[asagai]

I love the look of the iPhone, but I hate the "MICROSOFT-LIKE" minded attitude by Apple regarding how comsumers will use it. The iPhone should be an UNLOCKED /UNBLOCK...GSM phone that can be used ANYWHERE!!

Who is to say that I only can use a device I PAID FOR in the United States? The restricting of the ability of the device to use any SIM CHIP is equivalent to the Region Code Restraints that stop owners of their devices from playing Forien DVD on Mac product that they purchased. I am a global traveller, if I desire to view a DVD from a country that I have travelled to, there should not be any hinderance. The iPhone as well, should not have any hinderances.

Furthermore, given the MANY countries use GSM, I believe that Apple will be forced to end this policy when they begin selling the iPones abroad.

Best Regards,
-Asagai

[OldManMac]

Don't buy one, then. Vote with your dollars.

[MindFad]

What Karl, said, holmes.

[Adam Betts]

Originally Posted by asagai 

...when they begin selling the iPones abroad.

[img]

[mindwaves]

I could of sworn this was spam until I checked his other posts....

[Eug]

Originally Posted by KarlG 

Don't buy one, then. Vote with your dollars.

Indeed, that's what I'm going to do. They ain't getting mine with the iPhone. Well, at least not with the first iteration.

[memory-minus]

Originally Posted by asagai 

Who is to say that I only can use a device I PAID FOR in the United States?

Cingular Wireless International Rates | Cingular Wireless

[Eug]

Originally Posted by memory-minus 

Cingular Wireless International Rates | Cingular Wireless

Roaming charges are killer. Many people who travel lots use unlocked phones with local SIM cards for obvious reasons.

[memory-minus]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Roaming charges are killer. Many people who travel lots use unlocked phones with local SIM cards for obvious reasons.

OP didn't mention anything about roaming charges or other costs. I was simply addressing his misunderstanding and main point that the iPhone will not be useable outside of the US. It won't have any "hinderances" unless you consider the cost a hinderance. Some people may, and others with corporate accounts may not.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by memory-minus 

OP didn't mention anything about roaming charges or other costs. I was simply addressing his misunderstanding and main point that the iPhone will not be useable outside of the US. It won't have any "hinderances" unless you consider the cost a hinderance. Some people may, and others with corporate accounts may not.

Judging by his post, he completely understands the issue:

"The restricting of the ability of the device to use any SIM CHIP"

[memory-minus]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Judging by his post, he completely understands the issue:

"The restricting of the ability of the device to use any SIM CHIP"

He likened it to DVD region coding, but it is not the same. There is no technical limitation to using the iPhone (or any cell phone by a carrier that supports international roaming for that matter) outside of the US. I would argue that he does not completely understand the issue.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by memory-minus 

He likened it to DVD region coding, but it is not the same. There is no technical limitation to using the iPhone (or any cell phone by a carrier that supports international roaming for that matter) outside of the US. I would argue that he does not completely understand the issue.

I would argue that he would. It's pretty obvious actually, for anyone who travels.

More importantly, I agree with him. I'm not really as interested in a locked phone either, especially if I'm going to be paying that kind of coin for it. I would consider it though if I could get it unlocked easily, say within a year from the carrier, or else by someone else.

[Sub]

Cingular was the reason I decided not to get one.n:

[mduell]

With AT&T reportedly not subsidizing the price of the phone at all, it does seem a little greedy to make all the iPhones forever locked to AT&T.

[butterfly0fdoom]

There are reasons that the iPhone is carrier-locked. Because its features require the carrier to implement them. And because Verizon would never submit to Steve's demands, then the iPhone will be Cingular-only in the US. You swap in a different SIM card from a different carrier in a different country, you don't know if they will support visual voice mail, among things. Because the iPhone requires so much cooperation with the carrier, there is no SIM swapping. You want to swap out SIM cards? Then you'll have to lose out on certain features.

Personally, I don't care if it's locked to AT&T because it's not like I would switch out of Cingular (GSM, and I'm happy with their service).

[Eug]

Originally Posted by butterfly0fdoom 

There are reasons that the iPhone is carrier-locked. Because its features require the carrier to implement them. And because Verizon would never submit to Steve's demands, then the iPhone will be Cingular-only in the US. You swap in a different SIM card from a different carrier in a different country, you don't know if they will support visual voice mail, among things. Because the iPhone requires so much cooperation with the carrier, there is no SIM swapping. You want to swap out SIM cards? Then you'll have to lose out on certain features.

The point of SIM card swapping is primarily to make phone calls. Everything else is just gravy.

Furthermore, the iPhone will be launched overseas. Apple has already said so itself, so obviously at least some of the extras on the phone WILL work on other international carriers just fine.

Personally, I don't care if it's locked to AT&T because it's not like I would switch out of Cingular (GSM, and I'm happy with their service).

Huh? Cingular is part of AT&T.

[ort888]

Where's the "I have an opinion about the iPhone" pic?

[IceEnclosure]

I think he was using AT&T and Cingular to mean the same thing.

[earthlings]

IPones?

You mean Iphones?

[Hawkeye_a]

I reckon ill be waiting for iPhone mini...... all the phone n iPod, without the crappy camera, and smaller.

[Chuckit]

As far as I know, there's nothing that says you can't use the iPhone overseas. So I see no reason to complain.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by asagai 

I love the look of the iPhone, but I hate the "MICROSOFT-LIKE" minded attitude by Apple regarding how comsumers will use it. The iPhone should be an UNLOCKED /UNBLOCK...GSM phone that can be used ANYWHERE!!

Look, as much hate as there is on the forums for Cingular, Apple had to get SOMEONE to carry the phone. Apple wanted the phone to be free of all the crap providers usually put on the phones, and in return they had to promise Cingular it would be exclusive. A Cingular exclusive phone in exchange for a nickel and dime free experience of having to deal with a provider's music store and lock downs? Sounds like a good trade to me. If Apple could have sold the phone unlocked, I'm sure they would have.

Not to mention visual voicemail only works on certain providers. Apple doesn't like selling half working devices.

Originally Posted by asagai 

Who is to say that I only can use a device I PAID FOR in the United States? The restricting of the ability of the device to use any SIM CHIP is equivalent to the Region Code Restraints that stop owners of their devices from playing Forien DVD on Mac product that they purchased. I am a global traveller, if I desire to view a DVD from a country that I have travelled to, there should not be any hinderance. The iPhone as well, should not have any hinderances.

You can do anything you want with your iPhone once you buy it. Of course, I already explained why you have to buy it with a Cingular contract.

Originally Posted by asagai 

Furthermore, given the MANY countries use GSM, I believe that Apple will be forced to end this policy when they begin selling the iPones abroad.

Best Regards,
-Asagai

Again, even if you move the iPhone to a different provider, not all features will work.

[olePigeon]

I'm guessing 2 weeks after the iPhone comes out, DVD John or whatever will unlock it. Don't sweat it.

[gethigh]

Originally Posted by IceEnclosure 

I think he was using AT&T and Cingular to mean the same thing.

Let Stephen Colbert clarify:

YouTube - The History of AT&T on the Colbert Report

[Gamoe]

asagai, I don't like or agree with carrier locking either. And I won't be buying an iPhone anytime soon. But, I believe that this is a temporary situation, and Apple will offer unlocked and varied feature/price point iPhone versions at some point in the near future, I'd say three years off from now at most, and probably sooner. So, hang tight, and enjoy the ride as carrier options and models increase while price decreases.

BTW, I think you need a better reason to call Apple a Microsoft. We haven't gotten to that point yet, and I hope we never will.

[Chuckit]

I don't understand the premise of this article. Apple has usually has tighter integration and less flexibility when it comes to choosing hardware. Since when is that a Microsoft thing?

[Eriamjh]

Face it: If Apple was as big as Microsoft, we would hate them as much. Apple is more restrictive.

• Some examples:
• iTunes Fairplay DRM not being licensed (why not?).
• ADC connector that was unique to Apple (killed for DVI).
• Mag-safe third party chargers not available.
• Apple tells you to pound sand if you have third-party ram in your machine

Remember that Apple did not even want third parties to write SOFTWARE for the Apple II.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

As far as I know, there's nothing that says you can't use the iPhone overseas. So I see no reason to complain.

Is nobody reading the original post? He wants to use it overseas with an alternate SIM.

Originally Posted by goMac 

Look, as much hate as there is on the forums for Cingular, Apple had to get SOMEONE to carry the phone. Apple wanted the phone to be free of all the crap providers usually put on the phones, and in return they had to promise Cingular it would be exclusive. A Cingular exclusive phone in exchange for a nickel and dime free experience of having to deal with a provider's music store and lock downs? Sounds like a good trade to me. If Apple could have sold the phone unlocked, I'm sure they would have.

Not to mention visual voicemail only works on certain providers. Apple doesn't like selling half working devices.

You can do anything you want with your iPhone once you buy it. Of course, I already explained why you have to buy it with a Cingular contract.

Again, even if you move the iPhone to a different provider, not all features will work.

That makes no sense at all if the phone is locked to Cingular.

[nonhuman]

It's already been announced that Rogers will be the provider in Canada. And the iPhone will also be released in Europe I'm sure. But Apple, being an American company, released their product in America first, as they always do. Additionally, releasing it in other countries requires finding a carrier who is willing to agree to their terms (in the US it was only Cingular and only if they were the exclusive carrier for two years, if you'd been reading the news you'd know that Apple tried to take it to other carriers and was turned down). Also, the phone needs to be approved by the various government organizations that approve these things (like the FCC here in the states).

In conclusion, you're completely wrong. Apple had no choice but to restrict it to Cingular in the US because of the technological limitations of existing cell networks and the fact that Cingular was the only company willing to make the necessary changes and only then if they got an exclusive deal. In two years when Cingular's exclusive deal is up, assuming the iPhone has done well, the other carriers will have it too, you can be sure of that. The same goes for whatever carrier(s) in whatever other countries (such as Rogers in Canada as I've already mentioned).

[Sub]

Is it a world phone? Because my friend has the blackberry for business with cingluar, it's a world phone, but he loses service about 30 miles out of NYC.

[Oneota]

Originally Posted by Eriamjh 

Face it: If Apple was as big as Microsoft, we would hate them as much. Apple is more restrictive.

• Some examples:
• iTunes Fairplay DRM not being licensed (why not?).
• ADC connector that was unique to Apple (killed for DVI).
• Mag-safe third party chargers not available.
• Apple tells you to pound sand if you have third-party ram in your machine

Remember that Apple did not even want third parties to write SOFTWARE for the Apple II.

....and nowadays, they're one of the biggest corporate endorsers of Open-Source software. Just look at Mac OS X Server - *tons* of OSS in there, and Apple is contributing a lot of that code back to the community. Let's see Microsoft do that.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Look, as much hate as there is on the forums for Cingular, Apple had to get SOMEONE to carry the phone. Apple wanted the phone to be free of all the crap providers usually put on the phones, and in return they had to promise Cingular it would be exclusive. A Cingular exclusive phone in exchange for a nickel and dime free experience of having to deal with a provider's music store and lock downs? Sounds like a good trade to me. If Apple could have sold the phone unlocked, I'm sure they would have.

Not exactly. Nokia, Motorola, Sony Ericsson, etc. all get cell companies like Cingular, T-Mobile, etc. to carry their phones, but you can still buy unlocked phones separately from the carriers (well, I know you can with Moto anyway) - you just have to pay the full retail price for it instead of the carrier-subsidized price. I suspect the only reason Apple isn't selling an unlocked version of the iPhone is because they refuse to let Cingular subsidize the price, so having the unlocked and locked versions of the phone available at the same price would make it really stupid to buy the locked version. Either that, or Cingular's just got Apple by the balls, which would be disappointing.

Traditionally you've got two trade-offs: you can go with a subsidized phone, where the upside is a cheaper price for the phone but the downsides are legion: the phone's locked to the carrier, you're stuck on a 2-year contract with that carrier (unless it's T-Mobile), you're stuck with the (usually limited) selection of phones that carrier has decided to offer, certain features of the phone could be disabled (esp. on VZW), and it also causes US cell rates to be higher, because the carriers have to charge you more per month in order to have the money to subsidize the phones In the long run, this means that the carrier's practice of subsidizing phones costs you more money than an unlocked phone would have. Alternatively (if you're on GSM, anyway), you can just go get an unlocked phone, which gives you the freedom to use any phone and any carrier you want, and makes sure the phone is uncrippled. The downsides here are that the phone is more expensive, and that you're still paying expensive monthly bills since the carriers are still subsidizing everyone else's phones.

With the iPhone, you've got the worst of both worlds - you're stuck with expensive rates, a two-year contract, and no choice of carrier, and you don't even get a discount on the phone in return. The sad thing about it is that before the iPhone was launched, a lot of the pundits were saying things about how Apple could be the one company with enough influence to actually change how cell phones are sold in this country, by only selling the phone in their own stores and bypassing the carrier altogether for everything except the service itself, and possibly setting an example others would follow. This, as I understand, is the way it works in many other countries outside the US. Instead, Apple and Cingular have managed to make this phone even more locked down than other phones, and to make the cellphone-buying experience suck even more for the customer.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Eriamjh 

Tunes Fairplay DRM not being licensed (why not?).

I take it you haven't read Steve Jobs' call to do away with DRM.

Originally Posted by Eriamjh 

Apple tells you to pound sand if you have third-party ram in your machine

They'll tell you to swap out third-party RAM since it often causes problems. What's next, you're going to fault them for not acknowledging hardware defects in a MacBook that you obviously ran over with your car?

Originally Posted by Eriamjh 

Remember that Apple did not even want third parties to write SOFTWARE for the Apple II.

As I said, they like tight hardware and software integration. That's not evil, it's user-friendly. It's part of the reason Mac OS X sucks so much less than anything else.

Originally Posted by Eug 

Is nobody reading the original post? He wants to use it overseas with an alternate SIM.

And I want a pony. He can still use it overseas just fine. It has the capability. It just does not have one geeky feature that a few people want, and geeks are mistakenly assuming that it matters.

[butterfly0fdoom]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Huh? Cingular is part of AT&T.

Yeah, I'm sure I know that. They can be used interchangeably... it's inevitable that Cingular will become AT&T.

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Not exactly. Nokia, Motorola, Sony Ericsson, etc. all get cell companies like Cingular, T-Mobile, etc. to carry their phones, but you can still buy unlocked phones separately from the carriers (well, I know you can with Moto anyway) - you just have to pay the full retail price for it instead of the carrier-subsidized price. I suspect the only reason Apple isn't selling an unlocked version of the iPhone is because they refuse to let Cingular subsidize the price, so having the unlocked and locked versions of the phone available at the same price would make it really stupid to buy the locked version. Either that, or Cingular's just got Apple by the balls, which would be disappointing.

Traditionally you've got two trade-offs: you can go with a subsidized phone, where the upside is a cheaper price for the phone but the downsides are legion: the phone's locked to the carrier, you're stuck on a 2-year contract with that carrier (unless it's T-Mobile), you're stuck with the (usually limited) selection of phones that carrier has decided to offer, certain features of the phone could be disabled (esp. on VZW), and it also causes US cell rates to be higher, because the carriers have to charge you more per month in order to have the money to subsidize the phones In the long run, this means that the carrier's practice of subsidizing phones costs you more money than an unlocked phone would have. Alternatively (if you're on GSM, anyway), you can just go get an unlocked phone, which gives you the freedom to use any phone and any carrier you want, and makes sure the phone is uncrippled. The downsides here are that the phone is more expensive, and that you're still paying expensive monthly bills since the carriers are still subsidizing everyone else's phones.

With the iPhone, you've got the worst of both worlds - you're stuck with expensive rates, a two-year contract, and no choice of carrier, and you don't even get a discount on the phone in return. The sad thing about it is that before the iPhone was launched, a lot of the pundits were saying things about how Apple could be the one company with enough influence to actually change how cell phones are sold in this country, by only selling the phone in their own stores and bypassing the carrier altogether for everything except the service itself, and possibly setting an example others would follow. This, as I understand, is the way it works in many other countries outside the US. Instead, Apple and Cingular have managed to make this phone even more locked down than other phones, and to make the cellphone-buying experience suck even more for the customer.

You're forgetting all the carrier-dependent features. Apple wanted to add new features to the iPhone that would (supposedly) enhance the user experience. But because a lot of these features require the cooperation of the carrier, it requires being locked down. It's really only a problem to be locked down to Cingular if you don't like Cingular. And if you don't like it, then don't buy it. It's as simple as that.

But even if Apple went the selling the phones themselves unlocked, Verizon customers would still be left out in the cold, anyways, so there's no use in complaining about that.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

And I want a pony. He can still use it overseas just fine. It has the capability. It just does not have one geeky feature that a few people want, and geeks are mistakenly assuming that it matters.

Geeky feature? What are you smoking? I have several non-geek friends who are businessmen who do exactly this. Why? Because costs are way, way, way lower.

CNN: Navigating cell phone headaches overseas

If your phone is compatible, you'll need to decide whether you want to get your phone unlocked so that it can accept a local SIM card -- the ID chip that carries your local phone number.

The advantage behind that option? With a local phone number you can receive local calls and avoid the $1-$2 per minute international roaming charges you'd otherwise incur with a U.S.-based SIM card.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Originally Posted by Eriamjh

Remember that Apple did not even want third parties to write SOFTWARE for the Apple II.

As I said, they like tight hardware and software integration. That's not evil, it's user-friendly. It's part of the reason Mac OS X sucks so much less than anything else.

I find it interesting that Mac people will say things like this, but bash Verizon for doing essentially the same thing. In many respects, Apple is the Verizon of the computer industry.

Originally Posted by butterfly0fdoom 

You're forgetting all the carrier-dependent features. Apple wanted to add new features to the iPhone that would (supposedly) enhance the user experience.

Only one I heard of was that voice-mail thing.

But because a lot of these features require the cooperation of the carrier, it requires being locked down. It's really only a problem to be locked down to Cingular if you don't like Cingular. And if you don't like it, then don't buy it. It's as simple as that.

Other phone manufacturers offer unlocked versions of their phones even if they offer that same phone locked to a carrier, so this point is kinda moot.

But even if Apple went the selling the phones themselves unlocked, Verizon customers would still be left out in the cold, anyways, so there's no use in complaining about that.

True, but customers on other GSM providers such as T-Mobile wouldn't.

[MindFad]

What are the features other than visual voicemail that require the implementation from Cingular? Every other feature is available in some fashion already, or would only require a Wi-Fi connection (Google Maps/Safari).

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Eriamjh 

Face it: If Apple was as big as Microsoft, we would hate them as much. Apple is more restrictive.

• Some examples:
• iTunes Fairplay DRM not being licensed (why not?).
• ADC connector that was unique to Apple (killed for DVI).
• Mag-safe third party chargers not available.
• Apple tells you to pound sand if you have third-party ram in your machine

iTunes FairPlay - please see the other threads on the subject. Apple has no choice. They CANNOT license their DRM, because they HAVE TO be in control of every step, from purchase to playback device, because they HAVE TO fix any crack at any of these stages within only a few weeks; otherwise labels can remove all of their content from the iTunes store.

ADC connector was immensely practical, and not locked - anybody could make devices for ADC. It was just a stupid idea, unfortunately.

Mag-Safe third-party adapters - is there a patent that I'm not aware of, or is it merely a matter of time?

RAM - In no way does 3rd-party RAM violate the warranty. However, the majority of weird machine behavior stems from faulty RAM in my experience. So the first line of hardware troubleshooting in many cases is to re-install the factory RAM. Blame Apple for insisting, but from a service provider's perspective, it's the only thing they can do. Otherwise, they end up troubleshooting someone else's product. And can you imagine the rage if they get a machine in for repair, check it thoroughly, and then find out it's some bad third-party RAM? See, in that case, it ain't a warranty repair, so they'd HAVE TO BILL the customer. And a bunch of morons would raise a shitstorm on the intarweb, you can be sure of that.


As for this phone - I think it's far too early to complain about anything. So far, no European or Asian carriers have been announced, so we have NO IDEA what SIM policies will be, or how locked this phone will be. Nor indeed how it will be locked or unlocked.

Originally Posted by memory-minus 

He likened it to DVD region coding, but it is not the same. There is no technical limitation to using the iPhone (or any cell phone by a carrier that supports international roaming for that matter) outside of the US. I would argue that he does not completely understand the issue.

The original poster has a point about travelling and DVDs - the way it looks right now, those of you saying that this phone can be used outside the States with a roaming contract are basically arguing that DVD region codes are fine for international travellers: After all, you are free to watch your US-BOUGHT DVDs anywhere in the world.

Of course, region-coding is complete idiocy, but it is most certainly NOT up to Apple to do it away.

And it's really too early to say much about the phone.

[asagai]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

I'm guessing 2 weeks after the iPhone comes out, DVD John or whatever will unlock it. Don't sweat it.

I must say, as much as I am unhappy with Apple's approach to this endeavor, I REALLY believe you will be correct! It saddens me though, that Apple will only begin to sell these unlocked, only AFTER we hackers will make the device work with any GSM chip.

Whatever happened to CONSUMER CHOICE?

-Asagai

[zro]

What the... ?

Easy. Choose to not buy it.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

I find it interesting that Mac people will say things like this, but bash Verizon for doing essentially the same thing. In many respects, Apple is the Verizon of the computer industry.

I don't recall ever bashing Verizon. I've never really paid them much attention. What are they doing that I'm supposed to be bashing them for?

At any rate, whether Apple is the Verizon of the computer industry or not, I think Apple's products demonstrate that their approach is correct. Windows and Linux are both terrible and have bizarre and almost unpredictable compatibility problems. Mac OS X is compatible with all Macs produced after a certain point — period. I don't think Jobs was quoting Alan Kay just to play on Kay's nonexistent popularity with the masses. Producing the whole widget allows for a better user experience.

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Only one I heard of was that voice-mail thing.

I don't know for sure, but I somehow figured the Push-IMAP e-mail must require carrier support.

[butterfly0fdoom]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

I find it interesting that Mac people will say things like this, but bash Verizon for doing essentially the same thing. In many respects, Apple is the Verizon of the computer industry.

No, Apple isn't. Verizon cripples the phones so you spend money to use their services. Apple doesn't. Indeed, not licensing FairPlay could be considered akin to crippling iPods. But if Microsoft won't offer Mac users WMP, why should Apple be forced to open up? You aren't forced to use iTunes, you can go buy physical CDs.

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Only one I heard of was that voice-mail thing.

And free push IMAP e-mail from Yahoo that Cingular would otherwise charge money for.

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Other phone manufacturers offer unlocked versions of their phones even if they offer that same phone locked to a carrier, so this point is kinda moot.

But other manufactures don't offer features that require the cooperation of the carrier.



I reiterate. If you don't like this system, you aren't obligated to buy the iPhone. That's your consumer choice.

[Railroader]

Who is this "We" you speak of?

[Person Man]

Originally Posted by Eriamjh 

Remember that Apple did not even want third parties to write SOFTWARE for the Apple II.

I call BULLSH*T on that one.

Where's your source?

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by butterfly0fdoom 

No, Apple isn't. Verizon cripples the phones so you spend money to use their services. Apple doesn't.

Apple cripples things all the time to make you buy more expensive stuff. Take my iMac G5, for instance, which has an artificial software block in it to cripple video mirroring, to encourage people to buy something more expensive. Or more generally, look at Apple's entire consumer line since the original iMac - completely closed. No PCI slots on the desktop models, no card slots on the laptop models; unless you pay over $2000, you won't get these features which are standard on every other machine in the industry, so when some new standard comes out like USB 2.0 or eSATA or 802.11n, you have to chuck your whole machine and buy a new one instead of just sticking a card in. Oh, and they also like to lag behind in implementing those standards just so you'll have to buy a new machine when it becomes difficult to use it without that standard (see: USB 2.0 and 5G iPods).

Add in the fact that both companies are criticized for using technologies that are incompatible with what most people in the world use (note: not saying that's a bad thing), and it's pretty clear to me, at least, that Apple pretty much is the Verizon of the industry. Of course, there's some really nice things about what they do that keeps me using their stuff, but there are also some other things about the way they do business that are maddening.

And free push IMAP e-mail from Yahoo that Cingular would otherwise charge money for.

Uh... so use some other IMAP service? I have eight different IMAP accounts right now. I seriously doubt that there's too many people out there who don't have some sort of e-mail service already.

But other manufactures don't offer features that require the cooperation of the carrier.

Okay, so T-Mobile users will do without Visual Voicemail. Big deal.

I reiterate. If you don't like this system, you aren't obligated to buy the iPhone. That's your consumer choice.

It'd be out of my price range anyway, but that doesn't mean I can't have an opinion about it. That's called free speech.

[Eriamjh]

Originally Posted by Person Man 

I call BULLSH*T on that one.

Where's your source?

I can't back it up, but I'm sure there are a few here who remember those days (we're talking late 70s, early 80s).

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Or more generally, look at Apple's entire consumer line since the original iMac - completely closed. No PCI slots on the desktop models, no card slots on the laptop models; unless you pay over $2000, you won't get these features which are standard on every other machine in the industry, so when some new standard comes out like USB 2.0 or eSATA or 802.11n, you have to chuck your whole machine and buy a new one instead of just sticking a card in.

That's like how you intentionally cripple Pacifist by not letting it edit video or do my taxes even though there are dozens of programs out there that allow it. Not including something extra that you want is different from crippling the functionality that exists. I am glad Apple didn't charge an extra $500 for a feature 98% of people probably don't give a **** about.

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Of course, there's some really nice things about what they do that keeps me using their stuff, but there are also some other things about the way they do business that are maddening.

I would just like to note that while you are correct, that does not mean they are necessarily the wrong choices. I hate having to pay for stuff at all, but I understand that companies can't very well give away their wares. All companies have to have a gameplan, and sometimes that plan doesn't completely gibe with yours or mine.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Eriamjh 

I can't back it up, but I'm sure there are a few here who remember those days (we're talking late 70s, early 80s).

VisiCalc and the rise of the Apple ][

Bricklin implemented a primitive demo program in Integer BASIC on an Apple II loaned to him by Personal Software. Fylstra selected the Apple II not only because of its technical merits (it had superior graphics to the CP/M microcomputers and many minicomputers) and because he got a steep discount from Steve Jobs after promising that the popular KIM-1 program, MicroChess, would be ported to the Apple.

Originally Posted by analogika 

iTunes FairPlay - please see the other threads on the subject. Apple has no choice. They CANNOT license their DRM, because they HAVE TO be in control of every step, from purchase to playback device, because they HAVE TO fix any crack at any of these stages within only a few weeks; otherwise labels can remove all of their content from the iTunes store.

Microsoft doesn't seem to have that problem.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Microsoft doesn't seem to have that problem.

And Apple doesn't have the problem where all of the music that goes on the player has to be put under DRM. One would almost be led to believe they struck separate deals with the record companies.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

And Apple doesn't have the problem where all of the music that goes on the player has to be put under DRM. One would almost be led to believe they struck separate deals with the record companies.

Huh?