For those very few who have an interest in details of the remaining issues to be determined in the Apple/Samsung trial, here's a copy of Samsung's latest motion and arguments asking for a new trial as the best case, and portions of the jury's award over-ruled at the least.
Here is what Samsung asked for in the California trial they lost, not much point in them complaining if things didn't go the way they wanted:-
CASE NO. 11-cv-01846-LHK
SAMSUNG ENTITIES' ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS TO APPLE INC.'S AMENDED COMPLAINT; AND
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL..
...DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
SEC [Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.], SEA [Samsung Electronics America, Inc.] and STA [Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC] hereby demand a jury trial on all issues.
It would be nice to hear that all these billions will be spent by Apple on QC/QA and no betas or beta-like products for end users in future.
Right. Apple should always just stay with the status quo and never ever change anything. See how far Microsoft, RIM and countless other companies are performing with that winning strategy.
No risk... no reward! I'm happy that at least one company out there has the fortitude and lack of fear to make changes and release industry-defining products.
BTW: funny how everyone just KNOWS what iOS 7 looks like and it's release date, and what integration Apple is planning with their "beta" software.
You might want to consider going Android. Google recently has tackled the "Stutter Bug" with the new "Jelly Bean" dance. Oh... thats version 4.1 I believe?!
On Topic: Apple should take 'em for all their worth. You went this far, make the extra effort and score the winning touchdown... do the "Dougy" after. It's just as silly as the dances above.
I'm sure a decent sized monitor can be had for $100. A useful, durable, if basic Logitech scroll mouse and keyboard are $15 each. Assuming you actually need to buy things you cant just use from your old computer, that total is $730. What am I missing?
More than they sold 17" MacBook Pros. I guess that's our only metric. If they ever decide to drop the iPod classic, we'll have yet another metric.
Neither of which having solid numbers, of course.
Well they no longer offer the 17" MBP and when they did it cost over 3Gs, I'd expect a $599 Mac Mini to outsell that. I'm curious to see how it fares against the iMac but their sales get lumped in together.
Samsung has been found to have copied Apple's designs in several jurisdictions, therefore Samsung did copy Apple.
How is it possible for something to be copied in one place but not in another?
This is an amazingly large flaw in logic
Apple or Samsung did not create their products within the Judge's jurisdiction, this crazy judge should shove his ruling where the sun don't shine, the judge is inciting Apple to commit a crime by forcing them to engage in false advertising.
Samsung has been found to have copied Apple's designs in several jurisdictions, therefore Samsung did copy Apple.
How is it possible for something to be copied in one place but not in another?
This is an amazingly large flaw in logic
Apple or Samsung did not create their products within the Judge's jurisdiction, this crazy judge should shove his ruling where the sun don't shine, the judge is inciting Apple to commit a crime by forcing them to engage in false advertising.
Because it's really subjective, and what might be obvious in one area of the world doesn't mean it is everywhere else. You can dismount that high horse now.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
For those very few who have an interest in details of the remaining issues to be determined in the Apple/Samsung trial, here's a copy of Samsung's latest motion and arguments asking for a new trial as the best case, and portions of the jury's award over-ruled at the least.
http://www.groklaw.net/pdf4/ApplevSamsung-1990Samsung50and59motions.pdf
Here is what Samsung asked for in the California trial they lost, not much point in them complaining if things didn't go the way they wanted:-
Right. Apple should always just stay with the status quo and never ever change anything. See how far Microsoft, RIM and countless other companies are performing with that winning strategy.
No risk... no reward! I'm happy that at least one company out there has the fortitude and lack of fear to make changes and release industry-defining products.
BTW: funny how everyone just KNOWS what iOS 7 looks like and it's release date, and what integration Apple is planning with their "beta" software.
You might want to consider going Android. Google recently has tackled the "Stutter Bug" with the new "Jelly Bean" dance. Oh... thats version 4.1 I believe?!
On Topic: Apple should take 'em for all their worth. You went this far, make the extra effort and score the winning touchdown... do the "Dougy" after. It's just as silly as the dances above.
deleted
How many people go that route?
Which route? Either way, I don't really know. I've seen people buy minis at the Apple store, but not a mini + screen + mouse + keyboard.
How many Mac Minis does Apple sell in a year?
Originally Posted by dasanman69
How many Mac Minis does Apple sell in a year?
More than they sold 17" MacBook Pros. I guess that's our only metric. If they ever decide to drop the iPod classic, we'll have yet another metric.
Neither of which having solid numbers, of course.
Well they no longer offer the 17" MBP and when they did it cost over 3Gs, I'd expect a $599 Mac Mini to outsell that. I'm curious to see how it fares against the iMac but their sales get lumped in together.
I've not seen them give out sales figures for specific Mac models.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
Here is what Apple asked for in the UK trial they lost, not much point in them complaining if things didn't go the way they wanted:
Apple ordered to run Samsung 'did not copy iPad' adverts
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-18895384
Samsung has been found to have copied Apple's designs in several jurisdictions, therefore Samsung did copy Apple.
How is it possible for something to be copied in one place but not in another?
This is an amazingly large flaw in logic
Apple or Samsung did not create their products within the Judge's jurisdiction, this crazy judge should shove his ruling where the sun don't shine, the judge is inciting Apple to commit a crime by forcing them to engage in false advertising.
Because it's really subjective, and what might be obvious in one area of the world doesn't mean it is everywhere else. You can dismount that high horse now.