or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Rayz

  Unfortunately, you're assuming that someone's day job is an indicator of how technically adept he/she is. You also didn't account for jobs they may have had in the past.   Most of them owned smartphones and tablets, four had worked for technology companies, two were engineers. And the most important fact is that Samsung approved all of them.   I know people with masters degrees who work as shop assistants. It doesn't mean they're not technically adept.           Amongst...
  Damaging their reputation? The only thing that folk will remember is the idiot judge saying that 'Samsung wasn't as as cool.'   And they'll forget that quickly enough too.   Still, if the judge is out to get headlines out of a exceptionally dull case, then Apple should stop obliging him. 
They state that the problem (if it is indeed a problem) is caused by hardware, but fail to say why.    Could it be that presenting it as a hardware glitch is a little more sensationalist?   Two possibilities:   1/. Apple will present a 'software fix' that will do nothing, but will lead the six people who believe they've seen the problem to proclaim that all is well. 2/. Folk will lose interest and go on to something else (as they did with PurpleFlareGate).
  And I suspect they won't.
  Really?   So when they're up against a phone that was widely known to be due for an upgrade, doesn't get any discounts, and had a far smaller screen, Samsung only managed to ship  2million more?   This plainly demonstrates that the iPhone4s screen is plenty big enough, and the popularity of the iPhone5 proves that there is a significant number of people who don't want a phone as big as their face.
  I think the A6 was designed entirely in-house by Apple. Samsung is only manufacturing it.   Apple's problem isn't expertise; there are plenty of outfits who could make the chips, but not in the quantities that Samsung can.   I'd like to think that one day Apple could take on more of the manufacturing itself, but then I think of the sheer cost involved... 
  There's no other analyst worth listening to, IMO.
  Unacceptable to you, was it?   That settles it then; they need to shut down the company and give the money back to the shareholders.
  Wow. The old "detonate a bomb in your own underpants" legal strategy. Haven't seen that used in while.  
New Posts  All Forums: