Slashdot Mirror
Apple and AT&T Sued, Again, Over 3G
Macworld is reporting that Apple and AT&T are being sued, again, for the lack of delivery on their 3G network. This follows a long line of other lawsuits in San Jose, San Diego, Alabama, Florida, Texas, and New York "The lawsuit charges the companies with Negligence, Breach of Express Warranty, Breach of Implied Warranty of Merchantability, Unjust Enrichment, Negligent Misrepresentation, Violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and Other Similar State Statutes, and Breach of Contract. Dickerson is seeking to force Apple and AT&T to correct its labeling and advertising, as well as to recover compensatory, statutory and punitive damages."
The reason blackberrys are more attractive to networks than the iPhone is because
I'm sorry, but I'm fairly certain that most other networks would be more than happy to get a share of the iPhone market. The customers may not be happy with the resulting performance! But the networks would have no problem adding an iPhone, and accompanying plan, to their offerings...
Except they are.
They claim it does all this wonderful stuff, you buy it and it doesn't work as promised*.
You cant switch providers or get your money back.
In that enviroment suing is the only avenue a consumer has.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Um.. yes, AT&T _IS_ forcing one to use their service. You remember that little thing called a contract?
Granted, nobody forced me to *choose* them, but once they are chosen - I'm locked in for two years!
But what happens when after 6 months or 1 year my service begins to suck? Have I no recourse?
I have no idea if this lawsuit has merit or not, but an attitude of 'don't like it, don't use it' is likely an oversimplification of the situation.
If they weren't locked into a contract, they wouldn't have to sue over it.
Most purchases can be returned when the product doesn't work as advertised. Usually this is because the store has a return policy to keep their customers happy, but some of the time it's the law.
In this case, there not only isn't a policy like that, there's a contract guaranteeing that you have to -continue- paying for it.
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
But it handles WiFi data just fine which is in most cases faster than 3G. I doubt the phone itself is the issue.
EDGE is an extension of GPRS (which is an extension of GSM) that provides higher performance packet data on GSM (in this context, the air interface).
The data traffic - inlcuding authentication - travels over either GSM/EDGE or WCDMA until it is handed off from one to the other.
You do not "need" both GSM and WCDMA coverage at the same time to use data. Many devices can be set to use WCDMA only.
Yeah, too bad they don't have a brand-new revenue stream from a popular exclusive device to finance such an upgrade.
"I guess the moral of the story is, don't paint your airship with rocket fuel." -- Addison Bain
This is not about iPhone versus Blackberry. This is 1990 ISPs all over again. AT&T wants to sell "unlimited" data plans knowing you'll pay more for unlimited. It works great because people just check their e-mail on it. Why? Cause the Internet sucks on a Blackberry/Windows Mobile device. The problem is, iPhone users ACTUALLY use the Internet/data other than e-mail. Why? Cause it doesn't suck. Result, oversold bandwidth. Same old story.
And you just hit the nail on the head on why this country is falling apart. Stocks were supposed to be for investing, where you looked at the business's long term game plan and if you supported it bought stock in the company. Now Wall Street is nothing but Las Vegas with nicer clothes. When my parents built their house 29 years ago the ISDN and cable stopped 2 blocks away. Now 30 years later how far is it? Why 2 blocks away, of course!
Nobody has laid any lines or upgraded shit around here in years because it might hurt the short term stock price if they actually spent a dime. Problem is, if a business isn't growing it is dying. I mean I'm sure they could pay out a nice dividend if they burnt the thing to the ground for the insurance but that doesn't make for much of a business plan. Having everything revolve around the short termers and day traders is the same thing, it just takes longer for the business to burn. for business(and the economy) to grow their have to be INVESTMENTS. Investments in the infrastructure to grow, in the lines, in automation to improve efficiency, in customer service, etc. Instead everything has been low balled and left to rot to please the short term mentality on Wall Street. Is it any wonder that it seems everything is falling apart?
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
You can cancel your contract. You'll pay a nice penalty, but you can cancel.
Why should I pay a penalty if the other party didn't uphold its end of the agreement?