A Verizon iPhone would be in the best interest of Apple, even if they had to give up some profits. Why?
1) AT&T's network Sucks. I have heard many complaints that the iPhone is wonderful -- at everything but being a plain cellphone.
2) AT&T's customer service sucks. DNA from a big telco. Monopoly mindset. Nuff said!
3) Mindshare is king. If there were a Verizon iPhone, there would be more Apple iPhone mindshare. I hated to leave Verizon's better network and service for AT&T's suckyness, but I did it anyways. Lower that barrier, and many more people like me would have an iPhone. In the long run mindshare = more profits!
Experiences with cell phone companies are so varied, it's impossible to draw any conclusions approaching 1) or 2)... if anything, all you can come up with is "All cell phone companies suck."
For every "AT&T's network sucks" you'll have a "Verizon's network sucks", and the same for customer service.
As an example, my wife and I both defected from Verizon. I've been with AT&T for 6-7 years, and her since the iPhone 3G launched. She left Verizon because of several experiences with rude customer service, and spotty coverage.
You don't get the coupon anymore, they discontinued that. If you're on a old plan that originally had the coupons, they let you keep them. New members can't get them, though.
They've been through a lot of plan changes trying to find something that worked: 1) Give away free rental coupons. 2) Unlimited in-store exchanges that don't count towards your online plan. 3) Limited in-store exchanges that don't count towards your plan + an additional plan with unlimited exchanges 4) #3, modified so that the exchanges count towards your plan
They're grasping at straws trying to find something that is attractive to customers and doesn't cost them too much money. For example, #2 was killed because the online users would rent all the new releases they could have otherwise charged $6 for.
Oakley makes a couple pairs of sunglasses with built-in headsets that are similar to what you want. One model has a built-in MP3 player, and the other is a stereo Bluetooth receiver. You'd need a Bluetooth adapter to use the latter with an iPod (probably a Nano, I doubt one exists for the Shuffle). The former only has up to 1GB of storage. And they're not cheap. You would be rid of the wires, though, if that's your main concern.
Our company voted to make the move when we were purchased by a larger company that observed 9/80. The change was made partially in response to frustration that resulted from not being able to contact employees at the parent company on their off Fridays.
A large company with various people who work every Friday, every other Friday, or no Fridays at all makes it difficult to organize and communicate at the end of the week.
Of course, this probably varies significantly by the kind of work being performed.
It probably depends on the employer. Depending on the holiday, we either get an "Observed" day for the Thursday before (like Christmas this year), or we get an additional floating holiday that can be used for any regular work day.
That the way it should be, I think, but I wouldn't be surprised if many organizations didn't follow that.
I imagine it has to do with the airplane-specific map data they use. They likely have detailed information on all the airports in the country, including things like runway orientation, fuel availability, etc.
The market probably isn't that big, so a company or two price the units wherever they want because they have no competition, and the result is a $10k GPS system.
I agree, 9/80 is great. I hired on with a company about a year ago that had just switched to the 9/80 system. There were some issues as everyone adjusted, but it's been great since. I like it so much, I'd view a typical 5/40 as a negative for any future employers.
I found that I didn't miss the extra hour during the week, and the Friday off is great for sleeping in, doctor appointments, or for random things that can't be done on the weekend.
My employer doesn't typically pull people in on the off Friday, but I imagine it happens every once in awhile. Although, I'm sure this varies greatly by company.
Overall, I'd say it's nothing to be scared of as long as the entire company embraces it. It's when portions of the employees are working regular weeks and some are on 9/80 that things tend to fall apart.
I think you're probably right on. Apple likes clearly-defined product groups with certain features.
I wouldn't be surprised to see: iPhone Nano = iPod + Phone (Data plan not required) iPhone 3G (or whatever is next) = iPod + Phone + Apps (Data plan required)
Then there's a nice upgrade path for Apple from one to the other.
I think the most compelling argument for the iPhone Nano is "Who said it would provide App Store support?" A cheap iPhone Nano that is merely a cellphone + iPod would make a killing. Then there's a clear upgrade path: Get hooked on the iPod and phone integration, then step up to the full iPhone with application support when your contract's up. I don't think it would be unusual to have a basic phone (iPhone Nano) and a smartphone (iPhone) in the Apple lineup.
Also, the official SDK specifically warns against using hard-coded pixel values to place items on the screen. They are supposed to be in relation to the actual pixel edges, for which an easy access method is provided. I doubt many people design this way, which will undoubtedly create a nightmare when the resolution is inevitably changed, but Apple did warn everyone.
This is basically spot-on. My mother worked for a variety of chiropractors in the area as a receptionist, because she had experience with them. She also suffers from pretty severe asthma. Each one wanted her to come off her meds and rely on adjustments to help with the asthma. They "prohibited" their workers from getting flu shots (which are important for asthma sufferers), insisting they be replaced by adjustments. They routinely recommend parents avoid vaccinating their children in any way.
Eventually she got fed up and took a job at a different type of medical facility. The take-away for me was that the majority of chiropractors appear to have little knowledge of medicine, and should not be trusted for anything beyond glorified massages.
He bought the original iPhone. He began to understand how great a device can be when someone has control over the hardware and the software.
Off-topic comment, I know, but when I read that quote something inside me cried a little. Probably the part that monitors my faith in humanity.
I don't see how that's inherently a bad thing (or even a good thing, for that matter). Practically every electronic device you interact with on a daily basis has its hardware and software controlled by the same company. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.
I don't see any real defining feature that makes one approach clearly superior to the other. It certainly doesn't warrant a change in faith in humanity.
Unfortunately for Psystar, they did offer it pre-installed at one point. This complicates some things for them, and they would have been better off if they hadn't.
Apple would argue that there is no reason for them to check for a previous version. From Apple's point of view, in order to install them you need to have a Mac, which would have come with OS X, therefore making the boxed copy an upgrade.
Since you can't get a Mac without OS X, all boxed copies of the OS are upgrades.
Same here. It has some scratches, but nothing major. I also got mine from Boone Rings, who will resurface it for life as long as you pay shipping both ways.
A couple other posts mentioned the light weight of titanium as their biggest problem, but I found that to be the best feature. My fairly large ring weighs a fraction of my wife's dainty platinum band. I don't want to walk around with a weight on my hand.
This is only really the case here in the US. Around Europe, Mercedes is similar to Ford here in the States. They produce a wide variety of less expensive models that don't make it to the US, and are common in fleets (Police, taxis, etc.).
Not that this negates your argument, however. I think Europeans are far more likely to embrace alternative fuels than Americans.
And it's probably not only that they're getting better at detecting it, but also that average life expectancy is increasing. Living longer allows a larger window for getting cancer.
I think it'd be extremely difficult to back up a statement like "Cancer rates have increased in the last few years" with any kind of certainty.
The Do Not Call list exempts companies you've had a previous business relationship with. We get calls from Dish with fair regularity, probably a few times a month, but we're also Dish customers so there's not a whole lot you can do besides threaten to cancel unless they stop calling. You didn't mention if you are, or have been in the past, a Dish customer, but that may explain why you're getting the calls. Placing the calls from India does not get around the Do Not Call list. Dish is still an American corporation, no matter where the calls originate.
OnStar has always had privacy issues, but I don't see how this modification makes it any worse than it was before. They can already track where the car is at all times and listen to the conversation in the car if they want to. Being able to shut the car down isn't a huge step forward from that.
Credit freezes would have no effect on pre-existing credit. This would not stop anyone from raising your credit card limits as access to your credit report is not required to do so. They can, and usually will, provide limits increases based solely upon your previous spending habits and payment history.
I frequently read through CreditBoards, and while having a lot of available credit could conceivably hurt you, actually being denied for having too much credit is pretty rare and seems to only apply to mortgages. In this case, the loan officer will instruct you to close some tradelines before they will proceed. This practice hardly seem predatory, especially given the multitude of other huge problems with the CRA system.
It's possible, because some PowerShots do have limited movie modes, but others allow video recordings of length limited only by the size of the flash card.
Um -- I'm sorry but you are really stretching the imagination here.
It would take some serious leaps of logic to say that snapping a picture (5 seconds) and doing something else for 9 minutes and 55 seconds equals 10 minutes of "photography occurring" or "taking photographs". And where did you get 100ft area? That wasn't in the text at all. You seem to be sewing your case out of whole cloth here.
I think you need to read the proposed regulations a bit more closely: From the regulations, a permit is required for "Filming, photography, production, television or radio remotes occurring on City property" when they meet the group size/time criteria. Take a single 10 minute period where you stayed within 100ft of where you started. If you took a photograph, photography occurred on City property during that period. No stipulation is made for the length of filming or photography, only that it occurred at a "single site".
Which brings up the next point. The regulations specifically define the 100ft work area, and it's certainly in the text. Direct from the regulations: A "single site" shall be any area within 100 feet of where an activity commences
Let's come back to reality now. NYC lives and breathes on tourism. They bend over backwards and sideways to keep tourists coming to the city. They even make cab drivers go through training to be nicer to tourists. NYC will do absolutely nothing at all to jeopardize tourism in any way because they'd be cutting their own throats -- and they know it. Then we can assume that they'll modify the regulations based on the comments they receive during this period.
Like you said, I don't think further regulations are necessarily a bad thing, just that these particular proposed regulations should be rejected. There should be no reason they can't come up with definitions that don't impact casual photographers/filmmakers/whatever that are having no impact on those around them. You can definitely tell they aimed at professionals, but the wording is so vague that it could be applied to anyone.
Hopefully the comments they receive will convince them to change some of the wording.
It's really that simple. Amateur photographers and sightseers do not need to film in one place longer than a half hour. A "let me take a picture of you in front of the Jumbotron" does not take a half hour. If it takes you or anyone else longer than 10 minutes to get your shot or are clogging the streets with multiple tripods and a gaggle of people, then you have almost certainly gone past "amateur" status.
Your "detain and question anyone with a camera" remark was plain and simple fear mongering.
Who says you have to clogging the streets? A guy and his wife setting up a shot and bothering absolutely no one with no tripod has a time limit of 30 minutes. You could be sitting in the park with nobody around and still trigger the regulations. You could be waiting for a friend in front a building and take a picture with your camera phone and trigger the regulations. If you want regulations to prevent impeding traffic, write them that way. I don't think anyone would have a problem with that. People blocking sidewalks and roads are more than an annoyance, they can be dangerous. The fact is, as written, these regulations could apply to all kinds of completely legal and unobtrusive photography.
As far as fear mongering, I seriously doubt it. It is well known that these regulations stemmed from a lawsuit over an Indian filmmaker who was detained and then denied permits for no reason. Others claim it's in response to the filming of Police brutality, but I don't think that argument is correct. Photographers are regularly forced to stop taking pictures in public, often at the request of building owners, despite it being completely legal. It has gotten so bad that there are even "Know your Rights" worksheets to carry around.
If current regulations aren't enough to stop teams from impeding sidewalks and such, then I completely support regulations to do so. But, as written, this proposal goes entirely too far.
Let's say you're there with your wife or girlfriend. That's two people. If you're there longer than 30 minutes and can be said to be participating in photography, you need a permit. A crew of 5 is not necessary. Read the regulations.
The only positive thing they did is completely exempted photographers working alone.
Except that you can clearly take a single photograph and remain in the same 100ft area without doing anything for a further 10, 30, or however many minutes depending on group size and trigger these regulations. You can make guesses at what they were trying to accomplish, but the wording is very poor. One picture is certainly "photography occurring on City property," wouldn't you agree? You don't have to actively be taking pictures.
Slashdot Mirror
A Verizon iPhone would be in the best interest of Apple, even if they had to give up some profits. Why?
1) AT&T's network Sucks. I have heard many complaints that the iPhone is wonderful -- at everything but being a plain cellphone.
2) AT&T's customer service sucks. DNA from a big telco. Monopoly mindset. Nuff said!
3) Mindshare is king. If there were a Verizon iPhone, there would be more Apple iPhone mindshare. I hated to leave Verizon's better network and service for AT&T's suckyness, but I did it anyways. Lower that barrier, and many more people like me would have an iPhone. In the long run mindshare = more profits!
Experiences with cell phone companies are so varied, it's impossible to draw any conclusions approaching 1) or 2)... if anything, all you can come up with is "All cell phone companies suck."
For every "AT&T's network sucks" you'll have a "Verizon's network sucks", and the same for customer service.
As an example, my wife and I both defected from Verizon. I've been with AT&T for 6-7 years, and her since the iPhone 3G launched. She left Verizon because of several experiences with rude customer service, and spotty coverage.
You don't get the coupon anymore, they discontinued that. If you're on a old plan that originally had the coupons, they let you keep them. New members can't get them, though.
They've been through a lot of plan changes trying to find something that worked:
1) Give away free rental coupons.
2) Unlimited in-store exchanges that don't count towards your online plan.
3) Limited in-store exchanges that don't count towards your plan + an additional plan with unlimited exchanges
4) #3, modified so that the exchanges count towards your plan
They're grasping at straws trying to find something that is attractive to customers and doesn't cost them too much money. For example, #2 was killed because the online users would rent all the new releases they could have otherwise charged $6 for.
Oakley makes a couple pairs of sunglasses with built-in headsets that are similar to what you want. One model has a built-in MP3 player, and the other is a stereo Bluetooth receiver. You'd need a Bluetooth adapter to use the latter with an iPod (probably a Nano, I doubt one exists for the Shuffle). The former only has up to 1GB of storage. And they're not cheap. You would be rid of the wires, though, if that's your main concern.
Our company voted to make the move when we were purchased by a larger company that observed 9/80. The change was made partially in response to frustration that resulted from not being able to contact employees at the parent company on their off Fridays.
A large company with various people who work every Friday, every other Friday, or no Fridays at all makes it difficult to organize and communicate at the end of the week.
Of course, this probably varies significantly by the kind of work being performed.
It probably depends on the employer. Depending on the holiday, we either get an "Observed" day for the Thursday before (like Christmas this year), or we get an additional floating holiday that can be used for any regular work day.
That the way it should be, I think, but I wouldn't be surprised if many organizations didn't follow that.
I imagine it has to do with the airplane-specific map data they use. They likely have detailed information on all the airports in the country, including things like runway orientation, fuel availability, etc.
The market probably isn't that big, so a company or two price the units wherever they want because they have no competition, and the result is a $10k GPS system.
I agree, 9/80 is great. I hired on with a company about a year ago that had just switched to the 9/80 system. There were some issues as everyone adjusted, but it's been great since. I like it so much, I'd view a typical 5/40 as a negative for any future employers.
I found that I didn't miss the extra hour during the week, and the Friday off is great for sleeping in, doctor appointments, or for random things that can't be done on the weekend.
My employer doesn't typically pull people in on the off Friday, but I imagine it happens every once in awhile. Although, I'm sure this varies greatly by company.
Overall, I'd say it's nothing to be scared of as long as the entire company embraces it. It's when portions of the employees are working regular weeks and some are on 9/80 that things tend to fall apart.
I think you're probably right on. Apple likes clearly-defined product groups with certain features.
I wouldn't be surprised to see:
iPhone Nano = iPod + Phone (Data plan not required)
iPhone 3G (or whatever is next) = iPod + Phone + Apps (Data plan required)
Then there's a nice upgrade path for Apple from one to the other.
I think the most compelling argument for the iPhone Nano is "Who said it would provide App Store support?" A cheap iPhone Nano that is merely a cellphone + iPod would make a killing. Then there's a clear upgrade path: Get hooked on the iPod and phone integration, then step up to the full iPhone with application support when your contract's up. I don't think it would be unusual to have a basic phone (iPhone Nano) and a smartphone (iPhone) in the Apple lineup.
Also, the official SDK specifically warns against using hard-coded pixel values to place items on the screen. They are supposed to be in relation to the actual pixel edges, for which an easy access method is provided. I doubt many people design this way, which will undoubtedly create a nightmare when the resolution is inevitably changed, but Apple did warn everyone.
This is basically spot-on. My mother worked for a variety of chiropractors in the area as a receptionist, because she had experience with them. She also suffers from pretty severe asthma. Each one wanted her to come off her meds and rely on adjustments to help with the asthma. They "prohibited" their workers from getting flu shots (which are important for asthma sufferers), insisting they be replaced by adjustments. They routinely recommend parents avoid vaccinating their children in any way.
Eventually she got fed up and took a job at a different type of medical facility. The take-away for me was that the majority of chiropractors appear to have little knowledge of medicine, and should not be trusted for anything beyond glorified massages.
He bought the original iPhone. He began to understand how great a device can be when someone has control over the hardware and the software.
Off-topic comment, I know, but when I read that quote something inside me cried a little. Probably the part that monitors my faith in humanity.
I don't see how that's inherently a bad thing (or even a good thing, for that matter). Practically every electronic device you interact with on a daily basis has its hardware and software controlled by the same company. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.
I don't see any real defining feature that makes one approach clearly superior to the other. It certainly doesn't warrant a change in faith in humanity.
Unfortunately for Psystar, they did offer it pre-installed at one point. This complicates some things for them, and they would have been better off if they hadn't.
Apple would argue that there is no reason for them to check for a previous version. From Apple's point of view, in order to install them you need to have a Mac, which would have come with OS X, therefore making the boxed copy an upgrade.
Since you can't get a Mac without OS X, all boxed copies of the OS are upgrades.
Same here. It has some scratches, but nothing major. I also got mine from Boone Rings, who will resurface it for life as long as you pay shipping both ways.
A couple other posts mentioned the light weight of titanium as their biggest problem, but I found that to be the best feature. My fairly large ring weighs a fraction of my wife's dainty platinum band. I don't want to walk around with a weight on my hand.
This is only really the case here in the US. Around Europe, Mercedes is similar to Ford here in the States. They produce a wide variety of less expensive models that don't make it to the US, and are common in fleets (Police, taxis, etc.).
Not that this negates your argument, however. I think Europeans are far more likely to embrace alternative fuels than Americans.
And it's probably not only that they're getting better at detecting it, but also that average life expectancy is increasing. Living longer allows a larger window for getting cancer.
I think it'd be extremely difficult to back up a statement like "Cancer rates have increased in the last few years" with any kind of certainty.
The Do Not Call list exempts companies you've had a previous business relationship with. We get calls from Dish with fair regularity, probably a few times a month, but we're also Dish customers so there's not a whole lot you can do besides threaten to cancel unless they stop calling. You didn't mention if you are, or have been in the past, a Dish customer, but that may explain why you're getting the calls. Placing the calls from India does not get around the Do Not Call list. Dish is still an American corporation, no matter where the calls originate.
OnStar has always had privacy issues, but I don't see how this modification makes it any worse than it was before. They can already track where the car is at all times and listen to the conversation in the car if they want to. Being able to shut the car down isn't a huge step forward from that.
Credit freezes would have no effect on pre-existing credit. This would not stop anyone from raising your credit card limits as access to your credit report is not required to do so. They can, and usually will, provide limits increases based solely upon your previous spending habits and payment history.
I frequently read through CreditBoards, and while having a lot of available credit could conceivably hurt you, actually being denied for having too much credit is pretty rare and seems to only apply to mortgages. In this case, the loan officer will instruct you to close some tradelines before they will proceed. This practice hardly seem predatory, especially given the multitude of other huge problems with the CRA system.
