Who here have any iCrap devices? All those that does should be ashamed of themselves.

I'm surprised no discussion was started on this topic. Anyone aware of what Apple is attempting to do? Well...attempting...and actively doing. Apple has been bullying many other companies. Why? Apple believe they should be the only one to sell iCrap devices such as smartphones (iCrap) and those mini-computers "iPad" which is also iCrap. Apple want to terminate the production of superior Android, Tablet, and the list goes on and on.

Apple want the consumers to have only one option. To buy from Apple. HELL NO!!!

If Apple is far superior to Microsoft Windows, then why the hell doesn't it rule? It seems plenty of people think Windows is a far, far inferior operating system, yet it still easily rules.

As someone who sells every kind of tablet, I can assure that Android tablets are not exactly dominating our sales right now.

I call "iCrap" on your assertion Thunder. What Apple IS doing is protecting their patents. Seems they do all the innovation and then other companies come along and try and steal their work. And, the Android tablet has yet to even get a foothold and is not even close to being superior.

Long Live Blackberry

If Apple is far superior to Microsoft Windows, then why the hell doesn't it rule? It seems plenty of people think Windows is a far, far inferior operating system, yet it still easily rules.

That's easy, cost.

That's easy, cost.

and more available 3rd party access to integration.

Long Live Blackberry

Dead man walking…..BlackBerry is going to be this year’s Palm.


Here’s a funny quote I read about BackBerry/RIM “RIM is already dead, it’s just the corpse hasn’t started stinking yet”.

Speaking of Palm. My wife has had the Palm Pixi cell phone since it came out and she hates that she is going to have to go with something else when she upgrades. The phone has held up great and she loves the features. But their app market is pitiful.

I used to have the Palm Centro - loved it. Prior to that I used Palm handheld organizers. Such a shame.

I call "iCrap" on your assertion Thunder. What Apple IS doing is protecting their patents. Seems they do all the innovation and then other companies come along and try and steal their work. And, the Android tablet has yet to even get a foothold and is not even close to being superior.

Error! Brian needs help!

The patents that Apple applied for was too broad and should never been approved. The whole patent system needs a major complete overhaul. One of the patents Apple got was motions by hand/finger on screen. WHAT THE HELL?! Obviously people can see how stupid Apple is. They are a bunch of crybabies when other companies produce bigger and better products. We don't see Ford crying and suing all automakers for copying their invention of 4 wheels. We don't see brand name companies suing for production of similar generic brand. The bottom line, and this is fact, Apple is a pathetic joke.

I agree - something in this thread is a "pathetic joke" - but its not Apple.

C'mon, Brian, you know Apple shouldn't be bullying other companies. We have the right to choose what we want. Why would you support a patent made by Apple that prevent other companies making smartphones with same hand motion?! This doesn't even make sense.

http://files.myopera.com/minigamer1896/albums/576508/I%20love%20this%20thread%20SO%20MUCH.jpg

Bunty,
Cloning, and IBM (which threw their support behind the PC) drove prices down. Apple wouldn't allow cloning and they had a lot of problems hanging on in the 80's. But don't forget, Windows was Microsoft's crummy attempt to do what the Apple products have done for many years. It's taken a long time but Windows 7 is a pretty good product.
C. T.

If Apple is far superior to Microsoft Windows, then why the hell doesn't it rule? It seems plenty of people think Windows is a far, far inferior operating system, yet it still easily rules.

C'mon, Brian, you know Apple shouldn't be bullying other companies. We have the right to choose what we want. Why would you support a patent made by Apple that prevent other companies making smartphones with same hand motion?! This doesn't even make sense.

It's called proprietary... Proprietary software is computer software licensed under exclusive legal right of the copyright holder. The licensee is given the right to use the software under certain conditions, but restricted from other uses, such as modification, further distribution, or reverse engineering. Just as you would trademark a name for your company you can trademark the things made/developed/invented by that company that prevents others from copying it. Why would companies spend millions of dollars developing a product if others can just copy it for free?

It's called proprietary... Proprietary software is computer software licensed under exclusive legal right of the copyright holder. The licensee is given the right to use the software under certain conditions, but restricted from other uses, such as modification, further distribution, or reverse engineering. Just as you would trademark a name for your company you can trademark the things made/developed/invented by that company that prevents others from copying it. Why would companies spend millions of dollars developing a product if others can just copy it for free?

The issue here is even more fundamental - patents.

In an ideal world, someone gets a good idea or process, files the paperwork, and gets a patent. In practice, however, you have large companies with scads of lawyers who file patent claims on just about everything you can imagine - and some things you can't. The intellectual property world in which we now live really exposes the weaknesses in our current patent law system.

I have no problem with a patentholder protecting their interests. By the same token, trying to patent every inane incarnation of some aspect of a process with no real intent to leverage it is nothing more than the old Internet domain homesteaders of a few years ago. No value-add, nothing new to the table, just a stake in the ground to make profit out of hole cloth.

Apple hates Android's success in general. In the business world, there's an axiom that if you can't compete, litigate, and that's precisely what Apple is trying to do - litigate Android out of business under the guise of patent protection. It may follow the legal letter of the law, but it is at best a disingenuous effort to eliminate a competitor. But because Apple is the one doing it, and they tend to retain "favored nation" status in the media, no one calls them on it. The media is so enamored of the "gee-whiz" Apple store and the inherently chic, trendy social status implied with anything having the Apple logo, they just figure they're too cool to investigate negatively.

U.S. patent law is archaic and needs to be overhauled. Unfortunately, the last intellectual property law overhaul gave us the asinine and hideous Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which was created primarily at the behest of movie studios to circumvent the ability of private individuals from collecting their own, legally obtained library of movies....but that's a separate thread.

It's called proprietary... Proprietary software is computer software licensed under exclusive legal right of the copyright holder. The licensee is given the right to use the software under certain conditions, but restricted from other uses, such as modification, further distribution, or reverse engineering. Just as you would trademark a name for your company you can trademark the things made/developed/invented by that company that prevents others from copying it. Why would companies spend millions of dollars developing a product if others can just copy it for free?

Exactly. Speaking of trademarks. I exercise mine regularly. Several media outlets pay me to use the name Video Vigilante, because I own the trademark on it (along with others). That, that you cease to enforce, you cease to own.

Don't blame Apple, blame whomever granted them the patent.

Apple hates Android's success in general. In the business world, there's an axiom that if you can't compete, litigate, and that's precisely what Apple is trying to do - litigate Android out of business under the guise of patent protection. It may follow the legal letter of the law, but it is at best a disingenuous effort to eliminate a competitor.
I don't think Apple hates Android's success as much as the way Google likes to generously and shamelessly "borrow" others' intellectual property, as this writer points out:

Judge Alsup — the federal judge presiding over this litigation — attaches a great deal of importance to that particular document. At a recent hearing, he essentially said that a good trial lawyer would just need that document “and the Magna Carta” (arguably the origin of common law) to win this case on Oracle’s behalf and have Google found to infringe Oracle’s rights willfully. The judge told Google that “you are going to be on the losing end of this document” with “profound implications for a permanent injunction”. Let me add that a finding of willful infringement would not only make an injunction much more likely than otherwise. It can also result in a tripling of whatever damages will be awarded. […]

It’s certainly remarkable that those two emails show a consistent attitude: the Android team basically says “let’s just infringe” whenever an intellectual property issue comes up. If they did this to Oracle, what about the intellectual property of other companies like Apple, Microsoft, eBay and Skyhook?
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/08/oracle-and-google-keep-wrangling-over.html

Bunty,
Cloning, and IBM (which threw their support behind the PC) drove prices down. Apple wouldn't allow cloning and they had a lot of problems hanging on in the 80's. But don't forget, Windows was Microsoft's crummy attempt to do what the Apple products have done for many years. It's taken a long time but Windows 7 is a pretty good product.
C. T.

I still have a Power Computing Apple clone in my attic. What a nightmare that company was to deal with. While the lack of cloning and 3rd party integration stifled Apple's market penetration, I feel it helped them produce a superior product.

LOL. I still have my Power Computing clone too. i didn't have any issues with the company though, mine worked well and was certainly cheaper than the Apple made ones. Have worked on both Windows and Mac based machines (about 10 years on each), and would never consider owning a Windows one based on performance, security issues and the like. The only attraction would be the price point difference. Each platform has its place.

Now when it comes to the iPhone and similar products, i just can't see paying those kind of prices for what should be a phone. I but a phone to be a phone and a computer to be a computer. At least when they first came out, the iPhone wasn't a great phone at all. Don't know about now.

That said, the iPhone and later products really saved Apple from oblivion (at one point they only had 10% of the home computer market). But they were a computer maker and not just a platform company (like Microsoft which didn't make the equipment). Now Apple has more money the the U.S. government 9or something like that). LOL

I never owned an Apple product until I bought my iPad (first generation), which I loved. It's a great tablet. Then I bought my 7" Galaxy Tab, which I take with me most of the time, and now when I pick up the iPad the experience is just dull in comparison. While the apps for iOS are generally superior, the overall experience with Android can't be beat. Also note how, coming full circle, Apple is introducing so much in the vein of Android with the release of iOS 5, all the while complaining about their "look and feel" being stolen from other companies.

The fact is, Apple's initial success was granted them because they stole from Xerox. They then went after Microsoft for stealing their stolen interface. Technology is a cutthroat industry. Corporations will get patents for things that shouldn't be patentable, then sue the pants off of other companies who issue a vaguely similar device. I can see Apple's complaint about the TouchWiz UI on the first Samsung Galaxy S phone. But the other devices they're going after are a bit baffling. The 7" Galaxy Tab was part of their lawsuit, which doesn't bear any resemblance at all to any Apple product. The same goes for the Galaxy S II, Infuse and Tab 10.1. In fact, these devices are technically superior to Apple products, and that truly is the drive with Apple's lawsuits. If these devices weren't a challenge to Apple's bottom line, but actually did rip off the "look and feel" of iProducts, Apple wouldn't be concerned. Apple is biting when threatened, and Samsung is the biggest threat to Apple right now.

I don't intend to knock Apple or belittle anybody who supports them. I despise their business practices and I think the motivation behind their legal actions is transparent, but they make some good products. I just happen to prefer a more open ecosystem that won't tether me to iTunes, and I think that any company that appeals to the courts while they're being lapped in the innovations arena should focus more on product development than spending millions on attorneys to stifle the competition.

That said, if they released a 7" iPad, I'd probably consider having a go at it.

I'm typing icrap on my iPad right now iThunder

That said, the iPhone and later products really saved Apple from oblivion (at one point they only had 10% of the home computer market). But they were a computer maker and not just a platform company (like Microsoft which didn't make the equipment). Now Apple has more money the the U.S. government 9or something like that). LOL

As of yesterday Apple passed Exxon as the largest company in the world (based on market valuation)

And Google has yet to make a profit on Android.

Android is a freeware buggy slapped together operating system without patent support that phone manufactures like to slap half a$$ed proprietary GUIs over the top of making the system even more buggy and making upgrades and fixes very difficult to accomplish. This is why Android users lag iPhone users in satisfaction surveys by almost 30 points and why almost half of people with an Android phone plan to buy an iPhone next. Google recently declined to buy a set of patents for $4.5 billion that would have protected Android, likely because they internally already know they have a losing business plan with Android.

I don't think Apple hates Android's success as much as the way Google likes to generously and shamelessly "borrow" others' intellectual property, as this writer points out:

http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/08/oracle-and-google-keep-wrangling-over.html

Understand, but the "shameless borrowing" wouldn't amount to a hill of beans had Android never seen any traction in the marketplace.

Understand, but the "shameless borrowing" wouldn't amount to a hill of beans had Android never seen any traction in the marketplace.
If someone else was generating revenue off your innovation, are you saying you wouldn't care? Protecting your ideas and intellectual property is just simply a case of envy -- even though as others have pointed out, Apple has continue to enjoy record sales, record profits and amazing stock price jumps?

Then, if that's the case, then I want to hate Android too so that I can enjoy those kind of profits.

If someone else was generating revenue off your innovation, are you saying you wouldn't care? Protecting your ideas and intellectual property is just simply a case of envy -- even though as others have pointed out, Apple has continue to enjoy record sales, record profits and amazing stock price jumps?

Then, if that's the case, then I want to hate Android too so that I can enjoy those kind of profits.

Apple's very best product is AAPL

If someone else was generating revenue off your innovation, are you saying you wouldn't care?

Did I say that?

Nope.

I said:
Understand, but the "shameless borrowing" wouldn't amount to a hill of beans had Android never seen any traction in the marketplace.;

..which pretty much means that the only point in going after them is because they're making a buck, isn't it? I mean, absent the money, it's all sophistry, isn't it? People can admire my intellectual property, but I can't spend their admiration...

And so Apple is a bad guy because someone is making a buck off their intellectual property? I'm not really understanding what your point is.

On a somewhat related note, here is a look back at comments made about the iPhone when it was about to first be released from John C. Dvorak, in March 2007, “Apple Should Pull the Plug on the iPhone":


The problem here is that while Apple can play the fashion game as well as any company, there is no evidence that it can play it fast enough. These phones go in and out of style so fast that unless Apple has half a dozen variants in the pipeline, its phone, even if immediately successful, will be passé within 3 months.

There is no likelihood that Apple can be successful in a business this competitive.

Blogger John Gruber notes, "Meanwhile, today, the best-selling and most-profitable phone in the world is the 14-month-old iPhone 4."

And for some reason coming up with a innovative, well-designed, well-built and very popular consumer products somehow makes Apple evil.

Error! Brian needs help!

The patents that Apple applied for was too broad and should never been approved.

How is that Apple's fault?

I was an IT professional and kept up with a lot of this but I really don't remember an Apple clone. Thanks for the info. I always compared Apple's problems versus PCs to Sony's Betamax versus VHS. They both had quality on their side (although Betamax had a few problems with things like limited recording time on a cartridge) but Sony limited the manufacturers that could produce and sell the Betamax player/recorder. Since VHS could be manufactured by anybody, their inferior product became the standard and Betamax tucked it's tail between it's legs and went away. At least Apple survived.
C. T.

I still have a Power Computing Apple clone in my attic. What a nightmare that company was to deal with. While the lack of cloning and 3rd party integration stifled Apple's market penetration, I feel it helped them produce a superior product.

Don't hate on Apple hate on the broken patent office.

Also I don't think Apple really cares about Android or PC dominance, considering they seem to have the most cash on hand of any company in the world at the moment, and are very very close to becoming the single most valuable company in the world, I'd say they're doing ok for themselves. I myself am thankful for Apple. Without them we would still be chained to the carriers approved handsets. Apple came along and busted the whole mobile market wide open by not giving in to the carriers on every single issue. They told the carriers what they wanted and the carriers listened. Without them I don't think the mobile industry would have became what it has today.

Was Franklin considered an Apple clone? I seem to recall my small juco had a Franklin or four in its com lab in the mid-80's

Who here have any iCrap devices? All those that does should be ashamed of themselves.

I'm surprised no discussion was started on this topic. Anyone aware of what Apple is attempting to do? Well...attempting...and actively doing. Apple has been bullying many other companies. Why? Apple believe they should be the only one to sell iCrap devices such as smartphones (iCrap) and those mini-computers "iPad" which is also iCrap. Apple want to terminate the production of superior Android, Tablet, and the list goes on and on.

Apple want the consumers to have only one option. To buy from Apple. HELL NO!!!

You say that like all the other companies have clean hands, Samsung flat out has been directly copying the look and feel of apple devices. Other (software and hardware) have moved in the same direction Apple started but not been as blatant about mimicking every detail. While Android has some good features it is hardly superior, Google flat out said the first release of the tablet software was so much of a hack the were limiting the release of the code to a few they were working with, verses their standard distribution of methods. In several places Android is hardly consistent or polished. If manufacturers come up with original ideas (or even ones that are not based on iDevices) then Apple would not have a leg to stand on, but look at where phones and tables designs went before the iPhone and iPad verses after and you can see a dramatic shift in the products these manufactures put out.

Was Franklin considered an Apple clone? I seem to recall my small juco had a Franklin or four in its com lab in the mid-80's

Only familiar w/Power Computing. As far as I know they were the only authorized computer maker other than Apple that used the Mac OS. Can't say I have heard of Franklin. My first exposure to computers was at the juco too. Took a Basic programing class on Wang computers (1984ish). LOL

And IIRC at that time those weren't "personal computers" yet, but just terminals connected to a central mainframe computer. When my Metrotech class toured the Oklahoman Tower, the only personal computers we saw even then were the Macs in the ad dept (92 or 93). The reporters were still using terminals and a massive mainframe computer that we got to give a gander.

had to look it up... franklin was an unauthorized apple ii clone. -M

Since VHS could be manufactured by anybody, their inferior product became the standard and Betamax tucked it's tail between it's legs and went away.

Beta only went away as a home format. It kinda morphed a bit and became the industry standard for professional video news gathering up until digital came along.

Yes, I should have been clear about the "home video".
C. T.

Beta only went away as a home format. It kinda morphed a bit and became the industry standard for professional video news gathering up until digital came along.

And so Apple is a bad guy because someone is making a buck off their intellectual property? I'm not really understanding what your point is.


Again, you put words in my mouth (where did I say "Apple is a bad guy?"), and then ask why you don't understand the point behind what I never said....???

If Apple wants to protect its intellectual property, that's great. Power to 'em. But let's not also simultaneously pretend Apple is pure in the midst of intellectual property discussions. Among all the competitors in intense markets thorughout history, there are none with purely "unclean hands."

How strange...whenever I type a-n-d-r-o-i-d on this iPad, it shows *******

=\

Apple literally sued Samsung over making a rectangular tablet with a glass screen and a bezel. That is what the lawsuit was. A rectangle.

Apple literally sued Samsung over making a rectangular tablet with a glass screen and a bezel. That is what the lawsuit was. A rectangle.

I seem to recall case law directly on-point where Motorola sued Qualcomm over the design of a phone which resembled a makeup compact (a flip phone) Motorola lost that battle, but federal lawsuits between multi-billion-dollar companies can never be summed up in a couple of sentences. I hope several 600-partner law firms make a lot of money in this pissing match.

On a related note: read where Hershey recently sued (or threatened) the maker of a brownie pan because it divided up the batter in a pattern similar to the one found on the Hershey chocolate bar!

Well it doesn't matter now - Google (maker of Android) is going to buy all the patents that Apple runs on. Hold onto your Apple stuff, they will be collectors items someday. Mess with the bull and you might bet the horns.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/google-to-buy-motorola-mobility/

Well it doesn't matter now - Google (maker of Android) is going to buy all the patents that Apple runs on. Hold onto your Apple stuff, they will be collectors items someday. Mess with the bull and you might bet the horns.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/google-to-buy-motorola-mobility/


That’s just about as accurate as your claim that Oracle was moving to Salt Lake City. As in your assertion has no basis in reality at all. Moto doesn’t hold Apple’s patents, Apple does. This buy is just an attempt to protect Android.

And even if Google were ever able to threaten Apple, by the end of the year Apple is projected to have more than $100 billion IN CASH. Google’s entire market cap is $160 billion. Apple easily could just buy Google in a half cash, half stock transaction and be done with them.

swake2 - I don't know what to tell you. However, it must feel weird rooting for the big guy over the little guy for once. You made the transit well.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/06/motorola-suing-apple-for-patent-infringement/


Motorola suing Apple for patent infringement


It's getting hard to keep track of, isn't it? The way we hear it told, most of these patent disputes and overlaps in the mobile space used to be settled in quiet ways, mutually assured destruction-style, but lately there's a whole lot of nukes going off. Motorola is now suing Apple over a wide range of technology patents which it claims Apple is infringing on with its iPhone, iPad, "iTouch," and even some Macs. The company is leveling three complaints which include 18 patents on "early-stage innovations" by Motorola, covering a pretty wide swath of the mobile landscape, including WCDMA, GPRS, 802.11, antenna design, wireless email, proximity sensing, software application management, location-based services and multi-device synchronization. Outside of the devices, Apple's MobileMe and App Store services get called out specifically. At the end of its press release Motorola makes a very similar claim to the one Nokia made at the outset of its own lawyer salvo against Apple:

I don't remember saying Oracle was moving to SLC. I do know that Oracle has moved something like 2,000 jobs to SLC.

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=148&sid=12172379


The California Chamber of Commerce and others want the Legislature to pass a more business-friendly budget. Some leaders are expressing concerns that e-Bay, Adobe, Twitter, Electronic Arts and Oracle are all expanding in Utah.

Apple literally sued Samsung over making a rectangular tablet with a glass screen and a bezel. That is what the lawsuit was. A rectangle.

Here's one.


Q What do you call 1,000 lawyers chained together at the bottom of the ocean?

A A good start.

^ lol

swake2 - I don't know what to tell you. However, it must feel weird rooting for the big guy over the little guy for once. You made the transit well.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/06/motorola-suing-apple-for-patent-infringement/



I don't remember saying Oracle was moving to SLC. I do know that Oracle has moved something like 2,000 jobs to SLC.

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=148&sid=12172379

It’s not rooting, it’s reality. And since when is Google “the little guy”?

Here’s your quote that was just downright silly:

Oracle is already in the process of slowly and quitely relocating everything to Salt Lake City.

And the related thread:
http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=25738&page=1&highlight=oracle

Oracle didn’t “move” 2,000 jobs to SLC, they opened a data center there.

The data center is just one of the Oracle operations in SLC. Check out huge Oracle complex and tower in South SLC.

The data center is just one of the Oracle operations in SLC. Check out huge Oracle complex and tower in South SLC.


Oracle isn't moving.

Apple isn't afraid of Android, with or without Moto.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung/2011/08/18/googles-big-mistake-buying-motorola-to-save-android/


8/18/2011 @ 2:16PM
Google's Big Mistake - Buying Motorola to Save Android

The business world was surprised this week when Google announced it was acquiring Motorola Mobility for $12.5B – a 63% premium to its trading price (Crain’s Chicago Business). Surprised for 3 very good reasons:

because few software companies move into hardware
effectively Google will now compete with its customers like Samsung and HTC that offer Android-based phones and tablets, and
Motorola Mobility had pretty much been written off as a viable long-term competitor in the mobile marketplace. With less than 9% share, Motorola is the last place finisher – behind even crashing RIM.
Truth is, Google had a hard choice. Android doesn’t make much money. Android was launched, and priced for free, as a way for Google to try holding onto search revenues as people migrated from PCs to cloud devices. Android was developed as a way to defend the search business, rather than as a profitable growth opportunity. Unfortunately, Google didn’t really think through the ramifications of the product, or its business model, before taking it to market.

Sort of like Sun Microsystems giving away Java as a way to defend its Unix server business. Oops.

Then, in early August, Google was slammed when German courts held that the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 could not be sold – putting a stop to all sales in Europe (Phandroid.com “Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 Sales Now Blocked in Europe Thanks to Apple.”) Clearly, Android’s future in Europe was now seriously jeopardized – and the same could be true in the USA.

This wasn’t really a surprise. The legal battles had been on for some time, and Tab had already been blocked in Australia. Apple has a well established patent thicket, and after losing its Macintosh Graphical User Interface lead to Windows 25 years ago Apple did a better job of defending its intellectual property this time around. It was also well known that Microsoft was on the prowl to buy a set of patents, or licenses, to protect its new Windows Phone O/S planned for launch soon and fight off any other competitors (like Android).

Google had to either acquire some patents, or licenses, or seriously consider dropping Android. Google’s severe intellectual property problems assured big legal expenses trying to keep Android in the market. And Android still might well fail if Google did not come up with a patent portfolio – and before Microsoft! Given the lack of profitability in Android, dropping the product really doesn’t seem that bad – especially since Google has been on a run of dropping products lately!

Nonetheless, Google leadership clearly decided “in for penny, in for a pound” and bought Motorola. The acquisition gives Google some 16,000-17,000 patents. With that kind of I.P. war chest it is able to defend Android in the internecine wars of intellectual property courts – where license trading dominates resolutions between behemoth competitors.

Only, what is Google going to do with Motorola (and Android) now? This acquisition doesn’t really fix the business model problem. Android still isn’t making any money for Google. And Motorola’s flat Android product sales don’t make any money either:


Apple grabs 2/3s of all Smart Phone profits world wide, all other makers lost money (Including Moto) or split 1/3. And Google didn't make anything.

http://www.slashgear.com/apple-grabs-two-thirds-of-mobile-phone-industry-profits-29168396/

Almost 2/3s of Smart Phone owners plan to buy an iPhone 5, sight unseen. Including almost half of Android users:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2390323,00.asp

....
....

Apple isn't afraid of Android, with or without Moto.

....
....
....


I wonder if MSFT will take out NOK.

I wonder if MSFT will take out NOK.

Now that is really possible. HPs shutting down WebOS this week is going to make MS very cautious before they buy Nokia, but it could happen. Right now Nokia is on the ropes and Microsoft is already pretty much running the show there, but if Nokia continues to fall and becomes bargain for MS and is in danger of dying MS may well buy them out to protect the Windows Phone operating system.

Now that is really possible. HPs shutting down WebOS this week is going to make MS very cautious before they buy Nokia, but it could happen. Right now Nokia is on the ropes and Microsoft is already pretty much running the show there, but if Nokia continues to fall and becomes bargain for MS and is in danger of dying MS may well buy them out to protect the Windows Phone operating system.

Ironically Nokia is having the windows phones they are 'producing' this year built by another manufacture since that manufacture has experience building windows phones.

....
....
Nokia
....
....

Finns are cool.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDAfLhj-OSY

Beta only went away as a home format. It kinda morphed a bit and became the industry standard for professional video news gathering up until digital came along.

And unfortunately many stations are still using beta

Samsung lost? Geez, MORONIC JUDGES and COURT SYSTEMS!!!


The patent is titled "Portable Electronic Device for Photo Management" and describes a way to scroll through a photo gallery using finger gestures on a touchscreen.

What the hell?! Apple might as well sue the makers of many Gallery apps! Geez, I'm serious, Apple is a total whinebaby! How can anyone stand to possess any iCrap and support Apple?

THANKFULLY, Steve Jobs is out. Tough luck, what comes around...comes around.

My gawd, how the hell can different phones scroll through galleries? DUH! Stupid patent systems.

Samsung lost? Geez, MORONIC JUDGES and COURT SYSTEMS!!!



What the hell?! Apple might as well sue the makers of many Gallery apps! Geez, I'm serious, Apple is a total whinebaby! How can anyone stand to possess any iCrap and support Apple?

THANKFULLY, Steve Jobs is out. Tough luck, what comes around...comes around.

My gawd, how the hell can different phones scroll through galleries? DUH! Stupid patent systems.


Talk about whiny...

Talk about whiny...

I know, let them keep doing that. Just watch, they will crash and burn when the time comes. Many people obtaining iCrap now don't realize it, but when they do, just watch the public outrage.

Credibility isn't your strong suit, so I'll file that prediction in the same place as your prediction of the "list of devastation" after the VA earthquake...

Credibility isn't your strong suit, so I'll file that prediction in the same place as your prediction of the "list of devastation" after the VA earthquake...

Dude, don't believe me? Google it all up. You will see how Apple suing as many people they can in order to enforce that iCrap is to be the only products that people must buy.