backtop


Print 71 comment(s) - last by retrospooty.. on Feb 6 at 10:19 AM

Circuits were a "major milestone" in peer-reviewed research, allowed better multitasking

The Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison's Computer Science Department Professor Gundihar S. Sohi and his colleagues -- University of Toronto CS Professor Andreas Moshovos, former graduate student Scott Breach (who received his Ph.D in 1998), and Terani Vijaykumar (another former graduate student) -- in 1998 published a groundbreaking paper entitled "Data Dependence Speculation Apparatus for Parallel Processing Unit".

I. Professor Fights to Get Licensing on His Game-Changing Circuit-Tech

The paper layed out a piece of circuitry that allowed parallel tasks on a modern multiprocessor to be better scheduled, improving processing throughput and power efficiency.  More specifically, the circuit allows for a heurisitic where the processor learns from its mistakes in scheduling, getting smarter at balancing the loads for certain user profiles.

For the work, Professor Sohi in 2011 won the ACM-IEEE CS Eckert-Mauchly Award — "the computer architecture community's most prestigious award."  He and his co-authors also received a patent on the circuit -- U.S. Patent No. 5,781,752, filed for in 1996 and granted in 1998. 

Sohi multitasking
The work from the Univ. of Wisconsin team was groundbreaking when it was published in 1996-98. [Image Source: IEEE/ACM]

And yet, many in the semiconductor industry have fought tooth and nail to try to use the invention without paying for it.

The latest to borrow the technology without paying licensing fees is Apple, Inc. (AAPL).  Its A7 chip -- found aboard the iPhone 5S, iPad Air, and iPad mini with Retina display -- reportedly has predictive circuitry similar to that described in the patent. 

Apple A7
Apple A7
The Apple A7 -- the brains of the iPhone 5S -- is produced by Samsung Electronics.
[Image Source: iFixit (bottom), Cult of Mac (top)]

That circuitry is a crucial component in delivering the terrific battery life of these Apple devices, even in the face of high processing loads.

iPhone 5S

 

iPad Air



iPad Mini With Retina Display

Someone tipped off the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) that the patented work might be being used without licensing.  WARF contacted Apple, but the mobile devicemaker reportedly refused to cooperate.  WARF testifies in its court filing:

Apple has stated that it is the policy of the company not to accept or consider proposals regarding licensing from outside entities like WARF for any purpose.
...
WARF is informed and believes, and on this basis alleges, that Apple has incorporated the technology of WARF's '752 patent into the A7 processor to achieve enhanced efficiency and performance. WARF now asks this Court to prevent Apple's unauthorized use of the '752 patent.

WARF is seeking monetary damages and an injunction preventing the sale of iOS that are non-compliant.

This is actually not the first major incident regarding the patent.  Intel Corp. (INTC) also integrated similar circuitry into its "Core 2 Duo Processor", which launched in 2006.  It subsequently refused licensing and was smacked by a suit from WARF.  In the eleventh hour, apparently sensing it was on the losing end of things, Intel caved. the company agreed in 2008 to license the award winning technology just before the case was set to go to trial.

It remains to be seen whether Apple chooses a similar path, or opts to fight.

II. Steal and Sue?

Apple has at times appeared more eager to sue than to compete.  It has been very aggressive in suing other OEMs like Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd.(KRX:005935) (KRX:005930) trying to score punitive product bans in the U.S. and other regions. 

Apple v. Samsung
Apple has been fond of suing other gadgetmakers.  [Image Source: Gizmodo]

These attempts have largely proved futile, despite Apple winning a jury verdict against Samsung worth around $800M USDApple and Samsung are currently in court-ordered negotiations in a second case, which involves the 2012-era Galaxy S3, as well as the Galaxy Note and Note 2 phablets.

Much of Apple's intellectual property used in its lawsuits details multitouch gestures that were first published in peer-reviewed research.  For example, Professor Krueger developed and published papers on virtually equivalent pinch-to-zoom multi-touch technology almost 25 years prior to Apple producing its first multi-touch device (the iPhone). 
 
Early multitouch devices
Myron Krueger developed pinch-to-zoom [pictured] in the 1980s. [Image Source: Bill Buxton]

 
Much of this work went unpatented and the technology was not commercially available, hence when Fingerworks filed for patents on it in the 1990s, it faced little resistance.  Apple would go on to acquire Fingerworks and then claim it "invented" multitouch.

Apple has been forced to admit it was using others' technologies before.  Notably, Nokia Oyj. (HEX:NOK1V) sued it over multiple intellectual property "theft" claims back in 2009, which culminated in an agreement from Apple to pay licensing fees in 2011.

Late Apple cofounder and CEO Steven Paul "Steve" Jobs once famously stated:

Picasso had a saying - 'Good artists copy, great artists steal.' And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas.

But sometimes if you steal, you have to pay in the end.

Sources: Apple Insider, Google Patents



Comments     Threshold


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

sucker punch
By Motoman on 2/3/2014 2:20:44 PM , Rating: 5
Can we just ban Apple already? They're a pox.

And then fix the f%cking patent system as I've described a billion times over.




RE: sucker punch
By Argon18 on 2/3/14, Rating: 0
RE: sucker punch
By tng on 2/3/2014 2:41:08 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, I agree. Seems that any interesting tech that comes along gets bought up by one of these guys for the patents, then disappears.


RE: sucker punch
By tonyswash on 2/3/14, Rating: 0
RE: sucker punch
By elleehswon on 2/3/2014 3:21:59 PM , Rating: 1
add IBM and Oracle to the list. They are, by far, the worst.


RE: sucker punch
By drlumen on 2/3/2014 3:33:29 PM , Rating: 2
How would we know if the IP never made it to market?

Some conspiracy theorists claim there was an engine that ran on water with the idea and company bought out by Big Oil. Does this qualify?


RE: sucker punch
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/3/2014 4:21:13 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
How would we know if the IP never made it to market?
Tony doesn't think very logically.


RE: sucker punch
By inighthawki on 2/3/2014 8:10:07 PM , Rating: 2
The poster claimed that these ideas are bought up and then nothing is done with them, and then Tony asked for an example. Your counter argument is that we don't know if that ever happened...

That makes no logical sense since the poster provided no evidence that this occurred, and Tony is asking for it.


RE: sucker punch
By Reclaimer77 on 2/3/2014 8:54:34 PM , Rating: 1
So it's okay to steal IP if the product hasn't been made yet?

Gotcha...


RE: sucker punch
By Fleeb on 2/3/2014 9:36:39 PM , Rating: 2
Well, as they say, it is not about who does it first. It is about who markets it better.


RE: sucker punch
By inighthawki on 2/4/2014 1:08:53 AM , Rating: 2
That's not what I said at all. I was claiming his comment was contradictory of itself. You cannot claim that people buy up patents that never see the light of day and simultaneously claim that you don't know if that actually happens.


RE: sucker punch
By Wazza1234 on 2/4/2014 7:15:41 AM , Rating: 2
Logical progressions are not his strong point.

You're absolutely right. The guy was claiming that IP gets bought up and then never seen by consumers, but then by claiming that we 'wouldn't know' he proved that he has zero evidence.


RE: sucker punch
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/3/2014 9:01:22 PM , Rating: 2
The problem is, you don't know what significant IP hasn't made it to market, there are probably thousands a year that are significant that do not make it to market. Tony asking for an example is only to boost his comments when someone can't name something, so he can say "You can't name anything? HERPA DERP!"

Point is, if it doesn't make it to market, how does anyone know, except either the people who created it, or the companies who own it, outside of that, NONE of us know.


RE: sucker punch
By Wazza1234 on 2/4/2014 7:18:09 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The problem is, you don't know what significant IP hasn't made it to market


Then you can't claim that it hasn't, or that it's significant.

quote:
there are probably thousands a year


= an unsubstantiated guess.

quote:
Point is, if it doesn't make it to market, how does anyone know, except either the people who created it, or the companies who own it, outside of that, NONE of us know.


