There's a lot to like in this, but the intro is gimmicky. "Why are diamonds more expensive than water?" is a classic question for super early economics lessons, but not really appropriate for the more complicated piece that this is.
It's a commonly suggested thought from people that like both companies. In a happy-go-lucky sort of way it is a fun thought experiment, but I've never heard anyone seriously suggest it.
It's about losing all of your cards when you lose one. And most people aren't going to spend money ($100) on one - yet alone TWO - cards vs. the free cards they get from their banks 24/7. If I lose my Amex, I can walk into an Amex office and get a free card in under an hour. Or have it overnighted for free.
This is purely anecdotal: every time I have lost one card I have lost all of my cards (because it's when I lose my wallet or the bag my wallet is in). In this case I'd be able to go home and grab my 'originals' and use those as my backup cards.
Maybe I'm missing your point. You don't lose the ability to get a new card quickly with Coin (i.e., Coin gets stolen, cancel cards and Amex will send a new one), you just don't gain the ability to get a replacement Coin.
There are no social requirements in the app—you can use it to get your record from multiple doctors and never add any friends in Prime.
The target market of the app is people who have close friends and family members that they want to keep in the know about their health. This might not be you, which is totally okay.
We're fully HIPAA-compliant, as Tyler mentioned in another comment. Data is encrypted, and isn't stored on the device. HIPAA (and specifically MU Stage 2) is actually more helpful for what we are doing than anything else; letting patients get access to their records electronically is a hugely important step towards solving major problems in the health industry.
Apple has taken measures to technologically limit your ability to do so. When I bought my most recent MacBook Pro it came with Lion. Because of network issues at work I could't use Lion (still can't), so I tried to put Snow Leopard in a VM (using the copy I had previously put on my now defunct MacBook Pro) but Apple and VMWare had put in technological blockers to prevent putting SL on a Lion VM or Lion on a SL VM. So, I repartitioned and copied my old MacBook over and am still living happily with SL.
I suspect there were other factors which prevented your success.
There were no measures to technologically limit one's ability to perform multiple installations from a purchased OS X install disc. You could buy two different Tiger installers and they'd checksum the same, and there were no serial numbers to be entered. It was an honor thing.
There was a restriction on VMs, but they've since eased up on that. I imagine it was because of the Hackintosh thing.
I'm reasonably confident the OS didn't actively try to detect that it was running in a VM, but VMware Fusion (and presumably other such software) would prevent you from installing the OS.
There was a relatively simple work around (a hack) that allowed you to install in a VM. I think it was as simple as touching the right path.
At the point that I was trying to solve this problem (and not getting paid as a result) I was unable to find anyone who had successfully gotten SL to run in a VMWare VM or Lion to run in a SL VM. Interestingly, I did find individuals who had Lion running in Lion VMs, but that didn't help me get back up and running.
Edited to add: You are correct, the technical restriction was on the VMWare side, but IIRC it was because of legal threats from Apple. Apparently earlier versions of VMWare would run SL without any problems, but the VMWare version I had would not not and I couldn't get a copy of the older version.
I'd forgotten that, but yes, I seem to remember reading that. Unfortunately I didn't have the server version and was already loosing money because of my down time, so I needed to get up and running with a known good system as soon as I could.
A funny thing about the family pack is that for at least one version of OS X, the only differences between the family pack and the single user version were a sticker that said "Family pack" on the front, and the price. The contents of the box were identical.
As I recall depending on what you paid you could install in on a different number of machines, but they didn't restrict you from installing it on more.
Apple has continued sales of old devices to corporate/educational buyers without making them publicly available in the past. The eMac and original iPad were both available to education markets far longer than public markets.
The eMac was, but that's because it had it's origins in education. That was also 8 years ago and Apple has changed.
I can't find any corroboration for your assertion about the original iPad. Every source I can find says it was discontinued immediately in favour of the iPad 2. Selling off old stock to the education market isn't the same.
My memories of the iPad 1 might be hazy—though I had friends in education that purchased them well after the iPad 2 was available. Perhaps they were getting bulk orders of refurbished (or third party refurbished) units.
The main point is that it's not unreasonable to think Apple would keep products around for enterprise/education markets without selling them publicly, or at the very least without mentioning them during a high profile keynote.
I use iTunes Match and have quite a bit of music on my computer and my phone, so it doesn't often occur to me to listen on my iPad. However, when I do, I exclusively stream, so this might actually be the perfect fit for me. Will let you know when I try it out.
Also please let me know how long it takes to open when you load.... We have an issue with large library parse times... If you get a blank screen for more than a few seconds please time it and let me know how long it takes. We need to put this initial loading/library prep into a new thread.
I didn't really connect with this piece until the end.
>Remind yourself, that you are not that thing. This will help you to see the other person’s point of view, instead of lashing out irrationally.
I'm pretty sure the entire reason I went to art school was to learn how to do this. I disagree with the post's description of 'who/what you are' but this point holds.
Great feedback. Thanks for that. The primary point (although possibly poorly communicated so) was meant to help us detach from the things we identify too strongly with. And no not be insulted when those things with which we associate (our art or other things) are criticized.
> We are how we make other people feel
Is a very bias and really a choice of a perspective more than an absolute truth.
