ktappe

themacman said:

They’ll purchase as many as they can and return any unsold. 

Then Apple Hong Kong should do what Apple Delaware does:  Limit iPhones to 2 per customer. 

fallenjt said:

FaceTime is not a feature of the iPhone, you moron. It's a feature of the iOS and iOS features got added and removed over time.

You and Apple can claim that all you want. And technically that's true. The problem is, and the judge noted, Apple distinctly advertised FaceTime as a feature of the iPhone. That means part of the $ customers paid for the iPhone went to FaceTime. It wasn't "free". When Apple took FaceTime away, it took away features it had used to sell the iPhone. That's not legal. Apple *chose* to disable FaceTime on phones that had it previously worked on. They didn't have to do that. And that's what the lawsuit is about.

It makes no sense to make something like this "optional". 

Dumb.

We all put cases on them anyway, so the color and finish really don't matter that much.

SpamSandwich said:

next quarter I will vote in favor of any and every shareholder proposal requiring Apple to divulge these kinds of politically motivated expenditures.

Good luck with that. The rest of us shareholders will vote status quo to keep Apple on track to becoming the first $1 Trillion company.