He needs to think a bit more clearly. Amazon bought a load of these from Sony, and sold them to UK customers. Amazon are in breach of their contract of sale with all of their UK customers following the removal of this feature. Amazon should discharge their responsibility under those contracts and offer a partial refund to all of their customers (without them asking) as should all honest retailers as soon as they are aware of this issue. The retailers should then pursue Sony for their refund as Sony is in breach of their contract(s) with the retailers having altered the goods after the fact. Wanting the feature is irrelevant.
Not true. At least in the UK there is the Trading Standards Institute which will take on clearcut issues for customers at no cost to the customer. It's relatively easy to get fairly hefty refunds by writing a letter to the company, quoting the relevant legislation or regulation, and stating that your next step will be to involve Trading Standards. Most retailers will back down immediately because they know it will cost them huge amounts to fight, and cost the customer almost nothing.
Actually, no. Often these sort of issues are dealt with by the local Trading Standards Office. Because these regulations are to do with the retailer, not the manufacturer, retailers are concerned about their local reputation because of their direct relationship with customers but also because if they get a bad name it can affect their ability to get licenses to sell certain goods and generally make it difficult to trade. The Trading Standards Office can impose certain fines and require retailers to provide refunds or exchanges without ever having to go to court and without costing the customer a thing.
One of the things a lot of people don't realise is that, in the UK, retailers (not manufacturers) are responsible for the quality of goods for up to 6 years. If you can argue that it would be reasonable to expect goods to last a certain time, then the retailer can be required to repair or replace them regardless of warranty periods, and it's impossible to contractually sign those rights away. So e.g. a pair of shoes worn daily couldn't reasonably be expected to last beyond 6 months, but a premium computer (say a MacBook) most people would expect to last 3 years, so one can presume that a failure before that time would be a result of a manufacturing problem and you would be due a repair. That's why I never buy an extended warranty but make sure I buy from companies I can track down.
They can last about 2,500 complete cycles or 4,800 80% discharge cycles. (From the wikipedia article linked elsewhere). Presuming a power outage once a week requiring 80% discharge, it would last about 90 years, if the number of cycles is the only thing determining its longevity.
Because you can come from using your Windows machine at work, pick up the iPad and sit and browse Slashdot, Facebook, check your email, use an instant messenger app, and do all of the things that 95% of people want to do with their computer at home. You can curl up on the couch without having to balance the thing on your lap with a cushion (don't even think about putting a laptop on your lap for more than 5 minutes, the heat will lead to serious issues).
You can download and install a new app in a few seconds, and delete it from the iPad again in a few seconds. If you're bored on a journey, there's 101 different games that can be installed right from the app store without having to trawl shareware websites for something decent.
You can press the power button and it will turn itself off in a second, get on the bus and turn it on again in a second, and use it there without worrying about scratching the back of the screen on the seat in front. Seriously - I would use my iPhone for most of what I use my laptop for if it wasn't for all of the scrolling around on the tiny screen.
An iPhone with a bigger screen would be more or less my ideal platform for social computer use - an Internet Appliance. When I want a full computer for video editing or DTP I can use one, otherwise the iPad would be ideal.
If the above isn't obvious to you, or you consider it stupid, then - yes, you're not supposed to get it.
You may not want it. However, I'll wager that there's *nothing* on the market as easy, convenient and stable for sitting up in bed and browsing the web and checking email. For that reason alone, it will sell well (although not as well as the iPod/iPhone). It's not aimed at geeks who want to tinker, it's aimed at everyday computer literate people who want to get things done and enjoy themselves at the same time. Tell me what else on the market could really fit that niche and I'll shut up;).
I think you just proved his point - the things that are difficult on the iPhone are the nerdy sorts of things that you and I might want to do, but which most people really don't. People ask me for technical advice all the time, and I've never been asked how to print from a phone.
There is currently no evidence to support Chiropractic's "subluxation" theories.
You are right, of course, but it would be more complete and accurate to say 'there is currently an abundance of evidence that Chiropractic's "subluxation" theories are false and misleading'. Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack; but in this case there is plenty of evidence of lack.
Yeah, I'm sure the police will be really keen to come out to a store and arrest the shop assistant for talking to you. If you walk away and they chase you it might be harassment, but probably that would still only count if it was over a protracted period of time. By the way, if you reply to this post then you're harassing me;).
Actually, yes they do. By moving their head around, they can appreciate different perspectives of the same object. A true 3D display would allow one to see the object in different ways by moving around. Current '3D' motion pictures give an illusion of depth, but it is fixed with respect to the viewer and therefore not truly 3D. A one-eyed person would be able to appreciate head-tracking 3D because they would see the view change as they moved their head.
Uh... I think the idea is to give a probability that someone is both male and over 18, so that if they pose as someone younger than 18 and/or female then they will be given away. The big, obvious problem with this is that the software would have to reside on the computer of the person who may or may not be posing as someone younger, in order to assess their typing in realtime, which seems to me a fatal flaw.
Any compensation Apple requires for the purchase of iTunes should be collected prior to sale. They cannot impose restrictions on use after the sale.
When did you buy iTunes, by the way? Get real, companies give away or sell products as a loss-leader all the time. This is why games consoles are often sold as a loss. Even if you had bought iTunes (which you didn't), I don't know if you noticed - but there's a click-through license whenever the software is updated - so if there is any contract between Apple and the end-user, anyone who downloaded an updated version of iTunes that blocked the Palm agreed to those changes when installing the software.
No, and I don't expect Apple to support syncing with Palms either. However, software changes made solely for the purpose of breaking compatibility with a 3rd-party product are still wrong. This has nothing to do with support.
Why is it 'wrong' for a company to adjust their product to prevent it being exploited by a third party? Particularly when they have already provided a documented API to do this? I just don't see the moral imperative there.
You don't get to dictate how your products are used - only that people pay for them. That's essentially the first-sale doctrine.
Sorry, when did you pay for iTunes again? One can argue about the purchase of software versus licensing, etc., but I think when Apple are giving the software away, it's perfectly reasonable to have some additional functionality that only works when you but a product from them - many software/hardware companies have that sort of business model.
Citation please? I'm not aware of Linux being modified solely and repeatedly for the purpose of breaking compatibility with some 3rd-party product...
That's not what I said, I said that functionality gets removed from Linux for philosophical reasons. Go read a Debian mailing list. Stuff gets taken out all the time because it's not 'free' enough, and the devs decide that it's better to break things for the end user for the sake of freedom. I was drawing the parallel that there's a reason for Linux - freedom - that sometimes trumps the end user's desire for functionality. Apple exists to make money for its shareholders, and without that happening the software would not exist. It seems very fair to me that they provide iTunes for free, and benefit by driving sales at the iTunes store, and providing enhanced functionality with iPod/iPhones. The don't want to provide that advanced functionality for third-party devices because that removes one of the revenue streams so they've provided a documented API for other companies to interact with iTunes.
What Apple is doing is nothing more than restraint of trade - somebody makes a better widget and Apple is trying to use dominance in one field to obtain dominance in another. No consumers benefit from these kinds of actions.
Well, I don't think it's really a 'lie'. My post was quite clearly talking about software to run on a PC/Mac, not firmware in the device. Palm have every right to do this as you say, but iTunes is a loss-leader - it's given away in order to drive sales at the iTunes store and sales of iPod/iPhones. It's not at all surprising that Apple want to keep exclusive the tight integration of iTunes and iPod/iPhone, and Palm would have known that. I really can't understand why Apple is the bad guy in this scenario - they have provided a documented API, Palm knew this, but Palm chose to emulate an iPod instead. That's something I would expect from a bargain bucket far eastern clone manufacturer selling 'iPhrone' on eBay.
I do understand the frustration the other way around - I think it should be easier to use an iPod/iPhone without iTunes as a mass storage device, but I think that comes down to the clash between Apple's vision of computing appliances and people's expectations of what a general-purpose computing device can do.
No, there's nothing wrong with emulating a device for compatibility purposes. But Apple specifically provides the iTunes/iPod integration as a benefit of purchasing an iPod. I say again, would you expect HP to support Epson scanners in their scanning software? It's a very common thing to buy a hardware device like a scanner and have features advertised on the outside that are actually software/driver features, and when a company has invested money developing a desirable piece of software, I would expect them to defend it from freeloaders. Would you expect nVidia to support an ATI card with their fancy Windows drivers?
Just because Apple gives iTunes away for free (gratis) doesn't mean that they should support every media player. They are definitely intentionally breaking compatibility, but that's because Palm are freeloading in order to benefit from the tight integration that Apple have reserved exclusively for their own media player. Linux is provided for free, but compatibility is still broken regularly for high-profile devices in order to fit in with some sort of philosophical decision. iTunes is commercial software developed to make money, and Apple want you to buy an iPod if you want the tight integration/management features; for everything else you get it for free (gratis). I think that's a pretty good deal.
