Pa kad nemamo topik o Eplu. Morao sam.
Apple is now the most valuable company of all time (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-08-21-apple-now-the-most-valuable-company-of-all-time)
Quote
iPhone and iPad maker Apple has become the most valuable company the world has ever seen.
It's worth an incomprehensible $623 billion (£397bn).
The record was previously held by arch rival Microsoft (worth $620bn in 1999).
Apple is now richer in share value than any other firm since money was invented. And that was a long time ago.
It ridicules other companies with its wealth. With that amount of cash, Apple could buy Manchester United - the richest football club in the world - more than 279 times.
It even puts small countries to shame. Apple's worth is now more than oil-rich country Saudi Arabia's entire GDP last year.
We could go on.
The numbers, even for a booming technology giant such as Apple, are stratospheric. The company has seen huge growth since the beginning of the year, when the total value of its shares was still hovering around the $400bn mark.
Continual rumours of a new iPhone (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/df-hardware-in-theory-where-next-for-iphone) and a new iPad (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-07-05-apple-preparing-pocket-sized-ipad-production-report) have got investors frothing at the mouth. They think we're all going to buy one. They may be right.
jbg, da su uložili 10% u bejzik istraživanje kancera, možda bi stvari danas drugačije izgledale. ali nisu!
Bejsik. Bejsik! BEJSIK!
ˈbeɪsɪk
:cry:
A sad još ima da zarede kad izađe iPhone 5 xwink2
Quote from: Father Jape on 21-08-2012, 15:31:18
Bejsik. Bejsik! BEJSIK!
ˈbeɪsɪk
:cry:
plači do sutra, kod mene je to bejZik! i nikako drugačije!!!
Plakanje tek počinje:
Apple triumphs over Samsung, awarded over $1 billion damages (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/24/us-apple-samsung-trial-idUSBRE87N13V20120824)
Quote
Reuters) - Apple Inc. scored a sweeping legal victory over Samsung on Friday as a U.S. jury found the Korean company had copied critical features of the hugely popular iPhone and iPad (http://www.reuters.com/subjects/ipad) and awarded the U.S. company $1.051 billion in damages.
The verdict -- which came much sooner than expected -- could lead to an outright ban on sales of key Samsung products and will likely solidify Apple's dominance of the exploding mobile computing market.A number of companies that sell smartphones based on Google's Android operating system may now face further legal challenges from Apple, a company that is already among the largest and most profitable in business history.Shares in Apple, which just this week became the biggest company by market value in history, climbed almost 2 percent to a record high of $675 in after-hours trade.Brian Love, a Santa Clara law school professor, described it as a crushing victory for Apple: "This is the best-case scenario Apple could have hoped for."The jury deliberated for less than three days before delivering the verdict on seven Apple patent claims and five Samsung patent claims -- suggesting that the nine-person panel had little difficulty in concluding that Samsung had copied the iPhone and the iPad.Billions of dollars in future sales hang in the balance.Apple's charges that Samsung copied its designs and features are widely viewed as an attack on Google Inc and its Android software, which drives Samsung's devices and has become the most-used mobile software.Apple and Samsung, two companies that sell more than half the world's smartphones and tablets, have locked legal horns in several countries this year.Earlier on Friday, a South Korean court found that both companies shared blame, ordering Samsung to stop selling 10 products including its Galaxy S II phone and banning Apple from selling four different products, including its iPhone 4.But the trial on Apple's home turf -- the world's largest and most influential technology market -- is considered the most important.The fight began last year when Apple sued Samsung in multiple countries, accusing the South Korean company of slavishly copying the iPhone and iPad. Samsung countersued. Apple had sought more than $2.5 billion in damages from Samsung, which has disputed that figure.The companies are rivals, but also have a $5 billion-plus supply relationship. Apple is Samsung's biggest customer for microprocessors and other parts central to Apple's devices.A NEAR CLEAN SWEEP?The U.S. jury spent most of August in a packed federal courtroom in San Jose -- just miles from Apple's headquarters in Cupertino -- listening to testimony, examining evidence and watching lawyers from both sides joust about seven Apple patents, five Samsung patents, and damage claims.Jurors received 100 pages of legal instructions from U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh on August 21 prior to hearing the closing arguments from attorneys.Lawyers from both tech giants used their 25 hours each of trial time to present internal emails, draw testimony from designers and experts, and put on product demonstrations and mockups to convince the jury.At times, their questions drew testimony that offered glimpses behind the corporate facade, such as the margins on the iPhone and Samsung's sales figures in the United States.From the beginning, Apple's tactic was to present what it thought was chronological evidence of Samsung copying its phone.Juxtaposing pictures of phones from both companies and internal Samsung emails that specifically analyzed the features of the iPhone, Apple's attorneys accused Samsung of taking shortcuts after realizing it could not keep up.Samsung's attorneys, on the other hand, maintained Apple had no sole right to geometric designs such as rectangles with rounded corners. They called Apple's damage claim "ridiculous" and urged the jury to consider that a verdict in favor of Apple could stifle competition and reduce choices for consumers.The California trial has produced its share of drama and heated moments. Lawyers routinely bickered over legal matters in the jury's absence, filed rafts of paperwork to thwart each other's courtroom strategy, and sometimes even resorted to public relations tactics to make their views known.
A slično suđenje u Koreji rezultira zabranom za
obe kompanije. :-? :-?
Apple and Samsung get South Korea bans (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19364875)
Quote
A South Korean court has ruled that Apple and Samsung both infringed each other's patents on mobile devices.
The court imposed a limited ban on national sales of products by both companies covered by the ruling.
It ruled that US-based Apple had infringed two patents held by Samsung, while the Korean firm had violated one of Apple's patents.
The decision comes as a jury in California is deliberating on a patent trial between the two firms in the US.
The sales ban will apply to Apple's iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4 and its tablets the iPad and iPad 2.
Samsung products affected by the ban include its smartphone models Galaxy SI and SII and its Galaxy Tab and the Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet PCs.
The court ordered Apple to pay 40m won ($35,000; £22,000) in damages to its South Korean rival, while Samsung was told to pay Apple 25m won.
The awards are dwarfed by the damages being sought by Apple in its case in California. It is seeking more than $2.5bn (£1.6bn) from Samsung, for allegedly violating its patented designs and features in the iPad and iPhone.
'Differentiated its products'
A Samsung spokesperson told the BBC that the court had found the South Korean firm guilty of violating Apple's patent relating to the "bounce back" function.
The function lets users know that they have reached the end of a screen that they may be scrolling through on their devices.
Meanwhile, Apple has been found guilty of violating patents relating to telecom standards held by Samsung, including technology that makes the transfer and transmission of data between devices more efficient.
However, the court ruled against Apple's claims that Samsung had copied the designs of its products.
"There are lots of external design similarities between the iPhone and Galaxy S, such as rounded corners and large screens... but these similarities had been documented in previous products," a judge at the Seoul Central District Court was quoted as saying by the Reuters news agency.
"Given that it's very limited to make big design changes in touchscreen based mobile products in general... and the defendant [Samsung] differentiated its products with three buttons in the front and adopted different designs in camera and [on the] side, the two products have a different look," the judge said.
Setio sam se jedne zabavne činjenice na koju nabasah pre par godina u teksti o bankama i krizi u London Review oF Booksu:
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n10/john-lanchester/its-finished (http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n10/john-lanchester/its-finished)
(autor je divni John Lanchester)
QuoteFast-forward 300 years, and RBS is today, by the size of its assets, not just a big bank, and not just one of the biggest companies in Europe. The Royal Bank of Scotland, by asset size, is the biggest company in the world. If I had to pick a single fact which summed up the cultural gap between the City of London and the rest of the country, it would be that one. I have yet to meet a single person not employed in financial services who was aware of it; I wasn't aware of it myself. I think if I had been, there are two questions I would have wanted answered: how did that happen? And is it a good thing?
E sad, ja nisam siguran kako se meri asset size, tj. kakva je razlika između toga i sirove vrednosti, ali eto.
Nekako ni ja ne vidim razliku, ali pouzdano znam da akcije nisu vrednost, nego potencijal. Nestane potencijal, nestane i vrednost. Te sirove assets (da spojim ono gde ne vidiš razliku), mogu da promene očekivanu vrednost, ali su i dalje prisutne. Na primer, ovo naše guravo tržište nekretnina je imalo deceniju nenormalno visoke cene, a sad su daleko niže. Ipak, sve te nekretnine su i dalje tu, a Agrobanka može da se slika sa svojim potencijalom jer su potrošili nepostojeće. Možda Kraljevska škotska banka poseduje pola Škotske.
Ja se tek ne razumem u to, ali asset je valjda nekretnina, a deonice po prirodi stvari nisu nekretnina - pa je to valjda razlika?
Tako sam i ja pretpostavljao - RBS ima gomilu ovakvog ili onakvog propertyja širom sveta verovatno, a Apple ima visoku vrednost u smislu broj akcija puta vrednost akcija, koja opet ima veze sa assetima firme, ali to nije odlučujući toliko faktor, već ono... predviđeni rast i uspeh u bliskoj budućnosti.
Asset je imovina.
Akcije nisu imovina, nego potencijal da to postane, ako se proda pre nego što potencijal nestane. Najveći deo svetskog finansijskog potencijala može da nestane u svakom trenutku. Kao akcije nekih velikih banki, investicioni i penzijski fondovi i slično.
Quote from: scallop on 26-08-2012, 12:52:22
Nekako ni ja ne vidim razliku, ali pouzdano znam da akcije nisu vrednost, nego potencijal. Nestane potencijal, nestane i vrednost.
Tačno.
U assets spadaju ne samo nekretnine nego i pokretnine i generalno efemeralna goodwill imovina. Vrednost asseta je potencijalna, odnosno, vrednost svakog pojednog aseta se revalorizuje u svakom point-in-time. Otud se assets obezvređuju po unapred naznačenim taksenim skalama: MV assets (motor vehicle) se obezvređuje na petogodišnjoj skali (20% godišnje), Computer Equipment se obezvređuje na trogodišnjoj skali (33% godišnje), generalni Office Equipment se obezvređuje na petogodišnjoj skali & so on % on. (Naravno, različite zemlje imaju različite taksene sisteme, pa to varira, ali ne mnogo.) Deonice su asset koji vredi samo onoliko koliko same deonice u trenutnom momentu: drugim rečima, jednom kad (ako) riknu, možete sa tim silnim asetom slobodno dupe obrisati. :) Za razliku od drugih navedenih asseta (MV, Office, Land, Comp, Manufacturing Equipment) koji, čak i kad su potpuno obezvređeni u Profit & Loss kalkulaciji, ipak mogu da steknu relativnu vrednost, u visini svote koju će vam neko platiti za njih, ako poželi da ih od vas kupi. Propale deonice, pak, neće niko. :lol:
U principu, novac je dug. Što imaš više novaca to si više dužan - za sve ono što koristiš ili trošiš.
Banke imaju ogromnu količinu duga kao svoju imovinu.
Dug je osnovno sredstvo porobljavanja.
Čitav sistem se održava na silu, grubom silom, i gomilom laži koje zbunjuju ljude (to je ta takozvana civilizacijska i kulturna nadgradnja na koju su ljudi toliko ponosni).
U Severnoj Koreji, robovi prave iPad po proizvodnoj ceni od $0, a ovamo se prodaje na malo po ceni od $300+.
To je moguće zbog čitavog niza kobajagi vojno-političkih i monopolističkih kvaziekonomskih mera koje su projektovane kao geopolitička situacija i trt-mrt papazjanija koju običan narod mora da guta i da se pravi srećan što je tako.
Automobili i drugi potrošački predmeti se prave s ugrađenim rokom trajanja (Blade Runner fora). Mogli bi oni lako da naprave sijalicu koja traje 50 godina, postoje takve sijalice. Ali onda bi propao čitav koncept porobljavanja, jer, pobogu, ljudi moraju da RADE kako bi ZASLUŽILI da mogu da jedu. Koliko se tu resursa nepotrebno troši kako bi opstala ova ideja, to nikakav kompjuter, što bi reko pokojni Sloba, ne može da izračuna...
Kraj trolovanja 8-)
Kaže se da Kina poseduje 850 milijardi dolara američkih obveznica i da drži Ameriku za đoku.
Ali, nigde se ne kaže koliko asseta ima Amerika u Kini...
Kina i Indija su danas navjeće "powerhouses" na svetu. Njima treba mnogo nafte i druge energije da bi te radionice radile.
Kako će to da obezbede vlasnici ova dva najveća asseta na svetu?
U Indiji, Enron je odradio svoje. Napravio je ogromnu elektranu, onda je izbio skandal jer Indija nije "htela" da plati. Pojeo vuk magarca, Amerikanci platili od svog incoma.
Aha, nafta!
Eto, Bog dao da je Iran teroristička država.
Udariše sankcije Iranu. Al, ne lezi vraže. Kina i Indija ne jebavaju sankcije nego kupuju iransku naftu, baš ih briga.
Kupuju je po povoljnoj ceni.
Ostatak sveta više nema toliku potrebu za naftom, jer su Indija i Kina powerhouses....
Cena nafte na svetskom tržištu je pala.
Aj sad kupujemo zlato... Zbog toga što se zlato, koje je postalo asset, kupuje - cena zlatu je skočila. Kad dovoljno poraste, mangupi će da prodaju odjednom sve što imaju i cena će opet da padne...
A mi mislimo saće rat između Izraela i Irana. Malo morgen. Ahmedindžaba se istrčava s pretnjama, ali ne piše u novinama da tamo ima finansijski skandal u obliku 3 milijarde dolara proneverenih od strane ministra za finansije (nije valjda on sam sve to skockao?).
Profit nastao ovakvim globalnim manipulacijama troši se na razvoj novih oružja i vojne sile koja sve to obezbeđuje. To je prava ekonomija, a ne tamo neki Kenjsovi ili deda Avrami.
Inače, naleteh jutros na ovaj osamnaest godina star tekst Umberta Eka gde na neviđeno šarmantan način objašnjava da je Apple Mac katolička platforma a MS-DOS protestantska. Genije je Eko, vazda bio:
http://www.themodernword.com/eco/eco_mac_vs_pc.html (http://www.themodernword.com/eco/eco_mac_vs_pc.html)
Quote
| The Holy War:
Mac vs. DOS |
| (https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.themodernword.com%2Feco%2Fimages%2Fspacer.gif&hash=9e9aad10bd9a2400ddc1a11059ecd452fc1e32ed) | (https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.themodernword.com%2Feco%2Fcleardot.GIF&hash=52d45837179bba0aecbf796317d1b624cbb9e492)
By Umberto Eco The following excerpts are from an English translation of Umberto Eco's back-page column, La bustina di Minerva, in the Italian news weekly Espresso, September 30, 1994.
A French translation may be seen here (http://www.pasteur.net/olivier/eco.htm).
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.themodernword.com%2Feco%2Fcleardot.GIF&hash=52d45837179bba0aecbf796317d1b624cbb9e492)Friends, Italians, countrymen, I ask that a Committee for Public Health be set up, whose task would be to censor (by violent means, if necessary) discussion of the following topics in the Italian press. Each censored topic is followed by an alternative in brackets which is just as futile, but rich with the potential for polemic. Whether Joyce is boring (whether reading Thomas Mann gives one erections). Whether Heidegger is responsible for the crisis of the Left (whether Ariosto provoked the revocation of the Edict of Nantes). Whether semiotics has blurred the difference between Walt Disney and Dante (whether De Agostini does the right thing in putting Vimercate and the Sahara in the same atlas). Whether Italy boycotted quantum physics (whether France plots against the subjunctive). Whether new technologies kill books and cinemas (whether zeppelins made bicycles redundant). Whether computers kill inspiration (whether fountain pens are Protestant).
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.themodernword.com%2Feco%2Fcleardot.GIF&hash=52d45837179bba0aecbf796317d1b624cbb9e492)One can continue with: whether Moses was anti-semitic; whether Leon Bloy liked Calasso; whether Rousseau was responsible for the atomic bomb; whether Homer approved of investments in Treasury stocks; whether the Sacred Heart is monarchist or republican.
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.themodernword.com%2Feco%2Fcleardot.GIF&hash=52d45837179bba0aecbf796317d1b624cbb9e492)I asked above whether fountain pens were Protestant. Insufficient consideration has been given to the new underground religious war which is modifying the modern world. It's an old idea of mine, but I find that whenever I tell people about it they immediately agree with me.
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.themodernword.com%2Feco%2Fcleardot.GIF&hash=52d45837179bba0aecbf796317d1b624cbb9e492)The fact is that the world is divided between users of the Macintosh computer and users of MS-DOS compatible computers. I am firmly of the opinion that the Macintosh is Catholic and that DOS is Protestant. Indeed, the Macintosh is counter-reformist and has been influenced by the ratio studiorum of the Jesuits. It is cheerful, friendly, conciliatory; it tells the faithful how they must proceed step by step to reach -- if not the kingdom of Heaven -- the moment in which their document is printed. It is catechistic: The essence of revelation is dealt with via simple formulae and sumptuous icons. Everyone has a right to salvation.
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.themodernword.com%2Feco%2Fcleardot.GIF&hash=52d45837179bba0aecbf796317d1b624cbb9e492)DOS is Protestant, or even Calvinistic. It allows free interpretation of scripture, demands difficult personal decisions, imposes a subtle hermeneutics upon the user, and takes for granted the idea that not all can achieve salvation. To make the system work you need to interpret the program yourself: Far away from the baroque community of revelers, the user is closed within the loneliness of his own inner torment.
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.themodernword.com%2Feco%2Fcleardot.GIF&hash=52d45837179bba0aecbf796317d1b624cbb9e492)You may object that, with the passage to Windows, the DOS universe has come to resemble more closely the counter-reformist tolerance of the Macintosh. It's true: Windows represents an Anglican-style schism, big ceremonies in the cathedral, but there is always the possibility of a return to DOS to change things in accordance with bizarre decisions: When it comes down to it, you can decide to ordain women and gays if you want to.
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.themodernword.com%2Feco%2Fcleardot.GIF&hash=52d45837179bba0aecbf796317d1b624cbb9e492)Naturally, the Catholicism and Protestantism of the two systems have nothing to do with the cultural and religious positions of their users. One may wonder whether, as time goes by, the use of one system rather than another leads to profound inner changes. Can you use DOS and be a Vande supporter? And more: Would Celine have written using Word, WordPerfect, or Wordstar? Would Descartes have programmed in Pascal?
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.themodernword.com%2Feco%2Fcleardot.GIF&hash=52d45837179bba0aecbf796317d1b624cbb9e492)And machine code, which lies beneath and decides the destiny of both systems (or environments, if you prefer)? Ah, that belongs to the Old Testament, and is talmudic and cabalistic. The Jewish lobby, as always.... |
kratko i jasno
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/08/what-apples-legal-win-over-samsung-means-for-you-technology-design-and-the-world/261620/ (http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/08/what-apples-legal-win-over-samsung-means-for-you-technology-design-and-the-world/261620/)
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.smbc-comics.com%2Fcomics%2F20120829.gif&hash=8ae092cd2d88448fd1bc04372cdfc205d4a3a983)
E, sad, porotnici u Apple/ Samsung suđenju su odmah rekli da su prilično mrljavo odradili posao. Detaljnije:
Apple/Samsung Jurors Admit They Finished Quickly By Ignoring Prior Art & Other Key Factors (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120826/23534320161/applesamsung-jurors-admit-they-finished-quickly-ignoring-prior-art-other-key-factors.shtml)
Quote
Late Friday afternoon, the jury in the Apple/Samsung patent dispute surprised just about everyone by telling the court it had reached a verdict. Given the number of complex issues it needed to go through, most experts expected it to take well into this week. According to observers in the courtroom, one of Apple's lawyers was so surprised and unprepared that he had to rush back to court without a suit, and showed up in a polo shirt. The quickness of the decision certainly resulted in some questions about just how thoroughly the jury reviewed the instructions and then considered each of the approximately 700 questions it needed to answer (initial jury form is embedded below). As we noted in an update to our post (http://www.techdirt.com/blog/innovation/articles/20120824/16335120154/samsung-routed-apple-patent-fight-told-to-pay-105-billion.shtml) on Friday, about half an hour after the ruling was read out -- and long after most of the press stopped paying attention -- the judge announced at least two problems with the ruling, where the jury had awarded damages, despite not finding infringement.
As we said on Friday, that certainly raised significant questions about how carefully the jury actually reviewed the issues in question. While some said it could have just been a clerical error in answering all the questions, that appears not to be the case. Because after the judge instructed the jury to fix the mistakes, they didn't reassign those damages elsewhere, they just wiped them off the slate. Besides, even if you were to argue it was merely a mistake, that's no excuse. This "mistake" could have ended up costing millions of dollars. That's quite a "mistake."
Over at Groklaw, they're discussing this and other evidence of jury misconduct (http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2012082510525390). The awarding of damages for things they found didn't infringe was already pretty bad, but some of the other details highlight how the jury clearly did not read the jury instructions (or bother to comprehend them).
A Reuters interview with the jury foreman (http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/08/25/us-apple-samsung-juror-idINBRE87O09U20120825) demonstrates conclusively that the jury ignored the rules. Foreman Velvin Hogan told Reuters that they wanted to punish Samsung: >"We wanted to make sure the message we sent was not just a slap on the wrist," Hogan said. "We wanted to make sure it was sufficiently high to be painful, but not unreasonable."
That sounds nice, except... patent awards are only supposed to be about making the patent holder whole, not about punishing the infringer. And, in fact,
the jury instructions (http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120821152214965) clearly stated this:
>The amount of those damages must be adequate to compensate the patent holder for the infringement. A damages award should put the patent holder in approximately the financial position it would have been in had the infringement not occurred, but in no event may the damages award be less than a reasonable royalty. You should keep in mind that the damages you award are meant to compensate the patent holder and not to punish an infringer. And yet here's the jury foreman flat out admitting that they decided to use the award amounts to punish Samsung. Elsewhere, it becomes pretty clear that Hogan was hardly an impartial juror. He has his own patent, 7,352,953 (http://www.google.com/patents/US7352953) on "recording and storing video information." That, by itself, does not automatically make one biased in favor of the system (I know plenty of people with patents who hate the patent system), but he admitted elsewhere that he ended up making decisions based on how he would feel if it was his patent at stake, rather than on what the law actually says -- and then said he needed to rule as if he were speaking out "for all" patent holders. In an an interview with Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-25/apple-samsung-jury-foreman-says-google-e-mail-persuasive.html), he made that bias clear:
>"When I got in this case and I started looking at these patents I considered: 'If this was my patent and I was accused, could I defend it?'" Hogan explained. On the night of Aug. 22, after closing arguments, "a light bulb went on in my head," he said. "I thought, I need to do this for all of them." He then told Bloomberg that "he explained his thinking to his fellow jurors" and that seemed to drive the discussion. An interview with another juror, over at News.com, confirmed that Hogan's views focused the jury (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57500358-37/exclusive-apple-samsung-juror-speaks-out/), with one juror admitting that they just started ignoring prior art, because that question was too time consuming. Seriously.
>"It didn't dawn on us [that we agreed that Samsung had infringed] on the first day," Ilagan said. "We were debating heavily, especially about the patents on bounce-back and pinch-to-zoom. Apple said they owned patents, but we were debating about the prior art [about similar technology that Samsung said existed before the iPhone debuted]. [Velvin] Hogan was jury foreman. He had experience. He owned patents himself...so he took us through his experience. After that it was easier. After we debated that first patent -- what was prior art --because we had a hard time believing there was no prior art."
"In fact we skipped that one," Ilagan continued, "so we could go on faster. It was bogging us down." Yeah. Read that sucker again. The jury instructions are again clear that the jury needs to consider the prior art, but according to this juror, Manuel Ilagan, after foreman Hogan talked about his own experience with patents, they decided that prior art was "bogging us down" and they might as well "skip" it.
In the long run, the jury verdict probably won't matter much, because this case would have been appealed no matter what. But these kinds of stories certainly give Samsung plenty of fodder to ask the judge to toss out the jury verdict already. It also raises questions, yet again, about why we allow juries on patent trials. This has been a big problem for a long time and the results here only serve to emphasize that fact.
Tako da se sada razmišlja ima li smisla da na ovakvim suđenjima koja se bave patentnim zakonom uopšte sedi porota sastavljena od nestručnih lica. Zvuči logično kada čovek razmisli da su ovo veoma kompleksna pitanja ali sa druge strane, ako je zakon toliko kompleksan da obična osoba ne može da se razabere u njemu, nismo li zapravo onda pod tiranijom pravnika?
http://gigaom.com/2012/08/27/3-reasons-juries-have-no-place-in-the-patent-system/ (http://gigaom.com/2012/08/27/3-reasons-juries-have-no-place-in-the-patent-system/)
Quote
nless you spent the weekend under a rock, you've heard that a jury ordered Samsung to hand Apple $1.05 billion for violating its patents. The verdict and month long trial has captivated tech types but also provides more ammunition for critics who say juries shouldn't be deciding these questions in first place.
Background
The jury in Apple-Samsung confronted hundreds of questions, some of them on topics obscure enough to make an intellectual property lawyer blanche — design patents, patent exhaustion and so on. Yet, they were done in less than three days. As Abovethelaw editor, Elie Mystal, mused (http://abovethelaw.com/2012/08/apple-samsung-verdict/) "It would take me more than three days to understand all the terms in the verdict! Much less come to a legally binding decision on all of these separate issues. Did you guys just flip a coin?"
A more damning criticism came from the popular Groklaw (http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2012082510525390) site which pointed out a series of basic errors by the jury: a decision to award $2 million for a patent that Samsung hadn't infringed in the first place; a decision to assign damages based on punishment, not compensation.
This type of slapdash decision-making lends support to Judge Richard Posner and others who argue that it's time to end jury trials (http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/07/why-there-are-too-many-patents-in-america/259725/#.T_7jUH2JTJg.facebook) in patent cases. Here are three more reasons Apple v Samsung should not have gone before a jury:
Reason 1: Jurors can be influenced by brand loyalty
Let's remember that the jurors who decided the case were not Blind Justice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Justice) but consumers who are influenced by brands.
That influence can be considerable. According to Robert Kozinets, a marketing professor at York University, "brand communities" that emerge around products like Apple's are supplanting religions or neighborhoods as a source of personal identity. He says that Apple today has greater ideological power than many countries.
"That identification with Apple will lead to community and a sense of loyalty. It also leads to a sense of empowerment that can lead people to step up and protect it because they know there are so many others like them."
There's nothing wrong, of course, with defending Apple (or Google or Microsoft). The problem is that brand loyalty can interfere with patent policy. When asked to decide a patent case, juries are likely to go with emotion over evidence — deciding a case based on brand loyalty rather than the law at hand.
In the case of Apple-Samsung, the trial was about a beloved American brand versus a foreign competitor. Not only that, but the trial took place in Silicon Valley, right in the heart of Apple land. This was like asking Boston Red Sox fans to judge the conduct of the New York Yankees.
In this climate, it's no wonder that the jury appears to have made their decision based on a desire to "send a message (http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/08/25/us-apple-samsung-juror-idINBRE87O09U20120825)" to Samsung rather than parsing harder technical questions about whether Apple's rectangle and "bounce-back" patents should have existed in the first place.
Reason 2: Juries are too easily swayed by "he's a copycat"
During the trial, Apple offered an easy-to-follow narrative that is familiar to anyone who has been in grade school: "That's my idea. He took it and pretended it was his." Samsung on the other hand had to explain why, even though Apple had patents, it was not infringing and that the patents were not actually valid patents and so on. One story is crisp and clean, the other is furtive and guilty-sounding. Guess which story has more punch in the hands of a trial lawyer?
In the words of Posner: "patent plaintiffs tend to request trial by jury because they believe that jurors tend to favor patentees, believing that they must be worthy inventors defending the fruits of their invention against copycats."
Unfortunately, these simple narratives distort what patents are all about. Patents are not primarily about stopping copycats (that's why we have trademarks) but are instead a form of industrial policy based on 20-year monopolies. If the policy is effective, it produces more innovation. If the patent policy is not effective, it creates monopolies that harm competitors and consumers. In Apple-Samsung, there's a good chance we're doing the latter; we may regard Apple as an innovator and Samsung as a copycat — but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to award Apple sweeping monopolies that may raise prices and stunt the smartphone market.
Patents are as complex as other industrial policies like subsidies or regulatory regimes. When disputes arise, they should be put before an expert tribunal rather than a jury that is easily swayed by schoolyard "copycat" narratives.
Reason 3: Jury trials over patents are a waste of money
Apple and Samsung will spend from $20 million to $500 million in legal fees, according to sources surveyed by the Wall Street Journal (http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/08/24/check-please-experts-say-apple-samsung-face-sky-high-legal-fees/). While the companies would have blown a bundle no matter what, the jury presence added millions to the tab. This figure doesn't even take account of the costs to the federal justice system or to the jurors and their employers. And for what? To respond to questions likely beyond their capacity and that will, in any case, be picked apart on appeal.
There's a faster, cheaper and more efficient way to handle this. As Judge Posner proposes, it makes sense to stuff future patent disputes into a corner of the US Patent and Trademark Office.
Juries are not responsible for all that ails the patent system. But getting rid of them would be a useful step.
(Image by Junial Enterprises via Shutterstock)
Groklaw još pojašnjava kako je porota ispustila loptu:
The Foreman's Aha Moment in Apple v. Samsung Was Based on Misunderstanding Prior Art (http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120828225612963)
Quote
The foreman in the Apple v. Samsung trial has now done an interview with Bloomberg News, giving him an opportunity to answer some of the criticisms of the verdict. It's a video on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9cnQcTC2JY), titled "Apple Jury Foreman: Here's How We Reached a Verdict", and while he answers the criticisms, he describes how the jury, under his instructions, decided that the Samsung prior art didn't invalidate an Apple patent. In doing so, I think he has revealed the biggest mistake of all made by the jury, one so large I don't believe it can be ignored. At a minimum, Apple shouldn't want to win like this. His aha moment, as he calls it, and assuming what he says on the video is accurate, was based on a misunderstanding of what constitutes prior art.
In discussing the first patent on the list, he says they got into a discussion about the prior art that was presented at trial. Here's why they discounted it: >The software on the Apple side could not be placed into the processor on the prior art and vice versa. That means they are not interchangeable. That changed everything right there.That isn't disqualifying for prior art. It doesn't have to run on the same processor. It doesn't have to run at all. It can be words on a piece of paper. (If you don't believe little old me, here's a lawyer noticing the video too (http://www.patentspostgrant.com/lang/en/2012/08/apple-jury-confuses-obviousness-analysis) now.) Here is the jury instruction given on what is prior art, on page 44 of the instructions PDF, which you can find here (http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120821152214965): FINAL JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 31
UTILITY PATENTS—ANTICIPATION A utility patent claim is invalid if the claimed invention is not new. For the claim to be invalid because it is not new, all of its requirements must have existed in a single device or method that predates the claimed invention, or must have been described in a single previous publication or patent that predates the claimed invention. In patent law, these previous devices, methods, publications or patents are called "prior art references." If a patent claim is not new we say it is "anticipated" by a prior art reference. The description in the written reference does not have to be in the same words as the claim, but all of the requirements of the claim must be there, either stated or necessarily implied, so that someone of ordinary skill in the field looking at that one reference would be able to make and use the claimed invention. Here is a list of the ways that either party can show that a patent claim was not new: – If the claimed invention was already publicly known or publicly used by others in the United States before the date of conception of the claimed invention; – If the claimed invention was already patented or described in a printed publication anywhere in the world before the date of conception of the claimed invention. A reference is a "printed publication" if it is accessible to those interested in the field, even if it is difficult to find; – If the claimed invention was already made by someone else in the United States before the date of conception of the claimed invention, if that other person had not abandoned the invention or kept it secret; If the patent holder and the alleged infringer dispute who is a first inventor, the person who first conceived of the claimed invention and first reduced it to practice is the first inventor. If one person conceived of the claimed invention first, but reduced to practice second, that person is the first inventor only if that person (a) began to reduce the claimed invention to practice before the other party conceived of it, and (b) continued to work diligently to reduce it to practice. A claimed invention is "reduced to practice" when it has been tested sufficiently to show that it will work for its intended purpose or when it is fully described in a patent application filed with the PTO. – If the claimed invention was already described in another issued U.S. patent or published U.S. patent application that was based on a patent application filed before the patent holder's application filing date or the date of conception of the claimed invention. Since certain of them are in dispute, you must determine dates of conception for the claimed inventions and prior inventions. Conception is the mental part of an inventive act and is proven when the invention is shown in its complete form by drawings, disclosure to another, or other forms of evidence presented at trial. Did you notice that prior art can be a piece of paper describing the invention? It doesn't have to run on *any* processor. It's the claims that have to match, not what it runs on. For example, when Red Hat was accused of patent infringement by IP Innovation, they rolled in a 1985 Amiga computer that a Groklaw reader still have running to demonstrate (http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20101103012251490) prior art, and they won. Otherwise, by his logic, Samsung couldn't infringe any of Apple's patents, in that Android and Linux don't run directly on iOS. The foreman, in answering criticisms, says that the jury paid close attention to the jury instructions. But looking at this one, did they? I'm sure they meant to, and I'm also sure they did their best according to what they understood. But this was an error, and it's one I don't think the judge can ignore, if anyone brings it to her attention. Incidentally, just in case he said prior art and he meant obviousness, the jury instruction on that is No. 33. Let's look at some details. The foreman says that the jury started out in a stalemate, because some on the jury were not clear how prior art can invalidate a patent. At that point, he thought it was going Samsung's way. So he went home and had his aha moment. He felt he could defend it if it was his patent. So he explained it all to the jury. And that turned the tide. But if he told them that interchangeability was a requirement for prior art, he goofed big time. A volunteer did a partial transcript of the relevant section, so you can see his quote about the patent in context: Emily Chang: Were you ever confused? Were other people ever confused? Vel Hogan: I wasn't confused but there was a, a few of the jurors that were confused so what we did in the jury room before we did anything after we did the election of who was going to lead the jury I told them let's just lay out on the table any concerns or open questions you may have that's left over and let's just get that out of the way first. Emily Chang: Now when you first got into the jury room initially, this was Wednesday right? Vel Hogan: Yes. Emily Chang: Was? There are reports that you were initially divided but did you, did you have a feeling this was going to sway overwhelmingly in Apple's favour? Vel Hogan: No. No. In fact if you'd have asked me at that moment in time, I thought it was gonna ultimately maybe lean the other way. Emily Chang: Why? Vel Hogan: Why? We were at a stalemate but some of the jurors weren't sure of the patent prosecution process. Some weren't sure of how, ah, prior art could either render a patent accept... ah, acceptable or whether it could invalidate it and so what we did is we started talking about one and the day was over. When I was at home thinking about that patent, ah, claim by claim, limit by limit I had what we would call an aha moment. Emily Chang: Um hmmm. Vel Hogan: And I suddenly decided that I could defend this if it was my patent. Emily Chang: Really? Vel Hogan: Really. And with that, I took that story back to the jury, laid it out for 'em, they understood the points that I was talking about and then we meticulous, meticulously went patent by patent claim by claim against the test that the judge had given us because each area, each patent had a different ah legal premise to judge on. We got that all sorted out and decided which ones were valid, which ones weren't valid. Emily Chang: So the initial stalemate that you found yourself in, what was that about? Vel Hogan: It was about a particular, ah, patent, ah, the '460 patent, and whether or not the prior art really did invalidate that pattern, that patent and so with that moment I had, I realized that the software on the Apple side could not be placed into the processor on the prior art and vice versa. Emily Chang: Um hmm. Vel Hogan: And that means that they're not interchangeable and that just cha..., that changed everything right there. Emily Chang: You know it's all obviously extremely technical. there has been a lot of talk since this verdict has come down. How did you guys make this verdict so quickly. There were more than a hundred pages of jury instructions. There are even reports that you didn't read all of those instructions. Vel Hogan: Oh. We read. First off, before closing arguments was given, the judge read to us the final instructions, instruction by instruction. Then she allowed the closing arguments, then she dismissed us. And so we had those closing argue..., those ah, instructions and we had them open there and then we took patent by patent and got hung upon the first one but the day was almost over by then and so I said to the jury, "We're not going to allow ourselves to get hung up. We're going to, if we find a debate like this, we'll move on. We'll do the simplest things first." So then when I came back the next day... This was regarding what the foreman in the video calls the '460 patent, but there was no such Apple patent in the case listed on the verdict form that I could find. That's why I can't be sure what he said on the video was accurately portraying the event. But the other jurors surely could speak to clarify. I would certainly like to hear from the youngest juror, who apparently held out against the tide until the foreman's "explanation" seemed to settle the matter. Here's the Amended Jury Verdict (http://www.groklaw.net/pdf3/ApplevSamsung-1931.pdf) [PDF] form, so you can see for yourself. You'll find the list on page 9. That mistake in speaking makes it impossible to understand what he is referring to, so as to check it with certainty. He also says it was the first one on the list, though, and that would be the '381 patent (http://groklaw.net/pdf3/ApplevSamsung-1Ex4.pdf) [PDF], "List Scrolling and Document Translation, Scaling and Rotation on a Touch-Screen Display", or the bounce-back patent. (You can confirm that this is the patent they were arguing about by what another juror said earlier about the dispute. CNET's Greg Sandoval interviewed (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57500358-37/exclusive-apple-samsung-juror-speaks-out/) juror Manuel Ilagan, and he said the argument was over Apple's bounceback and pinch to zoom.) The prior art Samsung listed in its trial brief for bounceback included: the Tablecloth program installed on the DiamondTouch system developed by Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratory ("MERL"), the LaunchTile and XNav programs developed by Dr. Benjamin Bederson, and International Publication Number WO 03/081458. I don't know about the rest, but the Tablecloth system was demonstrated at trial (http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/15/3244581/samsung-expert-apple-bounce-back-patent-invalid) by Adam Bogue. Another witness, Benjamin Bederson, presented as prior art his Launch Tile invention, a system of icon tiles in an interfact allowing users to zoom in and out. It had a snapback feature too. Please read the patent now, if you are free to do so, and you'll see that there is no limitation in the claims to just Apple software or Apple devices. It's claiming funcionality on "portable multifunction devices". Anybody's. That's the only reason it *could* be infringed by Samsung, despite any differences as to what each runs on. Of course, in a way it doesn't matter which patent they were discussing, because prior art is prior art. What has to match are the claims, not what it runs on. If, for example, Microsoft had invented the bounceback feature for its tablets and phones, it would be prior art for Apple, even though you can't run Apple software directly on Microsoft's operating system. This statement by the foreman is, to me, the biggest goof of them all. And since his story is that this is what he used to persuade the rest, who were otherwise favoring Samsung, it means the entire verdict is now seriously in doubt. My favorite comment on Hacker News (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4446102) about this video, from ktizo: >I think he may have a valid point. Perhaps apple have invented some new numbers, like eleventy-four, that don't fit into the old computers properly due to magic and stuff.He's kidding around, of course, with a touch of despair. Software is algorithms, and algorithms are mathematics. That's why they should never be allowed to be patented in the first place, which would have avoided all this Apple v. Samsung trial about bounceback anyway. And by the way, how does the foreman know what processor is being used and what can and can't run? Was that *evidence* at trial, or his personal "expertise" in play? If the latter, are jurors supposed to decide matters based on their own personal evidence offered to the jury without cross examination? And would he qualify as an expert at trial? Is he supposed to play that role in the jury deliberations? See the problem? By the way, for any who might not know, hacker from the beginning usage of the word means something good to programmers. Crackers are the bad guys. The non-technical world gets that mixed up all the time, but programmers know the difference. And it is irresistable to point out that Andrew Orlowski may wish now to edit his paen of praise (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/08/28/patent_system_bruised_or_borked/) in The Register to the foreman's "clarity of thinking" and common sense approach and how great patents are for us all and how the verdict is "GOOD for YOU, your KIDS and TECH". He writes that "When ordinary citizens gather to assess an intellectual property decision, they don't let us down." Except sometimes they do. They just did. That's one reason why the new patent rules soon to go into effect give you a choice, a jury trial or a decision by a panel of experts, as Patents Post Grant explains (http://www.patentspostgrant.com/lang/en/2012/08/apple-jury-confuses-obviousness-analysis): After September 16th, defendants will have a choice to continue on to roll the dice at the district court with a jury trial of laypeople, or avail themselves of the new USPTO patentability trials of the AIA. The new trial proceedings of the AIA will be completed within 12-18 months of initiation and will be conducted before the USPTO's Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB). Unlike jurors, the decision makers of the PTAB are not laypeople. Rather, PTAB judges are experienced in the application of U.S. patent law and must additionally have an engineering and/or science background. In addition to the established expertise in technology and patent law, unlike the courts, PTAB judges do not accord patents a presumption of validity, nor do they require clear and convincing evidence to invalidate a patent. Indeed, patent claims are accorded a broadest reasonable interpretation at the USPTO, which makes them that much easier to invalidate. Update: Mr. Hogan continues to respond to criticism. And he never makes it better. The BBC has a full transcript (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19425051) of an interview they have done with him. He tries to clarify, but in doing so, it does not fix the legal problems we have identified, although he seems to think it does. He states, for example, that when he said the jury wanted to send a message by their damages figure, he didn't mean a message to Samsung alone. They meant to send a message to the entire industry not to infringe. Again, damages are only to be based on making the victim whole for any actual losses, not to send a message to anyone. This is proof, once again, that this jury didn't follow instructions. If there is a message to be sent, that's up to the judge. The judge can order triple damages if there is a message to be sent. It's outside the jury's authority to do that. And it means that their damages figures is inevitably and demonstrably not the correct figure. The jury took it upon itself to play the judge's role, and that isn't following the jury instructions. It's amazing that after all these days, he apparently has not reread the jury instructions. Or if he has, he still doesn't understand them. As for his aha moment, he adds that he looked at source code and showed it to the rest, to show them that the Samsung prior art was unable to run Apple code. That is NOT the way you decide whether prior art invalidates a patent. He claims that the instructions given were that the prior art and the patent must be "interchangeable". There is no such word in the jury instructions. I don't know why he keeps talking, but I'm sure Samsung hopes he keeps it up. Here, then, are two snippets from a much longer interview, on those two points: BBC: A lot has been made about the original interview you gave to Reuters in which you said you wanted to make the award sufficiently high to be painful to Samsung, but not unreasonable. There has been concern raised by some people that that may have been prejudicial and the awards should have been based on the facts alone. I wonder if you would like to clarify that. Hogan: Yes I would. Bloomberg asked me that question and others that have interviewed me asked that question and I have tried to make it clear that it wasn't an attempt from a punitive standpoint. And it wasn't necessarily focused at Samsung - that is where it had been taken out of context. What was actually meant by that statement when I made it was that what I wanted... the jurors wanted to send a message to the industry at large that no matter who you are - whether you are Apple, whether you are Samsung, or anybody - if you wilfully take the risk to cross the line and start infringing and you get caught, and again I emphasise wilfully, you need to be prepared to pay the cost for that.... BBC: There were two issues, looking at Apple's case: Whether Samsung had infringed their patents and whether the patents were valid. Why weren't you convinced by Samsung's arguments that some of the patents that Apple had put forward shouldn't be allowed to stand? There has been a lot made in the media and elsewhere that Apple wasn't the first with some of the ideas that they had patented. Hogan: To try to make it as easy as possible - I have addressed this in other interviews that I have had - what it amounts to is there has been a big fuss since the deliberation that prior art was not considered. Prior art was considered. When we had to determine the validity of Apple's patent against the charges of Samsung's with the prior art examples, what we had to do - to make it clear - is that not only did we have to validate, if you will, the Apple patent, but in looking at the prior art we had stipulations in the law that tested both sides and if the test wasn't passed then it was clear either the patent was valid or it wasn't. Prior art didn't mean that the prior art wasn't valid. It was valid. But the stipulation under the law is for the prior art to be sufficient to negate or invalidate the Apple patents in this case, it had to be sufficiently similar or, more importantly, it had to be interchangeable. And in example after example, when we put it to the test, the older prior art was just that. Not that there's anything [wrong] with older prior art - but the key was that the hardware was different, the software was an entirely different methodology, and the more modern software could not be loaded onto the older example and be run without error. And vice versa of that was also true. So the point being, at the 40,000 foot-level, even though the outcome of the two seemed similar, the internal methodology of how you got there was entirely different. One could not be exchanged for the other. And that is the thing that most people at large do not understand about the legal system. And as a result of that you have heard a lot of hype in the media about did we turn our back on prior art? No. Did it mean prior art could not have been used to compete against anything any other company had done? No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying both could have existed independently of each other and been used. The thing you have to remember is that the prior art that belonged to Samsung, or belonged to somebody else that they had the ability of using, they had not used for quite some time. And the methodology that they had implemented was just right up against the line of infringement and went beyond it in most cases. And not all cases. Not everything that Apple accused of Samsung was correct and we made those stipulations as we filled out the form, and well, you know how it played out. My point is that there were substantially difference between the prior art and the new method, but the key was you could not replace one for the other. BBC: There had been a lot of speculation that although Apple might get damages, Samsung might get damages as well. Why did Samsung's case fail? Hogan: Whenever we considered the prior art and we looked at those patents, and specifically the claims that were involved, and the claim limitations that were involved, we had the instruction from the judge who had given us the stipulation of the precedent in the law that for the prior art in this case to negate or invalidate the patent on Apple's side - that was being involved in the allegation from Samsung that the patent was invalid because of the prior art - we had to establish that number one, the two methods were substantially similar; that the outcome was the same, in other words the functionality was the same, that would be at the 40,000-foot level. But what was key to us, and it was a very important piece, is that the stipulation in the law, they had to be interchangeable. And so consequently, when we looked at the source code - I was able to read source code - I showed the jurors that the two methods in software were not the same, nor could they be interchangeable because the hardware that was involved between the old processor and the new processor - you couldn't load the new software methodology in the old system and expect that it was going to work, and the converse of that was true. And we're talking about Samsung's patent claim about combining a mobile phone with email [and a camera]? Hogan: Exactly, in fact that is the one issue that we left on Wednesday night, the first day of deliberation, that had hung us up. And I, being the foreman, said because we had ran over and the US marshals had already told us that we could not work past six o'clock, and we were approaching six o'clock. And we had hung up on this for over an hour and 45 minutes. I told them let's leave it, let's come back fresh in the morning and then let's deal with this. And it was that evening that when I was sitting at home relaxing - and I have the type of mind when I'm relaxing doing one thing, my mind is running 90 miles an hour typically thinking about my distraction. In this case, I was thinking about that specific patent and I was thinking of each and every claim and each and every claim limitation. And I know there are people out there that question what I have said and why it was important. But the task that I put it to, for myself, while I was going through this thought process is: let's pretend that this patent is mine. And what I mean by the term "can I defend this patent", there's a process you go through in this country that you go through before a patent issued. When the patent office determines that they are going to reject your patent based on a claim you are making against prior art - and in my case I had several of those - you have to be able to lay the groundwork and defend your claim that in light of the prior art it would not have been obvious to the individual who drafted that prior art that the new methodology could have been accomplished. So that's the comparison and that's what I meant by defending the patent. And I'm going through this thought process of the patent that was involved and the prior art example that was involved, and making that comparison. And when I got through with that comparison and that test, I asked myself the question: could I defend this patent, not in the court, could I defend this patent through that process just like I had to do my own if this were mine? And that's the "aha" moment that you hear talked about out there. The answer to that question for me was yes. And so it just hit me that evening that that process I needed to explain to my fellow jurors because I was the only one that had ever gone through that process among them. And there's a lot of misconception - even in the engineering community today among individuals who have never had to go through that process - of what that process consists of. BBC: Do you think if you hadn't been on the jury then we might have ended up with a very different verdict? Hogan: I think so. But let's not say me specifically. ... And that, ladies and gentlemen, truly says it all. |
| |
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi48.tinypic.com%2Fl9u0k.jpg&hash=8583e9defcc975108607a09d78e7332b6f717087)
"Samsung" NIJE isplatio "Eplu" milijardu dolara u novčićima od pet centi (http://www.blic.rs/IT/340322/Samsung-NIJE-isplatio-Eplu-milijardu-dolara-u-novcicima-od-pet-centi)
Ali, s druge strane:
Did Apple Just Help Samsung Sell A Ton Of Smartphones? (http://www.forbes.com/sites/benzingainsights/2012/08/28/did-apple-just-help-samsung-sell-a-ton-of-smartphones/)
Quote
On Friday, a California jury ruled in favor of Apple (http://www.forbes.com/companies/apple/) (NASDAQ: AAPL (http://www.forbes.com/search/?q=aapl)) and ordered Samsung to pay just over $1 billion (http://www.benzinga.com/news/12/08/2859443/jury-awards-apple-1-05b-in-samsung-patent-dispute) for infringing on the iPhone maker's patents. Many critics have been quick to analyze the verdict (http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/apple-samsung-jury-recommends-billion-damages-apple/story?id=17076455#.UDtU19ZlTho), but there appears to be an interesting side effect that no one saw coming: increased sales of the Galaxy S III.
According to Trip Chowdhry, the managing director of equity research at Global Equities Research, customers "rushed" to buy Samsung's flagship phone after the verdict was announced.
Chowdhry investigated multiple retail outlets — including Costco (NASDAQ: COST (http://www.forbes.com/search/?q=cost)), AT&T (http://www.forbes.com/companies/att/) (NYSE: T (http://www.forbes.com/search/?q=t)), Sprint (NYSE: S (http://www.forbes.com/search/?q=s)), and Verizon (NYSE: VZ (http://www.forbes.com/search/?q=vz)) — to get an update on how the Galaxy S III performed this weekend.
Two out of three Costco stores were completely sold out of the T-Mobile (http://www.forbes.com/places/al/mobile/) and AT&T versions of the phone. The third location had the T-Mobile version in stock, but was sold out of the AT&T version.
All five of the AT&T stores that Chowdhry investigated experienced "significant sales" of the device, which has been outselling the iPhone 4S this month. The Galaxy S III has also outsold Apple's smartphone at all five of the Sprint stores and all three of the Verizon stores that Chowdhry examined. However, only two of those Sprint locations had completely sold out of the Samsung-built device.
This is an intriguing outcome for Samsung, which had already produced smartphones that collectively outsold the iPhone by more than 20 million units (http://www.benzinga.com/news/12/07/2746900/samsung-sales-top-apples-iphone-by-20-million-units). While it is unlikely that consumers decided to buy a Galaxy S III on the verdict alone, (which affects older Samsung devices), it is interesting to see where consumer desire is headed as we approach the release (http://www.benzinga.com/news/12/08/2851316/iphone-5-to-launch-on-september-21) of the iPhone 5.
The demand for the iPhone 4S' successor is through the roof (http://www.benzinga.com/news/12/07/2764929/apple-iphone-5-demand-breaks-new-record). Competitors are so concerned about the iPhone 5′s arrival that they are doing everything in their power (http://www.benzinga.com/news/12/08/2840483/zynga-expands-game-lineup-with-new-nokia-deal) to stifle its unveiling (http://www.benzinga.com/news/12/08/2803005/apples-biggest-competitor-to-undercut-the-iphone-5s-unveiling). Once the iPhone 5 is released, the world will be watching to see if the Galaxy S III can continue to compete successfully.
Regardless of current or future sales, Chowdhry stands by his belief (http://www.benzinga.com/news/12/08/2852042/apple-samsung-patent-battle-could-lead-to-cross-licensing-deal) that the jury verdict will lead to a cross-licensing deal between Apple and Samsung.
I onda malo anegdotalnog dokazivanja:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/114476892281222708332/posts/246srfbqg6G#114476892281222708332/posts/246srfbqg6G (https://plus.google.com/u/0/114476892281222708332/posts/246srfbqg6G#114476892281222708332/posts/246srfbqg6G)
Quote
Enrique Gutierrez (https://plus.google.com/u/0/114476892281222708332/posts/114476892281222708332)Aug 25, 2012 (edited) (https://plus.google.com/u/0/114476892281222708332/posts/114476892281222708332/posts/246srfbqg6G) - PublicI can't make this stuff up
I'm sitting in a Starbucks doing random whatever over an iced americano. While I waiting for my drink, I watched a guy with his friend, pick up a newspaper; and start to remark on the Samsung Apple verdict.
Guy: "Wait, so what they're saying is, Samsung is the same as Apple?"
Friend: "I know, right? Makes me think twice about how much I paid for my Mac Book"
Guy: "Seriously"
Not 10 minutes later, a husband and wife, same newspaper:
Husband: "... Samsung's iPad is the same as Apple's iPad, and I paid how much for the Apple one? Honey, I told you they were a ripoff", after looking up the Samsung tablet on his iPhone.
Wife: "Oh wow," looking at the screen, "... that's a lot cheaper. Think we can return it?"
I put my Samsung QX410 on my table, and started to plug in, when he leans over to me, "Sorry, you don't mind if I ask, how much did you pay for your Samsung laptop?"
"Oh, no worries, it was $700." I replied.
I watched shock overcome his face, like actual shock. He looked at me, blankly, for an awkward amount of time, "Mind if I have a look?" he asked.
So, I obliged, and showed him a few things. He commented on Windows 7, so I opened up my virtual machine of OS/X... By the time the conversation was over, he was ready to kick Cupertino in the nuts, I think.
... Now, the punchline:
I'm writing this post after the FOURTH group of Starbucks patrons have made the connection that Samsung is now the same as Apple. They don't know the details, they don't really care, what they know is Apple is saying that Samsung is the same as Apple ... and with one simple Google Search, you get prices that are basically half for what seems to be the same products -- for nearly everything.
Two of these groups (including the husband/wife) asked me about my Samsung laptop, the second group noticed my Galaxy phone (also by Samsung)... Best billion dollar ad-campaign Samsung ever had.
Tokyo court gives win to Samsung after US loss (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19433019)
Quote
A court in Tokyo has ruled that Samsung Electronics did not infringe on patents held by Apple, a victory for the South Korean company.
The patent was related to transferring media content between devices.
It comes after Samsung lost a key patent case in the US last week and was ordered to pay more than $1bn (£664m) in damages.
This is one of many cases brought to courts around the world by the two smartphone market leaders.
"We welcome the court's decision, which confirmed our long-held position that our products do not infringe Apple's intellectual property," said Samsung in a statement to the BBC.
Tokyo District Judge Tamotsu Shoji dismissed the case filed by Apple in August, finding that Samsung was not in violation of Apple patents related to synchronising music and video data between devices and servers.
Sales ban
On 24 August, a US court ruled Samsung had infringed Apple patents for mobile devices, including the iPhone and iPad.
The company has vowed to continue to fight against Apple saying it will appeal against the US ruling.
Apple is now seeking a ban on sales of eight Samsung phones in the US market.
On 6 December, US District Judge Lucy Koh, who presided over the initial trial, will hear Apple's plea for an injunction against the Samsung phones, although it does not include the most recent Samsung phone to hit the market, the Galaxy S3.
Uzeti sa zrnom soli:
Alleged Apple UDID Hack Raises Potential Privacy Questions for FBI (http://slashdot.org/topic/cloud/alleged-apple-udid-hack-raises-potential-privacy-questions-for-fbi/)
Quote
Hackers have allegedly stolen millions of Apple UDIDs from an FBI laptop, raising some potentially uncomfortable questions about privacy.
It could turn out to be a very bad week for Apple and the FBI.
On Sept. 4, news began to circulate around the Web that hackers associated with AntiSec (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisec_Movement) had stolen more than 12 million Apple Unique Device Identifiers (UDIDs) for iOS devices from an FBI agent's laptop. In a Sept. 4 posting via Pastebin (http://pastebin.com/nfVT7b0Z), those attackers offered download links to what they claimed were 1 million of those IDs, which are linked to individual devices.
"The original file contained around 12,000,000 devices. We decided a million would be enough to release," read that posting (http://pastebin.com/nfVT7b0Z). "We trimmed out other personal data as, full names, cell numbers, addresses, [zip codes], etc." The writer went on to claim the information came from the Dell Vostro laptop of an FBI agent with the FBI Regional Cyber Action Team and the New York FBI Office Evidence Response Team, "breached using the AtomicReferenceArray vulnerability on Java."
The rest of the posting features callouts to Syrian rebels, a certain Russian punk-rock group, and various hackers either arrested or killed over the past couple decades.
Are these UDIDs authentic? That's the question of the hour for pretty much everybody involved. Forbes writer Andy Greenberg, who covers data security and hacker culture, downloaded the file and poked around a bit (http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2012/09/04/anonymous-hackers-claim-to-release-one-million-apple-devices-unique-identifiers-stolen-from-fbi/):
"While there's no easy way to confirm the authenticity or the source of the released data, I downloaded the encrypted file and decrypted it, and it does seem to be an enormous list of 40-character strings made up of numbers and the letters A through F, just like Apple UDIDs. Each string is accompanied by a longer collection of characters that Anonymous says is an Apple Push Notification token and what appears to be a username and an indication as to whether the UDID is attached to an iPad, iPhone or iPod touch."
Meanwhile, TheNextWeb is offering a way to check whether one's UDID ended up released by AntiSec. "Just input your UDID/UUID into the form and we'll run it against the database," the publication posted Sept. 4 (http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/09/04/heres-check-apple-device-udid-compromised-antisec-leak/). "Of course, TNW won't store your identifier." Which is more than could be said for the FBI, if the information about the hack turns out to be true.
If the FBI is truly storing UDIDs, that raises some interesting privacy questions. First, how did the agency obtain said information, and to what purpose? Why did all that personal data reside on the laptop of one special agent?
So far, the FBI has not issued an official response to the alleged leak. Apple had already started phasing out apps (http://www.insidemobileapps.com/2012/03/26/what-apples-udid-phase-out-means-to-the-ios-ecosystem/) that relied on UDIDs to track users, reportedly because of privacy concerns; this hack could drive them to take additional steps to safeguard that data, especially if millions of Apple users' personal data ends up spilled all over the Web.
Kinezi, dakle, da bi ispunili sve narudžbine za iphone 5 lepo dovuku decu iz škola u Fokskon, kažu im da je to praksa i onda ih ostave da dva meseca prave ajFoun 5. Svi srećni.
Allegations Chinese Students Forced to Work on iPhone 5s (https://www.rebelmouse.com/leandro/#allegations_chinese_students_f-30887404.html)
Quote
In what may be the most compulsory internship experience you've ever heard of, the Shanghai Daily is reporting that thousands of Chinese students from schools neighboring a Foxconn factory in the city of Huai'an were forced to help fulfill iPhone 5 orders (http://goo.gl/jpK7s).
According to the paper, students were taken by bus to the plant, and started working on the production line last Thursday after the Taiwanese-owned company was badly in need of extra hands to keep up with assembly of the hotly anticipated new version of Apple's iPhone line.
Teachers from nearby schools confirmed via a radio report that classes had been interrupted, as these internships would fulfill their pupils' need to "experience working conditions." The student workers received the equivalent of $243.97 per month as compensation for working six days a week, and clocking in 12 hours per day.
More:
A Huai'an University student posting under the name of Dalingzhuimengnan said Foxconn was badly in need of 10,000 workers but students were looking forward to returning to classrooms to continue their academic studies which had been seriously disrupted. MengniuIQ84 wrote that the authorities had ordered the schools to send students to assist Foxconn but said that the factory neither informed parents nor signed agreements with students.... Yu Fangqiang, executive director of Nanjing-based Tianxiagong, a non-government organization focusing on policy advocacy regarding social issues, said he wanted to help students take legal action against their schools.But some refused for fear of schools taking revenge by not allowing them to graduate, he said.via Shanghai Daily: http://goo.gl/jpK7s (http://goo.gl/jpK7s)
QuoteThe student workers received the equivalent of $243.97 per month as compensation for working six days a week, and clocking in 12 hours per day.
Toliko sam i ja dobijao, samo za 6 i po dana u nedelji po 14 sati po danu. I nisam proizvodio ajfon! :oops:
Predlažem da se mi sa Sagite udružimo i otkupimo taj Epl, ako je toliko dobra kompanija. Da bude vajde i od ovog topika.
Kolka je prosečna kineska plata?
zna li se kad izlazi novi iphone?
Zna se: sutra xwink2
Izašao iPhone 5 (http://isvijet.com.hr/sluzbeno-predstavljen-novi-iphone-5-izgled-i-specifikacije/) :lol:
posle 22 godine, došlo vreme da današnji datum pamtim po dobru!!!!! :lol:
Живео Самсунг! xfuck5 Доле шабански Епл!
18% tanji, duplo brži CPU, duplo brža grafika, kamera od 28 megapiksela (??? da li je ovo uopšte moguće?), veći ekran za oko 25% (to cenim po tome što su dodali peti red ikona), podrška za 1080p video... Jaka mašina.
moćno deluje zaista, nadam se da će ga provajderi davati na ugovor.
http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/12/apple-iphone-5-liveblog/ (http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/12/apple-iphone-5-liveblog/)
Nije kamera od 28 megapixsela. Ostala je od 8mpxile samo su je malo doterali, oštrinu i stabilnost, a to što se naveo je kao fora kad se napravi panoramska fotka od 8 slika pa onda ona ima 28 megapixela, nije mi samo jasno kako, vrv neka matematika x puta y.
samsung je big shit, sa naglaskom na velikm tj prevelik, da bi bio telefon.
Quote from: Barbarin on 13-09-2012, 10:19:07
Nije kamera od 28 megapixsela. Ostala je od 8mpxile samo su je malo doterali, oštrinu i stabilnost, a to što se naveo je kao fora kad se napravi panoramska fotka od 8 slika pa onda ona ima 28 megapixela, nije mi samo jasno kako, vrv neka matematika x puta y.
samsung je big shit, sa naglaskom na velikm tj prevelik, da bi bio telefon.
Aha, to sam ja na brzinu čitao Yahoov live blog pa sam video cifru i zabezekno se. Hvala!
U drugim vestima:
Američkim pilotima je sada dopušteno da iPad koriste u svim fazama leta (http://paritynews.com/hardware/tablets/item/295-faa-permits-american-airlines-to-use-ipads-in-cockpit-during-all-phases-of-flight) :cry:
Ali sa druge strane, škola koja je sve svoje laptopove zamenila iPadima, sada kuka i veli da se moraju vratiti na laptop (http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2012/09/11/the-school-that-swapped-its-laptops-for-ipads-and-wants-to-switch-back/). Mislim... retardi. Tablet računar ipak nije isto što i laptop...
Takođe:
Samsung expected to sue Apple over iPhone 5 tomorrow (http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/samsung-expected-to-sue-apple-over-iphone-5-tomorrow-20120911/)
Quote
The courtroom battle (http://www.geek.com/articles/apple/jury-finds-samsung-guilty-in-apple-patent-case-over-1b-in-damages-20120824/) between Apple and Samsung seems to be far from over, and come tomorrow Apple is in for a major headache as soon as it makes the iPhone 5 (http://www.geek.com/articles/tagged/iphone-5) official. That's because Samsung is poised to sue the company over patents it owns relating to the LTE (http://www.geek.com/articles/tagged/lte) connectivity the new smartphone is expected to use.
All Samsung (http://www.geek.com/articles/tagged/samsung) needs to confirm is that the iPhone 5 is shipping with 4G LTE and it can then apparently set its lawyers into action. As is typical with these patent lawsuits, Samsung will most likely seek an import ban meaning the iPhone 5 may not be able to leave its manufacturing plants and make it to the US to fulfill pre-orders. If such a thing ruling was made, Apple (http://www.geek.com/articles/tagged/apple) would most likely do a deal that meant it no longer pursued Samsung product bans, and might even forget about that billion dollar payout.
Facing Samsung in court again may not phase Apple even though the shoe will firmly be on the other foot this time. However, there's two other companies set to try and block sales of the new iPhone. The first is the company behind the GooPhone i5, which successfully managed to patent the design of its phone in China (http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/iphone-5-copied-and-design-patented-in-china-2012095/) that just happens to look like the leaked shots we have seen of the iPhone 5. If the two phones do indeed look the same, expect a lawsuit.
Apple may easily get that case thrown out on a prior art claim, but then there's HTC to deal with. Apple is attempting to get two HTC patents relating to data transmission invalidated, but the comments of a US trade judge recently make that seem unlikely (http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/htc-patent-lawsuit-could-see-ipad-and-iphone-5-banned-20120910/). If Apple doesn't succeed, then it either has to settle with HTC or face both an iPad and iPhone 5 ban.
The iPhone 5 launch event is happening tomorrow, that is for certain. Whether Apple will have any iPhone 5 stock available to fulfill preorders in a few weeks is becoming increasingly uncertain.
Read more at The Korea Times (http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2012/09/182_119602.html), via ZDNet (http://www.zdnet.com/samsung-to-sue-apple-over-4g-lte-in-iphone-5-7000004015/)
Quote from: Barbarin on 13-09-2012, 10:19:07
samsung je big shit, sa naglaskom na velikm tj prevelik, da bi bio telefon.
Превелик да би био телефон? Мислиш, по габариту? Пре свега, "галаксији" већ јесу телефон, између осталог, па се може расправљати само о његовој употревљивости. "Галакси" кеца купио сам прошле године на пролеће и то је била једна од бољих инвестиција последњих година, пошто он мени није само телефон, већ мултифункцијски уређај у сваком смислу. После телефонирања, највише га користим као навигацију, па као подсетник и фотоапарат, помало се на њему играм и читам, сурфујем по нету... Да је макар мало мањи, део тих функција биле би бесмислене, пре свега то што ради као ГПС навигација. Што се мене тиче, величина му је таман.
Наравно, сад неко може да каже да ови Еплови статусни симболи раде исто то, можда и боље. Али "андроид" је "андроид", нуди се гомила корисних апликација од којих су неке направљене код нас, за нашу употребу: плаћање паркинга, преглед саобраћајних камера, провера броја паркинг места по јавним гаражама, е-банкинг... Имам све то, ферцера, а нисам платио ни динара. Самсунг, кад се погледа оно најважније, однос перформансе-понуда-цена, просто није у истој класи с Еплом. Ове "ај-курацпалац" играчке су статусни симболи, па ко хоће да издвоји неколико стотина евра за сличицу начете јабучице, само напред. Одох ја сад бесплатно да апдејтујем моје корисне апликације. 8-)
Samsung istovremeno prodaje softver govnermentima da mogu da špijuniraju korisnike tih aparata.
@john
ma nema to veze sa statusom, ne znam sto to neces da prihvatis. mislim, apple je jednako status samo za ...hm, kogagod. :lol:
prosto se radi o tome da apple jeste bolji od samsunga, brzi, funkcionalniji (bar za ono za sta meni treba) pa i lepsi :lol: od samsunga. koristim i jedno i drugo i popizdim kad mi galaksi II zastopa, s eplom se to nikad ne desava. tablete ne mogu ni da poredim, druga planeta.
i da, jeste da sam i ja ranije pljuvala epl zbog milion polisis koje imaju, al znaju ljudi sta rade. em imas funkcionalnost, em je to sve skopcano s dizajnom koji je nekako organik i pravljen za prosecnog coveka. sve nekako ide instinktivno. e sad, sto u srbiji kostaju i ne moze na 0% kredit, to je vec druga prica.
Epl je statusni simbol samo u Srbiji i u sličnim siromašnim backwaterima.
A inače, ubodu oni tu i tamo superioran proizvod, ali jasno je da su Epl fanbojzi najveća pošast zapadnog sveta i služe pre svega da ovi ostali imaju kome da se podsmevaju. :lol:
Епл је статусни симбол у смислу по коме је то "мерцедес" (био?), јер при томе не негирам његов квалитет. Али се сам гура у хај-енд тржиште, вероватно им је самима јасно на коју клијентелу рачунају. Отуда моја реченица "ко хоће да плаћа сличицу начете јабучице".
Што се функционалности тиче, па то му дође као нека лична оцена. Додуше, само сам једном прошле године поредио братовљев "ај-нешто" и мој "галакси", али могао сам да поредим само апликације које су тренутно биле инстралиране. На S1 немам никакву примедбу, за моје је потребе потпуно функционалан, у претходном посту сам навео доста примера. Сад, наравно, можда неко те апарате користи за неке друге ствари, али пошто не могу ни да замислим шта би то могло бити, онда кад неко каже да је Епл "фунционалнији", не могу да верујем да реч.
Додуше, и не занима ме, јер као што рекох, гледам пре свега однос перформансе-понуда-цена. И да је на кредит од 0% не могу да замислим ниједан разлог због кога бих прешао на Епл.
А што се кочења тиче, то је урбана легенда. Бар за мој уређај. Успорио се само једном кад је било активно више апликација, међу којима једна захтевна игра. Зазвонио је и после сам заборавио да све то погасим. Ако је то та Еплова предност, нека буде. Мој фирмвер је сасвим стабилан и овај ће уређај остати овакав док не цркне. А носим га у џепу на бутини, дакле шутирам га непрестано, лети се сатима пржи залепљен за фошерфајбну, зими се са мном ваља по снегу, гњече га по концертима... И ево га, здрав је и читав.
Mislio sam na samsung s3, pošto zadnjih meseci se oni kolju.
Ima i za iphone parkiranje u srbiji, ovo ostalo nisam tražio. Dal ste čuli za jailbreak, kojim gomila aplikacija postaje dostupna/besplatna, a i hakeri su odradili neke stvari koje nemaju u org, a izgledaju bolje, mada ima stvari koje i oni prodaju.
Samsung mi deluje krhko, ne znam dal bih se usudio da ga nosim u džepu na poslu kojim se bavim, isto tako ne znam kakav je u multitaskingu, al kad sam na 3gs-u istovremeno slušao muziku, švrljao po netu, skajpovao sa dve osobe, i pisao još nešto, prosto sam se oduševio. Mogu samo da zamislim kako je to sad na novijim sve još brže i bolje.
Sa Jabubom su najveći problem autorska prava, jer svaka pesma, svaka aplikacija košta, 0.99 pa nadalje, aplikacije su ponekad i besplatene par dana, i kasnije updejt te ne košta ništa.
@john
razumem i cool sam s tim sto pises, sve zavisi od toga za sta ti treba.
ja sad moram da menjam laptop posto mi je stari na izdisaju i definitivno uzimam PC a ne retina mac lepotana, posto koristim dosta softvera koji je pravljen samo za PC, a mrzi me da se akam sa wmware-om.
Quote from: Джон Рейнольдс on 13-09-2012, 12:26:54
Епл је статусни симбол у смислу по коме је то "мерцедес" (био?), јер при томе не негирам његов квалитет. Али се сам гура у хај-енд тржиште,
Kako za šta, tj. kako za koji proizvod. Ajpod je u nekom trenutku mislim dostigao u Americi tri četvrtine tržišnog udela na polju mp3 plejera. Nema ništa haj end oko toga. To je plain vanilla, to je jugo, to ima svaka kuća. Ajpod je kao klineks ili bendejd - sinonim za proizvod.
Quote from: Father Jape on 13-09-2012, 12:36:13
Quote from: Джон Рейнольдс on 13-09-2012, 12:26:54
Епл је статусни симбол у смислу по коме је то "мерцедес" (био?), јер при томе не негирам његов квалитет. Али се сам гура у хај-енд тржиште,
Kako za šta, tj. kako za koji proizvod. Ajpod je u nekom trenutku mislim dostigao u Americi tri četvrtine tržišnog udela na polju mp3 plejera. Nema ništa haj end oko toga. To je plain vanilla, to je jugo, to ima svaka kuća. Ajpod je kao klineks ili bendejd - sinonim za proizvod.
da, i nije tako samo u americi. u austriji ga ima svako.
Ne znam za samsung, al me iphone oduševio recimo ovim, slušaš muziku dok šetaš gradom, zove te neko, muzika se sama pauzira i nakom završenog razgovora sama nastavlja tamo gde je stala. Tokom razgovora ekran se gasi, tj kad pričaš i primakneš telefon licu, ekran se ugasi, kad odaljiš on se upali. Sviđa mi se i što ima malo dugmića, home button, za zaključavanje, za kontrolu glasnoće i za gašenje tonova.
Moja jednina zamerka na 3 gs je što nije glasan kad zvoni i što vibracija nije jaka, to su moje jedine zamerke.
Quote from: Barbarin on 13-09-2012, 12:45:28
Ne znam za samsung, al me iphone oduševio recimo ovim, slušaš muziku dok šetaš gradom, zove te neko, muzika se sama pauzira i nakom završenog razgovora sama nastavlja tamo gde je stala. Tokom razgovora ekran se gasi, tj kad pričaš i primakneš telefon licu, ekran se ugasi, kad odaljiš on se upali. Sviđa mi se i što ima malo dugmića, home button, za zaključavanje, za kontrolu glasnoće i za gašenje tonova.
Moja jednina zamerka na 3 gs je što nije glasan kad zvoni i što vibracija nije jaka, to su moje jedine zamerke.
ovo sve imas i na galaksi II i III.
то што си рекао џејп није истина, епл јесте статусни симбол у америци, много више него што је код нас, а у европи, рецимо у немачкој, где ми живи пријатељица и бави се графичким дизајном у фирми коју изнајмљују, између осталих највеће софтверске куће и холивудски студији, која, наравно ради на меку/еплу због свих погодности које та платформа пружа њеном послу, пуна је разноразних увреда на рачун корисника еплових уређаја са којима има контакт, пошто им служе, искључиво, да их отворе у 'фенси' кафићу, показујући тиме осталим смртницима да 'нису вредни'.
епл овде видим најчешће као аномалију, и, на жалост, већина корисника које познајем су празилуковићи
едит.
наравно да не причамо овде о ајподу, који је и код нас постао неприметан захваљујући свом броју, а и изашао joш 2001 године и био суштински револуционарни производ (наравно као дизајнерски и као технолошки напредак)
едит2. избрисао једно 'овде' и једно 'чак'
iPhone sam kupio nakon Nokie 5310, jel nisam znao niti sam tražio nešto drugo osim iPhona, da je jak (može da mi ispadne), da mogu muziku da slušam, da mogu na net, igrice i čitanje da ubijem dosadu, i tako. 240 eu i nije neka cena za kurčenje.
Već drugi put pišeš jel tamo gde treba da stoji jer. Ispravi se, molim te, grozno je.
530 do 700 фунти није 240 евра
QuoteApple confirmed yesterday that the iPhone 5 will be released on September 21. Unlocked, the phone will cost £529 (16GB), £599 (32GB) and £699 (64GB). Prices will be lower with a contract and providers are likely to issue prices for those very soon.
извор:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/9540423/iPhone-5-price-4G-and-everything-else-you-need-to-know.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/9540423/iPhone-5-price-4G-and-everything-else-you-need-to-know.html)
Što lepo ne kažu to je džepni PC. Mislim, tehnologija je dovoljno smanjila kućni PC da može da se nosi sa sobom. Jedino je monitor minimalan. Sad kad izmisle projektivne monitore, biće to druga priča. Živećemo u hologramskom oblaku...
Šta ćemo sa prstima? Promašujem slova i na ovom velikom laptopu.
Quote from: scallop on 13-09-2012, 14:24:38
Šta ćemo sa prstima? Promašujem slova i na ovom velikom laptopu.
Upravo to - Scallop jednostavno pojašnjava zašto Smartfoun nije PiSi. Imaju različite namene, različite interfejse i daju različite rezultate u istim stvarima. U načelu, smartfounovi i tableti su sprave koje mnogo bolje služe za konzumiranje informacije nego za njeno uređivanje ili proizvođenje.
To je rezervisano za kiboršku tehnologiju. Takođe - uskoro! Svima to ionako fali :twisted:
Ja znam koji deo mog tela će prvi da dobije kibroška pojačanja :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Neće služiti za uređivanje informacije, to sa sigurnošću mogu da kažem!!!!!!!
Quote from: Lord Kufer on 13-09-2012, 14:21:09
Što lepo ne kažu to je džepni PC.
Pa verovatno zato što je u Epl rečniku PC sininim za Windows PC, a kategorija 'džepni PC' se i zaista odnosi na Windows PDA uređaje, sada već zastarele, bez telefunken funkcionalnosti...
Nisam se dobro odrazio, ja sam svoj fon platio 240 eu, polovan skoro ko nov.
@mac Oprosti.
Quote from: Meho Krljic on 13-09-2012, 15:13:46
Ja znam koji deo mog tela će prvi da dobije kibroška pojačanja :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Neće služiti za uređivanje informacije, to sa sigurnošću mogu da kažem!!!!!!!
Eto, čovek zna šta mu fali :lol:
Quote
Upravo to - Scallop jednostavno pojašnjava zašto Smartfoun nije PiSi. Imaju različite namene, različite interfejse i daju različite rezultate u istim stvarima. U načelu, smartfounovi i tableti su sprave koje mnogo bolje služe za konzumiranje informacije nego za njeno uređivanje ili proizvođenje.
ovaj mehan ponekad zna da bude koncizan i precizan!
Ali sasvim slučajno!!!!!!!!!
to se podrazumeva.
Quote from: дејан on 13-09-2012, 14:19:17
530 do 700 фунти није 240 евра
Кретање цена је прича за себе, већ сам мало писао о томе. I9000 с 16 гига меморије купио сам по набавној цени мало пред излазак двојке, рецимо у марту прошле године за 350 евра. У продавницама му је цена била 550-600 евра. Мени је лично сметало то да ми се по џепу тумба уређај који "вреди" толико, али сам проценио да би ми такав уређај послужио и да, вредело је купити га. Али НЕ БИХ дао 550-600 евра. Ту је штос. Зато су за мене ово статусни симболи. Јер заиста не видим шта то нови уређаји, прецењени, доносе толико ново да би их требало купити. А тек шта учинити са старом, претходном, сасвим функционалном машином?
Гледам, сад I9000, мени функционална и корисна машина, кошта 250 евра. Нов. Али наводно. Пријатељ преко кога сам "галаксија" купио и који ради у фирми која је увозник прича да продавци раде следеће, а то наслућује по томе који се резервни делови наручују... Увозник сад доста продаје маске за телефоне. Продавнице откупљују старе телефоне и само препакују електронику, ресетују систем и то продају као ново. Никад не треба куповати апарат из излога или са полице или из отворене кутије, мада мислим да се и те кутије лако могу наћи, а они жигови фалсификовати.
Но, хајде да кажемо да је ово земља где су преваранти ионако на сваком кораку, али и даље остаје мени нерешиво питање - чему куповина новог модела сваке године, а који не нуди ништа револуционарно ново? Статусни симбол, не може ме нико убедити да није. А ове рантове је заправо изазвало извештавање с промоције "ајфона" на РТС-овом сајту, као директан пренос, у толико сати десило се то-и-то. То раде само кад су утакмице, ратови или неки важни политички обрти. Јбт... :x Ако Епл или одвашњи заступније није платио скривену рекламу.
Quote from: Джон Рейнольдс on 13-09-2012, 18:05:17
...Но, хајде да кажемо да је ово земља где су преваранти ионако на сваком кораку...
sorry na oftopiku, ali moram negde da napisem da je skandalozno sto 8 nekih hemikalija - koje su potrebne mom ex-labu- kad bi narucivali u srbiji kostalo oko 4500 evra, a kad ih narucujes u becu, kostaju 2100. a tek poludim kad uzmem u obzir kakva je disproporcija u kolicini para koja se za research dobija tamo i ovde. nikako da lociram ko uzima toliku proviziju, nemoguce da carina i transport kostaju toliko. mislim, za ove moje, kupujemo u vienni, al ne do ti bog da moras da dilujes sa nasim spediterima i uvoznicima i vec kim.
Ма које царине. Ево, горе ти је егзактан податак. 350 евра, царињен телефон, оригинал паковање, све по пе-есу. У продавницама и до 600. Разлику од 250 евра поделе увозник и продавац. А тек оне персонализоване форе, ограничена и фенси издања... Ту су зараде астрономске. Добар ми је то пријатељ и често га виђам, па ми прича. Нисам запамтио који нови телефон су добили у "хелоу кити" варијанти, цео контигент је плануо за неку бесну лову. Има се-може се, али то је већ друга прича.
Како ја схватам ствари, рачунају да не постоји широко тржиште и онда се циљају купци који новац имају. А и лакше им је да зараде 250 евра на продаји једног комада него да зарађују 50 евра по комаду, па морају да их продају пет. Веће је цимање.
Quote from: Джон Рейнольдс on 13-09-2012, 18:47:17Како ја схватам ствари, рачунају да не постоји широко тржиште и онда се циљају купци који новац имају. А и лакше им је да зараде 250 евра на продаји једног комада него да зарађују 50 евра по комаду, па морају да их продају пет. Веће је цимање.
Nažalost ovako razmišlja preko 90% naših "biznismena"/"trgovaca".
Pre nekoliko godina kad sam uzimao Nokuju 5310, u najavi da izlazi u avgustu je stajala cena 160 eu (na stranom sajtu), kod nas se pojavila tek posle nove godine sa početnom cenom od 250/260 eura, a do tad je napolju opala cena za dvadesetak eura. Ima još gomila primera, preko patika, odeće, knjiga itd. Neko to sve kontroliše i opstruiše, isto kao što još uvek nema PayPal-a, meni je to i dalje nerazrešiva misterija, ono najmanje ostrvo u Pacifiku ispunjava uslove, a mi "zemlja u razvoju" ne.
Ovde bre ne znaju ni da spuste cenu leba popodne.
Čekaju Novu godinu da sklone letnju robu iz izloga...
Da neogrešim dušu ima ih i koji spuste cenu, ali su toliko retki da se jednostavno iznenadite.
Evo malo slika
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dodaj.rs%2Ff%2F2X%2Fl%2F4Oj0isNB%2F384166101510984707162622.jpg&hash=4149fdb8d1555d82263c54d4391bb1a95b930c67)
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dodaj.rs%2Ff%2F2x%2F112%2F3YRYzGsk%2F377881469347626431471150.jpg&hash=1ea42e6cc1b43ee06dff72f0aec683d5bf6424e5)
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dodaj.rs%2Ff%2Fh%2FqG%2F2dfHUOWV%2F292949526576537359040783.jpg&hash=ed7de5d950af3886650a4181eced35e19d404ec1)
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dodaj.rs%2Ff%2F3Q%2FiG%2F1a7z8lL%2F251740526456487371045127.jpg&hash=d37a7273726aff3fa425cabbb970306aea8ea646)
Pored novog telefona stiže i novi operativni sistem iOs 6 (http://www.omizio.com/apple/iphone/sve-ios-6-novosti-sa-wwdc-2012-keynotea-u-kratko/)
Malo bezazlene satire:
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/apple (http://theoatmeal.com/comics/apple)
Šokantna priča novinara koji se uvukao u fabriku "Epla" u Kini (http://www.021.rs/Info/Svet/Sokantna-prica-novinara-koji-se-uvukao-u-fabriku-Epla-u-Kini.html)
Kolko zapravo košta iPhone
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dodaj.rs%2Ff%2F1F%2Fin%2F103u2ma0%2Fiphone5-bom-comparison70.jpg&hash=dd8ad250d13564de24048cdfea677072fd43cb35)
Da ne ispadne da su drugi anđeli, evo kako Gugl reaguje na glasinu da će Acer na svojim telefonima koristiti Aliyun operativni sistem, umesto Androida: http://www.slashgear.com/google-threatened-acer-with-android-excommunication-claims-alibaba-13247461/ (http://www.slashgear.com/google-threatened-acer-with-android-excommunication-claims-alibaba-13247461/)
Aliyun je, dakako, OS koji je proizvod Alibabe, kineske verzije Amazona, i koji može da pokreće i Android aplikacije :lol:
Šljam ostaje šljam :lol:
iPhone 5 Misses Standardisation Opportunity (http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2012/09/iphone-5-misses-standardisation-opportunity/index.htm)
Quote
Perhaps more concerned about renewing its grip on the accessory market than avoiding more pointless electronic waste, Apple has apparently reneged on its 2009 commitment to the European Commission to use the micro-USB standard in its future products.Published 17:00, 14 September 12In amongst all the details of Apple's new phone and the incremental improvements it has made on earlier designs, one change that I'd been waiting for stood out. With this new design, Apple has finally followed the rest of the industry and mothballed the proprietary charging and data connector they were using, with its distinctive -- and presumably patented -- 30-pin design.
I'd been expecting some change following Apple's involvement in an industry standardisation activity a few years ago; Apple signed up to use the micro-USB standard along with everyone else, and were the last to make the switch away from their proprietary connectors.
Environmental ConcernsThe standard involved arose out of concern by and co-ordination from the European Commission. Every manufacturer of mobile phones was using different approaches to delivering effectively the same function - 5 volt power plus high-speed data connections to computers.
The result was bad for pretty much everyone, creating endless redundant gadgets with each phone generation, none of which were compatible with other phones. In particular, consumers were faced with the need to carry multiple chargers if they carried multiple devices, and with the premature redundancy of peripherals that connected to the phone if they switched brands. Manufacturers, hopeful their spin on the same idea might win the accessory market lock-in lottery this time, continued to churn out new variants on connectors with every generation.
To avoid pointless extra electronic waste -- as well as provide the convenience it would create for consumers -- the European Commission strongly encouraged the industry in 2007 to agree a standard for power and data connectors.
The result in 2009 was a pair of new industry standards - CENELEC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Committee_for_Electrotechnical_Standardization) EN 62684 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_External_Power_Supply) and ETSI (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Telecommunications_Standards_Institute) EN 301489-34, which together finessed the pre-existing micro-USB standard and set it as the new standard for phone power and data connections in Europe. Aware that such standards need a little help to get established, the European Commission went on to seek a Memorandum of Understanding from all the important players. Everyone - including Apple (http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/rtte/chargers/questions/index_en.htm#8) - agreed to set 2011 as a target for implementation.
As the phone market is fairly fast-moving, every other manufacturer easily met the deadline. Despite the long notice period, Apple stuck with its proprietary connector, and even the iPhone 4 retained it. So a change in connector in 2012 came as no surprise.Lost OpportunityThe only problem is, Apple has reneged on that commitment to the European Commission to change to micro-USB like everyone else. Instead, they have introduced a completely new proprietary connector. Dubbed "Lightning", it is quite unlike any other connector in the industry. But it appears to only offer power and data connections -- with HDMI via a dongle (http://www.theverge.com/2012/9/13/3329062/apple-lightning-hdmi-vga-cable-adapter-coming-months), which is also possible with micro-USB (http://htcpedia.com/news/HTC-One-X-S-TV-Out-Connect-HDTV-MHL-HDMI-Cable.html) -- while forcing customers to once again either carry two chargers or spend money to buy an adaptor that is only useful for Apple phones.
Yes, they are offering to sell customers an adaptor (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57512245-37/apple-to-sell-micro-usb-adapter-for-lightning-but-only-in-europe/). But that doesn't actually achieve the waste reduction objective they signed up for; in fact it creates more electronic waste for the future to deal with, in the form of adaptors that only serve a single device family. More than that, the fact it's an option extra undermines the ubiquity of the standard.
Why has Apple done this? Nokia, for example, innovated with wireless charging but still kept the micro-USB connector in the Lumia 920 (http://www.nokia.com/gb-en/products/phone/lumia920/specifications/). I asked Apple to comment, but so far they've failed to do so. Apparently Lightning doesn't offer compatibility (http://money.cnn.com/2012/09/13/technology/apple-lightning-adapter/) with earlier iPod/iPhone/iPad accessories either, even via the 30-pin-to-Lightning adaptor they will be selling, so I can only guess that they cherish the power to junk earlier accessories and then create an exclusive after-market in new accessories using their -- once again presumably patented -- proprietary connector. Locking customers in - and competitors out - appears to be a higher priority for Apple than honouring standardisation commitments or avoiding unnecessary electronic waste.
Follow Simon as @webminkon Twitter (http://www.twitter.com/webmink)andIdenti.Ca (http://identi.ca/webmink/)and also onGoogle+ (http://gplus.to/webmink)
[/size]
Srećom, alternativa je tu!
There is something magical about Firefox OS (http://rawkes.com/articles/there-is-something-magical-about-firefox-os)
Quote
Over the past year and a half I've been spending more and more of my time working with Mozilla's latest project, Firefox OS. During that time I've fallen in love with the project and what it stands for, in ways that I've never experienced with a technology platform before.
Let me be perfectly clear; Firefox OS is the start of something huge. It's a revolution in waiting. A breath of fresh air. A culmination of bleeding-edge technology. It's magical and it's going to change everything.What is Firefox OS?For those of you wondering what on earth I'm on about, let me bring you up to speed.Firefox OS is a new mobile operating system developed by Mozilla's Boot to Gecko (B2G) project. It uses a Linux kernel and boots into a Gecko-based runtime engine, which lets users run applications developed entirely using HTML, JavaScript, and other open Web application APIs.
>Mozilla Developer Network (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox_OS)
In short, Firefox OS is about taking the technologies behind the Web, like JavaScript, and using them to produce an entire mobile operating system. Just let that sink in for a moment — it's a mobile OS powered by JavaScript!
To do this, a slightly-customised version of Gecko (the engine behind Firefox) has been created that introduces the new JavaScript APIs necessary to create a phone-like experience (https://wiki.mozilla.org/WebAPI#APIs). This includes things like WebTelephony to make phone calls, WebSMS to send text messages, and the Vibration API to, well, vibrate things.
But Firefox OS is much more than the latest Web technologies being used in crazy ways, as awesome as that is, it's also a combination of many other projects at Mozilla into a single vision — the Web as a platform. Some of these projects include our Open Web Apps initiative (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Apps) and Persona (https://login.persona.org/about), our solution to identity and logins on the Web (formally known as BrowserID). It's absolutely fascinating to see so many different projects at Mozilla coalesce into a single, coherent vision.
I'll leave the description there as this entry isn't about explaining the project in fine detail, though more information can be found on the Firefox OS pages on MDN (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox_OS). I definitely recommend checking them out.Why Firefox OS?So you might be thinking, "This sounds great, but why use JavaScript to build a phone?" And you'd be right, that's a really important question to ask. The good news is that there are plenty of reasons why this is a good idea, besides making Web developers weak at the knees.
The two major reasons are that Firefox OS fills a gap in the mobile market, and that it provides an alternative to the current proprietary and restrictive mobile landscape.Closing a gap in the mobile marketIt's no surprise to anyone that smartphones are often ridiculously expensive, even in areas of the world that are perceived to have high levels of income. But if you thought they were expensive in countries that have the disposable income to afford them, consider for a moment that a 16GB iPhone 4S costs the equivalent of £615 (http://store.apple.com/br/browse/home/shop_iphone/family/iphone/iphone4s) in a developing market like Brazil — that's over £100 more expensive than the same phone in the UK!
Now, those inflated prices in Brazil are mainly down to high levels of import tax. Apple are apparently working to avoid that in the future by building local production lines in the country. Regardless, it points out a key issue in that expensive, high-end devices aren't always an option in all areas of the world. Let alone the fact that in some societies you might not want to publicly brandish a phone the price of a small car (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Brazil).
So what do you do if you want a smartphone experience without shelling out a stupid amount of money? You could turn to the cheap Android devices but they tend to run poorly.
Fortunately, this is where Firefox OS comes in...The goal of Firefox OS isn't to compete with high-end devices, but to offer entry- to mid-level smartphones at feature phone prices.
>Bonnie Cha (http://allthingsd.com/20120906/mozilla-makes-a-mobile-web-browser-feel-like-a-smartphone)
Firefox OS fits this gap in the market perfectly. It offers a smartphone experience on cheap, low-end hardware that is comparable to an Android experience on mid-range hardware. That is not a joke.
For example, I am currently testing JavaScript games on a Firefox OS device that costs £50 (arguably, a very low-end device). You may expect them to run pretty poorly but they not only run much faster than the same games running in an Android browser (Firefox or Chrome) on the same device, they run as fast, if not faster than the same game running in an Android browser on a much better device that costs 4 or 5 times as much.
Why the huge performance improvements over browsers in Android on identical devices? It's because of the lack of stuff going on between Gecko and the hardware, meaning things like JavaScript can run at full pelt. So much for JavaScript being slow!
This JavaScript performance on such cheap hardware is one of the reasons why I'm convinced that Firefox OS is the beginning of something huge.
I should point out that Mozilla isn't necessarily launching with a £50 device, it's just one that we're currently using for development and testing.Providing an alternative, open platformThe second reason for 'Why Firefox OS?' is that it's an attempt to not only provide an open alternative mobile platform, but to stand up to and try and influence the big proprietary mobile players to change things.Mozilla's mission since its outset in 1998, first as a software project and later as a foundation and company, has been to provide open technology that challenges a dominant corporate product.
>Steve Lohr (http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/why-mozilla-is-entering-the-smartphone-war/)
Mozilla is attempting to replicate its success with Firefox, in which it stormed the browser market and showed users that there is an alternative, one that lets them be in control of how they use the Web.This time, it's the mobile Web that's threatened, not by Microsoft but by Apple and Google, the leading smartphone platforms. With their native apps, locked-down platforms, proprietary software stores, and capricious developer rules, Apple and Google are making Web technology less relevant.
Thomas Claburn (http://www.informationweek.com/development/mobility/mozillas-firefox-os-seeks-innovation-wit/240007065)
On mobile, one of the main areas that needs improving is application portability...For all the excitement around mobile apps, they seem a step backward in one respect: they tie users to a particular operating system and devices that support it. The Web, by contrast, evolved so that content is experienced much the same way on any hardware.
Mozilla, maker of the Firefox Web browser, is determined to make the same thing true for smartphones.
Don Clark (http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/09/06/backers-tout-firefox-os-as-open-mobile-option/)
What Firefox OS aims to do here is to use the native everywhere-ness of the Web to provide a platform that allows applications to be enjoyed on a mobile device, a desktop computer, a tablet, or anywhere else that has access to a browser. Wouldn't you want to be able to pick up your Angry Birds game on the desktop where where you left it on your phone? I certainly would!A hackable dream for developersOne final, extra reason why Firefox OS is needed is that we don't really have a comparable hackable mobile platform at the moment (you can sort of customise Android but it's not easy).
Because Firefox OS is constructed using HTML, JavaScript and CSS it means you only need basic Web development skills to reach in and completely change the device experience. You could literally change one line of CSS and completely change the way the icons on the homescreen look, or re-write some core JavaScript files that handle phone-calls.
It's truly a platform for developers and I'm most excited about seeing where they take it beyond Mozilla's vision.Perfect timingSomething that I've been fully aware of during my year-and-a-half at Mozilla is how fortunate I am to be here for the beginning of the Firefox OS project. If I remember right, it was announced (as Boot to Gecko) internally during my first few weeks on the job.
Things were exciting back then but boy have they become even more exciting over time. Firefox OS is literally the number 1 thing that I'm working on at the moment and I honestly love it, I actually feel privileged to be a part of it.
I've wondered many times if this is how it felt to work at Mozilla during the initial launch of Firefox; the excitement, passion, nervousness, and inability to explain quite how amazing it all is and why people should care.
To be honest, I don't think many people will truly understand what's happening with Firefox OS and why it really matters until long after it has launched. A little like Firefox, I suppose.
For now, I'm happy to be at Mozilla at a very interesting point in its life.Blown mindsThe people who do get it right now are the developers that have been hands-on with the demo devices that occasionally come with Mozillians to events. There's not much I enjoy more than watching their expressions as they go through the various stages of emotion while playing with the devices...- It starts with mild confusion — a sort of 'Why have you just given me an Android device?' look
- Following confusion is sudden realisation that this isn't Android, it's built using JavaScript
- After a short while the excitement starts in a sort of "Holy shit!" mind-blowing moment
- A while longer and they're deep in concentration, exploring every corner of the device and asking lots of questions
- The last stage is slight reluctance as I ask for the device back and a final "That wasn't half bad, I'm impressed!" as they hand it over
[/list]You'd think I made that up to make things sound all rosy and amazing, but I honestly get those exact reactions from so many people that I show the devices to. It's actually quite funny.
What I've come to realise is that the more I see others play on a Firefox OS device the more I'm convinced that it's a real game-changer. It just seems blows minds left right and centre, with barely any explanation needed from me.Plenty of challengesIt wouldn't be fair to talk about the greatness of Firefox OS and the things I'm working on without covering some of the challenges that we need to solve.
On one side there are the more general issues, like how to manage an apps ecosystem that's open and unrestrictive, or possible device fragmentation like there is with Android. Those issues are important but are ultimately uninteresting to me.
However, what I'm most interested in is the challenge we have with HTML5 games on mobile devices — both the perceived and very real performance issues that developers often complain about. This is by no means an issue specific to Firefox OS (Android and iOS are just as bad) but right now I'm purely focussed on Firefox OS and how we can improve things there.
As it stands, the majority of pre-existing HTML5 games for mobile either run really poorly (0—20FPS), or sort of alright (20—30FPS). Most of the time these games don't run at a stable frame-rate either, which makes the experience not very enjoyable.
What's interesting is that a lot of the issues don't necessarily seem to be with the device or with JavaScript. There are a few intense games, like Biolab Disaster (http://playbiolab.com/), that perform stunningly on even the £50 low-end device that I'm testing on — we're talking between 40 and 60FPS.
It's definitely clear to me that, although the devices and platform are sometimes to blame (not as often as some would like to make out), there is a lot we can learn from the games that do perform well on the low-end devices to see what techniques they're using and how best to educate other developers looking to target HTML5 on mobile devices.
I truly believe that quite intense HTML5 games can run well on mobile devices, even low-end ones. Why am I so confident about that? Because people are already making those games today. There are 2 things that I trust most in my life... my eyes.
We'll get there.Beyond the mobile phoneWhat excites me most about Firefox OS has nothing to do with the mobile device that we're launching next year but is instead about what the future holds. I touched on this earlier when talking about Firefox OS being a hackable dream, how others could take it and extend it beyond Mozilla's vision.
The great news is that this is already happening today. We already have a port of Firefox OS for the Raspberry Pi (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk1oTO6cYH0), as well as one for the Pandaboard (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Boot_to_Gecko/Pandaboard). They aren't perfect, but what's awesome (I've tried so hard to avoid that word) is that this has all happened before Firefox OS has even reached it's first release.
You also have the ability to run Firefox OS via a desktop client (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Boot_to_Gecko/Using_the_B2G_desktop_client) on Mac, Windows, and Linux. While not giving you the same hardware access as you get on a device, the desktop client allows you to benefit from the other features of the OS (like apps running in separate processes) and is fairly easy to set up.
I can just imagine a day in the not-to-distant future where the Gamepad API has landed in Gecko and can be accessed via the Firefox OS desktop client. What's so cool about that? Well it's not a giant stretch of the imagination to see that desktop client being run on a device connected to a TV, with the OS customised to use gamepad input instead of mouse and touch (it's all JavaScript, remember).
What you'd have there is the beginnings of a HTML5 games console, and it's actually something I'm keen to explore in my 'free' time outside of Mozilla.
My point here is that we're coming to a point in time where devices can now be powered by the same technologies that we would normally use to build websites. What could we do with a world full of devices powered by those technologies, that can all access and communicate with the same APIs?
I'm desperate to see what that world looks like!
Quote from: Meho Krljic on 15-09-2012, 12:58:29
Da ne ispadne da su drugi anđeli, evo kako Gugl reaguje na glasinu da će Acer na svojim telefonima koristiti Aliyun operativni sistem, umesto Androida: http://www.slashgear.com/google-threatened-acer-with-android-excommunication-claims-alibaba-13247461/ (http://www.slashgear.com/google-threatened-acer-with-android-excommunication-claims-alibaba-13247461/)
Aliyun je, dakako, OS koji je proizvod Alibabe, kineske verzije Amazona, i koji može da pokreće i Android aplikacije :lol:
Zapravo - ne. Aliyun ne može da pokreće standardne android aplikacije, pa otud i Guglova reakcija.
Iz linkovanog teksta:
Quote
Alibaba's intention to use another OS, Aliyun, of its own creation, TNW (http://thenextweb.com/asia/2012/09/13/alibaba-claims-google-forced-partner-acer-cancel-aliyun-po/) reports; that runs webapps, based on Alibaba's servers, though can also install Android apps.
Evo zanimljivog štiva s ATS-a
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread883258/pg1&flagit=883258# (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread883258/pg1&flagit=883258#)
Apple ready to shut down your iPhone remotely
Apple ready to shut down your iPhone remotely (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJymTlfScaU#)
samo da polizem sve ono sto rekoh o galaxyju. pre dva dana, upao galaxy u wc solju (cistu, ovo navodim cisto zbog eksperimentalnih uslova), proveo tamo jedno 8 sekundi, izvadjen, opran sapunom, cekao sat vremena da ga odnesem do mesta gde je rasklopljen i osusen fenom. nakon sat vremena posle susenja je proradio, sim kartica nije.
jutros krenem da zamenim sim, kad vidim da telefon prima poruke a nije bio na vajfaju.
tako da...sve preporuke.
sad me kopka da probam isto i sa iphoneom, al suzdrzacu se. nekako.
Ma, nemoj! Tresni ga u šolju, pa šta bude.
Razbiće se šolja xwink2
Šta će joj šolja, kad nije iŠolja?
pojma nemas, naravno da jeste.
Kad konektuješ sve dođe na svoje mesto. xrofl xrofl xrofl
Kao što smo već odavno primetili, sistem se raspada fraktalno 8-)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443890304578008712527187512.html?mod=googlenews_wsj (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443890304578008712527187512.html?mod=googlenews_wsj)
Apple Makes a Wrong Turn as Users Blast Map Switch
The criticism poured in world-wide as users of the new maps found misplaced labels for businesses and landmarks, cities with missing roads and erroneous features like a fractured river in Ann Arbor, Mich. A search for the Golden Gate Bridge yielded a marker roughly four miles away in San Francisco.
But more than an embarrassment, the misstep highlights Apple's challenge as it takes on Google and others with Web services.
Apple spokeswoman Trudy Muller said the company knows its map service is a major initiative and designed it so that it would get better as more people use it.
Hahaha! Korisnici treba sami da popune mapu :evil:
"We've forgotten the complexity and effort that goes into making that [maps] work," Mr. Thompson said.
Zaboravili? :cry:
A ovo je za Radionicu:
"Maps is the app I use most because it has where am I, where am I going and what's near me," he said.
Kako ja da napišem priču kad znam gde sam, gde ću i šta je kraj mene? xcheers
Al kombinacija onog prethodnog i sadašnjeg zadatka - jedno bi objasnilo drugo :D
Nego, zaboravismo juče da posvedočimo ovome. Pobuna radnika u Fokskonu. Naravno, nije Epl jedini koji tamo sklapa hardver, ali to bi moglo da proizvede nestašice ajFouna 5
Riot breaks out at Foxconn's Taiyuan plant, reportedly over guards beating up a worker (update: confirmed) (http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/23/foxconn-taiyuan-riot/)
Quote
News just came in that workers at Foxconn's (http://www.engadget.com/tag/foxconn) Taiyuan plant have started a riot in the wee hours in China, and that police forces are on site to control the crowd. While the motive isn't clear, Sina Weibo user Li Tian reports that the riot isn't related to the recent anti-Japan protests, though judging by his photos, much damage has been done in the process. The same site suffered from a strike back in March over salary dispute -- the front-line workers failed to receive the promised pay rise. On a similar note, Foxconn's Chengdu plant (http://www.engadget.com/tag/chengdu,foxconn) also had a riot in June, but that was apparently due to an argument between some workers and a local restaurant owner.
Update: We are seeing unofficial reports (http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=zh-CN&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=zh-TW&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Ftieba.baidu.com%2Fp%2F1880368511) claiming the "2,000-people" riot was triggered by security guards hitting a worker at 10pm local time.
Update 2: According to a provincial website (http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=zh-CN&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=zh-TW&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fbig5.huaxia.com%2Fzhsx%2Ftzzc%2Ftqxl%2F2008%2F11%2F1237397.html), Foxconn's Taiyuan industrial park focuses on magnesium alloy components for consumer electronics, heat conduction products, LED lighting products, mobile phone products and magnesium alloy automotive components.
Update 3: An undercover report (http://newspaper.jfdaily.com/xwwb/html/2012-08/27/content_870967.htm) from August mentioned that the Taiyuan plant processed the back casing of the iPhone 5 (http://www.engadget.com/tag/iphone5). It also highlighted the company's harsh management as well as "practically compulsory" over-time work. We don't doubt that this riot escalated due to dissatisfaction over working conditions.
Update 4: Unsurprisingly, the original Sina Weibo posts have since been deleted. At the time of publication, the author had already noticed that some of the photos were already being censored by Sina. However, the photos over at Baidu Tieba are still intact.
Update 5: Well this is interesting. Foxconn has told Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/24/us-hon-hai-idUSBRE88N00L20120924) that there was "a fight among workers from different production lines," but the company's spokesperson said they're "still investigating the cause of the fight and the number of people involved." An official statement will be released on Monday.
Update 6: The Next Web (http://thenextweb.com/asia/2012/09/24/workers-riot-foxconn-factory-china/) has heard that there were no deaths in the incident. Here's hoping those 40 injured people will recover quickly.
Update 7: Foxconn has told CNET (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57519024-37/apple-supplier-foxconn-production-will-resume-tomorrow/) that production has resumed today.
Update 8: Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/25/us-honhai-idUSBRE88O03120120925) spoke to some employees who confirmed the fight between guards and workers. This wouldn't be the first time the two sides clashed in a Foxconn facility.
Povodom petnaestog rođendana Slešdota, sajt ima raznorazne prigode, a jedna od njih je i to da se Stwve Wozniak složio da učestvuje u Q&A sešnu sa čitaocima. Ima ovde:
http://apple.slashdot.org/story/12/10/01/1527257/ask-steve-wozniak-anything (http://apple.slashdot.org/story/12/10/01/1527257/ask-steve-wozniak-anything)
EU says Apple's Warranty Advertisements are Unacceptable (http://www.tekgoblin.com/2012/10/01/eu-says-apples-warranty-advertisements-are-unacceptable/)
Quote
The European Union believes that Apple (http://www.tekgoblin.com/tag/apple) should be investigated for the way that it advertises warranties on their products. EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding wrote to the member countries which is 27 to ask them to check whether Apple retailers failed to let buyers know about the right to a minimum 2-year warranty for products such as the iPhone and iPad under EU law.
Under EU law, companies must offer consumers a 2 year guarantee in which the consumer is entitled to replacement of the device in those 2 years if defects are found. Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-01/apple-warranty-ads-should-be-examined-by-eu-states-reding-says.html) was able to obtain the letter sent to the EU which contains the following statement:
Apple prominently advertised that its products come with a one-year manufacturer warranty but failed to clearly indicate the consumers' automatic and free-of-cost entitlement to a minimum two-year guarantee under EU law," Reding said to ministers in the letter, "These are unacceptable marketing practices."
Now, Apple does have their warranty obligations on their website which can be found here (http://www.apple.com/uk/legal/statutory-warranty/). However the issue isnt that Apple is honoring the warranty, it is that they are not making consumers aware of the Law and almost disguising that it even exists. Some would argue that it is the consumers responsibility to know the law, however it is also the merchants responsibility as well.
Companies that are found in violation of this law can be taken to court and have sanctions levied against them. Just last year Apple was found to be in breach of European Law by an Italian regulator, Apple appealed and still lost and had to pay €900,000 or $1.2m USD.
Now, I do firmly believe that Apple should make consumers aware of their rights as a consumer while purchasing their products. Apple is a large company and has the resources to educate buyers. Apple also states on their website that the Law protects consumers only a purchase time but the AppleCare warranty will protect the consumer and device after purchase.
We do not expect this to end quietly. What do you think? Should Apple be held responsible to help educate consumers?
U Fokskonu se štrajkuje zbog novih standarda kvaliteta kod slpanaja ajFoun petice:
Foxconn workers on strike over iPhone 5 production, labor group says (http://www.itworld.com/it-consumerization/300915/foxconn-workers-strike-over-iphone-5-production-labor-group-says)
Quote
October 05, 2012, 4:03 PM — Thousands of workers went on strike at a Foxconn factory in China on Friday, bringing some iPhone 5 production lines to a halt, a labor rights group said.
The strike at Foxconn's Zhengzhou factory began at 1 p.m. local time and involved 3,000 to 4,000 workers, according to New York-based China Labor Watch, which said it received its information from workers at the plant.
The workers are upset about stricter quality-control requirements introduced for the new Apple smartphone, the labor group said. They are also upset at being made to work through a Chinese national holiday this week, it said.
"According to workers, multiple iPhone 5 production lines from various factory buildings were in a state of paralysis for the entire day," China Labor Watch said. It also reported that quality-control inspectors were attacked.
Apple did not immediately respond to a request for comment and Foxconn, based in Taiwan, could not be reached for comment. It was not possible to confirm independently the number of workers striking.
It wouldn't be the first disruption at a Foxconn plant in China. Last month, 2,000 workers rioted (http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9231666/Riot_at_Foxconn_factory_in_China_blamed_on_harsh_security_guards) at a factory in Taiyuan after what workers described as aggressive behavior from security guards.
This latest incident followed tighter rules to prevent tiny indentations on the phones and scratches to the phones' frames and back covers. The new iPhone 5 is said to be more susceptible to such markings.
A fight between workers and quality-control inspectors resulted in some injuries and people being taken to the hospital, China Labor Watch said.
"They have such high expectations for these products, even if you raise the demands a little bit it makes a huge difference to the pressure on the workers," Li Qiang, China Labor Watch's executive director, said in an interview.
He last heard from workers at the plant late Friday night and the strike had not been resolved, he said.
James Niccolai covers data centers and general technology news for IDG News Service. Follow James on Twitter at @jniccolai (http://twitter.com/jniccolai). James's e-mail address is james_niccolai@idg.com
lep je, lep, videla sam ga, ko ce sacekati isporuku. :cry:
Steve Jobs je umro pre godinu dana ali njegov legat i dalje živi. Da bi obeležili godišnjicu Stivove smrti u reklamnoj agenciji Filter su smislili da plate gomilu ljudi da se obuče kao Džobs, da uleti u Apple radnju u Sijetlu i da tamo izvede Gangnam Stajl ples (http://www.geekwire.com/2012/video-flash-mob-apple-store-honors-steve-jobs/):
Apple Store Flash Mob (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSkMtsnn_4U#ws)
:x :x
Heh... Eplova pobeda na sudu protiv Samsunga deluje sve klimavije. Integralna verzija Samsungove dokumentacije pokazuje da zapravo ne postoji instrukcija "kopirajte Apple" nigde u njima. I još mnogo detalja ovde. (http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20121004050859829)
Why Apple should acquire Nokia (http://www.tnl.net/blog/2012/10/06/why-apple-should-acquire-nokia/)
Edit: u kuras, ne izgleda lepo kad se kopira, koga zanima nek klikće.
Heh heh, da je Stiv Džobs još u životu, sad bi se šamaralo po Kupertinu:
Apple To Run 'Samsung Did Not Copy iPad' Ad In UK: Loses Case Against Samsung (http://www.muktware.com/4611/apple-run-samsung-did-not-copy-ipad-ad-uk-loses-case-against-samsung)
Quote
Apple has lost is appeal in a UK court against Samsung (http://www.muktware.com/companies/samsung)'s Galaxy Tab. The court of appeals has upheld its previous judgment that Samsung did not infringe on any Apple design. The judge had said that 'Samsung products were not as cool as Apple'.
The previous decision had come in July. (http://www.muktware.com/3867/uk-judge-says-sansung-tabs-doesnt-infringe-upon-ipad-design#.UH_tljvBa50)Colin Birss (sitting as a Judge of the High Court, UK) had said that Galaxy Tab does not infringe upon the design of Apple's iPad. The judge said that Galaxy Tab is not identical to the iPad even if there are some similarities but that doesn't account to design infringement. The judge actually criticized Samsung's design by stating that they "do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design."
Apple has not only lost the appeal but also its face. According to the order Apple will have to run an ads in leading UK newspapers as well its own website stating that Samsung did not infringes its products. To ensure that the ad is visible the court also ordered that the text of the ad must not be in a font size smaller than Ariel 14. Apple will have to run the ad on its site for a period of one month.
According to BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19989750), "The appeal judges decided not to overturn the decision on the basis that an Apple design-rights victory against Samsung in the German courts risked causing confusion in consumers' minds."
This is yet another jolt to Apple which has already lost in courts of Appeals in the US against both Samsung Galaxy tab and Galaxy Nexus.
Suggested read for those looking for some humor: Chinese Companies To Outsource Manufacturing To US (http://www.damnocrazy.com/13/chinese-companies-outsource-manufacturing-us)
Pa, onda turi i ovaj deo:
http://www.damnocrazy.com/13/chinese-companies-outsource-manufacturing-us (http://www.damnocrazy.com/13/chinese-companies-outsource-manufacturing-us)
Kufer će biti srećan.
Pa, to je ipak samo bezazlena satira, ne treba da joj pridajemo poseban značaj :lol:
Ah, da, da. Ti si genije za linkove, a mi ostali linkujemo samo informacije bez značaja. :shock: Autsorsing traga za bedom i uskoro neće biti čudo i zasejavanje SAD. Uslovi se polako stiču. Da ne govorimo da je najelitniji auto tamo Lexus, a to je Toyota.
Ma, ne, samo nisam smatrao da je jedan zajebantski tekst kakvih ima milion na Internetu (i boljih i smešnijih od ovoga) sad zavređuje da bude citiran u celosti na Sagiti. Dosta je što sam ostavio link na nj!!!!!!!!!!!!
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dodaj.rs%2Ff%2F3c%2Fho%2F3EJIUDfV%2F49484253b58a80e9ed378851.jpg&hash=6a7de6f83cf816496d0c4069220fbeb332f1f45e)
Sam da notiramo da je Epl otkrio iPad Mini i iPad 4 sveckoj javnosti. (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-10-23-apple-reveals-ipad-mini) Takođe, nije loše da se setimo da je iPad 3 bio pušten u divljinu pre svega šest meseci. :shock:
ipad mini me nece gledati, ta velicina mi je prosto neprakticna.
al ako docekam nekako nedelju od 5-9. nov, nece biti vece gikovske srece.
Quote from: lilit_depp on 24-10-2012, 13:44:56
ipad mini me nece gledati, ta velicina mi je prosto neprakticna.
Pa to je i rahmetli Džobs rekao. Ali evo, nije se ni ohladio a oni defeciraju po njegovom lešu.
rahmetli-nerahmetli, jeste da nije dao kintu za bejzik risrc, al sve mu oprastam! kako je ovo funkcionalno! jbt! pricam o mojoj mashini sada. malo malo, pa je lepo pomazim, a ona prede. skoro pa sve sama radi. vidim da me Laza L. ceka na kraju, al nek ide zivot!!! :lol: :lol:
Bizarno je da su vreme između dve generacije skratili na šest meseci :(
jbg.
al moj dragi muz je odusevljen ovim mini shitom. da ne verujes!
Izdao je sjeni Stiva Džobsa.
Ooops! Appleovi patenti koje je Samsung tobože tako brutalno eksploatisao bez nadoknade, zapravo se ne smatraju validnim u novom mišljenju američke patentne kancelarije, pošto postoje primeri prethodne primene istih:
USPTO invalidates Apple's "rubber-banding" patent asserted against Samsung (http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/10/23/uspto-invalidates-apples-rubber-banding-patent-asserted-against-samsung)
Quote
It was discovered in a Monday court filing from Samsung that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office tentatively invalidated Apple's bounce scroll, or "rubber-banding," patent, possibly putting the Apple v. Samsung jury's decision regarding the property at risk.
First reported by FOSS Patent's Florian Mueller, the filing notes (http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/10/patent-office-tentatively-invalidates.html) that the USPTO invalidated all claims of Apple's U.S. Patent No. 7,469,381, including two rejections on claim 19 which was successfully asserted against Samsung in the companies' high-profile California trial.
From the USPTO's examination:
Rejections:
The following rejections are utilized by the Examiner below, referencing the proposed prior art listed on pages 23-85 of the Request:
Rejection A: Claims 1-6, 8-12, 16, 19, and 20 as being anticipated by Lira
Rejection B: Claims 7 and 13-15 as being obvious over Lira
Rejection D: Claims 1-5, 7-13, and 15-20 as being anticipated by Ording
Samsung points out in its statement to Judge Lucy Koh that the USPTO published the finding on its website on Oct. 22, following an ex parte examination of the patent. It was reported in May that an anonymous request to reexamine (http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/05/29/two_important_apple_multitouch_patents_face_anonymous_uspto_challenges) the '381 patent, along with Apple's U.S. Patent No. 7,479,949 (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7,479,949.PN.&OS=PN/7,479,949&RS=PN/7,479,949) for touchscreen heuristics. At the time, it was thought that Android maker Google lodged the request, however it could have been any number of rival companies in the business of building smartphones.
Rejection A and Rejection D are based on prior art considerations, one from PCT Publication No. WO 03/081458 (http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?FT=D&date=20031002&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP&CC=WO&NR=03081458A1&KC=A1&ND=4) on "controlling content display," by AOL/Luigi Lira, published on October 2, 2003 and U.S. Patent No. 7,786,975 (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7,786,975.PN.&OS=PN/7,786,975&RS=PN/7,786,975) on a "continuous scrolling list with acceleration," with named inventors Bas Ording, Scott Forstall, Greg Christie, Stephen O. Lemay and Imran Chaudhri.
A finding of anticipation means no inventive step was found between the prior art and Apple's '381 patent claims. The company must now prove to the patent office, or the appeals court that the IP was both new and its claimed inventive step is tenable.
Judge Koh is currently hearing so-called Rule 50 motions, or those that overrule jury decisions, from Samsung and Apple. The USPTO's non-final finding may play a role in her decision regarding the devices affected by the '381 patent, and if a final Office action comes in invalidating the claims, the patent could be unenforceable.
As Mueller notes, however, Apple has a chance to persuade the patent office as more than on non-final Office action can be reached, and final Office action can be reconsidered by the Central Reexamination Division. The last decision by the division can then be appealed to the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, and that outcome can be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Finally, a Federal Circuit decision can be appealed to the Supreme Court, though the matter is unlikely to reach such extremes.
As for Samsung, the Korean company already developed a workaround to the overscroll bounce patent, but if the invention were to be found invalid, it is probable that the feature would make a return to handsets sold in the U.S.
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dodaj.rs%2Ff%2F46%2F4K%2F3uHMzbtH%2F553488300267396748359934.jpg&hash=23bd4044e6246e79912d239c363a384d4691c155)
xrofl
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Os87PLlyU4k (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Os87PLlyU4k#)
Počeo fraktalni raspad
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20132843 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20132843)
Apple's Scott Forstall and John Browett to leave firm
Da ne gnjavim, ovo je suština fraktalnog raspada:
"If you have two different heads, you have two different fiefdoms," said BGC Partners analyst Colin Gillis.
Apple tells judge it needs two weeks to update website
A British judge has criticised Apple after the company claimed it would take two weeks to change a notice on its website about its patent lawsuit loss to Samsung.
The Court of Appeal in London has ordered Apple (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/) to replace the notice, which the court says is "incorrect", within 24 hours but the California-based company said it would take 14 days to make the change.
Apple posted a notice on its website last week (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/9635516/Apple-acknowledges-Samsung-UK-patent-loss-in-unapologetic-advert.html) acknowledging a British court ruling that said Samsung had not copied Apple's iPad in designing its own tablets. The ruling required Apple to post the notice on its website and to place it as an advertisement in a range of publications. However, the notice also referenced similar cases in Germany and the US in which Apple defeated Samsung and made reference to the judge's comments in the British case that Samsung products were "not as cool".
Samsung complained that parts of the statement were "untrue" and "incorrect" and the Court of Appeal has agreed. Sir Robin Jacob said: "I'm at a loss that a company such as Apple would do this. That is a plain breach of the order." Apple's lawyers argued that the statement was in line with the order, which was intended to correct the impression that Samsung had copied Apple's designs.
Apple requested 14 days to make the changes to the statement but the court refused. The judge said: "I just can't believe the instructions you've been given. This is Apple. They cannot put something on their website?"
He suggested that Tim Cook, Apple's chief executive, should make a statement to the court explaining why the change would take so long.
Apple lost the case against Samsung in July when Judge Colin Birss ruled that the Korean firm's products were not "cool" enough to be confused with Apple's. Apple tried to overturn the ruling last month in the Court of Appeal but lost.
Prc:
Apple Can't Use The iPhone Name in Mexico (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/120475-Apple-Cant-Use-The-iPhone-Name-in-Mexico)
Quote
Apple's trademark lawsuit against Mexican telecommunications company, iFone, has backfired horribly.
Apple's zealous protection of its trademarks may have cost the company dearly, if a report from Mexican newspaper, El Universal, is to be believed.
In 2009, Apple launched a lawsuit against Mexican telecom company, iFone, arguing that consumers wouldn't be able to tell it and the iPhone apart. Now the name iFone does bear a striking resemblance to that of Apple's ludicrously successful shiny tray/phone hybrid, but here's where things get interesting; the iFone trademark was registered in 2003, back when the iPhone was just a twinkle in Steve Jobs' eye. Apple didn't register the iPhone trademark until 2007.iFone won the lawsuit, then counter sued and won that case too. Apple appealed, but the case was tossed out last week.
According to the Judges sitting in Mexico's 18th District Appellate Court, iFone is the only company allowed to use the "iPhone" or "iFone" brands in Mexico. The ruling could even be applied retroactively, allowing iFone to claim a sizable chunk of the profits Apple has made using the brand name in Mexico.
As iFone's lawyer, Eduardo Gallástegui, explained to El Universal (as translated by the clever chaps over at The Register):
"All that remains is processing claims for invasion of brand. Additionally, they face a sanction of up to 20,000 days at minimum wage rate, and iFone shall be entitled to claim compensation for damage caused by the invasion of their brand. These damages may not be less than 40 per cent of the sales of iPhone services in Mexico, as provided by law."
This is the second time in recent months that one of Apple's copyright/patent lawsuit has backfired. In July, a UK judge ordered the company to publish a statement on its UK Homepage saying that, contrary to its earlier claims, Samsung had not in fact infringed on one of its registered iPad designs. Apple complied, but in a rather snide, passive aggressive way. The apology, hidden behind a tiny link at the bottom of the company's UK frontpage, was filled with digs at Samsung - including quotes from a judge saying Samsung's Galaxy tablet was "not as cool" as the iPad - and ended with a claim that courts in other countries had ruled in Apple's favor. Not amused by Apple's behavior, the judge reprimanded the company for putting up an "incorrect" and "non-compliant" statement and ordered them to put up another one, in a larger font.
Source: El Universal (http://www.eluniversal.com.mx/finanzas/98620.html) via The Register (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/02/iphone_ifone_mexico_trademark/)
Uskoro Apple neće moći da pobedi nigde osim u Opštinskom sudu Zvezdara.
A ni tamo neće moći kad uvedemo šerijat!!!!!!!!
Ili inkviziciju.
Imaju li ovi u Appleu stida????
Apple hides Samsung apology on its UK site so it can't be seen without scrolling (http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/11/03/apple-hides-samsung-apology-on-its-uk-site-so-it-cant-be-seen-without-scrolling/)
Quote
Apple today posted its second Samsung apology to its UK website (http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/11/03/apple-corrects-inaccurate-samsung-apology-adding-it-to-its-uk-website-front-page-following-judges-order/), complying with requests by the UK Court of Appeal to say its original apology was inaccurate and link to a new statement. As users on Hacker News (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4736985) and Reddit (http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/12kcpo/apples_new_clarification_on_samsung_copyright/) point out, however, Apple modified its website recently to ensure the message is never displayed without visitors having to scroll down to the bottom first.
ne znam imaju li stida, al moje srce kuca tika-taka!!!! pure geek excitement!!!!!
(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-yXJ-hh2APxk/UJjY0IcEMNI/AAAAAAAAPHw/jDygY2Zu50o/s640/2012-11-06%252009.35.31.jpg)
Opa, kakav je ono puding?
Quote from: Barbarin on 06-11-2012, 11:39:29
Opa, kakav je ono puding?
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gupuds.com%2Fwp-content%2Fthemes%2Fgu-uk%2Fimages%2Fbanners%2Fslide7.jpg&hash=d4b6785a0b090cc8a7554e01fcd819c4cb3c6511)
:lol: :lol: :lol:
A jao, pa bolji je od Iphona :o :o :o
iphone je sama plastika. nema tu prave vrijednosti.
Nema ni plastike xwink2
ma ima! i to one reciklirane.
Apple i patenti... sa jedne strane ih kažnjavaju za kršenje tuđih patenta:
Apple engineers 'pay no attention to anyone's patents', court told (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/07/apple_loses_patent_case_facetime/)
A sa druge im odobravaju patente na takve tehnološke inovacije kao što je "zaobljeni četvorougao" :cry: :
Apple awarded design patent for actual rounded rectangle (http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/11/apple-awarded-design-patent-for-actual-rounded-rectangle/)
Dobro, makar je ovo drugo "dizajn patent", a to je sličnije trejdmarku nego "pravom" tehnološkom patentu...
Čini mi se da se Epl malo pogubio nakon Džobsove smrti. Poslednjih nekoliko projekata nemaju tu njegovu viziju, ni u dizajnerskom ni u tehnološkom smislu. Da se razumemo, ne volim ni Epl ni njihove proizvode - sa mogućim izuzetkom ajPoda, kojeg nemam - ali mislim da je Epl naterao ostatak industrije na inovaciju. Bojim se da će ta industrija stagnirati ako ne bude prinuđena da se stalno upinje da pruži nešto bolje od Epla.
Ja naravno ne smem da kažem ništa konklutzivno jer nemam sad neke ozbiljne uvide u sve to koje bih analizirao pa doneo informisan sud, ali zaista je utisak da, dok je Džobs bio živ, Apple jeste otimao, klao i silovao ali se na posletku nametao snagom proizvoda, dok u Kukovoj eri pokušavaju da konkurenciju sudski istisnu iz takmičenja.
Al videćemo. Nije da nisu izgubili ogroman deo tržišnog udela dok je Džobs još disao.
Mislim da nisu gubili tržište. Njima je prodaja neprestano rasla. Mislim da se android razvio pre na račun Nokije nego Epla. Čini mi se da je ajFon 5 najprodavaniji model telefona na svetu - u drastično većoj meri od GS3 ili Note-a. Međutim, poslednja istraživanja kažu da Epl gubi korisnike koji su spremni da kupuju njihove proizvode po svaku cenu. To nije dramatičan gubitak, istina. Ali za Džobsovog života tako nešto ne bi moglo da dođe u obzir, je je Epl pre svega estetski - ali i hardverski - davao najbolji mogući proizvod. Danas ipak ne može da se kaže kako je ajFon 5 hardverski bolji proizvod od glavnog konkurenta. Epl se i dalje dobro drži na polju tableta, ali videćemo šta će biti kada Mikrosoft uđe u igru.
Oh, gubili su ga prilično. Evo, recimo, pre dve godine su imali 26 posto tržišta (http://www.intomobile.com/2010/11/01/apple-leads-u-s-smartphone-marketshare-with-26/), a sada imaju 16,9 posto (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/07/27/apples-share-of-worldwide-smartphone-market-slides-as-samsung-continues-to-surge/). Što je i skok u odnosu na prethodnu godinu. Ali zato i dalje ostvaruju preko 70 zarade jer prodaju jako skupe sprave.
I stand corrected. Ovo izgleda sluti da će Epl morati da se posveti tzv. ekonomskom segmentu tržišta, ali to bi dovelo do promene njihove paradigme. U svakom slučaju, Epl mora da se menja - to je neosporno. Mene brine, da će se ostali tehnološki lideri, poput Amazona i Gugla, prestati da se trude i da će početi da iskorišćavaju svoje korisnike (više nego što to već čine).
Čisto da se utrlja so na ranu :lol: :
Samsung's Galaxy S III steals smartphone crown from iPhone (http://bgr.com/2012/11/08/best-selling-smartphone-2012-q3/)
Quote
The best-selling smartphone in the world is no longer an iPhone (http://bgr.com/tag/iphone). New data released on Thursday by market research firm Strategy Analytics finds that Samsung's (http://bgr.com/tag/samsung) (005930 (http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=005930.KS)) Galaxy S III (http://bgr.com/tag/galaxy-s-iii) was the world's top-selling smartphone model in the third quarter this year, displacing Apple's (http://bgr.com/tag/apple) (AAPL (http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=AAPL)) iPhone for the first time in years. Samsung announced earlier this week that cumulative Galaxy S III channel sales reached the 30 million unit milestone (http://bgr.com/2012/11/05/galaxy-s-iii-sales-2012-30-million/) and according to Strategy Analytics, 18 million of those were shipped in Q3 2012. During the same period, Apple shipped an estimated 16.2 million iPhone 4S handsets, slipping into the No.2 spot for the quarter.
"Samsung's Galaxy S3 smartphone model shipped 18.0 million units worldwide during the third quarter of 2012," said Strategy Analytics analyst Neil Shah. "The Galaxy S3 captured an impressive 11 percent share of all smartphones shipped globally and it has become the world's best-selling smartphone model for the first time ever. A large touchscreen design, extensive distribution across dozens of countries, and generous operator subsidies have been among the main causes of the Galaxy S3's success. Apple shipped an estimated 16.2 million iPhone 4S units worldwide for second place, as consumers temporarily held off purchases in anticipation of a widely expected iPhone 5 upgrade at the end of the quarter."
Samsung's time at the top will be short-lived however, as Apple's iPhone 5 (http://bgr.com/tag/iphone-5) is expected to regain the title to top-selling smartphone in the December quarter. "Samsung's Galaxy S3 has proven wildly popular with consumers and operators across North America, Europe and Asia," Shah's colleague Neil Mawtson stated. "However, the Galaxy S3's position as the world's best-selling smartphone model is likely to be short-lived. The Apple iPhone 5 has gotten off to a solid start already with an estimated 6.0 million units shipped globally during Q3 2012. We expect the new iPhone 5 to out-ship Samsung's Galaxy S3 in the coming fourth quarter of 2012 and Apple should soon reclaim the title of the world's most popular smartphone model."
Sad znamo šta je Apple znao da će da mu smeta.
Američki sud je upravo odlučio da Appleov "pinch to zoom" patent, na osnovu kojeg su silovali Samsung na sudu, zapravo nije validan jer postoji prethodni primer (http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20121219174625546). Apple će se boriti protiv ove odluke (http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2012/12/20/apple-samsung-iphone-ipad-patents/1783017/).
http://www.cracked.com/video_18522_why-apple-clearly-thinks-youre-stupid.html (http://www.cracked.com/video_18522_why-apple-clearly-thinks-youre-stupid.html)
A njemački sud oborio i Appleov slide to unlock patent
German Court finds Apple's 'slide to unlock' patent invalid (http://www.tuaw.com/2013/04/05/german-court-finds-apples-slide-to-unlock-patent-invalid)
Quote
Germany's Federal Patent Court on Thursday invalidated all of Apple's claims for its slide to unlock patent (http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/04/apples-slide-to-unlock-patent.html). The news comes courtesy of Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents who was in the courtroom observing the proceedings in question.
Samsung and Google's Motorola Mobility have just scored a win over a famous Apple user interface patent. The Bundespatentgericht, Germany's Federal Patent Court, ruled that all claims of EP1964022 on "unlocking a device by performing gestures on an unlock image" are invalid as granted, and additionally held that none of the 14 amendments proposed by Apple could salvage the patent.
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8JZBLjxPBUU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8JZBLjxPBUU)
Apple, of course, plans to appeal.
A question worth posing, however, is to what extent does this matter anymore?
As Mueller points out, Apple's slide to unlock function is today much more famous than it is a strategic feature. Note that Apple's slide to unlock patent doesn't embody every multitouch unlocking gesture and that many companies have developed alternatives that skirt around Apple's patent.
(https://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi48.tinypic.com%2Fav4x2h.jpg&hash=bacef3e60e3cdde43c225122d07118048647e994)
Mueller also points out a fundamental difference between patent law in the US and patent law in Europe. Put simply, the patent requirements in Europe are more stringent to the extent that they are granted for technical solutions to technical problems.
"In this case," Mueller writes, "the mere fact that a sliding gesture has a visual representation was not deemed to constitute a technical innovation worthy of patent protection."
The death blow for Apple's slide to unlock patent was likely a Swedish phone called the Neonode N1m that launched well before the iPhone and featured its own slide to unlock implementation. The N1m was released in 2005 while Apple's own patent for slide to unlock wasn't filed until December of 2005.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8JZBLjxPBUU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8JZBLjxPBUU)
Skip ahead to about 3:58 into the video and you'll see something very familiar.
Incidentally, a Dutch Court also found Apple's slide to unlock patent invalid because of the Neonode N1m.
When Steve Jobs first introduced the iPhone, he confidently went over some of its unique features and boldly exclaimed, "and boy have we patented it!" Yet here Apple is, still battling over iPhone patents.
10,000 iPhone 5 Domino (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tj7al6MXu7U#ws)
Deset godina iTunes prodavnice. Revolucionarno.
iTunes Store at 10: how Apple built a digital media juggernaut (http://www.theverge.com/2013/4/26/4265172/itunes-store-at-10-how-apple-built-a-digital-media-juggernaut)
Za slučaj da niste videli kako se hakuje iPhoneov touch ID:
http://youtu.be/HM8b8d8kSNQ (http://youtu.be/HM8b8d8kSNQ)
Hilerijs. Ljudi koriste AppleMaps aplikaciju na svojim telefonima/ tabletima, dok voze, pa ih greška na mapi pretera preko piste aerodroma na Aljasci. Pomenuta pista nije nasred, jelte, puta, nego da biste do nje došli prođete prvo kroz obeleženu kapiju, pa vozite kilometar i po niz drum na kome su znaci da se krećete ka pisti i da treba da se okrenete. pošto ljudi više veruju ajFounu nego, jelte, saobraćajnim signalima, aerodrom je na kraju zabarikadirao ovaj prolaz dok Apple sredi mapu.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24246646 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24246646)
Quote
An Alaskan airport has closed an aircraft access route because of a flaw with Apple's Maps app.
Fairbanks International Airport told a local newspaper that in the past three weeks two motorists had driven along the taxiway and across one of its runways.
Apple's app had directed users along the taxiway but did not specifically tell them to drive onto the runway.
The firm has now issued a temporary fix.
Users searching for directions are told they are "not available" rather than showing the earlier route.
A spokesman for Apple was unable to provide comment.
The airport said it had first complained to the phone-maker three weeks ago via the local attorney general's office.
"We asked them to disable the map for Fairbanks until they could correct it, thinking it would be better to have nothing show up than to take the chance that one more person would do this," Melissa Osborn, chief of operations at the airport, told the Alaska Dispatch newspaper (http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/20130924/iphone-map-app-directs-fairbanks-drivers-airport-taxiway).
She added that barricades had since been erected to block access to the final stretch of the taxiway and that they would not be removed until Apple had updated its directions.
The BBC still experienced the issue when it tested the app early on Wednesday, asking for directions to the site from a property to the east of the airport. By contrast the Google Maps app provided a different, longer route which takes drivers to the property's car park.
A spokeswoman for the airport said that Apple had finally disabled the faulty directions at about 19:00BST.
Warnings ignored Apple faced criticism after it ditched Google's service as its default maps option last year.
Complaints of inaccuracies followed, including placing Dublin Airport about 17km (11 miles) away from its true location after apparently confusing the site with a farm named Airfield.
The Australian police went so far as to warn that Apple's software was "life threatening" after motorists became stranded in a national park after being given the wrong directions to the city of Mildura, Victoria.
Chief executive Tim Cook posted a letter (http://www.apple.com/letter-from-tim-cook-on-maps/) to the firm's website apologising for the "frustration" caused and promised "we are doing everything we can to make Maps better".
The company has since taken over several other mapping software developers including Locationary, Hopstop and Embark.
Reviews of its latest operating system, iOS 7, noted that its Maps product had improved, with the Guardian newspaper reporting (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/sep/18/ios-7-review-apple) that Apple's "POI (points of interest) database is getting better".
However, the latest mishap indicates problems remain.
Fairbanks Airport said the drivers involved in the 6 September and 20 September incidents had both been from out of town and had ignored signposts warning them that they should not be driving along the taxiway.
"They must have been persistent," the airport's assistant manager Angie Spear told the BBC.
"They had to enter the airport property via a motion-activated gate, and afterwards there are many signs, lights and painted markings, first warning that aircraft may share the road and then that drivers should not be there at all.
"They needed to drive over a mile with all this before reaching the runway. But the drivers disregarded all that because they were following the directions given on their iPhones."
The runway the motorists crossed was used by 737 jets among other aircraft. No one was injured.
"All these types of mapping software have flaws but the problem for Apple is that because it's such a high-profile brand, it gets a lot of attention," said Neil McCartney from the McCartney Media and Telecoms consultancy.
"It's very important for a company in that sort of situation to acknowledge a problem when it is reported and then put it right as fast as possible."
Nick Dillon, senior device analyst at research house Ovum, added that Fairbanks Airport's complaint illustrated how hard the mapping business was to get right.
"With Apple Maps the firm has made a rare misstep by releasing a product which has not lived up to its own high standards.
"Apple evidently did not fully grasp the complexity involved in deploying a mapping service and its continuing woes show that it is not an easy thing to fix."
lol ljudi previš veruju telefonima a ne svojim instiktima ;)
Ili saobraćajnim znacima...
Quotenego da biste do nje došli prođete prvo kroz obeleženu kapiju, pa vozite kilometar i po niz drum na kome su znaci da se krećete ka pisti i da treba da se okrenete
Da sam sudija za prekršaje, ili američki ekvivalent toga, izrekao bih im kaznu jedenja tog tableta ili fona (sa ili bez začina, zavisno od okolnosti) kome slepo veruju, i da nauče čitati pa na ponovno polaganje vozačkog.
Takvi su opasni, 'ladno bi prošli kroz školsko dvorište ili park pun šetača.
Svašta, da ne veruju svojoj percepciji okoline. Bože sačuvaj. :D
Apple, najvredniji brend na svetu:
http://www.interbrand.com/en/best-global-brands/2013/Best-Global-Brands-2013.aspx (http://www.interbrand.com/en/best-global-brands/2013/Best-Global-Brands-2013.aspx)
Kad smo već tu:
http://www.apple.com/mac-pro/ (http://www.apple.com/mac-pro/)
Da se upotpuni utisak:
http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/10/4412350/apple-new-mac-pro-wwdc-2013 (http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/10/4412350/apple-new-mac-pro-wwdc-2013)
Quote from: Meho Krljic on 26-08-2012, 13:08:07
Ja se tek ne razumem u to, ali asset je valjda nekretnina, a deonice po prirodi stvari nisu nekretnina - pa je to valjda razlika?
asset je Aktiva, a vrednost kompanije se procenjuje ne po tome već po sadašnjoj vrednosti budućih prihoda...a tu apple očito vodi.
Njujork Tajmz ima opširan tekst o nastanku ajFouna:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/magazine/and-then-steve-said-let-there-be-an-iphone.html?hpw&_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/magazine/and-then-steve-said-let-there-be-an-iphone.html?hpw&_r=0)
U Kaliforniji školske vlasti podelile učenicima ajPede, da ih koriste kao nastavno sredstvo. U preokretu koji nije iznenadio nikoga, učenici su krekovali zaštitu postavljenu da obezbedi da se mašine koriste u akademske svrhe, kako bi igrali Temple Run. (http://games.yahoo.com/blogs/plugged-in/los-angeles-students-ipads-classroom-play-video-games-173850244.html)
Ovo je moglo i na neki drugi topik, al evo ga ovde:
The Techtopus: How Silicon Valley's most celebrated CEOs conspired to drive down 100,000 tech engineers' wages (http://pando.com/2014/01/23/the-techtopus-how-silicon-valleys-most-celebrated-ceos-conspired-to-drive-down-100000-tech-engineers-wages/)
In early 2005, as demand for Silicon Valley engineers began booming (http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Google-blamed-for-jump-in-high-tech-pay-Rivals-2587880.php), Apple's Steve Jobs sealed a secret and illegal pact with Google's Eric Schmidt to artificially push their workers wages lower by agreeing not to recruit each other's employees, sharing wage scale information, and punishing violators. On February 27, 2005, Bill Campbell, a member of Apple's board of directors and senior advisor (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/media-zelig-men-bill-campbell-and-vivi-nevo/) to Google, emailed Jobs to confirm that Eric Schmidt "got directly involved and firmly stopped all efforts to recruit anyone from Apple."
Later that year, Schmidt instructed his Sr VP for Business Operation Shona Brown to keep the pact a secret and only share information "verbally, since I don't want to create a paper trail over which we can be sued later?"
These secret conversations and agreements between some of the biggest names in Silicon Valley were first exposed in a Department of Justice antitrust investigation (http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2010/September/10-at-1076.html) launched by the Obama Administration in 2010. That DOJ suit became the basis of a class action lawsuit (http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_24916714/silicon-valley-poaching-case-draws-closer-trial) filed on behalf of over 100,000 tech employees whose wages were artificially lowered — an estimated $9 billion (http://thevarguy.com/computer-technology-hardware-solutions-and-news/011614/silicon-valley-workers-ok-d-class-action-lawsuit-aga) effectively stolen by the high-flying companies from their workers to pad company earnings — in the second half of the 2000s. Last week, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals denied attempts by Apple, Google, Intel, and Adobe to have the lawsuit tossed, and gave final approval for the class action suit to go forward. A jury trial date has been set for May 27 in San Jose, before US District Court judge Lucy Koh, who presided over the Samsung-Apple patent suit.
In a related but separate investigation and ongoing suit, eBay and its former CEO Meg Whitman, now CEO of HP, are being sued by both the federal government (http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2012/November/12-at-1376.html)and the state of California (http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/12/09/63583.htm) for arranging a similar, secret wage-theft agreement with Intuit (and possibly Google as well) during the same period.
The secret wage-theft agreements between Apple, Google, Intel, Adobe, Intuit, and Pixar (now owned by Disney) are described in court papers obtained by PandoDaily as "an overarching conspiracy" in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act and the Clayton Antitrust Act, and at times it reads like something lifted straight out of the robber baron era that produced those laws. Today's inequality crisis is America's worst on record (http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/the-rich-get-richer-through-the-recovery/?_r=0) since statistics were first recorded a hundred years ago — the only comparison would be to the era of the railroad tycoons in the late 19th century.
Shortly after sealing the pact with Google, Jobs strong-armed Adobe into joining after he complained to CEO Bruce Chizen that Adobe was recruiting Apple's employees. Chizen sheepishly responded that he thought only a small class of employees were off-limits:
I thought we agreed not to recruit any senior level employees.... I would propose we keep it that way. Open to discuss. It would be good to agree.
Jobs responded by threatening war:
OK, I'll tell our recruiters they are free to approach any Adobe employee who is not a Sr. Director or VP. Am I understanding your position correctly?
Adobe's Chizen immediately backed down:
I'd rather agree NOT to actively solicit any employee from either company.....If you are in agreement, I will let my folks know.
The next day, Chizen let his folks — Adobe's VP of Human Resources — know that "we are not to solicit ANY Apple employees, and visa versa." Chizen was worried that if he didn't agree, Jobs would make Adobe pay:
if I tell Steve [Jobs] it's open season (other than senior managers), he will deliberately poach Adobe just to prove a point. Knowing Steve, he will go after some of our top Mac talent...and he will do it in a way in which they will be enticed to come (extraordinary packages and Steve wooing).
Indeed Jobs even threatened war against Google early 2005 before their "gentlemen's agreement," telling Sergey Brin to back off recruiting Apple's Safari team:
if you [Brin] hire a single one of these people that means war.
Brin immediately advised Google's Executive Management Team to halt all recruiting of Apple employees until an agreement was discussed.
In the geopolitics of Silicon Valley tech power (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1386409/Worlds-richest-dinner-party--including-guests-Obama-Mark-Zuckerberg.html), Adobe was no match for a corporate superpower like Apple. Inequality of the sort we're experiencing today affects everyone in ways we haven't even thought of — whether it's Jobs bullying slightly lesser executives into joining an illegal wage-theft pact, or the tens of thousands of workers whose wages were artificially lowered, transferred into higher corporate earnings, and higher compensations (http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_24106474/bay-areas-richest-residents-silicon-valley-billionaires-forbes) for those already richest and most powerful to begin with.
Over the next two years, as the tech industry entered another frothing bubble, the secret wage-theft pact which began with Apple, Google and Pixar expanded to include Intuit and Intel. The secret agreements were based on relationships, and those relationships were forged in Silicon Valley's incestuous boards of directors (http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/07/04/in-silicon-valley-chieftains-rule-with-few-checks-and-balances/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0), which in the past has been recognized mostly as a problem for shareholders and corporate governance advocates, rather than for the tens of thousands of employees whose wages and lives are viscerally affected by their clubby backroom deals. Intel CEO Paul Otellini joined (http://www.siliconbeat.com/2007/11/28/part-time-google-gig-for-intels-otellini-worth-about-464000-per-shift/) Google's board of directors in 2004, a part-time gig that netted Otellini $23 million in 2007 (http://www.siliconbeat.com/2007/11/28/part-time-google-gig-for-intels-otellini-worth-about-464000-per-shift/), with tens of millions more in Google stock options still in his name — which worked out to $464,000 per Google board event if you only counted the stock options Otellini cashed out — dwarfing what Otellini made off his Intel stock options, despite spending most of his career with the company.
Meanwhile, Eric Schmidt served on Apple's board of directors until 2009, when a DoJ antitrust investigation (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2009/aug/03/google-chief-schmidt-resigns-apple-board) pushed him to resign. Intuit's chairman at the time, Bill Campbell, also served on Apple's board of directors, and as official advisor — "consigliere" (http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/21/technology/reingold_coach.fortune/) — to Google chief Eric Schmidt, until he resigned (http://appleinsider.com/articles/10/11/08/apple_board_member_bill_campbell_cut_ties_to_google_over_rivalry) from Google in 2010. Campbell, a celebrated figure () played a key behind-the-scenes role connecting the various CEOs into the wage-theft pact. Steve Jobs, who took regular Sunday walks with Campbell near their Palo Alto homes, valued Campbell for his ability "to get A and B work out of people," gushing that the conduit at the center of the $9 billion wage theft suit, "loves people, and he loves growing people." (http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/21/technology/reingold_coach.fortune/)
Indeed. Eric Schmidt has been, if anything, even more profuse in his praise of Campbell. Schmidt credits Campbell for structuring Google when Schmidt was brought on board in 2001:
His contribution to Google — it is literally not possible to overstate. He essentially architected the organizational structure.
Court documents show it was Campbell who first brought together Jobs and Schmidt to form the core of the Silicon Valley wage-theft pact. And Campbell's name appears as the early conduit bringing Intel into the pact with Google:
Bill Campbell (Chairman of Intuit Board of Directors, Co-Lead Director of Apple, and advisor to Google) was also involved in the Google-Intel agreement, as reflected in an email exchange from 2006 in which Bill Campbell agreed with Jonathan Rosenberg (Google Advisor to the Office of CEO and former Senior Vice President of Product Management) that Google should call [Intel CEO] Paul Otellini before making an offer to an Intel employee, regardless of whether the Intel employee first approached Google.
Getting Google on board with the wage-theft pact was the key for Apple from the start — articles (http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Google-blamed-for-jump-in-high-tech-pay-Rivals-2587880.php) in the tech press in 2005 pointed at Google's recruitment drive and incentives were the key reason why tech wages soared that year, at the highest rate in well over a decade.
Campbell helped bring in Google, Intel, and, in 2006, Campbell saw to it that Intuit — the company he chaired (http://about.intuit.com/about_intuit/executives/bill_campbell.jsp) — also joined the pact.
From the peaks of Silicon Valley, Campbell's interpersonal skills were magical (http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2013/12/24/executive-coach-bill-campbell/4189333/) and awe-inspiring, a crucial factor in creating so much unimaginable wealth for their companies and themselves. Jobs said (http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/21/technology/reingold_coach.fortune/) of Campbell:
There is something deeply human about him.
And Schmidt swooned (http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/21/technology/reingold_coach.fortune/):
He is my closest confidant...because he is the definition of trust.
Things — and people — look very different when you're down in the Valley. In the nearly 100-page court opinion issued last October by Judge Koh granting class status to the lawsuit, Campbell comes off as anything but mystical and "deeply human." He comes off as a scheming consigliere carrying out some of the drearier tasks that the oligarchs he served were constitutionally not so capable of arranging without him.
But the realities of inequality and capitalism invariably lead to mysticism of this sort, a natural human response to the dreary realities of concentrating so much wealth and power in the hands of a dozen interlocking board members at the expense of 100,000 employees, and so many other negative knock-off effects on the politics and culture of the world they dominate.
One of the more telling elements to this lawsuit is the role played by "Star Wars" creator George Lucas, who emerges as the Obi-Wan Kenobi of the wage-theft scheme. It's almost too perfectly symbolic that Lucas — the symbiosis of Baby Boomer New Age mysticism, Left Coast power, political infantilism, and dreary 19th century labor exploitation — should be responsible for dreaming up the wage theft scheme back in the mid-1980s, when Lucas sold the computer animation division of Lucasfilm, Pixar, to Steve Jobs.
As Pixar went independent in 1986, Lucas explained his philosophy about how competition for computer engineers violated his sense of normalcy — and profit margins. According to court documents:
George Lucas believed that companies should not compete against each other for employees, because
'
t's not normal industrial competitive situation.' As George Lucas explained, 'I always — the rule we had, or the rule that I put down for everybody,' was that 'we cannot get into a bidding war with other companies because we don't have the margins for that sort of thing.'
Translated, Lucas' wage-reduction agreement meant that Lucasfilm and Pixar agreed to a) never cold call each other's employees; b) notify each other if making an offer to an employee of the other company, even if that employee applied for the job on his or her own without being recruited; c) any offer made would be "final" so as to avoid a costly bidding war that would drive up not just the employee's salary, but also drive up the pay scale of every other employee in the firm.
Jobs held to this agreement, and used it as the basis two decades later to suppress employee costs just as fierce competition was driving up tech engineers' wages.
The companies argued that the non-recruitment agreements had nothing to do with driving down wages. But the court ruled that there was "extensive documentary evidence" that the pacts were designed specifically to push down wages, and that they succeeded in doing so. The evidence includes software tools used by the companies to keep tabs on pay scales to ensure that within job "families" or titles, pay remained equitable within a margin of variation, and that as competition and recruitment boiled over in 2005, emails between executives and human resources departments complained about the pressure on wages caused by recruiters cold calling their employees, and bidding wars for key engineers.
Google, like the others, used a "salary algorithm" to ensure salaries remained within a tight band across like jobs. Although tech companies like to claim that talent and hard work are rewarded, in private, Google's "People Ops" department kept overall compensation essentially equitable by making sure that lower-paid employees who performed well got higher salary increases than higher-paid employees who also performed well.
As Intel's director of Compensation and Benefits bluntly summed up the Silicon Valley culture's official cant versus its actual practices,
While we pay lip service to meritocracy, we really believe more in treating everyone the same within broad bands.
The companies in the pact shared their salary data with each other in order to coordinate and keep down wages — something unimaginable had the firms not agreed to not compete for each other's employees. And they fired their own recruiters on just a phone call from a pact member CEO.
In 2007, when Jobs learned that Google tried recruiting one of Apple's employees, he forwarded the message to Eric Schmidt with a personal comment attached: "I would be very pleased if your recruiting department would stop doing this."
Within an hour, Google made a "public example" by "terminating" the recruiter in such a manner as to "(hopefully) prevent future occurrences."
Likewise, when Intel CEO Paul Otellini heard that Google was recruiting their tech staff, he sent a message to Eric Schmidt: "Eric, can you pls help here???"
The next day, Schmidt wrote back to Otellini: "If we find that a recruiter called into Intel, we will terminate the recruiter."
One of the reasons why non-recruitment works so well in artificially lowering workers' wages is that it deprives employees of information about the job market, particularly one as competitive and overheating as Silicon Valley's in the mid-2000s. As the companies' own internal documents and statements showed, they generally considered cold-calling recruitment of "passive" talent — workers not necessarily looking for a job until enticed by a recruiter — to be the most important means of hiring the best employees.
Just before joining the wage-theft pact with Apple, Google's human resources executives are quoted sounding the alarm that they needed to "dramatically increase the engineering hiring rate" and that would require "drain[ing] competitors to accomplish this rate of hiring." One CEO who noticed Google's hiring spree was eBay CEO Meg Whitman, who in early 2005 called Eric Schmidt to complain, "Google is the talk of the Valley because [you] are driving up salaries across the board." Around this time, eBay entered an illegal wage-theft non-solicitation scheme of its own with Bill Campbell's Intuit, which is still being tried in ongoing federal and California state suits.
Google placed the highest premium on "passive" talent that they cold-called because "passively sourced candidates offer[ed] the highest yield," according to court documents. The reason is like the old Groucho Marx joke about not wanting to belong to a club that would let you join it — workers actively seeking a new employer were assumed to have something wrong with them; workers who weren't looking were assumed to be the kind of good happy talented workers that company poachers would want on their team.
For all of the high-minded talk of post-industrial technotopia and Silicon Valley as worker's paradise, what we see here in stark ugly detail is how the same old world scams and rules are still operative.
Court documents below...
October 24, 2013 Class Cert Order (http://www.scribd.com/doc/201651711/October-24-2013-Class-Cert-Order#)
Apple je izgubio poziciju najvrednije firme na svetu. Sada je to Google (http://www.businessinsider.com/google-most-valuable-brand-2014-5). Tim Cook će sigurno morati da izvrši hara-kiri.
Ček', ček', da ne bude zabune: ti ovde u stvari misliš na brendove, ne na firme... Apple nikad nije bio najvrednija firma na svetu, a kamoli najbogatija.
Pratim Forbes već nekoliko godina, i ne mogu da se setim da sam ikad video Apple na vrhu njihovih godišnjih lista firmi. Imali su najveću tržišnu vrednost, istina, ali ona nije jedini pokazatelj ekonomske moći. Imaš i prihode, profit i imovinu, i tu Apple zaostaje za nekima.
Inače, poslednje dve godine Kinezi RAZVALJUJU. ICBC pre svih.
Da notiramo najavu novog ajFouna sa par dana zakašnjenja ovim udobnim slešdot samarijem:
Apple Announces Smartwatch, Bigger iPhones, Mobile Payments (http://mobile-beta.slashdot.org/story/14/09/09/1819244/apple-announces-smartwatch-bigger-iphones-mobile-payments)
QuoteToday at Apple's September press conference, they announced the new iPhone 6 models. There are two of them — the iPhone 6 is 4.7" at 1334x750, and the iPhone 6 Plus is 5.5" at 1920x1080 (http://arstechnica.com/apple/2014/09/apple-announces-iphone-6-iphone-6-plus/). Both phones are thinner than earlier models: 5S: 7.6mm, 6: 6.9mm, 6 Plus: 7.1mm. The phones have a new-generation chip, the 64-bit A8 (http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/9/6122731/iphone-6-apple-4-7-inch-display-announced). Apple says the new phones have a 25% faster CPU, 50% faster GPU, and they're 50% more energy efficient (though they were careful to say the phones have "equal or better" battery life to the 5S). Apple upgrade the phones' wireless capabilities, moving voice calls to LTE and also enabling voice calls over Wi-Fi. The phones ship on September 19th, preceded by the release of iOS 8 (http://arstechnica.com/apple/2014/09/apple-to-release-ios-8-on-september-17/) on September 17th.
Apple also announced its entry into the payments market with "Apple Pay." They're trying to replace traditional credit card payments with holding an iPhone up to a scanner instead (http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/9/6084211/apple-pay-iphone-6-nfc-mobile-payment). It uses NFC and the iPhone's TouchID fingerprint scanner. Users can take a picture of their credit cards, and Apple Pay will gather payment information, encrypt it, and store it. (Apple won't have any of the information about users' credit cards or their purchases, and users will be able to disable the payment option through Find My iPhone if they lose the device.) Apple Pay will work with Visa, Mastercard, and American Express cards to start. 220,000 stores that support contactless payment will accept Apple Pay, and many apps are building direct shopping support for it. It will launch in October as an update for iOS 8, and work only on the new phones.
Apple capped off the conference with the announcement of the long-anticipated "Apple Watch." (http://www.engadget.com/2014/09/09/apple-watch-announced/) Their approach to UI is different from most smartwatch makers: Apple has preserved the dial often found on the side of analog watches (http://arstechnica.com/apple/2014/09/apple-reveals-long-rumored-apple-watch/), using it as a button and an input wheel. This "digital crown" enables features like zoom without obscuring the small screen with fingers. The screen is touch-sensitive and pressure sensitive, so software can respond to a light tap differently than a hard tap. The watch runs on a new, custom-designed chip called the S1, it has sensors to detect your pulse, and it has a microphone to receive and respond to voice commands. It's powered by a connector that has no exposed contacts (http://techcrunch.com/2014/09/09/meet-the-apple-watch/) — it magnetically seals to watch and charges inductively. The Apple Watch requires an iPhone of the following models to work: 6, 6Plus, 5s, 5c, 5. It will be available in early 2015, and will cost $349 for a base model.
саће се нагледамо и наслушамо како је њи'ов смартњоч суперкул и диван и најбољи и....то све.
Meni se već smučilo po FB i Tviteru što gledam poslednjih nekoliko dana ljude kako iznova ismevaju Apple i iPhone. Mlate mrtvu ragu.
Zanimljivo je i to što ovaj smartwatch makar deluje kao značajno bolji od bilo čega što do sada postoji na tom tržištu. Možda Apple podigne ovaj segment industrije na neki ozbiljniji nivo?
па то може да се деси, несумњиво....али колика је вероватноћа?!
Quote from: Father Jape on 11-09-2014, 11:55:15
Meni se već smučilo po FB i Tviteru što gledam poslednjih nekoliko dana ljude kako iznova ismevaju Apple i iPhone. Mlate mrtvu ragu.
требало би да промениш друштво!
Quote from: дејан on 11-09-2014, 11:51:26
саће се нагледамо и наслушамо како је њи'ов смартњоч суперкул и диван и најбољи и....то све.
почело је
гизмодо - ево шта експерт за сатове мисли о новом епловом смартњочу (http://gizmodo.com/this-is-what-a-watch-expert-thinks-of-the-apple-watch-1633387118)
Quote
They Nailed The Feel
The overall level of design in the Apple Watch simply blows away anything – digital or analog – in the watch space at $350. There is nothing that comes close to the fluidity, attention to detail, or simple build quality found on the Apple Watch in this price bracket.
They Respected Tradition
The Apple Watch, in its own way, really pays great homage to traditional watchmaking and the environment in which horology was developed. We have to remember that the first timekeeping devices, things like sundials, were dictated by the sun and the stars, as is time to this day. The fact that Apple chose to develop two faces dedicated to the cosmos shows they are, at the very least, aware of the origins and importance of the earliest timekeeping machines, and the governing body of all time and space – the universe.
But It's Still Just Not the Same
My watches will last for generations, this Apple Watch will last for five years, if we're lucky. On an emotional level, you can't compare them, and that is why I don't believe many serious watch lovers (who, again, would normally be racing to spend their cash on an Apple release) will go for this.
цео преглед ође (http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/hodinkee-apple-watch-review)
(морам признати профи - за све паре)
Apple prijavio zaradu od 18 milijardi dolara u prethodnom kvartalu! (http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2015/01/27/apples-china-iphone-coup-shows-angela-ahrendts-is-worth-every-penny/)
Apple se sprema da uleti u privrednu granu striminga muzike:
Apple, The Record Label? (http://techcrunch.com/2015/02/08/exclusive-streaming/)
Quote
You better believe that when Apple's streaming music service comes out later this year, it's going to come hard. Apple's MO is to arrive late but with superior firepower, as it did with the iPhone and will with the upcoming Apple Watch. What does that mean for its quest to steamroll Spotify, Google Play, Deezer, and everyone else in streaming? I'd bet part of it will be big exclusives, offering music you can't stream anywhere else.
Apple denied unsubstantiated rumors (http://hitsdailydouble.com/news&id=294560) that it would acquire Taylor Swift's label Big Machine this weekend, but that idea doesn't seem so far-fetched. Yes, The Beatles' label happened to be called Apple Records, but what if Apple Computer got into the business of owning music itself?
Swifty is already a staunch iTunes ally. She famously pulled her catalogue from Spotify last year because she disagreed with their royalty payment structure (http://techcrunch.com/2014/11/07/taylor-swift-explains-why-she-knew-spotify-was-trouble/), while managing to get her new album 1989 featured for sale on iTunes. I've heard that that actually gave a ton of mainstream press exposure to Spotify, along the lines of "Wait, there's a free way to listen to all of music except for Taylor Swift? I'm in."
But this situation looks a lot worse for Spotify if it faces a competing streaming service where people can shake it off on repeat. Taylor Swift got even more popular tonight thanks to the Grammys.
Spotify and the other existing streaming services are going to have a hard enough time competing with Apple's play already. iTunes is said to have over 800 million credit cards on file and is available in nearly 150 countries. Compare that to the Spotify's 15 million paying subscribers and roughly 60 countries of operation.
Oh, and then there's those 1 billion iOS devices sold. If iTunes' streaming app comes pre-installed in the next generation of iPhones and iPads, it could leapfrog Spotify's user base over night.
The always well-sourced Mark Gurman of 9To5Mac (http://9to5mac.com/2015/02/04/apple-beats-cheaper-android-ios/) says the new Apple streaming service will be deeply integrated into iOS, iTunes, and Apple TV, plus will be available on Android. And to make it even harder on competitors, Gurman says the price point under consideration is $7.99 a month, which would undercut the $9.99 a month cost of Google Play Music and Spotify's paid tier.
For Your Ears Only
And then there's the potential for exclusives. Music execs tell me that artist managers and labels are constantly trying to pitch exclusivity deals to iTunes in return for being featured in its store. They'll do the same to get highlighted in Apple's streaming service.
The question is just how aggressive Apple will get with this strategy. Would it buy artists, their master recordings, or entire labels to box out its competitors? The risk is that other artists or labels might think Apple is playing favorites with people it has deals with. But Apple arguably already does this in the app world, pre-loading its own media and productivity apps on iOS and promoting them when possible.
Imagine if Apple could lock up exclusive streaming deals with Taylor Swift or Coldplay, two artists it's been very chummy with in the past, or its own employee Dr. Dre? Apple already has an exclusive digital sales deal with The Beatles for iTunes. If Apple can convince their representatives to let iTunes be the first and only ones to stream the fab four's masterpieces, it could go a long way to attracting mainstream listeners.
Luckily, Apple's got music industry legend and super-connector Jimmy Iovine to convince artists its the smartest move. The company has also staffed up with many former label execs Being the sole place to stream these musicians could lure plenty of fans to an on-demand iTunes service.
Spotify has already used a similar strategy to seduce rock'n'roll fans. It struck deals to get streaming hold-outs like Led Zeppelin, Napster-haters Metallica (http://techcrunch.com/2012/12/06/lars-ulrich-the-notorious-napster-destroyer-announces-his-band-metallicas-music-is-coming-to-spotify/) on its platform. Perhaps it will be the one to go the next step and sign artists. Spotify incubating a set of indie artists on the cusp of popularity seems plausible. To fend off Apple, Spotify will have to (http://techcrunch.com/2014/10/19/the-sonic-mad-scientists/) rely on its free ad-supported tier, focus on product and personalization (http://techcrunch.com/2015/01/10/music-is-a-mobile-linchpin/), and its burgeoning ecosystem of third-party apps (http://techcrunch.com/2014/10/19/the-sonic-mad-scientists/)that piggyback on its legal music subscription.
Despite its advantages, Apple will likely have to navigate the complication of simultaneously offering music download sales and streaming. To many more casual listeners, the idea that they're slowly amassed MP3 collection will suddenly be devalued in the face of limitless streaming will be a shock. It's efforts with iTunes Radio didn't pan out so well in part because teaching new tricks to its audience of old dogs isn't easy. Music listening is a huge market too, so there's likely to be room for multiple players with different focuses, like catalogue, product features, and curation that appeal to different segments.
Still, Apple revolutionized the music biz, for better or worse, with the songs a la carte model of iTunes, and it has the leverage to do it again.
Apps Over Labels
The value that record labels provide is dwindling. The last two crucial services they provide are distribution to physical stores and FM radio promotion. Artists need both to become superstars today, but online alternatives to those channels are quickly growing.
That's placing more of the value creation around record music in the hands of full-stack management agencies like Red Light and Zeitgeist. They handle merchandise, touring, digital, and brand sponsorship where the big bucks get earned as recorded music becomes a promotional vehicle for other revenue streams.
The shifting role of record labels could make artists more open to experimenting with an idea like signing directly with a streaming service, or getting their label to cut a significant exclusivity or acquisition deal with one.
Music is game where Apple could get a lot out of throwing its money around, while the relatively tiny, private Spotify lacks the cash and Google seems to lack the will to keep up. Plenty have joked that Apple could buy all of recorded music with its massive treasure chest. But to win streaming, it might just need control of a fraction of it.
Heh, svinje ostaju svinje:
Apple Shines Spotlight On Unsigned Artist... Who Doesn't Exist (http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2015/06/08/apple-shines-spotlight-on-unsigned-artist-who-doesnt-exist)
Quote
Monday morning's Apple Keynote address brought the usual high production value we're used to from these events. After two hours of operating system demos, explanations of updates to Apple Maps, developer software and Apple Pay, Tim Cook wrapped up the keynote with Steve Jobs' classic "One More Thing" moment. He announced Apple Music by exclaiming, "It will change the way you experience music forever."
Interscope Records / Beats by Dre co-founder and all around music industry mogul, Jimmy Iovine, was welcomed to the stage to introduce Apple Music. Just over a year after Apple bought Beats for $3 Billion (ushering Iovine and Dre into the Apple family), Apple finally unveiled their subscription streaming service – nearly 7 years after Spotify launched.
Apple Music will include many of the features Spotify and Tidal recently unveiled like video and artist profiles, exclusives and content (they previewed hand written lyrics, a studio tour by Bastille, and a live performance video by Alabama Shakes (who just put out my favorite album of the year, Sound and Color...seriously stop what you're doing and go check this incredible piece of art out)).
Drake came on stage and fumbled through a speech about nothing that was only meant to show the Tidal crew (http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2015/03/31/jay-z-tidal-need-truly-change-music-industry) that they have heavy hitters on their side as well. In addition to the aforementioned acts, they highlighted other huge artists like Pharrell, Florence and the Machine, Mark Ronson, Bruno Mars, Bruce Springsteen, Aretha Franklin, and ended with a performance by The Weeknd.
