or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Two lawsuits take aim at Apple, AT&T over iPhone MMS
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Two lawsuits take aim at Apple, AT&T over iPhone MMS - Page 2

post #41 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by livings124 View Post

Well, you are paying for each month. You're not getting a discount even though they're not providing one of the advertised features.

No, you'te not. Since you have to pay extra for sending text messages, I assume you'll also pay extra for MMS. So unless you have a separate line on your bill for MMS messages, you aren't paying for it.

The lawsuit isn't about paying for features you didn't get. It's about false advertising. As such, the central question will likely be if Apple did enough to warn customers that MMS was to be delivered at a later date. Everything I've seen includes that disclaimer. So is this another case of the customer being too lazy to read the clearly spelled out footnotes and is now filing a lawsuit because of their own incompetence? At what point are people going to be held responsible for their own negligence?
post #42 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilM View Post

I'm going to sue the state of Indiana. My car can go 150 mph but the state won't allow that. Damn speed limits...

I thought you could drive as fast as you wanted on I-65. Or at least, you used to be able to. Have they finally started cracking down?
post #43 of 97
while this suit is shite- ATT&T is a crock. people who defend att should just stop being a patsy custy.

The lawsuit that should come out is how utterly ridiculous their service is. The real world service level is hardly 3G, barely works, and you're fucked if you are in a any structure outside of a windowed fishbowl type house. You can't use the phone for business because the calls drop consistently, or you get a notice of a voicemail from a missed call you never even got an hour ago. the best is when you cant even listen to the VM to boot.

AT&T has gotten a home run with the iphone- and basically they aren't doing jack shit with the opportunity. as soon as another carrier becomes available AT&t can suck my ass. I know many people that feel the same way. AT&T's customer base will collapse as soon as that happens. i'd gladly pay a termination fee on the contract just so i could get to a carrier that is somewhat competent with their infrastructure. att is a god damn joke.

As far as MMS, yes it will be awesome to have. Anyone with an active social life finds value in having that capability... necessary? no. but it is pathetic as fuck that we don't have that right now. I know why that is.. because their network is already taxed to the gills and MMS would make an already shitty spotty service worse.

who wants ot bet once they get MMS online they will have severely misjudged how much it will tax their system again and we'll end up with shitty service with failed MMS messages 60% of the time? that's when this lawsuit should be busted out. but fuck it- let the lawsuits roll at&t into a shithole where they deserve to be so apple makes moves to ditch them even faster.
post #44 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

I don't think it does. This is what most consumers will see:

http://www.apple.com/iphone/

(Click on the "Messages" icon to view the marketing on SMS/MMS.)

Unless the consumer "digs around" they aren't going to see the disclaimer you posted. Again, it's AT&Ts fault that this isn't available yet, but Apple's marketing seem to have designed their web content to avoid drawing any attention to the limitation.

Right, but Apple website is not a U.S. only resource, it's worldwide.
post #45 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by macologist View Post

Am I understanding this correctly?

SMS = text only
MMS - text + audio and or video attachment?

But, since we have Smart Phones how are those SMS + MMS better than email, which is much more widely used, and is more flexible!?!

Can SMS + MMS messages be offloaded to computer, and shared as easily as email?

iChat, on iPhone or any other device, during a meeting etc. - that might be easier than email, but a Chat via SMS + MMS, that seems silly!

Can't wait for someone to explain that to me!

Email is great but most non smart phones dont handle email all that well. Additionally in order to send a quick photo to all you friends ho have smart phones, I would need to have their phone numbers and email information which isnt a big deal but MMS is standard way sending pictures when it comes to phones, so why wouldnt an advanced phone support this standard. And what i dont get is how can ATT say they are concerned about increased data traffic from MMS when every other non iphone can send picture messages.
post #46 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

No, you'te not. Since you have to pay extra for sending text messages, I assume you'll also pay extra for MMS. So unless you have a separate line on your bill for MMS messages, you aren't paying for it.

The lawsuit isn't about paying for features you didn't get. It's about false advertising. As such, the central question will likely be if Apple did enough to warn customers that MMS was to be delivered at a later date. Everything I've seen includes that disclaimer. So is this another case of the customer being too lazy to read the clearly spelled out footnotes and is now filing a lawsuit because of their own incompetence? At what point are people going to be held responsible for their own negligence?

Actually (and clearly I am not one of the people who thought they were getting MMS right away), AT&T announced that MMS, when available by late summer, would be at no extra charge beyond that for the normal messaging plan.

But clearly, as you can see from our respective responses, reasonable people can disagree on whether there is possible liability here, so the label "frivolous lawsuit" does not apply.

