You do not HAVE to buy your computer from Apple. There are a multitude of competitors. Running other OSes.
You see, it is not illegal or wrong for software maker A to force hardware maker A (the same company) to use their operating system. Apple is selling an OS + hardware combo - which was the common practice back in the day.
But what Microsoft did back in the day was forcing hardware makers B, C and D to use their software, excluding competing operating systems (DR-DOS, CP/M-86 etc.) By the time they were slapped for doing this the damage had been done and DOS had "won".
Had Microsoft made both the hardware and software they could have "forced" themselves as much as they wanted. But they chose a different business model where they provided software to other companies - but did not want to compete.
IBM forgot to design in some sort of proprietary lock for the PC
But they did: the BIOS. But someone reverse-engineered it and stood up to them in court. Since the hardware specs were already published (because of some antitrust stuff earlier) that was the last bit (since the IBM deal for DOS was not exclusive) the clone manufacturers needed.
These days the BIOS would have been protected by software patents, unheard of at the time.
Stop worshiping that proprietary mess from Adobe called Flash. It's dog awful on EVERY other platform than Windows. Just read any non-Apple thread on Slashdot regarding Flash and the criticism is fierce, but when it mercifully is kept from iOS it is "evil"? How about complaining about its non-existence on the PS3 browser as well?
And noone are forced to sell anything on the App Store. What, do you think Apple walk around putting guns at publisher's heads? It's not a loss, dammit, it's a fee for using Apple's services. You will find this is common when business A want an advantage provided by business B that they pay for the privilege.
So what? Do you really think non-geeks care one bit that they cannot get the source for their operating system? How many Android or Linux users actually bother downloading that source anyway? Or read it and try to understand it?
How does Apple "hold your data hostage" as in how do they prevent access to it? Why can't people accept that Apple's customers might actually be satisfied with their products? Instead, the insults rain.
It's not Apple's fault their competitors seem to have little success competing. Or perhaps it's because OS X shows the success of BSD on the desktop, a success so far mostly denied to Linux?
However, if Apple was really trying to support open standard, they would have added support for the OGG and FLAC formats long ago for their iPods and Quicktime/Itunes
I guess it is a chicken and egg problem: Proponents of these open standards argue they should be more widely supported, but this appears to have gone unheard by the people actually creating audio, which so far have stuck to other formats. Since there is so relatively little content using the formats, there is no incentive to add support for them. Archos used to have a media player that supported them but I think they, too, have largely abandoned them in favor of the more widely used codecs.
iOS supports AIFF, CAF, MP3, AAC, MPEG-4 (also as container for Apple Lossless - ALAC) and WAV, I guess they thought that covers most practical bases. Then the mostly unused, fan-driven formats can be converted if needed be.
The main reason for ships to move through the "pirate zone" is to conserve/save fuel. With nuclear power the incentive to do so is reduced a lot, so they could move through the sea outside of the "pirate range" (i.e. the max distance the pirate vessels move relative to their land bases in order to make it back in the case of failure).
Up to a point: There was a recent decision where AT&T had protested a FOIA request for something they had sent to a public entity (FCC?) on the grounds that it would be embarrassing for the company. The judge dismissed the argument saying companies cannot become embarrassed - they are not "real" persons.
Register, yes: To get into the part of developer.apple.com that has the SDK downloads (the XCode you get with the Mac does not contain the iOS SDK parts). You need to pay to get the parts that deal with code signing etc. so in order to run the app on someone's device instead of the (limited) emulator you need to pay the $99.
Now you're asserting that Sony, because they make the PS3, can prevent people from talking about it?
No, that is not what was said. Written. You can blog on your own site to your heart's content about it. But if you use a Sony-run service, Sony are free to delete your rants against them since the 1st Amendment does not limit their actions.
From where does that power derive?
Usually from something called "Terms of service". You are not entitled to using somebody else's private or corporate service.
The Sony support was totally wrong. It could not have applied to the PS3 Slim since that never came with OtherOS enabled. But the huge warning did (as far as I remember) say that the feature would be removed and the partition (if any) returned to the "PS3 OS".
Illegal/unlicensed copying is not stealing. (Nor are downloaders raping the artists, another illegal act that does not apply). Stealing involves depriving someone of something. Illegal copying only potentially lessens income from a sale, but the original to that copy is still available to be bought.
Theft applies to property; "intellectual property" is an abstract idea that relate to some Government-granted monopolies.
(IANAL since you Americans have 40% of the World's lawyers and thus need such a disclaimer.)
Tell us how you can get toilet paper from a shop while leaving it on the shelf for someone else to buy.
Unlicensed copying - whether a music download or a corporate GPL violation - is not the same as depriving someone of some thing. It is a violation of a Government granted monopoly. Again: If act A is illegal and act B is illegal, that does NOT mean A == B.
That would make sense as an argument if they had a filter that blocked any non-work-related site, e.g. YouTube or whatever, and this happened to be one more of them.
If it is just this site then it is very close to censorship.
Well, they demand users get to choose whether to get content through Apple or the provider, and that they cannot charge more for in-app purchases than online. For that they take a 30% cut, but the real problem for the content providers is that Apple don't give them customer info, which is what really has value in the transaction.
They could cut Apple out completely and make a HTML5 app for all browsers, but wait: HTML5 lacks the Digital Revenue Management they are so fond of...
802.11n - the AirPort was one of the first to support that spec, even before it was finalized. Therefore, by the OP's logic, it must have been an Apple standard.
Slashdot Mirror
You do not HAVE to buy your computer from Apple. There are a multitude of competitors. Running other OSes.
You see, it is not illegal or wrong for software maker A to force hardware maker A (the same company) to use their operating system. Apple is selling an OS + hardware combo - which was the common practice back in the day.
But what Microsoft did back in the day was forcing hardware makers B, C and D to use their software, excluding competing operating systems (DR-DOS, CP/M-86 etc.) By the time they were slapped for doing this the damage had been done and DOS had "won".
Had Microsoft made both the hardware and software they could have "forced" themselves as much as they wanted. But they chose a different business model where they provided software to other companies - but did not want to compete.
IBM forgot to design in some sort of proprietary lock for the PC
But they did: the BIOS. But someone reverse-engineered it and stood up to them in court. Since the hardware specs were already published (because of some antitrust stuff earlier) that was the last bit (since the IBM deal for DOS was not exclusive) the clone manufacturers needed.
These days the BIOS would have been protected by software patents, unheard of at the time.
Stop worshiping that proprietary mess from Adobe called Flash. It's dog awful on EVERY other platform than Windows. Just read any non-Apple thread on Slashdot regarding Flash and the criticism is fierce, but when it mercifully is kept from iOS it is "evil"? How about complaining about its non-existence on the PS3 browser as well?
And noone are forced to sell anything on the App Store. What, do you think Apple walk around putting guns at publisher's heads? It's not a loss, dammit, it's a fee for using Apple's services. You will find this is common when business A want an advantage provided by business B that they pay for the privilege.
iOS = iPhone + iPod Touch + iPad. Your numbers only deal with the iPhone part of the equation.
Free as in beer, but not free as in Speech
So what? Do you really think non-geeks care one bit that they cannot get the source for their operating system? How many Android or Linux users actually bother downloading that source anyway? Or read it and try to understand it?
How does Apple "hold your data hostage" as in how do they prevent access to it? Why can't people accept that Apple's customers might actually be satisfied with their products? Instead, the insults rain.
It's not Apple's fault their competitors seem to have little success competing. Or perhaps it's because OS X shows the success of BSD on the desktop, a success so far mostly denied to Linux?
However, if Apple was really trying to support open standard, they would have added support for the OGG and FLAC formats long ago for their iPods and Quicktime/Itunes
I guess it is a chicken and egg problem: Proponents of these open standards argue they should be more widely supported, but this appears to have gone unheard by the people actually creating audio, which so far have stuck to other formats. Since there is so relatively little content using the formats, there is no incentive to add support for them. Archos used to have a media player that supported them but I think they, too, have largely abandoned them in favor of the more widely used codecs.
iOS supports AIFF, CAF, MP3, AAC, MPEG-4 (also as container for Apple Lossless - ALAC) and WAV, I guess they thought that covers most practical bases. Then the mostly unused, fan-driven formats can be converted if needed be.
Something is overpriced if the price causes people not to buy it. Since iPods sell well, they by definition are not overpriced.
It's the old bricks vs. diamonds paradox: A brick is far cheaper and more useful than a diamond, but people still buy diamonds.
The main reason for ships to move through the "pirate zone" is to conserve/save fuel. With nuclear power the incentive to do so is reduced a lot, so they could move through the sea outside of the "pirate range" (i.e. the max distance the pirate vessels move relative to their land bases in order to make it back in the case of failure).
Up to a point: There was a recent decision where AT&T had protested a FOIA request for something they had sent to a public entity (FCC?) on the grounds that it would be embarrassing for the company. The judge dismissed the argument saying companies cannot become embarrassed - they are not "real" persons.
Opera + Flash on Mac = teh slowness. Runs better in both Safari and Chrome.
I smurf your Tolkien joke.
Yes, because PCs grow on trees, you can go into the woods and pick on for free!
Register, yes: To get into the part of developer.apple.com that has the SDK downloads (the XCode you get with the Mac does not contain the iOS SDK parts). You need to pay to get the parts that deal with code signing etc. so in order to run the app on someone's device instead of the (limited) emulator you need to pay the $99.
Well, if the license says "Apple branded hardware", just affix one of the stickers you got in the Snow Leopard box on your PC... hey instant branding!
So your PC came free? I mean, you could have chosen a Mac initially instead of getting a PC, and Eclipse would run fine there.
(Some native-tied plugins might not work though, depending on how interested the plugins' developers were in compiling for Mac OS X).
The world does not owe anyone a success in quotes.
Now you're asserting that Sony, because they make the PS3, can prevent people from talking about it?
No, that is not what was said. Written. You can blog on your own site to your heart's content about it. But if you use a Sony-run service, Sony are free to delete your rants against them since the 1st Amendment does not limit their actions.
From where does that power derive?
Usually from something called "Terms of service". You are not entitled to using somebody else's private or corporate service.
The Sony support was totally wrong. It could not have applied to the PS3 Slim since that never came with OtherOS enabled. But the huge warning did (as far as I remember) say that the feature would be removed and the partition (if any) returned to the "PS3 OS".
Illegal/unlicensed copying is not stealing. (Nor are downloaders raping the artists, another illegal act that does not apply). Stealing involves depriving someone of something. Illegal copying only potentially lessens income from a sale, but the original to that copy is still available to be bought.
Theft applies to property; "intellectual property" is an abstract idea that relate to some Government-granted monopolies.
(IANAL since you Americans have 40% of the World's lawyers and thus need such a disclaimer.)
Tell us how you can get toilet paper from a shop while leaving it on the shelf for someone else to buy.
Unlicensed copying - whether a music download or a corporate GPL violation - is not the same as depriving someone of some thing. It is a violation of a Government granted monopoly. Again: If act A is illegal and act B is illegal, that does NOT mean A == B.
Assuming he actually did provide the information to Wikileaks, then he's guilty of both crimes
Who died and made you judge?
That would make sense as an argument if they had a filter that blocked any non-work-related site, e.g. YouTube or whatever, and this happened to be one more of them.
If it is just this site then it is very close to censorship.
Well, they demand users get to choose whether to get content through Apple or the provider, and that they cannot charge more for in-app purchases than online. For that they take a 30% cut, but the real problem for the content providers is that Apple don't give them customer info, which is what really has value in the transaction.
They could cut Apple out completely and make a HTML5 app for all browsers, but wait: HTML5 lacks the Digital Revenue Management they are so fond of...
802.11n - the AirPort was one of the first to support that spec, even before it was finalized. Therefore, by the OP's logic, it must have been an Apple standard.