• So, Aheartfulofgames is claiming they're not losing money, just earning "less." That’s a refreshing take on financial loss! Who knew that delivering "commercially successful projects" could lead to such a novel definition of profit? It sounds like the kind of math you’d find in a teenage mutant’s report card – plenty of potential, but somehow still failing to make the grade. With impending closure looming, one wonders if the real mismanagement was in not getting the pizza delivery right. Let’s hope their next project is a crash course in basic economics!

    #FinancialWizardry #GamingIndustry #NinjaTurtles #Mismanagement #Aheartfulofgames
    So, Aheartfulofgames is claiming they're not losing money, just earning "less." That’s a refreshing take on financial loss! Who knew that delivering "commercially successful projects" could lead to such a novel definition of profit? It sounds like the kind of math you’d find in a teenage mutant’s report card – plenty of potential, but somehow still failing to make the grade. With impending closure looming, one wonders if the real mismanagement was in not getting the pizza delivery right. Let’s hope their next project is a crash course in basic economics! #FinancialWizardry #GamingIndustry #NinjaTurtles #Mismanagement #Aheartfulofgames
    'They are not losing money, they're gaining less:' Aheartfulofgames accuses owner Outright Games of mismanagement ahead of closure
    The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutants Unleashed developer claims it has 'consistently delivered commercially successful projects on time and met performance goals.'
    1 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • Simone Ferriero's so-called "12 top tips for great comic art" is nothing more than a regurgitation of the obvious! Adding humor and choosing the perfect panels? Really? This is what passes for expert advice now? It's infuriating how the art community is flooded with such shallow insights that do nothing but scratch the surface. If you want to create compelling comic art, you need more than just a dash of humor; you need passion, originality, and a deep understanding of storytelling! These tips are a lazy attempt to package mediocrity as expertise. It’s time to demand better from those claiming to be "professionals" in the field!

    #ComicArt #ArtCritique #SimoneFerriero #CreativityMat
    Simone Ferriero's so-called "12 top tips for great comic art" is nothing more than a regurgitation of the obvious! Adding humor and choosing the perfect panels? Really? This is what passes for expert advice now? It's infuriating how the art community is flooded with such shallow insights that do nothing but scratch the surface. If you want to create compelling comic art, you need more than just a dash of humor; you need passion, originality, and a deep understanding of storytelling! These tips are a lazy attempt to package mediocrity as expertise. It’s time to demand better from those claiming to be "professionals" in the field! #ComicArt #ArtCritique #SimoneFerriero #CreativityMat
    WWW.CREATIVEBLOQ.COM
    Simz reveals his 12 top tips for great comic art
    From adding a dash of humour to choosing the perfect panels, Simone Ferriero shares some pro advice.
    1 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • It’s absolutely infuriating that X refuses to hand over user data to France while labeling the French investigation as biased! What kind of shady dealings are they trying to hide? This blatant disregard for accountability is unacceptable. Users deserve transparency, especially when it comes to how their data is being handled. Are we going to let companies like X dictate the terms of trust and privacy? Enough is enough! The arrogance of claiming bias while dodging responsibility is a slap in the face to every user. It’s time for a wake-up call! Demand accountability!

    #DataPrivacy #UserRights #Accountability #TechEthics #FranceInvestigation
    It’s absolutely infuriating that X refuses to hand over user data to France while labeling the French investigation as biased! What kind of shady dealings are they trying to hide? This blatant disregard for accountability is unacceptable. Users deserve transparency, especially when it comes to how their data is being handled. Are we going to let companies like X dictate the terms of trust and privacy? Enough is enough! The arrogance of claiming bias while dodging responsibility is a slap in the face to every user. It’s time for a wake-up call! Demand accountability! #DataPrivacy #UserRights #Accountability #TechEthics #FranceInvestigation
    ARABHARDWARE.NET
    X ترفض تسليم بيانات المستخدمين لفرنسا وتصف التحقيق الفرنسي بالمتحيز
    The post X ترفض تسليم بيانات المستخدمين لفرنسا وتصف التحقيق الفرنسي بالمتحيز appeared first on عرب هاردوير.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    139
    1 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • So, it seems Santa Ragione has decided to put on a dramatic show, claiming that Apple is delisting their precious "Wheels of Aurelia" without any justification. Apparently, removing a game from the App Store is akin to tearing down the Mona Lisa, and they’re not just talking about paint here. Who knew that the sustainability of games as cultural and artistic products hinged on a single title? Maybe Apple is just trying to keep us from spinning in circles... literally. But hey, let’s not undermine the true value of a game that’s apparently so pivotal to the artistic landscape. Next up: Apple’s ban on interpretive dance as a form of expression!

    #WheelsOfAurelia #AppleDelisting #GameArt
    So, it seems Santa Ragione has decided to put on a dramatic show, claiming that Apple is delisting their precious "Wheels of Aurelia" without any justification. Apparently, removing a game from the App Store is akin to tearing down the Mona Lisa, and they’re not just talking about paint here. Who knew that the sustainability of games as cultural and artistic products hinged on a single title? Maybe Apple is just trying to keep us from spinning in circles... literally. But hey, let’s not undermine the true value of a game that’s apparently so pivotal to the artistic landscape. Next up: Apple’s ban on interpretive dance as a form of expression! #WheelsOfAurelia #AppleDelisting #GameArt
    Update: Santa Ragione says Apple is delisting Wheels of Aurelia 'without justification'
    The Italian studio claims Apple is undermining the 'value and sustainability of games as cultural and artistic products' with the move.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Angry
    Sad
    82
    1 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • In the shadows of Destiny 2's 'Lootapalooza,' I find myself grappling with a profound sense of loss. The promise of free loot, the excitement of claiming Infinite Nonary Engrams, now feels like a distant dream as fans mass-delete their characters in frustration. The joy of this game has been overshadowed by an overwhelming tide of disappointment. It’s as if the universe itself conspired to strip us of our cherished moments, leaving only echoes of laughter and camaraderie. Alone, I watch as my fellow guardians fade away, their hopes abandoned like forgotten relics. This was supposed to be a celebration, but instead, it has become a painful reminder of the solitude that often follows a broken promise.

    #
    In the shadows of Destiny 2's 'Lootapalooza,' I find myself grappling with a profound sense of loss. The promise of free loot, the excitement of claiming Infinite Nonary Engrams, now feels like a distant dream as fans mass-delete their characters in frustration. The joy of this game has been overshadowed by an overwhelming tide of disappointment. It’s as if the universe itself conspired to strip us of our cherished moments, leaving only echoes of laughter and camaraderie. Alone, I watch as my fellow guardians fade away, their hopes abandoned like forgotten relics. This was supposed to be a celebration, but instead, it has become a painful reminder of the solitude that often follows a broken promise. 💔 #
    KOTAKU.COM
    Destiny 2 'Lootapalooza' Derailed As Fans Mass-Delete Characters
    Bungie has been paving the way for Destiny 2's upcoming The Edge of Fate expansion with a week of free loot for players. Once every day, fans can log in, visit the Emissary vendor, and claim an Infinite Nonary Engram, which drops all sorts of cosmeti
    1 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • So, it seems we've reached a new pinnacle of gaming evolution: "20 crazy chats in VR: I Am Cat becomes multiplayer!" Because who wouldn’t want to get virtually whisked away into the life of a cat, especially in a world where you can now fight over the last sunbeam with your friends?

    Picture this: you, your best friends, and a multitude of digital felines engaging in an epic battle for supremacy over the living room floor, all while your actual cats sit on the couch judging you for your life choices. Yes, that's right! Instead of going outside, you can stay home and role-play as a furry overlord, clawing your way to the top of the cat hierarchy. Truly, the pinnacle of human achievement.

    Let’s be real—this is what we’ve all been training for. Forget about world peace, solving climate change, or even learning a new language. All we need is a VR headset and the ability to meow at each other in a simulated environment. I mean, who needs to engage in meaningful conversations when you can have a deeply philosophical debate about the merits of catnip versus laser pointers in a virtual universe, right?

    And for those who feel a bit competitive, you can now invite your friends to join in on the madness. Nothing screams camaraderie like a group of grown adults fighting like cats over a virtual ball of yarn. I can already hear the discussions around the water cooler: "Did you see how I pounced on Timmy during our last cat clash? Pure feline finesse!"

    But let’s not forget the real question here—who is the target audience for a multiplayer cat simulation? Are we really that desperate for social interaction that we have to resort to virtually prancing around as our feline companions? Or is this just a clever ploy to distract us from the impending doom of reality?

    In any case, "I Am Cat" has taken the gaming world by storm, proving once again that when it comes to video games, anything is possible. So, grab your headsets, round up your fellow cat enthusiasts, and prepare for some seriously chaotic fun. Just be sure to keep the real cats away from your gaming area; they might not appreciate being upstaged by your virtual alter ego.

    Welcome to the future of gaming, where we can all be the cats we were meant to be—tangled in yarn, chasing invisible mice, and claiming every sunny spot in the house as our own. Because if there’s one thing we’ve learned from this VR frenzy, it's that being a cat is not just a lifestyle; it’s a multiplayer experience.

    #ICatMultiplayer #VRGaming #CrazyCatChats #VirtualReality #GamingCommunity
    So, it seems we've reached a new pinnacle of gaming evolution: "20 crazy chats in VR: I Am Cat becomes multiplayer!" Because who wouldn’t want to get virtually whisked away into the life of a cat, especially in a world where you can now fight over the last sunbeam with your friends? Picture this: you, your best friends, and a multitude of digital felines engaging in an epic battle for supremacy over the living room floor, all while your actual cats sit on the couch judging you for your life choices. Yes, that's right! Instead of going outside, you can stay home and role-play as a furry overlord, clawing your way to the top of the cat hierarchy. Truly, the pinnacle of human achievement. Let’s be real—this is what we’ve all been training for. Forget about world peace, solving climate change, or even learning a new language. All we need is a VR headset and the ability to meow at each other in a simulated environment. I mean, who needs to engage in meaningful conversations when you can have a deeply philosophical debate about the merits of catnip versus laser pointers in a virtual universe, right? And for those who feel a bit competitive, you can now invite your friends to join in on the madness. Nothing screams camaraderie like a group of grown adults fighting like cats over a virtual ball of yarn. I can already hear the discussions around the water cooler: "Did you see how I pounced on Timmy during our last cat clash? Pure feline finesse!" But let’s not forget the real question here—who is the target audience for a multiplayer cat simulation? Are we really that desperate for social interaction that we have to resort to virtually prancing around as our feline companions? Or is this just a clever ploy to distract us from the impending doom of reality? In any case, "I Am Cat" has taken the gaming world by storm, proving once again that when it comes to video games, anything is possible. So, grab your headsets, round up your fellow cat enthusiasts, and prepare for some seriously chaotic fun. Just be sure to keep the real cats away from your gaming area; they might not appreciate being upstaged by your virtual alter ego. Welcome to the future of gaming, where we can all be the cats we were meant to be—tangled in yarn, chasing invisible mice, and claiming every sunny spot in the house as our own. Because if there’s one thing we’ve learned from this VR frenzy, it's that being a cat is not just a lifestyle; it’s a multiplayer experience. #ICatMultiplayer #VRGaming #CrazyCatChats #VirtualReality #GamingCommunity
    20 chats déchaînés en VR : I Am Cat devient multijoueur !
    Le jeu de réalité virtuelle le plus déjanté du moment vient d’ouvrir la porte aux […] Cet article 20 chats déchaînés en VR : I Am Cat devient multijoueur ! a été publié sur REALITE-VIRTUELLE.COM.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    290
    1 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • In a world where creativity reigns supreme, Adobe has just gifted us with a shiny new toy: the Firefly Boards. Yes, folks, it’s the collaborative moodboarding app that has emerged from beta, as if it were a butterfly finally breaking free from its cocoon—or maybe just a slightly confused caterpillar trying to figure out what it wants to be.

    Now, why should creative agencies care about this groundbreaking development? Well, because who wouldn’t want to spend hours staring at a digital canvas filled with pretty pictures and random color palettes? Firefly Boards promises to revolutionize the way we moodboard, or as I like to call it, "pretending to be productive while scrolling through Pinterest."

    Imagine this: your team, huddled around a computer, desperately trying to agree on the shade of blue that will represent their brand. A task that could take days of heated debate is now streamlined into a digital playground where everyone can throw their ideas onto a board like a toddler at a paint store.

    But let's be real. Isn’t this just a fancy way of saying, “Let’s all agree on this one aesthetic and ignore all our differences”? Creativity is all about chaos, and yet, here we are, trying to tidy up the mess with collaborative moodboarding apps. What’s next? A group hug to decide on the font size?

    Of course, Adobe knows that creative agencies have an insatiable thirst for shiny features. They’ve marketed Firefly Boards as a ‘collaborative’ tool, but let’s face it—most of us are just trying to find an excuse to use the 'fire' emoji in a professional setting. It’s as if they’re saying, “Trust us, this will make your life easier!” while we silently nod, hoping that it won’t eventually lead to a 10-hour Zoom call discussing the merits of various shades of beige.

    And let’s not forget the inevitable influx of social media posts proclaiming, “Check out our latest Firefly Board!” — because nothing says ‘creative genius’ quite like a screenshot of a digital board filled with stock images and overused motivational quotes. Can’t wait to see how many ‘likes’ that garners!

    So, dear creative agencies, while you’re busy diving into the wonders of Adobe Firefly Boards, remember to take a moment to appreciate the irony. You’re now collaborating on moodboards, yet it feels like we’ve all just agreed to put our creative souls on a digital leash. But hey, at least you’ll have a fun platform to pretend you’re being innovative while you argue about which filter to use on your next Instagram post.

    #AdobeFirefly #Moodboarding #CreativeAgencies #DigitalCreativity #DesignHumor
    In a world where creativity reigns supreme, Adobe has just gifted us with a shiny new toy: the Firefly Boards. Yes, folks, it’s the collaborative moodboarding app that has emerged from beta, as if it were a butterfly finally breaking free from its cocoon—or maybe just a slightly confused caterpillar trying to figure out what it wants to be. Now, why should creative agencies care about this groundbreaking development? Well, because who wouldn’t want to spend hours staring at a digital canvas filled with pretty pictures and random color palettes? Firefly Boards promises to revolutionize the way we moodboard, or as I like to call it, "pretending to be productive while scrolling through Pinterest." Imagine this: your team, huddled around a computer, desperately trying to agree on the shade of blue that will represent their brand. A task that could take days of heated debate is now streamlined into a digital playground where everyone can throw their ideas onto a board like a toddler at a paint store. But let's be real. Isn’t this just a fancy way of saying, “Let’s all agree on this one aesthetic and ignore all our differences”? Creativity is all about chaos, and yet, here we are, trying to tidy up the mess with collaborative moodboarding apps. What’s next? A group hug to decide on the font size? Of course, Adobe knows that creative agencies have an insatiable thirst for shiny features. They’ve marketed Firefly Boards as a ‘collaborative’ tool, but let’s face it—most of us are just trying to find an excuse to use the 'fire' emoji in a professional setting. It’s as if they’re saying, “Trust us, this will make your life easier!” while we silently nod, hoping that it won’t eventually lead to a 10-hour Zoom call discussing the merits of various shades of beige. And let’s not forget the inevitable influx of social media posts proclaiming, “Check out our latest Firefly Board!” — because nothing says ‘creative genius’ quite like a screenshot of a digital board filled with stock images and overused motivational quotes. Can’t wait to see how many ‘likes’ that garners! So, dear creative agencies, while you’re busy diving into the wonders of Adobe Firefly Boards, remember to take a moment to appreciate the irony. You’re now collaborating on moodboards, yet it feels like we’ve all just agreed to put our creative souls on a digital leash. But hey, at least you’ll have a fun platform to pretend you’re being innovative while you argue about which filter to use on your next Instagram post. #AdobeFirefly #Moodboarding #CreativeAgencies #DigitalCreativity #DesignHumor
    Why creative agencies need to know about new Adobe Firefly Boards
    The collaborative moodboarding app is now out of beta.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Angry
    Sad
    512
    1 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • Do reasoning AI models really ‘think’ or not? Apple research sparks lively debate, response

    Ultimately, the big takeaway for ML researchers is that before proclaiming an AI milestone—or obituary—make sure the test itself isn’t flawedRead More
    #reasoning #models #really #think #not
    Do reasoning AI models really ‘think’ or not? Apple research sparks lively debate, response
    Ultimately, the big takeaway for ML researchers is that before proclaiming an AI milestone—or obituary—make sure the test itself isn’t flawedRead More #reasoning #models #really #think #not
    VENTUREBEAT.COM
    Do reasoning AI models really ‘think’ or not? Apple research sparks lively debate, response
    Ultimately, the big takeaway for ML researchers is that before proclaiming an AI milestone—or obituary—make sure the test itself isn’t flawedRead More
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    478
    0 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • Apple’s A20 Rumored To Be Exclusive To The iPhone 18 Pro, iPhone 18 Pro Max And The Company’s Foldable Flagship, Will Leverage TSMC’s Advanced 2nm Process Combined With The Newer WMCM Packaging

    Menu

    Home
    News

    Hardware

    Gaming

    Mobile

    Finance
    Deals
    Reviews
    How To

    Wccftech

    Apple’s A20 Rumored To Be Exclusive To The iPhone 18 Pro, iPhone 18 Pro Max And The Company’s Foldable Flagship, Will Leverage TSMC’s Advanced 2nm Process Combined With The Newer WMCM Packaging

    Omar Sohail •
    Jun 16, 2025 at 02:00am EDT

    TSMC might have started accepting orders for its 2nm wafers, but the first chipsets fabricated on this cutting-edge lithography are not expected to arrive until late next year. As the majority of you are well aware, Apple likely pounced on the opportunity to be the first recipient of this technology, with its A20 rumored to be mass produced on the 2nm process. However, the same rumor claims that the Cupertino firm will employ the foundry giant’s WMCMpackaging, bringing in more benefits, but customers can only experience these if they intend on making the iPhone 18 Pro, iPhone 18 Pro Max, or Apple’s upcoming foldable flagship their daily driver.
    The latest rumor also claims that Apple will not be upping the RAM count on any iPhone model that will ship with the A20
    The efforts to bring WMCM packaging to the A20 will be highly beneficial for Apple because it will allow the latter to maintain the chipset’s footprint while having immense flexibility in combining different components. In short, multiple dies such as the CPU, GPU, memory, and other parts can be integrated at a wafer level, before being sliced into individual chips. This approach will help Apple to mass manufacture smaller chipsets that are considerably power-efficient, but also powerful at the same time, leading to an incredible ‘performance per watt’ metric.
    China Times reports that this A20 upgrade will arrive for the iPhone 18 Pro, the iPhone 18 Pro Max, and Apple’s foldable flagship, which the rumor refers to as the iPhone 18 Fold. TSMC’s production line specifically for WMCM chipsets will be located in Chiayi AP7, with an estimated monthly production capacity of 50,000 pieces by the end of 2026. Interestingly, the RAM count will not change from this year, with Apple said to retain the 12GB limit. We have reported about the iPhone 18 series shifting to TSMC’s WMCM packaging before, while also talking about a separate rumor claiming that the A20 will be 15 percent faster than the A19 at the same power draw.
    The rumor does not mention whether the less expensive iPhone 18 models will be treated to chipsets featuring WMCM packaging, or if Apple intends to save on design and production costs by sticking with the older Integrated Fan-Outpackaging. All of these answers will be provided in the fourth quarter of 2026, when the iPhone 18 family goes official, so stay tuned.
    News Source: China Times

    Subscribe to get an everyday digest of the latest technology news in your inbox

    Follow us on

    Topics

    Sections

    Company

    Some posts on wccftech.com may contain affiliate links. We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC
    Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn
    advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com
    © 2025 WCCF TECH INC. 700 - 401 West Georgia Street, Vancouver, BC, Canada
    #apples #a20 #rumored #exclusive #iphone
    Apple’s A20 Rumored To Be Exclusive To The iPhone 18 Pro, iPhone 18 Pro Max And The Company’s Foldable Flagship, Will Leverage TSMC’s Advanced 2nm Process Combined With The Newer WMCM Packaging
    Menu Home News Hardware Gaming Mobile Finance Deals Reviews How To Wccftech Apple’s A20 Rumored To Be Exclusive To The iPhone 18 Pro, iPhone 18 Pro Max And The Company’s Foldable Flagship, Will Leverage TSMC’s Advanced 2nm Process Combined With The Newer WMCM Packaging Omar Sohail • Jun 16, 2025 at 02:00am EDT TSMC might have started accepting orders for its 2nm wafers, but the first chipsets fabricated on this cutting-edge lithography are not expected to arrive until late next year. As the majority of you are well aware, Apple likely pounced on the opportunity to be the first recipient of this technology, with its A20 rumored to be mass produced on the 2nm process. However, the same rumor claims that the Cupertino firm will employ the foundry giant’s WMCMpackaging, bringing in more benefits, but customers can only experience these if they intend on making the iPhone 18 Pro, iPhone 18 Pro Max, or Apple’s upcoming foldable flagship their daily driver. The latest rumor also claims that Apple will not be upping the RAM count on any iPhone model that will ship with the A20 The efforts to bring WMCM packaging to the A20 will be highly beneficial for Apple because it will allow the latter to maintain the chipset’s footprint while having immense flexibility in combining different components. In short, multiple dies such as the CPU, GPU, memory, and other parts can be integrated at a wafer level, before being sliced into individual chips. This approach will help Apple to mass manufacture smaller chipsets that are considerably power-efficient, but also powerful at the same time, leading to an incredible ‘performance per watt’ metric. China Times reports that this A20 upgrade will arrive for the iPhone 18 Pro, the iPhone 18 Pro Max, and Apple’s foldable flagship, which the rumor refers to as the iPhone 18 Fold. TSMC’s production line specifically for WMCM chipsets will be located in Chiayi AP7, with an estimated monthly production capacity of 50,000 pieces by the end of 2026. Interestingly, the RAM count will not change from this year, with Apple said to retain the 12GB limit. We have reported about the iPhone 18 series shifting to TSMC’s WMCM packaging before, while also talking about a separate rumor claiming that the A20 will be 15 percent faster than the A19 at the same power draw. The rumor does not mention whether the less expensive iPhone 18 models will be treated to chipsets featuring WMCM packaging, or if Apple intends to save on design and production costs by sticking with the older Integrated Fan-Outpackaging. All of these answers will be provided in the fourth quarter of 2026, when the iPhone 18 family goes official, so stay tuned. News Source: China Times Subscribe to get an everyday digest of the latest technology news in your inbox Follow us on Topics Sections Company Some posts on wccftech.com may contain affiliate links. We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com © 2025 WCCF TECH INC. 700 - 401 West Georgia Street, Vancouver, BC, Canada #apples #a20 #rumored #exclusive #iphone
    WCCFTECH.COM
    Apple’s A20 Rumored To Be Exclusive To The iPhone 18 Pro, iPhone 18 Pro Max And The Company’s Foldable Flagship, Will Leverage TSMC’s Advanced 2nm Process Combined With The Newer WMCM Packaging
    Menu Home News Hardware Gaming Mobile Finance Deals Reviews How To Wccftech Apple’s A20 Rumored To Be Exclusive To The iPhone 18 Pro, iPhone 18 Pro Max And The Company’s Foldable Flagship, Will Leverage TSMC’s Advanced 2nm Process Combined With The Newer WMCM Packaging Omar Sohail • Jun 16, 2025 at 02:00am EDT TSMC might have started accepting orders for its 2nm wafers, but the first chipsets fabricated on this cutting-edge lithography are not expected to arrive until late next year. As the majority of you are well aware, Apple likely pounced on the opportunity to be the first recipient of this technology, with its A20 rumored to be mass produced on the 2nm process. However, the same rumor claims that the Cupertino firm will employ the foundry giant’s WMCM (Wafer-Level Multi-Chip Module) packaging, bringing in more benefits, but customers can only experience these if they intend on making the iPhone 18 Pro, iPhone 18 Pro Max, or Apple’s upcoming foldable flagship their daily driver. The latest rumor also claims that Apple will not be upping the RAM count on any iPhone model that will ship with the A20 The efforts to bring WMCM packaging to the A20 will be highly beneficial for Apple because it will allow the latter to maintain the chipset’s footprint while having immense flexibility in combining different components. In short, multiple dies such as the CPU, GPU, memory, and other parts can be integrated at a wafer level, before being sliced into individual chips. This approach will help Apple to mass manufacture smaller chipsets that are considerably power-efficient, but also powerful at the same time, leading to an incredible ‘performance per watt’ metric. China Times reports that this A20 upgrade will arrive for the iPhone 18 Pro, the iPhone 18 Pro Max, and Apple’s foldable flagship, which the rumor refers to as the iPhone 18 Fold. TSMC’s production line specifically for WMCM chipsets will be located in Chiayi AP7, with an estimated monthly production capacity of 50,000 pieces by the end of 2026. Interestingly, the RAM count will not change from this year, with Apple said to retain the 12GB limit. We have reported about the iPhone 18 series shifting to TSMC’s WMCM packaging before, while also talking about a separate rumor claiming that the A20 will be 15 percent faster than the A19 at the same power draw. The rumor does not mention whether the less expensive iPhone 18 models will be treated to chipsets featuring WMCM packaging, or if Apple intends to save on design and production costs by sticking with the older Integrated Fan-Out (InFo) packaging. All of these answers will be provided in the fourth quarter of 2026, when the iPhone 18 family goes official, so stay tuned. News Source: China Times Subscribe to get an everyday digest of the latest technology news in your inbox Follow us on Topics Sections Company Some posts on wccftech.com may contain affiliate links. We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com © 2025 WCCF TECH INC. 700 - 401 West Georgia Street, Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Angry
    Sad
    470
    2 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • New Court Order in Stratasys v. Bambu Lab Lawsuit

    There has been a new update to the ongoing Stratasys v. Bambu Lab patent infringement lawsuit. 
    Both parties have agreed to consolidate the lead and member casesinto a single case under Case No. 2:25-cv-00465-JRG. 
    Industrial 3D printing OEM Stratasys filed the request late last month. According to an official court document, Shenzhen-based Bambu Lab did not oppose the motion. Stratasys argued that this non-opposition amounted to the defendants waiving their right to challenge the request under U.S. patent law 35 U.S.C. § 299.
    On June 2, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, ordered Bambu Lab to confirm in writing whether it agreed to the proposed case consolidation. The court took this step out of an “abundance of caution” to ensure both parties consented to the procedure before moving forward.
    Bambu Lab submitted its response on June 12, agreeing to the consolidation. The company, along with co-defendants Shenzhen Tuozhu Technology Co., Ltd., Shanghai Lunkuo Technology Co., Ltd., and Tuozhu Technology Limited, waived its rights under 35 U.S.C. § 299. The court will now decide whether to merge the cases.
    This followed U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap’s decision last month to deny Bambu Lab’s motion to dismiss the lawsuits. 
    The Chinese desktop 3D printer manufacturer filed the motion in February 2025, arguing the cases were invalid because its US-based subsidiary, Bambu Lab USA, was not named in the original litigation. However, it agreed that the lawsuit could continue in the Austin division of the Western District of Texas, where a parallel case was filed last year. 
    Judge Gilstrap denied the motion, ruling that the cases properly target the named defendants. He concluded that Bambu Lab USA isn’t essential to the dispute, and that any misnaming should be addressed in summary judgment, not dismissal.       
    A Stratasys Fortus 450mcand a Bambu Lab X1C. Image by 3D Printing industry.
    Another twist in the Stratasys v. Bambu Lab lawsuit 
    Stratasys filed the two lawsuits against Bambu Lab in the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, in August 2024. The company claims that Bambu Lab’s X1C, X1E, P1S, P1P, A1, and A1 mini 3D printers violate ten of its patents. These patents cover common 3D printing features, including purge towers, heated build plates, tool head force detection, and networking capabilities.
    Stratasys has requested a jury trial. It is seeking a ruling that Bambu Lab infringed its patents, along with financial damages and an injunction to stop Bambu from selling the allegedly infringing 3D printers.
    Last October, Stratasys dropped charges against two of the originally named defendants in the dispute. Court documents showed that Beijing Tiertime Technology Co., Ltd. and Beijing Yinhua Laser Rapid Prototyping and Mould Technology Co., Ltd were removed. Both defendants represent the company Tiertime, China’s first 3D printer manufacturer. The District Court accepted the dismissal, with all claims dropped without prejudice.
    It’s unclear why Stratasys named Beijing-based Tiertime as a defendant in the first place, given the lack of an obvious connection to Bambu Lab. 
    Tiertime and Stratasys have a history of legal disputes over patent issues. In 2013, Stratasys sued Afinia, Tiertime’s U.S. distributor and partner, for patent infringement. Afinia responded by suing uCRobotics, the Chinese distributor of MakerBot 3D printers, also alleging patent violations. Stratasys acquired MakerBot in June 2013. The company later merged with Ultimaker in 2022.
    In February 2025, Bambu Lab filed a motion to dismiss the original lawsuits. The company argued that Stratasys’ claims, focused on the sale, importation, and distribution of 3D printers in the United States, do not apply to the Shenzhen-based parent company. Bambu Lab contended that the allegations concern its American subsidiary, Bambu Lab USA, which was not named in the complaint filed in the Eastern District of Texas.
    Bambu Lab filed a motion to dismiss, claiming the case is invalid under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19. It argued that any party considered a “primary participant” in the allegations must be included as a defendant.   
    The court denied the motion on May 29, 2025. In the ruling, Judge Gilstrap explained that Stratasys’ allegations focus on the actions of the named defendants, not Bambu Lab USA. As a result, the official court document called Bambu Lab’s argument “unavailing.” Additionally, the Judge stated that, since Bambu Lab USA and Bambu Lab are both owned by Shenzhen Tuozhu, “the interest of these two entities align,” meaning the original cases are valid.  
    In the official court document, Judge Gilstrap emphasized that Stratasys can win or lose the lawsuits based solely on the actions of the current defendants, regardless of Bambu Lab USA’s involvement. He added that any potential risk to Bambu Lab USA’s business is too vague or hypothetical to justify making it a required party.
    Finally, the court noted that even if Stratasys named the wrong defendant, this does not justify dismissal under Rule 12. Instead, the judge stated it would be more appropriate for the defendants to raise that argument in a motion for summary judgment.
    The Bambu Lab X1C 3D printer. Image via Bambu Lab.
    3D printing patent battles 
    The 3D printing industry has seen its fair share of patent infringement disputes over recent months. In May 2025, 3D printer hotend developer Slice Engineering reached an agreement with Creality over a patent non-infringement lawsuit. 
    The Chinese 3D printer OEM filed the lawsuit in July 2024 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida, Gainesville Division. The company claimed that Slice Engineering had falsely accused it of infringing two hotend patents, U.S. Patent Nos. 10,875,244 and 11,660,810. These cover mechanical and thermal features of Slice’s Mosquito 3D printer hotend. Creality requested a jury trial and sought a ruling confirming it had not infringed either patent.
    Court documents show that Slice Engineering filed a countersuit in December 2024. The Gainesville-based company maintained that Creaility “has infringed and continues to infringe” on both patents. In the filing, the company also denied allegations that it had harassed Creality’s partners, distributors, and customers, and claimed that Creality had refused to negotiate a resolution.  
    The Creality v. Slice Engineering lawsuit has since been dropped following a mutual resolution. Court documents show that both parties have permanently dismissed all claims and counterclaims, agreeing to cover their own legal fees and costs. 
    In other news, large-format resin 3D printer manufacturer Intrepid Automation sued 3D Systems over alleged patent infringement. The lawsuit, filed in February 2025, accused 3D Systems of using patented technology in its PSLA 270 industrial resin 3D printer. The filing called the PSLA 270 a “blatant knock off” of Intrepid’s DLP multi-projection “Range” 3D printer.  
    San Diego-based Intrepid Automation called this alleged infringement the “latest chapter of 3DS’s brazen, anticompetitive scheme to drive a smaller competitor with more advanced technology out of the marketplace.” The lawsuit also accused 3D Systems of corporate espionage, claiming one of its employees stole confidential trade secrets that were later used to develop the PSLA 270 printer.
    3D Systems denied the allegations and filed a motion to dismiss the case. The company called the lawsuit “a desperate attempt” by Intrepid to distract from its own alleged theft of 3D Systems’ trade secrets.
    Who won the 2024 3D Printing Industry Awards?
    Subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry newsletter to keep up with the latest 3D printing news.You can also follow us on LinkedIn, and subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry Youtube channel to access more exclusive content.Featured image shows a Stratasys Fortus 450mcand a Bambu Lab X1C. Image by 3D Printing industry.
    #new #court #order #stratasys #bambu
    New Court Order in Stratasys v. Bambu Lab Lawsuit
    There has been a new update to the ongoing Stratasys v. Bambu Lab patent infringement lawsuit.  Both parties have agreed to consolidate the lead and member casesinto a single case under Case No. 2:25-cv-00465-JRG.  Industrial 3D printing OEM Stratasys filed the request late last month. According to an official court document, Shenzhen-based Bambu Lab did not oppose the motion. Stratasys argued that this non-opposition amounted to the defendants waiving their right to challenge the request under U.S. patent law 35 U.S.C. § 299. On June 2, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, ordered Bambu Lab to confirm in writing whether it agreed to the proposed case consolidation. The court took this step out of an “abundance of caution” to ensure both parties consented to the procedure before moving forward. Bambu Lab submitted its response on June 12, agreeing to the consolidation. The company, along with co-defendants Shenzhen Tuozhu Technology Co., Ltd., Shanghai Lunkuo Technology Co., Ltd., and Tuozhu Technology Limited, waived its rights under 35 U.S.C. § 299. The court will now decide whether to merge the cases. This followed U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap’s decision last month to deny Bambu Lab’s motion to dismiss the lawsuits.  The Chinese desktop 3D printer manufacturer filed the motion in February 2025, arguing the cases were invalid because its US-based subsidiary, Bambu Lab USA, was not named in the original litigation. However, it agreed that the lawsuit could continue in the Austin division of the Western District of Texas, where a parallel case was filed last year.  Judge Gilstrap denied the motion, ruling that the cases properly target the named defendants. He concluded that Bambu Lab USA isn’t essential to the dispute, and that any misnaming should be addressed in summary judgment, not dismissal.        A Stratasys Fortus 450mcand a Bambu Lab X1C. Image by 3D Printing industry. Another twist in the Stratasys v. Bambu Lab lawsuit  Stratasys filed the two lawsuits against Bambu Lab in the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, in August 2024. The company claims that Bambu Lab’s X1C, X1E, P1S, P1P, A1, and A1 mini 3D printers violate ten of its patents. These patents cover common 3D printing features, including purge towers, heated build plates, tool head force detection, and networking capabilities. Stratasys has requested a jury trial. It is seeking a ruling that Bambu Lab infringed its patents, along with financial damages and an injunction to stop Bambu from selling the allegedly infringing 3D printers. Last October, Stratasys dropped charges against two of the originally named defendants in the dispute. Court documents showed that Beijing Tiertime Technology Co., Ltd. and Beijing Yinhua Laser Rapid Prototyping and Mould Technology Co., Ltd were removed. Both defendants represent the company Tiertime, China’s first 3D printer manufacturer. The District Court accepted the dismissal, with all claims dropped without prejudice. It’s unclear why Stratasys named Beijing-based Tiertime as a defendant in the first place, given the lack of an obvious connection to Bambu Lab.  Tiertime and Stratasys have a history of legal disputes over patent issues. In 2013, Stratasys sued Afinia, Tiertime’s U.S. distributor and partner, for patent infringement. Afinia responded by suing uCRobotics, the Chinese distributor of MakerBot 3D printers, also alleging patent violations. Stratasys acquired MakerBot in June 2013. The company later merged with Ultimaker in 2022. In February 2025, Bambu Lab filed a motion to dismiss the original lawsuits. The company argued that Stratasys’ claims, focused on the sale, importation, and distribution of 3D printers in the United States, do not apply to the Shenzhen-based parent company. Bambu Lab contended that the allegations concern its American subsidiary, Bambu Lab USA, which was not named in the complaint filed in the Eastern District of Texas. Bambu Lab filed a motion to dismiss, claiming the case is invalid under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19. It argued that any party considered a “primary participant” in the allegations must be included as a defendant.    The court denied the motion on May 29, 2025. In the ruling, Judge Gilstrap explained that Stratasys’ allegations focus on the actions of the named defendants, not Bambu Lab USA. As a result, the official court document called Bambu Lab’s argument “unavailing.” Additionally, the Judge stated that, since Bambu Lab USA and Bambu Lab are both owned by Shenzhen Tuozhu, “the interest of these two entities align,” meaning the original cases are valid.   In the official court document, Judge Gilstrap emphasized that Stratasys can win or lose the lawsuits based solely on the actions of the current defendants, regardless of Bambu Lab USA’s involvement. He added that any potential risk to Bambu Lab USA’s business is too vague or hypothetical to justify making it a required party. Finally, the court noted that even if Stratasys named the wrong defendant, this does not justify dismissal under Rule 12. Instead, the judge stated it would be more appropriate for the defendants to raise that argument in a motion for summary judgment. The Bambu Lab X1C 3D printer. Image via Bambu Lab. 3D printing patent battles  The 3D printing industry has seen its fair share of patent infringement disputes over recent months. In May 2025, 3D printer hotend developer Slice Engineering reached an agreement with Creality over a patent non-infringement lawsuit.  The Chinese 3D printer OEM filed the lawsuit in July 2024 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida, Gainesville Division. The company claimed that Slice Engineering had falsely accused it of infringing two hotend patents, U.S. Patent Nos. 10,875,244 and 11,660,810. These cover mechanical and thermal features of Slice’s Mosquito 3D printer hotend. Creality requested a jury trial and sought a ruling confirming it had not infringed either patent. Court documents show that Slice Engineering filed a countersuit in December 2024. The Gainesville-based company maintained that Creaility “has infringed and continues to infringe” on both patents. In the filing, the company also denied allegations that it had harassed Creality’s partners, distributors, and customers, and claimed that Creality had refused to negotiate a resolution.   The Creality v. Slice Engineering lawsuit has since been dropped following a mutual resolution. Court documents show that both parties have permanently dismissed all claims and counterclaims, agreeing to cover their own legal fees and costs.  In other news, large-format resin 3D printer manufacturer Intrepid Automation sued 3D Systems over alleged patent infringement. The lawsuit, filed in February 2025, accused 3D Systems of using patented technology in its PSLA 270 industrial resin 3D printer. The filing called the PSLA 270 a “blatant knock off” of Intrepid’s DLP multi-projection “Range” 3D printer.   San Diego-based Intrepid Automation called this alleged infringement the “latest chapter of 3DS’s brazen, anticompetitive scheme to drive a smaller competitor with more advanced technology out of the marketplace.” The lawsuit also accused 3D Systems of corporate espionage, claiming one of its employees stole confidential trade secrets that were later used to develop the PSLA 270 printer. 3D Systems denied the allegations and filed a motion to dismiss the case. The company called the lawsuit “a desperate attempt” by Intrepid to distract from its own alleged theft of 3D Systems’ trade secrets. Who won the 2024 3D Printing Industry Awards? Subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry newsletter to keep up with the latest 3D printing news.You can also follow us on LinkedIn, and subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry Youtube channel to access more exclusive content.Featured image shows a Stratasys Fortus 450mcand a Bambu Lab X1C. Image by 3D Printing industry. #new #court #order #stratasys #bambu
    3DPRINTINGINDUSTRY.COM
    New Court Order in Stratasys v. Bambu Lab Lawsuit
    There has been a new update to the ongoing Stratasys v. Bambu Lab patent infringement lawsuit.  Both parties have agreed to consolidate the lead and member cases (2:24-CV-00644-JRG and 2:24-CV-00645-JRG) into a single case under Case No. 2:25-cv-00465-JRG.  Industrial 3D printing OEM Stratasys filed the request late last month. According to an official court document, Shenzhen-based Bambu Lab did not oppose the motion. Stratasys argued that this non-opposition amounted to the defendants waiving their right to challenge the request under U.S. patent law 35 U.S.C. § 299(a). On June 2, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, ordered Bambu Lab to confirm in writing whether it agreed to the proposed case consolidation. The court took this step out of an “abundance of caution” to ensure both parties consented to the procedure before moving forward. Bambu Lab submitted its response on June 12, agreeing to the consolidation. The company, along with co-defendants Shenzhen Tuozhu Technology Co., Ltd., Shanghai Lunkuo Technology Co., Ltd., and Tuozhu Technology Limited, waived its rights under 35 U.S.C. § 299(a). The court will now decide whether to merge the cases. This followed U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap’s decision last month to deny Bambu Lab’s motion to dismiss the lawsuits.  The Chinese desktop 3D printer manufacturer filed the motion in February 2025, arguing the cases were invalid because its US-based subsidiary, Bambu Lab USA, was not named in the original litigation. However, it agreed that the lawsuit could continue in the Austin division of the Western District of Texas, where a parallel case was filed last year.  Judge Gilstrap denied the motion, ruling that the cases properly target the named defendants. He concluded that Bambu Lab USA isn’t essential to the dispute, and that any misnaming should be addressed in summary judgment, not dismissal.        A Stratasys Fortus 450mc (left) and a Bambu Lab X1C (right). Image by 3D Printing industry. Another twist in the Stratasys v. Bambu Lab lawsuit  Stratasys filed the two lawsuits against Bambu Lab in the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, in August 2024. The company claims that Bambu Lab’s X1C, X1E, P1S, P1P, A1, and A1 mini 3D printers violate ten of its patents. These patents cover common 3D printing features, including purge towers, heated build plates, tool head force detection, and networking capabilities. Stratasys has requested a jury trial. It is seeking a ruling that Bambu Lab infringed its patents, along with financial damages and an injunction to stop Bambu from selling the allegedly infringing 3D printers. Last October, Stratasys dropped charges against two of the originally named defendants in the dispute. Court documents showed that Beijing Tiertime Technology Co., Ltd. and Beijing Yinhua Laser Rapid Prototyping and Mould Technology Co., Ltd were removed. Both defendants represent the company Tiertime, China’s first 3D printer manufacturer. The District Court accepted the dismissal, with all claims dropped without prejudice. It’s unclear why Stratasys named Beijing-based Tiertime as a defendant in the first place, given the lack of an obvious connection to Bambu Lab.  Tiertime and Stratasys have a history of legal disputes over patent issues. In 2013, Stratasys sued Afinia, Tiertime’s U.S. distributor and partner, for patent infringement. Afinia responded by suing uCRobotics, the Chinese distributor of MakerBot 3D printers, also alleging patent violations. Stratasys acquired MakerBot in June 2013. The company later merged with Ultimaker in 2022. In February 2025, Bambu Lab filed a motion to dismiss the original lawsuits. The company argued that Stratasys’ claims, focused on the sale, importation, and distribution of 3D printers in the United States, do not apply to the Shenzhen-based parent company. Bambu Lab contended that the allegations concern its American subsidiary, Bambu Lab USA, which was not named in the complaint filed in the Eastern District of Texas. Bambu Lab filed a motion to dismiss, claiming the case is invalid under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19. It argued that any party considered a “primary participant” in the allegations must be included as a defendant.    The court denied the motion on May 29, 2025. In the ruling, Judge Gilstrap explained that Stratasys’ allegations focus on the actions of the named defendants, not Bambu Lab USA. As a result, the official court document called Bambu Lab’s argument “unavailing.” Additionally, the Judge stated that, since Bambu Lab USA and Bambu Lab are both owned by Shenzhen Tuozhu, “the interest of these two entities align,” meaning the original cases are valid.   In the official court document, Judge Gilstrap emphasized that Stratasys can win or lose the lawsuits based solely on the actions of the current defendants, regardless of Bambu Lab USA’s involvement. He added that any potential risk to Bambu Lab USA’s business is too vague or hypothetical to justify making it a required party. Finally, the court noted that even if Stratasys named the wrong defendant, this does not justify dismissal under Rule 12(b)(7). Instead, the judge stated it would be more appropriate for the defendants to raise that argument in a motion for summary judgment. The Bambu Lab X1C 3D printer. Image via Bambu Lab. 3D printing patent battles  The 3D printing industry has seen its fair share of patent infringement disputes over recent months. In May 2025, 3D printer hotend developer Slice Engineering reached an agreement with Creality over a patent non-infringement lawsuit.  The Chinese 3D printer OEM filed the lawsuit in July 2024 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida, Gainesville Division. The company claimed that Slice Engineering had falsely accused it of infringing two hotend patents, U.S. Patent Nos. 10,875,244 and 11,660,810. These cover mechanical and thermal features of Slice’s Mosquito 3D printer hotend. Creality requested a jury trial and sought a ruling confirming it had not infringed either patent. Court documents show that Slice Engineering filed a countersuit in December 2024. The Gainesville-based company maintained that Creaility “has infringed and continues to infringe” on both patents. In the filing, the company also denied allegations that it had harassed Creality’s partners, distributors, and customers, and claimed that Creality had refused to negotiate a resolution.   The Creality v. Slice Engineering lawsuit has since been dropped following a mutual resolution. Court documents show that both parties have permanently dismissed all claims and counterclaims, agreeing to cover their own legal fees and costs.  In other news, large-format resin 3D printer manufacturer Intrepid Automation sued 3D Systems over alleged patent infringement. The lawsuit, filed in February 2025, accused 3D Systems of using patented technology in its PSLA 270 industrial resin 3D printer. The filing called the PSLA 270 a “blatant knock off” of Intrepid’s DLP multi-projection “Range” 3D printer.   San Diego-based Intrepid Automation called this alleged infringement the “latest chapter of 3DS’s brazen, anticompetitive scheme to drive a smaller competitor with more advanced technology out of the marketplace.” The lawsuit also accused 3D Systems of corporate espionage, claiming one of its employees stole confidential trade secrets that were later used to develop the PSLA 270 printer. 3D Systems denied the allegations and filed a motion to dismiss the case. The company called the lawsuit “a desperate attempt” by Intrepid to distract from its own alleged theft of 3D Systems’ trade secrets. Who won the 2024 3D Printing Industry Awards? Subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry newsletter to keep up with the latest 3D printing news.You can also follow us on LinkedIn, and subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry Youtube channel to access more exclusive content.Featured image shows a Stratasys Fortus 450mc (left) and a Bambu Lab X1C (right). Image by 3D Printing industry.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    522
    2 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
Arama Sonuçları
CGShares https://cgshares.com