I agree that they have the right to run off business due to exorbitant fees/prices, but, if they change any terms DURING your current contract you should have the right to terminate with no fee or other repercussions. And yes, the that section of their TOS allowing them to do that should be struck down as deceptive.
Furthermore, if you don't like the posts from an individual, try this : DONT READ THEM.. geesh. You are whining as much as you claim others are..
Publishing this just upset the pattern. Knowledge should not be released to the public as they can use it for bad purposes!! They are just supporting the terrorists, warning them of their mistakes.
( just being sarcastic here.. people are stupid, they will ALWAYS follow patterns, and information should always be free )
Because that is now how the world works now. This isn't the 80s, when technology advanced industries along ( be it computers, or cars, whatever..), now attorneys do.
The licence for OS X says "only to be used on Apple hardware" and if you want to stay true to that licence, you cannot make a business model out of selling machines with OS X preinstalled that clearly break the licence.
If you think "well, the licence should be ignored"
Works for me.
I am one of those that think copyrights( and IP in general ) is nonsense and just a legal way to reduce innovation and control the public.
If you want to make money, you sell support for what you created.
Tell that to the people that get told they cant have a domain name that says 'Disney', even if their name IS Disney.. Its not always cut and dry like one would expect.
Selling us all unlimited *contracts* that they know they cant deliver, then later switching it to limited while we are still stuck with the contract should be something the FCC should look into.
I just bought a unlocked blackberry clone for 100. Id say that was cheaper for me then getting one subsided thru a carrier, and be locked into them forever.
I happen to agree, as id love to get out of the x86 world on my laptop, just out of principle.. I did it on the desktop, but now that has become a dead end too ( thanks Steve Jobs.. grr )
And no, i don't want to buy an old Tadpole.. i want something current. Wifi, bluetooth, 8 hours battery life etc.
The question is whether ARM-based netbooks will sell at all. It doesn't really matter what OS a netbook is running. Nobody buys any kind of computer to run an OS. They buy computers to run apps.
True, and if they are targeted to the 'cloud' marketing spin as netbooks are for the most part, then i don't see conflict or any reason for them not to sell.
If they can push portable 'cloud terminals' (tm) out the door at $100 or less, they will sell lots.
This story should have been declared "AT&T Declares war on customers". For reasons unknown, AT&T just doesn't grasp the idea of upgrading their network.
There is so little competition out there in the wireless world, the reasons are pretty clear.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree that they have the right to run off business due to exorbitant fees/prices, but, if they change any terms DURING your current contract you should have the right to terminate with no fee or other repercussions. And yes, the that section of their TOS allowing them to do that should be struck down as deceptive.
Furthermore, if you don't like the posts from an individual, try this : DONT READ THEM.. geesh. You are whining as much as you claim others are..
Publishing this just upset the pattern. Knowledge should not be released to the public as they can use it for bad purposes!! They are just supporting the terrorists, warning them of their mistakes.
( just being sarcastic here.. people are stupid, they will ALWAYS follow patterns, and information should always be free )
If you don't like that, you need to complain to your government officials to change how software is copyrighted,
You are kidding right? They don't care, and doing so labels you as a pirate ( ie, linked to some terrorist organization, save the kids, krill, etc )
Because that is now how the world works now. This isn't the 80s, when technology advanced industries along ( be it computers, or cars, whatever..), now attorneys do.
The licence for OS X says "only to be used on Apple hardware" and if you want to stay true to that licence, you cannot make a business model out of selling machines with OS X preinstalled that clearly break the licence.
If you think "well, the licence should be ignored"
Works for me.
I am one of those that think copyrights( and IP in general ) is nonsense and just a legal way to reduce innovation and control the public.
If you want to make money, you sell support for what you created.
Good for them they are telling the man to shove it. Everyone should support these guys.
Only terrorists......
Perhaps to use the wifi, but you cant sit in the building or on the lot unless you bought something. " parking for customers only"
Famous last words we have all heard before.
Does that come in a picoATX version?
Tell that to the people that get told they cant have a domain name that says 'Disney', even if their name IS Disney.. Its not always cut and dry like one would expect.
( but i agree, he's stupid )
Sorry dude, you deserve every ounce of grief you get. ( and more )
Welcome to the brave new world. Now, stop talking about it before we sweep you under the rug.
I care if i don't exceed it the new cap. It is the principle, not the practice.
Selling us all unlimited *contracts* that they know they cant deliver, then later switching it to limited while we are still stuck with the contract should be something the FCC should look into.
As we said early on, and have continually been proven right, Information just wants to be free.
And no amount of trying to stop that will end up working in the end.
No, but governments can make life unbearable in its pursuit.
Id gladly trade that 'resource' for a plant that made cars, or food... IP wont mean much when we cant actually make anything.
Why would they want the public to be there? They just get in the way.
I just bought a unlocked blackberry clone for 100. Id say that was cheaper for me then getting one subsided thru a carrier, and be locked into them forever.
Just because you have the tools and skills doesn't mean you don't need the blueprints.
I happen to agree, as id love to get out of the x86 world on my laptop, just out of principle.. I did it on the desktop, but now that has become a dead end too ( thanks Steve Jobs.. grr )
And no, i don't want to buy an old Tadpole.. i want something current. Wifi, bluetooth, 8 hours battery life etc.
The question is whether ARM-based netbooks will sell at all. It doesn't really matter what OS a netbook is running. Nobody buys any kind of computer to run an OS. They buy computers to run apps.
True, and if they are targeted to the 'cloud' marketing spin as netbooks are for the most part, then i don't see conflict or any reason for them not to sell.
If they can push portable 'cloud terminals' (tm) out the door at $100 or less, they will sell lots.
If you go back far enough. This is a non-story and just an excuse to get research grants.
err wait...
This story should have been declared "AT&T Declares war on customers". For reasons unknown, AT&T just doesn't grasp the idea of upgrading their network.
There is so little competition out there in the wireless world, the reasons are pretty clear.