There's an app for that: NNTP news reader for Android
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: Atheist Chaplain on 4 Jul 2010 22:05 "nospam" <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in message news:040720101750367480%nospam(a)nospam.invalid... > In article <4c31255d$1(a)news.x-privat.org>, Atheist Chaplain > <abused(a)cia.gov> wrote: > >> > the iphone has a usenet app, and contrary to your beliefs, apple >> > doesn't control what people do with iphones. >> >> just what they can install :-) > > nope. > > they only control is what is available on the store. companies can > deploy apps directly to employees without going through the store and > users can do the same to their own devices if they are so motivated. > web apps don't go through the store at all, and can be used on any > iphone (or other mobile device for that matter). > > and it isn't just apple. microsoft windows phone 7 will also have a > single store and sell only approved apps. google can (and has) removed > apps and can even install apps without the user's consent. you really need to read and understand the current restrictive EULA from Apple :-) doing ANYTHING that is not approved by them is not only leaving yourself open to litigation but they can point blank refuse to service or repair your shitty iPhone as well. using un-approved apps on the phone is one of those restrictions, sure, you may be able to install it but doing so voids your warranty and can cost you big dollars in legal costs if Apple decides to be petulant, and its not like they have been above that in the past. -- [This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Church of Scientology International] "I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ." Gandhi
From: nospam on 4 Jul 2010 22:42 In article <4c313dce$1(a)news.x-privat.org>, Atheist Chaplain <abused(a)cia.gov> wrote: > >> > the iphone has a usenet app, and contrary to your beliefs, apple > >> > doesn't control what people do with iphones. > >> > >> just what they can install :-) > > > > nope. > > > > they only control is what is available on the store. companies can > > deploy apps directly to employees without going through the store and > > users can do the same to their own devices if they are so motivated. > > web apps don't go through the store at all, and can be used on any > > iphone (or other mobile device for that matter). > > > > and it isn't just apple. microsoft windows phone 7 will also have a > > single store and sell only approved apps. google can (and has) removed > > apps and can even install apps without the user's consent. > > you really need to read and understand the current restrictive EULA from > Apple :-) i have read it. it seems you need to read it, and also learn about how iphone apps are developed and deployed. and you are completely ignoring microsoft, who essentially has the same restrictions. why is it ok for them but not apple? > doing ANYTHING that is not approved by them is not only leaving yourself > open to litigation but they can point blank refuse to service or repair your > shitty iPhone as well. nonsense. where do people come up with this stuff? open to litigation for what? yes they can refuse to repair a jailbroken phone under warranty, but that's no different than if you made an unauthorized modification to any other product. it's also possible to just restore stock firmware and wipe all traces of jailbrokeness. modify a nikon or canon camera and see how well that works out for you. remove the infrared cut filter and they will no longer warrant it, although the company that made the infrared mod might. if you did it yourself and something breaks, bummer. adjust the autofocus calibration then send it in to 'fix it' after you screw it up, see how well *that* works out. even something as minor as using a third party battery can void a warranty (read the agreement), although it may be impossible to determine unless the camera explodes with parts of the third party battery melted inside. canon even displayed non-canon batteries at trade shows to show how dangerous it could be (and to sell their batteries). > using un-approved apps on the phone is one of those restrictions, sure, you > may be able to install it but doing so voids your warranty and can cost you > big dollars in legal costs if Apple decides to be petulant, and its not like > they have been above that in the past. complete nonsense. there are legitimate methods of installing apps that are not submitted to the apps store, including remote deployment for enterprise as well as web apps, some of which can remain resident on the device and not need the web to be used. jailbreaking does void the warranty, but there are no legal costs unless you do something stupid to justify it, and jailbreaking isn't one of them.
From: Chris F.A. Johnson on 4 Jul 2010 23:32 On 2010-07-05, nospam wrote: > In article <4c313dce$1(a)news.x-privat.org>, Atheist Chaplain ><abused(a)cia.gov> wrote: > >> >> > the iphone has a usenet app, and contrary to your beliefs, apple >> >> > doesn't control what people do with iphones. >> >> >> >> just what they can install :-) >> > >> > nope. >> > >> > they only control is what is available on the store. companies can >> > deploy apps directly to employees without going through the store and >> > users can do the same to their own devices if they are so motivated. >> > web apps don't go through the store at all, and can be used on any >> > iphone (or other mobile device for that matter). >> > >> > and it isn't just apple. microsoft windows phone 7 will also have a >> > single store and sell only approved apps. google can (and has) removed >> > apps and can even install apps without the user's consent. >> >> you really need to read and understand the current restrictive EULA from >> Apple :-) > > i have read it. > > it seems you need to read it, and also learn about how iphone apps are > developed and deployed. > > and you are completely ignoring microsoft, who essentially has the same > restrictions. why is it ok for them but not apple? It's not OK for them either; I will not use anything from either company. -- Chris F.A. Johnson <http://photos.cfaj.ca> Author: ======================= Pro Bash Programming: Scripting the GNU/Linux Shell (2009, Apress) Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
From: nospam on 4 Jul 2010 23:44 In article <89d22fF13gU1(a)mid.individual.net>, Chris F.A. Johnson <cfajohnson(a)gmail.com> wrote: > It's not OK for them either; I will not use anything from either > company. your loss. by doing so, you give up a significant amount of extremely useful software, some of which has no replacement.
From: Chris F.A. Johnson on 5 Jul 2010 00:17
On 2010-07-05, nospam wrote: > In article <89d22fF13gU1(a)mid.individual.net>, Chris F.A. Johnson ><cfajohnson(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> It's not OK for them either; I will not use anything from either >> company. > > your loss. by doing so, you give up a significant amount of extremely > useful software, some of which has no replacement. There is nothing I need or want that I cannot get for my GNU/Linux system. -- Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfajohnson.com> Author: ======================= Pro Bash Programming: Scripting the GNU/Linux Shell (2009, Apress) Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress) |