$0.12*10000 = $1200. Still expensive though.

You are confused about the meaning of Industry Standard. An industry standard is not "something very common", an industry standard is something adhering to a very specific set of rules as specified by a Standards Body such as W3C, VESA, CEN or WSC. While Flash is not an industry standard.

Now, from what I can tell, the first part of that story is true – Google and many others have figured out ways to get around Apple’s default settings on Safari in iOS – the only browser that comes with iOS, a browser that, in my experience, has never asked me what kind of privacy settings I wanted, nor did it ask if I wanted to share my data with anyone else (I do, it turns out, for any number of perfectly good reasons). Apple assumes that I agree with Apple’s point of view on “privacy,” which, I must say, is ridiculous on its face, because the idea of a large corporation (Apple is the largest, in fact) determining in advance what I might want to do with my data is pretty much the opposite of “privacy.”

Then again, Apple decided I hated Flash, too, so I shouldn’t be that surprised, right?

[...]

I don’t know, but when I bought an iPhone, I didn’t think I was singing up as an active recruit in Apple’s war on the open web. I just thought I was getting “the Internet in my pocket” – which was Apple’s initial marketing pitch for the device. What I didn’t realize was that it was “the Internet, as Apple wishes to understand it, in my pocket.”

Does not make any sense to me. First the author claim that Apple should have actively asked him do define the security settings and because it did not Apple is somehow evil. No operating system ever can actively ask their users to set up everything to a microscopic level, there has to be a default somewhere. It would take days to get through all the settings on my computer. I would say "fuck this" after fifteen minutes of configuring panels where I left almost everything set to the default anyway.

How could Apple agree with your stance on privacy unless you tell Apple your privacy wishes? The author seems to be well versed in computers and smartphones, I am sure he could figure out how to tell Apple how his privacy should be managed.

Then he somehow thinks Flash is an industry standard. This is what Apple allows to run in mobile Safari and disallowing non-standard (arguably proprietary) third party extensions is not really how you stymie industry-standard practices.

I agree that that would have been a problem for Apple, however, due to exhaustion because Qualcomm paid Motorola for the chips used by Apple the license was already paid. Then Motorola re-negotiated their bilateral license with Qualcomm and now Motorola wants money from Apple for the time that Qualcomm had already paid, thus trying to get money twice plus some extra.

Me neither, but this link (found in other comments on this article) claims Motorola repeatedly declined payment from Apple.

It would be impossible at even 0.1% since there are 2987 patents in 1729 families. 2.25% will never fly, especially for a single patent (probably a patent family actually). An average licensing cost of 0.01% per family would be 17.29% of the cost of the device. There is no way 2.25% can be considered FRAND.

Well... It's sometimes hard to pay what one should when:

source

I'll take some number from my butt (definitions of my butt may vary, but in this context it is random site on internet).

1.186 billion mobile broadband subscribers.
Let's say that half of these are on a 3G chip that somehow requires the Motorola 3G license: 593 million.
If these devices sell for an average of $20 we would have 11,86 billion in sales for these devices.
If Motorola wants 2.25% of the sales of these devices that would mean $297 million, a very significant number considering it is a single patent of a large portfolio of 1729 patents (yes, one thousand seven hundred and twenty nine).

Imagine if each of these patents would warrant an average licensing cost of 0.1% rather than the 2.25% that Motorola wants, then we would look at a licensing cost of more than the sales price to license 3G technology for the device. 2.25% does not smell FRAND to me, but I am no patent lawyer, I only pretend I know stuff on the internet.

gig 1 |gig| noun
1 chiefly a light two-wheeled carriage pulled by one horse.
2 a light, fast, narrow boat adapted for rowing or sailing.

I too would like to know if it is half a boat or half a carriage.

My point exactly!

Record profits each year for the last seven years in a row. I wish I made failures like that!

Oh my, and so spins the wheel and we are back at the seven hundredth flamebait thread about whether Apple invents or not... *sigh*