or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by newbee

This.
It's just one more example of having "the finest legal system that money can buy". ... and often does. As one of my favourite song states:  When will we ever learn, when will we ever learn.
With lawyers, it's always an" intellectual game".
I'm not sure that I'm "comfortable" with this appstore within an appstore scenario. Does this mean that Apple has lost the ability to monitor all of the "sub apps" (for lack of a better term) ? And, if so, what if some "unethical party" goes the same route? Can someone better versed in this explain this to me, "like I'm a 5 year old" ?
Well, that would be in keeping to their profile, wouldn't it.   
Here's my wish list for Apple TV ... and I think we will see these implemented sooner, rather than later. ... Some storage space, doesn't have to be massive, say 30-60 gigs would suffice, but the bigger, the better, if they can still be in the current price range. ... 64 bit processor ... if they can have that in an iPhone and iPad .. why not Apple TV ... a better remote  (a cheap iPod Touch could be the basis for a fantastic remote)  a dedicated App Store for Apple TV ......
Yes, but he used that info to tell a negative slant i.e. ( but the competition has caught up and people are not motivated by features like fingerprint recognition.) ..... Same info, two vastly different opinions. Not everyone can "tell a joke".   
It seems to me that the purpose is twofold. One, to present to the courts "an alternative" to having two companies sue each other over IP, while, at the same time, skirting the issue of stealing the IP of others in a desparate act to bamboozle the courts. Hopefully, that idea won't work ... but with the recent stupidity/corruption shown by our courts, who knows. Two ... I think it's possible Google will be getting into bed with NSA in a serious way in the not too distant...
You make some interesting points, however, here's the problem, as I see it. Apple got to be the most valuable tech company in the world, and perhaps the most valuable public company  .... by following it's core beliefs.  That is, put their customers, product buyers, not shareholders, first. By focusing on customers, not shareholders. .... Now all of a sudden these same shareholders, who presumably bought Apple shares because they valued Apple's past performance, are...
My point was that, in spite of the actual meaning of the phrase "opportunity costs" .... in the real world, it is most often used to sway a decision involving someone else's capital and, more often than not, only in hindsight, so as to quantify it. Perhaps I should have used the sarcasm tag ... didn't think it was necessary, especially for you.
New Posts  All Forums: