Comments on: Freepress petition to “Free the iPhone” From ATT

By: RB

RB — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 16:37:07 +0000

Very good points from Rhett & J.Moore. Everyone who wants the iPhone should be able to get one but like with all good things there’s a price for it – you have to switch. How many previously kick-butt cellphones were locked to Sprint or Verizon and were never usable on any other network? Where was this petition then? How many other consumer products used proprietary parts and were only upgradeable/seviceable from a specific vendor? The iPhone is no different in that sense. I’m currently a T-Mobile user but as soon a my iPhone arrives so-long T-Mobile. I get great service from TMo but I’m willing to switch in order to use the iPhone. Will the services be worse, I’ll know soon enough and will have 2 years to live with that decision. The FCC can regulate the airwaves but it shouldn’t be able to dictate how a company sells it’s products. Verizon had a chance at the iPhone (passed on it) now everyone is crying sour grapes. ATT took the chance, now they’re reaping the benefits from it. Get over it and wait in line like everyone else for your iPhone or use a different phone and service.

By: Jerroyd Moore

Jerroyd Moore — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 06:14:30 +0000

I agree with both the substance of the article and (the idea behind) what Rhett said. Consumers need a market that has its best interests in mind (which usually means less profit for the company), while still being profitable for companies (two conflicting concepts). This is why patents exist. The companies involved get a period of time to profit on innovation they delivered to the market, and after the patent expires, the open market can take advantage of the innovation. I see no difference between the definition of “a patent” and the exclusive contract between att and apple. Both companies took a risk and had a part to delivering the iPhone. If I’m wrong stop me. But since iPhone requires special Apple servers on the carrier’s side, to take advantage of all of iPhone’s functionality, att is playing a part to the birth of the iPhone. If there was nothing innovative about the iPhone and it was just another standard phone that works on any network, I can understand the question of “why?” but since it’s not the case, i believe it is only fair to lwt the two companies benefit from iphone so that they may invest in future innovations or better network.

Now if you don’t care about the innovations that att helped deliver (voice mail) and still wanted the cool touch-screen phone on a different network, well att might not mind if you have a half-disabled iphone on other networks (but I’m sure Apple might :)

By: Rhett

Rhett — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 04:16:01 +0000

I’m sorry but I don’t need Congress to help me make retail decisions. Grow a pair of balls you spineless sheeple and learn how to…
1. stand up for yourself and
2. Vote with you wallet.

I wanted an iPhone, I bought an iPhone. If there were no such thing as exclusive agreements, innovation would come screeching to a halt. How the hell would Apple have worked out Visual Voicemail without carrier support? Why don’t you people use your heads for once.