And thanks for the moderation abuse again, 'offtopic' doesn't mean 'I like abusing my moderation points so I'll keep going'. I've been earning Karma since 1999 with very few negative mods so carry on.
On the other hand, if you have your iPhone/smartphone, then you have your phone, PDA and media player, and you're able to sit down without crushing the collection of devices in your pocket. One of the things I love about my iPhone is that iTunes does a full 'mirror' style backup when I sync, so if it does get lost or stolen I can do a remote wipe and then get back up and running as soon as the insurance company OK's the replacement.
iTunes works as long as Apple says it's ok, not if anything actually knows how to interact with iTunes. Palm does know how and kept programming to make it work. It was Apple that kept altering iTunes to purposely [slashdot.org] break [slashdot.org] that connection [slashdot.org] to wall out Palm since they didn't want to jump through Apple's hoops.
No, that's utter rubbish. There's a well-documented method for interacting with iTunes via its database. There are many third-party apps that do so, including the Amazon mp3 downloader which competes directly with the iTunes store. Palm were trying to piggy-back onto iTunes by partially emulating an iPod, which isn't something that Apple support (and why should they, any more than HP will support your Epson scanner with their scanning software), and made a huge fuss about it. Palm should have written their own code for interacting with their media player and interacted with iTunes (and any other software) through the right APIs.
If you set iTunes to disk mode, it will ignore the iPhone and then you can drag and drop files (well, this works for the iPod anyway, I don't know whether this works on Windows or not). I've never had the problems you describe with playlists. It's annoying that they can't be directly edited, although there is an 'on the go' playlist feature which does a similar thing. I hate the sound of music via bluetooth so I've never used it that way.
Yup, that hits the nail on the head. I've just helped my parents buy their first MacBook having previously had a Windows XP laptop. I've noticed that when they can't figure out how to do something and get me to show them, when they see the solution on the Mac they say "ahh... clever! that's how it works". On Windows XP, when I showed them something or they finally figured it out for themselves, they would tend to say "damn, I've been looking for that for hours, how stupid!".
Slashdot Mirror
He needs to think a bit more clearly. Amazon bought a load of these from Sony, and sold them to UK customers. Amazon are in breach of their contract of sale with all of their UK customers following the removal of this feature. Amazon should discharge their responsibility under those contracts and offer a partial refund to all of their customers (without them asking) as should all honest retailers as soon as they are aware of this issue. The retailers should then pursue Sony for their refund as Sony is in breach of their contract(s) with the retailers having altered the goods after the fact. Wanting the feature is irrelevant.
Not true. At least in the UK there is the Trading Standards Institute which will take on clearcut issues for customers at no cost to the customer. It's relatively easy to get fairly hefty refunds by writing a letter to the company, quoting the relevant legislation or regulation, and stating that your next step will be to involve Trading Standards. Most retailers will back down immediately because they know it will cost them huge amounts to fight, and cost the customer almost nothing.
Actually, no. Often these sort of issues are dealt with by the local Trading Standards Office. Because these regulations are to do with the retailer, not the manufacturer, retailers are concerned about their local reputation because of their direct relationship with customers but also because if they get a bad name it can affect their ability to get licenses to sell certain goods and generally make it difficult to trade. The Trading Standards Office can impose certain fines and require retailers to provide refunds or exchanges without ever having to go to court and without costing the customer a thing.
One of the things a lot of people don't realise is that, in the UK, retailers (not manufacturers) are responsible for the quality of goods for up to 6 years. If you can argue that it would be reasonable to expect goods to last a certain time, then the retailer can be required to repair or replace them regardless of warranty periods, and it's impossible to contractually sign those rights away. So e.g. a pair of shoes worn daily couldn't reasonably be expected to last beyond 6 months, but a premium computer (say a MacBook) most people would expect to last 3 years, so one can presume that a failure before that time would be a result of a manufacturing problem and you would be due a repair. That's why I never buy an extended warranty but make sure I buy from companies I can track down.
The wikipedia page about these batteries. Apparently there's only 1 company in the world that manufactures them, so the information is universal.
Yeah. It delivers 4MW, it takes 8 hours to charge and 8 hours to discharge.
They can last about 2,500 complete cycles or 4,800 80% discharge cycles. (From the wikipedia article linked elsewhere). Presuming a power outage once a week requiring 80% discharge, it would last about 90 years, if the number of cycles is the only thing determining its longevity.
The phrase "to have" in this case could be read "to keep", so the popular phrase really means '[he] wants to eat his cake and keep it'.
Because you can come from using your Windows machine at work, pick up the iPad and sit and browse Slashdot, Facebook, check your email, use an instant messenger app, and do all of the things that 95% of people want to do with their computer at home. You can curl up on the couch without having to balance the thing on your lap with a cushion (don't even think about putting a laptop on your lap for more than 5 minutes, the heat will lead to serious issues).
You can download and install a new app in a few seconds, and delete it from the iPad again in a few seconds. If you're bored on a journey, there's 101 different games that can be installed right from the app store without having to trawl shareware websites for something decent.
You can press the power button and it will turn itself off in a second, get on the bus and turn it on again in a second, and use it there without worrying about scratching the back of the screen on the seat in front. Seriously - I would use my iPhone for most of what I use my laptop for if it wasn't for all of the scrolling around on the tiny screen.
An iPhone with a bigger screen would be more or less my ideal platform for social computer use - an Internet Appliance. When I want a full computer for video editing or DTP I can use one, otherwise the iPad would be ideal.
If the above isn't obvious to you, or you consider it stupid, then - yes, you're not supposed to get it.
You may not want it. However, I'll wager that there's *nothing* on the market as easy, convenient and stable for sitting up in bed and browsing the web and checking email. For that reason alone, it will sell well (although not as well as the iPod/iPhone). It's not aimed at geeks who want to tinker, it's aimed at everyday computer literate people who want to get things done and enjoy themselves at the same time. Tell me what else on the market could really fit that niche and I'll shut up ;).
I think you just proved his point - the things that are difficult on the iPhone are the nerdy sorts of things that you and I might want to do, but which most people really don't. People ask me for technical advice all the time, and I've never been asked how to print from a phone.
There is currently no evidence to support Chiropractic's "subluxation" theories.
You are right, of course, but it would be more complete and accurate to say 'there is currently an abundance of evidence that Chiropractic's "subluxation" theories are false and misleading'. Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack; but in this case there is plenty of evidence of lack.
Hahaha bet you 100 it doesn't :).
Yeah, I'm sure the police will be really keen to come out to a store and arrest the shop assistant for talking to you. If you walk away and they chase you it might be harassment, but probably that would still only count if it was over a protracted period of time. By the way, if you reply to this post then you're harassing me ;).
Actually, yes they do. By moving their head around, they can appreciate different perspectives of the same object. A true 3D display would allow one to see the object in different ways by moving around. Current '3D' motion pictures give an illusion of depth, but it is fixed with respect to the viewer and therefore not truly 3D. A one-eyed person would be able to appreciate head-tracking 3D because they would see the view change as they moved their head.
Uh... I think the idea is to give a probability that someone is both male and over 18, so that if they pose as someone younger than 18 and/or female then they will be given away. The big, obvious problem with this is that the software would have to reside on the computer of the person who may or may not be posing as someone younger, in order to assess their typing in realtime, which seems to me a fatal flaw.
Any compensation Apple requires for the purchase of iTunes should be collected prior to sale. They cannot impose restrictions on use after the sale.
When did you buy iTunes, by the way? Get real, companies give away or sell products as a loss-leader all the time. This is why games consoles are often sold as a loss. Even if you had bought iTunes (which you didn't), I don't know if you noticed - but there's a click-through license whenever the software is updated - so if there is any contract between Apple and the end-user, anyone who downloaded an updated version of iTunes that blocked the Palm agreed to those changes when installing the software.
No, and I don't expect Apple to support syncing with Palms either. However, software changes made solely for the purpose of breaking compatibility with a 3rd-party product are still wrong. This has nothing to do with support.
Why is it 'wrong' for a company to adjust their product to prevent it being exploited by a third party? Particularly when they have already provided a documented API to do this? I just don't see the moral imperative there.
You don't get to dictate how your products are used - only that people pay for them. That's essentially the first-sale doctrine.
Sorry, when did you pay for iTunes again? One can argue about the purchase of software versus licensing, etc., but I think when Apple are giving the software away, it's perfectly reasonable to have some additional functionality that only works when you but a product from them - many software/hardware companies have that sort of business model.
Citation please? I'm not aware of Linux being modified solely and repeatedly for the purpose of breaking compatibility with some 3rd-party product...
That's not what I said, I said that functionality gets removed from Linux for philosophical reasons. Go read a Debian mailing list. Stuff gets taken out all the time because it's not 'free' enough, and the devs decide that it's better to break things for the end user for the sake of freedom. I was drawing the parallel that there's a reason for Linux - freedom - that sometimes trumps the end user's desire for functionality. Apple exists to make money for its shareholders, and without that happening the software would not exist. It seems very fair to me that they provide iTunes for free, and benefit by driving sales at the iTunes store, and providing enhanced functionality with iPod/iPhones. The don't want to provide that advanced functionality for third-party devices because that removes one of the revenue streams so they've provided a documented API for other companies to interact with iTunes.
What Apple is doing is nothing more than restraint of trade - somebody makes a better widget and Apple is trying to use dominance in one field to obtain dominance in another. No consumers benefit from these kinds of actions.
What??!
Well, I don't think it's really a 'lie'. My post was quite clearly talking about software to run on a PC/Mac, not firmware in the device. Palm have every right to do this as you say, but iTunes is a loss-leader - it's given away in order to drive sales at the iTunes store and sales of iPod/iPhones. It's not at all surprising that Apple want to keep exclusive the tight integration of iTunes and iPod/iPhone, and Palm would have known that. I really can't understand why Apple is the bad guy in this scenario - they have provided a documented API, Palm knew this, but Palm chose to emulate an iPod instead. That's something I would expect from a bargain bucket far eastern clone manufacturer selling 'iPhrone' on eBay.
I do understand the frustration the other way around - I think it should be easier to use an iPod/iPhone without iTunes as a mass storage device, but I think that comes down to the clash between Apple's vision of computing appliances and people's expectations of what a general-purpose computing device can do.
No, there's nothing wrong with emulating a device for compatibility purposes. But Apple specifically provides the iTunes/iPod integration as a benefit of purchasing an iPod. I say again, would you expect HP to support Epson scanners in their scanning software? It's a very common thing to buy a hardware device like a scanner and have features advertised on the outside that are actually software/driver features, and when a company has invested money developing a desirable piece of software, I would expect them to defend it from freeloaders. Would you expect nVidia to support an ATI card with their fancy Windows drivers?
Just because Apple gives iTunes away for free (gratis) doesn't mean that they should support every media player. They are definitely intentionally breaking compatibility, but that's because Palm are freeloading in order to benefit from the tight integration that Apple have reserved exclusively for their own media player. Linux is provided for free, but compatibility is still broken regularly for high-profile devices in order to fit in with some sort of philosophical decision. iTunes is commercial software developed to make money, and Apple want you to buy an iPod if you want the tight integration/management features; for everything else you get it for free (gratis). I think that's a pretty good deal.
And thanks for the moderation abuse again, 'offtopic' doesn't mean 'I like abusing my moderation points so I'll keep going'. I've been earning Karma since 1999 with very few negative mods so carry on.
On the other hand, if you have your iPhone/smartphone, then you have your phone, PDA and media player, and you're able to sit down without crushing the collection of devices in your pocket. One of the things I love about my iPhone is that iTunes does a full 'mirror' style backup when I sync, so if it does get lost or stolen I can do a remote wipe and then get back up and running as soon as the insurance company OK's the replacement.
iTunes works as long as Apple says it's ok, not if anything actually knows how to interact with iTunes. Palm does know how and kept programming to make it work. It was Apple that kept altering iTunes to purposely [slashdot.org] break [slashdot.org] that connection [slashdot.org] to wall out Palm since they didn't want to jump through Apple's hoops.
No, that's utter rubbish. There's a well-documented method for interacting with iTunes via its database. There are many third-party apps that do so, including the Amazon mp3 downloader which competes directly with the iTunes store. Palm were trying to piggy-back onto iTunes by partially emulating an iPod, which isn't something that Apple support (and why should they, any more than HP will support your Epson scanner with their scanning software), and made a huge fuss about it. Palm should have written their own code for interacting with their media player and interacted with iTunes (and any other software) through the right APIs.
Thanks for the moderation abuse, guys. 'Troll' doesn't actually mean 'I disagree'.
Scratch that, I think only iPods that contain a conventional hard drive will work with disk mode.
If you set iTunes to disk mode, it will ignore the iPhone and then you can drag and drop files (well, this works for the iPod anyway, I don't know whether this works on Windows or not). I've never had the problems you describe with playlists. It's annoying that they can't be directly edited, although there is an 'on the go' playlist feature which does a similar thing. I hate the sound of music via bluetooth so I've never used it that way.
Yup, that hits the nail on the head. I've just helped my parents buy their first MacBook having previously had a Windows XP laptop. I've noticed that when they can't figure out how to do something and get me to show them, when they see the solution on the Mac they say "ahh... clever! that's how it works". On Windows XP, when I showed them something or they finally figured it out for themselves, they would tend to say "damn, I've been looking for that for hours, how stupid!".