Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 21st Oct 2011 23:17 UTC, submitted by jello
Permalink for comment 493761
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/25/13 0:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 23:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2011-06-17
That is the very definition of marketing(with distribution part cut-out).
Its the definition of good product design. It all starts with the product.
Are you saying that if Netscape had a patent on a browser, then we all would bask in the joys of innovation by Netscape for the next 20 years? (PS: Irony is, iPod is the IE of the PMP market)
I'm saying that if NetScape would have been around, the internet would not have been the stagnant place dominated with a browser that didn't get any noteworthy updates in a decade.
Thus, iPhone revolutionised the market. But even thinking that it's their market, because they changed it is ridiculous.
See my above post on humans.
Sure... It's not even the fighting, it's the reason for the fight and overwhelming sense of entitlement. The me-too part of Android was the finger oriented touch.
If you had followed the Apple versus Samsung case, you'd know they are suing Samsung for way more than that.