Free Cases for all iPhone Users Until September 30th

Free Cases for all iPhone Users Until September 30th

Just announced by Apple. Good move. Presumably units sold after
September 30th will be new production that will not need the case
(though of course most everyone will use a case anyway).

On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 10:36:58 -0700, in
<4c4098b1$0$22173$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, SMS
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

>Free Cases for all iPhone Users Until September 30th
>
>Just announced by Apple. Good move. Presumably units sold after
>September 30th will be new production that will not need the case
>(though of course most everyone will use a case anyway).

According to you. You need to get out more. While many kids do like
cases, and a fair number of women, there are actually many people who
use iPhones *without* cases.

--
John

"Assumption is the mother of all screw ups."
[Wethern’s Law of Suspended Judgement]

In article <7a7146dtifvltffq5jfo04ed5r7v5pibi3@4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> >Just announced by Apple. Good move. Presumably units sold after
> >September 30th will be new production that will not need the case
> >(though of course most everyone will use a case anyway).
>
> According to you. You need to get out more. While many kids do like
> cases, and a fair number of women, there are actually many people who
> use iPhones *without* cases.

maybe *you* need to get out more. apple said that 80% of iphone 3gs
users have cases and that is consistent with what i've seen, where most
people *do* have cases. the same for ipods and ipads too. laptops not
so much but i do see more than just the occasional one.

nospam wrote:
> In article <7a7146dtifvltffq5jfo04ed5r7v5pibi3@4ax.com>, John Navas
> <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>>> Just announced by Apple. Good move. Presumably units sold after
>>> September 30th will be new production that will not need the case
>>> (though of course most everyone will use a case anyway).
>>
>> According to you. You need to get out more. While many kids do like
>> cases, and a fair number of women, there are actually many people who
>> use iPhones *without* cases.
>
> maybe *you* need to get out more. apple said that 80% of iphone 3gs
> users have cases and that is consistent with what i've seen, where
> most people *do* have cases. the same for ipods and ipads too.
> laptops not so much but i do see more than just the occasional one.
>
>
I don't see that what you're saying is substantially different than what
John was saying. What do you do with your 20% who DON'T use cases? Do they
have a right to NOT use a case?

Do you really think that Apple's "solution" to this problem is really a
"fix", that users have to put their phones in a specially designed case, one
that may not even be to their liking?

Seems like another slippery slope cover-up job to me.

On 19/07/10 8:40 AM, Carl wrote:

<snip>

> Do you really think that Apple's "solution" to this problem is really a
> "fix", that users have to put their phones in a specially designed case, one
> that may not even be to their liking?

It's a "workaround" not a "fix".

> Seems like another slippery slope cover-up job to me.

Not really. Apple admitted the problem. They offered a solution. They
stated that other phones have similar problems, though the other
manufacturers deny it. Since most people use cases anyway, it's not an
unreasonable solution. While Apple stated that only 20% of users don't
use cases, there's nothing to say that those 20% would not use a free
rubber bumper. In any event, they are free to return the iPhone for a
refund if they don't want to use a case or bumper, or hold it in a way
that mitigates the problem. A real fix is likely coming, and they can
always keep using their old iPhone until the iPhone4 with a real fix is
available.

There have been far worse work-arounds for other consumer products where
a problem was discovered after millions of the product had been sold. No
one got hurt. No one died. The story is over. Navas is wrong as usual.
Move on.

On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 11:23:27 -0700, in
<4c449817$0$22178$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, SMS
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

>On 19/07/10 8:40 AM, Carl wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> Do you really think that Apple's "solution" to this problem is really a
>> "fix", that users have to put their phones in a specially designed case, one
>> that may not even be to their liking?
>
>It's a "workaround" not a "fix".
>
>> Seems like another slippery slope cover-up job to me.
>
>Not really. Apple admitted the problem. They offered a solution. They
>stated that other phones have similar problems, though the other
>manufacturers deny it. Since most people use cases anyway, it's not an
>unreasonable solution. While Apple stated that only 20% of users don't
>use cases, there's nothing to say that those 20% would not use a free
>rubber bumper. In any event, they are free to return the iPhone for a
>refund if they don't want to use a case or bumper, or hold it in a way
>that mitigates the problem. A real fix is likely coming, and they can
>always keep using their old iPhone until the iPhone4 with a real fix is
>available.
>
>There have been far worse work-arounds for other consumer products where
>a problem was discovered after millions of the product had been sold. No
>one got hurt. No one died. The story is over. Navas is wrong as usual.
>Move on.

Unsubstantiated denial isn't terribly persuasive.

--
John

"Never argue with an idiot. He'll drag you down to his level
and then beat you with experience." -Dr. Alan Zimmerman

In article <4c4471f0$0$5010$607ed4bc@cv.net>, Carl
<crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote:

> >>> Just announced by Apple. Good move. Presumably units sold after
> >>> September 30th will be new production that will not need the case
> >>> (though of course most everyone will use a case anyway).
> >>
> >> According to you. You need to get out more. While many kids do like
> >> cases, and a fair number of women, there are actually many people who
> >> use iPhones *without* cases.
> >
> > maybe *you* need to get out more. apple said that 80% of iphone 3gs
> > users have cases and that is consistent with what i've seen, where
> > most people *do* have cases. the same for ipods and ipads too.
> > laptops not so much but i do see more than just the occasional one.
>
> I don't see that what you're saying is substantially different than what
> John was saying.

it's very clearly different. john said many people use iphone without
cases but apple said 80% use cases, which means that the vast majority
*do* use cases.

> What do you do with your 20% who DON'T use cases? Do they
> have a right to NOT use a case?

they can skip a case if they don't want to. keep in mind that not
everyone is experiencing the problem. a lot of people tried to
duplicate it and can't. other people find it's a big problem. it's
*not* as simple as people make it out to be.

> Do you really think that Apple's "solution" to this problem is really a
> "fix", that users have to put their phones in a specially designed case, one
> that may not even be to their liking?

they will be offered a choice of cases, or they can return it for a
full refund if that's not acceptable.

> Seems like another slippery slope cover-up job to me.

of course it does, because you don't want to look at actual facts.

On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 11:40:32 -0400, "Carl"
<crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote:

> Just announced by Apple. Good move. Presumably units sold after
>>>> September 30th will be new production that will not need the case


Is this true? I have not seen this stated.

Best,

Bob

Robert A. Fink, M. D., FACS, P. C.
Neurological Surgery
2500 Milvia Street Suite 222
Berkeley, CA 94704-2636 USA
510-849-2555

"Ex Tristitia Virtus"

In article <l0e946tjm0lpefsb40slm4r7jgosgi4cni@4ax.com>, Robert A.
Fink, M. D. <lynxer@comcast.net> wrote:

> > Just announced by Apple. Good move. Presumably units sold after
> >>>> September 30th will be new production that will not need the case
>
> Is this true? I have not seen this stated.

that's because it's speculation.

what jobs said was that free cases are available through september 30,
at which time apple will decide whether to extend the offer, or 'maybe
we'll have a better idea.'

they'll also have a lot more hard data to see just how common it really
is.

On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 13:46:53 -0700, in
<l0e946tjm0lpefsb40slm4r7jgosgi4cni@4ax.com>, "Robert A. Fink, M. D."
<lynxer@comcast.net> wrote:

>On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 11:40:32 -0400, "Carl"
><crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote:
>
>> Just announced by Apple. Good move. Presumably units sold after
>>>>> September 30th will be new production that will not need the case
>
>Is this true? I have not seen this stated.

That's just a guess AFAIK:

<http://www.tomsguide.com/us/iPhone-4-iPhone-Antenna-AT-T-bumper,news-7501.html>

Though they can't give everyone a bumper (because they can't make 'em
fast enough), they will be giving everyone who purchases an iPhone 4
between now and September 30, a free case of some kind. AFTER
SEPTEMBER 30, THEY'LL BE RE-EXAMINING THE ISSUE, WHATEVER THAT MEANS.
Anyone who's already paid for a bumper will get a refund. [emphasis
added]

--
John

"Assumption is the mother of all screw ups."
[Wethern’s Law of Suspended Judgement]

On 19/07/10 1:46 PM, Robert A. Fink, M. D. wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 11:40:32 -0400, "Carl"
> <crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote:
>
>> Just announced by Apple. Good move. Presumably units sold after
>>>>> September 30th will be new production that will not need the case
>
>
> Is this true? I have not seen this stated.

