And I think some of these 4g rumors are well-crafted plants from Apple itself. People are going to buy the new iPhone regardless, it just makes people talk about it more, maybe adding some last minute feedback to Cupertino.
The iPhone platform is falling further and further behind WRT capabilities vs. Android. Apple has a LOT to worry about. Check this out:
Ford Opens Up Sync Developer Network for Android and BlackBerry
Oh and one last detail. Valleywag, that site that was almost sued just for making the cash offer, is owned by the same people as Gizmodo. So they definitely know how wrong it was that they didn't just mail it back to Apple, take it to the closest Apple store etc. Without ripping it open, making the videos or even saying on their site that they had seen it. Or telling the guy to take it to the nearest store if not campus itself. He was only 30 minutes away in traffic after all
Just because Apple threatened to sue doesn't mean it's wrong. I can threaten to sue you for saying my name. Doesn't meant that you now know that it's wrong.
So, if the person that found the phone called Apple to try to find out where to return it, received a call ticket for his inquiry and never heard back, it sounds like he make a reasonable attempt. Going public with it was probably the best way to get someone from Apple to call him back.
Where's the evidence for this?
Also, if the person was sincere, why did the person end up selling the item to Gizmodo?
And, if Gizmodo is sincere, understood that it is the real thing, why did it go ahead and publish information about a proprietary product?
The best that could be said of Gizmodo here is that they have no moral compass.
lol @ the typography and apple logo critique ... It might have been sent from the "uncool" department at apple or some left overs form years ago .. :-p nonetheless ... your comment was hilarious
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajprice
10 year old 'Grape' purple iMac G3 style logo and Garamond type on the letterhead? In 2010? Really?
From the Giz story, the person realized it was not a production unit and so called Apple directly and informed of this fact. Maybe he though Apple would pay him a reward.
Why did he contact Giz? Maybe he felt that with their contacts in the tech industry, they would be better able to get resolution through Apple...
And get a reported $5000.00 from Giz?
Anyhow the whole story seems a little fishy to me, for example, while I have no personal knowledge what Apple's letterhead looks like, the logo used on the letter looks nothing like the current logo used on Apple's website or current products. Seems to me that they would have newer letterhead using the current logo.
He reached for a phone and called a lot of Apple numbers and tried to find someone who was at least willing to transfer his call to the right person, but no luck. No one took him seriously and all he got for his troubles was a ticket number.
magic ticket number = logged phone call = proof
Geez are you drunk too?
Not drunk and not stupid.
the bar was 30 minutes from both Cupertino and at least one Apple store. And yet this noble finder didn't drive to either and just hand it over.
He made a lame attempt, allegedly (where's the ticket number, who exactly did he talk to) and then sold it.
Not to mention that he didn't simply hand it over the bartender etc
if anything he saw that he could have a free iphone. He admits that he tried to plug it into itunes after it was wiped. so he was meaning to keep it. It was only when his itunes wasn't able to restore it because he needed updated software that he figured out what he might have and then,again instead of taking to Apple directly, he sold it to Gizmodo who were up front about being willing to pay for information.
the bar was 30 minutes from both Cupertino and at least one Apple store. And yet this noble finder didn't drive to either and just hand it over.
If they were at a Bar, we can probably safely assume that the Apple store was closed. And if we take the story at its face, the finder didn't discover that it was a prototype iPhone until well after he got home from the bar. There's no reason to turn a normal 3g/3gs iPhone in to the Apple store or Apple Corporate Headquarters.
Quote:
He made a lame attempt, allegedly (where's the ticket number, who exactly did he talk to) and then sold it.
If you are insinuating that he's lying about calling Apple, then we can't really argue there since neither of us have enough information. Is the ticket number relevant to a news story? No. Is it relevant to a law suit? Yes.
Quote:
Not to mention that he didn't simply hand it over the bartender etc
He waited around at the bar to come back. He knew what the guy looked like so he would have known who to return it to. That makes it more likely that he would have been able to return it to the guy than the bartender.
Quote:
if anything he saw that he could have a free iphone. He admits that he tried to plug it into itunes after it was wiped. so he was meaning to keep it. It was only when his itunes wasn't able to restore it because he needed updated software that he figured out what he might have and then,again instead of taking to Apple directly, he sold it to Gizmodo who were up front about being willing to pay for information.
Plugging it into iTunes was also the next logical step to figuring out who the real owner was. It doesn't necessarily mean that he intended to keep it.
According to the facts cited in the article, the "finder" attempted to contact Apple and go higher up in the phone chain to find someone to return the phone to. It was only after the phone got into Gizmodo's hands and the article was published, that the right person, the General Counsel, made the appropriate demand in the form of a written letter.
But Apple's competitors (such as Google) now have advance knowledge of what the next iPhone will be, possibly several months ahead of time. This could give them direction in their own designs.
Certainly the person who found the phone at the german pub should have handed it to the bartender, not walked off with it.
Didn't PCs at one point came out looking exactly like macs, copying their design?
I do not believe apple can be hurt by this. Sure they can copy ideas designs etc. but at
you are right - however once remote swipe is performed then find my phone won't work
they should know that though (unless employee panicked)?
By the time Gray found out his phone was gone, the "finder" was probably already home with it. They can't really send a commando team into some dude's house... It was probably more important to wipe the data and the OS.
IF someone is interested in doing some real investigative journalism contact the Bar it is claimed the iPhone was lost. Find out if anyone inquired if a missing iPhone was found, find out if the guy who found the iPhone left his name and number with the Bar so the owner could contact him. Check if the guy who found the phone contacted the Bar in the following days to find out if the owner came looking for the phone. He could have simply dropped by a police station and turned it in there.
I am sure most reputable establishments have a lost and found and deal with this sort of situation regularly.
Apple has how many employees? Is it reasonable to expect that calling the phone numbers he'd have access to would actually get him into contact with someone able to handle the situation? If he believed it belonged to Apple and not the individual he could have mailed it to Apple in a padded envelope and let them deal with it. If he believed it belonged to the individual and not Apple well calling the company that has thousands of employees is not likely to work. Leaving it at the Bar would have been more likely to get the phone back into the hands of the guy. The first thing people do who lose something is retrace their steps and the guy who lost it would be checking with the bar and by taking out of the bar he was in fact decreasing the likelihood the owner would get his phone back.
Apple has how many employees? Is it reasonable to expect that calling the phone numbers he'd have access to would actually get him into contact with someone able to handle the situation? If he believed it belong to Apple and not the individual he could have mailed it to Apple in a padded envelope and let them deal with it. If he believed it belonged to the individual and not Apple well calling the company that has thousands of employees is not likely to work. Leaving it at the Bar would have been more likely to get the phone back into the hands of the guy.
Calling won't work but mailing a padded envelope addressed to the company mailroom will?
If they were at a Bar, we can probably safely assume that the Apple store was closed. And if we take the story at its face, the finder didn't discover that it was a prototype iPhone until well after he got home from the bar. ...
This isn't accurate. The story is that he played with it for a long time in the bar and that he knew the OS was not the current one. Only a complete moron wouldn't know what it was.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freddych
... Plugging it into iTunes was also the next logical step to figuring out who the real owner was. It doesn't necessarily mean that he intended to keep it.
When he got home and plugged it into iTunes it showed itself up as a real iPhone. Again, good luck arguing in court that despite this fact, he still "didn't know" it was a prototype iPhone. He also knew who the owner was when he was in the bar. He is described as looking at the owners Facebook page in the bar, but he doesn't do anything about it.
I don't follow Gizmodo much, but reading all these posts, I am wondering why all the hating on them? I thought they just write articles about tech news. What's all the vitriol about?
Just wondered.
They have offended Apple so they are now the antichrist.
If they were at a Bar, we can probably safely assume that the Apple store was closed. And if we take the story at its face, the finder didn't discover that it was a prototype iPhone until well after he got home from the bar. There's no reason to turn a normal 3g/3gs iPhone in to the Apple store or Apple Corporate Headquarters.
but once he knew, he didn't.
Quote:
If you are insinuating that he's lying about calling Apple,
At the very least we can't say that he made it perfectly clear what phone he had.
And given that he didn't take it in, he's lying about 'trying really hard to return it'
Quote:
He waited around at the bar to come back. He knew what the guy looked like so he would have known who to return it to. That makes it more likely that he would have been able to return it to the guy than the bartender.
all well and good. but when the guy didn't return, an honest person would have given it to the bartender. Not taken it home.
Quote:
Plugging it into iTunes was also the next logical step to figuring out who the real owner was.
No it isn't. itunes won't tell you squat about how owns it. particularly after it was wiped.
Quote:
It doesn't necessarily mean that he intended to keep it.
no but taking it home does. You don't take home something you mean to return to the rightful person when logic is that the owner will retrace his steps once he realizes it's missing and go back to the bar.
Anyhow the whole story seems a little fishy to me, for example, while I have no personal knowledge what Apple's letterhead looks like, the logo used on the letter looks nothing like the current logo used on Apple's website or current products. Seems to me that they would have newer letterhead using the current logo.
Actually that is the current logo. It can be in any colour and still be the logo although it's most often used in white. The old logo is the rainbow one.
Comments
And I think some of these 4g rumors are well-crafted plants from Apple itself. People are going to buy the new iPhone regardless, it just makes people talk about it more, maybe adding some last minute feedback to Cupertino.
The iPhone platform is falling further and further behind WRT capabilities vs. Android. Apple has a LOT to worry about. Check this out:
Ford Opens Up Sync Developer Network for Android and BlackBerry
http://www.intomobile.com/2010/04/20...lackberry.html
The iPhone 4.0 has no "wow". It isn't even able to catch up. Apple had to do something to keep the attention away from the new Android stuff.
Oh and one last detail. Valleywag, that site that was almost sued just for making the cash offer, is owned by the same people as Gizmodo. So they definitely know how wrong it was that they didn't just mail it back to Apple, take it to the closest Apple store etc. Without ripping it open, making the videos or even saying on their site that they had seen it. Or telling the guy to take it to the nearest store if not campus itself. He was only 30 minutes away in traffic after all
Just because Apple threatened to sue doesn't mean it's wrong. I can threaten to sue you for saying my name. Doesn't meant that you now know that it's wrong.
So, if the person that found the phone called Apple to try to find out where to return it, received a call ticket for his inquiry and never heard back, it sounds like he make a reasonable attempt. Going public with it was probably the best way to get someone from Apple to call him back.
Where's the evidence for this?
Also, if the person was sincere, why did the person end up selling the item to Gizmodo?
And, if Gizmodo is sincere, understood that it is the real thing, why did it go ahead and publish information about a proprietary product?
The best that could be said of Gizmodo here is that they have no moral compass.
CGC
10 year old 'Grape' purple iMac G3 style logo and Garamond type on the letterhead? In 2010? Really?
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._engineer.html
Then, they turn around and insinuate that the iPhone was stolen. Slanted much?
From the Giz story, the person realized it was not a production unit and so called Apple directly and informed of this fact. Maybe he though Apple would pay him a reward.
Why did he contact Giz? Maybe he felt that with their contacts in the tech industry, they would be better able to get resolution through Apple...
And get a reported $5000.00 from Giz?
Anyhow the whole story seems a little fishy to me, for example, while I have no personal knowledge what Apple's letterhead looks like, the logo used on the letter looks nothing like the current logo used on Apple's website or current products. Seems to me that they would have newer letterhead using the current logo.
He reached for a phone and called a lot of Apple numbers and tried to find someone who was at least willing to transfer his call to the right person, but no luck. No one took him seriously and all he got for his troubles was a ticket number.
magic ticket number = logged phone call = proof
Geez are you drunk too?
Not drunk and not stupid.
the bar was 30 minutes from both Cupertino and at least one Apple store. And yet this noble finder didn't drive to either and just hand it over.
He made a lame attempt, allegedly (where's the ticket number, who exactly did he talk to) and then sold it.
Not to mention that he didn't simply hand it over the bartender etc
if anything he saw that he could have a free iphone. He admits that he tried to plug it into itunes after it was wiped. so he was meaning to keep it. It was only when his itunes wasn't able to restore it because he needed updated software that he figured out what he might have and then,again instead of taking to Apple directly, he sold it to Gizmodo who were up front about being willing to pay for information.
Not drunk and not stupid.
the bar was 30 minutes from both Cupertino and at least one Apple store. And yet this noble finder didn't drive to either and just hand it over.
If they were at a Bar, we can probably safely assume that the Apple store was closed. And if we take the story at its face, the finder didn't discover that it was a prototype iPhone until well after he got home from the bar. There's no reason to turn a normal 3g/3gs iPhone in to the Apple store or Apple Corporate Headquarters.
He made a lame attempt, allegedly (where's the ticket number, who exactly did he talk to) and then sold it.
If you are insinuating that he's lying about calling Apple, then we can't really argue there since neither of us have enough information. Is the ticket number relevant to a news story? No. Is it relevant to a law suit? Yes.
Not to mention that he didn't simply hand it over the bartender etc
He waited around at the bar to come back. He knew what the guy looked like so he would have known who to return it to. That makes it more likely that he would have been able to return it to the guy than the bartender.
if anything he saw that he could have a free iphone. He admits that he tried to plug it into itunes after it was wiped. so he was meaning to keep it. It was only when his itunes wasn't able to restore it because he needed updated software that he figured out what he might have and then,again instead of taking to Apple directly, he sold it to Gizmodo who were up front about being willing to pay for information.
Plugging it into iTunes was also the next logical step to figuring out who the real owner was. It doesn't necessarily mean that he intended to keep it.
According to the facts cited in the article, the "finder" attempted to contact Apple and go higher up in the phone chain to find someone to return the phone to. It was only after the phone got into Gizmodo's hands and the article was published, that the right person, the General Counsel, made the appropriate demand in the form of a written letter.
Was the Find My Phone feature simply not working that day? Or the next? In other words Remote Wipe worked, but FMP didn't?
you are right - however once remote swipe is performed then find my phone won't work
they should know that though (unless employee panicked)?
Did they do something illegal? I don't know.
But Apple's competitors (such as Google) now have advance knowledge of what the next iPhone will be, possibly several months ahead of time. This could give them direction in their own designs.
Certainly the person who found the phone at the german pub should have handed it to the bartender, not walked off with it.
Didn't PCs at one point came out looking exactly like macs, copying their design?
I do not believe apple can be hurt by this. Sure they can copy ideas designs etc. but at
the end, it is NOT an Apple product.
you are right - however once remote swipe is performed then find my phone won't work
they should know that though (unless employee panicked)?
By the time Gray found out his phone was gone, the "finder" was probably already home with it. They can't really send a commando team into some dude's house... It was probably more important to wipe the data and the OS.
I am sure most reputable establishments have a lost and found and deal with this sort of situation regularly.
Apple has how many employees? Is it reasonable to expect that calling the phone numbers he'd have access to would actually get him into contact with someone able to handle the situation? If he believed it belonged to Apple and not the individual he could have mailed it to Apple in a padded envelope and let them deal with it. If he believed it belonged to the individual and not Apple well calling the company that has thousands of employees is not likely to work. Leaving it at the Bar would have been more likely to get the phone back into the hands of the guy. The first thing people do who lose something is retrace their steps and the guy who lost it would be checking with the bar and by taking out of the bar he was in fact decreasing the likelihood the owner would get his phone back.
Apple has how many employees? Is it reasonable to expect that calling the phone numbers he'd have access to would actually get him into contact with someone able to handle the situation? If he believed it belong to Apple and not the individual he could have mailed it to Apple in a padded envelope and let them deal with it. If he believed it belonged to the individual and not Apple well calling the company that has thousands of employees is not likely to work. Leaving it at the Bar would have been more likely to get the phone back into the hands of the guy.
Calling won't work but mailing a padded envelope addressed to the company mailroom will?
If they were at a Bar, we can probably safely assume that the Apple store was closed. And if we take the story at its face, the finder didn't discover that it was a prototype iPhone until well after he got home from the bar. ...
This isn't accurate. The story is that he played with it for a long time in the bar and that he knew the OS was not the current one. Only a complete moron wouldn't know what it was.
... Plugging it into iTunes was also the next logical step to figuring out who the real owner was. It doesn't necessarily mean that he intended to keep it.
When he got home and plugged it into iTunes it showed itself up as a real iPhone. Again, good luck arguing in court that despite this fact, he still "didn't know" it was a prototype iPhone. He also knew who the owner was when he was in the bar. He is described as looking at the owners Facebook page in the bar, but he doesn't do anything about it.
I don't follow Gizmodo much, but reading all these posts, I am wondering why all the hating on them? I thought they just write articles about tech news. What's all the vitriol about?
Just wondered.
They have offended Apple so they are now the antichrist.
If they were at a Bar, we can probably safely assume that the Apple store was closed. And if we take the story at its face, the finder didn't discover that it was a prototype iPhone until well after he got home from the bar. There's no reason to turn a normal 3g/3gs iPhone in to the Apple store or Apple Corporate Headquarters.
but once he knew, he didn't.
If you are insinuating that he's lying about calling Apple,
At the very least we can't say that he made it perfectly clear what phone he had.
And given that he didn't take it in, he's lying about 'trying really hard to return it'
He waited around at the bar to come back. He knew what the guy looked like so he would have known who to return it to. That makes it more likely that he would have been able to return it to the guy than the bartender.
all well and good. but when the guy didn't return, an honest person would have given it to the bartender. Not taken it home.
Plugging it into iTunes was also the next logical step to figuring out who the real owner was.
No it isn't. itunes won't tell you squat about how owns it. particularly after it was wiped.
It doesn't necessarily mean that he intended to keep it.
no but taking it home does. You don't take home something you mean to return to the rightful person when logic is that the owner will retrace his steps once he realizes it's missing and go back to the bar.
And get a reported $5000.00 from Giz?
Anyhow the whole story seems a little fishy to me, for example, while I have no personal knowledge what Apple's letterhead looks like, the logo used on the letter looks nothing like the current logo used on Apple's website or current products. Seems to me that they would have newer letterhead using the current logo.
Actually that is the current logo. It can be in any colour and still be the logo although it's most often used in white. The old logo is the rainbow one.