Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Doren who wrote (85158)	9/15/2009 10:56:55 PM
From: Sr K	Respond to of 213185

Apple Hires Intel's Top Lawyer By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Published: September 15, 2009 Filed at 11:05 a.m. ET CUPERTINO, Calif. (AP) -- Apple Inc. said Tuesday it hired Intel Corp.'s top lawyer, Bruce Sewell, a day after the chip maker announced his departure. Apple said Sewell will report to CEO Steve Jobs as the company's general counsel and senior vice president for legal and government affairs. Daniel Cooperman, who has held the job for the past two years, will retire at the end of the month, the company said. In a statement, Jobs said, ''We expect this to be a seamless transition.'' Intel, the world's largest chip maker, said Monday that Sewell and Pat Gelsinger, the head of its main division, were leaving the company. It also announced a major reorganization of its management, though the company said the departures were not related. Sewell joined Intel in 1995, rising to vice president and deputy general counsel in 2001. Before Apple's announcement, Intel declined on Monday to say what Sewell's next job would be. He had been heading up the company's effort to fend off antitrust claims, including the appeal of a $1.45 billion antitrust fine from the European Union. nytimes.com

To: Doren who wrote (85158)	9/16/2009 2:01:17 AM
From: Win-Lose-Draw	2 Recommendations Respond to of 213185

Apologies, but I honestly don't know what you're trying to say. In the same paragraph "TV" is used in both the "industry" and "that display doodad" sense and I can't figure out what you're trying to communicate. I'm not interested in watching movies on a 30" screen, and I very much doubt there will ever be a 52" iMac, so I'm pretty sure there is a long life ahead for Samsung and Sony and Sharp etc in the standalone display business. I freely admit I may be weird that way, but I rather doubt it...