Dictatorships often call themselves "Democratic Republic of". In the same way, advocates of the GPL like to talk about "Freedom" and the "Free Open Source Movement" when there is a perfectly good Open Source Software movement that is independent of a specific license or philosophy.
The FOSS movement is not about freedom but rather a specific philosophy or agenda pushed by the GNU foundation.
32GB 3G iPad is $730. The 32GB 3G Xoom is $800. I'm not seeing a $150 difference.
The iPad 3G model does not require activation on a particular network and it can be used with micro sim from any carrier around the world that supports it whereas that 800 dollar Xoom tablet "REQUIRES" cellular data activation.
That requirement adds a bit to the price don't you think?
Why? When was the last time radical christians organized a global attempt to indiscriminately kill people on a massive scale? The Crusades?
There are simply more dangerous things in the world at the moment.
The Crusades were a response to over four hundred years of Muslim crusades and unchecked violence. Four centuries is a lot of turning the other cheek wouldn't you say? The purpose of the Crusades were to restore access to the holy land for pilgrims visiting from Europe and to halt the advance of the Moors into Europe.
iPad is total overkill, Kindle is way way WAY cheaper and does all the same things that they need to do.
Uh. You have to be kidding me. A Kindle is only useful for consuming information. There are no apps for editing/marking up documents. There is no colour support, not animation support and no app store.
Cantel (Rogers Wireless) was owned in part by AT&T and BT (British Telecom) in the 1990's. I would be interested to know when this law cited by the judge came into effect.
The Venn diagram of (people who buy Apple hardware) and (people who buy Rupert Murdoch content) does not have a very large overlap, but does have a big bubble for (people who would avoid buying Apple hardware if it came with Rupert Murdoch content).
I suppose that you came to those conclusions based on some scientific study? Was it rather gleamed for a combination of reading your favourite blogs, reading tea leaves and pulling ideas out of your ass?
I cannot stand it when people make sweeping generalizations about what type of people buy Apple products. Apple is no longer confined to the hipster counter culture but rather has become mainstream.
Most people dont care about that. Honestly, do these dead tree publishers not get it?
I want the magazines I like or the news sources I like in a e-form with updates during the day. Add articles, fix articles, delete unpatriotic things so we can all love big brother more....
IF I want to play suduko, I'll launch that app. If I want to watch video, I'll watch it from a company that has a far better video production department than the Daily.
Well it is good to know that you know exactly what most people want. Perhaps they should hire you. A lot of people apparently like apps like the NY Times one or the WSJ app. I could see this as being quite popular with people.
Seriously, why does this have to be an app? Smartphones and tablets have browsers, why spend all this time and effort on something that can't be used by all of them. $30 Million to make it, $500K a week to run , yet Murdoch's papers already have websites. And they don't have to pay Apple 30% for them.
Oh well, we've have the dotcom bubble, then the web2.0 bubble, Ladies and Gentlemen welcome to the 'app bubble' where every other company will soon be making crappy pointless apps and shouting 'me too!'
Why an app? Are you serious? Some people might want to have persistent data that is there whether you have a connection or not. Some people might have an iPad with WiFi only and not have access to Wifi wherever they want to read articles. While you can have "offline" storage in a web app, that storage can be so easily wiped out and is usually limited to a very small size by default. Also, having a rich experience on the web currently requires something like FLASH which is a huge battery drain while you can obtain an even richer experience with something other than flash with a native application that downloads data periodically when you are back at home or somewhere else with a fast Wifi connection.
There is also the issue of usability. It is much easier to have an app than expect a user to create a shortcut to the homescreen for a webpage manually.
The point he's making is a long term one. Apple hasn't hinted that it will ever again pay dividends, which in the long run makes its stock useless. Sure, you can sell it to someone else, and they can sell it, but that does absolutely nothing to the net amount of money for those involved. The only thing that makes people think that this makes more sense than a pyramid scheme is that some day apple may sell off part of itself or pay a dividend. I don't see either happening ever with Stevie in charge.
Well if you made a long term investment in MSFT "after" the bubble, you would be losing money per share even with dividends because of the stock dropping to below 28 dollars if you needed to sell right now.
If you invested in AAPL a long time ago, you would have made your money many times over if you sold them right now.
Your comment is a good indicator of how individuals are likely to think that others are much like themselves.
It's been my experience that organizational and individual users of Apple products are younger people - those more likely to skew liberal. I was recently in a situation where expats were being evacuated out of a developing country where people and organizations of all stripes were thrown together. Mac users - almost universally younger and/or belonging to secular NGOs. PC folks - mostly missionaries and/or commercial businesses.
Remember, Apple inculcates their future users young, just as they enter college. After school, these are the people for whom Its Really Important to have a Mac, regardless of their financial situation.
Your comment is a good indicator of how individuals are likely to think that others are much like themselves.
You sound like an American and you think that everyone in the rest of the world has a similar world view as you do.
First of all, I would like to clear something up. Most Americans including yourself have no clue what "liberal" is. Compared to even your northern neighbour's Conservative party, the Democrats are "RIGHT WING". There is no "left" in the American body politic.
Mac users are as diverse as the general populace and you might be surprise to find out that your stereotypes of "liberal" and creative arts do not necessarily intersect the way you think they do and you might also be confusing NGOs that are not "directly" connected with a particular church with "secular". Even NGOs that you might consider secular probably had their roots in religious groups. Take the YMCA for example. Are you aware that those initials stand for "Young Men Christian Association"?
Most bloggers generally either regurgitate news from other sources like News Corp properties while adding their own editorial spin on it or simply aggregate news from other sources. So given this, I am not in the least surprised that a blogger would claim that the daily is "doomed".
Here is a news flash for all of you wannabe "journalist" bloggers out there, you will fade into obscurity as the "web' becomes less relevant as a news source when the traditional media jumps on the electronic daily magazine bandwagon. These things are the future
Virgin media launched their magazine first with updating content on the iPad and this "Daily" takes the magazine concept one step further. You have the flashy layout of magazines combined with the dynamic and up to date feel of a website with the production values of the old news papers.
Blogging is the one that is doomed and news print media has been reborn as rich media that is both updated on the fly and persistent for times when the network connection is not there while retaining the production values of a glossy magazine.
We are alone. There is no proof to dispute this statement. Theories, hopes and dreams do not equal proof. The universe exists for the sole purpose to serve as a backdrop for humanity.
Quantum physics shows us that the universe behaves differently when it is observed by us than when it is not. This phenomenon appears to suggest that our physical universe exists solely for our benefit so that our limited minds can perceive and comprehend reality in a coherent and predictable manner.
This is exactly how I feel. What in the world would make you want to be a purveyor of obviously one sided misinformation?
Right, they should have teamed up with the Huffington Post or some other crackpot blog./SARCASM
Seriously, you should consult multiple sources to get the whole story and make of your own damn mind. Don't just listen to sources that match your own narrow world view. You should also consider that there is a difference between editorialized opinion peaces and reporting on the "news". News should be relatively unbiased as it is supposed to be a retelling of facts and eye witness accounts.
But don't let me stop you from believing the conspiracy theories.
XCode is smooth and elegant? LOL. Yeah right, it's buggy as hell and has a convoluted work-flow. I'm guessing you don't have much development experience.
Not that Eclipse is any better, it's sucks too, along with Java.
I'm guessing that you have not used a lot of development environments. X-Code is a dream compared to Exclipse. Who the heck thought that a "workspace" was a good idea? Perspectives? Really?!? Compared to Eclipse, X-Code gets out of your way and just lets you develop. What do you find so damn confusing about the write, build and debug workflow? It is not that different from Visual Studio.
I cannot believe that anyone is calling this real science. This belongs in the same category as Phrenology. It is an excuse to practice racism and anti-relgious bigotry.
I love how they try to pigeonhole the iPad into a "consumption" role when there are thousands of examples of things created using the iPad.
If you can only find 'thousands of examples' of things created on millions of iPads, then I think it's pretty clear that they're not a 'creation' device.
Most companies don't spend a lot of time finger-painting and if you have to carry a keyboard around to actually type long documents then there's little benefit over a netbook or laptop.
You really need to brush up on your trolling. First of all, you could have saved yourself a lot of time by using google to try to validate or falsify your assumptions but that would require intellectual honesty.
There are numerous other applications like the iWork apps and Office 2 HD.
Search for yourself. I assume that you are a grown up and that you can do that right?
BTW. Most long documents are written while sitting at a desk and not in the middle of a meeting. The iPad is sufficient for taking meeting minutes without taking along a bluetooth keyboard but you can use a keyboard when you get to your desk or you can simply use the iPad as a supplement to a powerful desktop at your desk and avoid having to have a laptop in the first place.
How much is the TCO? Those windows machines do not administer themselves. How many additional IT staff did your company have to hire to keep those windows machines running? How much do they cost in downtime?
It sounds like your new director wasted a lot of money by swapping out the hardware for no good reason. The amount of "work" done in Adobe's CS depends on the employee, not the hardware.
What makes you think it would cost that much? It's not like Apple is re-developing Apache and all the other open source software they use. They reuse a lot of code written by others where as MS can really only rely on themselves.
That also brings up the question that if the software is subsidised so much then the hardware is much cheaper so if Apple can maintain such high quality hardware then why can't others for the same cost?
Are you under the mistaken impression that the majority of open source software is written by unpaid volunteers on their own free time? Really? Are you that ignorant/naive? Apple makes use of open source projects which they also "contribute" to. Open source software may be offered as free source code but it costs money to develop. Do you enjoy using things like WebOS, Android webkit browsers or Chrome? Without the forking of KHTML into webkit and the continued maintenance of webkit by paid Apple employees, none of those things that I mentioned would exist today. There are a number of open source projects started by Apple from internal code which they decided to open up and a number of other projects which Apple contributes to heavily.
I don't know if you are speaking out of ignorance or just deliberately trolling but you do not seem to understand the costs and value of software development. As a software developer with over a decade of development experience of in house software development, I have some idea of how much software development costs but you apparently think that open source writes itself and that people write it for free on their own time. Some smaller projects do work that way but the majority of them are funded directly by companies that make use of them.
You should google "immigration gumballs" to see how increasing immigration will do nothing to solve the problems of the world. It also addresses how trying to attract even more of the "best of the best" from other countries can cause more harm than good when you consider the effect of the drain on their home country.
You are better off trying to help those developing country "help" themselves through increased international trade and providing aid for development of infrastructure in those other nations.
Following that approach is a "win-win" since you are developing another potential market for your country's products and services.
The problem is that right now people can't figure out whether software is secure. They buy software based on what's asserted and take companies at their face values.
Nothing mentioned about FOSS. It sounds like the focus is on proprietary software exclusively, as FOSS allows anybody to scrutinize and code-review the source, making his entire argument invalid.
Sorry but what is FOSS? There only OSS "Open" "Source" "Software". Prefacing it with "free" is redundant and is used by followers or the GNU movement in an attempt to politicize open source. The open source software movement encompasses a number of software licenses and philosophies besides just GNU approved GPL and LGPL.
Having source code under any open source license does not guarantee that anyone will bother scrutinizing the source let alone contribute to it. In fact, a number of high profile "open source" projects only have contributions from the company that created the project so I doubt that code is scrutinized by anyone outside of the company in any great detail if at all.
Even with access to the code, the person viewing the code has to be able to understand the code or it is quite pointless. Even assuming that the person has experience in the language used, it is doubtful that they will be able to make sense of the code if they have never worked with the codebase.
now look at the mac os tax it has to be at the most $1500-$500 on the mac pro.
Would you be willing to pay 400-500 dollars per copy of OS X? OS X development is subsidized by hardware purchases which is why it is so cheap compared to windows licenses. Would you be willing to put up with license keys and activation?
Most people probably would not.
New versions of OS X are cheap and have no copy protection on them. The trade off that you make for that is to only run it on macs.
This is a non-story for anyone who owns an iPhone 4. If your iPhone 4 breaks under warranty, take it into an Apple store or authorized repair depot. If the battery needs replacement and is not covered by warranty, send it in to Apple for replacement.
Slashdot Mirror
If FOSS is about freedom why do they use the GPL?
Dictatorships often call themselves "Democratic Republic of". In the same way, advocates of the GPL like to talk about "Freedom" and the "Free Open Source Movement" when there is a perfectly good Open Source Software movement that is independent of a specific license or philosophy.
The FOSS movement is not about freedom but rather a specific philosophy or agenda pushed by the GNU foundation.
I'm not familiar with your math.
32GB 3G iPad is $730. The 32GB 3G Xoom is $800. I'm not seeing a $150 difference.
The iPad 3G model does not require activation on a particular network and it can be used with micro sim from any carrier around the world that supports it whereas that 800 dollar Xoom tablet "REQUIRES" cellular data activation.
That requirement adds a bit to the price don't you think?
Why? When was the last time radical christians organized a global attempt to indiscriminately kill people on a massive scale? The Crusades?
There are simply more dangerous things in the world at the moment.
The Crusades were a response to over four hundred years of Muslim crusades and unchecked violence. Four centuries is a lot of turning the other cheek wouldn't you say? The purpose of the Crusades were to restore access to the holy land for pilgrims visiting from Europe and to halt the advance of the Moors into Europe.
Kindle, on the other hand, makes total sense.
iPad is total overkill, Kindle is way way WAY cheaper and does all the same things that they need to do.
Uh. You have to be kidding me. A Kindle is only useful for consuming information. There are no apps for editing/marking up documents. There is no colour support, not animation support and no app store.
Cantel (Rogers Wireless) was owned in part by AT&T and BT (British Telecom) in the 1990's. I would be interested to know when this law cited by the judge came into effect.
That's really its only fundamental flaw.
The Venn diagram of (people who buy Apple hardware) and (people who buy Rupert Murdoch content) does not have a very large overlap, but does have a big bubble for (people who would avoid buying Apple hardware if it came with Rupert Murdoch content).
I suppose that you came to those conclusions based on some scientific study? Was it rather gleamed for a combination of reading your favourite blogs, reading tea leaves and pulling ideas out of your ass?
I cannot stand it when people make sweeping generalizations about what type of people buy Apple products. Apple is no longer confined to the hipster counter culture but rather has become mainstream.
Most people dont care about that.
Honestly, do these dead tree publishers not get it?
I want the magazines I like or the news sources I like in a e-form with updates during the day. Add articles, fix articles, delete unpatriotic things so we can all love big brother more....
IF I want to play suduko, I'll launch that app.
If I want to watch video, I'll watch it from a company that has a far better video production department than the Daily.
Well it is good to know that you know exactly what most people want. Perhaps they should hire you. A lot of people apparently like apps like the NY Times one or the WSJ app. I could see this as being quite popular with people.
Seriously, why does this have to be an app?
Smartphones and tablets have browsers, why spend all this time and effort on something that can't be used by all of them.
$30 Million to make it, $500K a week to run , yet Murdoch's papers already have websites. And they don't have to pay Apple 30% for them.
Oh well, we've have the dotcom bubble, then the web2.0 bubble, Ladies and Gentlemen welcome to the 'app bubble' where every other company will soon be making crappy pointless apps and shouting 'me too!'
Why an app? Are you serious? Some people might want to have persistent data that is there whether you have a connection or not. Some people might have an iPad with WiFi only and not have access to Wifi wherever they want to read articles. While you can have "offline" storage in a web app, that storage can be so easily wiped out and is usually limited to a very small size by default. Also, having a rich experience on the web currently requires something like FLASH which is a huge battery drain while you can obtain an even richer experience with something other than flash with a native application that downloads data periodically when you are back at home or somewhere else with a fast Wifi connection.
There is also the issue of usability. It is much easier to have an app than expect a user to create a shortcut to the homescreen for a webpage manually.
The point he's making is a long term one. Apple hasn't hinted that it will ever again pay dividends, which in the long run makes its stock useless. Sure, you can sell it to someone else, and they can sell it, but that does absolutely nothing to the net amount of money for those involved. The only thing that makes people think that this makes more sense than a pyramid scheme is that some day apple may sell off part of itself or pay a dividend. I don't see either happening ever with Stevie in charge.
Well if you made a long term investment in MSFT "after" the bubble, you would be losing money per share even with dividends because of the stock dropping to below 28 dollars if you needed to sell right now.
If you invested in AAPL a long time ago, you would have made your money many times over if you sold them right now.
Your comment is a good indicator of how individuals are likely to think that others are much like themselves.
It's been my experience that organizational and individual users of Apple products are younger people - those more likely to skew liberal. I was recently in a situation where expats were being evacuated out of a developing country where people and organizations of all stripes were thrown together. Mac users - almost universally younger and/or belonging to secular NGOs. PC folks - mostly missionaries and/or commercial businesses.
Remember, Apple inculcates their future users young, just as they enter college. After school, these are the people for whom Its Really Important to have a Mac, regardless of their financial situation.
Your comment is a good indicator of how individuals are likely to think that others are much like themselves.
You sound like an American and you think that everyone in the rest of the world has a similar world view as you do.
First of all, I would like to clear something up. Most Americans including yourself have no clue what "liberal" is. Compared to even your northern neighbour's Conservative party, the Democrats are "RIGHT WING". There is no "left" in the American body politic.
Mac users are as diverse as the general populace and you might be surprise to find out that your stereotypes of "liberal" and creative arts do not necessarily intersect the way you think they do and you might also be confusing NGOs that are not "directly" connected with a particular church with "secular". Even NGOs that you might consider secular probably had their roots in religious groups. Take the YMCA for example. Are you aware that those initials stand for "Young Men Christian Association"?
Most bloggers generally either regurgitate news from other sources like News Corp properties while adding their own editorial spin on it or simply aggregate news from other sources. So given this, I am not in the least surprised that a blogger would claim that the daily is "doomed".
Here is a news flash for all of you wannabe "journalist" bloggers out there, you will fade into obscurity as the "web' becomes less relevant as a news source when the traditional media jumps on the electronic daily magazine bandwagon. These things are the future
Virgin media launched their magazine first with updating content on the iPad and this "Daily" takes the magazine concept one step further. You have the flashy layout of magazines combined with the dynamic and up to date feel of a website with the production values of the old news papers.
Blogging is the one that is doomed and news print media has been reborn as rich media that is both updated on the fly and persistent for times when the network connection is not there while retaining the production values of a glossy magazine.
We are alone. There is no proof to dispute this statement. Theories, hopes and dreams do not equal proof. The universe exists for the sole purpose to serve as a backdrop for humanity.
Quantum physics shows us that the universe behaves differently when it is observed by us than when it is not. This phenomenon appears to suggest that our physical universe exists solely for our benefit so that our limited minds can perceive and comprehend reality in a coherent and predictable manner.
This is exactly how I feel. What in the world would make you want to be a purveyor of obviously one sided misinformation?
Right, they should have teamed up with the Huffington Post or some other crackpot blog. /SARCASM
Seriously, you should consult multiple sources to get the whole story and make of your own damn mind. Don't just listen to sources that match your own narrow world view. You should also consider that there is a difference between editorialized opinion peaces and reporting on the "news". News should be relatively unbiased as it is supposed to be a retelling of facts and eye witness accounts.
But don't let me stop you from believing the conspiracy theories.
XCode is smooth and elegant? LOL. Yeah right, it's buggy as hell and has a convoluted work-flow. I'm guessing you don't have much development experience.
Not that Eclipse is any better, it's sucks too, along with Java.
I'm guessing that you have not used a lot of development environments. X-Code is a dream compared to Exclipse. Who the heck thought that a "workspace" was a good idea? Perspectives? Really?!? Compared to Eclipse, X-Code gets out of your way and just lets you develop. What do you find so damn confusing about the write, build and debug workflow? It is not that different from Visual Studio.
I cannot believe that anyone is calling this real science. This belongs in the same category as Phrenology. It is an excuse to practice racism and anti-relgious bigotry.
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_eugenics
They can get to the root of the problem.
I love how they try to pigeonhole the iPad into a "consumption" role when there are thousands of examples of things created using the iPad.
If you can only find 'thousands of examples' of things created on millions of iPads, then I think it's pretty clear that they're not a 'creation' device.
Most companies don't spend a lot of time finger-painting and if you have to carry a keyboard around to actually type long documents then there's little benefit over a netbook or laptop.
You really need to brush up on your trolling. First of all, you could have saved yourself a lot of time by using google to try to validate or falsify your assumptions but that would require intellectual honesty.
Go search on here. http://itunes.apple.com/us/genre/ios/id36?mt=8
Speaking of "finger painting", this app can create some impressive results: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/sketchbook-pro/id364253478?mt=8
There are numerous other applications like the iWork apps and Office 2 HD.
Search for yourself. I assume that you are a grown up and that you can do that right?
BTW. Most long documents are written while sitting at a desk and not in the middle of a meeting. The iPad is sufficient for taking meeting minutes without taking along a bluetooth keyboard but you can use a keyboard when you get to your desk or you can simply use the iPad as a supplement to a powerful desktop at your desk and avoid having to have a laptop in the first place.
How much is the TCO? Those windows machines do not administer themselves. How many additional IT staff did your company have to hire to keep those windows machines running? How much do they cost in downtime?
It sounds like your new director wasted a lot of money by swapping out the hardware for no good reason. The amount of "work" done in Adobe's CS depends on the employee, not the hardware.
I see that you do not know how to use the google search engine. I searched for the following "Ipad use in business" and got the following:
http://www.apple.com/ipad/business/
http://www.apple.com/ipad/business/apps/
http://www.apple.com/ipad/business/profiles/
and searching for "Ipad use fortune 100" yields:
http://www.financialpost.com/news/Fortune+using+testing+iPad/4131601/story.html
What makes you think it would cost that much? It's not like Apple is re-developing Apache and all the other open source software they use. They reuse a lot of code written by others where as MS can really only rely on themselves.
That also brings up the question that if the software is subsidised so much then the hardware is much cheaper so if Apple can maintain such high quality hardware then why can't others for the same cost?
Are you under the mistaken impression that the majority of open source software is written by unpaid volunteers on their own free time? Really? Are you that ignorant/naive? Apple makes use of open source projects which they also "contribute" to. Open source software may be offered as free source code but it costs money to develop. Do you enjoy using things like WebOS, Android webkit browsers or Chrome? Without the forking of KHTML into webkit and the continued maintenance of webkit by paid Apple employees, none of those things that I mentioned would exist today. There are a number of open source projects started by Apple from internal code which they decided to open up and a number of other projects which Apple contributes to heavily.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Launchd
http://launchd.macosforge.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonjour_(software)
http://bonjour.macosforge.org/
http://dss.macosforge.org/
http://webkit.org/
I don't know if you are speaking out of ignorance or just deliberately trolling but you do not seem to understand the costs and value of software development. As a software developer with over a decade of development experience of in house software development, I have some idea of how much software development costs but you apparently think that open source writes itself and that people write it for free on their own time. Some smaller projects do work that way but the majority of them are funded directly by companies that make use of them.
You should google "immigration gumballs" to see how increasing immigration will do nothing to solve the problems of the world. It also addresses how trying to attract even more of the "best of the best" from other countries can cause more harm than good when you consider the effect of the drain on their home country.
You are better off trying to help those developing country "help" themselves through increased international trade and providing aid for development of infrastructure in those other nations.
Following that approach is a "win-win" since you are developing another potential market for your country's products and services.
The problem is that right now people can't figure out whether software is secure. They buy software based on what's asserted and take companies at their face values.
Nothing mentioned about FOSS. It sounds like the focus is on proprietary software exclusively, as FOSS allows anybody to scrutinize and code-review the source, making his entire argument invalid.
Oblig Image: http://imgur.com/Vnbwb.png
Sorry but what is FOSS? There only OSS "Open" "Source" "Software". Prefacing it with "free" is redundant and is used by followers or the GNU movement in an attempt to politicize open source. The open source software movement encompasses a number of software licenses and philosophies besides just GNU approved GPL and LGPL.
Having source code under any open source license does not guarantee that anyone will bother scrutinizing the source let alone contribute to it. In fact, a number of high profile "open source" projects only have contributions from the company that created the project so I doubt that code is scrutinized by anyone outside of the company in any great detail if at all.
Even with access to the code, the person viewing the code has to be able to understand the code or it is quite pointless. Even assuming that the person has experience in the language used, it is doubtful that they will be able to make sense of the code if they have never worked with the codebase.
now look at the mac os tax
it has to be at the most $1500-$500 on the mac pro.
Would you be willing to pay 400-500 dollars per copy of OS X? OS X development is subsidized by hardware purchases which is why it is so cheap compared to windows licenses. Would you be willing to put up with license keys and activation?
Most people probably would not.
New versions of OS X are cheap and have no copy protection on them. The trade off that you make for that is to only run it on macs.
Why are you spamming on their behalf? Do you work for them?
There is no need for that kit or to open your iPhone 4 as long as it is working and under warranty.
If it is broken and under warranty, send it in for repair. Don't waste your time and money trying to fix it yourself.
This is a non-story for anyone who owns an iPhone 4. If your iPhone 4 breaks under warranty, take it into an Apple store or authorized repair depot. If the battery needs replacement and is not covered by warranty, send it in to Apple for replacement.
There is no need to open up an iPhone 4 yourself.