This sounds to me like it simply amounts to harassment by legal authorities, after having pressure put on them to "do something" by the movie and/or TV studios.
I know here in the United States, "search and seizure" is a popular law-enforcement tool for the purpose of slowing/stopping activities they can't really find sufficient evidence to prosecute. (All you need is a judge's signature saying it's ok to proceed with a search and seizure, and they can waltz in with the warrant in hand, seizing the "offending" property. Then just lock it away in an evidence locker for a few years, sitting on it and depriving the owner of it. Eventually, sure, they'll probably just return it, claiming "insufficient evidence" to make a case against them - but they accomplished what they were really after.)
Truthfully, I don't even see this particular issue as a "Microsoft only" matter. This makes for a good editorial to generate some "hits" and discussion... but it's ultimately pointless to argue.
I dare you to show me ANY automatic update type scenario for ANY software product on ANY platform where everyone using it is happy to accept all the updates, with the comfort of a full understanding of exactly what's being modified.
One of the most detailed lists of updates/changes I ever recall seeing was the change log IBM used to provide with OS/2 operating system patches. That wasn't an automatic update though. You had to go out and download and apply those yourself. But still, it was amazing how long and detailed those lists were... yet FEW people I knew of running OS/2 really bothered to read any of that. It was more like "Cool, a new fixpack! Let's apply it, because there's a lot of broken stuff in this OS I'm sure hoping they ironed out!"
If the updates you accept start breaking more than they fix for you, then you lose "trust" in them. If not, then your "trust" in them rises. It's that simple, really.
The *other* issue people fail to take into account is how many *older* machines end up being converted over to Linux boxes, despite initially being purchased with Windows on them.
I've worked for two different manufacturing firms now where this happened. The first firm bought exclusively Dell servers, always pre-loaded with a version of Windows server. After the older systems were "retired" from their original uses, they were usually still good, functional machines nobody wanted to throw away. So they'd find up getting reformatted, and used experimentally as Linux boxes.
Where I work now, I took an older PIII class rack-mounted server and turned it into a dedicated web proxy server with site filtering under Linux. (It ran too slow using its original Windows installation to be worth using anymore, but works GREAT in Linux for its new purpose.)
I agree that "a contract is a contract", and it's silly to go to court just because you don't like something you initially, willingly signed up for.
On the other hand though, the provider subsidy story is a little "flimsy" too, at times. For example, when I was with Verizon, I wanted one of the new Treo 650s when it was a brand new phone. Buying it with a 2 year extension on my contract, through Verizon, turned out to STILL be over $100 more expensive than buying the phone outright from some of the dealers selling them on the Internet.
The phone providers seem to like quoting MSRP as the "real price" of the phone, and then knock $100-200 off of that if you sign up for 1 or 2 years with them. Reality is, they're probably still making a profit on the phones after locking you into those contracts, because they're paying nowhere NEAR the MSRP on them.
Seriously, is this meant to be a dig at Apple bricking iPhones that people hacked to use other carriers? Because if we're talking strictly computers here, I don't follow.
My Macbook Pro notebook and my Mac Pro tower both dual boot into Windows, and I used to run Yellow Dog Linux on an older PowerMac with no problems at all. I've certainly used all sorts of different printers, a couple different scanners, and any display I wanted with my current Macs - with no ill effects.
(And as far as the iPhone thing is concerned, I think Apple was pretty up-front with the whole thing. They never forced your phone to take the newer firmware, and even issued a warning giving you the option to cancel out - stating that "unlocked" phones were subject to damage if you continued.)
I'm willing to go with that whole analogy, but I'd add that Mac OS X is akin to a corporation most people generally admire taking in a large share of these free tanks, taking some of the parts off that are unnecessary (or potentially even harmful) to the typical end-user/consumer (say, pulling off a machine gun turret), giving the tank a smooth, comfortable ride, a great sound system inside, and an attractive, sleek exterior - and then selling these "value added tanks", backed with their full support (free training in their stores and so forth).
Meanwhile, the GNU crowd has mixed feelings on all of this. Some think it's great and bought one of these "OS X tanks" themselves, while others still can't grasp why people would want anything other than exactly what they offer for free.
Bleah.... I read it as an early teen. I ran a BBS and had the text file everyone thought was so "cool" to possess back then. I happened not to be stupid enough to try making any of the explosives in there, though. Maybe the text files weren't quite the same as what was said in the original book, but I distinctly remember some of the recipes (like one for making nitroglycerin) even warning you that the described process was highly unstable. There was some bit about mixing things in a container sitting in a container full of ice, and having to be absolutely certain the mixture stayed below a certain temperature at ALL times, or it would explode. Even a 12 or 13 year old kid can read that and think "Hmm... so this one is probably a little more risky than what I want to try out myself!"
The only kids I knew who MIGHT be crazy enough to make things based on a book like this were the ones bound to get in serious trouble anyway. Banning the book wouldn't cure their real issues.
Both of my parents were teachers, too - and now that I'm in my mid 30's, I have good friends in teaching careers as well.
I'd say I'm totally in agreement with most of your insightful comments on the subject, first of all. My own kid has recently been diagnosed with ADHD, and was definitely causing a lot of disruption in her pre-K classes. Now that she's in kindergarten, our school district actually did move her to a special classroom (part of our "Special School District"), where she shares a class with less than 10 other students, all of whom have similar problems - but are otherwise intelligent, capable kids. She'll be re-integrated into the regular school district if they determine she's improved enough to do so. This is the way it SHOULD be handled, like you said. But unfortunately, many districts still won't spend the money for this sort of thing (or only do it after you jump through dozens of hoops for them first).
The only point where I'd have to argue with you is when it comes to parents "getting more involved in the process". Yes, in a perfect world, it would be NICE to see all the parents volunteering to repaint the school, fix broken desks or chairs, coming into the classrooms to teach the kids about what they do for a living, etc. etc. It would also be "ideal" if parents actually had 3 or 4 hours a day to spend working with their kids. But in the real world, this is simply an unreasonable expectation, bordering on fantasy.
I know when I was growing up, neither of MY parents had 3 or 4 hours of time to spend interacting with ME each day. I was expected to entertain myself, and I found many ways to do it. What my parents did for me was to supply me with constructive tools to accomplish that goal. (EG. One Christmas, I got a "Capsella" set - which teaches kids a lot about gears and mechanical systems, while they have fun building creative, moving toys out of the parts. Another time, I was given a Biology lab kit, complete with several preserved animals to dissect and examine. Still another time, I got a giant "All in one" electronics lab kit from Radio Shack, which let me learn about basic electronics and circuits while having fun making all sort of gadgets with it.)
They took out the time to encourage me or praise me if I did something constructive, and that was important. And in grade-school, they did push me and assist with learning some of the basics (like memorizing my multiplication tables, which they bought me a gift I could look at but not touch until I succeeded). But ultimately, I don't think parents should feel "guilty" if they don't have lots of time to spend with their kid(s). I'm a single parent now myself, and time I spend "playing with my kid" is time I take away from necessary things she counts on me to do, like washing the clothes and putting them away, or paying the bills, or..... I think the *main* thing is that I encourage her to be creative and constructive. If she knows I care about her, she can get by with less "attention" from me than the "experts" might say is needed.
Umm.... I guess so? How much time do I have to spend in the car before it's "ok" to want a nice stereo system in it?
Not only did a work as a courier for a little while, where I spent all DAY in the car, basically - but I worked doing on-site computer service, so I was driving around a lot for that too.
Currently, I work a regular 8-5PM weekday job, but the commute is probably 40-45 mins. each direction - and it's the only time I really get to listen to music, most days.
So yeah, I'd have to say I'd consider my CAR audio a higher priority than my home audio, really.
I've maintained THAT was true for a LONG time now. Microsoft has always "turned a blind eye" to piracy, when they thought building market-share was more important than potentially loss of revenue to copyright infringement.
I've worked for companies (and known others in I.T. who had a similar experience) where the Microsoft sales rep would come in, basically hand us an illegal copy of a piece of MS software, and suggest we "install it... use it for a while, and you know... call us back and buy a legal one later on, whenever you're ready".
I agree that everything I ever saw with the Monster Cable brand on it was constructed fairly well. Usually they have fairly thick insulation around the cabling, strain-reliefs on the connectors, gold-plating on the ends, etc. etc.
BUT, I personally experienced an interesting situation some years back, where we were trying to put a better car audio system in my vehicle - and were fighting a bad noise problem. (Despite having brand new plugs and plug-wires, and ensuring everything had good grounds, you got a spark induced hum on the speakers whenever the engine was running.) The installation techs (at a pretty reputable "mom and pop" type installation shop) fought with it for hours. They initially substituted the Rockford Fosgate audio cables running from the stereo to the power amp in the trunk with Monster Cable, expecting it would reject interference better. Turned out it was worse! I forget what we ended up with, but they found something in their parts collection that worked better at rejecting the noise than the other 2 brands (may have been some Kenwood-branded cables or something like that?).
So basically, some cheaper (but not "no name garbage") cables had better shielding than Monster did at a much higher price!
The cell companies don't care about phones like the Treo, because #1, they know the processors and operating systems in them aren't powerful enough to do voice over IP reliably and efficiently. (Hell, the Treo 650 I owned could barely handle bluetooth pairing and keeping that connection up between the phone and a headset. It only supported version 1.0 of the spec. - and that was apparently even a stretch for that version of PalmOS to support at all!)
#2, most carriers have their pricing plans set up in some fashion that would prevent using the data for something like VoIP without incurring huge surcharges that would negate the value in doing it, or some sort of usage monitoring that would get your entire account suspended/terminated for doing it regularly. (Sprint, for example, used to kill service on people who used one of their cellphones as a modem on their high-speed data network, if they downloaded/uploaded too much data with it. They wanted you to pay more for a data plan for one of these PCMCIA PC cards instead, if that was your intention.)
I know you're trolling here, but I'm going to bite anyway.
The REAL problem here is AT&T, plain and simple.
Everybody whining about the iPhone being locked to them as the only carrier (and Apple's subsequent attempts to enforce this) were pretty much requirements for Apple to successfully launch this phone in the first place. If they had an unlimited budget, I'm sure Apple would have just started their own cellular carrier or bought one out, and then built a phone to work with it with all the features people would ever want. BUT, in the real world, breaking into the "good old boy" network of Cellular carriers and phone manufacturers meant playing by THEIR rules, *or* finding a few places they could win concessions in return for clamping down in other areas.
This is no different than Apple's reluctant agreement to enforce DRM on purchased songs from iTunes. They weren't in a position to start their own record label and sign on thousands of good artists - so they had to work with the record labels. By accepting DRM and some restrictions on usage of their software (no sharing your music to stream over a WAN to iTunes running at a remote location, for example), they were able to bring digital music sales into the 21st. Century.
With their agreement with AT&T, they were able to bring people a new, easier way to activate the phone. (No going into the store and filling out credit app paperwork, getting upsold on crap by salespeople, etc. etc.) They got AT&T to code custom stuff into their network for the "visual voicemail" feature that no other phone currently has. They even got AT&T to agree to a discounted "all you care to use for one price" data plan, so you wouldn't be screwed like Verizon owners of a Motorola Q... who have to pay $150+ per month for any half-way usable cell plan that gives them unlimited data for it.
I didn't think the iPhone was worth $599 when it came out, so I held off on getting it. But I sure did pick up one as soon as the price dropped, and a refurb 8GB was going for $349. At that price, it's definitely worth the money.... I've paid that much or more for every "Smartphone" I've owned before, including a Treo 650 and 600. and a couple Kyoceras - and NONE of those held a candle to the iPhone. In fact, I got so disgusted with them, I got a Motorola Razr and just lived with it for the last year. But even it had issues - including the inability to sync its calendar appointments with iCal on my Mac.
Although nobody's talking on this one, I also think AT&T is behind Apple's sudden negative attitude on hackers developing custom apps for the iPhone. Why? Because it was all good until someone at AT&T realized "Hey, wait a minute! If Apple doesn't put a damper on this, they're going to install a voice-over IP app on that thing, and then nobody will ever use up their minutes anymore talking on the iPhone! We'll never sell anything bigger than the smallest plan!" (Seems kind of odd Apple's V.P. just came out and said Apple wasn't against people loading unofficial apps on the iPhone, and they wouldn't "actively try to stop it"... only to have Jobs come out about 48 hours later saying something different?)
Bottom line here: This may be an Apple product, but it has to function in a space controlled by the cellphone industry. This is the same industry that flashes custom firmware into almost all the really useful phones they sell, to cripple features left and right to suit them. Given the hostile environment - I think Apple did a pretty good job bringing people a compromise that's still worthy of an Apple logo on the front of it.
I was never interested in "unlocking" my phone to get around the agreement they made very clear was part of the purchase.... BUT, I do use my phone with all the unofficial software apps people made for it. And I refuse to update to the latest firmware unless/until hackers break into it successfully like they have all the previous versions.
Yeah.... I, too, was a long-time Netbank customer. Back when I first signed up with them, they were one of the ONLY ways to do free, unlimited online billpay. Over the years, that turned into a "non issue" as practically all the other respectable banks and credit unions offered the same thing.... but I stuck with Netbank anyway, because frankly, I was screwed over and bumped around from bank to bank with my locally held checking account. (It seemed like every month or two, for a while there, whatever bank I was with was part of a merger with another bank. For a while, my book of checks had the name of a bank that was 4 or 5 institutions ago!) Given that history, Netbank was rock-solid stable by comparison.
I started to worry about Netbank's status when it started becoming tougher to make a convenient deposit. My electronic deposit of my payroll check was fine, but anything else I had to physically deposit was starting to become a pain. They had a list of "partner ATMs" supposedly in their network that you could make deposits at -- but I found the list started getting outdated, and Netbank made no effort to update it. (For a long time, it told me they had "Netbank branded ATMs" at all the Huck's gas stations in my city that I could use. Well, I found a grand total of *1* Huck's station that actually had one of those inside it. The other locations listed on their site were long since closed up. Then, the remaining Huck's in my town got purchased by Amoco/BP and the last remaining Netbank ATM went away with it.)
They experimented with the overnight deposits through any UPS Store location for a while, and that was great for me. But they discontinued that too, claiming it was costing them too much and wasn't used by enough Netbank customers.
And you could always request postage-paid envelopes to mail in a deposit directly, but half the time I'd fill out a request for more of those and would never receive them! When I did use one, Netbank seemed like they'd sit on the thing for over a WEEK before getting around to even opening it!
I've still got my account with them, mainly because I've been too lazy to open another account... but now, I have the necessary motivation. This whole situation sounds like it's going to be a "bumpy ride" if I leave it alone. Nothing against IMG Direct or anything, but I just don't have great luck with these bank mergers and changes.... I'd rather duck out now, instead of hassle with a direct deposit getting mis-routed, or my first few deposits getting lost in a black hole someplace when I put them in some partner's ATM, or ??
Yeah... I've been meaning to check out eMusic, actually. The latest Popular Science magazine included a coupon code on an inserted "post card" type ad, saying it was good for 25 free songs on sign-up or something like that. Hard to complain about 2+ albums worth of free songs just to take a look at it, I figure.
I took the plunge and bought my iPhone right after they announced the price drop. (Actually saved $50 more by going with a refurbished iPhone 8GB model off Apple's web site).
So far, I really like the phone, and somewhat dislike AT&T's lack of reliability and coverage. (Last week, for an entire day, it seemed like every phone call I got didn't make my phone ring. I only knew people tried calling when I got the missed call or new voicemail messages later. I started to blame my iPhone for it, until I talked to another friend of mine using a Moto Razr with AT&T who had the same problem.)
If it wasn't for AppTap installer though, I think I might not be as happy with the phone right now. I almost think this one caught even Apple by surprise. (It amazes me how quickly people are developing really good, un-official apps and distributing them conveniently through this "click and go" installer tool. It even keeps track of any updates you need and lets you uninstall with one tap too.)
Along with must-have applets like "Summerboard", I've downloaded such things as a VNC client for my iPhone, a decent IRC chat client, an instant-messenger for AOL's network (wish it supported others, but that's probably coming soon), a couple decent free games (Tetris and Blackjack), a Super NES emulator, a really good dictionary and thesaurus, and Navizon (www.navizon.com) - which gives you a pretty decent alternative to hardware GPS capabilities.
Already, enough good software development has gone on - I don't think Apple can really risk breaking or locking out this stuff now. Several commercial phone app makers are writing unofficial iPhone apps, and they all seem to comment on their web site that "Apple is aware of our project." If this was all still stuff you had to manually jump through hoops to get loaded onto your phone, then Apple would shrug and ignore them. But I'm starting to think maybe this next iPhone firmware update has taken longer than expected to come out BECAUSE they're doing some testing to see if they can add their changes without screwing up most of the AppTap installed apps? It's simply too GOOD a 3rd. party extension to the iPhone!
I think you missed the point, though.... The only people with authority to demand you show them "what's in the bag" are law enforcement officers! That's why if someone is caught shoplifting and detained at a store, the police are called in if they don't want to co-operate. Ultimately, the store employees don't have the authority to MAKE a person co-operate.
I agree that stores should be able to hire someone to stand around and *ask* if they could please see your receipt, if they think this will really deter some theft for them. There's no law against asking.... BUT, by the same token, you, as a paying customer, should have every right to *ignore* that request too.
The laws on shoplifting are fairly clear, anyway. You're not allowed to do anything to a suspected shoplifter until after they walk out of the store. Even if you stand there and watch them shove something in their pocket, there's no law broken yet if they haven't left store property with the item.
So this guy was completely in the right. He paid for his item, and held a printed receipt that proved it was paid for. He had no legal requirement or obligation to produce said receipt for some store employee standing IN THE STORE.
I think reality is, things are broken from the top down... Unfortunately, most of us are so concerned about the "big elections", we make the "feel good" attempts to go vote for our new president every 4 years, and possibly go a time or two in-between, specifically to vote for or against some tax measure or issue that's of great personal importance to us for whatever reason.
Meanwhile, we don't bother with much of the "smaller stuff", when in reality, THAT is precisely where one's vote really counts!
You may have noticed, it's not too often someone comes out of nowhere to take on a high-profile political career as president, vice-president, or Supreme Court justice.
These people "grow into" their jobs, after getting elected first at a local level and working their way up the ranks over the years. By the time they've made all the political connections and accepted all the bribes in a higher-ranking position, your "say so" in keeping them around (or even expecting them to do what they initially promised you) is pretty much zilch.
Where you STILL have control is at the bottom of the pyramid, instead of up near the peak. I know not everyone has time to research all the candidates for judges in their district and so on... but at least you can make an effort to weed out known corrupt ones. (If I don't know better, I just vote out all of them whenever I get the chance. I figure, worst case, I have better odds bringing in fresh, new people for the job vs. letting the existing people stick around, potentially getting more crooked over time.)
Just by going to the occasional city/county council meeting, you're able to have say-so in issues that directly affect things right near your own home and workplace - and you may be one voice out of only 10 or 20 taken into consideration at that meeting.... Not 1 vote out of hundreds of thousands or millions!
Well, your comment shows you're on the OTHER extreme from "fanboyism"....
In reality, I think the iPhone *is* going to revolutionize the cellphone market. To say otherwise takes some rather close-minded thinking.
Visual voicemail, for example, is a great enhancement to the tired "call in to pick up your saved messages" strategy everyone has been using since day 1. It wouldn't surprise me at all if AT&T starts making use of it on other new phones, and eventually, other carriers offer something similar as well to compete.
It also raises the bar on browser usability. Safari on the iPhone is quite simply the BEST mobile web experience out there on a phone. This is bound to spur on others to improve their built-in browsers too.
It's certainly an easier set-up experience than any carrier has ever given people before! Just buy a phone, take it home and let it sit around as long as you like. When you're ready to activate service, port an existing number over, etc. - you just click the options inside iTunes and do it yourself. No pushy salesperson to wait in line to speak with. No big "credit check" paperwork to fill out first and turn in to said pushy salesperson. No hassles with being "upsold" on accessories for your phone you didn't really want.
Apple's "lock-in" with AT&T reminds me a lot of their buddying-up to the recording industry in order to get the iTunes music store launched. Sometimes, you're just shooting for something that's too big to accomplish completely on your own. (Apple was in no position to sign up hundreds of thousands of good artists on their own record label, just so they could then put that content THEY owned onto an online music store.) By the same token, they were in no position to build out their OWN cellular infrastructure, just to launch their new phone. So you have to dig into all the "red tape" and politics of joining an established partner - and hope you can create change one little piece at a time.
That's exactly my experience too. I used to work for a guy who sold new and used computers (on consignment, mostly). Right after Xmas, he had a guy come in with a brand new Toshiba notebook. The guy claimed he got it as an Xmas gift, but really needed the money more than another computer - so he wanted to see if the store would pay him cash for it. The store owner looked it over, offered him $600 or so for it (after photocopying his drivers license), and the deal was made.
Well, a week or so goes by, and all of a sudden, the county sheriff is in the store, looking for said notebook computer. It turns out the seller was a guy recently released from prison who went on a crime spree, buying a new car, new furniture for his home, etc. -- all with false identities obtained from a buddy who handled credit reports for a pager store. The notebook, too, was purchased this way on one of those retail store credit cards he obtained using false info.
The cops were really pleased that my boss actually had the foresight to photocopy the guy's license, because that was apparently the *only* correct info anyone had on him -- and finally allowed them to pin the crimes to him. Nonetheless, they confiscated the laptop and my boss was out the $600 he paid for it, never to be compensated. (If he knew his "reward" for helping stop a criminal was to lose $600, I imagine he would have been far less co-operative!)
Another good friend of mine had his truck broken into, right in front of my house, one evening. They took his new cellphone, pulled his $800 Alpine car stereo/MP3 changer, and got his wallet he had left under his seat. He was able to log in to his cellphone carrier's web site and get a detailed list of calls, and discovered the thief was actually *using* his cellphone to call his girlfriend and other friends regularly! He reported everything to the police, including keeping them up-to-date on the list of calls being made. STILL, the cops did NOTHING. Made NO attempt to track this guy down at all! After a week or so of this nonsense, my friend ended up calling his cellphone and talked to the thief directly. The thief wanted to work out some kind of trade deal, where he'd give back the wallet and everything in it plus the cellphone, for a couple hundred bucks, at a Denny's restaurant! (He considered his options there, and finally decided to just stand the guy up... Wasn't worth the potential risk if the guy was armed or something.) He ended up just making an insurance claim for everything, and getting a new copy of his driver's license, etc. etc. REALLY frustrating though, he knew so much about the thief, he could have showed up at the guy's girlfriend's house and waited for him... yet the cops didn't bother, having all this info spoon-fed to them.
I'm not trying to take sides one way or the other, at this point in time. But it occurs to me that this sort of thing is exactly how the American Revolution got started. When the "redcoats" took the first shot at one of the "unarmed, innocent Yankees" - it's pretty much known historical fact that things didn't quite go down that way. According to witness testimony and police records dug up by historians long after the fact (saw much of this on the "History Channel", FYI), it was much more a situation of some radicals harassing the British guards, throwing rocks at them, spitting on them, and so forth - for perhaps as long as an hour or so straight, before one of them finally "snapped". Then the story was twisted around to make them look as bad as possible.
Not sure exactly what this student's real "motive" was here, but it's certainly arguable that today's political conventions and "Q&A sessions with the public" aren't quite as "free and open" as they should be. Look at the situation at Wash. U's campus in St. Louis, MO when Libertarian *candidate* Michael Badnarik was arrested during their presidential debates in 2004! Sure, he wasn't "invited" to be there either, but doesn't that seem wrong in and of itself, really??
Seriously, Mossberg probably wrote a fair, overall, summary of things with this review. But picking on the trackpad sensitivity or speed is pretty weak. I'm just as angry that Apple still defaults to the right-click being disabled in "keyboard/mouse preferences" in OS X, despite every one of their new desktop Macs shipping with a "mighty mouse" that has right-click capabilities. I've already had to "fix" that for 2 new iMac owners who thought their mighty mouse was broken or defective.
Umm... you probably should if you want a fairly reliable, well-engineered, and easy to use portable music player that's compatible with the widest variety of 3rd. party hardware add-ons and accessories?
I didn't know that a device's inability to have Linux easily installed on it made it "defective by design"? Wow... I better get rid of my washer, dryer, toaster, oven, microwave, plasma TV set, and a whole slew of other electronic devices in my home then! Who knew!?
Seriously, I like it as much as the next person when hackers find ways to do new things with electronics. There were some great little unofficial hacks to the firmware of my Motorola Razr cellphone, for example. But I'd never label the phone "defective" if Motorola updated the original firmware and broke the hacks. It's really not Moto's job to make sure 3rd. party hacks and changes continue to work for people!
As someone else already pointed out - in this case, Apple very well might just be trying to protect the iPod's database from being modified by malicious applications. Mac users aren't so used to that concept, but Windows user sure should be by now -- and more people sync iPods with Windows than any other OS.
Slashdot Mirror
How is anything this site did remotely "illegal"?
This sounds to me like it simply amounts to harassment by legal authorities, after having pressure put on them to "do something" by the movie and/or TV studios.
I know here in the United States, "search and seizure" is a popular law-enforcement tool for the purpose of slowing/stopping activities they can't really find sufficient evidence to prosecute. (All you need is a judge's signature saying it's ok to proceed with a search and seizure, and they can waltz in with the warrant in hand, seizing the "offending" property. Then just lock it away in an evidence locker for a few years, sitting on it and depriving the owner of it. Eventually, sure, they'll probably just return it, claiming "insufficient evidence" to make a case against them - but they accomplished what they were really after.)
Truthfully, I don't even see this particular issue as a "Microsoft only" matter. This makes for a good editorial to generate some "hits" and discussion ... but it's ultimately pointless to argue.
... yet FEW people I knew of running OS/2 really bothered to read any of that. It was more like "Cool, a new fixpack! Let's apply it, because there's a lot of broken stuff in this OS I'm sure hoping they ironed out!"
I dare you to show me ANY automatic update type scenario for ANY software product on ANY platform where everyone using it is happy to accept all the updates, with the comfort of a full understanding of exactly what's being modified.
One of the most detailed lists of updates/changes I ever recall seeing was the change log IBM used to provide with OS/2 operating system patches. That wasn't an automatic update though. You had to go out and download and apply those yourself. But still, it was amazing how long and detailed those lists were
If the updates you accept start breaking more than they fix for you, then you lose "trust" in them. If not, then your "trust" in them rises. It's that simple, really.
The *other* issue people fail to take into account is how many *older* machines end up being converted over to Linux boxes, despite initially being purchased with Windows on them.
I've worked for two different manufacturing firms now where this happened. The first firm bought exclusively Dell servers, always pre-loaded with a version of Windows server. After the older systems were "retired" from their original uses, they were usually still good, functional machines nobody wanted to throw away. So they'd find up getting reformatted, and used experimentally as Linux boxes.
Where I work now, I took an older PIII class rack-mounted server and turned it into a dedicated web proxy server with site filtering under Linux. (It ran too slow using its original Windows installation to be worth using anymore, but works GREAT in Linux for its new purpose.)
I agree that "a contract is a contract", and it's silly to go to court just because you don't like something you initially, willingly signed up for.
On the other hand though, the provider subsidy story is a little "flimsy" too, at times. For example, when I was with Verizon, I wanted one of the new Treo 650s when it was a brand new phone. Buying it with a 2 year extension on my contract, through Verizon, turned out to STILL be over $100 more expensive than buying the phone outright from some of the dealers selling them on the Internet.
The phone providers seem to like quoting MSRP as the "real price" of the phone, and then knock $100-200 off of that if you sign up for 1 or 2 years with them. Reality is, they're probably still making a profit on the phones after locking you into those contracts, because they're paying nowhere NEAR the MSRP on them.
What little engine-destroying machine?
Seriously, is this meant to be a dig at Apple bricking iPhones that people hacked to use other carriers? Because if we're talking strictly computers here, I don't follow.
My Macbook Pro notebook and my Mac Pro tower both dual boot into Windows, and I used to run Yellow Dog Linux on an older PowerMac with no problems at all. I've certainly used all sorts of different printers, a couple different scanners, and any display I wanted with my current Macs - with no ill effects.
(And as far as the iPhone thing is concerned, I think Apple was pretty up-front with the whole thing. They never forced your phone to take the newer firmware, and even issued a warning giving you the option to cancel out - stating that "unlocked" phones were subject to damage if you continued.)
I'm willing to go with that whole analogy, but I'd add that Mac OS X is akin to a corporation most people generally admire taking in a large share of these free tanks, taking some of the parts off that are unnecessary (or potentially even harmful) to the typical end-user/consumer (say, pulling off a machine gun turret), giving the tank a smooth, comfortable ride, a great sound system inside, and an attractive, sleek exterior - and then selling these "value added tanks", backed with their full support (free training in their stores and so forth).
Meanwhile, the GNU crowd has mixed feelings on all of this. Some think it's great and bought one of these "OS X tanks" themselves, while others still can't grasp why people would want anything other than exactly what they offer for free.
Bleah.... I read it as an early teen. I ran a BBS and had the text file everyone thought was so "cool" to possess back then. I happened not to be stupid enough to try making any of the explosives in there, though. Maybe the text files weren't quite the same as what was said in the original book, but I distinctly remember some of the recipes (like one for making nitroglycerin) even warning you that the described process was highly unstable. There was some bit about mixing things in a container sitting in a container full of ice, and having to be absolutely certain the mixture stayed below a certain temperature at ALL times, or it would explode. Even a 12 or 13 year old kid can read that and think "Hmm... so this one is probably a little more risky than what I want to try out myself!"
The only kids I knew who MIGHT be crazy enough to make things based on a book like this were the ones bound to get in serious trouble anyway. Banning the book wouldn't cure their real issues.
Don't forget:
The RIAA is *really* cracking down on illegal music downloads with the latest DRM!
Both of my parents were teachers, too - and now that I'm in my mid 30's, I have good friends in teaching careers as well.
..... I think the *main* thing is that I encourage her to be creative and constructive. If she knows I care about her, she can get by with less "attention" from me than the "experts" might say is needed.
I'd say I'm totally in agreement with most of your insightful comments on the subject, first of all. My own kid has recently been diagnosed with ADHD, and was definitely causing a lot of disruption in her pre-K classes. Now that she's in kindergarten, our school district actually did move her to a special classroom (part of our "Special School District"), where she shares a class with less than 10 other students, all of whom have similar problems - but are otherwise intelligent, capable kids. She'll be re-integrated into the regular school district if they determine she's improved enough to do so. This is the way it SHOULD be handled, like you said. But unfortunately, many districts still won't spend the money for this sort of thing (or only do it after you jump through dozens of hoops for them first).
The only point where I'd have to argue with you is when it comes to parents "getting more involved in the process". Yes, in a perfect world, it would be NICE to see all the parents volunteering to repaint the school, fix broken desks or chairs, coming into the classrooms to teach the kids about what they do for a living, etc. etc. It would also be "ideal" if parents actually had 3 or 4 hours a day to spend working with their kids. But in the real world, this is simply an unreasonable expectation, bordering on fantasy.
I know when I was growing up, neither of MY parents had 3 or 4 hours of time to spend interacting with ME each day. I was expected to entertain myself, and I found many ways to do it. What my parents did for me was to supply me with constructive tools to accomplish that goal. (EG. One Christmas, I got a "Capsella" set - which teaches kids a lot about gears and mechanical systems, while they have fun building creative, moving toys out of the parts. Another time, I was given a Biology lab kit, complete with several preserved animals to dissect and examine. Still another time, I got a giant "All in one" electronics lab kit from Radio Shack, which let me learn about basic electronics and circuits while having fun making all sort of gadgets with it.)
They took out the time to encourage me or praise me if I did something constructive, and that was important. And in grade-school, they did push me and assist with learning some of the basics (like memorizing my multiplication tables, which they bought me a gift I could look at but not touch until I succeeded). But ultimately, I don't think parents should feel "guilty" if they don't have lots of time to spend with their kid(s). I'm a single parent now myself, and time I spend "playing with my kid" is time I take away from necessary things she counts on me to do, like washing the clothes and putting them away, or paying the bills, or
Umm.... I guess so? How much time do I have to spend in the car before it's "ok" to want a nice stereo system in it?
Not only did a work as a courier for a little while, where I spent all DAY in the car, basically - but I worked doing on-site computer service, so I was driving around a lot for that too.
Currently, I work a regular 8-5PM weekday job, but the commute is probably 40-45 mins. each direction - and it's the only time I really get to listen to music, most days.
So yeah, I'd have to say I'd consider my CAR audio a higher priority than my home audio, really.
I've maintained THAT was true for a LONG time now. Microsoft has always "turned a blind eye" to piracy, when they thought building market-share was more important than potentially loss of revenue to copyright infringement.
... call us back and buy a legal one later on, whenever you're ready".
I've worked for companies (and known others in I.T. who had a similar experience) where the Microsoft sales rep would come in, basically hand us an illegal copy of a piece of MS software, and suggest we "install it... use it for a while, and you know
I agree that everything I ever saw with the Monster Cable brand on it was constructed fairly well. Usually they have fairly thick insulation around the cabling, strain-reliefs on the connectors, gold-plating on the ends, etc. etc.
BUT, I personally experienced an interesting situation some years back, where we were trying to put a better car audio system in my vehicle - and were fighting a bad noise problem. (Despite having brand new plugs and plug-wires, and ensuring everything had good grounds, you got a spark induced hum on the speakers whenever the engine was running.) The installation techs (at a pretty reputable "mom and pop" type installation shop) fought with it for hours. They initially substituted the Rockford Fosgate audio cables running from the stereo to the power amp in the trunk with Monster Cable, expecting it would reject interference better. Turned out it was worse! I forget what we ended up with, but they found something in their parts collection that worked better at rejecting the noise than the other 2 brands (may have been some Kenwood-branded cables or something like that?).
So basically, some cheaper (but not "no name garbage") cables had better shielding than Monster did at a much higher price!
The cell companies don't care about phones like the Treo, because #1, they know the processors and operating systems in them aren't powerful enough to do voice over IP reliably and efficiently. (Hell, the Treo 650 I owned could barely handle bluetooth pairing and keeping that connection up between the phone and a headset. It only supported version 1.0 of the spec. - and that was apparently even a stretch for that version of PalmOS to support at all!)
#2, most carriers have their pricing plans set up in some fashion that would prevent using the data for something like VoIP without incurring huge surcharges that would negate the value in doing it, or some sort of usage monitoring that would get your entire account suspended/terminated for doing it regularly. (Sprint, for example, used to kill service on people who used one of their cellphones as a modem on their high-speed data network, if they downloaded/uploaded too much data with it. They wanted you to pay more for a data plan for one of these PCMCIA PC cards instead, if that was your intention.)
I know you're trolling here, but I'm going to bite anyway.
... who have to pay $150+ per month for any half-way usable cell plan that gives them unlimited data for it.
... only to have Jobs come out about 48 hours later saying something different?)
.... BUT, I do use my phone with all the unofficial software apps people made for it. And I refuse to update to the latest firmware unless/until hackers break into it successfully like they have all the previous versions.
The REAL problem here is AT&T, plain and simple.
Everybody whining about the iPhone being locked to them as the only carrier (and Apple's subsequent attempts to enforce this) were pretty much requirements for Apple to successfully launch this phone in the first place. If they had an unlimited budget, I'm sure Apple would have just started their own cellular carrier or bought one out, and then built a phone to work with it with all the features people would ever want. BUT, in the real world, breaking into the "good old boy" network of Cellular carriers and phone manufacturers meant playing by THEIR rules, *or* finding a few places they could win concessions in return for clamping down in other areas.
This is no different than Apple's reluctant agreement to enforce DRM on purchased songs from iTunes. They weren't in a position to start their own record label and sign on thousands of good artists - so they had to work with the record labels. By accepting DRM and some restrictions on usage of their software (no sharing your music to stream over a WAN to iTunes running at a remote location, for example), they were able to bring digital music sales into the 21st. Century.
With their agreement with AT&T, they were able to bring people a new, easier way to activate the phone. (No going into the store and filling out credit app paperwork, getting upsold on crap by salespeople, etc. etc.) They got AT&T to code custom stuff into their network for the "visual voicemail" feature that no other phone currently has. They even got AT&T to agree to a discounted "all you care to use for one price" data plan, so you wouldn't be screwed like Verizon owners of a Motorola Q
I didn't think the iPhone was worth $599 when it came out, so I held off on getting it. But I sure did pick up one as soon as the price dropped, and a refurb 8GB was going for $349. At that price, it's definitely worth the money.... I've paid that much or more for every "Smartphone" I've owned before, including a Treo 650 and 600. and a couple Kyoceras - and NONE of those held a candle to the iPhone. In fact, I got so disgusted with them, I got a Motorola Razr and just lived with it for the last year. But even it had issues - including the inability to sync its calendar appointments with iCal on my Mac.
Although nobody's talking on this one, I also think AT&T is behind Apple's sudden negative attitude on hackers developing custom apps for the iPhone. Why? Because it was all good until someone at AT&T realized "Hey, wait a minute! If Apple doesn't put a damper on this, they're going to install a voice-over IP app on that thing, and then nobody will ever use up their minutes anymore talking on the iPhone! We'll never sell anything bigger than the smallest plan!" (Seems kind of odd Apple's V.P. just came out and said Apple wasn't against people loading unofficial apps on the iPhone, and they wouldn't "actively try to stop it"
Bottom line here: This may be an Apple product, but it has to function in a space controlled by the cellphone industry. This is the same industry that flashes custom firmware into almost all the really useful phones they sell, to cripple features left and right to suit them. Given the hostile environment - I think Apple did a pretty good job bringing people a compromise that's still worthy of an Apple logo on the front of it.
I was never interested in "unlocking" my phone to get around the agreement they made very clear was part of the purchase
Yeah.... I, too, was a long-time Netbank customer. Back when I first signed up with them, they were one of the ONLY ways to do free, unlimited online billpay. .... but I stuck with Netbank anyway, because frankly, I was screwed over and bumped around from bank to bank with my locally held checking account. (It seemed like every month or two, for a while there, whatever bank I was with was part of a merger with another bank. For a while, my book of checks had the name of a bank that was 4 or 5 institutions ago!) Given that history, Netbank was rock-solid stable by comparison.
... but now, I have the necessary motivation. This whole situation sounds like it's going to be a "bumpy ride" if I leave it alone. Nothing against IMG Direct or anything, but I just don't have great luck with these bank mergers and changes.... I'd rather duck out now, instead of hassle with a direct deposit getting mis-routed, or my first few deposits getting lost in a black hole someplace when I put them in some partner's ATM, or ??
Over the years, that turned into a "non issue" as practically all the other respectable banks and credit unions offered the same thing
I started to worry about Netbank's status when it started becoming tougher to make a convenient deposit. My electronic deposit of my payroll check was fine, but anything else I had to physically deposit was starting to become a pain. They had a list of "partner ATMs" supposedly in their network that you could make deposits at -- but I found the list started getting outdated, and Netbank made no effort to update it. (For a long time, it told me they had "Netbank branded ATMs" at all the Huck's gas stations in my city that I could use. Well, I found a grand total of *1* Huck's station that actually had one of those inside it. The other locations listed on their site were long since closed up. Then, the remaining Huck's in my town got purchased by Amoco/BP and the last remaining Netbank ATM went away with it.)
They experimented with the overnight deposits through any UPS Store location for a while, and that was great for me. But they discontinued that too, claiming it was costing them too much and wasn't used by enough Netbank customers.
And you could always request postage-paid envelopes to mail in a deposit directly, but half the time I'd fill out a request for more of those and would never receive them! When I did use one, Netbank seemed like they'd sit on the thing for over a WEEK before getting around to even opening it!
I've still got my account with them, mainly because I've been too lazy to open another account
Yeah... I've been meaning to check out eMusic, actually. The latest Popular Science magazine included a coupon code on an inserted "post card" type ad, saying it was good for 25 free songs on sign-up or something like that. Hard to complain about 2+ albums worth of free songs just to take a look at it, I figure.
I took the plunge and bought my iPhone right after they announced the price drop. (Actually saved $50 more by going with a refurbished iPhone 8GB model off Apple's web site).
So far, I really like the phone, and somewhat dislike AT&T's lack of reliability and coverage. (Last week, for an entire day, it seemed like every phone call I got didn't make my phone ring. I only knew people tried calling when I got the missed call or new voicemail messages later. I started to blame my iPhone for it, until I talked to another friend of mine using a Moto Razr with AT&T who had the same problem.)
If it wasn't for AppTap installer though, I think I might not be as happy with the phone right now. I almost think this one caught even Apple by surprise. (It amazes me how quickly people are developing really good, un-official apps and distributing them conveniently through this "click and go" installer tool. It even keeps track of any updates you need and lets you uninstall with one tap too.)
Along with must-have applets like "Summerboard", I've downloaded such things as a VNC client for my iPhone, a decent IRC chat client, an instant-messenger for AOL's network (wish it supported others, but that's probably coming soon), a couple decent free games (Tetris and Blackjack), a Super NES emulator, a really good dictionary and thesaurus, and Navizon (www.navizon.com) - which gives you a pretty decent alternative to hardware GPS capabilities.
Already, enough good software development has gone on - I don't think Apple can really risk breaking or locking out this stuff now. Several commercial phone app makers are writing unofficial iPhone apps, and they all seem to comment on their web site that "Apple is aware of our project." If this was all still stuff you had to manually jump through hoops to get loaded onto your phone, then Apple would shrug and ignore them. But I'm starting to think maybe this next iPhone firmware update has taken longer than expected to come out BECAUSE they're doing some testing to see if they can add their changes without screwing up most of the AppTap installed apps? It's simply too GOOD a 3rd. party extension to the iPhone!
I think you missed the point, though.... The only people with authority to demand you show them "what's in the bag" are law enforcement officers! That's why if someone is caught shoplifting and detained at a store, the police are called in if they don't want to co-operate. Ultimately, the store employees don't have the authority to MAKE a person co-operate.
Same goes for a receipt, really.
I agree that stores should be able to hire someone to stand around and *ask* if they could please see your receipt, if they think this will really deter some theft for them. There's no law against asking.... BUT, by the same token, you, as a paying customer, should have every right to *ignore* that request too.
The laws on shoplifting are fairly clear, anyway. You're not allowed to do anything to a suspected shoplifter until after they walk out of the store. Even if you stand there and watch them shove something in their pocket, there's no law broken yet if they haven't left store property with the item.
So this guy was completely in the right. He paid for his item, and held a printed receipt that proved it was paid for. He had no legal requirement or obligation to produce said receipt for some store employee standing IN THE STORE.
I think reality is, things are broken from the top down... Unfortunately, most of us are so concerned about the "big elections", we make the "feel good" attempts to go vote for our new president every 4 years, and possibly go a time or two in-between, specifically to vote for or against some tax measure or issue that's of great personal importance to us for whatever reason.
... but at least you can make an effort to weed out known corrupt ones. (If I don't know better, I just vote out all of them whenever I get the chance. I figure, worst case, I have better odds bringing in fresh, new people for the job vs. letting the existing people stick around, potentially getting more crooked over time.)
Meanwhile, we don't bother with much of the "smaller stuff", when in reality, THAT is precisely where one's vote really counts!
You may have noticed, it's not too often someone comes out of nowhere to take on a high-profile political career as president, vice-president, or Supreme Court justice.
These people "grow into" their jobs, after getting elected first at a local level and working their way up the ranks over the years. By the time they've made all the political connections and accepted all the bribes in a higher-ranking position, your "say so" in keeping them around (or even expecting them to do what they initially promised you) is pretty much zilch.
Where you STILL have control is at the bottom of the pyramid, instead of up near the peak. I know not everyone has time to research all the candidates for judges in their district and so on
Just by going to the occasional city/county council meeting, you're able to have say-so in issues that directly affect things right near your own home and workplace - and you may be one voice out of only 10 or 20 taken into consideration at that meeting.... Not 1 vote out of hundreds of thousands or millions!
Well, your comment shows you're on the OTHER extreme from "fanboyism" ....
In reality, I think the iPhone *is* going to revolutionize the cellphone market. To say otherwise takes some rather close-minded thinking.
Visual voicemail, for example, is a great enhancement to the tired "call in to pick up your saved messages" strategy everyone has been using since day 1. It wouldn't surprise me at all if AT&T starts making use of it on other new phones, and eventually, other carriers offer something similar as well to compete.
It also raises the bar on browser usability. Safari on the iPhone is quite simply the BEST mobile web experience out there on a phone. This is bound to spur on others to improve their built-in browsers too.
It's certainly an easier set-up experience than any carrier has ever given people before! Just buy a phone, take it home and let it sit around as long as you like. When you're ready to activate service, port an existing number over, etc. - you just click the options inside iTunes and do it yourself. No pushy salesperson to wait in line to speak with. No big "credit check" paperwork to fill out first and turn in to said pushy salesperson. No hassles with being "upsold" on accessories for your phone you didn't really want.
Apple's "lock-in" with AT&T reminds me a lot of their buddying-up to the recording industry in order to get the iTunes music store launched. Sometimes, you're just shooting for something that's too big to accomplish completely on your own. (Apple was in no position to sign up hundreds of thousands of good artists on their own record label, just so they could then put that content THEY owned onto an online music store.) By the same token, they were in no position to build out their OWN cellular infrastructure, just to launch their new phone. So you have to dig into all the "red tape" and politics of joining an established partner - and hope you can create change one little piece at a time.
That's exactly my experience too. I used to work for a guy who sold new and used computers (on consignment, mostly). Right after Xmas, he had a guy come in with a brand new Toshiba notebook. The guy claimed he got it as an Xmas gift, but really needed the money more than another computer - so he wanted to see if the store would pay him cash for it. The store owner looked it over, offered him $600 or so for it (after photocopying his drivers license), and the deal was made.
... Wasn't worth the potential risk if the guy was armed or something.) He ended up just making an insurance claim for everything, and getting a new copy of his driver's license, etc. etc. REALLY frustrating though, he knew so much about the thief, he could have showed up at the guy's girlfriend's house and waited for him ... yet the cops didn't bother, having all this info spoon-fed to them.
Well, a week or so goes by, and all of a sudden, the county sheriff is in the store, looking for said notebook computer. It turns out the seller was a guy recently released from prison who went on a crime spree, buying a new car, new furniture for his home, etc. -- all with false identities obtained from a buddy who handled credit reports for a pager store. The notebook, too, was purchased this way on one of those retail store credit cards he obtained using false info.
The cops were really pleased that my boss actually had the foresight to photocopy the guy's license, because that was apparently the *only* correct info anyone had on him -- and finally allowed them to pin the crimes to him. Nonetheless, they confiscated the laptop and my boss was out the $600 he paid for it, never to be compensated. (If he knew his "reward" for helping stop a criminal was to lose $600, I imagine he would have been far less co-operative!)
Another good friend of mine had his truck broken into, right in front of my house, one evening. They took his new cellphone, pulled his $800 Alpine car stereo/MP3 changer, and got his wallet he had left under his seat. He was able to log in to his cellphone carrier's web site and get a detailed list of calls, and discovered the thief was actually *using* his cellphone to call his girlfriend and other friends regularly! He reported everything to the police, including keeping them up-to-date on the list of calls being made. STILL, the cops did NOTHING. Made NO attempt to track this guy down at all! After a week or so of this nonsense, my friend ended up calling his cellphone and talked to the thief directly. The thief wanted to work out some kind of trade deal, where he'd give back the wallet and everything in it plus the cellphone, for a couple hundred bucks, at a Denny's restaurant! (He considered his options there, and finally decided to just stand the guy up
I'm not trying to take sides one way or the other, at this point in time. But it occurs to me that this sort of thing is exactly how the American Revolution got started. When the "redcoats" took the first shot at one of the "unarmed, innocent Yankees" - it's pretty much known historical fact that things didn't quite go down that way. According to witness testimony and police records dug up by historians long after the fact (saw much of this on the "History Channel", FYI), it was much more a situation of some radicals harassing the British guards, throwing rocks at them, spitting on them, and so forth - for perhaps as long as an hour or so straight, before one of them finally "snapped". Then the story was twisted around to make them look as bad as possible.
Not sure exactly what this student's real "motive" was here, but it's certainly arguable that today's political conventions and "Q&A sessions with the public" aren't quite as "free and open" as they should be. Look at the situation at Wash. U's campus in St. Louis, MO when Libertarian *candidate* Michael Badnarik was arrested during their presidential debates in 2004! Sure, he wasn't "invited" to be there either, but doesn't that seem wrong in and of itself, really??
Seriously, Mossberg probably wrote a fair, overall, summary of things with this review. But picking on the trackpad sensitivity or speed is pretty weak. I'm just as angry that Apple still defaults to the right-click being disabled in "keyboard/mouse preferences" in OS X, despite every one of their new desktop Macs shipping with a "mighty mouse" that has right-click capabilities. I've already had to "fix" that for 2 new iMac owners who thought their mighty mouse was broken or defective.
Umm... you probably should if you want a fairly reliable, well-engineered, and easy to use portable music player that's compatible with the widest variety of 3rd. party hardware add-ons and accessories?
I didn't know that a device's inability to have Linux easily installed on it made it "defective by design"? Wow... I better get rid of my washer, dryer, toaster, oven, microwave, plasma TV set, and a whole slew of other electronic devices in my home then! Who knew!?
Seriously, I like it as much as the next person when hackers find ways to do new things with electronics. There were some great little unofficial hacks to the firmware of my Motorola Razr cellphone, for example. But I'd never label the phone "defective" if Motorola updated the original firmware and broke the hacks. It's really not Moto's job to make sure 3rd. party hacks and changes continue to work for people!
As someone else already pointed out - in this case, Apple very well might just be trying to protect the iPod's database from being modified by malicious applications. Mac users aren't so used to that concept, but Windows user sure should be by now -- and more people sync iPods with Windows than any other OS.