backtop


Print 36 comment(s) - last by retrospooty.. on Nov 25 at 9:23 AM

Samsung now owes Apple about $890 million total

The patent war between Apple and Samsung has shifted in Apple's favor in the U.S. as a jury recently decided Samsung should pay more in damages.

According ABC News, a Silicon Valley jury decided Thursday that Samsung should pay Apple $290 million in damages for patent infringement. The trial ran for about a week in San Jose, California and covered five patents and 13 products.

The two tech giants have been warring over patents with one another for over two years now. It largely began in April 2011, when Apple called Samsung an iPhone and iPad copycat. From there, lawsuits have been flung back and forth all over the world. 

In August 2012, a California jury decided that Samsung infringed on several Apple patents and should have to pay $1.05 billion in damages. However, Judge Lucy Koh -- a United States District Judge for the Northern District of California -- said that sum may not have been calculated correctly. 

Koh later vacated $450 million of that award, and left Samsung with the remaining $600 million to pay. 

 
This most recent trial aimed to decide if Samsung should pay more or less of that $450 million that was vacated. Judge Koh called a meeting Wednesday to help the jury learn how to properly calculate the final sum. Now that the jury has decided that Samsung should pay $290 million, the South Korean electronics maker now owes Apple about $890 million total.

While this is certainly another win for Apple in the U.S., the Cupertino, California-based company was hoping for more than $290 million. In fact, it wanted $379.8 million to make up for the profits it lost after Samsung’s smartphones entered the market.

Samsung, on the other hand, wanted to only give Apple $52 million. It suggested giving Apple royalties for every Samsung device sold that contains the infringed patents. Samsung's lawyer added that Apple shouldn't be entitled to lost profits because customers could have bought Samsung's phones for reasons unrelated to the infringed patents, such as larger screen sizes and lower prices. 

This particular trial has been a ride for both companies. Samsung attempted to put the trial on hold Wednesday (the day before the verdict was delivered) because a patent involved in the trial associated with touchscreen mechanics might be deemed invalid by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Samsung argued that reaching a verdict now could be too soon.

However, Apple wanted to press on, saying that a delay would waste time and money. 

Source: ABC News



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By ritualm on 11/22/2013 2:13:28 AM , Rating: 4
... with prejudice, along with all present and future trials between the two. Let them duke and slug each other out in the market.

It's a total waste of time for everyone involved, and the only folks winning anything at all are lawyers. Apple won't see much out of that $290-million award when all is really said and done.




By Mint on 11/22/2013 6:27:30 AM , Rating: 5
There are decent arguments both ways, whether you think Samsung should have paid less or more, but ultimately it doesn't mean a whole lot relative to Samsung's smartphone revenue over the last 4 years.

The most important part of the verdict is that Samsung didn't get slapped with any meaningful sales ban, so they were indeed able to duke it out in the market.


By retrospooty on 11/22/2013 7:12:03 AM , Rating: 4
Totaly agreed. I dont give a crap, let the company that makes the best product win. For me, the answer is neither.


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By FITCamaro on 11/22/2013 7:17:42 AM , Rating: 2
But then patent attorneys don't make tens of millions encouraging lawsuits between competitors.


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By SDBud on 11/22/2013 8:28:13 AM , Rating: 4

Exactly! It's ALL about the attorneys trying to justify their existence. AND the greed of Apple!!

I wouldn't buy an Apple product if they were 1 cent a piece!


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By bupkus on 11/22/2013 9:01:43 AM , Rating: 2
I would, pay 1 cent.

Actually, I'd pay about $350 for the Air, maybe even $400 if I tried it and found it not too confining.

I'm waiting on the nexus 10 v2, but even then they cost quite a lot. I'll probably just stick with my nook HD+ which I got for $149. I like its screen for reading email, learning chess, books in pdf, internet curios, etc.

Maybe CMod will come up with a newer version of Android for smoother scrolling. I was hoping for that when I bought it.


By retrospooty on 11/22/2013 9:44:55 AM , Rating: 2
"I'm waiting on the nexus 10 v2, but even then they cost quite a lot. I'll probably just stick with my nook HD+ which I got for $149. I like its screen for reading email, learning chess, books in pdf, internet curios, etc. Maybe CMod will come up with a newer version of Android for smoother scrolling. I was hoping for that when I bought it."

It's just too slow with the old OMAP processor and a GPU that is too weak to drive a 1920x1280 screen with any snappiness. It's a good tablet for the price and the screen is really nice. You wont get a better screen of that size for that price even today, but its never going to be fast.


By Wazza1234 on 11/23/2013 4:27:28 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Exactly! It's ALL about the attorneys trying to justify their existence. AND the greed of Apple!!

I wouldn't buy an Apple product if they were 1 cent a piece!


Ruling out products from companies just makes you a bitter fanboy.

And as for greed - Samsung has tried to ban every iPhone and iPad. You only don't hear about it because they fail every time. Motorola did the same. I wonder which companies you'll have left to choose from if you make such silly comments?

By the way, the total damages is 900m, not 290, and there is another trial to come.

And a second by the way, this isn't even about money for Apple. It's about stopping Samsung using Apple's patented designs/technology.

If you want to be angry at a company, be mad at Samsung for not being original.


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By YearOfTheDingo on 11/22/2013 9:38:22 AM , Rating: 2
It'd be a pretty miserable marketplace for consumers if we let companies that rip off other people's idea go unpunished. No one can deny that the iPhone was a unique product at the time of its release. Apple took considerable risk bringing it to the market. It was not a given that a phone of that form-factor and feature-set would find consumer acceptance. Apple deserves to be rewarded for being a pioneer.

A world without IP protection would look like this:

Alice goes to the CEO of Company A with a great idea. "This is going to change everything!" But her CEO looks at her and answers, "Well, let us wait for someone else to build it first. I don't want to waste money on unproven idea."

Bob goes to the CEO of Company B with the same idea (in reality, it's not very novel). "This is going to change everything!" His CEO looks at him and gives the same answer as the CEO of Company A.

In the end, the great idea never gets implemented because everyone is waiting for someone else to try it first.


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By Tony Swash on 11/22/2013 10:17:41 AM , Rating: 2
Just started to read the recently published "Dogfight: How Apple and Google Went to War and Started a Revolution" by Fred Vogelstein which offers a history of the origins of the iPhone, Android and the collapse of partnership between Apple and Google. A couple of chapters in and it's a pretty good read, the author seems to have got a lot of people who were involved at Apple and Google to talk.


By Tony Swash on 11/24/2013 8:24:56 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Dogfight: How Apple and Google Went to War and Started a Revolution" by Fred Vogelstein


Nearly finished "Dogfight: How Apple and Google Went to War and Started a Revolution" by Fred Vogelstein now and I am less impressed with it than at first. A lot of the analysis of the smart phone market and phenomena in the latter half of the book is as crass and superficial as any that appears in the worst of the tech media. It also has almost nothing to say about the impact of the firing of Scott Forstall and Andy Rubin. The latter is perhaps more interesting as it seemed to signal a shift in the Android strategy at Google and I would love someone to dig out some more details.

The book is OK and and an easy read but less enlightening than it could have been, the best is the first half which covers the internal development of the iPhone at Apple and Android at Google.


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By lparkin on 11/22/2013 1:09:56 PM , Rating: 2
Apple didn't invent the shape or function of the iphone which is what the majority of the patent award came down to. The trial judge disallowed prior art showing Sony had the shape and size with a one button interface. Also HTC had previously released a rectangular slab phone with no buttons but used resistive touch screen technology rather than capacitive. That is the real innovation of the iphone not anything else. Bounce back stuff...come on, that had been done before.

The trial judge has made many mistakes here. This will go to the supreme court before Samsung pays a dime.

So only the lawyers win.


By YearOfTheDingo on 11/22/2013 9:32:08 PM , Rating: 1
"Real" innovation is what has real impact on people's lives. Patent laws exist to promote desirable incomes from a societal standpoint, not to enforce some notion of justice. The system that you view as ideal is, in fact, completely perverse. If trying an idea that has previously failed means a firm is exposed to competitions from imitators, then there is far less incentive to reattempt ideas where we got tantalizingly closed. A rectangular slab phone with a resistive touch screen failed. A rectangular slab phone with a capacitive touch screen succeeded. The knowledge that that particular combination leads to a commercial breakthrough is the intellectual property we seek to protect.


By Wazza1234 on 11/23/2013 4:33:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Apple didn't invent the shape or function of the iphone which is what the majority of the patent award came down to


No, it isn't. That's such a ridiculously wrong and simplistic overview of what were some very complicated patents. None of them focused purely on the shape OR the overall function of an iPhone. Specific user interface utility patents were used, and design patents covering all kinds of ornamental characteristics which made the iPhone unique and Samsung copied.

Furthermore, the jury didn't break down damages by patent, only by handset - the only company who has claimed that the majority of the patent award is due to rounded corners is Samsung - because they are a deceitful, misleading company.

For an interesting article where you might actually learn anything at all about the patents in this case before commenting - go here:

http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/11/retrial-jury-aw...

Finally - the 'bounce back' patent has not yet been invalidated. If there was prior art (which is your claim when you say it had been done before) - it would have been.

Please show me which device was using the specific Apple patented bounce back method prior to Apple filing the patent. I bet you don't even THINK you can do this, but if you try you'll definitely realise you can't.

Forums like this are full of ill-informed people such as yourself. You probably don't even know when Apple filed the bounce back patent.

And yes, it will go to appeal but now Samsung has had 2 independent juries side with Apple and it will be extremely unlikely for any appeals court to overturn both decisions.


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By retrospooty on 11/22/2013 1:36:20 PM , Rating: 2
"It'd be a pretty miserable marketplace for consumers if we let companies that rip off other people's idea go unpunished. No one can deny that the iPhone was a unique product at the time of its release. Apple took considerable risk bringing it to the market. It was not a given that a phone of that form-factor and feature-set would find consumer acceptance. Apple deserves to be rewarded for being a pioneer."

There are two major problems with your theory in this case...

1. Apple didnt "invent" anything. They bought companies and used existing tech to create a product that worked better than anything did before it as far as usability. Home run.

2. Apple DID receive the reward and still is to this day - record breaking - mind blowing profit.

If you are implying that manufacturers modify their products to match what sells well and that Apple had a hit with the iPhone in 2007 you would be correct. What of it? Are you trying to say no-one else should be allowed to make a multitouch smartphone now because Apple was 1st to market with it?

Apple also copied Androids notifications and WebOS's multitasking. Should they then be forced to remove those features because they weren't first with it? Apple copied the whole smartphone idea in the first place from Palm and RIMM. Should it have been banned? Of course not. Businesses copy the working ideas of other businesses. It's how business has been ran since the dawn of civilization. Apple does it as much as any company.

In the end the best product at the best price wins. That is called competition and its how the free market works and always has.


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By Wazza1234 on 11/23/2013 4:39:29 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
1. Apple didnt "invent" anything. They bought companies and used existing tech to create a product that worked better than anything did before it as far as usability.


1 - The law disagrees with you. Each successful Apple patent is an invention as defined by the patent system (which gets to make that call, not you).

2 - I don't think any of the patents in this case were purchased, they are Apple's own IP

3 - The reward for Apple's IP would be a lot higher had Samsung not stolen many of their inventions. So they have NOT received 'the reward'. They have received 'a' reward - a proportion of what it should have been.

quote:
Apple also copied Androids notifications and WebOS's multitasking


Not invented by Android or WebOS, and not patented. Learn the difference between infringement and non infringement.

quote:
In the end the best product at the best price wins.


And if the company behind the worse products copies the better product, they'll get sued and have to pay damages.

quote:
Apple copied the whole smartphone idea


If you don't understand the difference between patents for specific pieces of technology and broad fields such as 'smartphones' - you shouldn't ever talk about patents full stop.

quote:
If you are implying that manufacturers modify their products to match what sells well and that Apple had a hit with the iPhone in 2007 you would be correct. What of it? Are you trying to say no-one else should be allowed to make a multitouch smartphone now


1 - If they infringe patents in the process, they'll get sued.
2 - Because it's illegal.
3 - Nobody has a patent on 'multitouch smartphone'. Idiot.


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By retrospooty on 11/23/2013 6:06:15 PM , Rating: 2
Ummm. Ok like everyone doesn't know the patent system in the United States is a ridiculous mess, and Apple is manipulating at with the skill of a Romulan.

Just stop testerguy, heard it all before. No one bought it before you were banned and no ones buying it now. The trial is irrelevant anyhow.


By Wazza1234 on 11/24/2013 4:31:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Ok like everyone doesn't know the patent system in the United States is a ridiculous mess


Only to people who don't understand the law, and misleading comments from Samsung actually being believed by people. Apple isn't manipulating anything.

quote:
The trial is irrelevant anyhow


The decision makes it far more likely that Apple will get injunctions for the upcoming case which centres around newer phone models. I wouldn't describe that as irrelevant.


By ritualm on 11/22/2013 3:35:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Apple took considerable risk bringing it to the market.

The risk was miniscule compared to the alternative, and Apple learned this the hard way. The first iTunes-enabled phone was a collaboration with Motorola, called the ROKR E1. Remember that one?

It sucked.

Apple wasn't the one calling the shots, and neither was Motorola. The carriers dictated what can/not go on the phone. The E1's Bluetooth implementation is crippled on Day One - you can pair it with a headset, but you cannot use it to send/receive data. Why? Because the carriers want you to do those things over their super-expensive data plans. Also, carriers are allowed to load their own bloatware onto the phone, and they cannot be removed at all.

So when Apple went into the smartphone business themselves, they had one big condition (among other things) that the carriers must accept before they could carry it: they are not allowed to load their own bloatware onto the iPhones. Verizon called BS on Apple, and we all saw how that ultimately panned out.


By Reclaimer77 on 11/23/2013 6:11:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It'd be a pretty miserable marketplace for consumers if we let companies that rip off other people's idea go unpunished.


What you people call "ripped off" is simply the natural evolution of technology. No, the world would be a TERRIBLE place if we allowed ideas to be "owned" by a single corporate entity through patents.

In your world only Ford could make vehicles. Only IBM computers. A&W would be the only fast food option available, because they were the first. I could go on and on all day, but I hope you get the point.

quote:
A world without IP protection would look like this:


Stop right there, nobody is arguing against IP protection. But the process at which patents are issued is the problem. Apple was granted patents that so clearly and obviously to everyone else should NOT have been. Patents on concepts hundreds of years old, behavior that exists in nature, and other things that existed before them. Because they attached "to a phone" on some of these in no way means they are unique ideas worthy of "protection".


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By marvdmartian on 11/22/2013 10:31:28 AM , Rating: 2
Not to mention, why the heck isn't Samsung getting this trial moved somewhere else? Silicon Valley? Home of Apple?? Could you find any place where Apple would be more likely to win???


By Nutzo on 11/22/2013 11:07:19 AM , Rating: 2
And after the verdict everyone on the jury pulled out their iPhones to text the results their friends.....


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By retrospooty on 11/22/2013 4:42:10 PM , Rating: 2
It doesn't work like that. Apple filed it, so hey filed it with their local court. That is where this trial is held - Apple HQ is literally miles from the courthouse. The inevitable appeal will be held elsewhere, by a higher court with a higher standard. I am not really a fan of either Samsung or Apple these days, but if I were a Samsung fan I wouldn't worry one bit.


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By Wazza1234 on 11/23/2013 4:45:01 PM , Rating: 2
Don't be an idiot. Apple can file in any country.

It's in the US because it's about US sales. No other reason. No conspiracy.

quote:
The inevitable appeal will be held elsewhere, by a higher court with a higher standard


No it wont, and no it doesn't. The standard is the same. The authority is higher. Yet overruling 2 independent jury decisions is highly unlikely.

And really Samsung fans should worry right now, not with this recalculated damages because we knew that a year ago, but because of the potential of bans for their more recent phones in the upcoming cases, which now looks inevitable. Plus further damages.


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By retrospooty on 11/23/2013 6:00:56 PM , Rating: 2
As usual, you are having an argument no one else is having. Of course we're talking about the United States, they filed where their headquarters is, they aren't going to file a case in Montana. They had a hometown judge, a hometown jury and there were a lot of anomalies in a case like evidence dismissed that showed prior art, a jury foreman that later turned out to have history with patents being taken from him and many other anomalies. Ultimately it's decided this by the jury, and the jury is from the Silicon Valley, as the poster above mentioned. you are expected to know what's going on here you're from England and also you're a moron.

Funny you can actually post as you do and you don't realize why everyone knows that you are testerguy. There are dozens and dozens of Apple fans here that defend Apple at every turn. But you have a style about you testerguy, angry, obnoxious, incessant annoying, argumentative, asinine and obsessive. The thing that makes me laugh ifs that you don't seem to realize why you were banished, or maybe it just doesn't bother you that everyone thinks you're nut. You've been banned twice on a site that bans almost no one. You have to be a real major creep to get banned from this site, and you're working on your third time. You have issues that the internet can not help you with. Seek help...


By Cheesew1z69 on 11/23/2013 9:27:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
a jury foreman that later turned out to have history with patents being taken from him
And from a company Samsung purchased, so sounds like he had an ax to grind...


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By Tony Swash on 11/24/2013 8:30:14 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
But you have a style about you testerguy, angry, obnoxious, incessant annoying, argumentative, asinine and obsessive.


Careful: Cheesew1z69 holds the patent on that.


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By retrospooty on 11/24/2013 2:57:52 PM , Rating: 2
Not even remotely... Tony even you have to admit that guy has major issues.


By Cheesew1z69 on 11/24/2013 4:11:18 PM , Rating: 2
I highly doubt Tony would admit that being Tester is even more an Apple nutjob than he is, they tend to stick together.


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By Wazza1234 on 11/24/2013 4:44:32 PM , Rating: 2
Seeking confirmation from Tony.

Is that a new level of desperation, even for you?

You should try this novel thing which is not being out debated by all of my comments, rather than desperately trying to link me to some random string of letters who has obviously really, really upset you.


By retrospooty on 11/25/2013 9:23:28 AM , Rating: 2
"Seeking confirmation from Tony."

Not at all. Tony, other than being a complete and total "Apple fanboy extraordinaire" to the highest power, is also a good guy and unlike you , he has class.

"You should try this novel thing which is not being out debated by all of my comments"

Out debated? LOL. You are wrong on your very approach. You hide behind Apple's legal actions as if "The law" is some perfect entity that cant be wrong. "The law" sends innocent people to jail and lets guilty go free every day. Ignoring that, as far as "The law" it isn't a quick case in the hometown of one of the plaintiff... It's a several years long drawn out process of cases, appeals and an eventual decision. What Apple has won, is the 1st hometown case part. It wont be over for years, and like I said, I really don't care as it is irrelevant to me. I am not impressed with either Samsung or Apple or their hypocritical behavior, nor am I impressed enough by either of their current products to want to buy any of it.

"rather than desperately trying to link me to some random string of letters who has obviously really, really upset you."

Let me be very clear here. Nothing that happens on a web tech forum/comment section at Anandtech/Dailytech or anywhere else for that matter is desperate nor does it upset me. You and I went head to head many times in the past and in the end you lost. You were banned twice for being a complete and utter troll. I am simply pointing out who you are to avoid any mistake, and again Testerguy, we know its you . You are a pathetic loser to come back here at all, and even more so to and act as if you aren't the same guy. Your maniacal antics are unmistakable, and your attempts to hide it are as lame as your attempts to hide your clear agenda.


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By Wazza1234 on 11/24/2013 4:41:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
As usual, you are having an argument no one else is having. Of course we're talking about the United States


Given that wherever Apple filed it would still be in the US and Apple is still a US company, you'd just cry about that, too. Any excuse to try and claim that Samsung didn't copy Apple, something they quite obviously did.

quote:
a hometown judge


A judge born in Washington who is highly regarded and respected.

quote:
a hometown jury


A jury Samsung had every right to research and take issue with.

quote:
there were a lot of anomalies in a case like evidence dismissed that showed prior art,


No, invalid evidence was dismissed on grounds of irrelevance. In other words, the 'prior art' which you claim was shown was not prior art at all and therefore not part of the case.

quote:
a jury foreman that later turned out to have history with patents being taken from him


Again, Samsung's obligation to research. Yet who was the company which made the ridiculous claim that he was the reason they lost the case? Samsung. Of course. Here is what Hogan said:

quote:
“Had I been asked an open-ended question with no time constraint, of course I would’ve disclosed that,” Hogan said. “I’m willing to go in front of the judge to tell her that I had no intention of being on this jury, let alone withholding anything that would’ve allowed me to be excused.” The jury elected Hogan foreman due in part to his experience as an electrical engineer. He claims the only dissenting vote was his own.

As for the jury selection process, Hogan said, “I answered every question the judge asked me” and Samsung “had every opportunity to question me.” Hogan said.

He was also surprised to hear that Samsung didn't know of the history referred to in Tuesday's filing, given that the lawyer cited in the claim is married to another lawyer working for the firm representing the company.

Hogan said he questions if Samsung “let [him] in the jury just to have an excuse for a new trial if it didn’t go in their favor.”


quote:
you are expected to know what's going on here you're from England and also you're a moron.


Sorry - what are you about to say about angry, obnoxious, annoying, argumentative, asinine and obsessive?

quote:
Funny you can actually post as you do and you don't realize why everyone knows that you are testerguy


I find it hilarious that you're so desperate to associate me with this 'testerguy' character. As if two anonymous usernames has any relevance to our discussion. Perhaps the lack of relevance is precisely the point when you can't address the actual arguments.

quote:
The thing that makes me laugh ifs that you don't seem to realize why you were banished, or maybe it just doesn't bother you that everyone thinks you're nut. You've been banned twice on a site that bans almost no one


If you say that this Testerguy character is like me, then the only thing he could possibly have been banned for is for educating you. Only takes a mod who doesn't like hearing reality, it seems? Only that mod, according to you, can't even 'banish' people properly. I'd question what made them so tearful that they had to attempt (and fail - according to you) to ban in the first place.

Seems like logical people are a rarity on this site so I'm not entirely sure that this 'Testerguy' character should worry about a bunch of Android yes-sheep not getting banned, huh? Although - I would definitely question the emotional stability of someone who constantly tried to comfort themselves in the face of losing arguments by trying to claim the poster outwitting him is banned (when he clearly isn't). Seems a bit desperate, a bit irrelevant - a bit - you.


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By Cheesew1z69 on 11/24/2013 4:56:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
the only thing he could possibly have been banned for is for educating you.
Classic TesterGuy... no doubt now.


RE: Should have thrown the entire trial out...
By Wazza1234 on 11/25/2013 3:38:31 AM , Rating: 2
Just read his comments. He says that every single time. It obviously annoys you both.

But wait - I thought you were sure?


By retrospooty on 11/25/2013 7:59:24 AM , Rating: 2
"If you say that this Testerguy character is like me, then the only thing he could possibly have been banned for is for educating you. "

Now speaking of yourself int eh 3rd person. Classic signs of nutjob.

I have had this exact same argument with you before Testerguy, I am not interested in repeating the same points again and again.

I repeat and stand behind this... "Apple also copied Androids notifications and WebOS's multitasking. Should they then be forced to remove those features because they weren't first with it? Apple copied the whole smartphone idea in the first place from Palm and RIMM. Should it have been banned? Of course not. Businesses copy the working ideas of other businesses. It's how business has been ran since the dawn of civilization. Apple does it as much as any company."


FIND NEW JOBS......
By clarisayjn053 on 11/23/2013 4:51:10 PM , Rating: 1
if you need a job try this site JOBS61 (dot)COM. Dan does it at home and makes $17.92 hourly just sitting and typing stuff all day...No experience needed too




"If you look at the last five years, if you look at what major innovations have occurred in computing technology, every single one of them came from AMD. Not a single innovation came from Intel." -- AMD CEO Hector Ruiz in 2007

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki