or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by charlituna

Of course it was Cote. And of course she ruled against Apple. More and more it seems like she's ruled every case and possible case against them as guilty before they are even filed. They need to get above her, especially over those guilty comments before the trial started.
 I don't recall anything in these deals that says they can't advertise for people. Or that employees of a company can't look for such advertisements. So how exactly does 'promise not to call up folks and tell them that there is a job opening' equate to them not knowing it exists. In this day and age it doesn't. If they have an interest in perhaps moving to another company then its on them to find the openings, using all the varied tools available to them
"may have" to me is a really loaded term. These actions may have kept their wages low because it may have resulted in the employees not being able to seek a higher paying job or it may have simply given the current employer the balls not to give them a raise.    But they may have not been hired for that job or may have not been given that raise anyway, because they didn't earn it.    To me the right or wrong of this matter depends on how the agreement was worded. If it...
I would love to know exactly what they said. Did they claim it was only 5MP when it is 8MP. Or something similar. Or was it a review where someone said their opinion that the photos taken are drop quality and Samsung just doesn't like that opinion.
In the first trial part of the Samsung lawyers arguments was that it was just happenstance that things seemed identical. That was blown apart by similar memos. So it doesn't shock me that there's another one out there saying essentially the same Apple focus. Not very smart of them to be so focused on one company.
I'm trying to figure out what makes this such a big improvement. oh it has voice control. doesn't work outside of searching Amazon. If you try to use it in something like Netflix you don't get Netflix hits but Amazon ones. So that's basically a fail of an interesting idea. it's 802.11n despite ac being out so that's no better than everyone else. it supports 7.1 sound in the hardware but what about the content. Something tells me that most of it is likely still 5.1 so is...
 One could say the same thing about Apple. If they weren't trying to do the personal computer OS better than the existing then they might not be around. Heck the idea of a GUI wasn't even Apple's. They got it from Xerox who didn't know just how valuable the idea was and let Apple roll with it for nothing. And even after the whole lawsuit issue, Apple trying to better Microsoft was a driving force for years. Same with redoing the phone etc. Apple historically has been less...
 it's the perfect name, since everything Apple makes is 'just a toy'
but does nothing for my time warner connection which is off line half the time and slower than an elderly snail the rest.
I know some folks will think that this is over the top but I rather side with Samsung. Not so much with the whole notion that the video is validating Apple's patents but just a general notion that no brand name or logo from any company should be shown. There are plenty of fake products out there in prop houses with fake OS that could have and perhaps should have been used.
New Posts  All Forums: