greginprague

paisleydisco said:

pwrmac said:

Build or assemble more in the US 😄

Nothing to do with a patent. but carry on ....

@pwrmac If the Apple Watch was manufactured in the USA then this ruling would have no effect.  You can’t effectively ban imports to the USA if the product isn’t coming from outside the USA. The larger civil trial over the patent validity/infringement/damages is separate from the import ban.

VictorMortimer said:

aderutter said:

michelb76 
apple's third party stores

No such thing as Apple’s third party stores, third party stores are third party, perhaps you meant how shitty “third party stores” are compared to Apple’s app store(s). 

That WOULD be true if Apple was allowing normal software installation.

But Apple is (illegally) charging a fee for app downloads in 3rd party stores, and (illegally) insisting on "notarizing" apps that users would otherwise be able to install normally.

I'm looking forward to the MASSIVE fines for Apple's bad behavior.

Why shouldn’t Apple have the right to protect owners of its equipment from documented bad actors like Epic by vetting their 3rd party App Store?  Beyond that why do you think that should be illegal?

gatorguy said:

And IMO this is the reason Apple's event is on Monday.  The EU announcement is Tuesday. 

Can you please elaborate? I can’t see how that accomplishes anything related to the announcement.  It also doesn’t seem like the announcement is remotely important enough that Apple would schedule around it.  If the ruling is in Apple’s favor they get $14 billion back plus the interest it has accrued in escrow.  If the ruling is unfavorable it just means another trial and years of additional appeals.  Why would Apple schedule/move a major product release event on a particular date because of that?

doggone said:

The stock market is always like this.  Stocks go up more on future promise than actual results. Likewise goes down on fears of lower revenue.
AAPL went up significantly with the AI announcement.  No real revenue associated with it except for the vague projections of enhanced future iPhone sales.
Now AAPL is going down because projections for China are low.

10K invested in early 2000s is now over 1.5M.  If I listened to the analysts I would have never got that.

Hopefully you continued to invest more over the intervening two decades.  I didn’t get in until 2008 and some more in Jan 2009 when its split adjusted price got down to $2.89/share.  I’m an Apple Millionaire when the prices gets above $232.75. It’ll be nice once that’s a  review mirror price and not one we keep bouncing around.

Fidonet127 said:

The Massimo patent we are to believe so similar to Apple that Apple should pay, and yet by the Massimo CEO, Apple's software is so inferior it shouldn't be used. Which is it?

Good luck getting these trolls to answer the hard questions…

I had this issue two weeks ago with my Apple Watch 9. It was just going insane, literally seemed possessed. Unfortunately we can’t upload video in the comments. I’d never needed to do a force restart on any of my previous Apple Watches going back to 2015, so I wasn’t sure how. I couldn’t do a standard restart because of all the ghost touching, finally figured out how to do the hard restart on the watch. The issue hasn’t cropped up again yet. I’ve owned the watch since Christmas.

macxpress said:

GG1 said:

macxpress said:

GG1 said:

I hope Apple Park is included.

Apple Park is not a home...

Maybe not a residential home...

Its not a home...plain and simple!

It’s not Apple’s corporate Home?  Is that still at 1 Infinity Loop??

melgross said:

Quite frankly. $0.26 is well under what Apple should be paying. They buy much more stock back than they pay in dividends.

They “could” pay much more than $0.26 quarterly.  Why should they do so?  I prefer the buybacks.  That doesn’t create a taxable event for me.  I think they pay a 1% fee to buy back versus a 15-20% qualified divided tax rate for most folks.  How is that better?