Only on digital spy forums could you find a thread where one moment someone tries to belittle the decision of a jury, and in the next tries to redefine a well known and established legal principle. you've got to love it here.
Sadly true, I sometimes think that some posters act like ignorant idiots just to troll an argument. It is impossible that after even 2 minutes of a dictionary a person can't tell the difference.
I'll stick with my very first argument use that claims of people with dropped or bent phones did it on purpose and are attentions seekers was slander. It is the behaviour that is slanderous.
Even in a dictionary it has two meaning.
Now a question for thought.
Though 'Reality Distorton Field' is attributed to referring to Steve Jobs (and Apple), was the term ever out there before in general use ?
I'll stick with my very first argument use that claims of people with dropped or bent phones did it on purpose and are attentions seekers was slander. It is the behaviour that is slanderous.
Even in a dictionary it has two meaning.
Now a question for thought.
Though 'Reality Distorton Field' is attributed to referring to Steve Jobs (and Apple), was the term ever out there before in general use ?
It's not in general use now. It also isn't going to help you convince anyone to believe your completely new definitions of established legal terms
Seems pretty general to me. I guess it also hangs around in there alongside the 'cult' word.
'The term has extended in industry to other managers and leaders who try to convince their employees to become passionately committed to projects without regard to the overall product or to competitive forces in the market. It also has been used with regard to hype for products that are not necessarily connected with any one person.[6] Bill Clinton's charisma has been called a reality distortion field.[7] The chess champion Bobby Fischer was said to have a "Fischer aura" surrounding him that disoriented Boris Spassky and other opponents.[8] '
Hi guys, just wondered right IF and a big IF the iPhone 6s is released in Spring 2015 when will any announcement or specs be released?
I know Apple hold an event to officially announce new devices but as we have all seen there are always pics and details of the new iPhone months before release day.
I'm only asking so I know whether to bother getting the iPhone 6 Plus for Christmas like as the last thing I'd want to happen is a newer model be released 3-5 months later. Ok it's quite annoying having the iPhone 5s right now but I'd hold off for a few months more if it meant having the flagship device again.
Ryan
Sorry to do a bit of a repost here like but could someone answer the above question please? Need a bit of an Apple expert to help me decide when would be the best time to upgrade my iPhone 5s. Cheers
LOL, I bet we already knew that was coming as it had a jury, not a good thing on such technical matters. I knew too little about the case to have my own opinion of what would be a 'just outcome'.
'Delivering a unanimous verdict today, the group said Apple's iTunes 7.0, released in the fall of 2006, was a "genuine product improvement," meaning that new features (though importantly increased security) were good for consumers. Plaintiffs in the case unsuccessfully argued that those features not only thwarted competition, but also made Apple's products less useful since customers could not as easily use purchased music or jukebox software from other companies with the iPod.'
Sorry to do a bit of a repost here like but could someone answer the above question please? Need a bit of an Apple expert to help me decide when would be the best time to upgrade my iPhone 5s. Cheers
Hey, a real 'expert' with the news is not allowed to actually tell you, otherwise they are likely become an unemployed bankrupt expert.
Best is what suits you. No one knows that but you.
Next September is the 'expected launch' so it will take good leaks to change that.
And hey, they have left out more specs on the 6 (too embarrassed to tell you it has only has 1GB Ram ?) so don't expect the real specs for the 7 till late next year.
You don't follow any of the sentence: Most people don't upgrade their phone every year.?
I don't know.
Why? Are you disagreeing?
Sorry let me get this straight, most people don't upgrade every year - yet you have no idea how often they do
So when you said apple
maximise the appeal to everyone
what did that mean, how do they achieve that exactly.
Have we now embarked on the CP double speak journey where you make less sense than you have done up until now. If so I will just file this with the usual scattergun comments you make.
Sorry let me get this straight, most people don't upgrade every year - yet you have no idea how often they do
There's nothing to be confused about.
I don't need to know how often people upgrade to know that most probably don't upgrade every year.
Similarly, I have no idea how often people upgrade their washing machine. But I'd be pretty sure that most don't upgrade their washing machine every year.
So when you said apple what did that mean, how do they achieve that exactly.
Presumably they would do this by including features rather than not including features.
Have we now embarked on the CP double speak journey where you make less sense than you have done up until now. If so I will just file this with the usual scattergun comments you make.
There is no double speak, whatever that is.
There are no scattergun comments, just a fairly simple argument:
Most people don't upgrade every year, and of those who do many probably would regardless.
As such the argument that Apple withhold features to get people to upgrade more regularly seems counter intuitive.
There's nothing to be confused about.
I don't need to know how often people upgrade to know that most probably don't upgrade every year.
Similarly, I have no idea how often people upgrade their washing machine. But I'd be pretty sure that most don't upgrade their washing machine every year.
So you don't know the upgrade cycle of iPhones every year, that is all you had to say. Duely noted and filed away as another misadventure into the scattergun world of CP.
Washing machine and upgrade not often used together, especially when discussing phones
So you don't know the upgrade cycle of iPhones every year, that is all you had to say. Duely noted and filed away as another misadventure into the scattergun world of CP.
Washing machine and upgrade not often used together, especially when discussing phones
Well, in order to make the point with reference to Apply withholding features that wasn't all I had to say, no.
By all means ignore the point and go on about scattergun this and scattergun that if it makes you happy.
The washing machine thing wasn't about phones. It was about how you don't need to know the exact figure for something to know that it probably happens more or less than a particular amount.
I don't know how many characters are in this post, but I'd be pretty certain it's more than two.
Sorry to do a bit of a repost here like but could someone answer the above question please? Need a bit of an Apple expert to help me decide when would be the best time to upgrade my iPhone 5s. Cheers
Unfortunately it is a question that cannot be answered. Apple normally update their phones around September. You can wait forever to get the latest phone, so you just need to decide when you want to update and go for it.
Seems pretty general to me. I guess it also hangs around in there alongside the 'cult' word.
'The term has extended in industry to other managers and leaders who try to convince their employees to become passionately committed to projects without regard to the overall product or to competitive forces in the market. It also has been used with regard to hype for products that are not necessarily connected with any one person.[6] Bill Clinton's charisma has been called a reality distortion field.[7] The chess champion Bobby Fischer was said to have a "Fischer aura" surrounding him that disoriented Boris Spassky and other opponents.[8] '
I'm sure I'm going to regret this, but maybe you can explain why this has suddenly become relevant? I suggested it isn't General because I've never heard of it, it appears to be a term used 20 odd years ago and is not in common use now. Even the links you provided were 2 and 3 years old and reference back years, so no, not in general use at all.
However, that is all immaterial because I'm unsure what it has to do with anything, unless you were just trying to divert away from your latest stance of redefining legal terms
Well, in order to make the point with reference to Apply withholding features that wasn't all I had to say, no.
By all means ignore the point and go on about scattergun this and scattergun that if it makes you happy.
The washing machine thing wasn't about phones. It was about how you don't need to know the exact figure for something to know that it probably happens more or less than a particular amount.I don't know how many characters are in this post, but I'd be pretty certain it's more than two.
You know what an analogy is, right?
And other than some random statement that people don't always upgrade their phones every year no one has a clue what you are saying. However you have said that you have no idea about yearly upgrade cycles for the iphone so let's move on eh.
The BIB is a classic CP statement of the scattergun variety. As for the analogy, I do know what one is, I also know when I see a **** poor one. You will have to tell us some time about how people 'upgrade' their washing machines and what spec they look for in these machines - I heard Samsung washing machines have 3gb ram now ;-)
It wasn't a random statement. It was to do with you not grasping the point I was making.
Its pretty simple - you don't need to know how many times Federer has won Wimbledon to know that he hasn't won it 100 times.
And the original point was pretty simple too:
If there is an argument that Apple withhold features because they think people will upgrade more often than they otherwise might, then how often, and why, they upgrade is entirely relevant.
If most people don't upgrade every year, and of those who do many probably would regardless.
As such the argument that Apple withhold features to get people to upgrade more regularly seems counter intuitive.
Maybe if you were to ever post any sort of rational reply instead of going on about double speak and scattergun this that or the next thing, these discussions wouldn't be such hard work.
You know - something along the lines of:
I don't think that's the case, I think.... would be more likely.... because....
You just seem a lot better at putting other people down, than you are at ever making many points yourself.
Well, that court case was decided on one basis and why it took the jury only a few minutes.
The judge ordered them to judge whether an improvement had been made. Side effects of an upgrade are quite irrelevant.
So when Apple changes a system to make it permanently useless for your specific purpose, it is their right to do so, as long as they have done an improvement somewhere in that update.
So all those petitions on other IOS OS subjects, such as Safari, are worthless too as is any petition about the 'no going back' policy.
So what Apple need to do, is make every single use case scenario for every single person's specific purpose possible?
And how would they (or indeed any company) realistically and practically go about that?
What you seem to do is single out, as you say, a very specific purpose that isn't covered, and conclude that the whole thing is useless on those grounds.
For example, the very specific GPS in airplane mode. Or the safari tabs issue.
They might be shortcomings for your specific requirements, but to conclude that the iPhone is, objectively, crap because of them is absurd.
In the example you mention, where you say:
"So when Apple changes a system to make it permanently useless for your specific purpose, it is their right to do so, as long as they have done an improvement somewhere in that update."
I think the following would be more appropriate:
So when Apple changes a system to make it permanently useless for your specific purpose, it is their right to do so, because they were liable and beholden to the wishes of the record companies, and under no obligation to either licence out their DRM, or support third party DRM on their devices.
...What you seem to do is single out, as you say, a very specific purpose that isn't covered, and conclude that the whole thing is useless on those grounds....
What I said was that it can become completely useless for your main purpose use at the next update.
The very same happens with Windows and Android, the big difference being that it is undo-able, though as often as not a major faff to undo.
So when you click that 'install' button you have signed away rights to what you had before.
I'm not condoning it, it is how it is.
What I said was that it can become completely useless for your main purpose use at the next update.
The very same happens with Windows and Android, the big difference being that it is undo-able, though as often as not a major faff to undo.
So when you click that 'install' button you have signed away rights to what you had before.
I'm not condoning it, it is how it is.
If your main purpose for an iPod was playing music bought from digital stores other than iTunes, that's probably a bit niche.
I'm not sure anyone ever had the rights to play that music on the iPod - that was kind of the whole point. Just because Real backwards engineered FairPlay certainly didn't give people those rights.
Comments
SMS is not "nowhere land" at all you plank, it is WRITTEN therefore it is libel.
Why are you so obtuse? It's not hard (for anyone with any comprehension skills) that you can only slander a person with SPOKEN words.
Let's try in small words:
Libel is words written.
Slander is words spoken.
How hard is that to understand?
Sadly true, I sometimes think that some posters act like ignorant idiots just to troll an argument. It is impossible that after even 2 minutes of a dictionary a person can't tell the difference.
Or...
The lost the other one because collusion was illegal.
They won this one because they didn't actually do anything illegal.
Or...
Maybe its all a great big conspiracy!
Even in a dictionary it has two meaning.
Now a question for thought.
Though 'Reality Distorton Field' is attributed to referring to Steve Jobs (and Apple), was the term ever out there before in general use ?
It's not in general use now. It also isn't going to help you convince anyone to believe your completely new definitions of established legal terms
You don't follow any of the sentence:
Most people don't upgrade their phone every year.?
I don't know.
Why? Are you disagreeing?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_distortion_field
http://www.quora.com/What-rhetorical-techniques-can-be-attributed-to-Steve-Jobs-reality-distortion-field
http://fortune.com/2011/03/03/steve-jobs-reality-distortion-takes-its-toll-on-truth/
Seems pretty general to me. I guess it also hangs around in there alongside the 'cult' word.
'The term has extended in industry to other managers and leaders who try to convince their employees to become passionately committed to projects without regard to the overall product or to competitive forces in the market. It also has been used with regard to hype for products that are not necessarily connected with any one person.[6] Bill Clinton's charisma has been called a reality distortion field.[7] The chess champion Bobby Fischer was said to have a "Fischer aura" surrounding him that disoriented Boris Spassky and other opponents.[8] '
Sorry to do a bit of a repost here like but could someone answer the above question please? Need a bit of an Apple expert to help me decide when would be the best time to upgrade my iPhone 5s. Cheers
You see what is written in forums as spoken word?
Is this a wind up?
The irony being that it would have taken less knowledge and a more simplistic view to reach a guilty verdict.
There's a lot of *interesting* stuff on the net about the moon landings being faked. That doesn't mean the moon landings were faked.
Best is what suits you. No one knows that but you.
Next September is the 'expected launch' so it will take good leaks to change that.
And hey, they have left out more specs on the 6 (too embarrassed to tell you it has only has 1GB Ram ?) so don't expect the real specs for the 7 till late next year.
Sorry let me get this straight, most people don't upgrade every year - yet you have no idea how often they do
So when you said apple what did that mean, how do they achieve that exactly.
Have we now embarked on the CP double speak journey where you make less sense than you have done up until now. If so I will just file this with the usual scattergun comments you make.
There's nothing to be confused about.
I don't need to know how often people upgrade to know that most probably don't upgrade every year.
Similarly, I have no idea how often people upgrade their washing machine. But I'd be pretty sure that most don't upgrade their washing machine every year.
Presumably they would do this by including features rather than not including features.
There is no double speak, whatever that is.
There are no scattergun comments, just a fairly simple argument:
Most people don't upgrade every year, and of those who do many probably would regardless.
As such the argument that Apple withhold features to get people to upgrade more regularly seems counter intuitive.
So you don't know the upgrade cycle of iPhones every year, that is all you had to say. Duely noted and filed away as another misadventure into the scattergun world of CP.
Washing machine and upgrade not often used together, especially when discussing phones
Well, in order to make the point with reference to Apply withholding features that wasn't all I had to say, no.
By all means ignore the point and go on about scattergun this and scattergun that if it makes you happy.
The washing machine thing wasn't about phones. It was about how you don't need to know the exact figure for something to know that it probably happens more or less than a particular amount.
I don't know how many characters are in this post, but I'd be pretty certain it's more than two.
You know what an analogy is, right?
Unfortunately it is a question that cannot be answered. Apple normally update their phones around September. You can wait forever to get the latest phone, so you just need to decide when you want to update and go for it.
I'm sure I'm going to regret this, but maybe you can explain why this has suddenly become relevant? I suggested it isn't General because I've never heard of it, it appears to be a term used 20 odd years ago and is not in common use now. Even the links you provided were 2 and 3 years old and reference back years, so no, not in general use at all.
However, that is all immaterial because I'm unsure what it has to do with anything, unless you were just trying to divert away from your latest stance of redefining legal terms
And other than some random statement that people don't always upgrade their phones every year no one has a clue what you are saying. However you have said that you have no idea about yearly upgrade cycles for the iphone so let's move on eh.
The BIB is a classic CP statement of the scattergun variety. As for the analogy, I do know what one is, I also know when I see a **** poor one. You will have to tell us some time about how people 'upgrade' their washing machines and what spec they look for in these machines - I heard Samsung washing machines have 3gb ram now ;-)
Its pretty simple - you don't need to know how many times Federer has won Wimbledon to know that he hasn't won it 100 times.
And the original point was pretty simple too:
If there is an argument that Apple withhold features because they think people will upgrade more often than they otherwise might, then how often, and why, they upgrade is entirely relevant.
If most people don't upgrade every year, and of those who do many probably would regardless.
As such the argument that Apple withhold features to get people to upgrade more regularly seems counter intuitive.
Maybe if you were to ever post any sort of rational reply instead of going on about double speak and scattergun this that or the next thing, these discussions wouldn't be such hard work.
You know - something along the lines of:
I don't think that's the case, I think.... would be more likely.... because....
You just seem a lot better at putting other people down, than you are at ever making many points yourself.
The judge ordered them to judge whether an improvement had been made. Side effects of an upgrade are quite irrelevant.
So when Apple changes a system to make it permanently useless for your specific purpose, it is their right to do so, as long as they have done an improvement somewhere in that update.
So all those petitions on other IOS OS subjects, such as Safari, are worthless too as is any petition about the 'no going back' policy.
And how would they (or indeed any company) realistically and practically go about that?
What you seem to do is single out, as you say, a very specific purpose that isn't covered, and conclude that the whole thing is useless on those grounds.
For example, the very specific GPS in airplane mode. Or the safari tabs issue.
They might be shortcomings for your specific requirements, but to conclude that the iPhone is, objectively, crap because of them is absurd.
In the example you mention, where you say:
"So when Apple changes a system to make it permanently useless for your specific purpose, it is their right to do so, as long as they have done an improvement somewhere in that update."
I think the following would be more appropriate:
So when Apple changes a system to make it permanently useless for your specific purpose, it is their right to do so, because they were liable and beholden to the wishes of the record companies, and under no obligation to either licence out their DRM, or support third party DRM on their devices.
The very same happens with Windows and Android, the big difference being that it is undo-able, though as often as not a major faff to undo.
So when you click that 'install' button you have signed away rights to what you had before.
I'm not condoning it, it is how it is.
If your main purpose for an iPod was playing music bought from digital stores other than iTunes, that's probably a bit niche.
I'm not sure anyone ever had the rights to play that music on the iPod - that was kind of the whole point. Just because Real backwards engineered FairPlay certainly didn't give people those rights.
If it gives Apple the right to take things a massive step further, IOS 9 could be mighty interesting.