Slashdot Mirror


Apple Tells Retailers To Stop Selling Certain Samsung Devices

walterbyrd writes with news that Apple has been sending out letters to carriers and retailers who sell the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 and the Galaxy Nexus, informing them of a court-mandated ban on sales and warning them against continuing to market the devices. The court order for the patent case on the Galaxy Tab says Samsung and "those acting in concert" with them are enjoined from selling the devices, and Apple has used the letters to point this out. Samsung, of course, disagrees: "Apple’s menacing letters greatly overreach, incorrectly claiming that third-party retailers are subject to the prohibitions of the preliminary injunction, which they clearly are not."

189 of 308 comments (clear)

  1. annoying? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    I own a mbp, 2 iPhones, and an iPad... but this is getting annoying. think I'll go buy a
    galaxy s3 today.

    1. Re:annoying? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Why? it's an inferior phone. Grab a nexus.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:annoying? by tepples · · Score: 1

      It's illegal to sell a Galaxy Nexus in Slashdot's home country. RTFA.

    3. Re:annoying? by Deorus · · Score: 1

      How's it getting annoying? How's it even affecting you?

    4. Re:annoying? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How's it getting annoying? How's it even affecting you?

      It's annoying to support this kind of bickering with my dollars. At least since I really want 75% of all tech patents invalidated (because they are too obvious) and don't think software patents should exist at all. If you buy from a company you are supporting their business practices, all of them. Don't know about "annoying" but it's quite legitimate to scrutinize what you are patronizing. It's no surprise that not everyone will like how a given company does business.

    5. Re:annoying? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      a) Point is third-party resellers are not affiliated with Samsung

      b) Bigger point is there is no ban on Galaxy Nexus, it was lifted last week. If they started sending those letters only this week, it's outright anticompetetive and possibly illegal move.

    6. Re:annoying? by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      The best way to change the system is to actually push for this kind of legal warfare until governments realize that it's causing more harm than good (assuming it actually is)

      Except that patents are specifically designed TO cause competitive harm. They're designed to protect an innovator from being copied by a competitor, for a while at least.

      So if you really don't want this legal warfare, you're going to have to get rid of patents, and even the ideas behind patents, and instead let competition be an all out warfare. Which sounds great in theory, until it's your time & money you put into building something only to be scooped by another company with a spy.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    7. Re:annoying? by fredprado · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In practice patents were never an incentive to research and innovation. The legal costs make them a viable protection only to big business, which means that hundreds of thousands of small and medium business not only are not entitled to have their researches protected but have to be careful not to step in the big guys toes, even by a tortuous stretch of logic when researching anything.It serves absolutely nothing but the big guys. Period.

      Furthermore these big guys have the distribution networks and the manufacturing advantages to profit without such protections.Apple would not going to stop creating new things because Samsung or anybody else could copy them. For God's sake. To tell the truth nobody copied other people's ideas more than Apple in this World.

    8. Re:annoying? by NatasRevol · · Score: 2

      There were no 'big guys' when US patent law was written.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    9. Re:annoying? by fredprado · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There were ALWAYS big guys.

    10. Re:annoying? by rhook · · Score: 2

      Have you used the Galaxy S3? It is far superior to the Galaxy Nexus. In fact I plan on buying one for myself next month now that I have had a chance to play with one.

    11. Re:annoying? by rhook · · Score: 1

      You can buy them right now on the Google Play Store.

      https://play.google.com/store/devices/details?id=galaxy_nexus_hspa

    12. Re:annoying? by rhook · · Score: 3, Informative
    13. Re:annoying? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Far superior? Be honest, it's incrementally better. Slightly bigger screen (0.2"), slightly faster processor (0.3ghz), slightly better cameras (0.6mp/3mp), slightly bigger battery (~200mah), etc. The only major differences are that it's available with twice the RAM (2gb vs 1) and an SD slot. All for the low, low price of Samsung taking a crap on the UI, a lag in SW updates, and a locked bootloader.

    14. Re:annoying? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Yes I have, the Nexus is superior.

      Why? Not locked to a carrier. not Locked for OS updates. That makes the Nexus VASTLY superior to a S3. unless you can show me where I can get completely unlocked S3's for $349.00

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    15. Re:annoying? by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Argh, you mean Samsung have installed Touchwiz on it? That's enough to scare me right off.

      I got a free Galaxy Tab 2 and it's fucking horrendous. Screen resolution is worse than my Galaxy Nexus, UI has been crippled by Samsung's shite and the applications I want to install on it "aren't available for this version" - even though they're available for the Galaxy Nexus running the same Android 4.03.

      The Galaxy Nexus is a lovely phone but the Tab 2 has really made me chary of buying any other Samsung mobile devices, even if the hardware is good (and the S3 does have nice hardware).

    16. Re:annoying? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      The screen is the same, and the rest of hardware is not that much impressive - there's nothing "next-gen" there. About the only thing that's noticeably better there is the camera, and the presence of an SD card slot.

      On the other hand, Nexus is pentaband, so you can use it on both AT&T and T-Mo with 3G and HSDPA - going wherever the deals are better (which right now is T-Mo). And, of course, stock Android, and the only phone at 4.1 right now.

      What really nails it, though, is the price. Nexus can be had for $350 right now at Play Store with no strings attached. S3 is $200 with a 2-year AT&T contract, and the full price is $650 - more than twice is expensive. There's no way the minor difference in features between the two is worth $300...

    17. Re:annoying? by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Problem is, Samsung's shite sucks up resources unless I root the device. And then it wont run the software that I want on it.

      I can't even fucking uninstall some Yahoo shit that nobody on the planet would want, without rooting the device. That's just fucking obnoxious.

      Being able to do things and not needing to do them in the first place are very different.

    18. Re:annoying? by psiclops · · Score: 1

      b) the ban wasn't lifted, just temporarily removed until further legal wranglings.
      http://www.androidauthority.com/galaxy-nexus-ban-temporary-lifted-100109/ [androidauthority.com]

      temporarily removed = temporarily lifted = lifted(if stated after the starting point of the period in which it was temporarily lifted)

      --
      i spent five minutes thinking and all i got was this crappy sig
    19. Re:annoying? by Fjandr · · Score: 2

      how they do business with others in order to serve your needs, however, should be no concern to you.

      Perhaps, if you're a sociopath. There are many business practices which are abhorrent, and by purchasing a product from those businesses the profit margin from that product purchase further supports their bottom line and tends to reinforce the methods they use to do business as legitimate (in that it makes them money).

      The only reference needed is DeBeers and their practices regarding trading precious stones prior to the international condemnation of the purchase of blood stones from conflict regions. I am not in any way saying Apple (or anyone else) rises to this level, but the actions of a company can, in fact, be very relevant to people who have an actual conscience. A conscience can involve sensitivity to injustices of a much lesser nature than slave labor and child soldiers while still being justifiable.

    20. Re:annoying? by rhook · · Score: 1

      TouchWiz on the Galaxy S3 is very minimal, you don't even really notice it.

    21. Re:annoying? by rhook · · Score: 1

      The screen is not the same, 4.8" with Gorilla Glass vs 4.65" with no protective glass. Faster processor/GPU, 2GB RAM, microSD slot, etc.

    22. Re:annoying? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      The screen is not the same, 4.8" with Gorilla Glass vs 4.65" with no protective glass.

      By 'same screen' I meant screen technology & resolution - both are 720p AMOLED PenTile screens. I don't care much for the size difference - 0.15" is not something you would readily notice anyway, and since resolution is the same, it doesn't display more content or anything like that.

      While it's not Gorilla glass, Google has said that it is some form of protective glass, just not trademarked one. In practice I've yet to see a single scratch on the screen of my Nexus, which I've been carrying in my pocket (with keys etc) since I purchased it in November last year.

      The rest of it is not really worth the money, IMO. What exactly are you going to use that faster processor/GPU for? Most app writers still target older 2.x phones since those are the majority of the market.

  2. Apple: You do the nice gear... by craznar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... and leave the law to the authorities.

    Mmmmk?

    --
    EMail: 0110001101100010010000000110001101110010 0110000101111010011011100110000101110010 0010111001100011011011110110
    1. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by Freaky+Spook · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Samsung should just stop selling components to Apple...
      Let them invent & manufacture that stuff themselves.

    2. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by brxndxn · · Score: 2

      Actually, I would much prefer the enforcement of copyright law to be on the copyright holder instead of the taxpayer. If we're stuck with silly copyright laws, we might as well avoid paying to enforce it.

      --
      --- We need more Ron Paul!
    3. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by macshit · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh come on ... Apple's completely exhausted from inventing the rectangle! The rectangle!

      What more do you want from them?!

      --
      We live, as we dream -- alone....
    4. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by rgbrenner · · Score: 1

      Instead of simply notifying Samsung's affiliates, they should have just sued Samsung and the affiliates for violating the order by continuing the sale of the devices.

      That would be much nicer, right?

    5. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by BeanThere · · Score: 1

      This is a patent issue, not a copyright one .. patents are very different to (and far worse than) copyrights.

    6. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Also, because it's one of Samsung's largest revenue sources.

      Apple is very deliberately trying to separate themselves from Samsung by funding development of other manufacturing facilities that are not owned by Samsung.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    7. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by Deorus · · Score: 1

      So you support all actions taken by MPAA and RIAA?

      I agree with the grandparent, and that doesn't mean I support the RIAA/MPAA. The main reason why I don't support them is because they abuse the courts in order to gain information about citizens that they should never have access to in order to practice extortion. Instead they should just complain to an authority, mention all the steps they took in order to prevent the violations, and only then expect authorities to take action. This is essentially what Apple is doing, they are making sure that no retails can claim lack of knowledge by directly informing them and guaranteeing that they will face consequences should that not be enough. Apple is not extorting anyone here.

    8. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Then perhaps they shouldn't try and beat their component provider like a red-headed step child.
      Apple doesn't have a leg to stand on.

      Rectangle with rounded corner? Fuck Apple - 2000+ year old design used for clay stylus pads.
      Their finger swipe? Prioer EU art - patent invalidated - not just defended against, invalidated - ie - it doesn't exist anymore.
      The rest of the crap they stole from others and threw a patent on it? Wait and see - they will be invalidated as well.

      Apple is fucked... Royally...

    9. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Samsung should just stop selling components to Apple...
      Let them invent & manufacture that stuff themselves.

      That's called "cutting off your nose to spite your face". Apple is one of (maybe the?) biggest customer of Samsung's components. Cutting them off would be a huge financial hit for Samsung.

      I should mention, for the record, I think this move by Apple is massively overstepping their authority. Leave enforcement of court rulings to the courts and regulatory agencies. No need to go all vigilante.

    10. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by Deorus · · Score: 1

      I should mention, for the record, I think this move by Apple is massively overstepping their authority. Leave enforcement of court rulings to the courts and regulatory agencies. No need to go all vigilante.

      For starters, Apple is not enforcing anything, only ensuring that nobody can claim lack of knowledge. Secondly, all regulatory agencies that I know only act on complaints, so Apple would have to file them either way, and in the event that they have to, being able to prove that they tried to address the situation without litigation will serve as aggravation against the offenders.

      Never give a legal opponent a chance to even think they can get away with a violation, always make sure they are well aware how royally fucked they will be unless they comply with your demands. That's how I treat companies that violate my civil rights as a citizen, that's how I would treat them if I was Apple.

    11. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Samsung should just stop selling components to Apple...
      Let them invent & manufacture that stuff themselves.

      That's called "cutting off your nose to spite your face". Apple is one of (maybe the?) biggest customer of Samsung's components. Cutting them off would be a huge financial hit for Samsung.

      It could still be a correct strategic move by samsung if they could severely strangle the supply of iProducts in the market and thus grab some market share.
      I am however quite sure apple and samsung components have contracts in place that prevent this from being a legal option.

    12. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by rhook · · Score: 1

      It is the plaintiff's responsibility to enforce a civil ruling. But this is getting ridiculous. We need to just invalidate all software patents and ban them.

    13. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by boorack · · Score: 1

      I don't know exact numbers but I suppose their margins on stuff sold to Apple are razor thin. More than half of Samsung revenues come from mobile phones. More than all the rest combined (chips, nand flash, computers, TVs, cameras, washing machines, tons of other stuff).

      Yet I think cutting Apple off still would be a very bad deal for Samsung. I imagine Apple going to US regulators and crying foul how unfairly have they been threated. I imagine US regulators opening antitrust case for Samsung and cutting them off US market due to "monopoly abuse". US govt officials would quickly press other countries to ban Samsung from their markets or make them pay huge fines for "abuses". It would make Apple more happy than many people think.

      Crony capitalism, crookery and corruption is the name of game nowadays and Apple became one of prominent examples of this phenomenon. As Apple's business quickly moves from competing on quality basis (developing new cool stuff) to outright rent seeking (and racketeering), we'll see more and more evidence of Apple being in bed with (corrupt) US government.

    14. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

      Citation please? Because the last figures I saw put Apple at less than 6% of Samsung's business, which while not nothing helping a company try to crush you for a relatively small sale is seriously retarded. See all the companies that get treated like crap by Walmart only to have Wally World come out with a store brand and crush what remaining sales they had.

      Supporting a company who is trying to put you out of business is just retarded any way you slice it, and I'd like to see those latest figures because unless they have jumped it would hurt Apple a hell of a lot more than it would hurt Samsung at this point to just pull the plug.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    15. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      How do you figure? At least patents DO expire whereas thanks to lobbying what we have with copyrights is "forever minus a single day" and even cases of things that were PD being put BACK into copyright!

      While I agree that software patents frankly should have never been allowed saying patents are in any way worse than copyrights is just crazy, at least you'll live to see many patents expire, i doubt our grandkids will live to see a copyright expire in this country.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    16. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 2

      Blasphemy! Apple invented the rounded rectangle. I hope you get poked by the corners of the same rectangle you claim apple had invented. You might then learn to appreciate how innovative the rounded rectangle is.

    17. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by BeanThere · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, firstly, copyrights cover works that are impossible for a second content creator to *accidentally* independently create. It's impossible for an independent film producer to accidentally re-create a virtually exact copy of, say, Avatar, and it's impossible for a second independent author to accidentally re-write a major novel. It's just impossible. This makes it much easier to verify and keep track of the actual creator of some copyrighted content - i.e. there cannot be meaningful (honest) conflicting claims from two separate authors honestly claiming to have independently written the same book. This is completely the opposite of patents, where actual, honest independent invention is not only incredibly common, it's actually to be expected and happens every day, all the time.

      Second, patents are basically effecitvely a priori force-based restraints on using your mind. E.g. an independent software author must now, with every single step, wonder if they're violating patents. This is not true for copyrights --- it's impossible to independently rewrite large parts of someone else's source code --- when you program, as long as you are doing your own work, you do not have to sit and wonder "am I violating copyrights, am I violating copyrights". Likewise, if you want to write a book, and you just start writing using your mind, you do not have to worry "am I going to accidentally rewrite someone else's novel" -- you just write. But with patents, you are effectively required by law to avoid inventing or writing code lest you accidentally violate someone's patents.

      Third, patents have become unreasonably impossible to implement. Not only are you bound by a priori restraints on using your mind to create --- i.e. you are required to continually search for existing patents every time you write a piece of code --- but there are so many thousands of patents (something like 40,000 software patents now in the US IIRC?) that it's actually impossible to even know if you're violating the patent, you need a team of patent lawyers continually searching and checking. This is NOT TRUE for copyright, where it's easy to know, because it's virtually impossible to accidentally violate in any meaningful way.

      Finally, patents operate on a basis that violates 'innocent until proven guilty', a basic principle of a moral justice system. If a second inventor GENUINELY accidentally re-invents something, according to the patent system, he is automatically guilty even if he wasn't copying --- and no evidence of copying is required. In crime, evidence is usually required. With patents, no evidence is required - being 'first to file' is considered 'evidence', which is nonsense. Copyright, however, does not operate on an 'innocent until proven guilty' .. you need evidence in order to be considered guilty of copyright violation.

    18. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by BeanThere · · Score: 1

      Ah, found the link I was looking for, with some additional info:

      http://c4sif.org/2012/04/software-industry-needs-2-million-patent-attorneys-and-2-7-trillion-per-year-to-avoid-infringing-software-patents/

      if US software industry companies wanted to stay abreast of US software patents to avoid infringing them, it would take roughly 2 million patent attorneys working full time to examine all the software patents. And this assumes these patent attorneys would only need 10 minutes per patent, which “is an unrealistically low amount of time.” And at $100 per hour, this would be $400 billion per year. In an industry that is valued at about $224 billion. ...
      And all this is still a conservative estimate since it takes more than 30 minutes to review a patent, and because this is only for the software industry and software patents. If all companies in all industries had to review all relevant patents, the cost would likely be in the hundreds of trillions of dollars per year—multiples of the annual US GDP

    19. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by JimCanuck · · Score: 1

      Which is a drop in the bucket compared to the $248 Billion in sales last year. A mere 3% of their revenue.

    20. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      What about as old grey beards, we claim inventing the rounded rectangle from dropping and bashing about masonite clip boards, everyone of those things had rounded corners within a month of first use, now they make them all that way.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    21. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, it's not so simple. Economically, it would be a blow to Samsung even were there not laws (at least in the USA, UK, and Australia; probably in other countries) barring them from refusing to supply Apple.

    22. Re:Apple: You do the nice gear... by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      That's called "cutting off your nose to spite your face". Apple is one of (maybe the?) biggest customer of Samsung's components. Cutting them off would be a huge financial hit for Samsung.

      Citation needed

      I see you didn't read one comment further down in this thread, which is understandable since you can't seem to figure out how to log in.

      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2979325&cid=40650881

  3. Thanks Apple by Kangburra · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you hadn't made such a fuss about the Samsung Tabs they would not be so popular today, Here in Australia they are very hard to find, you have to pre-order it while the ipads sit in the shops. I am not suggesting that they are outselling the ipad, but there is a real demand which, in part, has been created by the market leader. What a weird world we are in today!

    --
    Common sense is not so common
    1. Re:Thanks Apple by firex726 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yep, Streisand effect, thanks to Apple I have been hearing more news of Google's offerings then I have Apple's.

    2. Re:Thanks Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      He didn't say Kangburra was lying, he said that his conclusions didn't follow from the facts. The only thing certain from the original statement is that Tab sales outstripped the supply.

    3. Re:Thanks Apple by DRJlaw · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's no more evidence of strong demand than it is of short supply.

      The iPad 3 was on a worldwide short supply for months, and that was effectively due to huge demand!

      The degree of self-contradiction that you've allowed yourself boggles the mind.

    4. Re:Thanks Apple by Coward+Anonymous · · Score: 1, Informative

      You are either severely deluded or a troll.

      Apple's market share in Australia was last measured at 84%

    5. Re:Thanks Apple by chrb · · Score: 1

      The iPad 3

      Officially there's no such thing as an "iPad 3" - it's just "the New iPad". It might be the worst product name ever, but it is what it is.

    6. Re:Thanks Apple by ZorinLynx · · Score: 1

      What will Apple call it when the next iPad comes out? It's going to need a moniker; "The New iPad" is ambiguous.

      As far as I'm concerned it's the iPad 3.

    7. Re:Thanks Apple by Kangburra · · Score: 1

      That was last year, I was hunting a Samsung in June 2012!

      --
      Common sense is not so common
    8. Re:Thanks Apple by Deorus · · Score: 2

      No evidence. Assumption bias fueled hypocrisy.

      If there is assumption bias, it is not mine, though you can always wait for the earnings conference calls to be sure.

      Is there no doubt as to why analytical people despise Apple culture with such fervor that they will avoid it even when it is a reasonable alternative?

      The term you're looking for is rational, and if you avoid something when it's a reasonable alternative then you are not being rational yourself.

    9. Re:Thanks Apple by Deorus · · Score: 1

      Wait wait wait, so you're saying that saying a shortage is not caused by excessive demand, and then you claim a shortage is caused by excessive demand.!?

      No,

      As to the facts: if anything has a shortage then it is indicative of demand outpacing supply. That doesn't mean that demand is huge or that supply is small, it just means that demand > supply. In the same way that 2 > 1, 3 > 2 and 5000 > 4000 > 1.

      I didn't claim otherwise.

      I don't think you actually understood my post. Try again.

    10. Re:Thanks Apple by Deorus · · Score: 1

      Officially there's no such thing as an "iPad 3" - it's just "the New iPad". It might be the worst product name ever, but it is what it is.

      Actually it's just iPad, "the new" is not part of the name and isn't referenced anywhere on the box. That said, even the iPad 2 was just iPad on the box (unlike the iPhone boxes, which prominently display the model), the only thing actually mentioning iPad 2 was the sticker with the specs. This one is only referred to as an iPad Wi-Fi 4G 64GB Black.

    11. Re:Thanks Apple by Iskender · · Score: 1

      Yeah, if I had the money I'd probably get one of these Samsungs and run Stellarium on it. It must be pretty good seeing as how Apple feels the need to sue about it.

    12. Re:Thanks Apple by fredprado · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You self-contradicted yourself. There is simply no way around it. Just admit it and get done with it. The burden of the proof of the proof of any claim is always on the person who does it. You did it on the second sentence, and in exact the same way the poster you criticized did.

    13. Re:Thanks Apple by Teun · · Score: 1

      Oh come one, just take an example on how the North Koreans are naming their dictators!

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    14. Re:Thanks Apple by Deorus · · Score: 1

      One day I have to figure out where this stereotype came from. Following that I have to figure out the reason for homophobia, because, honestly, I DON'T GIVE A CRAP if people think I'm gay! Actually, I'd rather they thought so, because that would make my interaction with females feel less sex-driven. Of course I can't just tell people I'm gay, because then I'd be lying, but I don't see any drawbacks with causing confusion.

    15. Re:Thanks Apple by fredprado · · Score: 1

      It is common belief that iPad has market dominance, but that has nothing to do with what you said.

      You clearly state that iPad shortages have nothing to do with supply and are due exclusively to high demand, in opposition to the Galaxy Tab, which could be in shortage exclusively because of low supply although its demand remains neglectable.

      That is basically what you said. You required a proof for the refutation of the second statement, but failed to provide a proof of the first statement yourself.

    16. Re:Thanks Apple by Deorus · · Score: 2

      I think I can field his question. I have a friend who was switched on to Apple by the company that I work for. Every conversation I have with him about computers has been "if you switch to Apple you won't have to deal with *blank*," which has to be followed by a methodical listing of all the features I would lose by switching to Apple. Only then will he shut up. It's probably the most annoying thing I have to deal with at work, followed by the actual customers.

      That trait is not just common to Apple fanboys. I don't do it myself, but I see it done everywhere. I see the free software community that is praised so much here on Slashdot do it all the time, for example. If you have segregation, that kind of stuff is bound to happen. There is, however, the opposite, which is when other people decide to give me crap because there's a glowing bitten apple on the lid of my computer, or because I am using a phone with the same logo to access the net at lunch. Just yesterday I was on #minecraft at Freenode and an operator started to give me crap about my "overpriced toy computer" as soon as they learned that I was on a Mac, and when I questioned exactly what my "overpriced toy computer" couldn't do that his "pro computer" could and mentioned all the futures and hardware specs on my "overpriced toy computer", I was promptly banned and kicked off the channel, so as you can see the prejudice goes both ways thus making that kind of mentality completely irrational.

    17. Re:Thanks Apple by Deorus · · Score: 1

      You clearly state that iPad shortages have nothing to do with supply and are due exclusively to high demand, in opposition to the Galaxy Tab, which could be in shortage exclusively because of low supply although its demand remains neglect able.

      No, I didn't. The bold part couldn't have been deduced from my post at all, you pulled that out of your ass.

      That is basically what you said. You required a proof for the refutation of the second statement, but failed to provide a proof of the first statement yourself.

      This proves that you either lack reading comprehension (stupidity) or are purposely altering the facts (trolling). Re-read my post and rethink your stance if you're not attempting the latter. Either way I am done arguing with you.

    18. Re:Thanks Apple by fredprado · · Score: 1

      What you wrote is exactly what I pointed. Your inability to accept it just proves that you are either unable to express yourself (stupidity) or you are unable to admit you made a mistake (stubbornness and stupidity). So basically although you can't determine if I am stupid or a troll I can safely assume you are stupid.

    19. Re:Thanks Apple by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Do what I do - dance with men. The ladies _love_ that.

      (Although on Tuesday, it was two other men that were most interested. One of them even started videoing. I think that might be for the benefit of his girlfriend, who wasn't there, but likes dancing with me. She's a bit good)

    20. Re:Thanks Apple by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 4, Funny

      You self-contradicted yourself.

      Well, he obviously didn't self-contradict anyone else.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    21. Re:Thanks Apple by serbanp · · Score: 1

      Don't waste your time. Deorus is clearly impaired in his/her cognitive skills. Not a troll, just a slow person.

    22. Re:Thanks Apple by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      How and why did they learn you were using an Apple computer?

      When I am wearing fruit-of-the-loom underwear I don't broadcast it on IRC channels. Likewise with whatever computer I happen to be logged on with. You only told half of the story. Was there some reason, i.e. gloating or showing off, that you chose to mention your 'mac'? Why did they even know? I like Logitech mice, but I don't carry on about it in chat channels.

  4. Weird... by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's almost like in this sector, patents are hurting innovation. No wait, that can't be right...

    1. Re:Weird... by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1, Interesting

      What innovation? Neither Apple nor Samsung sell innovative products...

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    2. Re:Weird... by fluffythedestroyer · · Score: 1

      Why do I have Microsoft windows and apple OS in my head, same with the mouse with xerox... lol

    3. Re:Weird... by Yvanhoe · · Score: 2

      Because, you know, phones are just a square of plastic with all the same parts inside...

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    4. Re:Weird... by geoskd · · Score: 1

      What innovation? Neither Apple nor Samsung sell innovative products...

      Apple had great innovation but two things happened: 1) They are mostly sitting back and riding the iPhone success. There has been lots of evolutionary improvement in both iPhone and iRippoff devices, but no revolutionary improvements like the iPhone. 2) Steve Jobs is dead. There simply isn't anyone else who will take the reins like he did. Apple has begun the slow decline back to mediocrity with the rest of the pack.

      -=Geoskd

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    5. Re:Weird... by danomac · · Score: 1

      Makes me wonder if Apple is going to start suing other manufacturers when/if they ever release their iPad mini...

      I bought the Nexus 7 yesterday, and one of the reasons I bought it immediately is because of that thought.

    6. Re:Weird... by alexgieg · · Score: 1

      What innovation? Neither Apple nor Samsung sell innovative products...

      I guess it depends on what one means by "innovation". Myself, I think the only actual recent innovation in the field of anything hardware-related was the invention of memristors. Everything else are just iterations over iterations of the same old resistor/capacitor/inductor, under the same old principles of computer science. But if you expand the definition of innovation to include some of those iterations, then at some point, yes, Apple can be seen as an innovator.

      --
      Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
    7. Re:Weird... by Deorus · · Score: 1

      Smartphones, as whole, are not innovative. What's inside your smartphone, on hardware and software level, has bits of innovation here and there with every generation.

      Why are smartphones only innovative on the inside?

      Blocking competitor because they infringe on your huge inventions of "searching multiple sources at once" and "replacing emails and phone numbers with hyperlinks" is a way for Apple to cop out of competing on merit.

      Legalese isn't pretty; don't look at it if you don't understand it. You can disagree with software patents, that's fine, but if you do then blame the game, not the players. All the parties involved had the same opportunities as Apple to register the same patents; nobody is being unfairly treated here.

      But, well, you already know that "innovation occured at Apple". All of it. I mean, they invented searching, and sliding locks and regex replace, what else there is for others to innovate? Others might as well close their mobile division at once, innovation already happened.

      Of course not, and they've been sued by others for infringement too. To ignore that is a sign of bias.

    8. Re:Weird... by fredprado · · Score: 1

      You certainly would if J. K. Rowling copied the other 29 chapters from someone else (like Conan Doyle, for example) and added just one of her own. ;)

    9. Re:Weird... by fredprado · · Score: 1

      You force the market to change in many ways, and innovation is just part of the equation, and not even a mandatory one.

    10. Re:Weird... by fredprado · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes I do. Everything is a copy of many many things with a little bit of originality (if any). It is ridiculously arrogant to think that your little bit of originality is so important that you have a divine mandate to exclusivity over it.

    11. Re:Weird... by oztiks · · Score: 1

      Apple has changed fuck nothing of the mobile phone market, when I go to a cell carrier for a phone I get a handset it has a monthly fee attached to it which I pay over X months. If iPhone's didn't exist today I would still be doing that, it's been like that since I was an early teen and lots of people bought them back then as they do now. The iPhone "took over" the phone market, but so did Nokia, Gee I remember when Nokia was the phone to have, funny. Rebok and Nike all over again if you ask me!

      Apple popularised the mobile app market and to say that the use of the mobile internet (3G) was a market of their doing is not accurate either because that requires tech from the cell carriers, i.e Apple may of supported technology that made mobile friendly websites but it was on the shoulders of everything else around them that created more of a right time / right place scenario. If you think I'm wrong about that consider Facetime as prime example of an Apple fuelled failure because that did happen at the wrong time / place.

      It is arguable that they created the tablet market because of the fact that tablets existed prior but it's the closest to a "market creation" your going to get, why? because, would people 5 years ago by tablets? no wasn't widely accepted by mainstream, so yes its arguable that Apple created the iPad market I can give you that.

    12. Re:Weird... by fredprado · · Score: 1

      It is simple, you copy because many many times there is no way around doing anything but copying parts of other things, or at least making things that produce similar results. Copyright is bad enough, because it gives authors way too much power over ideas and concepts they "created". Patents are considerably worse, because they give their owners rights over practically anything remotely associated with what they registered just because the results are similar.

    13. Re:Weird... by bky1701 · · Score: 1

      I don't know, but I would say you have the right to release your chapter 11 by itself. As it stands, you do not. This is pretty objectively wrong, even if you agree with the fundamental lie surrounding copyright.

  5. Re:Pretty Soon... by cruff · · Score: 1, Informative

    They already did that with that iPhone prototype that was lost in a bar.

  6. No surprise here by fluffythedestroyer · · Score: 1

    Why wouldn't they ? This has always been their way to make business and I don't think it will stop in the future. If it's not illegal to the point where they will only face a slap on the wrist they will do it. I think to their eyes, that if you do that kind of action and you get a slap on the wrist and you get told your a bad boy...then why not. It's worth the risk

    1. Re:No surprise here by funkylovemonkey · · Score: 1

      I'm not so sure. I don't really see what Apple's end game is. Most of these patent claims take the phone or tablet off the market for a few weeks at the most. Like the Galaxy Nexus, where sales were forbidden for about a week and then the ban was lifted because google made changes. The sale of the Nexus didn't stop since most companies already had them in stock so at most it was a hiccup. And the claim against the Galaxy Tab 10.1 is against a tablet that is obsolete and was never that popular to begin with. So what's the point? And there is a lot of risk, especially when they use strong arm tactics like this. They have a very real chance of alienating their consumers just like others have before them including Microsoft. And while this is obviously not evidence of a larger trend, I have to admit that for the last little while I've been planning on buying a new iPad, but won't be doing that anymore. I can't in good conscious support a company as litigious and anti-competitive as Apple has become. Of course one lost sale isn't going to hurt them, but if they continue down the path they're going, they risk it becoming a trend. And once the shine is off the apple (cough) it's very hard to get it back.

    2. Re:No surprise here by fluffythedestroyer · · Score: 1

      Can we blame Time Cook and friends ? I mean, do they have the creativity, innovation and mindset like Steve Jobs did ? This is just a tought and I may be way wrong with this one but I believe they do this kind of business because they problably know they got almost nothing or not enough "new" devices, technology or devices to make their business run. So they try to postpone their business as much as they can with patent and licence war like we all know so this in turn gives them more time to think about their new toy. But that's just a thought.

  7. eventually by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The USA, with its abyssmal right wing social and economic policies will mean the USA will fall to second rate status in the world. By then China, Brazil, Korea, India, etc will grow wise to this lame "intellectual property" scam, and the next American Steve Jobs wont stand a chance.

    When that day comes, and other countries say it was us who invtented this aggressive international enforcememt of this completely bullshit monopoly maintenance technique, just be happy there is and was an alternative strand of thought on the concept of intellectual property: no.

    Then maybe we can fnally rid the world of this abomination. It is not ised to protect small inventors, it is used to enforce anti-market monopolistic practices.

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:eventually by BlueStrat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The USA, with its abyssmal right wing social and economic policies

      Apparently you fell asleep in 2008 and just now woke up. The "right wing" hasn't had the presidency for nearly 4 years now. It hasn't had Congress for even longer.

      Sorry. This is pure Left. As is NDAA, Fast & Furious, Solyndra et al, etc etc etc. And now the destruction by Executive Order, completely bypassing Congress and effectively nullifying the law by fiat, of one of Bill Clinton's biggest successes, welfare reform.

      I, for one, welcome our government-cheese, foodstamp, and welfare-Cadillac-driving overlords?

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    2. Re:eventually by Kharny · · Score: 4, Informative

      LOL, you really think the dems are leftwing?
      They talk slightly more leftwing than reps, but their politics are the same

      --
      Make a man a fire and he will be warm for a day, set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life
    3. Re:eventually by mdmkolbe · · Score: 1

      Left and right don't actually exist. They are a tool of the political powers to keep people in the us versus them / my team versus their team mentality.

      The political spectrum is a multidimentional hyperspace, and collapsing it to one or even two or three dimentions leads to contradictions and naive thinking. In the US, being pro-weed is considered left, but so is being anti-tabaco. Being against abortion is considered right but so is being pro-death penalty. This is a very inconsistent way of categorizing beliefs and makes many mutually consistent beliefs look like they are in opposition.

    4. Re:eventually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The Democrats (nearly all) and many of the Republicans, especially the "establishment" Republicans, are Progressives.

      If you define cutting social programs in order to pay for more war and more tax cuts as "progressive", then yeah. But you're also an idiot.

    5. Re:eventually by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, there are only a handful of people anywhere who recognize that politics is not either-or. My guess is that is not likely to ever change.

  8. Whiny by jellie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why does Apple need to complain and whine about all these stupid patents? It's already the largest and most profitable technology company, and its cash reserves are insane. Everything it's doing is just like the Microsoft of the 1990's. And Steve Jobs was possibly a bigger asshole than Gates and Ballmer. Except, for some reason, people actually liked Jobs.

    1. Re:Whiny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because Apple has nothing in the pipeline. That is the only logical reason for pouring massive resources into slowing the entry of others into the market. Apple is trying to buy time. In 5 years Apple will be listed next to Nokia and RIM.

    2. Re:Whiny by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Oh, come on. Apple has lots in the pipeline.

      iPad 4. iPad5.

      Eventually they might even come out with a tablet with connectivity. The one I just acquired has a USB port on it. Two USB ports, actually. One to connect it to a host, i.e. a PC, and one to be a host for other plug-in devices, like USB drives (well, any drive at all with a FAT or NTFS partition actually) and mice, game controllers, keyboards, etc. Connectivity is why I bought the thing. For about 20% more I could have bought an iPad with similar internal specs, but a locked OS and inferior connectivity.

      I don't think I am alone. People are figuring this stuff out. Apple better be ready, because they're mostly relying on fashion at this point.

  9. So that means lots of fire sale by Pecisk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ....and more Samsung Androids in the streets. Really smart tactics Apple. Obsessive as your former master. In fact, insane. But who cares if shiny is there.

    Just one simple promise - I will never buy any Apple product in my life. Sorry, you simply can't have it both ways.

    --
    user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
  10. It won't happen ... by boorack · · Score: 1

    ... as long as US is the most powerful military power in the world. Since 2-nd World War oil (and by extension - USD backed by oil) was used as primary mean for US to control other countries and as asource of extraordinary benefits. Any nation trying to contest this state of affairs was pushed back with all possible means ("bringing democracy" included). Now as we've reached peak oil, US grip on the rest of the world will weaken unless they find some other means to maintain it. My bet is that IP in general and GMO's IP in particular is main contender to replace oil as USD collateral. Expect all countries trying to get rid of US-mandated IP laws to be forced back in line with all possible means (with "bringing democracy" included - if necessary).

    1. Re:It won't happen ... by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      You need oil to live. Literally, a lot fertilizer is energetically deroved from fossil fuels.

      But no one needs IP. Its not going to get to that. besides, military status is a direct corollary to economic status. As the USA's economic status fades due to horrible right wing social and economic policies our military status will fade as well.

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    2. Re:It won't happen ... by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      As the USA's economic status fades due to horrible right wing social and economic policies our military status will fade as well.

      There are so many things wrong with this sentence, I'm not even sure where to start.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  11. Re:Pretty Soon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ya, no. Retailers that have already purchased product and have them in inventory are free to sell those items. Samsung and it's distributors are no longer allowed to sell the devices to retailers or end-users. If a retailer is holding inventory on behalf of Samsung or it's distributors in a form of consignment, then no, they can't sell them.

    You see it the way Apple does; that ALL sales must stop and that's not the case. Selling inventory you've already paid for is not working in concert with the manufacturer. Samsung listing your website or store as a place to get the product, is.

  12. Re:Pretty Soon... by kelarius · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Except there is no injunction against the Nexus, just the Tab 10.1 (the old version noone sells anymore). The Nexus was cleared for US sale last week. This is not only overreaching but blatantly fraudulent. Samsung needs to get their lawyers warmed up.

    --
    Personally I'd rather have my idiots at home glued to the TV than out doing idiotic things
  13. Grade school analogy by Compaqt · · Score: 1

    If you want be her friend, you can't be mine!

    --
    I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
  14. Re:Oh intelectual property of patents by DMorritt · · Score: 1

    Between these two (Samsung and Apple) they *do* create tens of thousands of jobs (if not more), mostly in China of course.

    They wont sue each other out of existence, just the tablet markets, if it gets that bad they will just pull out, if this carries on they will just end up doing what they did before. One selling highly priced computers, the other selling, well, practically everything else technology wise.

    This spat between the two of them is getting tiring, I've never bought any Apple products, and I don't intend to, I've used a few, and they work well, but I just don't like the closed eco system, and I'm not particularly interested in learning the nuances of a new OS. On the other hand, I have a Galaxy Tab 10.1, and the only thing that annoys me is the speed they are taking to update Android versions (my HTC phone was updated months ago), next time I'd probably go with something more direct. Will this affect my intentions to buy things like TV's from Samsung? No, because you don't get these kinds of issues with those.

  15. You know what? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Fuck Apple. I've been thinking about replacing the 3 year old Mac Pro that I use for music production with a new one, but I'm about done with Apple's stormtrooper bullshit.

    Seriously. Fuck Apple. You know fads come and go, and nerds and geeks carried Apple through some bad spots. Let's see how long Apple's dominant position in the market lasts when people start to realize that the corporation behind those snappy ads and shiny products are greedy, heavy-handed scum.

    I've just decided Apple products are no longer cool. The Apple logo is not cool and owning anything Apple is not cool. Since I was among the first who decided that Apple was cool, decades ago, I feel I have the responsibility now end this thing.

    It doesn't matter if I'm the only one. When I see someone with an iPhone or iPad, I'm going to see them as particularly uncool. I will tell them.

    Watch and see if it doesn't start a trend. Not because I'm special, but because I'm NOT special. If this is how I feel, it's almost certain that there are lots of other people who feel this way because I am not special. The not-special people who made Apple cool to begin with will be the ones to remove their cool status.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:You know what? by dew-genen-ny · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Couldn't. Agree. More. There's a reason I've ditched my iphone and will be soon to ditch my ipad.... not that they're not totally cool devices, just that Apple are acting like such douches. I remember how much I used to hate on Microsoft for not being open, not allowing everyone to play and now here we are, Apple are doing the EXACT same thing. Thank fuck Android is open source, this bullshit ends here.

      --
      tom-george.comBecause geeks rate higher t
    2. Re:You know what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      "I used to hate on Microsoft for not being open, not allowing everyone to play"

      Wait, what?

      Seriously, on their platform MS has allowed everyone to play as they see fit for some time. It hasn't been an issue since DOS days, And frankly, I really don't care that much about Lotus 1-2-3 or Wordperfect anymore. On the hardware manufacturing side of things, MS has not limited who can make x86 hardware in any way, shape or form. Infact, they used to even make versions of windows that ran on a number of non-x86 architectures, and now that ARM is returning to viability, they are starting that again too!

      On the other hand, Apple has almost always been a closed system, Exempting a brief period in the mid 90s when they licensed clones (and the clone manufactures ate their lunch), NOONE has been allowed to make a OSX compatible system, or license a copy of OSX for it. Apple has ALWAYS been more closed then MS. It's in their blood.

      CAPTCHA: slaver

    3. Re:You know what? by godawful · · Score: 2

      *sees someone with an iphone*
      "hey man, you're not cool!"

      Good luck with that. The Internet brings out the hyperbole in people, and what an age we live in where we can find outrage in the smallest things.

      --
      Live EVERY week... Like it's Shark Week
    4. Re:You know what? by FloydTheDroid · · Score: 1

      I've been thinking about replacing the 3 year old Mac Pro that I use for music production with a new one, ...

      ...

      I've just decided Apple products are no longer cool.

      Since you're using a computer for real work maybe it should be about the software and hardware rather than what's cool.

    5. Re:You know what? by Psicopatico · · Score: 1

      The Apple logo is not cool

      Maybe there's something that can overturn your judgement? (Warning: NSFW and usign Coral Cache not to fry personal host)

      --
      Mastering the English language is fucking easy: all you have to do is to put an f* word in every fucking sentence.
    6. Re:You know what? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Informative

      *sees someone with an iphone*
      "hey man, you're not cool!"

      Good luck with that.

      Oh, I don't know. There is a significant number of people who own iPhones because they believe it is cool to do so. People who do things because they are cool happen to be especially sensitive to any suggestion otherwise.

      That's why fads disappear so suddenly. One day it's the coolest thing ever, and the next day, someone says, "Oh, that's so last year" and the next thing you know, the fad has evaporated with nary a trace.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    7. Re:You know what? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Since you're using a computer for real work maybe it should be about the software and hardware rather than what's cool.

      Good point. For the last several years it's been entirely about Logic for me. It's software that I've used as a primary DAW for well over a decade. But now there is another program that I find myself reaching for more and more in the place of Logic, and that's Cockos' Reaper. There is an OSX version of Reaper, but it's not as refined as the standard version.

      Still, I was one of those guys who really wanted to see Apple succeed in those years when they couldn't get out of their own way, because the Macintosh had been so significant for me. I bought a Newton. I led a group of faculty at my university that fought the efforts to standardize on Windows. We insisted that we needed our Macs. That's when the "bite" out of the Apple was supposed to represent Apple's commitment to higher education.

      Those days are gone now. Apple doesn't have the same commitment to higher ed, or the same commitment to those in the arts. Now they're committed to the hipsters that are congregating down the street from my house at this very moment at Chicago's Pitchfork music festival.

      I may not sell all of my remaining shares of Apple stock, but I'm not going to support them as a customer any more.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    8. Re:You know what? by StripedCow · · Score: 1

      When I see someone with an iPhone or iPad, I'm going to see them as particularly uncool. I will tell them.

      My grandma doesn't care. She uses the iPhone because it's the only interface she understands.
      Same for my technophobic schoolteachers.

      --
      If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
    9. Re:You know what? by Truedat · · Score: 1
      How you use your purchasing power is up to you, but you should know that geeks wield an influence of approximately zero. Also slashdot has become institutionally politicised against apple if you look at the kind of comments that are modded 4 and 5, which means that those that would provide a balance of opinion are leaving in droves. Not saying that you aren't entitled to voice your concerns but there is a danger that your arguments won't be strengthened through genuine debate and that there is a lot of preaching to the converted. If that's the endgame then I think it would be a hollow victory.

      As for me I am an apple admirer (although not on this issue) and I specifically read slashdot to have my opinions challenged, but more and more I am saddened by the lack of reasoned debate. This is a word of caution to slashdot in general not just your post. For all the good that will do though, as if I have that kind of power!

    10. Re:You know what? by Truedat · · Score: 1
      That was my thought exactly, that its similar to microsofts tactics. Not good. As for androids status, isn't it only really open to handset manufacturers? I mean unless I wanted to start up a handset company or am in the minority of geeks that like to hack my handset, isn't it true that what the average user ends up with is something as closed as apples platform?

      For example nexus looks pretty cool and open but that would be a property of Nexus and NOT android. Similarly the kindle fire is a lot more locked down because that is how Amazon has decided to play. So I'm saying that we're all subject to the whim of the handset and carrier folk - they get the benefit of android not us. Not really seen any counter to this line of reasoning here on slashdot.

    11. Re:You know what? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      My grandma doesn't care. She uses the iPhone because it's the only interface she understands.

      Even better. Let's see how long the hipsters want to have the same phone as their grandma.

      I think I'll adopt that when I tell people how uncool it is to own Apple. "iPhone: it's your grandma's smartphone".

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    12. Re:You know what? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      As for me I am an apple admirer

      It's really not cool to own Apple products. They abuse patents and use the courts to prevent competition. They have terrible labor practices and they glue their batteries into their iPhones and iPads which means you can't change them so the old battery can be recycled.

      Cool people don't use Apple products.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    13. Re:You know what? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      I mean, fine if you want to say /now/ you're not special and don't want to carry the fashionable Apple around anymore

      I've never carried Apple products around. I've owned their desktop machines, such as the Mac Pro.

      But I heard some cool people at the Pitchfork Music Festival saying that Apple products aren't cool any more, so I won't be buying any new ones.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    14. Re:You know what? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      For myself, I never really saw Apple as "cool", but I couldn't help but notice that they do make some nice offerings. I've had an iPhone 4 for a while (when it was the best phone on the market - then Galaxy S2 stole that crown). I have a Macbook Air and a retina iPad, and I've bought a Mac Mini and another iPad for my mom - again, not because they're cool or anything, but because they were the best choices for my requirements.

      These days, though, looking at what Apple does, I can't help but agree that I'll have to abstain from Apple purchases from now on, much as I wanted to buy the new retina Macbook. Reason being that Apple is the only company on the market today that doesn't try to abuse the patent system just for profit (as everyone else does, skimming some bucks from competitor sales when they can), but seems to be determined to abuse it for complete dominance - outright denying their competitors the use of the most basic features they have patents for.

      I don't much like the whole situation with patents in general, but with established unspoken rules of the game, it doesn't interfere all that much with my ability to choose - it may make some of them more expensive then really necessary - say, I like Samsung phones, and part of their cost is MS licensing fees - but I can still buy a Samsung phone if I want to. If Samsung starts to suck feature-wise, I can go buy HTC, or Moto, or whatever. But Apple doesn't play the game by the rules. They want me to only have one choice, that choice being an Apple device. I despise that on philosophical grounds, but, more importantly, I despise it because it has a very direct and pragmatic effect - I've replaced my iPhone with something else back in the day for a reason, and the reason is that it doesn't do what I expect my phone to be able to do.

      And at that point, I can only say "fuck you, Apple".

    15. Re:You know what? by lilfields · · Score: 1

      Microsoft has tried to do this, somewhat failing. "The beta test is over."

    16. Re:You know what? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      And this, kids, is a prime example of projection.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    17. Re:You know what? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      I own an iPhone because it is a nice piece of hardware with a nice interface. My jailbroken 4S is simply better in terms of performance and flexibity than any of the android offerings to date, hands down.

      That's fine. I'm glad you like it. As long as you understand that it's not at all cool.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    18. Re:You know what? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Microsoft has tried to do this, somewhat failing. "The beta test is over."

      Nobody's going to listen to Microsoft. But they'll listen to me because I am cool.

      These people are much too groovy to let some corporate marketing program tell them what's cool, but they are extremely sensitive to having a cool person tell them what's NOT cool. They might not listen to me regarding what IS cool, but it's a whole lot easier to convince them that something is so 2005.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  16. Florian Mueller by chrb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Worth pointing out that this article was written by Florian Mueller of "Top Anti-Android Blogger Florian Mueller is Being Paid by Oracle" fame. He has been proven wrong before, and so we should probably wait for some better reporting on this story. That said, I would say he is right about the ban on Samsung extending to third parties that "act in concert" with Samsung to continue selling the Galaxy Tab 10.1, but he is wrong that the ban applies to really independent third parties who are selling the Tab 10.1 without "acting in concert" with Samsung (i.e. third party importers etc.). To stop those guys, Apple needs to take them to court.

  17. I don't mean to take Apple's side in this, but.... by mark-t · · Score: 1

    I think that they are actually right about the scope of the injunction. If I remember correctly, the prohibition was against *ANY* sales of the device within the USA, and retailers should have probably returned any devices that they had.

    If somebody else has specific information to indicate otherwise, please feel free to correct me.

  18. Re:Pretty Soon... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Who gives a rat's ass? I may go looking for a Samsung. Screw Apple, and screw the judges too. Whatever happened to the concept of free market?

    Oooops, my bad. The market is only free if the rich sumbitches agree to make it free.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  19. Re:Pretty Soon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Except for this part: Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung Telecommunications America, Inc., its officers, directors, partners, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, subsidiaries, and those acting in concert with any of them

    Especially considering that there's no ban on Galaxy Nexus. Apple's going the way of 90's era Microsoft, and that's sad.

  20. Re:Pretty Soon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't recall Microsoft using the courts to uphold patents to prevent copycat competition.

  21. Re:Pretty Soon... by CBM · · Score: 1

    So by your logic, any company can avoid an impending injuction by setting up shell companies, and selling them vast quantities of infringing product prior to an injunction going into effect?

    If the shell companies are acting in concert with Samsung, then no.

  22. Re:I don't mean to take Apple's side in this, but. by mark-t · · Score: 2

    Did the injunction specifically refer to that? From what I remember, the injunction used language to the effect of "barring all U.S. Galaxy Tab sales", and was not directed at any particular entity.... just general prohibition against sale of the device anywhere within the the US. I would hope that if somebody knows otherwise, they can refer me to the specific text of the ruling that indicates it.

  23. Re:Pretty Soon... by mark-t · · Score: 1

    The prohibition is against *sales*, not against purchasing. If you do purchase one within the USA, then you have not violated the injunction, but I believe the one who sold it to you would have.

  24. Re:I don't mean to take Apple's side in this, but. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung Telecommunications America, Inc., its officers, directors, partners, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, subsidiaries, and those acting in concert with any of them who are banned from selling, importing, making and using gTabs in US.

    "Using" part is funny, will Apple next conduct searches at Samsung's officers, directors, employees etc. homes to enforce the injunction in full? "He's taking the Tab from his desk drawer... He's turning it on! Team Bravo, move out!"

  25. Re:I don't mean to take Apple's side in this, but. by mark-t · · Score: 1

    But aren't retailers that sell the device "acting in concert" with them?

  26. Re:Pretty Soon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Except for this part: Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung Telecommunications America, Inc., its officers, directors, partners, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, subsidiaries, and those acting in concert with any of them

    Especially considering that there's no ban on Galaxy Nexus. Apple's going the way of 90's era Microsoft, and that's sad.

    Retailers are considered partners.

  27. Re:Pretty Soon... by phoomp · · Score: 1

    I have a Samsung Galaxy tablet that I'm planning to sell on Kijiji. Am I prohibited from doing this?

  28. Re:Pretty Soon... by fredprado · · Score: 1

    If it cannot be proved any ownership relation between the two, yes.

  29. Re:Pretty Soon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Except there is no injunction against the Nexus, just the Tab 10.1

    Except there was http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/06/30/028234/sale-of-galaxy-nexus-banned-in-the-us.

  30. Re:Is this just a brilliant step in the plan.. by Dewin · · Score: 1

    I'm fairly certain these are hardware patents, but it's still just as ludicrous.

    --
    Of course nobody reads the FAQ! If people read the FAQ, the Questions wouldn't be so Frequently Asked.
  31. unfortunately by k(wi)r(kipedia) · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The USA, with its abyssmal right wing social and economic policies will mean the USA will fall to second rate status in the world. By then China, Brazil, Korea, India, etc will grow wise to this lame "intellectual property" scam [...]

    Unfortunately, it appears as if some of the countries you've mentioned are suffering from even more regressive political and economic policies. Take for instance, Korea. Samsung dominates Korea in a manner that would put shame any claims that Microsoft or Apple are monopolies. China's government and private sector partnerships make US defense contractors seem like angels. And note how the income disparity between China's billionaires and the peasant poor is greater than that of the US.

  32. Re:I don't mean to take Apple's side in this, but. by BradleyUffner · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But aren't retailers that sell the device "acting in concert" with them?

    I'f I buy 1000 widgets from you, then 1 month later turn around and sell those widgets in my store, how am I acting in concert with you? Our transaction ended completely as soon as I handed you the money and you handed me the widgets.

  33. Re:Pretty Soon... by MachDelta · · Score: 1

    Not unless you're owned by Samsung.

  34. Re:Pretty Soon... by mark-t · · Score: 1

    "Selling inventory you've already paid for is not working in concert with the manufacturer."

    Are you sure about that? Most significantly, as long as the retailer is permitted to return their inventory for a refund, I'm not sure how it can be argued that they *AREN'T* acting in concert with them.

    A return policy, after all, is a type of contract between the buyer and seller... in absence of any such return policy, however, yeah... I'd agree that they aren't acting in concert with Samsung.

    I have no appreciation at all for what Apple is doing here, but based on the how the injunction is worded, I'm pretty sure that they are legally right here, and retailers probably should have returned their inventory to Samsung, since they would be prohibited from selling them. When Samsung wins this case (and I'm confident that they will, actually), they'll claim the $96 million that Apple posted to get the injunction, which is the amount the court deemed sufficient.

  35. Re:I don't mean to take Apple's side in this, but. by mark-t · · Score: 2

    As long as we have an arrangement where you can return any unsold widgets back to me for a refund, I'm not sure how you would *NOT* be acting in concert with me. If I did not stipulate such a return policy with you, however, then yeah... we wouldn't be acting in concert.

    Retailers can, typically, return unsold product back to the distributor.

  36. Re:Pretty Soon... by dark12222000 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Wrong. Retailers are almost always independent parties who are simply reselling a product. The transaction with the OEM is already completed and any business has been tidied up. Once I have the product, I am free to sell it independently unless I have an injunction placed against me directly.

  37. Re:Pretty Soon... by dark12222000 · · Score: 2

    Return policy in this case falls under as an extension of Uniform Commercial Code, and while it may be listed in the contract, the primary body of the contract has most likely already been executed.

  38. Re:Pretty Soon... by DeadCatX2 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Except there is no injunction against the Nexus, just the Tab 10.1

    Except there was http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/06/30/028234/sale-of-galaxy-nexus-banned-in-the-us.

    Keyword: was. Your slashdot article is dated June 30. This engadget article is dated July 6. So, as GP said, there is no ban on the Nexus.

    http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/06/samsung-gets-temporary-stay-on-galaxy-nexus-ban/

    --
    :(){ :|:& };:
  39. I wonder when by kilodelta · · Score: 1

    Google is going to start flexing it's patent muscle and sue Apple out of existence in the wireless market. When you look at the purchase of Motorola Mobility that was the ONLY reason Google bought it, a trove of thousands of patents relating to mobile telephony. Because remember, the first player in cellular was Motorola.

    1. Re:I wonder when by lilfields · · Score: 1

      False, Google's Motorola has actively pursued patent suits against Microsoft.

    2. Re:I wonder when by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Motorola wasn't "Google's Motorola" until less than two months ago. The last Motorola lawsuit against MS I heard about was filed well before that, but I could have missed something.

  40. and what will it be like when the chaebol and the CPC start wielding intellectual property law internationally?

    it will exactly as you describe, now pointed at weaker countries and trading partners, with the same brutality

    so then you agree with me on the absurdity and evil of intellectual property law, right?

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  41. Anti-competition patent scams affect us all by walterbyrd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't kid yourself. These actions by Apple drive up prices, kill innovation, and limit choice.

  42. Re:I don't mean to take Apple's side in this, but. by Rockoon · · Score: 1

    Manufacturer sells to retailer. Retailer sells to you. You dont like it but you know I will so you sell to me. Obviously your sale to me is "in concert" with the manufacturer because you could have returned it, right? right? oh, no? Even though you have an implied legal contract with the manufacturer (as defined and mandated to exist by law regardless of what you may or may not have signed), you arent their partner?

    Stop being a ridiculous fanboy. Logic isnt hard. Try fucking using some.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
  43. I think FRAND will prevent this by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    That is what Apple advocates keep screaming.

  44. Re:Pretty Soon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Ya don't say.

  45. Re:I don't mean to take Apple's side in this, but. by oakgrove · · Score: 1

    Retailers can, typically, return unsold product back to the distributor.

    Depends on how big you are. If you have a sign on your front door that happens to say WalMart or BestBuy then you're good. Otherwise, prepare to get laughed at.

    --
    The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
  46. Re:I don't mean to take Apple's side in this, but. by mark-t · · Score: 1

    First of all, I do not argue that any third party sales are "in concert" with the manufacturer. only that *I*, not my sales, could be said to be "in concert" with the manufacturer if I have any sort of arrangement with the manufacturer to return any unsold items to them for a refund.

  47. Re:complete boycott of apple by Teun · · Score: 1

    Vive le tarte aux pommes!

    --
    "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
  48. Re:I don't mean to take Apple's side in this, but. by mark-t · · Score: 2

    If there's no opportunity for returning unsold product back to the distributor, then I'd fully agree that the distributor and the retailer are not acting "in concert" with eachother. Even if the retailer offers a return policy themselves, note that A having a contract with B and B having a similar contract with C does not imply that A has a contract with C. So third parties are safe, as are any independent sales.

  49. Re:Apple Sends Cops To Seize Galaxy Nexus by Starfleet+Command · · Score: 3, Informative

    You realize this link is a satire/joke site right????

  50. Re:Pretty Soon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Except for the part were it forbids Samsung to do that. If a store has already purchased inventory they are free to sell what they've got. Just like if I had one I'd still be free to sell it to someone else.

  51. Fuck off Apple by ronmon · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't buy your crap if it was the last...

    Oh wait. I would buy your crap if it was the last choice, but not if there was a single other choice.

  52. Apple calls Samsung “pirates, thieves, count by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    July 14, 2012: Samsung’s request for expedited Galaxy Nexus hearing accepted, Apple groups them with “pirates, thieves and counterfeiters”

    http://phandroid.com/2012/07/14/samsungs-request-for-expedited-galaxy-nexus-hearing-accepted-apple-groups-them-with-pirates-thieves-and-counterfeiters/

  53. What isn't made offshore? by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    Please list US computer devices which are entirely developed in the USA. Thank you.

    1. Re:What isn't made offshore? by CompMD · · Score: 1

      Garmin still believes in doing work in the USA.

      All of their consumer electronics products for sale in the USA (except nuvis) were designed and developed in the USA. (Kansas, Arizona, Oklahoma) Nuvis have about 5% development in Taiwan, 95% in Kansas.

      All avionics are designed, developed, and manufactured entirely in the USA. (Kansas, Arizona, Oregon)

      The vast majority of the Marine devices are designed and developed in the US, with some assistance from the UK.

      Most in-dash car stereo work is done in the USA, but out of the necessity to work with car stereo manufacturers, there is development done in Taiwan as well.

  54. Three words: by Issarlk · · Score: 4, Informative

    Fuck you Apple!

  55. Join #BoycottApple on plus.google.com by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    This has been trending for some time.

  56. This article is not by Florian Mueller by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    At least it does not look that way to me. Or were you responding to somebody else?

    Apple sent takedown letters to retailers selling Galaxy Nexus and Galaxy Tab 10.1

    By Adi Robertson on July 13, 2012 03:31 pm

    http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/13/3157505/apple-retailer-galaxy-nexus-tab-10-1-takedown-order

    1. Re:This article is not by Florian Mueller by Asic+Eng · · Score: 2

      The last link to fosspatents.com - that's Florian Mueller's blog. The "FOSS" label serves to give him the appearance of an independent party, while he is in fact a paid lobbyist.

  57. Re:Pretty Soon... by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

    no they just threaten to do so then buy you out if you refuse to pay them and call their bluff. just look at the nook case. or they fund other people and have them do it for them see nokia suing android manufacturers, and sco (funded by Microsoft) suing the Linux community.

    --
    ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
  58. Re:I don't mean to take Apple's side in this, but. by Rockoon · · Score: 1

    only that *I*, not my sales, could be said to be "in concert" with the manufacturer if I have any sort of arrangement with the manufacturer to return any unsold items to them for a refund.

    You seem to have missed the point. You already do have an arrangement with both the manufacturer and the retailer to return items that you purchased. Whenever Mark-T .. lowly consumer .. buys anything, he enters into a legal contract with both the retailer and manufacturer, because the law states quite clearly that Mark T has entered such a contract.

    In fact, everyone in Mark-T's household also enters a contract (his wife, for instance) when Mark-T purchases something, even if they did not approve of the purchase. If Mark-T should not be available to execute the terms of the contract, other members of his household may do so.

    Its called the Uniform Commercial Code, and nearly everyone in the country is bound by it.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
  59. Re:I don't mean to take Apple's side in this, but. by mark-t · · Score: 1

    I have no contract with the manufacturer unless the manufacturer is offering me a return policy.

    Return policies are a wise PR move, they encourage more confidence in the products offered, but they are not required by any laws in all jurisdictions. Where they are, there would be no implied contract, since the return policy is a consequence of the law and not an arrangement made between purchaser and seller.

  60. Doubt it by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    If you want to go into fantasy land. How would the asian tigers react to protectionist measures from the US? Maybe ban Apple from ALL purchases? Oops, Apple out of business because Asia is essential to the tech industry? Maybe block US sales? US on its knees because it suddenly notices that its military hardware is all based on Asian parts?

    Pure fantasy of course, but so is yours I am afraid, these things don't happen in real life because Apple is a very small player in the real men's world and Apple would most certainly NOT be told by anyone that if they were to try such a move, things wouldn't go very bad for them. Or do YOU really think the powers that be want a real trade war? Don't think for a second that the trade wars you read about are real. They are just very carefully negotiated deals to give each side some headlines while neither side is really hurt. If this wasn't the case, those trade disputes wouldn't drag on for decade after decade.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  61. RIAA-MPAA by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    Apple...the NEW version of the MPAA-RIAA Apple has just about reached the end of its "fame" I think even fanbois are about fed up with them.

  62. Re:Pretty Soon... by petsounds · · Score: 1

    Yeah...keep telling yourself that, as they stuff the cost of the phone into your contract.

  63. Re:Pretty Soon... by Asic+Eng · · Score: 1

    No, there is no restrictions for you doing that. You would have to work together with Samsung in some fashion - e.g. importing them from them from Korea .- in order to be impacted by that ban.

  64. Most, actually by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Apple's rise to prominence is because they managed to become a fashion company. Normally consumer electronics is quite price sensitive. You don't become the biggest charging premium pricing, consumers just won't have it, even if you are offering something that justifies the cost. However fashion doesn't work like that, expensive is ok, even good. People will pay more to be fashionable.

    Well that's what Apple did starting with the iPod. They didn't invent MP3 players, you could get them long before the iPod, however few people did. Like walkmen and so on only some people were interested. However Apple made them not a tech device, but a fashion accessory. You were cool if you owned one, complete with the white earbuds, cord hanging out in front to show you had one. Suddenly Shure and Etymotic had demand for white earbuds, something nobody had ever wanted before (because people wanted better sound but still the status symbol). People didn't buy MP3 players, they bought iPods because it was the fashionable thing.

    This continues. People buy Apple because they think it is cool to do. Some people buy it for other reasons, as some people have bought Apple in the past, but the majority buy it to be one of the "in crowd". We just saw this at work, one of the secretaries just had to have an iMac for her new computer. She could not give a coherent reason, particularly since all the software she needs is for Windows (sometimes Windows exclusively). Indeed it has Fusion on it and she basically uses Windows exclusively with it. But she had to have a Mac. The real reason was, of course, because the Mac is "cool" and a PC is not. There was no technical reason or business case for it (and indeed reasons not to do it) it was all about fashion.

    Apple is in a world of hurt the day that ends. When that day will be, who knows? It could be tomorrow, it could be in 500 years. However when it happens their profitability will take a massive hit. People will stop buying their devices not for any good reason, but just because they are no longer the cool thing to own.

    1. Re:Most, actually by lilfields · · Score: 1

      This is actually a very interesting perspective that I never thought about in regards to Apple's business model. A "Fad" business model if you will. I definitely think Apple is sort of running short on ideas lately, and people like Google and Microsoft are catching up or have even surpassed in some ways. I think Apple's biggest problem will be this: iOS is growing less flexible as it ages. They show new apps, but nothing innovative. Hardware is traditionally not very profitable, yet Apple has explosive growth, not due to its software margins, but because of its hardware's massive margins. Seeing Apple trot out this path will be interesting...same for Microsoft.

  65. Remember when... by lilfields · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hey guys, remember when some of you thought Apple was the good guys? That was real cute, you guys. When do we get an Apple borg icon?

    1. Re:Remember when... by leonbev · · Score: 1

      Exactly. When it comes to anti competitive behavior, Apple in 2012 is every bit as ruthless as Microsoft was in the late 1990's.

      If Microsoft still has a Borg icon, Apple should have one as well.

    2. Re:Remember when... by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Do Micorsoft still have a Borg icon? I remember it was replaced, but I can't remember what it is now.

    3. Re:Remember when... by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure an apple borg would work.

      Remember, we're on apple.slashdot.org right now, not the regular slashdot that nerds hang out on.

      From the way this subdomain of slashdot fosters shills and astroturfers for Apple, I sometimes get the feeling Apple might be paying the electric bill for the server apple.slashdot.org runs on.

  66. Re:Pretty Soon... by mark-t · · Score: 1

    Afaik, other than in jurisdictions that impose regional law-mandated return policies, a return policy is at the discretion of the seller, barring certain specific issues such as the item not being fit for sale. If a seller offers a return for refund policy and you buy something from them, then you have entered an implied contract with them that terminates only when the seller determines that you can no longer return the purchase for a refund, for whatever reason (typically explicitly outlined in the return policy).

  67. Re:Pretty Soon... by qwerty+shrdlu · · Score: 1

    Samsung's lawyers are warmed up- and when the first shipment of iPhone5s reaches customs they will pounce.

  68. syndicate time by Nyder · · Score: 1

    Wonder when Apple is going to send over hire goons (thugs) to get their point across?

    --
    Be seeing you...
  69. Re:Jeezus F'ing Christ! by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    Humans are fucking retards. Humans are not Cool.

    I'm cool.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  70. Re:Pretty Soon... by camperslo · · Score: 1

    Even if committed to doing so, it is very likely that retailers haven't yet paid for the merchandise in inventory. Sometimes retailers have the right to return unsold goods, depending on the specific agreements in place. I suspect that some contract terms may be under a NDA, but perhaps some upper management from major retails chains can provide (post!) specifics as to the terms for Samsung distribution? There are many possible terms to contracts. The current issue is something that retailers might be able to treat similarly to the situation of a wide-scale manufacturing defect that requires returns. Without knowing the terms, we're only speculating about whether retailers must still pay for what they have received.

    When HP withdrew their tablets, many actually came back from the retail channel. Had the retailers sold them and had to pay at the previously contracted price, the retailers would have likely suffered large losses from selling at the announced deeply cut prices.

    Those interested in these products could look on the bright side, perhaps have some hope for them to appear with different firmware, or Apple to lose the case. Then not only would the products reappear unaltered, but Samsung would be paid damages from the bond Apple posted.

    I think most people here have pretty strong feelings about censorship or manipulation of the news. I'd hope that moderators avoid using the system as a way to vote their opinions, and try to stick with promoting the insightful/informative and demoting the disruptive. We're all only human, so sometimes it takes some effort to resist temptation to warp the process by treating it as voting. That degrades the quality of the site.

  71. But.... by Slutticus · · Score: 1

    But, since it's "not cool", and I own one anyway, doesn't that make me "cool" again? Kinda like those hipster faggots and their instagram app, fuck me, how uncool is that? But its cool 'cause it looks shitty. See?

    1. Re:But.... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      But, since it's "not cool", and I own one anyway, doesn't that make me "cool" again?

      No, life doesn't work that way, unfortunately. Desperation does not make you more attractive to the opposite sex, not bathing doesn't increase your manly appeal and what goes around does not come around.

      Kinda like those hipster faggots and their instagram app, fuck me, how uncool is that? But its cool 'cause it looks shitty. See?

      OK, maybe you're a little bit cool. But not because of the iPhone. That's still extremely uncool and makes you look like a douche. But don't get despondent because you're a survivor. I've got a fiver that says you're not using an Apple mobile device in 2014. I kinda have this sixth sense about people, see, and you've got the right attitude. And remember, I'll always be here for you.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.