or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Jury likely to decide Apple and Samsung case as parties fail to narrow dispute
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Jury likely to decide Apple and Samsung case as parties fail to narrow dispute - Page 2

post #41 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ewan View Post

I love Apple but for the sake of humanity I hope they lose! Apple losing will set an example for every other corporation who tries to bully the small guy. Go Samsung! Free Apple Juice for everyone when Apple loses.

 

You are all ass-backwards ... Samscum is a shit load bigger than Apple.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarquisMark View Post


I mostly feel the same way. Been an Apple shareholder since before the iPod, but something drastic needs to happen in order for this lawsuit happy environment to end. Only people benefitting from this are lawyers and patent trolls. I understand the reasons for patents but it surely hinders competition (generally speaking). Competition is good for everyone. Intel and MS got lazy when they were the top dog, i don't want to see Apple do the same.

 

It's a lawsuit happy situation because it's a copy / clone situation first and foremost. True competitors innovate first and foremost.

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #42 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

No behavior that breaks the rules.

If he were being paid by Samsung to make specious arguments without declaring it, would that be a breach of the rules?
post #43 of 156

I keep seeing talk of an appeal if Apple looses...

 

There are not a lot of lower court decisions that are overturned on appeal.  You have to prove more than you dislike the jury's decision.  You don't hear of too many lower court decisions being overturned on appeal.  It's the exception, not the rule.

 

I don't claim to know who will win, but whoever wins has a major upper hand.  Neither Samsung nor Apple want to count on an appeal.

post #44 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Personally I would prefer that Apple settle and license virtually every patent claim thus taking the high road.

So in your view, letting your competitors steal all of your IP and giving away your competitive advantage for a pittance is "the high road"?

OK, then let's do this. I want to use your car. I'll pay you $1 per day for unlimited use of your car. You need to take the high road and allow it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ewan View Post

I love Apple but for the sake of humanity I hope they lose! Apple losing will set an example for every other corporation who tries to bully the small guy. Go Samsung! Free Apple Juice for everyone when Apple loses.

So humanity benefits when companies are allowed to brazenly steal all of their competitors IP? It would be interesting to see how you justify that. It would also be interesting to see how you're going to justify companies spending money on innovation if their competitors are allowed to steal everything as soon as it comes out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ewan View Post

Is Judge Koh Kohrean by any chance? He seems very bias against Apple.

I guess I see where your previous opinion came from. You seem to love proving your ignorance.

Koh is not Korean. She's American. He's also not a 'he'. You would be better off if you stop expressing opinions on subjects you don't understand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post

You are all ass-backwards ... Samscum is a shit load bigger than Apple.

You can't make a blanket statement like that without defining what you mean by 'bigger'. In market capitalization, Apple is the largest company on the planet.
Revenue? For the Christmas quarter, Apple was larger - $46 B to $45 B. I haven't looked up more recent numbers or annual figures.
Profits? Apple is well ahead.
Samsung is considerably larger in number of employees, though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rednival View Post

I keep seeing talk of an appeal if Apple looses...

There are not a lot of lower court decisions that are overturned on appeal.  You have to prove more than you dislike the jury's decision.  You don't hear of too many lower court decisions being overturned on appeal.  It's the exception, not the rule.

I don't claim to know who will win, but whoever wins has a major upper hand.  Neither Samsung nor Apple want to count on an appeal.

While it's true that whoever wins has the upper hand, winning at least SOMETHING on appeal is not as uncommon as you think. After all, Apple won an appeal on this very case in order to get an injunction on the sale of some Samsung products.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #45 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Personally I would prefer that Apple settle and license virtually every patent claim thus taking the high road.

 

Power to differentiate drops considerably. Long-term, not a good idea. Apple are where they are today in part because they don't license a lot of their key tech. 

 

We've already gone through this a hundred times. 

 

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post


I know that sounds a bit idealistic but I don't like seeing all of Apples private research and strategy information being made public.

 

If that's your position on *that*, then why on earth would you want Apple to license out the very underpinnings of their "research strategy"? (their IP.)

 

*confused*

 

DIFFERENTIATION IS EVERYTHING. You let go of your IP to make a quick buck and play "nice" (which is for industry LOSERS), and soon enough Apple will slip into the "generic" category. Another HP running an OS that's barely different from everything else. Apple's entire strategy revolves around keeping the "Apple experience" as exclusive to Apple as possible. You don't do that by giving away the farm. 


Edited by Quadra 610 - 8/19/12 at 6:10am
post #46 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

You can't make a blanket statement like that without defining what you mean by 'bigger'. In market capitalization, Apple is the largest company on the planet.
Revenue? For the Christmas quarter, Apple was larger - $46 B to $45 B. I haven't looked up more recent numbers or annual figures.
Profits? Apple is well ahead.
 

 

Apple is not the largest company on the planet by market capitalization or revenue.  Saudi Aramco has a value (theoretical market cap) somewhere between 2.2 and 7 trillion dollars and had revenue of $210 billion in 2010....

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_aramco

post #47 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ewan View Post

I love Apple but for the sake of humanity I hope they lose! Apple losing will set an example for every other corporation who tries to bully the small guy. Go Samsung! Free Apple Juice for everyone when Apple loses.

poor little multi-billion dollar companies...

Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

You can't make a blanket statement like that without defining what you mean by 'bigger'. In market capitalization, Apple is the largest company on the planet.
Revenue? For the Christmas quarter, Apple was larger - $46 B to $45 B. I haven't looked up more recent numbers or annual figures.
Profits? Apple is well ahead.
Samsung is considerably larger in number of employees, though.
While it's true that whoever wins has the upper hand, winning at least SOMETHING on appeal is not as uncommon as you think. After all, Apple won an appeal on this very case in order to get an injunction on the sale of some Samsung products.

 

So... your saying if Samsung made a net loss in a quarter, but Mom&Pop country produce store on the corner of a little town in middle of no where pulled in a profit of $50,000 with their 5 employees... that they are now bigger than Samsung!!  Cool!!

post #48 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregInPrague View Post

Apple is not the largest company on the planet by market capitalization or revenue.  Saudi Aramco has a value (theoretical market cap) somewhere between 2.2 and 7 trillion dollars and had revenue of $210 billion in 2010....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_aramco

But since Aramco is not a public company, the term 'market capitalization' does not apply, so your point is moot.

And I never claimed that Apple was the largest by revenue. Several other public companies have greater revenue. My statement was simply that Apple's revenues were greater than Samsung's (refuting the person I was responding to).
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #49 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregInPrague View Post

Apple is not the largest company on the planet by market capitalization or revenue.  Saudi Aramco has a value (theoretical market cap) somewhere between 2.2 and 7 trillion dollars and had revenue of $210 billion in 2010....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_aramco


Reinforces the problem with relying too much on Wiki. It's always useful to compare to peer companies when valuing an entity and ask the question "what's unique?". Exxon-Mobile (XOM) has well over $400 B in revenue and is highly profitable. 2x+ estimated Saudi Aramco (SA) revenue. Not sure of SA's profits. XOM has a market cap < Apple. What would cause SA's hypothetical market cap to be 4x that of Apple? They probably have less profits and lower annual growth than Apple.
post #50 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minnesota_Steve View Post

What would cause SA's hypothetical market cap to be 4x that of Apple? They probably have less profits and lower annual growth than Apple.

How much they own comes to mind. How much untapped oil reserves they own compared to Exxon. We know they are the largest but how much larger are they than Exxon? You can also factor in the relative difficultly vis-à-vis cost for extracting that oil. How much they have also saved plays a roll. I wouldn't be surprised if SA has billions in gold bar sitting in some secret location but would be if Exxon had the same.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #51 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

So in your view, letting your competitors steal all of your IP and giving away your competitive advantage for a pittance is "the high road"?
OK, then let's do this. I want to use your car. I'll pay you $1 per day for unlimited use of your car. You need to take the high road and allow it.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Power to differentiate drops considerably. Long-term, not a good idea. Apple are where they are today in part because they don't license a lot of their key tech. 

 

If that's your position on *that*, then why on earth would you want Apple to license out the very underpinnings of their "research strategy"? (their IP.)

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough about the word license. If you reread my comment it might make more sense once you understand it says that I think Apple should be the one buying the licenses not the other way around.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #52 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

And if they lose?

Correct me if wrong but it's multiple decisions, so it could be win some lose some.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #53 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minnesota_Steve View Post

Reinforces the problem with relying too much on Wiki. It's always useful to compare to peer companies when valuing an entity and ask the question "what's unique?". Exxon-Mobile (XOM) has well over $400 B in revenue and is highly profitable. 2x+ estimated Saudi Aramco (SA) revenue. Not sure of SA's profits. XOM has a market cap < Apple. What would cause SA's hypothetical market cap to be 4x that of Apple? They probably have less profits and lower annual growth than Apple.

While you are probably correct that Wikipedia appears to greatly overstate the value of Aramco, it's irrelevant, anyway. Aramco is not a public company, so it doesn't have a market capitalization, so my statement that Apple has the largest market cap of any company in the world is correct.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough about the word license. If you reread my comment it might make more sense once you understand it says that I think Apple should be the one buying the licenses not the other way around.

Then your post makes absolutely no sense.

It is widely recognized that Apple has to license the FRAND patents. The only thing that's not settled is what the license fee should be.

But that's not the issue of this trial. The issue is what to do about Samsung stealing Apple's IP without permission and if you meant that Apple should pay to license technologies, that doesn't address the biggest issues.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #54 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

You do know that the Judge can overthrow the Jury's decision if she/he doesnt agree with its outcome, no?

Are you still here?!

 

Ugh.

post #55 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Personally I would prefer that Apple settle and license virtually every patent claim thus taking the high road. My feeling is that they would profit even more and minimize the critical media press commentaries therefore enhancing their public image and further solidifying their dominate position in mobile technology worldwide. That way they could pay the fees yet maintain their own IP. Perhaps it would add another $50 to the cost but that being subsidized would not make that much difference. When it was time to take another company to court over patents the competitor would have no counter position to argue from since Apple would have already licensed all relevant patents.
I know that sounds a bit idealistic but I don't like seeing all of Apples private research and strategy information being made public.

 

 

 

As seen with Apple settlement with Nokia, Apple is willing to agree to reasonable licensing terms for standard essential patents. It, however, isn't going to be discriminated against merely because it sells a lot of product. Many people thought Nokia was going to squeeze anywhere from one to two billion dollars from Apple in back owed licensing fees. Instead, Apple paid 600 million. That was a win for Apple because Apple always knew it had to pay Nokia something. 

 

In this case, Apple also knows it has to pay Samsung something for Samsung's standard essential patents. The issue is merely how much does it have to pay. Companies like Nokia, Samsung, and Motorola are trying to discriminate against Apple because its volume of sales and charge it a higher rate than it does other companies licensing their patents. They can't do that when standard essential patents are involved. 

 

In terms of Apple licensing its patents, it made Samsung an offer, and as the trial showed,  it gave Microsoft a license as well. Apple, however, isn't going to tolerate companies making products that look like its own because making products that stand out is how Apple has become successful. 

post #56 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregInPrague View Post

 

Apple is not the largest company on the planet by market capitalization or revenue.  Saudi Aramco has a value (theoretical market cap) somewhere between 2.2 and 7 trillion dollars and had revenue of $210 billion in 2010....

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_aramco

Actually, my theoretical market cap is even higher: 9 trillion. People (sort of) mean the real world....

 

Incidentally, the total revenues of Saudi Aramco are probably two or three multiples of the number you suggest.

post #57 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregInPrague View Post

 

Apple is not the largest company on the planet by market capitalization or revenue.  Saudi Aramco has a value (theoretical market cap) somewhere between 2.2 and 7 trillion dollars and had revenue of $210 billion in 2010....

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_aramco

 

Market capitalization refers to companies publicly traded on the exchanges. The market cap is easy to figure out in such cases. If a company is private, it doesn't have a market cap. 

post #58 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

How much they own comes to mind. How much untapped oil reserves they own compared to Exxon. We know they are the largest but how much larger are they than Exxon? You can also factor in the relative difficultly vis-à-vis cost for extracting that oil. How much they have also saved plays a roll. I wouldn't be surprised if SA has billions in gold bar sitting in some secret location but would be if Exxon had the same.

Could be. Just guessing that their excess cash gets distributed as a huge dividend back to the state to finance the country. I haven't looked up their proven reserves vs. those owned/licensed by XOM.
post #59 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

While you are probably correct that Wikipedia appears to greatly overstate the value of Aramco, it's irrelevant, anyway. Aramco is not a public company, so it doesn't have a market capitalization, so my statement that Apple has the largest market cap of any company in the world is correct.
Then your post makes absolutely no sense.
It is widely recognized that Apple has to license the FRAND patents. The only thing that's not settled is what the license fee should be.
But that's not the issue of this trial. The issue is what to do about Samsung stealing Apple's IP without permission and if you meant that Apple should pay to license technologies, that doesn't address the biggest issues.


No argument here. Just found the 2.2-2.7 potential market cap number fun to debate.
post #60 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by logandigges View Post

Finally I can send out my invitations for the Apple winning party, anyone wanna come? There will be Appletinis and Apple flavored vodka.

Actually, Apple could win and Samsung could also win its complaints. In the end, both companies could win than then be awarded practically nothing. Just because you "win" doesn't mean you will receive the damages that you expect.

post #61 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmarcoot View Post

I don't envy this jury. I have my own thoughts and opinions from having followed Apples innovation for the iPhone closely for years. To have all this crammed in 2 weeks must be mind boggling. I expect the jury to be hung.

The jury is not on trial. Hanging them seems a bit extreme, don't you think?
post #62 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Well, they say if you repeat a lie enough, that makes it true.

 

"Samsung is innovative."

"Samsung is innovative."

"Samsung is innovative."

"Samsung is innovative."

"Samsung is innovative."

"Samsung is innovative."

"Samsung is innovative."

"Samsung is innovative."

"Samsung is innovative."

"Samsung is innovative."

"Samsung is innovative."

"Samsung is innovative."

"Samsung is innovative."

"Samsung is innovative."

"Samsung is innovative."

Shouldn't the moderators job be to make sure everything runs well in the forums and not to constantly post their opinions in the forums?  

 

His actions are like a beach volley ball referee running on the sand to play the game when he should be making sure everybody else follows the rules. But, I guess when you have all the power  you can do what you want without worrying about others' recourse. Probably the reason he left Mac Rumors(?) after three years.

post #63 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post


Shouldn't the moderators job be to make sure everything runs well in the forums and not to constantly post their opinions in the forums?  

His actions are like a beach volley ball referee running on the sand to play the game when he should be making sure everybody else follows the rules. But, I guess when you have all the power  you can do what you want without worrying about others' recourse. Probably the reason he left Mac Rumors(?) after three years.

Why should a moderator not be able to express opinions? Their job is to moderate based on the rules, not on opinions, so there is no inherent conflict of interest.
post #64 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post

Shouldn't the moderators job be to make sure everything runs well in the forums and not to constantly post their opinions in the forums?  

 

His actions are like a beach volley ball coach running on the sand to play the game when he should be making sure everybody else follows the rules. But, I guess when you have all the power  you can do what you want without worrying about others' recourse. Probably the reason he left Mac Rumors(?) after three years.

No, moderators can still be part of the discussion. And he does a great job, he never says "Shut up, I am a moderator", or uses the power to ban people who doesn't like. He only bans spammers. So you shut up. And "left" MacRumors? He didn't leave...

 

 


Tim Cook using Galaxy Tabs as frisbees

 

Reply

 

 


Tim Cook using Galaxy Tabs as frisbees

 

Reply
post #65 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

But that's not the issue of this trial. The issue is what to do about Samsung stealing Apple's IP without permission and if you meant that Apple should pay to license technologies, that doesn't address the biggest issues.

Understood, this case was a disaster. Samsung kept trying to derail the case by saying Apple was infringing on many other company's patents too. If Apple was more cooperative in licensing others' patents instead of just flipping them off and saying sue me if you don't like it, then they would perhaps have a better standing in court the next time they start a lawsuit against the likes of Samsung. As it is now the defense is always going to be Apple steals everyone else IP too. Sure Apple is a big target but with this upcoming Motorola case they should just settle and be done with it. That way they have complied with Motorola so when it comes time to sue Google there is no counter argument available to them.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #66 of 156
Originally Posted by BertieBig View Post
If he were being paid by Samsung to make specious arguments without declaring it, would that be a breach of the rules?

 

Paid, yes. Back in 2008, we had some paid Adobe shills (posting from Adobe IPs, the morons) touting how great Flash was. In the dumpster they went.

 

Originally Posted by logandigges View Post
And "left" MacRumors? He didn't leave...

 

Should have, though. lol.gif Would have by now, given what they've become.

 

But then I wouldn't have met you fine people as early as I did. So it all works out.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #67 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post


Why should a moderator not be able to express opinions? Their job is to moderate based on the rules, not on opinions, so there is no inherent conflict of interest.

The difference is that with his extreme polarizing and demeaning  style he does cross the line often with impunity. If he wants to participate on the same level as the other members then the other members should be able to add him to their ignore list as I find him quite obnoxious at times.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #68 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

So you prefer DOS prompts and crappy cell devices?

Bleh.. this is beyond silly. Apple didn't think of the GUI. Xerox made one before them. Others considered the idea before that. Get over it. Someone else would have come along and you have no way of knowing whether it would have been better or worse. Beyond that I've mentioned before that mobile phones would have changed anyway. You might not have quite as many apps yet, but things like larger screens and touch devices were merely accelerated by Apple. I've mentioned the plummeting price of lcd displays around the time of the iphone. Once the cost barrier was down, more companies would have moved in. The LG prada is mentioned frequently. It wouldn't have been the only one. They didn't even have the first high resolution display. A couple before them marketed as "print quality". Apple chose "retina" because it sounds cooler. It's fine to enjoy the stuff you own. Just get over the idea that they are the only ones.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

"Only way", huh.

 

Your line of thinking was outmoded 28 years ago.

It's still useful for scripting, although I typically use an IDE or a text editor that colors the font based on syntax.

Quote:
Originally Posted by softeky View Post


The jury is not on trial. Hanging them seems a bit extreme, don't you think?

Not sure if you're kidding or unfamiliar with the term. If you're unfamiliar, a hung jury means they are unable to return a verdict due to unresolvable differences in opinion during deliberation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post

Shouldn't the moderators job be to make sure everything runs well in the forums and not to constantly post their opinions in the forums?  

 

His actions are like a beach volley ball referee running on the sand to play the game when he should be making sure everybody else follows the rules. But, I guess when you have all the power  you can do what you want without worrying about others' recourse. Probably the reason he left Mac Rumors(?) after three years.


His posting style hasn't changed. It has always been like that. Other moderators also post regularly. Note Marvin and JeffDM.

post #69 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

But that's not the issue of this trial. The issue is what to do about Samsung stealing Apple's IP without permission and if you meant that Apple should pay to license technologies, that doesn't address the biggest issues.
Understood, this case was a disaster. Samsung kept trying to derail the case by saying Apple was infringing on many other company's patents too. If Apple was more cooperative in licensing others' patents instead of just flipping them off and saying sue me if you don't like it, then they would perhaps have a better standing in court the next time they start a lawsuit against the likes of Samsung. As it is now the defense is always going to be Apple steals everyone else IP too. Sure Apple is a big target but with this upcoming Motorola case they should just settle and be done with it. That way they have complied with Motorola so when it comes time to sue Google there is no counter argument available to them.

It might well help Apple in court to be immune from counter-claims, but probably not at the cost of settling unreasonable claims; setting that kind of precedent would likely backfire in the long term. I've also wondered whether some of the license offers that are made to them are deliberately unreasonable, just to ensure that they don't settle in order to enable these kinds of counter-claims when Apple sues.
post #70 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

Why should a moderator not be able to express opinions? Their job is to moderate based on the rules, not on opinions, so there is no inherent conflict of interest.
The difference is that with his extreme polarizing and demeaning  style he does cross the line often with impunity. If he wants to participate on the same level as the other members then the other members should be able to add him to their ignore list as I find him quite obnoxious at times.

Fair enough on the ignore thing. Personally, I find him to be quite knowledgeable, and never worse than amusing. There are several far more obnoxious posters here - even ones that I generally agree with. Certainly wouldn't be on my ignore list.
post #71 of 156
Originally Posted by mstone View Post
If he wants to participate on the same level as the other members then the other members should be able to add him to their ignore list as I find him quite obnoxious at times.

 

Well, you seem to have taken care of that and are advertising as such to everyone else, so why bother complaining about it?


Originally Posted by hmm View Post
It's still useful for scripting, although I typically use an IDE or a text editor that colors the font based on syntax.

 

Oh, sure! Most classes are still almost exclusively command-line, too, as silly and pointless as that can be at times. It's just that the perpetuation of this form of input turns into "this is the only way to fly" for some people when that couldn't be further from the truth.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #72 of 156
Quote:
Jury likely to decide Apple and Samsung case as parties fail to narrow dispute
Even if it had been narrowed, it would have been decided by a jury.
Judge Koh was wanting Apple & Samsung to narrow it down to make it simpler for the jury to decide.
The only way the jury would NOT have made a decision is if both sides had agreed to get rid of everything (either drop the claims, cross-licensing, whatever).
post #73 of 156

I certainly hope Apple loses as well. This will show relatively smaller, yet significantly wealthy tech corporations that they cannot go around bullying larger SUPER-MEGA-GINORMO-CONGLOMORATE-CORPORATIONS-THAT-COPY-THE-HELL-OUT-OF-EVERYTHING. Oh and just so you don't mistake me for a troll, I have been an Apple user since the Reagan administration (true story), I have 300 different Apple products, and have owned stock since OSX 10.2.3 build number 6G37. /s

 

Everyone makes a big deal about how Apple hates competition...they don't hate competition...they hate the competition building "look & feel" clones based on their IP. Maybe its far-reaching of Apple to make the argument that people are confused between the two product lines, but it should be reasonable to say that Samsung's success at the top of the Android food-chain is due to Apple already doing the R&D for them. Whether Apple was inspired by Sony is irrelevant...Apple never copied Sony or even released a product that might have been a copy of a Sony product. Samsung was not inspired by Apple...they were inspired by Apple's success and then copied the hell out of their products.

 

However, methinks the next month will really provide some serious competition should Apple actually be making a larger iPhone and a smaller iPad/larger iPod touch. Though, Apple critics will likely make a stink that Apple supposedly invented these "new" form factors (new for its product lines anyway). The point is, if these products come out, people will buy them...not because they are in response to Android, but because people have wanted these products in these form factors from Apple and Apple listened. Apple usually does listen, it just generally takes a few years to make sure everything works well and fits the eco-system. Sometimes there's even a little clever misdirection from the late CEO to keep people guessing. Maybe these two products are just rumors and will remain rumors...we won't know till mid-September.

Samsung Galaxy series: Faster on a benchmark, not in your hand.

Reply

Samsung Galaxy series: Faster on a benchmark, not in your hand.

Reply
post #74 of 156

i have a lot of apple stuff at home but there were lots of candy bar style phones out before the iphone. samsung entered like 10 of them into evidence, just the apple blogs ignored it. going back further RIM had the grid style layout with different screens and folders. Palm had the rectangle with rounded corners and grid layout as well. apple gave us the best OS on a mobile device at the time

 

other than some icons being too similar and maybe the rubber band effect there was lots of prior art for everything apple and samsung had done. just like MS in the 90's, apple had the right product at the right time when the cost structure became right to build a nice smartphone

post #75 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Personally I would prefer that Apple settle and license virtually every patent claim thus taking the high road. .

So they should settle and pay what could be FRAND violating rates for Samsungs SEPs and settle and let Samsung have access to Apples nonSEP that Apple is not legally required to give them at all much less under any pricing restrictions
Edited by charlituna - 8/19/12 at 9:42am

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #76 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by 845032 View Post

Apple is 'one and only' trouble maker in industry.
World will be a better place if without Apple

A statement like that shows how little you get this scene. For every lawsuit with Apple as a party there are at least ten IP suits without. We don't hear about them because, the site in question is about Apple and doesnt post things with no connection or simply the companies dont get the page hits that invoking Apple does so the general sites are less inclined to waste time on them.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #77 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

You do know that the Judge can overthrow the Jury's decision if she/he doesnt agree with its outcome, no?

There would have to be a major reason to do so or she just guaranteed an appeal by the losing party, if not also the winning one ( if say she downgraded the damages majorly).

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #78 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by BertieBig View Post

If he were being paid by Samsung to make specious arguments without declaring it, would that be a breach of the rules?

Why bother even trying to think up something. Put him on ignore and move on.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #79 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Oh, sure! Most classes are still almost exclusively command-line, too, as silly and pointless as that can be at times. It's just that the perpetuation of this form of input turns into "this is the only way to fly" for some people when that couldn't be further from the truth.

 

Most classes? Well regarding scripting, I mentioned that I use either an IDE or one of the better text editors. Some software just contains an enormous number of GUI icons, pull down menus, etc. and even then doesn't provide every possible function. A good scripting API can allow you to remedy that. I took up Python a while back due to its popularity in this regard. The annoying thing is that some are on Python 2.x.x where others are on 3, and 2.7 actually grabbed features from the 3.x.x language. They backported them for a final 2.x.x release. It does get annoying.

post #80 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

.
But that's not the issue of this trial..

Yes Apples violation of Samsung FRAND patents was part of this. Personally I don't think it should have been because it mixes two totally different patent situations together but it wasn't my call.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Jury likely to decide Apple and Samsung case as parties fail to narrow dispute