8 ms·

> But when the trial did happen every single accusation Apple made against Qualcomm turns out to false before they were quickly settled. Sorry, could you expou

by cglong 5y ago

> But when the trial did happen every single accusation Apple made against Qualcomm turns out to false before they were quickly settled. Sorry, could you expound on this a bit? I don't recall hearing about this.

homarp 5y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19678453 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19678453 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19679675 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19679675
ksec 5y ago
The best source is actually reading all that was shown in court, so many juicy details in all shape and form. Along with evidence that confirm or reshape your certain belief with each individuals as well as companies. The 2nd best I found was somehow from Cnet [1] from Shara Tibken. The link is a high level summary, her twitter account has many more information. And it was at that moment I learned, It wasn't the reporter's problem for fake news. I discovered most Reporter's Twitter account actually report more useful information with very little bias. They were actually doing their job, wonderful and brilliantly old fashioned way. What was the problem is a lot of these were editorialised in print or online in order to drive click rate. I was on Apple's side at first, although I knew their explanation of "Double Dipping" and Patents Percentage of a Devices were false. But I still gave them many benefits of doubt and that Qualcomm was over charging. But when all the figure was shown, Intel throw in the towel, the amount of Hypocrisy from Apple was far beyond anything I have seen. I seen then have gain tremendous respect for Qualcomm as a business and how professional they were in the whole account. [1] https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-and-qualcomm-settle-heres-what-it-means-for-your-next-iphone/ https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-and-qualcomm-settle-heres-wh...
- cglong 5y ago
  Thank you for the in-depth explanation! Will definitely dig further into this :)

by cglong 5y ago

homarp 5y ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19678453 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19678453 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19679675 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19679675

ksec 5y ago

The best source is actually reading all that was shown in court, so many juicy details in all shape and form. Along with evidence that confirm or reshape your certain belief with each individuals as well as companies. The 2nd best I found was somehow from Cnet [1] from Shara Tibken. The link is a high level summary, her twitter account has many more information. And it was at that moment I learned, It wasn't the reporter's problem for fake news. I discovered most Reporter's Twitter account actually report more useful information with very little bias. They were actually doing their job, wonderful and brilliantly old fashioned way. What was the problem is a lot of these were editorialised in print or online in order to drive click rate. I was on Apple's side at first, although I knew their explanation of "Double Dipping" and Patents Percentage of a Devices were false. But I still gave them many benefits of doubt and that Qualcomm was over charging. But when all the figure was shown, Intel throw in the towel, the amount of Hypocrisy from Apple was far beyond anything I have seen. I seen then have gain tremendous respect for Qualcomm as a business and how professional they were in the whole account. [1] https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-and-qualcomm-settle-heres-what-it-means-for-your-next-iphone/ https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-and-qualcomm-settle-heres-wh...

cglong 5y ago
Thank you for the in-depth explanation! Will definitely dig further into this :)