 MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | reply to clickie
Re: Google will get what it wants said by clickie:Apple is the first handset to be release in the past 10 years that hasn't had the manufacturer's software replaced or modified to the liking of the carrier. As an iPhone owner, I find this laughable. Modification comes in many more forms than outright OS modification. Not allowing applications to work over 3G seems like a pretty serious modification to me. Aside from that, I've owned 2 Windows Mobile phones and aside from crippling GPS, there was no OS modification whatsoever.
And as far as anti-trust, the only reason Apple is able to get away with things Microsoft gets slapped for, is because they have high margin, low-volume products. Of course, the iPod and the iPhone have changed that and the repercussions are starting to be seen. Anyone remember the France iPod lawsuit? I would imagine that is just the start if the iPhone stays exclusively on the AT&T network. |
|
|
|
Reviews:
 ·WOW Internet and..
| MSFT doesn't get slapped here in the US. It's the EU that doesn't like MSFT and thats only because Google runs their mouth over there and then two weeks later (if that long) you see Google in the news getting their hands slapped for the same damn thing. |
|
| reply to Matt
Aside...aside...aside. That is exactly my point, although I did a poor job of enumerating it. Apple is no saint, and the 3.0 software is crippled. But what I had intended on saying is that it isn't an outright replacement of the phone OS with something that displays a big red V and moves menu buttons around to increase the probability of hitting the data service to incur a $2 data charge for 31kb of data.
Likewise for disabling Bluetooth, disabling file transfer of photos. However, despite its faults, the iPhone is a very big first step in the right direction of getting the carrier's sticky fingers out of the phones.
I don't find a compelling comparison between Microsoft and Apple as it pertains to monopoly in computers. However, I will agree that they might have a difficult time of it in their own App Store. Their control seems to be intended more to protect their and partner profits and less about user experience. Troubling times. |
|
MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | said by clickie:Aside...aside...aside. That is exactly my point, although I did a poor job of enumerating it. Apple is no saint, and the 3.0 software is crippled. But what I had intended on saying is that it isn't an outright replacement of the phone OS with something that displays a big red V and moves menu buttons around to increase the probability of hitting the data service to incur a $2 data charge for 31kb of data. Likewise for disabling Bluetooth, disabling file transfer of photos. However, despite its faults, the iPhone is a very big first step in the right direction of getting the carrier's sticky fingers out of the phones. They don't do this on any smartphones. I've never seen an OS replaced on a BlackBerry nor a Windows Mobile phone. They did do this on the handheld phones (the Verizon BREW software was a terrible offender) but not on their smartphone-type devices ... the ones that would compete with the iPhone that is. |
|
