Keep in mind the contract between a user and a provider is two ways. If they change your plan/billing rate, this is a possible way out of the contract.

If AT&T's decisions here result in a higher bill, I'll leave them and let them eat the subsidy on the phone.

The Dell 30 inch panels are $1400 or $1700, and they don't sell refurb models on the Dell outlet (been checking for 2 months now). They do offer coupon codes from time to time, but it's still a big investment, and CCFL lighting.

Thats why the iMac is tempting, it's LED lit, and has higher then 1920x1080 resolution at a comparable price.

@insky Quote: "You keep making the same old tired argument about what Microsoft almost "did". Let's not get into your complete misunderstanding of what they almost "did", or the fact that Apple actually "did" do this. "

I keep saying this, because it happened. Microsoft did threaten OEMs, and did jack up prices on them as punishment for including alternate browsers. IE is not a monopoly, but Windows was, and Microsoft illegally used their OS monopoly to try and grow their browser market. This is well documented in legal paperwork from the US DOJ case against Microsoft. I'll repeat that last part for you. The United States Department of Justice found that Microsoft was committing acts that violate century old anti-trust laws.

And my cure little example means nothing? Really? The iPod is not a monopoly, period. If it was a monopoly and Apple was doing something truly evil, legal departments at Sony, Creative, Microsoft and other companies would have lawsuits lined up right now. Instead, those companies continue to release products to try and compete, without fear of a retailer saying "Sorry, Apple demanded that we not sell your product."

Microsoft is in trouble for things Apple simply cannot do. The situation is vastly different. Companies like Dell and HP depends on Microsoft software to stay in the computer business. No OEM depends on Apple software to stay alive, so even if iTunes is somehow a monopoly, Apple can't do much with that power.

Should the same base rules apply to everyone? Sure. But additional rules come into effect when you hit certain points, due to the history of corporations abusing monopoly power. This isn't just to punish Microsoft. This is also to enforce laws that protect consumers, and many of these laws have been around for more then 100 years. Laws that most civilized nations now have.

@Nimer55 Because at the time when the decision was made, Netscape tended to work better then IE. IE was a typical MS product, in that it took them a few revisions before it was decent.

As for offering it as a choice when signing up for Gateway.net, this was still during the era where Netscape had a decent lead, and some sites only worked properly with it. But because Gateway wanted to offer users choice, Microsoft illegally punished them.

@Region2 MS jointly developed OS/2 1.0 and 2.0, but not Warp versions (3 and 4). At that point, (around 94-95), Microsoft had no legal say in anything that happened with OS/2, but still managed to illegally help to kill off any chance it had.

I am really tempted to buy a 27 inch iMac once they hit the refurb store, to use as a standalone monitor. Not sure what I'd do with the computer part, but already the entire iMac is $100 less then a 30 inch Cinema Display. For $100 less, I get a slightly smaller resolution due to the 16:9 aspect ratio, LED backlighting, and entire computer that I'm sure I could find a use for.

Apple really needs to rev or kill off the 30 inch display. It's now ridiculous in the current product lineup.

This was the main reason I decided to jailbreak my device, and it lead to my baseband crashing at least once a day, usually when I wanted to make a call. Reverted the hack, and the problem went away. YMMV.

@insky First off, the iPod is not a monopoly. You can still go into any big box electronics store and walk out with a non Apple media player. And even though Apple has a commanding market share, they aren't forcing retailers to help make them a monopoly.

Microsoft on the other hand forced PC makers to keep IE on the system, and to keep other browsers off. How? By threatening them with higher prices on Windows, or even laying down the possibility of pulling the OEM license entirely. How long do you think Gateway, Compaq, Dell or HP would have lasted if they stopped selling computers with Windows?

@(Unverified) Microsoft isn't being punished for bundling their browser. Microsoft is being punished for threatening OEMs like Gateway, Dell and HP for offering browser choice to their end users. Microsoft was found guilty in the US of anticompetitive practices, and the EU is simply finishing what the US never bothered to do.

Go read up on the US side of the case sometime, it should help explain why this is actually a good thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Microsoft_antitrust_case

Microsoft played very dirty games behind the scenes for a long time, and in the end, it has harmed all computer users around the world. Lack of choice and competition in any market often leads to stagnation, and Microsoft has been guilty of that even in recent history. Look at how long IE6 sat and stagnated, while users became increasingly frustrated with popups. Still today, IE6 holds back the web, costing web design companies valuable time.

@viper24 Yep, gotta hate the EU for actually enforcing their consumer protection laws. I mean, really, why bother having laws that stand up for consumers. Corporations should be allowed to run wild, and force us to pay whatever they demand for oil, phone service, or computer software.

*end sarcasm*