Don't be a wise guy. You finished editing long before I did my own edits.
You shouldn't have written those things in the first place.
Some other mods would have banned you from just your first post. I'm giving you another chance, so don't be snarky.
I'm sorry I missed the part where there's a time limit for editing posts to not be tried and judged by the mods. Is that 10 seconds - 20 seconds - or 30 seconds? I need to know because how will I ever type and edit responses without some kind of notice on how long I've got to change things before the Roman legions get the cross and nails ready?
Obviously this is of the utmost in importance to you so please let me know as soon as possible. I'll do bird calls through my meat-whistles in my hands to while away the time.
BTW is "snarky" inflammatory? I can't tell. Is this a mod-perk?
I'm sorry I missed the part where there's a time limit for editing posts to not be tried and judged by the mods. Is that 10 seconds - 20 seconds - or 30 seconds? I need to know because how will I ever type and edit responses without some kind of notice on how long I've got to change things.
Obviously this is of the utmost in importance to you so please let me know as soon as possible.
Normally, there is no time limit. I've corrected, or added to posts long after I posted them.
It's when you curse another member, or otherwise direct some sort of comment like that in the public forum, that you essentially have no time. Your post was reported, and that's why I saw it. If it wasn't reported, and no mods were on this thread to see it, it may have remained for a while. That doesn't mean that you should assume that if you do it again you won't be banned directly, without any more warning.
But please think of how the other person may feel when directing these comments, BEFORE you post.
I'm sorry I missed the part where there's a time limit for editing posts to not be tried and judged by the mods. Is that 10 seconds - 20 seconds - or 30 seconds? I need to know because how will I ever type and edit responses without some kind of notice on how long I've got to change things before the Roman legions get the cross and nails ready?
Obviously this is of the utmost in importance to you so please let me know as soon as possible. I'll do bird calls through my meat-whistles in the my hands to while away the time.
BTW is "snarky" inflammatory? I can't tell. Is this a mod-perk?
I have to tell you that on most other sites, comments like that would enough to get you banned.
I have to tell you that on most other sites, comments like that would enough to get you banned.
Is that your intention?
Heh, this is quite the back and forth... You explain the rules to him, he writes something offensive back... I don't see why you're being so patient though!
Heh, this is quite the back and forth... You explain the rules to him, he writes something offensive back... I don't see why you're being so patient though!
I try very hard to not be a hypocrite. As you know, I get into heated arguments with some here, though I don't direct comments they way these have been, not do I use those types of words (this IS a public forum!).
So I like to give people second chances if I can.
But I have meetings tonight, and won't be here shortly.
Congratulations, you just made 99.9% of all advertising on American TV illegal.
And yes, I'm specifically calling out American TV. These lawsuits pointing to rulings in the UK is irrelevant. Last time I checked, neither Florida or New York are part of the United Kingdom. Different countries have different standards for how much creative leeway you have in marketing products. The UK and the EU in general have stricter guidelines. Lawsuits in the US can't be based on those guidelines.
Do you think all the stuff you saw in the Super Bowl ads were real? Match.com "guaratees" me a match in 6 months, but you have to read the fine-print to know what that means. Just like you need to read the fine print of anybody's claims. Technology claims are pretty much always based on theoretical or ideal performance. USB = 480 Mbps, Firewire 400 = 400 Mbps, Gigabit Ethernet = 1000 Mbps, my DSL is 3 Mbps. Not a single one of those claims hold up under ANY real-world conditions. And yet Apple is being sued because in some areas you aren't getting the maximum performance. They can't hardly be expected to represent the real-world performance you'll get in your own living room.
False. Rogers calims up to 7 MB download for High Speed Express... Tested it... And guess what? I get anywhere from 6.7 to 6.8 on my airport express for downloads. For uploads, Rogers says up to 500 KB. Guess what? I get over 500 each time. Apple's test are far off with the iPhone. Sorry to burst your bubble.
False. Rogers calims up to 7 MB download for High Speed Express... Tested it... And guess what? I get anywhere from 6.7 to 6.8 on my airport express for downloads. For uploads, Rogers says up to 500 KB. Guess what? I get over 500 each time. Apple's test are far off with the iPhone. Sorry to burst your bubble.
OK, so what are Apple's claims and what are the actual results? Please provide the exact numbers and tell us by how much they (well, ATT) missed the claim.
Oh, and why are you satisfied with speeds of 6.7 or 6.8 when you are promised 7 MBps? Or maybe I should ask, how does one contest a speed promise when the promise is "up to" a certain level? That's essentially saying you'll get a max of 7 - isn't ANY delivered speed therefore fulfilling the promise that you'll get no more than 7 MBps?
I get that we're mostly Apple customers of some sort here, and for most of us, that's probably because we like our electronics to operate smoothly and with minimal error and frustration. However, demanding perfection is unreasonable.
Apple (and buyers, for that matter) should have known very well that white plastic is far less durable than most other colors, and made a bad move by going with white for the iPhone. Dyed plastic is much more durable than bleached plastic. Most of the hairline cracks are in white iPhones. I get it. It shouldn't have been done, and Apple should probably swap them out for black ones for free, at the customers' option. As for network connection and speeds, that's AT&T's issue (in the US), and they're working on it. $20,000,000,000 worth of working on it in four years.
People are either legitimately unhappy, greedy, or have some fetish for litigation, and they're suing. This means that whether they win or not, they're diverting some of Apple's resources into litigation, and not into the things that I as a customer really want them to. If they win, I might get a check in the mail, but increasing Apple's margin of safety is not something I want as a customer, because you and I will pay for it in the long run, whether it's in dollars, quality, or innovation.
I bought the 3G the week it came out, and it's performed well. Not perfectly, but well. In my opinion, it's the best on the market. And it continues to get better.
What you continue to be ignorant of and ignore is that real world speed varies depending on the carrier and network. These factors have nothing to directly do with the phone.
I posted several reviews where they did achieve 3 and 4 times better performance that EDGE. The phone is capable of achieving these data rates. But the phone cannot go any faster than the data network.
Quote:
Originally Posted by italiankid
False. Rogers calims up to 7 MB download for High Speed Express... Tested it... And guess what? I get anywhere from 6.7 to 6.8 on my airport express for downloads. For uploads, Rogers says up to 500 KB. Guess what? I get over 500 each time. Apple's test are far off with the iPhone. Sorry to burst your bubble.
What you continue to be ignorant of and ignore is that real world speed varies depending on the carrier and network. These factors have nothing to directly do with the phone.
I posted several reviews where they did achieve 3 and 4 times better performance that EDGE. The phone is capable of achieving these data rates. But the phone cannot go any faster than the data network.
Again, funny how they achieved these results, but 98% of owners who own the phone complain about it. Seems fishy to me no?
In real world life the phone does not meet or exceed the claims Apple publishes.... TWICE AS FAST!
Again, funny how they achieved these results, but 98% of owners who own the phone complain about it. Seems fishy to me no?
In real world life the phone does not meet or exceed the claims Apple publishes.... TWICE AS FAST!
98%! Wow!
Wait a minute.... you didn't just make that up, did you?
It's amazing that 98% of iPhone 3G owners complain about its speed, when the overall customer satisfaction with the phone has set industry records by large margins. Weird!
They used software that measures the speed of the network. Its empirical data not made up numbers. Unlike some people.
So the software measuring the speed of the network spits out empirical data that indicates that 98% of people that own the phone complain about it. I'm not sure I see a clear connection there. Does complaining affect the speed, allowing this conclusion to be drawn?
No, italiankid doubted the results of reviewers who found the iPhone 3G significantly faster than EDGE. The reviewers used software that measured the network speed to determine how much faster 3G was over EDGE.
His 98% stat was just pulled out of his corn hole.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DHKOsta
So the software measuring the speed of the network spits out empirical data that indicates that 98% of people that own the phone complain about it. I'm not sure I see a clear connection there. Does complaining affect the speed, allowing this conclusion to be drawn?
The one thing I really hate about the iPhone is lack of carrier options. I would love to see how many people would get it if it was offered on Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile. I don't mean to sound like an ATT hater, but I do live in an area that they don't provide coverage for. I have survived with my iPhone on the roaming (free on ATT), but the coverage is less than ideal.
The lack of carriers is directly due to those carriers dictating what can or cannot be added to the iPhone.
In short, those carriers will never be eligible to have the phone.
False. Rogers calims up to 7 MB download for High Speed Express... Tested it... And guess what? I get anywhere from 6.7 to 6.8 on my airport express for downloads. For uploads, Rogers says up to 500 KB. Guess what? I get over 500 each time. Apple's test are far off with the iPhone. Sorry to burst your bubble.
Good for you.
I bought a 7Mbps/1Mbps up from Qwest 3 years ago.
Last year I received a TOS change, and suddenly my continuing agreement is up to 5Mbps down/896Kbps up.
Coincidentally, this has been changed with the Fiber to the Node crap they still cannot manage to get lit other than select markets.
Officially, I'm 5,280Kbps down/ 896Kbps up.
So it's a miracle! I'm faster than they claim down and exactly as they claim up!
The language morphed over the past 3 years to be sure the term, ''up to'' was in there several times.
Maybe I should sue, afterall it's the trendy action to take when one cannot get to theoretical ceilings.
The lack of carriers is directly due to those carriers dictating what can or cannot be added to the iPhone.
In short, those carriers will never be eligible to have the phone.
But your answer is ? Apple would sell a TON of iPhone/Camera, Music downloading/email retrieving/game playing devices, if they could be sold by other carriers.
But your answer is ? Apple would sell a TON of iPhone/Camera, Music downloading/email retrieving/game playing devices, if they could be sold by other carriers.
And the corollary to that answer is... Apple may very well make less money if they did so, because the carriers which are now willing to pay Apple over $600 per device compared to the market price of around $200 for the iPod Touch. The primary difference between those two devices, from an economic standpoint, is that a service is provided through the iPhone which can be locked to a certain provider. Without that ability, carriers would be willing to pay far less of a subsidy.
We can all agree, I'm sure, that Apple did consider the option of not having exclusive contracts, am I correct? While we all can sit here and fudge numbers all we like, can we also agree that Apple had access to data of greatly higher quality which led them to the conclusion that doing it the way they have done it was the best way to maximize expected profits.
Looking back at the results of Apple's decisions, it is hard to imagine that Apple is regretting them. Certain users who prefer Verizon or whatever other carrier they use definitely regret those decisions, but not Apple. Remember, many of the decisions were made when Apple did not have a strong bargaining position. While the device may have been nearly complete, Apple was a new entrant to the phone business and it likely took some very crafty bargaining to get as good of a deal out of ATT as they did, even though now looking back it might look like ATT got a great deal out of it as well.
That's economics. If you think Apple should have sold the device to everyone instead of just ATT or Rogers or whomever, no one is stopping you from creating your own godphone and selling it on the cheap
Comments
Don't be a wise guy. You finished editing long before I did my own edits.
You shouldn't have written those things in the first place.
Some other mods would have banned you from just your first post. I'm giving you another chance, so don't be snarky.
I'm sorry I missed the part where there's a time limit for editing posts to not be tried and judged by the mods. Is that 10 seconds - 20 seconds - or 30 seconds? I need to know because how will I ever type and edit responses without some kind of notice on how long I've got to change things before the Roman legions get the cross and nails ready?
Obviously this is of the utmost in importance to you so please let me know as soon as possible. I'll do bird calls through my meat-whistles in my hands to while away the time.
BTW is "snarky" inflammatory? I can't tell. Is this a mod-perk?
I'm sorry I missed the part where there's a time limit for editing posts to not be tried and judged by the mods. Is that 10 seconds - 20 seconds - or 30 seconds? I need to know because how will I ever type and edit responses without some kind of notice on how long I've got to change things.
Obviously this is of the utmost in importance to you so please let me know as soon as possible.
Normally, there is no time limit. I've corrected, or added to posts long after I posted them.
It's when you curse another member, or otherwise direct some sort of comment like that in the public forum, that you essentially have no time. Your post was reported, and that's why I saw it. If it wasn't reported, and no mods were on this thread to see it, it may have remained for a while. That doesn't mean that you should assume that if you do it again you won't be banned directly, without any more warning.
But please think of how the other person may feel when directing these comments, BEFORE you post.
I'm sorry I missed the part where there's a time limit for editing posts to not be tried and judged by the mods. Is that 10 seconds - 20 seconds - or 30 seconds? I need to know because how will I ever type and edit responses without some kind of notice on how long I've got to change things before the Roman legions get the cross and nails ready?
Obviously this is of the utmost in importance to you so please let me know as soon as possible. I'll do bird calls through my meat-whistles in the my hands to while away the time.
BTW is "snarky" inflammatory? I can't tell. Is this a mod-perk?
I have to tell you that on most other sites, comments like that would enough to get you banned.
Is that your intention?
I have to tell you that on most other sites, comments like that would enough to get you banned.
Is that your intention?
Heh, this is quite the back and forth... You explain the rules to him, he writes something offensive back... I don't see why you're being so patient though!
