Samsung v Apple, The Game Continues

The game of ping-pong continues. Did you miss the Samsung case against Apple Samsung miss? Your daily dose for today is the scheduling of cases and a possible conflict of interest in Apple's legal team.

Samsung and Apple filed a few days ago their proposals for the timing of the events. While Apple's interest to expedite the process, Samsung has instead play for time: the two calendars differ by more than a month.

The judge in charge of the case has decided not to accede to the request of Apple, "the court agrees with Samsung to say that Apple has not shown evidence of harm sufficient to justify a procedure accelerated.” Although it has simplified its prosecution, Apple will not benefit from a tighter timetable.

Samsung does not stop in so good way: the Korean company has requested the withdrawal of all or part of the legal team to defend Apple on this issue because of potential conflict of interest. At least five lawyers from the firm's Apple & Bridges Mavrakakis, were indeed in the past Samsung lawyers in the firm Kirkland & Ellis.

The lawyers involved refute any conflict of interest: the records they would have had to deal on behalf of Samsung were not related to the proceedings. The Korean firm is not of that opinion, and fears that the increased involvement of lawyers cannot get with it to Apple: Samsung has asked the court to verify that the other two firms representing the Cupertino, Morrison & Foerester and Wilmer Hale, have not received "confidential information" on the part of Samsung lawyers Mavrakakis & Bridges.

Nortel Auction

Nortel Placed in receivership, Nortel has auctioned a 6000 patent represents a real treasure chest for any company involved in some way in mobile telephony. While Google had started the bidding at 630 million Euros, it is ultimately a consortium of Apple, EMC, Ericsson, Microsoft, RIM and Sony who won for a mere $ 3.2 billion Euros. A kind of all against Google that worries the authorities right now.

The problem is that this consortium, which became known as the Rockstar Bidco, has three companies in direct competition with Google (Android) in the field of mobile telephony: Apple (IOS), Microsoft (Windows Phone) and RIM (BlackBerry OS). This is not the first time these companies come together to counter Google, which has a real problem of industrial property, the sword of Damocles over Android and all manufacturers using this OS: Microsoft, Apple and EMC s 'were already allied to blow the beard and nose Google patents from Novell.

The competition authorities are concerned that these alliances can be considered a breach of competition against Google. These patent portfolios are real weapons that can destroy the strategy of the Mountain View Company in mobile telephony: by attacking Samsung, Motorola, HTC and others, Microsoft, Apple or RIM would indeed make Android charge, and decrease of much interest, while Google cannot defend its partners want to have itself a sufficient portfolio of patents.

Google has the best role here: she continues to assert itself as opposed to the arms race in the field of patents, but nevertheless participated in the entire major who presented bids in recent months. The Mountain View Company has in fact no choice: "the best defense of society against this type of prosecution is, ironically, to have a thick portfolio of patents, Google is a relatively young company, but our competitors have larger portfolios given their history, "admitted the legal department a few months ago.

Google should obviously try to invalidate the sale of a portfolio covering areas as diverse as wireless, Internet search, social networks and new technologies of data transmission for mobile devices. The defense seems to be emerging is that of accusing these companies have allied in order to keep up: if it could fly against RIM, EMC and Ericsson have finally paid unless each bid basis, it should be less effective against Apple.

The Cupertino company is not only the company that has most contributed to the pot, but the only company to have never left the table deal with Google - it actually covered financially for Rockstar Bidco they retire no negotiations without formally never join the consortium. A real poker game, it will be understood, which Apple is out to win the pedal.

Which iMac To Choose? Part.III

The model 27 "does not allow you to choose your processor, unlike the 21.5", which you can spend i5 Quad 2.7 GHz Core i7 Quad 2.8 GHz, an option 200 € may consider that those who want maximum power in a small footprint. The option that will turn over your iMac will still be adding an SSD though expensive (600 € for a 256 GB SSD, 750 € for a 512 GB SSD), this operation is rather complicated to do it even then (it will make all the components or so), and radically changes the profile of the iMac.

Machine father, the iMac becomes a little racing machine far more fluid, responsive to win this immediacy own SSD. The parameters to be considered at the time of this choice are many: the cost first, but the actual use you make of this machine and depreciation potential of this option over time. If you are not quite sure you post these questions, it is likely that the SSD is too big a pill to swallow: not so sure that the disk Western Digital Caviar Black 7200 RPM SATA III fitted to these iMac is not only quiet but also very fast (120 MB / s average flow against 160 MB / s average flow for the SSD Apple iMac mounted in 2011), and should not hamper you more than that.

