I don't see how Apple should be forced to lose exclusivity because they offer operating system upgrades for their customers, or how they would be more "in the right" if they didn't offer upgrades at all.
Apple can afford to lose the sale of the few computers that Psystar sells and with all the publicity it makes, it's good advertising. The average user thinks that OS X must be one heck desirable system for anyone to fight so hard to obtain it. So Apple may in fact be hyping up the news to their own advantage. But if they think there could be a chance that they might lose, then we'll see Apple 'Genuine Advantage' and all software will be delivered over the internet only to qualified machines.
I find it interesting how pretty much every update from Apple requires a restart and the supposed restart initiates before the product even starts downloading effectively preventing some custom program from reading the data or installer script due to the fact that no other application can run during the install process.
16GB 3GS, and I now purposefully keep WiFi turned off most of the time to make sure I use up as much "unlimited" data as I can. But the point is that consumers should have the choice of how they want to be billed/use data connectivity. If I only check an occasional email over the data network, that's what, 1MB max/month. Why should I be forced to pay $30 a month for that as opposed to $.10/KB?
Just what IS the problem with this Psystar company? And who the hell is funding them?
Curious if the path leads back to someone at Microsoft...
GTSC
Here is what I think is amusing (or proof of conspiracy if you like to think that way.) If Psytar were to win in court and force Apple to allow clones, companies like HP and Dell would crush Psytar into oblivion with their own Mac clones.
That is beside the point. You can do all those things without a cellular data connection. There are plenty of people that want an iPhone because they can combine their iPhone and phone and/or because they have plenty of WiFi in the areas they work in or at home and around town but AT&T doesn?t cover that area and so they don?t want to spend $30/month for 2 years for a service that they aren?t getting in their area.
Sure wifi is great but most people don't sit around indoors all day next to the wifi.
But if you have an iPhone you already have a required data plan. How does the new At&T policy requiring data on other smart phone affect you?
To date, there are no confirmed battery overheating incidents for iPhone 3GS and the number of reports we are investigating is in the single digits ...
The iPhones with broken glass that we have analysed to date show that in all cases the glass cracked due to an external force that was applied to the iPhone, ...
I doubt these facts will get anything like the circulation that the smear originally did.
At least it lets iPhone owners feel that the rules are fair, now that everyone has to have a data plan. I mean what is the reason to have a smart phone without a data plan anyway?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
I guess some people may only play games and watch movies but I tend to use email, maps, web, weather, stocks, etc. I don't even own 1 game. But that's just me. Which phone did you say you had?
I'm not sure if no unlimited data plan necessarily means no data though. After all, not everyone buys unlimited talk time plans either. Weather forecasts, stock information, email probably doesn't take much data. I'm not convinced that maps are necessarily best done over the internet. Web is the biggest data hog.
The only things I really cared about are my todo/shopping list, calendar and contacts, which is all basic PDA functionality. The other stuff is a bonus, though it's because I might as well use it if I'm paying for it.
Here is what I think is amusing (or proof of conspiracy if you like to think that way.) If Psytar were to win in court and force Apple to allow clones, companies like HP and Dell would crush Psytar into oblivion with their own Mac clones.
HP and Dell may very well be part of Pystar's investors. My theory is that pissed off billionaire Michael Dell, invested in or even created Pystar because Apple refused to license him OS X for his Dell machines. That's the only thing I can think of since Pystar seems to be able to magically keep pulling money out of its company ass.
Whichever set of idiots is backing Psystar are playing a very dangerous game because if Apple does lose the lawsuit they will have no alternative but to instantly and immediately license OSX to all PC hardware vendors at $29 a copy. It is precisely this move that could end Microsoft's dominance of the middle market desktop OS forever. Apple's high end hardware sales would likely be unaffected since they are so different and superior to anything offered by any other hardware vendor, and the iPod/iPhone sales will keep them massively liquid.
This could well be the event that causes Apple to go 'all out' to win...
If this is a little bit of Redmond subterfuge they are very likely to end up regretting it.
At least it lets iPhone owners feel that the rules are fair, now that everyone has to have a data plan. I mean what is the reason to have a smart phone without a data plan anyway?
Last time I checked the iPod touch was selling pretty well.
HP and Dell may very well be part of Pystar's investors. My theory is that pissed off billionaire Michael Dell, invested in or even created Pystar because Apple refused to license him OS X for his Dell machines. That's the only thing I can think of since Pystar seems to be able to magically keep pulling money out of its company ass.
I doubt it. If that was true, Psystar would have been able to pay their first set of lawyers.
How many of you are old enough to remember claims of "SUAIs" (sudden unintended acceleration incidents) in Audis? Many years ago (in the 80s, I think) 60 Minutes did a very slanted piece about it, and Audis began going crazy everywhere, running spouses through garage walls, going off into pools... dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!
It was such an epidemic, everybody KNEW it had to be real, and the only questions being asked where (1) what causes this dreadful thing where the car suddenly accelerates, usually while the person is stamping on the brake as hard as possible? (2) why is Audi hiding it? and (3) Why can't (or won't) the Department of Transportation get to the bottom of it?
After a $2 million study (1 or 2 million, I can't remember anymore), it was determined that "pedal misapplication" was the cause. Yep, the dumb buggers had stepped on the gas after all.
Why does this exploding iPhone thing reek of that?
I remember this very clearly.
These kinds of things happen all the time and if you want someone to blame it's really the media that does it. It's the publishing of what would normally be seen as outlandish claims and the re-publishing of them to the point that they gain some kind of currency that is the root cause.
For instance, even if you believe the reports of the French consumers verbatim, the iPhones never, ever "exploded" in any sense of the word. However this very forum, along with almost all the others published story after story about "exploding iPhones." I heard someone in a restaurant just yesterday asking their friend if they had "heard about the exploding iPhones" when in fact no iPhone has ever exploded or even been reported as such.
The accusation is that the glass spontaneously cracked on somewhere between two and eleven French iPhones. But this is reported as "exploding iPhones" with a lot of dire language that makes it seem like a problem when it clearly isn't. Even if it's 100% true that this happened, that would give a failure rate somewhere south of 0.00001% (or less) on a product that's made and sold in the millions.
People are actually killed or maimed by tech products all the time, but those stories aren't covered. A few French consumers claim the iPhone screen cracked though and there is a big hullaballoo about it. It's because the tech media like to crank up the public over this kind of thing and apple is top dog right now. That's all.
Sure wifi is great but most people don't sit around indoors all day next to the wifi.
But if you have an iPhone you already have a required data plan. How does the new At&T policy requiring data on other smart phone affect you?
This ploy will likely just move non iPhone non data smartphone users to Verizon or T0Mobile unless they also has a "data mandatory" rule. It could also encourage customers that have been buying web enabled phones for their other features, to just buy an iPhone, if they have to buy data to have anything other than a basic phone.
16GB 3GS, and I now purposefully keep WiFi turned off most of the time...
When I am at home or at work I use wifi but on the road I never try to find unlocked wifi because you can't trust them. It could be hacked to discover passwords etc. I always use the cell network. And I do love my 32 gig 3G S. I bought the 32 but I doubt I'll ever use that much storage.
Sure wifi is great but most people don't sit around indoors all day next to the wifi.
But if you have an iPhone you already have a required data plan. How does the new At&T policy requiring data on other smart phone affect you?
Just as everyone who wants and iPhone needs constant data or is in an area that AT&T supplies constant data. We understand that you want and/or need constant unlimited data from your carrier. I do, too, but that doesn?t mean I also think that everyone has the same interests and usage habits as me. I know plenty of people that would love an iPhone if they weren?t required to pay the data fee.
I find it interesting how pretty much every update from Apple requires a restart and the supposed restart initiates before the product even starts downloading effectively preventing some custom program from reading the data or installer script due to the fact that no other application can run during the install process.
Huh? Most updates I've installed *do not* require a restart. It is the system-altering stuff that requires it, or programs which require elements to be loaded on startup, that require a restart. And I'll assume you mean the restart is initiating in that user interface processes are exited before the download and installation begin. I think it is far more likely that this process is handled in such a way to provide a controlled environment for the installation--one which I, the user, am less likely to interfere with out of stupidity or impatience--than for any sort of shady reason. I doubt anything in this process would hide the more important details from a software firm (or company with a good software team) that wanted to analyze it.
Ha ha. These Psystar people cannot be serious. This is a joke that is being taken to the limits. I really have to get one of these Psystar Open computers and see if they are really that friggin' good. We need to tie these people up, put 'em in a boat, ship out to ocean and sink it half way.
Comments
I don't see how Apple should be forced to lose exclusivity because they offer operating system upgrades for their customers, or how they would be more "in the right" if they didn't offer upgrades at all.
Apple can afford to lose the sale of the few computers that Psystar sells and with all the publicity it makes, it's good advertising. The average user thinks that OS X must be one heck desirable system for anyone to fight so hard to obtain it. So Apple may in fact be hyping up the news to their own advantage. But if they think there could be a chance that they might lose, then we'll see Apple 'Genuine Advantage' and all software will be delivered over the internet only to qualified machines.
I find it interesting how pretty much every update from Apple requires a restart and the supposed restart initiates before the product even starts downloading effectively preventing some custom program from reading the data or installer script due to the fact that no other application can run during the install process.
Which phone did you say you had?
16GB 3GS, and I now purposefully keep WiFi turned off most of the time to make sure I use up as much "unlimited" data as I can. But the point is that consumers should have the choice of how they want to be billed/use data connectivity. If I only check an occasional email over the data network, that's what, 1MB max/month. Why should I be forced to pay $30 a month for that as opposed to $.10/KB?
Just what IS the problem with this Psystar company? And who the hell is funding them?
Curious if the path leads back to someone at Microsoft...
GTSC
Here is what I think is amusing (or proof of conspiracy if you like to think that way.) If Psytar were to win in court and force Apple to allow clones, companies like HP and Dell would crush Psytar into oblivion with their own Mac clones.
That is beside the point. You can do all those things without a cellular data connection. There are plenty of people that want an iPhone because they can combine their iPhone and phone and/or because they have plenty of WiFi in the areas they work in or at home and around town but AT&T doesn?t cover that area and so they don?t want to spend $30/month for 2 years for a service that they aren?t getting in their area.
Sure wifi is great but most people don't sit around indoors all day next to the wifi.
But if you have an iPhone you already have a required data plan. How does the new At&T policy requiring data on other smart phone affect you?
To date, there are no confirmed battery overheating incidents for iPhone 3GS and the number of reports we are investigating is in the single digits ...
The iPhones with broken glass that we have analysed to date show that in all cases the glass cracked due to an external force that was applied to the iPhone, ...
I doubt these facts will get anything like the circulation that the smear originally did.
At least it lets iPhone owners feel that the rules are fair, now that everyone has to have a data plan. I mean what is the reason to have a smart phone without a data plan anyway?
I guess some people may only play games and watch movies but I tend to use email, maps, web, weather, stocks, etc. I don't even own 1 game. But that's just me. Which phone did you say you had?
I'm not sure if no unlimited data plan necessarily means no data though. After all, not everyone buys unlimited talk time plans either. Weather forecasts, stock information, email probably doesn't take much data. I'm not convinced that maps are necessarily best done over the internet. Web is the biggest data hog.
The only things I really cared about are my todo/shopping list, calendar and contacts, which is all basic PDA functionality. The other stuff is a bonus, though it's because I might as well use it if I'm paying for it.
Here is what I think is amusing (or proof of conspiracy if you like to think that way.) If Psytar were to win in court and force Apple to allow clones, companies like HP and Dell would crush Psytar into oblivion with their own Mac clones.
HP and Dell may very well be part of Pystar's investors. My theory is that pissed off billionaire Michael Dell, invested in or even created Pystar because Apple refused to license him OS X for his Dell machines. That's the only thing I can think of since Pystar seems to be able to magically keep pulling money out of its company ass.
This could well be the event that causes Apple to go 'all out' to win...
If this is a little bit of Redmond subterfuge they are very likely to end up regretting it.
At least it lets iPhone owners feel that the rules are fair, now that everyone has to have a data plan. I mean what is the reason to have a smart phone without a data plan anyway?
Last time I checked the iPod touch was selling pretty well.
HP and Dell may very well be part of Pystar's investors. My theory is that pissed off billionaire Michael Dell, invested in or even created Pystar because Apple refused to license him OS X for his Dell machines. That's the only thing I can think of since Pystar seems to be able to magically keep pulling money out of its company ass.
I doubt it. If that was true, Psystar would have been able to pay their first set of lawyers.
How many of you are old enough to remember claims of "SUAIs" (sudden unintended acceleration incidents) in Audis? Many years ago (in the 80s, I think) 60 Minutes did a very slanted piece about it, and Audis began going crazy everywhere, running spouses through garage walls, going off into pools... dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!
It was such an epidemic, everybody KNEW it had to be real, and the only questions being asked where (1) what causes this dreadful thing where the car suddenly accelerates, usually while the person is stamping on the brake as hard as possible? (2) why is Audi hiding it? and (3) Why can't (or won't) the Department of Transportation get to the bottom of it?
After a $2 million study (1 or 2 million, I can't remember anymore), it was determined that "pedal misapplication" was the cause. Yep, the dumb buggers had stepped on the gas after all.
Why does this exploding iPhone thing reek of that?
I remember this very clearly.
These kinds of things happen all the time and if you want someone to blame it's really the media that does it. It's the publishing of what would normally be seen as outlandish claims and the re-publishing of them to the point that they gain some kind of currency that is the root cause.
For instance, even if you believe the reports of the French consumers verbatim, the iPhones never, ever "exploded" in any sense of the word. However this very forum, along with almost all the others published story after story about "exploding iPhones." I heard someone in a restaurant just yesterday asking their friend if they had "heard about the exploding iPhones" when in fact no iPhone has ever exploded or even been reported as such.
The accusation is that the glass spontaneously cracked on somewhere between two and eleven French iPhones. But this is reported as "exploding iPhones" with a lot of dire language that makes it seem like a problem when it clearly isn't. Even if it's 100% true that this happened, that would give a failure rate somewhere south of 0.00001% (or less) on a product that's made and sold in the millions.
People are actually killed or maimed by tech products all the time, but those stories aren't covered. A few French consumers claim the iPhone screen cracked though and there is a big hullaballoo about it. It's because the tech media like to crank up the public over this kind of thing and apple is top dog right now. That's all.
Sure wifi is great but most people don't sit around indoors all day next to the wifi.
But if you have an iPhone you already have a required data plan. How does the new At&T policy requiring data on other smart phone affect you?
This ploy will likely just move non iPhone non data smartphone users to Verizon or T0Mobile unless they also has a "data mandatory" rule. It could also encourage customers that have been buying web enabled phones for their other features, to just buy an iPhone, if they have to buy data to have anything other than a basic phone.
16GB 3GS, and I now purposefully keep WiFi turned off most of the time...
When I am at home or at work I use wifi but on the road I never try to find unlocked wifi because you can't trust them. It could be hacked to discover passwords etc. I always use the cell network. And I do love my 32 gig 3G S. I bought the 32 but I doubt I'll ever use that much storage.
Sure wifi is great but most people don't sit around indoors all day next to the wifi.
But if you have an iPhone you already have a required data plan. How does the new At&T policy requiring data on other smart phone affect you?
Just as everyone who wants and iPhone needs constant data or is in an area that AT&T supplies constant data. We understand that you want and/or need constant unlimited data from your carrier. I do, too, but that doesn?t mean I also think that everyone has the same interests and usage habits as me. I know plenty of people that would love an iPhone if they weren?t required to pay the data fee.
I find it interesting how pretty much every update from Apple requires a restart and the supposed restart initiates before the product even starts downloading effectively preventing some custom program from reading the data or installer script due to the fact that no other application can run during the install process.
Huh? Most updates I've installed *do not* require a restart. It is the system-altering stuff that requires it, or programs which require elements to be loaded on startup, that require a restart. And I'll assume you mean the restart is initiating in that user interface processes are exited before the download and installation begin. I think it is far more likely that this process is handled in such a way to provide a controlled environment for the installation--one which I, the user, am less likely to interfere with out of stupidity or impatience--than for any sort of shady reason. I doubt anything in this process would hide the more important details from a software firm (or company with a good software team) that wanted to analyze it.