These are the sections, which I emphasized them in my original post, that lead me to reply to you.
NVIDIA is not responsible for any interoperability or compatibility issues that may arise when (a) products, software, or options not supported by NVIDIA are used; (b) configurations not supported, provided or approved by NVIDIA are used;
and this within the same paragraph:
NVIDIA will have no warranty obligation with respect to the following: (a) Warranted Product hardware that has no defects in materials or workmanship,... (f) defects or damage to the Warranted Product arising from or related to: (1) any modifications, alterations, tampering, repair, or servicing by any party other than NVIDIA or its authorized representatives; (2) handling, transit, storage, installation, testing, maintenance, or use not in accordance with the Warranted Product documentation;... (4) third party software or viruses;
Well the logic being that they could say that you messing with the firmware or boot configuration can cause the unit to become inoperative and therefore unreasonable or expected use. You'd have to counter their argument in court or arbitration.
Of course, they don't need to do this if they explicitly state what their warranty doesn't cover.
You do have a point. However they did explicitly state the terms of their warranty and make it available prior to the sale. It appears that they satisfied the MMWA by disclosing the conditions that will void the warranty.
IANAL but after reading the link you provided, I have doubts that you're completely correct.
(All replies not taking the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act [wikipedia.org] into consideration will be cheerfully ignored under the presumption of idiocy on the part of the respondent.)
I did see a lot of details about enforcing "full warranties" however NVIDIA only provides a "limited warranty" and they explicitly state:
NVIDIA does not guarantee that the operation of the Warranted Product will be uninterrupted or error free. NVIDIA is not responsible for any interoperability or compatibility issues that may arise when (a) products, software, or options not supported by NVIDIA are used; (b) configurations not supported, provided or approved by NVIDIA are used; (c) parts intended for one system are installed in another system of different make or model. NVIDIA will have no warranty obligation with respect to the following: (a) Warranted Product hardware that has no defects in materials or workmanship, (b) software, games or applications, (c) cosmetic damage; (d) normal wear and tear; (e) expendable or consumable parts; (f) defects or damage to the Warranted Product arising from or related to: (1) any modifications, alterations, tampering, repair, or servicing by any party other than NVIDIA or its authorized representatives; (2) handling, transit, storage, installation, testing, maintenance, or use not in accordance with the Warranted Product documentation; (3) abuse, negligence, neglect, accidents, or misuse; (4) third party software or viruses; or software loss or data loss that may occur during repair or replacement; (5) fire or spillage of food or liquid, external electrical fault, or any acts of God (such as, but not limited to, lightning), or any other external factor.
NVIDIA IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGE TO OR LOSS OF ANY PROGRAMS, DATA, OR REMOVABLE STORAGE MEDIA. NVIDIA IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RESTORATION OR REINSTALLATION OF ANY PROGRAMS OR DATA OTHER THAN SOFTWARE INSTALLED BY NVIDIA WHEN THE PRODUCT IS MANUFACTURED.
Even if they offered it as a full warranty, this appears to comply with Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act that you linked since:
Under a full warranty, in the case of a defect, malfunction, or failure to conform with the written warranty, the warrantor:... may not exclude or limit consequential damages for a breach of any written or implied warranty on the product, unless the exclusion or limitation conspicuously appears on the face of the warranty;...
Also, the act isn't exactly bullet-proof protection since it contains the following:
The federal minimum standards for full warranties are waived if the warrantor can show that the problem associated with a warranted consumer product was caused by damage while in the possession of the consumer, or by unreasonable use, including a failure to provide reasonable and necessary maintenance.
You'd have to prove that modifying the firmware isn't unreasonable use. It would be cheaper just to buy a new $300 device.
The spy agencies are part of the national defences and are responsible for the security of their country. If they have clear evidence that malicious circuits are being widely deployed against their own people then they absolutely do have a duty to make this public. If the evidence is unclear then they have an absolute duty of secrecy and investigation until they can prove that clearly. At that point they should be banning all products of the manufacturers responsible and ensuring that they are removed from all public networks at the purchaser's or manufacturer's expense.
The agency is not obligated to wait for clear evidence in making their purchase decisions. They can err on the side of caution. I haven't seen them make any accusations outside of that they are no longer purchasing computer equipment from Chinese manufactures due to security concerns. From what I can tell, the media is the one deducing that Lenovo being a Chinese brand computer manufacturer is barred from being purchased. All the articles that make direct references to Lenovo appear to be citing the article from the Australian Financial Review that I linked above. Lenovo does make a good news article since they are the Chinese brand with the most recognition in the west and they purchased the PC division from IBM back in 2005.
This is mostly news in the UK and Australia. HP and Dell have been the preferred manufactures in the US.
I've always understood it to be "couldn't care less". I assume, in some areas of the US, the accent made it hard to enunciate the "n't" part and it was dropped in those parts of the US in the 1960s. Possibly due to someone mishearing the saying and then perpetuating the incorrect form in text.
The spy agency do not have to make their evidence public. The news is only reporting that the spy agencies have banned Lenovo equipment from being used on THEIR network. This doesn't affect anyone outside of that network from being able to buy Lenovo.
I see nothing wrong with insisting that all hardware and software used within the closed and secured network are written, assembled or manufactured from a member country with all vetting reasonable possible prior to use.
Yes, sure, that's why it suddenly deemed urgent to perform massive brutal codectomy for licensing reasons.
From the FAQ from OpenOffice.org
The source code for OpenOffice.org will be nearly all the source code in development for StarOffice. The source code not available for OpenOffice.org is source code or binaries which have been licensed to Sun Microsystems from external parties which Sun Microsystems is not entitled to distribute. Any code which cannot be distributed has been identified and removed.
These changes were done by Sun and then Oracle to allow them to distribute and relicense the code base. Oracle gave OpenOffice to Apache foundation with the blessing of IBM. Apache OpenOffice is not a derivative of Oracle's OpenOffice like LibreOffice. Instead it is the actual property transferred to them from Oracle.
You don't protect your investment with a license that makes it impossible to use the product truly freely. What you are doing is driving investors away.
Depends on your investment. LibreOffice has invested volunteer hours as well as some sponsored work into making what they believe is a open and free product. The GPL protects their investment by ensuring that any work based on their efforts will also be an open and free product.
OpenOffice has paid developers. The license allows the sponsor companies to make their own commercial versions with unique features as a way to get a return on their investment. Think Eclipse not XFree86.
LibreOffice is a derivative of OpenOffice. It has features and bug fixes unique to its distribution. LibreOffice uses the GPL to protect their return on investment and not to specifically harm OpenOffice. I'm sure there are some people in LibreOffice that do think that way, but I think LibreOffice needs OpenOffice more than they care to admit.
Apache developers are free to take changes LO developers make, as long as they stay under the MPL. Where's the problem?
The problem is your reading comprehension. I didn't say that LibreOffice was bad. I was replying to greg's comment and stated that trying "to starve the original of resources and its user base" by one-way code copying is not a great strategy because it risks having LibreOffice appear to simply be a downstream GPLed version of OpenOffice.
The point is moot since LibreOffice appears to want a better office suite and I'm sure they aren't out to get anyone especially something that actually benefits them.
LibreOffice is a derivative of OpenOffice.org [.] Apache OpenOffice is a somewhat younger derivative of OpenOffice.org
Apache OpenOffice is not a younger derivative of OpenOffice.org. AOO is OpenOffice under an Apache license.
It's not that great of a strategy. LibreOffice is a derivative of OpenOffice and they do risk appearing to be simply a downstream GPLed version of OpenOffice.
Dish Network's entire business model is based on re-broadcasting something. They negotiated with the major networks including OTA for the right to rebroadcast thier content. This is how cable television works. Dish Network despite being satellite based offers the same functionality. I can get my local channels via their satellite dish. I was able to watch local television despite being in an RV at a sporting event outside normal broadcast range (but still within the window of the satellite transponder).
The problem was that the agreement didn't include the right to remove commercials from the rebroadcast. However this is not Dish Network was doing. They were simply offering the ability to skip commercials not deleting them. Technically this is their version of on-demand content that is available quicker and you don't get fast forward disabled. They just pretend that you have a DVR.
...and yet there are still foreign born and educated that are qualified to practice medicine in the US. I don't mind they seem to have a better bed side manner.
And we get back to my original point, picking the lesser of two evils:
Should I stick with the incumbent even though I don't agree with him on some of the major issues and continue to benefit from his senior positions in committee when it comes to federal dollars entering my state?
Or should I vote for the new guy who made a lot of promises that seems difficult to keep, has views similar to mine, and is now a freshman in a minority party with no committee positions capable of keeping current projects going or bringing in new funds?
Despite what idealists believe, the job of the representative is to benefit his constituents. You may not agree with a senator or house member from my state but he is doing everything needed to keep us happy. In the end, that is what really counts.
This is my current experience with mine too. However during the prep stage it is making room on my time machine drive to receive the changes. Consolidating the older files will take time.
When my drive was new and had plenty of space, the prep stage was much shorter.
I guess this where common sense should take over. If the price for a "apple" product is too good to be true then it probably isn't a true apple product.
You will be electrocuted before the cable fails. It's likely that only a single leg of the 220V outlet will be forwarded to the phone therefore we are really talking about 110V. You holding the other end of the cable completes the circuit to ground. You will probably die or have serious injury before the load that you introduced melts the cable.
Slashdot Mirror
Let me clarify. Rooting the device doesn't necessarily void the warranty. The warranty doesn't cover you bricking your device while rooting it.
These are the sections, which I emphasized them in my original post, that lead me to reply to you.
and this within the same paragraph:
Well the logic being that they could say that you messing with the firmware or boot configuration can cause the unit to become inoperative and therefore unreasonable or expected use. You'd have to counter their argument in court or arbitration.
Of course, they don't need to do this if they explicitly state what their warranty doesn't cover.
You do have a point. However they did explicitly state the terms of their warranty and make it available prior to the sale. It appears that they satisfied the MMWA by disclosing the conditions that will void the warranty.
I did find this Understanding the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act in a Google search.
IANAL but after reading the link you provided, I have doubts that you're completely correct.
I did see a lot of details about enforcing "full warranties" however NVIDIA only provides a "limited warranty" and they explicitly state:
Even if they offered it as a full warranty, this appears to comply with Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act that you linked since:
Also, the act isn't exactly bullet-proof protection since it contains the following:
You'd have to prove that modifying the firmware isn't unreasonable use. It would be cheaper just to buy a new $300 device.
It's like a Vim developer showing up to work using Emacs.
The agency is not obligated to wait for clear evidence in making their purchase decisions. They can err on the side of caution. I haven't seen them make any accusations outside of that they are no longer purchasing computer equipment from Chinese manufactures due to security concerns. From what I can tell, the media is the one deducing that Lenovo being a Chinese brand computer manufacturer is barred from being purchased. All the articles that make direct references to Lenovo appear to be citing the article from the Australian Financial Review that I linked above. Lenovo does make a good news article since they are the Chinese brand with the most recognition in the west and they purchased the PC division from IBM back in 2005.
This is mostly news in the UK and Australia. HP and Dell have been the preferred manufactures in the US.
I've always understood it to be "couldn't care less". I assume, in some areas of the US, the accent made it hard to enunciate the "n't" part and it was dropped in those parts of the US in the 1960s. Possibly due to someone mishearing the saying and then perpetuating the incorrect form in text.
The most cited column is the one written in the Australian Financial Review: Spy agencies ban Lenovo PCs on security concerns
The spy agency do not have to make their evidence public. The news is only reporting that the spy agencies have banned Lenovo equipment from being used on THEIR network. This doesn't affect anyone outside of that network from being able to buy Lenovo.
I see nothing wrong with insisting that all hardware and software used within the closed and secured network are written, assembled or manufactured from a member country with all vetting reasonable possible prior to use.
No but it will generate traffic in Slashdot's comment section.
Were Diablo 3 preorders inflated by Blizzard giving away copies to longtime players of WoW? That's how I got mine.
From the FAQ from OpenOffice.org
The source code for OpenOffice.org will be nearly all the source code in development for StarOffice. The source code not available for OpenOffice.org is source code or binaries which have been licensed to Sun Microsystems from external parties which Sun Microsystems is not entitled to distribute. Any code which cannot be distributed has been identified and removed.
These changes were done by Sun and then Oracle to allow them to distribute and relicense the code base. Oracle gave OpenOffice to Apache foundation with the blessing of IBM. Apache OpenOffice is not a derivative of Oracle's OpenOffice like LibreOffice. Instead it is the actual property transferred to them from Oracle.
Depends on your investment. LibreOffice has invested volunteer hours as well as some sponsored work into making what they believe is a open and free product. The GPL protects their investment by ensuring that any work based on their efforts will also be an open and free product.
I completely agree. Customer reviews are the main reason I like online shopping.
OpenOffice has paid developers. The license allows the sponsor companies to make their own commercial versions with unique features as a way to get a return on their investment. Think Eclipse not XFree86.
LibreOffice is a derivative of OpenOffice. It has features and bug fixes unique to its distribution. LibreOffice uses the GPL to protect their return on investment and not to specifically harm OpenOffice. I'm sure there are some people in LibreOffice that do think that way, but I think LibreOffice needs OpenOffice more than they care to admit.
The problem is your reading comprehension. I didn't say that LibreOffice was bad. I was replying to greg's comment and stated that trying "to starve the original of resources and its user base" by one-way code copying is not a great strategy because it risks having LibreOffice appear to simply be a downstream GPLed version of OpenOffice.
The point is moot since LibreOffice appears to want a better office suite and I'm sure they aren't out to get anyone especially something that actually benefits them.
Apache OpenOffice is not a younger derivative of OpenOffice.org. AOO is OpenOffice under an Apache license.
It's not that great of a strategy. LibreOffice is a derivative of OpenOffice and they do risk appearing to be simply a downstream GPLed version of OpenOffice.
Dish Network's entire business model is based on re-broadcasting something. They negotiated with the major networks including OTA for the right to rebroadcast thier content. This is how cable television works. Dish Network despite being satellite based offers the same functionality. I can get my local channels via their satellite dish. I was able to watch local television despite being in an RV at a sporting event outside normal broadcast range (but still within the window of the satellite transponder).
The problem was that the agreement didn't include the right to remove commercials from the rebroadcast. However this is not Dish Network was doing. They were simply offering the ability to skip commercials not deleting them. Technically this is their version of on-demand content that is available quicker and you don't get fast forward disabled. They just pretend that you have a DVR.
...and yet there are still foreign born and educated that are qualified to practice medicine in the US. I don't mind they seem to have a better bed side manner.
And we get back to my original point, picking the lesser of two evils:
Should I stick with the incumbent even though I don't agree with him on some of the major issues and continue to benefit from his senior positions in committee when it comes to federal dollars entering my state?
Or should I vote for the new guy who made a lot of promises that seems difficult to keep, has views similar to mine, and is now a freshman in a minority party with no committee positions capable of keeping current projects going or bringing in new funds?
Despite what idealists believe, the job of the representative is to benefit his constituents. You may not agree with a senator or house member from my state but he is doing everything needed to keep us happy. In the end, that is what really counts.
Then just stick to reputable brands and buy from reputable dealers.
This is my current experience with mine too. However during the prep stage it is making room on my time machine drive to receive the changes. Consolidating the older files will take time.
When my drive was new and had plenty of space, the prep stage was much shorter.
True. As I told Chris above, sometimes you have to use common sense.
If in doubt, buy your accessories from reputable sources.
I guess this where common sense should take over. If the price for a "apple" product is too good to be true then it probably isn't a true apple product.
You will be electrocuted before the cable fails. It's likely that only a single leg of the 220V outlet will be forwarded to the phone therefore we are really talking about 110V. You holding the other end of the cable completes the circuit to ground. You will probably die or have serious injury before the load that you introduced melts the cable.
I wouldn't count on the cable acting as a fuse.