or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Crowley

^ It will have fluoro-elastomer tyres.
 Where is the justification for Apple profiting from software quality and marketability of top apps in the app store as opposed to the apps that are less expensive and less desirable?  Nowhere to be seen... Swings and roundabouts dude.
There were banner ads in the YouTube app? I never saw any.
No idea about Somerset, but Here has very good transit directions where I am.  It also has a very good option to overlay the transit routes on the map, which is better than anything I've seen in GMaps.  No Streetview, but I suspect Apple are working on their own version of that.
No one did.  You entirely made up this entire tangent when you took issue with the idea that consumers and their money are the root of job creation.  Because without someone to consume the fruit of labour, labour is worthless.  No one suggested that was just a single relationship between consumer and employee, you made that up in your head.   Especially silly since this thread, and this forum is about Apple.  Apple's products are not required by anyone to "Step 1 -...
 What are you basing that on?
 The data isn't good so people don't use the service, but you don't think it's worth Apple purchasing data because people don't use the service? I tend to use GM too, because the transit directions are very good in London; Apple certainly have a few things they need to do if they want to be the app of choice for all, but they'll never compete if they don't try, either internally or by acquisition.
^ I'm not constantly hungry, no.  And I don't eat simply to appease my hunger to a constant level.  Nor do I eat a constant and unchanging diet.  And I certainly don't eat Apple devices, or many other things.   Pulling an argument down to the very bottom rung of Malsow's Heirarchy of Needs just shows how simplistic your argument is, and ill-suited for describing a complete economic system.
Demand is a constant?  What rubbish.  if you're going to say silly things like that then let's not even bother.  Go back to Econ 101.
  The singular end result?  What sort of question is that?  There isn't one. In terms of differences from not having any patents though, there are significant differences.  1, Tesla implicitly indemnifies licensees of those patents from patent trolls.  2, Tesla could revoke licensing, which would not be unlikely after a takeover.  3, By owning patents on widely used technologies (assuming they become widely used), Tesla are formally recognised as the inventor, and the...
New Posts  All Forums: