or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › About 25 percent of iPhone buyers are 'switchers' to AT&T - firm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

About 25 percent of iPhone buyers are 'switchers' to AT&T - firm - Page 3

post #81 of 85
wow spamsandwich you may have touched on something there
Perhaps in 2 to 5 years we'll see how many at&t customers become 'switchers' to Apple's network...
__________________


now that is an interesting concept, build the base then if it's better for apple to have a mvno then more to it OR with such a loyal base as per ipod experience work the deal between at&t and verizon ....then whoever they go with so will the base. hmmmmm SJ is smart.....very smart. it puts apple in the driver seat for a long long time and it's revenue is NOT dependent on ipod and itunes sales.....smart very smart.
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
post #82 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnurse View Post

.... my point is that people are willing to give apple the benefit of the doubt without so much as even knowing why apple crippled a feature (not unless he was an employee of apple with inside information). You or anyone else here has 0 (and i mean absolutely 0) clue as to why apple would not include a feature or cripple a feature in their phone.

To ignore substantial prior empirical evidence in making a judgment is silly.

And if being an "employee of Apple with inside information" was the criterion for soundness of judgment or speculation, much of AI might as well shut down, no?
post #83 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraboy View Post

Well, it is our [differing] personal opinions that makes these discussions interesting after all, isn't it?

Potentially, but obviously not all of them.
post #84 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnurse View Post

I live in the same universe as you.. i assume that is how we are able to communicate. I know what your PERSONAL opinion of why verizon cripple some services.. i am not really interested in your personal opinion or TBaggins (the original poster). what makes your or his opinion valid?.. my point is that people are willing to give apple the benefit of the doubt without so much as even knowing why apple crippled a feature (not unless he was an employee of apple with inside information). You or anyone else here has 0 (and i mean absolutely 0) clue as to why apple would not include a feature or cripple a feature in their phone.

I see several people trying to get the point across that, in the realm of product design, "crippling" implies, to most of us, some capability having been present/available but withheld, or otherwise willfully (intentionally) held back. And this is a much, much, more specific situation than the broader class of situations where some capability is simply absent. E.g., my MacBook Pro can't do DLP video projection. Manifestly absent. I might be horrified at its absence. But it is in no way a matter of the MBP being "crippled" in its video projection capabilities - such capabilities weren't there in the precursor to this model, they aren't there in other units of the same model that other folks bought ... simply not there. But it would be completely improper to call it crippled.

As to the Verizon situation specifically, it might help to review some key history ... a situation that is the most pointed example I have ever heard of something that truly is a matter of "crippling". A few years back, Motorola made a model of phone - I think it was the E710, or at least something close (the model that was succeeded by the E815). This phone model had a good range of different Bluetooth profiles built into it - designed, coded, debugged, packaged, the full works - real product features. In the versions of that model of phone that were sold by Verizon, some of those profiles (including file transfer) were *willfully*, *explicitly* disabled at Verizon's direction ... crippling the phone's capabilities from what was already built in. This crippling was manifest, in part, by the fact that the same model of Motorola phone, when purchased from *other* carriers, was not crippled in this way. Or when a prospective purchaser reviewed its specs on Motorola's web site. Verizon crippled the units of that model that *they* sold ... and, um, "failed" to disclose that fact to their customers. Customers got pissed .... filed a class-action law suit ... and Verizon lost.

Now, back to the case at hand ... I've seen and heard nothing to suggest that Apple had/has a version of the iPhone that has these additional Bluetooth profiles present and (fully!) productized that they have willfully suppressed. Lacking something of that sort, it seem disingenuous, at best, to claim that the iPhone's BT capabilities are "crippled". Deficient? Perhaps. Limited? Sure. Missing something that you really, really, want and feel annoyed/pissed off because you can't have? Maybe. But crippled? No.
post #85 of 85
Back to 3G support.

There are a number of new 3G chips coming out, any of which will make battery life less of a liability, while seriously lowering cost. Here's one:

http://www.eeproductcenter.com/rf-mi...leID=201001508

This may be of interest as well:

http://www.embedded.com/showArticle....leID=201001445
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › About 25 percent of iPhone buyers are 'switchers' to AT&T - firm