iTools Membership agreement
E-Star
and start charging? I don't think anyone disaggrees that Apple can and
perhaps ever should charge for internet services. However, I think that
the mac.com email should be offered free (or at least at a minimum
charge). I personally do not want any of the other services which makes
it a very expensive email.
Until Apple realizes that a 'all or nothing' approach is wrong, I've
already begun using an alternate email since I won't be signing up to
.Mac as we currently know it.
E-Star
In article <michelle-723A36...@enews.newsguy.com>,
Michelle Steiner <mich...@michelle.org> wrote:
> The important part of the agreement regarding .mac is this:
>
> > Apple may change, suspend or discontinue any (or all) aspects of
> > iTools at any time, including the availability of any iTools feature
> > or content. Apple may also impose limits on the use of or access to
> > certain features or portions of iTools, including a charge for or
> > imposition of a subscription or other fee for use of iTools or any
> > part or feature of iTools, or restrict your access to any part or all
> > of iTools, in all cases without notice or liability.
>
> --Michelle
>
> iTOOLS MEMBERSHIP AGREEMENT
> AND
> ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY
>
>
> Â
> This iTools membership agreement and acceptable use policy (the
> Å‚agreementË› or the Å‚AUPË›) provides important information about your
> iTools membership, so you should take the time to read and understand
> it. You may review, save or print any part of this agreement. We
> encourage you to print out a copy of this entire document and refer to
> it as you use iTools.
> Â
> IMPORTANT: IF YOU CHOOSE TO ACCEPT THIS AGREEMENT, YOU MUST DO SO AS IT
> IS PRESENTED TO YOU -- NO CHANGES (ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS) WILL BE
> ACCEPTED BY APPLE.
> Â
> Apple may change, add or remove any part of this agreement at any time.
> If it does so, Apple will post such changes on the iTools site. IF ANY
> FUTURE CHANGES ARE UNACCEPTABLE TO YOU, YOU SHOULD DISCONTINUE USING
> YOUR iTOOLS ACCOUNT. YOUR CONTINUED USE OF iTOOLS NOW, OR FOLLOWING THE
> POSTING OF NOTICE OF ANY SUCH CHANGES, WILL INDICATE YOUR ACCEPTANCE OF
> THIS AGREEMENT, AND ANY SUCH CHANGES.
> Â
> €   BECOMING AN iTOOLS MEMBER
> Â
> To become an iTools member, you must be at least 13 years old. If you
> are not yet 13 years old, you may still use iTools, but only if the
> account you are using was created and registered by your parent or legal
> guardian.
> Â
> This agreement is a legal document that sets forth your rights and
> obligations as an iTools member. You cannot become an iTools member
> until you have accepted the terms of this agreement. You, as an iTools
> member, must abide by the terms of this agreement. Your iTools
> membership is also subject to AppleÄ…s corporate Privacy Policy. This
> applies to this agreement and the Privacy Policy as they currently exist
> and as they may be revised from time to time by Apple.
> Â
> When you accept this agreement and complete the iTools registration
> process, you become the account holder. As an iTools member, Apple
> provides you with a limited, non-exclusive license for no more than the
> term of your membership to use the member name and password provided to
> you for your account. Your member name is your on-line identity. Do not
> reveal your password to other users. Your account is at risk if you let
> someone use it inappropriately.
> Â
> Â
> €   AVAILABILITY OF THE SERVICE
> Â
> While Apple will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that iTools is
> available at all times, Apple does not guarantee, represent or warrant
> that iTools services will be uninterrupted or error-free, and Apple does
> not guarantee that members will be able to access or use all the iTools
> features at all times.
> Â
> Apple may change, suspend or discontinue any (or all) aspects of iTools
> at any time, including the availability of any iTools feature or
> content. Apple may also impose limits on the use of or access to certain
> features or portions of iTools, including a charge for or imposition of
> a subscription or other fee for use of iTools or any part or feature of
> iTools, or restrict your access to any part or all of iTools, in all
> cases without notice or liability.
> Â
> Apple also does not guarantee or warrant that any content or data you
> may have in your account at iTools will not be subject to inadvertent
> damage, corruption or destruction. You are responsible for backing up,
> on your own computer, any important documents, images or other content
> -- Apple will not be responsible for any archiving or back-up of any
> such information. If any data, messages, images or other content in your
> account and stored on the iTools system is damaged, lost or corrupted in
> any way, Apple will have no obligation or liability to you.
> Â
> Â
> €   ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY GUIDELINES
> Â
> Apple encourages iTools members to participate in the on-line world to
> express their views and benefit from the interactive experience.
> However, it is important to remember that there are rules and standards
> that you must abide by as an iTools member. These rules and standards
> are described in this agreement. As an iTools member, you agree to
> comply with this agreement, and you acknowledge that Apple has the right
> to enforce this agreement in its sole discretion. This means that if
> you, or anyone using your member privileges, violate the terms of this
> agreement, Apple may take any and all appropriate actions -- this can
> range from the issuance of a warning about a violation to the
> termination of your membership privileges in iTools -- as Apple deems
> necessary or appropriate. Apple is not required to provide notice prior
> to terminating your iTools membership for violating these rules and
> standards, but it may choose to do so.
> Â
> You are solely responsible for your conduct while using iTools,
> including the content of all email messages you generate or forward, and
> all content in any folders, home pages or other transmissions,
> information, images or other interactions you generate, transmit or
> maintain on or through iTools. Apple takes no responsibility for any
> such on-line distribution or publication by you. Apple cannot and will
> not review every message or other content you may generate or post, and
> Apple is not responsible for the content of those messages or content.
> Â
> Apple reserves the right to delete, move or edit any such item that
> Apple, in its sole discretion, deems abusive, defamatory, obscene, in
> violation of copyright or trademark laws, or otherwise illegal,
> inappropriate or unacceptable, including any material Apple believes may
> cause any liability for it or which may cause Apple to lose the services
> of any supplier, including but not limited to any Internet Service
> Providers (ISPs) which may provide services to iTools members.
> Â
> A userÄ…s conduct in the iTools space should conform to the requirements
> of the law, respect for the rights of other users of iTools, and current
> standards for communicating on-line. By your use of iTools, you agree to
> use appropriate conduct and language when you are on line -- this
> includes following the rules of any ISP, any other on-line services,
> this agreement and all applicable state, local and federal laws
> (including foreign or international law where appropriate).
> Â
> Apple reserves the right to terminate your account or suspend iTools
> services to you at any time, with cause or without cause, in the event
> of any breach of this agreement, your infringement of AppleÄ…s or iToolsÄ…
> or othersÄ… content, or any other circumstances which, in AppleÄ…s sole
> discretion, merit termination or suspension.
> Â
> Inappropriate conduct falls into a number of categories. The more
> commonly understood categories are discussed below, although this list
> is not exclusive.
> Â
> €   Illegal Conduct.
> Â
> iTools may be used only for lawful purposes. The laws that apply in the
> off-line world must be obeyed on-line as well. Posting, transmitting,
> promoting, using, distributing or storing Content in violation of any
> applicable law or regulation is prohibited. Å‚ContentË› means the text,
> software, communications, images, sounds, and all other information and
> materials you encounter or generate on-line on the Internet, including
> material protected by copyright, trademark, trade secret or other
> intellectual property rights, and material that is obscene, defamatory,
> constitutes an illegal threat, or violates export control laws.
> Â
> Examples of prohibited illegal conduct are:
> Â
>      €   Posting obscene content (including child pornography)
> Â
>      €   Planning illegal activity, such as building a bomb or
> counterfeiting money
> Â
>      €   Advertising a lottery, ammunition, firearms, tobacco,
> alcohol, illegal drugs and drug-related paraphernalia
> Â
>      €   Pretending to be anyone you are not -- you may not
> impersonate another person (including celebrities), another iTools
> Member, an Apple employee, or a civic or government leader
> Â
>      €   Using false statements to get, or to attempt to get, account
> information or other private information from other iTools members or
> Internet users
> Â
>      €   Engaging in copyright infringement or other intellectual
> property infringement
> Â
> If you believe that illegal Content is being transmitted through any
> iTools service, you may report it by filling out the abuse reporting
> form located in the Å‚ContactUsË› section of the iTools Help system.
> Â
> Apple reserves the right to cooperate with law enforcement authorities,
> including complying with warrants, court orders and subpoenas. If Apple
> decides to investigate or resolve possible misuse involving you or
> anything you do on iTools, Apple is entitled to disclose any information
> about you and anything you do with iTools to law enforcement or other
> government officials, as Apple, in its sole discretion, believes to be
> necessary or appropriate. By your use of iTools, you authorize Apple to
> take any such actions.
> Â
> €   Objectionable Conduct and Content
> Â
> It is essential that all Content on iTools reflect the provisions of
> this agreement. Apple reserves the right to remove Content if we become
> aware of any content in any iTools area which, in our judgment, does not
> conform to this agreement. You may receive a warning about the violation
> of this agreement if your iTools account was responsible for putting
> objectionable Content on-line. At all times, Apple reserves the right to
> terminate the accounts of iTools members who violate this AUP.
> Â
> Examples of objectionable conduct and Content that violate the iTools
> acceptable use policy are:
> Â
>      €   Harassing, threatening, or embarrassing another iTools or
> Internet user
> Â
>      €   Stalking another iTools or Internet user (łcyberstalking˛)
> Â
>      €   Transmitting or facilitating distribution of Content that is
> harmful, abusive, violent, racially or ethnically offensive, lewd,
> vulgar or (in a reasonable personÄ…s view) objectionable
> Â
>      €   If you are an adult, requesting personal or other information
> from a minor (any person under the age of 18) who is not personally
> known to you, including but not limited to any of the following: full
> name or last name, home address, zip code, telephone number, picture, or
> the names of the minorÄ…s school, church, athletic team or friends
> Â
>      €   Posting Content that defames, abuses or threatens physical
> harm to others or yourself
> Â
> Please remember that these are only guidelines; there are always Å‚gray
> areas.Ë› Ask yourself if your communication is something that you would
> say in a room full of people you never met, or in the workplace.
> However, Apple reserves the right to make the final determination about
> whether Content is objectionable or not.
> Â
> If you encounter something you find inappropriate, you may report it by
> filling out the abuse reporting form located in the Å‚ContactUsË› section
> of the iTools Help system.
> Â
> Â
> €   Copyright and Intellectual Property Infringement
> Â
> Much of the Content available through iTools is owned by others, and is
> protected by copyrights, trademarks, rights of publicity and other
> intellectual property rights. Before you upload or download any Content
> while using iTools, make sure you have been given the legal right to do
> so by the owner of the content. The Mac OS X Software folder on iDisk
> contains third-party software, which has been licensed by the developers
> thereof to Apple. You may download and use this software for your own
> personal use, subject to any rights retained by the developers.
> Â
>      €   You must not copy, transmit, modify, distribute, show in
> public or in private or create any derivative works from any of the
> Content you find through iTools, unless you have the legal right to do
> so; and
> Â
>      €   You must not make available serial numbers for software for
> the purpose of illegally validating or registering software.
> Â
> Making unauthorized copies of any Content can lead to the termination of
> your access to iTools and may even subject you to legal action. In
> addition, the owner of the Content may take criminal or civil action
> against you. If a Content owner takes legal action against Apple because
> of your unauthorized use of Content, you agree to hold harmless and
> indemnify Apple, its subsidiaries, affiliates, related companies,
> employees, officers, directors, agents and suppliers against any
> liability, claims, or demands, including the costs of Apple hiring
> attorneys to defend against the action.
> Â
> By submitting or posting Content on areas of iTools accessible by the
> public, you are representing that you are the owner of such material or
> have authorization to distribute it. You hereby grant Apple a worldwide,
> royalty-free, non-exclusive license to reproduce, modify, adapt and
> publish any such public area Content solely for the purpose of
> displaying, distributing and promoting the area on which such content is
> posted. Said license will be in effect only as long as you are an iTools
> member, and will terminate upon removal of such Content from the public
> area or when you are no longer an iTools member, whichever happens first.
> Â
> If you believe that any Content in which you claim copyright has been
> infringed by anyone using iTools, please contact AppleÄ…s agent (see
> below), and provide the following information, as required by the Online
> Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act of the Digital
> Millennium Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. 512):
> Â
>      €   A physical or electronic signature of a person authorized to
> act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly
> infringed;
> Â
>      €   Identification of the copyright work claimed to have been
> infringed, or (if multiple copyrighted works at a single on-line site
> are covered by a single notification) a representative list of such
> works at that site;
> Â
>      €   Identification of the material that is claimed to be
> infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be
> removed or access to which is to be disabled, and information reasonably
> sufficient to permit Apple to locate the material;
> Â
>      €   Information reasonably sufficient to permit Apple to contact
> the complaining party;
> Â
>      €   A statement that the complaining party has a good faith
> belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not
> authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law; and
> Â
>      €   A statement that the information in the notice is accurate
> and, under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized
> to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly
> infringed.
> Â
> AppleÄ…s copyright agent for notice of claims of copyright infringement
> on or regarding iTools can be reached as follows:
> Â
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Anthony V. Lupo
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Arent Fox Kintner Plotkin & Kahn,
> PLLC
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Washington, D.C. 20036-5339
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Phone: (202) 857-6353
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Fax: (202) 857-6395
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Email: avl...@arentfox.com
> Â
> €   Violations of System and Network Security
> Â
> Violations of system and network security are prohibited, and may result
> in criminal and civil liability. Apple will investigate incidents
> involving such violations and may involve and will report any suspected
> criminal activity to and cooperate with law enforcement. Examples of
> system and network security violations include the following:
> Â
>      €   Unauthorized access to or use of data, systems or networks,
> including any attempt to probe, scan or test the vulnerability of a
> system or network or to breach security or authentication measures
> without the express authorization of the owner of the system or network
> Â
>      €   Unauthorized monitoring of data or traffic on any network or
> system without the express authorization of the owner of the system or
> network
> Â
>      €   Interference with service to any user, host or network
> including, without limitation, mailbombing, flooding, deliberate
> attempts to overload a system and broadcast attacks
> Â
>      €   Falsifying your user identity or providing other false
> information to Apple or to other users of iTools in connection with your
> use of iTools or any feature of iTools
> Â
>      €   Posting viruses or software designed to create a virus or to
> do harm to iTools, any iTools Members or users of iTools, or any network
> Â
>      €   Taking any other action to disrupt the normal use of iTools
> or the Internet by other users
> Â
>      €   Use of software that allows your account to stay logged on
> while you are not actively using the account.
> Â
> €   Unsolicited E-Mail (łSpamming˛ and łMailbombing˛)
> Â
> This agreement prohibits abuse of iToolsÄ… e-mail and related
> functionalities. Some specific examples of prohibited actions are as
> follows:
> Â
>      €   Sending unsolicited bulk email messages including, without
> limitation, bulk commercial advertising and informational announcements
> (Å‚bulkË› is defined as sending the same or substantially similar messages
> to more than 400 e-mail users in a single day, sending more than 200
> individual pieces of email in a day, or sending one email to more than
> 50 recipients at once)
> Â
>      €   Using information collected from any iTools user or iTools
> Member directory or any other area of iTools for the purpose of sending
> unsolicited bulk e-mail
> Â
>      €   Posting the same or similar messages to one or more Usenet or
> other news groups, forums, or e-mail mailing lists (excessive
> cross-posting or multiple-posting) (Å‚excessiveË› includes posting the
> same or substantially similar messages to ten (10) or more groups in a
> single day)
> Â
>      €   Forging of any TCP-IP packet header or any part of the header
> information in an e-mail or a news group posting, or otherwise putting
> information in the header designed to mislead recipients as to the
> origin of the message
> Â
>      €   Using another siteąs mail server to relay mail without the
> express permission of the other site
> Â
>      €   Engaging in any of the foregoing activities by using the
> services of another provider, but channeling such activities through an
> iTools account, remailer, or otherwise through any feature of iTools, or
> using an iTools account as a mail drop for responses, or otherwise using
> the services of another provider for the purpose of facilitating the
> foregoing activities
> Â
> €   Exceeding Account Limitations
> Â
> iTools has been designed primarily for personal use. We do not intend
> that iTools will be used to host e-commerce businesses in their
> marketing, promotions and sales over the Internet. We also do not intend
> that iTools accounts will be used for FTP access and downloading. iTools
> accounts are limited in terms of the bandwidth for network traffic and
> disk utilization for storage allocated to them. Your iDisk account usage
> is limited to 20 MB and your email account may not exceed 5 MB.
> Exceeding the applicable limitations is prohibited.
> Â
> In addition to the iTools account limitations on bandwidth and disk
> utilization, certain commercial or business uses are prohibited,
> including the following:
> Â
>      €   Soliciting for advertisers or sponsors
> Â
>      €   Posting sponsorships and third-party advertisements and
> banners
> Â
>      €   Sending unsolicited advertising, promotional materials or
> commercial solicitations to third parties
> Â
>      €   Reselling, renting or subleasing iTools space under any
> circumstance
> Â
>      €   Using or providing to any third person or entity, whether or
> not for a fee, any directory of iTools Members other than for personal,
> non-commercial purposes
> Â
>      €   Disseminating multi-level marketing schemes, pyramid schemes,
> or commercial chain letters
> Â
> Â
> €   INVESTIGATIONS
> Â
> Apple reserves the right to investigate suspected violations of this
> iTools agreement. When Apple becomes aware of possible violations, Apple
> may initiate an investigation, which may include gathering information
> from any iTools member involved and the complaining party, if any, and
> the examination of Content stored on the iTools system.
> Â
> During the investigation, Apple may suspend or terminate any or all
> iTools member accounts involved and/or remove the Content involved from
> its computers. If Apple believes, in its sole discretion, that a
> violation of this agreement has occurred, it may take responsive action,
> including but not limited to permanent removal of illegal or
> inappropriate Content from the iTools system, warnings to the iTools
> member(s), and the suspension or termination of the account or accounts
> responsible.
> Â
> If, as a result of any such investigation, Apple believes that any
> criminal activity has occurred, Apple reserves the right to refer the
> matter to, and to cooperate with, any and all appropriate law
> enforcement authorities.
> Â
> BY BECOMING AN iTOOLS MEMBER, YOU AGREE TO WAIVE ANY CLAIMS YOU MAY HAVE
> AGAINST APPLE, AND TO HOLD APPLE HARMLESS AND INDEMNIFY APPLE WITH
> RESPECT TO ANY CLAIMS, RELATING TO ANY ACTION TAKEN BY APPLE AS PART OF
> ITS INVESTIGATION OF A SUSPECTED VIOLATION OF THIS AGREMENT OR AS A
> RESULT OF ITS FINDING OR DECISION THAT A VIOLATION OF THIS AGREEMENT HAS
> OCCURRED. THIS MEANS THAT YOU CANNOT SUE APPLE OR RECOVER ANY DAMAGES
> WHATSOEVER FROM APPLE AS A RESULT OF ITS DECISION TO REMOVE MATERIAL
> FROM THE iTOOLS SYSTEM, TO WARN YOU, TO SUSPEND OR TERMINATE YOUR iTOOLS
> ACCOUNT, OR TO TAKE ANY OTHER ACTION DURING THE INVESTIGATION OF A
> SUSPECTED VIOLATION OR AS A RESULT OF APPLEÄ…S CONCLUSION THAT A
> VIOLATION OF THIS AGREEMENT HAS OCCURRED. THIS WAIVER AND INDEMNITY
> PROVISION APPLIES TO ALL VIOLATIONS DESCRIBED IN OR CONTEMPLATED BY THIS
> AGREEMENT.
>
>
> €   SOFTWARE LICENSES
>
> If you access iTools through downloaded software or a CD-ROM, then these
> provisions relating to software licenses apply to you. Nothing in these
> provisions, however, supersedes any terms of any end-user license for
> software provided with your computer.
> Â
> Apple provides you with a limited license to use the software providing
> access to iTools, which you agree to use in accordance with these rules.
> You may not sublicense, or charge others to use or access, this
> software. Apple will occasionally provide automatic upgrades to improve
> your on-line experience.
> Â
> Apple grants to you a non-exclusive, limited license to use the software
> designed to provide access to iTools for the sole purpose of connecting
> you to iTools. This license is subject to the restriction that, except
> where expressly permitted by law, you may not translate,
> reverse-engineer or reverse-compile or decompile, disassemble or make
> derivative works from the software. You may not modify the software or
> use it in any way not expressly authorized by this agreement. You
> understand that AppleÄ…s introduction of various technologies may not be
> consistent across all platforms and that the performance and some iTools
> features may vary depending on your computer and systems and other
> equipment.
> Â
> Â
> €   DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES; LIABILITY LIMITATIONS
> Â
> YOU EXPRESSLY AGREE THAT YOUR USE OF, OR INABILITY TO USE, THE iTOOLS
> SERVICES ARE AT YOUR SOLE RISK. iTOOLS SERVICES ARE PROVIDED Å‚AS ISË› AND
> Å‚AS AVAILABLEË› FOR YOUR USE, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER
> EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
> FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. BECAUSE
> SOME JURISDICTIONS DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OF IMPLIED WARRANTIES, THE
> ABOVE EXCLUSION OF IMPLIED WARRANTIES MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU.
>
> APPLE DOES NOT GUARANTEE THAT ANY CONTENT, INFORMATION, SOFTWARE OR
> OTHER MATERIAL ACCESSIBLE THROUGH iTOOLS WILL BE FREE OF VIRUSES,
> Å‚WORMSË›, Å‚TROJAN HORSESË›, OR OTHER HARMFUL COMPONENTS. APPLEÄ…S ENTIRE
> LIABILITY AND YOUR SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDY WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF
> ANY SERVICES PROVIDED BY iTOOLS SHALL BE CANCELLATION OF YOUR ACCOUNT.
>
> IN NO CASE SHALL APPLE, ITS DIRECTORS, OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES, AFFILIATES,
> AGENTS OR CONTRACTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
> SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING FROM YOUR USE OF iTOOLS OR FOR
> ANY OTHER CLAIM RELATED IN ANY WAY TO YOUR iTOOLS MEMBERSHIP. BECAUSE
> SOME STATES OR JURISDICTIONS DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OR THE
> LIMITATION OF LIABILITY FOR CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, IN
> SUCH STATES OR JURISDICTIONS, APPLEÄ…S LIABILITY SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE
> EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW.
>
>
> EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY SET FORTH IN iTOOLS, APPLE DOES NOT ENDORSE,
> WARRANT OR GUARANTEE ANY THIRD-PARTY PRODUCT OR SERVICE OFFERED THROUGH
> iTOOLS AND WILL NOT BE A PARTY TO OR IN ANY WAY BE RESPONSIBLE FOR
> MONITORING ANY TRANSACTION BETWEEN YOU AND ANY THIRD PARTIES THROUGH
> iTOOLS. YOU HEREBY RELEASE APPLE FROM ANY AND ALL OBLIGATIONS,
> LIABILITY AND CLAIMS IN EXCESS OF THESE LIABILITY LIMITATIONS.
>
> Â
> Â
> €   NOTICES
> Â
> Apple may give notice to any iTools member by sending an e-mail message
> to the memberÄ…s mailbox or by sending a letter via postal mail to the
> contact address listed in the memberÄ…s iTools registration. iTools
> members may contact Apple by filling out the Å‚Comments and IdeasË› form
> in the Å‚ContactUsË› section of the iTools Help system.
>
> Â
> Â
> €   EXPORT CONTROLS
> Â
> You agree to abide by U.S. and other applicable export control laws and
> not to transfer, by electronic transmission or otherwise, any Content
> or software subject to restrictions under such laws to a destination
> prohibited under such laws, without first obtaining, and then complying
> with, any requisite government authorization. You further agree not to
> upload to your iTools account any data or software that cannot be
> exported without prior written government authorization, including, but
> not limited to, certain types of encryption software. This assurance
> and commitment shall survive termination of this agreement.
>
> Â
> Â
> €   LEGAL PRINCIPLES
> Â
> With respect to iTools, this agreement represents your entire agreement
> with Apple. You agree that this agreement is not intended to confer and
> does not confer any rights or remedies upon any person other than you,
> as an iTools member, and Apple.
>
> If any part of this agreement is held invalid or unenforceable, that
> portion shall be construed in a manner consistent with applicable law
> to reflect, as nearly as possible, the original intentions of the
> parties, and the remaining portions shall remain in full force and
> effect. The laws of the State of California, excluding its conflicts of
> law rules, govern this agreement and your iTools membership. Member
> conduct may be subject to other local, state, national, and
> international laws. You expressly agree that exclusive jurisdiction for
> any claim or dispute with Apple regarding iTools or relating in any way
> to your membership or your use of iTools resides in the courts of the
> State of California. You further agree and expressly consent to the
> exercise of personal jurisdiction in the California courts in
> connection with any such dispute, including any claim involving Apple
> or its affiliates, subsidiaries, employees, contractors, officers,
> directors, telecommunication providers and content providers with
> respect to iTools.
>
> Â
> Under California Civil Code Section 1789.3, California iTools members
> receive the following specific consumer rights notice: The Complaint
> Assistance Unit of the Division of Consumer Services of the California
> Department of Consumer Affairs may be contacted in writing at 1020 N
> Street, #501, Sacramento, California 95814, or by telephone at
> 1-916-445-1254.
> Â
> Â
> Revised 4.23.01
D.F. Manno
<unix...@linuxmail.org> wrote:
> However, I think that
> the mac.com email should be offered free (or at least at a minimum
> charge). I personally do not want any of the other services which makes
> it a very expensive email.
>
> Until Apple realizes that a 'all or nothing' approach is wrong, I've
> already begun using an alternate email since I won't be signing up to
> .Mac as we currently know it.
Why "should" mac.com e-mail be free or inexpensive? Just because you say so?
Apple has the right to charge whatever they want for the service. It knows that
not all iTools users will convert to .Mac. It's set the price for .Mac to what
it thinks the market will bear for the services it's willing to offer. What you
call an "all or nothing" approach isn't wrong; it's just business. If you or
anybody else doesn't like it, vote with your feet. And you're doing that by
using another e-mail account.
--
D.F. Manno
domm...@netscape.net
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." (Benjamin Franklin)
Steven Kan
>
> In article <unix_core-6055C...@corp.supernews.com>, E-Star
> <unix...@linuxmail.org> wrote:
>
> > However, I think that
> > the mac.com email should be offered free (or at least at a minimum
> > charge). I personally do not want any of the other services which makes
> > it a very expensive email.
> >
> > Until Apple realizes that a 'all or nothing' approach is wrong, I've
> > already begun using an alternate email since I won't be signing up to
> > .Mac as we currently know it.
>
> Why "should" mac.com e-mail be free or inexpensive? Just because you say so?
>
> Apple has the right to charge whatever they want for the service. It knows that
> not all iTools users will convert to .Mac. It's set the price for .Mac to what
> it thinks the market will bear for the services it's willing to offer. What you
> call an "all or nothing" approach isn't wrong; it's just business. If you or
> anybody else doesn't like it, vote with your feet. And you're doing that by
> using another e-mail account.
I think "should"=="if Apple wants to be competitive in this space they
oughtta"
Hotmail is free. Does Apple think .mac is so much more compelling that
people will pay for it? Time will tell, but I have my serious doubts.
--
A rich man who hailed from Seattle #```````
Wrote Win95 to do battle, # ```````
But Mac users pity # ```````
The masses not witty # ```````
Enough to know Wintel's for cattle. #. ```````
~ ~ . \_@_/ ```````
^_@ o . V ```````
Steven "Rocket Man" Kan `-' - \_@_ ~ . ######
mailto:ste...@kan.org V \ ~ . ######
http://www.kan.org ~ . #H2O##
Everybody S.H.I.N.E. ~ .#POLO#
Support Heterogeneity In Networked Environments ~ ~ ######
Robbo
Steiner at mich...@michelle.org wrote on 20/7/02 10:52 AM:
> In article <3D38AC9A...@kan.org>, Steven Kan <ste...@kan.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Hotmail is free. Does Apple think .mac is so much more compelling
>> that people will pay for it? Time will tell, but I have my serious
>> doubts.
>
> What does Apple gain by giving away free email services? Hotmail gets
> ad revenue, but Apple's model isn't built on that--and I suspect that if
> Apple started including ads in mac.com email, there would be an outcry
> much louder than this one.
They still made a profit with them free last year and the year before.
There's no excuse.
Steve doesn't need another yacht.
Phil Lefebvre
Steiner <mich...@michelle.org> wrote:
>What does Apple gain by giving away free email services? Hotmail gets
>ad revenue, but Apple's model isn't built on that
Apple got advertising from iTools. mac.com e-mail addresses let people
know they used a Mac. I used my mac.com address exclusively for online
shopping, so vendors knew I was probably buying for a Mac, even if the
product wasn't Mac specific. Apple can't buy that kind of marketing.
Everytime someone went to an Apple HomePage, Apple got advertising out of
it. "Look how easy it was to make a nice, elegant web page for my friends
and family, and it was so easy on a Mac." That kind of marketing can't be
bought.
The more people saw mac.com, the more it help dispel the myth that no one
uses a Mac, and reinforced the idea that Apple is gaining users. The
sudden drop in mac.com users will lead some people who otherwise don't pay
much attention to such things to think Apple is dying again. If Apple
didn't think they were getting any value, or couldn't afford that kind of
value, so be it. I think they'll lose more money than they'll make out of
the way they handled it.
>--and I suspect that if Apple started including ads in mac.com email, there
>would be an outcry much louder than this one.
Apple put ads in Sherlock and the uproar was nothing like this.
--
Phil Lefebvre
Chicago, IL
Remove GO from e-mail address to reply.
John Baxter
> Hotmail is free. Does Apple think .mac is so much more compelling that
> people will pay for it? Time will tell, but I have my serious doubts.
Well, hotmail is really busy web pages I can't stand.
Hotmail implies Passport...no thanks. (I haven't registered the Windows
NT for VirtualPC with MS, since I haven't seen any way to do so without
Passport.)
Hotmail is not the competition as seen from here. Perhaps as seen from
other places.
--John
Matthew Smith
<p-lefebvre-19...@areca-14-028082.nuts.northwestern.edu>,
p-lef...@GOnwu.edu (Phil Lefebvre) wrote:
> Apple got advertising from iTools. mac.com e-mail addresses let people
> know they used a Mac.
I don't find that to be true. A lot of people don't realise mac.com
means you have a Mac. Even if it did, I wouldn't say it was advertising.
--
Matthew Smith
(to reply via email replace xxx with net)
Matthew Smith
> Hotmail is free. Does Apple think .mac is so much more compelling that
> people will pay for it? Time will tell, but I have my serious doubts.
Hotmail can be unreliable. Using a Hotmail address is not as prestigious
as a mac.com address. Most people don't realise a mac.com email address
was free. The way I see hotmail addresses is that it is the address you
have when you don't have an ISP and you don't want to use your work
address for certain email. A mac.com address doesn't have that image.
Anyway, .mac is more than just an email address. One feature, in the not
too distant future, is the ability to synchronise your contacts and
calendar with .mac. You can't do that with Hotmail. I have always
thought you should be able to do that.
GrapeApe
Good customer morale with people that appreciate a short easy to remember
domain address, that has some clout for the customer, and serves as advertising
for Apple with every email sent, as well as being considered 'part of the
package' of being a mac owner.
I think they should probably continue to give minimal email services as part of
the ownership package of owning a Mac. Perhaps it would be ten dollars more
tagged on to the price of Jaguar or whatever.
I have only been using Mail since I installed OS X at the beginning of the
year. I have had perhaps only 40 pieces of mail, (at least that I have
archived) in those six months, (this is a plus) because I only use it with
well known friends, and its a new clean address that the spammers have not
found out about yet. My other email addresses are the Spam magnets, my Mac.com
address is the one I use with friends on occasion, and other Mac users.
I think they can handle the bandwidth volume that I am creating with my iTools
account. It is those that are really taking advantage of the account that are
causing the costs to rise.
And there was an inkling of this coming, with the charges for more storage,
etc...
The only part of it has me miffed that I will lose that minimal use completely
unless I cough up. And I may, as the services they offer, which aren't cheap
for them, become more worthwhile.
Presently, I am without broadband as I am moving, so iTools or .Mac is a non
issue for me.
So put me in the compromise camp on this issue, rather than the kneejerk "Dude,
I'm getting a Dell, and Jobs can go to Hell" crowd.
GrapeApe
When they bought Logic, they could have transitioned the closing down of the
windows version a bit more gracefully, and perhaps won some new customers.
They should also have sugar coated the .Mac stuff more, saying that they could
no longer support iDisk due to costs, but have decided to allow present users
to keep their .mac email addresses for life, as promised, for being loyal
customers (and they would remain loyal) Tell the faithful there are two
options- make OS 10.2 dollars more, charging people who are not even using the
service, or ask for around 8 bucks a month, a once a year charge, for an
expanded service. Then hype the new features of the expanded service.. iCal,
iSync, Rendezvous, whatever....
And the Microsoft bashing during the keynote, simply was bad Form. We all know
how most of us really feel about Microsoft, but we should be gentlemen about
it, and look at the positives.
Orac
> Is this posting trying to show us that Apple has every right to change
> and start charging? I don't think anyone disaggrees that Apple can and
> perhaps ever should charge for internet services. However, I think that
> the mac.com email should be offered free (or at least at a minimum
> charge). I personally do not want any of the other services which makes
> it a very expensive email.
>
> Until Apple realizes that a 'all or nothing' approach is wrong, I've
> already begun using an alternate email since I won't be signing up to
> .Mac as we currently know it.
Me neither. I use my Mac.com e-mail address mainly for posting to
newsgroups and as a convenient address to submit when filling out web
forms or ordering things online. I can easily use my Hotmail account for
the same time. It's just not as cool as a Mac.com address, and it's
subject to a couple of dozen spams every day that somehow manage to get
through Hotmail's filtering system.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"
Orac
"D.F. Manno" <domm...@netscape.net> wrote:
> In article <unix_core-6055C...@corp.supernews.com>, E-Star
> <unix...@linuxmail.org> wrote:
> > However, I think that the mac.com email should be offered free (or
> > at least at a minimum charge). I personally do not want any of the
> > other services which makes it a very expensive email.
> >
> > Until Apple realizes that a 'all or nothing' approach is wrong,
> > I've already begun using an alternate email since I won't be
> > signing up to .Mac as we currently know it.
>
> Why "should" mac.com e-mail be free or inexpensive? Just because you
> say so?
>
> Apple has the right to charge whatever they want for the service. It
> knows that not all iTools users will convert to .Mac. It's set the
> price for .Mac to what it thinks the market will bear for the
> services it's willing to offer. What you call an "all or nothing"
> approach isn't wrong; it's just business. If you or anybody else
> doesn't like it, vote with your feet. And you're doing that by using
> another e-mail account.
No one here is disputing that Apple can start charging for their
service. What some people are complaining about is that what is being
offered is not worth the price being charged for it. And, basically,
most of these people ARE stating that they are therefore voting with
their feet and not signing up for the .Mac service!
I happen to agree that an "all-or-nothing" approach to pricing is a
mistake on Apple's part. There should be a cheaper, e-mail-only option.
I have no use for most of the features they're bundling in the .Mac
service, and to me having a cool Mac.com e-mail address is not worth the
price being charged.
pz
Orac <Or...@mac.com> wrote:
That's right. I like having the address, and all of my family members
are also signed up -- but we're not going to be at that price.
Apple has every right to charge what they will, but the bad part of this
decision is that I and many others think they've miscalculated: they've
set a price that is going to drive away many more than their estimated
half of the current user base.
--
pz
David Silbey
> I think they can handle the bandwidth volume that I am creating with my iTools
> account. It is those that are really taking advantage of the account that are
> causing the costs to rise.
Interesting note on Macintouch this morning about Apple having problem
with mac.com/iDisk accounts being used as warez stashes.
(http://www.macintouch.com)
But let's try some speculative numbers (I have no idea if any of these
are accurate, so feel free to correct). With 2.5 million members, if
the iTools bandwidth costs Apple $1/user/month (most would be a lot less
than this, some would be a lot more), then that's $2.5 milllion/month or
$26 million/year.
$0.50/user/month? $13 million/year.
(Let's say that 1/10th of the current users actually pay for .Mac:
First year, that would be 250,000 x $50 = $12.5 million dollars, a swing
of either $38.5 million or $25.5 million. Second year, the swing is
either $51 million or $38 million).
THESE NUMBERS ARE PROVIDED AS-IS. THE SELLER DOES NOT WARRANTEE THAT
THEY ARE IN ANYWAY CORRECT, ACCURATE, OR NOT COMPLETELY WRONG.
i.e. YMMV.
I should also point out that protests to Apple about upgrade pricing did
seem to have an effect in the transition from the Public Beta of OS X to
10.0. If I remember correctly, after initially saying they wouldn't,
Apple gave away $30 coupons to people who had purchased the Public Beta.
palamino
> In article
> <p-lefebvre-19...@areca-14-028082.nuts.northwestern.edu>,
> p-lef...@GOnwu.edu (Phil Lefebvre) wrote:
>
> > >What does Apple gain by giving away free email services? Hotmail gets
> > >ad revenue, but Apple's model isn't built on that
> >
> > Apple got advertising from iTools. mac.com e-mail addresses let people
> > know they used a Mac.
>
> How many people do you know who pay attention to the domain in an email
> address?
>
You don't ask people if they pay attention to your email address or not.
But I'm sure email addresses at least helps promoting a site (or a
company). When people see some address with a unique domain (such as
michelle.org), they tend to get curious and try to find more information
by visiting the site (and found nothing but parent directory).
Anyway, it does have some impact.
<snip>
>
> > >--and I suspect that if Apple started including ads in mac.com email, there
> > >would be an outcry much louder than this one.
> >
> > Apple put ads in Sherlock and the uproar was nothing like this.
>
> You don't send sherlock screen shots to other people, do you?
no, you only feel irritated because of losing about X px by 100 pixels
of your screen.
--
No email, please.
Phil Lefebvre
>
>> In article
>> <p-lefebvre-19...@areca-14-028082.nuts.northwestern.edu>,
>> p-lef...@GOnwu.edu (Phil Lefebvre) wrote:
>>
>> > >What does Apple gain by giving away free email services? Hotmail gets
>> > >ad revenue, but Apple's model isn't built on that
>> >
>> > Apple got advertising from iTools. mac.com e-mail addresses let people
>> > know they used a Mac.
>>
>> How many people do you know who pay attention to the domain in an email
>> address?
I do for one. I would suspect that when the marketing guy from some
company sorts e-mail addressed by domain, if they suddenly saw several
thousand mac.com addresses, it might influence decisions about Mac
support. I hope that occurred to at least one of the brain dead marketing
people at Apple.
>> > >--and I suspect that if Apple started including ads in mac.com
email, there
>> > >would be an outcry much louder than this one.
>> >
>> > Apple put ads in Sherlock and the uproar was nothing like this.
>>
>> You don't send sherlock screen shots to other people, do you?
>
>no, you only feel irritated because of losing about X px by 100 pixels
>of your screen.
--
Orac
Michelle Steiner <mich...@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <Orac-A25B1B.1...@news.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>,
> Orac <Or...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > No one here is disputing that Apple can start charging for their
> > service. What some people are complaining about is that what is being
> > offered is not worth the price being charged for it. And, basically,
> > most of these people ARE stating that they are therefore voting with
> > their feet and not signing up for the .Mac service!
>
> If it's not worth it to them, then they can excersize their perogative
> and not sign up--that's what I'm doing.
>
> But to whine about it is simply a sign of immaturity.
It depends on what you mean by "whining." Complaining about something is
not a sign of immaturity, especially if there is any hope that the
complaints might make Apple rethink its pricing scheme.
Avery Raskin
Michelle Steiner <mich...@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article
> <p-lefebvre-21...@areca-19-028087.nuts.northwestern.edu>,
> p-lef...@GOnwu.edu (Phil Lefebvre) wrote:
>
> > >> How many people do you know who pay attention to the domain in an email
> > >> address?
> >
> > I do for one. I would suspect that when the marketing guy from some
> > company sorts e-mail addressed by domain, if they suddenly saw several
> > thousand mac.com addresses, it might influence decisions about Mac
> > support. I hope that occurred to at least one of the brain dead marketing
> > people at Apple.
>
> Why would a marketing guy sort email addresses by domain? And if they
> weren't already offering Mac support, why would so many people with .mac
> addresses be writing them?
You're both missing it. iTools was what's known in marketing parlance as
a loss leader. It costs money and you give it away, hoping it will lure
people to buy something else from you, like a Mac to run it on. In this
case, iTools was another reason to buy a Mac -- you got spam-free email
and a free web site...in other words, you got pretty much everything an
ISP gives you, except the dialup/DSL/cable access in the first place.
And you got it Mac friendly. Now, it's another fee, another charge,
another way Apple is reaching into your wallet. If the brain trust at
Apple had been smarter, they would have left a basic iTools exactly the
way it was or maybe a little less featured - like no IMAP in the email
the way it was originally and the old 20 Meg iDisk and etc. - and THEN
do the value-added model on top. And I'll bet you dollars to donuts that
that was considered. But then the marketing department comes in and
points out that they haven't been able to sell iDisk upgrades as long as
the 20 Meg is free so they need to kill off the freebie to ever make
money off the service. And so the freebie gets killed, because they
figure they'll make more money in the end and survive the ill will.
Companies today have no real sense of what goodwill means and what it's
worth. The decision to renege on the original iTools promise and make
the system $$$ only will not affect switchers coming to Mac from
Windows. It will affect those of us who have been Mac loyalists for
decades and those who maybe even came over in the last few years partly
because of iTools. The one-size-fits-nobody pricing and service
structure they've set up is ill-advised. But let's face it, it's not the
first time Apple has done something patently stupid and it won't be the
last time. Whether Steve can turn this into a plus instead of a minus in
the months to come remains to be seen. All I know is this is the first
time I've read the news coming out of MacWorld in horror instead of
elation.
John Baxter
Orac <Or...@mac.com> wrote:
> It depends on what you mean by "whining." Complaining about something is
> not a sign of immaturity, especially if there is any hope that the
> complaints might make Apple rethink its pricing scheme.
However, complaining HERE has near-zero chance of causing a rethinking.
Apple not seeing many signups by mid-September might cause one. (Easily
quantifiable.)
Apple seeing @mac.com subscriptions draining out of their mailing lists
(also easily quantifiable) might cause rethinking.
Apple seeing concerted replacement of mac.com web sites by redirection
pages to new sites might (but that had already started due to the absurd
bandwidth restriction implementation).
But a few people muttering on Usenet simply isn't on the radar...so
little so that the fact that some of those people mutter about
*everything* Apple does or doesn't do doesn't have to be discounted.
--John (who never before managed to string together "does or doesn't
do doesn't" meaningfully)
Jeremy
> That's not what I asked. I asked how many people pay attention to the
> domain in an email address.
Surprisingly many. I've had quite a lot of people -- non-computer people,
the ones who use a computer as an appliance and really don't know or care
how stuff works -- comment on the domain in my email address. If they're
from New Jersey, they know what it means and remark about it being clever
or whatever. If they used to be from Jersey or they know Jersey, they
usually make a joke about it. If they don't know anything about Jersey
they usually ask what it means. It's not even my domain (it's my ISP's)
but it gets noticed quite often.
--
Jeremy | jer...@exit109.com
Ben Sharvy
> Is this posting trying to show us that Apple has every right to change
> and start charging? I don't think anyone disaggrees that Apple can and
> perhaps ever should charge for internet services.
The iTools agreement is completely irrelevant, once Apple has
advertised iTools as having certain features, and you have made a
purchase decion based on that advertisement. One cannot say "Buy our
product and get XYZ for free" and then stick a piece of paper inside
the box which stipulates a right to make XYZ non-free without notice.
Apple advertised iTools as being free. I bought Mac OS 9 on the basis
of that advertisement. False advertising is illegal.
Rocky path: sue Apple
Easy path: never buy Apple again
Time to investigate Linux.
Jeremy
>> Surprisingly many. I've had quite a lot of people -- non-computer
>> people, the ones who use a computer as an appliance and really don't
>> know or care how stuff works -- comment on the domain in my email
>> address.
>
> Interesting. Hardly anyone (maybe once every two or three months)
> comments on my domain name.
But it's pretty obvious what yours means. :)
> BTW, is there something special about Exit 109 on the Jersey Turnpike or
> Garden State Freeway? Almost every interstate highway in the country
> (except in California) has an exit 109.
In New Jersey, where you live, where things are, how to get somewhere,
pretty much anything about geography, is described in terms of exit
numbers. You don't even have to tell someone a town name, just say
"it's at exit 117" or whatever and take the directions from there,
because they'll know what "exit 117" means. Over the years it's
become the standard NJ joke: "Oh, you're from Jersey? What exit?"
The only "special" thing about exit 109 on the Parkway is that it
happens to be where my ISP is located. :) And my former place of
employment, and the community college I went to, etc.
--
Jeremy | jer...@exit109.com
pz
luvn...@www.com (Ben Sharvy) wrote:
Hey, guess what? You got it for free. You used it for free. You've still
got it for free. And Apple has duly informed you that come September, it
won't be free anymore. No false advertising.
>
> Rocky path: sue Apple
> Easy path: never buy Apple again
>
> Time to investigate Linux.
No one is stopping you.
--
pz
Orac
Michelle Steiner <mich...@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <Orac-A94D9E.1...@news.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>,
> Orac <Or...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > > But to whine about it is simply a sign of immaturity.
> >
> > It depends on what you mean by "whining." Complaining about something
> > is not a sign of immaturity, especially if there is any hope that the
> > complaints might make Apple rethink its pricing scheme.
>
> Complaining is not whining, ÑŒthough whining can be a component of
> complaining, possibly the only component.
Certainly true.
> But "I'm going to switch to Windows/unix/linux/etc. because Apple won't
> give me a free email address any more" and the like is whining.
Yep. Which I didn't do.
> Demanding that Appl •continue giving away freebies just because you
> (generic you, not you personally) want them is whining.
Yep. Which I also didn't do.
> Criticizing Apple because you believe that they're making a financial or
> PR error--and explaining what the mistake is--is criticizing. I happen
> to disagree with it, and will argue against it, but I can distinguish
> that from whining.
That's good. Unfortunately, not everyone shares your perception.
D.F. Manno
Raskin <aver...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> It will affect those of us who have been Mac loyalists for
> decades
You're exaggerating a bit. _Nobody_ has been a Mac loyalist for decades, since
the Mac debuted in 1984. That's 18 years ago, which is not "decades."
Alien
> Until Apple realizes that a 'all or nothing' approach is wrong, I've
> already begun using an alternate email since I won't be signing up to
> .Mac as we currently know it.
>
.Ditto
I still remember eWorld and the terrific experience it was. And then...
Poof! It was gone. Although it was never free (and not cheap at $15 per
month) it was just another Apple fiasco leaving the faithful sucker
punched.
I'd considered one poster's comments about iTools being a "loss leader" and
began to wonder if Apple isn't indeed contemplating iTools future in the
eWorld/Newton vein.
Apple's track record in this iNet space is much too dodgey. To once again
depend upon their infrastructure to be dependable and present in the long
term is a "dog bites me..." cliche.
Alien
> Time to investigate Linux.
