danox

gilly33 said:

williamh said:

22july2013 said:

A lot of people here are inferring that a hostile question from a judge means that the judge's decision will reflect her questions. This is a presumptuous belief. Many judges ask difficult questions so that their opinions, which are going to be favourable to the person being spoken to, have all the possible angles covered. I learned this from reading the US Supreme Court transcripts.

Or maybe she's an idiot judge. Both explanations are possible.

Ok, you make sense.  But why is this even in front of a judge? The only party to have violated an agreement is epic and Apple didn’t sue them. 

It’s not that really. Just that judging (no pun intended) from recent history this kind of thing doesn’t seem to  pan out in Apple’s favor. Admittedly, I’m no expert on these matters like some of you here. Just a layman’s observation. 

Remember Java? Google copied the parts needed to make Android work sooner (Google was on a deadline) and got away with it. Apples lawyers aren’t as good as some of other tech companies Google, Qualcomm and Samsung have had better lawyers by far in the big cases. 

80s_Apple_Guy said:

The hole I see that may cost Apple this car is that free apps are serviced for nothing. That kind of negates Apple’s contention it needs to get a cut to support the work it does. I don’t agree with this, but Apple’s is arguing as if they have to justify their fees. They shouldn’t have to at all. 

Tim Cook is a hired hand, the owner/founder/CEO has long ago left the building at Apple, the current management will only fight to a certain level and that’s it. When Epic violated the agreement Apple should have kicked them out without anyway back at all for Epic, by wincing Apple may have doomed itself. When someone steals from you simply show them the door nothing else needs to be said…. (If you found someone under your car with a power saw? You don’t give them a hand and thank them for the removal of your catalytic converter).

The Apple HomePod not having the option of using wired connections ends that….. just an Old Dude…..:)

A larger screen needs to happen with a design that is somewhat easy to fix (access) ram and graphics.

Let’s move on Apple as soon as possible.

StrangeDays said:

CuJoYYC said:

lmasanti said:

—three month to bankruptcy—.

This is a myth. Apple's cash and cash equivalents in the mid 90s would last 7 years assuming their quarterly losses matched the worst quarterly loss of that period. I know. I built an all Mac business based upon this forgotten fact. It wasn't pretty but it wasn't on the brink of bankruptcy either.

Not according to Gruber and every other Apple historian/writer I've read. It was dire. Certainly not 7 years of savings at the end.

Bullshit, unlike today Apple had no debt at the time, and money in the bank, that was the one thing the previous CEO’s before Jobs got right..