Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Numbskullery (Score 1) 327

by obirt (#39357831) Attached to: AT&T Threatens To Shut Off Service of Customer Who Won Throttling Case

I still don't understand why data coming from the phone itself and data from a tethered device is treated differently. I can suck down 2 GB over the air using any number of pre-installed apps I'm not allowed to remove, but the second I want to tether my laptop to my phone to use a MB or two to check my email on a screen bigger than 3", I have to pay $20-$60 more a month with no pro-rated cost, or risk having my service cancelled. I just need to use it for a day or a week when I'm on vacation or off site. How is the data different because it's coming through the phone from another device than if it was coming from the phone itself?

It's no surprise with policies like this designed to deliberately make it difficult, annoying, and expensive to their customers that many would look to bypass their carriers mandatory second (or third) data plan required for tethering.

Do they even realize how much money they are loosing to pay-for-access 802.11 providers if they would just offer what customers want for a reasonable price and not feeling like we're being raped?

This à la carte sale of minutes, texts, and data is the biggest racket in history. How about this: $10/month per phone to cover your record keeping and base data prices to cover things like the phones tying up the network to ping pong the towers and servers all the time, then a reasonable per minute/MB/txt charge (i.e. 2-3 cents a minute/MB/txt regardless of it being sent or received) and everyone pays what they use. I'm ok with having a $20 bill one month and a $160 bill the next if that's what I used. I would much rather see that then the same $120 every month if I used 5 of everything vs 5000. This would also hopefully lead to more responsible use of phones in the first place. If base costs were reasonable to where a kid could pay for it with their allowance as long as they didn't go over board, then we probably wouldn't end up with quite so many people glued to the screen while "driving"/loosely aiming their vehicles down the roads.

If you're a corporation and you want to count on the bill being the same every month, than sure you can opt in to the current system we're using now so you have the same number of dollars every time it comes to pay the bill, but I really don't think many corporations would go for that kind of thing if it wasn't such a rip off to do it any other way.

Comment: Acrobat X Pro does not have sandbox (Score 1) 236

by obirt (#38290710) Attached to: Adobe Warns of Critical Zero Day Vulnerability
A little tidbit Adobe conveniently leaves out of their security announcements. It should read: "The sandbox will protect you, unless you're using the Pro version of our product that you paid a lot of money for. Mostly because we were too lazy and inept to include it, or have the security team release updates more than 4 times a year." Because everyone knows, the bad guys only work on release schedules.

Comment: Haven't had great luck with OCZ SSDs (Score 2) 189

by obirt (#37496042) Attached to: OCZ Wants To Cache Your HDD With an SSD
Too bad OCZ's Vertex 3 line does nothing but blue screen and cause system freezes as well as not being detected by the BIOS on occasion. 9 firmware revisions since we bought them, installed in multiple computers, and still no fix. They won't be getting my business. Doesn't matter how fast it is if you can't rely on it.

Comment: Re:Die Apple (Score 1) 695

by obirt (#31945782) Attached to: Apple To Buy ARM?
I don't quite agree with that. It strikes me more as a defensive acquisition. Grab the licenser before someone else does. There are other vectors to that end as well. The DEC/ARM StrongARM flavor, which evolved into Intel's Xscale, which was tossed by Intel to Marvell, presumably so they could focus on the Atom. Maybe.

Comment: Re:Leopard Screenshots and Tutorials (Score 1) 267

by obirt (#21103131) Attached to: A Closer Look At Apple Leopard Security
Not really, they were originally trying to get MacOS to run on custom Alpha's with DEC's help, but the DEC engineers wouldn't do it. 64 bit, 200+ MHz CPU in the early 90's. Things would have been a lot different today if they weren't so pig headed. (Both Apple and DEC). I think this was even before Intel stole core logic from the Alpha for the Pentium II.

Mr. Cole's Axiom: The sum of the intelligence on the planet is a constant; the population is growing.

Working...