Linked by nej_simon on Sat 11th Aug 2012 12:10 UTC
Permalink for comment 530702
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-03-20
30$ per device that could translate into billions of $ in the case of samsung. Even Microsoft is not that greedy with only a 16$/device licence for long file name over FAT.
Plus it applied on windows mobile based phone (I guess that it could not be applied to other OS in these terms) and applied a discount of 20% if samsung cross licence some of its patent ( which I guess that samsung though that they were worthing more than 6-8$ per device ).