Go Back   Rage3D » Rage3D Discussion Area » Gaming and Computing Forums » Smartphones, Tablets and Handheld Computing
Rage3D Subscribe Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Smartphones, Tablets and Handheld Computing From Android, Symbian to Apple devices, this is the place for discussion and debate, whether it's smartphones, tablets or even gaming handhelds.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old Aug 28, 2012, 11:21 PM   #91
Advertisement (Guests Only)

Login or Register to remove this ad
Sazar
Rage3D Spammer
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: United States Austin, TX
Posts: 25,600
Sazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dial


Default

The more I read about this stuff, the more I am stunned at the decision arrived at by the jury, as well as their overall level of incompetence.

It appears they all took their guidance from the one guy who has any patent experience and took his very flawed interpretation of something to be fact.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/15/32...patent-invalid

How, after reading that, the jury still decided that prior art didn't matter when discussing the case, I will never know.

Koh, the ball is in your court and I guess it's time to see whether facts are important to cases.

Refinement != innovation.

Last edited by Sazar : Aug 28, 2012 at 11:40 PM.
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 01:24 AM   #92
dodger
Doggy
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: United States Houston, Texas
Posts: 968
dodger is still being judged by the masses


Default

Be kind Sazar. If anything it is usually the lawyers/judge that are to blame for a bad jury because they're the ones that picked them to begin with.

Also is it so surprising they deferred to the only person that had any experience with patents? I've served on 3 juries (all unfortunately DUI) and one they made me foreman because I was the only one of them all that ever sat on a jury. I would like to think the case was an easy one to decide but it was the shortest deliberation of the 3 and it went my way. Just my anecdote; Sazar have you served on a jury?
dodger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 02:20 AM   #93
Zoolok
The Fly
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Serbia Vojvodina
Posts: 3,560
Zoolok is still being judged by the masses


Default

Look, I really don't care neither for Apple, nor for Samsung (Lumia and Windows Phone 7 - the only really innovative products on the market lately - FTW), I do have to say I don't understand where all this is coming from.

Wasn't this trial about whether Apple's patents were broken or not? I understood it to be exactly that, and not if Apple was right to get those patent in the first place. That said, Apple was always going to win this - not because there is a conspiracy theory behind all this, but because the trial was led by the same institutions that gave Apple the patents in the first place. Surely you didn't expect the state to take a crap on itself?

As for the patents - again, I don't really know all the details - but from what I read online, Apple patented "slide to unlock" and that "scroll bounce" thing. Samsung patented the way devices connect to 3G, and asked Apple to pay a fee for that? Ok, now think about this: there is a million ways to unlock a cellphone, and Apple patented ONE - slide to unlock - because they thought it was the coolest one of all and wanted only iPhone users to have it. That is a very specific patent IMHO. Same goes for the "scroll bounce" thing, as there is a million ways you can handle that, as well. Surely Samsung could have chosen any other way to handle those two features?

As for Samsung's patent, I'm not sure that there are many ways a device can connect to the 3G network. I dare say there is only one, and is specified by a standard of some kind. How much did they want to charge Apple for that one?

Anyway, was Apple right to get those patents? Some yes, probably, some no, probably. But now that they did get them, this trial was about whether Samsung broke them or not. I think that if you look at early Samsung post-iPhone cellphones, it's more than obvious that they did copy them. I read that Samsung displayed documents in which they analyzed how to make their devices as similar as possible to the iPhone.

I think Samsung gained an (unfair?) advantage over other Android phone makers. Look where they are now, compared to Samsung. Or where is Nokia, for that matter
__________________
All dogs go to Heaven.
Zoolok is offline   Reply With Quote
Advertisement (Guests Only)
Login or Register to remove this ad
Old Aug 29, 2012, 03:16 AM   #94
sMashPiranha
Radeon Volcanic Islands
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New Zealand New Zealand
Posts: 3,599
sMashPiranha is still being judged by the masses


Default

I think it's rather terrifying that they can pull 9 people off the street and ask them to decide if one company should pay another $1B

Last edited by sMashPiranha : Aug 29, 2012 at 03:20 AM. Reason: AIDS
sMashPiranha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 05:53 AM   #95
Elysian
SCAATSJW
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: United States Austin, TX
Posts: 48,545
Elysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling freshElysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling freshElysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling freshElysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling freshElysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling freshElysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling freshElysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling freshElysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling freshElysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling freshElysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling fresh


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolok View Post
Look, I really don't care neither for Apple, nor for Samsung (Lumia and Windows Phone 7 - the only really innovative products on the market lately - FTW), I do have to say I don't understand where all this is coming from.

Wasn't this trial about whether Apple's patents were broken or not? I understood it to be exactly that, and not if Apple was right to get those patent in the first place. That said, Apple was always going to win this - not because there is a conspiracy theory behind all this, but because the trial was led by the same institutions that gave Apple the patents in the first place. Surely you didn't expect the state to take a crap on itself?

As for the patents - again, I don't really know all the details - but from what I read online, Apple patented "slide to unlock" and that "scroll bounce" thing. Samsung patented the way devices connect to 3G, and asked Apple to pay a fee for that? Ok, now think about this: there is a million ways to unlock a cellphone, and Apple patented ONE - slide to unlock - because they thought it was the coolest one of all and wanted only iPhone users to have it. That is a very specific patent IMHO. Same goes for the "scroll bounce" thing, as there is a million ways you can handle that, as well. Surely Samsung could have chosen any other way to handle those two features?

As for Samsung's patent, I'm not sure that there are many ways a device can connect to the 3G network. I dare say there is only one, and is specified by a standard of some kind. How much did they want to charge Apple for that one?

Anyway, was Apple right to get those patents? Some yes, probably, some no, probably. But now that they did get them, this trial was about whether Samsung broke them or not. I think that if you look at early Samsung post-iPhone cellphones, it's more than obvious that they did copy them. I read that Samsung displayed documents in which they analyzed how to make their devices as similar as possible to the iPhone.

I think Samsung gained an (unfair?) advantage over other Android phone makers. Look where they are now, compared to Samsung. Or where is Nokia, for that matter
Prior art means Apple never should have gotten those patents. Patents can be invalidated at trial, btw.
Elysian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 06:06 AM   #96
Canesfan2020
Radeon Northern Islands
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: United States NC
Posts: 2,275
Canesfan2020 can beat 'Minesweeper' on any difficultyCanesfan2020 can beat 'Minesweeper' on any difficulty


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sazar View Post
I'll do Cannes job for him.

I can't take any of this seriously. People are still conveniently ignoring this: Which was announced like like 2005?

Canesfan2020 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 06:58 AM   #97
Zoolok
The Fly
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Serbia Vojvodina
Posts: 3,560
Zoolok is still being judged by the masses


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elysian View Post
Prior art means Apple never should have gotten those patents. Patents can be invalidated at trial, btw.
Was that prior art public and accessible to Apple (and everyone else) or are we talking about prototypes that never saw the light of day?
__________________
All dogs go to Heaven.
Zoolok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 07:32 AM   #98
Canesfan2020
Radeon Northern Islands
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: United States NC
Posts: 2,275
Canesfan2020 can beat 'Minesweeper' on any difficultyCanesfan2020 can beat 'Minesweeper' on any difficulty


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolok View Post
Was that prior art public and accessible to Apple (and everyone else) or are we talking about prototypes that never saw the light of day?
It doesn't matter. They still existed before. If my rectangle existed before yours I am not copying you. Also, weren't there images of the prada available as far back as 2005?
Canesfan2020 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 07:51 AM   #99
Zoolok
The Fly
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Serbia Vojvodina
Posts: 3,560
Zoolok is still being judged by the masses


Default

What I meant was that you can't realistically expect anyone, when submitting a patent, to know if someone, somewhere, in a basement, came up with a same idea and didn't bother to tell anyone about it. The body that processes patents should check it, but only to a certain extent. If there is no such previous patent, then why not approve the new one being submitted? How is anyone to know that some other company conducted internal experiments on something similar and never went public with them, nor bothered patenting them?

In the other case - when prior art is well known (regardless if it's patented or not) - then the idea of checking if it existed prior to the patent does make sens.
__________________
All dogs go to Heaven.
Zoolok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 08:06 AM   #100
IamHere
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: United States Florida, oh yeah!!!!
Posts: 3,845
IamHere has a basement full of buried neg-reppersIamHere has a basement full of buried neg-reppersIamHere has a basement full of buried neg-reppersIamHere has a basement full of buried neg-reppersIamHere has a basement full of buried neg-reppersIamHere has a basement full of buried neg-reppersIamHere has a basement full of buried neg-reppersIamHere has a basement full of buried neg-reppersIamHere has a basement full of buried neg-reppersIamHere has a basement full of buried neg-reppersIamHere has a basement full of buried neg-reppers


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolok View Post
What I meant was that you can't realistically expect anyone, when submitting a patent, to know if someone, somewhere, in a basement, came up with a same idea and didn't bother to tell anyone about it. The body that processes patents should check it, but only to a certain extent. If there is no such previous patent, then why not approve the new one being submitted? How is anyone to know that some other company conducted internal experiments on something similar and never went public with them, nor bothered patenting them?

In the other case - when prior art is well known (regardless if it's patented or not) - then the idea of checking if it existed prior to the patent does make sens.
When the patent is clearly preceded by prior art, and by multiple companies, than it is clear the patent is too impercise, or falls too much in to the realm of the obvious and that it should be voided.
IamHere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 08:10 AM   #101
Zoolok
The Fly
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Serbia Vojvodina
Posts: 3,560
Zoolok is still being judged by the masses


Default

Oh I agree, I'm just wondering if that was the case here and, if it was, is it really Apple's fault (or that of the institutions that allowed and upheld on court such a patent).
__________________
All dogs go to Heaven.
Zoolok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 08:13 AM   #102
Elysian
SCAATSJW
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: United States Austin, TX
Posts: 48,545
Elysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling freshElysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling freshElysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling freshElysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling freshElysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling freshElysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling freshElysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling freshElysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling freshElysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling freshElysian kills 99.99% of germs and leaves hands feeling fresh


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolok View Post
What I meant was that you can't realistically expect anyone, when submitting a patent, to know if someone, somewhere, in a basement, came up with a same idea and didn't bother to tell anyone about it. The body that processes patents should check it, but only to a certain extent. If there is no such previous patent, then why not approve the new one being submitted? How is anyone to know that some other company conducted internal experiments on something similar and never went public with them, nor bothered patenting them?

In the other case - when prior art is well known (regardless if it's patented or not) - then the idea of checking if it existed prior to the patent does make sens.
That's supposed to be the patent office's job, and companies should be doing their due diligence before submitting. Apple is abusing the system by submitting patents that should be invalidated by common sense or prior art and the patent office is letting them.

Also, a company has to put it out to the public for it to be considered prior art, even if they don't patent it. A lot of the patents under contention here have been seen in public before Apple ever patented them.
Elysian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 09:03 AM   #103
Canesfan2020
Radeon Northern Islands
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: United States NC
Posts: 2,275
Canesfan2020 can beat 'Minesweeper' on any difficultyCanesfan2020 can beat 'Minesweeper' on any difficulty


Default

Lets just not patent shapes. Have there ever been issues like this in other industries?
Canesfan2020 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 10:29 AM   #104
shrike126
Chirp Chirp Mother****er
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: United States Ocean, NJ
Posts: 25,033
shrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppers


Subscriber
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canesfan2020 View Post
Lets just not patent shapes. Have there ever been issues like this in other industries?
Yes, if you put 4 wheels on a car you... no wait... if you put wings on a plane you... no that's fine too. Let's see if you build a fridge and it's rectangular in shape, no... people do that. Uh TVs, if you make them square or rectangular you might get... no that's fine.

But don't you dare "slavishly copy" a rectangular design for a phone/tablet, then Apple will eat your lunch in court.

Another aspect of the jury's actions that I question is that they felt Samsung's executives weren't being forthright. They suspected they were hiding something. Ergo... they levied punishment (not compensation but punishment which is against their jury instructions). Now, as a juror if I'm deciding on a patent infringement case, should I be finding guilt with a party that I feel is hiding something? No direct evidence?

There is so very much wrong with what the jury's done here I cannot fathom how there is not bigger backlash or outcry over this.
__________________
Quote:
"I'll admit it. I did try and **** her, she was married."
"I moved on her like a bitch. I couldn't get there and she was married."
"I don't even wait. And when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything."
"Grab them by the pussy."

~Donald J. Trump
Quote:
"Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe, is that so far none of it has tried to contact us." ~ Calvin & Hobbes
Quote:
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ John F. Kennedy (1962)
shrike126 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 11:54 AM   #105
Tizen
Custom User Title
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: North Korea Close by.
Posts: 5,005
Tizen is still being judged by the masses


Default

__________________
Don't panic
Tizen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 01:06 PM   #106
@md_Guy
<strike>out</strike>
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,765
@md_Guy knows why the caged bird sings@md_Guy knows why the caged bird sings@md_Guy knows why the caged bird sings@md_Guy knows why the caged bird sings@md_Guy knows why the caged bird sings


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tizen View Post
A tad biased imho, as a patent "owner", the foreman seemed to be swayed because of 2 contributing factors,

1; because software on Apple wouldn't run on "prior art" devices, it was exempt ?

2: Samsung "willfully" violated patents on it's tablet (refers to Google meeting in S.Korea with Samsung) even though it (Tab) had already been declared not to have violated said patents.

Also seems to be a bit of backpedaling concerning earlier comments about damages being punitive.

How old is this guy anyway ? Almost as bad as when Ted Stevens was chair of United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation (in charge of many of the rules and regs for net access). Seriously I have issues with anyone over 40 (hell Im 42) heading up ANYTHING related with technology. Sure maybe if they were talking about punchcards maybe..
__________________
Fermi Paradox*: "The apparent size and age of Fermi die suggests that many technologically advanced GPUs ought to exist.
However, this hypothesis seems inconsistent with the lack of observational evidence to support it."
@md_Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 01:37 PM   #107
shrike126
Chirp Chirp Mother****er
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: United States Ocean, NJ
Posts: 25,033
shrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppersshrike126 has a basement full of buried neg-reppers


Subscriber
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by @md_Guy View Post
A tad biased imho, as a patent "owner", the foreman seemed to be swayed because of 2 contributing factors,

1; because software on Apple wouldn't run on "prior art" devices, it was exempt ?

2: Samsung "willfully" violated patents on it's tablet (refers to Google meeting in S.Korea with Samsung) even though it (Tab) had already been declared not to have violated said patents.

Also seems to be a bit of backpedaling concerning earlier comments about damages being punitive.

How old is this guy anyway ? Almost as bad as when Ted Stevens was chair of United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation (in charge of many of the rules and regs for net access). Seriously I have issues with anyone over 40 (hell Im 42) heading up ANYTHING related with technology. Sure maybe if they were talking about punchcards maybe..
#1 doesn't make anything remotely resembling any sense. Taking Android code and putting it on iOS won't work either. You don't disallow prior art describing an interface gesture/behavior based on implementation if the patent doesn't prescribe specific implementation.

#2 is just retarded on the juror's part. Google warning against similar design (assuming you think "copying" is bad which it's not) is understandable considering a sue-happy Apple.
__________________
Quote:
"I'll admit it. I did try and **** her, she was married."
"I moved on her like a bitch. I couldn't get there and she was married."
"I don't even wait. And when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything."
"Grab them by the pussy."

~Donald J. Trump
Quote:
"Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe, is that so far none of it has tried to contact us." ~ Calvin & Hobbes
Quote:
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ John F. Kennedy (1962)
shrike126 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 03:46 PM   #108
Sazar
Rage3D Spammer
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: United States Austin, TX
Posts: 25,600
Sazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dial


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dodger View Post
Be kind Sazar. If anything it is usually the lawyers/judge that are to blame for a bad jury because they're the ones that picked them to begin with.

Also is it so surprising they deferred to the only person that had any experience with patents? I've served on 3 juries (all unfortunately DUI) and one they made me foreman because I was the only one of them all that ever sat on a jury. I would like to think the case was an easy one to decide but it was the shortest deliberation of the 3 and it went my way. Just my anecdote; Sazar have you served on a jury?
I have never served on a jury, no.
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 03:48 PM   #109
Sazar
Rage3D Spammer
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: United States Austin, TX
Posts: 25,600
Sazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dial


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolok View Post
Was that prior art public and accessible to Apple (and everyone else) or are we talking about prototypes that never saw the light of day?
Prior art in the context of this thread and legally meets the requirements you are asserting. Any demos and items of the like that never made it outside of a lab don't hold weight although they can be used to show that it was not something being copied but rather something being developed concurrently.
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 3, 2012, 02:02 AM   #110
t3hl33td4rg0n
env x='() { :;};
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: United States Kent, OH
Posts: 1,727
t3hl33td4rg0n is not someone to be trifled witht3hl33td4rg0n is not someone to be trifled witht3hl33td4rg0n is not someone to be trifled witht3hl33td4rg0n is not someone to be trifled witht3hl33td4rg0n is not someone to be trifled witht3hl33td4rg0n is not someone to be trifled witht3hl33td4rg0n is not someone to be trifled with


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaWter View Post
All-in-one computers


Quote:
Originally Posted by slaWter View Post
MP3 Music Players


Quote:
Originally Posted by slaWter View Post
Multi-Touch Smartphones
Multi-Touch Display: http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~westerma/main.pdf

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaWter View Post
Tablets
http://mashable.com/2009/08/22/knight-ridder-tablet/

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaWter View Post
Ultrabooks
http://www.theverge.com/2012/6/15/30...-the-ultrabook

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaWter View Post
High Quality Notebooks
No point in looking this up, theres plenty of >Apple laptops out there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaWter View Post
Consumer 30" Displays
http://www.dell.com/content/topics/t...7wfp?c=us&l=en

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaWter View Post
Online Music Store
Plenty of those around.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaWter View Post
App Stores
And it sucks, example: http://www.afterdawn.com/news/articl...from_app_store

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaWter View Post
Stores for other digital Content....
Steam, Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, VUDU, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaWter View Post
Apple's influence in all those categories were and are genre/product defining.
Capitalizing on others ideas which would have otherwise been sub-par, fine. Trying to penalize others for the same, BS.

The rest speaks for itself.
t3hl33td4rg0n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 6, 2012, 07:13 PM   #111
BackToPC
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 689
BackToPC is still being judged by the masses


Default

Just received my international samsung galaxy s3 today.

That's the biggest "screw you" I can give to Apple right now

(former iphone 4 user)

BackToPC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 6, 2012, 07:16 PM   #112
Sazar
Rage3D Spammer
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: United States Austin, TX
Posts: 25,600
Sazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dialSazar is on Chuck Norris' speed-dial


Default

I am waiting patiently for the next Nexus phone announcement so I can make my move. I have a nice chunk of change invested in some apps (many bought before they became free), but I am done with Apple
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Apple Trolling .. Apple says that Samsung is being unfair Sundance Kid V2 Off Topic Lounge 121 Aug 5, 2012 08:07 AM
Samsung + Sony to invest $1.8 billion in LCDs Wunderchu General Hardware 2 Mar 10, 2004 09:57 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:06 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All trademarks used are properties of their respective owners. Copyright ©1998-2011 Rage3D.com
Links monetized by VigLink