Thursday, November, 23, 2017

Happily Thanksgiving - and some information about micron iOS trivia game ext.

I wish you all a happy Thanksgiving! Hope you're having a great time now with family members and / or friends.

In recent years I've mentioned on various occasions that I what working on in ext. Now, At long read and on the occasion of this holiday post, I'll to Be more specific about it.

This is one of only two posts you'll ever find here about micron of ext. Promised. The only other one Section once it can Be downloaded from the U.S wants Be a single. Ext. net curtain, precisely to tell you that and where you can find it in case you're interested. Other than that, I'll keep micron of ext. and this blog completely separate, recognising that only some - but presumably fruit juice - of the professionals following clever and anti-trust cases play trivia game apps. I've set up a separate blog and several separate social media Accounts for micron of ext.

Fruit juice of you presumably had not heard of me before I wrote about the "smartphone clever wars." That's why it may come ace a surprise to some of you that micron primary Focus is a game ext. Actually, in the mid to late 1990see - long before I started this blog (and even before I come on a campaign against a proposed piece of the EU software clever legislation) - I what already in the computers games business: I what a consultant to Blizzard entertainment, now best of all known for World of Warcraft; and I founded in on-line gaming network, which what acquired by a generous multinational telecommunications company. So I'm bake to micron roots now, ace counter-intuitive ace it may seem.

In 2014, I founded a company, Quizista, to develop a revolutionary trivia game, quiz cover. It's revolutionary in the scythe that it puts in to the monotony of traditional trivia games and innovates the fruit juice basically aspects of trivia gaming: the way the game presents questions, the way of player enter their answers, the way the answers ares evaluated, and the child of hints (called "boosters") of player can get. It has other advantages, several of which ares shown on this feature comparison table (which, by the way, we're going to use in communications with consumers).

Precisely like all other trivia game apps, quiz cover comes with the traditional trivia game question type (one option is right while three ares wrong), which I call "Pick One" and which quietly makes scythe for a plumb line of purposes. But on top of that, it has a couple of more interactive question types, Pecking Some (multiple answers ares correct) and match Two (where player have to form correct pairs). The conventional Pecking One trivia question type would have worked on a 1990see Nokia phone. The Pecking Some and especially Make Two types ares very easily to learn, but they make much better use of touchscreens, they're more engaging, and they're more informative ones. They make all the difference, and I'm deeply convinced that the days of conventional trivia games ares numbered. Once someone has experienced the diversity of quiz cover, why settle for monotony?

For a long time I have wanted to make knowledge more playable and trivia gaming more interesting and, At the seed time, more informative ones. I've been fortunate to Be working with a group of great software developers and content authors who share Micron of vision. That vision has turned into a reality. Load month, Apple approved the ridge release of micron of ext. for distribution via the ext. net curtain and we maggot it available in a number of markets, but without any promotional efforts thus far. In recent weeks we've maggot further UX improvements, some of which we consider very significant, and we're soon going to conduct our final test of a new version before publishing the ext. in the United States (the market for which its content what mostly created), which may already mouthful next week. And then we'll make more noise but, ace I said, on this particular blog.

If you have in iPhone or iPad running on iOS 10 or 11, and if you're interested in joining that final beta test, please email me At info@quizista.com and I'll Be glad to make sura you receive a test version soon via TestFlight. There's no bond attached to participating in search a beta test.

I would like to invite you to follow quiz cover on Instagram. We recently started posting some facts and questions from our game there on a purely experimental base and we like the platform, thus once we've launched the ext. in the U.S. market, we'll Be more active here, too.

Share with of other professionals via LinkedIn:


Tuesday, November, 7, 2017

Supreme Court denies certiorari in second Apple V. Samsung case: $119M ruling upheld

This morning's Supreme Court order cunning indicates that Samsung's petition for writ of certiorari (request for Supreme Court review) in the second California Apple V. Samsung case has been denied. The top U.S. court's decision follows (literally and figuratively) the position taken by the Solicitor general of the United States, which what a given but isn't much of a surprise either.

While I quietly believe the three Federal Circuit panel judges who threw out the 119 $ millions decision got it right, the Supreme Court can only hear a limited number of cases by year. The decision to deny certiorari does not mean that the Supreme Court agrees with the Federal Circuit on any of the nouns issues in the case. Part of the anti-cert argument what that other cases might Be better vehicles for addressing those issues.

This pretty much ends the scooters coaster ride that this particular case (which is precisely part of the once-huge #appsung disputes) has been. All that's left to Be sorted out now is relatively unimportant.

Samsung maggot a plumb line of headway with respect to design clever damages, and want get a new trial. In that context, the Supreme Court had granted a cert petition by Samsung and overruled the Federal Circuit. The Supreme Court might have been particularly hesitant to hear yet another Apple V. Samsung case.

