Phone Scoop

printed January 16, 2018
See this page online at:
http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/p_forum.php?ff=4928

Home  ›  Phones  ›  Apple  ›

Apple iPhone 6s Plus

 

Info Photos Reviews  11 News Forum  

You must log in to post.

gloopey1

Dec 30, 2017, 6:24 PM
over in the "Apple Lowers Battery Replacement Cost to $29 Immediately" discussion:

What about the 5s?

Does anyone know?
2 replies
thenewempire

Dec 31, 2017, 7:20 AM
over in the "Apple Lowers Battery Replacement Cost to $29 Immediately" discussion:

Ridiculous... They should be replacing them for free at this point.

Apple slow down your phone and hides it, and then they ask you to pay them to replace the battery which they say is the only reason they slow your phone down(when in reality this is programmed obsolescence). Dont buy this nonsense and consider a non-Apple phone next time around.
wondering10

Nov 7, 2016, 3:32 PM

iphone

does all iphones have arabic language already installed
crood

Jul 18, 2016, 10:35 AM
over in the "MetroPCS Opens Up iPhone Sales Nationwide" discussion:

Considered this for my son...

..until I saw they were all 16GB. Can get an unlocked refurbished 64GB 5s for 279.99 on Groupon. 16GB is almost useless.
tgc1980

May 20, 2016, 9:56 AM
over in the "Sprint Rolls Out BOGO Offer for the iPhone 6s and 6s Plus" discussion:

If that's the case...

...how can we longtime customers benefit?
4 replies

AD       discussions continues below...

dougm

Mar 23, 2016, 11:46 AM
over in the "Apple Says iOS 9.3 Available Today" discussion:

No night shift on older iPhones

I have a 5C that won't support Night Shift. Until today that was the only reason I was anticipating 9.3. Apple yet again shows their arrogance... My 5C supports greyscale and screen color inversion without a hitch in the accessibility preferences, yet my phone isn't powerful enough to warm the color temperature on the screen. My Windows XP computer from 2003 has the capability to choose a warm color temperature, Apple is just ridiculous these days.
1 reply
dougm

Mar 23, 2016, 11:43 AM
over in the "AT&T iPhones Gain International WiFi Calling Via iOS 9.3" discussion:

Iphone SE?

The article mentions the 6(s)(+) line of iphones but not the new SE, is that a deliberate omission?
1 reply
JJinNYC

Sep 30, 2015, 11:53 AM
edited
over in the "Review: Apple iPhone 6s Plus" discussion:

Force Touch

*cough* "3D Touch". You know I really got to hand it to Apple for their B.S. marketing. They are absolutely ruthless. Using the term "3D" and "Retina". Such a crock.

The thing is, had Samsung or any other manufacturer came out with Force Touch first, it would be a gimmick. But when Apple does it, It's "groundbreaking!", "innovative", "a game changer" and best invention since sliced bread. It's ridiculous how the media and tech bloggers literally bow down and kiss Apple's a$$ any chance they get. Especially the d-bags over The Verge. They're the worst. Force Touch a game changer? Are you f*cking kidding me? Samsung came out with something similar first, there are hardly any apps to take advantage of it and won't be for a while. Not to me...
(continues)
2 replies
thebriang

Oct 14, 2015, 10:55 AM
over in the "Apple Found Guilty of Infringing U. of Wisconsin Patent" discussion:

Hmm, Im torn about this one...

Apple is the king of the patent trolls, so it Is kind of karmic.

Then again, WARF is kind of a patent troll organization themselves, I mean how many colleges sue for patent infringement? When you read some of the other suits they have filed for their "patents", Id say some of them definitely Are bogus, patent troll type.

And if you read the long boring contested patent where they try to dazzle with 50 pages of deep technobabble, its not exactly breaking new ground, its when a CPU makes a wrong prediction, it makes a table of those mistakes to help it predict more accurately next time.

That's a basic feature of most CPU's for years, some even before their patent, and just because everyone else (like Intel) just rolled over and pa...
(continues)
3 replies
WhySoBluePandaBear

Oct 13, 2015, 10:05 PM
over in the "Apple Found Guilty of Infringing U. of Wisconsin Patent" discussion:

Listen, I get it

But really, was anyone going to use that patient for anything massive or significant? We know the answer to that.


Apple should pay them fairly of course - but being real for a second, they were the only ones who were making significant use of it.


Any REAL scientist or inventor doesn't patient ideas/inventions. If you don't believe me, watch Cosmos - so many geniuses opted out of making a fortune or claiming intellectual property, because they were interested in FAR more than just money or fame.
10 replies
Zpike

Oct 14, 2015, 9:09 AM
edited
over in the "Apple Found Guilty of Infringing U. of Wisconsin Patent" discussion:

Injunction

They should enforce an injunction against all infringing iPhones immediately.

I find it hilarious how patent cases tried in Apple's home town always go in their favor. But as soon as someone tries one in a less biased court we find out what the law really thinks of Apple's shenanigans. Lucy Koh must be furious.
tbacba

Oct 13, 2015, 6:47 PM
edited
over in the "Apple Found Guilty of Infringing U. of Wisconsin Patent" discussion:

Karma

What goes around comes around. Sweet.
1 reply
maxymax

Oct 3, 2015, 9:45 AM
over in the "Apple Took Steps to Protect New iPhones from Liquids" discussion:

Cheap Bastards

Apple charges like $650 retail for their phones, but are too cheap to spend $2 extra (if even that) putting in gaskets in their phones to make them water proof. Other makers that make sub $200 phones can do it, but not Apple. Their phones are all sealed up with non-removable batteries or back covers, but they're too cheap to add that little extra bit of protection for your phone. Maybe when the iPhone 17 comes out, they'll finally spend that $2 extra to protect your $650 phone. That's just one more reason why I don't like Apple and won't ever buy their garbage.
8 replies
rwalford79

Sep 25, 2015, 12:52 PM
over in the "Apple Upgrade Program Requires $129 AppleCare+ Purchase" discussion:

Agreement NOT of Good Faith

The agreement presented has a clear statement that Apple Care is inclusive of the deal. The agreement becomes tacit when reading it and seeing that What happens is the whole agreement falls apart and becomes a bait and switch, when customers realize they must pay $129 for something that is advertised as inclusive, and in fact is not, and should be optional. That is false advertising and is lacking good faith toward customers.
1 reply
undergroundgilligan

Sep 25, 2015, 12:22 PM
over in the "Apple Upgrade Program Requires $129 AppleCare+ Purchase" discussion:

I actually wish more companies would figure in "protection"

Being an ex Wireless employee of 8 years I would LOVE to see companies to figure protection into the costs. Many times people don't get insurance on a payment program because "I've never needed it before" then something happens and it is all of a sudden the store's fault they broke the device. How dare you keep charging me monthly for something I broke, I demand you replace it! OR they try to trade up a device during a payment program with damage are get all upset because "that crack across the screen shouldn't fall under not functioning." No matter how hard you explain it to a customer 9 out of 10 times they will come back and blame you for them breaking their phone.

We are required to have health insurance and car insurance...phone insu...
(continues)
4 replies
SBacklin

Sep 25, 2015, 8:54 PM
over in the "Apple Upgrade Program Requires $129 AppleCare+ Purchase" discussion:

I Did The Program

They didn't require the AC . They listed the option and I chose not to take it because the devices have 1yr coverage anyway and they allow you to upgrade every year.
Versed

Sep 25, 2015, 7:31 PM
over in the "Apple Upgrade Program Requires $129 AppleCare+ Purchase" discussion:

Here's the problem.

AppleCare is good for two years, they will allow you to switch to the next bottle as it becomes available. Being next year this time. You just dropped $129 for a two year insurance on a phone which is tied to that phone. So next year, you have to do this all over again. Am i wrong in this??
mikkej2k

Sep 25, 2015, 11:56 AM
over in the "Apple Upgrade Program Requires $129 AppleCare+ Purchase" discussion:

Apple , a filthy rich company for a reason !

Nothing comes for free. And nothing comes cheap.
furyx639

Sep 24, 2015, 12:14 PM
over in the "Sprint Undercuts T-Mobile with $1 iPhone 6s Lease" discussion:

This just in - Sprint to now start paying customers to use their service

Sprint will literally pay customers an allowance of $50 a month to be on their service. One customer had this to say about the deal "I think it's great that Sprint cares so much about the customer." On whether or not he'd miss his previous service provider, "That's the best part. I'm keeping my T-Mobile phone, and now Sprint is paying the bill!"
Versed

Sep 24, 2015, 9:14 AM
over in the "Sprint Undercuts T-Mobile with $1 iPhone 6s Lease" discussion:

They Sound Like a Cardealership.

Its like reading the Sunday Newpaper Autosection, where some VW dealer is going to lease you a Passat Diesel Limited Edition for $89 per month.
 
 
Page  1  of 1

Subscribe to Phone Scoop News with RSS Follow @phonescoop on Twitter Phone Scoop on Facebook Subscribe to Phone Scoop on YouTube Follow on Instagram

 

All content Copyright 2001-2018 Phone Factor, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Content on this site may not be copied or republished without formal permission.
1

This is a preview. Click for full glossary page.