Your dissatisfaction with Apple shouldn't be the impetus to dive into this
"revolution". And I would strongly recommend you do more than investigate.
Embrace it and I'll wager you'll be kicking yourself as to why you didn't
sooner.
Be forewarned, however, that there are many distributions and finding the
one that suits you can only be determined by you. Apple, like M$, do a lot
of the front-to-back work/thinking for you and this crutch will be absent.
Although, there's loads of help, how-to's, and ng's to aid you. (NOTE:
Linux folks in the ng's can be rude and ill mannered so if you aren't thick
skinned I'd suggest lurking a bit if ng's are where you learn the most.)
Like you, I'm not pleased with this iTools development but my feelings
aren't so harsh as yours. Perhaps because I'm no longer solely dependent
upon Apple to provide me with my digital experiences/connectivity.
Break free, suffer a little, and walk with the Penguin.
Avery Raskin
"D.F. Manno" <domm...@netscape.net> wrote:
> In article
> <avery9000-5BA07...@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net>, Avery
> Raskin <aver...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > It will affect those of us who have been Mac loyalists for decades
>
> You're exaggerating a bit. _Nobody_ has been a Mac loyalist for
> decades, since the Mac debuted in 1984. That's 18 years ago, which is
> not "decades."
Sorry DF, but 18 years is close enough to two decades for me. If you
want to split chronological hairs, be my guest, but 18 years is still
1.8 decades, and that's still a plural.
The bottom line for me is I feel abused. MacWorld New York 2002 will go
down in Apple history as the year they got greedy:
1) JAGUAR -- An OS upgrade with no upgrade pricing. Even $20 off would
have been a nod of appreciation to those of us who have paid for every
OS upgrade since they started charging for them.
2) DOT-GOTCHA -- The mac.com email addresses were billed as the
addresses you never had to change because they were yours forever.
Forever was a very short time. You want to take away the iDisk and the
home page because the server space costs too much? Fine. Go ahead. But
you committed to supplying the emails and now you're breaking the
committment. At the very least, they should have offered a low-cost
email-only option, but no doubt that was never in the cards because it
would bite too hard into the revenue they expect to generate.
The longer I think about this, the more convinced I am that they'll be
skiing in Hades before I hand over $150 a year Canadian for the joy of
software I don't need, server space I can get cheaper elsewhere, and a
mailserver I can't even use my own domain with anymore (if your reply-to
address doesn't match your mac.com account, it's rejected). The jury is
still out for me on $200 Canadian for Jaguar. I may have to suck that
one up, like I sucked up the $45 yesterday for QuickTime Pro 6. But what
Apple has done with all of this is pushed back any consideration of new
hardware for me for a long time.
Steve Hix
>
> Companies today have no real sense of what goodwill means and what it's
> worth.
On the contrary, they usually have a good idea of what it is worth.
Sometimes they decide they can't afford it, sometimes they can.
> The decision to renege on the original iTools promise and make
> the system $$$ only
There never was any such promise. What Apple *did* promise was:
- To provide a service available to all users of MacOS, starting
with OS 9, and continuing with OS X.
- To give you an email address that would never change, as long as
you chose to continue using the service. (If you choose to end
the arrangement, you lose the address.)
- There never was any promise to offer iTools or similar services at
no cost forever and ever, amen. The EULA specifically states that
Apple may, at any time and with no penalty, "change, suspend or
discontinue any (or all) aspects of iTools at any time, including the
availability of any iTools feature or content. Apple may also impose
limits on the use of or access to certain features or portions of iTools,
including a charge for or imposition of a subscription or other fee for
use of iTools or any part or feature of iTools, or restrict your access
to any part or all of iTools, in all cases without notice or liability".
This was stated up front, and anyone who wanted to sign up for iTools was
supposed to have read and agreed to the terms of the license.
> will not affect switchers coming to Mac from
> Windows. It will affect those of us who have been Mac loyalists for
> decades and those who maybe even came over in the last few years partly
> because of iTools. The one-size-fits-nobody pricing and service
> structure they've set up is ill-advised.
No doubt. Apple will almost certainly modify, at least in part, before the
current 60-day phaseout of iTools ends.
D.F. Manno
Raskin <aver...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 2) DOT-GOTCHA -- The mac.com email addresses were billed as the
> addresses you never had to change because they were yours forever.
You can still have the mac.com address forever; you just have to pay for it from
September on.
> Forever was a very short time. You want to take away the iDisk and the
> home page because the server space costs too much? Fine. Go ahead. But
> you committed to supplying the emails and now you're breaking the
> committment.
What committment is Apple breaking? I've as yet seen no evidence--absolutely
none whatsoever--that Apple promised anybody free e-mail for life. And the
membership agreement warned people (at least those who read it) that a fee could
be charged in the future. (If people didn't read the agreement, whose fault is
that? Not Apple's.)
Avery Raskin
se...@mac.com (Steve Hix) wrote:
> Avery Raskin <aver...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:<avery9000-5BA07...@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net>...
> >
> > Companies today have no real sense of what goodwill means and what it's
> > worth.
>
> On the contrary, they usually have a good idea of what it is worth.
> Sometimes they decide they can't afford it, sometimes they can.
No company can afford to throw away goodwill, especially a company which
has to battle a 9000 pound gorilla for market share. One Mac loyalist
will convert a hundred people into Mac loyalists. There was a time when
Apple had a lot more loyalists, even before the days of Macintosh. Bad
decisions allowed Microsoft and the cloners to take over. Good decisions
brought Apple back into contention when Steve came back. They can no
longer afford bad decisions.
> > The decision to renege on the original iTools promise and make
> > the system $$$ only
>
> There never was any such promise. What Apple *did* promise was:
Yes yes, I can read licenses too. They are written by lowyers and they
are 90% boilerplate. Every license says they can cancel and amend and
blah blah, so that when some dumb schmuck decides to do something heavy
handed like *this*, they can't be sued successfully for it. But the
bottom line is they led people to believe they would have the service
for life for free for at least as long as the service continued. If
Apple was getting out of the mailserver business altogether, that would
be one thing. But that's not the case. What they're in effect saying now
is, "Look, we've been trying to sell people upgrades to the free iTools
service for a long time now, and nobody's biting. The bean counters have
decided we can't afford to keep doing this, so we're going to dig into
all your pockets and there's nothing you can do about it - sorry."
> > because of iTools. The one-size-fits-nobody pricing and service
> > structure they've set up is ill-advised.
>
> No doubt. Apple will almost certainly modify, at least in part, before the
> current 60-day phaseout of iTools ends.
I certainly hope you're right.
Avery Raskin
"D.F. Manno" <domm...@netscape.net> wrote:
> In article
> <avery9000-D70DF...@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net>, Avery
> Raskin <aver...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > 2) DOT-GOTCHA -- The mac.com email addresses were billed as the
> > addresses you never had to change because they were yours forever.
>
> You can still have the mac.com address forever; you just have to pay
> for it from September on.
Not quite -- you can have it as long as you want to pay for the rest of
the service too. I might give Apple some cash per year for the email
addresses. I can occasionally find use for the iDisk, but I wouldn't
miss it if it were gone. The rest of 'DOT MAC' is completely useless to
me, either because I'll never use it, or because I already own products
which accomplish the same tasks.
Avery Raskin
Michelle Steiner <mich...@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <dommanno-C25652...@news2.localnet.com>,
> "D.F. Manno" <domm...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > You're exaggerating a bit. _Nobody_ has been a Mac loyalist for
> > decades, since the Mac debuted in 1984. That's 18 years ago, which is
> > not "decades."
>
> Rounding to the nearest decade, that's two decades.
>
> I wonder what surprise Apple will have for us in 2004. I hope the 20th
> anniversary of the Mac gives us something better than the Mac they
> released for the company's 20th anniversary.
Let's see -- the iMac-G5 -- dual 3 GHz processors, a five-terabyte hard
drive, 3 GB of DDR RAM, DVD-R and a 23-inch LCD floating over the new
electric mauve demi-beach ball.
Oh, and a price increase to $300 per year for DOT MAC.
Jeremy
>>> Interesting. Hardly anyone (maybe once every two or three months)
>>> comments on my domain name.
>>
>> But it's pretty obvious what yours means. :)
>
> Yeah, but those who do comment usually say something like, "Wow! How
> did you luck out and get that domain?"
Funny, that was almost exactly my reaction. :)
--
Jeremy | jer...@exit109.com
Avery Raskin
Jeremy <jer...@exit109.com> wrote:
Yeah, well "avery.com" was taken by the time I thought of it -- much to
my surprise <LOL>.
palamino
> > I wonder what surprise Apple will have for us in 2004. I hope the 20th
> > anniversary of the Mac gives us something better than the Mac they
> > released for the company's 20th anniversary.
>
> Let's see -- the iMac-G5 -- dual 3 GHz processors, a five-terabyte hard
> drive, 3 GB of DDR RAM, DVD-R and a 23-inch LCD floating over the new
> electric mauve demi-beach ball.
>
> Oh, and a price increase to $300 per year for DOT MAC.
And of course, they include M$ Entourage this time to read your mails
offline, get your database corrupted and lose your mails.
(no offense to those using Entourage)
--
No email, please.
palamino
> The iTools agreement is completely irrelevant, once Apple has
> advertised iTools as having certain features, and you have made a
> purchase decion based on that advertisement. One cannot say "Buy our
> product and get XYZ for free" and then stick a piece of paper inside
> the box which stipulates a right to make XYZ non-free without notice.
> Apple advertised iTools as being free. I bought Mac OS 9 on the basis
> of that advertisement. False advertising is illegal.
70+ day notice is enough to me to find another server. iTools is free
but .Mac isn't.
> Rocky path: sue Apple
> Easy path: never buy Apple again
I don't understand. I do feel upset about the new policy, but switching
platform just because the company doesn't offer a free mail anymore is
unwise imho. I love my OS X, life is much better here after using it.
Switching mail server is piece of cake. Moving my mail folders +
messages was just as easy as drag n dropping. Sending notification to
people is no big deal. Switching platform is just too much considering
how much time & money you've spent on softwares/sharewares/drivers etc.
--
No email, please.
Charlie Dilks
I had a free web site on tripod.com. I put many hours into making pages with
writeups and photos of the building of radio controlled model airplanes.
Members of a forum I frequent refer to our sites and help each other with
building. Then they changed their system and due to my Mac OS I could no
longer make thumbnails that could be enlarged by clicking.
I gave up on that site and made albums on iTools. I didn't have the ability
to make real web pages as with the Tripod site, but I figured "at least it's
Mac and not going to screw me." Now I can't use it with OS 9. I don't like
the look and feel of X and will not change until it becomes absolutely
necessary.
Now that I've given up on that I've gone to Sony's picture album site. It's
free and there are no pop up ads. I wonder how long it'll be before they
drop the ball.
--
Charlie Dilks Newark, DE USA
Larry Bickford
a shareholder.
I saw this thread while listening to an auto-generated favorites
playlist on iTunes while I was viewing just-taken photos in iPhoto,
posting a bunch to my Home...@mac.com and mailing them to my inlaws and
parents. All with a few clicks of my mouse and over my DSL AirPort
wireless network.
All for free. (Software, anyway)
And to tell you the truth, that pisses me off. As a shareholder, at
least.
Apple customers have for a too long of a time become spoiled getting
stuff for free. Apple has given away this awesome software (which sure
the heck makes MY life easier) and people are complaining about paying
for a web server service? A super-filtered mail account?
Perhaps they should be charging USD$ 29.95 for each of their now-free
software titles.
Personally, I'd rather see Apple make some money from that which they
currently do not. Perhaps that will lead to lower prices on some of the
hardware. The Windoze world has long thought that our pretty and perky
Macs have been over-priced, while they pay cheap for their boxes and a
little add-on for every little extra anything. Which business model is
best?
One thing we do know is that we want a healthy company that responds to
their client base and can grow that into an even more profitable and
larger group and carry on.
On the other hand, I do feel that Apple needs to re-think the .mac fee
structure and allow lower-level, lower cost services as a base with
add-ons for more services. There IS a price point and pricing structure
where no or less people would complain.
And the issue of thinking" they promised this to us and now they're
taking it away" is totally bogus. They NEVER said it was free forever
and in fact were quite clear that it may become a subscription service
in the future. Read the user agreement, folks. No whining allowed.
But free is over and that's OK with me.
PS: After 15 years of many macines and great service from Apple, my
defective (or at least "not as advertised") TiBook experience last fall
and dealing with "customer service" was horendous. Just so you don't
think I'm on the payroll. I agree that there are some serious issues
with how the company operates, but the bottom line is that my Mac does
what I tell it, doesn't crash (hardly ever, anyway) and simply works.
Apple, listen up:
Sign me up for 50mb server space, no mail, charge me $25/yr, no
question. Add mail for $2.50/month per address. Charge $10 year for
basic 20mb storage, $50/yr for storage plus mail.
Geez. That's the price of a double cappacino once a month.
OK. Charge more. Or provide coffee coupons.
--Larry
--
Larry Bickford, O.D.
Family Practice Eye & Vision Care
The EyecareConnection
http://www.eyecarecontacts.comSPAMTRAP
E-Star
Larry Bickford <larr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On the other hand, I do feel that Apple needs to re-think the .mac fee
> structure and allow lower-level
I agree almost completely....except ideally I'd want an only email
option. Free would be nice for a small 5MB POP account, but a
reasonable $10/year would be ok too.
Ben Sharvy
> In article <7ae24ad2.02072...@posting.google.com>,
> luvn...@www.com (Ben Sharvy) wrote:
>
> > E-Star <unix...@linuxmail.org> wrote in message
> > news:<unix_core-6055C...@corp.supernews.com>...
> > > Is this posting trying to show us that Apple has every right to change
> > > and start charging? I don't think anyone disaggrees that Apple can and
> > > perhaps ever should charge for internet services.
> >
> > The iTools agreement is completely irrelevant, once Apple has
> > advertised iTools as having certain features, and you have made a
> > purchase decion based on that advertisement. One cannot say "Buy our
> > product and get XYZ for free" and then stick a piece of paper inside
> > the box which stipulates a right to make XYZ non-free without notice.
> > Apple advertised iTools as being free. I bought Mac OS 9 on the basis
> > of that advertisement. False advertising is illegal.
>
> Hey, guess what? You got it for free. You used it for free. You've still
> got it for free. And Apple has duly informed you that come September, it
> won't be free anymore. No false advertising.
Hey guess what, you're stupid. I paid $65 for OS 9, in order to get
the "free iTools. That's what I wrote. Learn to read.
Stan Randle
> I paid $65 for OS 9, in order to get
> the "free iTools.
No you did not. But I give you points for putting (or attempting to
put) 'free' in quotes. Because it wasn't free. OS9 was a requirement to
access features which were made available, for a time, at no additional
cost.
> One cannot say "Buy our product and get XYZ for free" and then stick a
> piece of paper inside the box which stipulates a right to make XYZ
> non-free without notice.
Of course, Apple never said "Buy our product and get mail for free."
That is, unless you can find them an ad which says that. Can you?
More, you were required to read and agree to certain stipulations
<http://web.archive.org/web/20010311144052/itools.mac.com/1/membership_t
erms.html> before being able to get iTools, so yes, you agreed that
Apple could alter or remove features. Or even charge for them.
pz
You bought OS 9 simply so that you could get iTools? And you're calling
*me* stupid?
--
pz
Avery Raskin
Santa Mac <junk...@home.com> wrote:
> In article <avery9000-BB476...@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net>,
> Avery Raskin <aver...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > One Mac loyalist
> > will convert a hundred people into Mac loyalists.
>
> so why is Microsoft still the dominant player?
Boy is that a long story. You want the short strokes?
1) IBM stupidly decides to license DOS instead of buying it outright or
doing their own operating system, then loses a copyright infringement
case when they BIOS is cloned, opening to floodgates to cheap crappy
clones.
2) Apple decides to create a new proprietary OS for their new machinery,
but not to sell the OS to anyone else.
3) Apple lets Microsoft see all the goodies of the new operating system
so they can write the first third-party software for the Macintosh --
File, Word, Multiplan, Basic.
4) MS copies the Mac operating system and comes up with Windows.
5) Still not smelling the coffee, Apple continues its practice of making
better hardware and software, but charging premium prices and not
licensing anyone else to use it.
6) As clone makers create more and more cheap boxes for the masses, Bill
sells more and more copies of Windows. Those with deep pockets and
brains stay with Apples, but the rest of the world starts buying cheap
boxes.
7) Apple's market share starts sinking faster than the Titanic.
If it were not for the Mac loyalists, Apple would have gone the way of
Commodore and Atari long ago. We are the reason Apple survived long
enough for Steve to come back and become the hero.
Your Name
Avery Raskin <aver...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hero?!?!?!?!?
The guy's an utter moron!! The ONLY thing he's done right since being
back is turn Apple's financial downward trend about - and even then,
that was probably someone else's doing.
:-(
ZnU
> I come to this discussion from two places: an Apple user since 1987 and
> a shareholder.
>
> I saw this thread while listening to an auto-generated favorites
> playlist on iTunes while I was viewing just-taken photos in iPhoto,
> posting a bunch to my Home...@mac.com and mailing them to my inlaws and
> parents. All with a few clicks of my mouse and over my DSL AirPort
> wireless network.
>
> All for free. (Software, anyway)
>
> And to tell you the truth, that pisses me off. As a shareholder, at
> least.
You must get really steamed about the fact that QuickTime Broadcaster
and Darwin Streaming Sever are free. Real charges thousands of dollars
for their equivalent products. <g>
Really, someone needs to put together a list of all the great free stuff
Apple is giving away, so it can be posted every time someone decides to
start whining about Jaguar and .Mac actually costing money.
[snip]
--
"My trip to Asia begins here in Japan for an important reason. It begins
here because for a century and a half now, America and Japan have formed
one of the great and enduring alliances of modern times. From that
alliance has come an era of peace in the Pacific."
- George W. Bush
D.F. Manno
> In article <avery9000-BB476...@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net>,
> Avery Raskin <aver...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > One Mac loyalist
> > will convert a hundred people into Mac loyalists.
>
> so why is Microsoft still the dominant player?
Thousands of corporations and small businesses buy Wintel because all the other
businesses and corporations buy Wintel.
I've always thought the market share numbers you see are misleading, because
they count 10,000 individual decisions to buy a Mac as the equivalent of one
Fortune 500 executive's decision to buy 10,000 Windows boxes.
I'd like to see market share numbers based on individual users, factoring out
business and educational purchases.
Vincent Vega
Your Name <you...@host.com> wrote:
> The guy's an utter moron!! The ONLY thing he's done right since being
> back is turn Apple's financial downward trend about - and even then,
> that was probably someone else's doing.
Said the Kiwi who failed out of business school.
WeSaySo
> In New Jersey, where you live, where things are, how to get
> somewhere, pretty much anything about geography, is described in
> terms of exit numbers. You don't even have to tell someone a town
> name, just say "it's at exit 117" or whatever and take the directions
> from there, because they'll know what "exit 117" means. Over the
> years it's become the standard NJ joke: "Oh, you're from Jersey?
> What exit?"
Except for those of us who live northwest 50 minutes away from the nearest
exit on the Parkway/Turnpike. Then we just laugh at those that have to
deal with tolls :)
hn
Your Name
Steiner <mich...@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <230720021901050666%you...@host.com>,
> Your Name <you...@host.com> wrote:
>
> > > If it were not for the Mac loyalists, Apple would have gone the way
> > > of Commodore and Atari long ago. We are the reason Apple survived
> > > long enough for Steve to come back and become the hero.
> >
> > Hero?!?!?!?!?
> >
> > The guy's an utter moron!! The ONLY thing he's done right since being
> > back is turn Apple's financial downward trend about
>
> Wow, the only thing he's done right is turn the company around and keep
> it from going out of business. If that's not a definition of "hero," I
> don't know what is.
>
> > and even then, that was probably someone else's doing.
>
> Er, no.
We don't know the inner workings of Apple, only what they bother to
tell us - which may or may not be true.
It takes time for a company to recover, so it is perfectly possible
that the turnaround process had already been started BEFORE Steve Jobs
"returned".
Your Name
Vincent Vega <NoS...@verizon.net> wrote:
I never went to "business school", and yet I still run my own business
with no problems. :-p
Steve Hix
> in article michelle-87D811...@enews.newsguy.com, Michelle
> Steiner at mich...@michelle.org wrote on 20/7/02 10:52 AM:
> >
> > What does Apple gain by giving away free email services? Hotmail gets
> > ad revenue, but Apple's model isn't built on that--and I suspect that if
> > Apple started including ads in mac.com email, there would be an outcry
> > much louder than this one.
>
> They still made a profit with them free last year and the year before.
Did you happen to look at the trend of those profits over the past year?
Look again.
The economy is soft, PC sales are in the tank, and Apple has been paying
for maintaining iTools services out of that declining profit pool.
> There's no excuse.
At a first approximation, there certainly is *some* excuse. Until Apple
tells us how much iTools has actually been costing them to run, we won't
know how much.
> Steve doesn't need another yacht.
Steve didn't get a yacht in the first place. 'sides, Pixar has been paying
him the big bucks. Most of what Apple has paid him over the past couple of
years (mostly stock options) would cost him a *lot* to exercise, at least
until Apple's stock goes above $42/share or so.
Even the Gulfstream wouldn't be cheap to operate.
Steve Hix
> > > The decision to renege on the original iTools promise and make
> > > the system $$$ only
> >
> > There never was any such promise. What Apple *did* promise was:
>
> Yes yes, I can read licenses too. They are written by lowyers and they
> are 90% boilerplate. Every license says they can cancel and amend and
> blah blah, so that when some dumb schmuck decides to do something heavy
> handed like *this*, they can't be sued successfully for it. But the
> bottom line is they led people to believe they would have the service
> for life for free for at least as long as the service continued.
I have no idea *where* you got this idea. I certainly never saw any
"free for life" promise from Apple. And reading the EULA surely didn't
dispel that idea.
The *most* I could assume was that I would get to keep the same email
address as long as I stayed with the service, which could change, for
me, if they decided to charge too much for me to justify keeping it.
I guess I just have too much experience dealing with all sorts of
businesses, coupled with having just a smidgeon of understanding of
how volatile high-tech companies can be; I'm old enough to remember
previous economic slumps and their effect of businesses, especially
aerospace and computer types.
Phil Lefebvre
Steiner <mich...@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <240720020855143834%you...@host.com>,
> Your Name <you...@host.com> wrote:
>
> > > > The guy's an utter moron!! The ONLY thing he's done right since being
> > > > back is turn Apple's financial downward trend about
> > >
> > > Wow, the only thing he's done right is turn the company around and keep
> > > it from going out of business. If that's not a definition of "hero," I
> > > don't know what is.
> > >
> > > > and even then, that was probably someone else's doing.
> > >
> > It takes time for a company to recover, so it is perfectly possible
> > that the turnaround process had already been started BEFORE Steve Jobs
> > "returned".
>
> It may be possible, but it is highly improbable, given the observable
> causes and effects.
Actually, Apple observers will tell it was Gil Amelio that started the
financial turn around, at least WRT cutting and controlling costs. Fred
Anderson has a lot to do with that now.
What Steve Jobs rightly deserves credit for is creating the iMac and all
the attention and good press it brought to Apple. That's what allowed
Apple to really rebound as a company.
--
Phil Lefebvre
Chicago, IL
Remove "GO" to reply
Your Name
Steinberg <manby...@coldmail.com.theobvious> wrote:
> Phil Lefebvre wrote:
>
> > What Steve Jobs rightly deserves credit for is creating the iMac and all
> > the attention and good press it brought to Apple. That's what allowed
> > Apple to really rebound as a company.
>
> That and his trimming a lot of fat, i.e. the printer division, and other
> black holes. Jobs also trimmed the product line down to manageable
> levels, <snip>
And then the moron starts re-complicating the product line with
nonsense like the iPod and all the 'i' software - doesn't he EVER
learn.
Larry Fransson
wrote:
> And then the moron starts re-complicating the product line with
> nonsense like the iPod and all the 'i' software - doesn't he EVER
> learn.
I don't have a hard time telling the difference between an iPod and an iMac. I
also can tell the difference between software and hardware. What was confusing
was the multiple different PowerMac models with slightly different model numbers.
--
Larry Fransson
Seattle, WA
Matthew Russotto
The "i" software isn't for sale, so it doesn't count. As for
iPod... well, I agree, but all the people who bought it don't seem to.
--
Matthew T. Russotto mrus...@speakeasy.net
=====
Every time you buy a CD, a programmer is kicked in the teeth.
Every time you buy or rent a DVD, a programmer is kicked where it counts.
Every time they kick a programmer, 1000 users are kicked too, and harder.
A proposed US law called the CBDTPA would ban the PC as we know it.
This is not a joke, not an exaggeration. This is real.
http://www.cryptome.org/broadbandits.htm
Your Name
Steiner <mich...@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <250720020851125306%you...@host.com>,
> Your Name <you...@host.com> wrote:
>
> > And then the moron starts re-complicating the product line with
> > nonsense like the iPod and all the 'i' software - doesn't he EVER
> > learn.
>
> The hardware that's a commercial success and the software that entices
> people to buy the Mac is nonsense. *sigh*
Just because people are stupid enough to buy something doesn't mean
it's actually any good or should be being made. Just look at the
success of the "reality" and wrestling TV shows. Both supposedly
popular, but complete and utter garbage.
The Leader of the Rebel LLamas
I only want the email address so i have switched to yahoo. hotmail is
a microsoft (yuk) service.
that reminds me have to switch my groups name to sila...@yahoo.com.au
silas
D.F. Manno
wrote:
> Just because people are stupid enough to buy something doesn't mean
> it's actually any good or should be being made. Just look at the
> success of the "reality" and wrestling TV shows. Both supposedly
> popular, but complete and utter garbage
Apple is a _business_ remember? It exists to sell things (specifically
computers, software and peripherals) to people. If they produce something (legal
and not dangerous) that people want to buy, then they've fulfilled their role in
society.Whether those products are any good or should be made is a judgment to
be made by philosophers, critics and others.
The ultimate judgment for a business is whether it sells. The iPod sells.
Software such as iTunes, iMovie and the rest sell the mac.
Your Name
Steiner <mich...@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <dommanno-DD087B...@news2.localnet.com>,
> "D.F. Manno" <domm...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > The ultimate judgment for a business is whether it sells. The iPod sells.
> > Software such as iTunes, iMovie and the rest sell the mac.
>
> But he doesn't like them, so those who do are stupid. After all, he is
> the supreme artiber of what is good and what is not good. No one knows
> better than he does because all of them are stupid.
The point is not whether or not I like these products, which is
irrelevant, or even if these products are any good, but that the
supposed "hero" Stave Jobs hasn't got any clue.
He arrived and chopped the product line down to the pure basics, then
months/years later he's again recomplicating the product line full of
stuff that Apple has already dropped in the past - with more excess
"garbage" rumored.
They can't seem to make up their mind and never learn from the past.
We had the Newton, that after a few models was uncermoniously dropped.
Now we have the iPod, bacsically the same "lifestyle hub" device in a
different guise. Again, we'll probably see a few models and then it too
will get dropped.
On the software side, we had Apple and then Claris producing various
applications for a few versions. Then Claris got dumped, taking with it
some of these applications (Home Page, Em@iler, and selling off
Organiser). Now we have the 'i' software, which no doubt after a few
versions will also get dumped.
Apple need to learn that they're abilities lie in the Mac computer
itself (depsite a few disasters like Flower Power!), the MacOS
(although many question the X move) and perhaps QuickTime. All this
other stuff is just "interest fluff" that goes by the wayside at the
first opportunity.
Geoffrey F. Green
Your Name <you...@host.com> wrote:
> In article <michelle-92A890...@enews.newsguy.com>, Michelle
> Steiner <mich...@michelle.org> wrote:
>
> > In article <dommanno-DD087B...@news2.localnet.com>,
> > "D.F. Manno" <domm...@netscape.net> wrote:
> >
> > > The ultimate judgment for a business is whether it sells. The iPod sells.
> > > Software such as iTunes, iMovie and the rest sell the mac.
> >
> > But he doesn't like them, so those who do are stupid. After all, he is
> > the supreme artiber of what is good and what is not good. No one knows
> > better than he does because all of them are stupid.
>
> The point is not whether or not I like these products, which is
> irrelevant, or even if these products are any good, but that the
> supposed "hero" Stave Jobs hasn't got any clue.
>
> He arrived and chopped the product line down to the pure basics, then
> months/years later he's again recomplicating the product line full of
> stuff that Apple has already dropped in the past - with more excess
> "garbage" rumored.
Your comparison of pre-Jobs Apple and today is completely off-base.
Back before Jobs arrived the problem was that you had machines with
names like Performa 400, 405, 410, 430, 450, 475, 476, LC 475, Quadra
605, Quadra 610, Quadra 630, Performa 630, Power Mac 6100, 6200, 4400,
with technologies like OpenDoc that no one wanted to use, and a
floundering effort to develop a next-generation operating system. You
also had the Newton, which was completely unrelated to the Macintosh.
Today, Apple has:
A clear machine lineup: Power Macintosh G4 and Powerbook G4 for
professionals; iMac and iBook for home users; and eMac at the very low
end.
A clear software lineup: Mac OS X; multimedia applications designed
especially for OS X to make owning a Mac more attractive, such as
iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD, and iTunes.
A clear ancillary hardware lineup: the iPod, designed especially to
encourage people to purchase Macs (unlike the Newton). It was such a
success, that they decided to make a Windows version at relatively
little cost.
There's a huge difference between, say, the iPod, and the Newton,
which was designed as the basis of an entirely new hardware platform,
and which didn't work veryw ell to start. There's a similar
difference between, say, Claris Home Page and iPhoto; the iApps are
not intended to be standalone products for sale.
> Apple need to learn that they're abilities lie in the Mac computer
> itself (depsite a few disasters like Flower Power!), the MacOS
> (although many question the X move) and perhaps QuickTime. All this
> other stuff is just "interest fluff" that goes by the wayside at the
> first opportunity.
Well, iMovie's been around for, what, three years now; iTunes for two;
iPhoto for one. I don't see Apple deemphasizing any of them, do you?
- geoff
Your Name
<geoff-usenet-139A...@virt-reader.news.rcn.net>,
Errr ... not ALL of those models were available at the same time.
> Today, Apple has:
>
> A clear machine lineup: Power Macintosh G4 and Powerbook G4 for
> professionals; iMac and iBook for home users; and eMac at the very low
> end.
No, Apple now has:
eMac
iMac CRT
iMac LCD (two different models)
PowerMac G4 (three different models)
iBook
PowerBook
and the iPod, "which is completely unrelated to the Macintosh"
This is very little different to what was happening before.
> A clear software lineup: Mac OS X; multimedia applications designed
> especially for OS X to make owning a Mac more attractive, such as
> iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD, and iTunes.
>
> A clear ancillary hardware lineup: the iPod, designed especially to
> encourage people to purchase Macs (unlike the Newton). It was such a
> success, that they decided to make a Windows version at relatively
> little cost.
The iPod has nothing to do with selling Macs - it was (officially)
connectable to only a Mac, but then so was the original Newton.
> There's a huge difference between, say, the iPod, and the Newton,
> which was designed as the basis of an entirely new hardware platform,
> and which didn't work veryw ell to start. There's a similar
> difference between, say, Claris Home Page and iPhoto; the iApps are
> not intended to be standalone products for sale.
That's just nonsense - both QuickTime Pro and the movie package (I
forget the name right now) ARE being sold separately.
The fact that MOST of the "i" software is given away free on the Mac is
bordering on the same stupidity that Microsoft do with Windows -
cutting off any competition in the process.
> > Apple need to learn that they're abilities lie in the Mac computer
> > itself (depsite a few disasters like Flower Power!), the MacOS
> > (although many question the X move) and perhaps QuickTime. All this
> > other stuff is just "interest fluff" that goes by the wayside at the
> > first opportunity.
>
> Well, iMovie's been around for, what, three years now; iTunes for two;
> iPhoto for one. I don't see Apple deemphasizing any of them, do you?
YET!!!
Your Name
Steiner <mich...@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <260720020846095679%you...@host.com>,
> Your Name <you...@host.com> wrote:
>
> > We had the Newton, that after a few models was uncermoniously
> > dropped. Now we have the iPod, bacsically the same "lifestyle hub"
> > device in a different guise. Again, we'll probably see a few models
> > and then it too will get dropped.
>
> The Newton was a PDA; a failed attempt at what the Palm Pilot succeeded
> at by learning from the Newton's mistakes.
>
> The iPod is first and foremost an MP3 player; it has other features,
> but it is still a music player. The two are not at all comparable.
Of course they're comparable, in the sense that they're both "lifestyle
hub" devices.
> > Apple need to learn that they're abilities lie in the Mac computer
> > itself (depsite a few disasters like Flower Power!), the MacOS
> > (although many question the X move) and perhaps QuickTime. All this
> > other stuff is just "interest fluff" that goes by the wayside at the
> > first opportunity.
>
> The buying public disagrees with you.
Well the buying public will be badly disappointed (yet again) when
Apple decides (yet again) to totally drop these products.
Geoffrey F. Green
Your Name <you...@host.com> wrote:
> > Your comparison of pre-Jobs Apple and today is completely off-base.
> > Back before Jobs arrived the problem was that you had machines with
> > names like Performa 400, 405, 410, 430, 450, 475, 476, LC 475, Quadra
> > 605, Quadra 610, Quadra 630, Performa 630, Power Mac 6100, 6200, 4400,
> > with technologies like OpenDoc that no one wanted to use, and a
> > floundering effort to develop a next-generation operating system. You
> > also had the Newton, which was completely unrelated to the Macintosh.
>
> Errr ... not ALL of those models were available at the same time.
No, but I didn't want t
Geoffrey F. Green
Your Name <you...@host.com> wrote:
> In article
> <geoff-usenet-139A...@virt-reader.news.rcn.net>,
> "Geoffrey F. Green" <geoff-...@stuebegreen.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <260720020846095679%you...@host.com>,
> > Your Name <you...@host.com> wrote:
> > > The point is not whether or not I like these products, which is
> > > irrelevant, or even if these products are any good, but that the
> > > supposed "hero" Stave Jobs hasn't got any clue.
> > >
> > > He arrived and chopped the product line down to the pure basics, then
> > > months/years later he's again recomplicating the product line full of
> > > stuff that Apple has already dropped in the past - with more excess
> > > "garbage" rumored.
> >
> > Your comparison of pre-Jobs Apple and today is completely off-base.
> > Back before Jobs arrived the problem was that you had machines with
> > names like Performa 400, 405, 410, 430, 450, 475, 476, LC 475, Quadra
> > 605, Quadra 610, Quadra 630, Performa 630, Power Mac 6100, 6200, 4400,
> > with technologies like OpenDoc that no one wanted to use, and a
> > floundering effort to develop a next-generation operating system. You
> > also had the Newton, which was completely unrelated to the Macintosh.
>
> Errr ... not ALL of those models were available at the same time.
I know, but I didn't want to try to figure out what came out when.
But, do you think you knew the difference between the Performa 475 and
476 when they were released? I sure didn't; not off the top of my
head. That made it difficult to decide which computer to purchase.
Now -- well, do you want an integrated computer/monitor? Get an iMac.
Do you want a separate, expandable computer and purchase a separate
monitor? Purchase a Power Mac. Customize to your heart's content on
the web site.
> > Today, Apple has:
> >
> > A clear machine lineup: Power Macintosh G4 and Powerbook G4 for
> > professionals; iMac and iBook for home users; and eMac at the very low
> > end.
>
> No, Apple now has:
>
> eMac
> iMac CRT
> iMac LCD (two different models)
> PowerMac G4 (three different models)
> iBook
> PowerBook
The iMac CRT is not heavily advertised, isn't sold in any stores (as
far as I know), and barely gets a mention on the Apple web site.
Indeed, Apple planned on discontinuing them before they probably
realized that the prices on flat-panel displays were too high and they
couldn't sell the new iMac's cheaply enough.
> and the iPod, "which is completely unrelated to the Macintosh"
Yes, but it's not intended to be an entirely new computing platform,
like the Newton (or the Palm, for that matter).
> The iPod has nothing to do with selling Macs - it was (officially)
> connectable to only a Mac, but then so was the original Newton.
Huh? It had everything to do with selling Macs. That's why it was
only available for the Mac, and why the seamless integration between
the iPod and iTunes was hyped so much.
> > There's a huge difference between, say, the iPod, and the Newton,
> > which was designed as the basis of an entirely new hardware platform,
> > and which didn't work veryw ell to start. There's a similar
> > difference between, say, Claris Home Page and iPhoto; the iApps are
> > not intended to be standalone products for sale.
>
> That's just nonsense - both QuickTime Pro and the movie package (I
> forget the name right now) ARE being sold separately.
Final Cut Pro is not an iApp.
> The fact that MOST of the "i" software is given away free on the Mac is
> bordering on the same stupidity that Microsoft do with Windows -
> cutting off any competition in the process.
Do you seriously think anyone would have developed anything like
iMovie? Had you seen the low-cost movie editors that preceeded it?
Or the ones now available on the Windows platform? Nothing compares,
even today.
> > > Apple need to learn that they're abilities lie in the Mac computer
> > > itself (depsite a few disasters like Flower Power!), the MacOS
> > > (although many question the X move) and perhaps QuickTime. All this
> > > other stuff is just "interest fluff" that goes by the wayside at the
> > > first opportunity.
> >
> > Well, iMovie's been around for, what, three years now; iTunes for two;
> > iPhoto for one. I don't see Apple deemphasizing any of them, do you?
>
> YET!!!
By that token, the Apple II was just fluff, because Apple sure
abandoned it. Same with Apple Writer ][ for the Apple II. And
MacPaint.
- geoff
Jerry Kindall
<you...@host.com> wrote:
> We had the Newton, that after a few models was uncermoniously dropped.
> Now we have the iPod, bacsically the same "lifestyle hub" device in a
> different guise.
Yeah, I sure used to love listening to music on my Newton! And today,
I love taking notes on my iPod.
--
Jerry Kindall, Seattle, WA
http://www.jerrykindall.com/
Your Name
Steiner <mich...@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <260720021830519675%you...@host.com>,
> Your Name <you...@host.com> wrote:
>
> > > The iPod is first and foremost an MP3 player; it has other features,
> > > but it is still a music player. The two are not at all comparable.
> >
> > Of course they're comparable, in the sense that they're both "lifestyle
> > hub" devices.
>
> yeah, they're both comparable in the sense that they're both portable,
> battery-powered, electronic devices made by Apple.
Yes, and both unrelated to the production of the Mac computer.
> > Well the buying public will be badly disappointed (yet again) when
> > Apple decides (yet again) to totally drop these products.
>
> Just like they were disappointed when Apple totally dropped the black
> and white Macs, and the 68K macs, and the Apple II.
But those products were discontinued due to progress in technology, NOT
dropped because of "financial reasons" - just a *minor* difference.
Your Name
<geoff-usenet-393A...@virt-reader.news.rcn.net>,
"Geoffrey F. Green" <geoff-...@stuebegreen.com> wrote:
> In article <260720021252014650%you...@host.com>,
> Your Name <you...@host.com> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <geoff-usenet-139A...@virt-reader.news.rcn.net>,
> > "Geoffrey F. Green" <geoff-...@stuebegreen.com> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <260720020846095679%you...@host.com>,
> > > Your Name <you...@host.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > There's a huge difference between, say, the iPod, and the Newton,
> > > which was designed as the basis of an entirely new hardware platform,
> > > and which didn't work veryw ell to start. There's a similar
> > > difference between, say, Claris Home Page and iPhoto; the iApps are
> > > not intended to be standalone products for sale.
> >
> > That's just nonsense - both QuickTime Pro and the movie package (I
> > forget the name right now) ARE being sold separately.
>
> Final Cut Pro is not an iApp.
No, but it is still an Apple software product, which is the whole point.
> > The fact that MOST of the "i" software is given away free on the Mac is
> > bordering on the same stupidity that Microsoft do with Windows -
> > cutting off any competition in the process.
>
> Do you seriously think anyone would have developed anything like
> iMovie? Had you seen the low-cost movie editors that preceeded it?
> Or the ones now available on the Windows platform? Nothing compares,
> even today.
Most of Apple's "i" applications (including Final Cut Pro, etc. for the
dim) were created by tohers and taken over/bought out by Apple - just
like Microsoft always does.
> > > > Apple need to learn that they're abilities lie in the Mac computer
> > > > itself (depsite a few disasters like Flower Power!), the MacOS
> > > > (although many question the X move) and perhaps QuickTime. All this
> > > > other stuff is just "interest fluff" that goes by the wayside at the
> > > > first opportunity.
> > >
> > > Well, iMovie's been around for, what, three years now; iTunes for two;
> > > iPhoto for one. I don't see Apple deemphasizing any of them, do you?
> >
> > YET!!!
>
> By that token, the Apple II was just fluff, because Apple sure
> abandoned it. Same with Apple Writer ][ for the Apple II. And
> MacPaint.
As I said before, these were replaced by progress in the technology,
NOT just dropped for "financial reasons" like the Newton and Claris
products were. ALL of these new products are just fluff that Apple
picks up when it feels like it (can "afford" it) and are dropped at the
first opportunity (when it can't "afford" it).
Your Name
Kindall <jerryk...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <260720020846095679%you...@host.com>, Your Name
> <you...@host.com> wrote:
>
> > We had the Newton, that after a few models was uncermoniously dropped.
> > Now we have the iPod, bacsically the same "lifestyle hub" device in a
> > different guise.
>
> Yeah, I sure used to love listening to music on my Newton! And today,
> I love taking notes on my iPod.
Are people really this dumb, or is it just Internet users??????
The Newton was an extra product with NO relationship to the Mac
products - the same goes for the iPod, the iCam, the iPad and whatever
other "lifestyle hub" devices Apple has up it's sleeve.
In this respect they are the same as the Newton - a simple piece of
fluff technology that Apple can get people hooked into and then drop
the moment they can't "afford" it any longer.
Geoffrey F. Green
Your Name <you...@host.com> wrote:
Well, you say that, but all of these alleged "droppings" (great word,
eh?) took place before the Age of Jobs. But let me ask you this:
If they drop the iPod, so what? Will yours stop working? If Apple
will have made a good deal of money on it during its lifetime, does
that not make it a worthwhile effort?
If they drop iTunes, so what? Will the program stop working?
If they drop Final Cut Pro, so what?
- geoff
D.F. Manno
wrote:
> As I said before, these were replaced by progress in the technology,
> NOT just dropped for "financial reasons" like the Newton and Claris
> products were. ALL of these new products are just fluff that Apple
> picks up when it feels like it (can "afford" it) and are dropped at the
> first opportunity (when it can't "afford" it).
You just don't understand business. Apple offers new products when it thinks
they will sell or will lure people to buy Macs. It discontinues products when
the technology changes or they stop selling.
You appear to be saying that Apple shouldn't offer a new product unless it
intends to continue offering it until the end of time. That's not the way
business works.
If you have a point, it certainly isn't obvious.
Jerry Kindall
<you...@host.com> wrote:
> In this respect they are the same as the Newton - a simple piece of
> fluff technology that Apple can get people hooked into and then drop
> the moment they can't "afford" it any longer.
I will agree with you that the iPod is a bit of fluff. But you can't
really compare it to the Newton. The Newton was a general-purpose
computing device. It was a platform; you could write apps for it. The
iPod is essentially a single-purpose device. (It does have a few other
functions besides playing music, but nobody buys the iPod just to put
their address book on it.)
Developers and users alike had invested much time and effort into the
Newton. Many people had their entire lives on their MessagePads.
Those people were justifiably annoyed by the hassle of moving to a
different platform: new applications would need to be bought, data
would need to be converted to new formats. If, however, Apple drops
the iPod, users won't find it all that onerous to move their music
collection to a different MP3 player when their iPod eventually ceases
to operate. The file format is standard and there are no applications
to speak of.
Wes Groleau
> iPod is essentially a single-purpose device. (It does have a few other
> functions besides playing music, but nobody buys the iPod just to put
> their address book on it.)
Well, _I_ wouldn't. But people have paid
as much for a Palm Pilot just for that.
(On the other hand, the Palm _can_ be
used for more.)
--
Wes Groleau
http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau
MacShogun
> I still remember eWorld and the terrific experience it was. And then...
> Poof! It was gone. Although it was never free (and not cheap at $15 per
> month) it was just another Apple fiasco leaving the faithful sucker
> punched.
>
> I'd considered one poster's comments about iTools being a "loss leader" and
> began to wonder if Apple isn't indeed contemplating iTools future in the
> eWorld/Newton vein.
>
> Apple's track record in this iNet space is much too dodgey. To once again
> depend upon their infrastructure to be dependable and present in the long
> term is a "dog bites me..." cliche.
Remember Applelink Personal Edition? Look at the monstrosity that
became. I remember signing up for "The Source", I received the
Handbook and Software and it was out of business.
Why didn't they just create a paid service in the first place?
Who's running the show over there?
MacShogun
Gary Sumlak
in article michelle-804D00...@enews.newsguy.com, Michelle
Steiner at mich...@michelle.org wrote on 7/25/02 10:10 AM:
> In article <250720021832455236%you...@host.com>,
> Your Name <you...@host.com> wrote:
>
>>> The hardware that's a commercial success and the software that
>>> entices people to buy the Mac is nonsense. *sigh*
>>
>> Just because people are stupid enough to buy something doesn't mean
>> it's actually any good or should be being made. Just look at the
>> success of the "reality" and wrestling TV shows. Both supposedly
>> popular, but complete and utter garbage.
>
> Which shows that people aren't stupid, and know a good thing when they
> see it.
>
> If Apple had followed your advice, they'd be in the same boat as
> Commodore.
FYI - Commodore WAS extremely successful with the *first* affordable *real*
computer for the masses. Virtually every department store in North America
sold the Commodore Pet! There was nothing that could come close in
affordability, power and ease of use, even until the heralded Amiga line,
which was also an *extremely* successful product and OS - also UNIX bases
and featuring *true* preemptive multitasking. And lest we forget, hardware
installation on the Amiga was "Plug and Play" and not "Plug and Pray" like
today's personal computer offerings! :-)
Since installing OS X, only a couple of days ago, I have discovered this it
is yet another OS that is *almost* as advance as AmigaDOS was 13 years ago!
In time, it may even be as usable and stable.. ;-)
The problem was not in the Amiga platform, OS, consumer acceptance, or
developer support - developers LOVED it and supported it with tens of
thousands of titles - it was that corporate execs embezzled the company into
the ground.
If Commodore had someone at the helm then, like Jobs, or dare I say...
Gates, there would be no Windows or Apple today because no one would want to
use such antiquated and cumbersome products.
>
> No, dear heart; it's not the people who are stupid.
But it can be *very* difficult to resist hypnotizing and relentless
advertising campaigns. The Chinese knew centuries ago, that with the
repeated application of simple drops of water on one's forehead, one could
be made to believe *anything* and reveal *everything* that the applier of
the water desired!!
Not that I am saying basic torture techniques are employed in advertising
today... OK, yes I am.. ;-)
--
Thank You,
Gary
**** Remove NOSPAM from To: field on replies *****