Thread: iPhone
View Single Post
Old 03-10-2007, 15:32   #142
brundles
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 1,266
brundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of societybrundles is a pillar of society
Re: iPhone

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gavin View Post
The price drop isn't the most heinous example, but they are plenty more, across all Apple products.

Picking one at random, the iPhone doesn't allow custom ringtones. Virtually every phone over at least the last 5 years have had the ability to either record them via the mic, import them, or compose them. If you want a ringtone for your iPhone, you have to buy it from iTunes, even if you have already bought the song for your iPod. So despite buying the song in full, you need to buy another 15 seconds of the same song. And its not about protecting artists, or the like. Its about squatting over the customer and fleecing them because they can.
Can't really argue that one! In business terms it's great as you get all of the revenue - how many companies wouldn't like to be able to charge for the same thing several times "legitimately"? In support terms it's also good as you know what's on the phone - particularly when dealing with firmware's and the like (OK, I know that's a whole different story of Apple evilness). In customer terms though it's just crap! I haven't looked but how do the prices compare? Why do I have a feeling that the price of the ringtone is actually more expensive than the price of the whole song?

Quote:
Originally Posted by smharman
18m-2y contracts are far more common over here. I don't think many here consider the length of contract to be unusual of excessive.
They're starting to become pretty pervasive but I wouldn't go so far as to say common. At least in the UK the operators have a (somewhat wobbly) leg to stand on when trying to justify it. In this instance the high rates that AT&T agreed to pay Apple provide the same wobbly leg. (And of course $11 a month over a 2 year contract is better than over a 1 year contract for Apple too - hence Apple's incentive to keep phones locked to the network.)
brundles is offline   Reply With Quote