First mention of patent exhaustion I've seen in this thread at my threshold.
I believe what happened was Apple bought Qualcomm's chipset to implement wireless and Samsung had an agreement with Qualcomm regarding the licensing of those chips. Samsung basically changed the agreement so that Apple was not properly licensed like every other company which used those chips.
Apple has been evil on Slashdot for a long time.
For some, it was what they did to Franklin.
What they did to Franklin... are you joking? The Apple II ROMS are not public domain so I don't see how you can say that Franklin should have been able to copy them. Franklin was free to create their own computer but they took the easy road of waiting for someone else to do it for them.
For others, it was how the screwed over Apple records where they allowed Apple to use their name with the agreement that they never go into the music business. (They are now big in the music business with iTunes.) There are lots of reasons Apple is evil. The Apple vs Samsung thing is only the most recent reason.
Make up your mind. If we're going to enforce trademarks then we should probably enforce patents while we're at it. Apple Inc. bought the Apple trademark and licenses it to Apple Corp. which isn't quite as sinister a story as you're implying.
All those things are artifacts of how crappy java is, in order to get anything done you need a metric ton of framework crap slapped on
A C++ developer wouldn't necessarily embed a webserver into his code, instead expecting to reuse the existing web server infrastructure.
I'll never understand why anyone thinks that having a large framework available is bad? Just because they supply you with a framework doesn't mean you have to use any of it at all.
Saying that java is crappy because it uses libraries but then you proceeding to list libraries for C++ doesn't make sense. We don't develop green screens of text anymore... there's nothing wrong with using libraries or the best tool for the job.
most are academics who use Macs out of habit or the UNIX heritage, or simply because they're being pretentious twats and want to look better than everyone else.
<sarcasm>I'm typing this from a mac right now and I can assure you I don't give a shit what anyone else thinks about my os just so long as they know that their's sucks.</sarcasm> But seriously, couldn't you just write your say without throwing that irrational hatred in?
What are those FRAND terms which EVERY OTHER PHONE MAKER pays anyway? I don't think they've ever mentioned what they are exactly because they probably vary from company to company and sometimes involve cross patent licensing (not exactly sure so this may be gross speculation). I think paying 2.25% to every single company (Motorola isn't the only company who added patents) involved in phone standards would put you over 100% or at least make it impossible to sell a phone without taking a loss.
But yes, you're correct, Apple refused to pay what Motorola asked but at the same time you may not know the entire truth.
Your dates are right, but your descriptions are wrong. The Apple ][ was sold as a fully assembled unit in June of '77. The cases has defects, the hand-sanding you mention, so they were retooled as of December of '77.
Note the description in this story... the TRS-80 was introduced in August 1977. The machines weren't delivered until the end of December 1977. This would be half-a-year after the Apple ][ which was not a kit and therefor, the first consumer PC.
I've been thinking about replacing the 3 year old Mac Pro that I use for music production with a new one,
...
I've just decided Apple products are no longer cool.
Since you're using a computer for real work maybe it should be about the software and hardware rather than what's cool.
Really? If you think Samsung is some kind of angel then you're sadly mistaken because they've demanded their fair share of danegelds - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung#Price_cartels
And yet Israel still treats their Palestinian neighbors better than most of the nearby contries treat their Palestinian refuge camps. Naturally, the same people who blame the former on "teh Evil Jews" also blame the latter on "teh Evil Jews" (as well as the national debt, the behavior of Hollywood, and price of gas
A caged bird is still caged. I would challenge you to get off your high horse and live in the world which they do.
It's anti-semitic in the sense that it's usually mentioned as part of some larger anti-semitic rant.
As others have pointed out, nothing anti-semitic was said so this is basically the same as Godwin's law here.
On the other half of your comment - if Palestinians were launching rockets at my neighborhood school, I would have been vigorously advocating a Carthaginian peace myself, so I can only admire Israel's restraint in the circumstances.
Israel doesn't show any restraint at all. Basically they're attacked by crude rockets of questionable effectiveness and they respond with military grade weapons. The number of Israelis killed by these rockets since 2001 is 31. I'm pretty sure that they've killed more innocent Palestinians than that.
People are probably so up in arms about it because Google was taken to court over privacy issues in Buzz and the outcome of that was that Google agreed that they wouldn't make any future privacy misrepresentations.
I personally have my browsers set to block 3rd party and advertiser cookies so if some company were to put a cookie on my machine when I was trying my damnedest to not allow them to, well, that would make me a little miffed. The thing that gets me is all the companies doing this make me agree to a eula to use their site but when I ask them to obey the settings I've made on my machine they conveniently ignore them.
"No matter where you go, there you are..." -- Buckaroo Banzai
