4 ms·

His quote was "at this distance." And, without providing the distance specified, the article proceeds to blow the quote out of proportion. Shitty reporting any

• biot 13y ago
  The Reuters article (which Gizmodo re-blogspammed) says the distance was 10 feet: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/14/us-apple-samsung-lawsuit-idUSTRE79C79C20111014 http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/14/us-apple-samsung-l... "Koh frequently remarked on the similarity between each company's tablets. At one point during the hearing, she held one black glass tablet in each hand above her head, and asked Sullivan if she could identify which company produced which. 'Not at this distance your honor,' said Sullivan, who stood at a podium roughly ten feet away."
  • rednukleus 13y ago
    Something is very fishy about that incident. They aren't even the same aspect ratio. Either Koh held them at a strange angle or Sullivan has a problem with his sight. I don't believe that anybody who is familiar with the devices would not be able to tell them apart at 10 feet. The Samsung even has SAMSUNG written on the front, and Apple have a giant Apple icon on the back.
    • Kequc 13y ago
      The issue is as you would guess a strategic one. If he had answered the question definitively and been correct it wouldn't have aided his case, as it would have only reaffirmed what already was his case. If however for any reason he got it wrong, he would be fired and probably never work again. People's brains aren't that reliable. I know the difference between the tablets and I wouldn't stake my whole career on which was which if I was put on the spot. It's just not smart.
• jlgreco 13y ago
  It's Gizmodo, they probably just popped open a bottle of champagne now that you promoted them to "reporting, albeit shitty".