Yes, really. Apple - a bunch of hypocrites that willfully infringe, and build their own patent portfolio to countersue rather than license. It's how the game is played, and the game itself is the problem. You can only really blame Apple for their pretensions to some kind of moral high ground, when they are more than smart enough to know better.
They license plenty of tech, and I'm not giving a company the moral high ground on anything, since companies have no morals. Regarding accusations of willful infringement and outright theft, you'll have to go to MS.
I will agree with you that the game is the problem.
Motorola is just one of their many victims. They happen to have many patented, original ideas on telephony that Apple stole when they came late into the phone business, far beyond the FRAND stuff - as you will see in the trial.
Apple stole none of them - they bought licensed chips and used them much more creatively. That's not stealing or infringement any more than buying a lawnmower and creating a hovercraft with the engine would be, or would you argue that because they are using the engine for personal conveyance, they now need to pay an additional percentage of the value of the hovercraft to the engine manufacturer?
There should be a single post per article that could be modded up to be the main response, and this should be it for this one. It succinctly states all concerns in 2 lines. Good job.
Apple ripping off Motorola? Really? I thought they just bought chips from licensed FRAND suppliers. Hint - Motorola, after being acquired by Google) filed lawsuits asking for a ridiculous license fee. Apple was willing to pay the standard and expected fee. Had Apple been smarter, they might have avoided the entire debacle (and finished off Google's phone aspirations) by buying Motorola themselves and immediately selling off the pieces and shuttering what was left, keeping the licenses for themselves.
So apart from the cellular chips, the rest of the iPhone is so unlike Motorola's crap phones pre-iPhone as to render further thought to the realm of the absurd. For reference, I owned 2 pre 2007 Motorola phones, and borrowed a Razr for a while. It's like comparing AM radio to a HDTV. They both receive signal transmissions and can give you sound, but the rest isn't really comparable.
There are already restrictions in place on.gov and.edu (easily circumvented in many cases). There was even some noise about.net being tightened a bit in the last couple years.
What on earth are you talking about?.gov and.edu are controlled by the US government, just like.mil.
It's standard MS marketing philosophy - if your current product is crap, show the masses something shiny. If that is surpassed or insufficient to stem the bleeding tide, pre-announce an even better product in an attempt to sow uncertainty and keep people on the sidelines until you can produce some POS that will be called whatever you promised but failed to deliver. In the meantime, the lack of growing sales stunts or decimates the competition, allowing MS to step in and remove the "failed" competitor. (See Chicago, Blackcomb, Longhorn for previous examples)
Their main problem this time around? They're attempting to take 3 battling titans (Apple, Google, and Samsung) on that have leapfrogged everything they have ever conceived, and there is considerable doubt whether they'll even be able to make a viable entry into the market. It's kind of like a Model T trying to compete in the Indy 500. (obligatory car analogy) MS is last century's software company. It took them 30 years to climb to the top, and it appears they'll take 10 years to fall down to a mere competitor. Make no mistake about it - MS is a shrinking company.
Take a group of people who choose to give up and die early in a given mortal challenge where others survive, that would be the ultimate example of a group that cannot be motivated.
Apple makes most of their money off their proprietary hardware.
This is a true statement - Apple is a hardware company first, so it would follow that they'll make most of their money off it.
They are not going to switch to a USB charging/connecting solution unless forced to (by the EU).
What USB charging piece are we talking about here? iPhones/iPads? Aren't they almost their own standard? But yes, I can see why you'd going with a standard USB connection is ok. Even though the doc connector provides a mount point which USB does not, and would break an entire suit of third party products.
You should be very very careful when burning your bridges. In general, don't burn a bridge that exists. Been there, done that, and I can honestly say non-existent bridges still burn very brightly. That particular boss, even if met later on, will be a reason to avoid whatever company he's with, as he gives lawyers and conmen a bad name.
The problem with Skype, which has been a problem from day one, is that Skype maintains logs of your conversations for at least 6 months. I wouldn't use Skype for anything that you wouldn't have an open conversation in a room crowded with your enemies. People need to stop assuming the internet is this magical place where everything is secure, since it's the exact opposite, and you have to seriously work at security, and that includes assuming any service you don't pay for logs everything, and even services you do pay for require extra scrutiny.
A question remains: will companies like Apple, who have used proprietary chargers and connectors for years despite the prevalence of the USB standard, adopt the new cable?
I can't imagine they will, even with their recent EPEAT flip-flop. What I can't figure out is if they are just trying to keep their products distinct or they don't like it when someone else has a really good idea or what. They've already chosen Thunderbolt as their new adapter of choice, and while they'll never use that for the iFamily of products (since so many people won't/can't buy machines with that connectivity), I can't imagine they'll cave to the USB standard now. I do hope I'm wrong though.
On a side note, does anyone know how many thunderbolt devices are actually available for consumer purchase at this point? Are any of them reasonably priced?
The EPEAT flip-flop has nothing to do with Apple's choices in connectors. Thunderbolt was not invented by Apple, nor was FireWire (IEEE 1394) for that matter. Though both are far better standards than USB, which is pretty much the bottom of the barrel spec these days, although it is fine for peripherals like keyboards, mice, and other input devices. So Apple is also not averse to other people's ideas. As for the 30-pin USB connector, that originally was a FireWire connector, but the PC market, which became the major iPod consumer, tended to have USB ports readily available, but not FireWire. As USB was sufficient, they swapped it out.
As for TBolt devices, the only reasonable one I'm aware of today is the Apple Cinema Display. I find the entire series of HD products to be a little high priced for my tastes, but not for the market they're in (RAID boxes primarily)
Trust me, exit interviews are an opportunity to see how high the BS really gets, and that's all they are. Treat them that way, and just string the HR tool along (you do know all the proper managerese slang, right?) Sometimes you can get them to offer you a nice raise, the one that would have kept you from looking in the first place. Other times, it's not worth your time, and you can just skip it, unless you're on the clock. In that case - be late, and leave early.
I opt out every time, just like I opt out of CT scans every time I visit a doc/dentist. I've had enough "optional" radiation, and there's no reason to subject myself to anymore, especially from a source that's not been vetted by science and available to me to review. There's no need to be more anon about this.
How do we know this? Because they've already done it successfully.
What's really needed, and would truly scare the pants off the current crop of robber barons, is a non-profit infrastructure company to come along and build municipal networks, and only manage and maintain the network piece with services being bought however the users want. I believe this could be done rather easily with today's tech, and be profitable for both the non-profit (meaning they could expand) and the service providers.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, really. Apple - a bunch of hypocrites that willfully infringe, and build their own patent portfolio to countersue rather than license. It's how the game is played, and the game itself is the problem. You can only really blame Apple for their pretensions to some kind of moral high ground, when they are more than smart enough to know better.
They license plenty of tech, and I'm not giving a company the moral high ground on anything, since companies have no morals. Regarding accusations of willful infringement and outright theft, you'll have to go to MS.
I will agree with you that the game is the problem.
Motorola is just one of their many victims. They happen to have many patented, original ideas on telephony that Apple stole when they came late into the phone business, far beyond the FRAND stuff - as you will see in the trial.
Apple stole none of them - they bought licensed chips and used them much more creatively. That's not stealing or infringement any more than buying a lawnmower and creating a hovercraft with the engine would be, or would you argue that because they are using the engine for personal conveyance, they now need to pay an additional percentage of the value of the hovercraft to the engine manufacturer?
I don't agree with mcgrew often, this might even be a first, but he hit this one square on the head and I can only agree.
There should be a single post per article that could be modded up to be the main response, and this should be it for this one. It succinctly states all concerns in 2 lines. Good job.
Apple ripping off Motorola? Really? I thought they just bought chips from licensed FRAND suppliers. Hint - Motorola, after being acquired by Google) filed lawsuits asking for a ridiculous license fee. Apple was willing to pay the standard and expected fee. Had Apple been smarter, they might have avoided the entire debacle (and finished off Google's phone aspirations) by buying Motorola themselves and immediately selling off the pieces and shuttering what was left, keeping the licenses for themselves.
So apart from the cellular chips, the rest of the iPhone is so unlike Motorola's crap phones pre-iPhone as to render further thought to the realm of the absurd. For reference, I owned 2 pre 2007 Motorola phones, and borrowed a Razr for a while. It's like comparing AM radio to a HDTV. They both receive signal transmissions and can give you sound, but the rest isn't really comparable.
Awww, you bought your low id on ebay, did you? How cute.
Actually grouping those together in a container for viewing purposes is the right answer.
I do believe Google started the entire shebang by ripping off Apple's designs, or so says the lawsuits.
Wrap in electrostatic bag after turning it off.
How about I find their intolerance disagreeable? They certainly don't accept how I view things, so why should they be given any slack whatsoever?
There are already restrictions in place on .gov and .edu (easily circumvented in many cases). There was even some noise about .net being tightened a bit in the last couple years.
What on earth are you talking about? .gov and .edu are controlled by the US government, just like .mil.
Um, nevermind, it's too late for them to do that with a straight face.
I thought they preferred poker faces....
It's standard MS marketing philosophy - if your current product is crap, show the masses something shiny. If that is surpassed or insufficient to stem the bleeding tide, pre-announce an even better product in an attempt to sow uncertainty and keep people on the sidelines until you can produce some POS that will be called whatever you promised but failed to deliver. In the meantime, the lack of growing sales stunts or decimates the competition, allowing MS to step in and remove the "failed" competitor. (See Chicago, Blackcomb, Longhorn for previous examples)
Their main problem this time around? They're attempting to take 3 battling titans (Apple, Google, and Samsung) on that have leapfrogged everything they have ever conceived, and there is considerable doubt whether they'll even be able to make a viable entry into the market. It's kind of like a Model T trying to compete in the Indy 500. (obligatory car analogy) MS is last century's software company. It took them 30 years to climb to the top, and it appears they'll take 10 years to fall down to a mere competitor. Make no mistake about it - MS is a shrinking company.
Take a group of people who choose to give up and die early in a given mortal challenge where others survive, that would be the ultimate example of a group that cannot be motivated.
Apple makes most of their money off their proprietary hardware.
This is a true statement - Apple is a hardware company first, so it would follow that they'll make most of their money off it.
They are not going to switch to a USB charging/connecting solution unless forced to (by the EU).
What USB charging piece are we talking about here? iPhones/iPads? Aren't they almost their own standard? But yes, I can see why you'd going with a standard USB connection is ok. Even though the doc connector provides a mount point which USB does not, and would break an entire suit of third party products.
You should be very very careful when burning your bridges. In general, don't burn a bridge that exists. Been there, done that, and I can honestly say non-existent bridges still burn very brightly. That particular boss, even if met later on, will be a reason to avoid whatever company he's with, as he gives lawyers and conmen a bad name.
The problem with Skype, which has been a problem from day one, is that Skype maintains logs of your conversations for at least 6 months. I wouldn't use Skype for anything that you wouldn't have an open conversation in a room crowded with your enemies. People need to stop assuming the internet is this magical place where everything is secure, since it's the exact opposite, and you have to seriously work at security, and that includes assuming any service you don't pay for logs everything, and even services you do pay for require extra scrutiny.
A question remains: will companies like Apple, who have used proprietary chargers and connectors for years despite the prevalence of the USB standard, adopt the new cable?
I can't imagine they will, even with their recent EPEAT flip-flop. What I can't figure out is if they are just trying to keep their products distinct or they don't like it when someone else has a really good idea or what. They've already chosen Thunderbolt as their new adapter of choice, and while they'll never use that for the iFamily of products (since so many people won't/can't buy machines with that connectivity), I can't imagine they'll cave to the USB standard now. I do hope I'm wrong though.
On a side note, does anyone know how many thunderbolt devices are actually available for consumer purchase at this point? Are any of them reasonably priced?
The EPEAT flip-flop has nothing to do with Apple's choices in connectors. Thunderbolt was not invented by Apple, nor was FireWire (IEEE 1394) for that matter. Though both are far better standards than USB, which is pretty much the bottom of the barrel spec these days, although it is fine for peripherals like keyboards, mice, and other input devices. So Apple is also not averse to other people's ideas. As for the 30-pin USB connector, that originally was a FireWire connector, but the PC market, which became the major iPod consumer, tended to have USB ports readily available, but not FireWire. As USB was sufficient, they swapped it out.
As for TBolt devices, the only reasonable one I'm aware of today is the Apple Cinema Display. I find the entire series of HD products to be a little high priced for my tastes, but not for the market they're in (RAID boxes primarily)
Trust me, exit interviews are an opportunity to see how high the BS really gets, and that's all they are. Treat them that way, and just string the HR tool along (you do know all the proper managerese slang, right?) Sometimes you can get them to offer you a nice raise, the one that would have kept you from looking in the first place. Other times, it's not worth your time, and you can just skip it, unless you're on the clock. In that case - be late, and leave early.
That would be before or after you've poured a small amount of sugar into the tank of their Ferrari?
70% transparent is noticeable, but generally a nice amount, especially on south/west facing windows.
Don't think either of those matter to the store.
I opt out every time, just like I opt out of CT scans every time I visit a doc/dentist. I've had enough "optional" radiation, and there's no reason to subject myself to anymore, especially from a source that's not been vetted by science and available to me to review. There's no need to be more anon about this.
Simple enough to solve - have employees in the store, child picks up a package and opens it, parent gets to buy it.
Parents need to be more mindful of their children.
that's one clever pussy.
How do we know this? Because they've already done it successfully.
What's really needed, and would truly scare the pants off the current crop of robber barons, is a non-profit infrastructure company to come along and build municipal networks, and only manage and maintain the network piece with services being bought however the users want. I believe this could be done rather easily with today's tech, and be profitable for both the non-profit (meaning they could expand) and the service providers.