or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by e_veritas

  ...and what does any of this have to do with the fact that Apple did NOT invent the idea of increasing pixel density for better viewing quality???
Apparently someone should have told Apple that they shouldn't be holding onto the bomb when going 'thermonuclear'....  
  In jragosta's defense, he usually just makes stuff up or completely distorts the main points of his sources. I suppose ANY accurate quote is a step-up, even one from a completely non-credible source.
  Did you really just attribute your source to a user comment made in some forum!!!   What is even funnier is that the next comment in the thread that replied to your quoted comment is:   "LOL, this is not the case at all - I'm sure the carriers would love terms other than net 30."   How is your quoted user comment any more valid than the next? In the future, to avoid getting laughed at by everyone here and killing your credibility, please refrain from sourcing any random...
  Hmmm...maybe you have another definition that I'm not aware of?   conspiracy n pl -cies 1. a secret plan or agreement to carry out an illegal act; plot 2. the act of making such plans in secret   Considering all the allegations at AI of cover-ups & avoidance from Samsung (deleting emails, etc), and their lack of transparency, I'm not sure how this doesn't match the definition. Please elaborate....
  So what did you mean by your statement? It seems pretty cut and dry to me. Either Samsung conspired to copy Apple's designs and we have a "Samsung Copying Conspiracy", or they didn't.     From a Samsung shareholder's perspective, why does it matter if a device was sold to an end user or a carrier?
So Samsung didn't conspire to copy Apple's designs?? Never thought I would hear that statement coming from the lips of TS!   Regarding their refusal to release sales numbers, certainly there must be some nefarious intent by that action. Why else would they not give them....?
Must be the Samsung Sales Conspiracy! We can add it to the list along with the Samsung Copying Conspiracy....
Is Samsung really even selling the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the US anymore? If not, how is Apple going to prove this time around that "they face a substantial threat of irreparable damage or injury" as required to be granted a PI?
  What a surprise...Apple's stock could plummet by 50% tomorrow, and you would still claim it was an "Apple victory" :)   In regards to Samsung not accepting Apple's licensing offer, I was always under the impression that it was because Apple wanted to license the patent under FRAND and maintain the option to challenge the patent. Samsung's assertions was that those were unacceptable terms, and that Apple would need to forfeit their right to challenge the patent as is...
New Posts  All Forums: