Technology StocksApple Tankwatch

Previous 10 Next 10 
From: sylvester802/23/2012 8:09:04 AM
   of 32221
BREAKING..Android 4.0 ICS Update For ASUS Transformer TF101 Rolling Out Now, Starting With Taiwan
Posted by Artem Russakovskii in ASUS, Eee Pad Transformer, Ice Cream Sandwich 4.0, News

After numerous delays and much confusion (mostly due to ASUS Singapore being more out of touch with reality than other regional divisions), ASUS finally started the Ice Cream Sandwich over-the-air update process for the original Transformer TF101 today.

The official ASUS Facebook account stated that the OTA with version number is going to be available in Taiwan first, followed by other regions "soon after." Hopefully, that means the rest of the world will be able to enjoy ICS within the next few days, barring any unexpected issues.

Dear valued ASUS fans,

ASUS prides itself on delivering the best products to end-users, which means that we not only aim to deliver innovative products but also to continue improving the out of box experience throughout their life cycle with regular firmware updates.

Many of our Eee Pad Transformer TF101 users have waited patiently for the promised Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich update and we are delighted to announce that the first wave of FOTA updates for TF101 firmware v. started today in Taiwan. The update will FOTA in other regions soon after.

Although we will announce several new innovations at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona next week, we take great pride in delivering on-going enhancements and support for products that are well into their life cycle.

Thank you once again for your valued support!

Source: ASUS, thanks Niccolò!

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)

To: sylvester80 who wrote (16863)2/23/2012 9:04:10 AM
From: zax
   of 32221

You are welcome to post Android news here, but please don't treat TW as a simple mirror of your Android OS - GOOG board. Please think "best of" and relevance.

Thank you.

-- Zax

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: zax who wrote (16864)2/23/2012 5:13:14 PM
From: Stock Puppy
   of 32221
Nice graphics.

Done on a PC?


Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: sylvester80 who wrote (16863)2/23/2012 5:19:32 PM
From: puborectalis
   of 32221
had to get back into AAPL today................As Cook reminded investors of Apple’s stunning year, in which its total fiscal 2011 revenue of $108 billion was up $43 billion from fiscal 2010, he pointed out that the company’s growth was greater than H-P’s, Dell,’s Nokia’s HTC’s, Google’s and RIM’s, all combined.And with shareholders sitting on a stock that recently hit a new high and is up 27% since January, they aren’t complaining much.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (3)

To: puborectalis who wrote (16866)2/23/2012 5:32:31 PM
From: Sr K
   of 32221
Cook was referring to "growth" according to apple

Apple earned $108 billion in the last fiscal year, $43 billion of which was new growth over the previous year. That, Cook said, was more growth that HP, Dell Nokia, HTC, Google and RIM combined. "Really mind blowing," Cook said, adding that it wasn't too long ago that Apple was reporting $5 billion revenues.

Cook noted an additional $46 billion in revenue for its first fiscal (winter) quarter, coyly adding, "we had an extra week, for full disclosure," eliciting laughs from the audience.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: iggyl2/23/2012 6:12:21 PM
   of 32221
Google: Please Don’t Kill Video on the Web
22 Feb 2012 5:00 AM
Posted by Dave Heiner
Vice President & Deputy General Counsel, Corporate Standards & Antitrust Group, Microsoft

Earlier today, Microsoft filed a formal competition law complaint with the European Commission (EC) against Motorola Mobility and Google. We have taken this step because Motorola is attempting to block sales of Windows PCs, our Xbox game console and other products. Their offense? These products enable people to view videos on the Web and to connect wirelessly to the Internet using industry standards.

You probably take for granted that you can view videos on your smartphone, tablet, PC, or DVD/Blu-ray player and connect to the Internet without being tied to a cable. That works because the industry came together years ago to define common technical standards that every firm can use to build compatible products for video and Wi-Fi. Motorola and all the other firms that contributed to these standards also made a promise to one another: that if they had any patents essential to the standards, they would make their patents available on fair and reasonable terms, and would not use them to block competitors from shipping their products.

Motorola has broken its promise. Motorola is on a path to use standard essential patents to kill video on the Web, and Google as its new owner doesn’t seem to be willing to change course.

In legal proceedings on both sides of the Atlantic, Motorola is demanding that Microsoft take its products off the market, or else remove their standards-based ability to play video and connect wirelessly. The only basis for these actions is that these products implement industry standards, on which Motorola claims patents. Yet when the industry adopted these standards, we all were counting on Motorola and every contributor to live up to their promises. Watching video on the Web is one of the primary uses of computers these days. And we’ve all grown accustomed to “anytime, anywhere” access to the Internet, often made possible by the Wi-Fi standard. Imagine what a step back it would be if we could no longer watch videos on our computing devices or connect via Wi-Fi, or if only some products, but not others, had these capabilities. That would defeat the whole purpose of an industry standard.

The European Commission and the U.S. Department of Justice are both focused on this problem. At the urging of competition law officials, Microsoft recently announced that it will not seek injunctions against other firms’ products on the basis of standard essential products (and Microsoft had never done so). Apple and Cisco made similar statements. Unfortunately, Google refused. Not surprisingly, the European Commission does not seem to be satisfied. Joaquin Almunia, the European Union’s Competition Commissioner, said “I can assure you that the Commission will take further action if warranted to ensure that the use of standard essential patents by all players in the sector is fully compliant with EU competition law and with the FRAND commitments given to standard setting organisations.” The Department of Justice issued a similar statement. We know other companies in the industry share our concerns. Last week, Apple filed its own complaint against Motorola with the European Commission.

There is an obvious way out of all this. Motorola should honor its promises, and make its standard essential patents available on fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory (FRAND) terms. Microsoft is certainly prepared to pay a fair and reasonable price for use of others’ intellectual property. Within just the past few years, Microsoft has entered into more than a thousand patent licenses. We know how it’s done.

Unfortunately, Motorola has refused to make its patents available at anything remotely close to a reasonable price. For a $1,000 laptop, Motorola is demanding that Microsoft pay a royalty of $22.50 for its 50 patents on the video standard, called H.264. As it turns out, there are at least 2,300 other patents needed to implement this standard. They are available from a group of 29 companies that came together to offer their H.264 patents to the industry on FRAND terms. Microsoft’s patent royalty to this group on that $1,000 laptop?

Two cents.

That’s right. Just 2 cents for use of more than 2,300 patents. (Windows qualifies for a nice volume discount, but no firm has to pay more than 20 cents per unit.) Motorola is demanding that Microsoft pay more than 1,000 times that for use of just 50 patents.

And that is for a mid-level, $1,000 laptop. For a $2,000 laptop, Motorola is demanding double the royalty - $45. Windows is the same on both laptops, and so is the video support in Windows. But the high-end laptop will have a bigger hard drive, more memory, perhaps a titanium case—and Motorola is demanding a hefty royalty on all of this, even though none of these features implements Motorola’s video patents.

Imagine if every firm acted like Motorola. Windows implements more than 60 standards, and a PC supports about 200. If every firm priced its standard essential patents like Motorola, the cost of the patents would be greater than all the other costs combined in making PCs, tablets, smartphones and other devices. Obviously, this would greatly increase the prices of these devices for consumers.

How does Motorola justify this pricing, for so few patents? In German court proceedings earlier this month, Motorola’s economics expert likened Motorola’s patents to bullets: “It only takes one bullet to kill,” he testified. At least we know what this particular lawsuit is trying to accomplish.

Google says that it is just trying to protect manufacturers of Android devices against patent actions by Microsoft and others. But there are big differences between Google’s approach and Microsoft’s. Microsoft is not seeking to block Android manufacturers from shipping products on the basis of standard essential patents. Rather, Microsoft is focused on infringement of patents that it has not contributed to any industry standard. And Microsoft is making its patents—standard essential and otherwise—available to all Android manufacturers on fair and reasonable terms. In fact, more than 70 percent of Android devices are now licensed to use Microsoft’s patent portfolio.

Google has a chance to make a change. For a company so publicly committed to protecting the Internet, one might expect them to join the growing consensus against using standard essential patents to block products. Every firm that is willing to pay a fair royalty ought to be able to implement industry standards. Adherence to this basic point is essential to keeping computer costs down and preserving the Internet as an open, interoperable platform.

Google’s unwillingness so far to make this commitment is very concerning. That’s why you can pretty well count on a chorus from across the industry: “Google: Please don’t kill video on the Web.”

European Commission, Standards, Intellectual property, Patent, Wireless, marketplace, Marketplace Featured, Featured, Wi-Fi

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)

To: iggyl who wrote (16868)2/23/2012 9:34:22 PM
From: zax
   of 32221
Something is really, really ironic about this.

We started with Google preaching for open standards, like its own WebM video codec, and condemning H.264 because of its associated licensing and royalties.

Google tried to push a video standard that was open and not reliant upon the h.264 standard.

Apple and Microsoft worked against Google on the matter.

Now Google is acquiring the patent and using it as a stick to fend off attacks on Android?

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: zax2/24/2012 12:26:44 AM
   of 32221
Apple's China legal battle over iPad spreads to U.S.
Thu Feb 23, 2012 8:58pm EST

(Reuters) - The Asian firm trying to stop Apple Inc from using the iPad name in China has launched an attack on the consumer electronics giant's home turf, filing a lawsuit in California that accuses the iPhone-maker of employing deception when it bought the "iPad" trademark.

A unit of Proview International Holdings Ltd, a major computer monitor maker that fell on hard times during the economic crisis, is already suing the U.S. company in multiple Chinese jurisdictions and requesting that sales of iPads be suspended across the country.

Last week, units Proview Electronics Co Ltd and Proview Techdnology Co filed a lawsuit in Santa Clara County that brings their legal dispute to Silicon Valley.

Proview accuses Apple of creating a "special purpose" entity - IP Application Development Ltd, or IPAD - to buy the iPad name from it, concealing Apple's role in the matter.

In its filing, Proview alleged lawyers for IPAD repeatedly said it would not be competing with the Chinese firm, and refused to say why they needed the trademark.

Those representations were made "with the intent to defraud and induce the plaintiffs to enter into the agreement," Proview said in the filing dated February 17, requesting an unspecified amount of damages.

Apple, which has said Proview is refusing to honor a years-old agreement, did not respond to requests for comment on Thursday.

The battle between a little-known Asian company and the world's most valuable technology corporation dates back to a disagreement over precisely what was covered in a deal for the transfer of the iPad trademark to Apple in 2009.

Authorities in several Chinese cities have already seized iPads, citing the legal dispute.

Proview, which maintains it holds the iPad trademark in China, has been suing Apple in various jurisdictions in the country for trademark infringement, while also using the courts to get retailers in some smaller cities to stop selling the tablet PCs.

China is becoming an increasingly pivotal market for Apple, which sold more than 15 million iPads worldwide in the last quarter alone and is trying to expand its business in the world's No. 2 economy to sustain its rip-roaring pace of growth.

The country is also where the majority of its iPhones and iPads are now assembled, in partnership with Foxconn.

A Shanghai court this week threw out Proview's request to halt iPad sales in the city. But the outcome of the broader dispute hinges on a higher court in Guangdong, which earlier ruled in Proview's favor.

The next hearing in that case is set for February 29.

China's trademark system is a minefield of murky rules and opportunistic "trademark squatters" that even the world's biggest companies and their highly-paid lawyers find hard to navigate.

Legal experts say the onus is on companies looking to do business in China to understand how China's trademark law works, as it differs greatly from that of the United States.

Industry executives have said employing special-purpose entities to acquire trademarks is a frequent tactic in China.

(Reporting By Edwin Chan; Editing by Michael Urquhart)

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: iggyl who wrote (16868)2/24/2012 5:38:15 AM
From: sylvester80
   of 32221
Google's WebM is FREE and OPEN... yet Apple and Microsoft oppose it and want a closed and royalty based one. Apple and Microsoft are greedy HYPOCRITES and nothing more...

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: puborectalis who wrote (16866)2/24/2012 6:53:00 AM
From: sylvester80
   of 32221
NOK up 4% pre-market... up almost 20% since my "load up" call in just 9 trading days... did you get some of that or are you still playing for peanuts? LMFAO... too funny...

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)
Previous 10 Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2018 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.