Samsung is moving into the mobile network infrastructure market and hence is planing to become a competitor. This is probably the key for the dispute, Samsung will most likely use the IPR in other product segments than mobile phones only.

Ericsson has as well a 50% stake in ST-Ericsson, selling mobile platforms for manufacturers like Samsung. note, the S3 mini is based on an ST-Ericsson platform. Samsung has an own LTE platform as well. So Samsung is both a customer as a competitor to Ericsson in this area.

Yes, they do not compete on the mobile phones themselves but they do compete in all other areas. Stating this is only about the money or not is pure speculation. This is a rather complex situation.

Yes, let's build a cube.

This is not correct. BREIN is only allowed to submit Pirate Bay IPs and domain names. BREIN will get a fine if they submit non related IPs.

Why asking here? All info you need is on the web, why get confused by advice of users that probably at most have really used 2 tablets.
Bought a Sony myself, based on the info on the web and after holding it in my hands. I am happy with the form factor. Dont care about the otner specs as I bought the device for what it can, not for what it might do in the future (Hope for an ICS upgrade, but wont complain ifit doesnt happen. Didnt pay for it)

Enjoy your trip, try to enjoy it without any digital toys. They are overrated.

I'm a little ocnfused here. Nortel has bee na big company in the telecom buisiness and I'd assume that the majority of their patents are related in the field of Telecom Networks and Radio infrastructure.

Why does eveybody assume the patents sold recently are related to Android? What did Nortel do so that it was a buisiness case for them to have a strong Android portfolio?

I understand Apple wanting a piece of the cake, as they ship terminals and therefore could use radio technology for protection. But Google? They are not shipping terminals so why would they care.

Anybody who can explain this?

I really hope you are right.

The other scenario is even more scarry. In order to be hired for that new job, you are required to have at least 100 friends and a wall full of messages.

Sounds strange? It already happend with the credit rating. You are forced to have debt in order to get a positive rating.

> I think my problem is that I don't trust any of the above.

And therefore you should thrust them all.

This article reads like a commercial without any scientific background w.r.t. the algorithms used. They even state it does not perform as well as other available programs.

Still, interested giving the game a try? It is really simple.

Start here to learn the rules: http://playgo.to/iwtg/

Like the problem solving, this is a good site for problems: http://goproblems.com/ Note, 30kyu problems are the easiest, then 25kyu etc. Hardest are the dan problems. (Believe me, they are really difficult)

Want to play against the computer? GnuGo is your friend> http://www.gnu.org/software/gnugo/gnugo.html

Playing against real oponents on the web, there are 2 options: Turn-based (the slow progress variant) or real-time. I can recommend for the turn-based variant Dragon Go Server and Online Go Server: http://www.dragongoserver.net/ http://www.online-go.com/

Personally, I'm not into real-time, but KGS is an alternative: http://www.gokgs.com/ Note, people might not always be in the mood for chatting here.

Getting hooked, try to find a local club or check for players in your neighbourhood: http://igolocal.net/

Have fun.

It is rather trivial to change the keybord of a laptop. You might be able to order one for your brand for quite a small sum. Otherwise go to a local shop and check with them if they can help out. My experience is the smaller ones are willing to order a specific version for you and exchange the keyboard.

Note, local shops often have local keyboards in stock as there are always customers requesting English versions which they replace.

Good luck.

COTS != EOL != availability.

Going to COTS is in general a good thing, but any respectable company will focus on End of Life, Availability and MTBF when going for COTS. Those are not mutual exclusive.

Seems management approving the PS3 solution without having a solid contract with Sony should be fired on the spot.

> Part of being able to write good software is actually understanding how computers think.

Time for a Dijkstra quote: The question of whether Machines Can Think... is about as relevant as the question of whether Submarines Can Swim.

I am more confused by people mixing b (bit) and B (Byte).

The implementation of this all is left to the owners of the IPR. 3GPP only wants to ensure that nobody can block others from implementing the specification. Guess it is up to the local courts to decide what is fair.

Without having insight, I assume that in this case the discussion is more about the value estimation of the IPR portfolios. My guess is that Nokia does not consider the Apple portfolio as very valuable for them as the only need a part of the Apple IPRs.

And as an other poster pointed out, the discussion could be as wel regarding a per-unit fee based on sales price. As Apple is into deals with operators (keeping initial price low) they might not like Nokia going for the secondary payments.

Again, all is guessing. We will need to wait.

3GPP includes as well the original GSM (2G, phase 1) specification and my interpretation therefore is that patents related to GSM phase 1 fall under RAND as well.

GSM standardization activities started in 1982 (GSM == Groupe Spécial Mobile). In 1989 the responsibilities were transferred to ETSI and in 1990 Phase 1 was completed. That means, the original GSM technologies should be patent free (20 year).

3GPP initially copied the ETSI specifications and started working with that as a basis.

The GSM Association you refer to is according my knowledge not working on any technical standardization. They seem to be more operator focused.