or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by charlituna

That's why this comany has lawyers etc. to say it before they sign an unreasonable etc contract.They knew the game they were entering into. They agreed to play it. So if after the game has started they realize they can't win, they don't get to claim the didn't really understand the rules. There was a time to ask questions and they didn't etc.GT Advanced wanted Apples money and went for something they couldn't pull off in the end.
Maybe, maybe not. yes it's Apple but not everything they do is roses (remember Ping). And folks are more likely to be faithful to a merchant than insisting on a particular way to pay. At least for now. By the time they start to make payment demands, many companies will be up to speed on some system. Might be Apple Pay. Or like with Best Buy and Walmart it might be something else. 
 If you look at the actual article for several of them it says "At this time" or "do not yet have the equipment" not the suggested "Hell no". They are likely to support Apple Pay, among other options, in the future but need to get up to speed so they don't have a date yet. A few of them might be holding out a bit to see how well the uptake is. If the program turns out to be another Ping why support it. 
 Not true, as least as much as you think.  Every report of a fraudelent transaction is investigated which means the merchant having to research the issue, produce slips etc. Some major retailers get thousands of requests a day. The time wasted hurts them. Plus as more and more payments occur it costs the processing companies money and that gets passed on in the form of higher processing fees. Again, hurts merchants.  As for the equipment issue, the processors are pushing...
Apparently Apple did. By including a clause that they could buy from whomever they liked. So if GT couldn't keep up, Apple could go elsewhere
Seems like It. They willingly agreed to terms they couldn't keep up with. Apple will be fine in regards to the whole need for sapphire. And as I understand it they fronted the cash to build the Arizona plant so they could conceivably claim it's not a GT asset since the loans weren't paid back. Keep it running themselves, which might be what they mean by the jobs comment.
That would still require a middle man to tell the bank what card that really is. Rather than Apple Pay where the bank gives you a number etc
I highly doubt that Apple would be okay with Philips revealing this and not them. So I won't be shocked if, assuming this is true, suddenly the license disappears and these become a very limited release item. If any actually are allowed to be released at all.
 Here's the thing. IF Apple was thinking of using sapphire screens, and I'm not believing that to be true because some idiot site like Digitimes claims it, and failed to order the screens then that is NOT a fault against GT and therefore the payment wouldn't have been withheld.  And Apple would have known they were not going to use sapphire screens ages ago. Doesn't take months of testing or consulting with engineers to find out that sapphire is a shite material for such a...
 What sapphire project??? There is zero proof that Apple had any intentions for the material beyond the current uses. Any material engineer will tell you that sapphire is not viable as a screen material because it breaks on impact too easily at that size. Apple likely knew this when they started, before handing GT Advanced a penny.  the payments were based on delivery of ordered items and keeping a certain amount of cash in the bank. Where is that cash? Perhaps squandered...
New Posts  All Forums: