or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by anantksundaram

I think India's 'potential' has been huge for a few decades now. Nothing sustained ever seems to happen.I am in agreement with SpamSandwich on this one. India is still a few years away for Apple. It's fine to take a limited position, but it's not time for a huge investment yet. Moreover, it'll be nice to have something big a few years down the road as China starts to mature as a smartphone market.Let the low end folks like Samsung take it now.
I appreciate the clarification those facts. Really.It reinforces my view that Apple's lawyers are a bunch of nice weenies.
1) You obviously do not read the news all that often. You might want to get caught up with the last 48 hours, for starters.2) You clearly have selective memory (a fairly common affliction on these boards): here are three words for you to ponder -- eBooks, Cote, Bromwich.
No, I have no courtroom experience, and no I am (happily) not a lawyer. I have no doubt that Apple employs some pretty smart lawyers. (But so does Samsung). I can only respond to what I see/hear in the news and in blogs. In general, over the years, it seems to me that Apple's lawyers come through as sounding reactive and like a bunch of nice guys/gals, while Samsung's lawyers -- rightly or wrongly -- are proactive and appear to push the envelope more. A singular exception...
Of course I understood the context, and what the lawyers were saying. I am not so sure you understood what I was saying.
Wow. The Apple lawyer's earthshaking response was "the iPhone is not the cup-holder."   Enough to make one tremble....
  Model T and Radio are more than 85 years old. The BW list goes back only 85 years.
What a silly list. "Poverty Lab"? "IS-LM Curve" (does anyone even teach it anymore?) "Shadow Banking"? "High frequency trading"? "White board?" "Kitty litter"? "Singapore"? "Facebook"? C'mon, seriously?   No penicillin. No space program. No satellites. No laser. No air-conditioning. No skyscrapers. No elevators. (OK, maybe the last three are >85 years old, but still....)   I could go on....
As though they can't tell the wheat from the chaff.Can't you?
For this case to have got this far likely means that Apple has made pretty unconvincing arguments so far. That's shocking (and frustrating), given just the posts here in this one thread, about facts relating to the iPod. You really have to wonder about the quality of Apple's legal team. Perhaps they should start reading the comments section of Apple fan sites, for starters. They might actually learn something.
New Posts  All Forums: