actually have any word about the accusation's content itself while solely bashing me for standing up saying that enough is enough.

You sound to me like "Regardless if he might have stolen, you are the moron because you reveal it instead of just shut up".

I would be curious to learn more about this kind of thinking and your motivation why you completely ignore what he actually did.

Thanks for saying that - my irritation is growing with this constant moaning and whining.

How about this for an approach - imitation is the most sincere form of flattery. Just enjoy the flattery and drop the rest. As app103 (and others have said, and if anyone is still following this I bet others think) you are doing no good to yourself by trying to maintain a flame ware - and actually by this point you have ceased to do any damage to your 'rival'.

If you want to sell your app keep innovating and people will buy it - if your ideas are copied (and I would argue that there is nothing that is really new in the market place anyway) then it will take time - grab the market first with good ideas and good implementation.

my irritation is growing with this constant moaning and whining.

Nobody is moaning or whining, Carol.

I made a statement, people answer on my statement and everybody tries to clarify their standpoint. Which is very much appreciated.

Certainly, there are different opinions but I hope this does not violate any forum policy as long as everybody respect each other and the language is clean.

But I agree that a certain endless loop is showing up. I never said anything about patents. Then, somebody brought up something about patents. Then I confirmed that my posting was never about patents. But somebody brought up something about patents again. Then I confirmed again that my posting was never about patents. But somebody felt the urge to bring up something about patents again. Then I confirmed again that my posting was never about patents. But somebody brought up something about patents again. It seems to never stop.

Indeed, this certainly has the potential to make me start moaning. :-)

actually by this point you have ceased to do any damage to your 'rival'.

If you read my later postings you will find that it was not my intention to continue to damage my "rival" as everything was said already. But I rather had to answer on other's replies. Just like this posting. Or shall I not answer postings if I feel that there is a misunderstanding?

I would argue that there is nothing that is really new in the market place anyway

Wow, you quoted a wonderful classic:
http://www.quotationspage.com/weblog/2005-08-26-239/

:-)

who lacks the sense to see when his constant whining is an alienating force.

It is a misconception if you believe that I would not recognize that a few do not agree that I brought this topic up.

It seems that I fell into a snake pit. Is it that a few may have found themselves in a self-defence position in case that they entertain the same business of imitating or copying?!

No offence and no sarcasm intended, really! It just would explain all your hostile reactions. The sheer amount of motivation of defending the actual theft imitator feature-follower  ...well, your English is better than mine, so please add the appropriate word here ---> ....... <----- ...is worrying me.

Enough is enough? You are darn right it is! Especially (..)

App, picking my line this cheap and sarcastic was not only unfriendly but also completely unnecessary. You have not explained your motivation but just continued to bash, now even in an insulting manner.

Folks, let's leave it with that. It is really getting redundant and hostile.