And I think that's totally fair, I suppose I just don't believe that the anonymous poster of this has gone through the proper channels.
If he hasn't contacted the local authorities it makes little sense for the FBI to be involved, when their jurisdiction is expressly limited by the US Constitution. I think that he'd get a response if he went through the local authorities, and maybe even whatever state-sanctioned investigative body exists there (in Georgia, we have the GBI) but the FBI's not likely the best starting point. Kind of like working in a large corporation and sending an e-mail to the CEO because a co-worker is agitating you... Probably not the best analogy, but you can at least see some plausible reason (I hope) as to why the FBI isn't the best starting point, and there is no evidence of an appropriate starting point given. Nor is there an appeal to anyone who would know something about the law and how to proceed, but rather an open appeal to the Slashdot crowd.
Close enough I suppose;-) Let me put it this way, we're trained, up front (we spent an entire week, away from classes) to help people with problems. Obviously, your mileage may vary, but at their core, lawyers are meant to be problem solvers. While the contingency fee and the rise of Tort Law (see the King of Torts, Joe Jamail) have made it 'profitable' for many attorneys to litigate as much as possible, many attorneys are NOT paid for that purpose, and in fact many get paid significant amounts of money not to litigate.
That lawyers often don't simply solve the problems is a problem with the individuals themselves. The normative standards of the profession seek to promote precisely that goal (helping people with problems), and that so many don't should be a testament to the person, not the profession.
I choose to decide what it says about your understanding of the American legal system, and the normative function of American lawyers: that is to say, they are thought to solve problems, and not necessarily through litigation (despite what you may see on television...)
Not to denigrate your bemusement, of course, but our attorneys are, ideally, not just used when it's time to sue a major corporation. There is however confirmation bias. It's not exactly newsworthy to find out that a local attorney settled a property dispute between two neighbors in an amicable way that didn't require a public showdown in a courtroom.
As a bemused observer from the US, it seems strange to me that you don't see attorneys as able to solve problems. I'll leave it to others to decide what this says about the UK...;-)
It should be the first stop. Not that we're not all impressed by "anonymous reader's" efforts to help, but who is he and what is he going to do to help?
An attorney, which can often provide a free consultation on the subject (especially if they are the family attorney), could give the legal or civil remedies far better than the knowledgeable, yet removed and politically-big-talking-limited-action afforded by Slashdot readers. Seriously. The post in and of itself *asks* for legal advice that this community is not qualified to give. More to the point, if the Sladshdot community gives bad advice, you can't exactly hold them accountable. An attorney would have a fiduciary duty to help the client resolve the problem, and could be held accountable (via malpractice) for the advice given.
I find it difficult to believe that the authorities won't do anything. Far too often this demographic is willing to believe authorities use every tip and trick to circumvent civil liberties to get an arrest, but no they are so quick to believe they won't pursue something? Perhaps FBI lacks jurisdiction. Perhaps start with the sheriff's office before calling the FBI. Or public safety. Or state police. But most importantly CALL A LAWYER. Especially if she's unwilling to change her number.
Also disconcerting is that the cockpit is, well, facing the erm, cock pit...
Look, all I'm saying is you spend all day dodging Vader's death chokes, trying not to get blown up on the Death Star, and you have to spend your working hours staring at someone's crotch. It can't be fun.
Pro Tip: If you don't know about something, don't talk about it.
You can do all of those things with a v.1 iPhone. Data only activation has been available from AT&T for a few months now. Pay-as-you-go has always been an option for it.
I am not a lawyer, and the only legal advice contained in this post is to consult your own lawyer in a professional setting, but I think a suit like this would have legs.
Especially in a state that was heavily pro-plaintiff (normally I'd say California, but Texas might be a better forum given the subject matter), there's a good chance that any clause in the licensing agreement (contract) could be struck as unconscionable. The common law test for unconscionability is whether or not a signor would have signed the contract if they had known about the unconscionable clause.
I imagine there are a great many people, including judges, who would find a clause where people could simply have their music turned off as unconscionable. I realize that America is perceived as overly litigious, but this sort of injury redressability is exactly what the civil court system is for. The rise of the Standard Form Contract essentially means that consumers seeking a purchase have little or no bargaining power (go ahead and try and negotiate with your cell phone carrier about it's terms), and modern formulations of the law (like the Uniform Commercial Code) are designed to deal with these realities.
Sue 'em. Sue the shit out of 'em. It's what it's there for. Lawsuits hit MS a lot harder than 'boycotts' do. You need thousands of successful participants in a boycott, you only need one in a lawsuit.
If they've got such a problem with it, maybe they shouldn't charge $90 for their textbooks. Or thousands of dollars for their expertise.
Wikipedia doesn't thrive because we don't care about standards of evaluation; Wikipedia thrives because curious, thirsty minds seek answers they can afford and are available. I can, with my cell phone, answer just about any question I have, and Wikipedia is the easiest way to go about it.
If there's a tremendous worry that Wikipedia is somehow destroying academic integrity, I'm going to need a free, web-based solution, that has the support of a developer community that cares enough to write a website that formats the whole kit-and-caboodle for my iPhone (or for your Treo, or Blackberry for that matter) that allows me to, at a few concise clicks, satisfy my thirst for knowledge. I'm sick of hearing all the griping about Wikipedia, because it's whole purpose is to fulfill the job we're allegedly paying all this money at institutions for: procurement of knowledge. And these hooligans are trying to give it away for free... preposterous. Sometimes I don't want to know the nuances of the issue, I'm just trying to find who the NBA's scoring leader was, or what, for purposes of the article I'm reading, *is* a Boson Particle.
I can't read a book every time I've got a question, I'd literally do nothing at that point. Hell, I barely have the time to use Wikipedia to answer my question. I've got a lot of questions but having a phone on me with Wikipedia access means more of my questions get answered. Until there's a substitute that these people (charging thousands upon thousands for their answers in the form of collegiate education) can provide that helps me with that problem (my insatiable curiosity) Wikipedia's a gamble I'm willing to take. If something sounds unreasonable, I'll try and verify it elsewhere, but it doesn't particularly matter, it wasn't too long ago that Professors and Academics were up in arms about any internet sources; who knows who and what I can trust on the web.
Call me an Apple apologist, but this all pretty much seems like much ado about nothing...
a.) Skype over GPRS isn't particularly compelling as it is. GPRS has limited bandwidth (particularly for VoIP apps) and latency issues. It transmits TCP/IP just fine, but UDP is better scaled to VoIP's requirements. VoIP, and Skype are allowed over WiFi, which is entirely technologically feasible. And a great idea. I realize there's plenty of cloak-and-dagger arguments about Apple trying to preserve their high-revenue margins on carrier exclusivity agreements, but there's no need to delve into it. GPRS uses time-division multiplexing, which means that timeslots are limited, and a UDP usage of the GPRS timeslots would pretty much screw other people who just wanted to use their phone to make a cellphone call, the very thing they are paying AT&T for. I realize there's a huge nerdgasm at the though of getting an iPhone that only puts limited cash in AT&T's pocket, but let's face it, it's called the iPod Touch. AT&T doesn't just *have* a GSM cellular network, they *PAY* for it, and so do their customers, and giving the power to iPhone users to monopolize the entire network is going to hurt both AT&T's and Apple's bottom-lines.
b.) ZOMG no Java!! I don't know what to say to this, except that I find it absolutely absurd that people have been clamoring for Apple to open up their APIs, and they essentially did, busted the whole thing wide open, and when Java wasn't built in, now we want an extra API? Java doesn't, and has never, jived with Apple's goals and desires. Java on mobile devices, IMO, is kludgy to use, at best. I've also tended to notice that many Java apps run slow on all mobile platforms. You open a SonyEricsson cellphone, go to launch a game, wait for Java to start up, and then play the game. Using the iPhone native APIs will provide significant access to software writing without having to resort to Java. There have been cries aplenty from the Java people with the OS X debacle, and now the iPhone, but this is Apple's cry that Java is *irrelevant.* Whether you believe it or not, the people in Cupertino think they can do it better, and with the latest slate of software (including Boot Camp, Parallels, and VMWare) I'm hard pressed to argue with them. Someone has yet to give me a compelling reason why Java should be allowed other than the "freedom" argument which should extend to porn and malware as well (which is doesn't).
c.) Firefox. I could see Firefox wanting to go there, but Apple hasn't made any statement on this one way or the other. If you'd like to assume that Firefox is disallowed on the iPhone, well, I'm curious how you can assume that when there is no Mobile Firefox for any platform. Firefox is a pretty hefty program, especially once you get it laden down with extensions, and there are probably more practical impediments to generating a successful Mobile Firefox before they can even start worrying about what Apple thinks.
These are all HUGE non-starters, especially when everyone starts hailing the openness of Android, but quite frankly, Skype still isn't going to work (well) on GPRS, Firefox still isn't going to have a mobile device browser (even on Android), and if you actually do the research, Java isn't all that happy about Google's Java implementation on Android.
Seeing as this is Slashdot, lemme just say, you should probably take what you can get.
Astrology, piercings, fetishes, just be glad a girl's talking to you and not asking you to do her math homework.
Seriously though, sometimes breasts are big enough to make other things not important.
I think that's what losers call it. I don't know that I've ever heard anyone who has known anything about computers EVER call anything crippleware.
Freaking morons. You hear about this stuff all the time, it's like the lawyers decide they can take whatever noun they want, add "-ware" to the end of it, and its some part of the technological subculture that they can use that other lawyers and judges won't have any clue that they just made it up. They'll just assume that it is part of the "technological subculture" that they don't know anything about, and, voila, we've got new terms.
Crippleware. Jesus. I don't know anyone in the industry making up nonsense like this. Do y'all?
The problem lies not with the word, but with the phrase.
Is commercialism bad? Not in an of itself, no. Rampant commercialism however, as depicted in the movie, makes us all total consumers, with no genuine understanding of what we're doing or why, just a need to buy more shit. Sure, basic economics is good, but it's like booze, and sex and drugs.
Those things in moderation are EXCELLENT, but when they begin to consume your life, at the expense of the things that make a well-rounded human being (or well-rounded society) it starts to be a huge problem.
Thanks for judging me based on a single Slashdot post. Well, since I'm a moron ruining the nation, perhaps you can leave some helpful hints about how to adjust my lifestyle to be more in-line with what you think it should be.
I mean, I surely wasn't just mentioning the chain of events in the movie that cemented "Brawndo" as a centralized element of the downfall of society, but I was ACTUALLY confused that the U.S. Government was going to be sold off like a publicly traded company. Whew. I'm glad you cleared that up for me.
I expect you'll do your part in helping "fix" me, so I can't wait to read your life improvement suggestions. Dick.
I mean, talk about missing the point Fox. I mean, seriously, the movie is about rampant commercialism destroying society because people are gradually becoming too stupid to resist more insistent and clever marketing tactics, and now they're rolling out Brawndo?
I mean, WTF, I hope no one that saw Idiocracy goes and buys this, because it's contributing money to the very thing the movie was preaching against. Now we've only got to wait until the U.S. government endures a financial crisis (whoops) and then Fox can attempt to buoy the FCC and FDA and buy them out, and we're looking at the degradation of the world. Of society.
I always wondered if the other countries in the world had devolved as much as America had in the movie, maybe it's time to consider a change of scenery.
Apple has no reason to support software that is used in violation of their EULA.
I'm not sure how I proved that anyone else would be severely scorned for this. Adobe and MS do this all the time, with little to scorn. People that are running their software illegally have very little room to complain when further updates break it. Using a Sufers Serialz # to activate a copy of Photoshop or Office that, when updated disables the account shouldn't give anyone grounds for griping to MS or Adobe. If they had purchased the legal version of it, they wouldn't have had the problem.
Apple never hid the fact that Boot Camp was a BETA that expired at a specific time. There should have been ZERO copies of Tiger (10.4) with Boot Camp on them at the time 10.4.11 was released. The license for that software has expired, and a new license can only be acquired via upgrading to Leopard. It's not a bait-and-switch because they didn't bait anybody. Should Apple spend their engineering time beta-testing for illegal configurations? If you're running OS X on an unlicensed (non-Mac) Intel-based PC, should Apple be forced to test for problems that arise there? NO! Because there shouldn't be any copies of OS X on a non-Mac PC.
And I feel for you getting modded down, you'll notice I got the "Troll" hit myself, so that proves little.
I still see no substance to the claim. At worst, people will feel duped, even when they weren't. The alternative for Apple would a.) sacrifice revenue (Boot Camp is a feature to induce purchasing of Leopard) or b.) have put an auto-delete mechanism in Boot Camp Beta. They didn't do b.) so now they're expected to do a.)?? Why can't they just use their resources only to satisfy legal software uses?
PS- Nice way to turn into a dick at the end. I thought I was being pretty rational about it, at least arguing a substantive, descriptive view if not the normative view that you wish to take. I don't care when MS or Adobe does it either. If I'm pirating Office, and I download an update through the Auto-Updater, and it recognizes my serial number as an invalid, pirated serial number, they can, should, and do, make my copy worthless.::shrug:: If it breaks my machine, I've got to deal with the consequences of using the pirated software. Enjoy it.
I'm sure this is definitely mod-bait, but Apple's Boot Camp beta has expired.
If you have Boot Camp installed now, and it's not on your new Leopard operating system, you're running pirated software; you are in violation of the EULA; do not pass "Go;" do not collect $200.
I realize the issue is that people have beef with the fact that they've been getting Boot Camp for free, and now Apple, bastards that they are, have the gall to use the finished product as a means to make money. They have always been open and upfront with the fact that Boot Camp Beta was a limited license, set to expire, and that the new version would be a part of Leopard, a pay-for-upgrade product.
Where's the beef?
If you've got a pirated version of Photoshop, you install an Adobe-branded update that notices your copy is in violation of their EULA, and they cripple it, do you really think you've got any sort of recourse? It's like filing a police report that someone has stolen your marijuana (apologies to the cool countries that legalized it, maybe the bug up our ass will die one day).
Apple's position, legitimized by the American legal system (and any legal system that recognizes EULAs for that matter), is that they released a software update that wouldn't cripple anyone that was in compliance with the law and the EULA. Only those in violation are hosed.
Shady business tactic? Maybe. Legally justified? Absolutely, 100%, no question, without a doubt.
This is the biggest waste of time in the world. Let me do the freakin' parenting of my own children, and you figure out how to quit sending them off to die.
Seriously, it's not like buying a pack of cigarettes. The kid has to a.) buy the thing, only the older ones have money anyways, b.) has to play the thing, it's not like they can hide a TV and a 360 or PS3 in their pockets...
If my child is playing Manhunt 2, well, I probably know about it. If I wasn't having to bust my ass 24/7 to finance a trillion dollar war and a trillion dollar welfare system, maybe once in a blue moon I could, ya know, sit down with the children, and be aware of what they're doing and how it's effecting them.
Jesus. I've never hated politicians more than I do this very second. What a waste of time and money and resources, all the expense of so much other awful things going on in the world...
WTF is this? I've been using Slashdot for a few years now (obviously not a genuine OG, but still, less than a noob), but I've never understood what's going on here?
I mean, look at this? The subject isn't even words. Usually it says something that's totally nonsense, with some relation to 'First,' which is a long standing comments tradition, fight for first post. But what's the context here? And then a link to Goatse. That's sick.
Who the FUCK are you people? What's your motivation for doing this? Attention? Ad revenue? I don't see either as potentially successful. Do you just do this to fuck with my when I'm high?
Can anyone out there, maybe a more seasoned vet, to explain to me what the fuck this is, and why it happens, and why/. has had to build up a system designed to mitigate their presence (obviously the answer is 'volume' but why volume, does having more "Fris(t st0p); Goat.cx" matter to anyone, much less the people spending their time to do this.
Look, I'm an iPhone owner, and I love the damn thing, no question about it.
It was worth every penny, and then some; the SDK should only make it better.
However, that said, labeling it as "Invention of the Year" is a pretty sad state of affairs for the country. I'm pretty medical, environmental, and social breakthroughs deserve FAR more attention.
I'd hate to tell the guy with cancer that the really cool virus that eats cancer cells could've had a ton more funding for R & D if only it had one Time's Invention of the Year.
The iPhone is cool, no question, but it is the height of frivolity, and can't possibly compare with all the other wonderful things mankind is dreaming up and making a reality that deserve far more press coverage than the iPhone has already gotten.
Not that I'm complaining too loudly, my Apple stock just keeps on truckin'
And the money shot is where Russia claims that it doesn't believe this clear weapons-based pissing contest won't result in another arms race...
I can't tell if that statement is a.) a lie or b.) the result of extreme stupidity.
Clearly if they saw who was in the White House, or I don't know, maybe studied the past 200 years of American history, they'd have a pretty good idea that this would probably trigger an arms race... How often does America like to have its arsenal out-done by foreigners? How often is that translated into leverage used by politicians to justify further military spending?
Well, anyways, kudos Russia! Here's to the apocalypse...
Slashdot Mirror
And I think that's totally fair, I suppose I just don't believe that the anonymous poster of this has gone through the proper channels. If he hasn't contacted the local authorities it makes little sense for the FBI to be involved, when their jurisdiction is expressly limited by the US Constitution. I think that he'd get a response if he went through the local authorities, and maybe even whatever state-sanctioned investigative body exists there (in Georgia, we have the GBI) but the FBI's not likely the best starting point. Kind of like working in a large corporation and sending an e-mail to the CEO because a co-worker is agitating you... Probably not the best analogy, but you can at least see some plausible reason (I hope) as to why the FBI isn't the best starting point, and there is no evidence of an appropriate starting point given. Nor is there an appeal to anyone who would know something about the law and how to proceed, but rather an open appeal to the Slashdot crowd.
Law student.
Close enough I suppose ;-)
Let me put it this way, we're trained, up front (we spent an entire week, away from classes) to help people with problems. Obviously, your mileage may vary, but at their core, lawyers are meant to be problem solvers. While the contingency fee and the rise of Tort Law (see the King of Torts, Joe Jamail) have made it 'profitable' for many attorneys to litigate as much as possible, many attorneys are NOT paid for that purpose, and in fact many get paid significant amounts of money not to litigate.
That lawyers often don't simply solve the problems is a problem with the individuals themselves. The normative standards of the profession seek to promote precisely that goal (helping people with problems), and that so many don't should be a testament to the person, not the profession.
I choose to decide what it says about your understanding of the American legal system, and the normative function of American lawyers: that is to say, they are thought to solve problems, and not necessarily through litigation (despite what you may see on television...) Not to denigrate your bemusement, of course, but our attorneys are, ideally, not just used when it's time to sue a major corporation. There is however confirmation bias. It's not exactly newsworthy to find out that a local attorney settled a property dispute between two neighbors in an amicable way that didn't require a public showdown in a courtroom. As a bemused observer from the US, it seems strange to me that you don't see attorneys as able to solve problems. I'll leave it to others to decide what this says about the UK... ;-)
Call a Lawyer.
It should be the first stop. Not that we're not all impressed by "anonymous reader's" efforts to help, but who is he and what is he going to do to help?
An attorney, which can often provide a free consultation on the subject (especially if they are the family attorney), could give the legal or civil remedies far better than the knowledgeable, yet removed and politically-big-talking-limited-action afforded by Slashdot readers. Seriously. The post in and of itself *asks* for legal advice that this community is not qualified to give. More to the point, if the Sladshdot community gives bad advice, you can't exactly hold them accountable. An attorney would have a fiduciary duty to help the client resolve the problem, and could be held accountable (via malpractice) for the advice given.
I find it difficult to believe that the authorities won't do anything. Far too often this demographic is willing to believe authorities use every tip and trick to circumvent civil liberties to get an arrest, but no they are so quick to believe they won't pursue something? Perhaps FBI lacks jurisdiction. Perhaps start with the sheriff's office before calling the FBI. Or public safety. Or state police. But most importantly CALL A LAWYER. Especially if she's unwilling to change her number.
Also disconcerting is that the cockpit is, well, facing the erm, cock pit...
Look, all I'm saying is you spend all day dodging Vader's death chokes, trying not to get blown up on the Death Star, and you have to spend your working hours staring at someone's crotch. It can't be fun.
I just hope you're not breeding.
Pro Tip: If you don't know about something, don't talk about it. You can do all of those things with a v.1 iPhone. Data only activation has been available from AT&T for a few months now. Pay-as-you-go has always been an option for it.
Thank god, I was wondering how long it would take for this to show up on Slashdot (well, actually I'm hoping for Ars, but /. will do for now).
Can someone smarter than me about these matters explain to me what this means? Why did Apple do it? Did they get a good value for it?
I am not a lawyer, and the only legal advice contained in this post is to consult your own lawyer in a professional setting, but I think a suit like this would have legs.
Especially in a state that was heavily pro-plaintiff (normally I'd say California, but Texas might be a better forum given the subject matter), there's a good chance that any clause in the licensing agreement (contract) could be struck as unconscionable. The common law test for unconscionability is whether or not a signor would have signed the contract if they had known about the unconscionable clause.
I imagine there are a great many people, including judges, who would find a clause where people could simply have their music turned off as unconscionable. I realize that America is perceived as overly litigious, but this sort of injury redressability is exactly what the civil court system is for. The rise of the Standard Form Contract essentially means that consumers seeking a purchase have little or no bargaining power (go ahead and try and negotiate with your cell phone carrier about it's terms), and modern formulations of the law (like the Uniform Commercial Code) are designed to deal with these realities.
Sue 'em. Sue the shit out of 'em. It's what it's there for. Lawsuits hit MS a lot harder than 'boycotts' do. You need thousands of successful participants in a boycott, you only need one in a lawsuit.
If they've got such a problem with it, maybe they shouldn't charge $90 for their textbooks. Or thousands of dollars for their expertise.
Wikipedia doesn't thrive because we don't care about standards of evaluation; Wikipedia thrives because curious, thirsty minds seek answers they can afford and are available. I can, with my cell phone, answer just about any question I have, and Wikipedia is the easiest way to go about it.
If there's a tremendous worry that Wikipedia is somehow destroying academic integrity, I'm going to need a free, web-based solution, that has the support of a developer community that cares enough to write a website that formats the whole kit-and-caboodle for my iPhone (or for your Treo, or Blackberry for that matter) that allows me to, at a few concise clicks, satisfy my thirst for knowledge. I'm sick of hearing all the griping about Wikipedia, because it's whole purpose is to fulfill the job we're allegedly paying all this money at institutions for: procurement of knowledge. And these hooligans are trying to give it away for free... preposterous. Sometimes I don't want to know the nuances of the issue, I'm just trying to find who the NBA's scoring leader was, or what, for purposes of the article I'm reading, *is* a Boson Particle.
I can't read a book every time I've got a question, I'd literally do nothing at that point. Hell, I barely have the time to use Wikipedia to answer my question. I've got a lot of questions but having a phone on me with Wikipedia access means more of my questions get answered. Until there's a substitute that these people (charging thousands upon thousands for their answers in the form of collegiate education) can provide that helps me with that problem (my insatiable curiosity) Wikipedia's a gamble I'm willing to take. If something sounds unreasonable, I'll try and verify it elsewhere, but it doesn't particularly matter, it wasn't too long ago that Professors and Academics were up in arms about any internet sources; who knows who and what I can trust on the web.
I just want my questions answered people.
Call me an Apple apologist, but this all pretty much seems like much ado about nothing...
a.) Skype over GPRS isn't particularly compelling as it is. GPRS has limited bandwidth (particularly for VoIP apps) and latency issues. It transmits TCP/IP just fine, but UDP is better scaled to VoIP's requirements. VoIP, and Skype are allowed over WiFi, which is entirely technologically feasible. And a great idea. I realize there's plenty of cloak-and-dagger arguments about Apple trying to preserve their high-revenue margins on carrier exclusivity agreements, but there's no need to delve into it. GPRS uses time-division multiplexing, which means that timeslots are limited, and a UDP usage of the GPRS timeslots would pretty much screw other people who just wanted to use their phone to make a cellphone call, the very thing they are paying AT&T for. I realize there's a huge nerdgasm at the though of getting an iPhone that only puts limited cash in AT&T's pocket, but let's face it, it's called the iPod Touch. AT&T doesn't just *have* a GSM cellular network, they *PAY* for it, and so do their customers, and giving the power to iPhone users to monopolize the entire network is going to hurt both AT&T's and Apple's bottom-lines.
b.) ZOMG no Java!! I don't know what to say to this, except that I find it absolutely absurd that people have been clamoring for Apple to open up their APIs, and they essentially did, busted the whole thing wide open, and when Java wasn't built in, now we want an extra API? Java doesn't, and has never, jived with Apple's goals and desires. Java on mobile devices, IMO, is kludgy to use, at best. I've also tended to notice that many Java apps run slow on all mobile platforms. You open a SonyEricsson cellphone, go to launch a game, wait for Java to start up, and then play the game. Using the iPhone native APIs will provide significant access to software writing without having to resort to Java. There have been cries aplenty from the Java people with the OS X debacle, and now the iPhone, but this is Apple's cry that Java is *irrelevant.* Whether you believe it or not, the people in Cupertino think they can do it better, and with the latest slate of software (including Boot Camp, Parallels, and VMWare) I'm hard pressed to argue with them. Someone has yet to give me a compelling reason why Java should be allowed other than the "freedom" argument which should extend to porn and malware as well (which is doesn't).
c.) Firefox. I could see Firefox wanting to go there, but Apple hasn't made any statement on this one way or the other. If you'd like to assume that Firefox is disallowed on the iPhone, well, I'm curious how you can assume that when there is no Mobile Firefox for any platform. Firefox is a pretty hefty program, especially once you get it laden down with extensions, and there are probably more practical impediments to generating a successful Mobile Firefox before they can even start worrying about what Apple thinks.
These are all HUGE non-starters, especially when everyone starts hailing the openness of Android, but quite frankly, Skype still isn't going to work (well) on GPRS, Firefox still isn't going to have a mobile device browser (even on Android), and if you actually do the research, Java isn't all that happy about Google's Java implementation on Android.
Hence, FUD.
Seeing as this is Slashdot, lemme just say, you should probably take what you can get. Astrology, piercings, fetishes, just be glad a girl's talking to you and not asking you to do her math homework. Seriously though, sometimes breasts are big enough to make other things not important.
It almost certainly only include post-paid activations.
When carriers report their subscriber numbers they focus almost exclusively, in the US anyways, on post-paid subscribers.
You get a +1 insightful kudos sir, I hadn't considered this possibility until you mentioned it.
Is it?
Really?
I think that's what losers call it. I don't know that I've ever heard anyone who has known anything about computers EVER call anything crippleware.
Freaking morons. You hear about this stuff all the time, it's like the lawyers decide they can take whatever noun they want, add "-ware" to the end of it, and its some part of the technological subculture that they can use that other lawyers and judges won't have any clue that they just made it up. They'll just assume that it is part of the "technological subculture" that they don't know anything about, and, voila, we've got new terms.
Crippleware. Jesus. I don't know anyone in the industry making up nonsense like this. Do y'all?
The problem lies not with the word, but with the phrase. Is commercialism bad? Not in an of itself, no. Rampant commercialism however, as depicted in the movie, makes us all total consumers, with no genuine understanding of what we're doing or why, just a need to buy more shit. Sure, basic economics is good, but it's like booze, and sex and drugs. Those things in moderation are EXCELLENT, but when they begin to consume your life, at the expense of the things that make a well-rounded human being (or well-rounded society) it starts to be a huge problem.
I don't even know how to respond to this post.
Thanks for judging me based on a single Slashdot post. Well, since I'm a moron ruining the nation, perhaps you can leave some helpful hints about how to adjust my lifestyle to be more in-line with what you think it should be.
I mean, I surely wasn't just mentioning the chain of events in the movie that cemented "Brawndo" as a centralized element of the downfall of society, but I was ACTUALLY confused that the U.S. Government was going to be sold off like a publicly traded company. Whew. I'm glad you cleared that up for me.
I expect you'll do your part in helping "fix" me, so I can't wait to read your life improvement suggestions. Dick.
Now I'm scared.
I mean, talk about missing the point Fox. I mean, seriously, the movie is about rampant commercialism destroying society because people are gradually becoming too stupid to resist more insistent and clever marketing tactics, and now they're rolling out Brawndo?
I mean, WTF, I hope no one that saw Idiocracy goes and buys this, because it's contributing money to the very thing the movie was preaching against. Now we've only got to wait until the U.S. government endures a financial crisis (whoops) and then Fox can attempt to buoy the FCC and FDA and buy them out, and we're looking at the degradation of the world. Of society.
I always wondered if the other countries in the world had devolved as much as America had in the movie, maybe it's time to consider a change of scenery.
Apple has no reason to support software that is used in violation of their EULA.
::shrug:: If it breaks my machine, I've got to deal with the consequences of using the pirated software. Enjoy it.
I'm not sure how I proved that anyone else would be severely scorned for this. Adobe and MS do this all the time, with little to scorn. People that are running their software illegally have very little room to complain when further updates break it. Using a Sufers Serialz # to activate a copy of Photoshop or Office that, when updated disables the account shouldn't give anyone grounds for griping to MS or Adobe. If they had purchased the legal version of it, they wouldn't have had the problem.
Apple never hid the fact that Boot Camp was a BETA that expired at a specific time. There should have been ZERO copies of Tiger (10.4) with Boot Camp on them at the time 10.4.11 was released. The license for that software has expired, and a new license can only be acquired via upgrading to Leopard. It's not a bait-and-switch because they didn't bait anybody. Should Apple spend their engineering time beta-testing for illegal configurations? If you're running OS X on an unlicensed (non-Mac) Intel-based PC, should Apple be forced to test for problems that arise there? NO! Because there shouldn't be any copies of OS X on a non-Mac PC.
And I feel for you getting modded down, you'll notice I got the "Troll" hit myself, so that proves little.
I still see no substance to the claim. At worst, people will feel duped, even when they weren't. The alternative for Apple would a.) sacrifice revenue (Boot Camp is a feature to induce purchasing of Leopard) or b.) have put an auto-delete mechanism in Boot Camp Beta. They didn't do b.) so now they're expected to do a.)?? Why can't they just use their resources only to satisfy legal software uses?
PS- Nice way to turn into a dick at the end. I thought I was being pretty rational about it, at least arguing a substantive, descriptive view if not the normative view that you wish to take. I don't care when MS or Adobe does it either. If I'm pirating Office, and I download an update through the Auto-Updater, and it recognizes my serial number as an invalid, pirated serial number, they can, should, and do, make my copy worthless.
I'm sure this is definitely mod-bait, but Apple's Boot Camp beta has expired.
If you have Boot Camp installed now, and it's not on your new Leopard operating system, you're running pirated software; you are in violation of the EULA; do not pass "Go;" do not collect $200.
I realize the issue is that people have beef with the fact that they've been getting Boot Camp for free, and now Apple, bastards that they are, have the gall to use the finished product as a means to make money. They have always been open and upfront with the fact that Boot Camp Beta was a limited license, set to expire, and that the new version would be a part of Leopard, a pay-for-upgrade product.
Where's the beef?
If you've got a pirated version of Photoshop, you install an Adobe-branded update that notices your copy is in violation of their EULA, and they cripple it, do you really think you've got any sort of recourse? It's like filing a police report that someone has stolen your marijuana (apologies to the cool countries that legalized it, maybe the bug up our ass will die one day).
Apple's position, legitimized by the American legal system (and any legal system that recognizes EULAs for that matter), is that they released a software update that wouldn't cripple anyone that was in compliance with the law and the EULA. Only those in violation are hosed.
Shady business tactic? Maybe.
Legally justified? Absolutely, 100%, no question, without a doubt.
Is this what our elected leaders think we need?
This is the biggest waste of time in the world. Let me do the freakin' parenting of my own children, and you figure out how to quit sending them off to die.
Seriously, it's not like buying a pack of cigarettes. The kid has to a.) buy the thing, only the older ones have money anyways, b.) has to play the thing, it's not like they can hide a TV and a 360 or PS3 in their pockets...
If my child is playing Manhunt 2, well, I probably know about it. If I wasn't having to bust my ass 24/7 to finance a trillion dollar war and a trillion dollar welfare system, maybe once in a blue moon I could, ya know, sit down with the children, and be aware of what they're doing and how it's effecting them.
Jesus. I've never hated politicians more than I do this very second. What a waste of time and money and resources, all the expense of so much other awful things going on in the world...
Look at this?
/. has had to build up a system designed to mitigate their presence (obviously the answer is 'volume' but why volume, does having more "Fris(t st0p); Goat.cx" matter to anyone, much less the people spending their time to do this.
WTF is this? I've been using Slashdot for a few years now (obviously not a genuine OG, but still, less than a noob), but I've never understood what's going on here?
I mean, look at this? The subject isn't even words. Usually it says something that's totally nonsense, with some relation to 'First,' which is a long standing comments tradition, fight for first post. But what's the context here? And then a link to Goatse. That's sick.
Who the FUCK are you people? What's your motivation for doing this? Attention? Ad revenue? I don't see either as potentially successful. Do you just do this to fuck with my when I'm high?
Can anyone out there, maybe a more seasoned vet, to explain to me what the fuck this is, and why it happens, and why
Look, I'm an iPhone owner, and I love the damn thing, no question about it.
It was worth every penny, and then some; the SDK should only make it better.
However, that said, labeling it as "Invention of the Year" is a pretty sad state of affairs for the country. I'm pretty medical, environmental, and social breakthroughs deserve FAR more attention.
I'd hate to tell the guy with cancer that the really cool virus that eats cancer cells could've had a ton more funding for R & D if only it had one Time's Invention of the Year.
The iPhone is cool, no question, but it is the height of frivolity, and can't possibly compare with all the other wonderful things mankind is dreaming up and making a reality that deserve far more press coverage than the iPhone has already gotten.
Not that I'm complaining too loudly, my Apple stock just keeps on truckin'
Meh, I wouldn't sweat it.
a.) They already gave me the 'Flamebait' title, and
b.) It's pretty 'en vogue' to hate America these days. All the cool kids are doing it.
"Made in China"?
And the money shot is where Russia claims that it doesn't believe this clear weapons-based pissing contest won't result in another arms race...
I can't tell if that statement is a.) a lie or b.) the result of extreme stupidity.
Clearly if they saw who was in the White House, or I don't know, maybe studied the past 200 years of American history, they'd have a pretty good idea that this would probably trigger an arms race... How often does America like to have its arsenal out-done by foreigners? How often is that translated into leverage used by politicians to justify further military spending?
Well, anyways, kudos Russia! Here's to the apocalypse...