- Last Active
This can be a frustrating issue but it's not just an Apple issue. These guys aren't asking for it to be repaired for free. They admitted they broke it and they say they are offering to pay for the repair. Several years ago I bought an LED television and mounted it on the wall. The wall mount failed an the TV fell and broke. Luckily I was able to use the insurance provided with my credit card that I used to purchase the television to replace it. The crazy problem that I had was the insurance requirement for a repair estimate. Nobody would give me an estimate. They would say it's obviously been dropped. I would agree and just ask for an estimate, which they would continue to refuse.
Unelected clueless bureaucrats here to save the people. But guess who doesn't have to participate in this...#brexit! I wonder who's next to pull out of this clusterF organization.
This proposed type of breakup never makes sense. The breakup of Facebook and Google and Twitter should be to create five (or ten) separate and identical Facebooks or Google or Twitter. Just separating Instagram or WhatsApp does nothing to help consumers or reign in the monopolistic powers of the companies.
davgreg said:Mr. Pai came to the FCC from Verizon and has been on a mission to give the telecom/ISP lobby their wish list starting with net neutrality. He is not your friend regardless of your political viewpoint.
Simply stated, net neutrality is equal access for both those who provide content- like Apple Insider - and consumers who view it. By the way, both the providers and consumers already pay ISPs for internet access.
A free and open internet needs for there to be equal access to the whole internet both to serve for a fair commercial market and for an open exchange of ideas among the public. The huge companies we all know like Amazon, Google, Facebook, Netflix and such were able to become what they are in part because of an online environment where your content and service was the determining factor in your success- not a rigged internet where their sites were not hobbled by a second or third tier online connection.
There is also a reasonable concern about a fair an open internet that allows for the free exchange of ideas. Despite the flame wars that get outsized attention, most online commenters are reasonable and not offensive.
Landline ISPs are a natural monopoly due to the expense and complexity of the build out and upkeep of the connections. Very few people have a choice regarding broadband landline internet connections. Wireless is not really a competition due to the low data caps imposed upon wireless networks and the common problems with congestion. As such, there is a compelling need fro some level of government oversight to make sure ISPs to not abuse their market position.
Landlines aren't a natural monopoly...they are only a monopoly because the local governments grant them.
Free market competition works everywhere except where government touches it.
"Free exchange of ideas" ? How does that work in a regulated environment? Do you really want someone from an unelected government bureaucracy determining what is ok and what's not?
I'm 100% on board with regulation or even socialism as long as I get to be the person in charge.