Say all you want, but you have not put forth any evidence for abuse by Apple. Apple doesn't force you in any way to use the iTMS, and non-DRMed music from Amazon or Napster work just fine on the iPod - and the reason these stores even exist is a direct result of Apple's actions. Understand? Apple doesn't force you to buy an iPod either.
What you arer advocating is to force Apple to stop offering people what they want from them, thus punishing the customers. And why? Because Apple opened the music download market and broke the absolute monopoly of Microsft's restrictive DRMed WMA, convincing the music industry to even sell more than a few thousand titles, and later to do it without DRM.
Citation needed. Where do you get the number that there were 2000 Mac viruses in the wild in 2002? You need something to back up that claim. I've had Macs for 12 years and haven't worried about viruses since about the first year.
If you count in Office/Word/Excell Macro viruses (the ones that work in the Mac versions of those apps), that number may be right.
To "leverage their monopoly" wouldn't Apple have to do something else than what they did to become a monopoly?
Not necessarily. Many actions they have been taking to promote other products using the iPod and to make the "iPod experience" better become questionable. This includes things like bundling iTunes with iPods and tying iPods to both iTunes and the iTunes Store. Should Apple be ruled to have a monopoly, these actions are all potential antitrust abuses... if they have monopoly influence.
But the bundling was there from the start - and it was what made the iPod successful. But the reason it became a monopoly was that the competitors where too busy waiting for Apple to fail with their "stupid idea" to actually make something people (as opposed to a handful of geeks) wanted to buy - but blaming or even punishing Apple for that? What is this, Capitalism or the very, very Special Olympics, where the guy about to win gets a baseball bat to the kneecap (or something that is still there) to make the race "fairer"?
Take the so-called iTMS-iPod lock-in. It constantly gets blamed for the fact that people can't buy a non-iPod to replace the old iPod - but nobody I asked ever could name 5 persons (or even one for that matter) who didn't for just that lock-in. Instead you will find dozens of people in every discussion about Apple who will claim they would never again buy an iPod, and some will actually blame that "lock-in" for it. IOW there is no lock-in, QED.
I find it annoying that the same people who demanded that Macs are not to be called "PCs" are now doing the opposite. Why don't you put your PC where the sun doesn't shine - like this webpage.
Well, considering the last that was heard from the trial was the order that "Plaintiff shall file and serve her class certification motion no later than November 3, 2008" - what about that suit?
Why do people keep going on about the 'iTunes lock-in'? It is equivalent to Zune Marketplace, and any other mp3 player + music manager combo (there have been many over the years).
Because, unlike the Zune, there are reasonable arguments that the iPod constitutes monopoly influence in the portable music player market. If you don't understand the difference between leveraging a monopoly and bundling two un-monopolized products, then maybe you should do some reading before posting in a thread about monopolies.
To "leverage their monopoly" wouldn't Apple have to do something else than what they did to become a monopoly?
As for the DRM, Apple is trying to get rid of DRM in their music.
True, but it is still a concern and Apple doesn't seem to be trying to get rid of DRM for video, which is just as significant of a concern to most.
Well, you can always buy your non-DRM videos from Amazon. Oh, no, wait... It's amazing how people blame Apple for not doing miracles because they have done what nobody else has managed to do before them so many times.
The market share of Apple is directly proportional to the number of people with more money than sense, a number which in this current global crisis is fortunately decreasing.
Wow, you singlehandedly figured out why Apple's market-share has been dwindling the last couple of months - oh, no, wait...
OTOH, MacOS has been around since 7 years before the first line of the Linux
kernel was ever written and about 15 years before the first line of KDE was
ever written. MacOS also predates any Microsoft GUI that was more than token
gesture.
It's nice that Apple has managed to bring themselves back from the brink again.
Anything that blunts the hegemony makes it safe for the rest of us.
OT third Hand, when Apple was "on the brink", it had a market-share three times higher than Linux has now.
Yeah but I think desktop Linux is making bigger market-share returns proportionately to its marketing campaign investment. Nonetheless I agree with your original complaint, however take note that, by itself MacOSX does NOT reach above 10% so yes, you need to say "MacOSX and Linux have surpassed 10% market share" because we wouldn't let them gloss over that that easily.
Well, if it weren't for the fact that "MacOSX and Linux have surpassed 10% market share" is wrong - it also takes iPhone & Playstation & FreeBSD & Other to do that (actually, the iPhone or the rest combined will suffice).
Empirical UK centred tidbit: there are 3 major Linux magazines readily available in shops (Linux Format, Linux Magazine, Linux User) and there is only one for Apple fan boys (MacUser).
Gee, I wonder if that means Mac users know how to get on the Internet to find information, while Linux users have to read a magazine first to do so;-)
It does sound like a possible "setup". Macworld 2009 debuts new AV software? Who knows.
Errm, yes. Apple says people should get anti virus software and names three apps - all that so people will go dump whatever they got and use Apple's solution in 1.5 months.
Nuclear fusion reactor project in France: an expensive and senseless nuclear stupidity "Governments should not waste our money on a dangerous toy which will never deliver any useful energy," said Jan Vande Putte of Greenpeace International. Instead, they should invest in renewable energy which is abundantly available, not in 2080 but today"
So you agree this is a lie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fva9l_JIG8 No way in hell they can get all those people together in 30 seconds. Nokia is just as much a liar as Apple - just that they don't even dare show anything you can do with the phone.
So when Mozilla puts something in the license, they are disclosing it, and when Apple puts it in the EULA, they are hiding it. Thanks for clearing that up.
Slashdot Mirror
Errm, what?
I guess it would be too much to ask mac users to be altruistic wrt. their power bills and cpu cycles to lower overall virus rates, though.
It would be too much to ask them and make fun of them for doing so at the same time.
include Apple's patented chameleon computer case? Or Apple's patented Rotary Mouse?
What you arer advocating is to force Apple to stop offering people what they want from them, thus punishing the customers. And why? Because Apple opened the music download market and broke the absolute monopoly of Microsft's restrictive DRMed WMA, convincing the music industry to even sell more than a few thousand titles, and later to do it without DRM.
Citation needed. Where do you get the number that there were 2000 Mac viruses in the wild in 2002? You need something to back up that claim. I've had Macs for 12 years and haven't worried about viruses since about the first year.
If you count in Office/Word/Excell Macro viruses (the ones that work in the Mac versions of those apps), that number may be right.
At least the Commodore users aren't attacked for finally accepting that change of meaning.
To "leverage their monopoly" wouldn't Apple have to do something else than what they did to become a monopoly?
Not necessarily. Many actions they have been taking to promote other products using the iPod and to make the "iPod experience" better become questionable. This includes things like bundling iTunes with iPods and tying iPods to both iTunes and the iTunes Store. Should Apple be ruled to have a monopoly, these actions are all potential antitrust abuses... if they have monopoly influence.
But the bundling was there from the start - and it was what made the iPod successful. But the reason it became a monopoly was that the competitors where too busy waiting for Apple to fail with their "stupid idea" to actually make something people (as opposed to a handful of geeks) wanted to buy - but blaming or even punishing Apple for that? What is this, Capitalism or the very, very Special Olympics, where the guy about to win gets a baseball bat to the kneecap (or something that is still there) to make the race "fairer"?
Take the so-called iTMS-iPod lock-in. It constantly gets blamed for the fact that people can't buy a non-iPod to replace the old iPod - but nobody I asked ever could name 5 persons (or even one for that matter) who didn't for just that lock-in. Instead you will find dozens of people in every discussion about Apple who will claim they would never again buy an iPod, and some will actually blame that "lock-in" for it. IOW there is no lock-in, QED.
I find it annoying that the same people who demanded that Macs are not to be called "PCs" are now doing the opposite. Why don't you put your PC where the sun doesn't shine - like this webpage.
Well, considering the last that was heard from the trial was the order that "Plaintiff shall file and serve her class certification motion no later than November 3, 2008" - what about that suit?
Why do people keep going on about the 'iTunes lock-in'? It is equivalent to Zune Marketplace, and any other mp3 player + music manager combo (there have been many over the years).
Because, unlike the Zune, there are reasonable arguments that the iPod constitutes monopoly influence in the portable music player market. If you don't understand the difference between leveraging a monopoly and bundling two un-monopolized products, then maybe you should do some reading before posting in a thread about monopolies.
To "leverage their monopoly" wouldn't Apple have to do something else than what they did to become a monopoly?
As for the DRM, Apple is trying to get rid of DRM in their music.
True, but it is still a concern and Apple doesn't seem to be trying to get rid of DRM for video, which is just as significant of a concern to most.
Well, you can always buy your non-DRM videos from Amazon. Oh, no, wait... It's amazing how people blame Apple for not doing miracles because they have done what nobody else has managed to do before them so many times.
Apple have started sucking already: the newest Macbooks block you from playing back movies you own on a non-Hollywood-approved display, and there is no way to turn off this 'feature'.
Apart from updating Quicktime.
The market share of Apple is directly proportional to the number of people with more money than sense, a number which in this current global crisis is fortunately decreasing.
Wow, you singlehandedly figured out why Apple's market-share has been dwindling the last couple of months - oh, no, wait...
OTOH, MacOS has been around since 7 years before the first line of the Linux kernel was ever written and about 15 years before the first line of KDE was ever written. MacOS also predates any Microsoft GUI that was more than token gesture.
It's nice that Apple has managed to bring themselves back from the brink again.
Anything that blunts the hegemony makes it safe for the rest of us.
OT third Hand, when Apple was "on the brink", it had a market-share three times higher than Linux has now.
Yeah but I think desktop Linux is making bigger market-share returns proportionately to its marketing campaign investment. Nonetheless I agree with your original complaint, however take note that, by itself MacOSX does NOT reach above 10% so yes, you need to say "MacOSX and Linux have surpassed 10% market share" because we wouldn't let them gloss over that that easily.
Well, if it weren't for the fact that "MacOSX and Linux have surpassed 10% market share" is wrong - it also takes iPhone & Playstation & FreeBSD & Other to do that (actually, the iPhone or the rest combined will suffice).
Empirical UK centred tidbit: there are 3 major Linux magazines readily available in shops (Linux Format, Linux Magazine, Linux User) and there is only one for Apple fan boys (MacUser).
Gee, I wonder if that means Mac users know how to get on the Internet to find information, while Linux users have to read a magazine first to do so ;-)
It does sound like a possible "setup". Macworld 2009 debuts new AV software? Who knows.
Errm, yes. Apple says people should get anti virus software and names three apps - all that so people will go dump whatever they got and use Apple's solution in 1.5 months.
Gates actually studied law, not CS. Which courses he went to however...
Nuclear fusion reactor project in France: an expensive and senseless nuclear stupidity
"Governments should not waste our money on a dangerous toy which will never deliver any useful energy," said Jan Vande Putte of Greenpeace International. Instead, they should invest in renewable energy which is abundantly available, not in 2080 but today"
So your argument is that when a disease is already well funded, if it affects white men it should get more money - and I am the racist.
You are telling me that the ad is not claiming drawing a crowd of people is a function of the phone? Dream on.
So? Did I say anything to the opposite?
So you agree this is a lie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fva9l_JIG8 No way in hell they can get all those people together in 30 seconds. Nokia is just as much a liar as Apple - just that they don't even dare show anything you can do with the phone.
So how fast can you do all this on another phone? Well, put up or shut up. I want hard data.
So, unless the disease affects niggers, it doesn't matter?
No, if a disease affects white men, it matters to white men already, so it doesn't need any more money.
So when Mozilla puts something in the license, they are disclosing it, and when Apple puts it in the EULA, they are hiding it. Thanks for clearing that up.