OT: Apple service [was [clue-tech] Qwest DSL download speed reduced]

[Nate Duehr]

David L. Anselmi wrote:
> Nate Duehr wrote:
> [...]
>> "Consumers" aren't as dumb as most corporate support systems make 
>> them out to be.  My recent example of Apple requiring an appointment 
>> at the so-called "Genius Bar" to tell me my 4 day old laptop wouldn't 
>> even POWER ON [ http://www.natetech.com/?p=203 ] is a good example of 
>> corporate customer "service" policy gone insane.
>
> Hi Nate!  Can you handle a little introspection this weekend? ;-)
Sure, why not?  ;-)
> I think your story disproves your point.  The system avoided spending 
> any more money on you than it had to (better support than you got is 
> probably  an ongoing cost, not just the one time that you walked in I 
> think).  And in the end you bought a Mac anyway (sure, not from the 
> Apple store but you probably aren't their target market--so they don't 
> care a whit about you and rightly so).
I think I figured out that the Apple Store's target market isn't loyal 
customers.  It's teenagers with cellphones in their ears buying iPods.  
Only took me a week to absorb that Apple Stores could care less about 
Apple products.  They might as well start selling other "hip" stuff, really.
> So nice features and a low price trump good service.  And the slick 
> apps and solid integration trump Freedom.  Isn't that what you're saying?
Not really.  I see the Mac right now as the "platform that will do it 
all"... Free, Non-Free, all of it.  It's about the hardware.  Then I can 
load on it whatever I like.  Apple's software is nice, but the Mac 
Intel-based laptops will run Mac OS, Windows, and Linux and any strange 
combination thereof (e.g. using the new VM software from Parallels, or 
loading Fink on MacOS to get virtually every Debian package via apt-get).

> I'm not trying at all to be critical, just to clarify your values.
Not a problem.  My values are utilitarian.  If I "have to" support some 
closed-source developers to get a platform that will do all of the major 
end-user OS's on one portable machine at a lower price point than I can 
match at Dell.com -- I'm okay with that.  Apple OSX devs need to eat too.

To have a completely Free-as-in-Freedom OS was never my goal for loading 
Linux in the first place.  It's a nice platitude, but I use my computers 
to do things.  If the OS that does that best today is a proprietary one, 
and tomorrow is a Free or even free one, I'll use it.
> I find it tempting (being in the market for a laptop) to look at the 
> MacBook.  But I won't because I won't run Mac OS on it and I can't 
> bear the thought of paying for proprietary software and then throwing 
> it away (maybe I can get one without OS?)  I wonder how well the 
> hardware works with Linux?
As mentioned above, I have no problem with the software tax.  I even 
loaded a copy of WinXP on it with Apple Bootcamp.  Sometimes you just 
need all your tools... whatever they are.  I haven't put a native Linux 
partition on it (trying not to confuse Bootcamp on the partitioning 
scheme) but if it's like my previous Apple machines, the standardization 
of the hardware will make is such that Linux ends up (eventually) 
running just fine.  In this case, I'd bet it's moving right along, but 
haven't tried it.  Parallels supports various Linux flavors officially, 
so I'll probably be throwing a couple on here.
> That's me.  I'm learning to accept that even though I don't think much 
> of RMS I'm much more the idealist he is than most Linux people I know.
Perhaps true.  I know a lot of Linux people who are both ways... some 
are almost militant about true Free open-source code everywhere, and 
some just want to get things done with their computers with whatever 
tools are out there.  I support Debian Linux's goal of making SURE their 
Linux OS is completely free of any questionable licensing, something 
most of the other Linux distros are not nearly as careful about.

> My apologies if my fanaticism (or cynicism) offend.  I have a lot of 
> respect for you and the experience you bring to the list.
I don't mind at all - really.  I find the different viewpoints 
fascinating.  But at the end of the day, when I want a computer to "just 
work"... I may choose proprietary software, if that's the stuff that's 
currently working "best" for whatever task I feel like doing that day.  
On the other hand, for many tasks, Free software truly is so far ahead 
that it's silly to use proprietary apps (Apache comes to mind).

And as we've all learned from discussing the topic over the years, the 
GPL itself is mighty "non-free" to those who wish to create proprietary 
software.   Even Linus himself finds the GPLv3 too restrictive.  Apple 
chose to use BSD-licensed code to stay away from that issue, and people 
have varying opinions about it.  The scheming and strategic moves in 
computing like this will continue long after I'm dead and gone, I'm sure.

So for me, the Mac Intel machines seem to be the pragmatic answer to 
"give me a platform I can do anything with", at least right now.  
Efforts to create open hardware have all but failed everywhere -- 
hardware engineers like feeding their families, and most work for 
organizations that sell proprietary software as their major source of 
revenue, so I have no problem paying for "the whole enchilada", and then 
choosing whether or not I want to use the proprietary bits as I go along.

I agonized for a week over giving Apple my money (again) because I truly 
despise organizational "stuff" that causes poor customer service... I 
fight that tooth and nail, even at my job, trying to make sure my 
customers get the best service I can give them, even if the "rules" say 
we're not supposed to do something a certain way.  Of course, you have 
to pick and choose your battles in that arena carefully and with tact.

We'll see how it goes.  Had the new MacBook less than 24 hours and it's 
already running two OS's... soon more.  ;-)  Linux is next in line.

Nate