Depends on the watch.
I have seen cheap watches that appear to have no way to replace the battery at all. These are extremely annoying.
But if the battery can be replaced in theory--just not by you--it's less of a problem. Watch shops can replace watch batteries in minutes, so it's just a serious inconvenience.
It seems it takes Apple weeks to replace batteries for iPods and iPhones. They need to speed their turnaround time just a little...
There's continuity of service, and then there's continuity of service.
It shouldn't take more than a couple of minutes to swap out the battery on a Blackberry.
It takes between two and eight hours to charge an average phone battery.
So, there's at least one order of magnitude difference in how long you'll go without receiving calls between swapping batteries and recharging a single battery.
The problem is,it's a government mandate that had the theater chain even consider doing this stuff!
But, even if it had to be done, there are better ways to do it.
Actually, an iPhone whose battery cannot be replaced by the user is like a lamp whose light bulb can't be replaced by the user.
The iPhone comes with a battery, and the lamp comes with a light bulb. Odds are the battery and the bulb will both last a while with reasonable use. But when the battery burns out, it is gone, just like when the light bulb burns out, it is gone.
You cannot use an iPhone with a non-working battery any more than you can use a lamp with a non-working light bulb.
This is not sufficient to prevent sales of iPhones or of lamps with light bulbs that can't be replaced. (I actually have bought lamps like that.)
If the current vs. of iTunes links to MS Outlook, then Apple misled me when they called it a security update.
Seriously, does the e-mail functionality of the iPhone have to be in iTunes itself?
And what else would you use to communicate "in the bush"?
This is wilderness; no electricity, no built-up civilization, nothing to plug a phone into. If you want to maintain contact with the outside world in such a situation, you likely will want a cell phone. There sure aren't going to be any fixed phones nearby...
I think the idea is, you'll need a cell phone in the bush, but you won't have anything to recharge that cell phone with in the bush: no stores--it is wilderness--no electric outlets, and I'll presume no access to a car charger.
If you know in advance that you'll be in such a situation, and your phone has a replaceable battery, then you can charge an extra battery beforehand and swap batteries when the first one dies. This clearly won't work if the phone's battery is soldered in.
(BTW, they do make car chargers for iPhones, right?)
People who prefer Windows Media Player? [grin]
Believe it or not, not only is iTunes impossible on Linux, but it is optional on Windows PCs. And even people who do have iTunes don't necc. have the latest vs.!
Not everyone who will need to be "in the bush" for a few days will know this much in advance. What happens if you learn you'll need that capability one year into the two-year contract?
Yes, but how many non-technical people will think to click those links before they have an iPhone to activate?
Apple is marketing iPhones to ordinary people, not techies.
The iPhone has been heavily advertised on television. These ads show off the versatility of iPhones, look attractive, make iPhones look attractive, but say nothing about the technical requirements of iPhones. They don't even have the lines of fine print that can't be read without freeze-frame.
So, I imagine that half the people trying to buy iPhones are very aware of, not just the iPhone's capabilities, but its requirements. The other half, likely including this fella filing this suit, want iPhones because they are pretty and cool; they know some of the iPhone's capabilities, but they might not know about the little technical details, such as how to get the battery replaced, before they go to the at&t store or Apple Store. That sort of thing's normally in the manual, anyway.
So, if you have an iPhone and want to use it, for anything, you must have an iTunes store account and a computer that can work it? And the latest vs. of iTunes?
Has any other iPod had such stringent requirements?
Would any other phone? I know, no other phone syncs with computer-music so well as an iPhone. But could one rent, say, a Verizon Chocolate phone without the music options in hopes of getting that music later?
Thank you. I concede. The Louisville Journal-Courier is a better source than Associated Press, so it has precedence. And it does mention the non-gambling on that slot.
I only wish you had thought to post your link to this article in one of your earlier posts when you referenced its contents. It would've saved a little trouble & confusion...
The problem here is, even when the slot machine works, it is used for the purpose of financial gain at someone else's expense--near certain for the casino, and quite possible for a lucky player.
The gamblers using the broken machine used it to rip off another party. But the casinos using working machines are using them to "rip off" other parties. So, the clear solution is to outlaw gambling again and stop all the theft.
No. It's called gambling because the odds are against the player. That's what gambling means--taking a risk against the odds. Savvy states call it "gaming" in their vacation flyers for this reason.
People who play the slots usually know at some level that, under normal circumstances, gamblers are more likely to lose their quarter/credit than not. They play for the thrill they get when the machine actually coughs up money, and the thrill is greater because it isn't guaranteed.
So you can get $10, guaranteed, just by sticking the card into and out of that broken machine. But why settle for that when you can pull the lever and try to win $10 million?
ATMs do have buttons that say, "Press here to get $20."
People do not press these buttons thousands of times because they know it's coming out of their bank account and don't want their checks to bounce.
Of course, people who actually win at slots are drawing from the casino's bank account...
And yes, casino operators can go to jail if they make much more money than expected, or at least be fined out of their wits. There are laws against slots getting too "tight."
It gets worse.
Some casinos don't use actual money on the floor. The gambling money all goes into a casino card. You don't even have to stick the card in more than once per machine, so you don't even have that to remind you what you're doing.
Some casinos even let you use the gambling card elsewhere in the casino. You never have to cash out until you leave. In some cases, you never have to cash out at all.
May I add that Caesar's/Harrah's is one of those chains with the omni-casino cards? ("Earned at Harrah's; spent at Caesar's.")
No, the state would track the casino down and make the casino pay some big fine to the state.
If the state doesn't do this, the invisible hand will eventually notice that the casino is paying out too little. People will go to less depressing casinos, and the tight casino will shut down. Trust me, casinos advertise that they have better payouts than other casinos when they can.
Slashdot Mirror
Depends on the watch.
I have seen cheap watches that appear to have no way to replace the battery at all. These are extremely annoying.
But if the battery can be replaced in theory--just not by you--it's less of a problem. Watch shops can replace watch batteries in minutes, so it's just a serious inconvenience.
It seems it takes Apple weeks to replace batteries for iPods and iPhones. They need to speed their turnaround time just a little...
There's continuity of service, and then there's continuity of service.
It shouldn't take more than a couple of minutes to swap out the battery on a Blackberry.
It takes between two and eight hours to charge an average phone battery.
So, there's at least one order of magnitude difference in how long you'll go without receiving calls between swapping batteries and recharging a single battery.
The problem is,it's a government mandate that had the theater chain even consider doing this stuff!
But, even if it had to be done, there are better ways to do it.
Actually, an iPhone whose battery cannot be replaced by the user is like a lamp whose light bulb can't be replaced by the user.
The iPhone comes with a battery, and the lamp comes with a light bulb. Odds are the battery and the bulb will both last a while with reasonable use. But when the battery burns out, it is gone, just like when the light bulb burns out, it is gone.
You cannot use an iPhone with a non-working battery any more than you can use a lamp with a non-working light bulb.
This is not sufficient to prevent sales of iPhones or of lamps with light bulbs that can't be replaced. (I actually have bought lamps like that.)
If the current vs. of iTunes links to MS Outlook, then Apple misled me when they called it a security update.
Seriously, does the e-mail functionality of the iPhone have to be in iTunes itself?
And these geniuses have patented something that was done twelve years ago! Presumably not by them.
Grrrr....
And what else would you use to communicate "in the bush"?
This is wilderness; no electricity, no built-up civilization, nothing to plug a phone into. If you want to maintain contact with the outside world in such a situation, you likely will want a cell phone. There sure aren't going to be any fixed phones nearby...
I think the idea is, you'll need a cell phone in the bush, but you won't have anything to recharge that cell phone with in the bush: no stores--it is wilderness--no electric outlets, and I'll presume no access to a car charger.
If you know in advance that you'll be in such a situation, and your phone has a replaceable battery, then you can charge an extra battery beforehand and swap batteries when the first one dies. This clearly won't work if the phone's battery is soldered in.
(BTW, they do make car chargers for iPhones, right?)
Sorry... I know Linux users are techies, though I know at least some of you are working to change that.
People who prefer Windows Media Player? [grin]
Believe it or not, not only is iTunes impossible on Linux, but it is optional on Windows PCs. And even people who do have iTunes don't necc. have the latest vs.!
Not everyone who will need to be "in the bush" for a few days will know this much in advance. What happens if you learn you'll need that capability one year into the two-year contract?
Yes, but how many non-technical people will think to click those links before they have an iPhone to activate?
Apple is marketing iPhones to ordinary people, not techies.
The iPhone has been heavily advertised on television. These ads show off the versatility of iPhones, look attractive, make iPhones look attractive, but say nothing about the technical requirements of iPhones. They don't even have the lines of fine print that can't be read without freeze-frame.
So, I imagine that half the people trying to buy iPhones are very aware of, not just the iPhone's capabilities, but its requirements. The other half, likely including this fella filing this suit, want iPhones because they are pretty and cool; they know some of the iPhone's capabilities, but they might not know about the little technical details, such as how to get the battery replaced, before they go to the at&t store or Apple Store. That sort of thing's normally in the manual, anyway.
So, if you have an iPhone and want to use it, for anything, you must have an iTunes store account and a computer that can work it? And the latest vs. of iTunes?
Has any other iPod had such stringent requirements?
Would any other phone? I know, no other phone syncs with computer-music so well as an iPhone. But could one rent, say, a Verizon Chocolate phone without the music options in hopes of getting that music later?
Yes, but this suit happened because a live guy, Patterson, wanted to get the credit for creating MS-DOS!
Okay. Now, who will dig out that player for those old NASA tapes from '69?
Thank you. I concede. The Louisville Journal-Courier is a better source than Associated Press, so it has precedence. And it does mention the non-gambling on that slot.
I only wish you had thought to post your link to this article in one of your earlier posts when you referenced its contents. It would've saved a little trouble & confusion...
The problem here is, even when the slot machine works, it is used for the purpose of financial gain at someone else's expense--near certain for the casino, and quite possible for a lucky player.
The gamblers using the broken machine used it to rip off another party. But the casinos using working machines are using them to "rip off" other parties. So, the clear solution is to outlaw gambling again and stop all the theft.
I've read the fine article. It didn't claim that. It didn't say anything about the people using that slot machine not playing it.
No. It's called gambling because the odds are against the player. That's what gambling means--taking a risk against the odds. Savvy states call it "gaming" in their vacation flyers for this reason.
People who play the slots usually know at some level that, under normal circumstances, gamblers are more likely to lose their quarter/credit than not. They play for the thrill they get when the machine actually coughs up money, and the thrill is greater because it isn't guaranteed.
So you can get $10, guaranteed, just by sticking the card into and out of that broken machine. But why settle for that when you can pull the lever and try to win $10 million?
Corporations, yes. Casinos? Not so much.
ATMs do have buttons that say, "Press here to get $20."
People do not press these buttons thousands of times because they know it's coming out of their bank account and don't want their checks to bounce.
Of course, people who actually win at slots are drawing from the casino's bank account...
And yes, casino operators can go to jail if they make much more money than expected, or at least be fined out of their wits. There are laws against slots getting too "tight."
It gets worse.
Some casinos don't use actual money on the floor. The gambling money all goes into a casino card. You don't even have to stick the card in more than once per machine, so you don't even have that to remind you what you're doing.
Some casinos even let you use the gambling card elsewhere in the casino. You never have to cash out until you leave. In some cases, you never have to cash out at all.
May I add that Caesar's/Harrah's is one of those chains with the omni-casino cards? ("Earned at Harrah's; spent at Caesar's.")
No, the state would track the casino down and make the casino pay some big fine to the state.
If the state doesn't do this, the invisible hand will eventually notice that the casino is paying out too little. People will go to less depressing casinos, and the tight casino will shut down. Trust me, casinos advertise that they have better payouts than other casinos when they can.
If your ATM is an electronic game of chance, you had better go back to using the human tellers.