[wavejockglw]

Quote:

Originally Posted by IslandNiles

What makes you think it'll be a bundled freebie? I'd be very surprised if this was the case.

I would be also. It will doubtles be a very expensive stand alone product to begin with at least. Maybe Apple will bundle it with a phone or a tablet to disguise the true value of their offering but not for a while as their supporters will buy the product, good, bad or indifferent, in significant numbers from launch.

[psionic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by IslandNiles

What makes you think it'll be a bundled freebie? I'd be very surprised if this was the case.

Unlikely it will be freebie I would have thought.

[alanwarwic]

http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...nging_features
The 3 features they want removing from all Samsung devices are 'slide-to-unlock', auto-correct (spelling) and 'quick links' (click to email etc).

But going back to the "Samsung Electronics and Apple have recently agreed to begin talks to settle patent disputes out of court, according to people directly involved with the matter"
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news...33_157454.html
"Some say the Google-Apple agreement was seen as an effort by Apple to put more focus on its fight against Samsung"

I'd ignore the Foss patents rubbish. You can never quite work out what Mueller's paid game is. He has recently changed tactics and now promotes a middle ground angle, for what reason I do not know.

[kidspud]

Quote:

Originally Posted by alanwarwic

http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...nging_features
The 3 features they want removing from all Samsung devices are 'slide-to-unlock', auto-correct (spelling) and 'quick links' (click to email etc).

But going back to the "Samsung Electronics and Apple have recently agreed to begin talks to settle patent disputes out of court, according to people directly involved with the matter"
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news...33_157454.html
"Some say the Google-Apple agreement was seen as an effort by Apple to put more focus on its fight against Samsung"

I'd ignore the Foss patents rubbish. You can never quite work out what Mueller's paid game is. He has recently changed tactics and now promotes a middle ground angle, for what reason I do not know.

I thought you said the news was leaked by Apple. Or have you moved on from another made up claim of yours?

[alanwarwic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kidspud

I thought you said the news was leaked by Apple. Or have you moved on from another made up claim of yours?

What on earth is the connection with my last post? It had become a joined up discussion.

"Some say the Google-Apple agreement was seen as an effort by Apple to put more focus on its fight against Samsung""

They have managed that exceedingly well, have they not? It looks extremely unlikely Samsung leaked 'discussions'. In fact Samsung's reaction can be seen as saying 'I see no discussion'.

[kidspud]

Quote:

Originally Posted by alanwarwic

What on earth is the connection with my last post? It had become a joined up discussion.

"Some say the Google-Apple agreement was seen as an effort by Apple to put more focus on its fight against Samsung""

They have managed that exceedingly well, have they not? It looks extremely unlikely Samsung leaked 'discussions'. In fact Samsung's reaction can be seen as saying 'I see no discussion'.

You provided a link to the article which did not have any mention of the story being leaked by Apple. Oh well, I'm sure it is best for you to move on yet again. It's very difficult to tell which of your posts are real, information and which are just your made up speculation.

Irrespective of whether it is 'unlikely samsung leaked the story' you claimed 'Apple leaked the story'. Two very different things.

I would have thought it was far more likely samsung are after a settlement after yet another court failure for them.

[alanwarwic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kidspud

...It's very difficult to tell which of your posts are real, information and which are just your made up speculation.
....

How about quotation marks?
They do separate personal opinion from reporting opinion.

And so I came across what looked like the original news report, a useful aid to proper discussion.(discussion is usually about opinion and such like.)

[psionic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by psionic

Unlikely it will be freebie I would have thought.

Just to add though, I reckon it may make up part of the home-automation system some rumours are suggesting will be unveiled at the WWDC next month.

[alanwarwic]

http://m.koreatimes.co.kr/phone/news...newsidx=157532

"“Apple further contends that ‘a resolution must include compensation to Apple for Samsung’s use of Apple’s IP.’ However, and as Apple knows well, Apple has been found to have infringed Samsung’s patents throughout the world, including twice in the U.S. — once in the ITC and again most recently in the 630 case,” the Samsung attorney said."

"“In any event, Apple’s insistence that a condition precedent to further ADR be that it is the only party to be compensated runs contrary to its purported ‘commitment to a resolution of this matter,’” according to Samsung’s response to Apple’s letter."

"“The lawsuits have certainly become a painful distraction and bigfinancial burden to both,” said a source familiar with the issue."

Florian Mueller gets in there again. Maybe he is now a freelance journalist and getting recompense that way??????????? He certainly ain't his usual self and it certainly more than looks like he is also that 'source familiar with the issue'.

My guess now is that Mueller pretty much created the story line from the beginning.

[alanwarwic]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-27574765
"But Mr Mueller thinks Apple may be suffering "litigation fatigue", he pointed out that Apple has not filed a US case against Samsung in more than two years."

So yes, that KT 'source familiar to the matter' looks to be just another Mueller opinion, something often spiced up with baloney.

[calico_pie]

Quote:

Originally Posted by swordman

I was reading earlier seems they are also seeking a retrial as well now

Apple are now nothing more than patent trolls and should be branded Vexatious litigants or whatever the US equivalent is, unfortunately they write the law to some degree in the US.

Then you don't know what patent trolls actually are.

Yes, it's dragging on and getting pretty boring, but Apple are not patent trolls for the simple reason that they have actually manufactured products which use the things they feel should be covered by those patents.

[swordman]

No interest in your semantics around the term, the way Apple are now using patents and litigation makes them trolls and vexatious litigants in my view simple as that.

[Stiggles]

Quote:

Originally Posted by calico_pie

Then you don't know what patent trolls actually are.

Yes, it's dragging on and getting pretty boring, but Apple are not patent trolls for the simple reason that they have actually manufactured products which use the things they feel should be covered by those patents.

They have manufactured products, but they didn't invent the phone, nor did they invent half the stuff on their phones. Most of it is pinched from other phones or pinched and slightly improved on and they attempt to patent that. Slide to unlock it one feature in particular.

It is a kind of trolling.

[alanwarwic]

Well, after deciding that the anti Samsung lobbyist type person, Florian Mueller was responsible for the majority of this story, I thought his anti-Foss Foss web site was worth a visit to see what he is now up to.

He has certainly lowered the 'Samsung is always guilty' organ grinder tone. In the future, any auto/biography on his role in the story could be interesting

[calico_pie]

Quote:

Originally Posted by swordman

No interest in your semantics around the term, the way Apple are now using patents and litigation makes them trolls and vexatious litigants in my view simple as that.

They're not "my semantics". That's the actual, accepted definition of "patent troll".

[swordman]

OK well done that changes everything