One of the journalists at the press conference asked about the September
30th date...

10:53AM

Q: On the September 30th date, is that to let people know that you'll
have to buy a case?

Steve: Not really, we'll reevaluate then. Maybe we'll have a better idea



That's why I said "presumably." Certainly they could design a solution
that precludes the need for a case on future production but it will take
time to design it, test it, certify it, and get it into production. I
can't imagine a revised design being on units in stores by September
30th, only ten weeks or so away.

SMS wrote:
> On 19/07/10 1:46 PM, Robert A. Fink, M. D. wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 11:40:32 -0400, "Carl"
>> <crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Just announced by Apple. Good move. Presumably units sold after
>>>>>> September 30th will be new production that will not need the case
>>
>>
>> Is this true? I have not seen this stated.
>
> One of the journalists at the press conference asked about the September
> 30th date...
>
> 10:53AM
>
> Q: On the September 30th date, is that to let people know that you'll
> have to buy a case?
>
> Steve: Not really, we'll reevaluate then. Maybe we'll have a better idea


Free condoms. Cheaper, more natural feel?

SMS wrote:
> On 19/07/10 8:40 AM, Carl wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Do you really think that Apple's "solution" to this problem is
>> really a "fix", that users have to put their phones in a specially
>> designed case, one that may not even be to their liking?
>
> It's a "workaround" not a "fix".
>
>> Seems like another slippery slope cover-up job to me.
>
> Not really. Apple admitted the problem. They offered a solution. They
> stated that other phones have similar problems, though the other
> manufacturers deny it. Since most people use cases anyway, it's not an
> unreasonable solution. While Apple stated that only 20% of users don't
> use cases, there's nothing to say that those 20% would not use a free
> rubber bumper. In any event, they are free to return the iPhone for a
> refund if they don't want to use a case or bumper, or hold it in a way
> that mitigates the problem. A real fix is likely coming, and they can
> always keep using their old iPhone until the iPhone4 with a real fix
> is available.
>
> There have been far worse work-arounds for other consumer products
> where a problem was discovered after millions of the product had been
> sold. No one got hurt. No one died. The story is over. Navas is wrong
> as usual. Move on.
>
Aw gee, not to nitpick, but "fix" in quotation marks is a synonym for
"workaround". The quotation marks imply that the device is not really fixed.

Next, Apple can't know how many people use cases; it's absurd to think
otherwise. All they know is that 80% of the buyers took cases with their
purchase. The jump to "using" them is a leap of faith. Still, I granted you
the number. The "correct" "fix" is not a "workaround", but a real fix, with
a guaranteed exchange for original buyers when the fixed one comes out.
"Money back" is probably not a real solution. I'd have to ask if they're
also going to release the people who choose "money back" from their
contracts? I don't know, but intuition tells me otherwise.

And a reminder: Apple's original response to the problem was one of denying
it, typical of many big businesses these days, but typical of one that
hasn't yet learned the lesson of 'fessing up immediately. Only when the
problem became widespread and Consumer Reports panned it, did Apple own up.

John Navas wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 11:23:27 -0700, in
> <4c449817$0$22178$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, SMS
> <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 19/07/10 8:40 AM, Carl wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Do you really think that Apple's "solution" to this problem is
>>> really a "fix", that users have to put their phones in a specially
>>> designed case, one that may not even be to their liking?
>>
>> It's a "workaround" not a "fix".
>>
>>> Seems like another slippery slope cover-up job to me.
>>
>> Not really. Apple admitted the problem. They offered a solution. They
>> stated that other phones have similar problems, though the other
>> manufacturers deny it. Since most people use cases anyway, it's not
>> an unreasonable solution. While Apple stated that only 20% of users
>> don't use cases, there's nothing to say that those 20% would not use
>> a free rubber bumper. In any event, they are free to return the
>> iPhone for a refund if they don't want to use a case or bumper, or
>> hold it in a way that mitigates the problem. A real fix is likely
>> coming, and they can always keep using their old iPhone until the
>> iPhone4 with a real fix is available.
>>
>> There have been far worse work-arounds for other consumer products
>> where a problem was discovered after millions of the product had
>> been sold. No one got hurt. No one died. The story is over. Navas is
>> wrong as usual. Move on.
>
> Unsubstantiated denial isn't terribly persuasive.
>
I particularly liked the "hold it in a way that mitigates the problem". Is
that upside down against your ear, or standing on one leg in your bathtub?
:-)

nospam wrote:
> In article <4c4471f0$0$5010$607ed4bc@cv.net>, Carl
> <crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote:
>
>>>>> Just announced by Apple. Good move. Presumably units sold after
>>>>> September 30th will be new production that will not need the case
>>>>> (though of course most everyone will use a case anyway).
>>>>
>>>> According to you. You need to get out more. While many kids do
>>>> like cases, and a fair number of women, there are actually many
>>>> people who use iPhones *without* cases.
>>>
>>> maybe *you* need to get out more. apple said that 80% of iphone 3gs
>>> users have cases and that is consistent with what i've seen, where
>>> most people *do* have cases. the same for ipods and ipads too.
>>> laptops not so much but i do see more than just the occasional one.
>>
>> I don't see that what you're saying is substantially different than
>> what John was saying.
>
> it's very clearly different. john said many people use iphone without
> cases but apple said 80% use cases, which means that the vast majority
> *do* use cases.
>
>
You're kidding, right? You're saying that 20% of all the people is not the
same as "many people"? You are kidding or your understanding of "many" is
not the same as mine. Just because one guy states it in relative terms and
the other states it as an absolute (something he can't really know by the
way), doesn't mean they're underlying meaning was different. Sorry, I can't
get over this, that 20% cannot be construed as "many". Geez.
>
>

>> What do you do with your 20% who DON'T use cases? Do they
>> have a right to NOT use a case?
>
> they can skip a case if they don't want to. keep in mind that not
> everyone is experiencing the problem. a lot of people tried to
> duplicate it and can't. other people find it's a big problem. it's
> *not* as simple as people make it out to be.
>
>> Do you really think that Apple's "solution" to this problem is
>> really a "fix", that users have to put their phones in a specially
>> designed case, one that may not even be to their liking?
>
> they will be offered a choice of cases, or they can return it for a
> full refund if that's not acceptable.
>
>> Seems like another slippery slope cover-up job to me.
>
> of course it does, because you don't want to look at actual facts.
>
>
You're defending a big company from their responsibility to own up to a
pervasive problem, and to do the right thing and take the older versions
back and replace them with newer, "fixed" ones? Toyota took the same stupid
position recently and got their asses handed to them. All it takes is one
life lost because an iPhone owner couldn't make that emergency call due to
the inherent problem of the phone, and you'll learn a new perspective. I
hope for your sake that it's not your family filing the lawsuit,
particularly since your own posts would mitigate their case.

I am neither a fan or not of Apple. I am just a person who's tired of big
business going into cover-up mode everytime they produce an inferior
product.

In article <4c45f132$0$31273$607ed4bc@cv.net>, Carl
<crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote:

> Aw gee, not to nitpick, but "fix" in quotation marks is a synonym for
> "workaround". The quotation marks imply that the device is not really fixed.

it's also not really broken.

> Next, Apple can't know how many people use cases; it's absurd to think
> otherwise.

of course they can.

> All they know is that 80% of the buyers took cases with their
> purchase.

nope. that completely skips the third party case market, which for
iphones prior to the iphone 4 is *every* case since apple did not have
a case of their own.

> The jump to "using" them is a leap of faith. Still, I granted you
> the number. The "correct" "fix" is not a "workaround", but a real fix, with
> a guaranteed exchange for original buyers when the fixed one comes out.
> "Money back" is probably not a real solution. I'd have to ask if they're
> also going to release the people who choose "money back" from their
> contracts? I don't know, but intuition tells me otherwise.

money back *is* a real solution. the customer can buy something else
that they prefer.

> And a reminder: Apple's original response to the problem was one of denying
> it, typical of many big businesses these days, but typical of one that
> hasn't yet learned the lesson of 'fessing up immediately. Only when the
> problem became widespread and Consumer Reports panned it, did Apple own up.

nope.