Heh, this is quite the back and forth... You explain the rules to him, he writes something offensive back... I don't see why you're being so patient though!
I try very hard to not be a hypocrite. As you know, I get into heated arguments with some here, though I don't direct comments they way these have been, not do I use those types of words (this IS a public forum!).
So I like to give people second chances if I can.
But I have meetings tonight, and won't be here shortly.
I have to tell you that on most other sites, comments like that would enough to get you banned.
Is that your intention?
You seem to be baiting a response (also known as trolling) so you can ban people (also known as mod trolling).
Is that your intention?
Congratulations, you just made 99.9% of all advertising on American TV illegal.
And yes, I'm specifically calling out American TV. These lawsuits pointing to rulings in the UK is irrelevant. Last time I checked, neither Florida or New York are part of the United Kingdom. Different countries have different standards for how much creative leeway you have in marketing products. The UK and the EU in general have stricter guidelines. Lawsuits in the US can't be based on those guidelines.
Do you think all the stuff you saw in the Super Bowl ads were real? Match.com "guaratees" me a match in 6 months, but you have to read the fine-print to know what that means. Just like you need to read the fine print of anybody's claims. Technology claims are pretty much always based on theoretical or ideal performance. USB = 480 Mbps, Firewire 400 = 400 Mbps, Gigabit Ethernet = 1000 Mbps, my DSL is 3 Mbps. Not a single one of those claims hold up under ANY real-world conditions. And yet Apple is being sued because in some areas you aren't getting the maximum performance. They can't hardly be expected to represent the real-world performance you'll get in your own living room.
False. Rogers calims up to 7 MB download for High Speed Express... Tested it... And guess what? I get anywhere from 6.7 to 6.8 on my airport express for downloads. For uploads, Rogers says up to 500 KB. Guess what? I get over 500 each time. Apple's test are far off with the iPhone. Sorry to burst your bubble.
False. Rogers calims up to 7 MB download for High Speed Express... Tested it... And guess what? I get anywhere from 6.7 to 6.8 on my airport express for downloads. For uploads, Rogers says up to 500 KB. Guess what? I get over 500 each time. Apple's test are far off with the iPhone. Sorry to burst your bubble.
OK, so what are Apple's claims and what are the actual results? Please provide the exact numbers and tell us by how much they (well, ATT) missed the claim.
Oh, and why are you satisfied with speeds of 6.7 or 6.8 when you are promised 7 MBps? Or maybe I should ask, how does one contest a speed promise when the promise is "up to" a certain level? That's essentially saying you'll get a max of 7 - isn't ANY delivered speed therefore fulfilling the promise that you'll get no more than 7 MBps?
Apple (and buyers, for that matter) should have known very well that white plastic is far less durable than most other colors, and made a bad move by going with white for the iPhone. Dyed plastic is much more durable than bleached plastic. Most of the hairline cracks are in white iPhones. I get it. It shouldn't have been done, and Apple should probably swap them out for black ones for free, at the customers' option. As for network connection and speeds, that's AT&T's issue (in the US), and they're working on it. $20,000,000,000 worth of working on it in four years.
People are either legitimately unhappy, greedy, or have some fetish for litigation, and they're suing. This means that whether they win or not, they're diverting some of Apple's resources into litigation, and not into the things that I as a customer really want them to. If they win, I might get a check in the mail, but increasing Apple's margin of safety is not something I want as a customer, because you and I will pay for it in the long run, whether it's in dollars, quality, or innovation.
I bought the 3G the week it came out, and it's performed well. Not perfectly, but well. In my opinion, it's the best on the market. And it continues to get better.
I posted several reviews where they did achieve 3 and 4 times better performance that EDGE. The phone is capable of achieving these data rates. But the phone cannot go any faster than the data network.
False. Rogers calims up to 7 MB download for High Speed Express... Tested it... And guess what? I get anywhere from 6.7 to 6.8 on my airport express for downloads. For uploads, Rogers says up to 500 KB. Guess what? I get over 500 each time. Apple's test are far off with the iPhone. Sorry to burst your bubble.
What you continue to be ignorant of and ignore is that real world speed varies depending on the carrier and network. These factors have nothing to directly do with the phone.
I posted several reviews where they did achieve 3 and 4 times better performance that EDGE. The phone is capable of achieving these data rates. But the phone cannot go any faster than the data network.
Again, funny how they achieved these results, but 98% of owners who own the phone complain about it. Seems fishy to me no?
In real world life the phone does not meet or exceed the claims Apple publishes.... TWICE AS FAST!
Again, funny how they achieved these results, but 98% of owners who own the phone complain about it. Seems fishy to me no?
In real world life the phone does not meet or exceed the claims Apple publishes.... TWICE AS FAST!
98%! Wow!
Wait a minute.... you didn't just make that up, did you?
It's amazing that 98% of iPhone 3G owners complain about its speed, when the overall customer satisfaction with the phone has set industry records by large margins. Weird!
98%! Wow!
Wait a minute.... you didn't just make that up, did you?
Didn't you know? 84% of statistics are made up on the spot, just like lies and damned lies.
Oh, and it's my personal opinion that the TG01 is too big. Like if Zack Morris had a touchscreen.
Again, funny how they achieved these results, but 98% of owners who own the phone complain about it. Seems fishy to me no?
In real world life the phone does not meet or exceed the claims Apple publishes.... TWICE AS FAST!
They used software that measures the speed of the network. Its empirical data not made up numbers. Unlike some people.
So the software measuring the speed of the network spits out empirical data that indicates that 98% of people that own the phone complain about it. I'm not sure I see a clear connection there. Does complaining affect the speed, allowing this conclusion to be drawn?
His 98% stat was just pulled out of his corn hole.
So the software measuring the speed of the network spits out empirical data that indicates that 98% of people that own the phone complain about it. I'm not sure I see a clear connection there. Does complaining affect the speed, allowing this conclusion to be drawn?
The one thing I really hate about the iPhone is lack of carrier options. I would love to see how many people would get it if it was offered on Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile. I don't mean to sound like an ATT hater, but I do live in an area that they don't provide coverage for. I have survived with my iPhone on the roaming (free on ATT), but the coverage is less than ideal.
The lack of carriers is directly due to those carriers dictating what can or cannot be added to the iPhone.
In short, those carriers will never be eligible to have the phone.
False. Rogers calims up to 7 MB download for High Speed Express... Tested it... And guess what? I get anywhere from 6.7 to 6.8 on my airport express for downloads. For uploads, Rogers says up to 500 KB. Guess what? I get over 500 each time. Apple's test are far off with the iPhone. Sorry to burst your bubble.
Good for you.
I bought a 7Mbps/1Mbps up from Qwest 3 years ago.
Last year I received a TOS change, and suddenly my continuing agreement is up to 5Mbps down/896Kbps up.
Coincidentally, this has been changed with the Fiber to the Node crap they still cannot manage to get lit other than select markets.
Officially, I'm 5,280Kbps down/ 896Kbps up.
So it's a miracle! I'm faster than they claim down and exactly as they claim up!
The language morphed over the past 3 years to be sure the term, ''up to'' was in there several times.
Maybe I should sue, afterall it's the trendy action to take when one cannot get to theoretical ceilings.
The lack of carriers is directly due to those carriers dictating what can or cannot be added to the iPhone.
In short, those carriers will never be eligible to have the phone.
But your answer is ? Apple would sell a TON of iPhone/Camera, Music downloading/email retrieving/game playing devices, if they could be sold by other carriers.
Skip
But your answer is ? Apple would sell a TON of iPhone/Camera, Music downloading/email retrieving/game playing devices, if they could be sold by other carriers.
And the corollary to that answer is... Apple may very well make less money if they did so, because the carriers which are now willing to pay Apple over $600 per device compared to the market price of around $200 for the iPod Touch. The primary difference between those two devices, from an economic standpoint, is that a service is provided through the iPhone which can be locked to a certain provider. Without that ability, carriers would be willing to pay far less of a subsidy.
We can all agree, I'm sure, that Apple did consider the option of not having exclusive contracts, am I correct? While we all can sit here and fudge numbers all we like, can we also agree that Apple had access to data of greatly higher quality which led them to the conclusion that doing it the way they have done it was the best way to maximize expected profits.
Looking back at the results of Apple's decisions, it is hard to imagine that Apple is regretting them. Certain users who prefer Verizon or whatever other carrier they use definitely regret those decisions, but not Apple. Remember, many of the decisions were made when Apple did not have a strong bargaining position. While the device may have been nearly complete, Apple was a new entrant to the phone business and it likely took some very crafty bargaining to get as good of a deal out of ATT as they did, even though now looking back it might look like ATT got a great deal out of it as well.
That's economics. If you think Apple should have sold the device to everyone instead of just ATT or Rogers or whomever, no one is stopping you from creating your own godphone and selling it on the cheap