or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by AdonisSMU

and Apple wants your premium dollars for a devices thats not completely premium.
trade in you defective devices for non defective ones please.
i just did and I dont own any APPL
No they don't. I know people who work at Google and they laugh at me when I bring up do no evil to them. They say Google is a business and business comes first. Do no evil was always a marketing gimmick. Even by your own admission it was a marketing gimmick to recruit engineers to their cause. Farming your personal information to advertising companies against your will and stealing IP has been their game since they came into existence.
You need to back up your claims with links. Do no evil was just marketing. Google uses the open marketing for those in the development community who can't think for themselves and realize that its just a marketing gimmick. As soon as open doesnt benefit them they flip the script at the drop of the hat.
actually is not a blatant copy in terms of look or size or screen ratio. For a while i used to confuse Samsung devices with Apple devices....Apple entering the mini tablet market has never even remotely looked like a samsung device at all. In fact the mini looked just like a iTouch. I think thats why mini got the new tablet design first.
ii agree with her decision about additional damages....but you could argue that new devices require additional licensing like msft and everyone else pays to Apple.
The best advertisement for an iPhone is having used an Android. I didnt realize the goal of the "research" was to influence purchasing behavior.
Wait she shouldnt be ruling on this case because somehow this was a part of the original trial. She didnt seem to think Apple didnt deserve a payout for the four patents when this case originally was tried.
Why is Apple insider reporting on a non story. This is click bait. Im going to stop clicking on AI articles that are designed as click bait for advertisers.
New Posts  All Forums: