or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple recruits top chip designer, IBM responds with suit
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple recruits top chip designer, IBM responds with suit - Page 2

post #41 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

IBM believes this is "an attempt to expand Apple's presence in the markets for servers and chips for handheld devices."

Apple has issued a statement saying "No sh!t"
post #42 of 96
These law suites are bull shit. If they want to keep their top engineers, why not give better pay, better incentives, better work environments so they will have less incentives to go elsewhere? Thats better than paying for expensive lawyers and crying foul.
post #43 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolchak View Post

No, it doesn't. Read the agreement. It has the standard clause limiting it to one year after he leaves the company. He's free to legally work for whomever he wants to after that year is up.

I guess Papermaster could end up working for Pixar for a year then

Many of the most important software concepts were invented in the 70s and forgotten in the 80s.

Reply

Many of the most important software concepts were invented in the 70s and forgotten in the 80s.

Reply
post #44 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

IBM offered Papermaster "a substantial increase in his total compensation package" to stay at IBM, including "one year's salary." The complaint says Papermaster asked for time to consider the offer, then submitted his resignation the next day.

HA HA HA
Uhhh, let me think about it, uh...NO!
post #45 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by msoori View Post

These law suites are bull shit. If they want to keep their top engineers, why not give better pay, better incentives, better work environments so they will have less incentives to go elsewhere? Thats better than paying for expensive lawyers and crying foul.

Welcome to AppleInsider.
Better get a dictionary if you don't want to be eaten alive by trolls.
post #46 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

It certainly is ridiculous. It's why the world is so fucked up today. Everything is about money and, consequently, competition.

People say that competition is what drives better products and accelerates technological evolution. This is *completely* false!!!

Competition and money absolutely slows down technological evolution. IBM will do everything to stop the knowledge from spreading outside its boundaries because it'll lose its competitive edge which would then translate into a loss of money. If competition and money were never an issue, knowledge would spread rapidly and evolution would happen quickly.

And your alternatives are...? Even with its serious flaws, capitalism and competition are the best there is in action for bringing technology advances to the mainstream. Other systems have other issues that restrict technological evolution even more. I think in this case, there isn't enough competition.

Quote:
Possibly the most blatant example of slow evolution is the plague that is oil companies that are turning in record profits right now. Oil companies have always slowed down alternative energy inventions by buying rights and sitting on the technology or outright clandestinely sending thugs to kill the inventors that did not accept their offer they couldn't (read shouldn't) refuse.

I think you'll have to cite specific examples of people being wacked for not selling to "big oil". The same goes for buying technology rights so no one else can use it. I hear people repeat these things, I've yet to have someone give me specific names, they can't it's always fourth hand information at best. I think people make this stuff up or make connections that aren't there.
post #47 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuffyzDead View Post

Based on a thorough reading of both documents, Papermaster will just HAVE TO chill, until a year from now.

Look, if your going to actually READ the articles and make intelligent comments AFTER doing research...we are going to have to ask you to leave.
Consider this your first warning.

Now back to our regularly scheduled rumors, conspiracy theories and rampant speculation.
post #48 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by PXT View Post

I guess Papermaster could end up working for Pixar for a year then

Ha! Good call....
post #49 of 96
Here's how the job interview went...

Steve Jobs: "Do you want to make Big Iron for the rest of your life or do you want a chance to change the world?"

Mark Papermaster: "When do I start?"
post #50 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

...the hiring of Papermaster is most likely an effort to build Apple's brain trust in chip development.

Gee ya think?
post #51 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I think you'll have to cite specific examples of people being wacked for not selling to "big oil". The same goes for buying technology rights so no one else can use it. I hear people repeat these things, I've yet to have someone give me specific names, they can't it's always fourth hand information at best. I think people make this stuff up or make connections that aren't there.

I had not heard the hit man stuff before, but I vividly remember when Atlantic Richfield
(which became ARCO and was later acquired by BP) bought up a bunch of solar patents
in the 70's and 80's and then did nothing to develop them. Do a Google search on
ARCO solar patents.
post #52 of 96
Apple will eventually add to its Mac range chipcount by building in proprietary chips that wannabe encroachers do not have access to. Then the likes of PsyStar can go find something else to build, someone else's R&D investment to piggyback upon.
You heard it here first.
post #53 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by chano View Post

Apple will eventually add to its Mac range chipcount by building in proprietary chips that wannabe encroachers do not have access to. Then the likes of PsyStar can go find something else to build, someone else's R&D investment to piggyback upon.
You heard it here first.

Yes.
Months ago.
From several other people.
post #54 of 96
Anyone can put anything into a contract. Even if it's not legal. If all parties sign on then it's done.

The trouble comes in if it goes to court. Anything not legal gets thrown out immediately. The rest may, or may not.

I find it difficult to understand why some people are getting wound up about this.

California is often doing something that makes little sense. I wouldn't go and take their ideas as normal, or correct.

Non compete agreements make a lot of sense. The only people who don't understand that, are those who will never be involved in them.

Work done for a company is owned by that company as a matter of course, unless the person involved has special agreements in place about that. One is not allowed to take work done and take it to another company. That makes sense. Why should a company get the benefit of time consuming and expensive work for free? That makes no sense.

No one, no matter how brilliant, does work in a vacuum. The resources, monetary, environmental, and in people are all responsible for whatever progress is made. When someone leaves a company at a high level, after having being involved heavily with leading projects, they have benefitted from those resources. The new company will now benefit, to the loss of the first company. That's why both company AND employee agree to such contracts.

If the employee leaves, it can be assumed that it's because of the knowledge and skills learned at the former employer. While taking the skills is assumed to be proper, taking the specialized knowledge is not.

As I said earlier, the specialized knowledge can't be removed from the personality of the person.

By having a time of waiting, that knowledge becomes less important to the former employer. At that point, it's usually assumed that it's not as serious a problem.

I'm pretty sure that Apple knew very well that this would be a problem, and knew all about his agreements with IBM. It isn't that Apple didn't think there would be a conflict. They knew there would. All new employers know there will be conflicts in cases like this. The decide that it's worth taking the chance, as does the employee.

Apple can pay him for the year, even if he doesn't work, but likely there will be some agreement between them and IBM.

And Apple and IBM do compete, and will be competing. To say they don't is amazing!

It's also not likely he will be working on PPC's for Apple. That's dead and gone.
post #55 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by pandutzu View Post

Hey! I have to respond to your line about oil companies.... as I work for one.
1. if you don't want oil,....

I will agree that the OP is certainly out in left field about some conspiracy to kill off "free energy inventors" and other such nonsense of the conspiracy theorists. However, there is a valid point about oil and energy companies being a disruptive force in regards to environmental regulation, automotive fuel efficiency standards, hybrid-electric technology, renewable energy technology, etc. There are many cases of differing corporate entities and oil-financed 3rd party interest groups pulling shenanigans.

-Many different organizations lobbying congress on behalf of the enormous oil and gas sector have continually worked to undermine environmental legislation intended to reduce pollution, global warming, and other concerns. They have consistently worked to block revised congressionally-mandated automotive fuel efficiency requirements, automotive emmissions standards, etc.

- Chevron's (Texaco) majority ownership of Cobasys, a company which owned the majority of the IP on large-format NiMH battery technology, and refused to sell or license the manufacture of the technology for hybrid-electric automotive purposes for over a decade. Different companies, universities, and researchers were continually denied access to licensing the patent portfolio. They were clearly sitting on the technology.

- Exxon Mobile has consistently and aggressively funded political organizations, thinktanks, and other interest groups dedicated to misrepresenting the facts of and undermining climate change science, including the Competitive Enterprise Institute, George C. Marshall Institute, Heartland Institute, Congress on Racial Equality, and International Policy Network. The financial support of these groups is public knowledge, available in their SEC/financial filings.
post #56 of 96
I don't know why IBM is pursuing this. Non-competes are not enforceable in California, where Apple is based. Apple surely had that fact in mind when they hired the engineer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-com..._of_California
post #57 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Apple's not going to get into Blade Servers and the Enterprise.

It would be pretty easy for Apple to make a better product than IBM, the real competition is HP with their new stuff. Bladeserver is cool looking when it new and the black plastic faceplates are still nice, but kind of crap once you start using it.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #58 of 96
I am always amazed by the selfishness that drives people to justify just about anything thinking that somehow that would secure their jobs.

My dad also worked in the oil industry since the late sixties, he's retired now, but never did he try to justify the evils of these selfish oil fools, my half brother is also an oil piping engineer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pandutzu View Post

Hey! I have to respond to your line about oil companies.... as I work for one.
1. if you don't want oil, don't use it (you will have no cars, no shoes, no clothes, no almost anything). stop blaming oil companies for the sluts and greedy people we are.

That's exactly the point Einstein. It's dictatorship corporations, oil is such an important part of everyday life that it must be regulated so that it's not taken advantage of, and that's what's happening today. Also some of the taxes made from oil should be reinvested in alternate energy instead of being shoved in a couple of people's bank accounts. I have nothing against people making lots of money as long as it's not on the account of others.

I respected Carter for taking the initiative in the 70's with the alternate energy bill, but unfortunately that was short lived when Regan came to office, he pulled all solar panels from the roof of the White House and put us back on the bloody trail of oil.

There is no theory in conspiracy, conspiracy is just that. You obviously haven't watched some crucial documentaries such as: Crude Awakening, Who Killed the Electric Car, and Why We Fight. FYI, our planet's sun rays are capable of producing over 30,000 times more power than the 15 billion barrels of oil we consume every year, unlike oil, that energy is virtually endless. Also solar cells are made from the earth's second most abundant resource, Silicone.

If you cover a few thousand acres in Arizona with todays solar cells, as much as a few corn fields, they could power the whole US 24/7. If enough money is invested in solar cell and battery research, better solutions can be attained, and oil can be reserved for critical things like plastics and others as you mentioned. Todays best solar cells can only harvest about 40% of the sun's energy, this number can easily rise to over 70% with enough research.

The way the oil conglomerates have been going wasting the oil in ICE (Internal Combustion Engines) for short-term gains, by the time oil runs out (about 30 years) we'll be shit out of luck with plastics that are key products in helping us shift to a sustainable alternate energy.

BTW: Forget Hydrogen, it is almost impossible to attain without draining large amounts of electrical current which are now being generated by coal, oil, and nuclear. The only reason oil companies are behind Hydrogen is because, like oil, they can sell it to you at high profits and it costs more than oil to produce, if it ever becomes feasible, and that's the whole idea, to keep you waiting for Godot. Also Hydrogen generates less power per "gallon" or the equivalent thereof. Solar energy is much cheaper and the technology is available today.
bb
Reply
bb
Reply
post #59 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post

I am always amazed by the selfishness that drives people to justify just about anything thinking that somehow that would secure their jobs.

My dad also worked in the oil industry since the late sixties, he's retired now, but never did he try to justify the evils of these selfish oil fools, my half brother is also an oil piping engineer.



That's exactly the point Einstein. It's dictatorship corporations, oil is such an important part of everyday life that it must be regulated so that it's not taken advantage of, and that's what's happening today. Also some of the taxes made from oil should be reinvested in alternate energy instead of being shoved in a couple of people's bank accounts. I have nothing against people making lots of money as long as it's not on the account of others.

I respected Carter for taking the initiative in the 70's with the alternate energy bill, but unfortunately that was short lived when Regan came to office, he pulled all solar panels from the roof of the White House and put us back on the bloody trail of oil.

There is no theory in conspiracy, conspiracy is just that. You obviously haven't watched some crucial documentaries such as: Crude Awakening, Who Killed the Electric Car, and Why We Fight. FYI, our planet's sun rays are capable of producing over 30,000 times more power than the 15 billion barrels of oil we consume every year, unlike oil, that energy is virtually endless. Also solar cells are made from the earth's second most abundant resource, Silicone.

If you cover a few thousand acres in Arizona with todays solar cells, as much as a few corn fields, they could power the whole US 24/7. If enough money is invested in solar cell and battery research, better solutions can be attained, and oil can be reserved for critical things like plastics and others as you mentioned. Todays best solar cells can only harvest about 40% of the sun's energy, this number can easily rise to over 70% with enough research.

The way the oil conglomerates have been going wasting the oil in ICE (Internal Combustion Engines) for short-term gains, by the time oil runs out (about 30 years) we'll be shit out of luck with plastics that are key products in helping us shift to a sustainable alternate energy.

BTW: Forget Hydrogen, it is almost impossible to attain without draining large amounts of electrical current which are now being generated by coal, oil, and nuclear. The only reason oil companies are behind Hydrogen is because, like oil, they can sell it to you at high profits and it costs more than oil to produce, if it ever becomes feasible, and that's the whole idea, to keep you waiting for Godot. Also Hydrogen generates less power per "gallon" or the equivalent thereof. Solar energy is much cheaper and the technology is available today.


dream on...
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
Reply
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
Reply
post #60 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigc View Post

dream on...

With all due respect, your answer is ass dumb.
post #61 of 96
so was the statement that a couple acres of solar cells in Arizona desert would power the US...do the math...
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
Reply
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
Reply
post #62 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post

... BTW: Forget Hydrogen, it is almost impossible to attain without draining large amounts of electrical current which are now being generated by coal, oil, and nuclear.

On the contrary, I don't think anything should be "forgotten" in the search for an alternatives to fossil fuels. Here's an interesting 'bio-solar' source of hydrogen...

>Biological hydrogen production is done in a bioreactor based on the production of hydrogen by algae. Algae produce hydrogen under certain conditions. In the late 1990s it was discovered that if algae[clarify] are deprived of sulfur they will switch from the production of oxygen, as in normal photosynthesis, to the production of hydrogen.[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biologi...gen_production

And there is the more immediate prospect of massive electricity (and hence hydrogen) production from photovoltaic panel arrays in high solar flux regions. Interestingly, Germany (given its relatively low sunlight intensity) leads the way here.. http://www.solarbuzz.com/Marketbuzz2008-intro.htm
post #63 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigc View Post

so was the statement that a couple acres of solar cells in Arizona desert would power the US...do the math...

Couple of acres?!! Try 10,000 acres per cornfield. Watch King Corn.

enzos My bad, I wasn't aware of the bioreactors. However I read on DOE's own website that the Hydrogen infrastructure is very expensive and complicated, like storing, pressurizing, transporting, and fueling. Being able to pressurize and store enough Hydrogen to drive a vehicle over 150 miles is still a challenge. The other problems are the way the algae is grown on plastic sheets, which requires a steady stream of water to be broken down into Hydrogen, and with the low 15% efficiency is kinda blah. I recommend watching Crude Awakening, one of the prominent energy engineers admits that Hydrogen is at least 50 years away. In contrast solar energy is available today and with 40% efficiency, no water required or major storage issues. There are also many current vehicles that depend on electricity including cars (like the Tesla), forklifts, golf carts, trains, roller coasters, cranes, submarine, and even military tanks (diesel generators produce electricity). The technology is mature enough to implement at a large scale, and it has been done before.

Germany 47%, wow! That was quick.
bb
Reply
bb
Reply
post #64 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

No one, no matter how brilliant, does work in a vacuum.

What are you, some kind of socialist?
post #65 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

It certainly is ridiculous. It's why the world is so fucked up today. Everything is about money and, consequently, competition.

People say that competition is what drives better products and accelerates technological evolution. This is *completely* false!!!

Competition and money absolutely slows down technological evolution. IBM will do everything to stop the knowledge from spreading outside its boundaries because it'll lose its competitive edge which would then translate into a loss of money. If competition and money were never an issue, knowledge would spread rapidly and evolution would happen quickly.

Possibly the most blatant example of slow evolution is the plague that is oil companies that are turning in record profits right now. Oil companies have always slowed down alternative energy inventions by buying rights and sitting on the technology or outright clandestinely sending thugs to kill the inventors that did not accept their offer they couldn't (read shouldn't) refuse.

Your thinking is false.

While everything might be about money, the consequence of money is not competition. Competition is what spurns invention and innovation, and competition is one of the primary supports of the foundation of Capitalism.

Murdering your competitor, or using shady tactics to STIFLE your competition is neither competitive nor ethical.

Yes, I know that does not stop it from happening anyway, but dont bag on competition, because competition is what makes America the land of possibility and opportunity.
post #66 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec View Post

LOL, every time i hear law suit in amercia i just cant stop laughing......

Man yea i agree with that. America and Lawsuit is so cliche. I dont know of any other country where people just constantly sue eachother like its taking someone for coffee. Harassment from a tap on the shoulder. Suing here for gettig another job in your chosen field of work like what the fuckk
post #67 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by columbus View Post

How stupid is this noncompete agreement?

It appears to mean if you specialise in a certain area, then that means you have to work for the same company for life.

Imagine if it applied to chefs, or lawyers, or teachers.

Don't get your panties in a bundle, every company has non-compete, even Apple. This is standard. What will happen is that they will come to an agreement where he cannot use his knowledge in relation to power chip for a specific number of years. The question you should be asking is.. why did he sign the non-compete?. If we let every executive just violate the non-compete, then why not also violate a non-disclosure (which i recall, most of you here like espicially when it pertains to apple).. a NDA is a lot weaker than a non-compete and you guys love it (espicially when apple is trying to keep a new product under wraps). Relax, apple and IBM will come to an agreement and IBM cannot lose this suit.. the guy signed the agreement. No one put a gun to his head and made him sign it. He could have said no and forgone a lucrative paycheck and gone to work at 7-11 if he wanted to.
post #68 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by merdhead View Post

I agree non-competes are worthless, but all he has to do is not disclose the salient information in the NDA which isn't hard.

If I'm building an X at IBM under an NDA and I go to Apple and they say, build me an X, I can do so without effect from the NDA, as long as I don't say "hey, I built one just like this at IBM, with these features...".

Anyway this is a yawnfest except that it's a another confirmation that Apple is getting into the chip design business. Good on 'em.

Yeah, that works until IBM get a copy of Apple X and finds it shares some amazingly similiar feature with their X. I know what you are thinking.. hey, that's not fair, how can apple build their X without overlapping with IBM X and you know what?.. that is not IBM problem. They funded X with their money. Whether Apple can build a similiar product without overlapping is apple problem. IBM does not work for apple, they are not beholden to apple shareholders. IBM says to apple, tough luck, maybe you should have build X before we did. I guess then you guys don't mind is someone else develops a clone of MacOSX by hiring some apple developers as long as the former apple employees did not say "hey, this is what i did at apple?"... see how ridiculous your argument is?
post #69 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by pandutzu View Post

Hey! I have to respond to your line about oil companies.... as I work for one.
1. if you don't want oil, don't use it (you will have no cars, no shoes, no clothes, no almost anything). stop blaming oil companies for the sluts and greedy people we are.
2. are they turning in record profits? goooood. why nobody asked any of the banks and brokers who turned in record profits last year, or the year before, or two years ago? just look at the top 10 money makers in the last 3 years and you will see 1 oil company in and the rest are banks (bank of am, citigroup, etc.) what did these banks do? got us in the economic mess we are in right now, used (and still using) outrages fees, interest, and business practices to rip people off, move the pile of money from NY to LA to Jakarta and Hong Kong, and get more money out of it at the end of the day. I think Americans need to understand that you need to produce something, and of good quality, in order to make money. That means computers like apple, cars like the Japanese cars, nuclear reactors like the Canadian ones, etc. The DotCom crashed because they were selling puff pastry into thin air. The housing boom crashed because of speculants and greedy brokers who ripped off prople.
3. you want alternative energy? I want that too. I live in the great state of tx (because of work and not choice). I would put a solar roof but my incentives are so minimal that i do not want to spend 40k that I will maybe recoup in 30 years. i wanted to bring a small car (diesel) from europe (that has about 60miles/gal and it is much cleaner than my honda ULEV). but, sorry, can't do that because of the american protectionism toward their fat piggy cars.
4. and give me a break with oil compnies sending people to wack inventors because they did not want to sell their stuff to the oil companies. the fact of the matter is that alternative en are too expensive compared to fossil fuels and it will take time to replace the infrastructure you have in place right now. The $140/baril was the best thing that happened for alt. en. It made it more competitive with fossil fuels, people started conserving energy, and the big ugly SUV were out ofthe market.

Of course, you're correct about the political demonizing of the oil companies. The current market determines the price of oil, but the market is also affected by the politics that created these out-of-whack prices. Our involvement in the Middle East was largely driven by our oil interests. The oil companies have hugely influential lobbies in Washington. Anyone who does not understand this has bad wiring in their head.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #70 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booga View Post

As long as they just use their own processors in their own devices, they're still NOT COMPETING in any market.

Besides, Apple's not an idiot company-- why on Earth would they take the step backwards from ARM to PowerPC? My guess is they'd design an ARM core for use solely in their own products. (Products which IBM doesn't make and therefore DOESN'T COMPETE with.)

Do you think it's Apple's intent to dominate in a niche market, or to make future chip designs that are the best in the world, and thus, the default choice for other manufacturers of mobile products (or whatever is up their Apple-ish sleeves).

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #71 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post

If you cover a few thousand acres in Arizona with todays solar cells, as much as a few corn fields, they could power the whole US 24/7.

12/7 - sunset, whilst allowing great photographic moments, will prove a slight hindrance in your grand scheme.

Besides solar will only kick off once the Arabs run out of oil - in about 4 years.

McD
Android proves (as Windows & VHS did before it) that if you want to control people, give us choices and the belief we're capable of making them. We're all 'living' the American dream.
Reply
Android proves (as Windows & VHS did before it) that if you want to control people, give us choices and the belief we're capable of making them. We're all 'living' the American dream.
Reply
post #72 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by McDave View Post

12/7 - sunset, whilst allowing great photographic moments, will prove a slight hindrance in your grand scheme.

Besides solar will only kick off once the Arabs run out of oil - in about 4 years.

McD

Regardless of the panic inducing headlines... oil will be with us for a while longer.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #73 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

I'll be first inline if this recruit means what I forsee it to mean.

Come on Apple, get some balls and do what was conveyed to us, back in 1997, and if so, I just might suck it up and return to the Bay area. That is, if it speculates to what this hire and other recent hires may produce.

Is this also available in English?
post #74 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArthurAscii View Post

What are you, some kind of socialist?

Sorry Senator McCain, didn't mean to make you nervous!
post #75 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by McDave View Post

12/7 - sunset, whilst allowing great photographic moments, will prove a slight hindrance in your grand scheme.

Besides solar will only kick off once the Arabs run out of oil - in about 4 years.

McD

The Russians, the British and the Norwegians, as well as the Iranians have lots of oil.

Besides, i solar really kicks off, who do you think has vast desert areas?
post #76 of 96
You can't disclose "trade secrets" but you can use the knowledge you obtained from that job.
post #77 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by synp View Post

The Russians, the British and the Norwegians, as well as the Iranians have lots of oil.

Besides, i solar really kicks off, who do you think has vast desert areas?

There is no way that you can get electricity from those remote areas to the places where they are needed the most. And the Great American desert is pretty large too.
post #78 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnurse View Post

Yeah, that works until IBM get a copy of Apple X and finds it shares some amazingly similiar feature with their X. I know what you are thinking.. hey, that's not fair, how can apple build their X without overlapping with IBM X and you know what?.. that is not IBM problem. They funded X with their money. Whether Apple can build a similiar product without overlapping is apple problem. IBM does not work for apple, they are not beholden to apple shareholders. IBM says to apple, tough luck, maybe you should have build X before we did. I guess then you guys don't mind is someone else develops a clone of MacOSX by hiring some apple developers as long as the former apple employees did not say "hey, this is what i did at apple?"... see how ridiculous your argument is?

Maybe I could if I could understand your gibberish. Are you trying to say that by having someone sign an NDA means that no-one can build something similar, even if they come to it independently? An NDA just means you mustn't disclose the information to anyone else. It's not a patent.
post #79 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by merdhead View Post

Maybe I could if I could understand your gibberish. Are you trying to say that by having someone sign an NDA means that no-one can build something similar, even if they come to it independently? An NDA just means you mustn't disclose the information to anyone else. It's not a patent.

I understand what he's saying. It's much more complex than NDA's though.
post #80 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

There is no way that you can get electricity from those remote areas to the places where they are needed the most. And the Great American desert is pretty large too.

The US produces 4 trillion kWh per year. If we add cars, and make them electric, that will grow. I don't have numbers, so let's assume that's 6 trillion kWh per year.

1 square meter of photovoltaics can produce about 2 kWh per day, or 750 kWh per year. Now let's do some division.

6,000,000,000,000 / 750 = 8,000,000,000. That's 8 billion square meters, or 2 million acres.

Hmm, that's less than a square of 60 miles on a side. Humongous, but doable. You'd probably need about 50% more to accommodate inefficiencies in storage and transmission, but still....

I started writing this post to show how this was all a pipe dream, but I guess the math does work.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple recruits top chip designer, IBM responds with suit