In article <4c45f3e2$0$31268$607ed4bc@cv.net>, Carl
<crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote:

> > it's very clearly different. john said many people use iphone without
> > cases but apple said 80% use cases, which means that the vast majority
> > *do* use cases.
>
> You're kidding, right? You're saying that 20% of all the people is not the
> same as "many people"? You are kidding or your understanding of "many" is
> not the same as mine. Just because one guy states it in relative terms and
> the other states it as an absolute (something he can't really know by the
> way), doesn't mean they're underlying meaning was different. Sorry, I can't
> get over this, that 20% cannot be construed as "many". Geez.

20% without cases is the minority. 80% who have cases is the majority.
it's simple math. certainly you can see that 80% is a lot more than
20%.

> You're defending a big company from their responsibility to own up to a
> pervasive problem, and to do the right thing and take the older versions
> back and replace them with newer, "fixed" ones?

it's not a pervasive problem. only 0.55% of calls to applecare are
about the antenna. many people do not have a problem, and can't
duplicate it even if they try.

> Toyota took the same stupid
> position recently and got their asses handed to them. All it takes is one
> life lost because an iPhone owner couldn't make that emergency call due to
> the inherent problem of the phone, and you'll learn a new perspective.

cellular service is not guaranteed.

> I hope for your sake that it's not your family filing the lawsuit,
> particularly since your own posts would mitigate their case.

there is no case.

> I am neither a fan or not of Apple. I am just a person who's tired of big
> business going into cover-up mode everytime they produce an inferior
> product.

of course you completely ignore the fact that it holds calls better
than other iphones. see anandtech's review. it was the highest rated
phone in consumer reports.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in news:200720101540465824%
nospam@nospam.invalid:

> it's also not really broken.
>
>

Wow, the chief apologist has really been working overtime on this screwup.


--
iPhone 4 is to cellular technology what the Titanic is to cruise ships.

Larry

"nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:190720101701187349%nospam@nospam.invalid...
> In article <l0e946tjm0lpefsb40slm4r7jgosgi4cni@4ax.com>, Robert A.
> Fink, M. D. <lynxer@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > > Just announced by Apple. Good move. Presumably units sold after
> > >>>> September 30th will be new production that will not need the case
> >
> > Is this true? I have not seen this stated.
>
> that's because it's speculation.
>
> what jobs said was that free cases are available through september 30,
> at which time apple will decide whether to extend the offer, or 'maybe
> we'll have a better idea.'
>
> they'll also have a lot more hard data to see just how common it really
> is.

Despite what Steve Jobs said I'll bet he will be looking at the sales
figures. But then again maybe other smartphone manufacturers will start
using external antennas themselves and then offer free cases too.

nospam wrote:
> In article <4c45f3e2$0$31268$607ed4bc@cv.net>, Carl
> <crothman@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote:
>
>>> it's very clearly different. john said many people use iphone
>>> without cases but apple said 80% use cases, which means that the
>>> vast majority *do* use cases.
>>
>> You're kidding, right? You're saying that 20% of all the people is
>> not the same as "many people"? You are kidding or your
>> understanding of "many" is not the same as mine. Just because one
>> guy states it in relative terms and the other states it as an
>> absolute (something he can't really know by the way), doesn't mean
>> they're underlying meaning was different. Sorry, I can't get over
>> this, that 20% cannot be construed as "many". Geez.
>
> 20% without cases is the minority. 80% who have cases is the majority.
> it's simple math. certainly you can see that 80% is a lot more than
> 20%.
>
He said "many", not "majority". I see reading comprehension is not your
strong suit.

Hello everyone!
I need iPhone 4G unlocking code for AT&T. Please anyone can help me
regarding this matter.
Awaiting for prompt response. Thanks and keep on sharing good posts as
well.




--
ariakerry

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 08:14:12 +0100, in
<ariakerry.6948674@cellbanter.com>, ariakerry
<ariakerry.6948674@cellbanter.com> wrote:

>I need iPhone 4G unlocking code for AT&T. Please anyone can help me
>regarding this matter.

Only AT&T can help you. You should be able to get it by asking if your
account is in good standing.

--
John

"Assumption is the mother of all screw ups."
[Wethern’s Law of Suspended Judgement]

In article <1ipt465h1j81b74rlelurk9s230bajotq7@4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> >I need iPhone 4G unlocking code for AT&T. Please anyone can help me
> >regarding this matter.
>
> Only AT&T can help you. You should be able to get it by asking if your
> account is in good standing.

completely wrong. at&t will not provide unlocking codes for iphones.