Is Your Browser Color Managed?

On Sun, 04 Jun 2017 10:23:53 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

It must be the second sentence you are disputing. For that to be
wrong, Apple must have ceased using the disputed technology. That's
where I got that idea.

they can't cease using it. qualcomm has a monopoly on it.

Are you saying they are continuing to use it? If so, you are agreeing
with me when I wrote "But they kept on using the patented technology
just the same ..."

your position is that they're stealing it. they aren't.

So you accept my analysis. Good.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sun, 04 Jun 2017 10:23:54 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Mayayana
wrote:

| then charge their customers
| far more than they need to.
|
| except that the samsung galaxy s8 and note 7 (before its recall) sold
| for *more* than an equivalent iphone.
|
| Business 101. The sales price of a good does not depend on it's cost.
|
| exactly.
|
| now convince mayayana of that.
|
| Only after you show me that you have understood where this fits into
| the present discussion.

Won't happen. For nospam, wrongdoing by anyone but
Apple is wrongdoing. But if Apple does the same thing
nospam defends it like the child caught stealing cookies
who squeals, "But he did it, too!" There's never an actual
acknowledgement. His response to the fact that Apple
pricegouge their customers is to claim that Samsung
pricegouge their customers.

you don't understand what price gouging means.

neither company price gouges.

both companies can't make their products fast enough to meet demand.

In which circumstances they can increase their prices considerably
above cost and still sell all they make. That doesn't mean they are
price gouging and I doubt that many of the buyers feel they have paid
too much.

The problem is that the key to all this wealth is provided by Qualcomm
and Qualcomm want to share in the bonanza. But Apple doesn't want to
share.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sun, 04 Jun 2017 10:35:28 -0800, (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

Bill W wrote:

It's always been my experience that there are not only different phone
numbers for residential and business service, but there are also
different tech departments. It's also been my experience that response
times are *much* faster for business lines.

What perspective is your "experience"? Ever work in the
telecom industry, or did you observe this as a customer?

I had many friends in the telecom business, and I've had to order
service for many clients in my work. No one I ever knew worked in both
business & residential at the same time. Those were always completely
separate divisions of the companies my friends worked for. And when I
ordered service for others, if I called the wrong number, they would
simply transfer me to the other side of the service division. You did
also snip my disclaimer that this arrangement might be the rule only
in large metro areas.

I have never even seen a telcom company with different
departments for residential and business services. Some
numbers may be in blocks, but that isn't based on type
of service, it's base on how many lines any given
customer orders.

Routine trouble tickets are handled on a first come
first serve basis, and obviously if there is a problem
that puts it on hold it goes back into the que.

What does make a difference is not business service as
such, but bought and paid for Priority Service. The
FAA, as an example, commonly orders circuts with various
different priority levels. One of those is one hour
response time! You can imagine the money that costs
them, but it means that an hour after they report a
problem they fully expect to be able to ask for a status
report and it had better not be that nothing at all has
happened! In a common case that I experienced many
times the only response possible was to schedule a
chartered aircraft, and that had better be what the
status report says. If there are weather delays, that
has to be on the ticket. (For several years I
co-ordinated the Fairbanks Testboard trouble ticket
system with the FAA folks in Anchorage. It happened
that they had hired a retired tech that I'd worked with
for years, so we knew exactly how to communicate with
each other.)

In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

Nospam is totally clueless. Trouble ticket systems That
don't differentiate between business and residental. The tech
with the windshield wipers may never even know what was
being worked on

the tech doesn't need to know nor does he decide what to fix. he gets
sent out to fix something and he fixes it.

Usually the tech is exactly the person who chooses which
trouble ticket gets attention. Any other way results in
*stupid* mistakes being made.

no.

The next biggest mistake with trouble ticket systems is
choosing one that is really good at generating reports
for management and as a result very poor for dispatching
troubles! That is common. ATT on the other hand was
always famous for using a bureaucratic boondoggle that
was designed to make upper level administration of
management methods easier, without much concern about mid
or lower level management efficiency, and with no
concern about how it functioned at the technician level.

The Bell System was an astounding bureaucracy, that even
after divestiture could not be corrected even by a
Board of Directors that tried hard in the 90's to change
it. They eventually through up their hands and sold it
to Bell South and walked away.

not relevant at all.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

| then charge their customers
| far more than they need to.
|
| except that the samsung galaxy s8 and note 7 (before its recall) sold
| for *more* than an equivalent iphone.
|
| Business 101. The sales price of a good does not depend on it's cost.
|
| exactly.
|
| now convince mayayana of that.
|
| Only after you show me that you have understood where this fits into
| the present discussion.

Won't happen. For nospam, wrongdoing by anyone but
Apple is wrongdoing. But if Apple does the same thing
nospam defends it like the child caught stealing cookies
who squeals, "But he did it, too!" There's never an actual
acknowledgement. His response to the fact that Apple
pricegouge their customers is to claim that Samsung
pricegouge their customers.

you don't understand what price gouging means.

neither company price gouges.

both companies can't make their products fast enough to meet demand.

In which circumstances they can increase their prices considerably
above cost and still sell all they make. That doesn't mean they are
price gouging and I doubt that many of the buyers feel they have paid
too much.

true.

The problem is that the key to all this wealth is provided by Qualcomm
and Qualcomm want to share in the bonanza. But Apple doesn't want to
share.

absolutely wrong.

and it's not just apple, no matter how much you try to make it that way.

qualcomm charges *everyone* (not just apple) based on the price of the
entire device, which includes components not from qualcomm. that's
wrong.

qualcomm is only one part of a modern smartphone or tablet and they're
entitled to be paid *only* for that part.

under no circumstances is any company (not just qualcomm) entitled to
be paid for components or technology they did not create.

In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:


It's always been my experience that there are not only different phone
numbers for residential and business service, but there are also
different tech departments. It's also been my experience that response
times are *much* faster for business lines.

What perspective is your "experience"? Ever work in the
telecom industry, or did you observe this as a customer?

I have never even seen a telcom company with different
departments for residential and business services. Some
numbers may be in blocks, but that isn't based on type
of service, it's base on how many lines any given
customer orders.

just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

verizon, pacific bell, centurylink and comcast have separate
departments for business service. others do too.

Routine trouble tickets are handled on a first come
first serve basis, and obviously if there is a problem
that puts it on hold it goes back into the que.

in general, business customers will have their issue resolved much
sooner than residential customers, typically within a couple of hours.
it's one of the benefits for paying more.

nospam wrote:
In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

Nospam is totally clueless. Trouble ticket systems That
don't differentiate between business and residental. The tech
with the windshield wipers may never even know what was
being worked on

the tech doesn't need to know nor does he decide what to fix. he gets
sent out to fix something and he fixes it.

Usually the tech is exactly the person who chooses which
trouble ticket gets attention. Any other way results in
*stupid* mistakes being made.

no.

I've been intimately involved in the design and
implementation of large trouble ticket systems. I once
wrote a "white paper" for management detailing what a
trouble ticket system required, and why. I was a "beta
tester" for a web based trouble ticket system (costing
millions) that ATT designed and had up and running but
never implemented, and then a user of two of the later
replacements for it (in the middle 1990's).

Let me repeat that so that folks who have no experience,
such as you, will catch the drift: really stupid
mistakes!

Got it?

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Utqiagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

nospam wrote:
In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:


It's always been my experience that there are not only different phone
numbers for residential and business service, but there are also
different tech departments. It's also been my experience that response
times are *much* faster for business lines.

What perspective is your "experience"? Ever work in the
telecom industry, or did you observe this as a customer?

I have never even seen a telcom company with different
departments for residential and business services. Some
numbers may be in blocks, but that isn't based on type
of service, it's base on how many lines any given
customer orders.

just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

verizon, pacific bell, centurylink and comcast have separate
departments for business service. others do too.

I think you are mistaken. Different sales departments, different
marketing, and the entire customer service arena.

But when it comes to top tier repair technicians, they are not
differentiated.

Routine trouble tickets are handled on a first come
first serve basis, and obviously if there is a problem
that puts it on hold it goes back into the que.

in general, business customers will have their issue resolved much
sooner than residential customers, typically within a couple of hours.
it's one of the benefits for paying more.

Bull****.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Utqiagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

Nospam is totally clueless. Trouble ticket systems That
don't differentiate between business and residental. The tech
with the windshield wipers may never even know what was
being worked on

the tech doesn't need to know nor does he decide what to fix. he gets
sent out to fix something and he fixes it.

Usually the tech is exactly the person who chooses which
trouble ticket gets attention. Any other way results in
*stupid* mistakes being made.

no.

I've been intimately involved in the design and
implementation of large trouble ticket systems. I once
wrote a "white paper" for management detailing what a
trouble ticket system required, and why. I was a "beta
tester" for a web based trouble ticket system (costing
millions) that ATT designed and had up and running but
never implemented, and then a user of two of the later
replacements for it (in the middle 1990's).

that has nothing whatsoever to do with offering business & residential
class service. nothing at all.

Let me repeat that so that folks who have no experience,
such as you, will catch the drift: really stupid
mistakes!

Got it?

you sure don't.

nospam wrote:
In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

Nospam is totally clueless. Trouble ticket systems That
don't differentiate between business and residental. The tech
with the windshield wipers may never even know what was
being worked on

the tech doesn't need to know nor does he decide what to fix. he gets
sent out to fix something and he fixes it.

Usually the tech is exactly the person who chooses which
trouble ticket gets attention. Any other way results in
*stupid* mistakes being made.

no.

I've been intimately involved in the design and
implementation of large trouble ticket systems. I once
wrote a "white paper" for management detailing what a
trouble ticket system required, and why. I was a "beta
tester" for a web based trouble ticket system (costing
millions) that ATT designed and had up and running but
never implemented, and then a user of two of the later
replacements for it (in the middle 1990's).

that has nothing whatsoever to do with offering business & residential
class service. nothing at all.

Are you really that naive and unaware of what we are talking
about? Trouble ticket systems are the *core* of how "service"
is managed!

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Utqiagvik (Barrow, Alaska)