gnaffle

42 ms·

391.
by gnaffle 14y ago
I think it's way too early to tell. In fact, I doubt we will see if they truly will succeed without Steve until a new emerging technology trend threatens to dethrone Apple from one of the categories they dominate. If, in 5-10 years the iPho
392.
by gnaffle 14y ago
OK, that puts it in a different perspective - the question at hand now is whether those patents are covered by the ETSI FRAND agreements, and if those agreements are relevant in Australia.
393.
by gnaffle 14y ago
It could be argued that Apple is acting within the legal system, whereas Bill Gates and Microsoft were convicted and settled numerous lawsuits. And while I disagree with the patent suits, I'd have preferred that the competition found ways t
394.
by gnaffle 14y ago
Agreed, and I think it shows a disrespect for history since Apple would not have been able to thrive if Xerox, IBM, Microsoft and others had taken out patents and enforced them back in the 80s.
395.
by gnaffle 14y ago
Apple didn't license the patents directly from Samsung, but they did through Qualcomm. Apple claims that Samsung has exhausted their patent claims since they've already gotten paid by Qualcomm for those patents.
396.
by gnaffle 14y ago
While I don't agree with software patents and don't like Apple pursuing companies because of them, nobody is forcing other cell phone companies to violate those patents. It's not like Apple has patented the only way to make a smartphone. On
397.
by gnaffle 14y ago
Yes. Because, if they had not agreed to the FRAND terms, they wouldn't have been able to get their technology into the standards at all. Getting your patented technology into a widely adopted standard has huge benefits since you're forcing
398.
by gnaffle 14y ago
Yes, it's a legal agreement. Since a company can be sued for not following agreements that they've signed, they're bound by law to the FRAND agreements.
399.
by gnaffle 14y ago
All I have to say to that is "The New MacBook Pro".
400.
by gnaffle 14y ago
OK, that's more understandable, since I guess that glue has to be pretty solid and has to cover the entire surface. And that's also bad from a servicability perspective (have to buy the entire display assembly).
401.
by gnaffle 14y ago
I'd like a reference on that because it seems completely implausible, and would make recycling almost anything impossible because glue is used everywhere, on tape bits to hold cables in place etc. And if the batteries has to be glue free, t
402.
by gnaffle 14y ago
I wouldn't worry about it. Actually, I'd worry more if Apple didn't change at all after Steves departure, since that would be a sign that they were afraid of thinking for themselves. I don't think Apples success is dependent on being a dick
403.
by gnaffle 14y ago
Most companies have "damage control" (PR) departments that move very quickly to respond to and contain any criticism before a story explodes.
404.
by gnaffle 14y ago
They didn't make you do anything. You could have gone to a third party repair shop and bought a new screen (glass) for about $40 (first hit i found). If they had welded it together so there was no way to take it apart without destroying it,
405.
by gnaffle 14y ago
Actually, it's not glued with epoxy resin or something like that. The iFixit teardown shows them removing it with a spudger. Hardly a difficult job for recyclers. Online parts shops are already selling replacement batteries and can even rep
406.
by gnaffle 14y ago
I doubt it will be more expensive. After all, they still sell the iPad 2 for $100 more than the Nexus 7. The only other advantage would be price. Apple's been willing to cut some corners to achieve price before, for instance the iPod displa
407.
by gnaffle 14y ago
They are fiber optic, however the repeaters require power to operate.
408.
by gnaffle 14y ago
I think he can criticize because he knows exactly what the problem is. But besides that, Apple wasn't in a downward spiral in 1990. BeOS got bought and basically took over Palm, Palm got bought by HP. (And if not for Apotheker killing it, W
409.
by gnaffle 14y ago
It doesn't matter so much how big of a fish you are in the pond, if the pond is really small. Nokia was the biggest fish in the Symbian and Meego pond as well. If WP7 was a runaway success, other manufacturers would flock around it in no ti
410.
by gnaffle 14y ago
Of course, but the question at that point becomes: How do you sustain those steady profits? DEC was hugely successful in its day, but was a failure in the 90s because they couldn't manage the transition from minicomputers to PCs.
411.
by gnaffle 14y ago
Microsofts failure is most evident in their stock staying flat or dropping the last years, while all their competitors stock has soared, including Apples. That's the overall indicator of failure, and the one their owners care about. But loo
412.
by gnaffle 14y ago
I agree, although think if they had one not long after the iPhone launched, a lot of people would have bought them because of brand loyalty. If you already had a Nokia your default choice was usually a new Nokia. And they had a pretty stron
413.
by gnaffle 14y ago
I don't think Apple succeeded because people were looking for a change. They just made a smartphone that was usable for regular people (ie iPod users). Nokia could have done that too. Maemo was comparable to (or better than?) Android in 200
414.
by gnaffle 14y ago
I don't think I could have predicted exactly what would happen before the iPhone, but _after_ the iPhone launched I thought it was pretty evident that _if_ Apple managed to pull it off wrt the carriers (which they did), other cell phone com
415.
by gnaffle 14y ago
I think those proprietary, enterprise features are massively overstated. Push email isn't so new now, and iOS and Android are quickly closing the gap on enterprise features, including device management, remote wipe, VPN etc. Just like Micro
416.
by gnaffle 14y ago
If people recycle them, they won't be in that landfill. And many countries (at least in Europe) now recycle all garbage. Even stuff glued together can be separated and be recycled. Making long-lasting, more expensive products certainly decr
417.
by gnaffle 14y ago
I don't think most people say that. Tech geeks certainly do, but they're a minority. And in any case, most people don't have the money to buy a new smartphone every year. If Apple had an opt-in program where you could upgrade the screen, ba
418.
by gnaffle 14y ago
Please, don't conclude that Apple (and now Google) products aren't recyclable because of a quote from Wired citing some "friends from the recycling industry". One thing I do know is that iPhones and other Apple products have high resale val
419.
by gnaffle 14y ago
It has a built-in amplifier, so that makes it more of a Sonos competitor (of course, provided that it works as well as a Sonos system).
420.
by gnaffle 14y ago
The Zune, Kin an Xbox weren't devices sold in Microsofts primary market. And you can see how they have done what they can in order to not screw over the hardware manufacturers, by promising to only sell the device through their retails stor

More ›