One of the biggest criticisms of the botched Tidal Launch was that the superstar, millionaire "owners" who include Jay Z, Beyonce, Coldplay, Arcade Fire, Rihanna, Calvin Harris, Jack White, Kanye West, Madonna and deadmau5, asked fans to pay them more money exclaiming that artists will get a bigger cut of the streaming revenue than their competitors. But, and this is a big Kardashian but, unsigned, independent artists were completely absent from the presentation. The artists who are working their asses off every single day, on their own, attempting to make a living with their art (who actually NEED higher streaming royalties), did not have a place at the Tidal table. Only after the uproar, did Tidal launch "Tidal Rising" to attempt to correct its ways.
+Apple, Spotify and Tidal All Miss The Point. This Is The Future Of Recorded Music (http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2015/04/14/apple-spotify-tidal-all-miss-the-point-this-is-the-future-of-recorded-music)
Well, Apple was listening and senior VP of Intel Software and Services, Eddy Cue, stood on stage and proudly proclaimed that "even unsigned artists" will be able to upload their content to Apple Music profiles (kind of like they already do for Instagram, Twitter and Facebook). Then he did something amazing, he highlighted an unsigned artist on stage and played a snippet of his new song. Finally, a major tech company is looking out for the unsigned artists who are working tirelessly to make a full-time music career a reality!
Except, the "unsigned artist" the Apple senior VP played during the 2015 Keynote, Loren Kramar, doesn't actually exist. Well, maybe there's a guy named Loren Kramar who kinda plays guitar and has written a song or two. But this is not a working musician. And definitely not the unsigned artist they should have featured. With such a large stage at one of the most pivotal moments in Apple music history, Apple chose not to feature one of the thousands of unsigned, full-time musicians from around the globe with an actual music career, but some 26 year old visual artist (and magazine editor) from NYC who has zero existence as a musician on the web. No videos on YouTube. No Facebook Page. No releases on Spotify or iTunes. No history of performing live. And a Twitter account which launched two hours ago. Impeccable timing.
Turns out Loren Kramar's friend/manager (?) is Joe Weinberger, who used to be an A&R rep under Jimmy Iovine at Interscope. So Jimmy went to his old friend Joe and said "hey buddy, find me an unsigned artist we can feature at WWDC to make us look like we care about unsigned artists." And then Joe went to Loren and said, "yo dude, you got that song written yet? Let's quickly get it recorded so Jimmy can get it played at WWDC and then we turn you into a star. How bout it?!"
The only thing worse than omitting unsigned artists from the discussion, is showcasing an unsigned artist who doesn't yet exist – then patting yourself on the back for it. Apple has long been criticized for being out of touch – especially after the horrendous U2 album debacle where they forced it into everyone's album collection whether they liked it or not. But this is beyond being out of touch. This is flat out deceptive.
And it just goes to show that Apple, in fact, doesn't care about unsigned artists. Jimmy Iovine cares about making his friends, his company and himself rich. And that's it. Because if Apple (or Iovine) actually cared about helping unsigned artists, they would have chosen any of the thousands, literally thousands, out there who are incredible artists with loyal fan bases, but still unsigned.
Hell, you could have gone to venue owners or arts and entertainment weekly newspapers in any major city around the globe and asked them who their favorite new acts are. You could have checked in on Hypem.com to see who's trending. You could have popped into any number of your small San Francisco music venues (just an hour from Cupertino) hosting great local music every night of the week. Or you could have gone to the various management companies who are working to get their new acts traction.
Why not feature metal-pop band out of Milwaukee, Lost In A Name, who are hitting a 10 state tour this Summer and just released an incredible new song (self recorded and self released)? Or how about Philly's retro-hillbilly-rock act Low Cut Connie who just got a favorable review in Rolling Stone and regularly tours the country. Or Nina Storey, who has performed with Etta James, Sara Bareilles and Keb' Mo' and has 6 albums under her belt. Or YouTube star David Choi (with a million YouTube subscribers) who regularly tours independently to packed clubs around the world. Or Ron Pope, who has sold over 1.5 million downloads on iTunes, has 60 million Spotify streams and 50 million YouTube views. Or NYC's Secret Someones, now on tour supporting Ingrid Michaelson, or Minneapolis' Rogue Valley, who had a song featured on The Secret Life of Walter Mitty soundtrack and also tour regularly.
See, as a truly "unsigned artist" who has built my career on my own, touring relentlessly and navigating the ever-changing music industry (and has followed the careers of or played with the above artists), it's a direct insult to us when you slap us in the face with this "artist" who hasn't put in the blood sweat and tears like we have (or even released just a single song). Who doesn't know what it's like to put up posters in the dead of winter, forgo eating out (or eating much at all) so we can pay for 1,000 replicated CDs to sell on tour. To book a 60 date tour, without a booking agent, and then promote that tour (without a promoter) and actually turn it into a success. To spend most of our days not just writing, recording and creating, but emailing blogs, music supervisors, venues, managers, agents, promoters, labels and music tech companies to attempt to get a feature (or a better understanding of how to advance our careers). To self fund (or crowdfund) albums and music videos only to see them bounce around the local music scenes or blogosphere because we don't have the marketing budget to compete with the labels.
But the great, unsigned artists who are doing this, who are putting in the work, are doing it because they want to have a career in music. They know that if they don't do this, no one else will (initially) and they won't get out of their garage. And it's working. Poo poo their numbers all you want, but they're making a living doing what they love and have a fan base who love what they do.
But the executives at Apple don't realize this. They (just like everyone else completely out of touch with the NEW music industry) believe that you go from working a day job and playing guitar in your bedroom, to a record deal, topping the charts. That's what American Idol would like us to believe. They don't see the movement of TRUE unsigned artists ACTUALLY making it work – on their own (or with kickass managers by their side).
+Rock Musicians: Click here if you want to reach Rock and College Radio Stations! (http://72.52.81.231/revive/www/delivery/r16.php?oaparams=2__bannerid=92__zoneid=12__cb=2524077bb1__oadest=http%3A%2F%2Fradio-mall.com%2Fcollege%2520radio%2520ListDMN.htm) Spotify includes unsigned artists in their official curated playlists (with millions of playlist subscribers) which boost the artists' followings (and bank accounts). They also include merch on artist profiles and are rumored to unveil fan connectivity and analytics in the near future. Tidal has their "Tidal Rising" program to feature new, unsigned artists and has also publicly stated they will give artists complete access to their analytics and fan data. Pandora has their "Amp" platform which allows artists to see their complete fan analytics (however they don't have ways to connect with those fans), and Rhapsody now sends out concert push notifications.
+BandPage and Rhapsody Usher In "...The New Era Of The Music Industry" (http://wp.me/p40mAq-e8d)
What are you actually doing for unsigned artists, Apple? Are you going to give us our listener analytics like play counts, locations (to help route tours), email addresses (like BandCamp does), merch offerings (like Spotify and Rhapsody do)? Are you going to notify our fans when we're coming to town with ticket links? Are you going to give us ways to sell experiences (like meet and greets) to help buffer ticket sales for our initial money losing tours? Are you going to give us crowd funding features? Other than asking us to give you MORE content like photos, in studio sneak peaks, videos, behind the scenes footage, lyrics, etc, what are you you going to do for us? Besides paying us a (most likely) incredibly low streaming royalty rate?
That's something else Apple failed to mention. How much are you paying artists (not labels) per stream? So Apple users can sign up for Apple Music for $9.99 a month or $14.99 a month for a family plan. What do we see from that? Is it the same black box pot of money divvied up amongst major labels first, independent labels second and unsigned artists last (if there's anything left) that has become standard in the streaming world? Or are you going to treat every artist the same? Fairly.
I am the first to encourage fellow independent artists to look long term and not make every decision based on immediate financial gain, but artists will cease to become artists if we can't make enough to live on. So, Apple, I ask again, how are you truly going to help unsigned artists sustain a music career? Besides showcasing one at your keynote and hope people don't notice what you just did.
Ari Herstand (http://ariherstand.com) is a Los Angeles based singer/songwriter and the creator of the music biz advice blog, Ari's Take (http://aristake.com). Follow him on Twitter: @aristake (http://twitter.com/aristake)
Idemo dalje sa Apple Music šenaniganima.
Apple Music: The 5 big problems it needs to fix before launch (http://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/apple-music-the-5-big-problems-it-needs-to-fix-before-launch/)
Quote
Apple Music's launch is just 11 days away.
When Eddy Cue and Jimmy Iovine revealed the streaming service at WWDC last week (http://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/apple-music-is-go-the-13-facts-you-need-to-know/), it generated considerable excitement.
And why not?
Finally, Spotify was going to get some real streaming competition.
Apple clearly showed it still believes in the pulling power of music and its stars, which could only mean one thing: a ginormous marketing push from one of the world's biggest corporations – with the sole aim of reminding people of the power of songs.
http://youtu.be/Y1zs0uHHoSw (http://youtu.be/Y1zs0uHHoSw)
But then, the backlash began.
As we stand today, less than two weeks before Apple Music pops into the hands of Johnny Public, it has some serious problems.
Problems that could mean the difference between the biggest launch in digital music history... and not that.
Problems that could confuse and annoy consumers.
Problems that must make Daniel Ek say: 'Oh. Ok.'
Here are five of the worst offenders:
1) Adele
Let's cut to the chase.
Yes, independent labels from around the world are understandably aggrieved that Apple is, so far, refusing to compensate them (http://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/apple-music-contract-fears-grow/) for its three-month free trial. (A trial worth somewhere in the region of $4bn in would-be royalties. (http://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/apple-music-3-month-trial-is-worth-4-4bn/))
And, yes, that could feasibly mean that albums representing a frightening 30% of the market simply aren't available at launch.
Jamie XX and Caribou would be much-missed. Arctic Monkeys would sting. The Prodigy would leave a sizeable hole.
But let's not pretend that one name doesn't stand out above all others.
She's the biggest music star on the planet – and she just happens to be signed to an independent.
Adele, whose 21 and 19 are on XL/Beggars' roster – and whose third album is due, well, whenever she likes, really (http://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/adeles-new-album-wont-first-half-year-say-sources/) – will be one of most searched-for names on Apple Music's first day.
What if she's not there?
That's exactly what could happen should Beggars boss Martin Mills (in consultation with his labels and artists) decides that Apple Music's three-month trial isn't worth his catalogue.
Here's the really scary thought: How could Apple even risk Adele not being on its service?
Could it plausibly be true that Apple simply didn't understand this could happen?
Speculation amongst the indies suggests that the majors have received a softener (or a 'bung', depending on how emotive you want to be) for use of their entire catalogue during the three-month free window.
It makes sense. Remember, conspiracy theorists, this doesn't have to be cold, hard cash.
It could be promotional pledges, or some other form of payment in kind.
Surely, surely, surely, surely Jimmy Iovine et al weren't duped into thinking that – because she is licensed to Columbia in the US – Adele is a Sony artist?
A $780bn company has to be smarter than that.
Has to be.
Right?
2) Everybody else
Here's the troubling truth when it comes to the fallout from this royalty-free three-month window: it's not only indie labels who are unhappy.
Independent music publishers are just as aggrieved, and just as reticent to sign up.
And the publishers not playing ball is even more of a danger sign for Apple Music than the will-she-won't-she Adele story.
MBW understands that at least two of the major music publishers, UMPG and Warner/Chappell, have licensed Apple Music.
These negotiations were probably led by commercial reps of their parents, Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group.
(At Warner, that likely fell to COO Rob Wiesenthal... who left the company a fortnight after the major inked Apple Music's contract (http://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/warner-music-group-coo-rob-wiesenthal-quits/). Interesting.)
As for Sony/ATV, they're a more autonomous unit: 50% owned by Sony Music Entertainment, but 50% owned by other parties. As such, that's less of an obvious story. (Marty Bandier will want the best deal for Marty Bandier's songwriters; of that we can be sure.)
But here's a shocker of which we're more certain: Apple hasn't reached any agreements with any European collection societies for Apple Music.
You read that right.
This is effectively why Cupertino's finest is striking licensing deals direct with the major publishers and the major labels. On the surface, it's a simpler way to do things.
(As for what counts as mechanical rights and performance rights when Apple is boasting about running a live worldwide radio station... it's complicated. CMOs will likely have to get involved at some point.)
But where, you inevitably ask, does that leave the indie publishers?
Surely they need some kind of collective representation to do a neat and tidy deal?
Precisely.
In the UK, for instance, IMPEL – through PRS For Music – is locked in negotiations with Apple right now. And its members are every bit as peeved about getting no royalties for three months as their label counterparts.
These members include the publishing operations of Beggars, Mute, Warp, Kassner, Wixen (UK) and many more.
(Kobalt, something of an independent even amongst the independents, is also yet to sign – although it's understood to be optimistic of striking a deal before launch).
The problem for Apple when it comes to indie publishers is that, unlike record companies, their rights are scattered throughout the world's biggest hits like shrapnel.
So, for instance, without UK indie Bucks Music – a member of IMPEL – you can't technically license all of Ed Sheeran's material, because their writer Amy Wadge deserves a say.
The same goes for other indies when it comes to albums from Adele, Ellie Goulding, Emeli Sande and many, many more: all beneficiaries of the work independent songwriters, who in turn own a slice of their copyrights.
Shorthand: the day the music industry started encouraging its chart stars to use behind-the-scenes professional songwriters, organising (and clearing) rights became much more complicated.
Apple is finding out just how much more complicated as you read this.
"The really worrying thing is that Apple simply might be forced to launch unlicensed," one indie publisher told MBW.
"We're not going to risk the lights going off on our business because Apple wants to do something for free."
Eeek!
3) Apple Connect
"We have just licensed SoundCloud after years of back and forth.
"What, exactly, do Apple reckon we make of them encouraging our artists to give stuff away for free?"
That's what an independent label boss told MBW yesterday.
It echoes slightly less flagrant commentary from Beggars Group, which told its partners in a statement this week:
"We have reservations about both commercial and practical aspects of the Artist Connect area...
"It is a mistake to treat these rights as royalty free, especially in the light of recent licenses with services like Soundcloud."
As MBW noted a couple of days after Apple Music launched (http://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/why-apple-music-should-worry-and-excite-record-labels-everywhere/), photos, song lyrics, videos from the studio, snippets of new tracks, demos... it's all 'cool stuff' which Apple wants artists to give away to their fans for free.
But to labels, it isn't just 'cool stuff'.
It's assets. And assets have value.
On this count, you have to suspect Apple knows what it's doing.
It wants to get closer to artists, because people love artists.
Apple just wants to be loved. Pesky record companies must not be allowed stand in the way of true romance!
It also wants to sell some phones.
Yet if Apple Connect infuriates rights-holders the way SoundCloud did (before attempting to go a bit legit) – if artists give away 'cool stuff' to fans which record company execs see as 'bonus content' – then Apple may well have a war on its hands.
And so, just like with SoundCloud, recordings and assets may start to magically disappear from Apple Connect once they've been posted.
Apple may have to publicly atone.
The words 'takedown policy' may be uttered on tech sites.
Not a good look for anyone.
4) Sonos
Apple Music won't work properly with Sonos devices.
You knew that, right?
Go and read the blog Sonos boss John MacFarlane posted on MBW yesterday. (http://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/sonos-boss-weve-reached-a-watershed-for-streaming-music/)
His views might make a bit more sense now.
Apple owns Beats devices. It paid $3bn for them. Beats is a Sonos rival.
What a hot and spicy (http://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/apple-recalls-233000-beats-pill-xl-speakers-due-fire-hazard/) little conundrum.
"Only those music services that provide a true home solution will be successful in the long term," said MacFarlane.
Ahem.
5) The small matter of The Beatles and Taylor Swift
Remember when Jimmy Iovine said the music industry had pathetically tied itself in knots?
What was his exact phrasing? Oh yes: "The music industry is a fragmented mess."
Well if that's true, how's about launching a music service without:
- (a) The most popular artist (album) of now; (http://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/taylor-swifts-1989-wont-be-on-apple-music-but-will-be-on-itunes/)
- (b) The most popular artist of the past decade;
- (c) The most popular artist of all time?
Because that's what appears to be happening with Apple Music.
No Taylor. No Adele. No Beatles.
Pretty messy.
Pretty fragmented.
People accept it from Spotify. People don't expect it from Apple.
For fun proof of just how much this could deflate Apple Music's streaming platform, let's play the "but you don't have The Beatles" game.
Jimmy Iovine will recognise it because – as a man who worked with John Lennon – it must have reverberated around his mind every time he got pumped up at WWDC.
"Guys, can we build a bigger and better ecosystem with the elegance and simplicity that only Apple can do?"
"Yes Jimmy, but you don't have The Beatles."
"One complete thought around music!"
"A complete thought without The Beatles."
"That's why we're at Apple; to help artists' dreams be realised."
"The best dreams sound like The Beatles."
So... if Apple wants to make Apple Music as brilliant as it can be, it needs to fix all of these problems in 11 days.
That seems like a super-human task.
If only there was a simple, one-hit solution that would make all of these headaches go away.
What's that? Apple has just under $200bn in cash reserves?
There must be a way Apple can sort all of this out.
There's just got to be.
You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one.Music Business Worldwide
Appleova odluka da svoj Apple Music striming servis omili konzumentima tako što će im ga dati prva tri meseca za dž deluje velikodušno...
...osim što se onda setite da je Apple rešio da ni umetnici zastupljeni na tom servisu neće za ta tri meseca dobiti ni pare. Lukavo.
Tejlor Svift se uključila u bekleš koji je ovo izazvalo.
Taylor Swift denigrates Apple Music as 'shocking, disappointing' (http://betanews.com/2015/06/21/taylor-swift-letter-to-apple/)
QuoteThere are only a few days until Apple Music launches (http://betanews.com/2015/06/08/apple-music-and-beats-one-radio-launch-to-shake-up-audio-streaming/), but already there is quite a backlash (http://betanews.com/2015/06/18/indie-labels-screwed-by-apple-music-free-trial-deals/) against the music streaming service. It's not just smaller, independent labels that are complaining about Apple's refusal (http://betanews.com/2015/06/18/apple-music-shouldnt-steal-artist-royalties/) to pay artists any royalties (http://betanews.com/2015/06/18/indie-labels-screwed-by-apple-music-free-trial-deals/) during the initial three month free trial period. Taylor Swift has added her voice to the growing number of complainants, writing an open letter to Apple in which she says she will withhold her new album 1989 from the service.
In the letter, entitled "To Apple, Love Taylor", the singer says that the company's decision not to make royalty payments is "shocking, disappointing, and completely unlike this historically progressive and generous company". Swift is an artist who could afford to shoulder the cost of three months of not being paid by Apple, but she has chosen to make a stand and stick up for those who are less fortunate.
She acknowledges that Apple has been an important partner in helping her to sell her music, but feels that the financial arrangements that will be in place during the free trial period of Apple Music are unacceptable. While recognizing that Apple is ultimately aiming towards paying artists through the paid-for streaming service, Swift says that the current business model is harmful to smaller, up and coming artists.
Writing on her Tumblr blog (http://taylorswift.tumblr.com/post/122071902085/to-apple-love-taylor), she said:
This is not about me. Thankfully I am on my fifth album and can support myself, my band, crew, and entire management team by playing live shows. This is about the new artist or band that has just released their first single and will not be paid for its success. This is about the young songwriter who just got his or her first cut and thought that the royalties from that would get them out of debt. This is about the producer who works tirelessly to innovate and create, just like the innovators and creators at Apple are pioneering in their field...but will not get paid for a quarter of a year's worth of plays on his or her songs.
She took to Twitter to spread word of the letter:
Echoing sentiments expressed by independent record labels, Swift writes, "three months is a long time to go unpaid, and it is unfair to ask anyone to work for nothing". She calls for the company to rethink its policy before musicians are badly affected by it. She ends the letter by saying:
We don't ask you for free iPhones. Please don't ask us to provide you with our music for no compensation.
Apple je na kraju poklekao pred lobističkim moćima Tejlor Svift i platiće umetnike i tokom perioda besplatnog striminga (http://recode.net/2015/06/21/apple-says-it-will-pay-taylor-swift-for-free-streams-after-all/).
или је све то била добро организована кампања?
на много места, чак и на бизнис инсајдеру (http://www.businessinsider.com/taylor-swift-apple-music-2015-6) се говорило о томе. с'обзиром да никако не успевам да будем довољно циничан колико је овај свет покварен помишљам да је ово био још једна од лукавих манипулација ПР магова.
Imajući na umu da se svakom živom marketing-profesionalcu ekstremno diže na viralni marketing, naravno da ovo ne treba odbaciti kao mogućnost.
Apple conspired to fix e-book prices: U.S. appeals court (http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/30/us-apple-ebooks-decision-idUSKCN0PA1RS20150630)
QuoteA divided federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld a judge's ruling that Apple Inc (AAPL.O (http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/overview?symbol=AAPL.O)) had conspired with five publishers to increase e-book prices, in a win for the U.S. Justice Department.By a 2-1 vote, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed that the conspiracy violated federal antitrust law, and that the judge acted properly two years ago in imposing an injunction to prevent a recurrence. The ruling would force Apple to pay consumers $450 million under a 2014 settlement of a class action with 33 state attorneys general and lawyers, unless it files another appeal and wins. The settlement was contingent on Apple's civil liability being upheld."While we want to put this behind us, the case is about principles and values," Apple said in a statement. "We know we did nothing wrong back in 2010 and are assessing next steps."Writing for the majority, Circuit Judge Debra Ann Livingston said Apple's actions "unreasonably restrained trade," rejecting arguments that the company acted independently with its own business interests in mind."The district court did not err in concluding that Apple was more than an innocent bystander," Livingston wrote.
Assistant Attorney General Bill Baer welcomed the ruling, which he said "confirms that it is unlawful for a company to knowingly participate in a price-fixing conspiracy, whatever its specific role in the conspiracy or reason for joining it."The appeal followed a July 2013 decision by U.S. District Judge Denise Cote in Manhattan that Apple played a "central role" in a conspiracy with publishers to eliminate retail price competition and raise e-book prices.The Justice Department, which secured the ruling following a non-jury trial, said the scheme caused some e-book prices to rise to $12.99 or $14.99 from the $9.99 price charged by market leader Amazon.com Inc (AMZN.O (http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/overview?symbol=AMZN.O)). The publishers that the Justice Department said conspired with Apple include Lagardere SCA's Hachette Book Group Inc, News Corp's HarperCollins Publishers LLC, Penguin Group Inc, CBS Corp's Simon & Schuster Inc and Verlagsgruppe Georg von Holtzbrinck GmbH's Macmillan.Professor Keith Hylton of Boston University School of Law said Tuesday's ruling endorsed an "expansive view" of the law by allowing Apple to be held liable under a less-stringent standard than it advocated."The DOJ could feel emboldened in pursuing those cases with this theory of conspiracy," he said. In a dissenting opinion, U.S. Circuit Judge Dennis Jacobs said he would have reversed Cote's 2013 ruling, finding that Apple's behavior was pro-competitive in taking on Amazon, which controlled 90 percent of the market."Apple took steps to compete with a monopolist and open the market to more entrants, generating only minor competitive restraints in the process," Jacobs wrote.But Livingston said Jacobs' theory "endorses a concept of marketplace vigilantism that is wholly foreign to the antitrust laws."The case is U.S. v. Apple Inc, 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 13-3741.
Woz se sada, kada Jobsa već godinama nema na zemlji, odvažio da kaže (http://www.i-programmer.info/news/99-professional/8963-steve-wozniak-on-education-engineering-a-apple.html):
QuoteSteve Jobs played no role at all in any of my designs of the Apple I and Apple II computer and printer interfaces and serial interfaces and floppy disks and stuff that I made to enhance the computers. He did not know technology. He'd never designed anything as a hardware engineer, and he didn't know software. He wanted to be important, and the important people are always the business people. So that's what he wanted to do.
The Apple II computer, by the way, was the only successful product Apple had for its first 10 years, and it was all done, for my own reasons for myself, before Steve Jobs even knew it existed.
He does however point out that his partnership Jobs was important. A great product wouldn't do anyone any good unless it sells - and for that you need a company:
"So it's very important, even if you are not a business man, find someone who is."
Dakle Džobs je bio Džo Makmilan. :3
Videćemo da li će Makmilan iu drugoj sezoni da razvije Džobsove moći socijalne prekognicije i odnosnog dizajniranja. Ali u suštini, ovo i jeste nešto što se zna i što Apple sledbenici manje-više smatraju za kanonsko znanje - Woz je bio inženjer, Jobs prodavac. Vele da je Jobs i posao u Atariju dobio kada im je pokazao Wozovu ploču sa njegovim klonom Ponga, a Bushnell pomislio da je Jobs ovo sam dizajnirao itd. No, fakat je da je Jobs pokazao da razume socijalnu komponentu dizajna i inženjeringa bolje nego praktično iko na svetu i da Apple ne bi bio tu gde jeste bez njega.
Apple je najavio ajFoun 6 ali to znate (http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/a-laymans-guide-to-the-new-iphones-and-apples-other-ne-1729643905#_ga=1.231111901.331641795.1441855870). No, još koješta je tu najavljeno:
iPad Pro: Everything You Need to Know About Apple's New 12.9-Inch Mega Tablet (http://gizmodo.com/ipad-pro-everything-you-need-to-know-about-apples-new-1729520310)
Apple TV Is Getting A Gaming Remote (http://kotaku.com/apple-tv-is-getting-a-gaming-remote-1729609225)
The New Apple TV Is an App-Powered Fun Machine (http://gizmodo.com/the-new-apple-tv-is-an-app-powered-fun-machine-1729461839)
i :lol:
Apple's So-Called Gaming Console Is A Major Bust (http://kotaku.com/apples-so-called-gaming-console-is-a-major-bust-1729655923)
Samo da ukažem da sam u jednom članku iz Forbes-a, od pre više meseci, pročitao argument da "rich" i "wealthy" nisu isto. Nešto u vezi razlike izmedju kontrole i posedovanja, ali više se ne sećam šta je šta. Pokušaću da pronadjem citat.
Apple Purchases AI company Emotient to read users' expressions (https://thestack.com/world/2016/01/08/apple-purchases-ai-company-emotient-to-read-users-expressions/)
Quote
In its first acquisition of 2016, Apple has purchased an artificial intelligence company called Emotient for an undisclosed amount.
Emotient, a San Diego-based company, presents themselves as 'the leader in emotion detection and sentiment analysis (http://www.emotient.com/)', which can be used to help organizations understand audience reactions to their products, services, and marketing.
Emotient uses facial expressions to analyze people's emotions; then converts this analysis to quantitative data to gauge consumer reactions to marketing and media. This offers a more statistically comparable alternative to the standard focus group, which relies heavily on feelings and impressions to measure consumer reactions. With software that can translate a mushy emotion into a quantifiable KPI (key performance indicator), people's reactions to a specific input can be broken down and then compared to others in a measurable way.
Emotient does two specific things: it uses AI software to break down micro-emotions shown on each face in a video frame, then they quantify that into three indicators: is the subject paying attention to the advertising, are they emotionally engaged, and are they showing a positive or negative emotion?
Second, last September they received a new patent which anonymizes individual faces before they are processed for emotions and reactions, thereby protecting consumer privacy. A co-founder of Emotient who was an author of the patent stated (http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/emotient-issued-patent-to-make-emotion-analytics-anonymous-300142955.html), "Our goal is to provide avenues for people to express their feelings about content in an anonymous, effortless and scalable manner." The patent covers "sophisticated pixelating or blurring of an individual's features while retaining the expressive information before transmitting, so identity is never seen or captured, let alone transmitted."
There are some obvious applications of Emotient technology for Apple. First, it could improve analytics through its existing iAd program (https://developer.apple.com/iad/), using the front-facing camera on a mobile device to capture consumer input and custom-tailor advertising. But Apple could also use emotional recognition in its Health app; as facial expression has long been a valuable indicator of pain in a hospital setting. Or the Emotient technology could be used in Apple's retail locations, to hone on-site marketing as well.
This isn't Apple's first foray into facial recognition marketing plans. In January 2014, Apple submitted a patent application for targeted content delivery (http://%28http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=/netahtml/PTO/search-adv.html&r=2&p=1&f=G&l=50&d=PG01&S1=%28706/47.CCLS.%20AND%2020140123.PD.%29&OS=ccl/706/47%20and%20pd/1/23/2014&RS=%28CCL/706/47%20AND%20PD/20140123) by inferring a person's mood, and tailoring content based on that inferred mood.
Da sam ja neka vlast, Apple bi kompjutere pravio u Americi a ne u tamo nekim Kinama... kaže Donald Tramp, čovek koji se pravi da ne zna kako stoje stvari:
Donald Trump says he's going to make Apple build computers in the US (http://www.techinsider.io/donald-trump-ill-make-apple-build-in-the-us-2016-1)
QuoteIf elected, presidential candidate Donald Trump plans to make Apple start "building their damn computers and things in this country instead of other countries."
Trump's ultimatum to the most valuable company in the world was made towards the end of a 45-minute speech he gave at Liberty University in Virginia on Monday.
The most popular candidate in the Republican party said he would impose a 35% business tax on American businesses manufacturing outside of the United States, as noted by Gizmodo (http://gizmodo.com/trump-says-he-will-force-apple-to-manufacture-in-the-us-1753626111).
Apple has manufactured its Mac Pro at a factory in Texas since 2013, but the vast majority of its products (including the iPhone) are largely made and assembled in China.
How Trump would force Apple's supply chain, which relies heavily on a vast network of suppliers and large factories throughout Asia, to be brought stateside remains unknown. Apple CEO Tim Cook recently called the U.S. tax code "awful for America." (http://yashness.appspot.com/www.techinsider.io/apple-ceo-tim-cook-on-taxes-60-minutes-interview-2015-12)
You can watch Trump's full speech at Liberty University on C-SPAN (http://www.c-span.org/video/?403331-1/donald-trump-remarks-liberty-university).
U svemu ovome je najslađe kako se Tramp ni ne trudi da diskutuje
zašto američke kompanije prave stvari u Kini, dok se Kuk, šatro, poziva na poreze (koje većina kompanija veličine uporedive sa Appleom ionako izbegava na briljantne načine). Jeftina - često dečija - radna snaga i mnogo labavija regulativa rada sa tim nemaju nikakve veze, naravno :lol: :lol: :lol:
Appleove svinjarije o kojima je ovih dana pisala i Politika svode se na to da, ako ste popravljali telefon negde drugde a ne kod ovlašćenog Apple servisera (koji je skup i često ništa i ne popravlja) a instalirali ste novu verziju operativnog sistema, sad u rukama imate ekstremno fensi dizajniranu ciglu. Naravno ,sasvim je moguće da ovo nije iz zle namere već da se radi o brljotini, no ostaje da Apple ovde svoje korisnike propisno urpopasti.
'Error 53' fury mounts as Apple software update threatens to kill your iPhone 6 (http://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/feb/05/error-53-apple-iphone-software-update-handset-worthless-third-party-repair)
Quote
It's the message that spells doom and will render your handset worthless if it's been repaired by a third party. But there's no warning and no fix
Thousands of iPhone 6 (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/iphone-6) users claim they have been left holding almost worthless phones because Apple's latest operating system permanently disables the handset if it detects that a repair has been carried out by a non-Apple technician.
Relatively few people outside the tech world are aware of the so-called "error 53" problem, but if it happens to you you'll know about it. And according to one specialist journalist, it "will kill your iPhone".
The issue appears to affect handsets where the home button, which has touch ID fingerprint recognition built-in, has been repaired by a "non-official" company or individual. It has also reportedly affected customers whose phone has been damaged but who have been able to carry on using it without the need for a repair.
But the problem only comes to light when the latest version of Apple's iPhone software, iOS (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/ios) 9, is installed. Indeed, the phone may have been working perfectly for weeks or months since a repair or being damaged.
After installation a growing number of people have watched in horror as their phone, which may well have cost them £500-plus, is rendered useless. Any photos or other data held on the handset is lost – and irretrievable.
Tech experts claim Apple (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/apple) knows all about the problem but has done nothing to warn users that their phone will be "bricked" (ie, rendered as technologically useful as a brick) if they install the iOS upgrade.
Freelance photographer and self-confessed Apple addict Antonio Olmos says this happened to his phone a few weeks ago after he upgraded his software. Olmos had previously had his handset repaired while on an assignment for the Guardian in Macedonia. "I was in the Balkans covering the refugee crisis in September when I dropped my phone. Because I desperately needed it for work I got it fixed at a local shop, as there are no Apple stores in Macedonia. They repaired the screen and home button, and it worked perfectly."
He says he thought no more about it, until he was sent the standard notification by Apple inviting him to install the latest software. He accepted the upgrade, but within seconds the phone was displaying "error 53" and was, in effect, dead.
When Olmos, who says he has spent thousands of pounds on Apple products over the years, took it to an Apple store in London, staff told him there was nothing they could do, and that his phone was now junk. He had to pay £270 for a replacement and is furious.
"The whole thing is extraordinary. How can a company deliberately make their own products useless with an upgrade and not warn their own customers about it? Outside of the big industrialised nations, Apple stores are few and far between, and damaged phones can only be brought back to life by small third-party repairers.
"I am not even sure these third-party outfits even know this is a potential problem," he says.
Olmos is far from the only one affected. If you Google "iPhone 6" and "error 53" you will find no shortage of people reporting that they have been left with a phone that now only functions as a very expensive paperweight.
