.... whose business model does not depend on a EULA....
I did not know that a EULA is part of any business model, since anybody, including a 10-year-old can install any software in any computer. I have not heard that 10 year olds can enter into a binding legal agreement of any sort. Besides, does clicking a mouse or tearing some plastic wrapping constitute an agreement?
Apple can fix this whole problem very quickly by simply removing all retail copies of their OSX from the market and selling upgrades only to customers who can prove that they already own a genuine Apple Computer.
....I'm sure that would take far more time and money than they can muster...
Why could companies like Dell or HP not unify behind a version of Linux, write all the appropriate drivers for their hardware and start selling a complete computer system, like Apple does. Right now, everybody is selling only half computers, with the software made by third-party.
....Because I would like to build my own machine that runs OS X.....
Apple has known for a long time about people like you and have never sicced their lawyers on any of them and most likely won't ever do that. Only, if you started manufacturing them in your basement or garage, trying to make money, that their lawyers with spring into action.
(..to not actively attempt to sabotage my system...)
There is no evidence whatsoever that they do this, even with the iPhone, but their software is written for their hardware not yours. Therefore, if your hardware is not exactly like theirs, which is most likely true, then it is highly likely that their next update will not work correctly on non-Apple hardware.
...That restricting OSX to apple approved hardware is anti-competitive might have a chance...
That doesn't even make sense, because that would mean Honda could be forced to allow the installation of their engines in Fords and if they did not, be accused of being anticompetitive.
Wow, that sounds like a great way to sell Linux to the masses. Now all you have to do is a) persuade some company such as Dell or HP to put Linux on all their computer systems they sell and b) persuade them to run your ads on every TV network and on many video web sites.
Then, maybe enough normal, non-geek computer buyers might buy enough such computers to make it worth for companies to spend all the money it would cost to run your fabulous ads you have come up with.
....Stepping up awareness, dropping Linux down to a more "common user"-attainable status will make it more acceptable for common users and corporate fat cats alike.....
Linux may be a good product, but making people aware of any product, (advertising) costs gobs of money. Nobody will spend piles of money unless they see a way to make mountains of more money. Therefore, a company, such as Dell of HP must be somehow persuaded to put a good flavor of Linux on their wares and then invest in some clever advertising to step up awareness that hopefully translates into many sales.
Until someone with serious money is willing to do this, Linux, no matter how good it is, will not be what computer customers will ask for at their friendly computer retailer. Apple realized this and made their own retail stores and are spending some of their considerable piles of money on advertising. That is a big reason that Macs, especially their consumer laptops are selling still rather well, despite the dismal economic conditions. Apple also needs to sell fewer units for the same profits, because they sell a better product to those who value quality. They do not cater to the rock-bottom computer buyers.
If all I wanted to do is only what many computer users do, get email, surf the 'net and play a few media files, I'd get an iTouch, not some cheap, flimsy netbook or rock-bottom priced PC. It will do these things as well or better than most rock-bottom Windows PCs or netbooks. If I also needed a new phone, the iPhone, basically a handheld computer with thousands of software programs, could substitute for most things that a cheap Windows PC can do. What netbook or rock-bottom PC will allow a user to go almost anywhere and still surf the net, get email, know where they are, play many fun games, watch video, listen to radio or music files and even phone their friends or business associates? All that and it fits in a shirt pocket. No wonder these gadgets are selling like hotcakes.
....The city's stated goal is supposedly to increase safety....
Supposedly is right. These devices are really nothing more than automated road tax collection systems, no different than an electronic toll booth. Safety is the excuse, but revenue is the reason for the existence of these technologies used by governments.
No it is not, but just an extra road tax. Justice isn't involved in any way shape or form. If it a speeding ticket, you basically get taxed extra for the privilege or fun of driving fast.
...Traffic cops are one of the most effective means of law enforcement...
Indeed, around here they still do it the old fashioned way. No Hitech crap. The cops do have radar and most of them, are quite polite when they make you sign the promise to show up in court or pay the fine. Sometimes they will also let the offender get off with only a warning.
Do you want to spend whatever time and resources are allotted to you enriching the pharma-medical establishment? I suspect you can find a better, more enjoyable use for the money you shovel their way.
Indeed, despite all our medical advances, the human life span isn't really longer than what Moses wrote more than 30 centuries ago:
Psalm 90:10 We can expect seventy years, or maybe eighty, if we are healthy, but even our best years bring trouble and sorrow. Suddenly our time is up, and we disappear.
Don't take life and yourself too seriously, because you'll never get out of it alive. None of us have a guarantee we will see the next day.
...And, yes, the big pharma companies are greedy, self-serving bastards, but at least they're doing the research...
into natural substances they can alter a bit and then patent the resulting compound. Then they make obscene profits at the expense of suffering, ill people. Their research is not directed at curing the sick, but mostly treating their symptoms. If their medicines truly cured a illness, then their profits would come to an end. If however they can merely treat people, then they can sell their patented medicines forever or at least until the patent runs out and there's no more big money to be made.
....Hence the reason they're not allowed to claim to cure anything....
That is only true in the United States, where the FDA, being in the pocket of the big pharmaceutical companies makes the rules. After all, the FDA has allowed some of these companies to sell some rather dangerous drugs and later forced these drugs to be recalled. In European countries for example natural remedies and extracts are well researched, advertised and used extensively. Most of them are required to be sold in pharmacies and some are available by prescription from a doctor only.
...So what's better, the natural herb or the pill, if they contain the same chemical?....
Unlike a patented pharmaceutical product, there is no big profit in a natural substance, because these cannot be patented. However, if the drug company can isolate the main active ingredient in a natural herb, they can alter it slightly and then patent the resulting compound. Sometimes, that "minor. slight" alteration can cause unpleasant side effects that are absent from the natural substance. Besides the main active ingredient in any given herb, there are usually other accompanying substances that are also necessary or at least helpful. For example, when you get your vitamin C from an orange, or other natural fruit, there are certain substances called bioflavonoids, which enhance the effectiveness of the vitamin.
Therefore, in order for a pill to be profitable, it cannot, by definition, be exactly the same as the natural substance. Reputable companies that have been in business for a long time, extracting and packaging nature-based products, have learned how to standardize their products quite well. The big pharmaceutical outfits are not the only ones that have the know-how to do this.
...Would you like to be told eat some substance that will....
inhibit, block or slow an otherwise normal function or level of a needed substance? Almost ALL drugs taken for LONG term block or inhibit some designed in enzyme, receptor or biochemical function of the body. Can that EVER be good? If you have pain, blocking the pain with a drug will not fix the reason you have pain. If that happens occasionally, it might be OK, but if the pain is persistent, taking a painkiller is dangerous.
Remember, doctors treat and practice, but clowns can cure your sadness with laughter as they perform their silly acts.
Yes, if it was an non-natural substance that could be patented. If no patent could be obtained, anyone could harvest, purity and package it. It would therefore be open to competition, thereby inexpensive and unprofitable. The heavily advertised drugs are all patented medicines with exorbitant prices. These drugs are hugely profitable to the patent holder.
... as long as they've been thoroughly tested, and proven both safe and effective....
You mean like some of the prescription drugs of the big pharmaceutical companies? If you would study how most long term drugs work in the body, you'd learn that all of them, such as statins for example, operate by blocking or inhibiting an otherwise needed or normal function of the body. Anti cholesterol drugs all work by inhibiting the production of vitally needed cholesterol. Certain blood pressure medications are called calcium channel BLOCKERS or beta blockers. Others are ACE INHIBITORS.
Generally, in other sciences or technology, when a normally designed function is blocked or inhibited, that is NEVER good. If you block or inhibit the oil or brake light in your car, or block or bypass a vital interlock function of a machine or complex system over LONG TERM, the results are NEVER GOOD. Sometimes, in an acute situation such drugs can help for short term, just like sometimes it is necessary to inhibit or block an interlock, so the machine can continue to run for a short time before the normal maintenance and repair gets done. However, it is these long term blocking drugs that are prescribed to millions, that are the most profitable for the big drug companies.
All these drugs have supposedly been tested by "scientific" procedures to determine safety and efficacy. Statins for example DO lower cholesterol, but the overall mortality rate of those who take these drugs long term is the same or higher than those who do not. Can anything that blocks or inhibits an enzyme, various chemical receptors or otherwise hinders normal body chemistry be good for anybody LONG TERM?
In ancient China doctors got paid if they kept their clients healthy. If one got sick, their doctor had to work without pay to get them well again. In our western medical system, doctors and hospitals have no incentive to cure people, but on the contrary, keep treating them forever, if possible, especially if the patient has good insurance. If mandatory health insurance is forced on everybody, will that change for the better? I doubt it.
Do you really believe that the medico-pharma establishment would welcome the discovery of one or more natural (non-patentable) substances that would eliminate cancer, even if only in anyone under 70 years old?
And of course, nature pays attention to human consensus! History of science throughout the ages demonstrates that consensus is mostly wrong. For centuries the consensus was that the earth is flat, at the center of the universe, the universe has always existed, disease is caused by "bad air" and on and on and on. What makes us incredibly arrogant humans of the 20th and 21st century so sure that we are right "this time" in contrast to our ancestors? Truly, the more we discover about the universe, the life therein, our own nature and make-up, the more anyone who is even remotely honest, will come to the conclusion that the questions are far outpacing the answers.
Does the sun shine by burning wood, thermonuclear nuclear fusion or is there an external galactic or extragalactic power source? The fact is, we don't really know, but are guessing.
We think we know that opposite electric charges attract. What we don't know is that why then negative electrons and positive protons don't collide and merge and destruct in a flash of energy, obliterating every atom in the universe. There are theories, but there has never been an EXPERIMENT that shows why atoms don't self destruct or why the law of attraction of opposite charges should not apply to atoms. All we observe is that atoms work, yet appear to violate some other principles we observe by experiments. As to what is really going on -- well we have theories (guesses), but are these really right? Who knows?
In some ways, science is worse off than the blind men trying to determine the nature of the elephant. Each of them had a different theory, but if or when they came to a consensus, that would not be right either. Global warming is less accessible to study than the elephant.
...Our Ipod touches are not ours, never ours, and never will be...
Our toasters are not ours, never ours, and never will be. iPods and toasters are both appliances. One plays music and another browns bread slices. One can be programmed and one cannot. If you had a programmable toaster, would you also badmouth the toaster manufacturer, saying they had an iron grip and you did not really own that toaster you bought at the appliance store?
....on many technical levels they are inferior, especially the ipod....
That is why the technically superior Zune was such a hit! It was the one that let users "squirt" DRM infested songs to other Zunes. That is why they are selling like hotcakes and nobody has ever heard of these boring gadgets called iPods.
...in the Apple world, "you get what you paid for" doesn't apply...
That is possibly true a the lower end garden variety consumer computers, not for top of the line professional machinery. Even so, I did look for a long time at Apple's refurbished list until the system I wanted came up one day. I jumped on it and got my dual-quad core system for $2400. including shipping. It came with the same warranty as a new one and has worked flawlessly since I got it.
...Though I suppose Apple being Apple they could take an iPhone...
and make a "dock unit" with screen/keyboard, bigger battery and appropriate software which existing iPhones/iTouch handhelds slide into. The millions of existing users of these gadgets would be able to expand their handy pocket computers into net-books whenever they wanted to.
Here is an opportunity for an enterprising company. Make a "dock unit" for the iPhone/iTouch which has a screen/keyboard and battery. I don't think Apple's lawyers would get antsy if someone turned Apple's handheld computers into a net-book this way. How much do screens and keyboards cost? After all, how many "sound docks" are available for iPods?
Slashdot Mirror
.... whose business model does not depend on a EULA....
I did not know that a EULA is part of any business model, since anybody, including a 10-year-old can install any software in any computer. I have not heard that 10 year olds can enter into a binding legal agreement of any sort. Besides, does clicking a mouse or tearing some plastic wrapping constitute an agreement?
