or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Cpsro

I recall quite clearly Mr. Jobs demonstrating snapback in the January 2007 keynote. It's a distinguishing feature of iOS.
Whoa, doggies! You seem to be confusing what little knowledge of the case and the law you have with being an expert, or a quick little note of mine with being a treatise. (Appearance is enough for design patents, btw).DuhThat's irrelevant and immaterial.You call me incompetent, then dump me with all that responsibility? Let's leave it to Apple's legal team, shall we?It isn't over. And it isn't right(ful) that an entity (person or corporation) can do whatever they please...
AHHAHAHA! Thank goodness for you, troll!
Curiously, it doesn't matter whether Samsung copied Apple or not. It's only relevant that: (1) Samsung's product looks like Apple's; (2) Apple has patents on the design and features; and (3) Samsung produced its designs and features after Apple's patent applications were filed. If a cup holder was an intrinsic feature of a particularly swell brand of car, like snap-back is intrinsic to an iOS device, then I'd say an injunction is warranted. Cup holders aren't so highly...
Anti-reflective displays are desired by many professionals, who would opt for a Mac Pro over an iMac because of third party displays (and discontinued Apple displays) with anti-reflective surfaces.
I'm saddened to think anti-reflective displays may be further indication the Mac Pro has been killed.
That's called innovashun.
No, you're bad. Welcome to my ignore list... for ignor-amuses.
I believe Schmidt joined Apple's board only after Apple had made the decision to go full speed on the iPhone and after Google had responded by buying Android. Schmidt was properly excluded from board meetings that involved iPhone development. While Schmidt knew Apple was developing a mobile phone, Apple seems to have done an excellent job of keeping iPhone specifics secret until the January 2007 keynote.
Gurgles should shut up and retire.
New Posts  All Forums: