Unlikely since they haven't been vetted in a court so your speculative reply is well... exactly that. Until they are.
Because you think they didn't have their own lawyers look at the patents? No clearly companies like Casio, HTC, etc are just dumb. If only they had such brilliant slashtards as yourself in charge they clearly wouldn't make these dumb decisions with absolutely no research at all.
Feel free to repost once that has happened.
I don't need to. The fact that all these companies are licensing these patents rather than fighting them lends credence to the fact that these companies probably think these patents are valid. HTC, for example, isn't one to shy down from patent fights when they think they can win.
Or, you know, these companies might not be as stupid as Slashtards would want to believe and have vetted these patents and have come to the conclusion that they are valid? No, that couldn't possibly be it.
Being able to port it to the handset does not mean it will run WELL on the handset. As I said, the manufacturers will just say the new version will not run well on the hardware and they get out of the commitment.
Yeah, it's totally baffling that the more important part of the success of a business is how much profit they make rather than market share figures. Oh wait, it's not. If you were running a business would you rather have 20% market share and make 2/3rds of the profit for that entire product segment or would you rather be one of a half dozen or more companies who are fighting for the last 1/3rd of an ever shrinking profit pool?
I notice a trend among the Apple fanbois. It took a while to notice what was wrong but once I hit on the answer it was shocking.
So I'm an apple fanboi yet I don't own a single piece of apple hardware and on the other hand I've owned multiple Android phones the latest being a Galaxy S. Wait, what?
Lately you guys use Apple's insane profits (i.e. the fact they ruthlessly screw as many dollars out of you fans as possible) as a positive. You always cite sales figures, profits, and other things that stockholders of Apple should be approving of but a customer who isn't totally emotionally invested in the Cult of Mac shouldn't care so much for.
Why? Marketshare means dick if you're making a pittance in profit. This is the very reason why IBM and HP have left the PC business since you can have great market share but your profits are going to be razor thin. Whilst you fandroids crow about market share figures Apple is laughing all the way to the bank at the expense of the Android manufacturers who are making less and less in profit margins quarter over quarter. But hey, keep flailing around and calling me a fanboi when the only fanboi here is you.
Not that the the anti side doesn't gleefully note that Macs are a 10% niche,
Yes and both HP and IBM had far larger market share yet they both ditched their PC divisions. I'd rather have the 10% niche that pulls in a magnitude or more profits then the only that is 2-3 times larger yet is making 10 times less profits.
iPhone has been eclipsed by Android, etc.
Sure, as long as you lump all Android phones together which is dozens upon dozens of models vs 4 models of iPhone. On the other hand, there is no single Android model that has outsold the iPhone 3GS or 4.
but you don't see our side extolling the financial strength of Samsung or Dell or giddy about how Dell shafted us lately.
So your claim is they are going to intentionally run their customers off and for no reason break backwards compatibility which is the only reason.people stay on windows?S Suuuure they will.
Bullshit. They aren't going to deprecate the apis that form the backbone of the millions of applications that keep people on windows. There is no way it'll happen.
Have you seen the fact that apple makes 2/3rds of all profits taken from.global smartphone sales? They couldn't care less about android's market share when the android phone makers are fighting for meager scraps.
So basically it's even less free? Isn't the whole point of free software that it can be forked and modified without needing someone else's blessing to do so? It's ever amusing to hear fandroids come up with all sorts of ridiculous excuses your why this is a good thing that google is doing despite it going completely contrary to the claims of "freedom".
Considering my Samsung Vibrant only works on GSM, yes, it is important.
AT&T quit using the same frequencies after EDGE/2G.
Great, so I can get gimped speeds after being forced to become an AT&T customer? AWESOME!
So, if you don't mind turtle-like data speeds when using the same phone on the other's network, then it's really a moot point.
Yes, I do mind since I use 3G all the time so, no, it's not moot.
More than likely, if somebody switches carriers, they're going to get a new phone that works on all of their new carrier's frequencies anyways, whether or not they're GSM or CDMA.
That's the whole point: I DON'T WANT TO SWITCH CARRIERS. Nor do I want to have to buy another phone. I only just bought my Vibrant 10 months ago and I don't think I should have to choose between a shitty company who is going to give me shittier service at a higher price or having to spend another $300-$400 to get a comparable phone on another network.
Slashdot Mirror
Unlikely since they haven't been vetted in a court so your speculative reply is well ... exactly that. Until they are.
Because you think they didn't have their own lawyers look at the patents? No clearly companies like Casio, HTC, etc are just dumb. If only they had such brilliant slashtards as yourself in charge they clearly wouldn't make these dumb decisions with absolutely no research at all.
Feel free to repost once that has happened.
I don't need to. The fact that all these companies are licensing these patents rather than fighting them lends credence to the fact that these companies probably think these patents are valid. HTC, for example, isn't one to shy down from patent fights when they think they can win.
Or, you know, these companies might not be as stupid as Slashtards would want to believe and have vetted these patents and have come to the conclusion that they are valid? No, that couldn't possibly be it.
Let me take this opportunity to *facepalm* for you. My post was a sarcastic comment joking about this.
How many people know what version of Chrome they're running?
Anyone who ever opens the about dialog box?
Being able to port it to the handset does not mean it will run WELL on the handset. As I said, the manufacturers will just say the new version will not run well on the hardware and they get out of the commitment.
No.
Only for 18 months and the carriers still have a way to get out of it by saying the hardware can't handle the update.
Yeah, it's totally baffling that the more important part of the success of a business is how much profit they make rather than market share figures. Oh wait, it's not. If you were running a business would you rather have 20% market share and make 2/3rds of the profit for that entire product segment or would you rather be one of a half dozen or more companies who are fighting for the last 1/3rd of an ever shrinking profit pool?
I notice a trend among the Apple fanbois. It took a while to notice what was wrong but once I hit on the answer it was shocking.
So I'm an apple fanboi yet I don't own a single piece of apple hardware and on the other hand I've owned multiple Android phones the latest being a Galaxy S. Wait, what?
Lately you guys use Apple's insane profits (i.e. the fact they ruthlessly screw as many dollars out of you fans as possible) as a positive. You always cite sales figures, profits, and other things that stockholders of Apple should be approving of but a customer who isn't totally emotionally invested in the Cult of Mac shouldn't care so much for.
Why? Marketshare means dick if you're making a pittance in profit. This is the very reason why IBM and HP have left the PC business since you can have great market share but your profits are going to be razor thin. Whilst you fandroids crow about market share figures Apple is laughing all the way to the bank at the expense of the Android manufacturers who are making less and less in profit margins quarter over quarter. But hey, keep flailing around and calling me a fanboi when the only fanboi here is you.
Not that the the anti side doesn't gleefully note that Macs are a 10% niche,
Yes and both HP and IBM had far larger market share yet they both ditched their PC divisions. I'd rather have the 10% niche that pulls in a magnitude or more profits then the only that is 2-3 times larger yet is making 10 times less profits.
iPhone has been eclipsed by Android, etc.
Sure, as long as you lump all Android phones together which is dozens upon dozens of models vs 4 models of iPhone. On the other hand, there is no single Android model that has outsold the iPhone 3GS or 4.
but you don't see our side extolling the financial strength of Samsung or Dell or giddy about how Dell shafted us lately.
Good for you?
So your claim is they are going to intentionally run their customers off and for no reason break backwards compatibility which is the only reason.people stay on windows?S Suuuure they will.
Until the APIs the traditional desktop are no longer available
Which will be never.
Great but how many.pieces of hardware actually have that or even have it enabled? Seriously fud over tpm is getting old.
I'm.pretty sure most power users will use the traditional desktop which has no such restrictions. Our did you not bother to read the whole summary?
Eventually they will deprecate he older APIs
Bullshit. They aren't going to deprecate the apis that form the backbone of the millions of applications that keep people on windows. There is no way it'll happen.
Have you seen the fact that apple makes 2/3rds of all profits taken from.global smartphone sales? They couldn't care less about android's market share when the android phone makers are fighting for meager scraps.
So basically it's even less free? Isn't the whole point of free software that it can be forked and modified without needing someone else's blessing to do so? It's ever amusing to hear fandroids come up with all sorts of ridiculous excuses your why this is a good thing that google is doing despite it going completely contrary to the claims of "freedom".
Are we ignoring the fact that most if the ultra wealthy inherited their money and didn't actually do anything to earn it?
Yeah it's such a "fuck rich people" move that it's supported by a number of billionaires.
Is GSM really that important?
Considering my Samsung Vibrant only works on GSM, yes, it is important.
AT&T quit using the same frequencies after EDGE/2G.
Great, so I can get gimped speeds after being forced to become an AT&T customer? AWESOME!
So, if you don't mind turtle-like data speeds when using the same phone on the other's network, then it's really a moot point.
Yes, I do mind since I use 3G all the time so, no, it's not moot.
More than likely, if somebody switches carriers, they're going to get a new phone that works on all of their new carrier's frequencies anyways, whether or not they're GSM or CDMA.
That's the whole point: I DON'T WANT TO SWITCH CARRIERS. Nor do I want to have to buy another phone. I only just bought my Vibrant 10 months ago and I don't think I should have to choose between a shitty company who is going to give me shittier service at a higher price or having to spend another $300-$400 to get a comparable phone on another network.
First, it won't form a monopoly.
So what other GSM provider is there for someone to switch to who doesn't want to be forced to be an AT&T customer or to have to buy a brand new phone?
Eliot Spitzer was never a member of congress. He was the Attorney General of New York and then the Governor.
GSM is a more popular format worldwide because it is not patent-encumbered.
So it's not patent encumbered but Nokia sued Apple over GSM patents? Oh and this lack of patents was why Qualcomm Sued Nokia over GSM patents in 2005 as well, right? Are you an idiot, or what?
Or you could be talking to someone and be looking up something relevant to your phone call.
They'll get $3 billion in cash, free wireless spectrum and reduced charges for calls that goes over AT&T's network.
T-Mobile would be worse off without a merger since they are treading water as it is.
Rejection by regulators would leave AT&T liable to pay Deutsche Telekom $3 billion in cash, to give T-Mobile USA wireless spectrum, and to reduce charges for calls into AT&T’s network, a package valued at as much as $7 billion, Deutsche Telekom has said.
So actually T-Mobile will win a big concession if this falls through.