Mac OSX which roots to DARWIN at its core is open source. FoundationDB open source I read as a strategic action preceding the launch of another or new Apple platform.
Taking the view that using this software is 'helping Apple' is a pretty simplistic attitude, the way FOSS works is considerably more complex than so that it can be reduced to 'AppleCode==evil'.
Exactly!
But it doesn't fit into the Slashtard/Freetard mantra.
Here's more proof: iOS continues to lose market share and even in the US, all iOS devices now number about the same as just Samsung, one of multiple Android players. Was that from the headphone jack, or the general slide in iOS quality overall? I tend to think it's both, given the headphone market is continuing to explode and Apple basically locked themselves out of a vast majority of it.
So where's your proof?
The problem with that figure is that includes ALL Samsung phones; not just those that compete head-to-head against Apple's models. When you start breaking it out by model, an entirely different picture emerges, with Apple holding the first AND second place, in terms of units sold, with a low-end Samsung phone in third place (and no other Samsung models in the top 5) :
In fact, it is really hard to figure out exactly what Samsung is selling significant numbers of, with THIRTY ONE NEW models of Samsung phones INTRODUCED in 2016 alone! But I bet my bottom dollar that the vast majority of 2017's UNIT sales figures for Samsung are actually cheap-shit "giveaway" phones. :
And, although Apple's unit sales were down 1.3% year-over-year in 2017, Samsung's unit sales were down a whopping 4% in the same time period. Plus, despite the somewhat lower-than-expected sales of the iPhone X, Apple bested Samsung in unit sales in Q4 of 2017.
But we can go back and forth with statistics all night long. Both companies are doing quite well, and neither has any real signs of drying up and blowing away any time soon. Can we just agree that's the REAL answer to all this?
People on Slashdot keep claiming merging the two is what Apple is working towards. Perhaps this explicit statement from the CEO that users do not want it and Apple has no plans to do so are enough to quiet the minds of such people, for at least a little while.
Hahaha!
You forget: This is Slashdot; where people still make Single-Button-Mouse jokes about Macs!
As some of the stuff in the EULA you need to be an lawyer to under stand what they are talking about.
That reminds me of one of my favorite episodes of Boston Legal. The law firm is representing someone against a Credit Card company (similar impenetrable legalese in their contracts), and Jerry Espensen, the character who is supposedly a brilliant legal mind, but who also is incredibly awkward socially and also doesn't talk much due to his Aspberger's, suddenly pipes up and says:
"I have JD and an MBA from Harvard and even *I* can't make heads nor tails of this deception and fraud!"
Yep just like how the iPad was panned here (remember when people said no one would buy one since it sounded like maxipad?) as well and Apple has sold 100s of millions of them.
The hubris in having that mock iPhone funeral is still funny as hell. That’ll go down as one of the dumber moments along with Ballmer saying no one would buy an iPhone because there was no physical keyboard.
Hey, a lot of Slashtards essentially agreed with him...
Microsoft couldn't have come out with a design like that before the iPhone, because Apple HAD to show Everyone else what a usable smartphone should actually look like.
I was coming here to see how many people who bashed Apple on here last week for WARNING about STARTING to Deprecate 32-bit Support in macOS were going to completely DEFEND this move by "Linux" (whoever that is!).
Thanks, Fake Tim Cook for your definitive analysis. I'm sure we're all smarter for having read your non-misleading analysis.
As detailed by the article, this shop was non-authorized. In other aftermarket situations, like many other manufacturers, Apple does nearly everything in their power to make it hard for consumers to repair equipment on their own terms -- everything from using stupid special screws to refusing to publish board schematics (even to authorized shops) so customers are forced to make full board replacements. I wouldn't be surprised if they routinely pull this shakedown practice on other non-authorized shops.
As a former electronic repair tech, I've worked on LOTS of equipment where the manufacturer wouldn't release complete schematics, sometimes even to Authorized Service Centers. Also, many manufacturers require "board-level" replacement, especially under warranty. So, that's not out-of-line for the electronic repair industry, especially as the complexity of the devices goes up.
And there are no "Special Screws" that Apple uses for which you can't find appropriate drivers.
In the judgment, TÃnnesen writes that Huseby does not "use" Apple's trademark because he does not claim in his marketing or to customers that it is a matter of unused original parts. The logos that are applied to the parts can also not be removed without damaging the components, hence, sladding is the only way to hide the logo.
Since internal components are concerned, the logos will never be displayed to the customers, and the court found no reason to believe that Huseby removed the bill and took out the logos after the goods were cleared.
It is also a key point in the judgment that Huseby can not purchase original spare parts since Apple does not sell it to anyone other than itself and authorized workshops.
"sladding" doesn't make sense, but further up the article it talks about "blotting out" the logo. Anyways, I think the judgement was correct.
It's kind of a grey area; sort of the reverse of selling counterfeit Calvin Klein jeans WITH the Logo. Here, the parts probably WERE counterfeit, probably DID have an Apple Logo; but then the shop owner supposedly "de-counterfeited" them by OBSCURING said Logo, (or by installing where the customer would not normally see the Logo, a "workaround" which I don't personally agree with), and then simply making no claims as to their authenticity.
But in the end, it does not seem like the shop owner was attempting to defraud the customers or Apple; nor de-value its Brand; so the Court was PROBABLY (barely) right.
How can you read the first posting with its false claims, ignore all the replies calling out the falsehoods in the first posting and then post your agreement with the falsehoods?
"Apple said an unauthorized repair shop owner in Norway"
See that: "unauthorized". It's right there in bold in TFA.
Try to not be such an Apply fanboy in the future.
Your assumption was that I violated the/. TOS and actually READ TFA.
(I actually DID read it; but not until AFTER posting).
What is a counterfeit screen? Something that made look like a screen, but doesn't actually works? If not that, then it is third-party replacement screen, and Apple has no business telling anyone what parts to use.
And they DON'T, unless the Repair shop holds itself out as an Apple Authorized Service Center.
Thousands upon thousands of aftermarket repair shops make repairs to Apple equipment every single day without getting sued. There is something not being explained here.
The shop agreed to be licensed as an Apple Authorized repair center. That doesn't come for free -- they agree to use real Apple supplied parts, etc, etc. The guy was importing possibly mislabeled / counterfeit parts (in that they bear the Apple logo but are no longer valid Apple refurbed parts).
Regardless of what you believe is the right to repair, this is about the repair company representing itself as repairing your stuff with real OEM parts. They got identified as not doing so, probably defrauding consumers all the meanwhile. What's the problem? Why be happy that they won this case?
Aha! That's what I figured!
So, the Court was full of shit (as usual), and Apple was protecting its brand, and suing the repair shop for defrauding Apple and its Customers for using Aftermarket parts and then submitting Warranty Repair Claims to Apple.
Apple has NO PROBLEM with independent Repair Shops making NON-WARRANTY Repairs to its products using WHATEVER floor-sweepings they wish to use. I just got my iPhone 6 Plus screen repaired by an independent shop who was NO DOUBT using aftermarket parts (I can tell, because the new screen must not have that oleophobic coating that Apple uses, and BOY can you tell the difference! Every little smudge and smear is hideously visible. But, I digress...)
So, it was a false Warranty-Claims issue. Standard problem with unscrupulous independent repair shops. The shop owner's mistake was signing up to be an Authorized Apple Repair Center. That DOES come with both privileges AND REQUIREMENTS.
Apple, if you want the general public to care about "counterfeit" parts, make your production operations completely domestic.
Don't sue the little guy for your IP leakage problems in China. He's just trying to make a living, and there's no reason you should control the repair market.
Depends.
Was he an authorized Apple Repair Center, and using aftermarket parts to do WARRANTY Repairs?
If so, then Apple has a point. If not, I would agree with the Court's decision.
It's not something I'd order at a bar, but it's within the realm of tolerable for most folks. Just avoid the flavored MoM -- the cherry flavor is particularly disgusting in this solution.
I'd imagine the mint wouldn't be so hot, either...
Just a thot: magnesium acetate is more bioavailable and so less likely to loosen the bowels (because the mag doesn't get that far).
I mix magnesium laxative (e.g. Milk of Magnesia) 1:4 in apple cider vinegar and mix an ounce of the solution into a liter of water that I drink from throughout the day. Works fine with no worries.
Thanks for the tip; but that sounds REALLY vile... And I LIKE Apple Cider Vinegar!
The researchers found that the evening people were more likely than the early risers to have poor sleep quality and unhealthy behaviors such as smoking, sedentary lifestyles and eating late at night, Kim said. The night owls also tended to be younger, but were more likely to have high levels of body fat and triglycerides, or fats in their blood, than early risers. (Having high levels of fat is usually associated with older age.)
I wonder if any of these factors could attribute to a higher mortality rate? This study simply states that night owls have a higher rate of unhealthy lifestyle choices.
I would be more interested in the mortality rates of night owls who do not exhibit these behaviors. But then again there were only 95 night owls in this study, so I doubt you would be able to determine that from such a small sample size.
This entire study is pseudoscience at its worst. Or best. However you parse that phrase; I'm too sleepy to figure it out...
The biggest problem "night owls" have is living in a society that forces them to live in a state of life-long sleep-deprivation if they have any kind of normal job.
Reminds me of the book, "Eastern Standard Tribe", by Cory Doctorow.
Since you don't know each others timezones, you might both be waking up at the same time, putting you both in the same tribe.
The headline is also a lie. It's contradicted in the summary itself. This study isn't about going to bed early or late; it's about how much sleep one gets at night (ie: "Night owls' trying to live in a 'morning lark' world"). If the night owls' simply slept in just as much as they stayed up, it would be an entirely different study.
Slashdot Mirror
Mac OSX which roots to DARWIN at its core is open source. FoundationDB open source I read as a strategic action preceding the launch of another or new Apple platform.
That's a pretty far reach, methinks.
Taking the view that using this software is 'helping Apple' is a pretty simplistic attitude, the way FOSS works is considerably more complex than so that it can be reduced to 'AppleCode==evil'.
Exactly!
But it doesn't fit into the Slashtard/Freetard mantra.
Here's more proof: iOS continues to lose market share and even in the US, all iOS devices now number about the same as just Samsung, one of multiple Android players. Was that from the headphone jack, or the general slide in iOS quality overall? I tend to think it's both, given the headphone market is continuing to explode and Apple basically locked themselves out of a vast majority of it.
So where's your proof?
The problem with that figure is that includes ALL Samsung phones; not just those that compete head-to-head against Apple's models. When you start breaking it out by model, an entirely different picture emerges, with Apple holding the first AND second place, in terms of units sold, with a low-end Samsung phone in third place (and no other Samsung models in the top 5) :
https://www.bbva.com/en/top-se...
In fact, it is really hard to figure out exactly what Samsung is selling significant numbers of, with THIRTY ONE NEW models of Samsung phones INTRODUCED in 2016 alone! But I bet my bottom dollar that the vast majority of 2017's UNIT sales figures for Samsung are actually cheap-shit "giveaway" phones. :
http://www.businessinsider.com...
Samsung is still selling phones with a 5 MP back camera and 4 GB of storage, FFS!
https://www.gsmarena.com/samsu...
Or how about this beauty? Released in 2014 (!!!) and Still available! 2 MP main camera, 4 GB. Looks like it came straight from 1999:
https://www.gsmarena.com/samsu...
You may laugh: But every one of those phones counts as Samsung's UNIT Sales:
https://www.gsmarena.com/samsu...
And, although Apple's unit sales were down 1.3% year-over-year in 2017, Samsung's unit sales were down a whopping 4% in the same time period. Plus, despite the somewhat lower-than-expected sales of the iPhone X, Apple bested Samsung in unit sales in Q4 of 2017.
https://www.idc.com/promo/smar...
But we can go back and forth with statistics all night long. Both companies are doing quite well, and neither has any real signs of drying up and blowing away any time soon. Can we just agree that's the REAL answer to all this?
The press didn't like it, and do you have any proof that people WANTED Apple to remove the number one means of connecting headphones to cell phones?
It's not MY postulate to prove nor disprove, genius.
Uhm, let me right-click on this Mac... pop-up menu comes up in Firefox.
Not sure what you are getting at; since we don't know the CONTEXT, dumbass...
Users didn't want Apple to remove the headphone jack. Since when has apple ever listened to users?
Proof?
People on Slashdot keep claiming merging the two is what Apple is working towards. Perhaps this explicit statement from the CEO that users do not want it and Apple has no plans to do so are enough to quiet the minds of such people, for at least a little while.
Hahaha!
You forget: This is Slashdot; where people still make Single-Button-Mouse jokes about Macs!
reading test?? what about an BAR test?
As some of the stuff in the EULA you need to be an lawyer to under stand what they are talking about.
That reminds me of one of my favorite episodes of Boston Legal. The law firm is representing someone against a Credit Card company (similar impenetrable legalese in their contracts), and Jerry Espensen, the character who is supposedly a brilliant legal mind, but who also is incredibly awkward socially and also doesn't talk much due to his Aspberger's, suddenly pipes up and says:
"I have JD and an MBA from Harvard and even *I* can't make heads nor tails of this deception and fraud!"
https://www.springfieldspringf..."
Yep just like how the iPad was panned here (remember when people said no one would buy one since it sounded like maxipad?) as well and Apple has sold 100s of millions of them.
No WiFi. Less space than a Nomad. Lame.
Isn't that how it goes? ;-)
You deserve a Right Turn Today(tm)
The hubris in having that mock iPhone funeral is still funny as hell. That’ll go down as one of the dumber moments along with Ballmer saying no one would buy an iPhone because there was no physical keyboard.
Hey, a lot of Slashtards essentially agreed with him...
Microsoft couldn't have come out with a design like that before the iPhone, because Apple HAD to show Everyone else what a usable smartphone should actually look like.
FTFY.
I have an Apple IIe with an applecat modem.
Now Im showing my age. lol
I have an Apple 1.
Anyone interested?
Only Apple drops old hardware.
I was coming here to see how many people who bashed Apple on here last week for WARNING about STARTING to Deprecate 32-bit Support in macOS were going to completely DEFEND this move by "Linux" (whoever that is!).
Thanks, Fake Tim Cook for your definitive analysis. I'm sure we're all smarter for having read your non-misleading analysis.
As detailed by the article, this shop was non-authorized. In other aftermarket situations, like many other manufacturers, Apple does nearly everything in their power to make it hard for consumers to repair equipment on their own terms -- everything from using stupid special screws to refusing to publish board schematics (even to authorized shops) so customers are forced to make full board replacements. I wouldn't be surprised if they routinely pull this shakedown practice on other non-authorized shops.
As a former electronic repair tech, I've worked on LOTS of equipment where the manufacturer wouldn't release complete schematics, sometimes even to Authorized Service Centers. Also, many manufacturers require "board-level" replacement, especially under warranty. So, that's not out-of-line for the electronic repair industry, especially as the complexity of the devices goes up.
And there are no "Special Screws" that Apple uses for which you can't find appropriate drivers.
Here's a google translate of a norwegian article:
"sladding" doesn't make sense, but further up the article it talks about "blotting out" the logo. Anyways, I think the judgement was correct.
It's kind of a grey area; sort of the reverse of selling counterfeit Calvin Klein jeans WITH the Logo. Here, the parts probably WERE counterfeit, probably DID have an Apple Logo; but then the shop owner supposedly "de-counterfeited" them by OBSCURING said Logo, (or by installing where the customer would not normally see the Logo, a "workaround" which I don't personally agree with), and then simply making no claims as to their authenticity.
But in the end, it does not seem like the shop owner was attempting to defraud the customers or Apple; nor de-value its Brand; so the Court was PROBABLY (barely) right.
How can you read the first posting with its false claims, ignore all the replies calling out the falsehoods in the first posting and then post your agreement with the falsehoods?
"Apple said an unauthorized repair shop owner in Norway"
See that: "unauthorized". It's right there in bold in TFA.
Try to not be such an Apply fanboy in the future.
Your assumption was that I violated the /. TOS and actually READ TFA.
(I actually DID read it; but not until AFTER posting).
