 djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
kudos:1
 ·Verizon Wireless..
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·VOIPo
·PHONE POWER
| Lame and lamer ... While a lawsuit over MMS seems a bit lame, it's completely ridiculous that AT&T hasn't enabled this yet. All they have to do is turn the standard MMS feature on. Many figured out that the iPhone MMS works perfectly fine if you just trick AT&T into treating it like a regular cell phone. The trick is short lived because AT&T detects the IMEI and disables it, but how long does AT&T need to toggle a flag? Seriously weak, AT&T.
--
AT&T U-Hearse
Your funeral. Delivered.
|
|
 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
1 edit | Personally, I wonder what the holdup is (really).
On the other side - lawsuit is a bit
Summer isn't over, so I can't see anything wrong
quote:
Autumn is the season after summer and before winter. In the United States this season is also called fall. In the Northern Hemisphere, it begins with the autumnal equinox (late September) and ends with the winter solstice (late December)
Equinox = September 22, 2009
I suspect that this 'delay' is more due to AT&T beefing up/adding more spectrum (850MHz) and backhaul before allowing MMS.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
|
|
 DaSneaky1Done wall to block them allPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
·Charter
| reply to djrobx
It's not lame if you think of it from this perspective...
Over the life of a 3G-S iPhone, a customer is expected to pay for the price of the phone plus a monthly service charge. If someone delayed the purchase of that phone until they felt it was "worth the investment" (that worth being justified by what has been advertised and marketed), then this customer is not being provided the expected service.
Breaking the contract would cause an unexpected hardship on the customer because their intent is to spend a defined monthly amount for the service...not extra due to services not being provided by the faulting party.
This is more than simply a customer that wants to send MMS messages. This is about people spending hard earned money and are being possibly disregarded by two corporations though alleged deception.
There is certainly basis for this suit, until the judge finds otherwise. |
|
