Apple

Apple Watch Series 4 vs. Galaxy Watch Active

April 22, 2019 By Faiza Iftikhar Leave a Comment

Both are incredible fitness smartwatches, yet the Galaxy Watch Active costs half the price of the Apple Watch. Does that settle on it the best choice? We’ll help you to choose.

With regards to smartwatches, the Samsung Galaxy Watch Active and Apple Watch Series 4 are among the best you can be expected to purchase. They can also watch out for your health with numerous fitness tracking features, over the customary smartwatch functions you’d expect — like displaying notifications from your phone or tuning in to music on the go. The Galaxy Watch Active is $200, while the Apple Watch Series 4 is twofold that: it starts at $400 and $500 on the off chance that you get the version with built-in LTE. So is it worth spending the additional cash?

That relies upon what you’re searching for because the distinctions go priceless. The Apple watch series 3 costs $250 and is yet a great watch series 4 also make you think about it before you purchase any of Apple watch but for this comparison, we’re focusing on the most recent model. We tried these watches side-by-side to figure out which one addressed our needs the best.

Do you like your smartwatch face square or round?

In any case, you’re familiar with the original Galaxy Watch, the look of the Active won’t come to a lot of a surprise. Its round watch face looks more like a traditional timepiece than the square Apple Watch. Both depend on the touchscreen and physical buttons for navigation which is genuinely intuitive. Shockingly, the Active misses out on the pivoting bezel from the original Galaxy Watch that we cherished and that gave it a progressively premium look.

Apple gives both of you sizes to choose from with the watch face: either a 40 or 44 millimeter while the Galaxy Watch Active has a solitary 39.5mm size. Each screen is simple enough to see in bright, outdoor circumstances, yet the Apple Watch has thinner bezels so you can see a greater amount of the screen on the surface of the watch face and the thicker ties make it look marginally more elegant.

You can choose from distinctive metal finishes and colors for two watches and customize considerably further with extra watch ties in various materials. The Galaxy Watch Active has more third-party watch faces to truly make your watch your own, yet the Apple Watch has more third-party ties to choose from.

The Galaxy Watch is also somewhat thinner and lighter than two versions of the Apple Watch and we discovered Samsung’s watch increasingly comfortable to wear throughout the day and keeping in mind that you rest since it doesn’t have a knock such as the one on the Apple Watch that houses the pulse sensor.

Fitness features and health tracking differ

There’s no lack of fitness and health observing features on both. The Apple Watch has 14 workout types built-in while the Galaxy Watch has 39 and both give you a chance to monitor other types of workouts with the committed “other” class. They can also follow workouts automatically and set day by day goals for you to hold your activity levels within the proper check.

Here’s what else the two of them can do:

The Galaxy Watch Active is the only one that can auto-distinguished cycling, but the Apple Watch can auto-identify swims.
Track your pulse and calories burned.
Record your swims as both are water-impervious to 50 meters.
Both have built-in GPS to follow outdoor workouts.
A visual approach to indicate your everyday exercise, stand and move objectives. On the Apple Watch, it’s a three-ring framework; the Galaxy Watch Active is a heart, also with three segments that fill up as you complete your objectives.
Gives you alarms to move when you have been inactive for a timeframe.
Offer breathing exercises to oversee stress levels.
Share your activities with companions and take part in challenges.

We saw that when we wore the Apple Watch on one wrist and the Galaxy Watch Active on the other aimed the same workout, the Galaxy Watch Active took somewhat longer to enroll heart rate and it didn’t refresh as quickly as it did on the Apple Watch.

The Apple Watch Series 4 has two or three extra heart-related features, including an FDA-cleared ECG or electrocardiogram app. The watch can also inform you if it detects a high or low pulse or irregular rhythms that could signal atrial fibrillation. It also has sensors to recognize falls and the watch can automatically call your emergency contacts or 911 for help.

Not one to be left out, the Galaxy Watch Active can track your anxiety levels. It can also monitor your sleep then give you a breakdown of the sort and quality of your Zs in the Samsung Health app.

The Active also has a circulatory strain monitor that’s presently in beta. Users need to pick-in to take an interest in Samsung’s examination at this time to access to the feature, and it needs a standard circulatory strain pursuing from a traditional cuff monitor before it can acquire a reading from the watch. After this initial setup, we found the blood pressure reading was discontinuous and didn’t work a significant part of the time on the Galaxy Watch Active, so we wouldn’t much consider it in your basic decision-making process.

While both let you survey your fitness tracking and health metrics in their companion phone apps, it’s frequently really hard to work out where to discover and how to translate this information. Apple separates it across the Activity and Health App, while Samsung places everything in the Health app, However, it’s difficult to navigate. Samsung’s app breaks down your heart rate in zones which is useful, Apple simply shows your range, yet it can be truly tricky to decide how to see past workouts on Samsung’s Health app, calories consumed and different vitals without a ton of trial and error. The Activity app on the iPhone is somewhat progressively intuitive.

Smartwatch features are robust on both

You can get notifications from your phone, make calls, message or download a variety of third-party apps on both: standard functionality you would expect from a smartwatch. The Apple Watch works solely with iOS while the Galaxy Watch Active is perfect with both Android and iOS. But you don’t get the same number of connectivity options if you alternatives the Galaxy Watch to an Apple device, like not having the capacity to react to text messages from the watch. While the two of them have GPS, just the Apple Watch has an LTE version so you can get messages and calls without your phone — yet it costs $100 more in the US.

Also Read: Apple iPhones Get Recycled in This Secretive Lab. Presently it’s Opening Up

Battery life: Advantage Galaxy

Talking about battery life, it will dependably rely upon how you use these watches. We tried them both aimed a normal day, which comprised of commuting to work, completing a 45-minute workout, following sleep, getting the same notifications and listening to some music.

In the light of this, we pressed almost two entire days out of the Galaxy Watch Active and just under a day and a half on the 40mm Apple Watch Series 4. This is in no means a logical battery test, and your mileage will shift, yet suffice to say you will need to charge every one of these watches on a regular daily basis.

So which is the best smartwatch?

For the price, it’s difficult to go past the Galaxy Watch Active, particularly considering compatibility crosswise Android and iOS. It offers an extraordinary range of fitness features, a comfortable fit for little wrists particularly and a solid showing in battery life. But for iPhone clients who are mow profoundly tied into Apple’s environment, the usability, tracking accuracy and heart-related health features of the Apple Watch Series 4 is difficult to beat. Having LTE as an alternative is additionally a bonus, particularly for those who want the additional consolation of being associated on keeps running without taking their phone.

Apple Had a Course of Action to End Qualcomm’s Licensing Strategies, Yet at Last Surrendered

April 22, 2019 By Faiza Iftikhar Leave a Comment

At the point, when Apple consented to use just Qualcomm’s modem chips for the iPhone, it worked out yearly, $1 billion “incentive fee” that it would get from the chip producer. But there was an essential condition. In the event that Apple chooses to use a second modem chip provider, it would need to pay Qualcomm back the “incentive fees” it gets. Apple at that point went to a hearing held by the South Korea Fair Trade Commission and took a stand against Qualcomm’s chip licensing practices. As a result, the $1 billion checks halted. In the meantime, Qualcomm discovered that Apple was planning on using Qualcomm and Intel modem chips for the iPhone 7.

In January 2017, Apple sued Qualcomm over the $1 billion checks it was never again getting, setting off a chain response of lawsuits filed by the two sides against one another. Yet that is all no big deal following the settlement that the two companies consented to a week ago. All claims are dropped, and Apple will pay Qualcomm an undisclosed amount. Apple presently has a six-year licensing agreement with Qualcomm and a multi-year settlement that will promise it modem chips from the San Diego based chip creator. According to one examiner, Apple could be paying Qualcomm as much as $9 per iPhone for the part.

The Washington Post reports that aimed the two years before the settlement, Apple openly derided the quality of Qualcomm’s modem chips while in private it called them “the best.” These complementary remarks were made by Apple officials in reminders that also praised Qualcomm’s “unique patent share” and “significant possessions.” The updates were obtained by Qualcomm aimed at the disclosure process. That is when the two parties in a claim hand over proof to one another before a trial begins.

Apple called Qualcomm’s chips useless in arguments it made to officials, regulators, judges, and juries while secretly raving about the company’s components. This has many considering how profoundly Apple believed what it was stating when it attempted to get courts to change the methods that Qualcomm uses to sell its chips. Apple’s actual feelings about Qualcomm might clarify why it might be paying Qualcomm as much as $9 per iPhone for its chips.

Already, Apple derided Qualcomm’s eminences deals that compel phone manufacturers to pay a level of the retail price of each phone sold. Indeed, just before the settlement was declared, Apple and Qualcomm were squaring off in a San Diego courtroom with billions of dollars in play. On Tuesday, aimed his opening statements, Apple’s lawyer was trying to demonstrate that the iPhone didn’t depend on Qualcomm’s component. He did this by pointing out that an iPhone can work using a Wi-Fi connection. And Apple has pondered in the past why Qualcomm should receive royalties for parts of a phone that it has nothing to do with.

Apple had a plan to reduce royalty payments it was making to Qualcomm

Apple’s lawyer also pointed out Tuesday that licensing deals Apple made with Ericsson and Huawei were for double the number of patents that Apple licensed from Qualcomm, yet for a little level of what Apple was paying the chip provider. However, internal Apple licenses later obtained by Qualcomm demonstrated that indicates less expensive patents on purpose in order to prove that showed how much more Qualcomm was looking to permit its patents.

“While it’s regular for companies who are occupied in legal disputes to quit fooling around, the disclosure of these records is very unsettling. It conceivably reveals that Apple was taking part in a dishonesty argument both in front of authorities enforcers as well as the legal courts about the real value and nature of Qualcomm’s patented development.”-Adam Mossoff, law professor at George Mason University, director of the Center for the Protection of Intellectual Property

Also Read:

Documents gotten by Qualcomm during disclosure revealed that Apple had moved forward suing Qualcomm as far back as 2014; the tech giant chooses to wait so it could keep on collecting the billion-dollar payments from the chip creator. One document, produced by Apple half year before it lobbed the principal salvo in their court fights, revealed Apple’s game plan to decrease the amount of the royalties it was paying to Qualcomm. Apple would “hurt Qualcomm financially,” and “put Qualcomm’s licensing model in danger.”

Qualcomm’s licensing model is in danger, however not really as a result of Apple. Earlier this year the Federal Trade Commission and Qualcomm squared off in a non-jury trial held under the steady gaze of Judge Lucy Koh. Apple did have few executives affirm against Qualcomm’s licensing practices, yet other phone manufacturers did as such also. If Judge Koh, who directed over the Apple v. Samsung patent trial decides in favor of the FTC, Qualcomm might need to change the manner in which it sells its chips.

Apple iPhones Get Recycled in This Secretive Lab. Presently it’s Opening Up

April 20, 2019 By Faiza Iftikhar Leave a Comment

Hidden not a long way from downtown Austin, Texas, an exploration lab is attempting to change the manner in which we recycle electronics. Furthermore, it’s being controlled by Apple. in the event that you don’t know precisely where it is, you’ll certainly miss it. There are no signs. The parking lot is practically empty. There’s an unremarkable entryway at the base of a set of generic bond stairs. It would appear that the back entrance to a rundown shopping center. In any case, inside is a 9,000-square-foot distribution center where, only a stone’s throw from the front entryway, you’ll see one of the most fascinating robots in the world.

Meet Daisy

Daisy is 33 feet long, has five arms and can systematically deconstruct any of 15 iPhone models — from 2012’s iPhone 5 to 2018’s iPhone XS– at a rate of 200 per hour. In a planned and sometimes vicious move, Daisy expels the screen, battery, screws, sensors, logic board, and wireless charging coil, leaving its husk of an aluminum shell.

Apple welcomed me here not just to see Daisy in real life, yet additionally the Material Recovery Lab that’s been developed around it. A year ago, Apple reported Daisy out of blue to the world through a press release and video. Presently it’s inviting in academics, recyclers and different companies to learn how Daisy works. What’s more, hopefully, use its technology to make e-recycling far and wide better.

“This is about the enormous, hairy objective of making all our items from recycled materials,” said Lisa Jackson, Apple’s vice president of environment, strategy, and social initiatives, in an interview. “It will take some time, however, it’ll also take tons of innovation.”

Apple thinks sharing what it’s learned could help others, too.

What’s more, as it occurs, we could use all the assistance we can get. A United Nations report found that in 2016, the world created 44.7 million huge amount of e-waste, or 2.1 million Statues of Liberty stacked together. And just 20% of that, or 8.9 million metric tons, was reused.

At the point When different electronics like laptops, printers, and monitors are recycled, they don’t experience Daisy. They’re placed in a Shredder or a hammerlike pounder that breaks separated the devices in an effort to uncover the elements inside. This procedure frequently combines materials together, making them impure and less profitable. Still, a progression of sifters and magnets endeavor to gather the recyclable materials before the rest is tossed out.

That’s right: Recycling produces trash too.

This is the place Apple supposes it can help. If recyclers can figure out how to more effectively take apart technology, they can more productively gather the valuable materials. Give a recycler a cluster of copper charging loops, and it’s better than requesting it to break apart a phone looking for them. Apple thinks this can be done possible partially on the ground that it’s beginning to get there itself.

It’s going to take a while, but it’ll also take tons of innovation.

Apple is one of the world’s top phone producers, delivering an expected 218 million iPhones last year alone. At some point this year it may pass 1.5 billion iPhones since the first one appeared, which means in a little over a decade, Apple’s transported enough phones to circle the planet in excess of 13 times.

That is extraordinary for Apple’s baseline and diverted to turn the Cupertino company from a niche computer creator into one of the world’s most profoundly valued companies — ever. But it’s not so great for a representative’s conscience.

Apple’s mammoth achievement — and the business of endless other computer and gadget creators — has come at a surprising cost, included in untold tons of aluminum, cobalt, copper, glass, gold, lithium, paper, plastic, steel, tantalum, tin, tungsten, zinc and numerous other crude materials that are refined, extruded, packed, etched and cleaned into the magical device you’re using to pursuing this story.

“You have an ideal storm blending of everyone needs this stuff and the supply is quickly shrinking,” said Callie Babbitt, an associate professor of sustainability at Rochester Institute of Technology. A few materials could be used up in the following half-century, she stated, leaving us without key components for the screens on our TVs and tablets, or pieces that assistance magnets make the ready vibrations on our watches and phones.

Another issue comes when we move up to new devices, something the tech industry supports through warranty terminations and payment contracts. Our old ones regularly go in a cabinet as a backup “just in case” phone. Orthen again we may dispatch them off to an e-recycler that shreds or crushes them to gather the materials as productively as possible. More regrettable, we might just toss our once-cherished phone into a landfill.

You could consider Daisy as Apple’s attempt to right a portion of these wrongs. But if you squint and look another way, Daisy may resemble an expensive and cynical PR ploy by one of the world’s richest companies to whitewash the harm it’s doing to the planet through its huge size.

“I considered her Daisy the Deathbot,” said Kyle Wiens. Wiens is a tech fix supporter and head of online guidance site iFixit. He’s spent his career obstinately challenging Apple and other tech companies to make their devices simpler to repair.

He’s additionally spoken to legislators around the country to empower “right to repair” laws, forcing companies to permit people to access to tools and information to service their devices. And in 2016, he sold $21 million worth of toolboxes and parts to help people swap out awful screens, cameras, buttons, and batteries on their devices.

I asked Wiens what it would take to persuade him that Apple is serious about all this green stuff. What would it take for Apple to satisfy its feel-good advertising, similar when it distributes “environmental status” reports touting how its devices are free of specific chemicals? Furthermore, when would it be significant that Apple’s latest MacBook Air chassis are made of 100% recycled aluminum, including some from iPhones?

I call her Daisy the Deathbot.

One test is Apple’s secretive culture, he said. The company holds such a large number of things close to the vest, from its arrangements for the next iPhones to the fix manuals to fix them to the innovation behind Daisy. That makes it difficult for us to figure what’s real and what’s simply marketing.

What if Apple did the following best thing and let companies come in, perceive, how Daisy works and try to retrofit a portion of that technology to existing recycling programs?

“That would be interesting,” Wiens said.

The iPhone afterlife

Apple manufactured Daisy to help with what’s known as end-of-life iPhones. It would cost too expensive to refurbish these devices back to perfect working order, so Daisy guts them rather, stripping out their parts to be recycled into crude copper, aluminum, cobalt, and different materials so they can be used anew.

All told, of the roughly 9 million iPhones Apple got once more from customers last year, 7.8 million were restored and sent to new users, while 1.2 million were sent to Daisy.

Apple understands not everyone has near-infinite money and assets as it does. The iPhone producer intended nearly $20 billion in benefit aimed the Christmas season last year, and it has more than $245 billion in real money and investments to draw from. That enables to pay for the significant expansive behind structure costly machines like Daisy.

To point different companies in the correct way, Apple’s brought huge shredders and pounding machines you find at most e-recyclers around the globe. It’s also set up tables alongside them so general people who come into its lab can work with Apple to retrofit technology like Daisy’s advancements onto the current technology most recyclers already have.

Apple intends to patent and permits Daisy’s technology too.

“Technology by definition is all about the new, about things that couldn’t occur previously but at this point it can because of some remarkable advancement,” Apple VP Jackson said.

Jackson joined Apple in 2013 after a long career in government, working as the commissioner of environmental protection in New Jersey, the chief of staff to the governor of New Jersey and eventually, for President Barack Obama, as the first African American to lead the Environmental Protection Agency.

At Apple, Jackson has risen to turn into its top policy person, directing social initiatives, governmental undertakings, and environmental work, like Daisy.

During a panel session several years ago, she said Apple’s centered its efforts on durability, with the understanding that its items will frequently have two or three owners before they might get recycled. “We’re focused to a circular economy approach with assembling,” she said then, underscoring how the company wants to urge people not to clutch devices or toss them in drawers yet to give them back to Apple so they don’t finish up wasted or in landfills.

“There are 100-plus components in an iPhone, and we’re seeing at how to move them back through the chain,” she included. “The business opportunity is to come to Apple and state ‘Hey, I have a procedure for getting cobalt out of batteries,’ or ‘I have a procedure for getting tungsten.'” Then, Apple will pay for it.

Ultimately, Apple state, it wants to make a “closed loop” of recycling. At Apple, that implies taking in devices and either refurbishing them all around great and sending them off or recycling them so the materials can be used again in new devices.

So far, it’s started sending the iPhone batteries Daisy dismantles out to a recycler who uses the cobalt to make new batteries for Apple items. The company also uses 100% recycled tin in the weld on the logic sheets of 11 products. Furthermore, remember those 100% recycled aluminum MacBook Air housings.

Getting there

Whether Apple will draw in academics, recyclers and different companies to take interest in its new program is an open question.

In the meantime, it’s additionally working to gather more unused or destroyed iPhones to either refurbish or send them to Daisy. The company said US clients can now return iPhones to Best Buy stores too.

Also Read: Facebook Anticipates on Competing With Google, Amazon and Apple by Offering Its Own AI Feature

“Apple’s the brand to do it because their statistic thinks about the environment,” he said.

At the end of my visit to Apple’s office, I paused for a moment amid the cacophony of Daisy’s servos and punches driving screws out of the iPhones to glance around at Apple’s otherwise sparse facility.

While people may not agree on Apple’s motivations or its strategies, no one disagrees about the issue. It’s nothing unexpected that Apple’s hired into its ranks former Obama-era government workers who are passionate about environmental change, its impacts on the planet and the role companies like Apple play.

Google is Bringing Back a Profoundly Mentioned Play Store feature that Apple Always Supported

April 17, 2019 By Faiza Iftikhar Leave a Comment

While Google typically discloses its biggest software changes, new features, and obviously, beta versions of fresh Android flavors at the company’s yearly I/O developer gathering, the search giant is really revising and improving its Play Store in a variety of interesting ways ahead of this year glamorous mountain view shindig.

That may be on the ground that the oft-rumored Pixel 3 a and 3a XL are booked to make their long-awaited debut on May 7, towards the beginning of an event commonly held for software declarations only. Whatever the reason, we’re certainly excited to see Google Play plan support for direct Android OS updates, just as include a budgeting feature in the mix to enable you better manage your monthly spending, and now, at last, enable simultaneous app downloading functionality.

As reported by Android Police, the latter feature is yet being tried, with various screenshots flying around proving that some Android clients can already download different apps at once, while everyone else needs to sit tight for an extensive rollout. In the light from the buzz on Reddit thread, Google might want to hustle and complete its open tests as quickly as possible. It appears few peoples have been eagerly foreseeing this feature for many years, reviewing it was really a thing back in the early days of the “Android Market.”

It’s additionally worth calling out that Apple has been permitting simultaneous app downloads from its iOS App Store for quite a long time, so it’s a little strange Google is only now chipping away at going with the same suit.

Also Read:

As you can imagine, this most recent Play Store add-on is generally direct and easy to fold your head around… aside from a rather curious interface conduct. For some reason, the request of apps being simultaneously downloaded keeps changing in users’ arrangements of pending updates, which looks a touch messy and confusing. Hopefully, Google is going to fix that before kicking off a more extensive dispatch.

Qualcomm and Apple At Long Last Settle Ongoing Patent Dispute

April 17, 2019 By Faiza Iftikhar Leave a Comment

It’s an ideal opportunity for Apple to pay up, and everyone to proceed onward. Or what appear like always on at this point, Apple and Qualcomm have been returning and forth at one another over different royalty disputes.

However, on April 16, 2019, the two companies issued out an official announcement that they’ve reached a settlement.

According to release:

Qualcomm and Apple today reported a consent to expel all litigation between the two companies around the world. The settlement incorporated a payment from Apple to Qualcomm. The companies also have achieved a six-year permit agreement, compelling as of April 1, 2019, including a two-year choice to extend, and a multiyear chipset supply agreement.

Qualcomm first filed its first patent infringement back in 2017 arguing that Apple was using patented technology without properly repaying Qualcomm. Apple and Qualcomm have both taken turn conveying blows to each other over the last couple of years, and just this past Monday, trial proceedings had started in San Diego. It was expected that the trial would go until May, yet here we are.

Following this news, Qualcomm saw it’s stock value rise more than 20% to a total market cap of $85 billion. Apple, on the other hand, saw a small dip before going up by scarcely 1%. If you’re interested, you can read the press releases from Apple and Qualcomm in full.

The immediate casualty of this deal? Intel’s 5G modem goals.

As a direct result of the licensing deal, Intel has reported its “intention to exit the 5G smartphone modem business” and spotlights its efforts on infrastructure opportunities. In front of Apple and Qualcomm burying the hatchet, Intel acted as a bit of a negotiating chip for Apple by providing modems for some iPhone models regardless of for the most part offering more fragile performance than the Qualcomm options. Now that Apple will be standardizing on Qualcomm modems going ahead, Intel’s expectations of developing its mobile modem business were effectively decreased to zero.

Also Read:

The loss of Intel as a pseudo-rival in some ways plays into Apple’s contention that Qualcomm has a monopoly on this technology, However, Honestly, the issues with Intel being unable to compete on a fundamental technology performance level were bound to be there regardless. Outside of Apple’s negligible investment in Intel’s modems, the company had little putting all on the line in either LTE or 5G modems for consumer devices. Going ahead, Intel could perhaps observe quality in different portions of the 5G market — however, that will come after it finishes “an evaluation of the open doors for 4G and 5G modems in PCs, internet of things devices and other data-centric devices.”

Apple, Qualcomm Head Into Most Recent Fight In Court, With Billions at Stake

April 15, 2019 By Faiza Iftikhar Leave a Comment

The two are battling about permitting expenses, yet the results could affect how quick your next iPhone downloads data. With regards to Apple vs. Qualcomm, the Federal Trade commission trail on 29 Jan 2019 was only a dress practice. presently it’s time for the real show.

The two technology giants meet on Monday in a San Diego courtroom to commence a five-week, $27 billion trial that’ll decide if Qualcomm works a smartphone modem chip restraining infrastructure and charges a lot for licensing fees. Apple has blamed Qualcomm of anticompetitive practices that raised chip cost, limited competition and hurt customer decision.

Apple, which initially filed suit against Qualcomm in Jan 2017, contends that it basically pays Qualcomm twice, first by buying processors and afterward by paying royalty charges. The tech giant says it should pay charges based only on the expenses of the wireless chip inside its iPhones. Apple accomplices Foxconn and Pegatron, which collects its devices, agree and joined the claim. Qualcomm counters that it isn’t a monopoly and says its technology is more than modems so it should be repaid based on the selling cost of the phone itself. you can see the detail in this link.

The parties can’t come to an understanding, so it’s dependent upon a court to choose. The jury trial will have contended under US District Court Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel of the Southern District of California in San Diego. The results could influence what wireless networks your phone takes advantage of.

The trial will start Monday with jury selection. On Tuesday, the two sides present opening arguments, and Apple calls its first observers. The rundown could even incorporate Apple CEO Tim Cook, who’s probably going to appear during the first week. Other huge witnesses include Apple’s operating chief, Jeff Williams; its head of advertising, Phil Schiller; Qualcomm CEO Steve Mollenkopf; and Qualcomm President Cristiano Amon. After the principal week, the court will be in session Mondays to Wednesdays, and closing contentions and jury deliberation are expected the week of May 13.

At stake in the case are many of billions of dollars. Apple’s assembling partners want a refund of $9 billion for purportedly overpaying royalties since 2013. Under antitrust law, that sum could be tripled. Qualcomm wants harm of its own for breach of agreement, however, it hasn’t detailed the amount. A significantly greater concern for Qualcomm: whether it should change its whole business model, collecting far lower royalties dependent on the cost of its chips, not the phones they’re in.

For purchasers, this ongoing fight could result in iPhone network speed that can’t match up to those of Android devices. Apple’s present modem supplier, Intel, doesn’t yet have a 5G chip ready. Qualcomm is the only option for handset makers who want to take advantage of the ultra-fast wireless network this year. We may not see a 5G iPhone until 2020 or even 2021. If Qualcomm and Apple can’t resolve their issues, it’s unlikely Apple will have Qualcomm modems in its iPhone again at any point in the near future.

Apple referred CNET to remarks it made when it recorded its underlying protest. “Qualcomm’s illegal business rehearses are hurting Apple and the entire industry. They supply us with a single connectivity part, however, for a considerable length of time have been requesting a percentage of the total expenses of our products — effectively taxing Apple’s development, ” the comments read. “We accept profoundly in the estimation of intellectual property but we shouldn’t need to pay them for technology leap forward they have nothing to do with.”

Foxconn declined to comment. In short, the company and other contract manufacturers said their and Apple’s “antitrust cases against Qualcomm are an attempt to put a stop to Qualcomm’s uncalled and monopolistic practices.”

Qualcomm repeated a statement made by CEO Mollenkopf during the company’s profit report in January: “We are one of the main architects of the wireless environment, and our driving interest in R&D has positioned the company at the cutting edge of 2G, 3G, 4G and now 5G leadership,” he said. “We have one of the largest Patent portfolios around the world, with more than 130,000 patents and pending patent applications worldwide. Furthermore, it is important that we secure us and ensure that we are appropriately adjusted for our inventions and investments.”

Monopoly battle, take two

The upcoming trial from multiple points of views will reflect the FTC’s antitrust case against Qualcomm. Apple will contend that Qualcomm’s “no license, no chips” policy forces handset creators to sign unfair licenses. It also harms Qualcomm’s processor rivals, making it costly to stay aware with modem advancement, according to the claims against Qualcomm.

“This trial is about Qualcomm’s illegal and self-announced ‘unique’ business model that stifles competition, loads innovation, and blackmails customers and licensees,” Apple and its agreement manufacturers said in a trial brief document in late March. They noted they’re concerned Qualcomm’s strength will continue in 5G chipsets.

Qualcomm will contend that it’s licensing rehearses are sensible and that it has satisfied its responsibilities when it comes to fair licensing terms for standard basic patents. The company will also remind the judge that it isn’t presently being paid by Apple and its subcontractors. Furthermore, Qualcomm will contend it isn’t stifling challenge and hasn’t harm Apple or its manufacturers.

“In spite of the fact that this case includes a large number of cases and counterclaims, at its heart, it is about Apple and its agreement manufacturers’ refusal to pay what they owe for their proceeded use of Qualcomm’s IP,” Qualcomm said in a March trial brief. “The Qualcomm IP licensed to the contract manufacturers forms the center cell technology without which the iPhone could not exist.”

Also Read:

Some Twists

The trial will probably present a few surprises. Apple’s agreement manufacturers are firmly involved. Some of them showed up at the earlier FTC trial via taped testimony, yet many executives will show up in court this time. Rather than being supporting players, they’ll be real on-screen actors. It’s the manufacturers, after all, who needs almost $27 billion from Qualcomm. Since Qualcomm has experienced this before, it’ll have the capacity to tweak its protection to better appeal to a jury. It has to address how it functioned with Apple and its agreement manufacturers, not how it managed with the whole mobile industry, like in the FTC trial.

One thing that won’t come up in the trial is proof from other antitrust investigations. Curiel ruled the FTC case and other regulatory inquiries Qualcomm has faced can’t be examined. It’s not clear what would happen if Koh releases her decision for January’s FTC fight before the Apple-Qualcomm trial ends. Regardless of what happens, the trial will be intently viewed by the entire mobile industry. We will be on hand to bring you updates from the ongoing court fight.

Surprising Screen Sizes for Apple’s iPhone Triple-Camera 2019

April 8, 2019 By Faiza Iftikhar Leave a Comment

While Apple clearly announces a new iPhone generation anytime in the near future, the development of the company’s XS, XS Max, and XR sequels has already begun months ago, with actual production to pursue at some point this summer in front of a traditional fall release. That means well-associated insiders may already know a thing or two about Cupertino’s 2019 redesign plans, but unfortunately, it’s not always easy to transfer these reliable sources detailing trustworthy data from the false prophets relaying mere guesses and unwarranted speculation.

Of course, the reputation and track record of specific leakers and analysts, like Steve Hemmerstoffer and Ming-Chi Kuo, generally makes their predictions ascend over the crowd. At that point you have blogs like Japan’s Macotakara, which are sometimes wrong and sometimes directly hinting new iPhone designs and features, making our lives pretty troublesome as we try to offer you the most complete and solid image of what’s to come.

3 Cameras, 2 OLED Screens, Five Models?!

According to the latest report of Macotakara’s it is a lit tle confusing that it fails to specifically mention how many iPhone models are in the pipeline in 2019. We were normally expecting three, legitimately following in the footsteps of 2018’s iPhone XS, XS MAX and XR, however, this new batch of gossips could be translated to anticipate as many as five distinct variants, just two of which will sport triple rear-facing camera units.

Again, a more practical understanding would be that Apple is simply outfitting up to release a refreshed iPhone XR with

two shooters on its back
An LCD panel of unspecified size

As well as iPhone XS and XS Max sequels with

6.1 and 6.5-inch OLED screens respectively.

The iPhone XI is tipped to go up facing the “regular” Samsung Galaxy S10, actually pressing between

the 5.8-inch XS and 6.1-inch XR in terms of its footprint.

But where might that leave the iPhone XR (2019)? We honestly have no idea, however, maybe Apple is planning a size increase for that model after all.

What seems pretty much scratched in stone is that Apple has no intention to keep the three rear cameras exclusive to the largest 2019 iPhone version. Both that and its little OLED sibling are relied on to rock “large lens units” with expanded sensor sizes as well. There’s no new word on the actual design of this camera arrangement, but all ongoing signs are pointing towards a divisive square with a pronounced protrusion.

Thinner body, Cables, and Fast Charging

Regardless of whether we’re looking at three or five iPhone 11 variants, it’s more likely to expect another Lightning-connected generation. Apple may have switched to USB-C ports for 2018 iPad Pros, but the best we can expect to the extent 2019’s iPhones are concerned is to get a USB-C to lightning cable in the box. Also, a speedy 18W USB-C power adapter that’s currently sold for $29 independently from 2018 iPhones.

Of course, there’s a strong possibility just these triple-camera versions with OLED screens will get such included as standard, close by bilateral wireless charging. The last feature would be a replica of Samsung’s Wireless PowerShare functionality and Huawei’s Wireless Reverse Charging technology, allowing you to extravagant your new Airpods straight from your new iPhone.

Also Read: Familiar Objection About Apple Watch Surfaces Again in New Lawsuit

At the last, Macotakara also claims that the 6.1-inch next-gen OLED iPhone could be around 0.15 mm thinner than the already slender 7.7 mm XS, while the 6.5-inch is anticipated to beat the thinness of the 7.7 mm XS Max by a significant 0.4 mm. That sounds incredible as long as Apple can figure out a new way to also boost two battery capacity.

Google Duplex Feature and iPhone Makes AI Calls To Hotels And Restaurants For Reservations

April 5, 2019 By Faiza Iftikhar Leave a Comment

Google Duplex is the service that caused quite a raise up when Google announced it during Google I/O last year. In Google conference it is described as it is a service that is capable of making hotel and restaurant reservations all by itself, it just needs to utilize the power of Google and its AI chops.

When we saw it in action it is super impressive, but it also has the ability to feel super creepy because of the way it interacts with people. If you’re an iPhone or iPad user, you can now take a look at Google Duplex for a spin yourself.

Google has tried to make people more comfortable with Duplex by making sure they know that they are talking to a computer but it is something that it didn’t do when it was first announced. This is something that should help with some of the anxiety people feel about Duplex, but we do still don’t believe that people will be comfortable with it, at least for now. That said, one day we also suspect things like Google Duplex will be the norm.

Until now it still feels a little bit ‘off,’ but if you want to give it a try for yourself you can do that. Getting access to Google Duplex is done through Google Assistant app which you can easily download from the App Store. This is the first time the Google Assistant app has supported Duplex, with the feature having been an Android-only affair until now.

Also Read:

Will you be putting Duplex through its paces, and would you feel weird talking to a computer if you were on the receiving end of that call?

Apple Watch Series 2 for just $150 from Woot

April 5, 2019 By Faiza Iftikhar Leave a Comment

There are a number of Apple Watch deals out there in the market and you can take advantage of them, but you still need to pay a half amount if you want a current model. The Apple watch series 4 hasn’t been discounted even once by more than $50 since its launch, but the previous generation models are much cheaper than the MSRP.

