Update (Oct 1): Well, didn’t this spawn a minor firestorm. A lot of the comments below are interesting. Some are thoughtful, some are not. Some take me to task for things I didn’t say, and some take me to task for things I did. I love an interesting discussion. But this update really is to let you know that Crooks and Liars has more on the situation.
AT&T sucks.
Got that? AT&T sucks. And I can say that. Know why? Because I am not using AT&T service. If I did, then I would have to agree to their Terms of Service, which say:
5.1 Suspension/Termination… In addition, AT&T may immediately terminate or suspend all or a portion of your Service, any Member ID, electronic mail address, IP address, Universal Resource Locator or domain name used by you, without notice, for conduct that AT&T believes … (c) tends to damage the name or reputation of AT&T, or its parents, affiliates and subsidiaries.
So, if I used AT&T, I would not be able to post this blog entry.
You know what? That sucks. Not as much as gleefully acquiescing to give all their customer data over to the Bush Administration in violation of the Constitution, or censoring Pearl Jam, but it sucks nonetheless.
Hat tip to Slashdot.
September 29th, 2007 at 8:29 pm
Hmph. And Apple is gleefully bricking iPhones that have been unlocked from AT&T with their new firmware… And they refuse to fix them afterwards because it supposedly damages the phone… Which isn’t true. Of course, AT&T was snarling very loudly at Apple over the unlocking matters.
iPhones stink. Apple stinks. AT&T as well.
September 29th, 2007 at 8:35 pm
And woe to you if you bought an iphone and then modified it and now own an “ibrick”.
So, they decided that helping the government with illegal wiretaps wasn’t enough? I mean how are they going to monitor everything to make sure you’re dissing AT&T?
Unless you’re an employee of AT&T, isn’t this in violation of free speech? Or does it skirt it because you could choose another carrier?
September 29th, 2007 at 8:50 pm
*whistles* Apple and AT&T have both shot themselves in the foot with this, big time.
September 29th, 2007 at 8:58 pm
AT&T is not a sovereign nation, so they can censor people as they see fit. It just makes them really, really, really evil.
September 29th, 2007 at 9:05 pm
Sure, they can censor people as they see fit, and we can stay away from them as we see fit.
The beauty of being a customer!
September 29th, 2007 at 9:10 pm
Hmmmm. A Google search for “tends to damage the name or reputation of” yields 449 results - 441 of them being companies other than AT&T. Not quite enough to say that it’s standard TOS boilerplate, but it’s not exclusive to AT&T. (I seem to remember the same sort of language used in my Student Handbook in college, and it’s probably also in my Employee Handbook at work.)
September 29th, 2007 at 9:13 pm
Am I glad that I also apply my critical reasoning skills to contracts.
Harold is right: it’s standard boilerplate. And it’s also most likely unenforceable, just like the “not responsible for debris” signs on the backs of dump trucks.
Come on, Dr. Plait. You complain to no end when people just accept whatever they’re told, and yet when AT&T talks you just take them at their word?
September 29th, 2007 at 9:18 pm
Thanks for the heads up on that. I wouldn’t want to sign-up for that one, either. However, the agreement is for their internet access, not wireless services. I haven’t found similar wording in those agreements (although, that doesn’t mean there isn’t something nasty lurking in there…).
Here are the wireless agreement(s): http://www.wireless.att.com/learn/articles-resources/wireless-terms.jsp
Even though I’ve been an AT&T wireless customer for many years, I’m in no way defending them. I can’t say they’re better or worse than anyone else. I always suspect the minute I make a change, I’ll lose coverage somewhere else. Oh, and yes, I do have an iPhone.)
September 29th, 2007 at 9:24 pm
[…] Chris wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptAT&T sucks. Got that? AT&T sucks. And I can say that. Know why? Because I am not using AT&T service. If I did, then I would have to agree to their Terms of Service, which say:. 5.1 Suspension/Termination… … […]
September 29th, 2007 at 9:35 pm
And people still believe that Apple is less evil than Microsoft?
September 29th, 2007 at 9:35 pm
Michelle, don’t spread questionable information. The Gizmodo staff has an agenda. Nobody has any proof that Apple is “gleefully” bricking iPhones. This is, after all, the Bad Astronomer, right? Where we’re really concerned about FACTS, right? Then, you should only talk about known facts, and they are:
(1) Some people went ahead and unlocked their iPhones, consequently voiding their warranties, including yours truly;
(2) Apple issued a VERY loud and clear warning, pointing out that internal tests had shown that some of the methods employed to unlock the phones were at odds with the firmware update that Apple had been working on (v.1.1.1) and when the firmware is applied to unlocked phones, could render the phones useless;
(3) Several days later, Apple releases the firmware update that many tens of thousands of people had been waiting for, providing them with, among other things, wireless access to the iTunes Music Store;
(4) Those people STUPID (or brave, however you want to put it) enough to ignore (or to test) the warning made by Apple went ahead and applied the firmware update, yours truly NOT included;
(5) Most of those hacked phones were temporarily rendered useless.
And that is it. Nothing we know clearly indicates that there was ANY malicious intent on the part of Apple, and, if we were to apply Occam’s razor (a rather scientific way of logical reasoning), it would suggest that there really wasn’t any intentionality on the part of Apple. One post over at Gizmodo summarized it well, and I’ll put a modified version of it here:
If you’re Apple, and you’ve been working on a firmware update for a while and about a week before you release it, you find out there are multiple hacks in the wild that change portions of the firmware to unlock the phone, and you find out that your update is going to conflict with some of them. Do you;
a) spend time (days/weeks/months?) trying to fix your software so as not to upset any of the unofficial code
b) say ’screw you’ and spend money and resources to re-design your code to really screw up those phones
c) warn the public of the problem by making it abundantly clear what’s going to happen if you own a hacked phone and try to update, and roll out your software as planned, satisfying the 95-99% (if not more) of the users out there
Logically speaking, (c) is what happened. And don’t ya know it? The hackers have found a way to “unbrick” the phones:
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/notag/how-to-unbrick-an-iphone-the-jesus-phone-has-risen-updated-confirmed-it-unbricks-but-cant-call-305230.php
Looking at just how simple that process is (really, in terms of technical sophistication, much simpler than the unlock process), I’d say it was quite a mild “brick”.
September 29th, 2007 at 9:41 pm
AT&T isn’t a sovereign nation, but they are a common carrier, so no, they aren’t allowed to do this.
They’re trying to get away with this through some legal loopholes (there’s very little precedent when it comes to applying common carrier laws to the internet), but I’m willing to bet that when this makes it to court, they’ll lose hard.
Their options are really either to not censor their users, or to be liable for every single act of copyright infringement and every bit of child porn on their networks. I’m not sure they thought this one through.
September 29th, 2007 at 9:52 pm
I’m not a fan of AT&T, but for other reasons. Their wireless network is pretty decent for voice coverage but their 3G high speed data coverage is pathetic. If you live in one of the major cities it covers then you may be okay (but if you’re in a city you may very well get away with wifi). But the burbs? Forget about it. They have some of the area around boston and into rhode island covered. They have a couple splotches of Florida. In the western part of the US it’s pretty much limited to a few metropolitian blips.
Sprint/Verizon: Their data service is more propriotary (IE: Their data devices generally don’t work outside the US and Canada) but their network is quite extensive. I’m sure they have the whole Boulder area reasonably covered.
Also the Iphone has some great features, but it’s missing a few big ones as far as I can see. Also, I’m not crazy about the touch-only interface. I like some tactile feedback, even at the cost of screen size. Also, I’ve never seen an iphone that was not covered with grubby little fingerprints.
Maybe the iPhone 2.0 will turn out to be more rockin.
September 29th, 2007 at 9:57 pm
OK, so other companies put this in their contract too.
That means they suck too. But it doesn’t make AT&T any better for doing it.
September 29th, 2007 at 10:02 pm
[…] Rockwell wrote an interesting post today on Am I glad I didn’t buy an iPhone!Here’s a quick […]
September 29th, 2007 at 10:05 pm
AT&T sucks.
I said it and I have a contract with them.
The whole telecom industry is ridiculously messed up. The giants are in bed with the politicos. The FCC is nearly a complete waste of space. Bah to it all!
September 29th, 2007 at 10:20 pm
[…] Michael Rainey wrote an interesting post today!.Here’s a quick excerptAT&T sucks. Got that? AT&T sucks. And I can say that. Know why? Because I am not using AT&T service. If I did, then I would have to agree to their Terms of Service, which say:. 5.1 Suspension/Termination… … […]
September 29th, 2007 at 10:47 pm
>>> And people still believe that Apple
>>> is less evil than Microsoft?
Uhhhh, yeah? Especially since the “villian” here is AT&T.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/29/microsoft_vista_eula_analysis/
>>> tends to damage the name or reputation of AT&T,
Well, they can never enforce it.
There’s nothing anyone can say that can damage the reputation any further.
Slow news day, Phil?
September 30th, 2007 at 12:06 am
Hmph, I thought about switching to AT&T, but I’m out of my contract with T-Mobile and I see no reason to leap into another one just to get a discount iPhone that I can’t tinker with.
I like to tinker, make that I LOVE to tinker and tweak and adjust things until they suit me. I’m not interested in a product that’s been made difficult to play with. That’s part of why I’m a PC kind o’ guy.
September 30th, 2007 at 12:12 am
The worst of it is, unless you’re really hung up on the iPhone interface, there are unlocked phones in existence in a similar price range to the newly reduced iPhone with just as many features.
I just don’t get what is so damn great about the iPhone that anyone would even WANT to buy one then hack it.
I’m happy with my Nokia N80IE, and when I get annoyed at my carrier I can go to a new carrier without any pain.
September 30th, 2007 at 12:19 am
I REALLY wanted the iphone to fail on day 1, just because of the whole “Apple is holier than though” bs. I won’t deny they make good products, but when it comes to realizing they are JUST like Microsoft (and are only out to make money), people turn a deaf ear to it. As for AT&T, yeah, they’re a big ‘ol evil pie. Looks pretty on the outside, but when you open it up, you get the surprise of your life.
September 30th, 2007 at 1:28 am
I noted a telling little quote in a recent New York Times article:
Steven P. Jobs, Apple’s chief executive, has said the company wanted
to maintain control over the iPhone’s functions to protect carrier
networks and to make sure the phone was not damaged.
That is _exactly_ the same argument as British Telecom (the Post Office as was) made here when it was being privatised in the early 1980s and its monopoly broken - it fought to keep control at the consumer end through hardwired phone sockets (and failed) because people would put strange devices on the network and break them … and it!
(Exactly the same iPhone issues as in the US are going to play out in the UK, except that the sole network supplier is O2 rather than AT&T. The only difference is that AT&T, by all accounts, is far more “evil” than O2).
September 30th, 2007 at 1:52 am
All companies suck. You don’t succeed as a company, unless you suck. And the more you suck, the more you will succeed. Never, never develop an emotional attachment to a company. If they make a good product, use it, like it, even love it. But not the company itself. You will be disappointed.
Oh, yes, and Free Burma!
September 30th, 2007 at 5:42 am
I seriously doubt that ATT could take away a domain if you bad mouth them, especially if there is no connection between them and your domain.
I have my own domain - several in fact - and there’s no way they could be taken away from me if I violate a TOS from a company who is in no way connected to my domains.
That’s like saying that if I work for a company, but have my own personal domain on the internet, they can decide if I can keep it or not.
Sheesh.
September 30th, 2007 at 5:48 am
I don’t know how anyone can be surprised by these kind of actions. How could big business run our government without also running our personal lives????
September 30th, 2007 at 5:52 am
The “damage name or reputation” thing is commonly put in terms of service so that if you do something like send billions of spam messages on your internet connection, causing anti-spam blacklists to block huge ranges of AT&T internet address space in retaliation, then the carrier has grounds to boot you off the service so the rest of their customers can get their lives back.
Probably not really needed in an iPhone contract, but it likely goes along with it being a net-enabled device.
September 30th, 2007 at 6:56 am
*sigh*
First off as someone already mentioned you referenced a contract for their internet service not their cell phone service.
Second off - the Pearl Jam thing has already been debunked and was considered a mistake by the vendor that AT&T contracts the service out too.
Third off - don’t blame AT&T for our government’s illegal activities. Put the blame squarely where its due. The Bush administration.
And lastly - those that bash the iPhone or any Apple product and the only reason you site is the actions of of its “fanbois” have already lost the argument. They support a product unconditionally due to their irrational passion for the company - you bash the product unconditional due to your irrational hatred for the company. In short you are no different than they.
Here is where the Apple iPhone is going to do us all good - spur the development of competing phones that actually work. Say what you want about the iPhone but most -if not all- cell phones on the market in this country royally suck and the US cell phone network is abysmal (AT&T, T-Mobile, etc).
Personally I have found the iPhone a joy to use as a phone and its web browsing capabilities are second to none but its really not a better iPod than the iPod and its lack of support for third party apps will eventually kill it. I am patiently waiting for competitors to get a clue.
September 30th, 2007 at 7:20 am
BA, I think you’d be on safe grounds to say, “AT&T sucks” even if you had a contract with them. That is not damaging to their reputation, it is just confirming it. What they did is what damaged their reputation.
September 30th, 2007 at 7:40 am
@Rawhead,
Puhlease. Agenda? Let’s not go paranoid, it’s just a website.
Apple could’ve very easily stopped all the bricks. In fact, if they would’ve done it kosher there would not have been any bricks to begin with. The changes they did to their firmware was not enough to brick an iPhone. It’s extremely simple to just code a restore to the original locked state. Anyone with the least bit of knowledge knows that’s always the best to do to not make your geek market MAD with a bricked phone.
It’s like the folks that bought a PSP for the homebrew capabilities (Me included.) simply because the thing would not be worth the money otherwise. Sony fights it and lately the open firmware’s source was leaked out to them and they made interesting changes to their firmware… Too bad they don’t understand that homebrews are their big market. But thankfully they’re not that good at trying to block. It’s as if they just wanna clear their conscience and go “well look, at least we TRIED to stop them!”. Thus far I don’t think that any PSP was bricked by going back to the real official firmware because Sony KNOWS that would destroy their sales.
Fine, let Apple fight the unlock part. Afterall they have mad pressure from AT&T. But lots of people bought the iPhone because of the 3rd party apps which are absolutely more awesome than the ones Apple offer… because the iPhone otherwise is actually pretty LAME. What was great about it is all the capabilities you could add to the gadget. But Apple apparently does not want people to have as much freedom as possible on their gadgets. It’s like Microsoft going “I’m sorry, but all third party apps are now forbidden!” on every PC. Not quite brilliant.
What’s the use of me buying something I can’t do whatever I want with? Apple will never get a cent from me with that attitude.
September 30th, 2007 at 8:05 am
It it little wonder then, that the AT&T world logo has been nicknamed “The Death Star.”
September 30th, 2007 at 8:10 am
BA said:
And how many of us blissfully click “agree” without reading these agreements?
I’m guilty. Ignorance is bliss. I just click and get on with it.
Sometimes you’re the windshield, sometimes you’re the bug.
September 30th, 2007 at 8:18 am
I haven’t wanted to use AT&T ever since the NSA stuff came out. Unfortunately for me, they bought Cingular and Bellsouth so now I”m stuck with them for my cell carrier AND my land line. I need to find a good alternative for the land line, but I think I’m stuck on the cellular. I have to have the mobile to mobile free minutes on account of having a cell phone for my grandmother on my account. She calls a lot of relatives out of state and if it weren’t for the mobile to mobile minutes, it would eat me alive.
Don’t suppose anyone knows of any good alternatives to AT&T in the midwest?
September 30th, 2007 at 9:01 am
Well being a user of Smartphones for years now (currently using the HTC Wizard), I’m no fan of the iPhone. But when it is released in Europe, they will have to by law allow it to be unlocked.
So that should give people more options, either importing one to the US, or perhaps Apple will put a stop to bricking them.
September 30th, 2007 at 9:22 am
Slightly off the subject, but related, there was a piece
in today’s travel section about USAirways.
To paraphrase: “The purchase of a ticket does not
insure you of transportation.”
What good is buying a ticket then?
September 30th, 2007 at 9:33 am
A thread about cell phones. woot.
Here’s something new to try: Empty your pockets - cell phone, music player, PDA, pager, tricorder, all colors of teeth, the works.
Go outside. Listen. Look. Smell. Even reach out and touch. Sit down, anywhere, and wait for ten minutes to see what happens.
Beats the hell out of a Wallace & Gromit ringtone, doesn’t it?
There’s a special right now, only going to last until the end of the planet: Lifetime subscription to this for only $0. Hurry!
September 30th, 2007 at 9:45 am
What happened to the “Astronomy” in “Bad Astronomy” ? That is why I *used* to visit this site. Now all you do is post shrill rants about social issues and complain about telephone companies you don’t even use.
September 30th, 2007 at 9:47 am
Um. Speech is not “conduct.” IANAL, but I’m pretty sure AT&T would lose if they canceled service on the basis of speech alone. Sure, they’d likely do it anyway, because publicly traded corporations are required by law to behave like sociopaths.
September 30th, 2007 at 10:06 am
And still Republicans make excuses and Democrats snooze. You know what? Americans, we don’t deserve your freedom anymore. Maybe some other country will take up the cause…this one is lost on a sea of Republican party loyalty.
September 30th, 2007 at 10:12 am
Personally I have found the iPhone a joy to use as a phone and its web browsing capabilities are second to none but its really not a better iPod than the iPod and its lack of support for third party apps will eventually kill it. I am patiently waiting for competitors to get a clue.
Actually, to be fair, it’s web browsing capabilities are second to any good phone that’s been out for the last 3 years. The concept of a fully functional browser is absolutely NOT new with the iPhone.
September 30th, 2007 at 11:11 am
soon2be former reader: I think this is for you. Have a nice life.
September 30th, 2007 at 11:15 am
tim:
AT&T posted an excuse saying it was a vendor who censored Pearl Jam. We are now at the “he said she said” level, which I don’t consider a debunking. They are trying to make amends, it seems, but that could be simple face-saving.
I don’t care if it’s internet or cell phone service. I care that the ToS is evil (as are most EULAs).
I don’t blame AT&T for the government’s illegal (and don’t forget unconstitutional) actions. I blame AT&T for easily acquiescing.
I’m not bashing the iPhone per se, nor Apple, though I think they screwed up MASSIVELY on this. I’ll note I am typing this on a Mac.
September 30th, 2007 at 11:43 am
Michelle,
I could post another long one, but I’ll keep it simple:
“Apple could’ve very easily stopped all the bricks.”
And you know this for a fact, how?
Or, are you just taking the words of posters over at Gizmodo (or the Dev Team, whoever)?
Again, I reiterate, the FACT is, Gizmodo doesn’t know that, the Dev Team does not know that, and you certainly do not know that. Unless you’re gonna say “screw the NDA” and tell me you work for Apple, and you, personally, coded the firmware update.
“It’s extremely simple to just code a restore to the original locked state.”
Huh, funny. If it’s that easy to do, then why haven’t the Dev Team been able to come up with a full restore to v1.0.2 ? I mean, we have all the tools and the original 1.0.2 firmware, don’t we?
Again, the fact of the matter is, nobody knows (and yes, that includes the super 1337 hackers over at the Dev Team) exactly how easy or difficult it is to do that. I’ll say it again one more time and sign off from this thread.
This isn’t a thread in Gizmodo, this is BA, where we stick to the facts. So, STICK TO THE FACTS.
September 30th, 2007 at 1:00 pm
When do anti-trust laws kick in?
Cartels are such a joy.
September 30th, 2007 at 1:03 pm
Sounds like AT&T needs to be broken up again.
September 30th, 2007 at 1:20 pm
I recently dumped AT&T for my landline. This stuff isn’t even the half of it. To call in and ask what my bill is, I need three different numbers. But their policy when somebody dies is just this: Somebody called and said they’re dead, so they shut their phone off. They don’t ask the caller’s name, and you don’t need any information about the customer except their name and address. You can literally do this to anybody you want.
After my phone got shut off by somebody doing that to me, I got it turned back on, and then called AT&T from a different number and told them I’d died - it couldn’t possibly be that easy for somebody with no knowledge of my bills to do that, right?. Because they had the false report on record, they needed confirmation of the death. Confirmation came in the form of a second operator coming on the line and asking me to restate that I’d died. Didn’t ask my name, didn’t ask for any account or billing data, no death certificate, didn’t even ask my relationship to myself. My phone was turned off about ten minutes later. When I found out who’d had mine shut off the first time, I called in and said THEY were dead, with the same results - their phone was shut off within the hour.
September 30th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
Something else fun with AT&T, albeit a bit off topic: Anybody can have anybody else’s phone shut off at any time. They won’t ask your name, your phone number, your relationship to the person, or any proof. Just call AT&T, tell them the person died (you may need their phone number or address if there’s somebody else with their name in the same city).
Somebody did this to me a few months ago. I didn’t believe it could be as easy as the service rep told me, so after getting the phone turned back on (which took over a week), I went to a friend’s house and called them to tell them I was dead. Since the account had a false death report already on record, I needed proof - that is, I needed to tell two people I was dead, not just one. Didn’t have to give my name, my relationship to myself, my phone number, or even a death certificate. My phone was shut off in ten minutes with no meaningful questions asked. After I found out who’d shut mine off, I called AT&T and said they were dead and was told their phone would be disconnected and the number released within the hour.
Moral of the story: If you’re paying for any service from AT&T, find alternate service. This stuff is just the newest in a long line of abuses. They’re already doing most of the stuff Ma Bell was broken up for, and have added new ones.
September 30th, 2007 at 1:35 pm
Something else fun with AT&T, albeit a bit off topic: Anybody can have anybody else’s phone shut off at any time. They won’t ask your name, your phone number, your relationship to the person, or any proof. Just call AT&T, tell them the person died (you may need their phone number or address if there’s somebody else with their name in the same city).
Somebody did this to me a few months ago. I didn’t believe it could be as easy as the service rep told me, so after getting the phone turned back on (which took over a week), I went to a friend’s house and called them to tell them I was dead. Since the account had a false death report already on record, I needed proof - that is, I needed to tell two people I was dead, not just one. Didn’t have to give my name, my relationship to myself, my phone number, or even a death certificate. My phone was shut off in ten minutes with no meaningful questions asked. After I found out who’d shut mine off, I called AT&T and said they were dead and was told their phone would be disconnected and the number released within the hour.
Moral of the story: If you’re paying for any service from AT&T, find alternate service. This stuff is just the newest in a long line of abuses. They’re already doing most of the stuff Ma Bell was broken up for, and have added new ones, but currently nobody in the government seems to think it’s a problem.
September 30th, 2007 at 3:49 pm
Ummm…dumb question. Who the hell are “Chris”, “Lew Rockwell”, and “Michael Rainey”, and why are they cited as having written Josh’s properly-linked article in the three otherwise-identical posts that are indicated here in trackbacks? Is this some sort of new traffic-generating scam that involves swiping someone else’s content and giving it arbitrary attribution? I guess this is one way that pseudosites can keep visitors clicking in and hitting their advertising links, by just harvesting content from other sites.
September 30th, 2007 at 4:10 pm
Jesus Tap Dancing Christ, folks, if you don’t like the iPhone, don’t buy one. There’s no need to attack those that do like them as some sort of intellectually challenged individuals.
>>> because the iPhone otherwise is actually pretty LAME.
Have you actually used one? I mean, *really* used it?
Personally, I’m waiting to see what the next version is like.
>>> they are JUST like Microsoft (and are only out to make money),
Oh noes! Companies wants to makes the monies! Thanks for that newsflash, Mr. Murrow! Kthnx bye!
I love when people trot out the bloody obvious like it’s some sort of religious revelation.
What’s your encore? The secret fourth Fatima prophesy?
>>> Puhlease. Agenda? Let’s not go paranoid, it’s just a website.
What? Are you new to the Internet? Find me a website *without* an agenda! For Brahma’s sake, you’re *posting* to one!
>>> And still Republicans make excuses and
>>> Democrats snooze.
Warning! Warning! Thread adrift! (waves arms wildly)
>>> You know what? Americans,
>>> we don’t deserve your freedom anymore.
What?
>>> Maybe some other country will take up the
>>> cause…this one is lost on a sea of Republican
>>> party loyalty.
All this from a single phrase in an AT&T EULA?
Will you be projecting the total infinity of existence from a piece of fairy cake next?
>>> I care that the ToS is evil
And thus the word “evil” is devalued even more.
Here’s some real evil:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darfur_conflict
Now read the EULA again.
See the difference?
September 30th, 2007 at 4:19 pm
i would cencor pearl jam too, they SUCK, just like at&t
September 30th, 2007 at 5:51 pm
QD,
What can I say? Americans don’t care how many freedoms they lose as long as they have sparkly things to play with.
September 30th, 2007 at 6:57 pm
I don’t own a cellphone
Pete
September 30th, 2007 at 7:14 pm
>>> What can I say?
How about, “I shall gain a sense of perspective” 1000 times? It’s a fricken line from a EULA which will never be enforced. It’s not evil, and buying an iPhone will not burn a hole in the Constitution.
>>> Americans don’t care how many
>>> freedoms they lose as long as they have sparkly
>>> things to play with.
Why, because they don’t all agree with “Daffy”?
And which Americans are those? The Christians? The Muslims? The Jews? The Atheists? Blacks? Whites? Browns? Purples? Republicans? Democrats? Libertarians? Greens? Blue staters? Red staters? North-Easters? Southerners? Midwest folks? West Coasters?
I’l sorry, but that is one of my biggest peeves: people who think beginning a sentence beginning with “Americans are…” or “Americans think…” can lead to anything other than a statement of shallow, infantile bigotry.
You seem to imply you are outside the US. Where are you? I wanna play “mindlessly broad brush an entire, diverse nation” too, mommy!
September 30th, 2007 at 7:33 pm
There’s no need to attack those that do like them as some sort of intellectually challenged individuals.
Yes, there is a need.
Far too many people seem to believe - incorrectly - that iPhones are somehow so utterly awesome compared to all competing phones that they’re worth buying, hacking, and bragging about.
The iPhone is to cell phones what the Pet Rock was to granite - it’s nothing new in terms of features and functionality, it’s really not very innovative although it has a nice user interface, but most of all it’s got a LOT of great marketing behind it. It’s Apple hardware, just like the pet rock was, well, rock, so you can expect it to be durable - Apple hardware tends to be good in that area.
If, and only if, you use it on an AT&T network there is some cost savings with the data plans offered. However, for people hacking to unlock the phone, that’s not even true. In fact, for the phone hackers, you’d end up with an unsupported phone without the nice data package that cost about the same as or more than a phone from any of a number of phone vendors, and has no more flexibility or features than those other phones. In essence, a phone hacker is paying top dollar and giving up support all for an Apple UI on his phone.
So it all boils down to people going ape over something for no logical, rational reason. And those people ARE worthy of being made fun of since no amount of pointing out this fact seems to drive the point home.
Perhaps, at some future point, when carriers all over the world offer the same kind of deal that AT&T does with the iPhone then it might be less point-and-giggle-worthy… but then if they did that, the iPhone would simply be one phone of dozens with the functionality and would still be nothing special.
September 30th, 2007 at 10:11 pm
QD,
I am an American. Enjoy your coma.
September 30th, 2007 at 11:30 pm
I really hate American Telephone and Telegraph, they rip people off, lie, and are generally schmucks. Evolving Squid is right, there is nothing special about apple or anything they make. The I-phone does nothing I can’t do, and I don’t own a cell phone.
October 1st, 2007 at 5:59 am
Is it that AT&T lies, or that customers don’t actually read the agreements they sign with AT&T?
Here in Canada, people get on Rogers for lying about phone/cable/internet/whatever, and so far every lie I’ve been told about can be traced back to “customer didn’t read the agreement they signed.”
In my experience, the company may be inflexible, you may not like the deal they offer, but they don’t seem to deliberately misrepresent the truth. At the end of the day AT&T is out to make money for its shareholders. All they’re interested in is doing the minimum possible to get you - the potential customer - to put up that money… the same as any publicly traded company.
When you think of it in those terms, it becomes easier to deal with.
October 1st, 2007 at 7:08 am
In our case, “AT&T sucks” because a cell phone call on a 2-bar Verizon signal sounds much cleaner than one on a 5-bar AT&T signal. AT&T’s claim about “fewest dropped calls” must be because they simply don’t complete as many calls for you, thereby lowering the number of opportunities they have to drop your call…
October 1st, 2007 at 9:08 am
#1 ) Unlocking the iPhone (or moding any hardware) voids the warranty. All hackers know that, and don’t take this risk lightly. Bricking is a very real option - one you have no recourse over.
#2 ) We knew to skip the firmware update - weeks in advance. So complaining that it bricked your phone is your own fault.
Using this against Apple or AT&T amounts to whining that you weren’t smart enough to play the hardware hacking game. Maybe leave that game to the pros.
As for your taking the ToS out of context and calling it a black and white issue? Sounds more like “Bad Legal Advice” than “Bad Astronomy”. The day I listen to a blog pushing its own agenda (here its appearing like an activist fighting the ‘Man’) is the day I listen to myspace bands for new music. Both are just amateurs looking for attention, with no more value than bits they were transferred on.
October 1st, 2007 at 9:29 am
That’s nice, xentek, but if you read what I wrote, I didn’t mention either of the two things you’re discussing. I assume you’re talking about me, since you said “The day I listen to a blog pushing its own agenda…” and I am the author.
All blogs push their own agenda. What an odd thing to complain about! And if you read my blog going back a week, in fact, you’ll see I do talk about a woman who has a beautiful voice I found on MySpace, quite by accident.
And also, I am an activist, and many times I do fight The Man. Your point is?
As for amateur, well, that’s not an issue for me either. Again, what an odd thing to say!
October 1st, 2007 at 9:34 am
Freedom of speech? Did you really believe you had this in your country? Well then that was naïve..
All I van wish for is that American companies will never be able to bring these tricks to my country, Belgium. Lucky my country has laws against it to prevent it as most as possible!
Long live Europe =p
October 1st, 2007 at 10:10 am
Bright, you’re screen name should be Dim. Yes, we do have freedom of speech. (Especially compared to many other countries I have lived in and visited.) If we didn’t, this blog wouldn’t exist, especially with the low opinion BA frequently expresses on the current administration. And if you think your telecom companies don’t provide “legal snoopers” the same access to you and your info that happens in the US, you’re the naive one. Europe has always struck me as more big-brotherish than the US. For example, automated photo-radar and red-light cameras were extremely common in Germany for at least a decade before they started showing up in the US in any numbers. Outdoor surveillance cameras have been much more numerous in the UK than the US. Ill-informed comments like yours serve only to reinforce the stereotype of smug Eurocentrics who just love to US-bash.
October 1st, 2007 at 10:39 am
Dear DennyMo,
First of all, this is an overall image of America that everyone in the world has.
Second, I’m very glad that freedom of speech isn’t completely overall. You misunderstood me, I know there are numerous people who still have brains and opinions. And I know that everyone who visites this site and blog belongs to them. I love BadAss!
I also know that in Europe there are as much less intelligent people as in the US or wherever in the world. I’m just of the opinion that my gov protects me more from the greed of multinationals and the stupidity of individuals.
This is not waterproof. At all! About one year ago one old lady stopt a large wind mill energy plant from being built at our coast because it bothered her, while you had to take a TELESCOPE to see it!..
We also have extreme right parties who would want nothing else but the seperation of out country, and they are succeeding very well..
So I’m sorry for having made such a short and unclear statement earlier on.
PS: a little reply on your behalve:
The red-light and speeding camera’s are purely for our own safety, because people here drive much faster then people in your country. I can’s see what you could have against them..
And the CCD-camera’s in the UK, well.. UK is a very special country and is more US then Europe in some ways, so there behavier is hard to explain sometimes. I think it is more because they are afraid of terrorist attacks like they are in the US. But also I would like to say, so what? If you don’t do anything wrong, then what are you so afraid of?
October 1st, 2007 at 11:54 am
Daffy: better a coma than an alternative ideological mentalverse where a silly line in a EULA is equated with geopolitical Armageddon. Maybe the men in the black helicopters put it in there. Oooooooo!
Oh, and I did *ask* where you were because your choice of words made it unclear.
Squid: you are confusing a vocal few with “far too many people”. The media hypes things and points the cameras at the loudest people.
As for what’s really new about the iPhone, it’s the interface and ease of use. That’s something the geeksphere completely and consistently fails to grasp. And for Apple fandom, over half the people at my work who have iPhones have never bought an Apple product before. Anecdotal, yes, but there you have it.
Ever read a MythTV versus Tivo thread? Then you understand.
Bright: Yes, we have pretty damn free speech here. There’s a cartoon on Comedy Central that makes brutal fun of our current President and other political “leaders” on a weekly basis. Heck, we go out of our way to ridicule our government.
Sorry to disagree with your mythology about the USA. But then again, kudos to Belgian newspapers for reprinting the Danish Mohammad cartoons. That was more than most of the spineless media outlets here did. See? I’m fair.
The real problem here is all the hyperbole. “American has no free speech!” “We’re turning into a police state because of same legal jacka$$ery in a EULA!” We’re supposed to be skeptical people here, and such piffle has no place.
Ideology/politics is to skepticism as bleach is to mildew. Avoid it (politics) at ALL costs.
Phil said, “And also, I am an activist, and many times I do fight The Man.”
Fight the Power, Phil! Right on!
Seriously… The MAN? That’s *so* 70’s. Will you be fighting Chico as well?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chico_And_The_Man
Keep up the groovy work, even if you do go off into the ideo-ether once in a while.
And fix that roof. Geez!
October 1st, 2007 at 12:05 pm
On topic:
Yes, AT&T sucks. Most corporate entities, being merely legal persons with no real ethos beyond the very organic need to expand and conquer, suck. Many companies exist to make the monies, not be good citizens. Those companies that do actually have a civic sense… well, they tend to be less profitable, yes, but they don’t suck quite as much.
The iPhone strikes me as decidedly ‘meh.’ I don’t have one; I know people who do, and all I can say is I’m not particularly interested. Think of the parodies, though, possible due to the bricking: (imagine it with the music from the commercials in the background) “The iPhone. It’s a doorstop, it can weight your papers down when you open a window, it’s a coaster, if you notch the case it can open bottles. It revolutionizes the way you whizz away hundreds of dollars. And, despite the name, it’s not even a phone anymore.”
I have a very healthy sense of schadenfreude and am enjoying this thoroughly from every conceivable angle.
Slightly off-topic:
Apple sucks. Microsoft sucks. Windows sucks. OS X sucks. Linux sucks. Unix sucks. They’re computing tools, not life statements. Find what meets your needs and preferences, use it, and for the love of all that is good and holy in the world stop trying to convince others you’re on the side of right.
Totally off-topic:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The First Amendment only protects one freedom of speech from the government, and more particularly, from the Legislative branch. The First Amendment does /not/ protect one’s freedom of speech when it comes to other legal entities. Civil law, particularly concerning libel and slander, makes this readily obvious.
What this contractual clause actually says is that one will neither libel nor slander AT&T, and if one does, AT&T can claim breach of contract as reason for terminating service. “AT&T sucks” is not slander, it’s the statement of an opinion (albeit as fact). “AT&T runs a side business in child pornography” -would- be an example of libel.
October 1st, 2007 at 12:40 pm
Bright, thanks for clarification of your comments.
I’m not opposed to traffic monitoring systems, rather wish they were more widely used here in the US. If I had a dollar for every time I’ve seen someone run a “deep red” (as opposed to “pink” or “orange”) traffic light, I’d be pretty wealthy. If my county had $100 for every time someone did it, maybe my property taxes would go down. (A guy can dream…)
“people here drive much faster then people in your country.”
Let’s compare notes after you survive a rush hour in Atlanta. I prefer the Autobahn, at least drivers over there actually have the *learn* how to drive before getting a license.
October 1st, 2007 at 12:48 pm
The point remains:
Someone with no legal background, took an excerpt from a EULA, and used it to say “AT&T Sucks”. You obviously had that opinion before posting - that’s what I was pointing out.
The other comments were directed at the conversation the post ignited.
October 1st, 2007 at 12:59 pm
The point remains:
Someone with no legal background, took an excerpt from a EULA, and used it to say “AT&T Sucks”. You obviously had that opinion before posting - that’s what I was pointing out. In other words, only reality would fit your opinion, not the other way ’round. And some how not using something gave your opinion validity - in fact, I believe its quite the opposite. You weren’t even presented with the choice the EULA presented, but are just a spectator. And this makes you an activist?
The other comments were directed at the conversation the post ignited, especially those equating your opinion about the EULA, and the iPhone firmware update.
October 1st, 2007 at 1:25 pm
[…] (Oct 1): Phil Plait, a Mac user, chimes in on the issue and thinks that Apple “screwed up MASSIVELY on this.“ Spread this […]
October 1st, 2007 at 2:37 pm
“5.1 Suspension/Termination… In addition, AT&T may immediately terminate or suspend all or a portion of your Service, any Member ID, electronic mail address, IP address, Universal Resource Locator or domain name used by you, without notice, for conduct that AT&T believes … (c) tends to damage the name or reputation of AT&T, or its parents, affiliates and subsidiaries.”
This kind of terms-of-use is actually legal in the US? You guys REALLY need to work on your laws.
This would void the contract in just about every other country on the planet, with the possible exceptions of Burma/Myanmar and Northen Korea.
October 1st, 2007 at 3:02 pm
xentek, what does a legal background have to do with anything? I don’t need to be a lawyer to know whether something is a good thing or not. I didn’t say it was illegal for them to do have that in their ToS (not a EULA, BTW), just that it was sucky.
And yeah, I was no fan of AT&T before I posted this. What has that got to do with anything either?
October 1st, 2007 at 5:46 pm
QD,
“Mentalverse?” (Cute term, actually) Bush and the Republicans have been assaulting our constitutional freedoms under the banner of “Homeland Security.” I accept that you don’t care. But that is what they are doing.
Your not-so-subtle canard that I am some sort of conspiracy freak is lame. What I am is a reasonably intelligent person who is capable of independent thought.
October 1st, 2007 at 6:21 pm
Doubtful. Very few countries have laws requiring businesses to transact business with you if, in the opinion of the business, you are jerking them around.
If I think you’re messing with my store’s reputation, I can ban you.
If I think you’re messing with my consulting company’s reputation, I can stop consulting for you.
And if I think you’re messing with my reputation as a service provider, I can cut you off.
I don’t think it’s that unreasonable actually. Of course, I’m not in the USA either.
October 1st, 2007 at 6:22 pm
Oh bleah. I dangled a closing italic
My apologies.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:24 am
On the contract clause, that’s standard stuff. I’m not saying it’s right, I’m just saying it’s standard and the only way it’s coming out is if someone has their service cut off for this reason and then sues at a high enough level to make a difference.
On AT&T in general, I’ve been with them for years, from BellSouth Mobility, through Cingular, and now to AT&T, and I’ve never had any problems with them whatsoever. You always read how horrible/evil they are online, but just like anything else, you only hear from the dissatisfied minority. The satisfied customers are content to just continue being customers. I have been one for seven years, and have had no reasons to consider leaving.
On the iPhone and the iPhone hate, I know I’m going to be labeled a “fanboi,” but I love mine (which I didn’t purchase until after the price drop). I am a fan of Apple’s products in general because they are very sturdy, well-made, and feature great interfaces. The iPhone interface makes the device. Virtually none of the features are novel and most have been done before (the visual voicemail is amazing though), but the execution of them in the interface is appropriate and natural. It is by no means perfect. There are a number of things that could have been done better, sometimes far better. There doesn’t seem to be a way to highlight and delete blocks of text. There doesn’t seem to be a way to intelligently zoom out in some of the applications. There are lots of other minor annoyances. I very strongly dislike the music player interface. I much prefer the classic iPod interface, and am not sure why anyone would consider buying the iPod Touch, when in my mind, it is stripping away all of the good parts of the phone and just leaving a music player with a crappy interface.
October 2nd, 2007 at 11:36 am
Oh who gives a Bad Word deleted by The Bad Astronomer. Nothing ever comes of that stuff. The iPhone is unquestionably the coolest, most useful phone out there. I never read the fine print and I never will.
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:54 pm
I wouldn’t worry about the contract. It will never be enforced. Life is full of adhesion contracts. Take it or leave it.
No, the real problem with the iPhone is that it is IMPOSSIBLE to use with acrylic nails. I have very pretty, natural looking fake nails because my real once don’t grow well. In addition to looking nice, they also make a great stylus substitute. Most of my friends have acrylics, too. The boys at Apple apparently did not ask any of my peers to test the iPhone, or we would have told you to give us the option of tapping! Just try using the keyboard with the pad of your finger instead of your fingertip. It does not work. The first time I borrowed a friend’s, it took 10 or 15 tries to type my own name.
So, no thanks, Apple. Next time, try talking to a girl.
October 2nd, 2007 at 6:53 pm
Isn’t it amazing what one little blurb about a non-important issue will ignite. Wouldn’t it be great if we could get this kind of response about space tourism or more funding for NASA, or the scientific community in general? Usually this blog is one of the more intellectual ones that I read, and it is really funny to watch people argue like a bunch of children over a phone that is a marketing tool for a company. Do I own an iPhone? No I do not. Why? Because it serves no useful purpose in my life. Is this a bad thing? Depends on whom you ask.
” Why do something intelligent in advance, when you can wait until the last minute and do something truly idiotic? “
October 3rd, 2007 at 8:21 am
So, judging on what’s been posted above, it would seem that you have to have a legal background to have any opinions on terms in an EULA.
However, you are supposed to agree to said EULA to use the product. This presumably requires having some opinion on whether you want to accept terms in an EULA.
Therefore the only people who are legally permitted to use any product with an EULA are those who have a legal background? Is that what we’re saying here?
October 3rd, 2007 at 8:40 am
the real problem with the iPhone is that it is IMPOSSIBLE to use with acrylic nails.
There are technical reasons for that. The iPhone touchscreen works in a very similar manner to the touchpads on laptops, and those don’t work with fingernails either, acrylic or not. The object touching the surface has to be conductive in order to produce a capacitance at the touch point. Fingernails aren’t. A touchscreen like the ones used for ATM’s or self-checkouts just aren’t practical for a handheld device.
October 5th, 2007 at 12:02 pm
[…] than a deliberate attempt to break hacked phones). Saying otherwise makes you look like just another idiot on the […]