Warts--CP Nitric Acid until it hurts, then soaked in a baking soda solution until it stops fizzing....
Gak. Perhaps you might want to try an old home remedy for them next time.
Wash the area really well, then apply a small quantity of powdered ASA directly to the wart (NOT the surrounding tissue).
Cover with a bandaid.
Keep dry for 4-7 days (if it does get wet, reapply), then remove the bandaid.....the core of the wart should just pull out with the bandaid.
You can tell when it's ready to be removed because there will be some discomfort.
While I know of it as a treatment for Planter's Warts in particular, since it essentially does the same as your method (ie burns it away...just more slowly), it should work with others too.
Mmm. Yes, at the moment, Canada is quite a bit better on such issues.
Recent court decisions have stalled out a general trend in the same direction temporarily.
Unfortunately, as someone pointed out, we also have a Federal election on Monday...and all indications are that the Conservatives will gain power this time.
Campaign scare tactics aside, they ARE the most Republican-esque and openly Christian party that Canada has ever had. That said, it's really anyone's guess how hard they'll push on the Christian and further-right hot topics...ie revisiting abortion laws, same-sex marriage, "soft" drug legalization, etc.
I suspect that the mostly Liberal senate and courts really will act as a decent check and balance to them (that, and they WILL be scrutinized pretty heavily). At least they will until they appoint enough Conservative senators and Supreme Court judges anyway (10 years+).
The other potential problem is that we're the USAs little brother and chief trading partner. That means that a huge chunk of our economy is based on trade with the US. Put a federal government in place that wants to appease the US administration more (which many people perceive the Conservatives to be) and it'd be pretty easy to force the country to bend over to US interests....
Not sure if it's accurate or not, but the impression I always had was that they originally couldn't trademark "Windows" and the original trademark was "Microsoft Windows" for just that reason.
After briefly perusing the USPTO it looks like they do indeed hold just "windows" now, but the assigning dates that I saw are all in the 90's.
Perhaps the USPTO has gotten more lax in their approval process? Or perhaps Microsoft's overwhelming marketshare gave them more leeway later on.....
1/No more legalese. In other words, the application should be written in clear, unambiguous english.
The current need for a specialized patent or IP lawyer that costs more than the application itself is appalling.
The fact that legal terms are used to obscure the specific implementation is equally appalling. It makes bad patents (ie obvious or overly broad) much more difficult to remove, as "someone well-versed in the field" should not be required to be well-versed in patent law as well.
If you need examples of this, look back over Slashdot discussions of recent patents and see how differently they get interpreted by different people. That should not be happening.
Hehe. I'm of the opinion that the world would be a much happier place if all contracts were written this way as well, but that's a different discussion......:)
2/There needs to be a requirement for the patent to be for a very specific implementation of the idea. While this does allow for the "widget in a cell phone" and "same widget in an MP3 player" patents (possibly not a good thing), often extensions of an idea come from new implementations of that idea.
This would stop the "we developed this implementation in 1990 and now XXX company makes something that sorta-kinda works the same way. Since they seem to be successful with it, we're going to sue" lawsuits.
As someone watching from outside (ie non-USian), the slippery slope is far, far behind you. You're now in the Crisco coated grain chute. Any hope of derailing the current trend of personal freedom/privacy loss is likely long, long past.
What really disturbs me is how easily the US government is pulling other countries down the same route....
Hmmm. While I have never seen an actual image of the type of boxcutter used in the 9/11 sky-jackings (it's possible they were the rather rare straight-razor type, in which case I'm curious why they were allowed on in carry-on baggage in the first place), the standard boxcutter makes a pretty shitty knife too, from a threatening standpoint. I worked in several packaging places in my youth, and the linked type is the only one I ever ran into in the workplace.
That said, I've never understood how you could successfully high-jack a plane with one.....
Hehe. Yep, s'why I said "I'm not sure how much of it qualifies as "ordinary Mac programs"".
When using those definitions, then, no, nothing I've run into require admin access....except a cpl of games that insisted they be installed in/Applications, and then only for the installation.
There have been others I've run in the last few months that were that way as well, just CCC was the only one that came to mind....
On a side-note, CCC (and the others) irked me not because they require admin access (I quite agree that they should), but because they assume you are logged in as admin. ie it asks for an admin password, with no available field for admin user name. A better behaviour would be to simply not run at all, with a message stating "you must have admin access" or some such.
Just a couple of minor comments. There are quite a few pieces of software for OS X that do NOT run properly under non-admin log-in.
Many more pretend to, but don't really. A good example of that is Carbon Copy Cloner, a program that you can run in non-admin mode, but.....since it asks for your admin password, but not your admin log-in name, you can't actually run it....making it functionally useless unless you log out and back in under admin.
Granted, all the software I've seen like this is either shareware or open source and I'm not sure how much of it qualifies as "ordinary Mac programs", but that's another issue entirely......
I do agree with you on the "security through obscurity" issue being an old and tired one, though. Something I never see pointed out is that there are so many people saying so publicly "OS X is more secure"....you would think that's a massive incentive for someone to write a functioning piece of malware or a virus, just for bragging rights if nothing else.....
Out here in Vancouver, Canada, they did some awful things to the projectionists... rolling back wages, lessening the staff... etc. They ended up striking. Now projectionists made GOOD money, so I met a lot of people who thought they were overpaid anyways, so they should just take what they could get... they figured it was such an easy job they shouldn't be paid what they were.
Hmmm. Just a post to add some more information to what you said....
At the time, the projectionists were being paid by the number of screens they were dealing with at the same time. ie If a projectionist was running 7 screens at once, he was paid a higher hourly rate than a projectionist who was running 3 screens.
What that meant was they were making anywhere from $18-$33cdn/hr, with the $33/hr being the one reported in the media. AFAICR, there was 1 projectionist in the province making that much, with most making appx $20. The proposed rollbacks were as much as 60% over 3 years, which brought them back to appx $15/hr.....the same level they were left with after the previous 50% rollback 6 or 7 years (IIRC the time frame) before.
They went on strike, were locked out by the theater chains for more than a year, were denied the right to picket on questionable legal grounds, and finally accepted the rollback rather than have the union go bankrupt.
Because they couldn't picket, and because of the $33/hr reported wage very few people supported them....or even knew the strike was still going a cpl of months into it.
As a side note, this wasn't just a BC issue. The rollback was Canada-wide, but only the BC projectionists were protesting it.....
Sorry if this had a mildly ranty tone, that wasn't intended....but this is still a sore point with me. It's also the reason I haven't been to a movie in a Seagram (owner of Universal Studios and Cineplex) or Viacom (owner of Paramount and Famous Players) owned theater since.....
SCSI drives typically have a 5 year warranty, rather than 1 year for ATA (note that Seagate's ATA drives also have 5 years, and WD's Special Edition -JB ATA drives have 3 years)
The funny thing is.....that longer warranty for the ATA 'cuda is fairly recent (as in the last cpl/few years). It always kind of appalled/puzzled me that the ATA 'cuda warranty was 1 year or 3 years (depending on how far back we're talking about), while the SCSI 'cuda was 5....
The impression I had was that they were found guilty, but ninjas came in the night and removed the spines of the entire Justice Department....so MS was never properly punished.
Hehe. Yep, he's absolutely correct.
In fact, it wasn't that long ago (2yrs? 3yrs?) that Dr.Richard Daley was decrying the Mac as a "satanic" computer because it's based on "Darwin" (horrors! not evolution!) which is "open-source" (communism, ya know?). Apple was therefore promoting evolutionism over creationism and should be avoided by all right-thinking Christians. There was a bunch of other "evidence" he brought up as well. Eg the little "devil" mascot from BSD, daemons, etc. Quite a fun read if ya haven't seen it before.
Here is a reprint of his essay. Sorry, the original article from jesussave.us doesn't seem to exist anymore.:)
The disturbing thing is that are probably waaaaay more people like him than either you or I think. Well, that and the fact that this guy is a teacher.....
So basically, this $179,000 that the RIAA payed Orrin Hatch, would be illegal in Canada under the proposed bill
Well, yes and no. While it does stop a direct payment from such organizations, it doesn't stop groups like the RIAA from, say, forming "citizen groups" of 100 "right-thinking individuals" that make "donations" of $10000 per person. That would still achieve that same purpose.
Note, the donation has to be publicly disclosed, but the donors employer, union affiliations, etc don't have to be.
All the new regulations really do is make the money-trail harder to follow in some ways.
Just to get it said, mostly cause I really get tired of this getting pulled out over and over and over.......and it really is just another 'net myth.
When SJ returned to Apple in '97, there was a big pile of outstanding issues with Apple. One of them was a series of law-suits against Microsoft. Another was securing a viable third-party software future for the Mac (read...like it or not, we need Office). Yet another was that Apple was racking up consistent losses quarter after quarter.
After a series of negotiations, a settlement was reached between Apple and Microsoft....Apple dropped the patent law-suit they had outstanding against Microsoft, and agreed to make Internet Explorer the default browser for the OS. In return, Microsoft bought $150 million of non-voting stock (that was to be held for x number of years), and agreed to continue development of Office Mac for a further 5 years.
At the time, while Apple was definitely losing money consistently, they were in no real danger of going under....in fact they had roughly $1.2 billion in the bank. While that WAS an all-time low of cash on hand for Apple, the quarterly losses were (with one quarter's exception) relatively small (as were the few quarterly profits). On average, the profits and losses were in the $50-100 million range. The problem was, there were more losses than profits, and Q2 '97 was especially bad....loss of $700 million (that's why the cash on hand was less than $2 billion for the first time ever). Those factors (stock purchase, losses, one really bad quarter) led a bunch of Dvorak-style "journalists" to run around screaming that Microsoft was "propping" Apple up, etc, etc. Unfortunately too many in the Windows world take the word of these "journalists" as gospel. As a result, everybody "knows" that Microsoft owns a part of Apple.
Something that also never seems to get mentioned is that, before Jobs returned, Apple had done relatively little to cut costs back. That is what brought Apple back into consistent profits again...simplifying the line-up, ditching the clones, ditching unprofitable product (Newton, etc). In short, it really was pretty simple for Jobs to staunch the slow leak that Apple was experiencing.
As a final note, as far as I can tell (at least all the reports I've found have said so) Microsoft sold off all that stock the minute they could, and at a healthy profit. I believe the term for those was 3 years, which would make it back in 2001.
Here are some links if ya want.....
Cnet story from the time, Wired article from the time. Or......Google is your friend, if ya wanna dig for yourself. ^^
2/ OS checks to ensure that you have a "valid" license for that device
3/ if license is not valid go to step 20
4/ attempt to connect to the vendors website
5/ if contact fails go to step 20
6/ check with vendor to ensure that license is valid
7/ if license is not valid go to step 20
8/ check that vendors license is valid and up-to-date
9/ if license is not valid go to step 20
10/ check that vendor is paid-in-full member of the It Just Works(TM) program
11/ if license is not valid go to step 20
12/ attempt to download driver from vendor
13/ if download fails go to step 20
14/ install driver on client machine
15/ if install fails go to step 20
16/ request user to reboot machine
17/ final check for valid license for all components and software on machine at restart
18/ if any license is found not valid go to step 20
19/ "Lucky", the helpful animated llama, appears and announces "Your new device is ready for use. Have a nice day." End of install, ignore step 20
20/ "Lucky", the helpful animated cigarette, appears and announces "I'm sorry, but Microsoft has determined that you are a loathesome pirate. Your system will now shut down permanently. If you feel that this was in error, please contact your Microsoft representative at 555-555-5555....$5 per minute usage charge may apply. Have nice day."
The difference between this and what happened before is the layers of "security" checks and that it will all happen auto-magically in the background....meaning that it only takes 5 minutes to fuck up your machine instead of the 15-30 it previously did. And it'll make a MUCH bigger mess of things.
See? It Just Works(TM)....for Microsoft. ^^
PS oops, almost forgot (this IS Slashdot, after all).......21/ profit even more!
Hehe. I suspected it might be something like that.
Off-hand I don't know of a contact, but if you're really serious about it, I would expect Apple's website to have the info readily available, probably here http://www.apple.com/contact/ or linked from that page. Even a general message to service would likely get to the right person.
I do know that they will take any contact about it quite seriously, as they've had problems with both resellers and service centers doing things improperly in the past....s'why that rule is there.:)
Yep. I got one of these a half-year or so ago. When I requested a specific limit amount I was told 20gig (up+down) on the regular service. But, yes, nowhere on their site does it actually say that. I was annoyed about it too.
Funny enough, I received the email right after they announced the "extreme-i" service which does state a cap of 50gig (up+down). Same as the low-end "commercial" service.
As for Telus, they do state the (very low...5gig was it? Can't remember) limits for their services. Admittedly, I have heard from several people that they don't track it...but that doesn't mean they won't start at some point. I'm guessing at the point where they realize they can make more money off of you......
Orrrr....perhaps Apple should sue the company that you used to work for for not fulfilling their contract obligations.
In all likelihood, the repair company's contract stated that only the people with certs should have been touching Apple machines.
Yes, I agree that it's possible the contract said no such thing, but this is just as likely (well, more likely IMO) as your assertion that Apple was lying.
Slashdot Mirror
Cel was a joint development project between IBM, Sony, and Toshiba.
Gak. Perhaps you might want to try an old home remedy for them next time.
Wash the area really well, then apply a small quantity of powdered ASA directly to the wart (NOT the surrounding tissue).
Cover with a bandaid.
Keep dry for 4-7 days (if it does get wet, reapply), then remove the bandaid.....the core of the wart should just pull out with the bandaid.
You can tell when it's ready to be removed because there will be some discomfort.
While I know of it as a treatment for Planter's Warts in particular, since it essentially does the same as your method (ie burns it away...just more slowly), it should work with others too.
Recent court decisions have stalled out a general trend in the same direction temporarily.
Unfortunately, as someone pointed out, we also have a Federal election on Monday...and all indications are that the Conservatives will gain power this time.
Campaign scare tactics aside, they ARE the most Republican-esque and openly Christian party that Canada has ever had. That said, it's really anyone's guess how hard they'll push on the Christian and further-right hot topics...ie revisiting abortion laws, same-sex marriage, "soft" drug legalization, etc.
I suspect that the mostly Liberal senate and courts really will act as a decent check and balance to them (that, and they WILL be scrutinized pretty heavily). At least they will until they appoint enough Conservative senators and Supreme Court judges anyway (10 years+).
The other potential problem is that we're the USAs little brother and chief trading partner. That means that a huge chunk of our economy is based on trade with the US. Put a federal government in place that wants to appease the US administration more (which many people perceive the Conservatives to be) and it'd be pretty easy to force the country to bend over to US interests....
Not sure if it's accurate or not, but the impression I always had was that they originally couldn't trademark "Windows" and the original trademark was "Microsoft Windows" for just that reason.
After briefly perusing the USPTO it looks like they do indeed hold just "windows" now, but the assigning dates that I saw are all in the 90's.
Perhaps the USPTO has gotten more lax in their approval process? Or perhaps Microsoft's overwhelming marketshare gave them more leeway later on.....
If I may, some minor suggestions:
1/No more legalese. In other words, the application should be written in clear, unambiguous english. :)
The current need for a specialized patent or IP lawyer that costs more than the application itself is appalling.
The fact that legal terms are used to obscure the specific implementation is equally appalling. It makes bad patents (ie obvious or overly broad) much more difficult to remove, as "someone well-versed in the field" should not be required to be well-versed in patent law as well.
If you need examples of this, look back over Slashdot discussions of recent patents and see how differently they get interpreted by different people. That should not be happening.
Hehe. I'm of the opinion that the world would be a much happier place if all contracts were written this way as well, but that's a different discussion......
2/There needs to be a requirement for the patent to be for a very specific implementation of the idea. While this does allow for the "widget in a cell phone" and "same widget in an MP3 player" patents (possibly not a good thing), often extensions of an idea come from new implementations of that idea.
This would stop the "we developed this implementation in 1990 and now XXX company makes something that sorta-kinda works the same way. Since they seem to be successful with it, we're going to sue" lawsuits.
As someone watching from outside (ie non-USian), the slippery slope is far, far behind you. You're now in the Crisco coated grain chute. Any hope of derailing the current trend of personal freedom/privacy loss is likely long, long past.
What really disturbs me is how easily the US government is pulling other countries down the same route....
Hmmm. While I have never seen an actual image of the type of boxcutter used in the 9/11 sky-jackings (it's possible they were the rather rare straight-razor type, in which case I'm curious why they were allowed on in carry-on baggage in the first place), the standard boxcutter makes a pretty shitty knife too, from a threatening standpoint. I worked in several packaging places in my youth, and the linked type is the only one I ever ran into in the workplace.
That said, I've never understood how you could successfully high-jack a plane with one.....
Hehe. Yep, s'why I said "I'm not sure how much of it qualifies as "ordinary Mac programs"".
/Applications, and then only for the installation.
When using those definitions, then, no, nothing I've run into require admin access....except a cpl of games that insisted they be installed in
There have been others I've run in the last few months that were that way as well, just CCC was the only one that came to mind....
On a side-note, CCC (and the others) irked me not because they require admin access (I quite agree that they should), but because they assume you are logged in as admin. ie it asks for an admin password, with no available field for admin user name. A better behaviour would be to simply not run at all, with a message stating "you must have admin access" or some such.
Just a couple of minor comments.
There are quite a few pieces of software for OS X that do NOT run properly under non-admin log-in.
Many more pretend to, but don't really. A good example of that is Carbon Copy Cloner, a program that you can run in non-admin mode, but.....since it asks for your admin password, but not your admin log-in name, you can't actually run it....making it functionally useless unless you log out and back in under admin.
Granted, all the software I've seen like this is either shareware or open source and I'm not sure how much of it qualifies as "ordinary Mac programs", but that's another issue entirely......
I do agree with you on the "security through obscurity" issue being an old and tired one, though.
Something I never see pointed out is that there are so many people saying so publicly "OS X is more secure"....you would think that's a massive incentive for someone to write a functioning piece of malware or a virus, just for bragging rights if nothing else.....
Hmmm. Just a post to add some more information to what you said....
At the time, the projectionists were being paid by the number of screens they were dealing with at the same time. ie If a projectionist was running 7 screens at once, he was paid a higher hourly rate than a projectionist who was running 3 screens.
What that meant was they were making anywhere from $18-$33cdn/hr, with the $33/hr being the one reported in the media. AFAICR, there was 1 projectionist in the province making that much, with most making appx $20. The proposed rollbacks were as much as 60% over 3 years, which brought them back to appx $15/hr.....the same level they were left with after the previous 50% rollback 6 or 7 years (IIRC the time frame) before.
They went on strike, were locked out by the theater chains for more than a year, were denied the right to picket on questionable legal grounds, and finally accepted the rollback rather than have the union go bankrupt.
Because they couldn't picket, and because of the $33/hr reported wage very few people supported them....or even knew the strike was still going a cpl of months into it.
As a side note, this wasn't just a BC issue. The rollback was Canada-wide, but only the BC projectionists were protesting it.....
Sorry if this had a mildly ranty tone, that wasn't intended....but this is still a sore point with me. It's also the reason I haven't been to a movie in a Seagram (owner of Universal Studios and Cineplex) or Viacom (owner of Paramount and Famous Players) owned theater since.....
The funny thing is.....that longer warranty for the ATA 'cuda is fairly recent (as in the last cpl/few years). It always kind of appalled/puzzled me that the ATA 'cuda warranty was 1 year or 3 years (depending on how far back we're talking about), while the SCSI 'cuda was 5....
Huh. Out of curiousity, was it an updated/upgraded Knowledge Navigator, or was it a precursor to the eMate? Or something else entirely?
I originally thought it had to be, but it kept getting reported as if it were real at the time.
Oh well, live and learn. :)
The impression I had was that they were found guilty, but ninjas came in the night and removed the spines of the entire Justice Department....so MS was never properly punished.
In fact, it wasn't that long ago (2yrs? 3yrs?) that Dr.Richard Daley was decrying the Mac as a "satanic" computer because it's based on "Darwin" (horrors! not evolution!) which is "open-source" (communism, ya know?). Apple was therefore promoting evolutionism over creationism and should be avoided by all right-thinking Christians. There was a bunch of other "evidence" he brought up as well. Eg the little "devil" mascot from BSD, daemons, etc. Quite a fun read if ya haven't seen it before.
Here is a reprint of his essay. Sorry, the original article from jesussave.us doesn't seem to exist anymore. :)
The disturbing thing is that are probably waaaaay more people like him than either you or I think. Well, that and the fact that this guy is a teacher.....
Are you saying that's a drawback? :)
So basically, this $179,000 that the RIAA payed Orrin Hatch, would be illegal in Canada under the proposed bill
Well, yes and no. While it does stop a direct payment from such organizations, it doesn't stop groups like the RIAA from, say, forming "citizen groups" of 100 "right-thinking individuals" that make "donations" of $10000 per person. That would still achieve that same purpose.
Note, the donation has to be publicly disclosed, but the donors employer, union affiliations, etc don't have to be.
All the new regulations really do is make the money-trail harder to follow in some ways.
There may well be others available from them, I don't have the patience to dig through the nasty site layout today. ^^
When SJ returned to Apple in '97, there was a big pile of outstanding issues with Apple. One of them was a series of law-suits against Microsoft. Another was securing a viable third-party software future for the Mac (read...like it or not, we need Office). Yet another was that Apple was racking up consistent losses quarter after quarter.
After a series of negotiations, a settlement was reached between Apple and Microsoft....Apple dropped the patent law-suit they had outstanding against Microsoft, and agreed to make Internet Explorer the default browser for the OS. In return, Microsoft bought $150 million of non-voting stock (that was to be held for x number of years), and agreed to continue development of Office Mac for a further 5 years.
At the time, while Apple was definitely losing money consistently, they were in no real danger of going under....in fact they had roughly $1.2 billion in the bank. While that WAS an all-time low of cash on hand for Apple, the quarterly losses were (with one quarter's exception) relatively small (as were the few quarterly profits). On average, the profits and losses were in the $50-100 million range. The problem was, there were more losses than profits, and Q2 '97 was especially bad....loss of $700 million (that's why the cash on hand was less than $2 billion for the first time ever). Those factors (stock purchase, losses, one really bad quarter) led a bunch of Dvorak-style "journalists" to run around screaming that Microsoft was "propping" Apple up, etc, etc. Unfortunately too many in the Windows world take the word of these "journalists" as gospel. As a result, everybody "knows" that Microsoft owns a part of Apple.
Something that also never seems to get mentioned is that, before Jobs returned, Apple had done relatively little to cut costs back. That is what brought Apple back into consistent profits again...simplifying the line-up, ditching the clones, ditching unprofitable product (Newton, etc). In short, it really was pretty simple for Jobs to staunch the slow leak that Apple was experiencing.
As a final note, as far as I can tell (at least all the reports I've found have said so) Microsoft sold off all that stock the minute they could, and at a healthy profit. I believe the term for those was 3 years, which would make it back in 2001.
Here are some links if ya want..... Cnet story from the time, Wired article from the time. Or......Google is your friend, if ya wanna dig for yourself. ^^
1/ plug in device
2/ OS checks to ensure that you have a "valid" license for that device
3/ if license is not valid go to step 20
4/ attempt to connect to the vendors website
5/ if contact fails go to step 20
6/ check with vendor to ensure that license is valid
7/ if license is not valid go to step 20
8/ check that vendors license is valid and up-to-date
9/ if license is not valid go to step 20
10/ check that vendor is paid-in-full member of the It Just Works(TM) program
11/ if license is not valid go to step 20
12/ attempt to download driver from vendor
13/ if download fails go to step 20
14/ install driver on client machine
15/ if install fails go to step 20
16/ request user to reboot machine
17/ final check for valid license for all components and software on machine at restart
18/ if any license is found not valid go to step 20
19/ "Lucky", the helpful animated llama, appears and announces "Your new device is ready for use. Have a nice day." End of install, ignore step 20
20/ "Lucky", the helpful animated cigarette, appears and announces "I'm sorry, but Microsoft has determined that you are a loathesome pirate. Your system will now shut down permanently. If you feel that this was in error, please contact your Microsoft representative at 555-555-5555....$5 per minute usage charge may apply. Have nice day."
The difference between this and what happened before is the layers of "security" checks and that it will all happen auto-magically in the background....meaning that it only takes 5 minutes to fuck up your machine instead of the 15-30 it previously did. And it'll make a MUCH bigger mess of things.
See? It Just Works(TM)....for Microsoft. ^^
PS oops, almost forgot (this IS Slashdot, after all).......21/ profit even more!
Off-hand I don't know of a contact, but if you're really serious about it, I would expect Apple's website to have the info readily available, probably here http://www.apple.com/contact/ or linked from that page. Even a general message to service would likely get to the right person.
I do know that they will take any contact about it quite seriously, as they've had problems with both resellers and service centers doing things improperly in the past....s'why that rule is there.
Funny enough, I received the email right after they announced the "extreme-i" service which does state a cap of 50gig (up+down). Same as the low-end "commercial" service.
As for Telus, they do state the (very low...5gig was it? Can't remember) limits for their services. Admittedly, I have heard from several people that they don't track it...but that doesn't mean they won't start at some point. I'm guessing at the point where they realize they can make more money off of you......
In all likelihood, the repair company's contract stated that only the people with certs should have been touching Apple machines.
Yes, I agree that it's possible the contract said no such thing, but this is just as likely (well, more likely IMO) as your assertion that Apple was lying.
Hehe. Guess I should've dug deeper before posting. :)
If so, and your neighbourhod is around Main and 6th I can tell you exactly why it happened.....