Comment Have you seen the "iPhone 5" leaks? (Score 2) 738
It's a copy of the SGS2. They started the "na na nana na copycat copycat" war as a diversion.
It's a copy of the SGS2. They started the "na na nana na copycat copycat" war as a diversion.
pissed off customers
Actually, Apple is consistently one of the highest rated companies (very often the highest) in terms of customer satisfaction.
Apple's following seems to have a disproportionate number of irrational, fanatical disciples who truly "believe". I hold them in the same regard as scientologists or indeed, members of any cult. That they're "satisfied" is no big surprise.
I know you're joking but if I think about it, I'm forced to admit I would buy that game.
1. Buy Facebook stock
2.
No, wait...
It's also illegal to shout fire in a crowded theater
It is? Next time I'm in a crowded theater that's on fire I must remember not to shout "fire"
"makes MONEY" I don't know what happened to the m and the y, keyboard fart.
I am an advocate of organisations having a degree of responsibility for anything they intend to profit from - so I think Facebook should be party responsible for everything posted on Facebook, and organisations with Facebook pages should be partly responsible for anything posted on their pages.
What kind of twisted reasoning could possibly lead you to that conclusion?
I disagree wholeheartedly but I'm open minded enough to argue WHY you think anyone should be responsible for someone else's comments.
By your logic, Slashdot is (partly?) responsible for THIS comment? And yours? Where do you draw the line? Why should the fact that Slashdot (presumably) makes one off running the site make a difference, why the distinction whether it's for-profit or non-profit?
Of course! We've written an "interesting things" filter just for you. You'll never need to see anybody's post blaspheming against Apple again. But we were stopped from releasing it because Apple already had the patent "method of displaying only nice things that make me happy" so we can't let you use it.
When you have more money than God, prior art? Not a problem. Obviousness? Not a problem.
Yeah, that link totally helps here.
For a start, it shows how Samsung's design radically changed from F700 to Galaxy S (I mean, check it, icons are now in color AND there's color silver appearing on the border now). Also, their marking is incosistent, half of things they crossed out on F700 seems like were crossed just because nobody would bother to check what's written there (really, "The color black appears on the front of the deviceabove and below the gray rectangle and on the curved corners of the device." doesn't apply to F700?)
Now there's how specific are tablet related claims:
One question. Why did Apple themselves REMOVE the F700 from their filings?
Here's why:
Apple lawyer #1: Your honour, we'd like to draw your attention to the F700 which is clearly a copy of the iPhone
Apple lawyer #2: Errr... A moment your honour... [nudges lawyer 1] "(actually the F700 was before the iPhone 1)"
Apple lawyer #1: Your honour, we'd like to have the F700 excluded from these proceedings as it is not relevant
Because it is further proof that the patent system is not only damaged, but irrepairably broken. This will only speed up it's demise.
I'd like to see the ISPs MRTG graphs, in support of this claim. In theory, they should also have seen a very significant drop in traffic.
Otherwise, "Three strikes law in NZ doubles the number of people switching to Usenet, or using TOR, or other methods" might be more accurate...
The only think that astonishes me about this story, is that anybody is surprised by it.
The sweeping changes that took place post 9/11, and continue to take place, are delivering us inexorably into the stuff of fiction.
Surely they got it wrong, it should have been Island Records / Universal Music Group
Next up:
"Contributor creates world's stupidest headline with a keyboard"
Good day to avoid cops. Crawl to work.
