or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by charlituna

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...
 How are they the bad guys? They set up a contract which GT agreed to but then GT failed to keep up their end of the bargain. Giving them that last payment would be like a parent telling a kid he can get a smart phone if he makes straight As and doesn't get into any trouble all semester and then when he gets suspended for fighting and makes a C in math class, giving him the phone anyway. 
The tag line suggests atv box and or Mac mini. Revamp of iTunes stores would be nice also. Better prices, 265 support etc
Kuo is an idiot. Sapphire is not suitable for a full screen because a piece that size would be super fragile. One drop and it could shatter to pieces. And Apple has likely tested this and knows this. Which is why they aren't using it for the screens.
It was taken down yesterday. Likely not stolen merchandise but fraud. Apple could just contact eBay and tell them that the seller is lying and eBay would cut it. Especially with risk that highest bidder is in on it and would claim they paid but never got phone and try to get a huge refunds from eBay.
The article mentions the switch EMV but neglects to mention that this switch is basically mandatory. The credits card processors are losing a small fortune every month in fraud charge backs. If they stick with the current system of the stripe they will have to raise merchant rates. Which they will likely do for those that want to stay on the stripe. Europe etc have proven that chip and pin is way more secure so if you want 'cheap' processing rates you will have to switch....
I'm not sure that it would fall into the purview of antitrust but yes it could be seen as anti consumer (although Amazon would likely battle that by saying that they created apps for using iPads, computers etc so who cares what the format is).keep in mind that this isn't really about iTunes and its files. It's about the iPods. These folks were filing a class action suit over the 'offense' that they couldn't use realplayer files on the iPod. And when they could figure out a...
 Apple has been very good about saying 'not susceptible to PC viruses' Also most of the stuff coming up off phishing links etc isn't viruses. adware, trojans sure, but not viruses. 
New Posts  All Forums: