anton zuykov

maciekskontakt said:

nunzy said:

Qualcomm is going to get Appled if they keep this up.

If you go up against the king, you best not miss.

"The king"? Well business is business and judges rule what all business MUST do - no discussion. Business does not overrule legislation and execution. They can only negotiate. I would say Qualcomm seems to be asking for trouble by doing this, but Apple is nothing such as "king". It is just a successful business that can be squashed if it does not follow laws and regulations.

The point was - Apple is a powerful player and they usually are not sloppy with how they guard themselves against such patent-based lawsuits.
Apple can put massive supply orders, that can make any supplier very rich, and when not diversified enough, can break that supplier's back, when taken away.
When a 220 million component order is put forth at $15 a component, that creates a 3.3B dollar contract. And that is just one component... How many companies you know of that can do that?
Apple is a king, at least in terms of how many orders like that they can put, without even sweating!

nunzy said:

Google tried to kill iPhone. But instead it killed HTC.

It probably was Google's shortsightedness...aand the fact that HTC started looking more like iPhones is what killed HTC.
Sad story, as HTC would be a far better competitor to Apple, comparing to horrible UX that Samsung offered.

claire1 said:

anton zuykov said:

backstab said:

Has it ever been confirmed that Apple uses GG?
I've heard / read back and forth that it is, and that it isn't.

They used it from the beginning, IMHO, just did not call it GG, instead preferring "ion-X glass" name. But it is the same as Porsche having active suspension management system (PASM (r)) that is just a system from a company that manufactures adjustable shocks... It is essentially, rebranding of a product.

The funny thing is when iKnockoff users claim "but the Apple screens break faster!!!123"

*FACEPALM*

Formulation of the glass might not be the same, tho. Apple can ask the manufacturer to change hardness, for example, to meet their cost/material property requirements. 

backstab said:

Has it ever been confirmed that Apple uses GG?
I've heard / read back and forth that it is, and that it isn't.

They used it from the beginning, IMHO, just did not call it GG, instead preferring "ion-X glass" name. But it is the same as Porsche having active suspension management system (PASM (r)) that is just a system from a company that manufactures adjustable shocks... It is essentially, rebranding of a product.

avon b7 said:

anton zuykov said:

gatorguy said:

radarthekat said:

evilution said:

I’m sure it’ll be all Apple’s fault somehow. News sites will post about iOS apps sending out data, totally missing the fact it happens on Android and is Google’s product at fault.

Totally missing the fact that it’s not anything to do with the apps, per se, but with the underlying developers’ choice to use that server database.  No change to the apps could be made to close that leak, so why it’s presented by the press as an app issue is a bit odd.  

Late to the party this morning. From what I'm reading going to a couple of Reddit sites is that this a failure by the affected developers and not something on Google's end.

Yes and no. Good product is a product that lets you do what it claims on a tin without problems, while a great product is designed in such a way that minimizes mishaps mentioned in the article, instead of simple pushing that as a sole responsibility of an end user.

If the default setting is 'on' and developers have to manually turn it 'off' and pass through a modal dialog that warns of the consequences, how is that any different to iOS allowing users to turn off iDevice passcodes or set simply set very weak passcodes.