or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Nobodyy

Here's the thing I think about this:    If Apple were liable for charges because of their encryption, they will fight it full force, which could be a battle that benefits the entire consumer side of the tech sector. 
I don't use a case and never have, but imo, it isn't even noticeable. People who do complain about this are just looking for something to complain about.  The only thing I worried about was the camera lens is sitting directly on the surface, but I think they were confident in the material covering it, a confidence I share - I'm pretty rough with my phones and while there is scratching on bottom half of the metal ring around it from being set and slid around, the lens looks...
Now, that makes more sense to me. More or less taking advantage of the relationship they had to spread the blame across more parties in hope for a higher payout.Let's say some sort of "exercising algorithms" (I can't find what was exactly wrong or how wrong, just "inaccurate results") were taking place on the iPhone using pieces (hardware, software) that Apple built that contributed to Nike's failure, things would fall in place easy. That was my ultimate issue with the...
What I don't understand is why Apple is listed as a defendant here? So they didn't have a hand in the hardware (right?), there's some random quotes about Cook enjoying it, and Apple selling them through stores doesn't seem like enough to place them as liable.There has to be larger chunks to the story I am missing (or failing to connect) and I think they center around how the device failed to meet the standards set by marketing maybe?
Seriously, man, get over yourself. I didn't realize it was an atroscity to ask a few questions to others who are probably more knowledgable about this (this is the first time I've even heard about this case).The article doesn't go in depth beyond what the actual settlement website explains, it's not the worst to ask for the article to dive into the details of the settlement so I don't have to skim the associated legal documents over a topic I care to be educated in while...
I'd just really like them to sync up the iPad Air and iPad Mini internals and specs. I prefer the Minis form and would pay the premium they introduced for higher specs to make it last longer in the stream of updates. That's what got me to buy a Mini 2, but if they announce another iPad Mini that falls below specs (no real improvements, generate behind processors, skipping things like FT if the Air gets it), I'd be pretty disappointed and would probably hold off longer on...
First of all, that snooty tone is what keeps people out of this community, so "keep it to yourself if you don't have anything nice to say," because no one is high-fiving you for being a smartass on the Internet. Second, the article barely answered the questions I asked. Obviously the claim on health statistics was what was being debated, what else would be, but how? Vaguely bolding quotes from the article that may mean something is not a make up for poor reporting to...
What were the claims that it failed to meet and how/why? Why was Apple involved as a denfendent (versus someone like Walmart who presumably also marketed the band)? Aren't these questions that'd be an important component and chance for elaboration in this article? If anything, I'm way curious now
"This product won't sell"    ~ Sells at least a million    "But people are returning them"    ~ Profits from category jump 50% without major refresh in category   "But they need to justify the marketing?!"    Seriously, with some people you never win. Even if Apple were to post numbers that blew away competition, the Watch would be a failure to them.
L-O-L    What over zero-days are in flash that are being exploited for profit to excel horrendous international actions?
New Posts  All Forums: