From what I've read, Apple already shares their App Store revenue, with carriers who made it part of their deal for carrying the iPhone. (Some carriers used to make some pretty good money from their own feature phone app stores.)
Well, first off, it is not always watching. It's like Siri or Facetime. You have to turn it on, and this particular feature is only available while using a certain video player. More importantly, eye watching code only looks for realtime geometric shapes and shades. Not sure what kind of info you think anyone could harvest from that. Colors of face blobs, perhaps? Apple undoubtedly gets a lot more useful info from the voices they harvest from Siri requests.
You're picking on the wrong judge. Magistrate Grewal is the one who possibly helped Apple win their big trial last year, by preventing Samsung from presenting prior art evidence, even though he had the power to allow it.
In other words, Microsoft's willingness to pay for promotion. Apple was, however, famously willing to let carriers... especially AT&T... "suggest" that certain apps be restricted to WiFi, in order to keep their 3G network from being overwhelmed. Perhaps Microsoft should've kept Windows Mobile / CE going as well. It was used a lot in some countries, and in many places stayed above Windows Phone in popularity long after WinMo itself was dropped.
Right, MDM is part of the support I was thinking of. Thank you for noting it specifically. There are third party tools available, such as Good, which is popular with enterprises for managing Android tablets.
Apple noted that they had asked for a five month (!) delay, but had not been given any grace period: "How can a party design around a patent before it knows it is allegedly infringing and the new meaning of the patent has been decided? It cannot, and Apple and its baseband processor component supplier (Intel) should have been allowed a period of time to design around the ITC’s newly minted interpretation". - Apple -- The upshot of the two appeal letters was...
Aha. I just ran across a post in another forum, where a pilot was talking about his airline getting iPads approved.
He said it took over a year, and that they ran into problems with placement because it was interfering with the compass on one side.
He said they also had to get RF shielded mounts because they were getting headphone buzz at times.
Nope, probably not the pilots. It would've started with a manager looking for ways to save money, presenting the idea to bosses, and getting approval to start the project. (This of course would've been easier after another airline already did it and claimed all sorts of savings - grin) After that, an RFP (Request For Proposal) would be put out, from which the airline would choose the top responses. As for the criteria, I gave the most common ones from experience....