I'm entitled to my opinion. And my opinion is that in this case Apple are being c*nts.
I'm sorry for going off topic, but I have to ask....In the UK, businesses aren't considered entities like they are in the US? Because being an entity, which is singular, means that you use verbs such as 'is' instead of 'are'.
Just curious.
In a previous general discussion thread this topic was talked about and someone said it has to do with a business being made up of multiple people. But, again, in US legal terms, a business is seen as a single person.
After living in the Europe for the past few years, it has really become apparent how different British English is from American English....AKA wrong ;P j/k
But is Apple complaining about Sanho reusing their parts or just not paying royalties/licensing fees? To some extent, I can see what they're doing as being quite positive...they're recycling old/used parts.
I'm sorry for going off topic, but I have to ask....In the UK, businesses aren't considered entities like they are in the US? Because being an entity, which is singular, means that you use verbs such as 'is' instead of 'are'.
Yes, legally speaking, in the UK a company is an entity and is therefore singular. However, as you say, a company (apart from a sole trader) is also a collection of multiple individuals. As a result, it is considered grammatically acceptable in British English to refer to companies in either the singular or plural, with the latter being most common in my experience.
Actually, I am struggling to see what claim Apple have. HM are selling second hand cables. Since when is it viable for someone to sue you for selling a secondhand product?
Now, if someone was putting a magsafe connector from genuine parts bins in a PC, then I could understand...
I have said this before, there is clearly a reason that apple will not license the connector to anyone.
The primary reason I see is safety, they do not want people charging their batteries anywhere except where you can plug it into a AC wall outlet. I know this does not hold much water anymore, because some planes today do have an AC outlet, hell my new car has an AC outlet that I can charge me computer now.
Away, the worst time for bad things to happen to a battery is when it is being charged. The last thing Apple would want happening is the battery catching fire on a plane. Imagine all the bad things that would happen if battery shorts out on a plane.
I can not find any other business reason for apple not to license this, considering they do not make a competing product, oh I know they make a car or plane power adapter but it does not charge the battery it only keeps the battery from being run down. This also points to what I pointed out above.
Why didn't HyperMac just pay the "Mac/iPod" licensing fee and build their own cable? Oh right, that costs more, they actually have to do R&D, and make their own unique product. It's much easier to piggyback off someone else's R&D, modify their product, and raise profit margins, patents and licenses be damned.
Apple is doing the right thing. HyperMac is just riding the wave (ripple more likely) of media, casting themselves as poor little David under Goliath's polished-black lawyer's shoe.
If HyperMac really wanted to keep a viable business when they received those cease and desist letters from Apple, they could've approached Apple with a licensing fee and an apology and pulled their products with an announcement, "Creating brilliant new products, coming soon!" Then actually create something all their own and possibly be surprised at their own capabilities.... Or they could've just stopped shipping cables with their products, I guess like they are doing now.
Obviously you are not familiar with how stupid some people can be. I clearly indicated that I suspected (hoped?) that it was a joke, but I have often seen people make similar statements with all sincerity.
You did not "clearly indicate that you suspected it was a joke" at all. You asked ... "is this a joke"? ..... as in ... I can't tell if this is a joke or not, please enlighten me.
It was your classless view of Apple that bothers me .... even when another poster pointed that out to you ... you repeated the statement. You need to expand your vocabulary! ... and AI has to raise the standards for global moderators.
I'm entitled to my opinion. And my opinion is that in this case Apple are being c*nts.
And, for the record, a lot of us agree with that assessment in this case. There is a solution desired by the end-users that Apple does not supply and goes out of its way to prevent others from supplying. When one innovative company finds a loophole that allows it to legally provide the solution, harming no one, Apple uses its legal might to pummel that company into submission. Seriously c*nty.
Why didn't HyperMac just pay the "Mac/iPod" licensing fee...?
Because Apple won't license the connector. Name one company that has been able to license it. Ah, that's right, there aren't any. Kind of shoots your argument out of the water....
You did not "clearly indicate that you suspected it was a joke" at all. You asked ... "is this a joke"? ..... as in ... I can't tell if this is a joke or not, please enlighten me.
Had I not suspected it was a joke, the question "is this a joke" would not have been asked. Therefore the asking of the question is an indication of my suspicion/hope that it was indeed a joke.
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee
You need to expand your vocabulary!
No, I don't. I very rarely use the "c" word but consider it perfect for this occasion.
I know I'm in a niche market, but when I've shot in remote locations external batteries are helpful when you don't have a base-camp with electric or generators. Would Nikon, Canon, Panasonic or Sony ever release a camera with internal batteries? I don't think so. Journalists and documentary photogs/ Videographers would freak.
I understand that they should probably pay a licensing fee (BTW where would they get the connectors from?) In a all honesty Apple should let this one go. It's such a small market. I wonder if this has anything to do with Apple's obsession over image? As in, they stopped selling screen protectors in their stores to change the perception that the iphone and IPT doesn't need them. You still can't get a silicone skin for the ipad in their stores either. Only overpriced leather portfolios (and the worst ones at that; I'd recommend buying one online for 1/3rd of the price).
I mean ok, Apple doesn't want people to think they must "have" a skin because the device is "fragile" if you will, but that's ridiculous. All electronic devices are fragile to some degree and people want to protect them however they can. Apple devices are no different than any other. They don't scratch more or less their batteries don't really last infinitely any longer either. I understand their manipulating perception (go add agency!) but please. Reality is what it is.
So back to my original hypothesis... is this an issue Apple has with the perception of the internal (non-swappable) battery being a bad idea? I have a feeling this is part of the dispute and it's not just about licensing the part.
Also great advertising for hypermac. I'm going to buy a bunch of thier stuff right now.
1st comment w00t... Being 1st here only bright spot in an otherwise f**** miserable day for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wally626
Monoprice has also dropped its products with 30-pin connectors. You can still get cheap chargers but they just have the generic USB connector on them now, you have to supply your own cable.
Thanks mate... Although the miserableness was not related to the Hypermac announcement LOL. Though it does suck for people because what other external battery packs are there???
When one innovative company finds a loophole that allows it to legally provide the solution, harming no one, Apple uses its legal might to pummel that company into submission. Seriously c*nty.
Just because consumers might want that companies "solution" ... does not make it "legal". You need to brush up on what's legal and what's not.
Had I not suspected it was a joke, the question "is this a joke" would not have been asked. Therefore the asking of the question is an indication of my suspicion/hope that it was indeed a joke.
No, I don't. I very rarely use the "c" word but consider it perfect for this occasion.
Hence the need for upgrading the global moderator standards.
Why? I mean these battery packs are great for long haul flights - just great devices. I mean its not like apple let you replace batteries on long flights now anyway with the built-in battery design
Really pointless lawsuit and bad outcome.
Well done apple lawer vermin - what a great victory....
Do they even let in the airplanes nowadays, with batteries and cables hanging out?
If you want a forum completely free of profanity, including that with starred-out letters, go somewhere else.
I'd like to support you, but your posts in this thread don't mesh with the standards that reasonable people would expect of a moderator. People who hold the gavel in a discussion are expected to help maintain order, not incite dissension. The moderator's responsibility is to moderate. In legislative assemblies, those who preside over debates are expected to step aside from that role if they want to express personal opinions or participate in partisan arguments.
Comments
. Why did they just not license the connector/s from Apple in the first place.
I would assume Apple wanted a bag of money from them in return for the license. Apple has the patent on the connector, right?
I'm entitled to my opinion. And my opinion is that in this case Apple are being c*nts.
I'm sorry for going off topic, but I have to ask....In the UK, businesses aren't considered entities like they are in the US? Because being an entity, which is singular, means that you use verbs such as 'is' instead of 'are'.
Just curious.
In a previous general discussion thread this topic was talked about and someone said it has to do with a business being made up of multiple people. But, again, in US legal terms, a business is seen as a single person.
After living in the Europe for the past few years, it has really become apparent how different British English is from American English....AKA wrong ;P j/k
But is Apple complaining about Sanho reusing their parts or just not paying royalties/licensing fees? To some extent, I can see what they're doing as being quite positive...they're recycling old/used parts.
I would assume Apple wanted a bag of money from them in return for the license. Apple has the patent on the connector, right?
Hence the requirement to license it right ?
I'm sorry for going off topic, but I have to ask....In the UK, businesses aren't considered entities like they are in the US? Because being an entity, which is singular, means that you use verbs such as 'is' instead of 'are'.
Yes, legally speaking, in the UK a company is an entity and is therefore singular. However, as you say, a company (apart from a sole trader) is also a collection of multiple individuals. As a result, it is considered grammatically acceptable in British English to refer to companies in either the singular or plural, with the latter being most common in my experience.
I would assume Apple wanted a bag of money from them in return for the license. Apple has the patent on the connector, right?
Based on the price of these batteries, they can probably afford the cash.
Actually, I am struggling to see what claim Apple have. HM are selling second hand cables. Since when is it viable for someone to sue you for selling a secondhand product?
Now, if someone was putting a magsafe connector from genuine parts bins in a PC, then I could understand...
The primary reason I see is safety, they do not want people charging their batteries anywhere except where you can plug it into a AC wall outlet. I know this does not hold much water anymore, because some planes today do have an AC outlet, hell my new car has an AC outlet that I can charge me computer now.
Away, the worst time for bad things to happen to a battery is when it is being charged. The last thing Apple would want happening is the battery catching fire on a plane. Imagine all the bad things that would happen if battery shorts out on a plane.
I can not find any other business reason for apple not to license this, considering they do not make a competing product, oh I know they make a car or plane power adapter but it does not charge the battery it only keeps the battery from being run down. This also points to what I pointed out above.
Apple is doing the right thing. HyperMac is just riding the wave (ripple more likely) of media, casting themselves as poor little David under Goliath's polished-black lawyer's shoe.
If HyperMac really wanted to keep a viable business when they received those cease and desist letters from Apple, they could've approached Apple with a licensing fee and an apology and pulled their products with an announcement, "Creating brilliant new products, coming soon!" Then actually create something all their own and possibly be surprised at their own capabilities.... Or they could've just stopped shipping cables with their products, I guess like they are doing now.
Obviously you are not familiar with how stupid some people can be. I clearly indicated that I suspected (hoped?) that it was a joke, but I have often seen people make similar statements with all sincerity.
You did not "clearly indicate that you suspected it was a joke" at all. You asked ... "is this a joke"? ..... as in ... I can't tell if this is a joke or not, please enlighten me.
It was your classless view of Apple that bothers me .... even when another poster pointed that out to you ... you repeated the statement. You need to expand your vocabulary! ... and AI has to raise the standards for global moderators.
I'm entitled to my opinion. And my opinion is that in this case Apple are being c*nts.
And, for the record, a lot of us agree with that assessment in this case. There is a solution desired by the end-users that Apple does not supply and goes out of its way to prevent others from supplying. When one innovative company finds a loophole that allows it to legally provide the solution, harming no one, Apple uses its legal might to pummel that company into submission. Seriously c*nty.
Why didn't HyperMac just pay the "Mac/iPod" licensing fee...?
Because Apple won't license the connector. Name one company that has been able to license it. Ah, that's right, there aren't any. Kind of shoots your argument out of the water....
You did not "clearly indicate that you suspected it was a joke" at all. You asked ... "is this a joke"? ..... as in ... I can't tell if this is a joke or not, please enlighten me.
Had I not suspected it was a joke, the question "is this a joke" would not have been asked. Therefore the asking of the question is an indication of my suspicion/hope that it was indeed a joke.
You need to expand your vocabulary!
No, I don't. I very rarely use the "c" word but consider it perfect for this occasion.
I understand that they should probably pay a licensing fee (BTW where would they get the connectors from?) In a all honesty Apple should let this one go. It's such a small market. I wonder if this has anything to do with Apple's obsession over image? As in, they stopped selling screen protectors in their stores to change the perception that the iphone and IPT doesn't need them. You still can't get a silicone skin for the ipad in their stores either. Only overpriced leather portfolios (and the worst ones at that; I'd recommend buying one online for 1/3rd of the price).
I mean ok, Apple doesn't want people to think they must "have" a skin because the device is "fragile" if you will, but that's ridiculous. All electronic devices are fragile to some degree and people want to protect them however they can. Apple devices are no different than any other. They don't scratch more or less their batteries don't really last infinitely any longer either. I understand their manipulating perception (go add agency!) but please. Reality is what it is.
So back to my original hypothesis... is this an issue Apple has with the perception of the internal (non-swappable) battery being a bad idea? I have a feeling this is part of the dispute and it's not just about licensing the part.
Also great advertising for hypermac. I'm going to buy a bunch of thier stuff right now.
1st comment w00t... Being 1st here only bright spot in an otherwise f**** miserable day for me.
Monoprice has also dropped its products with 30-pin connectors. You can still get cheap chargers but they just have the generic USB connector on them now, you have to supply your own cable.
Thanks mate... Although the miserableness was not related to the Hypermac announcement LOL. Though it does suck for people because what other external battery packs are there???
Feeling better now anyways. Cheers
When one innovative company finds a loophole that allows it to legally provide the solution, harming no one, Apple uses its legal might to pummel that company into submission. Seriously c*nty.
Just because consumers might want that companies "solution" ... does not make it "legal". You need to brush up on what's legal and what's not.
Had I not suspected it was a joke, the question "is this a joke" would not have been asked. Therefore the asking of the question is an indication of my suspicion/hope that it was indeed a joke.
No, I don't. I very rarely use the "c" word but consider it perfect for this occasion.
Hence the need for upgrading the global moderator standards.
Hence the need for upgrading the global moderator standards.
If you want a forum completely free of profanity, including that with starred-out letters, go somewhere else.
Why? I mean these battery packs are great for long haul flights - just great devices. I mean its not like apple let you replace batteries on long flights now anyway with the built-in battery design
Really pointless lawsuit and bad outcome.
Well done apple lawer vermin - what a great victory....
Do they even let in the airplanes nowadays, with batteries and cables hanging out?
Just because consumers might want that companies "solution" ... does not make it "legal". You need to brush up on what's legal and what's not.
Me for example.
I finally bought a TV episode from itunes, only to find out you cant play it with any other programs besides itunes or quicktime.
Hey, I cant even play it with my WD live media player.
I bet finding a way to remove that protection would be illegal.
worst $2 I've ever spent.
If you want a forum completely free of profanity, including that with starred-out letters, go somewhere else.
I'd like to support you, but your posts in this thread don't mesh with the standards that reasonable people would expect of a moderator. People who hold the gavel in a discussion are expected to help maintain order, not incite dissension. The moderator's responsibility is to moderate. In legislative assemblies, those who preside over debates are expected to step aside from that role if they want to express personal opinions or participate in partisan arguments.