I wish for this man to come to NY to visit, and I wish for him to drop it down a subway grate just as I happen to be walking in the opposite direction, right in front of him. I also wish to be taking a picture of something else just behind him as it happens so I can capture this golden moment.
God, if you're listening, do me this favor and I'll smite whoever you want me to smite.
So, just in case you were wondering if, after three years running, Steve Jobs might sit this year out, give everyone else a chance to "catch up to the 1st gen iPhone", rest assured everyone. Apple will not be pulling an iPhone Snow Leopard.
The iPhone 3GS came out 8 months after the first field test reports came in.
Looks like the iPhone version 4 will come out in 8 months or so.
And it just happened to be in time for me to not be eligiable for an upgrade. On November 7th, I got my 3GS and started a 2 year contract then, couldnt wait any longer for a phone.
@KTK1990: I love the will not be eligible for the upgrade thing. its weird that whenever the new iPhone nobody is eligible for the upgrade....almost sounds like some kind of money making scheme.
@Illundiel: There's elgibility and elgibility with reduced pricing. You can always buy another phone if you want, but you won't get new subscriber pricing.
@KTK1990: Ha. I've been told I can upgrade early to iPhone... on the exact same date I can upgrade otherwise. February 11th, 2011. I bet the 5G will be out by then.
there was a time when you bought something you owned it. as in "I bought the software, I bought the hardware, I can do whatever I want with it." which would include paying someone to install the software you bought on the hardware you bought. is apple right in saying you can't buy their software, only "license" it? is there a real right and wrong in this issue? apple wants you to believe they're right because it's in their best interest. however, in this case, when you BELIEVE someone can sell you a license and what you paid for is not your property, you have given up a right to own you previously had. right?
Edited by dolo54 blows minds and blows engines! at 11/28/09 7:27 PM
dolo54 blows minds and blows engines! was starred
dolo54 blows minds and blows engines! was unstarred
@dolo54 blows minds and blows engines!:
Valid point. Not why I hate Pystar. They knowingly rip off consumers. They sell systems they can't hope to support once they fail.
@dolo54: If someone invents something, they are granted certain intellectual property rights. If they then choose to sell only a license to use that software, they are well within their rights to do so. So yes, buying intellectual property is often different from buying physical property. However, it is not uncommon for people to buy machines and get a license to use the machine that limits how and when the machine can be used. An operating system is sold in a similar way.
@dolo54 blows minds and blows engines!: Apple has never sold OSX, they have sold licenses that grant you the privilege of using OSX within certain parameters.
It's the same on the Microsoft side. You aren't actually buying Windows, you're buying a license to use Windows, again, within certain parameters. The only difference is that the Microsoft License is less restrictive.
A custom brew of Linux is pretty much the only "mainstream" OS you can actually own, and even then there are conditions of ownership.
Is it deceptive? No doubt, but that's how the entire software industry works these days (not just OSs) so the government and the courts aren't going to touch it.
With hardware it's a physical thing, in order to copy it you need to build a whole new one, from scratch. If you want to modify it you have to change the thing you bought, which involves risk because if you screw it up you have to buy a new one. With software, it's data, a couple keystrokes and you have another, for free, that you can give to a friend or modify with impunity. Which is why they don't sell software, they sell software licenses which are "physical".
@something_unique_and_descripti...: @koolatron: @Kerfudle:: @The Lab: Legality is decided by society, but laws are bought and sold like commodities. Do you know what a lobbyist does?
Consider this: you buy 1 copy of an os for your own use on 1 machine. you buy 1 machine. you pay someone to install the software on the 1 machine. that is what psystar does. they are not selling illegal copies of osx. they buy a copy of osx for each customer from apple. then they install it on the computer their customer has purchased. whether it is illegal or not is up to the courts to decide, but legality can also be influenced by everyone.
I'm not actually saying who is right and who is wrong, or what is legal and what isn't (both being only loosely related). what I'm saying is that me personally, I would rather purchase to own than to license.
When you allow someone to tell you that you have no rights and you believe them, then you have no rights. Rights don't come for free and no one will give them to you. Rights are what we, collectively, say they are. If you give up so easy you won't have much.
@dolo54 blows minds and blows engines!: I fully agree with you, it's bullsh*t, but nobody is going to do anything about it... in no small part because of those lobbyists.
But Apple doesn't sell a standalone OS license (and hence Pystar can't buy one). What you get when you buy OSX is an upgrade license, meaning in order for you to legally install it you have to have an existing full license to a previous version... and the only way you can get one of those is with a Mac.
And the 1.45 million wasn't an internal number, it was the number they showed to investors because they are GANGSTAS. Sounds more and more like a russian Mafia operation than a real computer company every day. Everyone who blasted Apple for hurting this poor small company can step up and apologize now. Owners of Pystar computers have a collectors item.
@tamoko:
But they didn't dream big. Before they even got started they had to know it wouldn't work because the first step in an enterprise like this is to talk to lawyers and investment advisors and all of them should have said it was a failed illegal venture. They knew from the beginning it was crap and from there it was a rip off for everyone who bought their computers. Think about support, think about everything that should warn you a purchase from this company was a terrible idea ... They're criminals and that was the way it was from the beginning.
08:16 PM
07:58 PM
How is this bad for the economy?
07:54 PM
07:59 PM
08:06 PM
07:29 PM
07:27 PM
Yeahhhhhhh Boyyyyyyyyyy!
07:11 PM
God, if you're listening, do me this favor and I'll smite whoever you want me to smite.
07:25 PM
Photoshop is phenomenal.
07:05 PM
06:26 PM
02:48 PM
03:10 PM
06:35 PM
06:57 PM
07:48 PM
02:40 PM
02:39 PM
Looks like the iPhone version 4 will come out in 8 months or so.
And it just happened to be in time for me to not be eligiable for an upgrade. On November 7th, I got my 3GS and started a 2 year contract then, couldnt wait any longer for a phone.
02:59 PM
03:23 PM
06:01 PM
11/28/09
11/28/09
11/28/09
Valid point. Not why I hate Pystar. They knowingly rip off consumers. They sell systems they can't hope to support once they fail.
11/28/09
11/28/09
It's the same on the Microsoft side. You aren't actually buying Windows, you're buying a license to use Windows, again, within certain parameters. The only difference is that the Microsoft License is less restrictive.
A custom brew of Linux is pretty much the only "mainstream" OS you can actually own, and even then there are conditions of ownership.
Is it deceptive? No doubt, but that's how the entire software industry works these days (not just OSs) so the government and the courts aren't going to touch it.
With hardware it's a physical thing, in order to copy it you need to build a whole new one, from scratch. If you want to modify it you have to change the thing you bought, which involves risk because if you screw it up you have to buy a new one. With software, it's data, a couple keystrokes and you have another, for free, that you can give to a friend or modify with impunity. Which is why they don't sell software, they sell software licenses which are "physical".
02:26 AM
Consider this: you buy 1 copy of an os for your own use on 1 machine. you buy 1 machine. you pay someone to install the software on the 1 machine. that is what psystar does. they are not selling illegal copies of osx. they buy a copy of osx for each customer from apple. then they install it on the computer their customer has purchased. whether it is illegal or not is up to the courts to decide, but legality can also be influenced by everyone.
I'm not actually saying who is right and who is wrong, or what is legal and what isn't (both being only loosely related). what I'm saying is that me personally, I would rather purchase to own than to license.
When you allow someone to tell you that you have no rights and you believe them, then you have no rights. Rights don't come for free and no one will give them to you. Rights are what we, collectively, say they are. If you give up so easy you won't have much.
12:21 PM
But Apple doesn't sell a standalone OS license (and hence Pystar can't buy one). What you get when you buy OSX is an upgrade license, meaning in order for you to legally install it you have to have an existing full license to a previous version... and the only way you can get one of those is with a Mac.
11/28/09
11/28/09
11/28/09
But probably those balls were placed where their brains should be.
11/28/09
11/28/09
But they didn't dream big. Before they even got started they had to know it wouldn't work because the first step in an enterprise like this is to talk to lawyers and investment advisors and all of them should have said it was a failed illegal venture. They knew from the beginning it was crap and from there it was a rip off for everyone who bought their computers. Think about support, think about everything that should warn you a purchase from this company was a terrible idea ... They're criminals and that was the way it was from the beginning.