This isn't any different than how it works with Amazon, who also uses words like "buy" and "purchase" to represent their permanent rentals of books, music, and movies.
I expect that if you read the terms of service (you do read that, before you click "OK"buying anything, you are renting it, anybody who doesn't understand that needs a keeper.
Most people can't understand the ToS. They are deliberately written to be difficult to understand, and contain unnecessary verbiage to discourage people from digging into them to begin with. That's part of why we have laws governing contracts. Further, pretending that the meanings of words doesn't matter is bollocks. Apple deliberately confused customers, and the ToS doesn't change that.
Prove it, Hater!
Apple's Legal documents are written in plain English. Maybe it is YOU that needs some tutoring on the subject.
This is the "victim's" fault for not understanding what he was doing, this was obvious from day one.
Not at all. This is unequivocally Apple's fault for describing it as a "purchase" instead of as a "rental". If Apple didn't secure a license to the content for effectively "forever" (such as a 99-year license) before "selling" the content to the user, then they made the sale in poor faith. Their activity was in fact fraud.
Oh, get off your high-horse, Hater!
It wasn't APPLE's "bad faith", it was the COPYRIGHT HOLDER's, who sold Apple a bill of goods when they led APPLE to believe that the COPYRIGHT HOLDER was granting APPLE a PERPETUAL LICENSE on the material, and then THEY (the COPYRIGHT HOLDER) renegged.
Apple had NO choice nor foreknowledge, and certainly there was no "scienter" (look it up) involved on APPLE's part.
Hence, APPLE committed NO FRAUD.
Dumbass Haters. The whole lot of you ought to be launched into the Sun...
I completely agree, but I also think this summary is being a bit unfair. Apple didn't reach into his hard drive to delete his local copies. They simply pulled the listing from their store, meaning that new downloads and streaming are no longer possible.
It's the same practice they've had across all their services for years. When a developer pulls an app from the app store, the app's users get to keep their local copies, can transfer them to new devices, and can otherwise use them without issue. Same thing for films. My wife had a dozen films she had purchased in iTunes before we got married, and they all still work fine (though these days I have her buying DRM-free so that we can get them into Plex more easily). I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Apple lost the rights to distribute some of her films, but we'd likely never know.
Never buy Apple unless you are okay with being a slave to their dictatorial policies. Please support Linux.
This is not unique to Apple, Hater.
If you want to be bitchy at someone, then by all means register your displeasure with the COPYRIGHT HOLDERS, which ultimately hold the keys to the kingdom.
tl;dr If you don't have physical media in your hand, it ain't really yours...
Alkaline D-cell capacity varies of course, but is typically 18-27Wh depending on brand, current draw, etc. A modern rechargeable NiMH clocks in around 12-15Wh
So no. At best your phone comes short of a SINGLE Alkaline (old-skool) D-cell battery and ties a single, modern NiMH. At least check your facts before ranting on...
While I sincerely apologize to all the Sladotters that got so Butthurt about my accidently mis-remembering the capacity of a D-Cell battery when I posted that at around 3:30 am (yes, I still should have taken an extra minute and checked!), I feel obliged to point-out that "Checking facts before ranting on..." almost never seems to be a priority when some Apple-Hating Anonymous COWARD wants to (intentionally?) incorrectly state "facts" regarding whatever it is they are "on"-about regarding Apple when they vent their Spleen.
It is more than that. I once had an HTC phone with some other proprietary connector. My old Samsung S5 had some other variant of micro to support USB 3. And now USB-C. I don't think I have ever had two cellphones that had the same connector.
And then there are all of the little gizmos that really only use USB just to charge the battery. Mini, micro - all still quite common.
Damn, that's ridiculous!
So, for all the Fandroids' bitching about Apple connectors, over the past 11.7 years, they have actually only had TWO charging/data connectors.
And before you whine about Lightning being a proprietary connector, remember it was out and working in the real-world Before USB-C was a viable option.
Where did you find health insurance for a single person that has a deductible of $5500 yet still costs $862 per month? Mine is $256 per month with $5500 deductible and allows me to have an HSA to put away $3450 tax free each year. My wife's plan through her job was $300/mo, but only $52/mo out of her paycheck with the employer covering the rest and putting $34/fortnight into her HSA, and us contributing up to the limit again. That means that for two of us on single person plans we paid $302, or $556 if including the employers portion, for our plans both with $5500 deductibles.
Health Care Marketplace, with the ONLY carrier in my state.
The original adaptor seems like it must be super poorly designed if a new version can reduce draw by 38%!! That seems like an insane gap. Seems like the original adaptor must have also gotten quite hot with that kind of extra draw?
Even if it's slightly more expensive I don't see where a dollar or two would make much of a difference, you're only going to be buying one or two adaptors at most (and many people need 0 if they just stick to bluetooth headsets).
That's exactly what I was thinking!
The averageQualcomm based Android Phone has a battery with about the capacity of 3-4 old-Sokol "D" cell flashlight batteries!
I wonder if Google was worried about BURN lawsuits from the melting insulation on that old headphone adapter!!!!
The skyrocketing premiums are directly related to insurance carriers' unconscionable GREED. They used the ACA as an excuse to throw out all the Actuarial Tables and recalculate EVERYONE as if they are on death's door from every costly disease they could think of.
But when Trump repeals ACA the companies will lower the premiums. Right?
In some markets, health Insurance companies have little reason to do what you describe. Under the PPACA they must pay out 80% of the incoming claims dollars for medical services. The other 20% covers all administrative costs (claims processing, salaries, utilities, negotiating networks, leases, computers, training, HR, claim review, approval review, etc) related to servicing existing customers and advertising (necessary to replace existing customers who pick a different plan, leave the service area, or die) and profits. If they pay out less than 80% premiums to medical claims, they have to rebate the difference back to the policy holders.
In fact, this limitation adds a perverse incentive to pay out MORE in claims, not less. If, hypothetically, an insurer doubles their premiums and doubles their medical pay outs (by not checking claims carefully, by approving questionable procedures, by not negotiating as hard as they could with medical providers) to keep within the 80% limit, the 20% they get to keep also doubles. Also, their expenses related to claims review and network negotiation probably drops as they they would just have to pay rebates back to policy holders if they deny claims and miss the 80% requirement. So, much - maybe more than all - of the increase in the 20% can go to pure profit.
Of course, if they raise their rates (and pay out more in claims), they may lose customers in a competitive market -- but in some areas there isn't a competitive market. For example, there are 1565 counties where there is only one provider on the exchange. In 2016, 30% of the participants in the Federal exchange had only ONE choice available to them. Also, since many people's premiums on the exchanges are highly subsidized by tax dollars, many people are not nearly as price sensitive as people who are paying their own way so raising rates in "one insurer" markets won't drive away business like it would in a conventional free market.
Well, you're 80% rule OBVIOUSLY doesn't apply where I live. Plus, we went from a 2-Insurer to a 1-Insurer "choice".
They did ban the catastrophic care plans which basically didn't provide actual care, but HSAs did continue to exist....I certainly have made use of them during the period that PPACA has been in operation.
Hey, my Deductible is $5500 per year; meaning that, unless I have some pretty high medical bills, my $862 per MONTH insurance Premiums are just G-O-N-E.
I'd call that "Catastrophic Health Insurance"; but without the benefit of having that nearly $12,000 per year in an account with MY name on it!
The skyrocketing premiums are directly related to the ACA.
Wrong.
The skyrocketing premiums are directly related to insurance carriers' unconscionable GREED. They used the ACA as an excuse to throw out all the Actuarial Tables and recalculate EVERYONE as if they are on death's door from every costly disease they could think of.
It all part of apples new greedy scheme. 1. Put a planned timed issue into their phones. 2. Have a "small percentage" of user return their phones for "free"* repairs 3. Whoops ; You have small hairline crack on your screen you are totally ok to live with? Sorry we have to repair that before for $300 before we can do the "free" repair. 4. PROFIT!!! apple sure didnt get their money being honest or ethical.
Yeah, almost unbearably slow, but working. There's nothing quite like Apple's planed obsolescence. Good brand choice indeed.
Hey, COWARD:
I am SURE you didn't watch this year's WWDC Keynote; but one of the first topics (if not THE first) was how they had SPECIFICALLY focused on PERFORMANCE of iOS 12 ON OLDER DEVICES.
In fact, they used an iPhone 6 (which I happen to have), and the performance gains were QUITE impressive.
And I guess that real-world tests with the Beta releases of iOS 12 seem to bear out these claims:
Speaking of which, I just recently Upgraded my iPhone 6 (actually a 6 Plus) from iOS 10.3.3 to iOS 11.4.1. I'm here to tell you that it is NOTICABLY FASTER.
But it seems that Apple has discovered that theur iPhone 8 is one big defect, they are just trying to hide behind the excuse that it is a manufacturing defect..
Riiiight.
They instituted AND ANNOUNCED a multinational recall program that will no doubt cost them millions up millions of dollars, JUST to provide an "excuse".
If it was a DESIGN defect, then why are only certain regions and date-ranges affected?
Sorry. This was either a coplanarity or contamination problem with the PCB and/or SoC, OR some sort of soldering issue. Same as with many products by many manufacturers for many years.
Especially since that evil RoHS "no-stick" Solder...
The point of having an app store is that it's a curated collection. If you can't trust the apps in the official store, that's a step backwards from ye olde retail outlet and you might as well just get apps from j. Random internet site, since you can't trust the app store.
Understood; but considering the vanishgly-small number of examples of Malware sneaking-past the vetting process of the COMBINED number of Apps in the Apple App StoreS (plural), and the fact that, IN EVERY known case, the Apps were either rejected outright, or REMOVED when the malware was discovered (unlike, on the Internet, as another Poster pointed-out), I'd say the Protction afforded by Apple's Curation is MILLIONS of times better than downloading those same Apps from some rando website or even a well-known third-party repository.
tl;dr : Nothing is perfect; but Apple's App StoreS (plural) have a years-long NEARLY PERFECT track record (to the point that EVERY exception is NEWSWORTHY!) relative to both the Internet at large AND envy other "App Store", and at this time represent the hands-down safest sources for Application and System-Software acquisition for Apple products.
The U.S. still does a lot of chip design and fabrication. It's just that the chips get shipped overseas for packaging and final product assembly.
Also, U.S. manufacturing output has been increasing year over year even though we were moving large chunks of it overseas. I think now would be a good time to start reinvesting in local manufacturing, but that would be done with machines. A lot of the jobs aren't coming back, but that's okay because it means that labor is free to do something that's more productive instead.
Ya know, for all the Apple-bashing around here, they have actually been doing manufacturing/final-assembly of at least one of their products here since 2013: The (often-maligned) Mac Pro.
Granted, it's not the highest-volume product Apple sells; but even if it represents just 1% of Apple's nearly 20 million Mac units sold in 2017, that still represents a quantity of nearly 2 million units of $2k-5k Mac Pros per year (for an average yearly income of $5 BEELION in gross sales), which is a production rate and income that many a company would die-for. Not so bad for a "failed" product!
Slashdot Mirror
This isn't any different than how it works with Amazon, who also uses words like "buy" and "purchase" to represent their permanent rentals of books, music, and movies.
That's the model now.
Unfortunate, but true.
It doesn't matter what the terms say what apples language clearly says purchase, not rent.
It's deceptive marketing.
So, you want the buttons to say "Rent $3.99" and "Rent Forever $14.99"?
Right. That wouldn't generate many Support calls, now would it?
I expect that if you read the terms of service (you do read that, before you click "OK"buying anything, you are renting it, anybody who doesn't understand that needs a keeper.
Most people can't understand the ToS. They are deliberately written to be difficult to understand, and contain unnecessary verbiage to discourage people from digging into them to begin with. That's part of why we have laws governing contracts. Further, pretending that the meanings of words doesn't matter is bollocks. Apple deliberately confused customers, and the ToS doesn't change that.
Prove it, Hater!
Apple's Legal documents are written in plain English. Maybe it is YOU that needs some tutoring on the subject.
This is the "victim's" fault for not understanding what he was doing, this was obvious from day one.
Not at all. This is unequivocally Apple's fault for describing it as a "purchase" instead of as a "rental". If Apple didn't secure a license to the content for effectively "forever" (such as a 99-year license) before "selling" the content to the user, then they made the sale in poor faith. Their activity was in fact fraud.
Oh, get off your high-horse, Hater!
It wasn't APPLE's "bad faith", it was the COPYRIGHT HOLDER's, who sold Apple a bill of goods when they led APPLE to believe that the COPYRIGHT HOLDER was granting APPLE a PERPETUAL LICENSE on the material, and then THEY (the COPYRIGHT HOLDER) renegged.
Apple had NO choice nor foreknowledge, and certainly there was no "scienter" (look it up) involved on APPLE's part.
Hence, APPLE committed NO FRAUD.
Dumbass Haters. The whole lot of you ought to be launched into the Sun...
I completely agree, but I also think this summary is being a bit unfair. Apple didn't reach into his hard drive to delete his local copies. They simply pulled the listing from their store, meaning that new downloads and streaming are no longer possible.
It's the same practice they've had across all their services for years. When a developer pulls an app from the app store, the app's users get to keep their local copies, can transfer them to new devices, and can otherwise use them without issue. Same thing for films. My wife had a dozen films she had purchased in iTunes before we got married, and they all still work fine (though these days I have her buying DRM-free so that we can get them into Plex more easily). I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Apple lost the rights to distribute some of her films, but we'd likely never know.
Exactly!
Never buy Apple unless you are okay with being a slave to their dictatorial policies. Please support Linux.
This is not unique to Apple, Hater.
If you want to be bitchy at someone, then by all means register your displeasure with the COPYRIGHT HOLDERS, which ultimately hold the keys to the kingdom.
tl;dr If you don't have physical media in your hand, it ain't really yours...
The S9+ has a 13.48Wh battery.
Alkaline D-cell capacity varies of course, but is typically 18-27Wh depending on brand, current draw, etc.
A modern rechargeable NiMH clocks in around 12-15Wh
So no. At best your phone comes short of a SINGLE Alkaline (old-skool) D-cell battery and ties a single, modern NiMH. At least check your facts before ranting on...
While I sincerely apologize to all the Sladotters that got so Butthurt about my accidently mis-remembering the capacity of a D-Cell battery when I posted that at around 3:30 am (yes, I still should have taken an extra minute and checked!), I feel obliged to point-out that "Checking facts before ranting on..." almost never seems to be a priority when some Apple-Hating Anonymous COWARD wants to (intentionally?) incorrectly state "facts" regarding whatever it is they are "on"-about regarding Apple when they vent their Spleen.
It is more than that. I once had an HTC phone with some other proprietary connector. My old Samsung S5 had some other variant of micro to support USB 3. And now USB-C. I don't think I have ever had two cellphones that had the same connector.
And then there are all of the little gizmos that really only use USB just to charge the battery. Mini, micro - all still quite common.
Damn, that's ridiculous!
So, for all the Fandroids' bitching about Apple connectors, over the past 11.7 years, they have actually only had TWO charging/data connectors.
And before you whine about Lightning being a proprietary connector, remember it was out and working in the real-world Before USB-C was a viable option.
Where did you find health insurance for a single person that has a deductible of $5500 yet still costs $862 per month? Mine is $256 per month with $5500 deductible and allows me to have an HSA to put away $3450 tax free each year. My wife's plan through her job was $300/mo, but only $52/mo out of her paycheck with the employer covering the rest and putting $34/fortnight into her HSA, and us contributing up to the limit again. That means that for two of us on single person plans we paid $302, or $556 if including the employers portion, for our plans both with $5500 deductibles.
Health Care Marketplace, with the ONLY carrier in my state.
Next question?
The original adaptor seems like it must be super poorly designed if a new version can reduce draw by 38%!! That seems like an insane gap. Seems like the original adaptor must have also gotten quite hot with that kind of extra draw?
