Nautilus said:
Cars have 1 or 2 year warranty. And that dosen't cover everything. Once that expires, your own your own. You can have a insurance for your car, but you pay a monthly fee for it, not much different than a platform cut.You don't have a leg to stand on this example, I'm sorry. There are cars that have 5 or even 7 years of warranty. Apple doesn`t even go over 1 year, and they do very lousy practices like the battery one. You pay an insurance for theft or accident, how does apple cover that for you? And it's Apple business, they can do whatever they want with it. You own the device, not it's services. If you want it's services, you not to abide by it's rules. This is something you know, or should know, going into it. It's not unfair, it's their property and their rules. They are not making anyone hostage. Nope it isn`t their property, you paid for the HW and with that the SW inside, it is yours to do what you wish. The fact that they do all they can to prevent it show they are the scums. If you want the service of anyone that Apple didn`t agreed (and got a cut) on your device paid with your money you can`t. That again would be like a car company saying if you don`t fuel on their gas station you can`t ask for warranty (they try that with the preventive maintenance during warranty period, that have been made null and void at least in Brazil, as long as you can prove you done the preventive maintenance they can`t say you don`t have a right for the warranty, and it covers all defects, just don`t cover consumables. Apple dosen't need to do what it does, but it wants to do it because it work. It's not a matter of right or wrong. It's their freedom to choose how they run their business. It owuld be the same to say that you don't "allow" me to run my shop the way I want it. As long as I am not breaking any law, it's my shop and I do what I want with it, even if it means bankrupting it, if that's what I want. Of course it is a matter of right or wrong, your are saying they are right in doing it, because no one here said they can`t (because well they are doing it). Monopolistic behavior is a breach of law, several ToS are against law, same as EuLAs, reason why they are overruled all the time. |

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."







