pedg

As this has turned into a more general android thread. For those with android who fancy trying a different keyboard the very good swiftkey 3 is currently reduced on the android market. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.touchtype.swiftkey

Given the break from reality of their signing if I wonder if the value of their squad is actually the square root of an negative number? As its only by taking into account the imaginary axis that any sense can be made of their finances.

To be fair they only missed out the one word: 'Third'.

Do we know how much is being run up in administrator fee's each month at the moment?

Hate to break it too you but Samsung and others have brought their own ideas, technology and devices to market. This opinion you have that everything in all other smartphones is ripped off from apple is plain stupid. Have you looked at what major innovation patents Apple have used in this case? Rounded corners and views that bounce, both earthshattering innovations I am sure.

Try and change the subject why don't you?! You where rather happy in I remember earlier in this thread to crow about the damages but as soon as its pointed out that the rules were not not followed and that Samsung have a good case for an appeal its suddenly not about the damages? As to this black and white view of the world that you have the Apple innovates and all everyone else does is copy, sorry but that is complete bunkum. I remember having a smartphone that has curved corners and ran apps years before the iphone was created. All apple appear to have been successful in is tweaking other peoples ideas and getting patents for things most people would find obvious (apparently its novel that when you use your finger to scroll that the scrolling speed depends on the speed of your finger, for example). Your right its not about the damaged thought its about apple trying to use the verdict to get as many Android phones banned as possible.

Very interesting article on the court case here: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2012082510525390 In summary: The jury did not actually appear to read the advice from the Judge. Specifically they were told twice in documents not to apply punitive fines but at least one juror has said that is what they did. It appears at the moment that they decided the total fine would be about $1 billion so just randomly divided this up amongst the 'infringing' products ending up with a fine associated with one phone that they did not actually agree did infringe.

All probably down to cache, not a problem for pompey as they don't have any.

For essie...

Good article about it. http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2012/aug/25/lance-armstrong-cycling-richard-williams

Once again American court sides with american firm. Remember UK judge threw same claims out of court.

Don't know why the BBC cut out that last bit of the quote?

Probably something like.. "Very funny, now where is the real bid"

Because, shock horror, they prefer the other phone and consider having a phone they like outweighs the loss of interconnectedness that they obviously did without anyway!? Cross device syncing is nice but its not really that important to a lot of people.

I wonder if they have considered scrunching it up and blowing on it.

That will be the apple who are suing Samsung for copying the look and feel of the iphone on a phone that Samsung released before the iphone?

Simple, just use chrome (which is available on far more platforms than safari), that your bookmarks sorted. Then use google mail and calender, again available on far more platforms for events, contacts and mail.

I have updated it for you:

Well it does look like it was done quickly (boom tish, here all thread).

I may be the only bid on the table but it is a 3 or 4 way decision isn't it? Accept PST Bid (if still credible) Accept Chinny Bid Think a better deal can be obtained so keep club going in admin Liquidate.

I see that figuring how to write a capital N is a tricky task for the natives.

and administrator fees.

"Leave our club alone or stumpy will gnaw your ankle!"

On BBC site but no new real info: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19355580 Just the PST bigging up the fact that birch called their bid credible.

As they say "Well he would say that wouldn't he?". He's not going to come out and say "I could not care less about the points I just want as much money back as possible" even if that was the case.