iPhone 1.1.1 Aftermath

[kzin]

Now, with some finesse, Apple could in fact deliver all 3 of those devices next year:

a) Add bluetooth to the iPod classic, letting it export music to other Apple devices.

b) Allow the iPhone to be remote controlled, via bluetooth, by other Apple devices ... and allow other devices to route IP traffic through the iPhone (bluetooth DUN tethering, and/or bluetooth PAN).

c) Release the Newton 2 as an iPod-Touch with 3rd party app capability, more bluetooth support (DUN, SPP, HDI, and PAN), and the full suite of iPhone apps (with the bluetooth remote dialer/handset capabilities I outlined above, in place of the direct phone capability). Or, if the Newton 2 is going to be a bigger-than-iPhone device, still do this, but also expand the capabilities iPod-Touch to fill the same role. So, basically the iPod Touch becomes a "Newton 2 lite" (in terms of size, but not in terms of software). You can choose to have a PDA (expanded iPod Touch) or a note-pad side tablet (same capabilities in a larger screen size).

Also, you should note that my scenario only requires a very modest expansion to each product. We know the Touch already has a bluetooth radio built in. So does the iPhone. The iPhone doesn't have to add 3rd party apps in this picture (the iPod Touch does, unless it gets replaced by a new device that has that capability: the Newton 2). The only hardware change, I think, is adding bluetooth to the Classic.

It fits the position that Apple is taking with the iPhone as a non-expandable platform. It fits all of the missing pieces I've talked about in past messages. The only people who are really "out in left field" in this scenario are the people who expected the iPhone to be a Newton 2.

 

[Thunderbird1]

The King is naked...everyone sees....

Aren't we are supposed to be living in a free society?
Free societies use "laissez faire economics" to do
business. In otherwords, free enterprise. Corporate Apple sells a product, consumer buys product and decides how they want to use it. They may choose to use it as a doorstop or a phone. It is ridiculous to think I am
barred from using my phone however I want, as long as it does not encroach on another. If it happens to not fit in the "box" that Apple thinks it should, but the consumer does, shouldn't they change their attitude (agreements)? What ever happened to the philosophy the customer is always right? The consumer will decide the best course of action for the product, but the company better listen to the consumer
or there will be a huge backlash. It happens with every business. ATT
is an outstanding example of a company that tries to do the opposite
of the free enterprise market philosophy. They simply don't care
about the consumer, but do care about total control over the consumer
the way "they think is best." ATT would like to change the name to
iControl, not iphone. If you have any doubt, read their agreement and
see how much in control they are. How much information they want from
you, including your SS#(talk about invasion of privacy! Aren't
these some of the reasons why they were busted up years ago? Most saw
them as a threat to free enterprise. Cannot believe Apple teamed up
with such a rough company. You can bet your last dollar they are
screaming at Apple to do something about the obvious popularity of
the unlock program. It is very legal to do and they know it. If ATTs
service were good and fair, they would not need to say a word. We
would all use it. That is the genius of free enterprise, the consumer
decides which carrier to use, not the other way around. You can bet
all carriers would compete in a most fair manner to win your
patronage. You are king and decide the future of Apple and ATT not
them deciding our future. If only Nokia, Samsung, Sony and others
would give them a run for their money. Apple and ATT would not behave
this way. Competition is always best for us the consumer. Without the
consumer Apple & ATT would not exist. There are many examples of
trying to lock the consumer out. Which history proves, only results
in bad PR for everyone involved. It takes years to get rid of a bad taste in everyone's mouth. That is precisely the reason the ATT name
was retired for such a long while, before they started the "New ATT"
with Apple. Those who fail to recognize history are destined to
repeat the same mistakes. Will they never learn?

 

[kzin]

Hate to piss in your Wheaties, but the bulk of Linux progress comes from Major World Corporations. The lead Linux Developers are all working for companies ranging from OSI to Google, to Apple, to IBM, to RedHat, to AMD, to Novell, etc.

The bulk of the platform support for KDE and GNOME comes from Corporate sponsorship and Governments.

Linux is every bit about making money as OS X. It's how the pie is focused that varies.

Linux isn't Hardware: They focus on Services since Shrinkwrap isn't their market, ala Microsoft.

In the end, No Money, no Game, No Jobs, Economies crash.

All of which is hot air on your part.

The reason Linux (or *BSD) matter in the argument that the other person is making is: while your development might largely be coming from corporations, the corporations don't control the ecosystem. If they start to go in a direction you don't like, you can split away from them, and use the open source code however you want. If they leave the market entirely, you can keep using the open source code without them.

Chances are, you wont be alone in those thoughts, and a new community will rise up around it. That's why there's both a FreeBSD and a NetBSD. The 386BSD community had to pick up on their own when then Jolitz's abandoned them. Then that community split because one half didn't like what the other half was doing, giving us FreeBSD and NetBSD. And, then, part of the NetBSD community didn't like the direction NetBSD was going in, and fractured into the OpenBSD community. Same thing, just add corporations in addition to individual contributors (and, there were also corporations involved in the *BSD evolution ... BSD/386 comes to mind).


Open Source isn't about "only the people contribute". It's about not having your future tied to someone else's decisions unless you WANT that. You can always learn how to hack kernel code and take control of your computer at the lowest level. That option is _always_ available to you with Open Source. The problem with closed (Windows) and semi-open (Darwin/OSX) platforms is that the ultimate fate of your platform is controlled by someone else.

I had to go through a similar decision when Next was slowly abandoning/de-emphasizing Nextstep. I wound up being a FreeBSD user from about 1998-2001. I only came back because I didn't think Apple could afford to make the same shift away from supporting its OS as a main product that NeXT had. Even now, as Apple de-emphasizes its Computer name, they're still an OS based company.

I don't think Apple made a blunder here though. I think Apple said all the right things, and people just inflated their hopes and dreams into what the iPhone was going to be (don't get me wrong, I was one of them who had higher hopes for the iPhone than what it turned out to be). And when that didn't pan out, they thought they could force the issue by hacking the device. Now they're getting the natural consequences of that.

My reason for not buying an iPhone was: it wasn't all I had hoped it would be, and I found the things I actually needed in another device. I don't have ill-will toward Apple for not making the device I wanted. And because it wasn't the device I wanted, I didn't buy it. The people who are complaining need to see the iPhone for what it actually is, not what they wanted it to be.

 

[kzin]

Aren't we are supposed to be living in a free society?
Free societies use "laissez faire economics" to do
business. In otherwords, free enterprise. Corporate Apple sells a product, consumer buys product and decides how they want to use it. They may choose to use it as a doorstop or a phone. It is ridiculous to think I am
barred from using my phone however I want, as long as it does not encroach on another. If it happens to not fit in the "box" that Apple thinks it should, but the consumer does, shouldn't they change their attitude (agreements)?

I think you have an insufficient understanding of what laissez faire economics, and a free market, are. Those concepts do more to support what Apple has done, than support your position.

1) Apple sold the product they wanted to. People were free to buy it or not (they vote with their dollars). The government doesn't interfere.

2) Apple provided an upgrade that enforces the use of the product they want. People choose to upgrade or not. People choose to stay with the product or not. The government doesn't interfere.

That's laissez faire economics, and an open market, at work. Laissez Faire Economics == minimal or no government regulation. Open Market == customers affect companies by voting with their dollars/feet by choosing among multiple competing products, not by dictating the product features/capabilities/uses to the company.

If the company thinks that, in order to continue to have an income, they should listen to the customers, then they will. If they feel that they can continue to have an income by ignoring the portion of their market that is upset that the product failed them in some way, then nothing about an open market, nor minimally regulated market, forces them to listen to the customer.

 

[sishaw]

Yes, but...

While clearly Apple can sell its own products under whatever terms and conditions it wants, and while customers were clearly on notice that the iPhone is a closed device and were living in never-never land in thinking they could transform it into a different device, I just don't think Apple's approach with the iPhone is sustainable over the long term. The current trend is toward openness in software. Two examples that have proven very popular: Google Maps opening its API, and the increasing popularity of Linux OSs.

I don't think Apple can buck this trend indefinitely. I predict that by this time next year there is an SDK and certification program for iPhone developers.

 

[jonny]

The Devil is 6

Finally, anyone who uses whole snippets of songs as 'ringtones' should be shot.

Amen! [Edit] I'd love to be able to make my own ringtones in Logic. That would be aces.

If ATT is the devil, then Rogers Wireless is the devils father. Of all the crying I've heard, people seem to thinking that ATT rips them off. The iPhone will be in limbo to come to Canada for a while due to Rogers ridiculous data fees. The prices I've seen for iPhone contracts in the states would be unheard of here.

I will stay with 1.0.2. I will not update and I will use my phone on my network of choice. And my decision to do so will not cause Apple or ATT to lose money.

 

[briand05]

Really?? Wrong as usual. The music companies do not consider the making of ringtones from songs you own a fair use. Personally, I think that is terrible but the music companies ARE terrible. To get just what you want onto many phones requires a hack of some sort and, as I have tried unsuccessfully with a number of colleagues' phones, many simply won't allow any song to be added as a ringtone. So, this shutout is NOT an Apple exclusive.

Now, should you be able to add bought songs for nothing? I think so, but that is NOT an Apple issue re: the iPhone. Should you also be able to add any sounds that are not covered by royalties to your iPhone via iTunes?-- you bet and here Apple is being silly.

Every phone I've ever used except the iPhone allows making any audio file a ringtone easily, Microsoft's Windows Mobile products out of the box with no work required let you select any file in your documents folder as a ringtone. Stop with the Apple shilling, the reality is Apple is making money off everything to do with this phone (contract, ringtones, etc.), they've created a locked in environment that doesn't exist with any other phone. I think honestly that there could be an anti-trust issue here. Apple is to blame for it all and I'm sure, AT&T unlocks all their other phones after a certain period and would unlock the iphone but Apple didn't give them the unlock code and I believe AT&T here. If Microsoft got in trouble for integrating IE and Windows Media Player too much with Windows, then surely what Apple is doing here is also against anti-trust laws.

 

[Stella]

I didn't think the Touch had bluetooth - wasn't the hardware removed rather than just disabled in the firmware?

Also, you should note that my scenario only requires a very modest expansion to each product. We know the Touch already has a bluetooth radio built in.

 

[goosnarrggh]

What about unlocking a phone to put on apps?

That is certainly not exempt.

Really? The exemption states that you can modify firmware with the intention of allowing a cellular telephone to work with different wireless services.

The only way that was known at the time to make the SIM unlock possible, was by going through an intermediate "jail break" step. This jailbreaking step additionally left the phone open to installing additional unrelated 3rd party applications.

Unless the plaintiff can prove that you had additional intent in performing the "jailbreak" beyond the sole purpose making it possible to achieve the SIM unlock, the exemption will still hold.

 

[Intarweb]

Just because Apple put some writing in the contract, and people signed it, doesn't mean it's legal.

Write up a contract that reads "You're giving me the power to kill you." Then kill the signer and see how that holds up in court.

This is something along the lines of the litigation with cable companies. People want to, and should be able to, use other cable boxes with their service. They don't want to have to continually "rent," ridiculously cheap to produce, set-top boxes. They want to own their boxes and be free to do as they wish as long as it's "legal."

 

[peharri]

I saw the direction Apple was heading in a few years ago, and switched back to GNU/Linux (initially Debian, then Ubuntu.) While Ubuntu is not Mac OS X, and I wish it was, it's usable, infinitely better than Windows (though that's almost a case of damning by faint praise...), and it's not controlled by a single entity seeking to lock you in.

It's depressing because when Apple is good, they're very good, but after some positive stuff in the early days of Mac OS X, they're reverting back to the control freakery that they're legend for. Indeed, in some ways they're worse than ever - the original Mac 128k had a reputation for being "locked down" but actually it wasn't in any meaningful way except for hardware. The system was programmable, and the users policed the developers pretty well. Now we don't even have that attitude with the iPhone/touch line.

A slightly more open attitude would have made the iPhone a thing I might have been willing to look at in the long run. Telling AT&T that locking was out of the question would have helped (hey, if the royalties were an issue, they could have just charged $100 more.) Letting third party developers develop for the phone (and not lying about why they can't) would have helped ensure the real limitations I see of that device could be over-come.

It's been some years since I last bought anything Apple. There's stuff I'm interested in, but it seems that every time I'm ready to get out the credit card I see an aspect of the system that unravels the whole deal for me. If you seek to control every aspect of the customer experience, then you need to make sure that you're able to make every aspect of the customer experience work. Apple isn't doing that. To use an iPhone I have to use immature software with a UI and paradigm that makes it a second rate phone, and the worst network in my area bar Verizon's. I can't use it when I travel to Britain because it's prohibitively expensive to do so. It makes no sense for me to buy it, even though I need a new MP3 player and have been wanting a mobile web browser for a while. The N800 coupled with Bluetooth-supporting good GSM phone combination seems best right now.

Even if I didn't have strong ideological positions on openness, I would be a complete moron if I bought an iPhone. Likewise, with Apple's laptop range crippled with bad mouse pointer alternatives (why the hell isn't the nipple available?), bad keyboards in my experience, and no legal way to run OS X on a laptop whose hardware is actually attractive to me, I would have to be out of my mind to get an Apple laptop of any description, even if Mac OS X is a nicer environment than Ubuntu. Mac OS X is not so good it outweighs the disadvantages of the hardware.

I'm temporarily in a minority. People are trying out Apple's hardware and they're getting a blip in sales. In the long term, I don't see that happening. I see either Microsoft getting its finger out and responding to the hardware manufacturers begging them to get a usable version of Windows out, or else the hardware manufacturers throwing their weight behind GNOME. This is not hyperbole, the hardware manufacturers have no choice, they only have their openness to fall back on, and the only thing that prevents them from beating Apple into a pulp is the fact that the current operating systems on offer for their hardware are not as good as they could be. They can and have to fix this. And when they do, Apple can expect to return to its old industry position of being the computer world's R&D lab, admired by a few diehard fans, and with the media constantly predicting its demise.

It will not disappear, of course. It's just it's not going to be where I think everyone wants it to be.

 

[ruckus]

I'm having trouble understanding the iPhone. I have a friend that raves about it all day long. I figured, what the hell i'll go buy one. Last weekend I was going to get one, but I got to play with one for awhile right before I went to get it.

Its beautiful and elegant to use, sure. But I tried to save an image from the web to use as a background and couldn't figure it out. I asked him how to do it, he said "you can't do that without a hacked iPhone". I said, "of course you can that is ridiculous!" Then he explains how you don't have any write access to the memory in it.

Then I ask about the hacking because I knew the update broke all previous hacking efforts. He says "oh just don't update to the latest patch".

Why would anyone knowingly buy a device they knew didn't meet their needs, and not only that, the company adamantly tries to stop you from using the device how you want. The whole thing seems a bit silly to me.

Needless to say, apple lost a sale on me until they get their act together. I'm sure i'm not the only one who feels this way.

 

[pale9]

Guys, this is obviously about much more than just the iPhone mess & its not so much that it bothers me to never update my iPhone's firmware again. Its just the simple principal of the matter.

After 8 years of being a loyal customer, I simply DO NOT feel comfortable giving Apple anymore of my $$. I dont want to "rent" my products & thats exactly what they are started to do here. If we keep buying into them, its like saying "Thank you sir. May I have another" while they gang rape us from behind. So, its never gonna stop unless we just stop.

I mean, obviously they dont care about what their customers want. So if thats the case, then I sure as fu*k dont care about them. There are way too many options out there to screw around with them anymore.

Im already in the process of selling my MacBook, my ExtremeN & Express routers, my 12" PowerBook that I use for a media center, my iPod HiFi, etc. Im going totally open-source, thats it. Thats what its come to.

Im damn serious about this, so if anyone wants to make me an offer on any of that stuff, lemme know cause they are going on eBay this week.

i agree with you to a certain extent. i do believe that SJ is now a clinical megalomanic and control freak. with the iphone he flipped his wig. just sell the product to every cell phone company? nooooo. he wants a cut of everthing, and now he is really PO'd that the hackers burst his little bubble. back when apple charged 2.99 (or whatever) for enabling wireless N, i though 'this is not a good sign'...the apple tv? lock that baby down! besides the utube upgrade, where are the hot new features??? music? itunes only. i think apple has now crossed the line where you need a certain amount of control to provide a positiv customer experience with a dictator-like 'its my way or the highway'....

 

[Feverish Flux]

i agree with you to a certain extent. i do believe that SJ is now a clinical megalomanic and control freak. with the iphone he flipped his wig. just sell the product to every cell phone company? nooooo. he wants a cut of everthing, and now he is really PO'd that the hackers burst his little bubble. back when apple charged 2.99 (or whatever) for enabling wireless N, i though 'this is not a good sign'...the apple tv? lock that baby down! besides the utube upgrade, where are the hot new features??? music? itunes only. i think apple has now crossed the line where you need a certain amount of control to provide a positiv customer experience with a dictator-like 'its my way or the highway'....

Uh... iPod?

I don't hear anyone screaming at the top of their lungs that they can't use Rhapsody...

Crossed the line - LOL!

 

[Stella]

There are people who believe that Apple provides the 'whole package'... and having the exclusive package like it is benefits the customer more than it disadvantages.

Ultimately, history will repeat itself and Apple will be stung once more by its control freak nature. Unless Apple frees up the iPhone, it will become a minor player. We will be looking back and thinking what could have been. The iPhone may be selling well now, but sooner or later there will be a customer and media backlash.

Other cell phone manufacturers will sort themselves out and provide the ease of use of the iPhone. These phones will still provide an open nature - 3rd party apps ( even if just Java ( MIDP ) games , ring tones, everything we see today. Once the 'iphone ease of use ' UI comes to other phones, iPhone will start to fade.

i agree with you to a certain extent. i do believe that SJ is now a clinical megalomanic and control freak. with the iphone he flipped his wig. just sell the product to every cell phone company? nooooo. he wants a cut of everthing, and now he is really PO'd that the hackers burst his little bubble. back when apple charged 2.99 (or whatever) for enabling wireless N, i though 'this is not a good sign'...the apple tv? lock that baby down! besides the utube upgrade, where are the hot new features??? music? itunes only. i think apple has now crossed the line where you need a certain amount of control to provide a positiv customer experience with a dictator-like 'its my way or the highway'....

 

[X38]

Wow. They hysteria here is really something.
[...] Anybody SCREAMING about how horrible Apple is because this 1.0 phone product failed to meet their wild expectations (even though it meets every promise Apple has ever made about it) is being ridiculous. [...]

I am not complaining; my iPhone is just fine and I am happy with it. I am not leaving; I've been an Apple fan since the days when the floppy disk replaced the cassette tape player on the Apple II and I'm still perfectly happy with my Mac. I have watched many times while Apple stumbles over its own pride and gets shoved to the sidelines of markets that they invent.

All you apologists just don't get it. (There is a difference between being a pleased customer and being an apologist.) You need to pull the wool out of your ears and listen.

Apple can not afford the negative publicity they will get if they try to defend bricking people's phones. They may be right, they may even win in court (I'm not a lawyer, I have no idea and don't care). So what?! If the market percieves that Apple will break your phone and not fix it for you, all the court rulings in the world will not be able to repair the broken trust of the consumers.

You folks need to repeat to yourselves 1000 times "the customer is always right", before you continue ranting in Apple's defence. If Apple doesn't give the customer what the customer wants, somebody else will.

That's what happened to the Apple ///, the LISA, the first generation Mac, the Mac after Windows 3.0 came out, the Newton, etc., and is on the verge of happening for the iPhone.

 

[Blue Velvet]

Unless Apple frees up the iPhone, it will become a minor player.

There's no evidence of that. On the whole, consumers aren't ditching their standard phones en masse because they can't run third-party apps or hack it to do other things. It's a fringe activity; that's what so many people here don't seem to get.

What's more, the sales targets for the iPhone are relatively modest and the deals with the networks aren't in perpetuity. I believe that Apple are making entirely the right moves for a new device, launching and controlling it carefully. Sounding out the market and positioning itself, much as the iPod was rolled out.

Let's see where things stand in 2010 (less than 30 months away) before we rush to judgement.

 

[freediverdude]

I must admit, there are a few odd things about the iPhone, like not being able to copy and paste, or save a picture from the web. But folks, this isn't supposed to be a fully functioning mac tablet or something. This is supposed to be a phone + ipod + web browser, which it does beautifully. If you want to trade the iPhone for one of those clunky Nokia phones and user interface, just to get some of that direct access to the flash drive functionality, then God bless. I think that stuff slows the phone down quite a bit though- people running a bunch of third party apps on the iPhone typically have a slower responding interface. But to each his or her own.

 

[Lazernet]

I don't know if its been mentioned yet -- but don't you all see?

Steve Jobs purposely released this software "update" that bricks iphones to cause its customers to purchase new iphones to help pay for the $100 refund he gave to us all... Surely, the two will even out ;-)...

All kidding aside, Apple warned you all before updating, I love my phone after the update - I bought it to be a nice locked apple product that worked well and thats what I got. I'm happy, if your not -- go with another product already... no one is forcing you to get an iphone ...

- Eric

 

[christian_k]

I'll put the business judgement of Steve up against the interests of a handful of open source (read 'unemployed') programmers any day.

Think a moment.

What would Apple be today without the open source guys?

Nothing. There is a lot of OS stuff in OSX, the BSD foundation, the Apache webserver, the smb client/server, the X11 server and even the core of our favorite browser came from KDE. No SpotLight without SQLite, no dashboard without KHTML. They were even hardly able to compile all of their stuff without the free gcc, the most portable compiler ever created and basis for XCode.

Without all this stuff they would have been out of money before finishing OSX.

Even microsoft recognized the value of non commercial developers, releasing products line VisualStudio Express or XNA allowing legal development for XBOX360 without a lot of money. Some of the university students that now spend time for creating open source or for hacking iPhones will become important developers in the future. It is not a wise decision to lock these guys out.

I think even Woz was a guy like this. Apple would not even exist.

Christian

 

[Stella]

I'm not just talking about 3rd party applications, I'm talking about Ring tones, carriers ( the limited contract choice ) - the whole lock-in.

But yes, we don't know whats going to happen, but we can still speculate - and history is a good reflective tool of predicting what may happen in the future. History often repeats itself.

The number 2010 seems so far away, but as you pointed out, its only 30 months..and thats not long! Just yesterday it seemed like 2000! How time flies!

There's no evidence of that. On the whole, consumers aren't ditching their standard phones en masse because they can't run third-party apps or hack it to do other things. It's a fringe activity; that's what so many people here don't seem to get.

What's more, the sales targets for the iPhone are relatively modest and the deals with the networks aren't in perpetuity. I believe that Apple are making entirely the right moves for a new device, launching and controlling it carefully. Sounding out the market and positioning itself, much as the iPod was rolled out.

Let's see where things stand in 2010 (less than 30 months away) before we rush to judgement.

 

[machan]

If you knew the risk of hacking the phone included bricking it when Apple updated it, you have no right to piss and moan about it now. You took a risk, so man up and accept the responsibility. Or maybe next time, don't dick around with your expensive toys in ways the company that built it did not intend.

 

[Blue Velvet]

I'm not just talking about 3rd party applications, I'm talking about Ring tones, carriers ( the limited contract choice ) - the whole lock-in.

Ring tones: what other phones of this nature let you use MP3s as ringtones?
Carriers: limited to a select few for a set time

versus

Everything you get with the iPhone.

I've got a Sony-Ericcsson phone. I can only buy skins, ringtones and games for it from the Sony-Ericcsson site through the phone. But instead of complaining about it, I do what most people would do and just don't purchase at all... it doesn't bother me that I'm locked-in because I can always go and buy a different phone if I want. No-one here is compelled to buy an iPhone and certainly, by now, no-one who reads this site is unaware of what the iPhone is, its features and the terms and conditions of its use.

I've never read so much unjustified complaining about a device that no-one is compelled to buy. And if you buy and mess with it, then that's your decision; people should learn to take responsibility for their own actions.

As I said, we shall see where things more clearly stand in a couple of years after Apple have exhausted their initial first-to-market advantage of the touch interface.

 

[psouper]

control freakery

This is just the latest sign of SJ and Apple's complete control freakery. Just like the mac mini that they didn't want you to even be able to upgrade the RAM on so you have to prise it open with a putty knife or the whole line of iMacs that can't be upgraded in any serious way. I'm onto my 5th Mac but I'm seriously considering going Windows or Linux to get away from these facists.....

 

[Digital Skunk]

This just makes me glad that I didn't buy the iPhone when it first came out. I would love to have one, and wish that I could get one on a better network and that the phone had a few more power features, but if I have to go through Steve forcing me to NOT use 3rd party software and such it's just ridiculous.

I just wish the other phone makers out there had as good a UI as the iPhone so I could easily spend my money with them. At least I get to use 3rd party apps with my crummy UI though... so Treo here I come.

This is just the latest sign of SJ and Apple's complete control freakery. Just like the mac mini that they didn't want you to even be able to upgrade the RAM on so you have to prise it open with a putty knife or the whole line of iMacs that can't be upgraded in any serious way. I'm onto my 5th Mac but I'm seriously considering going Windows or Linux to get away from these facists.....

Not that I don't agree with you because I do, but you'd be surprised at how many computer owners (PC and MAC) don't upgrade their machines at all. Even when they could just get more RAM and a bigger faster HDD they'd rather get a whole new machine.