Even if it's slightly more expensive I don't see where a dollar or two would make much of a difference, you're only going to be buying one or two adaptors at most (and many people need 0 if they just stick to bluetooth headsets).
That's exactly what I was thinking!
The averageQualcomm based Android Phone has a battery with about the capacity of 3-4 old-Sokol "D" cell flashlight batteries!
I wonder if Google was worried about BURN lawsuits from the melting insulation on that old headphone adapter!!!!
The skyrocketing premiums are directly related to insurance carriers' unconscionable GREED. They used the ACA as an excuse to throw out all the Actuarial Tables and recalculate EVERYONE as if they are on death's door from every costly disease they could think of.
But when Trump repeals ACA the companies will lower the premiums. Right?
Hahahahahaha!
Silly git... ;-)
In some markets, health Insurance companies have little reason to do what you describe. Under the PPACA they must pay out 80% of the incoming claims dollars for medical services. The other 20% covers all administrative costs (claims processing, salaries, utilities, negotiating networks, leases, computers, training, HR, claim review, approval review, etc) related to servicing existing customers and advertising (necessary to replace existing customers who pick a different plan, leave the service area, or die) and profits. If they pay out less than 80% premiums to medical claims, they have to rebate the difference back to the policy holders.
In fact, this limitation adds a perverse incentive to pay out MORE in claims, not less. If, hypothetically, an insurer doubles their premiums and doubles their medical pay outs (by not checking claims carefully, by approving questionable procedures, by not negotiating as hard as they could with medical providers) to keep within the 80% limit, the 20% they get to keep also doubles. Also, their expenses related to claims review and network negotiation probably drops as they they would just have to pay rebates back to policy holders if they deny claims and miss the 80% requirement. So, much - maybe more than all - of the increase in the 20% can go to pure profit.
Of course, if they raise their rates (and pay out more in claims), they may lose customers in a competitive market -- but in some areas there isn't a competitive market. For example, there are 1565 counties where there is only one provider on the exchange. In 2016, 30% of the participants in the Federal exchange had only ONE choice available to them. Also, since many people's premiums on the exchanges are highly subsidized by tax dollars, many people are not nearly as price sensitive as people who are paying their own way so raising rates in "one insurer" markets won't drive away business like it would in a conventional free market.
Well, you're 80% rule OBVIOUSLY doesn't apply where I live. Plus, we went from a 2-Insurer to a 1-Insurer "choice".
They did ban the catastrophic care plans which basically didn't provide actual care, but HSAs did continue to exist....I certainly have made use of them during the period that PPACA has been in operation.
Hey, my Deductible is $5500 per year; meaning that, unless I have some pretty high medical bills, my $862 per MONTH insurance Premiums are just G-O-N-E.
I'd call that "Catastrophic Health Insurance"; but without the benefit of having that nearly $12,000 per year in an account with MY name on it!
The skyrocketing premiums are directly related to the ACA.
Wrong.
The skyrocketing premiums are directly related to insurance carriers' unconscionable GREED. They used the ACA as an excuse to throw out all the Actuarial Tables and recalculate EVERYONE as if they are on death's door from every costly disease they could think of.
Since at least 2013, Apple DOES at least Assemble some of their Products in the USA, and are actively taking steps to increase those numbers:
https://www.statesman.com/busi...
https://www.apple.com/newsroom...
https://www.businessinsider.co...
https://www.apple.com/newsroom...
It all part of apples new greedy scheme.
1. Put a planned timed issue into their phones.
2. Have a "small percentage" of user return their phones for "free"* repairs
3. Whoops ; You have small hairline crack on your screen you are totally ok to live with? Sorry we have to repair that before for $300 before we can do the "free" repair.
4. PROFIT!!!
apple sure didnt get their money being honest or ethical.
Prove it, or STFU, COWARD!
all of my Apple devices just keep working.
Yeah, almost unbearably slow, but working. There's nothing quite like Apple's planed obsolescence. Good brand choice indeed.
Hey, COWARD:
I am SURE you didn't watch this year's WWDC Keynote; but one of the first topics (if not THE first) was how they had SPECIFICALLY focused on PERFORMANCE of iOS 12 ON OLDER DEVICES.
In fact, they used an iPhone 6 (which I happen to have), and the performance gains were QUITE impressive.
And I guess that real-world tests with the Beta releases of iOS 12 seem to bear out these claims:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/...
https://www.engadget.com/2018/...
https://9to5mac.com/2018/06/05...
https://techcrunch.com/2018/06...
https://www.fastcompany.com/40...
Speaking of which, I just recently Upgraded my iPhone 6 (actually a 6 Plus) from iOS 10.3.3 to iOS 11.4.1. I'm here to tell you that it is NOTICABLY FASTER.
So, kindly Stick It In Your Ass, COWARD!
But it seems that Apple has discovered that theur iPhone 8 is one big defect, they are just trying to hide behind the excuse that it is a manufacturing defect..
Riiiight.
They instituted AND ANNOUNCED a multinational recall program that will no doubt cost them millions up millions of dollars, JUST to provide an "excuse".
If it was a DESIGN defect, then why are only certain regions and date-ranges affected?
Sorry. This was either a coplanarity or contamination problem with the PCB and/or SoC, OR some sort of soldering issue. Same as with many products by many manufacturers for many years.
Especially since that evil RoHS "no-stick" Solder...
Many Android phones have better storage and battery than any iPhone so why buy an iPhone at all?
This is why:
https://techcrunch.com/2018/01...
Any questions?
Good for you.
I will likely take advantage of that offer, too; just because...
The point of having an app store is that it's a curated collection. If you can't trust the apps in the official store, that's a step backwards from ye olde retail outlet and you might as well just get apps from j. Random internet site, since you can't trust the app store.
Understood; but considering the vanishgly-small number of examples of Malware sneaking-past the vetting process of the COMBINED number of Apps in the Apple App StoreS (plural), and the fact that, IN EVERY known case, the Apps were either rejected outright, or REMOVED when the malware was discovered (unlike, on the Internet, as another Poster pointed-out), I'd say the Protction afforded by Apple's Curation is MILLIONS of times better than downloading those same Apps from some rando website or even a well-known third-party repository.
tl;dr : Nothing is perfect; but Apple's App StoreS (plural) have a years-long NEARLY PERFECT track record (to the point that EVERY exception is NEWSWORTHY!) relative to both the Internet at large AND envy other "App Store", and at this time represent the hands-down safest sources for Application and System-Software acquisition for Apple products.
People will still buy them at the same rate they do now.
Imagine the horror if they did not, upgrading their iPhone every three years instead of two.
I am still rockin' my 6 Plus. With 93% capacity still left on my original battery, I see no reason yet to upgrade.
But Macs are IMMUNE from Malware and Viruses! That's only something Windoze users have! This must be fake news! Apple is the best!
NO practical OS is, nor can made to be, Immune to a TROJAN.
Can't be done without completely banning the installation of software.
Period.
At least many Samsung phones are made in South Korea
Since the OP was talking about AMERICAN production, that is a Strawman argument.
The U.S. still does a lot of chip design and fabrication. It's just that the chips get shipped overseas for packaging and final product assembly.
Also, U.S. manufacturing output has been increasing year over year even though we were moving large chunks of it overseas. I think now would be a good time to start reinvesting in local manufacturing, but that would be done with machines. A lot of the jobs aren't coming back, but that's okay because it means that labor is free to do something that's more productive instead.
Ya know, for all the Apple-bashing around here, they have actually been doing manufacturing/final-assembly of at least one of their products here since 2013: The (often-maligned) Mac Pro.
Granted, it's not the highest-volume product Apple sells; but even if it represents just 1% of Apple's nearly 20 million Mac units sold in 2017, that still represents a quantity of nearly 2 million units of $2k-5k Mac Pros per year (for an average yearly income of $5 BEELION in gross sales), which is a production rate and income that many a company would die-for. Not so bad for a "failed" product!
And they are ALL at least Assembled in U.S.A
https://www.macrumors.com/2014... ...and Apple is at least TRYING to make even more products in the U.S.A.:
https://venturebeat.com/2018/0...