Scott Lawson wrote:
> "Kevin Weaver" <kevinkeithweaver@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:IoY3j.27591$lD6.3103@newssvr27.news.prodigy.n et...
>> It's still going to suck. The reason for not doing it in the 1st one
>> was battery life. Now that it's going to be added, there will be no
>> battery life. Maybe there going to make a battery access door.
>
> Battery life was _never_ the reason for the lack of 3G on the first
> version of the iPhone. If battery life was a concern then they
> wouldn't have included 802.11g either. Battery life was a
> rationalization used by Apple when they were criticized for the lack
> of 3G.

Then by your logic the only acceptable device is a battery in a box that
does nothing at all.

I am amused over how some of the iPhone-haters believe they "know" what
Apple's true intentions were. Hysterical.

There is a fine line between the iPhone-haters and the fanboys (especially
in the logic department).


--
Mike