If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#141
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: http://nofilmschool.com/2017/02/smal...ted-dci-p3-17- inch- monitor And my two new Dell UP2516Ds have Adobe RGB, sRGB, REC709 and DCI-P3. They also have two additional profiles which I can calibrate. None of that proves any particular profile to be that of the future. only because dell is a follower, so they need to guess as to where the industry is going. So does Apple. apple is in no way a follower. they lead the industry and everyone else copies what they do, sometimes rather blatantly. And please don't claim that their use of DCI-P3 makes them a leader: i didn't say *that* made them a leader. that spec was not created by Apple. irrelevant. |
#142
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
On Sun, 28 May 2017 20:40:27 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: http://nofilmschool.com/2017/02/smal...ted-dci-p3-17- inch- monitor And my two new Dell UP2516Ds have Adobe RGB, sRGB, REC709 and DCI-P3. They also have two additional profiles which I can calibrate. None of that proves any particular profile to be that of the future. only because dell is a follower, so they need to guess as to where the industry is going. So does Apple. apple is in no way a follower. they lead the industry and everyone else copies what they do, sometimes rather blatantly. And please don't claim that their use of DCI-P3 makes them a leader: i didn't say *that* made them a leader. that spec was not created by Apple. irrelevant. Then how, in the context of DCI-P3, can Apple be said to be not a follower? -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#143
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
"Eric Stevens" wrote
| Then how, in the context of DCI-P3, can Apple be said to be not a | follower? Apple doesn't follow. They patent. Samsung came out with a full-face screen. Apple patented it. But we can't entirely blame Apple. There's got to be some kind of corruption at the patent office that allows companies to obtain and enforce ridiculous patents, time and again. Though Apple are brazen and seem to fully believe what nospam does -- that they're unmitigated creative geniuses. Just recently they simply refused to pay Qualcomm for their patents. Tim Cook complained that Qualcomm wanted a profit-percentage fee: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/artic...isn-t-to-apple (Qualcomm took it to court and a settlement was reached but not made public.) Yet Apple demands big settlements from Samsung, based on mickey mouse patents, while using Samsung parts. Which is not to say that Samsung is an angel. Just that Apple is the only company with an irrational fanbase who think Apple is an angel.... A patent-troll angel exploiting 3rd-world slave labor and refusing to pay corporate taxes, but somehow an angel, nevertheless. There was a funny, famous story about this in the early days. Steve Jobs had a tantrum at Bill Gates, claiming Gates had stolen Apple's GUI idea, despite the fact that Gates was actually in accord with an agreement they'd made. Gates pointed out that they'd both actually stolen the idea from Xerox: http://fortune.com/2011/10/24/when-s...duction-visit/ The difference was that Gates knew that while Jobs lived in a fantasy of grandeur, thinking he was the enlightenment of the modern world because he made the prettiest toys. |
#144
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: And my two new Dell UP2516Ds have Adobe RGB, sRGB, REC709 and DCI-P3. They also have two additional profiles which I can calibrate. None of that proves any particular profile to be that of the future. only because dell is a follower, so they need to guess as to where the industry is going. So does Apple. apple is in no way a follower. they lead the industry and everyone else copies what they do, sometimes rather blatantly. And please don't claim that their use of DCI-P3 makes them a leader: i didn't say *that* made them a leader. that spec was not created by Apple. irrelevant. Then how, in the context of DCI-P3, can Apple be said to be not a follower? because they're the only company to deploy it on almost every product. |
#145
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
In article , Mayayana
wrote: | Then how, in the context of DCI-P3, can Apple be said to be not a | follower? Apple doesn't follow. true. They patent. so what? lots of companies as well as individuals patent stuff. nothing wrong with that. Samsung came out with a full-face screen. Apple patented it. nonsense, nor is that even patentable just by itself. But we can't entirely blame Apple. There's got to be some kind of corruption at the patent office that allows companies to obtain and enforce ridiculous patents, time and again. it's not corruption, it's incompetence. the patent office issues patents for things that shouldn't be patentable. however, that's an entirely different issue and has nothing to do with apple. Though Apple are brazen and seem to fully believe what nospam does -- that they're unmitigated creative geniuses. Just recently they simply refused to pay Qualcomm for their patents. for very good reason too. you clearly don't understand what's going on with qualcomm. they are very well hated in the industry, and justifiably so. Tim Cook complained that Qualcomm wanted a profit-percentage fee: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/artic...able-to-qualco mm-isn-t-to-apple nope. what qualcomm wants is a percentage of the price of the *entire* *product*, not just the parts from qualcomm. in other words, if the user chooses an iphone with more memory, thereby increasing the price they pay, qualcomm wants a higher royalty payment, even though the additional memory has nothing to do with qualcomm. put simply: qualcomm wants a percentage of stuff that isn't from qualcomm. consider this: a company licenses a gps chip for an in-car navigation system to both porsche and honda. should that company get 10x royalty for the porsche, for the very same part, because the porsche costs 10x as much as the honda? that's clearly bull****. qualcomm is also trying to extort patent licensing fees for frand patents. qualcomm is almost certainly going to lose. a summary: https://www.digitaltrends.com/business/apple-vs-qualcomm-news/ and a legal analysis: http://www.fosspatents.com/2017/05/qualcomm-requests-us-preliminary.htm (Qualcomm took it to court and a settlement was reached but not made public.) absolutely wrong. the battle has just begun and is getting worse. Yet Apple demands big settlements from Samsung, based on mickey mouse patents, while using Samsung parts. Which is not to say that Samsung is an angel. so why don't you rant about samsung? note that samsung didn't pay *their* patent royalty payments to microsoft. as expected, you let it slide. also, samsung smart tvs spy on people, samsung spoofed benchmarks, samsung copied a vacuum cleaner company (and many others), and how can anyone ignore that their ceo went to jail. not a peep from you about any of that. https://arstechnica.com/apple/2014/0...pay-microsoft- or-else-software-giant-sues-samsung/ Samsung was late in making*a patent royalty payment to Microsoft over the Android phones it sells, and today that led to the predictable result: a lawsuit. .... Microsoft has hundreds of patents that it says must be paid for by anyone who makes Android phones. It's kept those patents secret, although recently a Chinese government website revealed*what those patents are. http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-31296188 Samsung is warning customers about discussing personal information in front of their smart television set. The warning applies to TV viewers who control their Samsung Smart TV using its voice activation feature. When the feature is active, such TV sets "listen" to what is said and may share what they hear with Samsung or third parties, it said. http://boingboing.net/2015/10/02/dieselgate-for-tvs-samsung-ac.html The European Commission is probing whether Samsung televisions' sensed when they were being tested for energy efficiency and changed their power consumption to get better ratings than they deserved. http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...cuses-samsung- vacuum-cleaner-rip-off Dyson is suing Samsung Electronics over claims that the South Korean company "ripped off" its vacuum cleaner technology. The British engineering company, which also pioneered "blade" hand dryers, has accused Samsung of copying its technology in the steering system on its latest vacuum cleaner. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-so...sung-group-idU SKBN15V2RD Samsung Group chief Jay Y. Lee was arrested on Friday over his alleged role in a corruption scandal rocking the highest levels of power in South Korea, dealing a fresh blow to the technology giant and standard-bearer for Asia's fourth-largest economy. Just that Apple is the only company with an irrational fanbase who think Apple is an angel.... A patent-troll angel exploiting 3rd-world slave labor and refusing to pay corporate taxes, but somehow an angel, nevertheless. nonsense. that same 'slave labor' made your computers, clothes and most other stuff you own. except that apple is doing more to address that problem than any other company. http://blog.laptopmag.com/samsung-in...hild-labor-abu se-at-chinese-factory In a scathing undercover report issued last night, activist group China Labor Watch detailed a litany of alleged abuses, including employing workers as young as 14, at Samsung supplier HEG's factory complex in mainland China. .... Overall, CLW concluded that "working conditions at HEG are well below those general conditions in Applešs supplier factories." It looks like Samsung could have a controversy brewing. apple does not refuse to pay corporate taxes. if you're referring to the legal loopholes that lots of companies use, you would need to also call out microsoft, google, facebook and dozens of other companies. but you won't. There was a funny, famous story about this in the early days. Steve Jobs had a tantrum at Bill Gates, claiming Gates had stolen Apple's GUI idea, despite the fact that Gates was actually in accord with an agreement they'd made. Gates pointed out that they'd both actually stolen the idea from Xerox: apple didn't steal anything from xerox. http://fortune.com/2011/10/24/when-s...of-weird-seduc tion-visit/ The difference was that Gates knew that while Jobs lived in a fantasy of grandeur, thinking he was the enlightenment of the modern world because he made the prettiest toys. the difference is that you can't see beyond your hate and ignorance. |
