Jump to content

jgrimes80

Members
  • Content count

    469
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About jgrimes80

  • Rank
    InsanelyMac Sage
  1. jgrimes80

    If you won the lottery....

    -I'd put a few local politicians in my pocket and proceed to have that 30mil-180mil go to work for me. -I'd also start carry bullets again... -My wife wants a top end SUV (only because my mother brags about her decked out MDX) -Buy my dad his dream car - A very particular Ford T-Bucket -And in this economy, I'd definitely pick up as much commercial real estate as possible.
  2. It's a publicly traded company... it's financial status is readily available. Over 20 billion in tangible assets as of Sept '08... http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bs?s=AAPL It's definitely NOT unprecendented either. Wells Fargo easily surpasses that with 35 billion as of March '08... http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bs?s=WFC Just FYI ...
  3. Without people at least willing to challenge institution-based concepts, ideas, and stories, society would end up with a largely distorted picture of the world. I'm not sure why you find it's appropriate to shrug off something concerning bofors' home state. Realistically, we now have an idea of what the CIA was up to 50 years ago. What makes you think things have drastically changed? What do you have as concrete knowledge that warrants washing over bofors' concern? Rendering his share as unconstructive??? I'll take a guess and say "Nothing, short of instinct." The point is you don't have to agree, but me (and likely others) will view your post as unnecessary and insulting. I'm not even going to mention your sequent post. Personally, I enjoy reading alternative news; thanks for the share bofors. -jgrimes80
  4. I don't think any judge would have ruled against Apple. It's a clear-cut case.
  5. You politely asked me via PM, not to act like a jerk (in a nutshell) and I responded in a very offensive manner.

    I wish to honestly apologize for that and have removed the offending post.

    -hecker

  6. I didn't mean to imply that I (or anyone here) decides what's "ethical." I was merely referring to the consequence of a major corporation like Apple filing a suit against an individual for someone as minor as installing a paid-for license of OSX on the "wrong" hardware. However, I would imagine the public would definitely not respond well to Apple going on a campaign to nail everyone. Kind of like the iPhone software... they locked phones that were altered through an update. I don't know about you, but there were several folks I knew who were extremely pissed. I couldn't imagine Apple having done someone to file suit against people for breaching the Terms of Use contract by using a different carrier. Oh well.
  7. Obviously, I'm not a lawyer... Although it would greatly restrict sales and make alternatives much more attractive, I don't think it's against the law to have exclusive licensing agreements. If Dell sat down and wrote it's own operating system, I don't see why they should be forced to license it for use on other computers. Whether it could go to court is the question... and not many people with legitimate contracts are "laughed" out. However, I do think their public relations (PR) department would definitely have a field day... Not to mention political pressure for unethical enforcement of the EULA contract.
  8. jgrimes80

    President-elect Obama

    That was the only reason I didn't vote for him. Everything he claims is needed (or on his agenda) has a very large price sticker. And for an already battered treasury, I don't think funds can be made available. Time will tell I suppose... Oh, and before anyone says anything about my candidate of choice, I really don't have anything against the policies of Obama, I just don't support those policies in our current state affairs. In 4-8 years, my wants could change. Personally, I would have preferred an Administration in favor of aggressive cuts in spending and scaling back taxes. Plus, I don't support a withdrawal from Iraq. It doesn't mean I'm wrong or stupid, I just want different things.
  9. jgrimes80

    Apple joins Google in fighting Prop. 8

    I voted no... homosexual people should have the right to be miserable too... Plus, I'm not threatened by presence of same sex oriented couples. I would hate to see a same sex couple have issues attaining benefits and life insurance... blah blah blah. Besides, same sex relationship aren't going to cease to exist as a result of it passing. I'm not saying I enjoy going through San Fransisco during Pride week, but I certainly respect people's choices.
  10. Zaap, I'm going to have to agree with you here for a moment but, don't get excited. Ultimately, it's not whether installing OSX on alternate hardware is "illegal"... it's whether installing OSX on alternate hardware is a breach of Terms of Use. I don't think anyone would really go to jail (unless a court order ends up getting violated), but an End User who supposedly agrees to the Terms of Use has entered a legally recognized contract. Breaching of the aforementioned contract exposes the End User to liability. Equally, a Terms of Use containing items that violates consumer rights (eg. Lemon Laws) can be voided upon suit. I guess my point is, your right. An EULA violation isn't necessarily a criminalized ordeal. However, just because it's not illegal, doesn't mean there are no risks. If Apple wanted to be a jerk, they could sue, get a judgment and garnish wages. But obviously, they focus on bigger fish... one's with wages worth garnishing
  11. I don't understand how you conclude that a sticker results in a OSX being installed on an "Apple Labeled" product, but to each their own. The outcome, should it actually find its way in court, will be the deciding factor in who has the correct interpretation. My personal opinion is that EULA is clear, justified, and doesn't result in anti-trust issues. Time will tell.
  12. If I used Apple's trademarked logo on a box and profiting from such infringement... wouldn't I stand in violation anyways??? And, I don't read "Apple Labeled" as a label of Apple. I read that as an item labeled BY Apple. Apple(subject) Labeled(verb)... Apple does the labeling.
  13. jgrimes80

    New 'glass' MacBook and MacBook Pros

    I have to admit, I initially didn't like the gloss screen. Now I wouldn't prefer anything else. A slight trade off if a light source is shining on the screen at JUST the right angle... easily fixed with a little adjustment (heck, it's a laptop). Otherwise, the fact that it's usable outside in natural lighting was pretty cool IMO.
  14. jgrimes80

    U.S Presidency

    So, the decisions and interpretations of the few appointed justices (which are actually appointed with the "advice and consent" of CONGRESS!) should be credited to the President? Last I checked, the US Senate, House and Supreme Court gave the White House the authority to do everything they did. The president didn't single handedly do anything. What on earth made G. W. Bush an expert on Iraq? In fact, I doubt he knew exactly were it was when he took his oath. Actually, if you're really intrigued by this subject, take a look at the agenda for PNAC and its supporters. You'll see quite a few interesting names listed. Arguably something that would have occurred regardless of who was in office at the time. And somehow the President carries a Masters of Art and Science with full ranged educational background.... giving him/her the credible opinion and comprehension of effects in all legislature that gets passed through? Nope, this is his subcommittees, advisors, and partisanship. I think you missed the point of my comments. My point was specifically, the president doesn't have nearly the power to do much as the general population credits him/her for... he/she is nothing more than a person to blame or give credit.
  15. jgrimes80

    U.S Presidency

    I think all of you give WAY too much credit to the President. What does the "President" actually do for the country? Does he/she write legislature? No. Can he/she ensure something gets passed? No. So how can a single person promise anything more than a political standing? The reality is that our President tries to effect items the Senate and House push through and set a tone for the economy and relationships with other countries. I frequently find opposition in discussions about the current administration. How much of what we pin on the White House (as a WHOLE) is completely and entirely its fault? Sure there are things I'm not pleased about... but when it comes down to it. It's not just G. W. Bush, it's the government altogether. Regardless of who holds the position, there is (well, should be) collective responsiblity AND collective accountability. All members of the Federal Government should feel the wieght of the decisions/issues/failures it finds itself dealing with. We don't see these things. It's too easy to point a finger at a single person and say he/she is responisble. Does anyone else feel the same way? Personally, I think the bi-partisanship will need to come to an end in order to actually get another President who cares about his/her people. Until my Joe "Six Pack" neighbor can decide he wants to become President and can at least get himself on a ticket... I refuse to believe the democratic process is anything more than a smoke screen. I honestly think, our neighbors in the suburbs have a better understanding and more commonsense than some of our elected officials. Thoughts?
×