Re: I Phone?

In article <apony-E97E8D.17570108072008@news.qwest.net>, Oxford
<apony@pasture.com> wrote:

> if you buy a "computer" you don't need to PAY for a contract to connect
> to the internet... so the IDEA of paying for a 2 year contract is
> COMPLETELY out of line, unethical and simply won't stand...

actually that business model has been tried. buy a cheap pc (like $100
or something) as long as you sign up for 2 years of internet service.

In article <080720081110390306%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> the iphone 3g will not be sold without activation, at least in the
> short term. when they do start selling non-contract phones, it will be
> $400 more.

I read that they will also require ID like a drivers license.

--
Charles

At 08 Jul 2008 17:20:45 -0600 Oxford wrote:


> yes, that's a plausible plan... but not many will want to go through a
> credit check, pay $175, then cancel a few days later just to make a few
> $100... a lot of work for not much money.


Not everyone will do it for profit- assumig the 2.0 is able to be unlocked,
some will buy to use it on T-Mo, or perhaps prepaid.

> come friday, 1.0 iphones will be exactly the same as the new ones, other
> than 3G and a few other tweaks...

"Tweaks" like GPS?

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in news:080720081537052603%
nospam@nospam.invalid:

> http://gizmodo.com/5014909/att-memo-...ows-iphone-3g-

I've never been inside ATT or Apple, but you boys are smarter than the
average joe, even OX.

Have you EVER gotten a secret, internal, eyes only memo that started with
an ADVERTISEMENT for the product?

Come on....OPEN YOUR EYES! This "secret memo" is a SPAM! They don't send
spams to themselves!

"***Confidential AT&T Information. For Internal Distribution Only.***
AT&T and Apple today announced that the iPhone 3G will be available in the
U.S on July 11. iPhone 3G combines three products into one small,
lightweight device: a revolutionary mobile phone, a widescreen iPod, and it
puts the Internet in your pocket with the best e-mail, web browsing, search
and maps applications ever on a mobile phone."

They don't sell products to the store managers....

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in news:080720081537052603%
nospam@nospam.invalid:

> http://gizmodo.com/5014909/att-memo-...ows-iphone-3g-

"$30 - Unlimited Data (E-mail/Web), includes Visual Voicemail"

God I hope Attorney General Cuomo in NY State reads this. It cost Verizon
through the ass to sell "unlimited" data that WASN'T unlimited and never
has been. ATT needs a taste of some of that venom to stop this ****.

Email and web browsing are NOT "unlimited data"....

In article <Xns9AD5DC0C5258Dnoonehomecom@208.49.80.253>, Larry
<noone@home.com> wrote:

> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in news:080720081537052603%
> nospam@nospam.invalid:
>
> > http://gizmodo.com/5014909/att-memo-...ows-iphone-3g-
>
> I've never been inside ATT or Apple,

no surprise there.

> but you boys are smarter than the
> average joe, even OX.
>
> Have you EVER gotten a secret, internal, eyes only memo that started with
> an ADVERTISEMENT for the product?

that's not an ad, that's just a brief summary of the device, along with
the procedures to sell and activate it. nothing unusual about that.

> Come on....OPEN YOUR EYES! This "secret memo" is a SPAM! They don't send
> spams to themselves!

if you think it's bogus, then why not call or visit an apple or at&t
store and find out what the policy is for purchasing, cancelling and
returning an iphone. report back with what you find.

Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote:

> > yes, that's a plausible plan... but not many will want to go through a
> > credit check, pay $175, then cancel a few days later just to make a few
> > $100... a lot of work for not much money.
>
> Not everyone will do it for profit- assumig the 2.0 is able to be unlocked,
> some will buy to use it on T-Mo, or perhaps prepaid.

we'll see... but att will supposedly offer unsubsidized 2.0 versions
priced at $599 and $699 once initial demand has eased.

> > come friday, 1.0 iphones will be exactly the same as the new ones, other
> > than 3G and a few other tweaks...
>
> "Tweaks" like GPS?

iphone 1.0 already has quite decent GPS through skyhook, so i doubt
anyone will see the difference of having that additional "checkoff" item.

At 09 Jul 2008 01:40:41 +0000 Larry wrote:

> "$30 - Unlimited Data (E-mail/Web), includes Visual Voicemail"
>
> God I hope Attorney General Cuomo in NY State reads this. It cost
> Verizon
> through the ass to sell "unlimited" data that WASN'T unlimited and never
> has been. ATT needs a taste of some of that venom to stop this ****.


AT&T does allow "unlimited" web access on PHONES. They have a 5GB limit on
aircards and any data plan that allows/includes tethering a PC or external
device. Since the iPhone doesn't allow tethering, users can slurp as much
data s they are willing to.


> Email and web browsing are NOT "unlimited data"....


That's up to AT&T to define- not you, I or even the NY AG, as long as the
terms and restrictions are clearly spelled out to users.
Verizon was slapped by the AG for calling 5GB "unlimited"- not for
restricting the definition of "data" to web and e-mail.

At 09 Jul 2008 01:37:53 +0000 Larry wrote:

> I've never been inside ATT or Apple, but you boys are smarter than the
> average joe, even OX.
>
> Have you EVER gotten a secret, internal, eyes only memo that started with
> an ADVERTISEMENT for the product?
>
> Come on....OPEN YOUR EYES! This "secret memo" is a SPAM! They don't
send
> spams to themselves!


As a former SBMS/Cingular dealer, I Can say with absolute certainty that
"secret internal memos" often DO sound like advertising.


> "***Confidential AT&T Information. For Internal Distribution Only.***
> AT&T and Apple today announced that the iPhone 3G will be available in
the
> U.S on July 11. iPhone 3G combines three products into one small,
> lightweight device: a revolutionary mobile phone, a widescreen iPod, and
it
> puts the Internet in your pocket with the best e-mail, web browsing,
search
> and maps applications ever on a mobile phone."
>
> They don't sell products to the store managers....

Sure they do. They don't call it a "Compane Line" for nothing! ;-)

The memo looked and sounded perfectly legit to me...

"Oxford" <apony@pasture.com> wrote in message
news:apony-E97E8D.17570108072008@news.qwest.net...

>> That's the way it used to work with the old iPhone with its unsubsidized
>> price. Since the price of the new iPhone is now subsidized by the
>> contract
>> it seems likely that Apple won't be letting you out of their store with
>> a new $200 phone without having done the paper work and credit check
>> required to sign you up for a contract.
>>
>> It will be interesting to see how that works out. The idea of giving
>> someone in an Apple store my SSN is unappealing to me for reasons that
>> probably aren't rational.
>
> i fully agree... it's the neanderthal, "price fixing" cell industry that
> is in error... not apple, not the iphone, nor or any rational person.

Since the iPhone is the ONLY device in AT&T's arsenal that requires a
two-year contract to purchase it, I'd say Apple is as guilty as anyone here.
Any other AT&T-sold device can be bought cash-n-carry (at unsubsidized
price), put on a one-year contract (in return for a smaller subsidy),
activated month-to-month, or put on prepaid service. Only the iPhone
REQUIRES a two-year deal, apparently.


> if you buy a "computer" you don't need to PAY for a contract to connect
> to the internet... so the IDEA of paying for a 2 year contract is
> COMPLETELY out of line, unethical and simply won't stand...

But you COULD- People PC and AOL both offered PC price subsidies back in
their day. Like with most cellphones, it was OPTIONAL- the customer could
take advantage of the subsidy if they chose.

> it's criminal... since prices aren't dropping year to year in line with
> normal technology trends.

Sure they are; normal technology trends are that new technology items are
high priced, then drop until a natural "bottom" is found, then that low-end
becomes more featured rather than continuing to drop in price. Cellular has
been around nearly THREE DECADES. Wholesale cost has bottomed out at about
$30-40, and those low-end handsets get better and more featured every year-
those $30 handsets are a tenth of the size and weight, and have far more
features, than my circa-1987 Tandy CT-350, which wholesaled for $800.
That's right in line, trend-wise, with "mature" technology products like TVs
and VCRs. VCRs are four decades old, yet they still cost $30-40- they hit
"bottom" years ago.

> the entire cell industry is "corrupt" but I sure you know that...

Oh, please. It's a business like any other. You could argue that fast food
is also "corrupt" and "price fixed." Everyone's value menu seems
coincidentally "fixed" a $1 per item, and a chain's "signature" sandwich
runs about $3 from any of them, regardless of who sells it or what's in it.
A competitive marketplace tends to resemble "price fixing" since the
low-cost leader sets the bar, and everyone else decides how close to that
bar they are willing or able to go. If one grocery store sells a loaf of
Wonderbread for $1.99, the others can't get $5 for it. When they all end up
at or near $2, it's not price-fixing, it's competition!

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in
news:080720081913110593%nospam@nospam.invalid:

>> Come on....OPEN YOUR EYES! This "secret memo" is a SPAM! They don't
>> send spams to themselves!
>
> if you think it's bogus, then why not call or visit an apple or at&t
> store and find out what the policy is for purchasing, cancelling and
> returning an iphone. report back with what you find.
>
>

Has Apple filed suit against Gizmodo for posting this secret document,
company proprietary stuff they always sue over?

NO, they have not.

Has Apple threatened them with a lawsuit if they don't remove it from the
website, as they have others?

NO, they have not.

Ask yourself why.....

Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in news:g519d2$mi1$1
@aioe.org:

> That's up to AT&T to define- not you, I or even the NY AG, as long as the
> terms and restrictions are clearly spelled out to users.
> Verizon was slapped by the AG for calling 5GB "unlimited"- not for
> restricting the definition of "data" to web and e-mail.
>
>
>

Nope, it is not. It is up to the Attorney General of the State of
NY.....and the courts, if necessary, not me. This isn't about me....This
is about ATT doing the same ****ty advertising as Verizon Wireless....

Unlimited has been defined and THIS AIN'T IT!

In article <Xns9AD5F22FA7D19noonehomecom@208.49.80.253>, Larry
<noone@home.com> wrote:

> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in
> news:080720081913110593%nospam@nospam.invalid:
>
> >> Come on....OPEN YOUR EYES! This "secret memo" is a SPAM! They don't
> >> send spams to themselves!
> >
> > if you think it's bogus, then why not call or visit an apple or at&t
> > store and find out what the policy is for purchasing, cancelling and
> > returning an iphone. report back with what you find.
>
> Has Apple filed suit against Gizmodo for posting this secret document,
> company proprietary stuff they always sue over?
>
> NO, they have not.

it's at&t confidential information, not apple confidential information,
so it's not for apple to sue.

> Has Apple threatened them with a lawsuit if they don't remove it from the
> website, as they have others?
>
> NO, they have not.

which other websites has apple sued to have the at&t memo removed?

> Ask yourself why.....

as i mentioned, it's an at&t memo to its stores so apple isn't
involved. if anything, it's for at&t to find out who leaked it and
take appropriate action, should they decide to do so. also,
journalists are not liable for reporting news, even if someone *else*
violated an agreement.

it's also all over the net. who is to say that gizmodo isn't reporting
it after having read it elsewhere? whom do they sue first?

<http://www.iphoneactiveren.nl/index....t&view=article
&id=60:moeilijk&catid=1:homepagenieuws>

<http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2008/...etails-you-nev
er-wanted-to-know/>

<http://www.intoiphone.com/2008/06/10...g-upgrade-call
ingdata-plan-policies-revealed-no-more-revenue-sharing.html>

<http://iphone.click2creation.com/ind...ential-att-not
e-some-2g-iphone-users-to-get-free-3g-iphone-upgrade-3-iphones-per-perso
n-rule-remains-2g-iphones-still-activated-via-itunes/>

<http://fatmatrix.com/att-memo-to-ret...one-3g-policy-
iphone-3g.html>

<http://phonereport.info/2008/06/10/att-with-apple-iphone-3g-details/>

At 09 Jul 2008 03:47:40 +0000 Larry wrote:

> > That's up to AT&T to define- not you, I or even the NY AG, as long as
> > the terms and restrictions are clearly spelled out to users.
> > Verizon was slapped by the AG for calling 5GB "unlimited"- not for
> > restricting the definition of "data" to web and e-mail.
> >
>
> Nope, it is not. It is up to the Attorney General of the State of
> NY.....and the courts, if necessary, not me. This isn't about me....This
> is about ATT doing the same ****ty advertising as Verizon Wireless....
>
> Unlimited has been defined and THIS AIN'T IT!


How has the NY AG defined "unlimited" differently than AT&T? Again, they
went after Verizon for capping a plan advertised as "unlimited" at 5GB. As
I said, there is no transfer limit on AT&T's on-phone data plans, only
tethered plans, which AT&T does NOT describe as "unlimited."