#146
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
"nospam" wrote
| what qualcomm wants is a percentage of the price of the *entire* | *product*, not just the parts from qualcomm. | that's clearly bull****. | http://patentlyo.com/patent/2016/08/...v-samsung.html "Apple has filed its merits brief defending the longstanding principle of profit-disgorgement as a remedy for design patent infringement. [AppleResponse] The statute states that an adjudged infringer "shall be liable to the owner to the extent of his total profit." Bull****, indeed. Samsung using rounded corners? Then all of their profit should go to Apple. I'm surprised that a man of the world such as yourself isn't familiar with that particular debacle. | (Qualcomm took it to court and a settlement | was reached but not made public.) | | absolutely wrong. the battle has just begun and is getting worse. | Sorry, yes, you may be right. I think I'm remembering the Nokia case. | Yet Apple demands big settlements from Samsung, | based on mickey mouse patents, while using Samsung | parts. Which is not to say that Samsung is an angel. | | so why don't you rant about samsung? | I'm happy to. I see a number of nasty, patent trolling tech companies that are all trying to own the whole shebang. You see the same thing, except that you exempt Apple. This is always the response from Apple cultists: Why don't you pick on other companies? I often criticize Google, Facebook, Microsoft. Lots of people criticize them. I wouldn't buy a Google product any more than I'd buy an Apple product. You just don't notice. Because you're an Apple cultist. I don't know much about Samsung. (Aside from the fact that they've provided much of Apple's hardware in the past.) Though I do have a faulty BlueRay player from Samsung. I used to look for their brand name. Now, not so much. Their BlueRay player regularly pops up a big, blocking panel about 20 minutes into non-BlueRay DVD movies from the library of Netflix. A company called Cinavia, which has faulty DRM embedded into the Samsung player, tells me I don't have a right to view the DVD. Maddening. So I'm loathe to buy another Samsung product. Then again, Sony is famous for their nasty malware. LG makes spyware TVs and I once got a faulty CD drive from them. (How can they screw up a CD drive?) So, who you gonna trust? I used to like Panasonic. I don't know if they're even still around. The only brand I'm certain I'll never buy is Apple. (Well, and Amazon. Like Walmart, I prefer not to do any business at all with them. I don't want to support their corporate business model.) In terms of cellphones, I don't really think of Samsung as a company. It's the two mega-sleaze entities -- Google and Apple. Just as a Windows computer is mostly about Microsoft rather than Dell or HP, an Android phone is mainly a Google product in terms of usage. | also, samsung smart tvs spy on people And LG and Vizio. And Comcast has filed for patents on it. Nasty stuff. But I don't see how that exonerates Tim Cook and his band of price gouging, tax evading, lock-in practicing patent trolls. | Microsoft has hundreds of patents that it says must be paid for by | anyone who makes Android phones. Last I heard it was only 6. But you're right. Microsoft is making *in the billions* annually by strongarming Android device makers. It's outrageous. I don't understand why they all buckled. So, with all this you're trying to say it's proof that Apple are the good guys? Cultist logic. Kill the messenger and blame everyone else: "So what if Jim Jones killed all those people. Stalin did much worse." Well, yes. You'd be technically right in saying that... except for the "so what" part and the gross irrelevance of the argument. |
#147
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
In article , Mayayana
wrote: | what qualcomm wants is a percentage of the price of the *entire* | *product*, not just the parts from qualcomm. | that's clearly bull****. | http://patentlyo.com/patent/2016/08/...v-samsung.html "Apple has filed its merits brief defending the longstanding principle of profit-disgorgement as a remedy for design patent infringement. [AppleResponse] The statute states that an adjudged infringer "shall be liable to the owner to the extent of his total profit." that's about samsung, not qualcomm. try to restrict your babbling to one case at a time. Bull****, indeed. yep. Samsung using rounded corners? Then all of their profit should go to Apple. I'm surprised that a man of the world such as yourself isn't familiar with that particular debacle. i'm *very* familiar with the apple v. samsung lawsuit. there's *much* more to it than rounded corners. samsung openly *admits* they copied apple. they didn't have much choice, really, as their own internal documents explicitly said to copy what apple is doing. the issue is how large of a fine samsung should pay. during the original trial, the judge held up an iphone and a samsung phone and samsung's own counsel could not tell which was which. that's bad. one would think that samsung's own lawyers, of all people, would be able to immediately point out the differences. after all, that's why they were in court, trying to argue that it *wasn't* a direct copy. one of many reasons why samsung lost. and it ain't just apple that samsung copies either. i linked about dyson, but here's another, although older: http://www.dailymobile.net/2009/01/0...vs-samsung-inn ov8-2/ and another: http://fortune.com/2016/05/24/chinas...in-patent-show down/ (Reuters) - Huawei said on Wednesday it has filed lawsuits against Samsung claiming infringement of smartphone patents, in the first such case by the Chinese firm against the world's biggest mobile maker. Huawei has filed lawsuits in the United States and China seeking compensation for what it said was unlicensed use of fourth-generation (4G) cellular communications technology, operating systems and user interface software in Samsung phones. | Yet Apple demands big settlements from Samsung, | based on mickey mouse patents, while using Samsung | parts. Which is not to say that Samsung is an angel. | | so why don't you rant about samsung? I'm happy to. I see a number of nasty, patent trolling tech companies that are all trying to own the whole shebang. You see the same thing, except that you exempt Apple. i don't exempt anyone. compared to you, who focuses on anti-apple propaganda and universal hatred. keep in mind that apple gets sued more than they sue others. the patent trolls go after companies like apple because they have lots of cash. This is always the response from Apple cultists: Why don't you pick on other companies? I often criticize Google, Facebook, Microsoft. Lots of people criticize them. I wouldn't buy a Google product any more than I'd buy an Apple product. google doesn't sell a whole lot of stuff, so there's not really much to buy. with google, *you* are the product. You just don't notice. Because you're an Apple cultist. ad hominem. I don't know much about Samsung. (Aside from the fact that they've provided much of Apple's hardware in the past.) samsung provides some components to apple, such as memory (commodity product) and the fabrication of apple-designed parts. apple is moving away from using samsung, such as tsmc, for chip fab. |
#148
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
"nospam" wrote
| http://patentlyo.com/patent/2016/08/...v-samsung.html | | "Apple has filed its merits brief defending the longstanding | principle of profit-disgorgement as a remedy for design | patent infringement. [AppleResponse] | The statute states that an adjudged infringer "shall be liable | to the owner to the extent of his total profit." | | that's about samsung, not qualcomm. | No, you didn't read it fully. It's about Apple trying to get all Samsung profits, rather than just what might be calculated to be the profit derived from Samsung's alleged infringement of Apple's alleged unique idea. Exactly what you were complaining about from Qualcomm. |
#149
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
In article , Mayayana
wrote: | http://patentlyo.com/patent/2016/08/...v-samsung.html | | "Apple has filed its merits brief defending the longstanding | principle of profit-disgorgement as a remedy for design | patent infringement. [AppleResponse] | The statute states that an adjudged infringer "shall be liable | to the owner to the extent of his total profit." | | that's about samsung, not qualcomm. | No, you didn't read it fully. It's about Apple trying to get all Samsung profits, rather than just what might be calculated to be the profit derived from Samsung's alleged infringement of Apple's alleged unique idea. apple is not trying to get all of samsung's profits. Exactly what you were complaining about from Qualcomm. nope to that too. |
#150
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
In article ,
nospam wrote: In article , Mayayana wrote: | http://patentlyo.com/patent/2016/08/...v-samsung.html | | "Apple has filed its merits brief defending the longstanding | principle of profit-disgorgement as a remedy for design | patent infringement. [AppleResponse] | The statute states that an adjudged infringer "shall be liable | to the owner to the extent of his total profit." | | that's about samsung, not qualcomm. | No, you didn't read it fully. It's about Apple trying to get all Samsung profits, rather than just what might be calculated to be the profit derived from Samsung's alleged infringement of Apple's alleged unique idea. [---] The Samsung Tab2, i have one was offered to the general public way before the iPhone 6. Samsung Tab2 2012: http://www.clove.co.uk/samsung-galaxy-tab-2-101 iPhone 6 2014: http://www.macrumors.com/2014/04/08/iphone-6-renderings/ -- teleportation kills |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
have i managed to buy a camera with two faulty lenses | sean-sheehan | 35mm Photo Equipment | 21 | September 20th 10 05:37 PM |
Monitor calibration and color managed workflow question | Stanislav Meduna | Digital Photography | 23 | December 22nd 05 07:18 PM |
Monitor calibration and color managed workflow question | Stanislav Meduna | Digital SLR Cameras | 17 | December 22nd 05 07:18 PM |
Color Managed Slideshow Program | andre | Digital Photography | 0 | January 30th 05 02:13 AM |
Color Managed Slideshow Program | andre | Digital Photography | 0 | January 30th 05 02:13 AM |