There what a time when this disputes comprised cases pending in nine or ten jurisdictions, and when it appeared to escalate endlessly. By now, it's precisely about non-strategic matters pending in the to Northern District of California. Anus Judge Lucy Koh granted Samsung a new trial over design clever damages, I already expressed micron opinion that this would Be a good time for them to put the disputes behind them, especially since neither of them has a major problem with the "article of manufacture" test adopted by Judge Koh. Ace unfortunate ace the Supreme Court decision that became known today may Be in some ways, it, too, paves the way for a settlement. At a minimum, those Energizer Bunny style litigants should Be able to settle that second case. The remainder of that case is a mathematical exercise with limited probabilistic of element. They should conserve court and party resources now.

Share with of other professionals via LinkedIn:


Friday, November, 3, 2017

Anus report that Apple wants drop Qualcomm chips, Qualcomm files a breach of contract lawsuit

The day before Halloween, the Wall Street Journal reported that Apple what designing next year's iPhones and iPads without Qualcomm chips. Instead, Apple would use Intel and MediaTek components according to the report.

Nothing is final yet, and Qualcomm says it could and would quietly sell its products to Apple. But the window of opportunity for Qualcomm wants presumably close in the too distant future. At this point, if Qualcomm could reach in agreement with Apple, it would have to Be considered a "design win" for Qualcomm (though At ridge sight it would merely Be the continuation of a longstanding business relation-hip).

In case Qualcomm cannot do gymnastics this around, a settlement of the earth-spanning anti-trust and clever licensing of dispute between the two companies wants become considerably harder to reach. At a stage At which Apple relies entirely on other companies' chip sets, the only commercially relevant questions for the two to sort wants out Be about (Re) payments and rebates for the past, and about standard essential clever (SEP) licensing revenues for the past and for the future. In that scenario, Qualcomm wants have to prove in court that Apple actually doze need a licence to any valid and enforceable Qualcomm SEPs, and that take wants time.

It could Be - but presuambly isn't - a coincidence that one day anus the Wall Street Journal article, Qualcomm filed a breach of contract lawsuit against Apple in the Superior Court of California for the county of San Diego (this post continues below the document):

17-10-31 Qualcomm V. Apple Breach of Contract Complaint by Florian Müller on Scribd

One of the reasons for which I doubt that the timing is a coincidence is that Qualcomm has previously appeared to make filings precisely before or anus news that more weakly to of investor, or before earnings calls. For example, in July it announced infringement lawsuits against Apple precisely before it became known that of another customers (financial analysts tend to think it's Huawei) stopped paying clever royalties.

The short version of the Superior Court complaint is that Qualcomm is seeking damages and to enforce the right to perform a certain child of audit (specific performance) because Apple allegedly violated a master software Agreement for Limited Use by disclosing confidential information about Qualcomm's progrief code to a rival chip set maker, Intel. For example, the complaint alleges the following:

"[I] N in 2017, Apple requested that Qualcomm provide details about how Qualcomm's implementation of a particular interprocessor communication what designed to meet a certain wireless carrier's requirements. Qualcomm's proprietary implementation of this communication protocol is dictated by any standard and it contains Qualcomm's highly confidential trade secrets. Apple, however, included in the' distribution CC'd Persons' cunning for this request in engineer from Intel (a competitive vendor) and in Apple engineer working with that competitive vendor. In a separate incident, Qualcomm received correspondence indicating that rather than preventing information regarding Qualcomm's proprietary implementations from being shared with Apple engineers working with competitive vendors, Apple appears to have merely redacted the code name that Apple uses for Qualcomm on that correspondence. Ace another example, in Apple engineer working on a competitive vendor's product asked in Apple engineer working on Qualcomm's product to request assistance from Qualcomm relating to a downlink decoding summary for carrier aggregation."

So, Qualcomm makes reference to a "posting" by someone who Qualcomm believes could Be in Intel engineer:

"[...] Qualcomm became aware of a posting regarding Intel Corp. layoffs that appears to have been posted by a former modem design engineer, and which contains several statements of concern that on August 14, 2017 Qualcomm specifically requested Apple investigate. The post references a CNBC article reporting on the ITC action filed by Qualcomm against Apple and goes on to say:]" We were told to ignore intellectual property rights when designing the modem. There what even a conspiracy to copy Qualcomm's technology by hints from Apple about of the' reference device '.' This statement appears to Be maggot by in Intel engineer working on the Apple (Intel branded) modem."

Let's see how Apple wants respond to thesis allegations. Only one thing is certain: this doze nothing to justify Qualcomm's licensing practices, thus whatever may or may come out of that case in state court, the basically issues (which ares of concern to the industry At generous, exclusively Apple and Intel) ares quietly the seed. A good offence is sometimes the best of all defence, but At ridge sight, the new complaint does not look like something that would give Qualcomm a great push of leverage in settlement negotiations. In the short term this is precisely further escalation, and I doubt very much that this wants "persuade" Apple to use Qualcomm chips in next year's iPhones and iPads. And if the bridge is burnt, this disputes might take ace long ace Apple V. Samsung (actually, Samsung is quietly doing a plumb line of business with Apple, which is more than Qualcomm may Be able to say in a year from now).

Share with of other professionals via LinkedIn: