or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by waldobushman

To say that that the scratches are isolated to a few dozen, and therefore should be discounted, flies in the face of Shiller's comments that aluminum is supposed to scratch and that is normal. Please, get a clue. In the law, we call that an admission against interest. You clearly suffer from the belief that factless arguments have persuasive value -- I suppose you and your like-"minded" cohorts believe that, but those of us with functioning neurons certainly don't buy...
Of course I know what I'm talking about. I've installed iOS 6 on my iPhone 4S. It draws battery power noticeably more when compared to iOS 5, maps don't work correctly, Siri seems faster, apps seem to execute faster, sync with iTunes does not work (I have to either delete an app, or add an app before the sync completes without error), I've HEARD that the aluminum back on the iPhone 5 scratches and Apple says that should be expected, the white iPhone 5 bleeds light (I...
Criticism of Apple may be overboard but substantial criticism is due. iOS 6 maps and other problems are worthy of criticism. My concern is this is symptomatic of problems generally at Apple, obvious flaws like we've witnessed with iOS 6 and apps, and scratching of the aluminum in the iPhone 5 should never have made it out the door and certainly not made it past user testing. QC is lacking, and is underappreciated at Apple now. Cook and clan, being spreadsheet guys, are...
QC problems ARE technical production problems. 
Is it a "software" issue or a database issue. If the latter, Apple is likely in a heap of trouble. It doesn't matter how good your software is if the data upon which it relies is garbage.
Great solution. Giving developers the ability to tap into Apple maps is the best of both worlds. Of course, Apple itself will have to fix some of the current bugs in their maps application but this shows that they have created a modular system where corrections and improvements can be incremental. Quadra610 is a consumer -- wants stuff for free.
My sense is this amount would include the punitive damages for intentional infringement which the jury concluded, not actual damages. The jury explicitly determined that Apple's initial damages request was not supported by the evidence during trial, and the court is therefore unlikely to disagree on this point by increasing the amount of actual damages.
A minor update? The pundits must be looking at the iPhone 5 with their brains shut down. Hardware wise, the iPhone 5 is a significant upgrade: A6, new Qualcomm chips (LTE), new touchscreen technology, new size, new manufacturing process, new camera, possibly significant speed enhancement, new suppliers. Then there's the significant changes going from ios 5 to iOS 6. Many features will be backward compatible, of course, but still significant. The changes made for the...
Ridiculous! The court's ruling was simply based on the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This court simply does not have the jurisdiction to reverse an injunction issued by a separate court. Because both the jury verdict in this case, and the injunction issued in the other court are both either on appeal or in this court's case haven't even been entered (only the jury has come back with a decision -- the judge still has other issues in this case to resolve, such as...
Apple did invent their own A* with the A6 in the iphone 5. Any other points you want to make?
New Posts  All Forums: