backtop


Print 124 comment(s) - last by nafhan.. on Aug 27 at 4:41 PM

Want to guess which company is breaking out the champagne tonight?

The jury reached a verdict today and they found Samsung guilty on multiple counts of infringing upon Apple design and software patents. While Apple was able to hold Samsung's feet to the fire on the majority of its utility patents, Samsung received no love from the jurors on its countersuit claims.
 
The jury ordered Samsung to pay Apple $1,051,855,000 USD ($1.05B USD) in damages. Apple owes Samsung absolutely nothing.
 

Apple CEO Tim Cook [Image Source: Paul Sakuma, Associated Press]

Not surprisingly, both Apple and Samsung have issued statements to the New York Times regarding the decision. First up, Apple:
 
We are grateful to the jury for their service and for investing the time to listen to our story and we were thrilled to be able to finally tell it. The mountain of evidence presented during the trail showed that Samsung’s copying went far deeper than even we knew. The lawsuits between Apple and Samsung were about much more than patents or money. They were about values. At Apple, we value originality and innovation and pour our lives into making the best products on earth. We make these products to delight our customers, not for our competitors to flagrantly copy. We applaud the court for finding Samsung’s behavior willful and for sending a loud and clear message that stealing isn’t right.
 
And now we have Samsung, which is clearly not pleased with the outcome of this case:
 
Today’s verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer. It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices. It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners, or technology that is being improved every day by Samsung and other companies. Consumers have the right to choices, and they know what they are buying when they purchase Samsung products. This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple’s claims. Samsung will continue to innovate and offer choices for the consumer.
 
And even though Microsoft had absolutely nothing to do with this trial (Microsoft can safely sit on the sidelines as a spectator), Bill Cox, senior director of Marketing Communications for Windows Phone, added his two cents in on the decision:
 

Considering Microsoft’s current position in the smartphone marketplace, we’re not quite sure it's “winning” in this case.


Updated 8/25/2012 @ 2:53am EST
9to5Mac has received an internal memo sent to Apple employees by Apple CEO Tim Cook. In the memo, which features similar wording to the statement issued by Apple after the ruling, Cook describes how taking Samsung to court wasn't about the "patents or money":

Today was an important day for Apple and for innovators everywhere.
 
Many of you have been closely following the trial against Samsung in San Jose for the past few weeks. We chose legal action very reluctantly and only after repeatedly asking Samsung to stop copying our work. For us this lawsuit has always been about something much more important than patents or money. It’s about values. We value originality and innovation and pour our lives into making the best products on earth. And we do this to delight our customers, not for competitors to flagrantly copy.
 
We owe a debt of gratitude to the jury who invested their time in listening to our story. We were thrilled to finally have the opportunity to tell it. The mountain of evidence presented during the trial showed that Samsung’s copying went far deeper than we knew.
 
The jury has now spoken. We applaud them for finding Samsung’s behavior willful and for sending a loud and clear message that stealing isn’t right.
 
I am very proud of the work that each of you do.
 
Today, values have won and I hope the whole world listens.
 
Tim

Sources: The New York Times, Twitter



Comments     Threshold


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

well
By GulWestfale on 8/24/2012 9:34:44 PM , Rating: 0
1. the judge was obviously biased. not admitting exonerating evidence in defense of samsung, such as prior art, clearly shows that.

2. the rectangle with rounded corners shape should not ever be patentable, as it is an obvious shape. ever played poker? have a credit card? take a look at which shape they are in. it's an obvious shape for a handheld product. furthermore, it was used in consumer electronics well before the iphone came along.

3. when exactly has apple ever 'innovated'? as far as i know, they take ideas from others, and then polish them a bit. and i say this as the owner of an MBA, with which i am quite happy. but innovation is something else.

4. given that samsung makes the CPU (and probably the RAM) in the iOS devices... what will happen when they suddenly decide to have an "unfortunate manufacturing shortage"? :)

5. windows phone is still a piece of crap, regardless of what other companies do. what an idiotic interface... and soon you can have that on your desktop, too! no, thanks.

obviously, samsung will appeal this decision, and even more of your tax dollars will be wasted before an intelligent and non-corrupt judge throws this idiotic lawsuit out of his court and fines apple for filing it in the first place.

won't happen; i know. but i can dream, can't i?




