Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 03 2012 @ 04:10 AM EDT |
... Apple didn't. That seems to be the problem here. But
nonetheless, to disallow them from showing such crucial
information is very worrying.
I think it will be easy for Samsung to appeal, if they lose;
the judge ruled against them in a number of ways that should
raise eyebrows.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 03 2012 @ 04:19 AM EDT |
Mystery - with this judge ? [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 03 2012 @ 09:09 AM EDT |
I have and still use a Samsung SGH-i900 (not sold in the US; however, Verizon
sold a SCH-i910 in the US). This phone was release in Aug 2008 (post iPhone)
but it looks a lot like the original iPhone.
http://pdadb.net/index.php%3fm=specs&id=1328&c=samsung_sgh-i900__sgh-
i908_omnia_16gb
PS: It's still a good phone; I've used it on GLOBE (Philippines), AT&T (US),
and it's
currently on T-Mobile (US). It's a GSM only phone.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: cjk fossman on Friday, August 03 2012 @ 10:26 AM EDT |
Sadly it seems our current president has become a defender
of Most Holy California IP.
He seems to consider us little folk only when we appear at
his front gate bearing torches and pitch forks.
I'm not a one-issue guy, but the behavior of the Obama
administration is coming close to being a deal breaker.
Just so there's no confusion, let me say I'll sit out the
election rather than vote for a vulture capitalist.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Friday, August 03 2012 @ 01:09 PM EDT |
On the Samsung Galaxy Nexus and Tab.
Basically on the word of Apple.
---
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|