lol, just because you don't like something doesn't make it 'shitty'. i quite love the new 24" iMac i'm typing this on. sales figures would suggest many many ppl don't feel the iPhone is "shitty" as well.
Yes, because huge sales figures make something less shitty. Ford cars, McDonalds burgers, Windows....
I much prefer the clean white iMac I'm typing this on to the shiny new iMac with it's mismatched keyboard and mouse. IMHO the new iMac is worse than the old one design wise and in some respects technology wise. That's my opinion. For the last 6 years or so I've been spoilt by liking almost everything Apple has produced. The MacBook and the new iMac were my first two immediate strong dislikes, then the new Nano. There's also a few head scratchers that are almost dislikes - Airport Extreme before they added gigabit, Mighty Mouse's small uncleanable ball.
The iPhone has a wonderful UI but very sub-par applications (Safari aside), sub-par hardware and now a seemingly customer unfriendly business model. If Apple is saying that this is how the iPhone is to be and I have no say in it then I won't buy one. It's obviously not for me - which is an odd thing for me to say as I've almost universally liked Apple products.
I'll wait this one out at least hoping they open it up, add the missing features I need and revise the hardware. I got offered two iPhones for doing someone a favour a few weeks back and declined. I'm glad I did now.
I've been feeling it for the last year or so. Apple are falling out of favour with me gradually to the point that if I could run OSX on a Thinkpad without jumping through hoops, I would.
I think the first serious threat to the iPhone will be Verizon Wireless' LG Voyager phone. From what I've seen from the specs of the Voyager, not only does it have a pretty nice display and touchscreen operations, but a real keyboard so email and text messaging isn't such a painful experience. And best of all, unlike the iPhone, the LG Voyager supports EVDO wireless broadband Internet access, so web surfing works decent well even out of Wi-Fi range.
I think the first serious threat to the iPhone will be Verizon Wireless' LG Voyager phone. From what I've seen from the specs of the Voyager, not only does it have a pretty nice display and touchscreen operations, but a real keyboard so email and text messaging isn't such a painful experience.
That's kind of a subjective thing. For me, buttons on phones are usually painful but I had no trouble with the iPhone. Phone buttons by their nature are generally high pressure, I get sore thumbs pretty quickly.
That's kind of a subjective thing. For me, buttons on phones are usually painful but I had no trouble with the iPhone. Phone buttons by their nature are generally high pressure, I get sore thumbs pretty quickly.
Phones with QWERTY physical keyboards are very popular though, so it appears that many do not share your affliction.
The Sidekick and enV, for example, sell like hotcakes, not to mention Blackberries.
Far as the Voyager/VX10000 goes, it offers both a virtual keyboard and a physical one, so you can use whichever you prefer.
Interest in iPhone for me before 1.1.1 - might get one to play with as 3rd party software seems to be progressing along nicely.
Interest in iPhone for me afterwards - couldn't give me one for free.
Exact-o-mundo. I had an itch to go and buy a couple as Christmas presents but man, not now. Who would buy one of these now?
If I don't behave and do exactly as Apple tells me to do, they will purposely break (err, brick) my phone? And then, as snotty as they can be, tell me to buy another? C'mon, that's harsh.
What's next? If you install ASM on your MacBook to get the familiar and wonderful ol' Application Menu back in the upper right, they'll disable your laptop? Or they'll do a deal with Comcast - so if you use anybody else's high speed connection, they'll freeze your computer?
Nasty and mean spirited. Refusing support is one thing, breaking and entering is something completely different. As an old Mac user who goes way, way back, I gotta say, this is damned embarrassing.
Exact-o-mundo. I had an itch to go and buy a couple as Christmas presents but man, not now. Who would buy one of these now?
If I don't behave and do exactly as Apple tells me to do, they will purposely break (err, brick) my phone? And then, as snotty as they can be, tell me to buy another? C'mon, that's harsh.
What's next? If you install ASM on your MacBook to get the familiar and wonderful ol' Application Menu back in the upper right, they'll disable your laptop? Or they'll do a deal with Comcast - so if you use anybody else's high speed connection, they'll freeze your computer?
Nasty and mean spirited. Refusing support is one thing, breaking and entering is something completely different. As an old Mac user who goes way, way back, I gotta say, this is damned embarrassing.
I hope you don't buy another Apple product, as you seem to have your mind made up about Apple's motives.
I hope you don't buy another Apple product, as you seem to have your mind made up about Apple's motives.
Why would you care one way or the other?
Motives are meaningless, perception is reality. They're supposed to be in business here, young stud. Cause and effect. Nobody, including the stock analysts, cares about "motives," except apparently, you. Results are what counts.
Apple went out of their way to disable their customer's purchases. Equipment that other people owned, broken purposefully by the company that sold it to them! Anyway you look at this, it's pretty outrageous behavior. No wonder the competition is jumping all over this.
Like I wrote, refusal to support is one thing, and quite understandable; breaking and entering is something much, much different.
Apple has given themselves a self-inflicted wound, a doofus PR maneuver that could've been easily avoided. Then, on top of this stupid tactic, they trot out a clumsy junior executive who blames the customer (always good for business) and then, tells them to just go buy another. Brilliant marketing.
Even Chris Breen - usually the biggest Apple booster/rah-rah guy around - called this move "despicable." It makes no logical sense defending this.
Motives are meaningless, perception is reality. They're supposed to be in business here, young stud. Cause and effect. Nobody, including the stock analysts, cares about "motives," except apparently, you. Results are what counts.
Apple went out of their way to disable their customer's purchases. Equipment that other people owned, broken purposefully by the company that sold it to them! Anyway you look at this, it's pretty outrageous behavior. No wonder the competition is jumping all over this.
Like I wrote, refusal to support is one thing, and quite understandable; breaking and entering is something much, much different.
Apple has given themselves a self-inflicted wound, a doofus PR maneuver that could've been easily avoided. Then, on top of this stupid tactic, they trot out a clumsy junior executive who blames the customer (always good for business) and then, tells them to just go buy another. Brilliant marketing.
Even Chris Breen - usually the biggest Apple booster/rah-rah guy around - called this move "despicable." It makes no logical sense defending this.
You have this backwards. YOU seem to care about motives "young stud", who, or whatever, you are.
You're the one who complained so much about it in your post, not me. My response was in reference to your complaints about Apple's motives. Did you forget what you wrote? You wrote it again. for one who is now saying that motives shouldn't count, you seem to be making a big deal about it.
You are making unfounded assumptions about what Apple did. You have no idea about why Apple did what it did. Do you claim to have inside knowledge?
Since you quote Breen, who knows no more than you do, you shold read this:
You have this backwards. YOU seem to care about motives "young stud", who, or whatever, you are.
You're the one who complained so much about it in your post, not me. My response was in reference to your complaints about Apple's motives. Did you forget what you wrote? You wrote it again. for one who is now saying that motives shouldn't count, you seem to be making a big deal about it.
You are making unfounded assumptions about what Apple did. You have no idea about why Apple did what it did. Do you claim to have inside knowledge?
Since you quote Breen, who knows no more than you do, you shold read this:
I'm amazed at the number of people who have simply adopted the stance that "Apple deliberately broke hacked phones out of spite".
Which, if you give it a moment's thought, is absurd. I am relatively certain, however, that Apple's competitors see this meme as being pretty useful, and are doing all they can to astroturf the internets with "outraged" "iPhone users".
There have been an remarkable number of people registering here whose posting never moves beyond anti-iPhone screeds.
I'm amazed at the number of people who have simply adopted the stance that "Apple deliberately broke hacked phones out of spite".
Which, if you give it a moment's thought, is absurd. I am relatively certain, however, that Apple's competitors see this meme as being pretty useful, and are doing all they can to astroturf the internets with "outraged" "iPhone users".
There have been an remarkable number of people registering here whose posting never moves beyond anti-iPhone screeds.
Who said anything about spite? This was a bad business decision, and I identified it as such. Please do not inject your feelings into what should be a pure business discussion.
All I've seen posted here are engineering excuses, design excuses, contractual excuses, technical support excuses and excuses based on feelings, whether love for Apple or anti-Apple feelings. This is a business issue.
Apple made the wrong business decision, period. It was bad PR and then they magnified it with a poor attitude. As I noted previously, what they did was outrageous behavior. I never said Apple was bad, I said they made a bad move, one I believe will cost them sales and revenue.
I am neither anti-iPhone nor anti-Mac. I write this post from my MacBook. My company runs on Macs. I've been a Mac user for nearly 20 years.
Let's eliminate touchy-feely words such as "spite" from the discussion. Let's eliminate excuses - both engineering or otherwise - from the discussion. Let's concentrate on the business decision, and especially, what the company can do as damage control.
Let's eliminate touchy-feely words such as "spite" from the discussion. Let's eliminate excuses - both engineering or otherwise - from the discussion. Let's concentrate on the business decision, and especially, what the company can do as damage control.
If you eliminate emotional reactions to the decisions Apple made with the iPhone, yours - because there is no foundation to point to - needs to be eliminated, too.
Yours is a purely emotional position, since all financial results have been positive.
"It was bad PR" needs supporting evidence. If you have a poll you'd care to link...
"they magnified it with a poor attitude" is a subjective - and emotional - evaluation of their behavior.
Let's eliminate touchy-feely words such as "spite" from the discussion. Let's eliminate excuses - both engineering or otherwise - from the discussion. Let's concentrate on the business decision, and especially, what the company can do as damage control.
You twist & turn like a twisty, turny thing!
If Apples updater fails to fix the hacked files and the phone gets bricked it's the consumer's bad decision - not Apples. Why should the rest of us foot the bill for Apple having to clean up after hackers. If the consumer doesn't like, the consumer shouldn't buy.
If Apples updater fails to fix the hacked files and the phone gets bricked it's the consumer's bad decision - not Apples. Why should the rest of us foot the bill for Apple having to clean up after hackers. If the consumer doesn't like, the consumer shouldn't buy.
McD
More excuses. Only customers - and most certainly, the Apple faithful over many years - have "footed" any bill set forth by Apple, ever.
Regardless of the blank check you want to give them, what they've done here, the decisions they've made, are still not good for business long term.
More excuses. Only customers - and most certainly, the Apple faithful over many years - have "footed" any bill set forth by Apple, ever.
Sorry, was that some kind of lame excuse for increasing those bills?
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt_s
Regardless of the blank check you want to give them, what they've done here, the decisions they've made, are still not good for business long term.
Based on what? Their continued increase in market share for iMac & iPhone product lines (hard to increase iPod market share) and a market capitalisation that's stormed past Dell & HP (onlt IBM & MS to go). What planet do you live on?
Regardless of the blank check you want to give them, what they've done here, the decisions they've made, are still not good for business long term.
I'm still unclear why you target Apple for your complaints. Apple didn't push the update. If your system has been modified in a manner that Apple didn't design, how can you expect a system update to succeed? If you don't expect that, how could you even hold Apple accountable to provide a graceful exit strategy for it's software when the condition of the system isn't known?
How 'bout the kid that did the hardware hack - modified the hardware of an iPhone to accomplish the unlocking - can you expect Apple to support his system?
If I installed software on a Blackberry and an update bricked it, do you think RIM should warranty the repair?
Of course you do, and I really can't understand why.
Also, that washington post link? I liked how the author just glossed over his "jailbreak" activity and claimed he wasn't breaking laws. Yes, changing carriers is legal, but the unlock hack doesn't accomplish that change - it's a later activity that does that.
You can walk out of the bank with $1,000.00 in your hand quite legally - but you can't break the law and have the same protection. If there was another way to accomplish the carrier thing (like a hardware thing) then you'd be safe, as far as I can tell, 'cause it didn't change the code.
"Circumvention of a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work is illegal if done with the primary intent of violating the rights of copyright holders."
Apple has a lock against running 3rd party software. Jailbreaking is illegal.
Sorry, was that some kind of lame excuse for increasing those bills?
Based on what? Their continued increase in market share for iMac & iPhone product lines (hard to increase iPod market share) and a market capitalisation that's stormed past Dell & HP (onlt IBM & MS to go). What planet do you live on?
McD
A logical planet, one with a calendar. All of those glad tidings have happened prior to their corporate decision to purposefully ruin the equipment purchased by their customers who didn't do exactly as they were told to do. It will be iPhone sales over the next quarter that we should watch.
Moral of the story is simply: if you're an iPhone owner, you better behave or else. I believe this marketing tactic is not good business practice.
I'm still unclear why you target Apple for your complaints. Apple didn't push the update. If your system has been modified in a manner that Apple didn't design, how can you expect a system update to succeed? If you don't expect that, how could you even hold Apple accountable to provide a graceful exit strategy for it's software when the condition of the system isn't known?
How 'bout the kid that did the hardware hack - modified the hardware of an iPhone to accomplish the unlocking - can you expect Apple to support his system?
If I installed software on a Blackberry and an update bricked it, do you think RIM should warranty the repair?
Of course you do, and I really can't understand why.
Also, that washington post link? I liked how the author just glossed over his "jailbreak" activity and claimed he wasn't breaking laws. Yes, changing carriers is legal, but the unlock hack doesn't accomplish that change - it's a later activity that does that.
You can walk out of the bank with $1,000.00 in your hand quite legally - but you can't break the law and have the same protection. If there was another way to accomplish the carrier thing (like a hardware thing) then you'd be safe, as far as I can tell, 'cause it didn't change the code.
"Circumvention of a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work is illegal if done with the primary intent of violating the rights of copyright holders."
Apple has a lock against running 3rd party software. Jailbreaking is illegal.
I think you're still missing the point. You're talking about software; I'm talking about sales and marketing.
Apple made a corporate decision to shut down iPhones that have been modified in an attempt to circumvent the law that grants a cell phone owner rights to unlock their phone. Honoring consumer's rights would've meant potentially reducing revenue, and of course, revenue is always more important than people's rights - or the law. Perhaps as a new entrant to the global cell phone market, they don't yet understand how things have worked for years and what consumers expect & do. I doubt that but almost everyone in this forum is offering up excuses, so I thought I'd contribute one, too.
Apple could have created a firmware updater that previewed the state of the phone's native firmware and either stopped any further update - or - returned the phone to it's original and pristine condition. This would've been simple. This would've been a different software path, enabling a whole different and much more positive sales and marketing reaction. That would've meant a different marketing approach.
Instead of roaring towards the holiday sales season, they now have competitors basing entire ad campaigns on their actions, thousands of customers up in arms, a slew of bad PR and news reports, slams from the media and across the web, and now, the first of what I'm certain will be lots and lots and lots of lawsuits:
Bad press, angry customers and lawsuits. I don't see those three in the how to succeed in marketing handbook :-)
They did not have to do this. They wanted to do this. I think engaging in this was a poor decision from a sales and marketing perspective, especially prior to the holiday season.
I think you're still missing the point. You're talking about software; I'm talking about sales and marketing.
Apple made a corporate decision to shut down iPhones that have been modified in an attempt to circumvent the law that grants a cell phone owner rights to unlock their phone. Honoring consumer's rights would've meant potentially reducing revenue, and of course, revenue is always more important than people's rights - or the law. Perhaps as a new entrant to the global cell phone market, they don't yet understand how things have worked for years and what consumers expect & do. I doubt that but almost everyone in this forum is offering up excuses, so I thought I'd contribute one, too.
Apple could have created a firmware updater that previewed the state of the phone's native firmware and either stopped any further update - or - returned the phone to it's original and pristine condition. This would've been simple. This would've been a different software path, enabling a whole different and much more positive sales and marketing reaction. That would've meant a different marketing approach.
Instead of roaring towards the holiday sales season, they now have competitors basing entire ad campaigns on their actions, thousands of customers up in arms, a slew of bad PR and news reports, slams from the media and across the web, and now, the first of what I'm certain will be lots and lots and lots of lawsuits:
Bad press, angry customers and lawsuits. I don't see those three in the how to succeed in marketing handbook :-)
They did not have to do this. They wanted to do this. I think engaging in this was a poor decision from a sales and marketing perspective, especially prior to the holiday season.
You're still making assumptions that you have no proof for.
While I think it is a bad decision not to support third party software, you have no evidence that they did it this on purpose.
I posted good articles giving reasons why Apple isn't likely to have done so deliberately. You must have decided to not read them.
A logical planet, one with a calendar. All of those glad tidings have happened prior to their corporate decision to purposefully ruin the equipment purchased by their customers who didn't do exactly as they were told to do. It will be iPhone sales over the next quarter that we should watch.
Moral of the story is simply: if you're an iPhone owner, you better behave or else. I believe this marketing tactic is not good business practice.
A moral which, thankfully, doesn't apply to the vast majority of iPhone customers! Lets hope the rest don't listen to the vocal minority of whining wannabe-geeks. Maybe this is the sort of stunt could be used by Apple to discredit the self-proclaimed technical experts (of nothing as it turns out) who's sum achievement is to break a product and blame someone else.
Let me guess how your prediction plays out. You're going to take the inevitable decline of sales after the initial burst in demand at product launch to justify your claim & fuel your fantasy?
Comments
lol, just because you don't like something doesn't make it 'shitty'. i quite love the new 24" iMac i'm typing this on. sales figures would suggest many many ppl don't feel the iPhone is "shitty" as well.
Yes, because huge sales figures make something less shitty. Ford cars, McDonalds burgers, Windows....
I much prefer the clean white iMac I'm typing this on to the shiny new iMac with it's mismatched keyboard and mouse. IMHO the new iMac is worse than the old one design wise and in some respects technology wise. That's my opinion. For the last 6 years or so I've been spoilt by liking almost everything Apple has produced. The MacBook and the new iMac were my first two immediate strong dislikes, then the new Nano. There's also a few head scratchers that are almost dislikes - Airport Extreme before they added gigabit, Mighty Mouse's small uncleanable ball.
The iPhone has a wonderful UI but very sub-par applications (Safari aside), sub-par hardware and now a seemingly customer unfriendly business model. If Apple is saying that this is how the iPhone is to be and I have no say in it then I won't buy one. It's obviously not for me - which is an odd thing for me to say as I've almost universally liked Apple products.
I'll wait this one out at least hoping they open it up, add the missing features I need and revise the hardware. I got offered two iPhones for doing someone a favour a few weeks back and declined. I'm glad I did now.
I've been feeling it for the last year or so. Apple are falling out of favour with me gradually to the point that if I could run OSX on a Thinkpad without jumping through hoops, I would.
It was just a matter of time before someone would come out with the consummate iPhone killer - and that someone turned out to be Apple!
Well, as they say in the electronics business, if you don't eat your young, somebody else will...
lol! spot on.
Interest in iPhone for me before 1.1.1 - might get one to play with as 3rd party software seems to be progressing along nicely.
Interest in iPhone for me afterwards - couldn't give me one for free.
I think the first serious threat to the iPhone will be Verizon Wireless' LG Voyager phone. From what I've seen from the specs of the Voyager, not only does it have a pretty nice display and touchscreen operations, but a real keyboard so email and text messaging isn't such a painful experience.
That's kind of a subjective thing. For me, buttons on phones are usually painful but I had no trouble with the iPhone. Phone buttons by their nature are generally high pressure, I get sore thumbs pretty quickly.
That's kind of a subjective thing. For me, buttons on phones are usually painful but I had no trouble with the iPhone. Phone buttons by their nature are generally high pressure, I get sore thumbs pretty quickly.
Phones with QWERTY physical keyboards are very popular though, so it appears that many do not share your affliction.
The Sidekick and enV, for example, sell like hotcakes, not to mention Blackberries.
Far as the Voyager/VX10000 goes, it offers both a virtual keyboard and a physical one, so you can use whichever you prefer.
.
lol! spot on.
Interest in iPhone for me before 1.1.1 - might get one to play with as 3rd party software seems to be progressing along nicely.
Interest in iPhone for me afterwards - couldn't give me one for free.
Exact-o-mundo. I had an itch to go and buy a couple as Christmas presents but man, not now. Who would buy one of these now?
If I don't behave and do exactly as Apple tells me to do, they will purposely break (err, brick) my phone? And then, as snotty as they can be, tell me to buy another? C'mon, that's harsh.
What's next? If you install ASM on your MacBook to get the familiar and wonderful ol' Application Menu back in the upper right, they'll disable your laptop? Or they'll do a deal with Comcast - so if you use anybody else's high speed connection, they'll freeze your computer?
Nasty and mean spirited. Refusing support is one thing, breaking and entering is something completely different. As an old Mac user who goes way, way back, I gotta say, this is damned embarrassing.
Exact-o-mundo. I had an itch to go and buy a couple as Christmas presents but man, not now. Who would buy one of these now?
If I don't behave and do exactly as Apple tells me to do, they will purposely break (err, brick) my phone? And then, as snotty as they can be, tell me to buy another? C'mon, that's harsh.
What's next? If you install ASM on your MacBook to get the familiar and wonderful ol' Application Menu back in the upper right, they'll disable your laptop? Or they'll do a deal with Comcast - so if you use anybody else's high speed connection, they'll freeze your computer?
Nasty and mean spirited. Refusing support is one thing, breaking and entering is something completely different. As an old Mac user who goes way, way back, I gotta say, this is damned embarrassing.
I hope you don't buy another Apple product, as you seem to have your mind made up about Apple's motives.
I hope you don't buy another Apple product, as you seem to have your mind made up about Apple's motives.
Why would you care one way or the other?
Motives are meaningless, perception is reality. They're supposed to be in business here, young stud. Cause and effect. Nobody, including the stock analysts, cares about "motives," except apparently, you. Results are what counts.
Apple went out of their way to disable their customer's purchases. Equipment that other people owned, broken purposefully by the company that sold it to them! Anyway you look at this, it's pretty outrageous behavior. No wonder the competition is jumping all over this.
Like I wrote, refusal to support is one thing, and quite understandable; breaking and entering is something much, much different.
Apple has given themselves a self-inflicted wound, a doofus PR maneuver that could've been easily avoided. Then, on top of this stupid tactic, they trot out a clumsy junior executive who blames the customer (always good for business) and then, tells them to just go buy another. Brilliant marketing.
Even Chris Breen - usually the biggest Apple booster/rah-rah guy around - called this move "despicable." It makes no logical sense defending this.
Why would you care one way or the other?
Motives are meaningless, perception is reality. They're supposed to be in business here, young stud. Cause and effect. Nobody, including the stock analysts, cares about "motives," except apparently, you. Results are what counts.
Apple went out of their way to disable their customer's purchases. Equipment that other people owned, broken purposefully by the company that sold it to them! Anyway you look at this, it's pretty outrageous behavior. No wonder the competition is jumping all over this.
Like I wrote, refusal to support is one thing, and quite understandable; breaking and entering is something much, much different.
Apple has given themselves a self-inflicted wound, a doofus PR maneuver that could've been easily avoided. Then, on top of this stupid tactic, they trot out a clumsy junior executive who blames the customer (always good for business) and then, tells them to just go buy another. Brilliant marketing.
Even Chris Breen - usually the biggest Apple booster/rah-rah guy around - called this move "despicable." It makes no logical sense defending this.
You have this backwards. YOU seem to care about motives "young stud", who, or whatever, you are.
You're the one who complained so much about it in your post, not me. My response was in reference to your complaints about Apple's motives. Did you forget what you wrote? You wrote it again. for one who is now saying that motives shouldn't count, you seem to be making a big deal about it.
You are making unfounded assumptions about what Apple did. You have no idea about why Apple did what it did. Do you claim to have inside knowledge?
Since you quote Breen, who knows no more than you do, you shold read this:
http://brockerhoff.net/bb/viewtopic.php?p=2191#2191
And this:
http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/com...cultofmac_1003
You have this backwards. YOU seem to care about motives "young stud", who, or whatever, you are.
You're the one who complained so much about it in your post, not me. My response was in reference to your complaints about Apple's motives. Did you forget what you wrote? You wrote it again. for one who is now saying that motives shouldn't count, you seem to be making a big deal about it.
You are making unfounded assumptions about what Apple did. You have no idea about why Apple did what it did. Do you claim to have inside knowledge?
Since you quote Breen, who knows no more than you do, you shold read this:
http://brockerhoff.net/bb/viewtopic.php?p=2191#2191
And this:
http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/com...cultofmac_1003
I'm amazed at the number of people who have simply adopted the stance that "Apple deliberately broke hacked phones out of spite".
Which, if you give it a moment's thought, is absurd. I am relatively certain, however, that Apple's competitors see this meme as being pretty useful, and are doing all they can to astroturf the internets with "outraged" "iPhone users".
There have been an remarkable number of people registering here whose posting never moves beyond anti-iPhone screeds.
I'm amazed at the number of people who have simply adopted the stance that "Apple deliberately broke hacked phones out of spite".
Which, if you give it a moment's thought, is absurd. I am relatively certain, however, that Apple's competitors see this meme as being pretty useful, and are doing all they can to astroturf the internets with "outraged" "iPhone users".
There have been an remarkable number of people registering here whose posting never moves beyond anti-iPhone screeds.
Who said anything about spite? This was a bad business decision, and I identified it as such. Please do not inject your feelings into what should be a pure business discussion.
All I've seen posted here are engineering excuses, design excuses, contractual excuses, technical support excuses and excuses based on feelings, whether love for Apple or anti-Apple feelings. This is a business issue.
Apple made the wrong business decision, period. It was bad PR and then they magnified it with a poor attitude. As I noted previously, what they did was outrageous behavior. I never said Apple was bad, I said they made a bad move, one I believe will cost them sales and revenue.
I am neither anti-iPhone nor anti-Mac. I write this post from my MacBook. My company runs on Macs. I've been a Mac user for nearly 20 years.
Let's eliminate touchy-feely words such as "spite" from the discussion. Let's eliminate excuses - both engineering or otherwise - from the discussion. Let's concentrate on the business decision, and especially, what the company can do as damage control.
Let's eliminate touchy-feely words such as "spite" from the discussion. Let's eliminate excuses - both engineering or otherwise - from the discussion. Let's concentrate on the business decision, and especially, what the company can do as damage control.
If you eliminate emotional reactions to the decisions Apple made with the iPhone, yours - because there is no foundation to point to - needs to be eliminated, too.
Yours is a purely emotional position, since all financial results have been positive.
"It was bad PR" needs supporting evidence. If you have a poll you'd care to link...
"they magnified it with a poor attitude" is a subjective - and emotional - evaluation of their behavior.
...as snotty as they can be...
...Nasty and mean spirited.
Let's eliminate touchy-feely words such as "spite" from the discussion. Let's eliminate excuses - both engineering or otherwise - from the discussion. Let's concentrate on the business decision, and especially, what the company can do as damage control.
You twist & turn like a twisty, turny thing!
If Apples updater fails to fix the hacked files and the phone gets bricked it's the consumer's bad decision - not Apples. Why should the rest of us foot the bill for Apple having to clean up after hackers. If the consumer doesn't like, the consumer shouldn't buy.
McD
You twist & turn like a twisty, turny thing!
If Apples updater fails to fix the hacked files and the phone gets bricked it's the consumer's bad decision - not Apples. Why should the rest of us foot the bill for Apple having to clean up after hackers. If the consumer doesn't like, the consumer shouldn't buy.
McD
More excuses. Only customers - and most certainly, the Apple faithful over many years - have "footed" any bill set forth by Apple, ever.
Regardless of the blank check you want to give them, what they've done here, the decisions they've made, are still not good for business long term.
http://www.slate.com/id/2175304/
More excuses. Only customers - and most certainly, the Apple faithful over many years - have "footed" any bill set forth by Apple, ever.
Sorry, was that some kind of lame excuse for increasing those bills?
Regardless of the blank check you want to give them, what they've done here, the decisions they've made, are still not good for business long term.
Based on what? Their continued increase in market share for iMac & iPhone product lines (hard to increase iPod market share) and a market capitalisation that's stormed past Dell & HP (onlt IBM & MS to go). What planet do you live on?
McD
Regardless of the blank check you want to give them, what they've done here, the decisions they've made, are still not good for business long term.
I'm still unclear why you target Apple for your complaints. Apple didn't push the update. If your system has been modified in a manner that Apple didn't design, how can you expect a system update to succeed? If you don't expect that, how could you even hold Apple accountable to provide a graceful exit strategy for it's software when the condition of the system isn't known?
How 'bout the kid that did the hardware hack - modified the hardware of an iPhone to accomplish the unlocking - can you expect Apple to support his system?
If I installed software on a Blackberry and an update bricked it, do you think RIM should warranty the repair?
Of course you do, and I really can't understand why.
Also, that washington post link? I liked how the author just glossed over his "jailbreak" activity and claimed he wasn't breaking laws. Yes, changing carriers is legal, but the unlock hack doesn't accomplish that change - it's a later activity that does that.
You can walk out of the bank with $1,000.00 in your hand quite legally - but you can't break the law and have the same protection. If there was another way to accomplish the carrier thing (like a hardware thing) then you'd be safe, as far as I can tell, 'cause it didn't change the code.
"Circumvention of a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work is illegal if done with the primary intent of violating the rights of copyright holders."
Apple has a lock against running 3rd party software. Jailbreaking is illegal.
Sorry, was that some kind of lame excuse for increasing those bills?
Based on what? Their continued increase in market share for iMac & iPhone product lines (hard to increase iPod market share) and a market capitalisation that's stormed past Dell & HP (onlt IBM & MS to go). What planet do you live on?
McD
A logical planet, one with a calendar. All of those glad tidings have happened prior to their corporate decision to purposefully ruin the equipment purchased by their customers who didn't do exactly as they were told to do. It will be iPhone sales over the next quarter that we should watch.
Moral of the story is simply: if you're an iPhone owner, you better behave or else. I believe this marketing tactic is not good business practice.
I'm still unclear why you target Apple for your complaints. Apple didn't push the update. If your system has been modified in a manner that Apple didn't design, how can you expect a system update to succeed? If you don't expect that, how could you even hold Apple accountable to provide a graceful exit strategy for it's software when the condition of the system isn't known?
How 'bout the kid that did the hardware hack - modified the hardware of an iPhone to accomplish the unlocking - can you expect Apple to support his system?
If I installed software on a Blackberry and an update bricked it, do you think RIM should warranty the repair?
Of course you do, and I really can't understand why.
Also, that washington post link? I liked how the author just glossed over his "jailbreak" activity and claimed he wasn't breaking laws. Yes, changing carriers is legal, but the unlock hack doesn't accomplish that change - it's a later activity that does that.
You can walk out of the bank with $1,000.00 in your hand quite legally - but you can't break the law and have the same protection. If there was another way to accomplish the carrier thing (like a hardware thing) then you'd be safe, as far as I can tell, 'cause it didn't change the code.
"Circumvention of a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work is illegal if done with the primary intent of violating the rights of copyright holders."
Apple has a lock against running 3rd party software. Jailbreaking is illegal.
I think you're still missing the point. You're talking about software; I'm talking about sales and marketing.
Apple made a corporate decision to shut down iPhones that have been modified in an attempt to circumvent the law that grants a cell phone owner rights to unlock their phone. Honoring consumer's rights would've meant potentially reducing revenue, and of course, revenue is always more important than people's rights - or the law. Perhaps as a new entrant to the global cell phone market, they don't yet understand how things have worked for years and what consumers expect & do. I doubt that but almost everyone in this forum is offering up excuses, so I thought I'd contribute one, too.
Apple could have created a firmware updater that previewed the state of the phone's native firmware and either stopped any further update - or - returned the phone to it's original and pristine condition. This would've been simple. This would've been a different software path, enabling a whole different and much more positive sales and marketing reaction. That would've meant a different marketing approach.
Instead of roaring towards the holiday sales season, they now have competitors basing entire ad campaigns on their actions, thousands of customers up in arms, a slew of bad PR and news reports, slams from the media and across the web, and now, the first of what I'm certain will be lots and lots and lots of lawsuits:
<http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/10/10/iphone_bricking_lawsuit/>;
Bad press, angry customers and lawsuits. I don't see those three in the how to succeed in marketing handbook :-)
They did not have to do this. They wanted to do this. I think engaging in this was a poor decision from a sales and marketing perspective, especially prior to the holiday season.
I think you're still missing the point. You're talking about software; I'm talking about sales and marketing.
Apple made a corporate decision to shut down iPhones that have been modified in an attempt to circumvent the law that grants a cell phone owner rights to unlock their phone. Honoring consumer's rights would've meant potentially reducing revenue, and of course, revenue is always more important than people's rights - or the law. Perhaps as a new entrant to the global cell phone market, they don't yet understand how things have worked for years and what consumers expect & do. I doubt that but almost everyone in this forum is offering up excuses, so I thought I'd contribute one, too.
Apple could have created a firmware updater that previewed the state of the phone's native firmware and either stopped any further update - or - returned the phone to it's original and pristine condition. This would've been simple. This would've been a different software path, enabling a whole different and much more positive sales and marketing reaction. That would've meant a different marketing approach.
Instead of roaring towards the holiday sales season, they now have competitors basing entire ad campaigns on their actions, thousands of customers up in arms, a slew of bad PR and news reports, slams from the media and across the web, and now, the first of what I'm certain will be lots and lots and lots of lawsuits:
<http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/10/10/iphone_bricking_lawsuit/>;
Bad press, angry customers and lawsuits. I don't see those three in the how to succeed in marketing handbook :-)
They did not have to do this. They wanted to do this. I think engaging in this was a poor decision from a sales and marketing perspective, especially prior to the holiday season.
You're still making assumptions that you have no proof for.
While I think it is a bad decision not to support third party software, you have no evidence that they did it this on purpose.
I posted good articles giving reasons why Apple isn't likely to have done so deliberately. You must have decided to not read them.
A logical planet, one with a calendar. All of those glad tidings have happened prior to their corporate decision to purposefully ruin the equipment purchased by their customers who didn't do exactly as they were told to do. It will be iPhone sales over the next quarter that we should watch.
Moral of the story is simply: if you're an iPhone owner, you better behave or else. I believe this marketing tactic is not good business practice.
A moral which, thankfully, doesn't apply to the vast majority of iPhone customers! Lets hope the rest don't listen to the vocal minority of whining wannabe-geeks. Maybe this is the sort of stunt could be used by Apple to discredit the self-proclaimed technical experts (of nothing as it turns out) who's sum achievement is to break a product and blame someone else.
Let me guess how your prediction plays out. You're going to take the inevitable decline of sales after the initial burst in demand at product launch to justify your claim & fuel your fantasy?
McD