Re: [Fed-Talk] Snow Leopard transition creates problems
Re: [Fed-Talk] Snow Leopard transition creates problems
- Subject: Re: [Fed-Talk] Snow Leopard transition creates problems
- From: Dave Schroeder <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 11:17:56 -0500
You "wouldn't put it past them"?
Come on.
When Apple breaks something (that shouldn't work in the first place,
like the Palm Pre iTunes syncing, for which Palm was reprimanded by
the USB Forum), they make it explicitly known. When it's something
unintentional, it's because you can't predict how an OS update may
interact with unsupported hacks to core or low-level functionality of
a device. And Apple makes that pretty well known, too.
There is no intent in 3.1 to cause random crashes, short battery life,
etc., with a modified carrier file. If it occurs, it's merely an
unintended side effect.
And again, speaking from the perspective of an organization that has
literally thousands of iPhones and iPod touches, 3.1 has been our most
stable and trouble-free OS yet for the majority of users.
As to Apple "pulling something out" of iTunes in every version, I
wonder what your thoughts are on sharing/syncing of media between home
computers, a major new feature that Apple obviously fought to include
again, after it was pulled many moons ago, no doubt at the urging of
content owners? When things get pulled, it's for a reason, not because
Apple has a vendetta against you.
I have many complaints with Apple -- too many to list. However, I hate
to break it you you, but Apple is not out to screw you. It is not
Apple's call whether to provide tethering, MMS, etc., in a particular
market; and on issues surrounding copyrighted media, Apple is
operating in a complex legal and policy landscape in dozens of
countries' jurisdictions and an array of rights holders. It's amazing
Apple has been able to build the ecosystem it has.
The iPhone may be an amazing hardware device, but just because things
are technically possible doesn't mean they all can be enabled for all
users. You may be able to say, "I can tether just fine and I'd never
pay a dime more since it obviously works as-is and Apple is unfairly
denying us this feature", but if everyone did it at the current
pricing model, AT&T's network would collapse spectacularly. We're
talking about a company for whom a 20% dropped call rate in New York
City is described as "consistent with service in this area". You might
say, well, Apple should ditch AT&T, then. And then what? Who would be
a single strong carrier partner to promote a device like iPhone to the
masses, not to the tech geek elite who are content to hack their
phones day in and day out? There are multiple factors at play here.
As a federal employee on an Apple-sponsored list, I'm still surprised
you so blatantly seem to promote violating AT&T's terms of service and
using the iPhone in a manner unsupported by Apple, and then complain
about it to boot.
- Dave
On Oct 1, 2009, at 10:39 AM, Pike, Michael (IHS/NPA) wrote:
I wouldn't put it past them, however, I know people that are in the
same boat and the battery life and locking problems are awful.
I've made a practice of archiving every Apple app I have... iTunes
almost always pulls something out we had before, so at least I can
always roll back if I have to. I have every iTunes going back to 6.
-----Original Message-----
From: fed-talk-bounces+michael.pike=email@hidden on
behalf of Walls, Bryan K. (MSFC-IS30)
Sent: Wed 9/30/2009 4:20 PM
To: Dave Downin
Cc: email@hidden Talk
Subject: Re: [Fed-Talk] Snow Leopard transition creates problems
I wonder if 3.1 was designed to behave badly with a modified carrier
description?
I had 3.0.1, never hacked tethering, and have upgraded to 3.1. Seeing
improved battery life and stability.
On Sep 30, 2009, at 5:05 PM, Dave Downin wrote:
> I had 3.1 on my iPhone for exactly one day and noticed poor battery
> life, reduced cellular strength, and had a "coma". I had no idea of
> these issues before I installed it. Needless to say, I'm now back
on
> 3.0.1 and enjoying tethering and what to me is a far more stable OS.
>
> -Dave
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Sep 30, 2009, at 4:56 PM, Dave Schroeder <email@hidden>
wrote:
>
>> On 9/30/09 8:52 AM, "Pike, Michael (IHS/NPA)"
<email@hidden>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I wish they would do that with the iPhone os as well. 3.1 is crap.
>>> Even Peter Cohen of macworld (well formerly of macworld) is
>>> tweeting about lock ups, terrible battery life, etc.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>
>> As a counterpoint, 3.1 is the most stable OS we've had to date on
>> iPhone and iPod touch, and we are fielding far less complaints
about
>> issues than with 3.0 or any previous version of iPhone OS.
>>
>> - Dave
>> _______________________________________________
>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>> Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>
>> This email sent to email@hidden
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>
> This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden