I would guess the packet profile, as in, how many packets are sent and how often, would be quite different between using the browser on your phone, and using the browser on your laptop.
Just a question: Have any of you ever actually done the math between a regular, subsidized phone and a plan, and buying a phone outright? My Galaxy S cost $500, and my contract-free, subsidy-free T-Mobile plan is about $60/month. By going contract free, I save about $10-20/month, but it still comes out to $2k over 2 years.
Most US cell phones are free or almost free. The fact that you're getting a free phone in exchange for paying thousands of dollars over two years for service seems to be lost on most consumers here.
Its actually not that much cheaper to buy the phone separately, unless you're going for an old, cheap dumbphone. I'm on T-Mobile's contract-free, subsidy-free plan, which is about $60/month. I also bought my Galaxy S for $500. The total for 2 years comes to just under $2k.
But this is Apple's fault too. If you go with Windows phones you can tether how you want, as they only care about iPhone users and can't detect Windows traffic from other Windows traffic
I'm pretty sure AT&T knows what kind of phone you're on when you connect to their network, so they don't need Apple's support on it.
It will turn off some of the more intelligent ones, but the ones he was targeting in his statement are the type that will not rethink their views until Fox News tells them what their view is. In the interest of fairness, there are people like that on the Left, too.
Yes, but then does the AT&T block extend to anything that's not the Google market? As in, I install SlideME or some Steam-like game store from the Google Market. Does AT&T allow me to install from those markets then, or does their "Unknown Sources" extend to those markets I just downloaded?
>The culprit was traced to a Chinese origin. I highly doubt any US authorities will bother to run over there, hog-tie the guy and drag him back over to the US.
In 1972, a crack commando unit was sent to prison by a military court for a crime they didn't commit. These men promptly escaped from a maximum security stockade to the Los Angeles underground. Today, still wanted by the government, they survive as soldiers of fortune. If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire... The A-Team.
Our courts would take the "mothers operation" scenario into account, even if you're robbing a bank.
And they would still find you guilty, because you robbed a fucking bank.
An arbitrary punishment of auto-banning all infringers would just destroy Google's credibility with the Russian, Chinese, Indian, etc. developers who'll engage in casual infringement
I fail to see how this is a bad thing. And cut the "casual infringement" bullshit: These people have the goal of stealing revenue from legit developers. And any legit developer isn't going to do anything related to "casual infringement"
You seriously think google should damage their Android ecosystem by deleting non-infringing apps because the developer posted an infringing app?
YES. The developer broke the developer's agreement he agreed to when he started posting to the Android store. And if you had read even the summary, you'd know that the pirate in this case was only selling pirated copies of other apps. How many pirated copies does he have to be selling before he gets banned? 2? 4? A dozen?
Also, courts get kinda touchy about anyone cutting in on their territory. In particular, our infringer with a sick mother could absolutely find an ambulance chaser to sue google for his own lost legit revenue plus lawyer fees plus whatever.
And Google's army of lawyers would legally smack that guy back into the Stone Age. Here's a hint: Just because you have a sick mother is not an excuse for breaking the law.
As I said, the original developers asking for bans are just fucking morons who understand nothing about the wider world outside.
Or they do, and they realize that these pirates are just assholes trying to steal their revenue.
Yes, a criminal court would care about exactly those points
Not in the US they won't.
If google doesn't want to worry about that shit, then google must be very conservative on banning people. Ain't rocket science, just the wider world outside your cubicle.
Or, they could just ban the offending developer. What if the original developer worked hard and posted his game because his mother needed an operation?
No, it seems perfectly legit. You are stealing from that original developer.
Imagine a developer with legit games too who just posted that infringing game because his mother needs an operation.
That is a retarded scenario. If that's truly the case, then the guy should develop his own damn application.
Imagine two co-developers have falling out, one registers their new game first, reports the second's game as infringing, and gets the second account banned. Imagine a developer reposts another's game because he owns part but got cheated by the official developer. etc.
In each of these cases, that is not the proper way to handle it. The proper way is in the court system, for breach of contract.
Second, you don't want to scare away infringing users who might become legitimate non-infringing users and improve the Android market place. A ban for infringement obviously isn't going to dissuade a professional infringer, but it'll very likely drive away a legitimate developer who's just cheating to test the waters.
Another retarded justification. Someone who is posting pirated apps for sale is not "testing the waters", they are stealing, plain and simple, and should be dissuaded from being part of the marketplace, because they are some of the lowest form of scum out there.
Apple takes a significant fraction of the revenue as basically pure profit
You mean aside from all the costs associated with running the iTunes store? And don't forget that they distribute free apps as well, for nothing.
because Apple has locked down the iPad to make it difficult to use for anything other than reading magazines and playing games and music
Like what? Go to meeting works quite well, as do a bunch of other VNC apps. There's also the new Garage Band app, and the Office type apps which do quite well.
all of which Apple takes a significant fraction of the revenue from as basically pure profit to offset the loss incurred from selling iPads at or below cost
Stop lying. The iPad itself is making money. It isn't sold at a loss. If you don't believe me, then check out their financial statements, all of which are available to the public.
Slashdot Mirror
I would guess the packet profile, as in, how many packets are sent and how often, would be quite different between using the browser on your phone, and using the browser on your laptop.
Just a question: Have any of you ever actually done the math between a regular, subsidized phone and a plan, and buying a phone outright? My Galaxy S cost $500, and my contract-free, subsidy-free T-Mobile plan is about $60/month. By going contract free, I save about $10-20/month, but it still comes out to $2k over 2 years.
Most US cell phones are free or almost free. The fact that you're getting a free phone in exchange for paying thousands of dollars over two years for service seems to be lost on most consumers here.
Its actually not that much cheaper to buy the phone separately, unless you're going for an old, cheap dumbphone. I'm on T-Mobile's contract-free, subsidy-free plan, which is about $60/month. I also bought my Galaxy S for $500. The total for 2 years comes to just under $2k.
But this is Apple's fault too. If you go with Windows phones you can tether how you want, as they only care about iPhone users and can't detect Windows traffic from other Windows traffic
I'm pretty sure AT&T knows what kind of phone you're on when you connect to their network, so they don't need Apple's support on it.
You're an idiot if you don't know the fucking difference between unions for private employees and public employees.
And you're an idiot if you do make a difference.
I even convinced some that the last Bush administration was really, really bad, and I didn't have yo call him Shrub or Dumbya or anything. Fancy that!
While that's good, its not exactly hard to do, especially toward the end, when only the rabid Bush supporters still approved of him.
It will turn off some of the more intelligent ones, but the ones he was targeting in his statement are the type that will not rethink their views until Fox News tells them what their view is. In the interest of fairness, there are people like that on the Left, too.
Yes, but then does the AT&T block extend to anything that's not the Google market? As in, I install SlideME or some Steam-like game store from the Google Market. Does AT&T allow me to install from those markets then, or does their "Unknown Sources" extend to those markets I just downloaded?
Rumor has it that Amazon is going to be setting up their own Android store.
Normal people downloading crap instead of buying them should just be labelled smart people.
No, they shouldn't. Those people are still benefiting from the author's work without compensation.
>The culprit was traced to a Chinese origin. I highly doubt any US authorities will bother to run over there, hog-tie the guy and drag him back over to the US.
In 1972, a crack commando unit was sent to prison by a military court for a crime they didn't commit. These men promptly escaped from a maximum security stockade to the Los Angeles underground. Today, still wanted by the government, they survive as soldiers of fortune. If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire... The A-Team.
In this case, it doesn't matter which country the pirate is located in; if they're putting the app up on Google's market, then you contact Google.
What if they're the only provider worth a damn in your area?
Our courts would take the "mothers operation" scenario into account, even if you're robbing a bank.
And they would still find you guilty, because you robbed a fucking bank.
An arbitrary punishment of auto-banning all infringers would just destroy Google's credibility with the Russian, Chinese, Indian, etc. developers who'll engage in casual infringement
I fail to see how this is a bad thing. And cut the "casual infringement" bullshit: These people have the goal of stealing revenue from legit developers. And any legit developer isn't going to do anything related to "casual infringement"
You seriously think google should damage their Android ecosystem by deleting non-infringing apps because the developer posted an infringing app?
YES. The developer broke the developer's agreement he agreed to when he started posting to the Android store. And if you had read even the summary, you'd know that the pirate in this case was only selling pirated copies of other apps. How many pirated copies does he have to be selling before he gets banned? 2? 4? A dozen?
Also, courts get kinda touchy about anyone cutting in on their territory. In particular, our infringer with a sick mother could absolutely find an ambulance chaser to sue google for his own lost legit revenue plus lawyer fees plus whatever.
And Google's army of lawyers would legally smack that guy back into the Stone Age. Here's a hint: Just because you have a sick mother is not an excuse for breaking the law.
As I said, the original developers asking for bans are just fucking morons who understand nothing about the wider world outside.
Or they do, and they realize that these pirates are just assholes trying to steal their revenue.
Yes, a criminal court would care about exactly those points
Not in the US they won't.
If google doesn't want to worry about that shit, then google must be very conservative on banning people. Ain't rocket science, just the wider world outside your cubicle.
Or, they could just ban the offending developer. What if the original developer worked hard and posted his game because his mother needed an operation?
No, it seems perfectly legit. You are stealing from that original developer.
Imagine a developer with legit games too who just posted that infringing game because his mother needs an operation.
That is a retarded scenario. If that's truly the case, then the guy should develop his own damn application.
Imagine two co-developers have falling out, one registers their new game first, reports the second's game as infringing, and gets the second account banned. Imagine a developer reposts another's game because he owns part but got cheated by the official developer. etc.
In each of these cases, that is not the proper way to handle it. The proper way is in the court system, for breach of contract.
Second, you don't want to scare away infringing users who might become legitimate non-infringing users and improve the Android market place. A ban for infringement obviously isn't going to dissuade a professional infringer, but it'll very likely drive away a legitimate developer who's just cheating to test the waters.
Another retarded justification. Someone who is posting pirated apps for sale is not "testing the waters", they are stealing, plain and simple, and should be dissuaded from being part of the marketplace, because they are some of the lowest form of scum out there.
Should that freedom extend to being able to sell someone else's app as your own?
So you're saying that he shouldn't have had Google take down the pirated copy because the pirate might feel bad?
How does it show bias? The iPhone was released 9 months ago.
Its not really free if they need a subscription.
Citation on the government actually backing him up? And I'm going to need more than "The government provided a court system for him to sue in."
There are more ways to take advantage of extra screen real estate than "make it bigger". In fact, I'd argue that is the worst way to do it.
and it just doesn't have the software base of Windows.
Good. I don't want to have to deal with apps made for a keyboard and mouse on a touchscreen device. Its not a good experience at all.
You're full of shit.
Apple takes a significant fraction of the revenue as basically pure profit
You mean aside from all the costs associated with running the iTunes store? And don't forget that they distribute free apps as well, for nothing.
because Apple has locked down the iPad to make it difficult to use for anything other than reading magazines and playing games and music
Like what? Go to meeting works quite well, as do a bunch of other VNC apps. There's also the new Garage Band app, and the Office type apps which do quite well.
all of which Apple takes a significant fraction of the revenue from as basically pure profit to offset the loss incurred from selling iPads at or below cost
Stop lying. The iPad itself is making money. It isn't sold at a loss. If you don't believe me, then check out their financial statements, all of which are available to the public.