If you don't know, you have absolutely zero evidence to make the claim in the first place.


RE: sucker punch
By Fritzr on 2/3/2014 8:49:38 PM , Rating: 2
A piece of technology that did not require a lawsuit to bring it to the attention of consumers is the safety bicycle.

Invented and patented. The inventor sold the patent rights for $20,000. The buyer of the patent then licensed the manufacturing rights for $20 per unit.

Quite a profitable investment as the diamond frame safety bike became the dominant design for bicycles and is almost universal for two wheeled motorcycles.

A second piece of technology that did not require a lawsuit for it's successful introduction is the transistor radio which was the must have accessory of the 1960s and 1970s and of course the modern semiconductor transistor that made it possible.

A third piece of technology that did not require a lawsuit for it's successful introduction. The vacuum tube which is used in the construction of many different types of electrical devices. Many of the vacuum tube applications now use solid state, but the vacuum tube is still widely used for many applications.

The automobile was also quite successful without lawsuits over the various parts and the composite machine. In fact this particular tech triumphed over government action to prevent it coming to market in the late 19th century.

The elevator is another technology that did quite well without the necessity of lawsuits to attract attention.

The broadcast and reception of moving pictures using a radio transmitters & receivers which is properly known as Tele-Vision ran afoul of competing encoding standards, but was otherwise quite successful every time it was offered for sale.

There may have been patent suits when patented portions of the above were manufactured without the appropriate license, but none of them needed the publicity of patent battles to be successful.

Would you like some more Tony?


RE: sucker punch
By tonyswash on 2/4/2014 10:06:43 AM , Rating: 1
Dear Fritzr try to concentrate on what people are actually saying and then try to understand it. I asked if anybody could give me a single example of a technology that was not available to consumers because it had been blocked by IP legal action. You listed a lot technologies that had made it to the market place. Can you see the logical disconnect there or do you need me to spell it out?


RE: sucker punch
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/4/2014 10:19:08 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Can you see the logical disconnect
Says the rabid Apple shill...


RE: sucker punch
By Reclaimer77 on 2/3/2014 5:11:27 PM , Rating: 4
Buying tech is fine, stealing it is not.

Apple has never really come up with anything of their own. It makes perfect sense that their "custom" chip designs aren't their own either.

Here's to Apple getting their own medicine. And it couldn't have happened to a worst group of people.


RE: sucker punch
By KoolAidMan1 on 2/3/2014 6:57:30 PM , Rating: 3
Intel and other companies have been used by the same people. They'll settle or license like everyone else has.

Your post is also pretty stupid. Obviously they used the technique in this patent (are we liking patents on DT this week?) but it's a big stretch to say that the people suing literally designed the A7 or the C2D.


RE: sucker punch
By Reclaimer77 on 2/3/2014 7:51:46 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Your post is also pretty stupid.


Thanks. I'll put this in my Give a Fuck box with the others :)


RE: sucker punch
By Wazza1234 on 2/4/2014 7:19:48 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Obviously they used the technique in this patent (are we liking patents on DT this week?)


Oh the cryboy haters suddenly agree with the patent system whenever it's against Apple.


RE: sucker punch
By KoolAidMan1 on 2/4/2014 5:20:31 PM , Rating: 2
Reclaimer and Cheese are two of the biggest fanboys I've seen anywhere. It's pretty funny seeing them white knight so hard for Samsung and Google. They spend so much time doing it you'd hope that they're being paid for it.


RE: sucker punch
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/4/2014 7:35:07 PM , Rating: 2
Fanboy of what exactly? Nothing, unlike you. Actually, I am a fanboy, of my daughter, because she's awesomesauce and at 22 months, has more brains than you.

quote:
It's pretty funny seeing them white knight so hard for Samsung and Google.
That's just a flat out lie, it's pathetic.

Coming from an Apple troll fanboy, your post is pathetic and sad at the same time.


RE: sucker punch
By KoolAidMan1 on 2/4/2014 7:58:16 PM , Rating: 2
Anyone who says anything bad about Samsung is an Apple troll fanboy, got it.

My OS is Windows, I've owned a GS3, I also use WP8 and iOS. Clearly I'm a fanboy of a single company.

/s

You guys are funny. It's also scary that they let you breed, poor kid.


RE: sucker punch
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/4/2014 8:42:30 PM , Rating: 1
All anyone here's when you type, is blah blah blah, that's really all your comments amount too. Nothing of substance.

And as for my kid, she will be perfectly fine, she already is smarter than you and will live a full and happy and productive life.

You, you will live your sad, pathetic and miserable life trolling articles defending a company who gives 2 shits about you.


RE: sucker punch
By KoolAidMan1 on 2/5/2014 4:47:14 AM , Rating: 3
You will be useful teaching your kid how to have arguments on the playground, I'll give you that.

"That's your opinion", "Says you", "That's what you think", "I know you are but what am I", your standard DT comebacks will work perfectly in second grade.


RE: sucker punch
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/5/2014 8:13:21 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
"That's your opinion", "Says you", "That's what you think", "I know you are but what am I", your standard DT comebacks will work perfectly in second grade.
If I had actually said any of those, that might help your argument, but as I didn't, well. Why do you insist on making shit up? Does it make you feel better?


RE: sucker punch
By Reclaimer77 on 2/4/2014 5:55:47 PM , Rating: 2
Oh you misunderstand. I don't agree with the system, I just fucking LOVE whenever Apple has to take their own medicine.

Objectively? This isn't a huge deal. However, ahhh, it tastes soooo sweet. If irony had a flavor, it would be angel tears poured over an LSD laced Mars bar.

They're dicks, and people like it when bad things happen to a dick and a bully. Why don't you?


RE: sucker punch
By Wazza1234 on 2/5/14, Rating: 0
RE: sucker punch
By Reclaimer77 on 2/5/2014 11:32:43 AM , Rating: 2
Right, brilliant logic.

Are you done?


RE: sucker punch
By retrospooty on 2/5/2014 12:33:45 PM , Rating: 2
"It's like you're in a playground, watching a Samsung guy going round swinging his fists trying to punch everyone, then the Apple guy punches him. Suddenly, Apple is the 'dick', and the 'bully' - and when Samsung guy swings and misses again - you say he's retaliating to the bully. See the problem?"

I think we all see the problem, its just that you have it quite perfectly backwards.


RE: sucker punch
By vol7ron on 2/3/2014 11:10:31 PM , Rating: 2
Never used to be an Apple supporter - in fact, used to run a pure Microsoft shop before supporting Linux and then Apple - but, it's posts like these that make me more of an Apple supporter than I originally had been.

Patent system, agreed, flawed and needs evaluation on its current implementation. The system is so mangled and so much money is thrown into it, it's almost worthwhile to scrap its current state and start fresh.

OS-eco Debates: Microsoft vs Google vs Apple vs Nix -- tired of the squabble. I like them all; they each have their differences that make them fun to use in different ways. When I see someone only pro one of them, it makes me think that person is either funded by that company and not worth listening to, or I pity that person's failure to see the benefits of the companies, as well as the benefits of free market competition.


RE: sucker punch
By KoolAidMan1 on 2/4/2014 8:05:03 PM , Rating: 2
Quiet, there is no room for balanced opinions here.

Less intelligence, more ignorance please.


RE: sucker punch
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/4/2014 8:44:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Less intelligence, more ignorance please.
You already fill that void.


Stolen.. please.
By KurgSmash on 2/3/2014 2:20:37 PM , Rating: 5
First, I hate Apple and hope they go out of business, all their employees are blacklisted, and their headquarters is razed and the ground where it stood salted.

That said - nobody stole anything. The problem is a patent like this sounds pretty fancy and anything similar, to anyone but an expert, sounds like it is "copied".

It's not. This is what you come up with when faced with the problem, any set of good engineers would come up with a similar set of solutions and they may look like this.

Like most patents, it's general junk that's easy to sue over unless you somehow manage a jury of EEs.




RE: Stolen.. please.
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/3/2014 2:42:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's not. This is what you come up with when faced with the problem, any set of good engineers would come up with a similar set of solutions and they may look like this.
Yet, someone already did come up with it, and patented it. And of course, Apple sues others for the same thing, and not just the same thing, but obvious and prior art. But it's OK for Apple to do this according to some people. Go figure.


RE: Stolen.. please.
By niva on 2/4/2014 1:30:12 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly, plus we don't even know what the licensing fees for using this tech are. If they'd done their homework they would've already bought out this company or at least enlisted their services at a reasonable price. Is this what makes Intel chips so unaffordable now that we know they are paying for licensing fees? Hah.

I for one am glad every time I hear about Apple getting sued. For years they've acted as if they invented sliced bread and for years I've fumed at the absurdity of it all.


RE: Stolen.. please.
By Reclaimer77 on 2/3/2014 5:56:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That said - nobody stole anything. The problem is a patent like this sounds pretty fancy and anything similar, to anyone but an expert, sounds like it is "copied".


OH well, live by the BS patents and die by the BS patents.

Thanks to Apple there is a sad and unfortunate legal precedence for upholding patents such as this. So it's only fitting they become a victim to it themselves.

I never really believed in Karma, but goddamn, the irony is just delicious.


RE: Stolen.. please.
By Wazza1234 on 2/4/2014 7:22:07 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
OH well, live by the BS patents and die by the BS patents.


= fanboy talk.

Every company tries and fails to use BS patents, including Samsung which has attempted and failed to ban every iPhone and iPad.

Yet when Samsung steals Apple's IP you say the patent system is broken and that Apple is the bad guy, then when someone else claims Apple stole their IP you claim they deserve it.

You're so backwards it's ridiculous. At least try to stay consistent with your own points.


RE: Stolen.. please.
By Reclaimer77 on 2/4/2014 3:03:11 PM , Rating: 2
Samsung never stole Apple's IP. "Trade dress" is a bunch of vague and subjective superficial nonsense and everyone knows it.

Meanwhile Apple outright steals Samsung's IP, refuses to pay one red cent for years, and hides behind FRAND. If it wasn't for Apples little bitch, President Nobama, they would have been exposed for the scumbag company they are even more-so.

Samsung won, everyone saw the touchdown. Just because Apple paid off the referee doesn't put them in the right.


RE: Stolen.. please.
By Wazza1234 on 2/5/14, Rating: 0
RE: Stolen.. please.
By tonyswash on 2/4/2014 10:10:48 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Thanks to Apple there is a sad and unfortunate legal precedence for upholding patents such as this.


Absolute and total nonsense. Show me one single aspect of the legal case concerning the A7 chip that has any legal or procedural connection with any legal action that Apple has taken.

I bet you can’t.

More vacuous hysteria from the brain dead iPhobics.


RE: Stolen.. please.
By cbf on 2/3/2014 6:57:48 PM , Rating: 2
Any set of good engineers, -- or perhaps one guy named Seymour Cray. The CDC 7600 was the first super-scaler architecture in the world (i.e. that had pipelined and parallel function units -- as opposed to the CDC 6600 that only hard parallel). The people who rediscovered these techniques and called it super-scaler didn't seem to know about Cray.

The brief summary of this patent looks very similar to the 7600 "Scorcard" that was used to schedule instructions based on whether the functional unit had completed its previous task. But without having read the whole patent, I can't discount that there may be some twist that makes this a valid patent, but I'm not sure I'd bet on it. (And if the 7600 wasn't sufficient prior art, there's always the Livermore S1 Mark 2A - http://people.cs.clemson.edu/~mark/s1.html.)

At one time (circa 1973) I worked for a guy who had a short pamphlet that I believe was entitled "The Design of the CDC 7600" that explained all of this. Alas, Google can't seem to find it. (Does that call into question whether it ever existed??)

This seems to be closest available excerpt:
http://books.google.com/books?id=m5KlAgAAQBAJ&pg=P...


RE: Stolen.. please.
By Etsp on 2/4/2014 12:30:17 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Does that call into question whether it ever existed??
Some modern vernacular for you: Pics or it didn't happen.


RE: Stolen.. please.
By Fritzr on 2/3/2014 9:38:46 PM , Rating: 2
The PhDs came up with the idea first
They published it in a peer reviewed journal
They patented it.

Years later Intel engineers invented the same idea
Years late Apple engineers invented the same idea

Reinvention is not a defense when using an invention that was both published and patented.

The telephone is known to have been the original invention of several individuals.
Charles Bourseul of Belgium described the telephone in 1854 and experimented with the idea. Nothing came of this work.

Antonio Meucci of Italy demonstrated his electromagnetic teletrofono on Staten Island, New York in 1854. He later filed a patent caveat with the US patent office in 1871. His failure to renew the caveat or file for a full patent allowed his claim to expire in 1874. Congress is on record as stating that had Meucci renewed or filed for a patent, Bell's application would not have been accepted. They passed a resolution to that effect in 2002. The Canadian Parliament then passed a resolution disagreeing with the US Congressional resolution and claiming that A. G. Bell was the original inventor.

Johann Philipp Reis of Germany designed a speaking telegraph that could transmit music and imperfectly handle speech. He called his invention "telefon". The first words spoken on a telephone were "Das Pferd frisst keinen Gurkensalat" (in English: The horse doesn't eat cucumber salad

Innocenzo Manzetti demonstrated a working telephone in 1865, but did not patent or follow up with a commercial application.

Alexander Graham Bell was awarded the patent in the US in 1876. Elisha Gray was denied the patent in the US. Bell's patent was filed the same day as Gray's patent caveat. Bell's was later found to be first. Gray had previously patented the Harmonic Telegraph which was picked up by

Who invented the telephone is in little doubt ... it was not Alexander Graham Bell, he just received the patent for his version of an invention that had been around in various forms for nearly 20 years :D

To give Bell credit. He did original research and development work and just used the concepts of his predecessors in producing his telephone. It was just as much an original invention as most are today, building upon the ideas, successes and failures of thousands of inventors.


RE: Stolen.. please.
By Wazza1234 on 2/4/2014 7:23:36 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Reinvention is not a defense when using an invention that was both published and patented.


Yeah except he clearly wasn't using 'reinvention' as a defence. He was claiming obviousness. Which is a defence.


Money
By SuckRaven on 2/3/2014 2:14:49 PM , Rating: 2
They might get a settlement out of it, but they won't even scratch the probably hundreds of millions if not billions Apple has already made from the stolen tech. And the world keeps turning.




RE: Money
By DT_Reader on 2/3/2014 4:11:52 PM , Rating: 2
While they will probably get damages and a license out of it, I'd rather see Apple get a ban on the subject products, with all existing inventory destroyed. That's what they want for all Android devices, so what's good for the goose...


RE: Money
By Solandri on 2/3/2014 6:37:49 PM , Rating: 5
You can't get a ban on Apple products. Obama will just stay the ban.


RE: Money
By Wazza1234 on 2/4/14, Rating: 0
RE: Money
By Reclaimer77 on 2/4/2014 8:02:23 AM , Rating: 2
I'm pretty sure the ITC understands FRAND patents more than Obama. And they ruled against Apple.

So why don't you STFU fanboi?


RE: Money
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/4/2014 8:39:49 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
you deluded fanboy.
Much irony...


In Apple's Defense
By stm1185 on 2/3/2014 2:04:54 PM , Rating: 3
They thought they were stealing from Intel!




RE: In Apple's Defense
By FITCamaro on 2/3/2014 2:22:27 PM , Rating: 3
Wrong. They thought the multiprocessor was a good idea so they invented it.


iPhone 5
By joedon3 on 2/3/2014 2:35:15 PM , Rating: 3
Your image of an 'iPhone 5S' has the standard home button... making it a iPhone 5, not a 5S




Careful...
By tonyswash on 2/3/14, Rating: -1
RE: Careful...
By retrospooty on 2/3/2014 3:16:05 PM , Rating: 2
Something is different. I cant quite put my finger on it, but it's as if there is less space where space used to exit.


RE: Careful...
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/3/2014 3:28:51 PM , Rating: 2
It's a different account. I wonder if his other one got banned.


RE: Careful...
By tonyswash on 2/3/2014 7:20:24 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I wonder if his other one got banned.

Only in your dreams :)


RE: Careful...
By tonyswash on 2/3/2014 7:09:59 PM , Rating: 2
A story involving the wonders of the DT web site admin system. I was away from my system using someone else's PC, I couldn’t remember my password to login so I thought I would just change it as it’s worth changing password every so often. So I clicked the reset password button expecting to get an email - nothing - tried again- nothing - emailed various admin people at DT - nothing. Of course my old login password was now disabled. So I just started a new account. I would be happy to go back to the old account if only someone at DT would email me a new password - HELLO?

And still one cannot type the word s-h-o-e in a DT comment.

Give it a try without the hyphens.


RE: Careful...
By retrospooty on 2/3/2014 7:29:37 PM , Rating: 2
hmmm... sounds highly suspect. Say something only Horace Dediu would say and I'll buy it.

"And still one cannot type the word s-h-o-e in a DT comment"

What a trip. Someone has a major anti-foot fetish.


RE: Careful...
By Tony Swash on 2/4/2014 9:09:09 AM , Rating: 1
It's going to create a problem if somone comes out with augmented foot ware and we want to discuss it :)

As for Horace - this should entertain you

http://www.asymco.com/2014/01/21/invulnerable/


RE: Careful...
By retrospooty on 2/6/2014 10:19:00 AM , Rating: 2
hehe... Like I always say about Horace. He spends a great deal of time on the "Applesphere" but often misses what is going on with the rest of the world, so his opinions are usually quite myopic. But it is good to see you back in original form.

Meanwhile, http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/33873-apple-prod...


RE: Careful...
By nafhan on 2/3/2014 4:36:19 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Bertrand Russell one said: "A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand"
I think this might explain why you post Steve Jobs quotes all the time...


RE: Careful...
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/3/2014 5:14:47 PM , Rating: 2
I think that would apply to anyone he quotes, mostly Apple shills from Apple shill blogs...


RE: Careful...
By tonyswash on 2/3/14, Rating: 0
RE: Careful...
By Fleeb on 2/3/2014 9:39:36 PM , Rating: 2
I agree. We really fear that Apple will keep on ripping off others and then paint the accuser in a bad light. In other news, Apple sues everyone else for doing the same thing.


RE: Careful...
By Wazza1234 on 2/4/2014 7:28:29 AM , Rating: 1
With deluded comments like these you're not very successfully painting yourself as the normal one in this comment chain.

Even taking into account the sarcasm.


RE: Careful...
By nafhan on 2/4/2014 10:18:48 AM , Rating: 2
I wasn't limiting this to a single occurrence. You're constantly quoting stuff.


RE: Careful...
By MikeDiction on 2/3/2014 10:43:00 PM , Rating: 2
Wow Tony this has to be your most legit post ever.

I'm truly impressed. You had me at B-Russ quote. I love that guy. Please don't go back to posting all the BS, you can change!


RE: Careful...
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/3/2014 11:01:45 PM , Rating: 2
I think you missed an /s somewhere in that post....


"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer














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