Posting a message on an Apple Support Communities forum (https://discussions.apple.com/thread/7400931?tstart=0) on 31 December, "Arjunthebuster" is typical. He/she says they bought their iPhone 6 in January 2015 in Dubai, and dropped it the following month causing a small amount of damage.
They carried on using the phone, but when they tried to install iOS 9 in November "error 53" popped up. "The error hasn't occurred because I broke my phone (it was working fine for 10 months). I lost all my data because of this error. I don't want Apple to fix my screen or anything! I just want them to fix the 'error 53' so I can use my phone, but they won't!"
Could Apple's move, which appears to be designed to squeeze out independent repairers, contravene competition rules? Car manufacturers, for example, are not allowed to insist that buyers only get their car serviced by them.
Apple charges £236 for a repair to the home button on an iPhone 6 in the UK (https://www.apple.com/uk/support/iphone/repair/other/), while an independent repairer would demand a fraction of that.
California-based tech expert Kyle Wiens, who runs the iFixit website (https://www.ifixit.com/), says this is a major issue. "The 'error 53' page on our website has had more than 183,000 hits, suggesting this is a big problem for Apple users," he told Guardian Money. "The problem occurs if the repairer changes the home button or the cable. Following the software upgrade the phone in effect checks to make sure it is still using the original components, and if it isn't, it simply locks out the phone. There is no warning, and there's no way that I know of to bring it back to life."
He says it is unclear whether this is a deliberate move to force anyone who drops their phone to use Apple for a repair. "All along, Apple's view is that it does not want third parties carrying out repairs to its products, and this looks like an obvious extension of that," he says. "What it should do is allow its customers to recalibrate their phone after a repair. Only when there is a huge outcry about this problem will it do something."
The Daily Dot website features an article by tech writer Mike Wehner (http://www.dailydot.com/technology/what-is-error-53-iphone/) headlined "Error 53 will kill your iPhone and no one knows what it is". He relates how his own iPhone 6 Plus was left "effectively dead to the world".
Meanwhile, an article by tech writer Reuben Esparza (http://blog.icracked.com/blog/2015/11/24/error-53/), published in November by iCracked, a phone repair service, states: "When pressed for more information about the error, few, if any Apple employees could offer an explanation. There was no part they would replace, no software fix, and no way to access the phone's memory. The fix was a new iPhone." It continues: "Though still largely a mystery to most, we now know that error 53 is the result of a hardware failure somewhere within the home button assembly."
A spokeswoman for Apple told Money (get ready for a jargon overload): "We protect fingerprint data using a secure enclave, which is uniquely paired to the touch ID sensor. When iPhone is serviced by an authorised Apple service provider or Apple retail store for changes that affect the touch ID sensor, the pairing is re-validated. This check ensures the device and the iOS features related to touch ID remain secure. Without this unique pairing, a malicious touch ID sensor could be substituted, thereby gaining access to the secure enclave. When iOS detects that the pairing fails, touch ID, including Apple Pay, is disabled so the device remains secure."
She adds: "When an iPhone is serviced by an unauthorised repair provider, faulty screens or other invalid components that affect the touch ID sensor could cause the check to fail if the pairing cannot be validated. With a subsequent update or restore, additional security checks result in an 'error 53' being displayed ... If a customer encounters an unrecoverable error 53, we recommend contacting Apple support."
sve to stoji ALI!
juče u radnji videh 27-inch iMac sa Retina 5K display
i
majko
sve im je oprošteno
želim :lol:
Mrzelo me je da uredno pratim celu ovu operetu oko toga da je FBI od Applea tražio da pomogne u dekripciji ajfouna osobe optužene za terorizam, pa Apple odbio jer Tim Kuk ima velika muda a i nije zgodno, privatnost je bitna itd. ali ipak da se to pomene.
Evo Appleove verzije događaja (http://www.apple.com/customer-letter/):
QuoteA Message to Our Customers The United States government has demanded that Apple take an unprecedented step which threatens the security of our customers. We oppose this order, which has implications far beyond the legal case at hand.
This moment calls for public discussion, and we want our customers and people around the country to understand what is at stake.
Answers to your questions about privacy and security (http://www.apple.com/customer-letter/answers/)
The Need for Encryption Smartphones, led by iPhone, have become an essential part of our lives. People use them to store an incredible amount of personal information, from our private conversations to our photos, our music, our notes, our calendars and contacts, our financial information and health data, even where we have been and where we are going.
All that information needs to be protected from hackers and criminals who want to access it, steal it, and use it without our knowledge or permission. Customers expect Apple and other technology companies to do everything in our power to protect their personal information, and at Apple we are deeply committed to safeguarding their data.
Compromising the security of our personal information can ultimately put our personal safety at risk. That is why encryption has become so important to all of us.
For many years, we have used encryption to protect our customers' personal data because we believe it's the only way to keep their information safe. We have even put that data out of our own reach, because we believe the contents of your iPhone are none of our business.
The San Bernardino Case We were shocked and outraged by the deadly act of terrorism in San Bernardino last December. We mourn the loss of life and want justice for all those whose lives were affected. The FBI asked us for help in the days following the attack, and we have worked hard to support the government's efforts to solve this horrible crime. We have no sympathy for terrorists.
When the FBI has requested data that's in our possession, we have provided it. Apple complies with valid subpoenas and search warrants, as we have in the San Bernardino case. We have also made Apple engineers available to advise the FBI, and we've offered our best ideas on a number of investigative options at their disposal.
We have great respect for the professionals at the FBI, and we believe their intentions are good. Up to this point, we have done everything that is both within our power and within the law to help them. But now the U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone.
Specifically, the FBI wants us to make a new version of the iPhone operating system, circumventing several important security features, and install it on an iPhone recovered during the investigation. In the wrong hands, this software — which does not exist today — would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone's physical possession.
The FBI may use different words to describe this tool, but make no mistake: Building a version of iOS that bypasses security in this way would undeniably create a backdoor. And while the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control.
The Threat to Data Security Some would argue that building a backdoor for just one iPhone is a simple, clean-cut solution. But it ignores both the basics of digital security and the significance of what the government is demanding in this case.
In today's digital world, the "key" to an encrypted system is a piece of information that unlocks the data, and it is only as secure as the protections around it. Once the information is known, or a way to bypass the code is revealed, the encryption can be defeated by anyone with that knowledge.
The government suggests this tool could only be used once, on one phone. But that's simply not true. Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices. In the physical world, it would be the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks — from restaurants and banks to stores and homes. No reasonable person would find that acceptable.
The government is asking Apple to hack our own users and undermine decades of security advancements that protect our customers — including tens of millions of American citizens — from sophisticated hackers and cybercriminals. The same engineers who built strong encryption into the iPhone to protect our users would, ironically, be ordered to weaken those protections and make our users less safe.
We can find no precedent for an American company being forced to expose its customers to a greater risk of attack. For years, cryptologists and national security experts have been warning against weakening encryption. Doing so would hurt only the well-meaning and law-abiding citizens who rely on companies like Apple to protect their data. Criminals and bad actors will still encrypt, using tools that are readily available to them.
A Dangerous Precedent Rather than asking for legislative action through Congress, the FBI is proposing an unprecedented use of the All Writs Act of 1789 to justify an expansion of its authority.
The government would have us remove security features and add new capabilities to the operating system, allowing a passcode to be input electronically. This would make it easier to unlock an iPhone by "brute force," trying thousands or millions of combinations with the speed of a modern computer.
The implications of the government's demands are chilling. If the government can use the All Writs Act to make it easier to unlock your iPhone, it would have the power to reach into anyone's device to capture their data. The government could extend this breach of privacy and demand that Apple build surveillance software to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone's microphone or camera without your knowledge.
Opposing this order is not something we take lightly. We feel we must speak up in the face of what we see as an overreach by the U.S. government.
We are challenging the FBI's demands with the deepest respect for American democracy and a love of our country. We believe it would be in the best interest of everyone to step back and consider the implications.
While we believe the FBI's intentions are good, it would be wrong for the government to force us to build a backdoor into our products. And ultimately, we fear that this demand would undermine the very freedoms and liberty our government is meant to protect.
Tim Cook
tl;dr verzija: FBI traži od Applea da kreira novu verziju operativnog sistema koja se može instalirati na korisnikov uređaj bez njegove dozvole, zaobilazeći enkripciju i time otključavajući sve njegove, jelte, tajne. Apple kaže da je davanje podataka koje oni već imaju (kada to traži sud) jedna stvar ali da je ovo druga stvar i da to naprosto nije korisno i bezbedno i predstavljalo bi opasan presedan i kreiranje ogromnih bezbednosnih rizika u budućnosti.
Mark Šećerbreg se svrstao uz Apple (http://gizmodo.com/mark-zuckerberg-is-on-apple-s-side-even-though-most-ame-1760650224).
Ali statistička većina američkih građana, kao što se i očekivalo ne haje za poznatu krilaticu Bena Frankllina i svrstala se uz vlasti a protiv Applea (http://www.phonearena.com/news/Survey-finds-majority-of-Americans-dont-side-with-Apple_id78688).
Bil Gejc iskoristio priliku da poljubi skut FBI i opljune vječite rivale (http://www.siliconbeat.com/2016/02/23/whos-on-fbis-side-against-apple-bill-gates-plus-51-of-americans/).
Kinezi su, pak uz Apple (http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-china-tech-apple-20160224-story.html).
Ono što je možda interesantno imati na umu je da telefon o kome pričamo (da podsetim, radi se o Sajidu Faruku koji je sa suprugom Tašfin Malik pobio gomilu kolega/ prijatelja, prezjumabli u činu islamističkog ekstremističkog terorizma, prošlog Decembra (http://www.znaksagite.com/diskusije/index.php?topic=6352.msg612757#msg612757)) zapravo nije bio Farukov privatni telefon, već poslovni ajfoun koji je dobio na korišćenje od strane okružnih vlasti u San Bernardinu i da je zapravo samo za dlaku uzfalilo da svi podaci budu bekapovani u oblaku (http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/20/technology/apple-fbi-san-bernardino-shooting/index.html). Da Faruk nije promenio lozinku dan pred masakr, danas bi smo se svi smejali ovom incidentu. Dobro, ne bismo se smejali ali ne bi bilo ovog sukoba između Applea i FBI-ja...
...za koga mnogi tvrde da je samo Appleov PR ili čak FBIjev PR koji mudro biva korišćen da se podigne mnogo buke ni oko čega a da bi se onda promenio zakon čime bi se ubuduće olakšao pristup kritovanim podacima, jer, kako recimo ovaj tekst veli, obaveštajne i kontraobaveštajne agencije u SAD već imaju softver koji može da uradi ovo što FBI tako javno traži od Applea (http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/02/22/apples-iphone-the-backdoor-is-already-there/print/)...
I zabave radi, da ukažemo i da je serijski ludak Džon Mekafi iz nekog razloga odlučio da mu je ovo odlična prilika da izreklamira sebe pa je (takođe javno) ponudio da FBI njemu i njegovom "timu najboljih hakera na planeti" donese taj ajFoun i da će ga oni krekovati "koristeći pre svega socijalni inženjering" (http://www.businessinsider.com/john-mcafee-ill-decrypt-san-bernardino-phone-for-free-2016-2). Naravno, ne bi ništa naplatio jer ipak je Mekafiju Amerika na srcu (da li ste znali da je i on u predsedničkoj trci, kao kandidat Libertarijanske partije?). Vredi pročitati celo njegovo pismo jer... gaddemit.
Quote from: Meho Krljic on 25-02-2016, 09:49:56
I zabave radi, da ukažemo i da je serijski ludak Džon Mekafi iz nekog razloga odlučio da mu je ovo odlična prilika da izreklamira sebe pa je (takođe javno) ponudio da FBI njemu i njegovom "timu najboljih hakera na planeti" donese taj ajFoun i da će ga oni krekovati "koristeći pre svega socijalni inženjering" (http://www.businessinsider.com/john-mcafee-ill-decrypt-san-bernardino-phone-for-free-2016-2). Naravno, ne bi ništa naplatio jer ipak je Mekafiju Amerika na srcu (da li ste znali da je i on u predsedničkoj trci, kao kandidat Libertarijanske partije?). Vredi pročitati celo njegovo pismo jer... gaddemit.
Pretpostavljamo da nikoga neće baš
mnogo iznenaditi saznanje da je MekAfi lagao :lol: :lol: :lol:
John McAfee lied about San Bernardino shooter's iPhone hack to 'get a s**tload of public attention' (http://www.dailydot.com/politics/john-mcafee-lied-iphone-apple-fbi/)
Quote
John McAfee (http://www.dailydot.com/tags/john-mcafee/) isn't telling you the truth—but he says he's lying for a good cause.
McAfee has been on a media tour discussing a court order (http://www.dailydot.com/politics/apple-comey-encryption-san-bernardino/) that directs Apple (http://www.dailydot.com/tags/apple/) to write custom code to help the FBI (http://dailydot.com/tags/fbi/) access a terrorist's iPhone (http://www.dailydot.com/tags/iphone/). The method McAfee says he would use to break open the phone, he admitted to the Daily Dot, is false.
McAfee, who founded of one of the first companies to offer antivirus software, claimed on CNN (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HqI0jbKGaT8) and Russia Today (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MG0bAaK7p9s), as well as in a Business Insider column (http://www.businessinsider.com/john-mcafee-ill-decrypt-san-bernardino-phone-for-free-2016-2), that he could bypass the advanced encryption (http://dailydot.com/tags/encryption/) protecting the iPhone without Apple's help. But he lied in those interviews, he told the Daily Dot, to "get a shitload of public attention."
Further, the method McAfee says is real—the one he says he's lying to try to hide—is neither a secret nor feasible for anyone to accomplish without expensive tools and specialized skills. Even then, experts believe it would be difficult and would risk destroying the data the FBI is fighting so hard to access."Now, what I did not lie about was my ability to crack the iPhone. I can do it. It's a piece of friggin' cake."
Apple has the ability to write custom software that would allow the FBI to brute force its way into San Bernardino shooter Syed Rizwan Farook's iPhone without triggering a self-destruct security feature. But it must do so by authorizing the specialized version of iOS with a signature Apple exclusively holds.
FBI Director James Comey (http://dailydot.com/tags/james-comey/) said during a congressional hearing on Tuesday (http://www.dailydot.com/politics/apple-fbi-iphone-encryption-hearing-lawmakers/) that his office had requested the help of the entire U.S. government but that he did not find a viable solution for breaking into the iPhone without demanding Apple's assistance.
McAfee said he bent the truth in order to push back against the official narrative.
"By doing so, I knew that I would get a shitload of public attention, which I did," McAfee said. "That video, on my YouTube (http://www.dailydot.com/communities/youtube/) account, it has 700,000 views. My point is to bring to the American public the problem that the FBI is trying to [fool] the American public. How am I going to do that, by just going off and saying it? No one is going to listen to that crap.
"So I come up with something sensational," he continued. "Now, what I did not lie about was my ability to crack the iPhone. I can do it. It's a piece of friggin' cake. You could probably do it."
McAfee first admitted to lying in
an interview (https://www.inverse.com/article/12277-john-mcafee-challenges-reddit)
with Inverse.
The software company executive offered to tell the Daily Dot his secret method for cracking an encrypted iPhone, something that experts say cannot be done without Apple's authentic digital signature, but only if the Daily Dot promised to "not publish this publicly or tell anybody else."
The Daily Dot declined to make such a promise in order to keep the entire conversation on the record.
Later in the interview, McAfee described his method, which involves "decapping" the phone's processor and acquiring the device's unique identifier (UID), that may allow someone to brute force the phone's password—guess the password by flooding it with options—at a faster rate. Despite his insistence that the Daily Dot not publish this technique, McAfee has explained the method in previous media interviews.
Some experts believe, however, that McAfee's theory doesn't make much sense. Ars Technica explained why (http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/03/john-mcafee-better-prepare-to-eat-a-shoe-because-he-doesnt-know-how-iphones-work/): Thus far, the most plausible method for decrypting the San Bernardino iPhone without Apple's assistance involves manually inspecting the handset's processor using acid and lasers. Done correctly, this would let the FBI learn not the PIN, but the device's unique hardware ID. With that ID, they could combine it with each of the PINs in turn until they hit upon the right one. The cost and complexity of this technique would be extremely high, and it would be extremely risky: one wrong move and the hardware ID would be destroyed permanently, making the phone's data permanently and irrevocably lost.
When asked why he was discussing this method on the record, McAfee said, "Because I'm assuming, because you kept on asking, that you aren't going to publish it."
When the Daily Dot pointed out that McAfee had never secured such a promise, he said that the conversation was over and hung up.
"The lie was an exaggeration of simplicity," McAfee said in a text message after the interview. "As the Inverse article explained, it would have been impossible in the time allowed to explain the fullness of the truth. If you fault me for that, then you, and possibly your readers, will have been the only one on the planet to have done so."
McAfee also said, "I apologize for my anger." He added that it "seemed absurd to me to focus on a simplification of a technique, given the stakes at risk—a potentially Orwellian state initiated by the populace ignoring the truth of what the FBI is trying to do to us."
Rasplet:
Justice Department cracks iPhone; withdraws legal action (http://news.yahoo.com/justice-department-cracks-iphone-withdraws-220719890.html)
Quote
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The FBI said Monday it successfully used a mysterious technique without Apple Inc.'s help to hack into the iPhone used by a gunman in a mass shooting in California, effectively ending a pitched court battle between the Obama administration and one of the world's leading technology companies.
The government asked a federal judge to vacate a disputed order forcing Apple to help the FBI break into the iPhone, saying it was no longer necessary. The court filing in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California provided no details about how the FBI did it or who showed it how.
The FBI is now reviewing the information on the iPhone, the Justice Department said in a statement.
In response, Apple said in a statement that it will continue to increase the security of its products. While saying it will still provide some help to the government, "as we have done all along," the company reiterated its position that the government's demand was wrong.
"This case should never have been brought," Apple said in its statement.
Both sides left important questions unanswered: Who showed the FBI how to break into iPhones? How did the government bypass the security features that Apple has invested millions of dollars to build into its flagship product? Are newer iPhones vulnerable to the same hacking technique? Will the FBI share its information with scores of state and local police agencies that said they also need to break into the iPhones of criminal suspects? Will the FBI reveal to Apple how it broke its security? Did the FBI find anything useful on the iPhone?
The surprise development also punctured the temporary perception that Apple's security might have been good enough to keep consumers' personal information safe even from the U.S. government — with the tremendous resources it can expend when it wants to uncover something.
The FBI used the technique to access data on an iPhone used by gunman Syed Farook, who died with his wife in a gun battle with police after they killed 14 people in San Bernardino, California, in December. The iPhone was found in a vehicle the day after the shooting; two personal phones were found destroyed so completely that the FBI couldn't recover information from them.
U.S. magistrate Sheri Pym of California last month ordered Apple to provide the FBI with software to help it hack into Farook's work-issued iPhone. The order touched off a debate pitting digital privacy rights against national security concerns.
Apple was headed for a courtroom showdown with the government last week, until federal prosecutors abruptly asked for a postponement so they could test a potential solution brought to them by a party outside of the U.S. government last Sunday. Technical experts had said there might be a few ways an outsider could gain access to the phone, but the FBI insisted repeatedly until then that only Apple had the ability to override the iPhone's security. FBI Director James Comey said the bureau even went to the National Security Agency, which did not have the ability to get into the phone.
A law enforcement official said the FBI was successful in unlocking the iPhone over the weekend. The official spoke to reporters on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to publicly comment. The official said federal law enforcement would continue to aid its local and state partners with gaining evidence in cases — implying that the method would be shared with them.
First in line is likely, Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, who told a U.S. House panel earlier this month that he has 205 iPhones his investigators can't access data from in criminal investigations. Apple is also opposing requests to help extract information from 14 Apple devices in California, Illinois, Massachusetts and New York.
The case drew international attention and highlighted a growing friction between governments and the tech industry. Apple and other tech companies have said they feel increasing need to protect their customers' data from hackers and unfriendly intruders, while police and other government authorities have warned that encryption and other data-protection measures are making it more difficult for investigators to track criminals and dangerous extremists.
Apple CEO Tim Cook had argued that helping the FBI hack the iPhone would set a dangerous precedent, making all iPhone users vulnerable, if Apple complied with the court order. Cook said Congress should take up the issue.
The withdrawal of the court process also takes away Apple's ability to legally request details on the method the FBI used in this case. Apple attorneys said last week that they hoped the government would share that information with them if it proved successful.
The encrypted phone was protected by a passcode that included security protocols: a time delay and self-destruct feature that erased the phone's data after 10 tries. The two features made it impossible for the government to repeatedly and continuously test passcodes in what's known as a brute-force attack. Comey said with those features removed, the FBI could break into the phone in 26 minutes.
The official said the method used to unlock the phone appears to work on the iPhone 5C operating a version of iOS 9. In late 2014, Apple updated its operating system so the passcode is linked to the phone's overall encryption. The Cupertino-based company said that made it impossible for it to access data on the phone.
The Justice Department wouldn't comment on any future disclosure of the method to Apple or the public.
The government's announcement was praised by Stephen Larson, a Los Angeles attorney who filed a brief in support of the Justice Department's case and represents seven families of those killed in the attack. "For this to have dragged out in court battles would not have served the interests of either" the victims or law enforcement, he said.
Alex Abdo, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed a brief supporting Apple in its case, said the case is far from settled and it was "just a delay of an inevitable fight" about whether the government can force a company like Apple to undermine the security of its products to facilitate an investigation.
Apple should pay more tax, says co-founder Wozniak (http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36108378)
Quote
All companies, including Apple, should pay a 50% tax rate, Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak has told the BBC.
He said he doesn't like the idea that Apple does not pay tax at the same rate he does personally.
Apple, Google and Amazon have been criticised for not paying enough in tax and the firm is currently the subject of a European Commission tax inquiry.
Mr Wozniak, who left Apple in 1985, was also ambivalent at the prospect of the UK leaving the European Union.
Mr Wozniak - widely known as Woz - founded Apple along with Steve Jobs and Ronald Wayne 40 years ago. It has grown to become one of the most valuable businesses in the world, worth around $600bn.
He told BBC Radio 5 live: (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b077cl0q) "I don't like the idea that Apple might be unfair - not paying taxes the way I do as a person.
"I do a lot of work, I do a lot of travel and I pay over 50% of anything I make in taxes and I believe that's part of life and you should do it."
When asked if Apple should pay that amount, he replied: "Every company in the world should."
He said he was never interested in money, unlike his former partner Steve Jobs. "Steve Jobs started Apple Computers for money, that was his big thing and that was extremely important and critical and good."
Apple channels much of its business in Europe through a subsidiary in the Republic of Ireland, which has a corporation tax rate of 12.5% compared to the UK's 20%.
In the US it's 35%, but three years ago the company admitted two of its Irish subsidiaries pay a rate of 2%. It has built up offshore cash reserves of around $200bn - beyond the reach of US tax officials.
Tax avoidance has been brought back into focus by the recent Panama Papers revelations (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-35934836).
Mr Wozniak said: "We didn't think we'd be figuring out how to go off to the Bahamas and have special accounts like people do to try to hide their money.
"But you know, on the other hand I look back any company that is a public company, its shareholders are going to force it to be as profitable as possible and that means financial people studying all the laws of the world and figuring out all the schemes that work that are technically legal. They're technically legal and it bothers me and I would not live my life that way."
'Not against secession' The UK should be free to exit the European Union, Mr Wozniak added.
"I don't care. I think that all the states of Europe - it's better if you have very easy transportation - like movement from one to another to another", he said.
"Like we drive in the US from 50 individual states that all have their own laws and customs and typical types of people - you just drive through, and there are no customs hang-ups or anything...
"I'm not against secession. If a state wants to leave the union let them leave. I don't think we should have even fought our civil war, we should have let the states leave."
Apple's cyber scrap Mr Wozniak, who was speaking at the Business Rocks technology summit in Manchester, backed Apple over its recent tangle with US authorities over access to data: "Apple has been the good guy.
"There are politicians who do not have a clue as to what cyber security is all about trying to pass laws saying that Apple has to make a product less secure.
"Why? That's a crime. That is just so horrible. I just cry! Why would Apple do it for such a weak case where the government were not going to get any valuable information at all - it's impossible."
Proročanstva propasti:
LeEco CEO Jia Yueting says Apple is outdated (http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/24/leeco-ceo-jia-yueting-says-apple-is-outdated.html)
Apple Has First Earnings Decline in More Than a Decade (http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/apple-earnings-decline-decade/story?id=38674749)
2 thieves dressed as SoHo Apple store employees steal 19 iPhones: NYPD (http://pix11.com/2016/06/12/2-thieves-dressed-as-soho-apple-store-employees-steal-19-iphones-nypd/)
QuoteSOHO, Manhattan — It took a "genius" to pull off this heist: two thieves put on Apple store employee t-shirts and headed past the Genius Bar to the repair room, grabbed what they could and walked out with more than $16,000 worth of iPhones, police said.
Police released two pictures of the thieves, one of whom appears to be caught in the act with an iPhone in his hands.
This brazen heist happened at the Apple store in SoHo on Prince Street. It was crowded with customers when they walked up the flight of stairs in their green Earth Day Apple t-shirts to the second floor repair room at 5:30 p.m. on June 1, according to police. They hid 19 iPhone 6 Pluses under their shirts, worth close to $16,000, and walked right out.
Police said an hour before, the same thieves may have stolen three iPhones 6's worth $1,900 from the Apple Store on 14th Street and Ninth Avenue in the West Village.
The stolen iPhones are believed to not have sensors and are unlocked.
Earlier this year, three thieves pulled off two similar but much more lucrative heists at the Upper West Side Apple Store at Broadway and 67th Street, a training center for Apple employees.
Once again, they dressed as Apple employees and stole a total of $49,000 worth of iPhones.
Police, at this point, can't say if any of the heists are connected.
PIX11 News reached out to an Apple spokesman, but had yet to hear back on if there is an effort to tighten security measures.
Ehhh, kao da nije već bilo dovoljno loše...
Apple is making life terrible in its factories – labor rights warriors (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/08/26/apple_criticized_for_factories/)
QuoteManufacturers buckling under demands for cheaper iStuffs
Pressure from Apple to lower costs is driving worsening conditions for workers at the company's manufacturing partners.
This is according to watchdog group China Labor Watch, which says (http://www.chinalaborwatch.org/upfile/2016_08_23/Pegatron-report%20FlAug.pdf) [PDF] that under CEO Tim Cook, the Cupertino giant has asked the companies that assemble its products to cut their own costs, and those demands have led them to cut back on worker pay and factory conditions.
Specifically, the group reports that Pegatron has been passing on financial pressures from Apple by committing multiple violations of Chinese labor laws on fair pay and workplace safety.
"Working conditions are terrible, and workers are subject to terrible treatment," China Labor Watch writes.
"Currently, Apple's profits are declining, and the effects of this decline have been passed on to suppliers. To mitigate the impact, Pegatron has taken some covert measures to exploit workers."
Among the issues cited in the report were workers being forced to put in excessive overtime and have their wages cut to $1.60 per hour. Additionally, the investigation found Pegatron interns being forced to put in hours almost as long as employees, and factory conditions where workers were operating without proper safety equipment.
Apple did not respond to a request for comment on the report.
The company has pushed a campaign (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/02/14/tim_cook_on_supplier_workig_conditions/) to improve conditions at the plants that manufacture its products and has in the past cut ties with the worst offenders.
According to China Labor Watch, however, Cook and Co have at the same time been squeezing the manufacturers to reduce costs and keep profits up. This, in turn, makes them culpable when those partners pass the pressure on to workers.
"Apple has already subcontracted its production to suppliers such as Pegatron, however, these workers are making Apple products. Moreover, through outsourcing, Apple lowers its production cost, but this is only possible by exploiting workers," the report reads.
"Apple is the real reason working conditions are deteriorating." ®
Zavuče im ga Juncker:
Apple Ordered to Pay Up to $14.5 Billion in EU Tax Clampdown (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-30/apple-ordered-to-pay-up-to-14-5-billion-in-eu-tax-crackdown)
Apple Inc. was ordered (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-30/apple-s-14-5-billion-eu-tax-ruling-what-you-need-to-know) to pay as much as 13 billion euros ($14.5 billion) plus interest after the European Commission said Ireland illegally slashed the iPhone maker's tax bill, in a record crackdown on fiscal loopholes that also risks inflaming tensions with the U.S.
The world's richest company benefited from selective tax treatment that gave it an unfair advantage over other businesses, the European Union regulator said (http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-2923_en.htm) Tuesday. It's the largest tax penalty in a three-year campaign against corporate tax avoidance. Apple and Ireland both vowed to fight the decision in the EU courts. >
Irish tax rulings to Apple are illegal state aid. Effective taxation as low as 0,005 pct. #Apple (https://twitter.com/hashtag/Apple?src=hash) has to repay up to ÃÂÃÂÃÂâÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂì13 billion unpaid tax.
— Margrethe Vestager (@vestager) August 30, 2016 (https://twitter.com/vestager/status/770561765667110912)
Ireland allowed Apple to pay an effective corporate tax rate of 1 percent on its European profits in 2003 down to 0.005 percent in 2014, according to EU Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager.
"If my effective tax rate would be 0.05 percent falling to 0.005 percent -- I would have felt that maybe I should have a second look at my tax bill," she told reporters.
Click here to see a clip of Vestager's announcement. (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2016-08-30/apple-faces-record-payment-in-eu-tax-crackdown)
The U.S. Treasury Department, which has pushed back hard against the EU state-aid probes, said the commission's actions "could threaten to undermine foreign investment, the business climate in Europe, and the important spirit of economic partnership between the U.S. and the EU."
White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said that Apple executives have shared concerns about the company's tax treatment overseas with officials in President Barack Obama's administration.
Administration officials are broadly concerned that what Earnest called the EU's "unilateral approach" doesn't undermine coordinated efforts to prevent an "erosion of the tax base." Also, he said, they want to ensure that any actions are fair to U.S. taxpayers and U.S. businesses.
Apple, which employs about 6,000 people in Ireland, was one of the first companies caught up in the EU's backlash (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-22/what-is-amazon-s-core-tech-worth-depends-on-which-taxman-asks) against corporate tax-avoidance. The EU, like other global regulators, has targeted firms that sidestep taxes by moving around profits and costs to wherever they are taxed most advantageously -- exploiting loopholes or special deals granted by friendly governments.
"The most profound and harmful effect of this ruling will be on investment and job creation in Europe," Apple Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook said in a letter (http://www.apple.com/ie/customer-letter/) published on the company's website. "Every company in Ireland and across Europe is suddenly at risk of being subjected to taxes under laws that never existed." >
Minister Noonan disagrees profoundly with Commission on Apple https://t.co/zim7k0NOQ4 (https://t.co/zim7k0NOQ4) pic.twitter.com/tRyR6c28HU (https://t.co/tRyR6c28HU)
— Dept of Finance IRL (@IRLDeptFinance) August 30, 2016 (https://twitter.com/IRLDeptFinance/status/770565774763261952)
Apple shares fell as much as 1.2 percent in New York trading and were down 0.6 percent at 12:13 p.m.
While the 13 billion-euro figure represents the EU's estimate of how much Ireland should claw back from Apple, the commission said the actual figure could be less if other nations used the information gleaned by the EU to claim a share of taxes.
Irish Finance Minister Michael Noonan said in an interview with Bloomberg TV that Vestager was advising countries to "in effect, form a queue and look for that tax."
The commission said the amount could be reduced if the U.S. required Apple to pay larger amounts of money to its American parent company to finance research and development efforts.
Ultimately, the EU courts also have the power to cut or overturn repayment orders if they find fault with the commission methodology during the appeals process.
But such challenges can take years to finalize, meaning that the final sum Apple may have to pay won't be known until then. The money (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-30/why-ireland-doesn-t-want-apple-s-14-5-billion-in-back-taxes) clawed back can be held in escrow pending a ruling.
Cook on EU Apple tax case: "Total political crap" (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/09/tim-cook-slams-eu-apple-case-total-political-crap/)
Quote
BRUSSELS—A war of words has erupted between Europe's competition chief and Apple CEO Tim Cook after Ireland was ordered to reclaim (http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2016/08/apple-must-pay-ireland-13-billion-euros-in-taxes-says-brussels/) €13 billion (£11.1 billion/$14.5 billion) in back taxes from the company.
Cook, in an interview with the Irish Independent (http://m.rte.ie/news/2016/0901/813345-apple-reaction/), labelled Brussels' competition chief Margrethe Vestager's decision as "total political crap." He claimed Ireland was being "picked on" and that he hoped to see the Irish government launch an appeal against the ruling.
On Tuesday, Vestager said that the European Commission's two-year investigation had found Apple guilty of receiving illegal state aid from Ireland (http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2016/08/apple-must-pay-ireland-13-billion-euros-in-taxes-says-brussels/) thanks to so-called sweetheart tax deals in 1991 and 2007. She said that Ireland allowed Apple to pay an effective corporate tax rate of one percent on its European profits in 2003, down to as low as 0.005 percent in certain years.
Apple, in a statement (http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/AAPL/1744415757x0x906369/ED9C94CE-ACC4-42CA-8CC6-28E54A419796/EC_Opinion_Investor_FAQ.pdf) on Wednesday, said that the "number quoted by the European Commission is extremely misleading and deceptive." It added:
We paid $400 million in taxes in Ireland in 2014—considerably more than the commission's figure suggests. We were certainly one of the largest corporate taxpayers in Ireland that year, if not the largest.
In addition, we paid $400 million of current US taxes on those profits, bringing total current taxes paid to $800 million. Most importantly, the commission completely ignores the fact that the vast majority of those profits was subject to US taxation. Apple also accrued several billion dollars in US deferred taxes on those profits earned in 2014.
Vestager refuted that claim when quizzed by reporters on Thursday. "This is a decision based on the facts of the case. The figures that we used in our decision are the figures that we got from Apple themselves," she said.
"There are very, very few figures in the public domain. More transparency would be a good thing, for example, a country by country reporting. If it was up to me, the non-confidential version of the decision would have been published yesterday, because that is another way of enabling everyone to see what we have decided and on what basis we have made this decision. Right now the ball is in the hands of Apple and Ireland."
She also rejected Cook's claim that her decision was politically motivated. Vestager said: "The enforcement part of the competition portfolio does not really fit into any political picture. Even if it weren't like this, we always have the courts to keep us in line. Because I don't think the courts will hear any political opinions or feelings, they want the facts of the case and that is what we have to produce."
Apple has said it plans to appeal against the decision. However, despite previously insisting that Ireland's government would similarly challenge the commission's ruling in the courts, an agreement to do so wasn't made by the Irish cabinet during a special meeting convened on Wednesday.
The US has also weighed in on the case. Last week the treasury department warned that it would "consider its options." (http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2016/08/apple-tax-eu-probe-us-treasury-whitepaper/) On Wednesday, treasury secretary Jack Lew said that he was concerned that the case was an attempt to reach into income that ought to be taxed in the US.
Ars asked Vestager to respond to Lew's claims about the distribution of Apple's coffers. The commissioner said: "The Apple case is about profits made by sale in Europe so obviously it is a question of tax being paid in Europe. It is a European matter and a matter for state aid rules." She added that she was looking forward to meeting Lew in person in Washington later this month.
Meanwhile, Brussels' competition officials continue to investigate a similar case about Amazon's tax arrangements (http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-1105_en.htm) in the European Union.
Android users more honest and humble than iPhone users: Study (http://www.bgr.in/news/android-users-more-honest-and-humble-than-iphone-users-study-2/)
Apple bi, ako je verovati Timu Kuku uskoro mogao da počne da izbegava plaćanje poreza u Americi umesto u EU :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Tim Cook: Apple may bring billions back to U.S. next year (http://www.siliconbeat.com/2016/09/01/tim-cook-apple-may-bring-billions-back-to-u-s-next-year/)
QuoteIn what seems to be a huge turnaround, Apple CEO Tim Cook says the company plans to bring back billions of dollars in profit to the U.S. next year.
Cook's statement, made during an interview with RTE radio (http://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0901/813345-apple-reaction/) Thursday, contradicts his previous public statements on the issue: He has said for years that U.S. corporate taxes are too high, and that the Silicon Valley company wouldn't be repatriating profit until its home country changed its tax code.
"Right now I would forecast that we repatriate next year," Cook said, saying that the company has "provisioned several billion" for that purpose.
The interview with Irish radio was about this week's European Commission judgment, which found that Ireland's tax arrangements with Apple were illegal (http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_30307322/apple-slammed-14-5-back-tax-penalty-europe). The commission found that Apple had paid as little as 0.005 percent to 1 percent in taxes there, and ordered Ireland to collect the equivalent of $14.5 billion in back taxes. Cook said Apple will appeal the decision, which he called "maddening."
Ireland — whose low corporate tax rates are a lure to other multinationals such as Google and Facebook — may also appeal the commission's decision.
The decision has rankled the United States, which wants its share of the tax pie. After all, U.S. corporations were holding more than $2 trillion in profit overseas (http://www.siliconbeat.com/2015/10/07/apple-holding-181-billion-in-profit-offshore-study-says/) in 2014, according to a 2015 study by Citizens for Tax Justice and the U.S. Public Interest Research Group Education Fund. Apple had the biggest overseas stash then at $181 billion; the company said in July that its offshore pile had reached about $215 billion.
White House press secretary Josh Earnest said this week (http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/30/technology/apple-tax-eu-us-ireland/) that Europe's Apple judgment is effectively "a transfer of revenue from U.S. taxpayers to the EU."
The U.S. has a corporate tax rate of 35 percent, and state and local governments also want their share. In December, Cook said (http://www.siliconbeat.com/2015/12/21/apple-60-minutes-taxes-encryption-manufacturing-china/) during a "60 Minutes" appearance that bringing profit back to the U.S. "would cost me 40 percent." He told interviewer Charlie Rose: "This is a tax code, Charlie, that was made for the industrial age, not the digital age. It's backwards. It's awful for America."
Cook did not indicate during this week's radio interview what had changed — a proposal by President Obama in 2015 to change the tax code and lower corporate rates was rejected by Republicans — and how much Apple plans to repatriate.
Cook also said that in 2014, Apple paid $400 million in taxes in Ireland and $400 million to the United States.
Apple has not responded to SiliconBeat's request for comment.
Paying Taxes Is a Lot Better Than Phony Corporate Courage, Apple (https://theintercept.com/2016/09/07/paying-taxes-is-a-lot-better-than-phony-corporate-courage-apple/)
Quote
Every fall the internet and its resident tech mumblers congregate for The Apple Event, a quasi-pagan streaming-video rite in which Tim Cook boasts of just how much money his company is making (a lot) and just how much good it's introducing to the world (this typically involves a new iPhone). This is merely annoying most years; but in 2016, when Apple is loudly, publicly denying its tax obligations around the world, it's just gross.
Today's iteration (http://www.apple.com/apple-events/september-2016/) of the ritual, which spanned roughly two hours and included about five minutes of news, began with a rundown of some very large numbers: Apple's streaming music service has over 17 million paying subscribers, its App Store has topped 140 billion downloads, and that store's revenue is double that of its Google counterpart. After a brief preview of an upcoming Super Mario game for the iPhone, sure to be a revenue blockbuster, Cook segued into a spiel about the importance of education and the necessity of providing proper resources to students. His solution: a new version of iWork, Apple's productivity software suite, that allows for multiple kids to edit the same document at the same time. It seems unlikely this will make a substantial difference in the quality of education for children around the world — particularly in countries where public schools are underfunded because companies like Apple deliberately avoid paying taxes.
Apple, despite (or more likely, because of) its recurring status as the most valuable company in the history of capitalism, funnels (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-05-20/apple-s-offshore-entities-avoid-taxes-senate-probe-finds) a huge (https://www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/articles/2016-09-06/apple-should-put-its-tax-returns-where-its-pr-is) portion of its profits overseas, particularly to Ireland, in order to avoid paying its fair share at home in the United States. This year, the company has come under fire from the EU for failing to pay what it should even in the zone where it's stashing its profits — the European Commission has demanded a $15 billion payment from Apple over unpaid Irish taxes, a sum Ireland is actually refusing to accept for fear it will lose its coveted status as Apple's unscrupulously convenient money dump. Meanwhile, the United States is condemning the EU's ruling because it's also battling Apple for unpaid taxes — it has apparently not occurred to either party that Apple is so unfathomably cash-rich that it could satisfy its tax obligations on two continents at once.
The official corporate position is now effectively (https://theintercept.com/2016/08/16/ceo-tim-cook-decides-apple-doesnt-have-to-pay-corporate-tax-rate-because-its-unfair/) We'll pay what we want, and you'll deal with it; Tim Cook himself has said Apple will only repatriate its vast billions to the U.S. if it's at a rate he considers "fair." (https://www.washingtonpost.com/classic-apps/stepping-out-of-steve-jobss-shadow-tim-cook-champions-the-promise-of-apple/2016/08/12/fadb6c26-59cd-11e6-831d-0324760ca856_story.html?wpisrc=nl_draw2&wpmm=1) Cook simultaneously claims Apple is already paying more in taxes than anyone else in the world, which as Bloomberg's Shira Ovide puts it (https://www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/articles/2016-09-06/apple-should-put-its-tax-returns-where-its-pr-is), "has the benefit of possibly being true and impossible to verify."
Apple's tax schemes cannot be dismissed as merely matching the competition for reasons of corporate pragmatism. Yes, Google and Facebook engage in aggressive tax avoidance too (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-21/google-2-4-rate-shows-how-60-billion-u-s-revenue-lost-to-tax-loopholes.html/). But Cook appears to be pushing for permanently lower corporate taxes. That's the best explanation for why he has helped raise money for Republican legislators (https://theintercept.com/2016/06/28/apples-tim-cook-has-billions-of-reasons-to-raise-money-for-the-gop/) despite sharp differences on social issues (Cook is the world's most prominent gay executive). This seems like as good a point as any to mention that Cook today boasted that Apple has sold over a billion iPhones around the world — the iPhone 7 will retail for $649.
And so it's hard to swallow Apple's use of the word "courage" to describe the corporate ethos that pushed the company to remove the headphone plug from the newest iPhone while offering a new pair of jack-free earbuds that will run you $160. Removing a headphone jack or adding 20 headphone jacks does not require courage; engineers are very smart, but their job does not typically require much bravery. Courage is more often found in, say, running into a burning school to rescue the students and class rodent. Or, maybe, you could call courageous the act of paying the many billions you owe around the world into the system that ensures those students have all of the resources they need in order to learn and grow. Just a hint: Collaborative spreadsheet software doesn't count.
Apple's cord situation is completely out of control (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/apples-cord-situation-completely-control-212317333.html)
Quote
Apple's newest computer, the MacBook Pro, looks pretty great (http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-new-macbook-pro-2016-10): It's got fast chips, a good screen, MacOS, and a new kind of touchscreen keyboard it's calling the Touch Bar.
But I'm personally worried that buying the new MacBook Pro will doom me to carrying around various dongles for years, or as long as I'm in Apple's ecosystem. And you should be worried about that too.
In the company's zeal to move to next-generation connectors and future-proof devices, Apple's created a morass of different cords, dongles, and standards.
Take a user who has an iPhone 7 and new MacBook Pro. That's Apple's core customer: someone with disposable income who wants the best computers.
This person needs to think hard about what cords they are going to carry from day to day. The iPhone and MacBook Pro use different chargers, so that person would have to carry both. iPhones use Apple's proprietary Lightning charger. The new MacBooks use the relatively new open USB-C standard.
(That's not a big deal, although it's worth pointing out that if this person had a Google Pixel phone instead of an iPhone, their phone and computer could use the same charger. That's not very elegant, Apple.)
Things get worse when you consider headphones. The new MacBook Pro has a headphone jack, so you can plug basically any pair of headphones into it. The iPhone 7, as you've probably heard, does not.
Customers can use the dongle that comes with the iPhone 7 to use their laptop headphones with their iPhone. But if someone wants to use the Lightning Earpods that come with the iPhone 7, there's no way to plug them into your laptop, unless Apple makes another dongle — some kind of male USB-C-to-female-Lightning adapter.
Of course, what Apple wants you to do is buy its new AirPods, which cost $159, and need to be charged too. AirPods haven't gone on sale yet because Apple says they're not ready (http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-airpods-release-date-delayed-2016-10).
And finally, just try to charge your phone from your laptop using the cord that comes with your iPhone. You can't — unless you have yet another adapter (this one USB-C to USB), which Apple will sell you for $19. A USB-C to Lightning Cable costs $25.
Apple's insistence on using Lightning as its proprietary standard on its phone makes its choice to commit to USB-C on Mac a confusing one.
I understand that ports change and technology has to change with it. But the whole reason to adopt open standards like USB-C is so things can be standardized. And USB-C can do a lot of different things, like power a monitor — so it can certainly charge a phone, handle headphones, or anything else Lightning does.
It's madness (http://www.apple.com/shop/mac/mac-accessories/power-cableshttp://www.apple.com/search/adapter?src=globalnav). Apple's head of design Jony Ive said last month that "we believe in a wireless future." But my immediate future — deciding whether or not I buy a new MacBook Pro — looks to be full of different cords and dongles.
A ima i ovo:
Apple's annual sales fall for first time since 2001 (http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/25/technology/apple-earnings-decline/index.html)
QuoteApple's 15-year streak is officially over. Apple (AAPL (http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=AAPL&source=story_quote_link), Tech30 (http://money.cnn.com/technology/tech30/index.html?iid=EL)) just posted its first annual sales decline since 2001, the year it launched the iPod and kicked off a tremendous run of groundbreaking products.
The tech company revealed Tuesday that annual sales fell to $216 billion in the 2016 fiscal year ending September 30, from a record $234 billion in 2015.
The sales decline is closely connected to the falling sales for the iPhone, which remains Apple's largest source of revenue.
Apple sold 45.5 million iPhones in the September quarter, down from 48 million iPhones in the same quarter a year earlier. That marks the third consecutive quarter when iPhone sales and overall revenue have declined from a year prior.
Many analysts have raised concerns that the global smartphone market is saturated. Customers are taking longer to replace their phones. And Apple's latest iPhone is a dead ringer for the previous two models, eliminating some of the desire to upgrade.
Apple CEO Tim Cook said on a conference call with analysts that demand for the new iPhones is "outstripping supply in the vast majority of places, particularly on the iPhone 7 Plus."
Apple's sales in China, once a promising area of growth, fell 30% year-over-over year as the company faces competition from local smartphone makers like Xiaomi and Huawei. However, the company expects that to improve next quarter.
"We are very bullish on China," Cook said on the call, noting the vast number of "people growing into the middle class."
Related: Apple under Tim Cook: More socially responsible, less visionary
The good news is that this sales decline may prove to be a blip and not the new norm.
Apple is projecting that it will post sales of $76 billion to $78 billion in the upcoming quarter, up from $74.8 billion a year earlier.
The holiday quarter is typically Apple's largest as it represents the first full quarter when new iPhones are on sale. Apple's guidance suggests it is expecting greater demand for the iPhone 7 than its predecessor.
Katy Huberty, an analyst with Morgan Stanley, wrote in an investor note this month that Apple's iPhone sales would be helped in part by "Note 7 issues," a reference to Samsung's massive recall (http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/11/technology/samsung-galaxy-note-7-what-next/?iid=EL).
On the conference call, Apple's CFO Luca Maestri suggested that developments with other smartphone competitors are "not particularly relevant." The reason, he said, is demand for iPhones is already so high that "we are selling everything we can produce."
The earnings report comes two days before Apple is scheduled to hold a press event in California, where it is widely expected to unveil long awaited updates to its Mac product lineup that could help sales.
Apple stock was down 2.5% in after hours trading following the earnings release.
Cracked u humorističkom tonu ukazuje na sličnosti između Applea i Sajentološke crkve (http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-creepy-similarities-between-apple-scientology/).
Apple owes $2 million for not giving workers meal breaks (http://money.cnn.com/2016/12/15/technology/apple-class-action-meal-breaks/index.html)
Naravno za Apple je ovo prašina a većinu će verovatno da pokupe advokati....
Ahhh, uobičajeni "Nezgodno je to" odgovor koji svi mi dajemo poreskoj upravi kada nas opominju što nismo još platili porez. Naravno, u ovom slučaju nezgodnost dopunjava činjenica da vlasti Republike Irske pokušavaju na sve moguće načine da objasne da oni uopšte ne žele taj novac jer, eto, ako Epl bude moro da plaća porez, onda neće da zapošljava TOLIKI svet u Irskoj. Ne kažem da je neko tu potplaćen ali svakako deluje kao da je to slučaj...
'It's tricky': Apple has missed the deadline to pay $13.9 billion to Ireland in illegal tax benefits (http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/31/apple-misses-deadline-to-pay-ireland-illegal-tax-benefits.html)
Quote Apple (http://data.cnbc.com/quotes/AAPL) has not fully paid the 13 billion euros ($13.9 billion) it owes to Ireland in illegal tax benefits even though the deadline has passed, the European Union's competition said on Tuesday.
"Well the recovery is not done yet but we have been working with the Irish authorizes and we can see that they are moving forward to do the recovery of the unpaid taxes," EU Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager said during a press conference in response to a question by CNBC.
"It's a tricky thing to do because it's a large sum so of course you have to figure out how to do that. It's not as an escrow account in some of the other cases where it might be 25 or 30 million euros ... and therefore I do respect that it's a complicated matter and it may take a little more time."
Last year, the Commission ruled that Ireland must recover 13 billion euros in "illegal tax benefits" (http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/30/confused-by-the-eu-apple-ruling-read-this.html) from Apple. It found that the U.S. technology giant paid an effective tax rate of 0.005 percent (http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/30/how-apples-irish-subsidiaries-paid-a-0005-percent-tax-rate-in-2014.html) in Ireland in 2014.
The deadline for Ireland to recover the money into an escrow account was January 3. But the money still has not been repaid.
"We are continuing to make progress of the recovery from Apple with the full cooperation of the company and the EU Commission," a spokesperson for Ireland's Ministry of Finance told CNBC by email.
"The Commission are satisfied with the progress we are making. We have committed to complying with the decision and we fully intend doing that."
Still both Ireland and Apple have pledged to fight the decision via the European courts. Vestager said at the press conference that she does not know when the court case will take place for Apple and Ireland to appeal the EU's decision.
Ireland's Finance Minister Michael Noonan, in response to a question from CNBC concerning Apple's taxes, said because of the legal hurdles it could be years before there is a conclusion to the case.
"The appeal is in now and it'll go to a European ordinary court first and then whoever loses will probably appeal it to the European Court of Justice. So you're looking at a four-year time frame, five-year time frame. (A) slow bicycle race between the Apple case and Brexit seems to be emerging now. Let's see which will reach the destination first."
Apple has yet to respond to a request for comment when contacted by CNBC. But the company has spoken strongly about the decision. In an interview with the Irish Independent last year, Apple CEO Tim Cook called the ruling "total political crap" which has "no basis in law or in fact".
The Irish government has also been critical of the decision. Last year, Noonan slammed Brussels' interference in the country's tax matters.
"We stand by the legitimacy of what was done in the past ... we think the Commission is getting involved in what is the competence of sovereign governments in Europe.... This is an approach through the back door to try and influence tax policy through competition law," Noonan told CNBC in August (http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/30/ireland-to-appeal-against-apple-ruling-defends-tax-system.html).
Koliki porez Apple plaća na, recimo, Novom Zelandu? Ako ste pomislili da je trik pitanje bili ste u pravu: ne plaćaju ništa.
US Apple users urge company to 'do the right thing' and pay NZ taxes (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=11820984)
Quote
American-based Apple users are weighing in behind Kiwi politicians who are calling for the US tech giant to pay its taxes in New Zealand.
Bryan Chaffin of The Mac Observer (https://www.macobserver.com/columns-opinions/the-back-page/apple-pays-zilch-new-zealand-taxes-4-2-billion-sales/), an Apple community blog site founded in 1998, has urged Apple chief executive Tim Cook to "do the right thing" even though it would mean slightly lower profits for the company's shareholders.
He was commenting on revelations today in the Weekend Herald (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11820240) that Apple paid zero tax to the NZ Government in the past 10 years in a period when its sales in this country totalled $4.2 billion.
The company's accounts show that its NZ branch paid $37 million in tax since 2007 - but all of it was passed on to the Australian Government because the NZ operation is run out of Australia.
Chaffin wrote that Apple was the largest taxpayer in the United States, but "pays next to nothing in most parts of the world".
"There are so many areas where Apple does enormous good - far, far more good than any other electronics giant, and probably any other for-profit company," he wrote.
"But local taxes matter. Roads matter. Schools matter. Housing authorities matter. Health care matters. Regulation enforcement matters. All of the things that support civil society matter. Apple's profits are made possible by that civil society, and the company should contribute its fair share.
"According to the New Zealand Herald, 'Had Apple reported the same healthy profit margin in New Zealand as it did for its operations globally it would have paid $356 million in taxes over the period.'
"That kind of money matters to countries the size of New Zealand. To me, Apple should kick in to help pay for the civil infrastructure it needs to make those profits.
"And I won't be silent about it."
Labour's revenue spokesman Michael Wood said Kiwi taxpayers had "every reason to feel outraged" by Apple's zero NZ tax bill.
"Nurses, cleaners, office workers, and small business owners, who pay their fair share of tax to support public services in our country, will be dismayed at these latest revelations," he said.
"We know that this is the tip of the iceberg for big multinationals being let off the hook by the National Government being completely asleep at the wheel."
On March 3 the Government announced a package of measures (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11811220) which will deem non-residents to have NZ permanent establishments if they sell goods or services to a person in New Zealand, and have related entities carrying out activities here to bring the sales about.
The package will also stop companies using interest payments to shift profits offshore. But it stops short of a diverted profits tax which has been introduced in Australia and Britain.
Revenue Minister Judith Collins declined to comment specifically on Apple yesterday, but said a "minority" of international companies were exploiting rules to avoid paying tax and "we do not consider the amount of tax paid by these multinationals is fair".
An Apple spokesperson in Australia told the Weekend Herald yesterday: "Apple aims to be a force for good and we're proud of the contributions we've made in New Zealand over the past decade. Because our products and services are created, designed and engineered in the US, that's where the vast majority of our tax is paid."
Exclusive: Apple just promised to give US manufacturing a $1 billion boost (http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/03/exclusive-apple-just-promised-to-give-us-manufacturing-a-1-billion-boost.html)
Quote
Apple (http://data.cnbc.com/quotes/AAPL) CEO Tim Cook (http://www.cnbc.com/tim-cook/) said that his company will start a $1 billion fund to promote advanced manufacturing jobs in the United States.
"We're announcing it today. So you're the first person I'm telling," Cook told "Mad Money (http://www.cnbc.com/mad-money/)" host Jim Cramer on Wednesday. "Well, not the first person because we've talked to a company that we're going to invest in already," he said, adding that Apple will announce the first investment later in May.
The fund comes as President Donald Trump (http://www.cnbc.com/donald-trump/) has made bringing back manufacturing jobs a big part of his agenda, and it fits into Apple's larger effort to create jobs across its spectrum, from its own employees to app developers to its suppliers.
As advanced manufacturing jobs are in high demand in the U.S., the sector was already high on Apple's list of priorities, and Cook hopes the investment will spur even more job creation.
"By doing that, we can be the ripple in the pond. Because if we can create many manufacturing jobs around, those manufacturing jobs create more jobs around them because you have a service industry that builds up around them," the CEO said.
Apple has already created two million jobs in the United States, and Cook showed no signs of shrinking the tech giant's reach.
"A lot of people ask me, 'Do you think it's a company's job to create jobs?' and my response is [that] a company should have values because a company is a collection of people. And people should have values, so by extension, a company should. And one of the things you do is give back," Cook said.
"So how do you give back? We give back through our work in the environment, in running the company on renewable energy. We give back in job creation."
Watch a 10-Year-Old's Face Unlock His Mom's iPhone X (https://www.wired.com/story/10-year-old-face-id-unlocks-mothers-iphone-x/)
Apple to start paying Ireland the billions it owes in back taxes (https://www.engadget.com/2017/12/04/apple-paying-ireland-billions-back-taxes/)
Apple announces plans to repatriate billions in overseas cash, says it will contribute $350 billion to the US economy over the next 5 years (https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/17/apple-announces-350-billion-investment-20k-jobs-over-5-years.html)
Inside 'the reality distortion field': An early Apple employee told us what it was like having Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak as his bosses (http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-joe-shelton-on-steve-jobs-and-steve-wozniak-2018-7)
Apple breaches $1 trillion stock market valuation (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-stocks-trillion/apple-hits-1-trillion-stock-market-valuation-idUSKBN1KN2BE)
:shock:
А Србин негодује, има и том аплу да смркне, да пукне тај балон...пишу људи коментаре испод вести на српским порталима.
Quote from: Truman on 04-08-2018, 13:19:27
А Србин негодује, има и том аплу да смркне, да пукне тај балон...пишу људи коментаре испод вести на српским порталима.
Trumane, zar stvarno misliš da to nije balon? Ko im u mobilnom svetu dahće za vratom, tj već ih je skinuo sa koregentskog trona po prodaji telefona? Kinezi.
Što se tiče komentara, to je uvek tako, jer ako išta ovde ljudi znaju, to je da mrze. Nezadovoljni sami sobom, frustrirani i samozaljubljeni. Ujedno, radi se o Američkoj kompaniji, da je ruska, bilo bi ohoh, i radovanje, iako ni od jednog ni od drugog nikakve koristi nemaju.
По мом мишљењу није балон, тако озбиљна фирма ( не баве се они само телефонима ) неће допустити да зглајзне још барем 10 година. Кинези су ок, али немају тако јак бренд. На то додај ефекат инфлације, биће и других фирми које ће пробити ту магичну границу, додуше не из области телефоније.
Quote from: Truman on 05-08-2018, 13:57:51
По мом мишљењу није балон, тако озбиљна фирма ( не баве се они само телефонима ) неће допустити да зглајзне још барем 10 година.
Apple jeste ozbiljna firma, ali je udeo u onome na čemu su i stvoreni daleko manji od udela koji im donosi "vrednost". Više ljudi dahće i ahće za Ajfonom, Ajpadom, nego za Mac-ovima. Sa druge strane njihova zatvorenost, pseudo ekskluzivnost će im kad tad doći glave. Jer, da ne bude zabune, slavu su stekli na kompjuterskom tržištu otvorenošću arhitekture, da nije tako devedeset procenata onoga što nam je danas na stolu, ili pod stolom bi bilo neproširivo. A sve što imaju duguju pre svega Voznijaku, Džobs je bio i ostao samo šaman marketinga. Danas Apple nije tehnološki predvodnik, nego jedna obična tužibaba koja koristi nakaradni anglosaksonski sistem patenata da bi uklanjao konkurenciju. Uostalom, šta je Mac danas? Našminkani PC na kome je instaliran UNIX pod ukradenim grafičkim okruženjem. Gde je revolucionarnost prvog Mac-a? Ili Mac-a uopšte? Nema je. Samo prodavanje magle. Isto ti je ako pogledaš bilo koju emisiju na TV, bilo koji film, svugde se gura Macbook. Dok je u stvari situacija sasvim drugačija u realnom svetu. Dakle, šta pumpa vrednost Apple-a? Telefoni i marketing okrenut prema šminkerkama, hipsterima, i ostalima koji bi da im parče plastike, stakla i aluminijuma podigne ego.
Quote from: akhnaton on 05-08-2018, 15:03:03
Dakle, šta pumpa vrednost Apple-a? Telefoni i marketing okrenut prema šminkerkama, hipsterima, i ostalima koji bi da im parče plastike, stakla i aluminijuma podigne ego.
Таквих ће увек бити у довољном броју. :mrgreen: Не могу да замислим позере како балаве за "кинезима".
Quote from: Truman on 05-08-2018, 15:10:20
Таквих ће увек бити у довољном броју. :mrgreen: Не могу да замислим позере како балаве за "кинезима".
Ali oni jadni ne znaju, gde se pravi Ajfon. Pozeri misle da se ta džidža bidža pravi od suvog zlata u Fort Knoxu, i da ono što je zagrizla Eva na poleđini iste, daje neku važnost, mislim ono čim imaš Apple uređaj, ti si faca, cool, edgy, laća... da ne pričam koju poruku šalje činjenica da se istim služe i pozerkice sa plastičnim patka kljujnovima, namolovanim obrvama, crnačkim guzicama nataknutim na platforme... i njihovi veprovi od pratilaca.... uz naravno tetovažicu u vidu tribala i lačnićem od pola do dva kila zlata oko vrata...
Можда неки и знају где се прави, заправо писало се о томе у америчким медијима колико се сећам. Чак и да плате за кинеске стандарде у тим фабрикама нису лоше. Поента је опет у бренду, а не где је склопљено. Тако да ја не видим неки скори пад овој компанији...
п.с. шта имаш против црначких гузица ( женских )? Не фали им ништа...
Quote from: Truman on 06-08-2018, 16:04:26
Можда неки и знају где се прави, заправо писало се о томе у америчким медијима колико се сећам. Чак и да плате за кинеске стандарде у тим фабрикама нису лоше. Поента је опет у бренду, а не где је склопљено. Тако да ја не видим неки скори пад овој компанији...
п.с. шта имаш против црначких гузица ( женских )? Не фали им ништа...
Nisam ja rekao da će apple da propadne, niti da bih ja to želeo, samo sam izneo konstataciju o tome kakvu poruku šalju prosečni obožavaoci brenda. Apple nažalost nije ono što je nekada bio, ali šta i jeste kao nekada?
Što se tiče guzica, nisam mislio na prave crnačke guzice, nego na one koje su danas moderne da se plastifikuju, bolje reći ugrađuju.
Oš da odemo u oftopic?
Današnji medijima nametnut ideal ženske "lepote" je kosa azijatkinja, grudi rasnih plavuša, stomak sa pločicama, pozadina kao kod ugojene crnkinje, noge kao kod prosečne kobile, usta u obliku pačijeg kljuna izujedanog stršljenima, oči kao kod anime, obrve kao krem bananice, oblik lica mix baby face sa istaknutim jagodicama, koža kvarcovana i u stilu delfina.... istetovirana i "ukrašena" pirsingom, sve to natakareno na platforme visine prosečne U-Matic kasete... Sa druge strane, normalno lepe žene teško da mogu da dođu do izražaja, jer kao alternativa se nude podgojene tetke sa roze kosom, stomacima većim od mog (a nisam mršavko), đozlucima u stilu šezdesetih godina, i politički pootpaljenom mržnjom prema muškarcima....
Quote from: akhnaton on 07-08-2018, 16:28:29
Današnji medijima nametnut ideal ženske "lepote" je kosa azijatkinja, grudi rasnih plavuša, stomak sa pločicama, pozadina kao kod ugojene crnkinje, noge kao kod prosečne kobile, usta u obliku pačijeg kljuna izujedanog stršljenima, oči kao kod anime, obrve kao krem bananice, oblik lica mix baby face sa istaknutim jagodicama, koža kvarcovana i u stilu delfina.... istetovirana i "ukrašena" pirsingom, sve to natakareno na platforme visine prosečne U-Matic kasete... Sa druge strane, normalno lepe žene teško da mogu da dođu do izražaja, jer kao alternativa se nude podgojene tetke sa roze kosom, stomacima većim od mog (a nisam mršavko), đozlucima u stilu šezdesetih godina, i politički pootpaljenom mržnjom prema muškarcima....
Истина, а што је најгоре сам себе некад ухватим у томе да су ми силиконке привлачне. :oops: Не све, али неке да. И онда разум каже "будало, то су силиконске глупаче", али џаба...крв се већ слила доле.
Quote from: Truman on 07-08-2018, 17:43:29
Quote from: akhnaton on 07-08-2018, 16:28:29
Današnji medijima nametnut ideal ženske "lepote" je kosa azijatkinja, grudi rasnih plavuša, stomak sa pločicama, pozadina kao kod ugojene crnkinje, noge kao kod prosečne kobile, usta u obliku pačijeg kljuna izujedanog stršljenima, oči kao kod anime, obrve kao krem bananice, oblik lica mix baby face sa istaknutim jagodicama, koža kvarcovana i u stilu delfina.... istetovirana i "ukrašena" pirsingom, sve to natakareno na platforme visine prosečne U-Matic kasete... Sa druge strane, normalno lepe žene teško da mogu da dođu do izražaja, jer kao alternativa se nude podgojene tetke sa roze kosom, stomacima većim od mog (a nisam mršavko), đozlucima u stilu šezdesetih godina, i politički pootpaljenom mržnjom prema muškarcima....
Истина, а што је најгоре сам себе некад ухватим у томе да су ми силиконке привлачне. :oops: Не све, али неке да. И онда разум каже "будало, то су силиконске глупаче", али џаба...крв се већ слила доле.
Joj.. Meni bi ma koliko da se krv slila dole, odmah prestala da se sliva ako bih video bananica obrve, usta kao pačiji kljun... u stvari nikada se u takvom slučaju ne bi ni slila gde treba. Jednostavno taj tip "žene" nije prekidač za mene. Odosmo u offtopic.... xrofl
Behind the Hype of Apple's Plan to End Mining (https://earther.gizmodo.com/behind-the-hype-of-apples-plan-to-end-mining-1833045476)
Džabe ga je Gugl blokirao: Huavej napravio svoj operativni sistem i nadigrao Ameriku (https://www.b92.net/biz/vesti/svet.php?yyyy=2019&mm=05&dd=25&nav_id=1546351)
xjap
A $999 monitor stand is everything wrong with Apple today (https://www.engadget.com/2019/06/04/apple-pro-display-xdr-stand/?yptr=yahoo)
Apple is lobbying against a bill aimed at stopping forced labor in China (https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/11/20/apple-uighur/)
čekam 16" M1 MacBook Pro
https://www.gottabemobile.com/reasons-to-wait-for-the-2020-macbook-pro-reasons-not-to-2/?gbmsl=4
Ajd ovo ovde recimo:
EU targets Big Tech with sweeping new antitrust legislation (https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/24/22994234/eu-antitrust-legislation-dma-digital-markets-act-details)
Apple Announces Very Fancy 'Facial Computer,' Starts At $3,499 (https://kotaku.com/apple-vr-headset-vision-pro-mixed-reality-mac-iphone-1850507156)
Najpoznatiji internet consumer ga je već probao.
Apple Vision Pro Impressions! (https://youtu.be/OFvXuyITwBI)
Apple Vision Pro review: magic, until it's not (https://www.theverge.com/24054862/apple-vision-pro-review-vr-ar-headset-features-price)
QuoteThe Apple Vision Pro is the best consumer headset anyone's ever made — and that's the problem.