It's possible, because some PowerShots do have limited movie modes, but others allow video recordings of length limited only by the size of the flash card.
Um -- I'm sorry but you are really stretching the imagination here.
It would take some serious leaps of logic to say that snapping a picture (5 seconds) and doing something else for 9 minutes and 55 seconds equals 10 minutes of "photography occurring" or "taking photographs". And where did you get 100ft area? That wasn't in the text at all. You seem to be sewing your case out of whole cloth here.
I think you need to read the proposed regulations a bit more closely:
From the regulations, a permit is required for "Filming, photography, production, television or radio remotes occurring on City property" when they meet the group size/time criteria.
Take a single 10 minute period where you stayed within 100ft of where you started. If you took a photograph, photography occurred on City property during that period. No stipulation is made for the length of filming or photography, only that it occurred at a "single site".
Which brings up the next point. The regulations specifically define the 100ft work area, and it's certainly in the text.
Direct from the regulations: A "single site" shall be any area within 100 feet of where an activity commences
Let's come back to reality now. NYC lives and breathes on tourism. They bend over backwards and sideways to keep tourists coming to the city. They even make cab drivers go through training to be nicer to tourists. NYC will do absolutely nothing at all to jeopardize tourism in any way because they'd be cutting their own throats -- and they know it.
Then we can assume that they'll modify the regulations based on the comments they receive during this period.
Like you said, I don't think further regulations are necessarily a bad thing, just that these particular proposed regulations should be rejected. There should be no reason they can't come up with definitions that don't impact casual photographers/filmmakers/whatever that are having no impact on those around them. You can definitely tell they aimed at professionals, but the wording is so vague that it could be applied to anyone.
Hopefully the comments they receive will convince them to change some of the wording.
It's really that simple. Amateur photographers and sightseers do not need to film in one place longer than a half hour. A "let me take a picture of you in front of the Jumbotron" does not take a half hour. If it takes you or anyone else longer than 10 minutes to get your shot or are clogging the streets with multiple tripods and a gaggle of people, then you have almost certainly gone past "amateur" status.
Your "detain and question anyone with a camera" remark was plain and simple fear mongering.
Who says you have to clogging the streets? A guy and his wife setting up a shot and bothering absolutely no one with no tripod has a time limit of 30 minutes. You could be sitting in the park with nobody around and still trigger the regulations. You could be waiting for a friend in front a building and take a picture with your camera phone and trigger the regulations. If you want regulations to prevent impeding traffic, write them that way. I don't think anyone would have a problem with that. People blocking sidewalks and roads are more than an annoyance, they can be dangerous. The fact is, as written, these regulations could apply to all kinds of completely legal and unobtrusive photography.
As far as fear mongering, I seriously doubt it. It is well known that these regulations stemmed from a lawsuit over an Indian filmmaker who was detained and then denied permits for no reason. Others claim it's in response to the filming of Police brutality, but I don't think that argument is correct. Photographers are regularly forced to stop taking pictures in public, often at the request of building owners, despite it being completely legal. It has gotten so bad that there are even "Know your Rights" worksheets to carry around.
If current regulations aren't enough to stop teams from impeding sidewalks and such, then I completely support regulations to do so. But, as written, this proposal goes entirely too far.
Let's say you're there with your wife or girlfriend. That's two people. If you're there longer than 30 minutes and can be said to be participating in photography, you need a permit. A crew of 5 is not necessary. Read the regulations.
The only positive thing they did is completely exempted photographers working alone.
Except that you can clearly take a single photograph and remain in the same 100ft area without doing anything for a further 10, 30, or however many minutes depending on group size and trigger these regulations. You can make guesses at what they were trying to accomplish, but the wording is very poor. One picture is certainly "photography occurring on City property," wouldn't you agree? You don't have to actively be taking pictures.