MacOpz Rules of Conduct
Re: I know you're smoking something . . .
Posted By: Lord Crosis (18.104.22.168)
Date: Saturday, 8 September 2007, at 3:30 p.m.
In Response To: Re: I know you're smoking something . . . (J242)
: (which agreed is rediculously soon)
I don't usually chime in to correct spelling or grammar, but you have misspelled this enough times that I feel compelled. The word is "ridiculous."
: Your analogy for an extra $30 for the current QT Pro
: is bizarre. I'm fully up to date and never had to pay a cent other than my
: initial pro purchase. I'm running 7.2 right now, was never asked for more
: money, got a variety of fixes and "extended H.264" support with
: no problem at all.
I'm pretty sure he's referencing the move from Quicktime 6 to Quicktime 7. The primary new feature was the h.264 CODEC, and yet a paid Quicktime Pro 6 user who wanted the bug fixes in Quicktime 7 (of which there were a few significant ones), that user would be required to pay another $30 to retain the "Pro" features of the app. It was kind of a bullshit move on Apple's part.
: Apple doesn't charge for service packs either, they just don't label them
: service packs. Are you honestly suggesting that OSX.2 and X.3 were the
: same OS, only with a service pack addition? lol X.5 is different than X.4
: as well, just as different as Vista Enterprise is from Home Premium. Guess
: what, you have to pay to get the upgraded feature set there too. This is
: nothing new, nor is Apple solely to blame for it.
10.1 was DEFINITELY equivalent to a service pack, and Apple planned to charge an upgrade fee for it, though enough public outcry arose to make them reconsider patching what was essentially a beta OS. 10.2, 10.3, 10.4 and 10.5 all add substantial new features, but also fix things that should have been fixed in the already shipping product. Saying that the difference between 10.4 and 10.5 is analogous to the difference between Vista Home Premium and Vista Enterprise isn't quite right either... Apple does what I consider to be the "right thing" here. They don't nickel-and-dime users for every little feature: You Mac OS X which has everything a "Pro" level OS has, and Mac OS X Server, which has everything that an "Enterprise" level OS has.
OK, just once here or there and I'll let it go, but you did this one several times in the same paragraph. The word is "warranty."
: No, here's allow me to quote myself as I said NO such thing.
You really gotta start proof reading.
: Now where exactly did I say that they didn't have any plans until after the
: iPhone was released?
When you said:
: An iPhone witout the phone part attached and more memory.
: Bitch all you want but I honestly believe that this is a prime example of
: Apple paying attention to their user base and filling the demand that they
: requested/wished for/(or in your type of case) demanded...
This implies that people bought the iPhone and said, "Gosh, I really wish I had one of these without that pesky phone part," and in response Apple went to work on it. The evidence would seem contrarily to imply that the iPhone and iPod touch were developed in tandem.
: Nor will they. Steve is never going to pull a clone debacle again and doing
: so would eat into their prime market seeing as they make the majority of
: their money off of hardware still.
There is much disagreement on this, but it seems obvious to me that Apple stands to make more money off of selling Mac OS X than they would potentially lose from hardware sales. This wasn't true in the PPC days, because the PPC was an island. You couldn't buy a generic piece of hardware and dual boot Windows and Mac OS X. This would be possible with OSX86 (and is... if you buy Apple's hardware).
: Wow. WO-OW... Let me guess, you submitted something similar to a DCR/feature
: request on this, a bunch of people all said "that's a great
: idea!" and you have been carrying the torch ever since? Guess what,
: they are a private company and can choose to do whatever they want, just
: like any other company. You aren't their boss and straight out from
: personal experience on the matter, the louder you bitch and piss and moan
: about something not oging in, the less likely they are to even consider
This from the guy who is patting Apple on their back for "listening to their user base." The things mentioned by JT are things that huge portions of the Mac user base have considered to be things that should have obviously been done for years.
: Again, you keep focusing on one company only when as usual, it's an
: industry-wide problem.
It's not called the IndustryWideOpz discussion forum, it's called the MacOpz discussion forum.
: Do you see me on here bitching and complaining about the
: dropped features from specific apps in Vista that should have been
: included because they were there in previous versions? No! Why? Because
: it's pointless and I can use my wallet to make my vote for me. That speaks
: far louder than anything I could say on a forum that isn't paid attention
: to from anyone with any power to actually change things!
Well, it says loudly, "I'm not going to buy your product." It doesn't state why. That's where the bitching comes in.
: You expect honesty in advertising from a business?
I do, and so does the law. False advertising is illegal. It's a shame if any other companies are doing it, but the product I bought was an Apple product, and it was falsely advertised.
Messages In This Thread
MacOpz Forum is maintained by MacOpz Administrators with WebBBS 5.12.