adrayven

techprod1gy said:

I really do not understand the need for wireless car play. Have you used your phone for music and maps? You will definitely want your phone plugged in unless you are only driving a very short distance. I like the 9" display. I really think 10" is ideal. The more common 7" are just to small for such an important set of functions.

I've got the 7" Kenwood aftermarket unit my in Saturn 2008 VUE and love it.. 7" is just fine.. what you need to watch out for is the display's ability to overcome sunlight!.. Even Kenwood's high-end units display gets completely washed out in direct sign light.. impossible to see.. Other than that, I love mine.. it's a keeper.

foggyhill said:

r00fus1 said:

Yesss! It's pitiable that Android handset manufacturers can get away with delaying critical security patches for months (that is months after Google patches Android which may take weeks or months as well) while raking in billions in revenue selling insecure devices. I have friends and family who will never own Apple devices, and while I think Apple devices are more secure, those who use Android shouldn't be made to suffer because their manufacturer is playing fast and loose with updates.

Get a clue, the reason its like that is that OEM and phone company can barely make a buck off new phones let alone supporting old phones and Google fucked up in the way they intially created the OS.

Not allowing OEM's to actually be able to take control of their own version of Android (thus anti trust investigations) explains why they don't give a crap.

Google set up things to be the way they are and now you're whining about the OEM not spending their last bit of profits supporting old phones!

If they OEM's have to lose money to support those old phones, most will just fold and there will be not selection left in the Android space at all except maybe conglomerates like Samsung and LG.

Get a clue.. Android allowed that until 4.0, and it was HORRIFIC.. OEM's having control doesn't mean they will do crap. They just let things fall behind even further..

It wasn't util Google stepped up and started pushing that HTC ACTUALLY started pushing out updates.. I remember the first versions of the HTC Android phones from Sprint. They got 2, read it, 2 minor updates and then they realized if they kept updating people might not buy new..

OEM's have never had much incentive period. Trying to make it sound like Google is the reason is stupid. Also, Google doesn't control the cost of hardware or the market's costs.. They have never charged any of the OEM's for the OS either.. The profits, or lack their of, is completely on the OEM's.

Thats like saying that a free a car is the reason your late for work. Bulk of the responsibility is on the OEM, not Google. Google can only hand them to tools to do it right, they can only push so much before it's up to the OEM to do the right thing.

cropr said:

That a lot of BS.
The main reason why the Apple service business is successful, is the iPhone (and to a lesser extend the other devices).  And for the record, there is nothing wrong with that.

Without the iPhone ecosystem, the Apple service business would have a lot of difficulties to differentiate itself from the competition.
Nobody would consider using iCloud: it has less functionality and is more expensive than Dropbox, OneDrive, Google Drive, ....  If the service business could stand on its own, there should millions of Android only users having a subscription for Apple Music.

Bad examples. Dropbox, Google Drive, One Drive do not include Music/Movie/TV streaming and email, which Apple's services business does. Like the author said, Google DOES provide those other services, so it's a better fit. Which is where most of that money comes from.

iCloud services are NOT just a file sync services.. as you seem to think are.

How quickly congress forgets it doesn't set policy for the world. Their is basically no way to enforce this law globally, and because of that, all it does is weaken US based companies. Dumb and Dumber are in the HOUSE.. heh.

wonkothesane said:

"it won't be sued again for the next three years"? what is this, right for seconds?
Something is either legal/in alignment with IP law, or it isn"t. Where does this three years come from and for what purpose is this part of the agreement?

I think it has to do with getting the professor on-board.. Dynamic Advances seems to want time to arbitrate with the professor on the royalty rate.. Sounds like Dynamic Advances isn't going to just hand over money, probably wants to re-negotiate their terms with the professor. Apple is probably saying, "Fine, but if you end up wanting more because you cannot talk him into a reasonable rate, we want you to wait at least 3 years." Which is what the $5 million is buying, basically.