or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Gatorguy

According to news reports the district notified Apple about the curriculum deficiencies a year ago. The action Monday was a response to Apple's failure to cure it according to other published reports.IMHO it's actually the district trying to distance themselves from the entire shady project that began with the the way the bidding process was set up to eliminate any contractor but Apple and their partner Pearson from meeting the requirements.
An in-depth discussion of it:http://knowledge.ckgsb.edu.cn/2015/03/31/finance-and-investment/wholl-win-visa-and-mastercard-versus-unionpay/
Simple question: Who is the "contractor" referred to in that paragraph?Pretty darn sure that's Apple and thus the contractually-bound party. Pearson was Apple's to deal with and if they can't correct the the deficiency after official notice then the School Board has the right to search for a replacement, up to and including even the hardware that Apple was supplying per paragraph 21. Isn't that how you read it?
Always remember the only things that are binding are written within the bounds of the contract pages. In this case Apple accepted their designation as the responsible party, no matter whether you think they shouldn't have or how Pearson ended up as Apple's sub-contractor.
Now the SEC is getting involved. There's concerns bond investors were mislead on what the funds would be used for.
IMO swapping out TomTom/Teleatlas maps for Here would be problematic at this point. The two mapsets have significant global differences. Apple's POI data and navigation probably won't match up to Here in many places.
...except TomTom doesn't use Navteq/Here maps. Garmin does tho as does Magellan.
So you got the answer to "who settled what in the EU" and don't actually disagree with anything I wrote, much less with the statement that Apple made the right choice to settle to avoid a potential 10% fine.(and a point I thought you too were making). Your issue must be with something Singularity said or didn't say.Well that took awhile.
There's a couple of sections that would seem to apply. Paragraph 21:FAILURE OF CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE THE PRODUCTS, SOFTWARE OR SERVICES AS AGREED If Contractor fails to properly and satisfactorily perform the Services or provide the Products or Software ordered by the District under a purchase order that has been received by Contractor (a"breach"), and, except to the extent of a delay arising from a Force Majeure Event, if any of the following conditions occur:a. a breach...
New Posts  All Forums: