I actually meant that the case would have no merit. In order to win you would have to prove harm. It would be extraordinarily hard to prove that not delivering a product or service that was never actually promised to the customer has caused any harm whatsoever. It's like suing Ben & Jerry's because they didn't decide to give out free PinkBerry when you were there last Thursday.
Still fucked up. I don't want any of their employees opening my food and possibly contaminating it. If you don't want to sell the product with the toy, send it the f back and demand product without the competing product. Your inter-business dealings have little to do with the customer you supposedly serve.
Yes, you can. You didn't agree to shit, Gamestop did. You are under no obligation at all to abide by the EULA, especially since I'll bet that EULA has a clause about non-transferrable property that kicks in upon opening of the software packaging.
Gamestop is then violating the EULA, their problem, not yours.
As it is, this is product tampering, and bait and switch, not to mention anti-competitive practice.
No, sorry. The EULA agreement pops up during installation. Bait and switch does not occur since the coupon was never promised. Not providing a competitor's marketing coupon cannot reasonably be considered as anti-competitive.
Funny that you're modded down, your reaction pretty much matches mine.
MakerBot is cool, but pointless and not actually useful yet for anything that matters. The technology just isn't there yet at the hobbiest level. Its certainly out there, just not at the hobbiest level.
Right around 1980 or so you could have said the exact same thing about personal computers, and it would have been true.
> Just about everyone I saw in Shenzhen and Dongguan a couple months ago was rocking an iPhone 4
Hey, if that's what you've got to do to get a decent signal on one, go for it. ( If the cellphone coverage in Shenzhen is as miserable as the population themselves then I'm not at all surprised. )
"Yeah, the CEOs and Wall Street pukes really need the money!"
Pukes indeed. Everyone I know is celebrating this implosion fo the stock market. The rich bastards that have been robbing us working folks blind for decades are finally getting whats coming to them. People like us living paycheck to paycheck aren't being hurt by this. It's the greed rich bastards that are crying now, and you know what? I don't feel a BIT sorry for the assholes.
Are you somehow under the impression that you need a mustache, monocle and top hat in order to invest? Or perhaps you think Social Security will be enough to retire on? Good luck with that.
The market is tanking, not Apple specifically. I hate to point out the obvious, but you want to buy low and sell high, not the other way around. Just 'cause a stock is down doesn't mean you shouldn't buy it. Doesn't mean you should, either.
Just about everyone I saw in Shenzhen and Dongguan a couple months ago was rocking an iPhone 4. Fewer in Beijing but they were still plentiful. My unlocked iPhone 3G worked just fine in each of the six cities I visited, including data. The app store is a different subject, though.
He doesn't understand the difference between cost and value,
And you presumably believe that of course 'value' is exclusively determined by ''objective'' criteria, marketing (advertising included) having no say in the evaluation process.
CC.
No. Value is determined solely and exclusively by the customer.
I think I understand. You would prefer to replace something rather than an in-place upgrade, if the only way to perform that upgrade was with a license rather than a physical widget. Personally I like things like trial/shareware software and tiered purchase options, and the market does too, by and large. But to each their own.
Well.. I bought this 4-door car (its all they sell) but only the front 2 doors open. I can buy the upgrade package which they will send via OnStar which will unlock the back two doors, but its another $5k. If I change/modify the motor the back doors wont work any more.
Close, but it's more like you bought a two-door car that also had two unusable doors, then paid more to get all four working. You could have paid for the four-door version from the get-go but only needed two at the time and wanted to save some money. There's a subtle difference.
Some, including me, would argue there is value in increasing the longevity of a hardware platform by offering later upgrades. If you needed a 3GHz CPU why did you only buy a 2GHz CPU? I think what really pisses people off is that they value the increased performance but think they should get it for no cost. It's the same argument as mobile tethering. If it had no value, no one would give a shit. And because people do value it, only an idiot would provide it for no cost.
The issue here is the manufacturers are starting to realize just how much overhead they're spending making so many different models of products, and that it's cheaper to just manufacture one model, the best one, and then cripple it if you don't want to pay for the best.
What's the issue here? You think everyone should be forced to buy the top-end model because that's the only one manufacturers should make available? If you by a $20,000 car, you get $20,000 functionality. Just cause there's $50,000 functionality built into the car to make manufacturing cheaper, doesn't mean it should be given to you for free.
Yes, it does... If I bought the car, I own it, and everything that is physically part of it at the time of purchase. Including the "extra" $30,000 worth of performance.
So you're ok if you buy a $20K car, then purchase $30K of physical bolt-on accessories to turn it into a $50K car? Or perhaps it's better to sell your $20K car used for $15K? Confused about why the upgrade process itself seems so upsetting to you.
Don't bother. He doesn't understand the difference between cost and value, and even if he did he'd still be pissed off if the profit margin was greater than some arbitrary number floating around in his head.
This is about plutocracy and anti-labor stance. If the roles were reversed, then the union would be forced to compensate the company for the damages that the union's badly configured server caused the company.
God forbid a union member be fired, which is what started this mess.
And yet with all that innovation, Opera is still the red-headed stepchild of web browsers. I suspect it's because they tried to create revenue with a browser directly as opposed to OS bundling (MS/Apple) or advertising (Google/Firefox).
Slashdot Mirror
I actually meant that the case would have no merit. In order to win you would have to prove harm. It would be extraordinarily hard to prove that not delivering a product or service that was never actually promised to the customer has caused any harm whatsoever. It's like suing Ben & Jerry's because they didn't decide to give out free PinkBerry when you were there last Thursday.
Are there any lawyers (as in, licensed to practice law) who are gamers who are reading this willing to take this one pro-bono?
Only if they're idiots.
Still fucked up. I don't want any of their employees opening my food and possibly contaminating it. If you don't want to sell the product with the toy, send it the f back and demand product without the competing product. Your inter-business dealings have little to do with the customer you supposedly serve.
Do you eat your DVDs? wtf?
Yes, you can. You didn't agree to shit, Gamestop did. You are under no obligation at all to abide by the EULA, especially since I'll bet that EULA has a clause about non-transferrable property that kicks in upon opening of the software packaging.
Gamestop is then violating the EULA, their problem, not yours.
As it is, this is product tampering, and bait and switch, not to mention anti-competitive practice.
No, sorry. The EULA agreement pops up during installation. Bait and switch does not occur since the coupon was never promised. Not providing a competitor's marketing coupon cannot reasonably be considered as anti-competitive.
And in 1980, you would have been correct. "Not actually useful yet for anything that matters" is an accurate statement in 2011.
I think you're talking about Slashdot comments, right? :P
Funny that you're modded down, your reaction pretty much matches mine.
MakerBot is cool, but pointless and not actually useful yet for anything that matters. The technology just isn't there yet at the hobbiest level. Its certainly out there, just not at the hobbiest level.
Right around 1980 or so you could have said the exact same thing about personal computers, and it would have been true.
> Just about everyone I saw in Shenzhen and Dongguan a couple months ago was rocking an iPhone 4
Hey, if that's what you've got to do to get a decent signal on one, go for it. ( If the cellphone coverage in Shenzhen is as miserable as the population themselves then I'm not at all surprised. )
You've been there, right? No, I didn't think so.
The stock being down does not change the fact that most people probably can't afford to buy stock at $364/share.
They can if they don't buy an iPhone instead.
Dude, it's the frigging Popemobile. Get a grip.
There is nothing illegal about jailbreaking in the US.
"Yeah, the CEOs and Wall Street pukes really need the money!"
Pukes indeed. Everyone I know is celebrating this implosion fo the stock market. The rich bastards that have been robbing us working folks blind for decades are finally getting whats coming to them. People like us living paycheck to paycheck aren't being hurt by this. It's the greed rich bastards that are crying now, and you know what? I don't feel a BIT sorry for the assholes.
Are you somehow under the impression that you need a mustache, monocle and top hat in order to invest? Or perhaps you think Social Security will be enough to retire on? Good luck with that.
The market is tanking, not Apple specifically. I hate to point out the obvious, but you want to buy low and sell high, not the other way around. Just 'cause a stock is down doesn't mean you shouldn't buy it. Doesn't mean you should, either.
This was a US AT&T iPhone that was jailbroken & unlocked, then used with a SIM bought while in mainland China.
Just about everyone I saw in Shenzhen and Dongguan a couple months ago was rocking an iPhone 4. Fewer in Beijing but they were still plentiful. My unlocked iPhone 3G worked just fine in each of the six cities I visited, including data. The app store is a different subject, though.
He doesn't understand the difference between cost and value,
And you presumably believe that of course 'value' is exclusively determined by ''objective'' criteria, marketing (advertising included) having no say in the evaluation process.
CC.
No. Value is determined solely and exclusively by the customer.
I think I understand. You would prefer to replace something rather than an in-place upgrade, if the only way to perform that upgrade was with a license rather than a physical widget. Personally I like things like trial/shareware software and tiered purchase options, and the market does too, by and large. But to each their own.
Is there just some tool which can scan through my extensions and report back on which aren't marked as compatible with 6.0 or above?
Yes, Is It Compatible? does this.
Well.. I bought this 4-door car (its all they sell) but only the front 2 doors open. I can buy the upgrade package which they will send via OnStar which will unlock the back two doors, but its another $5k. If I change/modify the motor the back doors wont work any more.
Close, but it's more like you bought a two-door car that also had two unusable doors, then paid more to get all four working. You could have paid for the four-door version from the get-go but only needed two at the time and wanted to save some money. There's a subtle difference.
Some, including me, would argue there is value in increasing the longevity of a hardware platform by offering later upgrades. If you needed a 3GHz CPU why did you only buy a 2GHz CPU? I think what really pisses people off is that they value the increased performance but think they should get it for no cost. It's the same argument as mobile tethering. If it had no value, no one would give a shit. And because people do value it, only an idiot would provide it for no cost.
What's the issue here? You think everyone should be forced to buy the top-end model because that's the only one manufacturers should make available? If you by a $20,000 car, you get $20,000 functionality. Just cause there's $50,000 functionality built into the car to make manufacturing cheaper, doesn't mean it should be given to you for free.
Yes, it does... If I bought the car, I own it, and everything that is physically part of it at the time of purchase. Including the "extra" $30,000 worth of performance.
So you're ok if you buy a $20K car, then purchase $30K of physical bolt-on accessories to turn it into a $50K car? Or perhaps it's better to sell your $20K car used for $15K? Confused about why the upgrade process itself seems so upsetting to you.
Don't bother. He doesn't understand the difference between cost and value, and even if he did he'd still be pissed off if the profit margin was greater than some arbitrary number floating around in his head.
This is about plutocracy and anti-labor stance. If the roles were reversed, then the union would be forced to compensate the company for the damages that the union's badly configured server caused the company.
God forbid a union member be fired, which is what started this mess.
And yet with all that innovation, Opera is still the red-headed stepchild of web browsers. I suspect it's because they tried to create revenue with a browser directly as opposed to OS bundling (MS/Apple) or advertising (Google/Firefox).
Are you under the impression that the trunk does not receive security updates?
I find it funny that every time there's a discussion about browsers, most articles won't even mention Opera.
That's ok, because there is always an Opera user who will point out that even though few use it.
What about the new FCC law the says any app and any network?
That policy does not say what free tethering proponents think it says.