That's just bloody ridiculous. Every mobile phone in Europe that's on a contract (as opposed to payg) is 'locked' to a particular provider, it's always been done that way. Litigophilic old USA, hey ho. "My iPhone lost my borther his chix" suit soon to follow, no doubt.
_________________________ If it's brokenless, don't suffix it...
In fact I walked into a Verizon store and a sprint store last week to just check out whats there. They too all have 2 year contracts for subsidized phones as well and you have to use their applications too. Just like with Apple.
yeah, but i can buy the new Samsung Epic on Sprint . . . or i can buy the Galaxy S (same phone) on Verizon, etc.
i purchased my first iPhone and 2-year contract with the intention of staying 2 years. i then expected to switch to T*Mobile, but Apple had a secret contract with AT&T and their secret contract keeps me from using my iPhone elsewhere after i fullfil my contract. i also want to use the air sync app and apple won't allow it. i don't want some company "protecting me" from poor quality applications when i can decide how i use my phone, yet that's what Apple does through their app store. if they wanted to have an app store and also allow consumers to grab apps from other online sources then that should be up to the owner of the iPhone; not decided by the maker of the iPhone who sold it to you last year or 2 years ago or whenever. can you imagine Honda and Ford opening gas stations and accessory stores and only allowing you to fill up at their stations or to buy their cargo baskets? that's what Apple is doing. sure, i get that Apple is ensuring better quality, but if i don't want their version of quality then i shouldn't be locked into it, particularly after i fulfilled my 2-year contract, yet i am. if i buy the Samsung Epic then i can install any Android apps from any website i want. that's not a closed system.
i am lying as i had no intention of going to T*Mobile and i was happy to get the newer 3G iPhone. i am sort of serious about the app store issue. but the point is that these phone companies are way too closed across the board. you pay for unlimited data and yet they still want to charge me 15 cents per text (or have me buy a texting package). text messages are data and i am paying for unlimited data -- how do consumers allow a separate text message fee when text messages are super duper small compared to most web uses of smart phones (and even smaller than typical emails)? it's because we're all being played by the cell companies. if this lawsuit can help swing any part of this current model back towards consumers then i am all for it.
text messages are data and i am paying for unlimited data -- how do consumers allow a separate text message fee when text messages are super duper small compared to most web uses of smart phones (and even smaller than typical emails)? it's because we're all being played by the cell companies
Loc: Hampstead, MD, USA
Originally Posted By: FSM
how do consumers allow a separate text message fee when text messages are super duper small compared to most web uses of smart phones (and even smaller than typical emails)? it's because we're all being played by the cell companies.
That's one of the reasons I signed up for google voice. I never texted anyone, always just used email on the phone. But now I've got friends who've started texting a lot, and it ended up costing me extra. Doesn't take many texts to push your bill past what it would cost for unlimited texting either. I complained to them to email me instead of texting, but apparently it's too difficult.
So, I gave that GV number to friends that text me, now they send a text to GV number, I set GV to email my gmail account, and set gmail up on my phone with activesync so it's pushed to the phone immediately. I have a favorite shortcut with GV, just open that up and text them back, and it doesn't cost me an extra $15 a month or whatever for texting. Having to open up the GV favorite to text back is a small price to pay, I save $20 a month or so because of the texting and visual voice mails with GV.
Hey I'm an F'n Jerk!® twitter.com/SgtBaxter facebook.com/Bryan.Eckert
Sorry I don't buy into this app thingy. I mean what over 225,000 is some how a closed system.
if i make an app for your Mac, i can sell it from my website and make 100% of the profits. if i make an app for an iPhone then i have to turn it into Apple and they'll take their cut after they decide that my app is worthy. that's a closed system, carp. you don't have to buy it or not; it is closed. and, if Apple decides an app is (e.g., let's just say that the app allows me to use my iPhone to tether internet to my iPad) is not one it wants on the iPhone then it isn't going to be available in the store whether they have 200,000 apps or 2 million apps. that's closed regardless of the percentage of apps that they end up approving.
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.