[IceflowStudios]

FightTheFruit - Online Petition

Free the iPhone and put it into the hands of those who want to use it! Sign the petition today!

[theDreamer]

Originally Posted by IceflowStudios 

FightTheFruit - Online Petition

Free the iPhone and put it into the hands of those who want to use it! Sign the petition today!

We at FightTheFruit.com believe that everyone should have the opportunity to be able to own and use the iPhone
without the hassle of Apple's firmware upgrades.

Wait, who says you have to upgrade to use your iPhone?
I know people still running on the original firmware of the iPhone and are happy with it...

[mdc]

I'll sign an online petition to close down all online petition websites.

[theDreamer]

Originally Posted by mdc 

I'll sign an online petition to close down all online petition websites.

[besson3c]

At least this guy is trying to do something rather than be a weenie and just be content to let companies like Apple piss off their customers this way. I'm signing this petition.

[James L]

While I appreciate the sentiment of petitions and movements, the truth is online petitions are worthless, and completely ineffective.

[besson3c]

What are you petition naysayers doing about this?

[analogika]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

At least this guy is trying to do something rather than be a weenie and just be content to let companies like Apple piss off their customers this way.

What the hell?

I REALLY don't get this.

They're NOT "pissing off their customers"! They're pissing off people who end up NOT BEING their customers!

HUMANITY HAS LIVED THE PAST MILLENNIA WITHOUT THE IPHONE, just like most of us live without a Maybach or Bugatti Veyron.

Nobody is being inconvenienced by not being able to buy a luxury product.

If you're "angry" at not being able to spend money in the way you see fit, I suggest you NOT spend your money, or spend it elsewhere. As it is, Apple is selling iPhones as fast as they can make them, so it's not like anybody with the slightest hint of business sense should give a flying ****.

All this whining is just the lamest, dumbest, bass-ackwards idiotic misunderstanding of how companies and marketing work I've ever read.

I mean, really - WTF? There have always been *plenty* of reasons NOT to buy a particular Apple product. If you buy the iPhone and Apple "pisses you off" as a customer because of circumstances you were aware of going in, then YOU ARE AN IDIOT if you whine in public.


Aside: The best thing is that Apple was totally aware of all this going in; they even calculated on the outrage over the price reduction and their subsequent "gracious" marketing exercise of throwing people the $100 voucher. And the public, and the customers, lapped it up, while Apple looked the Hero Who Actually Listens To Their Customers. All the while collecting another couple hundred million dollars' worth of free advertising.

Wise up: Companies you give your MONEY to are usually in it for the MONEY. Some of us know this, and choose to spend it on Apple stuff because we prefer over the competitors', but sheesh, man: Bottom line is bottom line.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by analogika 

What the hell?

I REALLY don't get this.

They're NOT "pissing off their customers"! They're pissing off people who end up NOT BEING their customers!

HUMANITY HAS LIVED THE PAST MILLENNIA WITHOUT THE IPHONE, just like most of us live without a Maybach or Bugatti Veyron.

Nobody is being inconvenienced by not being able to buy a luxury product.

If you're "angry" at not being able to spend money in the way you see fit, I suggest you NOT spend your money, or spend it elsewhere. As it is, Apple is selling iPhones as fast as they can make them, so it's not like anybody with the slightest hint of business sense should give a flying ****.

All this whining is just the lamest, dumbest, bass-ackwards idiotic misunderstanding of how companies and marketing work I've ever read.

I mean, really - WTF?

The problem with your argument, IMHO, is that it doesn't take into account the balance of power and politics that goes on in the tech industry.

You're absolutely right, I don't have to buy these products, and I don't. This is not about "make this product the way I want it so that I can buy it", because I'm frankly not interested in an iPhone right now anyway regardless.

What this is about is precedent within the industry, about who controls what and how, and about what companies are allowed to get away with. I think it is absurd, for instance, that we have these silly cell phone contracts that we need to pay money to cancel.

The bottom line is, all of these companies want to control your data. It doesn't matter what company you choose, if you want a cell phone, the standard has been set that there will be some sort of contract, and there will be attempts to lock you into this sort of service. I'm bitching at Apple about the iPhone because they are setting the bar, and have a greater responsibility now being the premiere smartphone vendor.

[anthology123]

So what will this petition do? Force Steve Jobs to do this? He would be a fool if he did.
The goal this group wants will eventually happen. Of course, it would happen now, if only the US cell phone companies would stop the stupid territory model (CDMA here, GSM here, etc) and use the standard the rest of the world uses, GSM (or at least use one standard). Most likely, other countries will get the iphone before Verizon or Sprint for that very reason. There are so many great cell phones most of you don't even know about because they are only sold in Asia and Europe.
The one here to point the finger at is not Apple but the greedy cell phone companies who operate the way they do. Imagine if all the infrastructure in the US was one standard, there would be so much less coverage complaints.

[theDreamer]

Problem is this "contract" stuff goes way way back before the iPhone was even a thought on someone's head.
Wireless phone providers have always had contracts so as a way to "hold onto" customers and be able to keep them longer.

If I have a contract and things went fine for that year (two or more) and I need to renew it, well why am I going to waste time fighting for a new one with another company with X company will just give me the same one, same price, etc. and I just add more years to my contract. It makes it simple for the customer, but a fiasco the moment you want out of the contract.

[theDreamer]

Imagine if all the infrastructure in the US was one standard, there would be so much less coverage complaints.

That is a bold statement to make because without competition why would a company want to buy new towers when the government is not going to stop them since they are allowed full control? Now if it is one standard and many companies all using X frequency that would be great, but then companies would be fighting over data and who gets how much and the problems are still there.

[anthology123]

Originally Posted by theDreamer 

That is a bold statement to make because without competition why would a company want to buy new towers when the government is not going to stop them since they are allowed full control? Now if it is one standard and many companies all using X frequency that would be great, but then companies would be fighting over data and who gets how much and the problems are still there.

What it means is the infrastructure and service should be a separate thing, right now it's used as a way to leverage customers, not to give better service. Coverage should not be a factor in buying a cell phone service, it's what they have to offer and for how much.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

The problem with your argument, IMHO, is that it doesn't take into account the balance of power and politics that goes on in the tech industry.

The iPhone wouldn't *exist* without that balance of power.

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I'm bitching at Apple about the iPhone because they are setting the bar, and have a greater responsibility now being the premiere smartphone vendor.

What does this have to do with anything? "Greater responsibility" towards whom? They're not some messianic non-profit assortment of open-source geeks.

THEY'RE A ****ING CORPORATION. That's where their responsibilities and their primary duties lie.

You also forget that Apple were, when all these deals were sealed, in NO WAY "the premiere smartphone vendor" - they were an ABSOLUTE NEWCOMER! A complete nobody in the phone market, with NOTHING to throw around except a killer product everybody was willing to bet would sell well.

We don't know what other carrier-bound features beyond iTunes activation and visual voicemail they might have wanted/be planning for the mid-/long term.

[mdc]

Another thing, what is the donate link for on the site? Who is getting that money and how is it helping people "Fight the Fruit"?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by analogika 

The iPhone wouldn't *exist* without that balance of power.

What does this have to do with anything? "Greater responsibility" towards whom? They're not some messianic non-profit assortment of open-source geeks.

THEY'RE A ****ING CORPORATION. That's where their responsibilities and their primary duties lie.

You also forget that Apple were, when all these deals were sealed, in NO WAY "the premiere smartphone vendor" - they were an ABSOLUTE NEWCOMER! A complete nobody in the phone market, with NOTHING to throw around except a killer product everybody was willing to bet would sell well.

We don't know what other carrier-bound features beyond iTunes activation and visual voicemail they might have wanted/be planning for the mid-/long term.

I think that many people, rightfully so, anticipated that Apple would soon become one of, if not the premiere smartphone vendor.

I understand that Apple is a corporation, but they still set standards that other corporations follow as far as their practices and expectations that they create for their customers. For instance, Apple has created expectations that a good online music buying experience will cost .99/track and will include DRM. If you are a competing company, it would make no sense in the world to offer the same product for $1.50/track. However, you *could* easily justify also putting DRM in your product, because now that Apple has already blazed this trail, they would receive far less flack from anybody to follow this model. Since Apple is a leader, blazing new trails is something that they have done and will do frequently, so it is up to Apple's customers to be vocal about their disagreement with precedents Apple attempts to set.

[Nodnarb]

Ok, but the point is that the petition (like all other online petitions) is going to to absoulutely nothing.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Nodnarb 

Ok, but the point is that the petition (like all other online petitions) is going to to absoulutely nothing.

Most likely true... So what do you guys plan to do? I don't think there is much that we can do, but one thing I won't do is issue Apple a free pass here.

Yes they are entitled to do this as a corporation, and yes we can choose to not buy their products, and blah blah blah, but speaking as a customer, at the same time this is not an acceptable precedent IMHO.

[mdc]

Why don't they join this persons lawsuit and sue Apple?

[theDreamer]

at the same time this is not an acceptable precedent IMHO.

What is not acceptable...how have they failed in any way?

[Earth Mk. II]

Well, there's always the FCC...

iPhone: 90 Days Later - The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW)

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by theDreamer 

What is not acceptable...how have they failed in any way?

It is not acceptable to sabotage (as it seems like they have) efforts to use the expensive product that customers have paid for in a matter of their choosing. It is completely reasonable and understandable to not support these users, but to permanently brick their hardware is not cool. The hardware was purchased, not leased.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

For instance, Apple has created expectations that a good online music buying experience will cost .99/track and will include DRM. If you are a competing company, it would make no sense in the world to offer the same product for $1.50/track. However, you *could* easily justify also putting DRM in your product, because now that Apple has already blazed this trail, they would receive far less flack from anybody to follow this model. Since Apple is a leader, blazing new trails is something that they have done and will do frequently, so it is up to Apple's customers to be vocal about their disagreement with precedents Apple attempts to set.

There is a *slight* difference between entering a completely new market with a different angle and wiping the floor with the fledgling companies who were trying to apply outdated existing business models to it, and entering a twenty-year-old market comprised of THREE BILLION EXISTING CELL-PHONE SUBSCRIBERS (worldwide, according to wikipedia).

In one, you make the rules.

In the other, you find established partners and try to expand the rules just as much as they will allow.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

It is not acceptable to sabotage (as it seems like they have) efforts to use the expensive product that customers have paid for in a matter of their choosing. It is completely reasonable and understandable to not support these users, but to permanently brick their hardware is not cool. The hardware was purchased, not leased.

It doesn't look like that is actually happening. Apparently, phones are re-locked and must be completely re-set. But it's kind of early to say.

It is also not terribly unlikely that this is a normal consequence of the pretty in-depth update they've done - who's to say?

After all, they did mention WELL in advance that while they probably wouldn't *intentionally* break any hacks, they certainly wouldn't go out of their way to protect them (and stupid they would be if they made that their own problem).

Sometimes, "at your own risk" really DOES mean "AT YOUR OWN RISK," you know - even in the litigation-happy Americka.

[butterfly0fdoom]

Here's the thing: that new lawsuit against Apple, Steve, and AT&T is the most retarded thing ever. It shows why Apple's prominence in the media is a problem. iPhone price cut? Cellphones get price cuts fast and large, but no one cares and no one complains because no one notices. Except for the iPhone. Two year agreement? Industry standard. Why the ****ing hell are you suing Apple over it? Termination fee? Industry standard. You've got to be a complete moron if you weren't aware that all cell phone companies have termination fees. These people suing Apple over these problems are complete retards IMO. These lawsuits show a complete ignorance among the masses in regards to the cellphone industry, and suing Apple won't do anything. Suing all the cellphone carriers is more appropriate if you think it's unfair. Regardless of any clout Apple may have, they, as a new entrant, still have to comply by the precedents in the cell phone industry, at least for now.

As for that petition, seriously now, it's just stupid.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by butterfly0fdoom 

Here's the thing: that new lawsuit against Apple, Steve, and AT&T is the most retarded thing ever. It shows why Apple's prominence in the media is a problem. iPhone price cut? Cellphones get price cuts fast and large, but no one cares and no one complains because no one notices. Except for the iPhone. Two year agreement? Industry standard. Why the ****ing hell are you suing Apple over it? Termination fee? Industry standard. You've got to be a complete moron if you weren't aware that all cell phone companies have termination fees. These people suing Apple over these problems are complete retards IMO. These lawsuits show a complete ignorance among the masses in regards to the cellphone industry, and suing Apple won't do anything. Suing all the cellphone carriers is more appropriate if you think it's unfair. Regardless of any clout Apple may have, they, as a new entrant, still have to comply by the precedents in the cell phone industry, at least for now.

I agree with all of this, and to analogicka, perhaps I have over-estimated Apple's influence on the cellphone industry at this point. Really, many of my gripes could just as easily be targeted at other vendors too, I realize that.

[analogika]

Oh, I'm sure Apple will completely turn around this market over the next ten years. They may not necessarily be sole profiteer, but they'll be spear-heading a development. But at the moment, the deals they've got from the networks that have announced partnerships are completely unheard-of in the industry, and it's only by courting them and pandering to them that Apple had any chance at all of crashing this party - for now.


Oh, and I'm suing Apple for making desirable products but not tailoring them specifically to my exact needs/budget!

FTW!

[::maroma::]

The bottom line is this:

Apple is in no way responsible for iPhones that have been unlocked, therefor violating the license agreement. Apple will not, and is under no obligation to, spend resources making sure these unlocked phones are safe after an update.

These unlocking tools were written by individuals who are under no obligation to their users. There is no guarantee nor warranty.

Everyone knew this going in, and if they didn't, its their own fault.

If you read Apple's press release warning of the possible "bricking" of unlocked iPhones after the update, you'd see that they never said they intentionally made this happen. In fact Phil Schiller stated specifically that they didn't. Many (Apple's word) of these unlocking "hacks" were written in such a way where they messed with the underlying software of the iPhone. Apple tested the unlocked phones and found that the upcoming update bricked some of them. So they put out a warning/reminder that this "could" happen. I honestly don't think Apple did anything purposefully to damage anyone's phone. Its right there in black and white in their own words.

Personally, I think Apple should be thanked for putting out the warning. They didn't have to say a damn thing. People would've updated without thinking and all hell would've broken loose (as if it hasn't already).

My point: I really don't understand where all of this blame is coming from. Why are people so sure that Apple did this on purpose? While Apple doesn't make as much cash on unlocked phones, they are still making cash, possibly more than they would have without unlocking tools being available. Sure AT&T is probably freaking out, but that's another issue.

I'm still waiting for someone to show me definitive proof that Apple is purely at fault here, and not the shotty programming jobs done by these hackers. I've seen proof in Apple's own press release that they said "many" of the unlocking tools cause problems (that means not ALL of them do). I've seen Phil Schiller say specifically Apple did not intentionally break phones.

So can anyone show me proof that Apple is the devil in this dance?

[Johnny Niles]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

It is not acceptable to sabotage (as it seems like they have) efforts to use the expensive product that customers have paid for in a matter of their choosing.

You know, it's funny. I didn't hack my iPhone, and I ran the 1.1.1. update, and my iPhone is not bricked. In fact it works fine. Would you call that sabotage? Apple told everybody that they would not support iPhone hacks. If you choose to hack your iPhone after Apple specifically told you they would not support it, then you're probably the type of person that needs the "Warning: Coffee is HOT" signs.

If Apple tells you that they won't support your hacked iPhone and you hack it anyway, why is it Apple's fault if a firmware update kills your hacks? Wouldn't that sort of be your fault for hacking it when you knew it wasn't going to be supported?

[butterfly0fdoom]

I've said this a lot, and I don't know how many other people have taken note, but the release of the iPhone has made many of the flaws (or evils) of the cellphone industry very apparent, but all this blame (in the form of lawsuits, forum complaints, idiotic editorials, and retarded bloggers) is being unfairly directed solely at Apple, AT&T, and the iPhone (collectively, hence solely).

Yet the iPhone is a very special circumstance. Other phone companies don't have the kind of agreement with service providers the way Apple and AT&T do. To get a revenue stream from AT&T, Apple needs to compromise. I'm sure Apple themselves don't care if people hack and/or unlock their iPhones. But AT&T does. So to compromise, Apple rolls out software updates without regard to whether or not they will brick hacked/unlocked iPhones (which technically violates the user agreement, as well, so don't bother complaining, it's your own fault). They won't go out of their way to make sure they screw over hacked iPhones, but they won't go out of their way to make sure they don't, either. For even fanboys to gripe about this is pretty narrow-minded.

[stacybre]

I'm signing them all. Apple needs to free the iPhone a little more than they already have. The ringtone business is just stupid!

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/cus...for-the-iphone

[anthology123]

I wouldn't be surprised if all that petition does is increase the number of spam mails you get.

[theDreamer]

Originally Posted by stacybre 

I'm signing them all. Apple needs to free the iPhone a little more than they already have. The ringtone business is just stupid!

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/cus...for-the-iphone

Guess what, Apple (with AT&T) has the cheapest way to get ring tones. While it is still new and songs are limited it was like this for all companies, if you do not like it well sorry.

Originally Posted by anthology123 

I wouldn't be surprised if all that petition does is increase the number of spam mails you get.

[MacosNerd]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Most likely true... So what do you guys plan to do? I don't think there is much that we can do, but one thing I won't do is issue Apple a free pass here.

I don't think apple cares about your free pass, while you seem quick to paint people who defend apple has zealots, your doubly quick to criticize the company. No matter what Apple does, iMac, .mac, or any other product you are always complaining about how they operate. If you don't like them as much as you're complaining about them why buy macs. Go with a Dell and run Linux which you seem to have an affinity towards

As for you request of what should we do, is a nonsense request. Generally speaking if we use the product without unlocking, hacking or putting in non-authorized sim cards life will be good. True for some the update did brick their iPhones but they're in a minority and its possible it was caused by a software glitch in the update process.

Finally people vote with their check books, there's no need to sign online partitions. If the iphone (or any product) is too restrictive, or doesn't really suit your needs don't buy it. If the majority of people or a large segment doesn't apple will start to listen.

Take the g4 cube, a wonder of design, a work of art. I was not expandable, and priced too high. Instead of signing partitions to lower the price, people didn't buy it and apple killed it off.

The majority of people will be buying the iPhone to be using it on the AT&T network (here in the US) and not looking to alter or hack it. They have little to worry about and have even less of a need to sign a partition that will do absolutely nothing.

[pheonixash]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

It is not acceptable to sabotage (as it seems like they have) efforts to use the expensive product that customers have paid for in a matter of their choosing. It is completely reasonable and understandable to not support these users, but to permanently brick their hardware is not cool. The hardware was purchased, not leased.

When they paid for the expensive product they also agreed to the software license agreement. Apple is well within its rights to update the phone as it pleases, since they own the software rights. Only the hardware belongs to the consumer. Besides, the consumers can choose not to upgrade the phone if they do not want to have their phones bricked. It's not like Apple tricked them into it, they were forewarned in news articles as well as with the terms of conditions of the update.

While I'm not saying that being locked into a single provider is a good thing, it's how the American wireless industry is run. The fact that it is solely a way to rip-off a customer is another issue. IMHO this whole idea of a contract is bogus and must be done away with. No other country that I have lived in, is this phenomenon so prevalent and popular. The only reason the industry is in this state is due to the consumers themselves lapping up the free phones when the providers first started providing them. You only have the consumers to blame for the current situation...

[irunat2am]

Originally Posted by mdc 

I'll sign an online petition to close down all online petition websites.

Put my name on that.

[msuper69]

Originally Posted by analogika 

What the hell?

I REALLY don't get this.

They're NOT "pissing off their customers"! They're pissing off people who end up NOT BEING their customers!

HUMANITY HAS LIVED THE PAST MILLENNIA WITHOUT THE IPHONE, just like most of us live without a Maybach or Bugatti Veyron.

Nobody is being inconvenienced by not being able to buy a luxury product.

If you're "angry" at not being able to spend money in the way you see fit, I suggest you NOT spend your money, or spend it elsewhere. As it is, Apple is selling iPhones as fast as they can make them, so it's not like anybody with the slightest hint of business sense should give a flying ****.

All this whining is just the lamest, dumbest, bass-ackwards idiotic misunderstanding of how companies and marketing work I've ever read.

I mean, really - WTF? There have always been *plenty* of reasons NOT to buy a particular Apple product. If you buy the iPhone and Apple "pisses you off" as a customer because of circumstances you were aware of going in, then YOU ARE AN IDIOT if you whine in public.


Aside: The best thing is that Apple was totally aware of all this going in; they even calculated on the outrage over the price reduction and their subsequent "gracious" marketing exercise of throwing people the $100 voucher. And the public, and the customers, lapped it up, while Apple looked the Hero Who Actually Listens To Their Customers. All the while collecting another couple hundred million dollars' worth of free advertising.

Wise up: Companies you give your MONEY to are usually in it for the MONEY. Some of us know this, and choose to spend it on Apple stuff because we prefer over the competitors', but sheesh, man: Bottom line is bottom line.

Well said.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by pheonixash 

When they paid for the expensive product they also agreed to the software license agreement. Apple is well within its rights to update the phone as it pleases, since they own the software rights. Only the hardware belongs to the consumer. Besides, the consumers can choose not to upgrade the phone if they do not want to have their phones bricked. It's not like Apple tricked them into it, they were forewarned in news articles as well as with the terms of conditions of the update.

While I'm not saying that being locked into a single provider is a good thing, it's how the American wireless industry is run. The fact that it is solely a way to rip-off a customer is another issue. IMHO this whole idea of a contract is bogus and must be done away with. No other country that I have lived in, is this phenomenon so prevalent and popular. The only reason the industry is in this state is due to the consumers themselves lapping up the free phones when the providers first started providing them. You only have the consumers to blame for the current situation...

Good points here. Thanks!

[SEkker]

I have to admit, regardless whether what Apple has done is fair or legal, it is still uncool.

Don't get me wrong - I have an iPhone without any hacks on it. If I had thought too much about it, I would not have run the autoupdate just to try adding a few third party apps for fun. I have no intention of unlocking it.

What the hackers did was show those in the know how great a platform the iPhone is when it's opened up to creative programmers. Apple has managed to put the genie back in the bottle for now - but the memory is still fresh in some people's minds (like David Pogue).

My thoughts behind this update was that Apple would target the unlockers - that is, after all, something breaking the deal with AT&T. I truly do not know how the third party apps have costs Apple a dime, except maybe the (yawn) hugely profitable ringtones.

Apple used to stand for a company that made cool products; making a profit was a sideline. Factoring in the $200 tax to early adopters of the iPhone, Apple is now becoming an icon of corporate greed.

Again, I do not think this is out of the realm of what's legal. But the cache of being an Apple product is going to suffer long-term form this kind of PR.

[bloodshot]

Originally Posted by SEkker 

I have to admit, regardless whether what Apple has done is fair or legal, it is still uncool.

Don't get me wrong - I have an iPhone without any hacks on it. If I had thought too much about it, I would not have run the autoupdate just to try adding a few third party apps for fun. I have no intention of unlocking it.

What the hackers did was show those in the know how great a platform the iPhone is when it's opened up to creative programmers. Apple has managed to put the genie back in the bottle for now - but the memory is still fresh in some people's minds (like David Pogue).

My thoughts behind this update was that Apple would target the unlockers - that is, after all, something breaking the deal with AT&T. I truly do not know how the third party apps have costs Apple a dime, except maybe the (yawn) hugely profitable ringtones.

Apple used to stand for a company that made cool products; making a profit was a sideline. Factoring in the $200 tax to early adopters of the iPhone, Apple is now becoming an icon of corporate greed.

Again, I do not think this is out of the realm of what's legal. But the cache of being an Apple product is going to suffer long-term form this kind of PR.

Come on, you can't actually believe what you're saying. Apple has ALWAYS cared about making a profit, they just weren't very good at it for a while. They're a company in business to MAKE MONEY. Just because they used to be the underdog doesn't mean that they didn't try just as hard in the past to make money as they do today. Get serious man...

[frdmfghtr]

Originally Posted by pheonixash 

IMHO this whole idea of a contract is bogus and must be done away with. No other country that I have lived in, is this phenomenon so prevalent and popular. The only reason the industry is in this state is due to the consumers themselves lapping up the free phones when the providers first started providing them. You only have the consumers to blame for the current situation...

I remember when Sprint PCS first started out 10 years ago...$50/month, 500 minutes, and a dime per minute after that. No contract, no activation fee, but you bought the phone outright. They were all wonderful selling points, and I used them when selling phones (I worked for an office supply store at the time). Sprint strayed towards the Dark Side when it started offering more minutes in exchange for signing a "PCS Advantage" agreement, and they slipped into the wireless abyss in Hell shortly afterwards.

I told my Sprint rep that Sprint threw out the biggest selling points when it moved to the contract model.

[butterfly0fdoom]

Originally Posted by SEkker 

What the hackers did was show those in the know how great a platform the iPhone is when it's opened up to creative programmers. Apple has managed to put the genie back in the bottle for now - but the memory is still fresh in some people's minds (like David Pogue).

Apple used to stand for a company that made cool products; making a profit was a sideline. Factoring in the $200 tax to early adopters of the iPhone, Apple is now becoming an icon of corporate greed.

Having used Palm OS PDAs for a while, I was exposed to what happens when a platform is opened up to greedy/idiotic programmers

As for the $200, it's the cell phone industry. Price drops happen often in the cellphone industry. It's to be expected. If this weren't Apple, the price cut wouldn't have been publicized.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by SEkker 

I have to admit, regardless whether what Apple has done is fair or legal, it is still uncool.

Don't get me wrong - I have an iPhone without any hacks on it. If I had thought too much about it, I would not have run the autoupdate just to try adding a few third party apps for fun. I have no intention of unlocking it.

What the hackers did was show those in the know how great a platform the iPhone is when it's opened up to creative programmers. Apple has managed to put the genie back in the bottle for now - but the memory is still fresh in some people's minds (like David Pogue).

Really?

The only truly worthwhile thing I've seen so far that sorta works is the SNES emulator - that's wicked cool.

Originally Posted by SEkker 

Apple used to stand for a company that made cool products; making a profit was a sideline.

I think that is a *completely* misguided attempt at romanticising the past, and misrepresenting the present.

Apple has made the 180° transition from "Wait, they're still around?" to one of the most successful tech businesses in the world.

And they've done it, yes, by making really really cool and immensely desirable products (to gauge just how desirable, take one look at this thread and all the idiots so desperate to buy a product that doesn't fit their needs that they're *petitioning* the manufacturer!), but primarily by learning how to market the hell out of them and milk them for all they're worth.
I see the danger of overstretching that strategy, but as long as they back it up with products that drive people crazy, there's little chance of that happening.

They spent ten years in the dump, because they didn't look at the bottom line, and because the last really cool box they built apart from the Newton, which didn't work right when it hit the market, was the Mac IIci.

They turned around by throwing out everything that wasn't cool AND wasn't making money, and going from there.

Originally Posted by SEkker 

Factoring in the $200 tax to early adopters of the iPhone, Apple is now becoming an icon of corporate greed.

Really?

All I saw was MAJOR mainstream news coverage of the iPhone price drop (oh btw they also have new iPods out), along with some speculation about faltering sales maybe, or why else the price drop, and then a MERE TWO DAYS LATER, ANOTHER bout of MAJOR mainstream news coverage of Apple being the only technology company ever to have given a **** and actually *reimbursing* their early adopters for something that's completely normal in the industry (oh btw they also have new iPods out), along with some more speculation about faltering sales maybe, which was then finally quenched by ANOTHER bout of not-quite-so mainstream, but still massive news coverage some four days later, explaining how Apple just sold their first million 21 days ahead of target (oh btw they also have new iPods out).

Net result to the public:
- iPhone is selling like crazy, allowing Apple to lower prices and wipe the floor clean for Christmas.
- Apple is the only company that cares and actually reimburses their customers for their own impatience ("Just how crazy are these guys at Apple?")
- Woah - new iPods too. Cool! Lookit tiny tiny nano! And iTouch!

Net result for Apple:
- $100 million net profit on iPhones sold at higher price.
- supply was actually able to (barely) meet demand (due to artificially curbed demand), meaning everybody who wanted one was actually able to *get* one.
- Several HUNDRED MILLION dollars' worth of worldwide free advertising, on the eve of the European iPhone release.
- PR gain of underdog status - those crazy tech guys who pay their customers for whining about industry-standard procedures.
- iPod and iPhone sales THROUGH THE ROOF for Christmas.

Originally Posted by SEkker 

Again, I do not think this is out of the realm of what's legal. But the cache of being an Apple product is going to suffer long-term form this kind of PR.

Based on what I've seen in the press and what I see/hear from customers, the opposite is true.

[mdc]

Very nice response.
I think you nailed it regarding the publicity that Apple got out of turning the price drop around.

After using my iPhone for a few days on 1.1.1 the only thing i miss from installer.app is Books.
i used to use iit a lot on the subway to read books. In my opinion it was that perfect application. I do miss it, but i think the new features outweigh the loss of one app.

[analogika]

BTW, does anybody else see the idiocy/irony inherent in "FIGHT THE FRUIT! - LEMME GIVE THEM MY MONEY!"?

Boy, that's some credible outrage, there - real revolutionaries, the lot.

[AppleJockey]

Originally Posted by theDreamer 

We at FightTheFruit.com believe that everyone should have the opportunity to be able to own and use the iPhone
without the hassle of Apple's firmware upgrades.

Wait, who says you have to upgrade to use your iPhone?
I know people still running on the original firmware of the iPhone and are happy with it...

in a nutshell