If the price is not an obstacle and prefers the iMac to Mac Pro, there's always the option Royal: 27 "Core i7 Quad 3.4 GHz and an SSD. A configuration that will search the € 2 699 (300 € more than the Mac Pro "Basic"), but in our tests revealed a simply enormous potential.

This impulse potential is the same machine can you keep a cool head to this new range: the power of the platform Sandy Bridge, which is valid on this machine, is also on the rest of the range. The 2011 range is actually very reasonable and the choice is rather easy: all is a matter of needs (large slab or not, SSD or not) - and means (or no options). Whatever your choice, the range of 2011 iMac is consistent as ever, and all the component machines are efficient, well equipped and comfortable.

Which iMac To Choose? Part.II

IMac 21.5 "accompanied by an Apple LED Cinema Display 24". We often tend to emphasize the difference in definition between these two screen sizes (1920x1080 "Full HD" to 21.5 ", 2560x1440px for 27"), but we sometimes forget that these machines are primarily objects - and large objects. With its 52.8 cm wide and 45.1 cm high, the iMac 21.5 "figure of Tom Thumb is next to the iMac 27", spread over 65 cm wide and 51.7 cm. It is wrong to be fooled by the appearance of these air machines: they are 20 cm deep and then spread on a desk. This aspect must also be borne in mind at the time of choice.

The tests
- Testing the iMac 21.5 "Core i5 Quad 2.5 GHz, the" small "range
- Testing the iMac 27 "Core i5 Quad 2.7 GHz, the heart of the range also comes in 21"

Within a range, it is tempting to take the model is the most powerful and most expensive in the leaves to change later (which is difficult in the case of the iMac) or take cheapest model and the bard of options. The iMac does not escape this tension.

Side 21.5 ", the choice seems pretty quick: Apple severely limits the capacity of development of entry-level model. At € 1 149, it represents the choice of those who want an iMac without puncture their portfolio, population that Apple prohibits update the processor or the purchase of a first-hand SSD - but to whom she re peddle a 500 GB hard drive only. The performances are excellent Fortunately, thanks to the adoption of the Sandy Bridge platform.
In the heart of the range, things are less simple: once a choice of 21.5 "and 27" made, you may be tempted by a slightly more powerful processor or a little more RAM or a SSD. As always with the Apple Store, the rule is simple: do not buy what is the easiest way to change you, and think about the choice of what is the most complicated to modify in the future. RAM? Apple sells 4 GB € 200, three times the price in trade.

Which iMac To Choose? Part.I

You have scrutinized their specifications in detail; you know previously the Mac Generation tests, but nothing to do: you cannot decide for this iMac model over another. Perhaps you hesitate between 21.5 "and 27", and indeed between the "low" end and "high" quality, not to mention the SSD option. Here are some items to help you choose.

The choice of screen diagonal is perhaps not the easiest choice: Apple has smoothed its range even more than usual, and there is now no difference between the major design iMac 21.5 "and 27" iMac screen ... apart. Both models have four memory banks PC3-10600 (1333MHz) DDR3 SO-DIMM and can accommodate a SSD in addition to their hard drive (except the first 21.5 "), while the model 27" was previously advantage. The only material difference is iMac 27 "Thunderbolt have two ports, the iMac 21.5" have only one.


Segmentation is a much more quiet than before: the model of 21.5 ", you can have a 2.8 GHz Core i7 optional, but the 27" you can go up to 3.4 GHz. The iMac 21.5 "is limited to a graphics card with 512 MB VRAM, but you can get the side of the Radeon 6970M and 2 GB of VRAM with the 27". The iMac 27 "is indeed what it takes to feed all that beautiful world (310 against 205 W for 21.5 W"), but the differences end there: there is no hole in iMac range between entry level and a weak heart but more powerful range of flying a bit too fast in the price range.

The heart of the range, in fact, now consists of what is in fact a single machine available in two screen sizes: an iMac Core i5 Quad 2.7 GHz, 4 GB, 1 TB of disk and Card AMD Radeon HD 6770M with 512 MB VRAM. You will pay € 200 while the 5.5 "diagonal.