My understanding is its pretty rare for defendants to be awarded court costs. Probably particularly true when the accuser is an individual and the defendant is a company.
Sure it can. At the moment those of us with national health care systems are already paying for this research, plus the profits of big pharma. If we cut out the profiteers we're actually spending less than we do now.
Its more like car locks aren't effective so third parties start selling anti-theft devices. Car manufacturers begin to integrate anti-theft devices in their cars and its not as easy for third parties to sell their shit.
I think we probably need all the countries with national healthcare to band together and fund important research to completion. We'd all benefit by cutting out the middle men who are vastly inflating drug prices.
The point is for Samsung that they are not going to be dependent on Google. To use Android and ship Google's apps with it requires following Google's rules which can be onerous (for a manufacturer). Since Google's apps provide much of the functionality over AOSP (the AOSP versions are generally very sad limited functionality versions), if you wanted a full featured Android phone you're really having to go with Google.
But Samsung decided they didn't want to be beholden to Google, so for every Google app they license, they developed a version of their own. Should Google decide to screw Samsung over, Samsung would simply withdraw licensing Google's apps, use AOSP and ship their own versions.
Again, this is a lack of understanding of the market. If Samsung were to ship their next generation flagship without Google it would struggle to sell any devices. An analogy would be HP deciding to drop Windows in favour of Linux, their sales would fall over night and they'd have massive returns
And because of this, Samsung is also huge in the Android world, so Google cannot make huge changes to Android's licensing terms without risking Samsung's departure. And with a full suite of replacement apps, that would fork the Android ecosystem.
No, the issue Google has is that it must tread very carefully because of anti-trust laws.
If I call your parents and trick them into thinking I'm the IRS and take money from them - don't they have enough experience with paying taxes to be well informed?
I sometimes wonder if Korean manufacturers are mislead by their position home market into believing that there is a desire for them to duplicate everything already provided by Google & al. Is there really anyone outside of Korea interested in using LG Pay or Samsung Pay over Google? Similarly I struggle to envision the person interested in Bixby instead of Google Assistant.
Slashdot Mirror
What do you expect from a crappy tech blog? Real technology coverage? What is this, 2004?
My understanding is its pretty rare for defendants to be awarded court costs. Probably particularly true when the accuser is an individual and the defendant is a company.
I don't know about the rest of you, but when I go to Amazon I go to buy from Amazon. If I wanted ebay, I'd go there.
I think the issue is that they are like Kleenex in North America or Hoover in the UK where the brand is synonymous with the function.
are the only external buyers - the rest is a crypto circle jerk.
How does adding support for something else equate to phasing?
Here's the thing though.... Apple never had the data to begin with so they aren't actually wiping anything.
Quit jobs every couple years and get 6-figures.
They're removing support - phasing would require them to gradually remove it in steps.
Nah, as they became more the norm bachelor degrees have transitioned to be closer to the job market instead of preparation for masters & doctorates.
waaah I want more of my screen taken up by useless UI chrome.
Sure it can. At the moment those of us with national health care systems are already paying for this research, plus the profits of big pharma. If we cut out the profiteers we're actually spending less than we do now.
Its more like car locks aren't effective so third parties start selling anti-theft devices. Car manufacturers begin to integrate anti-theft devices in their cars and its not as easy for third parties to sell their shit.
Research also used to be done for moral reasons
I think we probably need all the countries with national healthcare to band together and fund important research to completion. We'd all benefit by cutting out the middle men who are vastly inflating drug prices.
There are alternative auto-injectors - http://www.consumerreports.org...
This is basically true for every decade. Nostalgia is the only reason people remember things fondly.
They were always unwatchable, we just didn't have other options.
Ice cold, like the reception on their last phone. /rimshot
Not much between a national security letter requiring Apple to give an agency an always on listening post.
It doesn't really say... are the imacs still using mobile CPUs?
I have some snake oil it cures cancer and makes you live 50% longer. Would you like to buy some?
The point is for Samsung that they are not going to be dependent on Google. To use Android and ship Google's apps with it requires following Google's rules which can be onerous (for a manufacturer). Since Google's apps provide much of the functionality over AOSP (the AOSP versions are generally very sad limited functionality versions), if you wanted a full featured Android phone you're really having to go with Google.
But Samsung decided they didn't want to be beholden to Google, so for every Google app they license, they developed a version of their own. Should Google decide to screw Samsung over, Samsung would simply withdraw licensing Google's apps, use AOSP and ship their own versions.
Again, this is a lack of understanding of the market. If Samsung were to ship their next generation flagship without Google it would struggle to sell any devices. An analogy would be HP deciding to drop Windows in favour of Linux, their sales would fall over night and they'd have massive returns
And because of this, Samsung is also huge in the Android world, so Google cannot make huge changes to Android's licensing terms without risking Samsung's departure. And with a full suite of replacement apps, that would fork the Android ecosystem.
No, the issue Google has is that it must tread very carefully because of anti-trust laws.
Seems odd they can regulate strictly medical devices, but wackos performing medical procedures can do whatever they want.
If I call your parents and trick them into thinking I'm the IRS and take money from them - don't they have enough experience with paying taxes to be well informed?
I sometimes wonder if Korean manufacturers are mislead by their position home market into believing that there is a desire for them to duplicate everything already provided by Google & al. Is there really anyone outside of Korea interested in using LG Pay or Samsung Pay over Google? Similarly I struggle to envision the person interested in Bixby instead of Google Assistant.