analogjack

Wow that is pretty fucked up. When I have had to take my rMBP in for repair, which has been many times over the past 3 years, (they finally installed a new screen assbly and logic board a couple of weeks ago) I also always wipe the entire hard drive. Last time as it has my life's work on it an a lot of confidential info I felt I needed to not only wipe the drive but overwrite it completely, just in case they replaced the mbp which they should have done instead of replacing the logic board the first time a few months after I bought it. This article no doubt makes me feel better about what may have seemed like extreme actions. This is in Brisbane.

If the fine is reduced to $150m then that sends a message to Samsung (or anyone else in this postion) that they can see stealing design as a business decision based purely on profit and loss. Are the three elements in this litigation worth $150m, if Samsung thinks 'yes' then in effect they can license the use of these elements from Apple for $150m without asking for permission. As mad as it seems, only complete loss of profit has the ability to deter.

digitalclips said:

True Bokeh isn't simply a blur.  

I know, right. I can't see how it's possible for them to ever get accurate artificial bokeh, because of the edge problem of masking. If the edge is not sharp on the part that is meant to be sharp then it just looks like an amateur photoshop job. This is an effect that *is* worth pursuing but they should not release it until it's fully formed. They have to engineer fake shutter blade effects as well as some other work, however having said that, even done badly it's an improvement, but it should not be called bokeh, it should just be called something like 'portrait enhancement' mode.

Ring silencing patent, FFS has the world gone made. What would Heinrich Hertz make of all this, he was the first to test the implications of Maxwell's EM equations and transmitted a radio signal across his laboratory, once he proved the proof of concept, he was done and left it to Marconi to turn it into something. Same with the guy who invented the telegraph, Joseph Henry, he had a one mile telegraph built from the university to his home so he could let his wife know when he was coming home for lunch, he wasn't interested in patenting it, even wikipedia credits Samuel Morse as the inventor which was impossible because he didn't know enough science to make it work.

misa said:

I still think it was a foolish idea to remove the 3.5mm jack from the phone. It either should have been a second lightning connector...

Install a second lightning connecter just for charging while using the other one, slight overkill wouldn't you agree? Not only that but the extra space it would use was the reason the analog jack (no relation) was removed.