or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by williamh

As we know from all the lawsuits being tossed about, it can cost money for all the little technologies that go into these chips. The article points out that the A5 in the iPhone contains circuitry specifically to facilitate Siri speech recognition, something these AppleTVs will never do. I don't know how ARM licensing works, but I assume they pay by the processor core, so why pay for more? There are probably dozens of things Apple can cut or add to its custom silicon to...
Patented technologies are used in standards when the owner of the patent is willing to license the technology on fair terms. If using a technology as part of a standard would mean that the owner could put the squeeze on anyone entering a market, that technology would not be used as part of the standard. Apple technologies were used as part of the MP4 standard, as I recall, and we don't see lawsuits or hear a lot of bitching and moaning about Apple being unfair with it.
The example given was a movie download. The win for whoever sells the movie, is that they'll sell more movies. The price of the bandwidth would be built into the price of the movie. Presumably the developer or whoever will be buying data wholesale and won't be paying $15/gb or whatever AT&T charges. A similar system could work for in-app purchases, the developer sells more in-app add-ons and part of the price is for bandwidth. It's another option, I don't see why...
Has anyone considered the fact that the trademark may be worth billions now, but it was NOT when Apple (or iPAd Ltd or whoever) bought it. Apple MADE IT worth billions by creating a great product and marketing it like crazy.
Once you open that Pandora's box, you can't close it. Better to tell the official's sons to go to hell. $100b is also enough to keep them boxed up waiting for bribes up to the grave. They have a lot of officials with a lot of sons. Don't confuse "the nation" with "the rule of law" or "the people." If the Chinese government can be convinced that the ban would harm the Chinese government, that will be a powerful factor.
The argument about hurting the Chinese national interest is only about the question of banning iPad sales, not about the underlying trademark dispute. Proview wants a ban on iPad sales before the trademark dispute is finally settled. Since Proview has no product, no sales, no competing "iPad" product, no nothing, they are not harmed by continued sale of the iPad. Obviously Apple would be harmed, but Apple's alleging also a harm to China from a ban on the sale of Apple's...
If you happen to be a Chinese person, that second condition isn't exactly a deal-breaker. Sharing a room with 7 other guys . . .
If you have a MBA and often find you need an ethernet port, I can understand your criticism. If you don't yet have a MBA and think you will often need one, you may find you don't. When I got my MBA, I bought the USB-ethernet adapter at the same time. When the adapter remained in the package for a few months, I got rid of it. I like the current arrangement that keeps the MBA nice and light and small and elegant. The USB-ethernet adapter ought to be fine for people...
Hasn't the failure of Flash on mobile platforms been proven well enough? Apple was absolutely right to keep it off of iOS. It's time for websites to stop using it.
How about doing a story where you go inside some US factories where nobody is working?
New Posts  All Forums: