or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by ash471

No post processing. They actually cut thin slices of sapphire from the boules. And yes it works.  GT has been doing it for years on smaller boules.  The problem occurred when they made bigger boules to get the costs down.  Many of the larger boules came out cracked (worthless).   
Agreed.  And who says there has to be "fault." It was an experiment.   Everyone makes it sound like Apple should have picked someone else.  Who?????Exactly.  Everyone keeps saying that Apple made a poor choice and GT is a terrible vender, but Apple's only other option was to not do the project.  Nobody else was going to make that much sapphire and as it turns out, neither could GT.  It's pretty obvious GT got in over their head.  However, entrepreneurs do it all the time....
How can you say they invented something that doesn't have anything to do with the current generation products?  You are clearly wrong. The court found that the patents do cover the future generation products. I think I know where your analysis went wrong. You compared the past products with the future products and determined that they aren't equivalent products.  However, that's not how patent law works.  The previous products are irrelevant. The analysis is between the...
Seems like over the last 10 years the public has become anti-patent.  It's a real shame. The patent system is the foundation of entrepreneurship and a pillar of the U.S. technology sector.  You naysayers are killing the goose that lays the golden egg.  And for what? Why not force big companies to compensate inventors? Incentivizing entrepreneurs to invent stuff is way better than taxing big companies and giving it to lazy people on welfare.   Apple has $150 billion...
A court of law (including a jury) analyzed all the evidence and decided the patent was valid and infringed. I can tell from your response that you  don't know shit about patent law.  What next, are you going to start giving the world advice about brain surgery?
The problem with your argument is that nobody forces anyone to sell products that infringe.  If the feature is so stupid, why doesn't Apple just take it out of their products?  Because they are important.  Secondly, why shouldn't Apple compensate the inventors that advanced the technology that made the iPhone possible.  Apple didn't start from a clean slate.  Many people invented stuff that made the iPhone possible. Apple expects to pay some of these people what they are...
$23.5 million isn't very much.  I would hope that Apple wraps up this litigation. They have proven that their patents are valid and infringed. $23.5 million seems pretty reasonable.  Apple should respect the patent system and write a check rather than appeal. 
Both sides would have presented mountains of evidence on damages. They hired experts, prepared numerous briefs, took depositions, and put many people on the stand to discuss this issue.   It wouldn't surprise me if the parties spent half a million dollars in legal costs to determine that number.  Apple seems to have won most of the damages issues if they only got $23.5 million.
I wonder if the rumors about the 12 inch MacBook Air retina got started from parts for the 12 inch iPad. I find it hard to believe that Apple just so happens to be coming out with a 12 inch iPad and a 12 inch MBA.
Eventually all electronics are commoditized. We don't know when it will happen for phones or who the survivors will be, but it will happen. It sure isn't going to happen this year. I like the iPhone 6 way better than the iPhone 5s. I'll be buying new iPhones until all my family members have something as good as iPhone 6.
New Posts  All Forums: