Would you want to owna product from a company that does buisness like this?

[Ron99]

Originally Posted by Crytone

I hate to play devils advocate but again I have to disagree with your first point. The only thing Rescuecom's scores tells us is that Apple's own Customer Support is doing it's job. To quote from the 2nd article "Rescuecom says that reliability depends on both the quality of components and the strength of customer support. If that support is lousy, customers will go looking for third-party options like Rescuecom." How many people would go to 3rd party support for an Apple? I wouldn't! I therefore find their score is irrelevant to Apple's reliability and more a "How many people come to us instead of Apple" score.

The iPad is not revolutionary. If anything it's a disappointment. I had high hopes for the iPad (I absolutely LOVE my iPod Touch) but Apple didn't deliver. No Flash support, No multitasking, no camera, etc.. iPad Version II and/or a firmware upgrade will likely fix some of these problems. I have no qualms in stating that the iPad is just an iPod Touch with a larger screen, which is how myself and many others feel. The only advantage Apple has is they already have their infrastructure in place already for the iPad- the iTunes stores and apps. Personally I'm way more interested in the Microsoft Courier as it, seems way more 'revolutionary' than the iPad.

And before I hear people call foul and that MS is copying- it was announced and had videos of it's interface in action well before iPad's announcement. Here's a small video from September 2009 of which we see what the Courier interface is conceptualized to do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmIgNfp-MdI

I know I probably sound heavily anti-Apple but that's far from the truth. I've stated countless times that I love my iPod Touch. I'd also likely own a Mac as my PC if I didn't dislike the OSX interface and their computers would run the apps I need them to run (running parallels and buying a copy of windows to install would defeat the purpose of owning a Mac and I'd still be limited to their hardware which isn't geared for CAD and gaming). I just don't feel Apple is as revolutionary as everyone makes them out to be but they do make slick products for sure and they do drive other companies to release more polished products/experiences.

Fair enough Mr. Devil's advocate However, since Rescuecom is not an authorized Apple repair company then the Apple computers they see are the older out of warranty ones. So it stands to reason that the older machines are still functioning well and reliably and Rescuecom is not receiving many service calls for older Macs. Also, others such as Consumer Reports and even PCMag have rated Apple products at or near the top. My personal experience is also one of great reliability. Of all the Macs I have bought or worked with or friends and family have owned, only two ever had a hardware problem. A faulty CDROM drive that failed within a day or two. It was replaced under warranty. And my latest Macbook Pro that had one of the faulty Nvidia chips that failed almost a year after the original warranty expired (Not Apple's fault since Nvidia shipped a bad batch of chips that ended up in many computers from Apple and Windows laptops too). Apple still replaced my entire logic board at no cost to me as they are honouring an extended warranty on that particular problem. Typing this on that machine right now. Every other machine has enjoyed a long productive life, often amongst several owners. I have passed on or sold every used Mac I ever had in still functioning condition. And not having to worry excessively about viruses and malware is also a big plus. Yeah , hackers could write Mac viruses if they wanted too but they don't at this point. So the end result is not having to deal with viruses in the same way a PC user has to.

As for the iPad, I don't think Apple has shown all its cards yet and nobody has really had a chance to use one to see what it can do. Even the developers have to make do with the software simulation at the moment. Flash? Who cares. Flash is probably on its way out and, at least the Mac version, is a major memory and performance hog. Flash on an iDevice would seriously degrade performance and battery life. HTML5 is coming and Flash is on its way out.

I also have every confidence that Apple will offer some form of multitasking to third parties. Your iPod Touch and iPhone do multitask now, just in limited ways that Apple has implemented. I stand by an earlier comment that for 98.3% of what the average user will do with their iPhone/iPod Touch multitasking is irrelevant and would significantly degrade battery life. I have rarely wished to be able to multitask. As battery performance improves and processors become more efficient I imagine Apple will open this up more. Apple seems to have specific battery life targets and implements things to meet those targets.

Now I think reading will be a killer app for the iPad. Imagine your newspaper and magazines with interactive content and videos etc. or textbooks with interactive diagrams and videos etc. Imagine the internet in your lap on the couch in an easy to use and very lightweight device that is better than any netbook but lighter then any laptop. I think as a textbook device this will be HUGE (note capital letters). I would have killed to have something like this in school instead of carrying 40 pounds of textbooks around. Now imagine your textbook being fully interactive. Videos, animated diagrams, interactive anatomical drawings that you can rotate and see from any angle and add or subtract layers or anatomical features. How about interactive quizzes to hep you test your knowledge? no more doing the sample questions and then having to flip back and forth between the quiz page and the end of the book (or end of the chapter and reading upside down) to find answers. Now have the textbook take you back to review only the topics you had problems with in the quiz. This could be a major change in education.

As for the Courier, I'll believe it when I see it. It's a nice cartoon concept but Microsoft has not shown any real device. I seriously doubt MS can pull off anything half as nice as the Courier concept in a real device. I guess we'll see but it is vapourware at the moment.

When it comes to multi touch both Apple and Microsoft and others are copying. The actual technology was developed and experimented with at various Universities and was really perfected by Jeff Han at NYU (look up some of the youtube videos of his work). Apple was the first to adapt and implement it for the mass market. I don't think Apple claims to have "invented" it but they have patented their implementation of it and if others are trying to implement it in the same way then I guess they infringe Apple's patents.

I think Apple is incredibly innovative as they are often the first to be able to bring new technology to the market, even if the concept came from Universities etc. They are masters at making technology work for the average person. Microsoft and others have never been innovative in the same way. Is Apple perfect? of course not. They make mistakes and sometimes get it wrong. But overall they get it way more right then others way more often. If appreciating elegant and stylish devices and software that allow me to work efficiently or make the technology intuitive and transparent in my everyday tasks is being a fanboy then I guess I'm guilty as charged.

[Cameron]

I must say, after having a few of my own patents, and having to file law suits against others that are infringing. I see no reason why not to sue.

I could roll over and let someone else steal my ideas, eventually be crowded out if they mass market more than me....or I can enforce my patent and my business, and be successful.

Business is business and try getting a shareholder to still fund your venture when you aren't turning a profit.....good luck.

Remember the shareholders own the company and if you aren't performing to what is expected of you, prepare to go under.

We live in a capitalistic society, live with it or leave it.

[fkshiu]

Frivolous lawsuits are par for the course in business - all business. It's simply a tool in negotiating deals nowadays, especially in the IT sector. All I did when I practiced civil law was start and defend lawsuits with little or no actual chance of success.

[StirCrazy]

Originally Posted by Cameron

I must say, after having a few of my own patents, and having to file law suits against others that are infringing. I see no reason why not to sue.

I could roll over and let someone else steal my ideas, eventually be crowded out if they mass market more than me....or I can enforce my patent and my business, and be successful.

Business is business and try getting a shareholder to still fund your venture when you aren't turning a profit.....good luck.

Remember the shareholders own the company and if you aren't performing to what is expected of you, prepare to go under.

We live in a capitalistic society, live with it or leave it.

ahh but were not talking about justified lawsuits, were talking about phony counter suits launched against smaller companies who your stold ideas from just to force them to drop the suit or go out of buisness so you don't have to pay them for there ideas you ripped off.


It seams people are still stuck on the Apple Vs. PC computer argument.. get over it or argue more in Doug's thread this is more to do with Cell phones and business preactices.

Steve

[Ron99]

Originally Posted by StirCrazy

ahh but were not talking about justified lawsuits, were talking about phony counter suits launched against smaller companies who your stold ideas from just to force them to drop the suit or go out of buisness so you don't have to pay them for there ideas you ripped off.


It seams people are still stuck on the Apple Vs. PC computer argument.. get over it or argue more in Doug's thread this is more to do with Cell phones and business preactices.

Steve

So who's business practices and lawsuits are we talking about here? Nokia suing Apple? Apple counter suing Nokia? Xerox suing everybody? Apple suing HTC? They're all suing each other. Because all the other phone companies scramble to copy the iPhone which was a big step forward? Not just as a phone but also as a business model in which the phone maker was not at the mercy of the network provider saying what features they could or could not have activated. Apple set the stage for a fully featured smartphone with few compromises insisted on by the networks. Previously the AT&Ts of the world insisted on having various features disabled etc. so they could maximize their own profits. So who's business practices were suspect?

So how is Apple different and worth attacking because of all this? Because of a few stupid articles by anti-Apple pundits who are trying to claim Apple wants to put others out of business and wants to slow down the pace of it's developments? Sorry, not sure exactly what the argument here is.

[Ron99]

Just to clarify things, who's ideas exactly did Apple rip off? HTC and Google certainly didn't come to the game first. Most likely Google ripped off Apple due to their CEOs insider knowledge from his position on Apple's Board of Directors. He was eventually forced to resign from their Board when Google decided to become a competitor to Apple.

[pinhead]

Originally Posted by Ron99

Just to clarify things, who's ideas exactly did Apple rip off? HTC and Google certainly didn't come to the game first. Most likely Google ripped off Apple due to their CEOs insider knowledge from his position on Apple's Board of Directors. He was eventually forced to resign from their Board when Google decided to become a competitor to Apple.

HTC manufactured touchscreen PDA's and phones for HP and Compaq years before the iPhone.
As well, the Google/Apple split occured after Apple pulled Google Voice from their apps store under pressure from AT&T which did not like the competition Google Voice provided.

Now Apple responds with a lawsuit because of the competition Google Android on HTC phones provides.

Most consumers like choices and drop in prices that competition brings. It appears Apple does not like competition.

Apple may be using accepted business practices but their press is going from bad to worse. Except for fanboys, the response to the ipad has been underwhelming. Now the forums are buzzing about the Apple/HTC lawsuit with the support is overwhelmingly on the side of HTC.

What I posted in the other Mac vs. Apple thread a few weeks ago is even more pertinent considering the lawsuit.
http://www.cracked.com/article_18377...red-apple.html

And as far as other companies not being innovative, the first pictures of the The Microsoft Courier has been released.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/m...ctures-and-de/

Finally, This is is what I did with my $1400 1st generation imac when the powersupply died. I couldn't drop in a new one because it was part of the mainboard and as with most Apple products design and appearance is more important than functionality.

[Ron99]

Originally Posted by pinhead

HTC manufactured touchscreen PDA's and phones for HP and Compaq years before the iPhone.
As well, the Google/Apple split occured after Apple pulled Google Voice from their apps store under pressure from AT&T which did not like the competition Google Voice provided.

Now Apple responds with a lawsuit because of the competition Google Android on HTC phones provides.

Most consumers like choices and drop in prices that competition brings. It appears Apple does not like competition.

Apple may be using accepted business practices but their press is going from bad to worse. Except for fanboys, the response to the ipad has been underwhelming. Now the forums are buzzing about the Apple/HTC lawsuit with the support is overwhelmingly on the side of HTC.

What I posted in the other Mac vs. Apple thread a few weeks ago is even more pertinent considering the lawsuit.
http://www.cracked.com/article_18377...red-apple.html

And as far as other companies not being innovative, the first pictures of the The Microsoft Courier has been released.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/05/m...ctures-and-de/

Finally, This is is what I did with my $1400 1st generation imac when the powersupply died. I couldn't drop in a new one because it was part of the mainboard and as with most Apple products design and appearance is more important than functionality.

Where do we start So HTC made touchscreen devices. Whoopdeedoo. Touchscreen devices have existed for a very long time. My wife has a Samsung Instinct touchscreen phone and I can tell you it is a piece of s*^t compared to the iPhone. My wife actually calls it her iSuck. What is at issue seems to go beyond that into the specific implementation of multi touch and perhaps other technical details. I haven't read all the patents in question (several are cited apparently) and I don't know the technical details of the HTC phones or Google Android but it is quite possible that the phones and Android OS do actually infringe some of Apple's patents. Why would Apple have to stand by and allow that infringement when every other similar company enforces their patents? Does Apple have to abide by some double standard? Are people sh*&ing all over Nokia and Xerox for their lawsuits? Who cares what the press says. Are they experts in patent law and the technical details of the devices and software in question? The press can be notoriously anti-Apple and you have to take what they say with a grain of salt. Are you a patent expert?

Did the press support or slam Palm for their shady implementation of iTunes syncing? Rather then use the approved ways to sync with Apple's media library Palm took the lazy and shady route of fooling iTunes into thinking it was an Apple iPod. This is not allowed according to the USB rules (each vendor has a unique ID and only that vendor can use it, Palm used Apples unique ID in their device which is not allowed). Palm could have made the effort to write the software to sync properly but they were to lazy or incompetent. But Apple is made to look like the bad guy eve though Palm was at fault.

As for the Google Apple splt this had nothing to do with Google voice but with Google's CEO probably using insider information to try to compete with Apple. When he joined Apple's Board Google did not compete with Apple. This came later and Eric Schmidt most likely took some of that inside info about the iPhone to help create Android. He could not ethically, and probably legally, continue to serve on Apple's Board when they became direct competitors to Apple and had to excuse himself.

I guess time will tell with the iPad. You can either see the potential or you don't have the vision to imagine the possibilities. I stand by my statement that Apple has likely not shown all its cards and the full potential is yet to be seen. I suspect the iPad will be a raging success and Apple will sell many of them.

Also, that article you link to is complete and utter nonsense. It has no facts, no accurate information and no substance. It is pure FUD and if you believe it well I guess you have your biases. Is cracked.com really considered an accurate and respected media source?

Point 5. How many other cell phones and networks support you modifying your phone and doing what you want with it? Personally, I like the fact Apple vets the software on the app store and have no interest in Jailbreaking the phone. That opens it up to all sorts of potential problems, malware, viruses etc. You seriously think Apple is evil because they want to ensure a stable user experience by having some control over the devices? Are the 100,000 or so approved Apps not enough for you? Do you think the cellphone networks will be happy with all sorts of unknown software running on phones connected to their networks? While remote there is a possibility that malware could crash the cell network.

Point 4. Seriously? You're going to critisize Apple for taking action against a site that was publishing confidential information that was not obtained legally? The first amendment does not protect the media when they illegally acquire information.

Point 3. Totally Bulls$%t. Nobody was tortured because they lost an iPhone prototype. Yes, the guy in China committed suicide which is sad but there were obviously deeper issues then a lost iPhone prototype. Really, this type of sensationalism belongs in the National Enquirer. The real story is more likely that this guy, who had "misplaced" prototypes several times before was actually letting Chinese counterfeiting companies look at them and knew the jig was up. Fearful of criminal charges he killed himself. Sad but not Apple's doing. And if he was beat up a bit by a security guard it wasn't authorized or accepted because that security guard was turned over to the police as well. Read this for more info:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE56T0BL20090730

Point 2. Google Voice was not blocked at the request of AT&T, AT&T had nothing to do with it. It was blocked because of issues with the software that Apple asked Google to address and resubmit the application. Stuff like google voice accessing the iPhones contact list and uploading it to Google's server with obvious confidentiality implications. This was investigated by the FCC and it was found that there was no collusion between Apple and AT&T. This again is incorrect information.

Point 1. Really doesn't merit any comment. Complete ridiculous speculation based on patent. Plenty of stuff gets patented that never gets used and even if Apple did use that tech there is no way to ascertain how they would use it. The writer simply takes the absolute worst possible scenario and says we should fear Apple. Give me a break.

That article is nothing but nonsense and bulls*&t.

Finally, the Courier. Is there any evidence those are official pics from Microsoft or somebody else's rendering? And all the user interface shots and videos are also still just concept animations and not any video of the real thing. I will grant you the concept looks great but I will believe it when I see the real thing. I have little confidence Microsoft can actually pull this off. The reality will pale compared to the concept.

I like your iMac aquarium. Did you see my iReef? Are you quite sure about the power supply being the problem? I seem to remember the power supply being a separate assembly when I dismantled the computer for my iReef. Maybe repair wasn't a DIY job like your typical PC tower power supply replacement but I doubt it was completely impossible.