And, this whole "frivolous lawsuit" thing is, generally, nonsense. Frivolous lawsuits are routinely tossed out by judges and never come to trial. The idea that judges actually allow cases without any merit to proceed is nothing more than urban legend

It's also an urban legend (as repeated by at least one poster to this thread) that medical malpractice suits have any significant impact on healthcare costs. Study after study has shown that this is false and, in fact, that the single greatest determinant of malpractice insurance rate increases are insurance company losses in financial markets, that they cover by jacking up insurance rates where they can.
post #47 of 97
For anyone who thinks you are not being charged for MMS and not getting it on ATT ponder this. I like many have been with the company for many years. I had family messaging BEFORE the iPhone and continue to have it. The cost before was 30 per month and cost since I have two iPhones is 30. ATT does not sell Family messaging as separate products for SMS and MMS. Family messaging includes both. Look, I am satisfied with ATT where I live. I love the iPhone and it even swayed me to become a Mac household. But ATT and Apple have some screwed up practices. ATT's seem to be with billing and money for their services. Apple's seems to be control. Henry Ford once said "you can have any color you want as long as it's black" Apple seems to follow that strategy. As for ATT would people who pay for Video conferencing, complain if I was getting it for Free and they had to pay for it? Sure they would. Same deal... I was paying for 3G from the time the 3G phone came out and i got one until we got 3G in our area. Again, a service I had to pay for but did not get. I did not think it was right as I don't think paying for MMS and not getting it is. My issue is the MMS feature has been around and ATT knew it was going to be offered back in June on the phone so why not have it up then. ATT seems to be a follower not a leader as is evident in Verizon's 4G network rollout versus ATT to mention one. ATT and Apple's customer service are very good as far as I am concerned when you need help but ATT slows down Apple because while they could put much of their resources to making their network the best for the iPhone they continue to just do what's necessary.
post #48 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by macologist View Post

Am I understanding this correctly?

SMS = text only
MMS - text + audio and or video attachment?

But, since we have Smart Phones how are those SMS + MMS better than email, which is much more widely used, and is more flexible!?!

Can SMS + MMS messages be offloaded to computer, and shared as easily as email?

iChat, on iPhone or any other device, during a meeting etc. - that might be easier than email, but a Chat via SMS + MMS, that seems silly!

Can't wait for someone to explain that to me!

Understand, not many people have the opportunity to send emails through their phones. The majority of all non-smartphone users have the ability of MMS, which makes it very convenient to send photos, audio, or video to each other. The market is changing. I'm convinced everything sooner or later will go mobile (and I mean, phone mobile). Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe, Apple was the first to introduce SMS texting as a chat interface. I personally love this. You'll see, in a near future there WILL be a way to download pictures, audio, or video from MMS to a computer. I don't think it seems complex, to be honest. I never texted before, until I got my iPhone.
post #49 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by kscottmyers View Post

Wow, now you can sue for not delivering features fast enough. What a crazy world we live in.

Totally. Every bit of advertising Apple came out with regarding MMS (even advertising in other countries) stated that MMS is not available emmediately in all markets. Not to mention at the Keynote the SPECIFICALLY said it is not available in the US yet.

Apple made this info readily available.. a person can't sue them because THEY didn't take the time to research their purchase.
post #50 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by turboredmr2 View Post

i hope this puts a little pressure on at&t to take their heads out of their arses. no tethering - i can understand if the network cannot handle the amount of bandwidth it requires to allow this for all iphone users.


but MMS? give me a break. i bet Apple is extremely pissed that this feature is left out. im really beginning to dislike AT&T.


Yes and to me the issue is that every other phone on the AT&T network gets MMS.
post #51 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by livings124 View Post

Well, you are paying for each month. You're not getting a discount even though they're not providing one of the advertised features.

Not so. The lack of MMS with AT&T was widely reported prior to the 3GS release.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #52 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by vandil View Post

Marketing a feature and then not delivering is false advertisement.

But how long did it take for Push to get implemented? 1 year?

So Summer ends in late September. Let's see if MMS rolls out. If not, oh well, I'll still use their stupid "viewmymessage.com/1" page until they roll it out.

Hard to believe anyone would purchase an iPhone prior to the 3GS with the expectation that unannounced features would be available, or guaranteed to be included. It strains credulity.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #53 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

I don't think it does. This is what most consumers will see:

http://www.apple.com/iphone/

(Click on the "Messages" icon to view the marketing on SMS/MMS.)

Unless the consumer "digs around" they aren't going to see the disclaimer you posted. Again, it's AT&Ts fault that this isn't available yet, but Apple's marketing seem to have designed their web content to avoid drawing any attention to the limitation.

While I see your point on the 'messages' screen, it still seems pretty obvious that this is an upcoming feature. If every company had to list every disclaimer, warning, and other legal CYA on every location they discussed their product - that's all we would see. There must be an inherent understanding from consumers that marketing by it's nature utilizes 'spin'. Further - many products advertise and market "upcoming" features.

Let's be honest - this is nothing more than an attempt to bring a lawsuit over a technicality in hopes of a payoff. Not to get all religous on the forum, but those who pursue these types of frivolous lawsuits will squirm when asked to justify their actions in the afterlife.

God: "So, Tim Meeker, do you feel you led an honest life? Free of theft, lies, etc?"

