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 10 Aug 2010 11:07 On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 23:17:02 -0700, in <pqq166h87msuj6jq3fhe0n8llidrvlivim(a)4ax.com>, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: >On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:49:44 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> >wrote: > >>In article <mem1669b5jvqds15tl0il4scgnem4ksr5b(a)4ax.com>, Jeff >>Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: >> >>> Very few. I don't have access to sales figures on rubber bumpers, but >>> my guess is that everyone buys one or gets one for free, but doesn't >>> use one. I think I've seen about 15 assorted iPhone 4's so far. Three >>> of them had rubber bumpers. A week later, only one did. The rubber >>> bumper feels odd, looks awful after they get dirty, are ugly, and most >>> important, are a visible admission that there's something wrong with >>> the phone. >> >>that's completely opposite to what i'm seeing, where almost *every* >>iphone has a case of some sort (not just iphone 4). apple said they >>sold cases 80% of the time with the 3gs, which doesn't include those >>who bought a case later. cases and other iphone/ipod accessories are a >>*huge* business. > >Do we live on the same planet? I eat at local restaurant far too >often, where I see plenty of people playing with (and showing off) >their nice new iPhone 4. Most do not have rubber bumpers. However, >the 3G series all seem to have some manner of cover. > >Why iPhone case makers aren't hitting the jackpot ><http://money.cnn.com/2010/07/16/technology/iphone_bumper_makers/index.htm> > > Jobs mentioned Friday that just 20% of iPhone 4 users have picked > up a bumper case so far, despite all of the hoopla about how the > case solves the phone's dropped-signal issue. That's far fewer > than the 80% of iPhone 3GS users who bought a case soon after the > phone's release last year. > >That could mean the other 80% that didn't pickup their free rubber >bumper either didn't think they need one, bought one somewhere else, >or weren't paying attention to the news. Difficult to tell. Or were most interested in showing off their new toys than in masking what they are. I suspect bumper use will pick up once the novelty wears off. -- John "We have met the enemy and he is us" -Pogo
From: John Navas on 10 Aug 2010 11:10 On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:54:14 -0700, in <jnp166h3bn92aqnecgr0luki3g48gisuuu(a)4ax.com>, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: >On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 01:00:25 -0400, ZnU <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote: >>So the availability of data plans that regular consumers might actually >>be willing to pay for makes the iPad itself more attractive and >>presumably helps sell more of them. > >Apple covered its posterior by making a Wi-Fi only version. The sales >breakdown between the two models might offer a clue as to how >important this data plan was to consumers. I only know 4 iPad owners. >All of them have the more expensive version with the 3G data modem. >However, only one subscribes to the AT&T data plan and she bought the >$15 cheapo version. I've asked about the logic behind paying for >something they're not using and get something about "playing it safe" >and the internal GPS. FWIW, the dozen or so iPad's I've used and seen were almost all the Wi-Fi only version. Several had a Wi-Fi plan. Most seemed to think 3G was too expensive. -- John "We have met the enemy and he is us" -Pogo
From: John Navas on 10 Aug 2010 11:17 On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 11:29:00 +0200, in <8cckesF2rpU1(a)mid.individual.net>, Sandman <mr(a)sandman.net> wrote: >On 2010-08-10 08:28:06 +0200, ZnU said: > >> I also have a 3G iPad and haven't activated service yet; when I'm in my >> usual routine, I have WiFi 99% of the time I'd want Internet access on >> the iPad. But if I'm going out of town or I'm on-set for a couple of >> weeks (we do video production work), _then_ it becomes really useful. >> That's why the fact that the plans are month-to-month is so nice. > >I just think your (as in, all you americans, not you specifically) >cellular plans are fucked up. I pay $80/month (VAT included) for >flatrate data and flatrate calls for my plan and twin card that share >the same flatrate data plan is included in the price, and I just went >to my providers home page and clicked "order micro-sim" and it was >posted to me free of charge as my twin card. But not all US residents -- I pay less than you for unlimited data, free nights and weekends, more anytime minutes than I'll ever need, and more, with no contract. (I presume you mean US residents, not "Americans" in other countries.) >Unfortunately, the iPad hasn't been released here yet :( But when it >is, I'll be getting the 3G version (I have imported the wifi version >already) and have free data for it. I use my Android mobile to tether notebook and netbook computers, which better serve my needs than the iPad. -- John "Assumption is the mother of all screw ups." [Wethern�s Law of Suspended Judgement]
From: John Navas on 10 Aug 2010 11:18 On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:28:35 +0200, in <8ccnujFnlcU1(a)mid.individual.net>, Sandman <mr(a)sandman.net> wrote: >On 2010-08-10 11:58:15 +0200, ed said: > >>> I just think your (as in, all you americans, not you specifically) >>> cellular plans are fucked up. I pay $80/month (VAT included) for >>> flatrate data and flatrate calls for my plan and twin card that share >>> the same flatrate data plan is included in the price, and I just went >>> to my providers home page and clicked "order micro-sim" and it was >>> posted to me free of charge as my twin card. >> >> unlimited (voice, data, txt) plans in the u.s. currently start in the >> $45-$50 range. on att, the ipad data plans were $30 unlimited when >> they existed ($25 for 2 gigs now); no shared extra-card plans, but >> unlimited data plans on other carriers start at about $40 (though i >> don't think anyone else has a micro sim at this point). so you're not >> really talking about a whole lot of difference in cost when it comes >> to the actual plans themselves. > >And those numbers are VAT included and no commitment time? ... Yes. -- John "Assumption is the mother of all screw ups." [Wethern�s Law of Suspended Judgement]
From: John Navas on 10 Aug 2010 11:19
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 09:40:02 -0400, in <g5d8o.4362$EF1.2031(a)newsfe14.iad>, Todd Allcock <elecconnec(a)AnoOspamL.com> wrote: >... (Keep in >mind pre-iPhone, no one in the US had tied mandatory data plans to phone >sales. Even Blackberries- essentially worthless without ubiquitous data- >didn't require data plans yet!) I seem to recall that AT&T required a higher cost "smartphone" plan for Blackberries and other smartphones. -- John "Assumption is the mother of all screw ups." [Wethern�s Law of Suspended Judgement] |