Class Action Lawsuit Over iPhone Exclusivity Certified
How come there are no suits over the Motorola Droid?
The Motorola Droid is locked to Verizon's network. You can't take it to Sprint, either. Oh, but it has over twice the ETF that the original iPhone had.
1) Carrier exclusivity is nothing new.
2) ETF's are nothing new.
Not saying I like either one of them.
1) Carrier exclusivity is nothing new.
2) ETF's are nothing new.
Not saying I like either one of them.
...
1. The motorola droid is exlusive, the OS (android) is not.
Again, this will come down to the apps and media content more than hardware.
Still a retarded lawsuit. But most likely this is why.
Again, this will come down to the apps and media content more than hardware.
Still a retarded lawsuit. But most likely this is why.
...
I bought the HTC Hero on Sprint. I returned it within 30 days later and purchased the Nexus One on T-Mobile instead. All of my purchased android apps automatically downloaded to my Nexus One.
The same is not possible for iPhone.
The same is not possible for iPhone.
...
furyx639 said:
I bought the HTC Hero on Sprint. I returned it within 30 days later and purchased the Nexus One on T-Mobile instead. All of my purchased android apps automatically downloaded to my Nexus One.
The same is not possible for iPhone.
Well, not really, because if you bought apps on a 3gs and get an ip4, you don't pay again, also toss in if you bought anything for an ipod touch or ipad.
...
He's talking about taking your apps (legally) do a different carrier with a phone you bought ON that carrier
...
this is a stupid agrument, because well..is there an iPhone on a different network in the US? No? hm so how can this be true?
its the same thing as my iPod Touch, I can install ALL of my apps that I have, and install them on my iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4. there is no restriction. just android fans talking out of their ass again.
its the same thing as my iPod Touch, I can install ALL of my apps that I have, and install them on my iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4. there is no restriction. just android fans talking out of their ass again.
...
in the end, if the app is sold in the app store, it will work for your iPod Touch, and iPhone.
...
1. The lawsuit is by people owning iphones, not android fans.
2. I've stated multiple time's that I think the lawsuit is stupid. I'm just pointing out how the iOS situation is unique in mobile devices.
3. iOS's situation is still unique.
4. So you're saying that everyone who has an iphone also has an ipod touch? I thought one of the reasons people GOT smartphones (and the iphone in particular) was so they could reduce the number of devices they're carrying around. If someone got used to that, do you really think they'd be willing to going back to lugging a phone and an mp3 player around again?
2. I've stated multiple time's that I think the lawsuit is stupid. I'm just pointing out how the iOS situation is unique in mobile devices.
3. iOS's situation is still unique.
4. So you're saying that everyone who has an iphone also has an ipod touch? I thought one of the reasons people GOT smartphones (and the iphone in particular) was so they could reduce the number of devices they're carrying around. If someone got used to that, do you really think they'd be willing to going back to lugging a phone and an mp3 player around again?
...
hes complaining about the apps not working on "other carriers" but the iPhone is only on AT&T. of course, the Apps will only work with the iPhone, just like the apps that are built for the android will only work with a device that has android on it. it all depends on who you are speaking to, because I have both, I bought the touch a about half a year before I got the iPhone, because I wasn't sure on if I was going to get an iPhone due to budgeting. but I ended up getting an iPhone last summer. I use my touch for when I work out at the gym, because I do not want to drop a dumbbell on my iPhone. I carry music on my iPhone, do all my stuff on my phone. my touch always sits in my gym bag, so i dont lug around 2 devices to get through the day.
...
(continues)
...
(continues)
...
That's the whole point of the lawsuit. That since the iphone is still on ATT, if someone wants to carry their apps over to their next device they have no other option but to STAY with att.
That's why iOS's situation is unique. With other smartphone OS's, you can carry your apps over to another carrier and device without much issue, because they all offer android, blackberry, and winmo offerings.
The lawsuit is stupid, but that's why the lawsuit exists.
That's why iOS's situation is unique. With other smartphone OS's, you can carry your apps over to another carrier and device without much issue, because they all offer android, blackberry, and winmo offerings.
The lawsuit is stupid, but that's why the lawsuit exists.
...
not true at all. apps will be able to be used on an iPhone that will be on a different carrier when it is allowed. where is it stated in this article that the apps will not be able to be transferred to lets say a Verizon, T-Mobile (non jailbroke iPhone) or Sprint iPhone? this article is talking about the exclusivity of the AT&T and Apple contact for the iPhone. nothing about apps.
...
...sigh
Ok... read the press release. You'll see it's about people who bought the original iphone when it came out for a 2 year contract. Because the iphone is still locked to att, they're claiming that they're essentially locked to a 4+ year contract with ATT since there are no other devices running their OS of choice on another network.
the apps WOULD transfer if other options existed, but they don't, so the apps are also currently locked to ATT.
the article doesn't say it's about apps, I DID. Because if it wasn't for the ridiculous amount of money customers spent on software/media that is locked to iOS, I'm willing to bet that this lawsuit would never get signed.
Ok... read the press release. You'll see it's about people who bought the original iphone when it came out for a 2 year contract. Because the iphone is still locked to att, they're claiming that they're essentially locked to a 4+ year contract with ATT since there are no other devices running their OS of choice on another network.
the apps WOULD transfer if other options existed, but they don't, so the apps are also currently locked to ATT.
the article doesn't say it's about apps, I DID. Because if it wasn't for the ridiculous amount of money customers spent on software/media that is locked to iOS, I'm willing to bet that this lawsuit would never get signed.
...
Because no one has filed it. It sounds kind of bizarre to say it, but people want that damned iPhone on every network they can get it on. There are Android based phones on every network, so the Droid has equivalents out there. Logically, and I am going to hate myself for saying this, you are right. It actually seems that this is more about having the platform essentially locked to AT&T. But I agree, it should be thrown out. Although I still think they should have an unlock option.
...
I don't believe that CDMA phones are locked in any way. It's a matter of the carrier allowing the device on their own network, as the carrier needs to add it to its device database, map it to plans, etc.
...
Simple as that. The BB Storm is also "exclusive" to Verizon Wireless but it's pretty easy to get one flashed over to Cricket or MetroPCS.
...
This forum is closed.
