 tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ | a subset of iphone users make me sick... "And they should say they will do that for every iPhone that Apple launches because they want the iPhone users to be part of the AT&T family for life," said Lawrence. "That would be the type of statement that would be leading -- outside the industry norm -- and would let iPhone users know they can make a commitment to AT&T because AT&T has made a commitment to them."
but what about all of the other carrier-subsidized phones? i'm with att on a blackjack2. where is my ability to upgrade *any*time to a new jack or an epix? its ludicrous to say that att *must* allow the upgrade of all iphone users regardless of their contract progression.
i don't understand why it happened in the first place. so the first-gen iphone users got a less capable phone than the second-gen users. big whoop. thats what you get for being "bleeding edge". att thought it would be a good idea (and keep apple fanboi loyalty up) by allowing it the first time. now everyone is *expecting* it. the sense of entitlement these people must have.
now, what i'm going to say isn't designed to offend. i have seen the mention of a lot of people here that understand how contracts work, even with the iphone. i am not targeting those people. my complaint is that *a lot* of the iphone users are part of the younger generation who expect everything handed to them, regardless of what piece of paper they signed. i am simply disgusted that they feel att *must* allow them to upgrade, even on contracts that are less than a year old. you bought a piece of technology. it was only a matter of time before it wasn't "top o' the line" anymore. simply astounding. these *are* the people that deserve to be called itards. whiny ones at that...
q.
--
"...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..." |
|
 RobIn Deo speramus, God Bless the USAPremium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:2 | The first gen iPhone users paid full price for their iPhone - not a subsidized price. So when the 3G came out, AT&T allowed them this time to buy it at the subsidized price.
--
CheckSite.us | YourIP.us | Reverseip.us |
|
|
|
tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ | said by Rob:The first gen iPhone users paid full price for their iPhone - not a subsidized price. So when the 3G came out, AT&T allowed them this time to buy it at the subsidized price. good to know. i think i remember seeing something, but i wasn't sure. i retract the above statement (but will not edit it out for completeness of post).
however, given that change in circumstances, att should *not* let anyone upgrade at the regular price given that the situation is different between the 3g and the 3gs.
q.
--
"...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..." |
|
 banditws6Shrinking Time and DistancePremium
join:2001-08-18
Frisco, TX
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Rob
said by Rob:The first gen iPhone users paid full price for their iPhone - not a subsidized price. So when the 3G came out, AT&T allowed them this time to buy it at the subsidized price. Yep. I'm still using my first-gen iPhone, and am getting subsidized price on a 3G S, so apparently this exception is still in play for us holdouts.
I don't get why it's such a problem for people to wait until their contract expiry to upgrade, if the costs in the interim are prohibitive. By the time some of these folks are eligible, there will probably be yet another new iPhone coming down the pike.
--
"I'll follow the law until it's just stupid." -Ted Nugent |
|
RobIn Deo speramus, God Bless the USAPremium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:2 | Right. And a lot of the features in the 3GS is provided through OS 3.0 - which 3G users can get.
Now if Apple had created the 3.0 OS only for the 3GS phone, then I could understand their point. But there isn't that much of an upgrade from the 3G to 3GS, IMO, to warrant an upgrade.
I just ordered my first iPhone yesterday - the 3GS. But if I had the 3G, with the 3.0 upgrade, I'd keep it and not upgrade.
--
CheckSite.us | YourIP.us | Reverseip.us |
|
 MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | But, but, but, it's not the latest and shiniest! I can't be seen walking around with an OLD iPhone! 
Note: I have an iPhone, but I don't subscribe to that mentality. I know people who do though. |
|
 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | reply to tubbynet
Anyone can purchase a device at full retail and use it.
I think the only issue with the iPhone being purchased is that it 'must' have a data plan attached to it (and not pay per use).
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ | said by en102:Anyone can purchase a device at full retail and use it. i am well aware of this fact. my complaint is not about that. my complaint is that all of the whiny apple entitled fanbois are complaining that they can't purchase a subsidized handset after a period of time less than when the upgrade window starts.
q.
--
"...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..." |
|
| reply to banditws6
The problem is that Apple cultivates a culture of "buy everything new and shiny as fast as humanly possible because it's cool", and then releases new products on a 1 year design cycle. All the while ATT forces users into 2 year contracts, without even offering a 1 year option. THAT'S the problem. |
|
MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | said by sonicmerlin:The problem is that Apple cultivates a culture of "buy everything new and shiny as fast as humanly possible because it's cool", and then releases new products on a 1 year design cycle. All the while ATT forces users into 2 year contracts, without even offering a 1 year option. THAT'S the problem. You can pay full price for the iPhone and not have a contract at all. When you pay $199 or $299 for the phone, AT&T eats the price difference of $300-$400. I see no reason AT&T should subsidize the phone and then turn right around and subsidize it again a year later. |
|
en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | reply to tubbynet
They should have to wait, just like the rest of us, unless AT&T/Apple have reason to sell them another device.
AT&T: We want 'new' customers in addition to our existing, and we want to have existing sign back up for another iPhone ($$$ data plan). We have to also manage this mess of GSM -> 3G network overhaul at the same time.
Apple: We want to you sell as many iPhones as we can produce, and we want you to know that your network isn't up to what 'we' make our device capable of supporting.
Customer: I just want a cheap iPhone.. that WORKS, and I don't want to have to pay for a dataplan ALL the time, and I want to be able to replace it yearly with the new ones, and I want to be able to run Skype, Slingbox and anything else I want on it, and be able to replace the battery.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Comcast
| reply to Rob
The problem here is the unsubsidized iphone price now is $200 more then the subsidized price after the $200 Apple price drop.
OTOH before the price drop pricing on the iPhone was comparable, capacity for capacity, to what it is now. Actually, with the release of the 3gs pricing is $100 better.
Personally, if Apple offered the 3gs 16GB for $400 or even $500, I'd likely buy, unlock and use it. |
|
en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | The device itself isn't priced _that_ bad compared to many others.
When I wanted a replacement phone - most were ~$100.. for a 'standard' phone. Anything that did any kind of media or touch screen is hitting the $150 mark. Try taking a look at what they go for unsubsidized - $$$$$$$.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
