bigsnake49

What What they don't come in charcoal black?

They just don't want to hurt your feelings, Robert:).

Nope, it looks nothing like an iPhone. When Samsung does not copy the iPhone their phones are ugly. I like the new LG Intuition for Verizon.

Yeah, HTC is making a lot of money in the android sphere. Same with Motorola, right? Nokia should have bought Palm. With Palm's software and Nokia's hardware, it could have been successful. I still like Nokia's hardware. At least they look attractive. Much more stylish than the GSIII. The GSIII is dipped in the sea of ugly;).

Cablevision leasing Apple TV box for $5 monthly to OMGFAST subscribers Testing the waters for using Internet video devices to compete with fellow cable operators, Cablevision (NYSE: CVC) launched a promotion at its OMGFAST wireless broadband system in Florida in which subscribers can lease an Apple TV set-top for $5 monthly. While Cablevision already competes with broadband Internet services from Comcast (Nasdaq: CMCSA), Time Warner Cable (NYSE: TWC) and other cable operators in South Florida with a wireless Internet product that offers subscribers download speeds of 50 Mbps for $29.95 monthly, the Apple TV promotion OMGFAST is touting this week marks its entry into the video business. OMGFAST is offering free installation of the Apple TV set-top, which retails for $99. The device lets users access content from Apple's (Nasdaq: AAPL) iTunes library, in addition to video from Netflix (Nasdaq: NFLX), Hulu, YouTube, Vimeo and other content providers. Formerly known as Clearband, OMGFAST relies on Multichannel Video Data Distribution Service (MVDDS) spectrum. It delivers high-speed data from microwave transmitters placed on communications towers and rooftops to subscribers with fixed wireless receivers that look similar to a high powered satellite dish. Read more: Cablevision leasing Apple TV box for $5 monthly to OMGFAST subscribers - FierceCable http://www.fiercecab...5#ixzz25d6XJfox I think that the Clearwire and Dish spectrum can be used for something like this. Sprint can be the wireless network provider as well as the backbone provider (since they are upgrading their backbone to 400G) for both Dish and DirectTV for their Video on Demand services. They might need to acquire Level 3 and/or XO Communications for their Metro loops though.

I know it is fashionable to bash Apple, but this is a completely different lawsuit than the one that the one they were awarded $1B on. For a bit more detail: http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/31/apple-samsung-galaxy-s-iii-galaxy-note-patent-lawsuit/

This victory is nothing. Apple has not really dragged out the touch gestures patents yet. Those will shut down the whole ecosystem. Samsung should just license the patents at $30/phone and give Apple major discounts on components. They might want to start producing a lot more WP8 phones.

Yep with the frequently malfunctioning slide mechanism for the QUERTY keyboard and Windows Phone OS, it certainly did. Pinch? Yes, the only way you could close the slide sometimes:you had to pinch just the right spot to close it.

The best thing for HP to do is to approach Apple and license WebOS to them to use as they see fit. There are a few things in there that Apple can use. In exchange HP can start making OSX Server boxes.

The fact that Google warned them that their (Samsung) designs were too close to Apple's really strengthened Apple's case.

There is an art to copying other people's work. Samsung was just blatant! As blatant as the mainland Chinese man that called me at 3AM to ask me about a module in a system I had written to which he had no license. At the time we had no customers in China. We still don't know how he got hold of our source code.

Having being associated with the development of large size systems, we had roadmaps that extended to 4-5 generations. I'm sure that Apple did as well. The roadmaps are even more secret than the different prototypes than have been exposed. We have no idea what Apple's roadmaps included.

For all of you ABA (anybody but Apple), maybe this will lead to the rebirth of WebOS, which was a truly innovative OS, or even Blackberry OS 10, as well as Microsoft's Phone's OS, OSes that are not "me too".

I think Samsung thought they had the bull by the horns because they were the largest provider of screens, chips etc. for Apple and that would shield their phone division from Apple. They were wrong. They were arrogant and they are going to pay for it. Apple is already shifting their business to other display providers and they are also going to shift their flash memory and ARM chip manufacturing to other chipmakers. Intel has wanted the Apple business for a long time and they will be the largest beneficiaries. I'm sure that Samsung will try to replace Apple with other customers, but not too many companies can afford to prepay for their orders. The $1B award is peanuts (although it can go up to $3B, triple damages). It's the loss of business from Apple that will hurt more. I also see Microsoft, and their licensees, benefitting from this, since carriers might be hesitant to deal with Android handset makers. Microsoft, licensed Apple patents and also signed a non-copying agreement. They have innovated, bringing a new interface paradigm to the smartphone wars, unlike Google and definitely Samsung.

Newer chipset phones should be able to come close to the Razr Maxx. I usually carry an external battery for all my devices. You know, just in case .

Yeah, but those limits are long gone!

Yes I think the upfront payments are too steep and prevent a lot of otherwise able companies from entering the wireless space. That's why I proposed the yearly payments.

Part of the problem has been FCC's insistence on letting people bid on small slices of spectrum, e.g. 5+5MHz. Now granted, that's fines if all you're doing is servicing voice but is totally inadequate when you start talking about data. I'm very happy that LTE allowed smaller channel widths. Sprint is the beneficiary of that in that they can deploy 3Mhz channels in border areas on 800MHz. I think that the FCC needs to tighten their buildout and usage reqs so that Verizon and AT&T don't warehouse spectrum to keep it out of the hands of smaller operators. I would also like for them to ditch auctions and go to a usage fee structure, where the operators rent the spectrum for x dollars per year per MW. I would also like to eliminate the spectrum speculators that just buy the spectrum to later on sell it to AT&T or Verizon or ..... You get 3 years to build it out, if you don't you lose it. You cannot sell your spectrum.

AJ, while I agree that that spectrum is much more suitable to T-Mobile's spectrum holdings, I don't think it's fair to bash WCDMA for T-Mobile's failing to migrate their 2G users to 3G. Now, I think they are stupid for jumping the gun and implementing LTE when HSPA+ has so much headroom. Or the fact that they implemented 3G on AWS instead of migrating their 2G user in place. AT&T just miscalculated how much spectrum they needed for data and panicked and reached for T-Mobile. They could have bought the cable cos spectrum or bought leap or metropcs. Does T-Mobile have problems with uplink? They prbably want to use the additional spectrum for downlink, not uplink. If they use it for downlink then the possibility for interference is much greater.

The FCC granted permission to T-Mobile USA to test the concept of sharing spectrum between federal and commercial users in the 1755-1780 MHz band. The pilot program is part of a larger government effort to use spectrum sharing technology to help meet mobile broadband demand. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said in a statement that by granting the authorization, the commission "hopes to facilitate commercial mobile broadband services in that band, which would significantly benefit millions of U.S. wireless consumers and help drive the mobile innovation economy." The tests are aimed at measuring the impact spectrum sharing will have on commercial carriers as they seek to deploy LTE. "As we move forward, we will continue to collaborate closely with key government agencies, including NTIA and the Department of Defense, as well as private sector partners, to gain greater spectrum efficiency and unlock the many potential benefits of government-commercial spectrum sharing," he said. Read more: FCC allows T-Mobile to test spectrum sharing in 1755-1780 MHz band - FierceWireless http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/fcc-allows-t-mobile-test-spectrum-sharing-1755-1780-mhz-band/2012-08-15#ixzz23dbQXwnp Would Sprint be interested in something like this?

Clearwire's problem has always been funding. They bit off more than they could chew when they expanded in a lot more markets than Sprint wanted them to, wasting their deployment money and not getting enough income out of Sprint. They thought they would be their own independent full service carrier when all along their fortunes were intimately tied to Sprint's. I still think that they need to go back to being a WISP for at least part of their spectrum.

From the same article: Hesse clearly said that if Clearwire can't or doesn't get its LTE network up and running in a sufficient way, that Sprint may be forced to acquire more spectrum for its 4G network. Hesse didn't say what spectrum bands it would look to acquire, but said that Clearwire's spectrum is highly desirable. It seems to me that they're already making contingency plans.

I think they said the same thing about the IDEN network a few years ago. It's coach-speak or CEO speak. Plus, under the spectrum swap proposed, they would get 40MHz in return. Nothing to sneeze at.

I think that Sprint is not really interested in Clearwire's spectrum. They have been keeping them at arm's length all this time. The Dish spectrum is lot closer to their mainstay band, and the Echostar 700Mhz could be aggregated with their 800MHz or sold to AT&T.

Once they started refarming their 1900PCS spectrum for HSPA and targeting AWS for LTE, they became less attractive to Sprint. This merger if it ever happened would be executed over many many years. The two would have to be operated independently for a long time.