|
|
|
| Authored by: nsomos on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 02:23 PM EDT |
A summary in the title may be . . hlpful -> helpful
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jvillain on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 02:32 PM EDT |
Sometimes the world's corruption makes one retch.
Truer
words PJ.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 02:38 PM EDT |
The practice has been around as long as the oldest profession. It is the
pressure for profit that makes these otherwise decent people change their
strategy. Shareholder's return on investment and stock price are tied to
compensation at the C level. It's a corrupt system that lends itself to pushing
the legality of any agreement. Corporate responsibility? Please.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 02:50 PM EDT |
---
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: kuroshima on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 02:51 PM EDT |
For the price of the new iPod Touch, you can get a Nexus 7,
and still have money left over. It may have less storage
capacity, but you get bigger resolution, a quad core
processor, and a lot more functionality. Oh, and it can fit
anywhere a kindle can fit (it's practically the same width)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: designerfx on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 02:52 PM EDT |
| off topic comments here [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- In A First, DOJ Seizes Illegal Phone App Download Websites - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 03:49 PM EDT
- 'Google strangled Acer phone using Alibaba Android rival at birth' - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 06:01 PM EDT
- The Inscrutable Orient - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 06:42 PM EDT
- 'Google strangled Acer phone using Alibaba Android rival at birth' - Authored by: PJ on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 06:49 PM EDT
- Ho. Hum. - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 06:57 PM EDT
- But, but, but... - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 09:52 PM EDT
- There's likely more to this than presented - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 07:41 PM EDT
- Microsoft's Connection to Alibaba - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 10:27 PM EDT
- How could you reasonably consider it the same? - Authored by: Charles888 on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 11:02 PM EDT
- except we can't substantiate this claim - Authored by: designerfx on Friday, September 14 2012 @ 07:50 AM EDT
- 'Google strangled Acer phone using Alibaba Android rival at birth' - Authored by: odysseus on Friday, September 14 2012 @ 11:07 AM EDT
- Only source is Alibaba/Aliyun - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, September 14 2012 @ 12:31 PM EDT
- HTTPS under attack again - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 06:12 PM EDT
- In other words - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, September 14 2012 @ 01:04 PM EDT
- Uniquely Android: Llama - Just the app for turning WiFi off when you leave home - Nice :-) - Authored by: SilverWave on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 07:42 PM EDT
- Mars Landing, now in stunning HD - with audio! - Authored by: Gringo_ on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 11:42 PM EDT
- Mat Honan Hack Followup - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, September 14 2012 @ 02:01 AM EDT
- Intel says Clover Trail will not work with Linux - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, September 14 2012 @ 07:00 AM EDT
- What next for motorola - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, September 14 2012 @ 07:33 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: designerfx on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 02:54 PM EDT |
newspicks discussion here, please link article if it's the
first comment on a particular topic[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: celtic_hackr on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 03:39 PM EDT |
I am like PJ. I can't bear the thought of taking a bite of the Poisoned
Apple. I commented some time back about ordering a Chinese Tablet. Which, I'm
afraid is probably made under similar conditions as the Apple tablet. But where
else are you going to get a tablet made from? Well my tablet arrived today. All
the way from China, on a slow boat.
http://www.ainol-novo.com/ainol-novo-7-aurora-ii-dual-core-1-5ghz-7-inch-ips-tou
ch-screen-1g-ram-android-tablet.html
I was so excited. It's not
perfect. Since I ordered it directly from a Chinese company, and saved myself a
few tens of dollars in the process, it doesn't have all the Bells and Whistles
it might have gotten by a US supplier. Some of the apps are Chinese. The English
instruction manual was for an older model. But surprisingly the case is a
sturdy aluminum one! Other than the fact that it has only a 2MP front facing
camera and no built in 3g, and I had to modify the default keyboard, it's
looking great so far. It's loaded with ICS 4.0.3, and it has an option to
encrypt the entire device! Sweet! The camera is decent though. Haven't played
with it much. But Angry Birds came pre-installed, so my daughter will love it.
Lol. It has Play Store installed. I'll certainly be hacking around with it and
install Amazon's App store. The apparent quality really surprises me. But it's
early yet. Still for a tad over $100, what's not to love? I know, I
should have bought a Samsung. Or some other major brand. But this one has
everything I could have found in devices 3 times it's cost. I suspect by
Christmas time, the market will be filled with better gadgets. But I'm so over
those big name brands with their lack of corporate morals. If I have to spend a
lot less to get the same thing, with perhaps a few less features and require a
bit more configuration on my part, so be it! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 04:16 PM EDT |
Google's letter consistently refers to Nokia's SEPs, and what Nokia
could do acting in concert with Mosaid. So these can be seen as
foreign (Canada, Finland) companies stifling the productivity of
innocent American companies who need the SEPs to survive.
The shadow they are all standing in must be hiding the strings.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: BJ on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 04:27 PM EDT |
in its Kick 'n tell on Nokia cum suis.
bjd
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 05:22 PM EDT |
Hi PJ, instead of Apple's iPod Touch, perhaps you can consider a Samsung Galaxy
Player: http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/mp3-players/YP-G70CWY/XAA
Same (and maybe more) features, but with Android. :)
I personally stopped using Apple products shortly after it started its
"thermonuclear" war. Am a happy Android phone/tablet and Linux laptop
user now. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: ChrisP on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 05:34 PM EDT |
If freedom is in our DNA, some researcher will have sequenced and patented the
relevant genes. Some NPE can then buy the patent and charge Joe Public a small
fee each for the right to be free. This is good for the economy and wealth of
the nation because by monetising freedom you add real value to the nation's
assets.
"The Price of Liberty is Eternal Vigilance." Not any more.
---
Gravity sucks, supernovae blow![ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 07:49 PM EDT |
Did Elop arrive at Nokia and then sell the patents to MOSAID?
- September 2010: Elop leaves MS for Nokia
- September 2011: Burning memo, sells patents to MOSAID.
Hmmm...[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 08:38 PM EDT |
I think an important note to consider is that the Apple/Microsoft fans are
trying to draw the issue very narrowly as "standards essential patents" (SEP),
while Google is trying to draw it more broadly as "FRAND patents in general".
Google has brought up a very important point, which is that the issue is FRAND
patents themselves, and it makes no sense to focus on a single avenue by which
they may arise.
To explain the issue more clearly, we need to consider
why FRAND exists. FRAND is essentially a contract. It's there to provide a legal
framework which will allow third parties to make investments which will rely on
the patents. That third party investment will in turn make the original
contracting parties themselves more successful. However, there are multiple ways
in which a FRAND contract can arise.
- As part of an "official"
standards process conducted amongst a group of patent holders. The "standards
essential patents" (SEP) we have been hearing about fall into this
category.
- As part of an unofficial process between two or more
parties. We hear about unofficial alliances between companies promoting one
thing or another all the time.
- As part of a commitment from a single
party. Google's Web/M is a good example of this (although it also happens to be
royalty free in this case).
- As a result of a ruling from national
competition authorities. One of the linked documents mentions the EU ruling
imposed on Microsoft.
- Possibly others as well?
In all
of these cases, the end result is the same. Third parties are induced to make
investments in the area which in turn acts to embed the particular technology
more deeply into the marketplace than would be the case without it. The
standards process itself is not some magical event. It's simply a forum in which
multiple independent parties can deal with each other. Monopolies however don't
need standards processes; they can just sit around in their own meeting rooms
and decide what everyone else is going to do. So the question I would have would
be, why would someone focus on just one avenue by which FRAND arises, while
ignoring the others? The real question is honouring (or not) FRAND commitments,
not how those FRAND commitments arose in the first place.
Often an
argument can be won by being able to narrowly frame the question in a way that
favours one party. So, when someone says "I think that companies should have
certain FRAND commitments imposed on them, but only if those FRAND commitments
arose in forums that I don't participate in", then you know they are trying to
frame the question such that the only possible answer favours them. This is like
asking "have you stopped beating your wife, yes or no?" When we see this, we
should not fall into this trap, but rather address the FRAND question directly.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Well put. n/t - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, September 17 2012 @ 10:44 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 09:35 PM EDT |
I just wanted to comment on this line
Microsoft will surely go
down in history for its long
history of competing every which way but straight,
don't you
think? Who can take pride in working on a scheme like this
one? What
does a man tell his family he does at work? Maybe
it's like the mob. The wives
and kiddies think they're in
the construction business.
That
should be changed to reflect only the people in
Microsoft that have this
authority. The developers and
lower-level engineers can safely tell their
families what
they do. They develop code for (at least in the general
public's
eyes) one of the most successful products in the
world.
It's the lawyers and
upper management who have to hide the
truth from their families. Or, their
families don't mind
what they do, so they don't have to hide it.
My point is,
lumping the entire company into one
generalization isn't proper. Someone in
software test
engineering has no say in whether Linux is allowed to use x
feature, so why should they be labeled as evil? They're
just doing their
job--which they'd be doing for Google or
RedHat or anyone else in the IT
industry.
Maybe the quote should have read
Microsoft's
management and lawyers will surely go down in
history for their long history of
competing every which way
but straight, don't you think? Who can take pride in
working
on a scheme like this one? What does a man tell his family
he does at
work? Maybe it's like the mob. The wives and
kiddies think they're in the
construction business.
Have a great day:)
Patrick.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, September 14 2012 @ 01:48 AM EDT |
It's an entrepreneur's fondest dream: a company with no employees. (Why do you
think hedge funds are so popular on Wall Street? All you have to do is play
computer games all day.)
Microsoft and Nokia get rid of all their jobs, and just collect money. No
bothersome people to pay.
I wish someone smarter than me would do a paper or write a book of what happens
to world's economy when no one has to hire employees any more.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: David665 on Friday, September 14 2012 @ 02:22 AM EDT |
I agree with you PJ but at the same time I sympathize with Jobs and his views.
Samsung was a provider and stole his ideas, years of work and he was offended.
Got that.
Google back-stabbed him. Eric Schmidt resigned from the apple board in August
2009. When they were fully into the android project. Instead of doing the right
thing and recusing himself or, preferably, resigning when he first heard about
the iphone he continued on the board.
Jobs was horribly offended by that I have to agree with him. I have apple
products after decades of Linux, which I still use, and the experience has been
nearly perfect. One gets used to the legions of apple haters but as a friend
pointed out to me when he explained how much he loved his android phone: It took
three weeks to get it exactly how he wanted it. It was great that he could do
it. But his 11 yo daughter was using her iPhone in under 30 minutes.
Is this war necessary? No. Absolutely not. Is there another solution? Absolutely
not. We elect the same group of clowns that want to support corporate theft,
greed and enjoy more protections then the citizens.
I don't have a solution here so sorry for going on a bit. However, I have to
admit I am with Jobs on both google and Samsung. I will never buy another
Samsung product at the consumer level. I cannot control the internals.
I am sticking with apple and google on the software side.
I am disappointed in both as well as our government and its horrid patent/IP
systems.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, September 14 2012 @ 04:42 PM EDT |
Samsung has gotten bad, bad advice from their lawyers from the getgo. They
knew or should have known that they had a huge risk of losing this case, and
fed their client, Samsung bad advice, making bigger fees for themselves than
they would have earned negotiating a settlement with Apple.
They gambled with Samsung's money and reputation that they might come
out heroes, and exaggerated to Samsung the odds of losing vs winning.
It's like the old saw about the convicted defendant who writes from prison to
his lawyer: "I thought you said with all the money I had in defense funds I
would never go to prison?" and the lawyer writes back: "No, that's not
what I
said - I said you'd never go to prison with all that money!" :)
I practiced law for 45 years and I ran into lawyers like that all the time -
especially those with big, expensive overhead law firms. They just couldn't
make enough money advising clients to settle. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
