No one's disagreeing with you there. But this hardware is being sold like an "appliance" and it isn't failing as an appliance - it's being effectively remotely disabled.
There are DVD players still going strong after 20 years of use. VCRs still kicking after 30. AM/FM Radios still going after 50+ years. There is still no question that the obsolescence was built into the Apple TV by virtue of how it is designed and what it's required to rely on. And in the end, you're still effectively renting the hardware - but it's being treated for most legal purposes like a purchase.
It really is a decent OS, but I wouldn't say better than the alternatives. They really wanted world dominance or nothing, without any patience for getting there. And they had to be delusional to think everyone would jump ship from established ecosystems.
So don't trust any third party repair companies, but totally trust the first party manufacturers because reasons. They are no more trustworthy and they know it.
There is nothing antiquated about it. Just nobody appreciates proper typography anymore and don't know any better. Some things are refined over centuries with careful, gradual tweaks. They will not be erased in an instant by one ignorant generation.
For the bank info, the problem is that account numbers are treated as the sacred piece of info. You pull money with a routing and account number and protect those numbers like a credit card number. Everywhere else, banking works on a push basis where the account number is merely a destination. It's all about legacy systems and backward compatibility.
If you didn't realize, Visa is part of the group that rolled out chip cards (EMV - Europay, MasterCard, and Visa) in the first place. They are still trying to convince the merchants and processors that are dragging their heels, because that's what people here always seem to do. Everyone is still in denial that chip cards are an important transition, let alone adding a pin.
If they locked down the OS, the store would have taken off. There are good reasons for them not to do that - one is pressure from people abandoning the platform (like Steam moving to Linux).
just make it CRYSTAL CLEAR what is being purchased
So we actually do agree. How can it be crystal clear if it's still completely vague and open to interpretation? If the rights are ever revoked, it's a breach of the sale contract. The government would only be involved because it's easier than having individual lawsuits for every breach of sale contract - it's a generic case.
Same with smart home devices, Ultraviolet movie purchases, Steam game purchases, standalone GPS units, and any hardware device that requires OS updates for security. Mystery EOL where keeping the product functioning requires continued spending on the manufacturer's part should not be permitted under law.
It would be different if buying a physical copy has any value down the road. As it is, you're just renting for a higher price. If the servers are shut down, you can't get the 20GB release-day patch to your game disc ever again. And you just have an archive copy of the beta version.
The problem with that is I still like 20 year old games enough that I don't need the new shiny ever again. I can perpetually stay 20 years behind and never give a company money again and still be happy. But I may not stay happy if that ruins the game industry in the process.
The game companies know they can still profit off the old games 20 years later. Their problem is finding a market for their new games when their old games are good enough. They're out of financial incentive for shovelware, so they really need to do some innovation. Fewer, better games is the answer.
So it seems only fair that a cultural work is free for all if the author chooses to no longer sell it.
There needs to be a "shut up and take my money" clause in copyright law. If a company refuses to accept a reasonable amount of money for a discontinued product - and will no longer sell it in any form, they should lose some aspects of their copyright protection just like an undefended trademark.
If they were smarter, they'd do both. Monetize the old servers rather than shutting them down. Then they make money either way. Still, buying a game with an indeterminate EOL date is a gamble - and there need to be more consumer protections for any device/software tied to a cloud service that could end at any time.
The ones that pay you to travel for business reasons? Going to/from the airport, travelling to/from hotel at the destination. The commenter above is not talking about commuting.
Yes it is. But that doesn't make it a taxi. It makes it a private car for hire, which is not regulated the same as a taxi. It should be regulated like limos.
They were referencing my story. To get a 3.5mm or TOSLINK output for a Google Home Mini to use your own speakers, you have to buy a Chromecast Audio too. And those were down to $25 on Black Friday, and back to $35 today.
For what amount? I paid $19 for a Google Home mini and $25 for a Chromecast audio (both on Black Friday) to use my existing speakers with the Google Home mini.
Slashdot Mirror
No one's disagreeing with you there. But this hardware is being sold like an "appliance" and it isn't failing as an appliance - it's being effectively remotely disabled.
There are DVD players still going strong after 20 years of use. VCRs still kicking after 30. AM/FM Radios still going after 50+ years. There is still no question that the obsolescence was built into the Apple TV by virtue of how it is designed and what it's required to rely on. And in the end, you're still effectively renting the hardware - but it's being treated for most legal purposes like a purchase.
It really is a decent OS, but I wouldn't say better than the alternatives. They really wanted world dominance or nothing, without any patience for getting there. And they had to be delusional to think everyone would jump ship from established ecosystems.
It's not signal strength...The body of the aircraft effectively blocks the RF from the GPS satellites
So it's signal strength.
Formats are "open." I'm not even sure if MS's own implementation matches the written spec.
Yeah, none of your comments reek of divisiveness at all... /s
So don't trust any third party repair companies, but totally trust the first party manufacturers because reasons. They are no more trustworthy and they know it.
There is nothing antiquated about it. Just nobody appreciates proper typography anymore and don't know any better. Some things are refined over centuries with careful, gradual tweaks. They will not be erased in an instant by one ignorant generation.
For the bank info, the problem is that account numbers are treated as the sacred piece of info. You pull money with a routing and account number and protect those numbers like a credit card number. Everywhere else, banking works on a push basis where the account number is merely a destination. It's all about legacy systems and backward compatibility.
If you didn't realize, Visa is part of the group that rolled out chip cards (EMV - Europay, MasterCard, and Visa) in the first place. They are still trying to convince the merchants and processors that are dragging their heels, because that's what people here always seem to do. Everyone is still in denial that chip cards are an important transition, let alone adding a pin.
You don't insert the card fully into the chip reader, so the mag stripe isn't read even if a skimmer was placed there.
MS saw that their store isn't taking off
If they locked down the OS, the store would have taken off. There are good reasons for them not to do that - one is pressure from people abandoning the platform (like Steam moving to Linux).
just make it CRYSTAL CLEAR what is being purchased
So we actually do agree. How can it be crystal clear if it's still completely vague and open to interpretation? If the rights are ever revoked, it's a breach of the sale contract. The government would only be involved because it's easier than having individual lawsuits for every breach of sale contract - it's a generic case.
Same with smart home devices, Ultraviolet movie purchases, Steam game purchases, standalone GPS units, and any hardware device that requires OS updates for security. Mystery EOL where keeping the product functioning requires continued spending on the manufacturer's part should not be permitted under law.
Copyright should apply as long as the holder uses it for economic gain
Say goodbye to the GPL, etc.
It would be different if buying a physical copy has any value down the road. As it is, you're just renting for a higher price. If the servers are shut down, you can't get the 20GB release-day patch to your game disc ever again. And you just have an archive copy of the beta version.
The problem with that is I still like 20 year old games enough that I don't need the new shiny ever again. I can perpetually stay 20 years behind and never give a company money again and still be happy. But I may not stay happy if that ruins the game industry in the process.
The game companies know they can still profit off the old games 20 years later. Their problem is finding a market for their new games when their old games are good enough. They're out of financial incentive for shovelware, so they really need to do some innovation. Fewer, better games is the answer.
So it seems only fair that a cultural work is free for all if the author chooses to no longer sell it.
There needs to be a "shut up and take my money" clause in copyright law. If a company refuses to accept a reasonable amount of money for a discontinued product - and will no longer sell it in any form, they should lose some aspects of their copyright protection just like an undefended trademark.
Weak DRM is also one step further toward the idea of game preservation like in the article.
Valve disagrees with your optimism. See: their linux gaming project that they started the moment they saw win10 and understood what it meant for them.
Having Linux at the ready gives them leverage against Microsoft. How do you think they were able to make a deal with Microsoft?
If they were smarter, they'd do both. Monetize the old servers rather than shutting them down. Then they make money either way. Still, buying a game with an indeterminate EOL date is a gamble - and there need to be more consumer protections for any device/software tied to a cloud service that could end at any time.
The ones that pay you to travel for business reasons? Going to/from the airport, travelling to/from hotel at the destination. The commenter above is not talking about commuting.
it's hiring a driver to take you somewhere.
Yes it is. But that doesn't make it a taxi. It makes it a private car for hire, which is not regulated the same as a taxi. It should be regulated like limos.
They were referencing my story. To get a 3.5mm or TOSLINK output for a Google Home Mini to use your own speakers, you have to buy a Chromecast Audio too. And those were down to $25 on Black Friday, and back to $35 today.
For what amount? I paid $19 for a Google Home mini and $25 for a Chromecast audio (both on Black Friday) to use my existing speakers with the Google Home mini.
For $45, I don't think it's that big a waste.
This one looks to be. That's how big you have to go to need such a large form factor.