or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Gatorguy

Schmidt would have been a terrible spy if Andy Rubin was taken by surprise when the iPhone was publicly revealed. Sounds much more likely that if he knew any of the details he wasn't sharing them with the head of Android development.EDIT: Pipped by Chipsy
My apologies. I mistakenly thought you believed in the fairytale of how Schmidt stole from Apple.So speaking to your suggestion that as a matter of ethics Schmidt should have recused himself from iPhone related discussions that 's just what was reported by independent news organizations. Schmidt did voluntarily bow out whenever discussion of the iPhone arose in Apple Board meetings. Still unethical?Very odd that you seem to have no apparent concerns about either Levinson,...
As far as I know it's not the case with Schmidt either. There's as much evidence that Schmidt acted unethically as there is for Levinson or Campbell. In effect zero unless you count FTC concerns over the sharing of directors.So I know it's a popular theory that Schmidt was stealing from Apple, put out there by a small number of Apple fans. Do you have any independent reports that show Schmidt stealing from Apple, or any Apple statements to that effect? If not is it...
You've completely left out induced infringement which could apply to Google's offer of Android as the OS. Nice write-up tho. Still doesn't make business sense that Apple would not have gone after Google immediately upon Android's public release if infringement of Apple IP was so clear and convincing. It would have nipped everything in the bud and avoided a whole lot of litigation IMHO if Apple had sufficient evidence to prove their claims. It's not like they haven't had...
Ah, so then you're saying if Schmidt was evil or at least unethical in stayin on at Apple for so long then Levinson was also for staying on at Google, and Bill Campbell was evil/unethical going back and forth "advising" both. Fair enough. So why are two unethical people still allowed to serve on Apple's board?
For whatever reason Apple (or Mr. Jobs) felt it was more important that Schultz remain on the board, just as Google felt it was more important that Arthur Levinson, also an Apple director, remain on their board. They both resigned their positions at roughly the same time, tho Levinson did stick around a bit longer at Google. Was he stealing information on plans for Android and taking it back to Apple even after Schmidt had already resigned? And what about Bill Campbell?...
This is the patent and it's claims:https://www.google.com/patents/US6285999In any event it's not Google's patent nor is it an exclusive license to them alone. Apple is free to negotiate a license from Stanford as is Microsoft or anyone else for that matter. In addition it's not any particular patent that led to Google's success. It was Larry Page and Sergey Brin's studied understanding of search, what people want to know, how to implement solutions to meet those wants, and...
There was a mention this weekend that Alpine will be selling a CarPlay compatible head unit by this fall. Priced in the $500-$700 range according to the article. http://asia.nikkei.com/Markets/Tokyo-Market/Alpine-to-sell-console-for-Apple-s-in-car-infotainment-system
There was a mention this weekend that Alpine will be selling a CarPlay compatible head unit by this fall. Priced in the $500-$700 range according to the article. http://asia.nikkei.com/Markets/Tokyo-Market/Alpine-to-sell-console-for-Apple-s-in-car-infotainment-system (Reposted for those that might have missed it from the other CarPlay thread. )
To prove you're not a bot could you scan your drivers license and post it here please?
New Posts  All Forums: