AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple files countersuit against Nokia
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple files countersuit against Nokia - Page 6

post #201 of 278
12/12/09 at 12:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

No more follish than someone overstating the impact of the iPhone internationally

They arent under- or overstated, they are stated exactly as the Gartner numbers indicate. I took worldwide handset numbers and Apples iPhone numbers and derived their percentage. I gaveyou the sources so you can do the math though I think youve been hit by a few too many kylies to make that possible

You are the only poster here trying to twist the numbers by saying Apple never meet their self-imposed goal because theyre market share is less than 1% of the installed base, as if that is suppose to make sense or that anyone over 10yo would be fooled by your silly and blatant attempt to lie about easily obtainable facts and well understand economic terms.

Youve been given sources and exact quotes as to what Jobs stated during the 2007 keynote and yet you still swear that Jobs implied installed base despite saying market share. Perhaps some protective headgear would be in order.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #202 of 278
12/12/09 at 12:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

You are the only poster here trying to twist the numbers by saying Apple never meet their self-imposed goal because theyre market share is less than 1% of the installed base, as if that is suppose to make sense or that anyone over 10yo would be fooled by your silly and blatant attempt to lie about easily obtainable facts and well understand economic terms.

You may want to sell a couple of your shares and get some reading lessons, I never said anything about Apple not meeting any target, I said Steve used the whole market for his metric. Big difference.
Reply
Reply
post #203 of 278
12/12/09 at 12:17am
Quote:
the suit is a tactical miscalculation because it tells the whole world they are desperate. the next Sony.

I'd say.

I highly doubt Apple is going to give Nokia their intellectual property. Apple buried Nokia's 20 years in the phone business inside 3 years. They've swept them away with a paradigm shift.

Unit sales will follow the fulcrum shift.

Nokia's is like dinosaur that had it's brain killed...it's doing to take it a while to realise it's dead. And Apple 'killed' it.

Apple are going to take alot more than 2% of the phone market. They're entering more markets, using more suppliers.

And there's always the annual refresh next year. And they're got 100k plus reason to buy one at the App store.

iPhone is a juggernaut. It's going to make the iPod and it's halo look like chicken feed.

Nokia is going to get run over...knocked clean outta the ring. A stale hardware maker sitting on it's product vs a software platform? Nokia got caught with it's pants down...and Apple booted them right up the ass.

Lemon Bon Bon.
You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...[/
Reply
You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...[/
Reply
post #204 of 278
12/12/09 at 12:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I think he works for the US State Department (if I recall correctly from his having said so in the past; I sincerely apologize in advance if I am wrong about this fact.).

Not sure that, if I were him, I'd be broadcasting that fact in an internet Forum, though.

----
Yeah, I was right. From an 11-06-09 thread (notice the arrogance dripping from every sentence):

Originally Posted by Tofino
way to drop the f-bomb all the way from Helsinki! Does everybody in Finland work for Nokia?


sapporobabyrtns' reply: Way to ask a totally inane question based completely in ineptitude. Does someone working for the State Department mean that someone works for Nokia. They are handing out clues. Pick up a box.
-------

Well, went back into the Sapporobaby fanclub archives to bring this up. Talk about hardly a life.

Anyway, you are not me. There are somethings you continue to broadcast post after post but here we are, so please do not be offended if I ignore many to most of your suggestions.
Reply
Reply
post #205 of 278
12/12/09 at 12:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

You may want to sell a couple of your shares and get some reading lessons, I never said anything about Apple not meeting any target, I said Steve used the whole market for his metric. Big difference.

There is a big difference but you aren’t understanding the difference. He used the sales market for 1 year. You didn’t use any market, but instead used the installed base to call Apple a failure and Jobs a liar. I’ve given you the transcript and done the math on this thread to show you how your lies are once again BS. Apple took a 2.28% marketshare for the handset market for Q3-2009. You can dispute it all you want but the facts back me up.
Quote:
Mobile phones, just about a billion last year, worldwide. So what does this tell you? What this tells you is, that 1 percent market share equals 10 million units.

What part of that is Jobs claiming that they’d have 1% of the installed base in 1 year? Either you can’t admit when you are wrong or you are seriously unable to comprehend simplest of things.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #206 of 278
12/12/09 at 12:26am
Quote:
Umm . . . the iPhone.The device the also-rans are trying furiously to imitate, unsuccessfully. The device that revolutionzed the entire mobile industry overnight. Where have you been the last two years??

Amen.

Where was that guy when S Jobs keynoted the iPhone? It sent a shock wave through the phone industry on day of launch. It blew everyone away. Familiarity may breed contempt. Alot of jealousy. And FUD.

But the iPhone is the closest thing we have to Star Trek tech' until the 'slate' is released.

Apple has systematically dismantled the phone industry.

They blew away the 'pipe' monopolist dictators that have stifled competition.
They blew away the 'hardware' model.
They blew away the old software model.
They made a mobile phone that CAN use a browser, the internet.
They created the App store. Which to date dwarfs any competition by a country mile.
They integrated an iPod and internet brower with a phone that blows the competition out the water.
YOu get a proper OS on it.
You get a proper browser on it.
It has multitouch that actually works.

They did all of this while Nokia and Sony and MS were busy fighting over yesterday's ideas.

It's only a matter of time before Unit sales blow the rest away. Rim 1st. But Apple are going to take Nokia down. Limb by limb. Nokia have had to shut their flagship store. And isn't their N-Gage platform in tatters?

Ironically, Apple's iPhone is a games heaven.

Sure. You pay for it. But in this case? You DO get what you pay for.

iPhone. You had me at 'hello.'

Lemon Bon Bon.
You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...[/
Reply
You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...[/
Reply
post #207 of 278
12/12/09 at 12:35am
Are they?

According to who?

Have Nokia's patents been tested in a court of law?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

Nokia's patents are necessary for any cell phone operator to operate today. Apple's are not.

Survey may say no but that is not important, it's what a court rules.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

One simple question:

Can an iPhone work without Nokia's technology? Survey says: NO !!!!!!!!!!!

Can any of Nokia's phones work without Apple's technology? Hell yes....

Suit dismissed. Suck on it Apple. You got caught and have to pay Nokia, but it will not come to that. An exchange of technology will happen and everyone will go their merry way. The only winners are the lawyers.

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply
post #208 of 278
12/12/09 at 12:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

What part of that is Jobs claiming that theyd have 1% of the installed base in 1 year? Either you cant admit when you are wrong or you are seriously unable to comprehend simplest of things.

I see I am wasting my time with you, your little shareholder glasses are stopping you from understanding the simple concepts in life. I will say this one last time in the hope you finally understand it, I am not holding my breath though.

I have never questioned Apple meeting their 1% target, never once, not at all. There that is it, either understand that, or just shut up.
Reply
Reply
post #209 of 278
12/12/09 at 3:46am
So how's your N97?

That was a massive success...

...not!

Hey it did so well Nokia is dumping Symbian for their high end handsets in favour of Maemo on the N900, their new flagship, well sort of flagship as it's more of an Internet tablet stuck in landscape mode most of the time.

Nokia needs Apple for it's phones as Symbian uses a WebKit based browser, open source developed by Apple.

Fennec is only for Maemo so far, the flagship after the failure of a hundred N95 clones with slightly different features.

Nokia grasping at straws, N-Gage is dead, their flagship stores are closing, London, New York, they pulled out of Japan, they made their first loss in ten years last quarter.

Nokia were knocked from the number one position based on handset revenue by guess who.

A Nokia executive admitted in 2007 that they are proud of copying others.

A dinosaur is slowly dying and all their executives offer is excuses as they slowly go down.

Their big plan to grow smartphone market share?

Dump S40 and filter S60 "Smartphone's" down into the dumb areas of the market, low cost "smartphone's that won't be used as smartphones,

Suck it up fanboy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

I see I am wasting my time with you, your little shareholder glasses are stopping you from understanding the simple concepts in life. I will say this one last time in the hope you finally understand it, I am not holding my breath though.

I have never questioned Apple meeting their 1% target, never once, not at all. There that is it, either understand that, or just shut up.

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply
post #210 of 278
12/12/09 at 4:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Are they?

According to who?

Have Nokia's patents been tested in a court of law?

According to every phone manufacturer?

Have Apple pattents been tested in a court?
Reply
Reply
post #211 of 278
12/12/09 at 4:28am
Dunno an' don't care, I guess we'll just have to wait and see how this pans out.

btw why did Nokia pay Qualcomm $2.6 billion again?

Wasn't it something to do with infringing Qualcomm's patents, including their GSM ones?

Hasn't Apple paid Qualcomm licensing fees?

Can a GSM phone work based solely on Qualcomm's patents?

What about Apple's work with Quicktime?

Do those codecs work over a GSM network without using Nokia's codecs?

It's not all black and white you know, where is the proof that Nokia's technology is essential?

Does Apple have licensing agreements with Ericsson, Motorola, Siemens, Phillips or any of the other players?

Does their technology allow for bypassing Nokia's "essential" technology?

Lot's of questions and it's up to the courts to decide them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

According to every phone manufacturer?

Have Apple pattents been tested in a court?

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply
post #212 of 278
12/12/09 at 4:31am
*sigh* What a dumb thread this has turned into.

Another couple of people for my ignore list. Congratulations guys.
Reply
Reply
post #213 of 278
12/12/09 at 4:35am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhetoric.assassin View Post

Isn't Google already abandoning older Android for their new Google Phone ANDROID...how can anyone keep this straight?

Indeed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhetoric.assassin View Post

What interest does google have to update devices that compete against their latest and greatest Google Phone Android..

Actually, quite a bit. If you think that Google is Microsoft, it isn't.

For starters, I don't think Google operatives are as crippled by bureaucratic inertia as Microsoft management is. But the biggest indicator, I feel, that Google will support older non-Google devices is from the simple fact that Google makes money from advertising, not from licensing.

Microsoft's WinMo is crap because Microsoft doesn't really need to care. It gets money up front from the phone sale. For Google, it needs to get that phone to pull users to their advertising, so Google is more apt to maintain support for non-Google phones. As I mentioned before, I think Google executives are just a bit smarter than Microsoft executives and learned the lessons that Microsoft should have learned with their WinMo experience. Microsoft executives seem content to push third-rate duplications of other products, litigate competitors into oblivion, and let their licensing fees simply roll in.

That's my $0.02. Take it for what you will.
Reply
Reply
post #214 of 278
12/12/09 at 4:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Dunno an' don't care, I guess we'll just have to wait and see how this pans out.

btw why did Nokia pay Qualcomm $2.6 billion again?

Nokia didn't pay again, it payed the money owed to Qualcomm and royalties for the next 15 years.

And no, you can't make a phone without licensing patents to Nokia, Qualcomm, Ericsson, etc. Theay all have essential patents
Reply
Reply
post #215 of 278
12/12/09 at 4:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhetoric.assassin View Post

Isn't Google already abandoning older Android for their new Google Phone ANDROID...how can anyone keep this straight?

Can you explain better this? What is abandoning Google?
Reply
Reply
post #216 of 278
12/12/09 at 4:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by patrickwalker View Post

For Google, it needs to get that phone to pull users to their advertising, so Google is more apt to maintain support for non-Google phones..

Google doesn't have to support anything, when a new version of Android is released, phone manufactures can compile it and adapt it for their handsets
Reply
Reply
post #217 of 278
12/12/09 at 4:46am
Proof?

Didn't Apple get together with Qualcomm to develop codecs specifically for streaming over networks for Quicktime?

How do we know Nokia didn't use those codecs or the same idea in their patents?

Wouldn't that make that specific claim invalid?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

Nokia didn't pay again, it payed the money owed to Qualcomm and royalties for the next 15 years.

And no, you can't make a phone without licensing patents to Nokia, Qualcomm, Ericsson, etc. Theay all have essential patents

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply
post #218 of 278
12/12/09 at 4:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Proof?

Proof of what?
Reply
Reply
post #219 of 278
12/12/09 at 5:49am
Uh, I don't even think Qualcomm has GSM patents; they are the ones who came up with CDMA for the cell market, and boy did they make a killing with their patents on it.

Quote:
Umm... Phones aren't new, they existed before the iPhone, they sold a lot of them as well. Touch screens, nope, they aren't new either. cellphones have had them for a long time, App Store, nope, not new, Apps, not new, acutally they was just a rehash from Apple that everyone else already had. Sure the iPhone was a great thing to come out in the US, but in the last two years Apple hasn't brought anything new to the table, all rehashes of what everyone else was already selling.

Infact, I have seen a grand total of two, maybe three iPhones in the wild in the last two years, in multiple countries, all with over 100% usage, that is including a grand total of one in the last year.

The trick is to quit while you are still ahead.
Reply
Reply
post #220 of 278
12/12/09 at 6:15am
Originally Posted by Gwydion

...no, you can't make a phone without licensing patents to Nokia...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

Proof of what?

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply
post #221 of 278
12/12/09 at 6:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dlux View Post

Stay with me here:

Apple sells music and video material at their iTunes store. Apple gets a cut of the sale, and the label/artist gets a cut. Apple provides the software, tech support, advertising, storage, electricity, and network bandwidth required to fulfill the purchase. Those components all cost money.

If Apple then offers material for people to download for free, they are assuming all the associated costs necessary to do so. Apple is GIVING YOU ALL OF THAT, FOR FREE.

You continue to waste everyone's time with your willful stupidity. Either that or you are simply a forum troll, and seek some perverse pleasure with your incessant mosquito bites attempting to point out some pedantic technicality or a trivial weakness of Apple and their products. You are the noise to everyone else's signal. You now have a post count exceeding 6400, of which the vast majority are childish one-liners seeking a response just for the sake of provocation. There are many people who have expressed exasperation or outright disgust with your antics. It's not just me.

Don't you think it's time for a little introspection?

the music companies absorb 100 percent of all song/video related promotions . apple does not and CANNOT ever give anything away for free .
Except when when you bought the 1 billionth song . and even then its apple products given away /

concerning your attack on teckstud >> you make some valid tired points
i simply wish you would PM him or give the whole picture
STAY WITH ME HERE.
TS is one single poster who makes or cracks scores of caustic/funny one liners . SAND in the eye type posts , no ??

YET if your attack on my buddy is true then WHAT does that say about the 2 or 3 dozen posters who follow him around again and again responding to him ?? How stupid moronic is it to respond over and over to such a terrible dude you so describe .??

takes two to tangle ?? NO ??

and the owner of this site engages and defends TS style in multiple recent posts .

why o why ??

TS is needed because he stirs the pot and brings eyeballs to AI . AND AI sells ads .. no ??
And all these lifeless white skinned nerds do need a foil like TS to daily rage against . no ??

re write your fine worded post to include the whole truth .
if not then you have wasted one of the best post's I have read IN A WHILE .

PEACE 9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #222 of 278
12/12/09 at 6:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

TS is one single poster who makes or cracks scores of caustic/funny one liners . SAND in the eye type posts , no ??

YET if your attack on my buddy is true then WHAT does that say about the 2 or 3 dozen posters who follow him around again and again responding to him ?? How stupid moronic is it to respond over and over to such a terrible dude you so describe .??

takes two to tangle ?? NO ??

and the owner of this site engages and defends TS style in multiple recent posts .

why o why ??

TS is needed because he stirs the pot and brings eyeballs to AI . AND AI sells ads .. no ??
And all these lifeless white skinned nerds do need a foil like TS to daily rage against . no ??

re write your fine worded post to include the whole truth .
if not then you have wasted one of the best post's I have read IN A WHILE .

PEACE 9

Bruce, sorry man, I can't agree with you on this. Everything else, I do - more than agree. This individual has, in recent memory, been banned twice already, and perhaps more before I began posting, and I'm sure has been warned more times than I care to count. There's a difference between playing the contrarian (and doing it well), and spamming the board with one-liners with an emoticon hanging off them, designed just to bait others and get attention. The owners and mods have not defended this behaviour. In fact, they've penalized it pretty heavily, as we've seen in recent memory.

This individual does not help AI sell ads, nor does he pull in viewers. AI articles help sell ads and pull in viewers. The tone, slant, and headlines of the articles help sell ads and pull in viewers.

And all these lifeless white skinned nerds do need a foil like TS to daily rage against

No, we don't.

I know you mean well, but easy on the generalizations. A lot of these "lifeless" people post a lot of substance, and if AI is about discussion, then they certainly advance the discussion further. And if we're not here to do that first and foremost, then our intentions are dubious at best.
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1713.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1685.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1704.gif
Reply
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1713.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1685.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1704.gif
Reply
post #223 of 278
12/12/09 at 7:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

Wow, what an ASSumption. Being in Finland does not make me a Finn. I just happen to work here at the moment. Whether or not Nokia is the largest, smallest, middle, infinitesimal company in the world is of no consequence to me. They could fold tomorrow and it would not affect me one bit. In short, I do not care. There you go, I saved you the surprise. Can't help you about the ASS.

By the way I do not speak Finnish and could not be bothered to use Google Translate, but I cordially invite you to: Foxtrot, Oscar, Echo, Sierra, Alpha, Delta. From me to you, up close and personal.

I just wanted to clarify for everyone else so I translated it for you:
Älä nakata poron paskaa, poika. Se saa heitti takaisin sinulle
Do not toss reindeer shit, son. It may be cast back to you
Reply
Reply
post #224 of 278
12/12/09 at 7:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Well I would beleive him over a lot of the stats tossed around here. But if there are 4.6 billion mobile connections in the world, and they have sold 35 million iPhones, how can you try and prove that they don't have a 0.7% market share?

Why are you restricting Apple to the Smartphone market, when Steve Jobs originally said he wanted a share of the total market?

If you read that article, it proves that the iPhone isn't as big as people in parts of the US make it out to be.

Perhaps because 4.4+ Billion of those purported connections aren't smartphones; hence they are money losers, not profit gainers. Apple's is gaining the lion's share of profits in the smart phone market.

This site claims in March 2009 Apple total iPhone sales at 17 million since it's inception.
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2009/03..._iphone_sales/

The now purported number has doubled in under a year.

Nokia sees it's profit futures crashing.
Reply
Reply
post #225 of 278
12/12/09 at 8:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

I have never questioned Apple meeting their 1% target, never once, not at all. There that is it, either understand that, or just shut up.

That is you, and only you, confusing installed base with market.
That is you, and only you, stating that Apple can only have a 0.7% marketshare because you don’t know the difference between installed base and market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning

But if there are 4.6 billion mobile connections in the world, and they have sold 35 million iPhones, how can you try and prove that they don't have a 0.7% market share?

Hence, my proof that your ‘stats' are that only ones that are wrong and that Appl took nearly 1.9% of the handset market for Q2-2009 and 2.28% of the handset market for Q3-2009.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #226 of 278
12/12/09 at 8:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Originally Posted by Gwydion

...no, you can't make a phone without licensing patents to Nokia...

Because Nokia and other companies have developed all the technology used in mobile telephony?

Really are you saying that those companies doesn't have to be paid for using the technology that they have developed?

Why, because we are talking about Apple?
Reply
Reply
post #227 of 278
12/12/09 at 8:31am
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Not only that, his assertion that "Apple infringed on Nokia's patents" is simply unfounded. (Underlining mine: the choice of the word 'infringe' is not accidental on his part, since, as any reasonable dictionary will show you, it implies a violation of the law or rights of the other person. It is a very loaded word on his part).

He apparently did not bother to read Apple's response to Nokia's suit.

Isn't the whole question here about four different points?

1) Did Apple infringe Nokia patents without paying? Who knows until court gives a verdict.

2) Are the Nokia patents "essential". Apple is saying no, other licensees and industry analysists are saying: YES. Look at pages 9-> http://www.frlicense.com/GSM_FINAL.pdf. Nokia chose 10 of 180+ patents that have been deemed essential to make the case strong.

3) Did Nokia offer F/RAND to Apple? Nokia says yes, but Apple told them to shove it, Apple says No. We'll knwo until the courts say which way it went.

4) Apple says Nokia infringed on their patents. Who knows until court gives a verdict.

So isn't this a case, where we as layman can only believe industry analysis of the FACTS (i.e. point 2). The other points are ruled by in court. Point 3 could be ruled by us, but none of us know what Nokia offered Apple and what other companies are paying for the same patents.

<Personal opinion>Apple's wording in the beginning of the filing about Nokia being desperate is not very professional and shows arrogance (founded in valid success no doubt) or an attempt to shift the focus from the fact of patents and licensing to "sore loser" type of blaming. </Personal opinion>

Regs, Jarkko
Reply
Reply
post #228 of 278
12/12/09 at 8:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jahonen View Post

Isn't the whole question here about four different points?

1) Did Apple infringe Nokia patents without paying? Who knows until court gives a verdict.

2) Are the Nokia patents "essential". Apple is saying no, other licensees and industry analysists are saying: YES. Look at pages 9-> http://www.frlicense.com/GSM_FINAL.pdf. Nokia chose 10 of 180+ patents that have been deemed essential to make the case strong.

3) Did Nokia offer F/RAND to Apple? Nokia says yes, but Apple told them to shove it, Apple says No. We'll knwo until the courts say which way it went.

4) Apple says Nokia infringed on their patents. Who knows until court gives a verdict.

So isn't this a case, where we as layman can only believe industry analysis of the FACTS (i.e. point 2). The other points are ruled by in court. Point 3 could be ruled by us, but none of us know what Nokia offered Apple and what other companies are paying for the same patents.

<Personal opinion>Apple's wording in the beginning of the filing about Nokia being desperate is not very professional and shows arrogance (founded in valid success no doubt) or an attempt to shift the focus from the fact of patents and licensing to "sore loser" type of blaming. </Personal opinion>

Regs, Jarkko

Thanks for expressing my opinion better than me
Reply
Reply
post #229 of 278
12/12/09 at 8:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jahonen View Post

Isn't the whole question here about four different points?

1) Did Apple infringe Nokia patents without paying? Who knows until court gives a verdict.

2) Are the Nokia patents "essential". Apple is saying no, other licensees and industry analysists are saying: YES. Look at pages 9-> http://www.frlicense.com/GSM_FINAL.pdf. Nokia chose 10 of 180+ patents that have been deemed essential to make the case strong.

3) Did Nokia offer F/RAND to Apple? Nokia says yes, but Apple told them to shove it, Apple says No. We'll knwo until the courts say which way it went.

4) Apple says Nokia infringed on their patents. Who knows until court gives a verdict.

So isn't this a case, where we as layman can only believe industry analysis of the FACTS (i.e. point 2). The other points are ruled by in court. Point 3 could be ruled by us, but none of us know what Nokia offered Apple and what other companies are paying for the same patents.

All good points and nicely presented. Were likely not going to know who stole whose patents since this will likely be settled out of court for some paltry amount that will make wonder why they even bothered to butt heads in the first place.

We can look at the 2003-2006 case of Apple Corps v. Apple Computers, Inc. to see how going to court can backfire.

Quote:
<Personal opinion>Apple's wording in the beginning of the filing about Nokia being desperate is not very professional and shows arrogance (founded in valid success no doubt) or an attempt to shift the focus from the fact of patents and licensing to "sore loser" type of blaming. </Personal opinion>

I see your point but I dont think its strong enough to be conclusive for me to form an opinion on who is at fault. It seems more like a tactic than Apple being cornered with the goods in hand.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #230 of 278
12/12/09 at 2:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

So how's your N97?

You must be confusing me with someone else, I don't have a N97. Infact, just like the iPhone, I don't know anyone that has one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Hey it did so well Nokia is dumping Symbian for their high end handsets in favour of Maemo on the N900, their new flagship, well sort of flagship as it's more of an Internet tablet stuck in landscape mode most of the time.

Again, you seem to be confusing things, Nokia hasn't dumped Symbian for anything, they are using a different OS on one model yes, dumping no.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Nokia needs Apple for it's phones as Symbian uses a WebKit based browser, open source developed by Apple.

If they are dumping Symbian like you say, why are you cared. Also, WebKit is open source, so they don't need Apple for it at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Fennec is only for Maemo so far, the flagship after the failure of a hundred N95 clones with slightly different features.

Not sure what you are trying to say here at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Nokia grasping at straws, N-Gage is dead, their flagship stores are closing, London, New York, they pulled out of Japan, they made their first loss in ten years last quarter.

Now, your lack of knowledge really comes out, Nokia handset division made a profit, quite a large one, it was NSN that made the loss. Also, they still sell some models of their phones in Japan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Nokia were knocked from the number one position based on handset revenue by guess who.

Yes all the metrics changed to revenue because Apple doesn't make a dent in the share otherwise. As a consumer (ie I don't own shares in any company) Apples profits on their devices offends me, enough to make me really think what make of computer I will purchase next will be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

A Nokia executive admitted in 2007 that they are proud of copying others.

Again, your point? Apple has been copying for years, all companies do it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Suck it up fanboy.

I own more Apple products than Nokia products and that makes me a fanboy? For which side?
Reply
Reply
post #231 of 278
12/12/09 at 2:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by success View Post

Is that you Gollum

sorry i am reading the hobbit right now,
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #232 of 278
12/12/09 at 2:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

That is you, and only youblah blah blah

Like I said, if you can't understand it, just shut up as your backpedalling is keeping me awake.
Reply
Reply
post #233 of 278
12/12/09 at 2:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Bruce, sorry man, I can't agree with you on this. Everything else, I do - more than agree. This individual has, in recent memory, been banned twice already, and perhaps more before I began posting, and I'm sure has been warned more times than I care to count. There's a difference between playing the contrarian (and doing it well), and spamming the board with one-liners with an emoticon hanging off them, designed just to bait others and get attention. The owners and mods have not defended this behaviour. In fact, they've penalized it pretty heavily, as we've seen in recent memory.

This individual does not help AI sell ads, nor does he pull in viewers. AI articles help sell ads and pull in viewers. The tone, slant, and headlines of the articles help sell ads and pull in viewers.

And all these lifeless white skinned nerds do need a foil like TS to daily rage against

No, we don't.

I know you mean well, but easy on the generalizations. A lot of these "lifeless" people post a lot of substance, and if AI is about discussion, then they certainly advance the discussion further. And if we're not here to do that first and foremost, then our intentions are dubious at best.

i was born from massive troll wars on the EMI pink floyd boards . A TROLL war so bad the board crashed forever. .I learned one thing and one thing only my friend . and my whole post addresses that single lesson learned

IF YOU FEEL SOME ONE IS A TROLLC THEN YOU MUST NOT ENGAGE HIM EVER .

quadra this seems so simple and clear .., i ilke TS a lot but even i cringe sometimes at his caustic remarks .

I was not referring to you in my WHITE BOY crack .. I was trying to shame some fine reg ppi who add so much great stuff hear yet on the turn of a dime they start fighting with TS about stupid stuff .
hi jacking yet another good topic .

i agree with you about the AI ad stuff i may be wrong .


last word is any one upset at this situation must just ignore said offender.

i regret quagra if i offended you ; i did not mean too .

peace
9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #234 of 278
12/12/09 at 3:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I see your point but I dont think its strong enough to be conclusive for me to form an opinion on who is at fault. It seems more like a tactic than Apple being cornered with the goods in hand.

Never meant to be conveying a conclusive point as such. A mere personal "feeling" from the filing.

Regs, Jarkko
Reply
Reply
post #235 of 278
12/12/09 at 3:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngusYoung View Post

Disturbing... Hate much?

oh dude
my god no
'just a joke
boil your bones is from the orc song in the childrens book the hobbit
again sorry meant no hate at all .
i simply dislike nokia


peace 9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #236 of 278
12/12/09 at 3:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jahonen View Post

Never meant to be conveying a conclusive point as such. A mere personal "feeling" from the filing.

Regs, Jarkko

Gotcha. Mea culpa.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #237 of 278
12/12/09 at 3:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

i
last word is any one upset at this situation must just ignore said offender.

i regret quagra if i offended you ; i did not mean too .

peace
9

No offense, taken, Bruce, I go tanning now and then. As always, we're just talkin.
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1713.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1685.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1704.gif
Reply
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1713.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1685.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1704.gif
Reply
post #238 of 278
12/12/09 at 4:04pm
i still don't understand any of this >>> WITH ALL THIS ALL BICKERING HERE

COULD SOME ONE EXPLAIN EXACTLY WHY THESE TWO GIANTS ARE SUING EACH OTHER .

please just some facts and or links but no fighting .
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #239 of 278
12/12/09 at 4:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

No offense, taken, Bruce, I go tanning now and then. As always, we're just talkin.

hey thanks for that
well my 2 kids are going wild on the wii game right now
i think i will join then in some 100 pin bowling

peace Quadra 610

9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #240 of 278
12/12/09 at 4:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

i still don't understand any of this >>> WITH ALL THIS ALL BICKERING HERE

COULD SOME ONE EXPLAIN EXACTLY WHY THESE TWO GIANTS ARE SUING EACH OTHER .

please just some facts and or links but no fighting .

$$$$$$$$
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple files countersuit against Nokia