Exactly. So then why are we just picking on AT&T? *this* is what really chaps my hide. It is popular to pick on AT&T because some people didn't like the NSA collaboration, and a LOT of people (on slashdot) hate Apple. This is yet another transparent attempt to put AT&T in a bad light, as if that somehow can make Apple look bad.
While I agree that iTunes is bloated on the Windows side, it isn't as so on the OS X. Or if it is, it is nicely integrated into the OS well enough that Mac users don't notice. In contrast, when using iTunes on a PC, I'm constantly "reminded" of the cpu/ram demands going on with iTunes.
Also, the QT full-screen complaint is moot, because any video, tv show or movie you purchase from the iTunes store plays in full-screen mode. The file itself will not play full screen in QT (if you launch it from outside of iTunes) unless you pay for QT pro (who does that anyway?). So, yeah, it sucks that you have full screen content with QT underpinnings if you use iTunes, but you don't if you play it straight in QT. Even as a Mac user, I circumvent this problem with a quick and easy (and free) install of VLC player.
It looks like they are trying too hard to be "cool" instead of focusing on usability. Why is it that Apple has the monopoly on cool AND functional devices? Hell, if MS would just lose the lame "social" element of the Zune, all six categories could fit on one screen (yet still be ridiculously and impractically sized).
I'm just resigned to accep the fact that the largest software company in the World simply can't make a good design (and I have 12 years of evidence as proof, starting with W95).
Yet the iPhone came out and it didn't have wireless syncing EITHER.
Well, the iPhone doesn't promise a half-assed feature of wireless syncing, so people aren't as pissed off that it doesn't have half-assed wireless syncing. In otherwords, if you are going to implement and advertise a "feature", then it better be ALL or nothing, instead of the Microsoft way of marketing half-truths and purposely limited features.
I welcome the competition too, but if it doesn't work on a Mac, then this is not new competition for us Mac users. I haven't seen any news indicating that zune 2.0 will work on Macs, and I didn't see it in this article, so I just have to assume it doesn't (without some serious work arounds, at least).
"There is a little thing in the U.S. Constitution that states that we have freedom of speech, press, and religion."
Except for the part that the Constitution prohibits the GOVERNMENT from preventing your free speech. Last time I checked, AT&T is not the government. And last time I checked, this is at least the third thread this month with people bitching about AT&T and invoking this faulty logic of "free speech".
How many times does this thread have to pop up, only to be shot down by the concept that the US Constitution does not protect AT&T customers by granting them freedom of speech?
One thing everyone is missing here is the new features available in the update. The iTunes store over the iPhone is simply awesome. It is actually faster than iTunes on my computer when it comes to sampling songs. The d/l rate is phenominal with my wifi connection at home. I'll try the Edge network from work tomorrow..I'm sure it will suck (as usual with Edge) but it beats the hell out of risking trying to download songs from the work intranet.
This update makes me forget everything bad about AT&T and shows that providing good stuff on your hardware always trumps the service provider.
Where it's a little different in this case is that the iPhone downloads its updates automatically.
No, it doesn't. You have to manually check for updates, then manually choose to apply that update. I know this because I just did it, and the update has been out for at least a couple of days, no?
Let's just hope that the trend towards integrated DRM, closed platforms, and locked-down devices/services doesn't continue to personal computers in general./blockquote.
Why?I like my Apple products, because the closed platform disallows all the problems that are evident in the Windows world.
And who says they are disabling phones? The fact that their upgrades don't work with a "hacked" phone, isn't Apple's problem. If you hack your phone, you get to deal with the consequences.
I agree with you. If Apple went out of their way to maliciously brick altered iPhones, then that is wrong. However, I've been an Apple customer since 1988, and this is not really in their corporate culture--cynics be damned.
contemptible and unlawful are two very different issues...I'm just sayin. I agree it sucks, but it isn't abridging free speech, nor is AT&T the government.
And yes going to a prestigious school does make you more employable for a variety of reasons.
Says somebody with a vested interest in this belief, having gone to STANFORD! I didn't mean to infer that Stanford was over the top expensive. It was an option for me, but the costs related to moving away to go to college and paying out of state tuition wouldn't have been worth it compared to going ot Oregon. Stanford was a bad example, because it is obviously an ELITE school and not just a top school.
Well stated. I'm *pretty* sure that the Constitution limits the government's ability to limit our free speech. I'm also prety sure that AT&T was busted up 20 some years ago and isn't remotely related to the government anymore.
Your ISP has every right to terminate your service for pretty much anything they like (race, sex, age, religion, sexual orientation?, etc. being the exceptions, obviously). You may have seen those "We reserve the right to refuse service" signs that are still legal in the US haven't you?
You know, you don't have to have AT&T for your phone to use AT&T Internet. AT&T wouldn't have to do anything to your phone line. All they'd have to do is disable your Internet account.
Well a corporation wholly owned and operated in the US, even if EVERY person inside of that corporation is foreign, counts as a "US Person" in federal law.
Well if "complete control over the courts" means they have the right to have restrictive plans and make specific demands like pretty much every other company on the planet, then yeah, I guess they do.
"Potential Employers" don't care where you went to school, as long as you went to school. Hell, most employers don't even care about what you studied. I have a degree in German from a State college in Oregon but I make bank in San Antonio Texas making PowerPoint slides for management teams of a huge grocery chain. I knew how to make boring PowerPoint slides in 1994 and didn't need my degrees to do this job, but I have this job ONLY because of my MAEd.
Well stated! People who blow thousands of dollars on prestigious, expensive schools are only fooling themselves. I went to a State school and it hasn't kept me from having great jobs, just because I went to Oregon, instead of Stanford (or some stupid expensive private school) doesn't make me any less employable. And for those saying a Grad degree is too expensive, I haven't seen a job in the past 10 years that doesn't have 100% tuition reimbursement for grad programs.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly. So then why are we just picking on AT&T? *this* is what really chaps my hide. It is popular to pick on AT&T because some people didn't like the NSA collaboration, and a LOT of people (on slashdot) hate Apple. This is yet another transparent attempt to put AT&T in a bad light, as if that somehow can make Apple look bad.
Also, the QT full-screen complaint is moot, because any video, tv show or movie you purchase from the iTunes store plays in full-screen mode. The file itself will not play full screen in QT (if you launch it from outside of iTunes) unless you pay for QT pro (who does that anyway?). So, yeah, it sucks that you have full screen content with QT underpinnings if you use iTunes, but you don't if you play it straight in QT. Even as a Mac user, I circumvent this problem with a quick and easy (and free) install of VLC player.
I'm just resigned to accep the fact that the largest software company in the World simply can't make a good design (and I have 12 years of evidence as proof, starting with W95).
I welcome the competition too, but if it doesn't work on a Mac, then this is not new competition for us Mac users. I haven't seen any news indicating that zune 2.0 will work on Macs, and I didn't see it in this article, so I just have to assume it doesn't (without some serious work arounds, at least).
You have a right not to use said service if you don't like it. Bill of Rights? Come on, get real.
"There is a little thing in the U.S. Constitution that states that we have freedom of speech, press, and religion." Except for the part that the Constitution prohibits the GOVERNMENT from preventing your free speech. Last time I checked, AT&T is not the government. And last time I checked, this is at least the third thread this month with people bitching about AT&T and invoking this faulty logic of "free speech".
How many times does this thread have to pop up, only to be shot down by the concept that the US Constitution does not protect AT&T customers by granting them freedom of speech?
It's not just Consumer Reports either. Nearly ALL reviews of computer service rank Apple #1, and usually by a huge margin.
Ahh...makes sense. All the bitching and moaning about AT&T though is stupid. Edge sucks, but that is Apple's fault for settling on Edge.
This update makes me forget everything bad about AT&T and shows that providing good stuff on your hardware always trumps the service provider.
And who says they are disabling phones? The fact that their upgrades don't work with a "hacked" phone, isn't Apple's problem. If you hack your phone, you get to deal with the consequences.
I agree with you. If Apple went out of their way to maliciously brick altered iPhones, then that is wrong. However, I've been an Apple customer since 1988, and this is not really in their corporate culture--cynics be damned.
contemptible and unlawful are two very different issues...I'm just sayin. I agree it sucks, but it isn't abridging free speech, nor is AT&T the government.
Well stated. I'm *pretty* sure that the Constitution limits the government's ability to limit our free speech. I'm also prety sure that AT&T was busted up 20 some years ago and isn't remotely related to the government anymore.
Your ISP has every right to terminate your service for pretty much anything they like (race, sex, age, religion, sexual orientation?, etc. being the exceptions, obviously). You may have seen those "We reserve the right to refuse service" signs that are still legal in the US haven't you?
You know, you don't have to have AT&T for your phone to use AT&T Internet. AT&T wouldn't have to do anything to your phone line. All they'd have to do is disable your Internet account.
Well a corporation wholly owned and operated in the US, even if EVERY person inside of that corporation is foreign, counts as a "US Person" in federal law.
Well if "complete control over the courts" means they have the right to have restrictive plans and make specific demands like pretty much every other company on the planet, then yeah, I guess they do.
Why is this tagged as censorship? If you don't like the terms of the service, don't use their service.
"Potential Employers" don't care where you went to school, as long as you went to school. Hell, most employers don't even care about what you studied. I have a degree in German from a State college in Oregon but I make bank in San Antonio Texas making PowerPoint slides for management teams of a huge grocery chain. I knew how to make boring PowerPoint slides in 1994 and didn't need my degrees to do this job, but I have this job ONLY because of my MAEd.
Well stated! People who blow thousands of dollars on prestigious, expensive schools are only fooling themselves. I went to a State school and it hasn't kept me from having great jobs, just because I went to Oregon, instead of Stanford (or some stupid expensive private school) doesn't make me any less employable. And for those saying a Grad degree is too expensive, I haven't seen a job in the past 10 years that doesn't have 100% tuition reimbursement for grad programs.