Ian Darwin wrote:

> I agree, but this is exactly what Apple/AT&T are trying to prevent you
> from doing with the iPhone, by attaching a binding entity called a
> "contract" to every iPhone that is sold.

The whole apple/att/iphone situation never made any sense to me, if they
were serious about this they would have signed you up for an AT&T
contract at the same time.

The only way it makes sense to me, is if you think Apple, which bound by
contracts etc to AT&T still wants to make money selling devices and the
whole bricking thing is just them doing "something" to appear to care.

I guess this sort of thing worked for MS in the past, allow everyone to
copy your OS until it owns 90+ % of the market then go sue everyone into
compliance, cept apple won't get that kind of market share with all the
heavy weights already in place, and all the non-sense restrictions they
have in place.

It's too surreal to be even bizarre, does Apple have a clue about the
phone market or even a grasp on the world/reality beyond the ipod?

Then there was the whole price drop thing ticking off the early
adopters, you'd have to think twice about lining up for another Apple
product ever again and Apple should really send something special to
make up for it to those people.

-- 

Best regards,
 Duane

http://www.freeauth.org - Enterprise Two Factor Authentication
http://www.nodedb.com - Think globally, network locally
http://www.sydneywireless.com - Telecommunications Freedom
http://e164.org - Because e164.arpa is a tax on VoIP

"In the long run the pessimist may be proved right,
    but the optimist has a better time on the trip."

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to