Disgusted.  I very much dislike the fact I have to use it.

--
ME2


On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Steve Ens <[email protected]> wrote:

> Another question - how do all the iphone lovers *feel *now that they know
> the security on their precious devices is crap and that Apple lied about the
> included encryption?
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 11:06 AM, Sam Cayze <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>  "So how many of you that have deployed the iPhone have had to deal with
>> physical damage"
>>
>> I have, but this guy breaks any phone he touches.  Many of my friends have
>> them, and they seem to hold up quite well.
>> The problem is that At&t's excludes Assurion Insurance on the iPhone.
>> (All other carries offer a damage insurance for smartphones, with a $50 or
>> so deductable).  A MUST IMO.
>>
>> That will leave you high and dry when someone breaks an iPhone.
>> 1.  Get 3rd party Insurance on the iPhone (http://www.squaretrade.com),
>> or check your Ins policy at work.  You might be able to add a policy rider.
>> (It was a rip off where I worked, I opted for square trade)
>> 2.  Keep a spare on hand.  (Or at least a dumbphone), in case the user's
>> phone breaks, and needs one ASAP.
>>
>>
>> *Another reason for 3rd Party coverage:*
>> Apple and At&t are NOT offering replacements to users that have bricked
>> iPhones during an upgrade to say OS 3.1.
>> (Ridiculous, I know, don't get me started).
>>
>>
>>
>> Sam
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>>  *From:* Martin Blackstone [mailto:[email protected]]
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 02, 2009 10:36 AM
>>
>> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues
>> *Subject:* RE: iPhone experience
>>
>>    So let me pose an iPhone question.
>>
>> Compared to a BB, how does it physically hold up. I have guys here that
>> just beat the living hell out of their phones and of course they are also
>> the ones who want iPhones and the iPhone just looks too delicate for day to
>> day usage by a lot of folks.
>>
>> The BB can take a hell of a beating and short of the occasional track ball
>> replacement, I rarely have to replace them unless someone has dropped it in
>> a toilet or some other catastrophic issue.
>>
>> But that glass front on the iPhone scares me.
>>
>> So how many of you that have deployed the iPhone have had to deal with
>> physical damage?
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:[email protected]]
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 02, 2009 8:25 AM
>> *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues
>> *Subject:* Re: iPhone experience
>>
>>
>>
>> OK, so my reply to you:
>>
>>
>>
>> I didnt say to pin it on anything.  I said it can be done; which is true.
>>
>>
>>
>> I didnt say to do it or not to; only that its possible.  I really dont
>> know how I could have written a more neutral statement about it originally
>> or in my reply to you.  I dont think its fair to say I'm being disingenuous
>> because of my intentional neutrality.
>>
>>
>>
>> Touché on the open source bits of router firmware, which opens the door
>> wide for any modifications. My mistake for neglecting to take that into
>> consideration. But, these forums have not been quick to uphold Microsoft's
>> licensing when it comes to phone firmware/software customization.  Theft,
>> sure.  Customization?  No.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jailbreaking is not theft.  Your comparison to BitTorrent use was 
>> disingenuous
>> - for real.
>> --
>> ME2
>>
>>  On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 12:24 AM, Ben Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Micheal Espinola Jr
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > I don't see what was "disingenuous" about my reply to Bob.
>>
>>  Not your reply to Bob, you reply to me.  Which I read along the
>> lines of, "Oh, I didn't mean you should actually *do* what I was
>> talking about, I was just saying it's theoretically possible."  You
>> want to argue you don't think it's a big deal, or you interpret the
>> license different, or something like that (which you did, now), okay.
>> I might not agree, but I can respect that.  But playing language
>> lawyer to try and dodge ownership of what you say -- that is bogus.  I
>> have no respect for that.  Maybe that's not what you intended to mean,
>> in which case, I apologize.
>>
>>
>> > Its funny, because whenever someone wants to get better access control
>> with
>> > a home router, there are plenty of recommendations for DD-WRT.
>>
>>  The license agreements with those routers don't prohibit third-party
>> firmware.  Indeed, in many cases, they're specifically required to
>> release the source under the GPL.  Some even advertise their
>> compatibility with third-party firmware as a feature, e.g., WRT54GL.
>>
>>  Apple/AT&T forbids it in their licenses, release updates to counter
>> it, and threatens legal action.
>>
>>  See the difference?
>>
>> > Apple is not special.
>>
>>  No, they're not.  And these forums are usually pretty quick to
>> uphold Microsoft's licenses.  So why not Apple's?
>>
>> -- Ben
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Reply via email to