With Intel reporting a year-over-year drop in revenue and profit for its third quarter, industry analysts say the company isn't in trouble but it needs to ward it off -- and now.
Late on Tuesday, Intel execs blamed a tough global economy and the rise of the tablet for a tough Q3 report. The company reported that profit for the quarter ending Sept. 29 came in at $2.97 billion, compared to $3.47 billion in the same quarter in 2011.
SHOPKEEPERS in Stokes Croft woke up to find more than 50 white swastikas daubed on walls, windows and cars in the area.
The offensive fascist symbols had been painted by someone overnight, in what looked like an indiscriminate manner.
Shop owners and workers were forced to clean off the graffiti before opening up for the day.
May Gurney cleaned off 42 of the symbols associated with Nazi Germany on behalf of the council, leaving only two still visible by 11am.
The shops vandalised included the Hooper House cafe, The Croft club, the Love Bristol Pop-up Bakery and the Runcible Spoon cafe on Nine Tree Hill.
Co-owner of the Hooper House, Andy Persson, had to clean four swastikas off the front of his shop.
"We've had people come and scratch the windows, but we've never had swastikas before," he said. "Like everyone else, I find them very offensive."
The pop-up bakery had five swastikas daubed on it, including a large one on a window.
Esme Wadie, who works at the charity-tun shop, said: "They were everywhere this morning and two of my housemates had them on their cars which were parked on Sydenham Road.
"We've been targeted with lots of graffiti before – we had a big paragraph of writing on the window once – but nothing like this.
"I don't know whether the people who did it are Nazis or they're accusing the people round here of being Nazis?
"It's hard to know why they would do something like this."
A man called Ben, 35, of St Paul's, spotted a number of the swastikas on his way to work and reported them to the council.
"I think it's absolutely disgusting," he said. "We all know the swastika is a symbol of hatred.
"There were so many it looked to me like it was some sort of campaign by whoever did it."
Anyone who knows who is responsible should call police on 101.
Apple has lost an appeal against a UK ruling regarding the similarity of the Samsung Galaxy Tab line of tablets to the iPad, and will be forced to run ads acknowledging that Samsung did not, in fact, copy the iPad design. The decision comes after Apple appealed a July ruling by the High Court that Samsung?s Galaxy Tab line of tablets did not infringe on the iPad?s design. Apple will have to post a link to the original judgement on its UK website, as well as run ads in major publications, the BBC reports:
The US firm had previously been ordered to place a notice to that effect - with a link to the original judgement - on its website and place other adverts in the Daily Mail, Financial Times, T3 Magazine and other publications to "correct the damaging impression" that Samsung was a copycat.
The appeal judges decided not to overturn the decision on the basis that a related Apple design-rights battle in the German courts risked causing confusion in consumers' minds.
The three judges determined that the Galaxy Tab did not infringe on the iPad based on the tests for infringement under UK law. This included the fact that Samsung?s logo is on the front of their device, where Apple?s registered design states that there should be ?no ornamentation?, and also that the Apple?s design features a ?sharp edge?, which the Galaxy Tab does not. The Samsung design was also said to be ?altoghether busier? than that of the iPad. Apple can still choose to appeal this decision to the UK Supreme Court.
Despite some victories Apple has lost a number of lawsuits to Samsung in a number of countries over tablet design. It should be noted that even in the case of the win in the US, Samsung was found not to have infringed on the iPad?s design, and their loss was entirely because the jury felt that they had infringed on the iPhone.
So was the Court of Appeal right in their decision that Samsung did not copy the iPad? Should Apple be forced to publicy acknowledge this on their website and in the press?
 |  |
