Re: Vodafone TERRIFIED of iPhone - Seeks Restraining Order!
"Jon" <Jon@Cebridge.net> wrote in message
news:fhujod$uj1$3@registered.motzarella.org...
> MuahMan wrote:
>>
>> "DTC" <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote in message
>> news:FMt0j.23869$JD.887@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net ...
>>> Jon wrote:
>>>> AppleTV
>>>
>>> Is THAT still around??
>>
>> There are pallets of dusty Apple TV's for like $99 dollars at Costco. LOL
> Yep, AppleTV was epic failure by Apple.
It simply can't be. Oxtard said it was poised to take over the world and put
all the Cable companies out of business by 2010.
Re: Vodafone TERRIFIED of iPhone - Seeks Restraining Order!
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-01CF63.08261520112007@nntp1.usenetserver.com...
> In article <puqdnZEceomfQt_anZ2dnUVZ_qKgnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> "MuahMan" <muahman@cumcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Awwwww, look at the Mactards sticking up for one another. Snit defending
>> Oxford's thousand newsgroup spam, what a shocker!
>
> dude, many of us Macintosh users are slamming Oxtard left and
> right--always have.
>
> Snit is another one of Oxtard's personalities that he uses online. He
> uses quite a few, and they talk to one another.
>
> That's why you see "Snit" defending "Oxford".
>
Certainly plausible as they are both equally retarded.
Re: Vodafone TERRIFIED of iPhone - Seeks Restraining Order!
In article
<linuxlovesosx-874348.17000319112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net>,
Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:
> Gosh people! just get an iPhone and get on with life... no other Cell
> Carrier is going to be able to compete against Apple in the handset
> market, Apple is just too experienced in building high quality small
> devices...
You're an idiot.
Apple is not more experienced than all companies at building small
devices, nor are they best in every way.
Cell _carriers_ are not competing against Apple, you fool. The carriers
are competing against other carriers, and Apple makes a handset.
> WE ALL know that. Learn a better way, don't try and fight the old guard.
Apple is not the 'old guard' you moron.
But either way, the sentiment is STUPID. It is always important to
fight the old guard when the old guard is serving you badly or corrupt.
> Move up in the world!
Buying an iPhone does not move you up in the world.
Fighting the 'old guard' does not move you up in the world.
Being a consumer of a popular device does not move you up in the world.
And, note this --
dumping hugely inappropriate messages all over every group you care to
infect, full of lies and misleading facts, full of broad claims and
stupidity, certainly does NOT move Oxford up in the world!
Re: Vodafone TERRIFIED of iPhone - Seeks Restraining Order!
In article
<linuxlovesosx-0305F8.19081619112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net>,
Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:
> poor cozmic, doesn't even understand that "who wins the iphone contract"
> WINS the entire handset market going forward.
Huh?
You might believe the iPhone is hugely important, but it is obvious to
everyone else that neither of these is true:
serving the iPhone service contract is not the same as the handset
hardware market
the iPhone is certainly not most of the handset market in any view of
the future
> SJ is the now KING maker of the cell industry...
No, he isn't. His product is worth bidding on, and nothing more.
It is just your delusions that claim the iPhone is so significant that
carriers must serve it or die.
> vodafone, is freaking out since they lost the apple contract, so they
> are crying out... into court... verizon is next to cry wolf, just watch.
Are you aware that these companies probably sue each other over similar
practices pretty often? The iPhone is merely visible to the consumer,
these cases may not be important at all.
> apple is waaaaay tooo powerful for simple little cell providers like
> verizon to complain. they are dead in the water unless they give in and
> accept apple's rules. they failed once to win the iphone contract.
Not even your own fantasies about iPhone's importance suggest any of
that. You've really gone around the bend.
They offer one handset which is in high demand. It doesn't make Apple
more powerful than the carriers in their own field.
Obviously, carriers are going to do just fine if they don't sell
Apple's handset.
> SJ will crush them until they do.
Wrong -- he will offer the handset to the competition. That's the full
extent of his 'power.' He won't even ASK another carrier to comply with
iPhone techs, because he is precluded from it until the exclusivity is
gone.
God, Oxford, get a clue -- you are deluded by your fantasies about
iPhone. They make you look and sound like a MORON.
>
> "Snit" <CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
> news:C367C49A.9A3A2%CSMA@gallopinginsanity.com...
>> "CozmicDebris" <isheforreal> stated in post
>> Xns99EDE7AD8BD60isheforreal@216.196.97.142 on 11/19/07 10:46 PM:
>>
>>> IronFist <Boot@YourAss.com> wrote in news:201120070834535545%
>>> Boot@YourAss.com:
>>>
>>>> In article <Xns99EDAFEBA1652isheforreal@216.196.97.142>, CozmicDebris
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in news:linuxlovesosx-
>>>>> 874348.17000319112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gosh people! just get an iPhone and get on with life... no other Cell
>>>>>> Carrier is going to be able to compete against Apple in the handset
>>>>>> market,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yo stupid- Apple is not a cell carrier.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Learn to read, moron. He didn't claim they are.
>>>>
>>>
>>> If he says that "no other Cell Carrier is going to be able to compete
>>> against Apple in the handset market," he is most certainly stating that
>>> Apple is a cell carrier. If he had said "no cell carrier," you would be
>>> correct.
>>>
>>> Learn to read, moron.
>>
>> Your interpretation is flawed. Ironic given your tone.
>>
>> Hint: if he believes Apple will *become* a cell carrier that does not mean
>> he thinks they *are* one now.
>>
>> Funny how you share similar reading comprehension challenges with someone
>> else in your neck of the woods - and then lash out at others when your
>> errors are pointed out. No relation between you two though... right?
>>
>>
>>
> Awwwww, look at the Mactards sticking up for one another. Snit defending
> Oxford's thousand newsgroup spam, what a shocker! And no, I won't show you
> where you defended him. So keep your retard circus to the other fucking
> imbecile mactards.
>
> We really have got to find a way to euthanize all Mac users. They are all
> big-government liberals anyway.
>
Please note that I never said I agreed with Oxford... I am merely noting
that if one is going to debate against his claims they should use *his*
claims in the rebuttal - not weaker straw men.
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing. - Edmund Burke
Re: Vodafone TERRIFIED of iPhone - Seeks Restraining Order!
In article <elmop-01CF63.08261520112007@nntp1.usenetserver.com>,
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
> In article <puqdnZEceomfQt_anZ2dnUVZ_qKgnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> "MuahMan" <muahman@cumcast.net> wrote:
>
> > Awwwww, look at the Mactards sticking up for one another. Snit defending
> > Oxford's thousand newsgroup spam, what a shocker!
>
> dude, many of us Macintosh users are slamming Oxtard left and
> right--always have.
>
> Snit is another one of Oxtard's personalities that he uses online. He
> uses quite a few, and they talk to one another.
>
> That's why you see "Snit" defending "Oxford".
"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-874348.17000319112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net...
> Old School Vodafone is so upset with the massive popularity of the
> iPhone in Germany they have gone to court to try and block their own
> downfall!
>
> Wow!
>
> We all knew this would happen sooner or later, but Germany's poorly
> managed Vodafone unit has gone to court to stop Cell Phone advancements
> in the the country of Germany. They can't stand the iPhone's pressure,
> so are seeking court relief before they go under.
>
> This will be good for everyone!
>
Here is the REAL facts...
Vodafone did not ask the court to stop T-Mobile from selling the iPhone,
Gordon said.
Vodafone would like to see a court eventually mandate that T-Mobile sell an
unlocked
version of the iPhone for the same or less as today's locked version, he
said.
> Here is the REAL facts...
>
> Vodafone did not ask the court to stop T-Mobile from selling the iPhone,
> Gordon said.
> Vodafone would like to see a court eventually mandate that T-Mobile sell an
> unlocked
> version of the iPhone for the same or less as today's locked version, he
> said.
>
> http://www.pcworld.com/businesscente...otests_tmobile
> _iphone_sales.html
>
> I don't think I've ever seen someone (Oxford) more consistently full of
> shit.
Yes, but from a LEGAL perspective Vodafone is TERRIFIED of losing
customers to the iPhone, so they are trying to open up holes so they can
obtain revenue from the iPhone without committing to the future.
No handset maker can now compete in the Cell Market against the iPhone,
that's a pure fact. Apple has too many patents on the future, so
everyone must either bow down to Apple or go out of business.
These are the facts... cell carriers and handset makers must face.
Do a great deal with Apple to carry the iPhone, or disappear.
Those are the only 2 choices for the next several decades.
Re: Vodafone TERRIFIED of iPhone - Seeks Restraining Order!
CozmicDebris <isheforreal> wrote:
> > SJ will own the cell market in that amount of time, he gained 72% of
> > the much more competitive MP3 market in 4 years,
>
> Huh? There was no mp3 market, you moron. Apple is entering a mature
> market here- something that they have little success with.
sure there was, the MP3 market was just as obsolete as the Cell market
at the time. Apple came in with a much better product priced at $399,
and then ended up with 72% of the market based on QUALITY.
The exact same thing is happening in the Cell Market, but only faster.
Apple has come quicker onto the scene with their great reputation in
building small, perfect devices. Apple sells 139,000 ipods every 24
hours, the triple that amount will be sold of iPhone within 18 months,
learn to deal with the new KING of Cell Phones.
You have no other choice...
> > Verizon is dying, they lost the iPhone contract because of their own
> > bungling, and have been in defensive mode ever since.
>
> Dying? Hardly. They are positioned to overtake AT&T as the largest US
> carrier WITHOUT the crapphone.
Verizon is fading away faster than you can say "Diamond Rio", the public
has caught on that Verizon is very expensive, very poor support and
doesn't have the top product, the iPhone.
Expect Verizon to be bought out within 6 years. They are just a
marketing firm for the poorly educated.
> > If a cell handset maker doesn't win Apple's good graces, they are no
> > longer a viable company.
>
> Nokia, Samsung and LG all say hello.
But none of them can build a great product. Look at the LG Voyager! What
is this 1999? That product is so far behind the iPhone it makes Korea
look like Bangladesh.
The iPhone will have massive market share, 30% or more in the coming
years.
Nobody can compete at this level, they just don't have the background,
or manufacturing talent to build small, highly engineered devices like
Apple does.
In article
<linuxlovesosx-2D1408.13355220112007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net>,
Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:
> No handset maker can now compete in the Cell Market against the iPhone,
> that's a pure fact.
Nonsense.
Different people use cell phones for different purposes; quite a lot of
people use them simply as phones. For that purpose something
considerably smaller, lighter cheaper and simpler makes a lot more sense
than the iPhone.
Some people use them to connect to the internet. Whatever you may think
is going to happen, at present open WiFi networks are not available in
most places, at least in my experience. Under those circumstances, a 3G
phone provides a better connection, especially for tethering, than the
iPhone.
I could go on. The iPhone is a very pretty piece of technology, and for
some users probably the best phone available, but not for all, probably
not for most.
> Apple has too many patents on the future, so
> everyone must either bow down to Apple or go out of business.
This is the sort of comment--a statement apparently made because it lets
you feel good about posturing rather than because there is any reason to
think it is true--that gives me some sympathy with the posters who spend
their time exchanging insults with you instead of actually posting about
something interesting.
David Friedman <ddfr@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
> I could go on. The iPhone is a very pretty piece of technology, and for
> some users probably the best phone available, but not for all, probably
> not for most.
>
> > Apple has too many patents on the future, so
> > everyone must either bow down to Apple or go out of business.
>
> This is the sort of comment--a statement apparently made because it lets
> you feel good about posturing rather than because there is any reason to
> think it is true--that gives me some sympathy with the posters who spend
> their time exchanging insults with you instead of actually posting about
> something interesting.
great, but you are missing the point that the current iPhone is just the
slightest tip of the product iceberg.
Apple has 20-30 designs on their 3D imager right now and is fine tuning
them as we speak to match the larger Cell Market. You'll see 8 to 12 new
models of iPhones within 36 months.
That's just how Apple operates... always bettering themselves since
there is no outside competition.
So, don't focus on the great first iPhone and say it's the last.
Simply look at the Monochrome 5GB iPod sold at $399 in 2001, then look
at the iPod Nano 8GB sold today in Walmarts across the world.
"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-A0AC9A.14150920112007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net...
> David Friedman <ddfr@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
>
>> I could go on. The iPhone is a very pretty piece of technology, and for
>> some users probably the best phone available, but not for all, probably
>> not for most.
>>
>> > Apple has too many patents on the future, so
>> > everyone must either bow down to Apple or go out of business.
>>
>> This is the sort of comment--a statement apparently made because it lets
>> you feel good about posturing rather than because there is any reason to
>> think it is true--that gives me some sympathy with the posters who spend
>> their time exchanging insults with you instead of actually posting about
>> something interesting.
>
> great, but you are missing the point that the current iPhone is just the
> slightest tip of the product iceberg.
>
> Apple has 20-30 designs on their 3D imager right now and is fine tuning
> them as we speak to match the larger Cell Market. You'll see 8 to 12 new
> models of iPhones within 36 months.
>
Sure, a new one every three months. That will really get the customers to
love the company. Get your head out of Apple's ass.
Re: Vodafone TERRIFIED of iPhone - Seeks Restraining Order!
At 20 Nov 2007 13:52:46 -0700 Oxford wrote:
> Verizon is fading away faster than you can say "Diamond Rio", the
public
> has caught on that Verizon is very expensive, very poor support and
> doesn't have the top product, the iPhone.
You're forgetting that a mobile operator's "product" is their network-
not the cute assortment of devices they sell. Frankly, Verizon has
always lagged other carriers in the "latest and greatest" phones, since
the GSM carriers can dip into the larger worldwide selection of GSM phones.
Despite this, Verizon ha always been very successful, since most
customers prefer a mediocre phone on a great network, over a great phone
on a mediocre network.
> Expect Verizon to be bought out within 6 years. They are just a
> marketing firm for the poorly educated.
If that was so, I'd expect you to have been a longtime customer...
"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-2D1408.13355220112007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net...
>
> Yes, but from a LEGAL perspective Vodafone is TERRIFIED of losing
> customers to the iPhone, so they are trying to open up holes so they can
> obtain revenue from the iPhone without committing to the future.
>
> No handset maker can now compete in the Cell Market against the iPhone,
> that's a pure fact. Apple has too many patents on the future, so
> everyone must either bow down to Apple or go out of business.
>
> These are the facts... cell carriers and handset makers must face.
>
> Do a great deal with Apple to carry the iPhone, or disappear.
>
> Those are the only 2 choices for the next several decades.
>
> -
>
Nope, sorry. Not even a moderately good attempt at spin.
Wrong on ALL counts. Sorry fanatic fanboy.
Since Oxford's pathetic spin is ALL complete CRAP - no point
in my refuting it line by line.
"David Friedman" <ddfr@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote in message
news:ddfr-F204B6.12564720112007@news.isp.giganews.com...
> In article
> <linuxlovesosx-2D1408.13355220112007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net>,
> Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:
>
>> No handset maker can now compete in the Cell Market against the iPhone,
>> that's a pure fact.
>
> Nonsense.
>
> Different people use cell phones for different purposes; quite a lot of
> people use them simply as phones. For that purpose something
> considerably smaller, lighter cheaper and simpler makes a lot more sense
> than the iPhone.
>
> Some people use them to connect to the internet. Whatever you may think
> is going to happen, at present open WiFi networks are not available in
> most places, at least in my experience. Under those circumstances, a 3G
> phone provides a better connection, especially for tethering, than the
> iPhone.
>
> I could go on. The iPhone is a very pretty piece of technology, and for
> some users probably the best phone available, but not for all, probably
> not for most.
>
>> Apple has too many patents on the future, so
>> everyone must either bow down to Apple or go out of business.
>
> This is the sort of comment--a statement apparently made because it lets
> you feel good about posturing rather than because there is any reason to
> think it is true--that gives me some sympathy with the posters who spend
> their time exchanging insults with you instead of actually posting about
> something interesting.
>
>
It's the "posturing" that is what garners the responses.
The arrogant, **I** know it all, everyone else doesn't piss poor attitude.
(That and the complete disregard for any facts whatsoever)
>
> sure there was, the MP3 market was just as obsolete as the Cell market
> at the time. Apple came in with a much better product priced at $399,
> and then ended up with 72% of the market based on QUALITY.
>
> The exact same thing is happening in the Cell Market, but only faster.
> Apple has come quicker onto the scene with their great reputation in
> building small, perfect devices. Apple sells 139,000 ipods every 24
> hours, the triple that amount will be sold of iPhone within 18 months,
> learn to deal with the new KING of Cell Phones.
>
> You have no other choice...
>
>
> Verizon is fading away faster than you can say "Diamond Rio", the
public
> has caught on that Verizon is very expensive, very poor support and
> doesn't have the top product, the iPhone.
>
> Expect Verizon to be bought out within 6 years. They are just a
> marketing firm for the poorly educated.
>
>
> But none of them can build a great product. Look at the LG Voyager!
What
> is this 1999? That product is so far behind the iPhone it makes Korea
> look like Bangladesh.
>
> The iPhone will have massive market share, 30% or more in the coming
> years.
>
> Nobody can compete at this level, they just don't have the background,
> or manufacturing talent to build small, highly engineered devices like
> Apple does.
>
> -
>
Do you actually read the shit you post? There is inaccuracy and poor
vision in every one of the statements above.
-The mp3 market was emerging when the iPod was developed. The cellualr
market is a mature, almost saturated market. There is no comparison,
dimwit.
-Apple is barely making a ripple in the US market these days. Once the
hype died down, it became just another phone.
-Apple will not be selling 150 million cel phones a year in 18 months.
-Verizon is positioned to overtake AT&T in the near future and actually
is outperforming them in postpaid customer adds- the prime customers.
-The LG Voyager is expected to sell quite well and could represent the
turnng point in Verizon's efforts to be #1.
_The iPhone will be lucky to hit 5% of the world market at it's peak.
-Actually, cell phone makers will have no problem competing with the
iPhone. See the Motorola Razr and the long-term effect on other
manufacturers- there were none.
You're an idiot and no amount of postulating on your part is ever going
to hide it.
> "Ness-Net" <richard.no@more.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:
>
>> Just more of the same, lame fiction.
>
> catch me back in 5 years... you'll then say SHIT! ... OXFORD WAS RIGHT!
>
> trust me Ness, I've seen all this before... many times...
Bullshit.
>
> Apple always disrupts static, non-functioning markets, then takes all.
More bullshit. Other than the mp3 market, Apple is a third rate player in
EVERY other market they do businees in.
"Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in message
news:linuxlovesosx-163999.16565620112007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net...
> "Ness-Net" <richard.no@more.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:
>
>> Just more of the same, lame fiction.
>
> catch me back in 5 years... you'll then say SHIT! ... OXFORD WAS RIGHT!
>
> trust me Ness, I've seen all this before... many times...
>
> Apple always disrupts static, non-functioning markets, then takes all.
>
> -
>
OK...... I'll NOT be holding my breath in the mean time.
Here's the deal..... the market is FAR from "static" and functions
VERY well. Therefore, your suppositions aren't based on any facts.
DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote in news:ADL0j.492$Vq.290
@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com:
> Oxford wrote:
>> Apple always disrupts static, non-functioning markets, then takes all.
>
> Always???
>
> Lets see....
>
> 1) Apple III computer, circa 1980 - overheating problems.
>
> 2) Lisa - Thousands buried in a landfill for a tax credit.
>
> 3) SJ's Next computer - never found a market, until Apple bought it.
>
> 4) Power Mac Cube - Shelved within a year after it was introduced.
>
> 5) Apple Cyberdog - It was a dog.
>
> 6) Taligent - Dead after a few years
>
> 7) EWorld - Dead after two years.
>
> 8) Pippin - Couldn't compete with Sony Playstation, Sega Saturn and
> Nintendo 64. Less than 45,000 sold.
>
> 9) 20th Anniversary Macintosh - Discontinued after one year, could the
> $7,499 price been a factor?
>
> 10) Macintosh Portable - The $6,500 price killed it off.
>
> 11) Newton - The "future of computing". Six year life.
>
> 12) Puck Mouse - No one could figure out which end was up.
>
>
>
>
>
CozmicDebris <isheforreal> wrote in news:Xns99EEBBE9BB7B8isheforreal@
216.196.97.142:
> DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote in news:ADL0j.492$Vq.290
> @nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com:
>
>> Oxford wrote:
>>> Apple always disrupts static, non-functioning markets, then takes all.
>>
>> Always???
>>
>> Lets see....
>>
>> 1) Apple III computer, circa 1980 - overheating problems.
>>
>> 2) Lisa - Thousands buried in a landfill for a tax credit.
>>
>> 3) SJ's Next computer - never found a market, until Apple bought it.
>>
>> 4) Power Mac Cube - Shelved within a year after it was introduced.
>>
>> 5) Apple Cyberdog - It was a dog.
>>
>> 6) Taligent - Dead after a few years
>>
>> 7) EWorld - Dead after two years.
>>
>> 8) Pippin - Couldn't compete with Sony Playstation, Sega Saturn and
>> Nintendo 64. Less than 45,000 sold.
>>
>> 9) 20th Anniversary Macintosh - Discontinued after one year, could the
>> $7,499 price been a factor?
>>
>> 10) Macintosh Portable - The $6,500 price killed it off.
>>
>> 11) Newton - The "future of computing". Six year life.
>>
>> 12) Puck Mouse - No one could figure out which end was up.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> You forgot Apple TV.
