The attachment rate is about 50% higher than the PS3's. 8.1 compared to 5.3 (as of Nov 2008). They were at 2x the PS3 attachment rate was after the PS3 was out for a year. Its now been 2 years and its no longer 2x. Please stop quoting old figures.

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=20988

slashdot.org also uses this model

Your entire premise is incorrect so pretty much the rest of your post is also false. The iPod firmware is required to actually operate the hardware. Its useless and can't even run any other OS without heavy modification. The firmware is pretty much the software driver to that extent. The hardware can't function with anything else. The firmware *can't* run on other media players either do to this idea. Its meant to run specific hardware. Systems like that are tailored to the OS. Its not just a piece of DRM that keep them tied together.

You seem to have something against people who are anti-DRM. No one has ever said that all software is DRM and that all DRM is evil. It just has to be noted that DRM can never *add* value, only detract from it, therefore anything *with* DRM should be priced accordingly and DRM-free options should be available.

You also provide no evidence as to why its a steep hill. Plenty of evidence is provided that they are two separate markets (as Apple *does* have a software and hardware division, Apple sells the OS separately and no, they're not just upgrades as you can wipe the entire OS and still install from the disc, therefore its a FULL OS, the hardware can run other OSes other than the OSX, their main competitor only sells OSes, should I keep going?).

And its BS (whether the law actually backs you up or not) to assume a company should have any say about what somebody does with the product AFTER they purchase it. They may have a legal right, but its ridiculous that you can't purchase anything anymore. If you can't do what you want with it, you don't own it. If you're fine with someone else owning the stuff you pay for, be my guest and be a fan of that business method. If, on the other hand, you're an intelligent being who thinks they own what they buy, you need to look deeper into what side you really want to support.

I was unclear, thats my fault. I should have stated you can't sue and expect an actual case to proceed. Through common understanding, when I say you can't sue for something, I mean you can't sue and possibly have any chance of winning. Technically, you can sue me for not having an "x" in my slashdot login name, but for the most part, I doubt anyone would argue if I said, "You can't sue me for not having an 'x' in my login name," as its understood that there are absolutely no legal grounds for the lawsuit. That was what I had meant to convey. There are zero legal grounds for them to sue.

Be careful... you're choosing a market for Apple if you give them market share... They're not in the OS market OR the hardware market (otherwise Psystar is correct)... they're in a complete systems market.

Your last paragraph is blowing smoke out of its ass. If that were the case, every company that has ever gotten sued and won could then sue for damages at the equivalent advertising cost of every square inch of newsprint or second of airtime devoted to the case. Every discussion on the internet about it could be construed as damage, etc, etc. Apple, despite what many Apple loyalists want to think, is just a regular tech company. Just because they rely more on hype then actual product does not mean that they can sue for damages caused by the truth about Apple and their dictatorship practices and their iron fist in telling customers what they can or cannot do with their own property.

No one can say what market you are or aren't in. If that were the case, Microsoft would never have trouble with anti-trusts because they could always define their market as whatever the hell they're making. Apple doesn't get any free rides no matter how you want to cut it and no matter how pretty you think their machines are. The point of the matter is that the only thing tying the two parts together (hardware and software) is a piece of unnecessary DRM. It is *not* one complete product. The software can run on other hardware. The hardware can run other software. They sell two things together. One division does NOT make the entire Mac computer. They have a software division and a hardware division. The large part of this case revolves around whether Apple has the right to define what market it is in. And I'd say they're telling everyone they're in the same market as PCs, in which case, they should fall under the same rules.

Apple is not special. It is a tech company. They don't get to play by their own rules. Windows gets in trouble for tying a goddamn media player THATS FREE to its OS, yet Apple can tie hundreds and thousands of dollars in hardware to its OS? Bullshit.

As I said, people who disable it understand what they're doing and will apply updates manually or am I to assume that you have forgone all updates from after that point on?

I have very few fans in my computer, but I do have watercooling which is much quieter (though obviously, still has fans). However, with people who work around these computers a lot, it almost becomes background noise. I need to turn on a fan at night because its too silent when I turn off my computer.

You need to get your program Windows certified or something. Google Updater in and of itself wouldn't exist, each program in the Google pack would be individually required to get certified. I'm not surprised most programs fail to do this as they either want to have their own so they can try to sneak in toolbar add-ons or they want you to visit their webpage before downloading. I'd prefer applications use the Windows updater, but thats only useful to the user, not the application vendors.

Even though it was an IE update, I was still forced to do a reboot. I have XPsp3. Dunno if its different on Vista or whatnot.

You haven't taken into account that the users you're used to running into aren't the best users. If people kept their machines updated and running properly, you wouldn't see them. Its like a cop saying everybody is a criminal because a majority of the people he sees are criminals.

I'm not saying that the other guy is right, but when it comes down to it, neither of you really have much to go on. From my experience, if auto update is turned on to download and install automatically very rarely gets turned off completely. One, for the most part, people who turn it off understand the system and either run updates manually themselves OR have it set to download and then they just install it whenever they see the little yellow shield icon. However, this doesn't apply to people who aren't constantly connected to the internet. If they're on dial-up, they can fall out of sync. I'm not sure of the percentage of people on dial-up, but it could be a problem.

I'm more interested from a hobby point of view (i like to tinker and code a bit), not as a replacement phone. So, I wouldn't really need 3g support. But its interesting to know.