What is a counterfeit screen? Something that made look like a screen, but doesn't actually works? If not that, then it is third-party replacement screen, and Apple has no business telling anyone what parts to use.
And they DON'T, unless the Repair shop holds itself out as an Apple Authorized Service Center.
Thousands upon thousands of aftermarket repair shops make repairs to Apple equipment every single day without getting sued. There is something not being explained here.
The shop agreed to be licensed as an Apple Authorized repair center. That doesn't come for free -- they agree to use real Apple supplied parts, etc, etc. The guy was importing possibly mislabeled / counterfeit parts (in that they bear the Apple logo but are no longer valid Apple refurbed parts).
Regardless of what you believe is the right to repair, this is about the repair company representing itself as repairing your stuff with real OEM parts. They got identified as not doing so, probably defrauding consumers all the meanwhile. What's the problem? Why be happy that they won this case?
Aha! That's what I figured!
So, the Court was full of shit (as usual), and Apple was protecting its brand, and suing the repair shop for defrauding Apple and its Customers for using Aftermarket parts and then submitting Warranty Repair Claims to Apple.
Apple has NO PROBLEM with independent Repair Shops making NON-WARRANTY Repairs to its products using WHATEVER floor-sweepings they wish to use. I just got my iPhone 6 Plus screen repaired by an independent shop who was NO DOUBT using aftermarket parts (I can tell, because the new screen must not have that oleophobic coating that Apple uses, and BOY can you tell the difference! Every little smudge and smear is hideously visible. But, I digress...)
So, it was a false Warranty-Claims issue. Standard problem with unscrupulous independent repair shops. The shop owner's mistake was signing up to be an Authorized Apple Repair Center. That DOES come with both privileges AND REQUIREMENTS.
As I said: The Court was wrong.
Apple, if you want the general public to care about "counterfeit" parts, make your production operations completely domestic.
Don't sue the little guy for your IP leakage problems in China. He's just trying to make a living, and there's no reason you should control the repair market.
Depends.
Was he an authorized Apple Repair Center, and using aftermarket parts to do WARRANTY Repairs?
If so, then Apple has a point. If not, I would agree with the Court's decision.
It's not something I'd order at a bar, but it's within the realm of tolerable for most folks. Just avoid the flavored MoM -- the cherry flavor is particularly disgusting in this solution.
I'd imagine the mint wouldn't be so hot, either...
Just a thot: magnesium acetate is more bioavailable and so less likely to loosen the bowels (because the mag doesn't get that far).
I mix magnesium laxative (e.g. Milk of Magnesia) 1:4 in apple cider vinegar and mix an ounce of the solution into a liter of water that I drink from throughout the day. Works fine with no worries.
Thanks for the tip; but that sounds REALLY vile... And I LIKE Apple Cider Vinegar!
The researchers found that the evening people were more likely than the early risers to have poor sleep quality and unhealthy behaviors such as smoking, sedentary lifestyles and eating late at night, Kim said. The night owls also tended to be younger, but were more likely to have high levels of body fat and triglycerides, or fats in their blood, than early risers. (Having high levels of fat is usually associated with older age.)
I wonder if any of these factors could attribute to a higher mortality rate? This study simply states that night owls have a higher rate of unhealthy lifestyle choices.
I would be more interested in the mortality rates of night owls who do not exhibit these behaviors. But then again there were only 95 night owls in this study, so I doubt you would be able to determine that from such a small sample size.
This entire study is pseudoscience at its worst. Or best. However you parse that phrase; I'm too sleepy to figure it out...
The biggest problem "night owls" have is living in a society that forces them to live in a state of life-long sleep-deprivation if they have any kind of normal job.
Boy, isn't THAT the truth!
Reminds me of the book, "Eastern Standard Tribe", by Cory Doctorow.
Since you don't know each others timezones, you might both be waking up at the same time, putting you both in the same tribe.
The headline is also a lie. It's contradicted in the summary itself. This study isn't about going to bed early or late; it's about how much sleep one gets at night (ie: "Night owls' trying to live in a 'morning lark' world"). If the night owls' simply slept in just as much as they stayed up, it would be an entirely different study.
Exactly what I thought, too.