 | | let them live i say, Apple you did not give them the iphone, at least let them live, but somehow i have a suspicion that ATT is pulling some strings for this to happen...... | |
|
 | | | Re: let them live said by marinemaster:i say, Apple you did not give them the iphone, at least let them live, but somehow i have a suspicion that ATT is pulling some strings for this to happen......
We don't know if it was Apple or T-Mobile who didn't make the iPhone on T-Mobile happen. I suspect that how it went down was that Apple said "we want a cut" and T-Mobile said, "hell no" then Apple said, "alrighty, no iPhone for you." | |
|
| | | | Re: let them live said by fifty nine:We don't know if it was Apple or T-Mobile who didn't make the iPhone on T-Mobile happen. I suspect that how it went down was that Apple said "we want a cut" and T-Mobile said, "hell no" then Apple said, "alrighty, no iPhone for you."
Just like Verizon before it realized how big of a mistake it was for them. | |
|
| | | |
| | | | | | Re: let them live said by TuxRaiderPen: said by moonpuppy:
Just like Verizon before it realized how big of a mistake it was for them.
Thats your opinion it was a mistake.... I think it was a mistake to allow this cult on to the VZW network...it screwed over more existing customers in many ways... This was a strictly greedy Gordon Gecko stockholder BS $$ grab.  Yeah, when Verizon was bleeding customers because ATT had the iPhone and Verizon did not. 
Verizon was selling their service over their phones and it was well known that Verizon's phone lineup was basic. This site even published a study that showed that 49% of the people switching to ATT for the iPhone were from Verizon. They had to beef up their phone offerings (which included Android phones) but they still wanted that Apple magic and then started begging for the iPhone.
You thinking it was a mistake is a consumer view but I can't tell you how many people, on this very site, whined about wanting an iPhone but not wanting ATT service. | |
|
|  cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7 | said by marinemaster:i say, Apple you did not give them the iphone, And by give I believe you mean enter into a deal where TMo pays Apple a small fortune per phone for the privileged to sell their device.
Why should Apple let them use their device in advertising without licensing it? If Samsung is going to get in trouble for having a device that looks similar, they aren't going to let TMobile slide for using the actual device in a manner beyond fair use.
ATT is pulling some strings for this to happen. | |
|
| |  tiger72SexaT duorPPremium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | Re: let them live Except that Samsung is selling a competing device with the intent of getting customers to *not* buy an Apple device.
T-Mobile's campaign actually would boost Apple's unlocked device sales. | |
|
| | | cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7 | Re: let them live said by tiger72:T-Mobile's campaign actually would boost Apple's unlocked device sales. For the 5 people who are buying an unsubsidized iPhone with the intention to move over to T-Mobile? | |
|
| | | |  The LimitPremium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2 | Re: let them live What's your point? How is this hampering Apple's bottom line? | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| said by cdru:said by tiger72:T-Mobile's campaign actually would boost Apple's unlocked device sales. For the 5 people who are buying an unsubsidized iPhone with the intention to move over to T-Mobile? Make it 6. I am going buy an unlocked Iphone and use T-Mobile. | |
|
| | | | | | said by cdru:For the 5 people who are buying an unsubsidized iPhone with the intention to move over to T-Mobile?
And all the stolen iPhones sold on the streets.  | |
|
| | | | bn1221
join:2009-04-29
Cortland, NY | Some people buy them and unlock them and use them overseas.... | |
|
| | | | | | Its a lot more than that I live in a town of under 200k people and have a friend who sells Tmobile phones. They have been getting 3-5 users come in a day since 5's launch.
I am actually on Tmobile and got the Iphone 5. I paid a friend 200 dollars to use their ATT upgrade then paid for an unlock through ebay for 8 dollars. | |
|
| | |
| | |  r81984Fair and BalancedPremium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
 ·row44
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| Re: let them live said by MovieLover76:It's fair use to use an unlocked iPhone on any network that it supports, it's sold unlocked or the phone is unlocked after it's off contract precisely for that reason.
Apple may have convinced carriers and people that they should pay a high premium just to get the device on the network, but the truth is once you buy and unlocked iphone it's yours to do with as you please. The carrier you choose doesn't have to pay apple to put your device on their network.
Apple sells unlocked iPhones, they consent to people using them on any network.
Agreed. An unlocked Iphone works on Tmobile.
It is fair use of them to advertise that the device works on their network. They can advertise reality and facts.
As long as they are not saying they are the official company of the iphone or they are exclusive for the iphone then I cant see how they are breaking any laws or encroaching on anyone elses exclusive deals with apple.
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr. | |
|
 milnoc
join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:1 | Very clever Very clever of them -- if this stunt was intentional.
Launch the "campaign", pull it for "legal concerns", have the media pursue the campaign in their news reports of the "pulled" campaign absolutely free.
Case in point: I now know that T-Mobile is offering a deal to owners of unlocked iPhones without even knowing of the existence of their original campaign.
--
Watch my future television channel's public test broadcast!
»thecanadianpublic.com/live | |
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Apple Won't Like It Of course Apple would want these ads pulled. If anything, they are a disincentive to buy a new iPhone 5.
--
Romney/Ryan 2012 - Put a couple of mature adults in charge. | |
|
| | | Re: Apple Won't Like It I thought the iPhone 5 came unlocked. | |
|
| | pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Re: Apple Won't Like It said by michieru:I thought the iPhone 5 came unlocked.
True... for some reason I was thinking more of unlocked iPhone 4 and 4S'
--
Romney/Ryan 2012 - Put a couple of mature adults in charge. | |
|
| The LimitPremium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2 | How? That's what I don't understand. Customers would have to buy the phone at full price. I feel like this is actually good for Apple because these "agreements" wouldn't have to exist if phones were as portable to other carriers. It's stupid that in this country, Sprint won't activate Verizon devices and vice versa, not because of technological limits, but because they simply won't. (in my personal experience, this has been the case, I don't know why exactly it would be the case for LTE devices).
I know that different carriers operate in different spectrums.
--
"We will evaluate these integrals rigorously if we can, and non-rigorously if we must".
---Victor Moll, invited talk, Tom Osler Fest (April 17, 2010) | |
|
| | T-Mobile T-mobile is not dumb enough to pay millions to have the IPHONE. | |
|
 GooberPremium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:5
 ·Dish Network
| No legal leg to stand on by ATT or Apple T-Mobile has every right to use the image in advertising. They just have to ensure that the appropriate disclaimer language is present and there can't be disparagement or inaccurate statements.
--
“The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." - Barack Obama, UN Speech 9/25/2012. Ever hear of the First Amendment, BO? Vote Romney/Ryan and take America back. | |
|
| | | Re: No legal leg to stand on by ATT or Apple It appears that t-mobile's legal department disagrees. | |
|
| | GooberPremium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:5 | Re: No legal leg to stand on by ATT or Apple Did you talk to them? | |
|
 IowaCowboyWant to go back to IowaPremium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
·Comcast
·Verizon Broadban..
| Customer backlash I suspect Apple wanted AT&T to be the exclusive carrier for the iPhone as long as it was in existence. Customer backlash over the exclusivity agreement forced Apple to make the free market decision to terminate the AT&T exclusivity agreement before it expired because it was hampering sales and customer backlash.
There are various reasons why people don't like AT&T such as living in an area with poor AT&T coverage being the main reason. Also, AT&T released a popular phone without the network capacity to support the hot new gadget (which is why they had to get rid of unlimited data).
I have had mostly good experiences with AT&T but decided to switch to Verizon because they have somewhat better coverage than AT&T and also better call quality. The decision to switch to Verizon was made after an iPhone 3GS dropped three times during the same call and would not stay connected more than a minute (despite having 3-4 bars of signal). I also had issues with network capacity and dropped calls.
Holyoke Mall (Holyoke, MA) was a bad spot to have an AT&T phone (particularly around Christmas) because their network would get overloaded. I have no trouble with Verizon.
Market pressure forced Apple to allow the iPhone on other carriers. I am sure Apple is selling many more iPhones thanks to the end of their AT&T exclusivity agreement.
As for me, I cannot wait to get the iPhone 5 and the LTE will be a treat considering that I live in a 4G area.
--
I wish I still lived in Iowa; Everything there from rent and groceries to Cable TV is much cheaper in Iowa (especially with an overbuilder in town). | |
|
| BiggA
join:2005-11-23
EARTH Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: Customer backlash Yes, they are selling a lot more, but the majority of iPhones, by quite a margin are on AT&T, partly for legacy, and partly because Verizon still hasn't had an iPhone that fully utilizes their network (no simultaneous voice and data, and a long time to get LTE, while AT&T had HSPA+). | |
|
|
|
Re: let them live
