Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Reportedly Acquiring Streaming Video Firm Color Labs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Whatever you guys say, this is a success story for the founders and chief investors of Color. In essence: "they made it" and we ponder over what we are still doing on these forums. Well at least I do, I remember when the Apple stock was worth just under $100 and I debated on buying some, but then again a poor student can't buy stocks. You have to have money to make money
How and Why would apple fix something that seems to be Valves problem?
Seems to me that Safari needs changing to protect or at least warn users of this issue. The more awareness there is, the more chance they'll do something about it, hence my post here.
considering his blog has gotten worse with apple getting more and more high profile i expect him to backpedal out of his repeated criticism of color.
df is almost unreadable with his crazed bias in every story be it google, apple, microsoft etc. i dont get it. the guy is connected and smart and hes just a pr mouthpiece
Let me guess.
They've "successfully" replaced Google Maps with their own "brilliant" solution, so maybe now they want to replace Youtube with their own "brilliant" solution?
They've "successfully" replaced Google Maps with their own "brilliant" solution, so maybe now they want to replace Youtube with their own "brilliant" solution?
I don't really understand how this story ties in with this one: http://venturebeat.com/2012/10/17/m...eholders-and-board-vote-to-wind-down-company/
VB are just talking about Color closing its doors but there's nothing Apple related in the article.
VB are just talking about Color closing its doors but there's nothing Apple related in the article.
Yeah, they "made it", the collected a whole lot of capital from investors, made products that failed then were bought for little more money than the cash they received. Remember, the investors control the company, they would have made Apple pay up as much as they can to release the founders. The founds would have made next to no money on the deal, given how investments are structured.
Interesting logo, maybe they worked at Target.
You joke - but if Target behaved like Apple - that logo would have been in court the second it showed up on the internet.
Let me guess.
They've "successfully" replaced Google Maps with their own "brilliant" solution, so maybe now they want to replace Youtube with their own "brilliant" solution?
Maps was less about creating a competitor to Google Maps and more about purging iOS of Google-dependency. As of now, there is absolutely 0 Google software included with iOS, so there's no need to go and reinvent the wheel with a Youtube clone.
If this is true, it probably has more to do with patents and/or talent than market-sector maneuvering.
Theory on Forbes is for FaceTime improvements...
Read more about their patents here:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthony...d-color-labs-for-patents-to-bolster-facetime/
Read more about their patents here:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthony...d-color-labs-for-patents-to-bolster-facetime/
Yeah Target must not be like Apple. They would be targeted by every Tom, Dick and Harry patent trolls.
They will also be targeted by unscrupulous competitors who refuse to pay royalties. Even competitors who had to fake an address to make Apple software look worse than their own.
"
for a file format that they were working on to record HD video. Or it's software engineering team, if Apple was impressed by their work
"
Maybe they're seeking some tech to help people properly use something as simple as an apostrophe. Eek's!
Maybe they're seeking some tech to help people properly use something as simple as an apostrophe.
Eek's!This has nothing to do with patents. Apple is notorious for suing anyone who's logo even remotely has elements like theirs. And some are HUGE stretches. My post was clearly tongue in cheek. You don't need to be a "troll" or "fanboy" to agree that Apple has always protected their logo very very carefully.
Bill Nguyen
Sounds like the rare event of lightning striking twice has happened for Mr. Nguyen. He has some real cronies at Apple who are happy to help him get rich at the expense of Apple shareholders.
Sounds like the rare event of lightning striking twice has happened for Mr. Nguyen. He has some real cronies at Apple who are happy to help him get rich at the expense of Apple shareholders.
Relax.
You don't have to explain to me who you are. People here can see it for themselves.
Apple get sued for logo and trademark infringement too. If your brand is valuable, of course there will be unscrupulous competitors trying to copy and smear you. At least Apple don't lie about competition's products to downplay them.
That's open to interpretation isn't it. Apparently, the UK courts would argue that Apple was "lying"
Apple loses out in UK tablet design case against Samsung
http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/18/apple-loses-uk-appeal/
Every company lies. Many companies sue. And a company doesn't have to be unscrupulous to be sued or to sue another.
People here can see your posts here for themselves too
Last edited:
But of course ! Be my guest.
Apple accused Samsung of copying. They won some, they lost some. Same for Google/Motorola and Samsung's infringement suits.
Google/Motorola created a fake address to trip Apple Maps, and made an ad out of it. Unfortunately, their own Map app accepted the garbage input. How odd ! 8^D
I wonder if Google/Motorola would pay Microsoft for their infringement. Samsung and other major Android licensees have already admitted that they should pay up. Nexus is a vanilla Android. Shouldn't they cough up the $$$ also ?
And if these Android vendors are compelled to pay MS, why reject cross licensing deals with Apple when they have more relevant patent portfolio ? Even MS has cross licensing deals in place with Apple. It looks like they already made up their mind not to pay Apple no matter what.
Apple accused Samsung of copying. They won some, they lost some. Same for Google/Motorola and Samsung's infringement suits.
Google/Motorola created a fake address to trip Apple Maps, and made an ad out of it. Unfortunately, their own Map app accepted the garbage input. How odd ! 8^D
I wonder if Google/Motorola would pay Microsoft for their infringement. Samsung and other major Android licensees have already admitted that they should pay up. Nexus is a vanilla Android. Shouldn't they cough up the $$$ also ?
And if these Android vendors are compelled to pay MS, why reject cross licensing deals with Apple when they have more relevant patent portfolio ? Even MS has cross licensing deals in place with Apple. It looks like they already made up their mind not to pay Apple no matter what.
Last edited:
You keep wanting to make the argument about something it's not. My original comment was that if Target responded to logos like Apple did, Color would have been sued long ago.
Do you disagree? If yes, state why you disagree - no need to go off on tangents. If you agree, then why go off on tangents? Smoke and mirrors, my friend. Let's stay on topic, shall we?