NEWS: Apple sued over hot iPad shutdowns
in [Wireless Internet]
|
Prev: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security of wireless networks
Next: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security ofwireless networks
From: John Navas on 5 Aug 2010 19:56 On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 11:55:08 -0700, in <d81m56dor7isroaf6be9crdmn7pm6550m7(a)4ax.com>, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: >On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 09:58:16 -0700, John Navas ><spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >>The annoying thing is that you have to activate it on AT&T before you >>can use it as a fancy PDA/iPod. > >I'm still trying to figure out exactly how that works. I think a persistent setting is changed in the phone when activated. >Two of the >iPhone 3G's came with the original SIM card. They work just fine as a >PDA without jailbreaking. Were they ever activated? >Moving the working SIM to these phones does >not work. Neither does installing a SIM from a working ordinary AT&T >phone. Jailbreaking works, but with iOS 4.01, there are problems. >Long delays, GPS doesn't work with all apps, YouTube app can't find >the internet, crashes, spontaneous reboots, and other oddities. It's >much more stable without Jailbreaking. No such problems with iOS 3. Haven't messed with iOS 4 yet. >The issue has been settled in some court case involving Sprint. I'll >see if I can find the details, but as I recall, Sprint initially >refused to remove the vendor lock from their cell phones when the >original contract expired. After some litigation, they now will >remove the vendor lock after the contract term is completed. Same >with all the other vendors except AT&T on both the Go Phone and >iPhone. Sprint and probably AT&T correctly contend that if they >subsidize the initial cost of the phone over the contract term, then >they should have some say in how it's used, and how it's disposed. I >agree with that, but after 2 years, it should revert to the owners >control. I expect this to eventually become an issue with all the >current expensive fashion phones, errr... smart phones. I think it's an issue that could be easily won in Small Claims Court. -- John "Assumption is the mother of all screw ups." [Wethern�s Law of Suspended Judgement]
From: John Navas on 5 Aug 2010 19:58 On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 16:35:33 -0600, in <F1H6o.36539$F%7.30352(a)newsfe10.iad>, Todd Allcock <elecconnec(a)AnoOspamL.com> wrote: >Exactly- so the ~60% of iPhone buyers forced to switch from Verizon, T- >Mo, or Sprint, breaking up family plans or calling circles, and/or losing >"free" M2M calls to friends/family still on their former service are >going to be annoyed, even if AT&T service is perfectly adequate, or even, >dare I say it, excellent. Given that 60 of iPhone customers switched to >AT&T for an iPhone, I'd say a 27% "bitching rate" is pretty good. I respectfully disagree -- it's quite bad by industry standards, and a tribute to Apple marketing that it's not turned into a bigger issue. >> at&t has shown that they have an inferior network, incompetent >> management and outright lying to customers. they really do suck. > >They handle (according to them) more data traffic than other carriers, >have a newer more advanced (albeit geographically smaller) 3G network >than Verizon, and their customer service lags behind VZW and T-Mo a >little in surveys, but not geometrically so. Agreed. -- John "Facts? We ain't got no facts. We don't need no facts. I don't have to show you any stinking facts!" [with apologies to John Huston]
From: Todd Allcock on 5 Aug 2010 18:46 At 05 Aug 2010 15:04:15 -0500 Lloyd Parsons wrote: > In article <050820101301232886%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>, > nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: > > > In article <lloydparsons-2C9285.10404005082010(a)idisk.mac.com>, Lloyd > > Parsons <lloydparsons(a)mac.com> wrote: > > > > > And for all the complaints about how good/bad AT&T is, > > > there has been much conjecture that if any other provider had been given > > > the iPhone exclusive, they would have had the same problems that AT&T > > > has had with the useage patterns. > > > > except that with the explosion of android phones, you don't see very > > many complaints about verizon, yet you still see complaints about at&t. > > In the grand scheme of things, that explosion is not a big one. The > numbers are still pretty low. Not to mention the reputations of the companies involved. Verizon has built such a reputation about its network (IMO, equal parts deserved and purchased via advertising) that I suspect the typical AT&T customer with any problem blames the network, while the analogous Verizon customer, with "can you hear me now?" ads bouncing in his head, blames his handset!
From: John Navas on 5 Aug 2010 20:01 On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 16:53:48 -0700, in <alangbaker-C1329B.16534805082010(a)news.shawcable.com>, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote: >In article <kvim565pseig2p2b8nh462eiqerfta9apt(a)4ax.com>, > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 15:21:34 -0500, in >> <lloydparsons-CEA3F6.15213405082010(a)idisk.mac.com>, Lloyd Parsons >> <lloydparsons(a)mac.com> wrote: >> >> >In article <050820101307103677%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>, >> > nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: >> > >> >> In article <lloydparsons-E4398D.15041505082010(a)idisk.mac.com>, Lloyd >> >> Parsons <lloydparsons(a)mac.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> > > > And for all the complaints about how good/bad AT&T is, >> >> > > > there has been much conjecture that if any other provider had been >> >> > > > given >> >> > > > the iPhone exclusive, they would have had the same problems that >> >> > > > AT&T >> >> > > > has had with the useage patterns. >> >> > > >> >> > > except that with the explosion of android phones, you don't see very >> >> > > many complaints about verizon, yet you still see complaints about >> >> > > at&t. >> >> > >> >> > In the grand scheme of things, that explosion is not a big one. The >> >> > numbers are still pretty low. >> >> >> >> although there are a lot more iphones than android devices, android is >> >> selling a *lot* of devices and there aren't very many problems on >> >> verizon, sprint or t-mobile. with the iphone, at&t had problems from >> >> day one. >> > >> >That is true, and the conjecture was that back then, any provider would >> >have had a horrible time dealing with it. Of course, it should be >> >better now, and from reports I see, it is in many parts of the country, >> >but not all. >> > >> >As to Android, yes they are selling lots these days, but the numbers are >> >still small compared to the number of active iPhones, >> >> Depends on your definition of "small" -- 8.7 million Android handsets >> here in the U.S. compared with 10.7 million iPhones according to >> Quantcast. >> >> >and it is spread >> >among providers. >> >> True, but Android phones on AT&T <http://goo.gl/EyTr> aren't generating >> complaints the way iPhone has and still is. > >Sorry, but you've provided nothing to support that claim. Can you? No lawsuits or press reports of problems. Anything to counter that? ;) -- John "Facts? We ain't got no facts. We don't need no facts. I don't have to show you any stinking facts!" [with apologies to John Huston]
From: John Navas on 5 Aug 2010 20:02
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 18:51:17 -0500, in <lloydparsons-DD96F1.18511705082010(a)idisk.mac.com>, Lloyd Parsons <lloydparsons(a)mac.com> wrote: >In article <gtim561mpmfelmnl94fc7oq2tjnoks7vfh(a)4ax.com>, > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 15:04:15 -0500, in >> <lloydparsons-E4398D.15041505082010(a)idisk.mac.com>, Lloyd Parsons >> <lloydparsons(a)mac.com> wrote: >> >> >In article <050820101301232886%nospam(a)nospam.invalid>, >> > nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: >> > >> >> In article <lloydparsons-2C9285.10404005082010(a)idisk.mac.com>, Lloyd >> >> Parsons <lloydparsons(a)mac.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> > And for all the complaints about how good/bad AT&T is, >> >> > there has been much conjecture that if any other provider had been given >> >> > the iPhone exclusive, they would have had the same problems that AT&T >> >> > has had with the useage patterns. >> >> >> >> except that with the explosion of android phones, you don't see very >> >> many complaints about verizon, yet you still see complaints about at&t. >> > >> >In the grand scheme of things, that explosion is not a big one. The >> >numbers are still pretty low. >> >> On the contrary -- Android has now moved past iPhone into 2nd place >> behind RIM in smartphones. > >In numbers in use? I don't think so. Can you provide a link showing >that please? Been there, done that -- see my posts here with citations and numbers. Otherwise, "Google is your friend." -- John "There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves." -Will Rogers |