RE: well
By TSS on 8/24/2012 9:42:57 PM , Rating: 5
Heh, well since the other news message of the guy having to pay $675,000 for downloading 30 songs, i wouldn't be so sure this case might still end up well.

Whatever way you spin it this is not a good day for the US justice system. Or the consumer.


RE: well
By Solandri on 8/25/2012 1:44:13 AM , Rating: 5
The problem is that too few people know about jury nullification. The judge instructs them to rule based on the letter of the law. That's what they did in the Tenenbaum case (with the $675k award). They don't know that if they feel the law is unjust or plain wrong, they can toss it and rule however they like. That's the next-to-last line of defense in the American legal system (last being the 2nd Amendment), but too few jurors know about it.

quote:
Whatever way you spin it this is not a good day for the US justice system. Or the consumer.

Obviously I got into the wrong career. Instead of an engineer, I should've become a patent attorney. I have several software and hardware ideas I'd like to develop into a product. There's nothing like them on the market right now, and I'm pretty confident they'd do well in their respective markets. But right now I am absolutely scared to death of being sued for infringing on some vague or obvious patent for what seems to be some fairly obvious ideas (application of already-existing technologies in one market into a different market). Even if you win, you lose because you have to pay your lawyer. I don't have enough cash reserves to fight a small business-threatening patent suit, and the last thing I want to do at my age is to get financially wiped out and have to start over.


RE: well
By Totally on 8/25/2012 2:28:24 AM , Rating: 2
Can't you simply have the guy who took you to court pay for your lawyer fees if you win the case.


RE: well
By Brazos on 8/25/2012 11:06:56 AM , Rating: 2
If you get called for jury selection and you don't want to be on it (personally, I love it)ask a question about jury nullification. They'll pass right over you.


RE: well
By ExarKun333 on 8/25/2012 12:54:16 PM , Rating: 1
Thats why they created corporations. Create your own and assign the patents. You are then not personally responsible.


RE: well
By xytc on 8/27/2012 6:26:25 AM , Rating: 4
Companies like Samsung, HTC, LG, Sony, Nokia and Motorola are in telecommunication business and some of them producing mobile phones since 1981.
From 1981 till 2007 all these companies have produced hundreds of mobile phones models and have sold billions of units worldwide before Apple was ever thinking of producing a mobile phone in 2007.
In contrast Apple was not a telecommunication company like the others and had zero history or research & development put in the field of developing mobile phones.
So in 2007 Apple just copied all the technology they could have found in all other mobile phones, smartphones and smart devices, and with all that stolen knowledge and technology they have created the iPhone.
Obviously they couldn't have been innovative in any way with their first mobile phone since all the technology was stolen from others, Apple's iPhone was nothing but a copycat.
If you wanna see what models of mobile phones, smartphones or smart devices did Apple just copied with their iPhone just check the following list of models that were produced way before the year 2007 when the first iPhone was released:
- remember the Compaq iPaq models released since year 2000 upwards
- then the old HP iPaq models released since year 2004 upwards, running on Windows Mobile featuring touchscreen displays with hand write recognition models: HP iPAQ h6320, HP iPAQ h6325, HP iPAQ rw6818, HP iPAQ rw6815, HP iPAQ rw6828
- Motorola models released since year 2004: Motorola A1000, Motorola A1010, Motorola ROKR E6, all smartphones with big touchscreen displays
- many HTC models based on Windows Mobile started from year 2002 upwards, including the first Windows Mobile phone released to marked, here are some model examples since year 2006: HTC P3300, HTC TyTN, HTC P3600 they are all smartphones with big touchscreen displays and hand write recognition
- in 2004 Samsung released a Windows Mobile phone model Samsung i700, again a smartphone with big touchscreen display
- Nokia Comunicator series released since 1998 models: Nokia 9000 Communicator, Nokia 9210i Communicator, Nokia 7710 touchscreen display, Nokia N95 they are all smartphones with big displays
- model from year 2006: LG KE850 Prada again with big touchscreen display
- model from year 2006: Philips S900
- models released since 2002 from Dell Axim X5 family:
Dell Axim X5
Dell Axim x50v
Dell Axim X30
- more models released since year 2002 upwards:
HP iPAQ hx4700
HP iPAQ rx3700
ASUS MYPAL A730
- all these smartphone models were made by HTC:
O2 XDA IIs
O2 XDA II
O2 XDA II mini
O2 XDA mini S
O2 XDA IIi
O2 XDA Neo
O2 XDA Exec
O2 XDA mini S
O2 XDA Trion
O2 XDA Orbit
Qtek S100
Qtek S110
Qtek 2020i
Qtek S200
Qtek 9000
Qtek 9090
Qtek 9100
Qtek 2020
Qtek 9600
Dopod 686
Dopod 818
Dopod 828
Dopod 818 Pro
Dopod 838
Dopod 838 Pro
Dopod D810/CHT 9100
Dopod D600
Dopod P860
i-mate JAM
i-mate JAMin
i-mate JASJAM
i-mate PDA2k
i-mate PDA2
i-mate K-JAM
i-mate Pocket PC
released in year 2004:
Orange SPV M500
T-Mobile MDA Compact
- released in year 2005:
Vodafone VPA Compact
Orange SPV M600
T-Mobile MDA Compact II
- released in year 2006:
Vodafone VPA Compact GPS
Orange SPV M650
Orange SPV M700
Orange SPV M3100
T-Mobile MDA Compact III
T-Mobile Wing
Cingular 8525

For the ignorants just check the above mentioned models to see how much iPhone resembles them in look and functionality.
http://www.gsmarena.com/htc_pocketpc_smartphone.ph...

Guys just keep in mind that there are many Apple employes which post pro Apple comments on sites like these trying to deceive people like you, they are among the biggest deceivers.
If you wanna know who is the biggest deceiver just read the Bible and you'll find that Satan is.
Ironically this doesn't seem to be the first time when Satan is using an Apple trying to deceive humanity.


RE: well
By Dr of crap on 8/27/2012 8:32:29 AM , Rating: 4
WELL, WELL -
You had a good arguement going until you brought satan into the mix.
Now you look like some kind of wack job!

Tin hat? Voices in your head?? Anxoius?


RE: well
By Mitch101 on 8/24/2012 10:14:43 PM , Rating: 3
Im convinced they need to investigate the Judges in these cases to ensure they have no way of financial gain in these matters.


RE: well
By W00dmann on 8/25/12, Rating: -1
RE: well
By Cheesew1z69 on 8/25/2012 5:33:30 PM , Rating: 2
Another Appletard speaks....


RE: well
By Mitch101 on 8/26/2012 4:34:24 PM , Rating: 2
Not a fan of Android but I also dont use Grandma's iPhone either.


RE: well
By KGBird on 8/24/2012 10:52:17 PM , Rating: 3
It's crazy that rounded corners can be patented. Every engineer should know that you avoid sharp edges because of the inherent stresses they generate that results in chipping or cracking. Sharp edges are also uncomfortable to the touch.
This was probably never presented in court because the jury would never understand that Apple has patented a standard practice.

Samsung should now charge Apple out the wazoo for the chips.


RE: well
By theapparition on 8/27/2012 10:24:03 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
It's crazy that rounded corners can be patented.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, so don't get too upset.

Rounded corners can't be patented.
A rectangle can't be patented.
The color black can't be patented.
A chrome bezel can't be patented.
A center mounted screen can't be patented.

But you can get a design patent that says it's a black phone with a rectangular shape, with uniformly rounded corners, a chrome bezel and center mounted screen with one button. It protects the "look" of the product.

Personally, I don't believe any intelligent person can look at the phones and claim any sort of confusion. I also dismiss the claim that even if there was no confusion, a similarly looking phone caused loss of sales to Apple. But apparently, I'm not on any jury to make the determination.

quote:
Samsung should now charge Apple out the wazoo for the chips.

Can't for several reasons. They already have purchase agreements in place to the tune of 5 Billion. It would be a contract violation to break those agreements.
Most importantly, despite our personal opinions, business is business. You MUST act ethically within accepted business practices. If Samsung were to act petty and break those agreements, what other company would trust them as a supplier? They could risk their entire business by doing that.


RE: well
By nafhan on 8/27/2012 4:41:50 PM , Rating: 3
Yep. The big problem here is that there are BIG problems with IP law, and Apple's just the best at taking advantage of the flawed system. Unfortunately, thanks to rulings like this, I think issues with IP law are going to get worse before things get better. How bad they will get... I have no idea, but I do feel a bit worried.


RE: well
By muhahaaha on 8/24/2012 11:12:54 PM , Rating: 2
+6


RE: well
By SongEmu on 8/24/2012 11:51:30 PM , Rating: 2
Korean judge. Soooo biased.


RE: well
By Camikazi on 8/25/2012 12:20:52 AM , Rating: 2
She has Korean ancestry but she was born in the USA, raised in the USA and educated in the USA, I don't expect her to be too friendly to Samsung just cause they are a Korean company. Now her being a bit more biased towards a company that is based in a district her court has jurisdiction over is more likely. If it were me I would ask a neutral 3rd party to preside over this since having an American company vs a Korean company in an American court is a bit biased.


RE: well
By W00dmann on 8/25/12, Rating: -1
RE: well
By Cheesew1z69 on 8/25/2012 5:34:42 PM , Rating: 3
Retarded much?


RE: well
By rob19478 on 8/25/2012 4:05:28 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
5. windows phone is still a piece of crap, regardless of what other companies do. what an idiotic interface... and soon you can have that on your desktop, too! no, thanks.


I have a windows 7 phone, and is both easy to use and gorgeous looking.

Still this was a biased trial, knew from when the judge disallowed important samsung evidence that they would loose


RE: well
By Reclaimer77 on 8/25/2012 4:32:01 AM , Rating: 2
You mean the courthouse being literally miles away from Apple's headquarters gave you the impression there was bias here? Color me shocked!

quote:
knew from when the judge disallowed important samsung evidence that they would loose


That basically killed any chance of Samsung having a fair trial. Juries accept the "facts" they are given. That ruling allowed Apple's lawyers to tell the jury they invented the smartphone, and prevented Samsung from proving they had not. Or even presenting evidence to the contrary.


RE: well
By althaz on 8/25/2012 4:38:10 AM , Rating: 5
You were going so well up until #5...

Windows Phone has the highest customer satisfaction rates and is widely regarded as market-leading in terms of basic interface. It has problems in other areas (missing features that iOS and Android have, limited software upgrade path, etc), but the interface is not one of them :).


RE: well
By Nyu on 8/25/2012 4:49:14 AM , Rating: 1
biased? obviously bribed.


RE: well
By kmmatney on 8/25/2012 6:28:51 AM , Rating: 3
"3. when exactly has apple ever 'innovated'? "

The original iPhone changed the entire phone landscape - how how you can be any more "innovate" than that. I remember spending an hour at the AT&T store trying NOT to buy the iPhone 3GS, but all the other phones sucked as Android phones didn't exist yet. You can thank Apple for forcing other companies to not make crappy smartphones.

Downrate me now...


RE: well
By cmdrdredd on 8/25/2012 8:52:51 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
The original iPhone changed the entire phone landscape - how how you can be any more "innovate" than that. I remember spending an hour at the AT&T store trying NOT to buy the iPhone 3GS, but all the other phones sucked as Android phones didn't exist yet. You can thank Apple for forcing other companies to not make crappy smartphones.


You know...the smartphone as we have it today would have happened anyway. It also wouldn't have resulted in lawsuits over round corners on the device either.


RE: well
By web2dot0 on 8/25/2012 9:36:09 AM , Rating: 2
Someone would of came up with E=mc2, a2+b2=c2, pi, yeah ....

You give it time, anything can be solved. The question is TIMING!

Someone would of came up with Nuclear Bomb eventually. But the US came up with it first.

GET IT?!!?

If you have a rebuttal, at least have some sort of logic.


RE: well
By BSMonitor on 8/27/2012 9:50:45 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
You know...the smartphone as we have it today would have happened anyway. It also wouldn't have resulted in lawsuits over round corners on the device either.


Really?

http://www.theverge.com/2012/4/25/2974676/this-was...


RE: well
By Icopoli on 8/25/2012 9:14:29 AM , Rating: 1
It's not called being biased, it's called being paid off :)


RE: well
By damianrobertjones on 8/25/2012 12:08:01 PM , Rating: 2
"5. windows phone is still a piece of crap, regardless of what other companies do. what an idiotic interface... and soon you can have that on your desktop, too! no, thanks."

Eh?? Icons might be icons but they're still in a square grid so you're talking rubbish. Sorry.

P.s. It's ultra easy to use and isn't that the point?


RE: well
By name99 on 8/25/2012 2:21:46 PM , Rating: 2
Shorter GulWestfale:
We were stabbed in the back.
Samsung will rise again.

Pathetic. The difference between adults and children is that adults don't find an excuse no matter what.


RE: well
By highlander2107 on 8/25/2012 6:35:07 PM , Rating: 4
Lost me at:

"when exactly has apple ever 'innovated'?"

I don't own a single Apple product and even I know you need to lay off the crack. You're clearly not a businessman, product creator, advertiser/salesman or engineer.


RE: well
By tayb on 8/25/2012 9:24:28 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
3. when exactly has apple ever 'innovated'? as far as i know, they take ideas from others, and then polish them a bit. and i say this as the owner of an MBA, with which i am quite happy. but innovation is something else.


People just have incredibly short memories. Do you not remember the "smartphone" market prior to 2007? It was horrible. Windows Mobile, RIM with trackballs, and Samsung using resistive touch screens with god awful OSes... just to name a few "features" from that time period. Hell, if you wanted a "smart phone" the top of the line models usually came with a stylus. A freaking stylus!!

Android was in development but if you ever saw the early Android builds you would know that it was a RIM clone. They weren't building a touch friendly OS, they were going to take on RIM, and it looked HORRIBLE.

The iPhone changed everything, whether you care to admit it or not. Did the technology exist? Sure. Had anyone put that technology in a phone?? No way. It was literally ground breaking and it brought the other players to their knees. They had nothing, absolutely nothing, to compete with the iPhone. WP7 and Android were created in RESPONSE to the original iPhone. That's innovation. We've all benefited from it.


RE: well
By amanojaku on 8/25/2012 10:59:00 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, you do have a short memory, limited to only the things Apple does that you like.

First off, LG arguably created the first modern touchscreen smartphone when it introduced the Prada. BEFORE Apple.

Second, the technology to create modern touchscreen smartphones wasn't even available or affordable until 2006. Those breakthroughs were not thanks to Apple, since 100% of the components were made by other companies, including Samsung. Apple submitted designs to the manufacturers, which looked eerily similar to Braun products from the 1960s.

These quotes are awesome:

"Apple lawyers are planning to ask that the two dozen Samsung devices found to have infringed its patents be barred from the U.S. market. Most of those devices are "legacy" products with almost nonexistent new sales in the United States."

"Apple should be paying royalties to Sony for stealing their idea of a rectangular portable music player that requires the user to wear earphones."

"Its okay, when apple trys to enter the TV game Samsung can sue em back left and right for making a tv that looks like a tv."

"As a product design engineer, I find the verdict absurd. No code or engineering was taken from Apple and used by Samsung. It would be like Ford suing GM over the Camaro because the Mustang came first. That's called competition, not theft!"


RE: well
By tayb on 8/26/2012 7:36:43 PM , Rating: 2
The Prada? Seriously? Did you ever use that phone? I did. It's great that it beat the iPhone to the market but the phone sucked. It had a capacitive touch screen....aaaaaaand... that's about the best feature of the phone. The iPhone had a well-built and well-designed OS backing the hardware, the Prada did not. The iPhone also managed to outsell the Prada nearly 7:1 despite costing over three times as much. The Prada was a POS.


RE: well
By Reclaimer77 on 8/26/2012 8:49:27 PM , Rating: 2
LOL I love the logic here. What a bunch of pathetic apologist nonsense.

quote:
It's great that it beat the iPhone to the market but the phone sucked.


If it "sucked", so what? Are you 12 or something? Prior art means prior art. Please find me a quote from patent law where prior art doesn't count if it can be subjectively judged as "sucking".

quote:
It had a capacitive touch screen


This is relevant how? It's not. Chassis design and rounded edges are relevant, no matter what screen technology is in the chassis.

quote:
The iPhone had a well-built and well-designed OS backing the hardware


That's great. Give Apple a cookie. In the meantime you can explain to me how this discounts any damn point he was making. Considering how the first iPhone released with an OS that omitted key features and common place things, it's pretty debatable how "well-built" the OS was until the first few major patches.

quote:
The iPhone also managed to outsell the Prada nearly 7:1 despite costing over three times as much.


Another fanboish talking point. I wasn't aware patent law and prior art was on a 'winner take all' basis!

By your logic Samsung shouldn't have been sued, because they outsell the iPhone 3 to 1. BOOM!


RE: well
By amanojaku on 8/26/2012 11:04:40 PM , Rating: 3
Rampant fanboyism exists on all sides, but the Apple side takes it to extremes. I'm curious about one thing, though. I never heard of the Samsung F700 until this case. It came out a month after the original iPhone, and looks just like it, yet Apple didn't include that as a device that broke its design patents, and it's listed in the evidence as a pre-iPhone design. Probably because it was a slider, but still...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vodafone_branded...
http://news.cnet.com/2300-13579_3-10013512-2.html

As someone else here said, the deck was stacked against Samsung. The jury already knew which way it was ruling on day one of deliberations, which is why the verdict came down so quickly.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57500358-37/excl...

What I find intriguing is the way the Samsung emails were interpreted.

quote:
“All this time we’ve been paying all our attention to Nokia, and concentrated our efforts on things like Folder (flip phone), Bar (candy bar), Slide (keyboard), yet when our [product] is compared to the unexpected competitor Apple’s iPhone, the difference is truly that of Heaven and Earth,” according to the email. “It’s a crisis of design.”

“Can you show me the document that shows me that there’s a crisis in design compared to Nokia?” (Apple lawyer William) Lee asked (Samsung Chief Strategy Officer Justin) Denison.

“No I can’t,” Denison said.

“The only documents that you can identify from Samsung that refer to a crisis in design… refer to the iPhone,” Lee said.
Basically, Samsung looked to Nokia, then the market leader, as the standard prior to the iPhone, yet Nokia never sued Samsung.

When the iPhone came out, every manufacturer ridiculed the form factor. Without a flip the screen was exposed, and it cracked often. Without the candy bar or slider all keys were virtual, and hard to press accurately. No one thought the iPhone would sell due to those limitations, yet it killed. The "crisis" was the realization that the masses didn't care, they just loved the way it looked.

Funny thing is, iPhone screens still crack, and the keys are still hard to press. I don't know anyone who can type on the damn thing quickly, and everyone I know has the phone in a bumper or sleeve. People say the iPhone is advanced, but the iPhone design is a step BACKWARDS, in my opinion.


RE: well
By BSMonitor on 8/27/2012 10:02:29 AM , Rating: 2
Umm, if the F700 was a sliding keyboard phone, it was much like an iPhone at all. Weird.


RE: well
By daar on 8/26/2012 4:17:09 PM , Rating: 2
Didn't matter if Samsung/LG had an awful OS, they were pioneering the availability of touch screens and complex OS to the consumer market.

What Apple did was the same thing but made improvements in both respective areas.

Did LG sue and try to ban the iPhone because they previously had a rectangular phone with touch screen capabilities? No, it was a good product and they (among other companies) decided to learn from it.

Samsung, with the help of Google's OS, introduced the Galaxy line of products which is selling well. Many people have decided to purchase it over Apple products because they feel it does some things better than Apple's products.

Instead of Apple learning and improving their product to match this, like all other companies have done before to reach the point we are at, Apple has decided to sue them out. Absurd.


RE: well
By Tony Swash on 8/27/2012 9:36:33 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
2. the rectangle with rounded corners shape should not ever be patentable, as it is an obvious shape. ever played poker? have a credit card? take a look at which shape they are in. it's an obvious shape for a handheld product. furthermore, it was used in consumer electronics well before the iphone came along.


Do you realise that Samsung were found not to have infringed the rectangle?


RE: well
By BSMonitor on 8/27/2012 9:46:08 AM , Rating: 2
No, they don't bother reading. They already know everything... LMAO


"Can anyone tell me what MobileMe is supposed to do?... So why the f*** doesn't it do that?" -- Steve Jobs














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki