I'd rather that Apple fixes Facetime. This has been plaguing my mom's computer: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3388112?start=165&tstart=0 since FT got out of Beta (Beta worked perfect). Apple's solution is to "upgrade to Mountain Lion", which is out of the question in this case.
But obviously, ducking it out in courts with Samsung is a better use of their profits, than fixing bugs for faithful consumers. I guess that Samsung guys are fixing bugs and Apple doesn't know what to do about it (fixing bugs? without pushing some new revolutionary amazing hardware out? what's the point?) and their response is "filing in couts" instead of "dealing with bug repots filed".
Post is deleted, (...) the bold are examples straight from my List. Hilarious.
TS, I never noticed that posts saying that the English court/judge were biased/bought/broken were wrong in your opinion... England is a democracy just as the USA are, so why the double standards?
I'd rather that Apple fixes Facetime. This has been plaguing my mom's computer: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3388112?start=165&tstart=0 since FT got out of Beta (Beta worked perfect). Apple's solution is to "upgrade to Mountain Lion", which is out of the question in this case.
But obviously, ducking it out in courts with Samsung is a better use of their profits, than fixing bugs for faithful consumers. I guess that Samsung guys are fixing bugs and Apple doesn't know what to do about it (fixing bugs? without pushing some new revolutionary amazing hardware out? what's the point?) and their response is "filing in couts" instead of "dealing with bug repots filed".
Yeah, I'm annoyed tonight with Apple.
1) FaceTime on Lion isn't broken. They ending the beta. It's that simple.
2) You honestly think Apple had a meeting saying do we pay to protect our IP from thieves or do we fix bugs in our software? Do you know how crazy that sounds?
TS, I never noticed that posts saying that the English court/judge were biased/bought/broken were wrong in your opinion... England is a democracy just as the USA are, so why the double standards?
Seriously? You can't see the forest for the trees. There is a major difference between saying you don't like something over the comment that was removed. If you can't see the difference I doubt there is anything I can say that will make you understand.
You do understand that FaceTime is an engineering concern and not a legal one and their lawyers are not also their engineers. So they can do both things and likely are.
1) FaceTime on Lion isn't broken. They ending the beta. It's that simple.
2) You honestly think Apple had a meeting saying do we pay to protect our IP from thieves or do we fix bugs in our software? Do you know how crazy that sounds?
1) Who says it's Lion? I'm talking of the last really good OS Apple pushed out, Snow Leopard, not of Apple's Vista.
I'm SO HAPPY that it's not broken on Lion, it's fabulous. Who would have expected that Apple's FaceTime would _also_ work on Apple's Lion?
/irony
Facetime is broken on SL. However, it's SOLD on the AppStore for Snow Leopard and hence it SHOULD work on Snow Leopard.
As far as I'm concerned, unless Apple starts advertising the iPhone, iPad, iPad Mini and all Macs as "With FaceTime, you might be able to talk for a few minutes with some of your family and friends, if our servers are not down and no bugs plague you and everyone has the latest hardware and software", then it's Apple's fault if my Mom cannot use her Snow Leopard iMac with her bought-on-the-AppStore-Facetime.
2) Of course that's crazy, it's called "irony". But I really am sad they do not seem to care about users who want to NOT upgrade to a new version of the OS, for whtever reason. One, of course, could be that people don't want to pay extra for having things that should just work, actually work. Another could be that older persons are afraid of having massive changes. Both are very good reasons, and I expect you can respect the fact that people may have other reasons. None of these justify the fact that Apple sells lots of iMacs on a false premise, because they don't care enough for their customers that they would solve a two years old issue. They have enough money to put an engineer on this issue for two years. How come they cannot solve it? remember: the beta worked fine, so then why don't they just push back the beta's code, only for SL users? They're Apple. If they were Samsung, I'd just go "well, that was to be expected". From Apple, not so much.
When Apple sells software, it should just work as advertised. "It's that simple".
1) Who says it's Lion? I'm talking of the last really good OS Apple pushed out, Snow Leopard, not of Apple's Vista.
The last really good OS they pushed out was Mountain Lion. In many ways it's what I expected Lion to have but at less than $20 it's fine that they are doing a tick-tock method of updating their desktop OS.
But I really am sad they do not seem to care about users who want to NOT upgrade to a new version of the OS, for whtever reason
When such a high percentage of their user base updates their SW so quickly you have to expect this. As someone who embraces the future I am quite happy that Apple isn't taking their developers off current projects so they can continue to add functionality to SW that was released over 3 years ago.
In a way I feel for you because I understand what it's like to want something in the tech world but being the odd man out. I was wishing for Apple to get rid of the ODD in their Pro machines years ago. I wasn't complaining they still included this larger, power-hungry component that goes unused. Instead I found a solution that suited my particular needs. If FT is that important to you I trust you'll find a solution.
I have a patent on eye rolling - see you in court.
Actually, sad as it is you're not far from reality. Samsung got sued by a purely patent troll company (they don't make a product) for adding emoticon buttons on some of their phones and Samsung has (had?) a suit against Apple for something similar. Emoji or something?
The current system of micropatenting every trivial thing is horribly broken.
1) Who says it's Lion? I'm talking of the last really good OS Apple pushed out, Snow Leopard, not of Apple's Vista.
FaceTime does work on Snow Leopard, at least it is supposed to. What problems are you experiencing? Perhaps you could try to delete it and reinstall. You do have to be running SL 10.6.6. The current SL is 10.6.8 I believe.
FaceTime does work on Snow Leopard, at least it is supposed to. What problems are you experiencing? Perhaps you could try to delete it and reinstall. You do have to be running SL 10.6.6. The current SL is 10.6.8 I believe.
I thought he was talking about iMessage, hence my Lion comment. I completely misread his comment to mean something that is actually an issue for some users who can't upgrade to ML because their HW is too old.
Secondary discussion moved here. I think it's testament to the "winding down" of all this patent talk, but then again, we all knew Apple would win in the first place. Now we just have to wait for the second round.
I have a patent on eye rolling - see you in court.
Very good . It looks as though my feeble attempt at "humour" backfired on me - at the very least I guess that I should have added the "/s" pseudo-tag (carefully avoids rolling eyes /s). Meanwhile I'll also scrabble through my files and see if I have a patent on seeing you in court .
I do understand the seriousness of the problem, however, and sometimes worry that Apple might have a tiger by the tail. But if they didn't do something the tiger would get 'em anyway (e.g., cf. SONY, Panasonic, Sharp, etc.). Samsung's apparent "government backing" which makes things even more worrying. Which is why Apple has lawyers, of course - I just hope that they're good enough.
It's easy to ignore pages or articles you don't want to read. Just admit that this is feeding your inner need to be critical.
There's no need to get psychomological, I was just suggesting that there are clearly 2 objective categories of articles on this site, and it would make sense to leverage that as an organising principle at a high level, not make it simply another tag. "Front Page" and "Back Page" is far less objective and clear than Legal and Tech.
wow i think toshiba missed an opportunity. my old T1000 laptop had hinges first with a display on one side and a keyboard and cursor controls on the other side. it was made of plastic and metalwowi need to buy toshiba stockright nowthey have a windfall ofpatent infringement dough coming their way based on these lawsuits. compaq and palm should get bunches of dough from apple for the round-ish centrally located button used in all iPhones and iPads.I better buy their stock too.
Comments
I'd rather that Apple fixes Facetime. This has been plaguing my mom's computer: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3388112?start=165&tstart=0 since FT got out of Beta (Beta worked perfect). Apple's solution is to "upgrade to Mountain Lion", which is out of the question in this case.
But obviously, ducking it out in courts with Samsung is a better use of their profits, than fixing bugs for faithful consumers. I guess that Samsung guys are fixing bugs and Apple doesn't know what to do about it (fixing bugs? without pushing some new revolutionary amazing hardware out? what's the point?) and their response is "filing in couts" instead of "dealing with bug repots filed".
Yeah, I'm annoyed tonight with Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Post is deleted, (...) the bold are examples straight from my List. Hilarious.
TS, I never noticed that posts saying that the English court/judge were biased/bought/broken were wrong in your opinion... England is a democracy just as the USA are, so why the double standards?
1) FaceTime on Lion isn't broken. They ending the beta. It's that simple.
2) You honestly think Apple had a meeting saying do we pay to protect our IP from thieves or do we fix bugs in our software? Do you know how crazy that sounds?
Seriously? You can't see the forest for the trees. There is a major difference between saying you don't like something over the comment that was removed. If you can't see the difference I doubt there is anything I can say that will make you understand.
You do understand that FaceTime is an engineering concern and not a legal one and their lawyers are not also their engineers. So they can do both things and likely are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
1) FaceTime on Lion isn't broken. They ending the beta. It's that simple.
2) You honestly think Apple had a meeting saying do we pay to protect our IP from thieves or do we fix bugs in our software? Do you know how crazy that sounds?
1) Who says it's Lion? I'm talking of the last really good OS Apple pushed out, Snow Leopard, not of Apple's Vista.
I'm SO HAPPY that it's not broken on Lion, it's fabulous. Who would have expected that Apple's FaceTime would _also_ work on Apple's Lion?
/irony
Facetime is broken on SL. However, it's SOLD on the AppStore for Snow Leopard and hence it SHOULD work on Snow Leopard.
As far as I'm concerned, unless Apple starts advertising the iPhone, iPad, iPad Mini and all Macs as "With FaceTime, you might be able to talk for a few minutes with some of your family and friends, if our servers are not down and no bugs plague you and everyone has the latest hardware and software", then it's Apple's fault if my Mom cannot use her Snow Leopard iMac with her bought-on-the-AppStore-Facetime.
2) Of course that's crazy, it's called "irony". But I really am sad they do not seem to care about users who want to NOT upgrade to a new version of the OS, for whtever reason. One, of course, could be that people don't want to pay extra for having things that should just work, actually work. Another could be that older persons are afraid of having massive changes. Both are very good reasons, and I expect you can respect the fact that people may have other reasons. None of these justify the fact that Apple sells lots of iMacs on a false premise, because they don't care enough for their customers that they would solve a two years old issue. They have enough money to put an engineer on this issue for two years. How come they cannot solve it? remember: the beta worked fine, so then why don't they just push back the beta's code, only for SL users? They're Apple. If they were Samsung, I'd just go "well, that was to be expected". From Apple, not so much.
When Apple sells software, it should just work as advertised. "It's that simple".
The last really good OS they pushed out was Mountain Lion. In many ways it's what I expected Lion to have but at less than $20 it's fine that they are doing a tick-tock method of updating their desktop OS.
When such a high percentage of their user base updates their SW so quickly you have to expect this. As someone who embraces the future I am quite happy that Apple isn't taking their developers off current projects so they can continue to add functionality to SW that was released over 3 years ago.
In a way I feel for you because I understand what it's like to want something in the tech world but being the odd man out. I was wishing for Apple to get rid of the ODD in their Pro machines years ago. I wasn't complaining they still included this larger, power-hungry component that goes unused. Instead I found a solution that suited my particular needs. If FT is that important to you I trust you'll find a solution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui
I have a patent on eye rolling - see you in court.
Actually, sad as it is you're not far from reality. Samsung got sued by a purely patent troll company (they don't make a product) for adding emoticon buttons on some of their phones and Samsung has (had?) a suit against Apple for something similar. Emoji or something?
The current system of micropatenting every trivial thing is horribly broken.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight
1) Who says it's Lion? I'm talking of the last really good OS Apple pushed out, Snow Leopard, not of Apple's Vista.
FaceTime does work on Snow Leopard, at least it is supposed to. What problems are you experiencing? Perhaps you could try to delete it and reinstall. You do have to be running SL 10.6.6. The current SL is 10.6.8 I believe.
I thought he was talking about iMessage, hence my Lion comment. I completely misread his comment to mean something that is actually an issue for some users who can't upgrade to ML because their HW is too old.
Secondary discussion moved here. I think it's testament to the "winding down" of all this patent talk, but then again, we all knew Apple would win in the first place. Now we just have to wait for the second round.
That is a great idea to separate legal on another page. I'm honestly getting turned off visiting appleinsider because of the loads of legal crap.
When are these 2 kids gonna grow up? Ridiculous.
Originally Posted by bigmike
When are these 2 kids gonna grow up? Ridiculous.
Probably when everyone starts playing fair.
Very good
I do understand the seriousness of the problem, however, and sometimes worry that Apple might have a tiger by the tail. But if they didn't do something the tiger would get 'em anyway (e.g., cf. SONY, Panasonic, Sharp, etc.). Samsung's apparent "government backing" which makes things even more worrying. Which is why Apple has lawyers, of course - I just hope that they're good enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
It's easy to ignore pages or articles you don't want to read. Just admit that this is feeding your inner need to be critical.
There's no need to get psychomological, I was just suggesting that there are clearly 2 objective categories of articles on this site, and it would make sense to leverage that as an organising principle at a high level, not make it simply another tag. "Front Page" and "Back Page" is far less objective and clear than Legal and Tech.