Apple Stops PhotoFast's MacBook Air SSD Replacement?

[KnightWRX]

Sorry, I do know what MFi stands for, but what I meant is that there could be other clauses as part of the license in relation to what other products or services a manufacturer can offer to Apple customers, and that PhotoFast could be breaking these clauses. But if they aren't breaking any of these rules, Apple shouldn't be sticking their nose into their business at all.

Unless Apple comments we'll never know. I just skimmed through the NDA you need to accept to enroll in the MFi program and it doesn't let you talk about the MFi program essentially. Kinda like Fight Club. So people who do get access to the actual MFi license can't really comment on it because of the NDA.

 

[leroypants]

Look, just so Tinhead can shut up, here's the exact quote (http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/30/apple-forces-photofast-to-abandon-256gb-upgrade-kit-for-macbook/ :

Vegas has 1:1 odds that tinhead will ignore that quote.

 

[leroypants]

Actually, I'm being objective.
If only you could show us this "obvious evidence".

It has been shown to you multiple times....

 

[TinHead88]

It has been shown to you multiple times....

leroypants, the reason I keep asking for evidence is because none has been shown. Obviously you can't discern what is real evidence and what is sensationalised reporting and opinion. You also can't seem to understand basic English. You have made your assumption about me being a blind Apple devotee and you have made your assumption about this reported story. It seems once you have made an assumption it is stuck. Not what evolution had planned. Sometimes things slip through I guess.

Just so that KnightWRX can make another silly comment without basis:
NONE of the links provide any evidence that Apple actually threatened PhotoFast.
Perhaps you need to re-read and analyse more objectively instead of continuing to see what it is you want to see.

Your analysis "This statement implies that it is in fact Apple that mentionned pulling Photofast's MFi license." is simply a conclusion that you draw, but it is not a fact. It is your opinion. Do you understand the difference between a fact and your own opinion? It seems you don't.

mrochester, the MFi is a side issue here being mentioned because people are assuming that Apple threatened to revoke it. This is simply not verifiable from the reports being quoted. It is the way it was reported that makes less critically thinking people assume that Apple might have made this threat.

 

[mrochester]

mrochester, the MFi is a side issue here being mentioned because people are assuming that Apple threatened to revoke it. This is simply not verifiable from the reports being quoted. It is the way it was reported that makes less critically thinking people assume that Apple might have made this threat.

The question then is, without a threat of their MFi license being revoked, why did PhotoFast give in so easily to Apple's demands? It seems unlikely that a company that has invested time and money into developing a product would lay down their tools so willingly at the request of another company, unless some sort of retribution had been indicated.

 

[TinHead88]

The question then is, without a threat of their MFi license being revoked, why did PhotoFast give in so easily to Apple's demands? It seems unlikely that a company that has invested time and money into developing a product would lay down their tools so willingly at the request of another company, unless some sort of retribution had been indicated.

Apple requested not demanded they stop selling these SSD upgrades. They may well have had a very good reason for this. Go and search google for Macbook SSD issues. PhotoFast decided it was in their best interests not to ignore the wishes of a company that is providing a big market for them in the form of being an MFi partner.

 

[mrochester]

Apple requested not demanded they stop selling these SSD upgrades. They may well have had a very good reason for this. Go and search google for Macbook SSD issues. PhotoFast decided it was in their best interests not to ignore the wishes of a company that is providing a big market for them in the form of being an MFi partner.

Well just like we can't say whether Apple did or did not make a threat to revoke the MFi license, we also can't say whether Apple requested or demanded they stop. All we do know is that the breaks were applied to an upgrade product for whatever reason.

 

[TinHead88]

Well just like we can't say whether Apple did or did not make a threat to revoke the MFi license, we also can't say whether Apple requested or demanded they stop. All we do know is that the breaks were applied to an upgrade product for whatever reason.

Actually the report states that Apple asked PhotoFast to stop selling the SDD upgrades. Perhaps you should read all the information in this thread before posting.

"Whatever the reason" is exactly my point. We all don't know what that reason is. It could be completely legitimate. But until we do know it just makes no sense to accuse Apple of being greedy and whatever else people have angrily written in this thread.

It is not a case of blind Apple followers, but rather angry mob with pitchforks.

 

[mrochester]

Actually the report states that Apple asked PhotoFast to stop selling the SDD upgrades. Perhaps you should read all the information in this thread before posting.

And we have had information that PhotoFast stopped selling their product for fear of their MFi license being revoked, yet for some reason that is being ignored! They can't have feared their license be revoked unless they were specifically given reason too.

 

[TinHead88]

And we have had information that PhotoFast stopped selling their product for fear of their MFi license being revoked, yet for some reason that is being ignored! They can't have feared their license be revoked unless they were specifically given reason too.

Are you really this thick?
Is it really beyond your capabilities to imagine a company would fear losing MFi status without Apple making such a threat?

As I keep saying (but you seem to be deaf), it was in their best interests to comply with Apple's wishes. Nowhere is it stated that Apple made any threats.

 

[mrochester]

Are you really this thick?
Is it really beyond your capabilities to imagine a company would fear losing MFi status without Apple making such a threat?

As I keep saying (but you seem to be deaf), it was in their best interests to comply with Apple's wishes. Nowhere is it stated that Apple made any threats.

Come on now, try and be civil. If you're not going to be civil, I'm not going to have this discussion.

No I don't believe they'd fear losing their license unless they were specifically given reason to think that. I think that if they hadn't been given reason to think their license would be revoked, they'd continue the production and sale of their product.

What you seem to be saying is that PhotoFast would stop making and selling a product simply because Apple asked them too, and I say that sounds very unlikely as they'd be throwing away the time and resources they invested to develop said product. I seems much more probable to me that PhotoFast abandoned this upgrade because they were given some sort of 'incentive' to do so, not because Apple asked really nicely.

 

[KnightWRX]

Are you really this thick?

Kettle, meet Pot.

 

[TinHead88]

Come on now, try and be civil. If you're not going to be civil, I'm not going to have this discussion.

No I don't believe they'd fear losing their license unless they were specifically given reason to think that. I think that if they hadn't been given reason to think their license would be revoked, they'd continue the production and sale of their product.

What you seem to be saying is that PhotoFast would stop making and selling a product simply because Apple asked them too, and I say that sounds very unlikely as they'd be throwing away the time and resources they invested to develop said product. I seems much more probable to me that PhotoFast abandoned this upgrade because they were given some sort of 'incentive' to do so, not because Apple asked really nicely.

Well, the problem here is that you are happy to slander Apple's reputation based purely on your own beliefs. This is what you are saying.

On a more extreme level that's the kind of attitude that makes for a good lynching. At least you're now admitting you have no facts to base your negative attitude on.

 

[mrochester]

Well, the problem here is that you are happy to slander Apple's reputation based purely on your own beliefs. This is what you are saying.

On a more extreme level that's the kind of attitude that makes for a good lynching. At least you're now admitting you have no facts to base your negative attitude on.

I could say exactly the same about you, except the exact opposite. I'm simply taking what we already know about the situation and applying what I think is the most probable explanation for it. If you wish to think differently, that's fine. I'm sorry if you think having a different opinion to you warrants a 'lynching', but you're just going to have to accept it.

 

[KnightWRX]

I could say exactly the same about you, except the exact opposite. I'm simply taking what we already know about the situation and applying what I think is the most probable explanation for it. If you wish to think differently, that's fine. I'm sorry if you think having a different opinion to you warrants a 'lynching', but you're just going to have to accept it.

It's funny when you get lashed out at while being completely objective and then the guy trying his hardest to insult anyone discussing the "facts" says he's the only one being objective in the first place.

Let's just ignore him like he ignores our rebuttals to his post.

 

[TinHead88]

I could say exactly the same about you, except the exact opposite. I'm simply taking what we already know about the situation and applying what I think is the most probable explanation for it. If you wish to think differently, that's fine. I'm sorry if you think having a different opinion to you warrants a 'lynching', but you're just going to have to accept it.

No, you could not say the same about me. I am not making indictments based on no evidence.

You also did not comprehend my sentence. Are you a native English speaker? Perhaps you could read more carefully for better comprehension. I said that attitude makes for a good lynching. This implies you are doing the lynching not that you should be lynched for your opinions.

I have no problem with a difference of opinion. I have a problem with people slandering and berating without any evidence, and then insisting they are right despite being presented with more logical and realistic alternatives. This is the lynch mob mentality I am seeing in this thread.

Stop ignoring my contributions and maybe we'll have a discussion. Until then, you have no credibility when you call someone dense or thick. Drop the "Apple can do no wrong attitude" and realise people don't feel "threats" when no one gives them reason to. While no one heard what was said to Photofast except Photofast, if they come forward and said that there was a threat to their MFi license, I'm pretty darn sure there was.

That's called leverage. Without leverage, there's no way Apple could've blocked the sale of this.

You say you are objective in all of this, yet your position has been completely pro Apple.



It's funny when you get lashed out at while being completely objective and then the guy trying his hardest to insult anyone discussing the "facts" says he's the only one being objective in the first place.

Let's just ignore him like he ignores our rebuttals to his post.

The problem is you're not making any rebuttals. You're just stating your opinion and defending your right to attack Apple based on no real evidence.

I consider my position to be objective because I am looking at what facts we actually have available. You, on the other hand, are making assumptions based on your negative bias and calling them facts, and then use these "facts" to attack Apple.

It is you that is ignoring my posts as you seem to simply reiterate the same argument without basis.

I am quite aware of my descent into name-calling and not proud of it, however, it is extremely frustrating trying to counter the enraging stupidity one finds on these forums at times.

 

[mrochester]

No, you could not say the same about me. I am not making indictments based on no evidence.

You also did not comprehend my sentence. Are you a native English speaker? Perhaps you could read more carefully for better comprehension. I said that attitude makes for a good lynching. This implies you are doing the lynching not that you should be lynched for your opinions.

I have no problem with a difference of opinion. I have a problem with people slandering and berating without any evidence, and then insisting they are right despite being presented with more logical and realistic alternatives. This is the lynch mob mentality I am seeing in this thread.

Sorry but I don't think your argument is more logical at all. You can believe what you want to believe because at the end of the day it doesn't make any difference to me. Petty insults and stupid comments do nothing to support your case.

 

[TinHead88]

Sorry but I don't think your argument is more logical at all. You can believe what you want to believe because at the end of the day it doesn't make any difference to me. Petty insults and stupid comments do nothing to support your case.

Yes, I think that sums up your position: I believe what I want to believe, I don't care what the facts are and I don't care what anyone else says.

I think we can leave it there. Going on would be futile (I suspect you will need to have the final word though).

 

[mrochester]

Yes, I think that sums up your position: I believe what I want to believe, I don't care what the facts are and I don't care what anyone else says.

I think we can leave it there. Going on would be futile (I suspect you will need to have the final word though).

We'll just have to agree to disagree then as I too feel that continuing any further will be futile.

 

[KnightWRX]

I believe what I want to believe, I don't care what the facts are and I don't care what anyone else says.

It's good that you at least realise you're being this way.

 

[TinHead88]

It's good that you at least realise you're being this way.

Now you're just being silly again. Did you not see the quote above and the colon.

Let me explain... the colon signifies that I am talking about mrochester's position.

You really do have a comprehension problem. Again, I apologise if you are not a native English speaker but in that case perhaps you should try to make sure you get help with comprehension before arguing so vehemently.

 

[leroypants]

And we have had information that PhotoFast stopped selling their product for fear of their MFi license being revoked, yet for some reason that is being ignored! They can't have feared their license be revoked unless they were specifically given reason too.

Some people will argue a point no matter how undebatable it is. Some people would argue that Kevin Bacon was not in Footloose....

 

[TinHead88]

Some people will argue a point no matter how undebatable it is. Some people would argue that Kevin Bacon was not in Footloose....

I can't be bothered to explain it to you in any more detail. I guess you just don't want to get it.

Try re-reading the first post's link to 9to5Mac OBJECTIVELY without getting suckered into the leading bias of the reporting. Look for the facts and try to imagine the possibility that there is an actual problem with these SSD upgrades.

We don't know that there is a problem specifically with these SSDs but if you google you will find that there are definitely problems with sandforce based SSDs in MacBook Pros. The PhotoFast product is also sandforce based I believe.

 

[KnightWRX]

You really do have a comprehension problem.

Nope, I understood what you were trying to do, I just thought my selective quoting made it clear that I found that statement to apply better to your participation in this thread than mrochester's.

Sorry if you failed to pick up on my subtle nuance there.

 

[TinHead88]

Nope, I understood what you were trying to do, I just thought my selective quoting made it clear that I found that statement to apply better to your participation in this thread than mrochester's.

Sorry if you failed to pick up on my subtle nuance there.

Unfortunately for you there is no subtle nuance there to be missed. Your previous posts were such that I truly believed you might make such an error of comprehension.

Now that you've stated that you understood my post it just makes you look like a child. Really how old are you?

I guess I won't get an answer to that since it is potentially very embarrassing for you.