|
Authored by: BJ on Friday, October 26 2012 @ 07:44 PM EDT |
Aren't you the guy that felt sorry for Samsung's
being victorious?
Now your defiance is a funny loser's -- Apple's is
just a sore's one.
Glad to assist.
bjd
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 26 2012 @ 07:48 PM EDT |
And where, exactly, do you think the parts from your nice
shiny iPad are
coming from? Do you think that's air you're
breathing?
Among
all component suppliers, Samsung
Electronics continues its reign as the big
winner in the
individual iPad analyzed by the IHS iSuppli Teardown
Analysis
Service. Samsung supplied both the display and the
applications processor. The
new iPad’s Retina display
represents the most expensive single component in the
tablet, at $87, while the applications processor costs an
estimated
$23. Combined, this gives Samsung a 30.2 percent
share of the 32GB LTE
version of the new iPad’s bill of
materials, the largest for any
supplier.
Source
--
Richard [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Tyro on Friday, October 26 2012 @ 08:23 PM EDT |
Are trolls human? [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: PJ on Friday, October 26 2012 @ 11:33 PM EDT |
I think it boils down to whether or not you
think truth matters and whether or not you
think civilization depends on legal systems
that reflect ethics worth holding and
respect shown to them, most especially by
those who influence others.
Would you teach your kids that this is
a brilliant way to behave? If so, then you
and I are indeed different.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: albert on Sunday, October 28 2012 @ 01:41 PM EDT |
I'm glad you're having a good laugh over this. I always enjoy it when arrogant
corporations make fools of themselves in public, and fanbois make excuses for
them.
Oh, and if you ever find yourself the subject of a court order, be sure to take
your disdainful attitude with you, let the judge know exactly what you opinion
is, and, for good measure, publicly denounce him. Best of luck to you![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: pem on Sunday, October 28 2012 @ 07:29 PM EDT |
Apple’s solution to this disdainful “court order” is actually
pretty funny
Yes it is funny, but not in the sense that you
apparently mean. As others have pointed out, it is obvious by the petulant,
whiny response that it really galled Apple at the highest level to have to do
this.
It will be even funnier once the court gives this the smackdown that
it deserves. I can envision it now (in best upper-class Barrister British
accent):
The court has previously judged that Apple has created
some "cool" products. Whilst this judgement stands, it pains the court to
observe that the actual corporation that created these products is petty and
vindictive, and completely uncool. Since Apple has not seen fit to correct the
misconceptions it has created; in fact has seen fit to reinforce those same
misconceptions, in direct violation of both UK advertising standards and
previous orders of this court, the court finds that Apple must underwrite a 20
million Pound Sterling advertising campaign for Samsung to correct the material
misrepresentations that Apple has made. Samsung may properly and truthfully
place "this advert paid for by Apple Corporation" on each such advert, and may,
at its discretion, use Apple's trademarked logos to reinforce in the public's
mind the source of funding for the adverts.
Unlike Apple, Samsung has not
shown itself to be uncool, so this caution may not be necessary, but the court
will take this opportunity to remind Samsung that the UK Advertising Standards
are still in effect, and Samsung should remain cool and not stoop to Apple's
despicable level of behavior when placing these adverts.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|