not a hecamillionaire anymore
He's a billionaire now, he has 28 million shares of Tesla, at $160 each.
341 posts • joined 4 Jun 2011
Firstly you quote the GBP prices for the 27inch incorrectly, the prices you quoted were for the 24inch should be pretty obvious since the pound isn't currently worth over $2. Somehow you got the USD equivalent of the UK price correct.
So the basic 27inch is £1499 including £250 in VAT - that £250 is worth $400 at current rates, which means that the UK price of $2400 would equate to a US price (with similar tax) of $2200 not $2000 - which should be pretty obvious as the pound isn't currently worth less than $1.
Proof read maybe?
ALJ Shaw determined that “the evidence supports Microsoft’s conclusion that Motorola was not interested in good faith negotiations and in extending a RAND license to it.”
The reason Apple don't provide Kaspersky with any such API is of course that such an API would itself have to breach the sandbox - and so its presence would make iOS less secure. The same will probably be true for Windows RT tablets, and is presumably the case on WP7.
This isn't a Mac vs PC thing, this is a heavily sandboxed device OS vs PC thing.
It almost has to be just channel at this stage, because WP7 is still a blip on the web-usage stats for china, in the last quarter iPhone's share of web usage grew fifty times faster than WP7's in the PRC. I guess next quarter we find out if they actually managed to shift any of them.
Because availability of 32GB and 64GB models in the Apple stores was non-existent, but I had no problem picking one up at Dixons in Gatwick - so if channel aren't getting very many, they're clearly having trouble shifting even the few that they do get.
I guess most people prefer to shop in Apple stores than Dixons/Currys if given the choices?
> FRAND is there to protect patent holders and people who need to use the tech in question, it protects the patent holders from someone just using their tech (in theory) without payment, it protects people who need the tech because they can't be stopped from using it (if they pay).
Completely wrong - FRAND is there to protect potential licensees, it does not protect patent holders in any way whatsoever. There's also no need to negotiate a license in advance of using the tech, you can start using and negotiate later, and this isn't just according to Apple, but also freely admitted by Nokia when they were suing Apple.
See for instance section 40 of http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/102209nokiapplecomplaint.pdf
No consideration at all because it wouldn't happen.
There's no point in holding a patent that would allow higher data rates if nobody adopts it, there's no point in putting it into one's own handsets if it's not in the base-stations. There's no point putting it into the base-stations if it won't be in a large fraction of handsets. This is the reason why industry bodies grew up in the first place, this is the reason why companies like Moto and Nokia joined them and submitted their patents.
This isn't bait and switch - this is what Moto signed up for.
I'm pretty sure you're wrong about IPcom not being bound by FRAND
In fact part of the problem for handset makers is that their patents are declared essential and so they can't stop implementing them without ceasing to technically implement the standard - and if they do that they lose their rights to FRAND licenses for everything else!
The power in the Hawking radiation from a solar mass black hole turns out to be a minuscule 9 × 10E−29 watts. Bigger bodies radiate less than smaller, so a 3 solar mass black hole wouldn't lose any appreciable amount of mass over the lifetime of the galaxy.
The only blackholes that could have shrunk appreciably are those that were created in the big bang itself and started off much smaller than any blackhole created by a supernova could be.
There are transistors, but they control whether the pixel is on or off, the LCD itself is more than just transistors so, there is another factor which is that the larger you make a screen the greater the possibility of faults, and the more pixels you make the larger the possibility of faults, so when you try to make a very high resolution large display you get truly terrible yields.
It took years for LCD panels at larger sizes to be economically viable.
Next quarter numbers are going to be pretty interesting. Is the iPhone 4S a big deal or a damp squib? Can WP7 pull Nokia out of the death spiral? Will Blackberry's consumer market hold up as WhatsApp and iMessage destroy the BBM advantage? Is the recent dip in Android sales in the US just a blip or the start of a wider slowdown?
Interesting times in the smartphone 'verse.
Nexus vs 4S is far more mixed than you are portraying it
CPU: Nexus ahead slightly - rendered irrelevant by the difference between native and VM code
RAM: As above, Nexus is ahead, but it needs far more due to architectural differences.
GPU: iPhone ahead enormously. It's unlikely we'll see an equivalent GPU from Android before Kal-El hits, maybe not until Krait.
Resolution: Higher in logical pixels, about even in subpixels, worse in pixel density, much worse in sub-pixel density. So better for video, but worse for text.
Just because it was supply constrained doesn't mean it still is. Apple also could have sold more iPad-2s if it hadn't been supply constrained, but those constraints no longer apply. Likely Asus could have sold more units if it had been able to get them to market while Apple was still struggling to meet demand, but it's a much rougher environment for them now - especially with the Kindle Fire launching in the US.
'Cupertino obviously believes patent rights should be transferable, but that will depend on the contract Samsung has with Qualcomm, which is why Apple wants to see it.'
This isn't about patent rights being transferable, non-exclusive licenses generally aren't - this is about double dipping not being allowed because patents rights are exhaustable.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018