Apple can fix this whole problem very quickly by simply removing all retail copies of their OSX from the market and selling upgrades only to customers who can prove that they already own a genuine Apple Computer.
....I'm sure that would take far more time and money than they can muster...
Why could companies like Dell or HP not unify behind a version of Linux, write all the appropriate drivers for their hardware and start selling a complete computer system, like Apple does. Right now, everybody is selling only half computers, with the software made by third-party.
....I'd love to use it at home but I just can't afford a Mac ....
I'd love to drive a BMW, but I can't afford one, so I have to be content with a Toyota. You will just have to be content with your Dell.
....Because I would like to build my own machine that runs OS X.....
Apple has known for a long time about people like you and have never sicced their lawyers on any of them and most likely won't ever do that. Only, if you started manufacturing them in your basement or garage, trying to make money, that their lawyers with spring into action.
(..to not actively attempt to sabotage my system...)
There is no evidence whatsoever that they do this, even with the iPhone, but their software is written for their hardware not yours. Therefore, if your hardware is not exactly like theirs, which is most likely true, then it is highly likely that their next update will not work correctly on non-Apple hardware.
...That restricting OSX to apple approved hardware is anti-competitive might have a chance...
That doesn't even make sense, because that would mean Honda could be forced to allow the installation of their engines in Fords and if they did not, be accused of being anticompetitive.
....Linux. There are no limits...
Wow, that sounds like a great way to sell Linux to the masses. Now all you have to do is a) persuade some company such as Dell or HP to put Linux on all their computer systems they sell and b) persuade them to run your ads on every TV network and on many video web sites.
Then, maybe enough normal, non-geek computer buyers might buy enough such computers to make it worth for companies to spend all the money it would cost to run your fabulous ads you have come up with.
....Stepping up awareness, dropping Linux down to a more "common user"-attainable status will make it more acceptable for common users and corporate fat cats alike.....
Linux may be a good product, but making people aware of any product, (advertising) costs gobs of money. Nobody will spend piles of money unless they see a way to make mountains of more money. Therefore, a company, such as Dell of HP must be somehow persuaded to put a good flavor of Linux on their wares and then invest in some clever advertising to step up awareness that hopefully translates into many sales.
Until someone with serious money is willing to do this, Linux, no matter how good it is, will not be what computer customers will ask for at their friendly computer retailer. Apple realized this and made their own retail stores and are spending some of their considerable piles of money on advertising. That is a big reason that Macs, especially their consumer laptops are selling still rather well, despite the dismal economic conditions. Apple also needs to sell fewer units for the same profits, because they sell a better product to those who value quality. They do not cater to the rock-bottom computer buyers.
If all I wanted to do is only what many computer users do, get email, surf the 'net and play a few media files, I'd get an iTouch, not some cheap, flimsy netbook or rock-bottom priced PC. It will do these things as well or better than most rock-bottom Windows PCs or netbooks. If I also needed a new phone, the iPhone, basically a handheld computer with thousands of software programs, could substitute for most things that a cheap Windows PC can do. What netbook or rock-bottom PC will allow a user to go almost anywhere and still surf the net, get email, know where they are, play many fun games, watch video, listen to radio or music files and even phone their friends or business associates? All that and it fits in a shirt pocket. No wonder these gadgets are selling like hotcakes.
....The city's stated goal is supposedly to increase safety....
Supposedly is right. These devices are really nothing more than automated road tax collection systems, no different than an electronic toll booth. Safety is the excuse, but revenue is the reason for the existence of these technologies used by governments.
...It's a perversion of justice...
No it is not, but just an extra road tax. Justice isn't involved in any way shape or form. If it a speeding ticket, you basically get taxed extra for the privilege or fun of driving fast.
...Traffic cops are one of the most effective means of law enforcement...
Indeed, around here they still do it the old fashioned way. No Hitech crap. The cops do have radar and most of them, are quite polite when they make you sign the promise to show up in court or pay the fine. Sometimes they will also let the offender get off with only a warning.
....What's your point?...
Do you want to spend whatever time and resources are allotted to you enriching the pharma-medical establishment? I suspect you can find a better, more enjoyable use for the money you shovel their way.
Indeed, despite all our medical advances, the human life span isn't really longer than what Moses wrote more than 30 centuries ago:
Psalm 90:10 We can expect seventy years, or maybe eighty, if we are healthy, but even our best years bring trouble and sorrow. Suddenly our time is up, and we disappear.
Don't take life and yourself too seriously, because you'll never get out of it alive. None of us have a guarantee we will see the next day.
...And, yes, the big pharma companies are greedy, self-serving bastards, but at least they're doing the research...
into natural substances they can alter a bit and then patent the resulting compound. Then they make obscene profits at the expense of suffering, ill people. Their research is not directed at curing the sick, but mostly treating their symptoms. If their medicines truly cured a illness, then their profits would come to an end. If however they can merely treat people, then they can sell their patented medicines forever or at least until the patent runs out and there's no more big money to be made.
....Hence the reason they're not allowed to claim to cure anything....
That is only true in the United States, where the FDA, being in the pocket of the big pharmaceutical companies makes the rules. After all, the FDA has allowed some of these companies to sell some rather dangerous drugs and later forced these drugs to be recalled. In European countries for example natural remedies and extracts are well researched, advertised and used extensively. Most of them are required to be sold in pharmacies and some are available by prescription from a doctor only.
...So what's better, the natural herb or the pill, if they contain the same chemical?....
Unlike a patented pharmaceutical product, there is no big profit in a natural substance, because these cannot be patented. However, if the drug company can isolate the main active ingredient in a natural herb, they can alter it slightly and then patent the resulting compound. Sometimes, that "minor. slight" alteration can cause unpleasant side effects that are absent from the natural substance. Besides the main active ingredient in any given herb, there are usually other accompanying substances that are also necessary or at least helpful. For example, when you get your vitamin C from an orange, or other natural fruit, there are certain substances called bioflavonoids, which enhance the effectiveness of the vitamin.
Therefore, in order for a pill to be profitable, it cannot, by definition, be exactly the same as the natural substance. Reputable companies that have been in business for a long time, extracting and packaging nature-based products, have learned how to standardize their products quite well. The big pharmaceutical outfits are not the only ones that have the know-how to do this.
...Would you like to be told eat some substance that will ....
inhibit, block or slow an otherwise normal function or level of a needed substance? Almost ALL drugs taken for LONG term block or inhibit some designed in enzyme, receptor or biochemical function of the body. Can that EVER be good? If you have pain, blocking the pain with a drug will not fix the reason you have pain. If that happens occasionally, it might be OK, but if the pain is persistent, taking a painkiller is dangerous.
Remember, doctors treat and practice, but clowns can cure your sadness with laughter as they perform their silly acts.
...Of course they would...
Yes, if it was an non-natural substance that could be patented. If no patent could be obtained, anyone could harvest, purity and package it. It would therefore be open to competition, thereby inexpensive and unprofitable. The heavily advertised drugs are all patented medicines with exorbitant prices. These drugs are hugely profitable to the patent holder.
... as long as they've been thoroughly tested, and proven both safe and effective....
You mean like some of the prescription drugs of the big pharmaceutical companies? If you would study how most long term drugs work in the body, you'd learn that all of them, such as statins for example, operate by blocking or inhibiting an otherwise needed or normal function of the body. Anti cholesterol drugs all work by inhibiting the production of vitally needed cholesterol. Certain blood pressure medications are called calcium channel BLOCKERS or beta blockers. Others are ACE INHIBITORS.
Generally, in other sciences or technology, when a normally designed function is blocked or inhibited, that is NEVER good. If you block or inhibit the oil or brake light in your car, or block or bypass a vital interlock function of a machine or complex system over LONG TERM, the results are NEVER GOOD. Sometimes, in an acute situation such drugs can help for short term, just like sometimes it is necessary to inhibit or block an interlock, so the machine can continue to run for a short time before the normal maintenance and repair gets done. However, it is these long term blocking drugs that are prescribed to millions, that are the most profitable for the big drug companies.
All these drugs have supposedly been tested by "scientific" procedures to determine safety and efficacy. Statins for example DO lower cholesterol, but the overall mortality rate of those who take these drugs long term is the same or higher than those who do not. Can anything that blocks or inhibits an enzyme, various chemical receptors or otherwise hinders normal body chemistry be good for anybody LONG TERM?
In ancient China doctors got paid if they kept their clients healthy. If one got sick, their doctor had to work without pay to get them well again. In our western medical system, doctors and hospitals have no incentive to cure people, but on the contrary, keep treating them forever, if possible, especially if the patient has good insurance. If mandatory health insurance is forced on everybody, will that change for the better? I doubt it.
Do you really believe that the medico-pharma establishment would welcome the discovery of one or more natural (non-patentable) substances that would eliminate cancer, even if only in anyone under 70 years old?
...This is why the consensus is....
And of course, nature pays attention to human consensus! History of science throughout the ages demonstrates that consensus is mostly wrong. For centuries the consensus was that the earth is flat, at the center of the universe, the universe has always existed, disease is caused by "bad air" and on and on and on. What makes us incredibly arrogant humans of the 20th and 21st century so sure that we are right "this time" in contrast to our ancestors? Truly, the more we discover about the universe, the life therein, our own nature and make-up, the more anyone who is even remotely honest, will come to the conclusion that the questions are far outpacing the answers.
Does the sun shine by burning wood, thermonuclear nuclear fusion or is there an external galactic or extragalactic power source? The fact is, we don't really know, but are guessing.
We think we know that opposite electric charges attract. What we don't know is that why then negative electrons and positive protons don't collide and merge and destruct in a flash of energy, obliterating every atom in the universe. There are theories, but there has never been an EXPERIMENT that shows why atoms don't self destruct or why the law of attraction of opposite charges should not apply to atoms. All we observe is that atoms work, yet appear to violate some other principles we observe by experiments. As to what is really going on -- well we have theories (guesses), but are these really right? Who knows?
In some ways, science is worse off than the blind men trying to determine the nature of the elephant. Each of them had a different theory, but if or when they came to a consensus, that would not be right either. Global warming is less accessible to study than the elephant.
...if your toaster came with the kind of EULA an iphone comes with, yes...
except the EULA's are not worth the paper they are printed on or the electricity it takes to display them.
...Our Ipod touches are not ours, never ours, and never will be ...
Our toasters are not ours, never ours, and never will be. iPods and toasters are both appliances. One plays music and another browns bread slices. One can be programmed and one cannot. If you had a programmable toaster, would you also badmouth the toaster manufacturer, saying they had an iron grip and you did not really own that toaster you bought at the appliance store?
....on many technical levels they are inferior, especially the ipod....
That is why the technically superior Zune was such a hit! It was the one that let users "squirt" DRM infested songs to other Zunes. That is why they are selling like hotcakes and nobody has ever heard of these boring gadgets called iPods.
...in the Apple world, "you get what you paid for" doesn't apply...
That is possibly true a the lower end garden variety consumer computers, not for top of the line professional machinery. Even so, I did look for a long time at Apple's refurbished list until the system I wanted came up one day. I jumped on it and got my dual-quad core system for $2400. including shipping. It came with the same warranty as a new one and has worked flawlessly since I got it.
...Though I suppose Apple being Apple they could take an iPhone...
and make a "dock unit" with screen/keyboard, bigger battery and appropriate software which existing iPhones/iTouch handhelds slide into. The millions of existing users of these gadgets would be able to expand their handy pocket computers into net-books whenever they wanted to.
...Apple can do 1 and 2, and 3 but 4, ...
Here is an opportunity for an enterprising company. Make a "dock unit" for the iPhone/iTouch which has a screen/keyboard and battery. I don't think Apple's lawyers would get antsy if someone turned Apple's handheld computers into a net-book this way. How much do screens and keyboards cost? After all, how many "sound docks" are available for iPods?
...If *Apple* tried to release a netbook,...
They already make two, the iPhone and iTouch. Maybe they'll add a larger screen/keyboard unit for these to dock into.