What, is it not ok for the original owner of the code to sell it? I thought that was ok in the open source world, or is making money verboten?
Apple sunk money and time into it because they appreciated its value, and the value of the guy who started it in the first place, in much the same way as they did with KHTML.
Since they *did* buy the rights to the code, it is accurate to describe it as "theirs", although that doesn't mean "they did all the work".
Blame your carrier - I can't say I have ever had that problem, and I live in a fringe area of coverage (half the time in areas with zero 3G coverage, half the time with reasonable 3G coverage).
Either that or your phone is faulty.
The only infuriating thing about the old iPhone 3G on iOS4 is that if it is "busy" (usually when trying to use the GPS) it will get bogged down enough that an incoming call will cause it to freeze up briefly, so the person on the other end might think the connection has dropped.
They are a business, operating private equipment that is offered as a convenience. Be lucky that you can get cellular access underground.
For emergencies, there is the added police presence on that particular time, and the emergency call units (two per carriage, and plenty on the stations)
I don't think Apple can do no wrong - they have done some pretty stupid things (suing over slide to unlock, design issue with magsafe cable strain relief, Magic Mouse/Mighty Mouse being a step backwards from two button mouse with scroll wheel, lack of bluetooth file transfer in iOS, reduction in performance of Preview.app in 10.7 compared to the lightning speed it had in 10.2>10.6, fixed location of page viewer in Preview app in 10.7, cost of Smart Cover for iPad 2 [especially since it doesn't also come with something to protect the back also], lack of support for ToDo items in the iOS version of calendar despite support in the OS X version). That's just a few.
All those bolded items talk about protection of sources, it does not give journalists a blanket protection from breaking the law and having a warrant served on them.
I hate to go all wikipedia on you, but [citation needed].
You have no proof of how the police would act, or that they would treat you any differently to the way they treated Apple other than your baseless ranting.
Being or not being an Apple fanboy here is not relevant - we're discussing the police and their role in investigating crime and executing warrants.
I think you just missed the point of the joke, and by doing so became the living embodiment of it, along with the several other AC posts I got in response to this. You're the first one with the stones to actually log in.
You see, what I did (since you clearly didn't see it - I probably should have appended "did you see what I did there?" to the end of my original post) was to use a literary device called a "generalisation". This is often used, quite frequently in the company of hyperbole, to emphasise a point.
For example, "The buses are never, ever on time. You wait for hours and then three turn up at once" is an example of a generalisation combined with hyperbole. No one reading the sentence (unless lacking in basic reading comprehension) believes that the writer *literally* had to wait hours, or that his assertion that the busses are "never ever" on time was a literal statement.
Do you need me to help you with applying that to my post? I can break it down piece by piece with quotes and explain it as I go if it makes it easier, or do you have enough to go on from here on your own?
"The facts speak for themselves" - so says the guy who is claiming "corporate privilege".
Gizmodo committed a crime. They admitted to it on their website. The police went over and arrested them.
Pretty textbook policing there.
If you're claiming that the police wouldn't do anything if you made a prototype that got stolen, and the offender posted proof of it on their website, then you are just making absurd assumptions in a continued attempt to make Apple out to be the bad guy. You have nothing but baseless ranting to back up your claim that the police "would not give you the time of day".
I've done plenty of reading and research on these topics - it's why I wasn't fooled by your initial "claim Apple was using jackbooted things and post a link, hoping that I won't do more than skim the first couple of lines of the linked site" tactic.
Put it this way, reality is not like the movie "hackers", where "The Man" is the Machiavellian evil mastermind out to keep the good, honest righteous tech nerds down.
Carcassonne cost me about £4 and I play it all the time - I have the physical game too, but it's great for passing the time when out and about on the iPhone, and to play with friends remotely.
I can certainly say I'd got way more out of that £4 than I did from the games on my DS, which I later sold in near immaculate condition because the games and gameplay experience were not grabbing me - I was always playing 'casual' games on my phone instead.
Nintendo have it right - the casual gamer is being lost to smartphone games that cost less than $10, usually $2 max, which is eating into their demographic. Now it won't kill the DS/3DS/DSi outright - there is still a place for those games (it is a wildly popular device range) but they lost a big chunk of users who are simply using their phones to play games.
Welcome to any Apple-themed post, except this time it's Google.
You didn't expect any of these armchair patent experts to actually *read* more than the headline before offering their infallible expert opinion, did you?
Also, hilarious that we have apologists out for Google too. When Apple patents something absurd it's "evil, greedy, anti-competitive", but when Google is perceived to do the same they are "doing it as a protest to put a spotlight on absurd patents". Nice hypocrisy, slashdot!
Oh pray tell me, oh great one, what is a "non trivial" number, and how does it related to our real world experiences of how Bluetooth performs.
I'm sure you're dying to tell me that I experience constant input lag on my bluetooth keyboard due to the large number of bluetooth enabled devices nearby. Do tell me more about my own experiences, I'm all ears, since clearly I have plenty of time to wait while my computer catches up to me typing this message.
So, your argument is "go and prove my point for me, I can't be bothered, since you've shot down my weak sauce Apple bashing and I'm now trying to dig my way out of it"?
If only you could edit slashdot posts, perhaps you wouldn't get yourself into these sorts of messes.
A partnership of 17 local, state, and federal agencies, with the Santa Clara County District Attorney's Office designated as the lead agency. The REACT Task Force is one of five in the State of California and authorized under California Penal Code 13848.
All Agents of the React Task Force are either California Peace Officers and/or U.S. Federal Agents
Yeah, Apple's private paramilitary army! You're totally selling it to me! The proof is just inescapable!
Good grief, the things people will say and believe due to the frothing Apple hatred. It must mess with the perception of reality quite badly.
Input lag? Come on, you;re just inventing issues now. My close friend types at 115 wpm sustained and I can't say she has ever said to me "you know, this input lag is killing me!"
They don't port to the Mac, they simultaneously develop the Windows and Mac versions side by side as they always have done since the early days.
There has been much talk about a Linux WoW client over the years, and I believe they had some internal builds for testing, but ultimately it's a marketshare problem that is further compounded because you can get their games to run in Wine. Linux gaming is where Mac gaming was several years ago - some dedicated developers who release on the platform (and do more than just a shitty port job), but struggling to see the economic sense of supporting a platform with such a small marketshare.
My goodness, your view of their actions is remarkably naive and irrelevant. They broke the law, there is no doubt about that. These laws are written down in black and white and were fired endlessly the last time the "zomg Apple sending police thugz to raid innocent gizmodo people!" stories came up.
They knew the phone did not belong to the person selling it to them and they paid money for it. It doesn't matter what their intent was - they could be the most altruistic people ever to live, but paying money for property you know to be stolen/not owned by the person selling it to you: illegal.
Going "above and beyond" is far from what they did. Aside from ransoming the phone back to Apple (after taking it apart and breaking it, and putting photos online) they also 'outed' the guy who "lost" the phone in the first place since they had all of his details, and they did it to "protect him from recrimination by Apple" (bollocks did they). So, if they knew exactly who the phone belonged to, including the guy's address, Facebook details, email etc then why the big "we just didn;t know how to get it back to who it belonged to, so we called Apple Support and they blew us off!" line that they were running with?
Gizmodo and the guy who originally took the phone were in the wrong here, no matter how you try to dress it up. They dug their own hole and just kept going.
They then capped it off when WWDC/Macworld came around and they complained that Apple withdrew their free press passes (meaning they'd have to pay to attend - they weren't barred from attending) for "petty reasons". Gee, I wonder why you're not in Apple's good books, eh Giz? Take it like a grown up and don't whine when things don't turn out the way you expect.
a) I know, I mentioned it in my post, that you quoted.
b) I know Gizmodo didn't try and sell it, and they they didn;t "find" it initially - they bought it. The point of talking about what is and isn't legal when you "find" something in California is that knowing purchasing stolen property is also a crime. I'm not accusing them of stealing the phone, I'm pointing out that they incriminated themselves by stating on their website that they bought the phone from a guy who had "attempted to return it to Apple".
The only difference is that gizmodo didn't find the prototype on the street, they paid the guy who was trying to unload it. But that's irrelevant. Going back to the wallet example... some bum on the street finds your dropped wallet and puts it up for sale on his blanket... you see it, buy it, and then see the ID inside... and then call the original onwer.
You might think it is irrelevant but it is *against the law in CA* to do what the guy who "found" the phone did, and to do what Gizmodo did, knowing that the guy did not own the phone himself. There is simply no getting around that fact, as inconvenient as it is, because it puts Apple as the non-bad-guy in a story on slashdot, but it's simply the reality of the matter.
If you purchased a wallet from a guy who said he found it on the street and you are pretty certain that it is not his, you are knowingly receiving stolen property by the strict definition of the law in CA which state found items must be reported. They cannot simply be sold on without that procedure.
You might not "see what is wrong" but the law doesn't work that way.
"Bringing down the police like they're personal security guards"? What are you smoking?!
Apple told the police that one of their prototypes was stolen, and had a pretty good idea who had it, since they posted about it on the internet, with self incrimination that they purchased stolen property (however you slice it, the law in California is very specific about what you can do with something you "find" - you cannot sell it right away, you have to register it as a lost item with the local sheriff's office, and if it goes unclaimed, then you can sell it).
This was not "personal security" from Apple, it was *the bread and butter day job of the police*. You just don't like it because someone who was not Apple was the bad guy in the whole palaver.
That is exactly the point. It's not ebay or a second hand shop, it's a recycling program. If you can get more for it because it's working, then sell it that way. This is intended for stuff that was going into the dumpster anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm told you beat your wife.
Seems legit. Time to write a story!
Out of interest, which $50 product are Apple selling for $500?
Or, to be more general, which product are they selling at 10 times the market price, assuming you were using 50/500 as an example?
"supposedly"
What, is it not ok for the original owner of the code to sell it? I thought that was ok in the open source world, or is making money verboten?
Apple sunk money and time into it because they appreciated its value, and the value of the guy who started it in the first place, in much the same way as they did with KHTML.
Since they *did* buy the rights to the code, it is accurate to describe it as "theirs", although that doesn't mean "they did all the work".
Cool, so it's totally ok to refer to all Linux users as parental-basement dwelling neckbeards with hygiene and attitude problems.
Just checking, since it's ok to "accurately describe" Apple users as "trust fund babies and social rejects".
To a Londoner, a map of the UK has London, the M25 and anything outside that marked "here be dragons".
Blame your carrier - I can't say I have ever had that problem, and I live in a fringe area of coverage (half the time in areas with zero 3G coverage, half the time with reasonable 3G coverage).
Either that or your phone is faulty.
The only infuriating thing about the old iPhone 3G on iOS4 is that if it is "busy" (usually when trying to use the GPS) it will get bogged down enough that an incoming call will cause it to freeze up briefly, so the person on the other end might think the connection has dropped.
They are a business, operating private equipment that is offered as a convenience. Be lucky that you can get cellular access underground.
For emergencies, there is the added police presence on that particular time, and the emergency call units (two per carriage, and plenty on the stations)
Can't tell if trolling...
I don't think Apple can do no wrong - they have done some pretty stupid things (suing over slide to unlock, design issue with magsafe cable strain relief, Magic Mouse/Mighty Mouse being a step backwards from two button mouse with scroll wheel, lack of bluetooth file transfer in iOS, reduction in performance of Preview.app in 10.7 compared to the lightning speed it had in 10.2>10.6, fixed location of page viewer in Preview app in 10.7, cost of Smart Cover for iPad 2 [especially since it doesn't also come with something to protect the back also], lack of support for ToDo items in the iOS version of calendar despite support in the OS X version). That's just a few.
All those bolded items talk about protection of sources, it does not give journalists a blanket protection from breaking the law and having a warrant served on them.
I hate to go all wikipedia on you, but [citation needed].
You have no proof of how the police would act, or that they would treat you any differently to the way they treated Apple other than your baseless ranting.
Being or not being an Apple fanboy here is not relevant - we're discussing the police and their role in investigating crime and executing warrants.
I think you just missed the point of the joke, and by doing so became the living embodiment of it, along with the several other AC posts I got in response to this. You're the first one with the stones to actually log in.
You see, what I did (since you clearly didn't see it - I probably should have appended "did you see what I did there?" to the end of my original post) was to use a literary device called a "generalisation". This is often used, quite frequently in the company of hyperbole, to emphasise a point.
For example, "The buses are never, ever on time. You wait for hours and then three turn up at once" is an example of a generalisation combined with hyperbole. No one reading the sentence (unless lacking in basic reading comprehension) believes that the writer *literally* had to wait hours, or that his assertion that the busses are "never ever" on time was a literal statement.
Do you need me to help you with applying that to my post? I can break it down piece by piece with quotes and explain it as I go if it makes it easier, or do you have enough to go on from here on your own?
"The facts speak for themselves" - so says the guy who is claiming "corporate privilege".
Gizmodo committed a crime. They admitted to it on their website. The police went over and arrested them.
Pretty textbook policing there.
If you're claiming that the police wouldn't do anything if you made a prototype that got stolen, and the offender posted proof of it on their website, then you are just making absurd assumptions in a continued attempt to make Apple out to be the bad guy. You have nothing but baseless ranting to back up your claim that the police "would not give you the time of day".
I've done plenty of reading and research on these topics - it's why I wasn't fooled by your initial "claim Apple was using jackbooted things and post a link, hoping that I won't do more than skim the first couple of lines of the linked site" tactic.
Put it this way, reality is not like the movie "hackers", where "The Man" is the Machiavellian evil mastermind out to keep the good, honest righteous tech nerds down.
Carcassonne cost me about £4 and I play it all the time - I have the physical game too, but it's great for passing the time when out and about on the iPhone, and to play with friends remotely.
I can certainly say I'd got way more out of that £4 than I did from the games on my DS, which I later sold in near immaculate condition because the games and gameplay experience were not grabbing me - I was always playing 'casual' games on my phone instead.
Nintendo have it right - the casual gamer is being lost to smartphone games that cost less than $10, usually $2 max, which is eating into their demographic. Now it won't kill the DS/3DS/DSi outright - there is still a place for those games (it is a wildly popular device range) but they lost a big chunk of users who are simply using their phones to play games.
Welcome to any Apple-themed post, except this time it's Google.
You didn't expect any of these armchair patent experts to actually *read* more than the headline before offering their infallible expert opinion, did you?
Also, hilarious that we have apologists out for Google too. When Apple patents something absurd it's "evil, greedy, anti-competitive", but when Google is perceived to do the same they are "doing it as a protest to put a spotlight on absurd patents". Nice hypocrisy, slashdot!
Oh pray tell me, oh great one, what is a "non trivial" number, and how does it related to our real world experiences of how Bluetooth performs.
I'm sure you're dying to tell me that I experience constant input lag on my bluetooth keyboard due to the large number of bluetooth enabled devices nearby. Do tell me more about my own experiences, I'm all ears, since clearly I have plenty of time to wait while my computer catches up to me typing this message.
So, your argument is "go and prove my point for me, I can't be bothered, since you've shot down my weak sauce Apple bashing and I'm now trying to dig my way out of it"?
If only you could edit slashdot posts, perhaps you wouldn't get yourself into these sorts of messes.
Also of note:
A partnership of 17 local, state, and federal agencies, with the Santa Clara County District Attorney's Office designated as the lead agency. The REACT Task Force is one of five in the State of California and authorized under California Penal Code 13848.
All Agents of the React Task Force are either California Peace Officers and/or U.S. Federal Agents
Yeah, Apple's private paramilitary army! You're totally selling it to me! The proof is just inescapable!
Good grief, the things people will say and believe due to the frothing Apple hatred. It must mess with the perception of reality quite badly.
REACT Investigates these Crimes:
Theft - where computer equipment
or high technology is the primary
target of the crime.
Gee, I wonder why they got involved here, eh?
And that site clearly shows that they are Apple's paid goons. Totally unequivocally.
Input lag? Come on, you;re just inventing issues now. My close friend types at 115 wpm sustained and I can't say she has ever said to me "you know, this input lag is killing me!"
They don't port to the Mac, they simultaneously develop the Windows and Mac versions side by side as they always have done since the early days.
There has been much talk about a Linux WoW client over the years, and I believe they had some internal builds for testing, but ultimately it's a marketshare problem that is further compounded because you can get their games to run in Wine. Linux gaming is where Mac gaming was several years ago - some dedicated developers who release on the platform (and do more than just a shitty port job), but struggling to see the economic sense of supporting a platform with such a small marketshare.
My goodness, your view of their actions is remarkably naive and irrelevant. They broke the law, there is no doubt about that. These laws are written down in black and white and were fired endlessly the last time the "zomg Apple sending police thugz to raid innocent gizmodo people!" stories came up.
They knew the phone did not belong to the person selling it to them and they paid money for it. It doesn't matter what their intent was - they could be the most altruistic people ever to live, but paying money for property you know to be stolen/not owned by the person selling it to you: illegal.
Going "above and beyond" is far from what they did. Aside from ransoming the phone back to Apple (after taking it apart and breaking it, and putting photos online) they also 'outed' the guy who "lost" the phone in the first place since they had all of his details, and they did it to "protect him from recrimination by Apple" (bollocks did they). So, if they knew exactly who the phone belonged to, including the guy's address, Facebook details, email etc then why the big "we just didn;t know how to get it back to who it belonged to, so we called Apple Support and they blew us off!" line that they were running with?
Gizmodo and the guy who originally took the phone were in the wrong here, no matter how you try to dress it up. They dug their own hole and just kept going.
They then capped it off when WWDC/Macworld came around and they complained that Apple withdrew their free press passes (meaning they'd have to pay to attend - they weren't barred from attending) for "petty reasons". Gee, I wonder why you're not in Apple's good books, eh Giz? Take it like a grown up and don't whine when things don't turn out the way you expect.
a) I know, I mentioned it in my post, that you quoted.
b) I know Gizmodo didn't try and sell it, and they they didn;t "find" it initially - they bought it. The point of talking about what is and isn't legal when you "find" something in California is that knowing purchasing stolen property is also a crime. I'm not accusing them of stealing the phone, I'm pointing out that they incriminated themselves by stating on their website that they bought the phone from a guy who had "attempted to return it to Apple".
The only difference is that gizmodo didn't find the prototype on the street, they paid the guy who was trying to unload it. But that's irrelevant. Going back to the wallet example... some bum on the street finds your dropped wallet and puts it up for sale on his blanket... you see it, buy it, and then see the ID inside... and then call the original onwer.
You might think it is irrelevant but it is *against the law in CA* to do what the guy who "found" the phone did, and to do what Gizmodo did, knowing that the guy did not own the phone himself. There is simply no getting around that fact, as inconvenient as it is, because it puts Apple as the non-bad-guy in a story on slashdot, but it's simply the reality of the matter.
If you purchased a wallet from a guy who said he found it on the street and you are pretty certain that it is not his, you are knowingly receiving stolen property by the strict definition of the law in CA which state found items must be reported. They cannot simply be sold on without that procedure.
You might not "see what is wrong" but the law doesn't work that way.
"Bringing down the police like they're personal security guards"? What are you smoking?!
Apple told the police that one of their prototypes was stolen, and had a pretty good idea who had it, since they posted about it on the internet, with self incrimination that they purchased stolen property (however you slice it, the law in California is very specific about what you can do with something you "find" - you cannot sell it right away, you have to register it as a lost item with the local sheriff's office, and if it goes unclaimed, then you can sell it).
This was not "personal security" from Apple, it was *the bread and butter day job of the police*. You just don't like it because someone who was not Apple was the bad guy in the whole palaver.
That is exactly the point. It's not ebay or a second hand shop, it's a recycling program. If you can get more for it because it's working, then sell it that way. This is intended for stuff that was going into the dumpster anyway.
Thunderbolt is Intel's technology.
Don't let facts get in the way of good Apple bash though.