Purchasing of an original Apple Watch right now is definitely not worth it, no matter the price, but an Apple watches Series 2 is still a good choice if you are assuming you’ll get it for a lot less than its full price.

Right now, woot offers the Apple watch series 2 for just $150, which is not even half price of Apple watch series 2 but these watches are in refurbished condition. But that’s not really the issue that might put you off. Although these are refurbished Apple Watches Woot mentions that customers should expect a moderate level of wear, which is kind of a bummer.

On the bright side of this deal is that each Apple smartwatch comes with a 90-day warranty, so you can return the watch if you don’t like what you get or if the product stops functioning within the next three months. Woot’s Apple Watch Series 2 deal is only available until the end of the day, so hurry up if you want this Apple watch.

Key Features of Apple watch series 2:

It has an Aluminum case
It has Dual-core processor
It has a Built-in GPS
Water resistant
Wi-Fi support
Bluetooth
It has a Heart rate sensor
Accelerometer
Gyroscope
Ambient light sensor
I have a second-generation OLED Retina display with Force Touch
Ion-X glass
Built-in rechargeable lithium-ion battery
Up to 18 hours of battery life
Magnetic charging cable
Requires an iPhone 5 or later.

Also Read:

If you want to buy this watch kindly visit here and you can purchase this Apple watch in just $150 with a three-month warranty.

Does Google Need its Very Own Apple Card?

April 4, 2019 By Faiza Iftikhar Leave a Comment

There’s a decent chance you’ve seen individuals clamoring over Apple’s new charge card or credit card in the event that you’ve been online at all since the organization’s keynote a week ago. Aptly named the Apple Card, it’s a smooth and negligible credit card with no yearly expenses and what resembles a quite incredible UI and the card is made of titanium.

However, the card isn’t too great without needing any proof. It acquires 3% money back on Apple items, and 2% on everything else when utilized over Apple Pay but just 1% when you utilize the physical card. That is a disgrace, given how pleasant Apple and its partner Goldman Sachs made the card look, yet it makes sense; the main reason you get a card by any means is as a backup for areas that don’t acknowledge mobile payments.

More News: Do you Truly Need 5G Smartphone?

Be that as it may, the card isn’t really about the prizes. Apple influenced a major ordeal in front of an audience about the path you to apply for and deal with the card, which will all be done through the Wallet application on your iPhone. You get a lot of data on the dealers you purchase from inside the application, alongside decent representations for interest and credit balances. Obviously, there’s a huge amount of spotlight on security too, with even Apple itself unfit to see your spending action.

A charge card that is managed totally from your phone sounds interesting, yet I don’t know how it would happen for Google.

With the for the most positive reaction the Apple Card has collected up until now, there’s a decent chance Google should think about releasing a comparable credit card soon. All things considered, Android has a significantly larger market share of the overall industry than iOS, and it wouldn’t be the first run through the organization has offered physical cards to its clients — however the last item was a debit card — but I’m not entirely certain it’d be such an extraordinary thought.

State what you will about Apple, yet it’s dependably put a solid spotlight on protection and security. Your exchanges and ways of managing money have escaped the merchants and Apple alike, scrambled and stored straightforwardly on your phone. Put basically, individuals trust Apple. Google doesn’t have very that dimension of trust, and the intermittent vulnerability doesn’t look good for something as delicate as charge card data.

As my associate Jessica Dolcourt from CNET calls attention to, offering a credit card that must be overseen from your phone likewise further bolts clients into that device’s environment. On the off chance that you get an Apple Card, changing far from the iPhone all of a sudden includes finishing off your charge card, which can negatively affect your record as a consumer.

Apple knows this and keeping in mind that it’s not especially incredible for the client, it’s a brilliant business strategy that everything except ensures that Apple Card clients won’t switch Android at any point in the near future. That being stated, I’d truly prefer not to see Google embrace this system since a standout amongst its best characteristics is the cross-similarity of its administrations. Google will in general draw you in with its product, as opposed to its equipment or working framework.

You may be in an ideal situation getting a card like the Chase Freedom that doesn’t lock you into your stage.

All things considered, a Google Card could be great in certain regards. Google doesn’t sell as much high-dollar equipment as Apple, yet 3% money back would at present be decent when you’re requesting your next Pixel — particularly since you don’t get much out of the Synchrony-controlled credit card at present offered in the Google Store. Google could likewise offer the money back for its online administrations like YouTube Premium and the Play Store.

Also Read: Apple Card won’t drive Google, Samsung to offer their own credit cards

At the present time, however, the thing I’m most curious about is the reason the Apple Card or speculative Google Card would worth getting over a regular charge card. The security and protection Apple’s implementing is unquestionably engaging, however with just fundamental money back remunerations, is it extremely a superior idea than cards like the Chase Sapphire Preferred or Amex Blue Cash Preferred, which offer comparative rewards addition to sign-on rewards, and don’t lock you into your stage?

In the event that you don’t anticipate exchanging phones at any point in the near future, the application and security could be sufficient to attract you, yet I’m not persuaded at this time credit cards from tech organizations like Apple and Google are fundamentally the right financial choice for a great many people.