If you return a phone, whether you opened a new contract, or simply extended a previous one, by federal law they must dissolve the changes (or creation) of the contract upon return, anytime within 30 days of purchase. You can at most be charged the prorated month's airtime you used, and in some cases (which do not apply if a device is returned defective) a restocking fee not to exceed 15% (which if you return it to apple directly, regardless of where you bought it, that is waived in any case).

Further, have you seen Anandtech's testing? This issue is irrelevent, and entirely based in eser perception of what the screen is telling them, not in RF frequency response, or the device's call quality or signal strength. Even when held, it gets better signal than other devices, and at the same signal, can make calls when others can't even connect to the tower. It;s better in every category, except that signal does drop more when held (to a value still better than older devices).

correction: when held NORMALLY it only dropped 19dB. the 3GS dropped 12 in the same conditions, and the Nexus one dropped 7. Even after the 19dB drop, it had stronger dB signal when held than the other two, and at the same db range the other two could not even connect to the tower while the iPhone 4 could make ands sustain both voice and data calls (and even concurrently).

The drop IS more pronounced, but the signal is STILL better. I call that irrelevant.

The FCC does it;s own testing, and Apple also has to have very specific scientific tests of the radio done as well, before they can even put the prototype in the hands of a field tester on the network. You know not of what you speak. Pleas stop spreading FUD. This was extensively tested, and even with a 19dB drop off, was found to be superior to the previous iPhone, hold calls at lower dB, and even when held, have more dB than the 3GS and several other tested phones.

Quit buying the bullshit and look at some (finally released yesterday) scientific data. Everything before yesterday was conjecture and perception, and had NO basis in reality or fact. This is not a problem, it's a perception of a problem.

Even "shorted" and after dropping 19db, the iPhone 4 still has more signal strength in the same conditions as the 3GS or Nexus one, so it's IRRELEVANT data (typically we call it propaganda), and the iPhone 4 even at the same strength hold signals much better and farther from the tower than any other tested phone, and can connect and maintain good call quality calls when the others can not even contact the tower at all.

This is a user perception issue, not a technical failing.

The iPhone 4 in fact is the best cell phone Apple has ever released. This is validated by scientific signal measurement. (even when it;s being held "wrong.")

Fact: even when held, and the iPhone 4 signal drops by approximately 19dB, it still has a stronger signal than the Nexus One or iPhone 3GS (both of which also drop off when held as well).
Fact: At -113db, neither the 3GS nor Nexus can connect a call, let alone maintain one, and the iPhone 4 can do both, and can maintain that signal strength significantly farther from the signal source, even when held.

Yes it has drop off. Yes, you may see 5 bars become 1 (out of a 140dB scale, 5 bars to 1 bar is only 43dB on most phones, so that more than half of the time, when you have better signal, you always see 5 bars, this is an insistence from multiple carriers, not just Apple and AT&T). On average, and in testing, the iPhone 4 does have superior signal strength either way, hold calls better and farther, and is in fact correct in Steve Jobs saying "far superior to any phone we have released."

The Nexus 1 looses 8db when held. The 3GS looses 12. The iPhone looses 19. However, when it looses 19, it's still higher than the 3GS... This is an issue of user perception, not scientific fact or manufacturing defect. MANY phones drop more than 20DB when held in certain ways, and on almost all new devices, due to FCC regulations, the antenna is at the bottom.

I've had 3 Macs repaired out of warranty, and had an iPhone 2G replaced 4 months outside of its. I've also gotten phone support on a mac as old as 7 years, and software support for software that did not even come with the machine. I've even gotten WINDOWS support on Mac hardware, something you can't get Dell to give you on their own machines (support basically ends at "re-install it.") and you have to PAY Microsoft for support on their OS unless you have a token (some editions get a single incident call within the first year after purchase).

And yes, I've see Dell refuse to come out to service a machine. Many times. They got sued for doing that too often in NY state (and lost) but the practice continues elsewhere. They "offer" to ship you the part so you can put it in yourself. They also insist on you going through exhaustive diagnostics, and re-image the machine, as part of hardware diagnostics (which certainly are not required to find a hard disk faulty, or bad RAM).

Yea, except in Dell's retail machine support contract (differs from contract for business systems), it;s at "dell's option" to send a representative onsite, and entirely within their option to ship you a component and ask you to install it for them. When they do need to send someone, its some local crackpot sub-contracted, who's company (not even him) is paid somewhere between $60 and 80 for the job, regardless of how long it takes, and they only get paid that one time, even if they have to make several trips. Dell also tries pretty hard to make the time as inconvenient as possible, with a big window. For business, yea, not too bad service. They have to be good or companies won;t buy the stuff to begin with.

I've both dealt with, and have been a contractor. Dells policies have always been close to the bottom of the barrel for both us and the customers. They do the absolute minimum needed in order to either claim the issue is not theirs (software, outside issue, lightning not covered, etc), or they do the legal minimum to meet the claims required by state law. (NY won a huge settlement, but others still suffer under the policies that won those NYers money). Bait and switch is still VERY common when ordering Dell systems as well, and some replacement parts are not the originals, and are sub-par (a newer video card may not have the same specs as an older one, or may have compatibility issues, a replacement drive may not be as fast, this is common).

Dell's retail support contract is almost worthless, and their support staff generally are. Buy a nice high end system, and a low end system. Try calling support and see the difference in how you;re handled first hand.

1 correction: iPad app developers have ACCESS to only 1/2 the RAM of the iPhone 4. They use the "exact same A4 processor" which just happens to have 2 layers of RAM. The iPad's RAM specs have never been publicly released. Apple has a history of unlocking latent hardware with new OS versions (WiFi N in macbook Pros a few years ago, video capabilities of the iPhone, etc).

The iPad also has some additional considerations to take in mind, and also remember Jobs's hand was pushed with the leak, and they're releasing the iPhone 4 sooner than expected. The iPad OS 4 update will be forthcoming soon enough, and I'm sure with a slew of additional features, and probably a new iTunes (expecting MUCH better file handling and syncing, cloud based services from their new NC data-center, and more).

Really? Dell supports some alternate OS under warranty even though the PC came with Windows? Gee, I'd not heard that before.

Jail-breaking the iPhone does NOT void the warranty, no different than putting Solaris on a Dell PC does its, but they DO refuse to support it until it is returned to factory specs (re-imaged and not unlocked). It's their right to support only their software, but NOTHING legally prevents you from jail-breaking the device (Though your carrier may have issue with that on a completely separate topic).

Attempts to circumvent Apple's OS are acceptable, so long as you do not SELL a product that does so for other people (as violating the device's DRM commercially is a violation of the DMCA, not Apple's warranty).

It is true they loose charge slowly, but not charge cycles unless fully discharged for extended periods (which damages the polymers).

A typical LiPo battery like in Apple models now, not LiIon in years past, will loose less than 2% charge capacity per year, wether charged frequently or not. Batteries are typically considered defective if after 5 years they have less than 90% of their original charge density/life.

The batteries proposed for the Chevy Volt will bleed less than a 5% loss after 10 years, properly maintained (which is not hard).

Ditto. MBP 15" w/ 9600GT, 500GB, 4GB. Get over 7 hours regularly. Got 5 hours and 40 minutes running DDO inside a win7 VM on top of OS 10.6 in Parallels 5, over WiFi n using a bluetooth mouse... 3D Gaming wirelessly in a VM for almost 6 hours, WOW!.

You're rights include you, a real person, playing for an estimated number of hours, and the scale of the server farm, and monthly cost to play, and expected term of sustained account status (number of months subscribed) are based on these averages. If a tool was allowed, and a mass of people started a) being logged in 3 times as long in an average month, and b) leveled up to max within a few months, experienced all the content, and quit, this imbalances their financials, as well as disadvantages many players who don;t do the same thing.

It interacts with a server in a way a human can't, for extreme long sessions, which is a server load, and is a cost to blizzard on multiple levels.

"Let's just be clear here, what are you saying, that when you lease allowance to use their servers, they have permission to do whatever they want to your local machine and define what software you can and can't run on it?"
Yup.

It's called access control. No they can't take over use of your machine "without permission" but they can mandate patch level, security settings, limitation of other apps that integrate with their systems or cause load on their servers.

A person is reasonably expected to be capable of a max number of online hours (as an average). The monthe fee is based on that basis. The bot apps allow user to be online VAST amounts more time in a day than is typically otherwise possible, causing them additional loads and typing up resources for real people.

  It also sets those without the knowledge to use those bots at a significant disadvantage to those who do, people who as part of their use fees expect to play in a relatively fair and balanced world for their money.

I think this is open and shut. This is essentially a subscription service running on remote systems. Your app, if you want to even argue it;s yours, is only a portion of the code, not a wholly owned app (you don't launch your copy on their servers, they launch their code and allow the app you bought to connect). Without your continuing subscription (or even a free use agreement if it ever goes Free-to-play, not likely), the app you bought is simply nothing more than an activation fee...

They have every right to maintain balance and fairness for the Masses playing, and base availability on predictable numbers. I'd perhaps be OK if, for example only, they said an average player is estimated at 20 hours per week, but a bot runner is estimated at 40, and thus charge a "premium rate" equal to double the base rate to be able to use a bot... but then also limit PvP for bot players only to other players that also used a bot for their game, since I'd really care less as an average player.

You agreed to a contract to play online. It's a subscription. They absolutely can control the access rules.

I worked in the DR industry for years, and supperted DR syystems as a consultant for hundreds of different clients for a decade. I've done thousands of restores on dozens of tape technologies.

yes, newer tape systems are more resilient. however, the tape itself is not. magnetic metal media exposed to the open air in a cartridge can not possible be as stable as a hermetically sealed drive system in a disk.

tape mis-alignment due to sagging spindles (where the tape in the spool slides against itself due to vibration, and creates a conical shape inside of the drive instead of a flat real, later when read, or even just retention ed, can cause the tape to rub against the inside of the cartridge and heat, causing data loss.

A tape itself, without heads, may technically be capable of surviving more Gs of force in a drop (though the plastic corners, not to much), but a disk drive can easily survive a drop from the server to the floor if you're not careful and drop it. In a caddy in a shipping case, we've thrown them from 5th story windows to concrete, repeatedly, and had no issues. We've even frozen a drive in a block of ice and read from it (still frozen!). In a fire safe, a HDDs control board will melt away, but the spindles inside the drive chassis will be fine beyond 250 degrees and the disk can be rebuilt and read fine, but a tape will simply melt, even inside a fire safe (which are only designed to keep internal temperatures below the combustion point of paper, a "media safe" is a whole different thing, and VERY expensive).

HDDs are fast, have parity across disk sets, don;t require expensive robotics and drive heads, and run on common (not arcane, ancient SCSI protocols like MTX), and have better longevity. Disks can alsdo be reused hundreds of times, a tape 10-20 if you;re lucky.

Many of my clients use disk for the rotational and daily backups, as well as the local and remote archive live copies (so restores are from in-house disk, and only archives are offsite, saving time). Long term archives are often to tape still as it CAN be cheaper, but I'd only trust it in weather controlled facilities.

The last firm i worked for shipped over 15,000 hard drives to be used for D2D backup. Drives do fail occasionally, and they're warranty replaced on a regular basis, but never in the 3.5 year history of working for them had a single backup not been recoverable, aside 1 we suspected was due to a backup not having been truly complete when the disk was removed (user did not run the command to spin down the SATA slot, they just pulled the drive).

Boards, controllers, that has nothing to do with data loss from archives, that would only cause the active JOB to fail. Fix the issue and run it again. When a tape drive fails, it costs thousands to replace (if you can get a compatible model). When an array controller fails, they're $500...

I was a skeptic for D2D when i heard about it in 2001. After working for a firm for years that worked with it, I've never looked back. My current employer has a massive IBM infrastructure, almost all tape, more than 20,000 tapes in storage. no way is that going away, there's legal hold data we simple have to keep, and thousands of terrabytes in archive we could not afford to migrate to disk (nor do we have time). However, we're addding D2D capacity to TSM constantly, and in a year if we're lucky, won't be using tape at all anymore. They think that will save us about 500K a year, and provide for near instant restores of files (current recovery of a single file can take 12-36 hours depending on where it comes from) That migration started before i got here, and I've kept silent on my opinion siting conflict of interest (I'm in a position to make purchase decisions, and my former employer is a bidder, so I abstain from comment entirely).

You know not of what you speak.

Red flag rules as well as HIPAA and PCI regulations do leave the doctor responsible for accurate billing practices, the intermediary is only a billing agent that handles transactions. Pissed off customers ARE likely to leave a doctor with an ineffective billing agent. Insurance issues are still handled first party by the doctor, not through the intermediary (the bill can only be sent to a customer after the HIPAA statement is generated and returned to the doctor clarifying coverage. In the end, you have rights, and guaranteed protections, and improper billing practices come with STIFF penalties for both the billing agency, the doctor, and the insurance company.

Now a "collections" agency is a different matter altogether...

I've also been in a 2.5 year fight over a bill for child birth with the insurance company. The doctor's bills are in order, as is the intermediary's bills to me, the only issue is the INSURANCE company not doing the math right, claiming things common to child birth are not covered, miscalculating my out-of-pocket maximum, and more. This has NOTHING to do with the doctor's correct belief that the insurance company paid X, I thus owe Y.