>
And the Motorola ROKR, a joint project betwwen Moto and Apple
Paul Miner <pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote in
news:jr47k31i4v9sru6tlrv46hb5gfbuesqq11@4ax.com:
> On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 16:56:56 -0700, Oxford
> <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:
>
>>"Ness-Net" <richard.no@more.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Just more of the same, lame fiction.
>>
>>catch me back in 5 years... you'll then say SHIT! ... OXFORD WAS RIGHT!
>>
>>trust me Ness, I've seen all this before... many times...
>>
>>Apple always disrupts static, non-functioning markets, then takes all.
>
> Like the Walkman? Oh wait, that was Sony. I can't think of an Apple
> example.
>
No- it was the flat screen hi-def market! Oh, wait... that was everybody
BUT Apple.
DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote in news:LFM0j.1053$Dt4.621
@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net:
> CozmicDebris wrote:
>>> You forgot Apple TV.
>>>
>>
>> And the Motorola ROKR, a joint project betwwen Moto and Apple
>
> I didn't mention the ROKR as he would have diluted Apple's failure as a
> Motorola thing.
But wait- Apple always sets the terms and makes the rules. Remember?
Motorola would have been at the mercy of the might Apple.
>
> Nor the Apple TV as he would have said I never gave it a chance to fly.
>
But Apple Products don't need time to fly. Apple goes in and changes the
face of industries with their cutting edge technology.
Wow- I've been listening to his crap for too long if I can recite it back
that quickly.
CozmicDebris wrote:
> But Apple Products don't need time to fly. Apple goes in and changes the
> face of industries with their cutting edge technology.
In article
<linuxlovesosx-2D1408.13355220112007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net>,
Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:
> > Vodafone did not ask the court to stop T-Mobile from selling the iPhone,
> > Gordon said.
> > Vodafone would like to see a court eventually mandate that T-Mobile sell an
> > unlocked
> > version of the iPhone for the same or less as today's locked version, he
> > said.
> >
> >
> > http://www.pcworld.com/businesscente...protests_tmobi
> > le
> > _iphone_sales.html
> >
> > I don't think I've ever seen someone (Oxford) more consistently full of
> > shit.
>
> Yes, but from a LEGAL perspective Vodafone is TERRIFIED of losing
> customers to the iPhone,
What can you show us to support that Vodafone is terrified?
> so they are trying to open up holes so they can
What can you show us to support that they are acting specifically
against iPhone and not other competition?
> obtain revenue from the iPhone without committing to the future.
How does Vodafone get iPhone revenue?
How does that prevent them from a commitment?
> No handset maker can now compete in the Cell Market against the iPhone,
> that's a pure fact.
In what way? To everyone else in the entire world, there are many
competitors, doing very well. Using ANY metric of any kind, iPhone is
one of many hundreds of choices, and it is clear to everyone else that
people will continue, mostly happily, to buy other ones.
> Apple has too many patents on the future, so
Apple has many patents on specific technologies that are in iPhone.
That's common -- most companies own patents for their techs. Since no
one has to replicate exactly what iPhone has in it, the patents only
mean that Apple is protected from exact copies. They aren't protected
from just all innovation.
> everyone must either bow down to Apple or go out of business.
Show us one way this is true.
Even assuming everyone HAD to copy the iPhone, there are many ways to
do many things. A little cleverness might manage.
But obviously they do NOT have to copy the thing -- they just need to
make better products, not the same thing Apple has.
> These are the facts... cell carriers and handset makers must face.
They are not facts, and that's one of your problems. They are OPINIONS
based on your extremely narrow view of what is going on and what is
needed in the industry. Plus, your incredibly shallow appreciation of
what iPhone is about that makes you think it's so unique or wonderful
that everyone must have one.
> Do a great deal with Apple to carry the iPhone, or disappear.
You seem to be missing a lot of major facts:
Apple isn't looking for multiple carriers. No one gets that choice, in
the short term. It's done. Over. Kaput. Everyone that isn't selling it
now has to find other handsets (there are MANY fine ones!) to sell and
promote.
Haven't you noticed they continue to do that, and are doing just fine?
> Those are the only 2 choices for the next several decades.
Your sure your really narrow, extremist view is so amazingly certain
that it predicts many decades of the future? That's idiotic!
Re: Vodafone TERRIFIED of iPhone - Seeks Restraining Order! 
Linear Mode
