Bobbypdue

nikon1 said:

“ Jensen reportedly managed to get Moyer to promise that Apple would donate 200 iPads, worth about $70,000, to the Sheriff's Office. Undersheriff sung also extracted from Chadha, the insurance broker, a "promise of $6,000 worth of luxury box seat tickets to a San Jose Sharks hockey game."

In California, it is illegal to carry a concealed firearm without a CCW license that can cost between $200 and $400.

So these 2 CLOWNS (Moyer & Chadha) risked their careers and wanted to avoid paying between $200 & $400 to legitimately get their CCW legally?  They should be imprisioned for pure greed and stupidity.

What a pair of Morons!

You must have missed the part where the Sheriff's office asked for the bribes. Also the average non-celebrity person requesting a CCW is turned down in nearly every case even people working in the middle of the night in a bad part of town will have their request for a CCW denied, because selfdefense is not a good enough reason to get a CCW in "may-issue" states. In nearly every case the odds of actually getting a CCW in California is as rare as winning the lottery. Having a process to get a CCW clears them from violating the constitution even though a person who meets "common-sense" need will often if not in every case be denied. Here is what Wikipedia said about "May-Issue" states: "A may-issue jurisdiction is one that requires a permit to carry a concealed handgun, and where the granting of such permits is partially at the discretion of local authorities (frequently the sheriff's department or police), with a few states consolidating this discretionary power under state-level law enforcement. Moreover, issuing authorities in most may-issue jurisdictions are not required to provide a substantive reason for the denial of a concealed carry permit. Some may-issue jurisdictions may provide administrative and legal avenues for an applicant to appeal a permit denial, while others do not. The law typically states that a granting authority "may issue" a permit if various criteria are met, or that the permit applicant must have "good cause" (or similar) to carry a concealed weapon. In most such situations, self-defense in and of itself often does not satisfy the "good cause" requirement, and issuing authorities in some may-issue jurisdictions have been known to arbitrarily deny applications for CCW permits without providing the applicant with any substantive reason for the denial. Some may-issue jurisdictions require a permit-holder to provide justification for continued need for a concealed carry permit upon renewal, and may deny the renewal of an expiring permit without sufficient showing of "good cause." Some of these jurisdictions may revoke a permit after it has been issued when the issuing authority in its discretion has determined that the "good cause" used in approving the permit application no longer exists. Other may-issue jurisdictions allow for automatic renewal of the permit, as long as the permit-holder completes any required firearms safety training and files the renewal application before the permit expires. Some may-issue jurisdictions give issuing authorities discretion in granting concealed carry permits based on an applicant's suitability (e.g., moral character) by requiring the applicant to submit evidence (resume/curriculum vitae, letters of reference, credit history, etc.) showing the applicant is of suitable character to be issued a permit."

chadbag said:

MacQuadra840av said:

lkrupp said:

iFixit is hell bent on stopping innovation and hardware advancements by demanding things be “repairable” according to whatever their definition of the term is. If iFixit had their way every component would be socketed, everything else connected with plugs and cables, weigh a ton, pop open, and be ugly as sin. Screw these douches.

Why are you so hell bent on not being allowed to do your own repairs when the warranty expires?  You are so full of BS.  Repairability is the ease to repair the item yourself with access to the same parts, without paying Apple a fortune to do what you have every right to do on your own.  It is not stopping innovation.  Your argument makes you sound ridiculous.  How about if you were not allowed to work on your own car, like changing your own oil?  How would you feel about that?  I have saved a ton of money by being able to do my own repairs on Macs that are well out of warranty because the parts were not cemented in with heavy glue.

This makes no sense.   No one is stopping you from fixing things yourself.  With cars, most people who do their own work buy after market parts because factory OEM parts are usually way expensive.  And must car manufacturers don’t make a lot of the parts available to enthusiasts or put barriers up like encrypted CAN access to the computer requiring expensive factory authorized equipment.   

Oil changes on you car are not the same thing as relaxing parts internal to your phone or computer.  

"No one is stopping you from fixing things yourself"  Apple is.  You can't buy aftermarket parts for a lot of Apple products. Apple prevents companies who make their parts from selling to anyone else.  And any parts that these companies produce for Apple that are sold to a third party can be seized at customs with no recourse from the person who bought the parts.  Customs can just call them counterfeit and seize/destroy them. Customs did this with competing earbuds from oneplus back in September. Customs called them counterfeit and seized them.  Apple also makes it so their devices have to be "programed" to accept replacement parts or the device won't work or they will produce an annoying warning. 

Soldering, or using glue has nothing to do with "right to repair".  Any metric showing how easy or difficult it is to repair something is only a gage of how easy something is to repair.  There is a difference between right-to-repair and ease of fixing something.  They are not the same thing.  Not allowing people access to parts, schematics or diagrams while designing products to make them impossible to fix without special software or hardware not available to anyone else is the issues the right-to-repair movement tries to address.  

jas99 said:

I’m still extremely surprised that Apple wasn’t able to overcome the gross lack of understanding that went into the criticism, lawsuit, and final ruling. Apple decided to give users optimal performance when their battery aged, making it less necessity replace the device. The intent and outcome was the polar opposite of what they were accused and convicted of doing. So many people are so stupid. 

How is reduced performance "optimal"?  People couldn't tell the batteries in their phones were losing capacity because they still held a charge as long as they did when they were new.  People who picked up a new phone at an Apple store would think the new iphones were that much faster than their current phone without realizing the performance of their phone was being suppressed without their knowledge.  I don't see how people are siding with Apple at all.  What has Apple done for you?  Do you really think Apple cares about you?  They are a trillion dollar business, they'd rather sell a few overpriced devices than sell devices to everyone at much smaller margins. 

meterestnz said:

larrya said:

I didn’t need to be educated about how batteries work. I needed Apple to disclose that they radically changed my phone’s performance characteristics, and I deserved to be a party to that decision. 

Clearly you do, or you would have recognized the batt was at the ragged edge of its performance and replaced it already!

How would someone know their battery has lost a significant amount of capacity if the phone still got the same battery life as it did when it was new?

"Bull. Chips have always been throttled for heat or for battery"   If anyone artificially throttled your device to encourage you to buy new "much faster" models isn't that an issue?  Also $113M might sound like a lot to us, it's nothing to Apple who's profits in 2020, so far, is over $57Billion.  And that's the money they made after running costs and taxes.  $113M isn't even 1% of their profits it's not even 0.5%.  It's such a small fine that Apple can just consider that a business expense and keep doing business they way they have been.