HotWingConspiracy: CygnusDarius: Hell, even the gigantic phone-tablet hybrid I've seen (can't remember the name) while unwieldy as a phone, it's a pretty cool piece of tech.

Probably the Note. I played with it when I was looking for a new phone, and it was pretty slick. Looked a bit silly holding it up to my ear though.

Made me think of the old side-talkin' days.

cervier: Windows took the approach that their OS could run on anything of hardware type X and anyone could write drivers/plugins/compatible software. So, you got a huge pile of hardware and s ...

Yes the argument "OMG, just don't farking buy them!111!111" is invalid because Apple tries to remove the option of buying a competing product, I tought anyone could see that...

my only wish is that I didn't have to use itunes to access my phone. i hate itunes. it's a poison.

Warlordtrooper: At some point if a jury intentionally ignores the law and jury instructions it should become a civil and/or criminal matter to the members of the jury that do so.

Jury nullification is the concept you're looking for.

I'd rather it remain legal in the off chance someone decides that America has had enough of the WBC's bullshiat.

nu lamb fen: Or because they're quality products?? Why do people pay a lot more for a Mercedes when they could spend half as much on a Chevy?

Ummm... you and your "Mercedes" analogy are behind the times.

pute kisses like a man: cervier: Windows took the approach that their OS could run on anything of hardware type X and anyone could write drivers/plugins/compatible software. So, you got a huge pile of hardware and s ...

Yes the argument "OMG, just don't farking buy them!111!111" is invalid because Apple tries to remove the option of buying a competing product, I tought anyone could see that...

my only wish is that I didn't have to use itunes to access my phone. i hate itunes. it's a poison.

It constantly tries to install safari on my computer, so yeah, it is poison.

DerAppie: ScottRiqui: Rev.K: ScottRiqui: Three times now, I've been able to sell my old iPhone on eBay for more than what the new one cost.

Wat?

Three times, someone bought your used iPhone for more than the cost of a brand new one?

Am I reading that right?

Yep - throughout its history, the carrier-subsidized price of the entry-level iPhone has always been right around $200. Look on eBay, and you'll find that out-of-contract iPhone 4 and 4s models are selling for significantly more than that. Buyers, especially overseas buyers, want unlocked, contract-free iPhones.

Just last week, I sold my iPhone 4 (not the 4S) on eBay for $275. The listing was up for less than two hours before it was sold, and when I put up the listing, mine was the lowest-priced one on there by almost $5.

It was the same two years ago, when the money I made selling my and my wife's iPhone 3G models more than paid for two of the iPhone 4 models. My wife wasn't planning on getting the iPhone 5, but since it's basically a free upgrade, she probably will.

Now compare the price for a service only plan to the price of your service + phone plan. Notice the price difference? You are paying for the phone either way.

I'm not sure I follow. Are you saying that if someone comes to AT&T with an unlocked iPhone and just wants service, they pay a lower monthly fee for an identical service package compared to someone who bought their iPhone through AT&T at the subsidized price?

Regardless, all I was pointing out was that the $200 price point for the subsidized iPhone is a little easier to swallow (not that the competition is much cheaper) if you consider that every two years, you'll likely be able to swap out for the newest one at no out-of-pocket expense.

pag1107: Rising_Zan_Samurai_Gunman: Mr Guy: I STILL don't understand how Samsung lost, since Samsung has plenty of prior art. Can someone explain to me how you have a continuing product line that predates the the patent and an extremely vague patent, and STILL lose?

Because the US Patent system and Patent Office are both complete messes, and most jurors on patent cases are not qualified to make decisions based on patent law.

The results of that case made it clear that the jury didn't have due diligence in the reward they worked out, as they filled it out in a matter of hours, and even gave damages on the patents they said were not infringed.

Not to mention the jury foreman apparently having an axe to grind against Samsung and not disclosing his involvement in a lawsuit with Seagate, a Samsung partner.

What are the odds on Samsung knowing that, and getting him on the jury anyway, so they could get the trial thrown out if they needed to? A little conspiracy nutish, but given the amount of research done and money involved on just about everything in a case like this, it's hard to imagine they didn't run a quick Lexis search on everybody involved.

ScottRiqui: HortusMatris: I guess I never really understood the whole wooey "Apple experience" thing. It's a farking phone. The only "experience" I require from a smart phone is being able to talk to people, text, use Google Maps when I get lost, check my email, listen to Pandora, play Angry Birds, and Google trivial facts that my kids are arguing about in the car to get them to shut up. I can do all this and more perfectly well on my Android, and save a bunch of money.

I'm not sure how big the long-term savings really are. Three times now, I've been able to sell my old iPhone on eBay for more than what the new one cost. Sure, it resets my two-year "contract clock" with AT&T each time, but I've been happy with their service and wasn't likely to be changing carriers anyway.

So in essence, I paid $200 for an iPhone once, back in 2008, and all of the subsequent upgrades have been free.

I'm too paranoid about identity theft to sell my used phones. I'm also too cheap to run out and get the newest model every year or two, though; I wait until a phone is dying to get a new one. One cheap cell phone usually lasts me several years, and by that time the technology has advanced so far that even the older models have me spending hours marveling over every silly little feature thinking "O, brave new world!" I may not be cool to the techies, but at least I'm easily satisfied.

louiedog: [i.imgur.com image 361x1500]

FTMFW!!!

nu lamb fen: Or because they're quality products?? Why do people pay a lot more for a Mercedes when they could spend half as much on a Chevy?

A better analogy would involve paying more money for an ed hardy tshirt.

fireclown: nu lamb fen: Or because they're quality products?? Why do people pay a lot more for a Mercedes when they could spend half as much on a Chevy?

A better analogy would involve paying more money for an ed hardy tshirt.

But you can feel it in the fabric, it breathes non spectrum colors better than any other shirt you can buy.

H31N0US: A better analogy would involve paying more money for an ed hardy tshirt.

But you can feel it in the fabric, it breathes non spectrum colors better than any other shirt you can buy.


OK. Then I"ll just fall back on the "I like being to change my own battery" argument. ;)

Teknowaffle: Marine1: ZAZ:


/typing this on my iPad tethered to my samsung galaxy.

typing this on my ipad tethered to my samsung galaxy note

FTFM

nu lamb fen: Or because they're quality products?? Why do people pay a lot more for a Mercedes when they could spend half as much on a Chevy?

Because they're idiots who like it when everyone makes fun of them behind their backs...

Mr Guy: I STILL don't understand how Samsung lost, since Samsung has plenty of prior art. Can someone explain to me how you have a continuing product line that predates the the patent and an extremely vague patent, and STILL lose?

The jury foreman was fired when he was working at Seagate (which is essentially owned by Samsung).

That's the reason why Samsung lost this case and won the same case in every other court and country in the entire world.

pag1107: Rising_Zan_Samurai_Gunman: Mr Guy: I STILL don't understand how Samsung lost, since Samsung has plenty of prior art. Can someone explain to me how you have a continuing product line that predates the the patent and an extremely vague patent, and STILL lose?

Because the US Patent system and Patent Office are both complete messes, and most jurors on patent cases are not qualified to make decisions based on patent law.

The results of that case made it clear that the jury didn't have due diligence in the reward they worked out, as they filled it out in a matter of hours, and even gave damages on the patents they said were not infringed.

Not to mention the jury foreman apparently having an axe to grind against Samsung and not disclosing his involvement in a lawsuit with Seagate, a Samsung partner.

Worth noting that I'm pretty sure it is illegal not to disclose something like that... so either they knew and selected him anyways or he will be going to jail.

nu lamb fen: Or because they're quality products?? Why do people pay a lot more for a Mercedes when they could spend half as much on a Chevy?

Because they have small penises?

pute kisses like a man: Mr Guy: I STILL don't understand how Samsung lost, since Samsung has plenty of prior art. Can someone explain to me how you have a continuing product line that predates the the patent and an extremely vague patent, and STILL lose?

jury trial.

samsung was too complicated for them, the jury found their lawyers and experts to be smug, because they described things like facts and details.

apple just said round corners... the jury could understand that and understand that apple's lawyers and experts didn't have to hide behind facts and explanations. they were just nicer and easier to understand.

This sounds ironically similar to:

Romney (Samsung)

vs

Obama (Apple)

ScottRiqui: DerAppie: ScottRiqui: Rev.K: ScottRiqui: Three times now, I've been able to sell my old iPhone on eBay for more than what the new one cost.

Wat?

Three times, someone bought your used iPhone for more than the cost of a brand new one?

Am I reading that right?

Yep - throughout its history, the carrier-subsidized price of the entry-level iPhone has always been right around $200. Look on eBay, and you'll find that out-of-contract iPhone 4 and 4s models are selling for significantly more than that. Buyers, especially overseas buyers, want unlocked, contract-free iPhones.

Just last week, I sold my iPhone 4 (not the 4S) on eBay for $275. The listing was up for less than two hours before it was sold, and when I put up the listing, mine was the lowest-priced one on there by almost $5.

It was the same two years ago, when the money I made selling my and my wife's iPhone 3G models more than paid for two of the iPhone 4 models. My wife wasn't planning on getting the iPhone 5, but since it's basically a free upgrade, she probably will.

Now compare the price for a service only plan to the price of your service + phone plan. Notice the price difference? You are paying for the phone either way.

I'm not sure I follow. Are you saying that if someone comes to AT&T with an unlocked iPhone and just wants service, they pay a lower monthly fee for an identical service package compared to someone who bought their iPhone through AT&T at the subsidized price?

Regardless, all I was pointing out was that the $200 price point for the subsidized iPhone is a little easier to swallow (not that the competition is much cheaper) if you consider that every two years, you'll likely be able to swap out for the newest one at no out-of-pocket expense.

What I'm saying is exactly that. I pay €35 a month and I can get an identical minutes/SMS (100) and data (1gb) bundle for €15 if I only wanted the SIM-card. If I had a plan with the newest galaxy/iphone I would be paying up to €50 a month with a 2 year plan. Price difference of 35 * 24 = €840. That is more than the 700 I'd need to pay for the newest smartphone. Sure, after the cintract ends you get to pick a new phone but you'll be paying for that one to.

Rising_Zan_Samurai_Gunman: Mr Guy: I STILL don't understand how Samsung lost, since Samsung has plenty of prior art. Can someone explain to me how you have a continuing product line that predates the the patent and an extremely vague patent, and STILL lose?

Because the US Patent system and Patent Office are both complete messes, and most jurors on patent cases are not qualified to make decisions based on patent law.

The results of that case made it clear that the jury didn't have due diligence in the reward they worked out, as they filled it out in a matter of hours, and even gave damages on the patents they said were not infringed.

Plus USA USA USA. There is this feeling that Apple is this grand US innovator that needs to be protected.

DerAppie: What I'm saying is exactly that. I pay €35 a month and I can get an identical minutes/SMS (100) and data (1gb) bundle for €15 if I only wanted the SIM-card. If I had a plan with the newest galaxy/iphone I would be paying up to €50 a month with a 2 year plan. Price difference of 35 * 24 = €840. That is more than the 700 I'd need to pay for the newest smartphone. Sure, after the cintract ends you get to pick a new phone but you'll be paying for that one to.

Ah - after reading your post, it's clearer now why it's usually Europeans and Asians who are buying my off-contract iPhones on eBay. I don't think the situation is the same here in the U.S. - if the service plans dropped precipitously in price once our phones went off-contract, for the same minutes/text/data limits, I think there would be a lot fewer people upgrading every two years.

you have pee hands: bingethinker: I see Samsung is still spreading anti-Apple propaganda instead of paying for better lawyers.

Sometimes it's cheaper to buy the judges.

/what?

See, I went with the "Apple bought the judge" thing early on... but now I'm wondering if that is true. The judge wanted this to get appealed, so she went along with the retarded jury. I think she's trying to put it up to a higher court so that someone can come down hard on Apple to stop shiat like this. She wants a big legal precedent to be set.

poot_rootbeer: Somebody help me understand this: if the issue at hand is whether Apple lost out on revenue due to people buying look-alike Samsung phones instead of authentic Apple phones, how does it help answer the question to know what Apple's per-unit profit margin is?

The judge's opinion seems to be "Techie blogs would be interested to find this out, therefore Apple can be compelled to make this proprietary business information public," which seems spurious to me.

Apple believes that every single person who ever bought a Samsung phone wanted to buy an iPhone and were unfairly tricked into buying a Samsung phone because they look so similar the consumer couldn't tell the difference.

Therefore, the amount due to Apple would be:

Profit per phone for Apple X number of Samsung phones sold = Penalty

Kate Gosselin's Pap Smear: Teknowaffle: Marine1: ZAZ:


/typing this on my iPad tethered to my samsung galaxy.

typing this on my ipad tethered to my samsung galaxy note

FTFM

Mini for me. It was free with my cable subscription with a free year of mobile surf. I hated it at first, but now I love it.

Marine1: ZAZ: "Apple has not established that public availability of its product-specific unit sales, revenue, profit, profit margin, and cost data would actually provide its competitors with an advantage"

One of the things I hated about working for a megacorporation was the "everything is a secret" mentality. Spending less than .01% of your quarterly profit to buy technology from a small company is not a legitimate "die before you give up the secret" deal. But to corporate lawyers it is. Don't you dare tell a soul, not even your family, that you'll be in (city) next week. The perceived cost of disrupting employees' lives is zero, so they don't think twice about making stupid rules.

Furthermore, let's remember something: Apple is currently the most valuable company in the history of business. I honestly want to know just what irreparable harm was done to their company by Samsung producing the Galaxy series.

Not actually true when you adjust for inflation, but I get your point.

ScottRiqui: Girion47: nomadalli: Shouldn't the Roddenberry family sue them all for stealing a Star Trek gadget?

Arthur C Clarke could so over IP infringement with the IPad, they existed in 2001 A Space Odyssey.

Well, for some meaning of "existed", I guess. Is there successful precedent for using a non-functional movie prop as "prior art"?

Yeah, it's called the definition of prior art...

StewieAreYouRetarded.jpg

Bullseyed: poot_rootbeer: Somebody help me understand this: if the issue at hand is whether Apple lost out on revenue due to people buying look-alike Samsung phones instead of authentic Apple phones, how does it help answer the question to know what Apple's per-unit profit margin is?

The judge's opinion seems to be "Techie blogs would be interested to find this out, therefore Apple can be compelled to make this proprietary business information public," which seems spurious to me.

Apple believes that every single person who ever bought a Samsung phone wanted to buy an iPhone and were unfairly tricked into buying a Samsung phone because they look so similar the consumer couldn't tell the difference.

Therefore, the amount due to Apple would be:

Profit per phone for Apple X number of Samsung phones sold = Penalty

I've yet to find a price point or feature that makes an Apple product appeal to me. On top of that, apple fanboys are so repugnant, I don't want to be associated with the company in any way.

Rev.K: ScottRiqui: Three times now, I've been able to sell my old iPhone on eBay for more than what the new one cost.

Wat?

Three times, someone bought your used iPhone for more than the cost of a brand new one?

Am I reading that right?

No, no. Someone paid him $200 (the subsidized cost) so they could have his old iPhone and not extend their contract.

Its funny cause libs love Apple, the richest company in America, with over 100 billion in cash sitting there. They make huge profits with a big margin, and all their products are completely non-essential. Entertainment only.

But they hate oil companies, who make small margins, and are important for every single thing that we do.

Big Apple is the real evil.

Girion47: I've yet to find a price point or feature that makes an Apple product appeal to me. On top of that, apple fanboys are so repugnant, I don't want to be associated with the company in any way.

I"m an apple anti-fanboy, but I love my old school ipod. For running, the click wheel is fanfreakingtastic.

cervier: JPSimonetti: I like Apple products a lot, but I am just so sick of Apple. I am ashamed to admit I own them. You know?

You know this could be the beginning of a shift from the "Apple - cool company with cool stuff" to "Apple AKA The Microsoft of the 90's era". More and more people are beginning to be fed up with Apple's antics in court. In the end, it might even be good for Samsung, yes they have to pay a bazillion of dollars to Apple, but

1. this amount as huge as it seems is not big enough to make Samsung go out of business
2. more people see Samsung as the company that makes products as good as Apple with the bonus that you don't have to drink the Apple Kool-Aid and pay the Apple tax.

So in the end Samsung might be the big winner after all.

It sounds like a lot of money to people who know nothing about money. It won't make much of a dent in Samsung's financial statements. It is less than 1/5 of the PROFIT (not revenue) they made from selling screens, processors, ram, etc to Apple for the iPhones and iPads in the last 5 years.

That's right... once you take the Apple logo case off (the only thing Apple actually designs) what you're left with is mostly a Samsung product.

Kit Fister: if you root your Droid device and install an unsupported ROM onto it, or make changes to the system, support from the OEM/Carrier that sold the phone goes away.

My carrier is Verizon, so I consider this a feature of rooting and using a third-party ROM.

/I miss you T-mobile
//Get a decent network, we could be together again

Bored Horde: hitmanric: I dont see why Apple doesn't want to reveal the cost per unit. Anyone who thinks an iphone/ipod/airbook cost so much more for any reason other than because it's an Apple, is a complete moron.

From what I understand Apple get the outlandish profits from iTunes and the App store. Apple's business strategy for the past 10 years has been building the most attractive walled garden around.

Well, those things are zero cost all profit. So yes and no.

The typical iPhone costs Apple about $300 to make, based on industry estimates. They sell them for $700+ dollars each (133% profit). Most consumers don't pay that much, but the carrier do. That's why your phone bill is so high.

ScottRiqui: DerAppie: What I'm saying is exactly that. I pay €35 a month and I can get an identical minutes/SMS (100) and data (1gb) bundle for €15 if I only wanted the SIM-card. If I had a plan with the newest galaxy/iphone I would be paying up to €50 a month with a 2 year plan. Price difference of 35 * 24 = €840. That is more than the 700 I'd need to pay for the newest smartphone. Sure, after the cintract ends you get to pick a new phone but you'll be paying for that one to.

Ah - after reading your post, it's clearer now why it's usually Europeans and Asians who are buying my off-contract iPhones on eBay. I don't think the situation is the same here in the U.S. - if the service plans dropped precipitously in price once our phones went off-contract, for the same minutes/text/data limits, I think there would be a lot fewer people upgrading every two years.

Yup, if you can get a previous generation phone at a discount and get a SIM-only plan it can save a few hundred bucks a year.

Teknowaffle: Marine1: ZAZ:

Furthermore, let's remember something: Apple is currently the most valuable company in the history of business.

I will be honest. This fact astouds me. Apple products are not at all necessary for life or the economy. When exxon mobil was the biggest company, I could understand it. Oil runs the world, not iPhones. I have a hard time grasping the fact that a company that makes doo dads can be so important.

And you know, I wonder how long it will last. Competitors are putting out better products with far more innovations and taking far more chances. The app store is a cesspool. It seems like every app you download does nothingnmore than attempt to make itself more money. Ads for other shiatty apps on your screen, pop ups telling you to "unlock this feature for 20 dollars, buy a digital item for 50 bucks" ( this is of course a problem in the android store, but the apple app store has more exposure ). I don't think I have ab app not made by google that hasn't tried to hit me up for money. I just wonder if people will start to push back against the bullshiat.

/typing this on my iPad tethered to my samsung galaxy.

Because stock value isn't based on fact. It isn't based on anything at all really.

Bullseyed: Because stock value isn't based on fact. It isn't based on anything at all really.

It's based on what investors will pay for it at the stocks expected rate of payment. Think of it as an annuity.

Bullseyed: poot_rootbeer: Somebody help me understand this: if the issue at hand is whether Apple lost out on revenue due to people buying look-alike Samsung phones instead of authentic Apple phones, how does it help answer the question to know what Apple's per-unit profit margin is?

The judge's opinion seems to be "Techie blogs would be interested to find this out, therefore Apple can be compelled to make this proprietary business information public," which seems spurious to me.

Apple believes that every single person who ever bought a Samsung phone wanted to buy an iPhone and were unfairly tricked into buying a Samsung phone because they look so similar the consumer couldn't tell the difference.

Therefore, the amount due to Apple would be:

Profit per phone for Apple X number of Samsung phones sold = Penalty

Yes, because the word Samsung printed on the phone can be misread as Apple.

fireclown: Girion47: I've yet to find a price point or feature that makes an Apple product appeal to me. On top of that, apple fanboys are so repugnant, I don't want to be associated with the company in any way.

I"m an apple anti-fanboy, but I love my old school ipod. For running, the click wheel is fanfreakingtastic.

I have an old 20 gig Ipod. the HD is corrupted or something, I dunni, it won't turn on and I get a sick looking folder icon.

My HTC One V works well for music while running, plus I can load up Couch 2 5K on it and MyTracks.

Girion47: My HTC One V works well for music while running, plus I can load up Couch 2 5K on it and MyTracks.

if you're training for your first 5k, look into an app called Zombies Run!. It rocks.

JPSimonetti: KierzanDax: You can come over and hang out in our Zune club. We have jackets. We meet every Thursday at 6. Bring snacks.

Ah, and theeeere's the catch. Always a catch ...

I thought the catch was that it was a Zune club...

fireclown: Girion47: My HTC One V works well for music while running, plus I can load up Couch 2 5K on it and MyTracks.

if you're training for your first 5k, look into an app called Zombies Run!. It rocks.

Not really training for a 5K. Just trying to be able to run for 30 minutes straight.

Girion47: Not really training for a 5K. Just trying to be able to run for 30 minutes straight.

The point still stands. It's a freaking great running app.

fireclown: H31N0US: A better analogy would involve paying more money for an ed hardy tshirt.

But you can feel it in the fabric, it breathes non spectrum colors better than any other shirt you can buy.


OK. Then I"ll just fall back on the "I like being to change my own battery" argument. ;)

After a year or so of owning my Galaxy S2 the battery life was starting to suck. I took it to the Sprint store with a bulging battery. They took one look said "yep you need a new battery" and 5 minutes later I walked out with my phone in brand new condition.

With an iPhone you're just screwed.

louiedog: [i.imgur.com image 361x1500]

Good find.

fireclown: Girion47: Not really training for a 5K. Just trying to be able to run for 30 minutes straight.

The point still stands. It's a freaking great running app.

It looks cool. I might go for it after the C25K, it'll be a nice break from the plain intervals. They don't have the 5K training app for Android yet. I think a half-marathon is my ultimate running goal, but I don't plan on hitting that for at least a year or 2. immediate goal is 10K level.

Caelistis: ScottRiqui: cameroncrazy1984: hitmanric: I dont see why Apple doesn't want to reveal the cost per unit. Anyone who thinks an iphone/ipod/airbook cost so much more for any reason other than because it's an Apple, is a complete moron.

The GS3 is thinner with a wider screen. You really think the iPhone 5 is so super advanced?

Actually, the GS3 is both thicker and heavier than the iPhone 5.

If it was made out of lead, perhaps. My S3, sans its Otter Box, is far thinner than the I5 and much lighter. My wife has the I5, I have the S3. We compared them on the day we bought both phones.


Well I guess Samsung is lying (and not in their favor, either) when they say the GS3 is 8.6mm thick and 133g, because I just weighed and measured my iPhone 5, and it matches its advertised specs of 112g and 7.6mm thick.

ScottRiqui: DerAppie: What I'm saying is exactly that. I pay €35 a month and I can get an identical minutes/SMS (100) and data (1gb) bundle for €15 if I only wanted the SIM-card. If I had a plan with the newest galaxy/iphone I would be paying up to €50 a month with a 2 year plan. Price difference of 35 * 24 = €840. That is more than the 700 I'd need to pay for the newest smartphone. Sure, after the cintract ends you get to pick a new phone but you'll be paying for that one to.

Ah - after reading your post, it's clearer now why it's usually Europeans and Asians who are buying my off-contract iPhones on eBay. I don't think the situation is the same here in the U.S. - if the service plans dropped precipitously in price once our phones went off-contract, for the same minutes/text/data limits, I think there would be a lot fewer people upgrading every two years.

That might change in the USA though. Verizon loses a shiatton of money on iPhones. They don't make enough back to cover the subsidy and operating costs if people upgrade too frequently. Since Apple idiots buy a new phone whenever one comes out, Verizon doesn't have time to recoup the loss.

This is a large part of why phone rates have been going up: Apple's fault.