Tim: "Well sure, I never stole anything except when I took a pack of gum when I was like 12 years old. And I tried not to lie."

God: "Well, help me understand this lawsuit you filed. You knew the iPhone didn't have MMS, yet you pretended that you were misled claiming a legal technicality."

Tim: <backpeddles> "errr... well, umm, see, it was Apple and AT&T that lied, yeah, that's it."

God: "Tim, we both know Apple was fairly forthright about this feature as being upcoming. And we know you certainly knew this. And the issue is that you pretended not to claiming you were misled. How was that honest Tim?"

Tim: "Well, err... <panics> umm... yeah, oh no. WAIT! No, no - the lawyer made me do it! He said Apple would just pay us to go away. Where is he? Ask him?"

God: <chuckles> "Oh, we won't even see him up here. But, if you'd like to speak to him, please take the down escalator to your right. Move along now. Next!?"

Well, that's how I see it.
post #54 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by super8sean View Post

And lets be fair here. Dont charge us for stuff we are not getting.
A discount by ATT would have been in order, but noooooooooooo, they don't wanna loose a dime!!!. I don't care about ATT's infrastructure, if u are gonna charge me for a product DELIVER!!!
Dumb consumers like u are the reason these corps. are running all over us..

You ARE NOT being charged for MMS! The plans you get don't even include SMS texting for christ sakes! Can you not read what you're getting when you buy it?

SMS and MMS are NOT the same thing! SMS is for texting, MMS is for sending multimedia messages. That would be like saying a text ichat is the same as a video ichat, both represent chatting so they must be the same!

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply
post #55 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by FormerARSgm View Post

While I see your point on the 'messages' screen, it still seems pretty obvious that this is an upcoming feature. If every company had to list every disclaimer, warning, and other legal CYA on every location they discussed their product - that's all we would see. There must be an inherent understanding from consumers that marketing by it's nature utilizes 'spin'. Further - many products advertise and market "upcoming" features.

It might be obvious to those who already know that it is an upcoming feature, but I don't think it is at all obvious to the average consumer looking at that web page. (I went there specifically looking for the disclaimer and at first thought it wasn't there at all. It took me a while to find it.) The design of the page draws your eye everywhere but the "fine print", which is literally, "lurking in the shadows."

The usual practice in similar cases is to "asterisk" the marketing claim and then explain the details in a footnote somewhere, the asterisk alerting the consumer that there are exceptions or limitations explained elsewhere. I think Apple's marketing screwed up on this one, making the disclaimer a little too non-obvious. And the sales environment in the stores (Apple, at least, and I imagine AT&T hasn't exactly been touting the unavailability of this feature in their stores) compounds the problem.

And, where exactly is the boundary between spin and false or deceptive (intentionally so or not) marketing? Consumers understand that features are hyped, but they shouldn't be expected to "understand" that advertised features may not be there, the advertiser has an obligation to explicitly state this in an obvious way.
post #56 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by m2002brian View Post

The world is moving so fast that there's no point not to be using email. SMS, MMS aren't worth the price you pay. Some will say they like the push notification. I say, it won't matter next year. Some say, but I need it now. I say, How the hell did you make it through the 80's?

I disagree with you in that you say people have no need for SMS or MMS. I know many people that either don't check email till they are home or their phones support for email sucks. I hate receiving images from people and then having to go to a separate site on my iphone to see the image.

I don't blame Apple at all and Im pretty pissed that AT&T has yet to allow use to send MMS. The only thing I would hope that comes out of this lawsuit is that AT&T would get off its *** and allow us to send MMS.
post #57 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRR View Post

while this suit is shite- ATT&T is a crock. people who defend att should just stop being a patsy custy.

The lawsuit that should come out is how utterly ridiculous their service is. The real world service level is hardly 3G, barely works, and you're fucked if you are in a any structure outside of a windowed fishbowl type house. You can't use the phone for business because the calls drop consistently, or you get a notice of a voicemail from a missed call you never even got an hour ago. the best is when you cant even listen to the VM to boot.

AT&T has gotten a home run with the iphone- and basically they aren't doing jack shit with the opportunity. as soon as another carrier becomes available AT&t can suck my ass. I know many people that feel the same way. AT&T's customer base will collapse as soon as that happens. i'd gladly pay a termination fee on the contract just so i could get to a carrier that is somewhat competent with their infrastructure. att is a god damn joke.

As far as MMS, yes it will be awesome to have. Anyone with an active social life finds value in having that capability... necessary? no. but it is pathetic as fuck that we don't have that right now. I know why that is.. because their network is already taxed to the gills and MMS would make an already shitty spotty service worse.

who wants ot bet once they get MMS online they will have severely misjudged how much it will tax their system again and we'll end up with shitty service with failed MMS messages 60% of the time? that's when this lawsuit should be busted out. but fuck it- let the lawsuits roll at&t into a shithole where they deserve to be so apple makes moves to ditch them even faster.

I wish there was a rep button on this site +1
post #58 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecaballerojr View Post

Understand, not many people have the opportunity to send emails through their phones. The majority of all non-smartphone users have the ability of MMS, which makes it very convenient to send photos, audio, or video to each other. The market is changing. I'm convinced everything sooner or later will go mobile (and I mean, phone mobile). Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe, Apple was the first to introduce SMS texting as a chat interface. I personally love this. You'll see, in a near future there WILL be a way to download pictures, audio, or video from MMS to a computer. I don't think it seems complex, to be honest. I never texted before, until I got my iPhone.

When you say "chat interface," I assume you mean threaded text? Threaded text has been around for a few years on many different handsets.
post #59 of 97
FYI, MMS can be had without much difficulty on iPhones through T-Mobile US (It's included in their $5 300 message package as well as the others). Here are the settings, should anyone with an unlocked phone happen to be reading this:

Settings->General->Network->Cellular Data Network

Under both Cellular Data and MMS enter:
APN: wap.voicestream.com

Under MMS enter:
MMSC: 216.155.174.84/servlets/mms
MMS Proxy: 216.155.165.50:8080

All other fields leave blank.

oooh, hacking!
post #60 of 97
Thanks guys, I am beginning to understand....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Troyness View Post

Email is great but most non smart phones dont handle email all that well. Additionally in order to send a quick photo to all you friends ho have smart phones, I would need to have their phone numbers and email information which isnt a big deal but MMS is standard way sending pictures when it comes to phones, so why wouldnt an advanced phone support this standard. And what i dont get is how can ATT say they are concerned about increased data traffic from MMS when every other non iphone can send picture messages.

So, as hinted in the next quote, once everyone is on Smart Phones, there wont' be need for MMS and SMS? But till then, might as well be compatible with the Rest of the World which can't afford Smart Phones, right?

As to why ATT say no MMS on iPhones, but OK to others, that does seem strange, unless one is on the inside of that corporate kabal and knows the real story, with all the NDA's!!!!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecaballerojr View Post

Understand, not many people have the opportunity to send emails through their phones. The majority of all non-smartphone users have the ability of MMS, which makes it very convenient to send photos, audio, or video to each other. The market is changing. I'm convinced everything sooner or later will go mobile (and I mean, phone mobile). Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe, Apple was the first to introduce SMS texting as a chat interface. I personally love this. You'll see, in a near future there WILL be a way to download pictures, audio, or video from MMS to a computer. I don't think it seems complex, to be honest. I never texted before, until I got my iPhone.

I just remembered that http://www.markspace.com/iphone/mac/ does offer:

Backup text messages to your Mac and extract information, like addresses and phone numbers, into Address Book.³

among other things...

So, the PUNCHLINE is that MMS + SMS on iPhone makes it compatible with most other phones, that are not Smart, which is most of the world!!!

As to APPLE + ATT, I'd love to see more clarity, so that there are less Conspiracy Theories (Google Voice etc...) Looks like a poorly masked greed thus far! There should be a mad rush towards 4G, so that bandwidth and speed are less of an issue, if at all... Maybe they are working on that like crazy, but why drive the customers crazy with all the games - billing, coverage etc. All that doesn't help good will, which, in addition to the PERFORMANCE, is what the carriers should be competing on, instead of BS TV ads: anyone can make claims, and since they can't be easily verified, beyond rumors, and 2nd hand info, those TV ads are probably useless!!!! That ad $$$ should be spent on 4G Upgrade, which will hopefully end the GSM - CDMA Divide and will Unify the WORLD, for global roaming and REAL CONNECTIVITY! When that happens, more Smart Phones will be sold, the prices will come down, and no more exclusive deals -- that's my fantasy! Hope all live that long

Go  Apple!!!

Reply

Go  Apple!!!

Reply
post #61 of 97
As to how well it works, this may depend on the network's implementation of MMS, but iPhone doesn't seem to recompress anything before sending, and on T-Mobile's non-3G network (they have a proprietary frequency for 3G that the iPhone doesn't support) it takes several minutes for an image taken with the camera to be transmitted. I haven't verified whether people receiving images get the original, nor have I received any MMS on my iPhone.
post #62 of 97
The issue is At&t. I think they deserve a court case. There are actual consumer discriminations here.
Even though Apple has said "available late summer" it's not there service, it's there hardware- and the fact that all the other countries around the world have MMS with the iPhone, and many other phones on At&t have MMS capabilities and support, shows that discrimination, either to the device or the end user.

So what if a real "iPhone Killer" was released, I mean something just utterly amazing, and At&t happened to win the exclusivity bid. Would At&t still deny features and services to end users to spare their fragile network?

It is purely this reason why I am fed up with At&t

The following is a copy of an email I received from their customer service after I placed a call and inquiry:

Dear Mr. Ø,

Thank you for taking the time to e-mail AT&T regarding MMS and tethering
with the iPhone 3G S. My name is Deborah Valdez and I am happy to help
you with your inquiry and I'm sorry I was unable to reach you by phone
this afternoon to provide you with additional information.

Mr. Ø, please contact AT&T Customer Care by dialing 611 from
your AT&T Wireless phone, or 1-800-331-0500 from any phone so we may
assist you. Our hours are Mon - Fri 7:00 am to 10:00 pm, Sat 9:00 am to
7:00 pm and we are closed on Sunday.

We regret to hear you may wish to cancel your service, however, service
may be cancelled at any time and a declining Early Termination Fee (ETF)
may apply if the service is cancelled while still under contract. The
ETF of $175 is reduced by $5.00 for each full month completed towards
the service agreement and at this time your ETF would be $140. As
cancellation requests cannot be processed via email, if you wish to
cancel your service, please contact AT&T Customer Care at the number(s)
provided above.


Apparently there still is no update on the matter-

At&t you fail.
post #63 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

I don't think it does. This is what most consumers will see:

http://www.apple.com/iphone/

(Click on the "Messages" icon to view the marketing on SMS/MMS.)

Unless the consumer "digs around" they aren't going to see the disclaimer you posted. Again, it's AT&Ts fault that this isn't available yet, but Apple's marketing seem to have designed their web content to avoid drawing any attention to the limitation.

That webpage serves more than just the US. I think it was designed to be universal. In my opinion, it doesn't take a lot of digging to find the disclaimer unless the person still doesn't own a mouse with a scroll wheel. Either way it is there, and it is legible, I hardly see any case against Apple at all.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #64 of 97
The feature is available on iPhone OS, the problem is AT&T. Apple should be able to wash its hands clean of this one, if it ever gets to trial. People have right to complain.

American companies always delay technologies that are available worldwide by 2-5 years. We are still paying ridiculous prices for for 1.5MBps internet, while in places like Japan, South Korea and even South Africa have access to 100MBps for less than our miserly service. It is all about greed. We Americans invented internet, yet other countries are inter-stellar away in service. We invented cellular phone, no American company is serious about cellular technology except Apple.

American corporations will pay the CEOs millions of dollars, rather than hire new employees to accomplish work. Greed is the culprit.
post #65 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

It's also an urban legend (as repeated by at least one poster to this thread) that medical malpractice suits have any significant impact on healthcare costs. Study after study has shown that this is false and, in fact, that the single greatest determinant of malpractice insurance rate increases are insurance company losses in financial markets, that they cover by jacking up insurance rates where they can.

Can you provide a reference to further qualify that statement?

Insurance companies make very little money, and often lose money, selling insurance and paying claims. They make money based on the fact that you pay your premium some finite amount of time before they need to use it to pay claims, and they can invest that money during that time. So yeah, if they can't make enough money off investments to cover claims liabilities and expenses, they have to raise premiums because they are required to hold enough money in reserves to pay future claims.

But I'd like to see the studies you are refering to that state investment performance, and not claims expenses, are the single biggest contributor to insurance rates. Keep in mind, that for every malpractice suit that results in a payment to the patient, there are many more that either never make it to court or are won by the defendant. And in all of those cases the insurance company pays the legal bills to defend the doctor. So if these studies are only looking at the actual malpractice awards, they are missing a pretty big chunk of expenses that affect the premium rates.

As a note of reference, from memory from some numbers I've seen in the past. For every dollar a premium a large P&C insurance company takes in, about 25-30 cents goes toward expenses (processing, legal, systems, etc) and about 65-70 cents goes towards paying claims. And some companies actually pay out more in claims and expenses than they take in for premium payments. So that leaves about 5% profit margin plus whatever investment return they can get on that dollar between the time they get it to the time they pay it out. So claims is by far the biggest contributor to insurance premiums.

However, I do agree with your first statement that malpratice suits have a relatively small impact on medical costs. I believe the awards plus the insurance premiums together account for less than 10% of the US's medical costs. So there are bigger fish to fry than either the lawsuits or the insurance companies.

BTW: Many insurance companies lost billions of dollars over the last couple of years due to investment performance. But they didn't raise rates to compensate. In fact, insurance has been a soft market the last several years and rates have been dropping, not raising to offset investment losses.
post #66 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

Can you provide a reference to further qualify that statement?

Well, I don't usually save these things, read over many years, but a quick search pulls up this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/07/bu.../07insure.html

There's another study out there, that I don't have time to look for right now, that looked at malpractice insurance rates, malpractice settlements and awards, and investment losses by insurance companies and showed that there was no relationship between insurance rates and settlements/awards, but a direct relationship between the money they lost in bad investments and rate hikes. This study looked at the industry over many years.

Which doesn't refute your argument. Yes, they base their rates on losses. It's just that those losses are not from "frivolous" (or even "non-frivolous") awards and settlements. The losses are from bad investment decisions by the insurance companies. Well, that's fine, that's how they do business.

But when they promote a brazen fiction to the public about how rates are going up because of "outlandish" malpractice awards, they are quite simply lying.

EDIT: And since you've gotten me started on the subject of tort reform, I will say this. The law allows people to sue for damages as a way of discouraging behavior that while perhaps not criminally illegal, is at least highly undesirable. This include doctors cutting off the wrong leg and companies manufacturing unsafe products that cause harm to consumers. Of course these companies and doctors (or insurance companies) don't want to have to pay damages for their misconduct, so of course they keep up a steady PR campaign to convince us that "the system is out of control". But there's a really good reason that punitive damages are allowed in these suits (which are often much higher than "real" damages), and an even better reason why there ought not be limits on these damages.

Punitive damages exist so that companies don't just consider harm to the public a cost of doing business. Sure, a death here and there might result in a certain cost due to real damages being awarded, but that cost is quantifiable. So, without punitive damages, or with caps on damages, companies are able to sit back and basically say, "Well, we know that the baby carriage is inherently unsafe, and our engineers tell us that that it will cause 1 death per 500 infants using it. But, if we factor out profits against the possible losses from law suits, we still come out ahead. And, since it'll take us a year to make it safe and cost just as much, and we need good results this quarter, let's just ship it anyway." So causing death and injury becomes just another cost of doing business.

(Many will object that this portrayal of corporate executives is too harsh, that they are not all evil. I would agree that most of them are not. (Some of them probably are, or become so.) They don't necessarily discuss the matter in the terms I outlined. They make all sorts of rationalizations and convince themselves that they aren't really putting the public at risk, and go home and play with their kids at the end of the day. But the end result, regardless, will be as I portrayed it.)

The only way to make causing harm something other than a manageable business cost is to introduce a degree of uncertainty into the equation. With unlimited punitive damages, shipping the unsafe product is always a gamble. It might work out, but it might also put them out of business. They do have a responsibility to the shareholders, so, in most cases, it's not a gamble that's worth taking. So called "tort reform" takes away this degree of uncertainty and encourages companies to engage in business practices that cause public harm.

And no, I'm not a lawyer, nor have I ever sued anyone, and I hope I never need to.
post #67 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

Can you provide a reference to further qualify that statement?

Insurance companies make very little money, and often lose money, selling insurance and paying claims. They make money based on the fact that you pay your premium some finite amount of time before they need to use it to pay claims, and they can invest that money during that time. So yeah, if they can't make enough money off investments to cover claims liabilities and expenses, they have to raise premiums because they are required to hold enough money in reserves to pay future claims.

But I'd like to see the studies you are refering to that state investment performance, and not claims expenses, are the single biggest contributor to insurance rates. Keep in mind, that for every malpractice suit that results in a payment to the patient, there are many more that either never make it to court or are won by the defendant. And in all of those cases the insurance company pays the legal bills to defend the doctor. So if these studies are only looking at the actual malpractice awards, they are missing a pretty big chunk of expenses that affect the premium rates.

As a note of reference, from memory from some numbers I've seen in the past. For every dollar a premium a large P&C insurance company takes in, about 25-30 cents goes toward expenses (processing, legal, systems, etc) and about 65-70 cents goes towards paying claims. And some companies actually pay out more in claims and expenses than they take in for premium payments. So that leaves about 5% profit margin plus whatever investment return they can get on that dollar between the time they get it to the time they pay it out. So claims is by far the biggest contributor to insurance premiums.

However, I do agree with your first statement that malpratice suits have a relatively small impact on medical costs. I believe the awards plus the insurance premiums together account for less than 10% of the US's medical costs. So there are bigger fish to fry than either the lawsuits or the insurance companies.

BTW: Many insurance companies lost billions of dollars over the last couple of years due to investment performance. But they didn't raise rates to compensate. In fact, insurance has been a soft market the last several years and rates have been dropping, not raising to offset investment losses.

Wow! Exactly what planet do you live on? I do not know of a single insurance company, regardless of product line, which has not raised it's rates and payouts due to the current economic conditions. And while I'm at it, did you ever notice that it is fairly common for the largest building in any US city to be the headquarters of an insurance company? 5% profit margin? REALLY? Most large US carriers have long term hedge positions that pay out more than that.

I have friends and other business associates that work in that industry. Trust me when I say they are not hurting at all.
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
post #68 of 97
Dont mean to get all technical, but this image shows a iPhone sending a MMS to a fictitious 415 area code (SF). and all the way at the bottom, in very small small font "MMS support from AT&T coming in late summer"

http://images.apple.com/iphone/home/...7-20090608.jpg

We will get MMS when ever ATT opens the floodgates. Until then, just send a email.
post #69 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by JesC View Post

Dont mean to get all technical, but this image shows a iPhone sending a MMS to a fictitious 415 area code (SF). and all the way at the bottom, in very small small font "MMS support from AT&T coming in late summer"

http://images.apple.com/iphone/home/...7-20090608.jpg

Well, not to get all technical back at you, but those words aren't part of the image.
post #70 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by livings124 View Post

Well, you are paying for each month. You're not getting a discount even though they're not providing one of the advertised features.

Nobody I know of has to pay for the 3.0 OSX update on the iPhone. The touch is a different story but should not qualify to be included in this suit since there is no AT&T agreement and no such marketing that I am aware of.

I'm SURE someone will CORRECT me if I have erred.
post #71 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress View Post

You ARE NOT being charged for MMS! The plans you get don't even include SMS texting for christ sakes! Can you not read what you're getting when you buy it?

SMS and MMS are NOT the same thing! SMS is for texting, MMS is for sending multimedia messages. That would be like saying a text ichat is the same as a video ichat, both represent chatting so they must be the same!


I'm pretty sure that if I buy the $20 unlimited messaging package and I own a motorola razor I can send mms messages. If I buy the $20 unlimited messaging package and I own an iPhone I cannot send mms messages.

I'd say it's pretty clear that I AM paying for mms and not getting it.

We all knew that it would be a while before att turned it on, so I see no need to bitch, but if you pay for unlimited messaging you are paying for mms, and if you are not able to use mms, then you are paying for something you are not getting.
post #72 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by justflybob View Post

Wow! Exactly what planet do you live on? I do not know of a single insurance company, regardless of product line, which has not raised it's rates and payouts due to the current economic conditions. And while I'm at it, did you ever notice that it is fairly common for the largest building in any US city to be the headquarters of an insurance company? 5% profit margin? REALLY? Most large US carriers have long term hedge positions that pay out more than that.

I have friends and other business associates that work in that industry. Trust me when I say they are not hurting at all.

If you'd bother to read, the 5% was on insurance operations, not net profits. Most larger carriers have combined ratios in the mid-90's, give or take. Check with your friends in the industry, that means 95 cents of ever dollar of premium they take in is paid out in claims and expenses. And that drives rates more than investment returns, which was the point being discussed.

Insurance companies will have large swings in profits/losses due to the market. Sometimes they make loads of cash, sometimes they lose loads of cash. But their insurance operations (and the combined ratio) are relatively level. That's the service they provide. In exchange for predictable premium payments, they take on the risk of huge swings in injuries, lawsuits, etc as well as market swings which could bankrupt a company if they had a pay out a settlement right when their investments had tanked. (Just like the unfortunate folks who are forced to sell their house in the current real estate meltdown.)

The commercial market (vs personal lines for your auto, homeowners, etc), which includes medical malpractice insurance, is currently in a soft market (but appears to be nearing the end of the soft market). That means rates have been dropped due to competition for market share.

http://www.property-casualty.com/Iss...Has-Begun.aspx

...the market in general remains relatively softas both general liability and workers compensation policies posted average declines in premiums.

If the gloom of the global recession has a silver lining for risk managers, it is the competitive insurance market, said Daniel H. Kugler, a member of the RIMS board of directors and assistant treasurer, risk management, at Snap-on Inc.

The soft market appears to be winding down, but except for increases already taking place in some financial segments, there are no strong signals that rates will rebound sharply in the near future,
post #73 of 97
1): MMS works perfectly fine here in New Zealand and other countries so the problem solely lies with AT&T NOT Apple because Apple has not removed the feature from the phones it's AT&T causing the issue.

2): They were TOLD that MMS would not work properly and were told when it would be available and so they have nothing to complain about.

America needs it's judicial system sorted out because it's ludicrous that stupid people should be rewarded for their stupidity.
post #74 of 97
http://www.apple.com/iphone/iphone-3gs/messages.html

[quote]MMS support from AT&T coming in late summer.[/quote[

So basically Apple is being sued because someone thinks summer ends in mid august?

Quote:
Send MMS.

Take a photo or shoot some video, then send it via Messages. You can also send audio recordings from Voice Memos, contact information from Contacts, and locations from Maps.

Does MMS for all phones offer these later functions? Perhaps the delay is simply AT&T building a way to deliver something reasonable to other phones if an iPhone sends an MMS that is a contact or map location?
post #75 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by livings124 View Post

Well, you are paying for each month. You're not getting a discount even though they're not providing one of the advertised features.

the trouble with that notion is that you aren't paying any more than you would have prior to 3.0. texting costs have stayed the same. if they had gone up, like how the data plans went up regardless of 3g performance in your area, you'd have something to go on

also, the phone itself can do MMS. the lack is all on ATT. so hitting ATT is not something bad in my opinion. because it seems a lot like they are just taking their time and in fact, they could turn it on at any time.

as for the false advertising claims, Apple has been up front about MMS not being on out of the box in their public statements. now if a few random sales staff are not up to speed . . .

Also, why limit this to just a handful of folks. is it not all the folks with a 3gs (which came with 3.0 out of the box) for sure that are affected. one could argue all iphone owners since any phone can be upgraded to said software

I say cut Apple out of this mess cause the phone can MMS if it is on 3.0. Hit ATT with an order to get their acts together. turn on MMS. as a fine for having not done it, they must refund all text charges from June on for all iphones with a text message plan (any level).and from judgment date to whenever they get MMS turned on, all iphone owners get free unlimited texting. and bar ATT from uping the rate plans for MMS given that they don't have different plans for such on any other phones. that ought to sting them

Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Consumer goes to Apple store to purchase iPhone. Purchase is made from Apple employee using handheld POS device and no mention of this limitation is made by Apple employee.

so perhaps the employees need a list of talking points, to include that the douches at ATT haven't turned on MMS in the US. they can follow up with a string of points about accidental damage, jailbreaking etc. just to be sure that everyone understands that you can't come screaming if you drop your phone, your dog pees on it, you decide to hack it etc and the phone breaks.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #76 of 97
I heard a "rumor" why MMS was pulled after beta 3 I believe it was. Remember when people found out that you could take the beta 3.0 and swap sim cards with another NON Iphone phone that had MMS, send an MMS then slip it back into your iphone, then MMS worked? Well AT&T caught on to this and wrote a program that sent out a kill switch to EVERYONE with an iPhone. When it got closer to release date, they realized that it was harder to UNDO the kill switch. So AT&T is to blame for the reason MMS isnt active today. Of course this is from an AT&T REP, so take it with a grain of salt.
post #77 of 97
A little Off Topic... but I read this the other day and I haven't seen it brought up on the AppleInsider yet.

http://www.9to5mac.com/itunes_class_action
post #78 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdyates View Post

I'm pretty sure that if I buy the $20 unlimited messaging package and I own a motorola razor I can send mms messages. If I buy the $20 unlimited messaging package and I own an iPhone I cannot send mms messages.

I'd say it's pretty clear that I AM paying for mms and not getting it.

We all knew that it would be a while before att turned it on, so I see no need to bitch, but if you pay for unlimited messaging you are paying for mms, and if you are not able to use mms, then you are paying for something you are not getting.

Except you aren't paying anymore than you were before iPhone 3.0 OS (assuming you had an iPhone before June). So if you owned a previous iPhone you were also paying for MMS and not getting it? Also, does the texting plan say MMS on it? If not, then its a service you are NOT paying for!

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply
post #79 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by macologist View Post

Am I understanding this correctly?

SMS = text only
MMS - text + audio and or video attachment?

But, since we have Smart Phones how are those SMS + MMS better than email, which is much more widely used, and is more flexible!?!

Can SMS + MMS messages be offloaded to computer, and shared as easily as email?

iChat, on iPhone or any other device, during a meeting etc. - that might be easier than email, but a Chat via SMS + MMS, that seems less practical, to me, particularly if a "thread" can't be archived on the computer and easily shared various ways!

A friend once told me that his kids were using SMS, so that they don't eat up Cell Phone minutes! Let's say same goes for MMS. But, that's for kids, who don't care about archiving, and they are mostly on the run! Adults need more industrial strength tools, particularly when doing business, right? The exceptions could be: "Honey, please grab some milk on the way home!" which might not require archiving, unless one needs an alibi!

Can't wait for someone to explain that SMS+MMS vs.Email advantage to me!

TIA!!!!



Here is the advantage... Not everyone lives in a big city with 3G and an expensive smart phone. In fact only my friends around my age even have iPhones and I had to nag the crap out of them to persuade them to get one after I did (Now they enjoy them) however most of my friends use hotmail for thier email accounts and don't even bother setting up a "real" email account to use with thier iPhone, and the ones that have dont have push notifications for email so they never even notice when I send them something unless I text them right after I send it... So why not just use MMS in the first place.

They will get MMS nearly immediately (I know AT&T sucks so it takes a while sometimes, but that goes for plain texts too) but then they can see the pic I sent, and the message with it, and reply directly, and with copy/paste they can take the image from there and do what they want with it. How are MORE OPTIONS for sending/recieving a bad idea? Not to mention as has been stated numerous times before MMS was on like EVERY phone BUT the iPhone, which means when AT&T finally supports it, you can use your "SMARTphone" to send pictures to the crappy phones who nobody bothers to add thier email accounts to even if they do already have an account.

I live in a rural area, though most places have cell service its all EDGE, and almost NOBODY uses email on thier phones, everyone I work with sends messages all day long via MMS though. It would be nice to participate. Just keep in mind, though you and the people around you may be perfectly content with email, the world does not revolve around you, and other areas may prefer, or even need MMS as an alternative. Sure if everyone purchased the $99 MobileMe account and set up email on thier iPhones, we really wouldn't need MMS, but until apple drops the $99 charge, thats not going to happen. (I am the only person I know in my area who is subscribed to MobileMe)

In short: Many people use crappy phones, but those phones already have the ability to view MMS messages, and though some also support email, nobody likes to set up extra stuff like that on a crappy phone, or much less set up extra stuff in the first place. Heck older people dont even know what IMAP or SMTP is...
post #80 of 97
These lawsuits are crazy.. They should just focus it on ATnT and not Apple..
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Two lawsuits take aim at Apple, AT&T over iPhone MMS