not sure why anyone keeps track of this guy anymore - regardless of what he says - he just a blogger for hire.
So you're saying Mueller is worse because he freely admits which companies are his clients? In Google's lawsuit with Oracle the judge recently order both parties to submit lists of blogger they had paid. Oracle complied with the order and Google didn't. So, clearly Google has been paying its own blogger and just doesn't want the truth to come out.
Besides when Mueller's posts arn't 5,000 words and I actually take the time to read them they are pretty well written with good supporting facts and documentation. All bloggers are biased. Why are you complaining about this one?
No, Steve Jobs just appeared to him in a dream, four times. Young Steve, who made Schmidt feel all the pain and anguish that came from what Microsoft stole, regular Steve, who forced Schmidt to feel all the pain and anguish from what Google stole, and Future Steve, who appeared as Steve Jobs had the cancer been beaten and showed Schmidt his vision for Apple 20 years down the road.
Then regular Steve returned and showed him what the world would be like without Google: No Android whoring out stolen tech, no advertising stranglehold on privacy and personal information… It was, in every way, better. And then Steve showed him what the world would be like without Apple. Blinkenlights machines until 1980, no GUI until 1989, and that was a failed experiment that didn't become usable until '93, fast forward to October 2001 and the best PMP on the market was a portable CD player that carried three (count 'em!) CDs at once, and then to 2010 where Dell releases its new tablet computer, 7.85", 16:10 screen at 640x400, powered by Microsoft PenSight 2012, a version of Microsoft InSight (TTL's Windows analogue) that supports the use of a stylus (only) on a resistive screen. Uses Intel's lowest-power chip, the lowest-end, under-clocked 25w model, only needs one fan to cool, battery lasts two hours, and it only weighs four pounds.
Either that or someone just got some intelligence knocked into Google in a meeting and they withdrew everything. I prefer the former.
No, Steve Jobs just appeared to him in a dream, four times. Young Steve, who made Schmidt feel all the pain and anguish that came from what Microsoft stole, regular Steve, who forced Schmidt to feel all the pain and anguish from what Google stole, and Future Steve, who appeared as Steve Jobs had the cancer been beaten and showed Schmidt his vision for Apple 20 years down the road.
Then regular Steve returned and showed him what the world would be like without Google: No Android whoring out stolen tech, no advertising stranglehold on privacy and personal information… It was, in every way, better. And then Steve showed him what the world would be like without Apple. Blinkenlights machines until 1980, no GUI until 1989, and that was a failed experiment that didn't become usable until '93, fast forward to October 2001 and the best PMP on the market was a portable CD player that carried three (count 'em!) CDs at once, and then to 2010 where Dell releases its new tablet computer, 7.85", 16:10 screen at 640x400, powered by Microsoft PenSight 2012, a version of Microsoft InSight (TTL's Windows analogue) that supports the use of a stylus (only) on a resistive screen. Uses Intel's lowest-power chip, the lowest-end, under-clocked 25w model, only needs one fan to cool, battery lasts two hours, and it only weighs four pounds.
Either that or someone just got some intelligence knocked into Google in a meeting and they withdrew everything. I prefer the former.
YOU SAW IT TOO!!!!!!.... I thought it was just me!!!! You had to have seen it to know all the details!
So you're saying Mueller is worse because he freely admits which companies are his clients? In Google's lawsuit with Oracle the judge recently order both parties to submit lists of blogger they had paid. Oracle complied with the order and Google didn't. So, clearly Google has been paying its own blogger and just doesn't want the truth to come out.
Besides when Mueller's posts arn't 5,000 words and I actually take the time to read them they are pretty well written with good supporting facts and documentation. All bloggers are biased. Why are you complaining about this one?
Google explicitly stated that they do not pay any bloggers to write articles in their favor. When they added that there may be individuals who receive money from Google via other channels (e.g. AdSense), the judge asked for more details in which Google complied. Even with the more detailed report, there was nothing along the same lines as Oracle paying Mueller to write 'propaganda' for them. You suggesting otherwise is completely disingenuous....
