or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple sues "inferior quality" iPod, iPhone and iPad accessory makers
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple sues "inferior quality" iPod, iPhone and iPad accessory makers - Page 2

post #41 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post

I just personally have a problem with paying Apple $19 for a simple USB sync cable. There's nothing special about it at all.

Umm actually there is because Apple invented the Dock Connector and the Dock Connector port. It is not a simple USB charging cable because there are all sorts of things to take into account. For example pin layouts according to the type of device is being hooked up to.

For example I have the Apple media cable which has USB and RCAs to allow me to hook up to my TV. There has to be pin layouts to compensate for the USB as well as the video signals. These are not standard USB. Only 4 pins of the 30 are for USB.

Apple has changed the Dock Connector at least once before when they moved the power to different pins to compensate for HD video being sent out the Dock Connector. Therefore the cheap cables aren't necessarily going to work. I have a Belkin cigarette lighter adapter for my car that won't work on my iPhone because it was designed for the old Classic iPods.

I prefer to buy Apple products because I know for 100% certainty that they will work and be guaranteed to work with my Apple products. To me that is worth far more than saving a few dollars on a cheap product. Now if it's something that I need that Apple doesn't make (cigarette adapter for car for example) I will buy third party but only the brands I know and trust which are generally not that much cheaper than Apple.

You want to cheap out then all you'll get are cheap products and that's fine if you don't mind that but quality costs.

But I agree with the posters saying Apple is only going after those using the "Made For iPod" labels when they are not part of the program. Essentially they would had to have reverse engineered the Dock Connector to get pin layouts and that means you have no guarantee that they got it right. This will ALWAYS come back on Apple not the product manufacturer so Apple has to go after these cowboys just to distance themselves.
post #42 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

After all, Sony doesn't sue the Joe Blow cable company if they make an inferior RCA audio cable or mini-to-mini stereo phone jack.

It's a little different actually. RCA is a standard that is used in many products. The Dock Connector is only used in Apple products.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

The question is how will Apple handle this. My guess is that they simply change the USB jack on their chargers to a micro-USB and they don't change the Apple dock on their devices, which kind of misses the point. That would enable another phone to use the Apple charger, but it wouldn't enable another charger to charge an Apple phone without having to buy a micro-USB to Apple dock connector.

Thing is Apple is using a universal power adapter. The USB charging lead is used in iPads, iPods, and iPhones. That's over 100 million products that are using the one connector. There will be at least one other person in the area that will have USB charging cable that you could use even though it is a proprietary standard.
post #43 of 96
I've been on this forum long enough to know that you are one of the more prolific trolls around here but this is just too much:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post

... Same goes for a USB wall charger -- it cost $30 from Apple plus the $19 for the plain USB sync cable. $50 for a wall charger for a $200 phone. ...

This is completely misleading and inaccurate.

In the first place, all the iPhones come with that $19 dollar cable and $30 wall charger. Secondly, even if they didn't come with the charger, practically everything they sell comes with one of those cables, so anyone who buys a few Apple products will have lots of them laying around. Third, the wall charger is around 30 bucks, just like most accessories whether they be Apple branded or not.

It's unfair to compare the average selling price of a good accessory with whatever the lowest price for some piece of illegal junk from China. When you are paying the "regular" (30 bucks or so) price, you are paying for the inspection of the plants, the fact that the workers get a decent wage, and the seal of approval on it that means you generally don't have to worry about it burning your house down.

Finally, it might sound better when you say "$200 dollar phone," but it isn't true. It's actually a $600 or $700 phone and you know it. I have the bill for my iPhone order in my hand and after taxes the bottom line reads: "$919.52"

As usual, you've cherry picked a bunch of facts, added a heaping dose of exaggeration and bile and come to a conclusion that no one else has reached. Maybe there's a lesson in that for you.
post #44 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

I've been on this forum long enough to know that you are one of the more prolific trolls around here but this is just too much: This is completely misleading and inaccurate.

In the first place, all the iPhones come with that $19 dollar cable and $30 wall charger. Secondly, even if they didn't come with the charger, practically everything they sell comes with one of those cables, so anyone who buys a few Apple products will have lots of them laying around. Third, the wall charger is around 30 bucks, just like most accessories whether they be Apple branded or not.

It's unfair to compare the average selling price of a good accessory with whatever the lowest price for some piece of illegal junk from China. When you are paying the "regular" (30 bucks or so) price, you are paying for the inspection of the plants, the fact that the workers get a decent wage, and the seal of approval on it that means you generally don't have to worry about it burning your house down.

Finally, it might sound better when you say "$200 dollar phone," but it isn't true. It's actually a $600 or $700 phone and you know it. I have the bill for my iPhone order in my hand and after taxes the bottom line reads: "$919.52"

As usual, you've cherry picked a bunch of facts, added a heaping dose of exaggeration and bile and come to a conclusion that no one else has reached. Maybe there's a lesson in that for you.

Are you a teacher ??
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #45 of 96
Still, I am happy with my really cheap and inferior cables and accessories...
post #46 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

I've been on this forum long enough to know that you are one of the more prolific trolls around here but this is just too much: This is completely misleading and inaccurate.

In the first place, all the iPhones come with that $19 dollar cable and $30 wall charger. Secondly, even if they didn't come with the charger, practically everything they sell comes with one of those cables, so anyone who buys a few Apple products will have lots of them laying around. Third, the wall charger is around 30 bucks, just like most accessories whether they be Apple branded or not.

It's unfair to compare the average selling price of a good accessory with whatever the lowest price for some piece of illegal junk from China. When you are paying the "regular" (30 bucks or so) price, you are paying for the inspection of the plants, the fact that the workers get a decent wage, and the seal of approval on it that means you generally don't have to worry about it burning your house down.

Finally, it might sound better when you say "$200 dollar phone," but it isn't true. It's actually a $600 or $700 phone and you know it. I have the bill for my iPhone order in my hand and after taxes the bottom line reads: "$919.52"

As usual, you've cherry picked a bunch of facts, added a heaping dose of exaggeration and bile and come to a conclusion that no one else has reached. Maybe there's a lesson in that for you.

1) So because I don't suck down everything Apple says without questioning them, I'm a prolific troll? I'm sorry, I love Apple (I'm typing this on my MBP), but I also hold their feet to the fire if I think they need it.

2) As for the USB chargers, if you only need ONE set, yes, it comes in the box. But if you need multiples, you're going to be paying Apple prices for it. As for us, my wife has an iPhone and I have an iPhone. So that means that we each have a wall charger set to use. But when we travel, instead of having to unplug stuff and pack it away, we keep extra sets with our luggage.

An extra USB cable plus an extra wall charger x 2 people isn't exactly cheap from Apple. A quick trip to eBay and I can have us two wall chargers, two car chargers, and two USB cables for less than $12 shipped free from EverydaySource on eBay.

If I go "The Apple Way" for my wife and I and I want an extra USB cable, wall charger, and a car charger (going from Apple's website):

(2x) USB cable: $38
(2x) Wall charger: $58
(2x) Auto adapter (Belkin): $50
Total: $146

I'm no rocket scientist, but that to me is a shocking difference

As for having a few cables left laying around from other Apple products (i.e., the OEM cables in the box), for me, not so much. When I sell an old Apple device, I sell all of the original accessories with it that came in the box on eBay (when I replace one of my Apple products with a newer model, the old one gets sold -- i.e. iPhone 3GS to iPhone 4). So the only cables I have at any time are what came in the box with the latest Apple gadget I have plus whatever third-party cables I've bought from eBay.
post #47 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sofabutt View Post

Still, I am happy with my really cheap and inferior cables and accessories...

Where do you get your cables?
post #48 of 96
Irony = Apple suing vendors over quality issues while Apple releases a phone you can't hold and an IOS4 "upgrade" that makes 3GS phones almost unusable.
post #49 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowededwookie View Post

Umm actually there is because Apple invented the Dock Connector and the Dock Connector port. It is not a simple USB charging cable because there are all sorts of things to take into account. For example pin layouts according to the type of device is being hooked up to.

For example I have the Apple media cable which has USB and RCAs to allow me to hook up to my TV. There has to be pin layouts to compensate for the USB as well as the video signals. These are not standard USB. Only 4 pins of the 30 are for USB.

which is all well and good but really means nothing when you're talking about a simple sync cable. Like you say there are only four wires. Kinda difficult to get wrong
post #50 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

But if they're going after non-licensed vendors who don't use "Made for iPod" on the packaging, then I think they're over-reaching.

And whatever happened to the "universal charger" and standard connections that was being pushed by the EU and that Apple promised to support? I realize the final implementation date is not until January 2012, but you would think that the more advanced companies would implement in advance of that date.

So please explain why Apple shouldn't be able to defend their intellectual property? The connector is patented and involves proprietary Apple technology. Why should they allow any John, Dick, and Harry to make products using patented technology without remuneration?

As for the universal charger, I don't have any idea how Apple will handle it. If I had to guess, it could be by separating the charging port from the data port, so the charger will use micro-USB while the data cable will continue to use 30 pin (or maybe an entirely new connection). In that scenario, Apple will not be able to stop people from using generic micro-USB chargers on the iPhone. They may well be able to stop them from advertising them as such (if the ads imply in any way that Apple approved them).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post

If you want to purchase Apple chargers at full retail, that's well within your rights. I just personally have a problem with paying Apple $19 for a simple USB sync cable. There's nothing special about it at all. You can get them for $1.00 or less (if you watch Slickdeals.net).

And that's exactly the point you keep ignoring. How much royalty do you think that $1 sync cable supplier paid Apple for use of the proprietary and patented 30 pin connection? Obviously none. Apple has every right to protect its technology and its investment. They have the right to go after criminals - which is what they did here.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #51 of 96
Quote:
How much royalty do you think that $1 sync cable supplier paid Apple for use of the proprietary and patented 30 pin connection? Obviously none. Apple has every right to protect its technology and its investment. They have the right to go after criminals - which is what they did here.

They're not criminals. If you're going to have a spray at least get the terminology right.
post #52 of 96
Cats and Dogs living together. Mass hysteria!
post #53 of 96
I thought it was considered fair game to design, make, and sell products that interoperate with another companies offerings. Wouldn't these sorts of devices qualify? If this is about the words "made for iPod" being stuck on the side of the box without licensing the ability to do so - that seems equally as silly to me. It's a descriptive sentence in plain English that describes it's function.
post #54 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Reed View Post

I thought it was considered fair game to design, make, and sell products that interoperate with another companies offerings. Wouldn't these sorts of devices qualify? If this is about the words "made for iPod" being stuck on the side of the box without licensing the ability to do so - that seems equally as silly to me. It's a descriptive sentence in plain English that describes it's function.

No. It's a copyright logo stating that a device id endorsed by apple.
post #55 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

No. It's a copyright logo stating that a device id endorsed by apple.

Id say that's debatable. To me, it seems to fall firmly in the short phrase category which as stated below is not copyrightable.

From http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html
How do I copyright a name, title, slogan or logo?
Copyright does not protect names, titles, slogans, or short phrases. In some cases, these things may be protected as trademarks. Contact the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, 800-786-9199, for further information. However, copyright protection may be available for logo artwork that contains sufficient authorship. In some circumstances, an artistic logo may also be protected as a trademark.

How do I protect my idea?
Copyright does not protect ideas, concepts, systems, or methods of doing something. You may express your ideas in writing or drawings and claim copyright in your description, but be aware that copyright will not protect the idea itself as revealed in your written or artistic work.


So what about a trademark. Given the following, it seems to be a descriptive mark though I don't think it meets the requirement for having achieved secondary meaning. When I read 'made for iPod' I don't think 'certified by apple'. I think nothing more than what it says - that someone made this to work with an iPod. If the mark was 'certified by apple' I would agree, it would be misleading for a 3rd party to display without authorization. As it stands though, I don't see how it meets the requirements for either trademark or copyright.

From http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metasch.../domain/tm.htm
A descriptive mark is a mark that directly describes, rather than suggests, a characteristic or quality of the underlying product (e.g. its color, odor, function, dimensions, or ingredients). For example, "Holiday Inn," "All Bran," and "Vision Center" all describe some aspect of the underlying product or service (respectively, hotel rooms, breakfast cereal, optical services). They tell us something about the product. Unlike arbitrary or suggestive marks, descriptive marks are not inherently distinctive and are protected only if they have acquired "secondary meaning." Descriptive marks must clear this additional hurdle because they are terms that are useful for describing the underlying product, and giving a particular manufacturer the exclusive right to use the term could confer an unfair advantage.

A descriptive mark acquires secondary meaning when the consuming public primarily associates that mark with a particular producer, rather than the underlying product. Thus, for example, the term "Holiday Inn" has acquired secondary meaning because the consuming public associates that term with a particular provider of hotel services, and not with hotel services in general. The public need not be able to identify the specific producer; only that the product or service comes from a single producer. When trying to determine whether a given term has acquired secondary meaning, courts will often look to the following factors: (1) the amount and manner of advertising; (2) the volume of sales; (3) the length and manner of the term's use; (4) results of consumer surveys. Zatarain's, Inc. v. Oak Grove Smokehouse, Inc., 698 F.2d 786 (5th Cir. 1983).
post #56 of 96
Dear Mr. Steve Jobs,

I am an Apple fan, promoter, and also a stock holder in your company. I was by your side, when you dealt with the antenna issue and when you were trying to push Adobe to fix their flash problems. But, this latest stunt, I don't approve of. I do agree with your concerns about quality of some of this vendor. I don't agree with the fact that you trying to make your cables and accessories incompatible with earlier versions. I just upgraded my iPhone to latest version, but forcing me to go buy new car adapters and cable is just not cool. The problem is that you are making your own accessories incompatibles in the process. For example, thanks for the free iPhone 4 bumper, but guess what, now I have to go buy a new set of docking cables. I have one adapter and the cable that came with the iPhone 4 at office, which works fine. I took my set from my older iPhone 3G and kept it at home for charging. Here comes the bumper and I am happy and excited to install it. It looks great! But as soon as I try to charge my phone using my iPhone 3G cable and "Wham!" I can't anymore. The plastic on the bumper case is blocking to completely made the contact. So, now I have a problem on hand - Either I sand down the plastic on the bumper, or remove the bumper when charging, or spend $30 bugs to get new charger/new cable. So my $30 free bumper is actually costing me more. You have just created incompatibility with your own product. How can you expect all these small companies to compete?

Do you remember that TV spot you did when you introduced the new Mac? With this latest stunt you are now looking like the guy on the big screen - The "Big Brother"! Please don't take this road!
post #57 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Reed View Post

Id say that's debatable. To me, it seems to fall firmly in the short phrase category which as stated below is not copyrightable.

From http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html
How do I copyright a name, title, slogan or logo?
Copyright does not protect names, titles, slogans, or short phrases. In some cases, these things may be protected as trademarks. Contact the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, 800-786-9199, for further information. However, copyright protection may be available for logo artwork that contains sufficient authorship. In some circumstances, an artistic logo may also be protected as a trademark.

How do I protect my idea?
Copyright does not protect ideas, concepts, systems, or methods of doing something. You may express your ideas in writing or drawings and claim copyright in your description, but be aware that copyright will not protect the idea itself as revealed in your written or artistic work.


So what about a trademark. Given the following, it seems to be a descriptive mark though I don't think it meets the requirement for having achieved secondary meaning. When I read 'made for iPod' I don't think 'certified by apple'. I think nothing more than what it says - that someone made this to work with an iPod. If the mark was 'certified by apple' I would agree, it would be misleading for a 3rd party to display without authorization. As it stands though, I don't see how it meets the requirements for either trademark or copyright.

From http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metasch.../domain/tm.htm
A descriptive mark is a mark that directly describes, rather than suggests, a characteristic or quality of the underlying product (e.g. its color, odor, function, dimensions, or ingredients). For example, "Holiday Inn," "All Bran," and "Vision Center" all describe some aspect of the underlying product or service (respectively, hotel rooms, breakfast cereal, optical services). They tell us something about the product. Unlike arbitrary or suggestive marks, descriptive marks are not inherently distinctive and are protected only if they have acquired "secondary meaning." Descriptive marks must clear this additional hurdle because they are terms that are useful for describing the underlying product, and giving a particular manufacturer the exclusive right to use the term could confer an unfair advantage.

A descriptive mark acquires secondary meaning when the consuming public primarily associates that mark with a particular producer, rather than the underlying product. Thus, for example, the term "Holiday Inn" has acquired secondary meaning because the consuming public associates that term with a particular provider of hotel services, and not with hotel services in general. The public need not be able to identify the specific producer; only that the product or service comes from a single producer. When trying to determine whether a given term has acquired secondary meaning, courts will often look to the following factors: (1) the amount and manner of advertising; (2) the volume of sales; (3) the length and manner of the term's use; (4) results of consumer surveys. Zatarain's, Inc. v. Oak Grove Smokehouse, Inc., 698 F.2d 786 (5th Cir. 1983).

This law suit is about third party manufacturers using apples 'made for ipod' logo without permission. didn't really need the copy and paste. The mark is a registered trademark and it cannot be used without permission.

Apple's customers see this mark and know the product us guaranteed to work with their iDevice and that it will be of a certain quality.

Apple have every right to defend their reputation, their customers and their proprietary technology. If people don't like it - tough.
post #58 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by radster360 View Post

Dear Mr. Steve Jobs,

I am an Apple fan, promoter, and also a stock holder in your company. I was by your side, when you dealt with the antenna issue and when you were trying to push Adobe to fix their flash problems. But, this latest stunt, I don't approve of. I do agree with your concerns about quality of some of this vendor. I don't agree with the fact that you trying to make your cables and accessories incompatible with earlier versions. I just upgraded my iPhone to latest version, but forcing me to go buy new car adapters and cable is just not cool. The problem is that you are making your own accessories incompatibles in the process. For example, thanks for the free iPhone 4 bumper, but guess what, now I have to go buy a new set of docking cables. I have one adapter and the cable that came with the iPhone 4 at office, which works fine. I took my set from my older iPhone 3G and kept it at home for charging. Here comes the bumper and I am happy and excited to install it. It looks great! But as soon as I try to charge my phone using my iPhone 3G cable and "Wham!" I can't anymore. The plastic on the bumper case is blocking to completely made the contact. So, now I have a problem on hand - Either I sand down the plastic on the bumper, or remove the bumper when charging, or spend $30 bugs to get new charger/new cable. So my $30 free bumper is actually costing me more. You have just created incompatibility with your own product. How can you expect all these small companies to compete?

Do you remember that TV spot you did when you introduced the new Mac? With this latest stunt you are now looking like the guy on the big screen - The "Big Brother"! Please don't take this road!

So apple shouldn't develop their products and introduce new technologies any more? You've got your year old car adapter, so product development must now stop? Seriously?! And Introducing new products, n3w technologies and making improvements makes the company big brother? Did anyone force you to upgrade? If you want to keep your legacy accessories, keep your legacy technology. Simple.

Nonsense.

People criticise product quality. Apple strive to improve it, both internally and through third party companies and they still get criticised?

Edit: ps, your new phone came with a cable, use that. Or take the (free) bumper off to charge using your old (free) cable. What's the big deal?!

Laughable. If you want to spend ninety cents on a cable, then enjoy. If this develops a fault and fries your computer/peripheral, you get everything you deserve.

You get what you pay for.
post #59 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Reed View Post

Id say that's debatable. To me, it seems to fall firmly in the short phrase category which as stated below is not copyrightable.

The Made for iPod logo is a trademark. They are not just a "simple phrase".


http://developer.apple.com/programs/mfi/
"MFi Logos
The Made for iPod, Made for iPhone, and Made for iPad logos mean that an electronic accessory has been designed to connect specifically to iPod, iPhone, or iPad and has been certified by the developer to meet Apple performance standards."
post #60 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubert View Post

"The suit names Accstation, Boxware Corporation, Crazyondigital, Eforcity Corporation, Everydaysource, Itrimming, and United Integral"

Isn't Itrimming an escort service company?

Play tell, kind sir, just as to how you know that?
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 #61 of 96
I have mixed feelings. I thought I'd lost my USB connector for my 3rd gen Shuffle. I was going to order one on line, for $1 plus $3 shipping, compared to the $20 Apple charges. But I was unsure about whether there is a difference between the identical-looking cable for a 2nd gen versus 3rd gen Shuffle. I was at the Apple store and mentioned my loss to an Apple Associate, and he immediately offered me one, no charge. I have had a number of experiences like this with Apple; and all considered, I'll acccept their business practices as overall very good for the Consumer.
post #62 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Cats and Dogs living together. Mass hysteria!

First of all, thanks for making me laugh. Ramis, Murray and Akyroyd are in league of their own.

Sadly, there will always be those that skimp on the very things they should be concerned about. Buying a $3,000 computer, but getting the cheapest surge protecter (or worse, not knowing the difference), cables, charging units, etc.
It's why dumps like WalMart exist.

At the other end of that same spectrum are ripoff artists such as MonsterCable. They prey on the ignorance of those that do not know the difference between their $300 surge protector "specifically designed for home theatre", whatever that means, and one sufficient for the average users needs. When a $30 protector, with a decent joule rating, will do just fine.

That is not to say that you can't get quality at a better price point. OWC and Monoprice are two solid companies with very low margins. But they are the exception - not the rule.

Apple protects the consumer with quality products and offers guidance on hows items are supposed to work together. The two others I mentioned will help you to a point, but much of it will be on your own. In other words, you're expected to know what you do or do not need and why, as well as what level of quality is needed and why.
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 #63 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

So apple shouldn't develop their products and introduce new technologies any more? You've got your year old car adapter, so product development must now stop? Seriously?! And Introducing new products, n3w technologies and making improvements makes the company big brother? Did anyone force you to upgrade? If you want to keep your legacy accessories, keep your legacy technology. Simple.

Nonsense.

People criticise product quality. Apple strive to improve it, both internally and through third party companies and they still get criticised?

Edit: ps, your new phone came with a cable, use that. Or take the (free) bumper off to charge using your old (free) cable. What's the big deal?!

Laughable. If you want to spend ninety cents on a cable, then enjoy. If this develops a fault and fries your computer/peripheral, you get everything you deserve.

You get what you pay for.

Dude! Read my post carefully before mouthing off!
  • First, I am as much of an Apple Fanboy as you are, except I am not someone who is going to agree what Steve Job says or does. Even Steve Jobs said that Apple can be falable.
  • If you remove that rosy glasses and read my comment about incompatible cables - I was referreing to Apple's incompatibility with their own cables and with the bumber and not some 3rd party cables as you claim.
  • What does little plastic added to make in incompatible has to do with innovation? It is like additing a plastic jacket on the wall plug to making it hard to insert the cable in AC outlet
  • Yes, I don't like some of the chezzy accessiories coming out Asia, which are badly manufactured. But I think it is lame for Apple to go after them. This is not the first time we see stuff coming out from there. Yes, they are inexpensive alternatives and sometimes they are worth the price.
  • Finally, if you are real Apple Fanboy - You certianly don't want Apple to take this path. The latest set of events had put Apple (rightfully or otherwise) into an "arrogant" category. You certainly don't want them to be added to "Bully" category.
post #64 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by radster360 View Post

Dude! Read my post carefully before mouthing off!

You lost me at "Dude!".
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 #65 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by radster360 View Post

Dear Mr. Steve Jobs,

I am an Apple fan, promoter, and also a stock holder in your company. I was by your side, when you dealt with the antenna issue and when you were trying to push Adobe to fix their flash problems. But, this latest stunt, I don't approve of. I do agree with your concerns about quality of some of this vendor. I don't agree with the fact that you trying to make your cables and accessories incompatible with earlier versions. I just upgraded my iPhone to latest version, but forcing me to go buy new car adapters and cable is just not cool. The problem is that you are making your own accessories incompatibles in the process. For example, thanks for the free iPhone 4 bumper, but guess what, now I have to go buy a new set of docking cables. I have one adapter and the cable that came with the iPhone 4 at office, which works fine. I took my set from my older iPhone 3G and kept it at home for charging. Here comes the bumper and I am happy and excited to install it. It looks great! But as soon as I try to charge my phone using my iPhone 3G cable and "Wham!" I can't anymore. The plastic on the bumper case is blocking to completely made the contact. So, now I have a problem on hand - Either I sand down the plastic on the bumper, or remove the bumper when charging, or spend $30 bugs to get new charger/new cable. So my $30 free bumper is actually costing me more. You have just created incompatibility with your own product. How can you expect all these small companies to compete?

Do you remember that TV spot you did when you introduced the new Mac? With this latest stunt you are now looking like the guy on the big screen - The "Big Brother"! Please don't take this road!

What a lame over-reaction! Wah!

Besides the absolute idiocy and hyperbole of saying you are "with him" but are considering thinking Steve Jobs is "big brother" for making an incompatible cable, you're leaving out some important information. The cables that *don't* work with the bumper that everyone is complaining about this month, are for the most part the self-same "fake accessories" that Apple is trying to stop. If you have an Apple made cable that doesn't fit, then it's a very old Apple cable (old in computer terms that is).

There is nothing "big brotherish" about what Apple is doing. I've seen these accessories for sale all over my home town since we have a huge connection to China here being as we are on the on the West Coast and have a roughly 30% chinese population. They look like Apple chargers, they have the logos, they have the accessory program stickers and logos, but they are made out of crap metal and toxic plastic and will either poison your child if they chew on the cable or burn your house down when you aren't home some day.

This is what the accessories market would look like if China had it's way. Completely unregulated, and "buyer beware."

I for one don't want that. Any crackdown on the illegal, dangerous junk that pours out of China on a daily basis is fine by me.
post #66 of 96
I would have agreed if these third parties would have used "Made for iPod" to market their accessories without paying apple the relevant "royalty".

However if that's not the case, then isn't it similar to "Ford" saying:
That if you buy a mustang and get gas from any gas station other then Wawa, then "Ford" is going to sue the gas station , typical Apple (Just give us the money, some how/someway, we should be getting commission on every thing which starts with "i" ).

Just waiting for my contract to get over and I am off to Android,can't tolerate this policing any more.
post #67 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Apple has take a number of accessory makers to court, filing a complaint that says "many are of inferior quality and reliability, raising significant concerns over compatibility with and damage to Apples products."

The suit, detailed in a report by Bloomberg, cited an example of a user who complained that a battery charger actually drained the battery rather than replenishing its charge.

The report noted that Apple earns a royalty of around 20 to 25 percent from licensed accessories branded under the "Made for iPod" program, according to analyst Shaw Wu of Kaufman Bros. Unauthorized vendors who create iPod accessories not only deprive Apple of those revenues, but also violate the company's patents and expose Apple to liability from an implied endorsement.

The suit names Accstation, Boxware Corporation, Crazyondigital, Eforcity Corporation, Everydaysource, Itrimming, and United Integral, and could expand to include twenty additional companies.

Apple has incrementally modified the specifications required by new generations of iPods and iPhones, forcing vendors to make regular changes to their products to remain compliant. For example, the company has dropped Firewire charging and modified how devices output video through the standard Dock connector, potentially leaving some cables or docks physically compatible but non functional.

Software changes in iOS 4 have also introduced problems for users with car connection kits and certain docks, causing previously functional hardware to stop working correctly. Maintaining device compatibility is easier when manufacturers are kept in a tight relationship with Apple under its licensing program.

However, there is a very fine line between Apple maintaining control over its gadgets and anticompetitive behavior, attorney Mark Kesslen told Bloomberg. You have to be very careful.

UNTOLD BILLIONS are made from 3rd and 4th party suppliers who feed at the apple dinner table . Invited guests lay 30 cents on the dollar to get an inside scoop on form factor changes

these companies sometimes charge 30 bucks for a cheap piece of plastic

yes it works but the profit is ....nuts
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #68 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhaiwaah View Post


However if that's not the case, then isn't it similar to "Ford" saying:
That if you buy a mustang and get gas from any gas station other then Wawa, then "Ford" is going to sue the gas station , typical Apple (Just give us the money, some how/someway, we should be getting commission on every thing which starts with "i" ).

No no no no no no.

Horrible analogy. Apple is suing third party vendors who infringe on its patents by selling unauthorized accessories. These vendors also market their products as endorsed by Apple when they are in fact not. A number of these products have allegedly damaged Apple's products.

How, on God's green earth, is wanting to maintain high standards across your product line a dumb decision?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bhaiwaah View Post

Just waiting for my contract to get over and I am off to Android,can't tolerate this policing any more.

The restrictions you feel are likely the result of your own inability to reason - switching devices won't help.
post #69 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post

Oh please, you have no idea what most consumers think. Chances are, most consumers will never even hear about this. And judging by the empty shelves, it's obvious which device consumers have chosen.

I never said consumers. I said customers. I am one of those customers and I know many more who feel just like I have written.

I have also mentioned the feeling amongst some developers about the App store policies. While there is some agreement that the policies are not entirely bad, e.i. the need to use apple approved tools (ban of flash compiling), and the ban of some apps after they were released etc, the WAY it was done
- with almost no warning- is certainly not a good policy.

Someone has mentioned that Apple started suing these accessory makers a while back, well that is good, but a fresh round should not have been on the heals of saying to the customers Apple is not perfect.
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
post #70 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhaiwaah View Post

I would have agreed if these third parties would have used "Made for iPod" to market their accessories without paying apple the relevant "royalty".

However if that's not the case, then isn't it similar to "Ford" saying:
That if you buy a mustang and get gas from any gas station other then Wawa, then "Ford" is going to sue the gas station , typical Apple (Just give us the money, some how/someway, we should be getting commission on every thing which starts with "i" ).

My vote for insane analogy of the week. This has absolutely nothing at all to do with Apple's situation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheff View Post

I never said consumers. I said customers. I am one of those customers and I know many more who feel just like I have written.

That's nice. Who cares?

The fact is that it's a free market. If enough people stop buying from Apple, Apple has to change. If people continue to buy from Apple at an accelerating rate, then Apple has probably been making the right decisions.

Apple has no obligation to satisfy every whiner out there - nor should they.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheff View Post

I have also mentioned the feeling amongst some developers about the App store policies. While there is some agreement that the policies are not entirely bad, e.i. the need to use apple approved tools (ban of flash compiling), and the ban of some apps after they were released etc, the WAY it was done
- with almost no warning- is certainly not a good policy.

Same thing. If developers don't like the policies, they can try to make more money elsewhere. In reality, the money is in the Apple AppStore, so developers are, by and large, choosing to continue to develop there. Many of the ones who left where thrown out for lack of quality of their apps or failure to follow the rules. Very, very few apps have voluntarily left.

As an aside, I think it's hilarious that Android fans can talk about Apple having a monopoly with 96% of paid app sales while at the same time bragging about how well the Android app store is doing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheff View Post

Someone has mentioned that Apple started suing these accessory makers a while back, well that is good, but a fresh round should not have been on the heals of saying to the customers Apple is not perfect.

Why are the two events even remotely related?

First, you can bet that these suits have been in preparation for some time.

Second, consumers are not going to relate the antenna 'issue' with Apple suing people stealing their patented technology (sure, some of the Anti-Apple whiners will try to tie the concepts, but who cares about them?)
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #71 of 96
Quote:
The report noted that Apple earns a royalty of around 20 to 25 percent from licensed accessories branded under the "Made for iPod" program, according to analyst Shaw Wu of Kaufman Bros.

I'm not totally clear on whether it is really publicly known that Apple takes a 20-25% royalty or whether Shaw Wu thinks Apple takes 20-25% royalty. Also not clear is whether that's off list price, dealer price or distributor/wholesale price. At any rate, that's a pretty big bite, if it's off list price, then that's possibly as much as half the money that the wholesale price of the product. Being from Shaw Wu, it's a suspicious figure from a suspicious figure. He's wrong a lot more often then he is right: http://guides.macrumors.com/Shaw_Wu_%28Analyst%29

I know at one time the rights to make a dock connector device was reputed to be a fixed price per accessory, I recall it was supposedly in the range of $2-$4, but I know that's changed, I hadn't heard any new figures.
post #72 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

The Made for iPod logo is a trademark. They are not just a "simple phrase".


http://developer.apple.com/programs/mfi/
"MFi Logos
The Made for iPod, Made for iPhone, and Made for iPad logos mean that an electronic accessory has been designed to connect specifically to iPod, iPhone, or iPad and has been certified by the developer to meet Apple performance standards."

Are these logos present on the packaging of the offending products? I haven't seen or heard of any specific examples where the graphic itself was used.
post #73 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer View Post

Dear Apple, please stop damaging your own goddamn reputation and FIX THE FUCKING PROXIMITY SENSOR ALREADY!
</rant>

Of course, cos they've stopped looking at the Proximity sensor issue to deal with this. Probably not!
post #74 of 96
I don't believe the level of "Ignorance" and "arrogance" coming from some of the fanboys here! I am glad they don't speak for Apple, because I do know some Apple employees and they are certainly not arrogant asses that I am finding here.
post #75 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by radster360 View Post

I don't believe the level of "Ignorance" and "arrogance" coming from some of the fanboys here! I am glad they don't speak for Apple, because I do know some Apple employees and they are certainly not arrogant asses that I am finding here.

Why don't you point out the ignorant posts rather than simply slinging mud endlessly?

People have said that Apple has the right to protect their intellectual property - which is a true statement, both legally and morally (at least within the context of the U.S. market economy).

Where is the ignorance and arrogance (other than, of course, from the Apple-haters like you who think that your mindless attacks are important).
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #76 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post

Making a USB cable is not rocket science.

That's what you'd think, but for some reason, a cheap $1 usb cable I bought on Amazon takes about twice as long to charge my 3gs than the oem cable
post #77 of 96
Protecting a monopoly?
post #78 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by ojay89 View Post

Protecting a monopoly?

Right, Apple has a monopoly on their own products. So does everybody else, but that makes Apple corrupt.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #79 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by stonefree View Post

It's really just a Mafia style shakedown- with Apple collecting exorbitant fees as its "protection" money.

Or ... watching out for their customers.
post #80 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

After a bit of digging, it looks like they are using Made for iPod without a license.


Why do you need a license to place a true statement on your box?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple sues "inferior quality" iPod, iPhone and iPad accessory makers