Um, Amazon didn't announce they were going DRM free until one month After Apple, and it was later that year they finally did. Amazon also only had EMI's music DRM free at launch.
With ebooks, Apple has left DRM "optional" and the content provider must explicitly tell apple to enable it for specific content. This was a NEGOTIATION and the result of numerous publishers refusing to allow their content online without DRM.
Video is not DRM Free from ANY legal provider for download. They're even fighting to get the FCC to let them turn on the DRM functions of your TV!
The app store is not DRM, it's about security, and it was insisted on by AT&T and other world providers. It was not originally included at all because Cingular refused to have a device as powerful as the iPhone on their network (as did Verizon, who actually had first chair), with an open app platform. only after AT&T bought singular were other arrangements possible.
Apple also clearly shows the app store is unprofitable. It barely breaks even, and exists only to provide the marketplace for the devs.
Apple also stated openly "we will not aggressively peruse hobbyists who unlock the iphone" the same statement they made about the Hackintosh community. They ARE under obligation to peruse BUSINESSES who profit by selling unlocking products (per their carrier contract), but if you unlock your phone, even AT&T won't peruse you. They did leave a key at the door (a default password that was easy to find).
Apple could give two shits about competition to the store. Pandora already is, as are a hundred other apps and dozens for video streaming.
The reason Flash is not on the iPhone is because Adobe has NEVER SUBMITTED IT for review. They have insisted on making apple release flash as in antegral OS component, always on, in a background capacity, as opposed to apple's suggestion that is be a foreground-only application.
Further, flash's use of CPU and resources is not compatible with the 2G iPhone, and is a powerful drain on the 3GS which would prevent most existing background functionality. Adobe refuses to provide a "lite" version of their app, and refuses to work with apple to let it run only on demand. Apple did extensive tests of Flash. They even admitted recently they had it running on the iPad, and it cut the battery life from near 10 hours to barely 2.
Apple has made this quite public. Their push of big-music to go DRM free is well documented. Their fights with the NBC over pushes to get TV episodes DRM free is also legendary. They're constantly working to get the MPAA to even allow rip to DVD of encrypted content for backup and are as yet unsuccessful. The MPAA refuses to release non DRM content as their position is ALL video available today comes DRM only, even in the stores, so why should it be DRM free on your PC?
Apple approves all devices that are approved under industry specs that their hardware also supports (USB, SATA, 1394, VGA, DisplaytPort, etc). Whether or not that device has Mac software is not apple's concern, the OS WILL detect it. in many cases, apple partners with the distributor and controls driver roll outs automatically (as Microsoft also does, as does Ubuntu and others).
An anticompetitive club? What dream land are you in? What app has apple rejected that they COMPETE with, or that approving would have reduced their revenue? none. The SDK simply states apps cant duplicate the functionality (aka operate as a complete replacement for) a default built-in app.
Swimsuits are not porn, they're not age 4+. Those apps can all be resubmistted as soon as they change the image in the APP STORE, not inside the app, not any of the code, just the AD in the store's content. All the "adult" apps in the world except outright porn are approved, but they simply can not use images or language in the DESCRIPTION that is not age 4+. That's all that changed. Of these 5,00 apps, 4900 of them will be back in a week or two (and the rest will try sneaky changes when they repost that will get caught and blocked until they comply with other policy). Apple's prevention of outright porn has to do with complying with some state laws, not a specific choice of their own (though they are openly against adult uses of the device). nothing prevents you from getting porn using Safari...
1) there have been numerous articles in the last year (since May when they last changed the plan terms) of people receiving bills with multi-hundred dollar overage charges. 2) The pro-rating may have doubled, but it's still over $100 in the last 30 day period, and many times what it was a few months ago any time prior to that. 3) I don't need to be on a call while driving, but I need to know some one is TRYING to call, or left a voice mail, or a text about an emergency. If I go on a 4 hour ride, and need GPS to get me there, I'm completely disconnected during that time. yes, it's a CDMA limit, but they could have deployed 3G anytime in the last 5 years, and they chose not to. I'm also not complaining about the limitation, I'm complaining all their advertising hinges around an OS that's crippled because of it, with no honest communication to buyers at time of purchase about that limit or its potential issues. 4) Smartphones no, but if you get a smartphone, you have to pay $30 a month extra (or $45 if you use push e-mail). I want a camera phone that lets me copy pictures to a PC to free. Verizon's phones can not do that since Verizon chooses to alter the firmware to prevent it (though a few new ones can, and it's becoming less of a common practice for them). 5) http://www.verizonwireless.com/customer_care/add_feature/TC486R1099.html: Section 10, clearly states "next whole minute" I'm right. 6) You can turn it off, but not if the text plan is part of your existing contract, without resigning for another 2 years from the date you turn it off (unless you simply keep paying for it after turning it off on the control panel without changing your plan, fick that!) 7) $100 after 18 months, $200 after 2. Not $400 after 18 months and $200 after 12 as they've done on the iPhone 3 times, including existing subscribers. Also, AT&T lets you get the full rebate, up to $400, after 2 years, but Verizon caps you at your new every two amount. 8) Sorry, happened to us twice. There's also a slew of oline articles about this. Add or remove a line, change to new plans (not different tiers in the same plan, that's OK), activate a dew device, these all triger contract renewal. I was burned by this just 7 months ago and had to pay $170 to get out of a plan we'd had for 29 months because my wife had changed her terms to a different plan that included texts a bit more than a year before. 9) I dig into rollover on my AT&T plan about every 3-4 months, and by doing so, I've saved $20 month by having 1 plan tier lower for more than 3 years. That's HUGE, and something worth bitching about. 10) Verizon bit 4 people in my office with this in the last year that I'm personally aware of. One got back billed over $150 on his Windows mibole (from day 1 on his contract), and he'd only connected the device to our exchange server 3 months earlier. (we only moved his department to Exchange 4 months before). If you buy a new device, it's one of the first questions they ask, and they inform you that use of push e-mail without the term on your contract IS monitored, is a violation of your contract, and they'll not only back bill for it, they can terminate your contract without prior warning.
For insurance, i have a rider policy on my homeowners insurance, costs about $30 a year, and covers loss, theft, accidental, and incidental damage of any of my PEDs. There's a $100 deductible per incident (not per device). This is far cheaper than insurance from the provider. You should contact your insurer and see if they offer a similar rider policy.
They would not let me do this for my wife, just 7 months ago. They technically told me I could, but there was a charge to disable it, and our plan, which included texts, could not be changed or discounted to remove the text plan without signing another 2 year contract.
I actually have had the unfortunate time period of having dealt with Cox, though it was years ago. I'm not disputing their service quality vs FIOS. I'm disputing their customer service practices and deceptive marketing.
i also understand there's some basic marketplace function that doesn't list apps you don't have API support because it requires a version newer than your installed version, but again, this is limited by the Dev's actually including that logic in their app (or tags, or something), and is also only limited to Google's marketplace, not all marketplaces. I also have no guarantee that when Verizon updates the OS on my device, without my ability to refuse it since apparently they can push those updates OTA (a high security risk I'm sure will be abused sooner rather than later), that my apps might break, and I'l left holding the bag.
Exactly, doesn't matter, nor does it on the Mac Platform. Some stuff is not compatible. Commodity stuff that follows current standards, especially those that have been around for some time, often works without having to install software (apple detects it and does that for you).
man, that is EXACTLY why i love Apple so much. Some argue the premium price (though spec for spec research shows them to be more often the cheapest competitor in the device class), but even if there is, i prefer it, because they're a SINGLE SOURCE support vendor. I can't have a hardware vendor blame and OS vendor who blames an app vendor, who blames a hardware issue.
i can buy any common device (and lots of uncommon ones) and plug it into the mac, and the only people involved would be the Device manufacturer and Apple, and half the time, Apple has taken on the driver support role for the provider as well (just not hardware support of the device).
With the iPhone, even when I call AT&T for help, there's a special devision of Apple staffed at AT&T to support the phone, and I can walk into any Apple store and get support. I know for certain that upgrades to the OS will include a minimum number of version of backward compatability, and apps sold in the store work exclusively withthe latest version of the OS or they're de-listed. Devs don't use unapproved APIs, and Apple keeps them all in the loop about changes to the APIs they're allowed to use months before the change takes effect.
People complain about Apple's Lock in a LOT, but in truth, it provides the devs a lot more freedom, make the platform more predictable, and simplifies code development. Devs know what they can and can't do. The devs who get apps in that get thrown back out later know damned well they were cheating the system to begin with, and if their app got selected and approved, it was lucky from day 1 and their number could come up anytime.
In the beginning, when Apple was using mostly man labor to inspect apps, and were completely overwhelmed with unexpected dev interest, and had an OS not designed from day 1 to support that kind of app development, there was a lot of issue and inconstancy. Now that Apple uses code inspection tools that run mostly automatically, and they've made more clear their stance (which appears to only frown on anything against the law, associated with porn, or against the carrier contracts, but all else is fair game), it's been a great marketplace. With 150,00 apps, I don't feel restricted at all, and I don't have to worry about security issues or app compatability at all.
OPEN only works if you have a rigorous and well documented code management team. Take Linux for example, in RedHat, all code intended to be leveraged by other applications is fed up the tree into a core solution, and it becomes part of the approved code base, and inclusion/depreciation of code is communicated. When a radical shift occours, code is "branched" or "forked" and a separate product is the result (Fedora), which then takes on a life of it's own with it's own code submission process.
Now, if you have code you rely on from RedHat's base, there's no guarantee it will work the same under Ubuntu. The root code might be there, but it might not be in the same revision, might have additional bugs introduced by other parties, etc.
Android is a virtually unmanaged code base, except for the root tree under development exclusively by Google. manufacterers who partnered with Google to get Android on their devices took that "open" code base and ran with it, adding their own firmware and application changes, and in some cases disabling hardware other apps might use. those variations are not tracked and maintained by Google, thus the problem. It would be like having Dell release a SP for Windows XP without consulting with Microsoft...
Apple prefers (and fight VIGOROUSLY for) DRM free content. The ONLY content DRM's on the Apple store is content the PROVIDER INSISTS is encrypted, not just by Apple, but by EVERY SINGLE METHOD OF LEGALLY GETTING IT. Apple is largely considered an industry leader in the DRM free content battle you moron.
This is not UFD against open source, it;s a valid argument that Android is suffering user confusion and disappointment because Google didn't explicitly require a reference platform, application certification process, and forward compatibility requirements. Yes, there are a lot of tools available to devs to assist with the compatibility issues, but its on the devs to actually USE those tools, and very few choose to (or even know how).
I KNOW that when iPhone 4 comes out, all apps i have on the iPhone now will either work, or require a minor patch that I'll get for free guaranteed. I know this because if the app isn't supported on the latest release, apple pulls it from the store, cutting that dev off from all future revenue on the app if they don't fix it, and updates are always free. I also know there's extremely good documentation coming out of apple to the devs about explicitly what they can and can't code for, which APIs are scheduled for depreciation, and which APIs replace existing functionality over time. They've been doing that with OS X successfully for nearly 10 years, and with Sysem X previously. in contracts, Web OS, Android, and Windows devs really have no clue what's going on until the SDK hits the street (on launch day, not months before release), and you're lucky to get any real documentation or guidance at all, let alone dev support.
Let me tell you, for 3 of the last 4 years, we had phones in my house from both companies. Verizon because my Mother-in law thought she'd be nice, and commit my wife and I to a 2 year contract on a phone so she and my wife could take for free (not that i could not already call her free on VoIP, so really she bought my wife a gift to save herself money at our expense). I had AT&T provided by the office, and later got an iPhone.
Let me clue you in on some of the discrepancies between these 2 companies I've experienced: 1) Verizon has a data plan cap on their unlimited plan, and RIDICULOUS overage charges. AT&T has a "soft cap" at 5GB, has no overage charges, and has not disconnected or throttled a single known customer for exceeding the cap (even given the network strain). 2) Verizon doubled its termination fees recently, on devices AT&T also sells with the same subsidies. AT&T has mode no move to change, and the FCC and FTC are crawling up Verizon's back over the policy. 3) Verizon's adds are all about those great multitasking devices, but they fail to mention in any literature or media that those devices come strictly limited to voice and data use independently, meaning you can't use GPS and take a call at the same time, or be on a call and look something up, a CORE FEATURE of those platforms. 4) Verizon embeds custom firmware in 3rd party devices, disabling advertised hardware features so they can charge for their own services. For example, on most of their camera phones (including all of them from Motorola I'm aware of), have the ability to sync with a PC over both a cable and bluetooth, but Verizon hacked the firmware to explicitly forbid this, in favor of a fee based service to "send yourself" images through their network at $0.29 each, and they didn't even bother to take the "PC sync cable sold separately" line off their OWN BOX (not Moto's box, completely Verizon's branded box). After we lodged a complaint with tech support, and after repeated, and repeated failed call backs, we finally were told Verizon would never sell that cable, but oops, you've had that device over 14 days now, so you can't return it without a huge contract penalty... 5) Billing for the next full utilized minute. You make a call for 30 seconds, 2 minutes are charged... 6) No ability what so ever to disable text messaging on any phone that supports it on Verizon. AT&T offers both a filtering service for a fee as well as a similar service at no charge if you get inundated with too many unsolicited texts, and you can also simply outright have text disabled completely. 7) Strict 2 year handset replacement policy. After 2 years, the new phone is only (up to) $200 off, not $400 off like a new iPhone, and you're still locked into a 2 year renewal anyway. New subscribers get a better deal than existing ones. 8) automatic contract renewal for a variety of things: Add a new line to an existing contract, even with a pre-existing phone, resets to 2 years, even if you were more than a year in on the existing line, changing plans extends contracts in many cases, replace a broken phone mid way through by any means other than their own (deductible incurring) additional warranty extends the contract, etc. 9) no rollover minutes. 10) extra charge for using ActiveSync or BES, even to YOUR OWN SERVERS, which have NOTHING to do with Verizon other than using their data channel.
I can go on.
AT&T may be a tad dishonest in it's ads (questionably), but so are all the others. AT&T's up front pricing is the same or lower than Verizon's across the board. Their network issues have nothing to do with their network, but with available FCC frequency and they readily admit that (btw, Verizon and Sprint are having the SAME issues, you just don't hear about it as much since they're not iPhone-hater targets). AT&T may be a hotly hated company, and they certainly have their share of issues I can't defend them for, but they're practically SAINTS compared to how Verizon treats their customers. Don't even get me started on Fios...
At least on the Apple store, it is clearly defined in the app description the required OS release, and the platform limitations. Apps will say "requires OS 3" and "Requires iPod Gen 2 or higher."
The problem with Android is that with all the disparate hardware configs, one-off versions of the OS, and lack of a true universal central store, there's no guarantee your device has the hardware requirements to support any given app, and no controls store side to check, or even warn you, as even in less than a year its simply gotten too complicated.
I may not be a fan of the new OS look and feel Microsoft developed for Windows 7 Mobile (whatever they're calling it now), but the strict hardware requirements, limitation on processor/GPU type and speed, and other system configuration, and strict software compatibility rules, should help eliminate most o fthose issues under their platform.
People who wanted the open platform, and had anti-apple simplicity sentiments, got exactly what they asked for; a complicated platform with few rules and lots of security issues.
Unless of course it requires hardware level interfaces that don't exist in your machine, leverage drivers or hardware you don't have, leverage legacy APIs no longer included in the OS, leverage "features" that were patched and the back door the app used is now locked, needs more resources than you have available, or in general is poorly written or buggy, or you have a virus or other system corruption that causes issues, and a hundred other reasons.
I can attest to the fact that I have dozens of apps designed even for XP, let alone NT/2K, that don't work in Vista, let alone 7. I even have apps written for XP that don't work in SP3, and many, many that require SP2 or higher.
No, but it's a problem if your Honda engine can't accept the Honda after market kit you bought that fits that engine, just not in your car's model, and when there's no documentation either way that's the case, and a strict no refund policy.
nope. It got dropped a WHILE ago....and still no HDMI cable in the box, only the more expensive (to manufacture) component cables, which can't enable true HD on an HD focussed game console...
This is a cycle, and I'm stuck in it. When the PS3 came out, first I waited simply because I wanted to be sure the platform took off. I eventually said to myself "It's going well, as soon as they drop the price I'll buy one." Well, they not only dropped the price, they dropped the emotion chip....so I didn't buy it. Later they were to drop the price, and they dropped the Emotion chip EMULATOR TOO, then Linux boot support, now they're dropping my ability to get good value on resale of games (since that $20 is getting passed to the consumer, my game is not $20 less valuable at resale, especially since most used games I BUY are only $20 or less, that's a huge hit). I was all set, finally just willing to admit there were few enough PS2 games I have that I'd actualyl play it was worth just keeping the PS2 slim i have around to play them, and I was going to buy a PS3 this summer when the price inevitably dropped again.
Sorry Sony, your screwed yourselves again. I'll just buy another PC based game or two, maybe a new Vid Card.
I don't have to itemize anything other than collectibles over $200, Jewelry over $500, Silverware (the real stuff), and china over $100 per piece. Strict itemization on paper is not required, photographs will do in most cases. Pre-itemization is also only required for items I don't have receipts/purchase records for. Not all insurers are so easy to deal with, many require full detail reports of categories of items beyond certain total prices...
Rider policies usually cover blanket amounts and do not require itemization, while default coverage usually has lots of stipulations. My personal electronics coverage for example requires only a receipt or physical proof, covers comparable or better replacement (including if replacement costs more than original purchase), and has a limit of $30K with no individual device price limit. Theft/loss requires a police report to be filed, but if I have the damaged device in hand that's the only proof required.
Replacement plans no, Black tie (formerly PSPs, not PRPs) yes. I've done it for 10 years, just did again about 3 months ago.
Device must be in excess of $200 and be in certain product categories that typically assume repair, not replacement, however, Inkjet printers in this class are not repaired but always replaced...
When they replace the device, those accessories are also covered if they're not feature compatible with the replacement so long as they were purchased with the device on the same receipt at BestBuy, which is why i shop there so often. I replace my printer about every 18-24 months under their in-store warranty. They even give me free ink when I return the cartridges I have for the old printer. I've also exchanged a camera there, a Sony for a Canon since I was able to use the excuse that the other Sony cameras were not as capable as the one I had (the model was no longer available, and there was no replacement in the series, only a much higher class one). BestBuy gave me 2 spare batteries, and 2 memory cards for the cannon when I exchanged the Sony. It took a bit of fighting, and a call to corporate, but upper management agreed even though the store manager did not that the policy did work that way.
Slashdot Mirror
Um, Amazon didn't announce they were going DRM free until one month After Apple, and it was later that year they finally did. Amazon also only had EMI's music DRM free at launch.
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Amazon-Follows-Apple-Down-The-DRM-Free-Road-54959.shtml
With ebooks, Apple has left DRM "optional" and the content provider must explicitly tell apple to enable it for specific content. This was a NEGOTIATION and the result of numerous publishers refusing to allow their content online without DRM.
Video is not DRM Free from ANY legal provider for download. They're even fighting to get the FCC to let them turn on the DRM functions of your TV!
The app store is not DRM, it's about security, and it was insisted on by AT&T and other world providers. It was not originally included at all because Cingular refused to have a device as powerful as the iPhone on their network (as did Verizon, who actually had first chair), with an open app platform. only after AT&T bought singular were other arrangements possible.
Apple also clearly shows the app store is unprofitable. It barely breaks even, and exists only to provide the marketplace for the devs.
Apple also stated openly "we will not aggressively peruse hobbyists who unlock the iphone" the same statement they made about the Hackintosh community. They ARE under obligation to peruse BUSINESSES who profit by selling unlocking products (per their carrier contract), but if you unlock your phone, even AT&T won't peruse you. They did leave a key at the door (a default password that was easy to find).
Apple could give two shits about competition to the store. Pandora already is, as are a hundred other apps and dozens for video streaming.
The reason Flash is not on the iPhone is because Adobe has NEVER SUBMITTED IT for review. They have insisted on making apple release flash as in antegral OS component, always on, in a background capacity, as opposed to apple's suggestion that is be a foreground-only application.
Further, flash's use of CPU and resources is not compatible with the 2G iPhone, and is a powerful drain on the 3GS which would prevent most existing background functionality. Adobe refuses to provide a "lite" version of their app, and refuses to work with apple to let it run only on demand. Apple did extensive tests of Flash. They even admitted recently they had it running on the iPad, and it cut the battery life from near 10 hours to barely 2.
Apple has made this quite public. Their push of big-music to go DRM free is well documented. Their fights with the NBC over pushes to get TV episodes DRM free is also legendary. They're constantly working to get the MPAA to even allow rip to DVD of encrypted content for backup and are as yet unsuccessful. The MPAA refuses to release non DRM content as their position is ALL video available today comes DRM only, even in the stores, so why should it be DRM free on your PC?
Apple approves all devices that are approved under industry specs that their hardware also supports (USB, SATA, 1394, VGA, DisplaytPort, etc). Whether or not that device has Mac software is not apple's concern, the OS WILL detect it. in many cases, apple partners with the distributor and controls driver roll outs automatically (as Microsoft also does, as does Ubuntu and others).
An anticompetitive club? What dream land are you in? What app has apple rejected that they COMPETE with, or that approving would have reduced their revenue? none. The SDK simply states apps cant duplicate the functionality (aka operate as a complete replacement for) a default built-in app.
Swimsuits are not porn, they're not age 4+. Those apps can all be resubmistted as soon as they change the image in the APP STORE, not inside the app, not any of the code, just the AD in the store's content. All the "adult" apps in the world except outright porn are approved, but they simply can not use images or language in the DESCRIPTION that is not age 4+. That's all that changed. Of these 5,00 apps, 4900 of them will be back in a week or two (and the rest will try sneaky changes when they repost that will get caught and blocked until they comply with other policy). Apple's prevention of outright porn has to do with complying with some state laws, not a specific choice of their own (though they are openly against adult uses of the device). nothing prevents you from getting porn using Safari...
1) there have been numerous articles in the last year (since May when they last changed the plan terms) of people receiving bills with multi-hundred dollar overage charges.
2) The pro-rating may have doubled, but it's still over $100 in the last 30 day period, and many times what it was a few months ago any time prior to that.
3) I don't need to be on a call while driving, but I need to know some one is TRYING to call, or left a voice mail, or a text about an emergency. If I go on a 4 hour ride, and need GPS to get me there, I'm completely disconnected during that time. yes, it's a CDMA limit, but they could have deployed 3G anytime in the last 5 years, and they chose not to. I'm also not complaining about the limitation, I'm complaining all their advertising hinges around an OS that's crippled because of it, with no honest communication to buyers at time of purchase about that limit or its potential issues.
4) Smartphones no, but if you get a smartphone, you have to pay $30 a month extra (or $45 if you use push e-mail). I want a camera phone that lets me copy pictures to a PC to free. Verizon's phones can not do that since Verizon chooses to alter the firmware to prevent it (though a few new ones can, and it's becoming less of a common practice for them).
5) http://www.verizonwireless.com/customer_care/add_feature/TC486R1099.html: Section 10, clearly states "next whole minute" I'm right.
6) You can turn it off, but not if the text plan is part of your existing contract, without resigning for another 2 years from the date you turn it off (unless you simply keep paying for it after turning it off on the control panel without changing your plan, fick that!)
7) $100 after 18 months, $200 after 2. Not $400 after 18 months and $200 after 12 as they've done on the iPhone 3 times, including existing subscribers. Also, AT&T lets you get the full rebate, up to $400, after 2 years, but Verizon caps you at your new every two amount.
8) Sorry, happened to us twice. There's also a slew of oline articles about this. Add or remove a line, change to new plans (not different tiers in the same plan, that's OK), activate a dew device, these all triger contract renewal. I was burned by this just 7 months ago and had to pay $170 to get out of a plan we'd had for 29 months because my wife had changed her terms to a different plan that included texts a bit more than a year before.
9) I dig into rollover on my AT&T plan about every 3-4 months, and by doing so, I've saved $20 month by having 1 plan tier lower for more than 3 years. That's HUGE, and something worth bitching about.
10) Verizon bit 4 people in my office with this in the last year that I'm personally aware of. One got back billed over $150 on his Windows mibole (from day 1 on his contract), and he'd only connected the device to our exchange server 3 months earlier. (we only moved his department to Exchange 4 months before). If you buy a new device, it's one of the first questions they ask, and they inform you that use of push e-mail without the term on your contract IS monitored, is a violation of your contract, and they'll not only back bill for it, they can terminate your contract without prior warning.
From: http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/mobilebroadband/?page=products_connect
"5 GB (5,120 MB) of data usage for Internet access through your notebook or Netbook. $0.05/MB after allowance."
This is for the "capable smartphones and blackberries"
Yes they do charge overages. They added that in May of 2009 (which dropping it from $0.40 to 0.05)
For insurance, i have a rider policy on my homeowners insurance, costs about $30 a year, and covers loss, theft, accidental, and incidental damage of any of my PEDs. There's a $100 deductible per incident (not per device). This is far cheaper than insurance from the provider. You should contact your insurer and see if they offer a similar rider policy.
They would not let me do this for my wife, just 7 months ago. They technically told me I could, but there was a charge to disable it, and our plan, which included texts, could not be changed or discounted to remove the text plan without signing another 2 year contract.
I actually have had the unfortunate time period of having dealt with Cox, though it was years ago. I'm not disputing their service quality vs FIOS. I'm disputing their customer service practices and deceptive marketing.
The core marketplace yes, others not so much.
i also understand there's some basic marketplace function that doesn't list apps you don't have API support because it requires a version newer than your installed version, but again, this is limited by the Dev's actually including that logic in their app (or tags, or something), and is also only limited to Google's marketplace, not all marketplaces. I also have no guarantee that when Verizon updates the OS on my device, without my ability to refuse it since apparently they can push those updates OTA (a high security risk I'm sure will be abused sooner rather than later), that my apps might break, and I'l left holding the bag.
Exactly, doesn't matter, nor does it on the Mac Platform. Some stuff is not compatible. Commodity stuff that follows current standards, especially those that have been around for some time, often works without having to install software (apple detects it and does that for you).
man, that is EXACTLY why i love Apple so much. Some argue the premium price (though spec for spec research shows them to be more often the cheapest competitor in the device class), but even if there is, i prefer it, because they're a SINGLE SOURCE support vendor. I can't have a hardware vendor blame and OS vendor who blames an app vendor, who blames a hardware issue.
i can buy any common device (and lots of uncommon ones) and plug it into the mac, and the only people involved would be the Device manufacturer and Apple, and half the time, Apple has taken on the driver support role for the provider as well (just not hardware support of the device).
With the iPhone, even when I call AT&T for help, there's a special devision of Apple staffed at AT&T to support the phone, and I can walk into any Apple store and get support. I know for certain that upgrades to the OS will include a minimum number of version of backward compatability, and apps sold in the store work exclusively withthe latest version of the OS or they're de-listed. Devs don't use unapproved APIs, and Apple keeps them all in the loop about changes to the APIs they're allowed to use months before the change takes effect.
People complain about Apple's Lock in a LOT, but in truth, it provides the devs a lot more freedom, make the platform more predictable, and simplifies code development. Devs know what they can and can't do. The devs who get apps in that get thrown back out later know damned well they were cheating the system to begin with, and if their app got selected and approved, it was lucky from day 1 and their number could come up anytime.
In the beginning, when Apple was using mostly man labor to inspect apps, and were completely overwhelmed with unexpected dev interest, and had an OS not designed from day 1 to support that kind of app development, there was a lot of issue and inconstancy. Now that Apple uses code inspection tools that run mostly automatically, and they've made more clear their stance (which appears to only frown on anything against the law, associated with porn, or against the carrier contracts, but all else is fair game), it's been a great marketplace. With 150,00 apps, I don't feel restricted at all, and I don't have to worry about security issues or app compatability at all.
OPEN only works if you have a rigorous and well documented code management team. Take Linux for example, in RedHat, all code intended to be leveraged by other applications is fed up the tree into a core solution, and it becomes part of the approved code base, and inclusion/depreciation of code is communicated. When a radical shift occours, code is "branched" or "forked" and a separate product is the result (Fedora), which then takes on a life of it's own with it's own code submission process.
Now, if you have code you rely on from RedHat's base, there's no guarantee it will work the same under Ubuntu. The root code might be there, but it might not be in the same revision, might have additional bugs introduced by other parties, etc.
Android is a virtually unmanaged code base, except for the root tree under development exclusively by Google. manufacterers who partnered with Google to get Android on their devices took that "open" code base and ran with it, adding their own firmware and application changes, and in some cases disabling hardware other apps might use. those variations are not tracked and maintained by Google, thus the problem. It would be like having Dell release a SP for Windows XP without consulting with Microsoft...
Apple prefers (and fight VIGOROUSLY for) DRM free content. The ONLY content DRM's on the Apple store is content the PROVIDER INSISTS is encrypted, not just by Apple, but by EVERY SINGLE METHOD OF LEGALLY GETTING IT. Apple is largely considered an industry leader in the DRM free content battle you moron.
This is not UFD against open source, it;s a valid argument that Android is suffering user confusion and disappointment because Google didn't explicitly require a reference platform, application certification process, and forward compatibility requirements. Yes, there are a lot of tools available to devs to assist with the compatibility issues, but its on the devs to actually USE those tools, and very few choose to (or even know how).
I KNOW that when iPhone 4 comes out, all apps i have on the iPhone now will either work, or require a minor patch that I'll get for free guaranteed. I know this because if the app isn't supported on the latest release, apple pulls it from the store, cutting that dev off from all future revenue on the app if they don't fix it, and updates are always free. I also know there's extremely good documentation coming out of apple to the devs about explicitly what they can and can't code for, which APIs are scheduled for depreciation, and which APIs replace existing functionality over time. They've been doing that with OS X successfully for nearly 10 years, and with Sysem X previously. in contracts, Web OS, Android, and Windows devs really have no clue what's going on until the SDK hits the street (on launch day, not months before release), and you're lucky to get any real documentation or guidance at all, let alone dev support.
Wow, you think AT&T is evil, compared to Verizon?
Let me tell you, for 3 of the last 4 years, we had phones in my house from both companies. Verizon because my Mother-in law thought she'd be nice, and commit my wife and I to a 2 year contract on a phone so she and my wife could take for free (not that i could not already call her free on VoIP, so really she bought my wife a gift to save herself money at our expense). I had AT&T provided by the office, and later got an iPhone.
Let me clue you in on some of the discrepancies between these 2 companies I've experienced:
1) Verizon has a data plan cap on their unlimited plan, and RIDICULOUS overage charges. AT&T has a "soft cap" at 5GB, has no overage charges, and has not disconnected or throttled a single known customer for exceeding the cap (even given the network strain).
2) Verizon doubled its termination fees recently, on devices AT&T also sells with the same subsidies. AT&T has mode no move to change, and the FCC and FTC are crawling up Verizon's back over the policy.
3) Verizon's adds are all about those great multitasking devices, but they fail to mention in any literature or media that those devices come strictly limited to voice and data use independently, meaning you can't use GPS and take a call at the same time, or be on a call and look something up, a CORE FEATURE of those platforms.
4) Verizon embeds custom firmware in 3rd party devices, disabling advertised hardware features so they can charge for their own services. For example, on most of their camera phones (including all of them from Motorola I'm aware of), have the ability to sync with a PC over both a cable and bluetooth, but Verizon hacked the firmware to explicitly forbid this, in favor of a fee based service to "send yourself" images through their network at $0.29 each, and they didn't even bother to take the "PC sync cable sold separately" line off their OWN BOX (not Moto's box, completely Verizon's branded box). After we lodged a complaint with tech support, and after repeated, and repeated failed call backs, we finally were told Verizon would never sell that cable, but oops, you've had that device over 14 days now, so you can't return it without a huge contract penalty...
5) Billing for the next full utilized minute. You make a call for 30 seconds, 2 minutes are charged...
6) No ability what so ever to disable text messaging on any phone that supports it on Verizon. AT&T offers both a filtering service for a fee as well as a similar service at no charge if you get inundated with too many unsolicited texts, and you can also simply outright have text disabled completely.
7) Strict 2 year handset replacement policy. After 2 years, the new phone is only (up to) $200 off, not $400 off like a new iPhone, and you're still locked into a 2 year renewal anyway. New subscribers get a better deal than existing ones.
8) automatic contract renewal for a variety of things: Add a new line to an existing contract, even with a pre-existing phone, resets to 2 years, even if you were more than a year in on the existing line, changing plans extends contracts in many cases, replace a broken phone mid way through by any means other than their own (deductible incurring) additional warranty extends the contract, etc.
9) no rollover minutes.
10) extra charge for using ActiveSync or BES, even to YOUR OWN SERVERS, which have NOTHING to do with Verizon other than using their data channel.
I can go on.
AT&T may be a tad dishonest in it's ads (questionably), but so are all the others. AT&T's up front pricing is the same or lower than Verizon's across the board. Their network issues have nothing to do with their network, but with available FCC frequency and they readily admit that (btw, Verizon and Sprint are having the SAME issues, you just don't hear about it as much since they're not iPhone-hater targets). AT&T may be a hotly hated company, and they certainly have their share of issues I can't defend them for, but they're practically SAINTS compared to how Verizon treats their customers. Don't even get me started on Fios...
At least on the Apple store, it is clearly defined in the app description the required OS release, and the platform limitations. Apps will say "requires OS 3" and "Requires iPod Gen 2 or higher."
The problem with Android is that with all the disparate hardware configs, one-off versions of the OS, and lack of a true universal central store, there's no guarantee your device has the hardware requirements to support any given app, and no controls store side to check, or even warn you, as even in less than a year its simply gotten too complicated.
I may not be a fan of the new OS look and feel Microsoft developed for Windows 7 Mobile (whatever they're calling it now), but the strict hardware requirements, limitation on processor/GPU type and speed, and other system configuration, and strict software compatibility rules, should help eliminate most o fthose issues under their platform.
People who wanted the open platform, and had anti-apple simplicity sentiments, got exactly what they asked for; a complicated platform with few rules and lots of security issues.
Unless of course it requires hardware level interfaces that don't exist in your machine, leverage drivers or hardware you don't have, leverage legacy APIs no longer included in the OS, leverage "features" that were patched and the back door the app used is now locked, needs more resources than you have available, or in general is poorly written or buggy, or you have a virus or other system corruption that causes issues, and a hundred other reasons.
I can attest to the fact that I have dozens of apps designed even for XP, let alone NT/2K, that don't work in Vista, let alone 7. I even have apps written for XP that don't work in SP3, and many, many that require SP2 or higher.
No, but it's a problem if your Honda engine can't accept the Honda after market kit you bought that fits that engine, just not in your car's model, and when there's no documentation either way that's the case, and a strict no refund policy.
nope. It got dropped a WHILE ago. ...and still no HDMI cable in the box, only the more expensive (to manufacture) component cables, which can't enable true HD on an HD focussed game console...
This is a cycle, and I'm stuck in it. When the PS3 came out, first I waited simply because I wanted to be sure the platform took off. I eventually said to myself "It's going well, as soon as they drop the price I'll buy one." Well, they not only dropped the price, they dropped the emotion chip. ...so I didn't buy it. Later they were to drop the price, and they dropped the Emotion chip EMULATOR TOO, then Linux boot support, now they're dropping my ability to get good value on resale of games (since that $20 is getting passed to the consumer, my game is not $20 less valuable at resale, especially since most used games I BUY are only $20 or less, that's a huge hit). I was all set, finally just willing to admit there were few enough PS2 games I have that I'd actualyl play it was worth just keeping the PS2 slim i have around to play them, and I was going to buy a PS3 this summer when the price inevitably dropped again.
Sorry Sony, your screwed yourselves again. I'll just buy another PC based game or two, maybe a new Vid Card.
I don't have to itemize anything other than collectibles over $200, Jewelry over $500, Silverware (the real stuff), and china over $100 per piece. Strict itemization on paper is not required, photographs will do in most cases. Pre-itemization is also only required for items I don't have receipts/purchase records for. Not all insurers are so easy to deal with, many require full detail reports of categories of items beyond certain total prices...
Rider policies usually cover blanket amounts and do not require itemization, while default coverage usually has lots of stipulations. My personal electronics coverage for example requires only a receipt or physical proof, covers comparable or better replacement (including if replacement costs more than original purchase), and has a limit of $30K with no individual device price limit. Theft/loss requires a police report to be filed, but if I have the damaged device in hand that's the only proof required.
Replacement plans no, Black tie (formerly PSPs, not PRPs) yes. I've done it for 10 years, just did again about 3 months ago.
Device must be in excess of $200 and be in certain product categories that typically assume repair, not replacement, however, Inkjet printers in this class are not repaired but always replaced...
It's through my bank's coverage, not Visa itself, sorry for the lack of clarification.
When they replace the device, those accessories are also covered if they're not feature compatible with the replacement so long as they were purchased with the device on the same receipt at BestBuy, which is why i shop there so often. I replace my printer about every 18-24 months under their in-store warranty. They even give me free ink when I return the cartridges I have for the old printer. I've also exchanged a camera there, a Sony for a Canon since I was able to use the excuse that the other Sony cameras were not as capable as the one I had (the model was no longer available, and there was no replacement in the series, only a much higher class one). BestBuy gave me 2 spare batteries, and 2 memory cards for the cannon when I exchanged the Sony. It took a bit of fighting, and a call to corporate, but upper management agreed even though the store manager did not that the policy did work that way.