I do agree with other comments though...very sad that AI continues to quote this discredited blogger.
Mueller is the fraud the guy hates google and gets paid by google competitors!
Hopefully this is a good sign or google taking the high road and not being a hypocrite by talking on both sides on their mouth.
Baloney. The removal of Google Maps for iOS is a gut punch, hitting Google directly in the pocket book. You seem to forget how Google makes money and it ain't by giving stuff away free. Google needs its apps on iOS more than Apple needs Google Maps and smart people know it. I agree with others that this may be a peace offering. If it is it means Google blinked first. Gonna be interesting to watch.
Mueller is the fraud the guy hates google and gets paid by google competitors!
Hopefully this is a good sign or google taking the high road and not being a hypocrite by talking on both sides on their mouth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by agramonte
not sure why anyone keeps track of this guy anymore - regardless of what he says - he just a blogger for hire.
It is difficult to tell who are the shills on the internet. It is certainly possible for a person to be paid or sponsored to blog about certain subjects and still publish the facts. Expert witnesses (who are paid, BTW) in court cases are expected to do just this. I have found Mueller's blogs to be interesting, well written and substantiated. He has not failed a single crosscheck test that I have performed on his patent reporting to date.
If you have found otherwise, please let us (readers) know as, as of this date, his credibility with me is certainly higher than both of yours.
1. High level talks are going well between Apple and Google, or 2. Google wants to preserve its iOS revenue (greater than all Android revenue), or 3. They're learning when to fold 'em, or 4. All of the above.
"Neither Google nor its counsel has paid an author, journalist, commentator or blogger to report or comment on any issues in this case. And neither Google nor its counsel has been involved in any quid pro quo in exchange for coverage of or articles about the issues in this case.”
"Neither Google nor its counsel has paid an author, journalist, commentator or blogger to report or comment on any issues in this case. And neither Google nor its counsel has been involved in any quid pro quo in exchange for coverage of or articles about the issues in this case.”
It is difficult to tell who are the shills on the internet. It is certainly possible for a person to be paid or sponsored to blog about certain subjects and still publish the facts. Expert witnesses (who are paid, BTW) in court cases are expected to do just this. I have found Mueller's blogs to be interesting, well written and substantiated. He has not failed a single crosscheck test that I have performed on his patent reporting to date.
If you have found otherwise, please let us (readers) know as, as of this date, his credibility with me is certainly higher than both of yours.
I agree that Mueller never lies about the facts, but his bias is clear in what he decides to leave out of his articles and the inferences and suppositions that he draws.
"Neither Google nor its counsel has paid an author, journalist, commentator or blogger to report or comment on any issues in this case. And neither Google nor its counsel has been involved in any quid pro quo in exchange for coverage of or articles about the issues in this case.”
That says that they stated that they have not used bloggers in the Oracle suit.
What does that have to do with this case? And why did you make a blanket statement that they never pay bloggers when your evidence only covers one specific case?
Oh, and furthermore, you should read the first article carefully along with Google's response. Google admits that they pay a number of people to comment on their products, but deny having told anyone specifically to comment on this case. So even if Google could say "we have 10,000 paid shills who are supposed to say good things about us, and half of them commented on the case, but we never SPECIFICALLY told them to, so we are not disclosing them" it would meet the judge's requirement for disclosure.
That says that they stated that they have not used bloggers in the Oracle suit.
What does that have to do with this case? And why did you make a blanket statement that they never pay bloggers when your evidence only covers one specific case?
I only stated it for the Oracle suit because that was the context of the post I was replying to. Please take the time to read the entire chain of discussion if you would like to join...
Comments
So you're saying Mueller is worse because he freely admits which companies are his clients? In Google's lawsuit with Oracle the judge recently order both parties to submit lists of blogger they had paid. Oracle complied with the order and Google didn't. So, clearly Google has been paying its own blogger and just doesn't want the truth to come out.
Besides when Mueller's posts arn't 5,000 words and I actually take the time to read them they are pretty well written with good supporting facts and documentation. All bloggers are biased. Why are you complaining about this one?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
No, Steve Jobs just appeared to him in a dream, four times. Young Steve, who made Schmidt feel all the pain and anguish that came from what Microsoft stole, regular Steve, who forced Schmidt to feel all the pain and anguish from what Google stole, and Future Steve, who appeared as Steve Jobs had the cancer been beaten and showed Schmidt his vision for Apple 20 years down the road.
Then regular Steve returned and showed him what the world would be like without Google: No Android whoring out stolen tech, no advertising stranglehold on privacy and personal information… It was, in every way, better. And then Steve showed him what the world would be like without Apple. Blinkenlights machines until 1980, no GUI until 1989, and that was a failed experiment that didn't become usable until '93, fast forward to October 2001 and the best PMP on the market was a portable CD player that carried three (count 'em!) CDs at once, and then to 2010 where Dell releases its new tablet computer, 7.85", 16:10 screen at 640x400, powered by Microsoft PenSight 2012, a version of Microsoft InSight (TTL's Windows analogue) that supports the use of a stylus (only) on a resistive screen. Uses Intel's lowest-power chip, the lowest-end, under-clocked 25w model, only needs one fan to cool, battery lasts two hours, and it only weighs four pounds.
Either that or someone just got some intelligence knocked into Google in a meeting and they withdrew everything. I prefer the former.
You just blew my mind...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
[...]
That was worthy of retaining your most high holy moderatorship for another day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
No, Steve Jobs just appeared to him in a dream, four times. Young Steve, who made Schmidt feel all the pain and anguish that came from what Microsoft stole, regular Steve, who forced Schmidt to feel all the pain and anguish from what Google stole, and Future Steve, who appeared as Steve Jobs had the cancer been beaten and showed Schmidt his vision for Apple 20 years down the road.
Then regular Steve returned and showed him what the world would be like without Google: No Android whoring out stolen tech, no advertising stranglehold on privacy and personal information… It was, in every way, better. And then Steve showed him what the world would be like without Apple. Blinkenlights machines until 1980, no GUI until 1989, and that was a failed experiment that didn't become usable until '93, fast forward to October 2001 and the best PMP on the market was a portable CD player that carried three (count 'em!) CDs at once, and then to 2010 where Dell releases its new tablet computer, 7.85", 16:10 screen at 640x400, powered by Microsoft PenSight 2012, a version of Microsoft InSight (TTL's Windows analogue) that supports the use of a stylus (only) on a resistive screen. Uses Intel's lowest-power chip, the lowest-end, under-clocked 25w model, only needs one fan to cool, battery lasts two hours, and it only weighs four pounds.
Either that or someone just got some intelligence knocked into Google in a meeting and they withdrew everything. I prefer the former.
YOU SAW IT TOO!!!!!!.... I thought it was just me!!!! You had to have seen it to know all the details!
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregInPrague
So you're saying Mueller is worse because he freely admits which companies are his clients? In Google's lawsuit with Oracle the judge recently order both parties to submit lists of blogger they had paid. Oracle complied with the order and Google didn't. So, clearly Google has been paying its own blogger and just doesn't want the truth to come out.
Besides when Mueller's posts arn't 5,000 words and I actually take the time to read them they are pretty well written with good supporting facts and documentation. All bloggers are biased. Why are you complaining about this one?
Google explicitly stated that they do not pay any bloggers to write articles in their favor. When they added that there may be individuals who receive money from Google via other channels (e.g. AdSense), the judge asked for more details in which Google complied. Even with the more detailed report, there was nothing along the same lines as Oracle paying Mueller to write 'propaganda' for them. You suggesting otherwise is completely disingenuous....
I do agree with other comments though...very sad that AI continues to quote this discredited blogger.
Baloney. The removal of Google Maps for iOS is a gut punch, hitting Google directly in the pocket book. You seem to forget how Google makes money and it ain't by giving stuff away free. Google needs its apps on iOS more than Apple needs Google Maps and smart people know it. I agree with others that this may be a peace offering. If it is it means Google blinked first. Gonna be interesting to watch.
When did they say that? Reference?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Techstalker
Mueller is the fraud the guy hates google and gets paid by google competitors!
Hopefully this is a good sign or google taking the high road and not being a hypocrite by talking on both sides on their mouth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by agramonte
not sure why anyone keeps track of this guy anymore - regardless of what he says - he just a blogger for hire.
It is difficult to tell who are the shills on the internet. It is certainly possible for a person to be paid or sponsored to blog about certain subjects and still publish the facts. Expert witnesses (who are paid, BTW) in court cases are expected to do just this. I have found Mueller's blogs to be interesting, well written and substantiated. He has not failed a single crosscheck test that I have performed on his patent reporting to date.
If you have found otherwise, please let us (readers) know as, as of this date, his credibility with me is certainly higher than both of yours.
1. High level talks are going well between Apple and Google, or
2. Google wants to preserve its iOS revenue (greater than all Android revenue), or
3. They're learning when to fold 'em, or
4. All of the above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
When did they say that? Reference?
Google stated:
"Neither Google nor its counsel has paid an author, journalist, commentator or blogger to report or comment on any issues in this case. And neither Google nor its counsel has been involved in any quid pro quo in exchange for coverage of or articles about the issues in this case.”
http://allthingsd.com/20120817/google-no-paid-bloggers-here-your-honor/
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-08-17/google-says-it-didn-t-pay-bloggers-to-write-about-oracle-suit
Well, considering how truthful they've been in the past, I totally believe them.
And Eric Schmidt is a real, stand-up guy...
Quote:
Originally Posted by softeky
It is difficult to tell who are the shills on the internet. It is certainly possible for a person to be paid or sponsored to blog about certain subjects and still publish the facts. Expert witnesses (who are paid, BTW) in court cases are expected to do just this. I have found Mueller's blogs to be interesting, well written and substantiated. He has not failed a single crosscheck test that I have performed on his patent reporting to date.
If you have found otherwise, please let us (readers) know as, as of this date, his credibility with me is certainly higher than both of yours.
I agree that Mueller never lies about the facts, but his bias is clear in what he decides to leave out of his articles and the inferences and suppositions that he draws.
I am extremely surprised anyone here would spin this as a tail tuck or negative against Googorola. :rolls eyes out of sockets:
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR
Well, considering how truthful they've been in the past, I totally believe them.
And Eric Schmidt is a real, stand-up guy...
When has Google not been truthful?
That says that they stated that they have not used bloggers in the Oracle suit.
What does that have to do with this case? And why did you make a blanket statement that they never pay bloggers when your evidence only covers one specific case?
Oh, and furthermore, you should read the first article carefully along with Google's response. Google admits that they pay a number of people to comment on their products, but deny having told anyone specifically to comment on this case. So even if Google could say "we have 10,000 paid shills who are supposed to say good things about us, and half of them commented on the case, but we never SPECIFICALLY told them to, so we are not disclosing them" it would meet the judge's requirement for disclosure.
Originally Posted by e_veritas
When has Google not been truthful?
There's a character limit to posts, so that's gonna be tough to elucidate…
Quote:
Originally Posted by e_veritas
When has Google not been truthful?
If you believe everything Google says, then I have a bridge to sell you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
That says that they stated that they have not used bloggers in the Oracle suit.
What does that have to do with this case? And why did you make a blanket statement that they never pay bloggers when your evidence only covers one specific case?
I only stated it for the Oracle suit because that was the context of the post I was replying to. Please take the time to read the entire chain of discussion if you would like to join...
This should go in as a Wiki page, on "how it really happened".
Loved the images in your post.