Subject: Re: Apple cuts $50 off price for replacment phone batteries, sheepishly offers apology
In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Mayayana<email@example.com> wrote:
> | I'm not even saying their reasoning for slowing down the phones was wrong,
> but they should have left it as an opinion.
> You meant "option"? In any case, they don't have a leg
> to stand on.
yes they do. it's called chemistry and physics.
> People have been complaining for years.
not about this, they haven't, since it only began last january with the
release of 10.2.1, to address a different problem.
> There are 8 lawsuits. Yet in all that time Apple refused
> to even acknowledge what they were doing, much less
> explain or provide an end-user option.
they not only acknowledged it, but disclosed it when they implemented
the changes last year.
prior to that, some phones were experiencing a sudden shutdown. this
*fixes* that problem and *extends* the useful life of the phone.
the lawsuits claim planned obsolescence, yet what apple did is the
> If I find a stranger in my house I assume he's broken
> in. What if he says he just came in because he thought
> he saw a window unlocked and decided to check them all?
> ....But he only admits he broke into my house after I've
> called the police....
> Maybe he was telling the truth. But he lied, hid the facts,
> and went onto my property without permission. He only
> admitted breaking in when he no longer had a choice.
> That's Apple's situation. I don't think they're just dutifully
> checking window locks, but that's really an academic
> question. They're guilty of trespass, tampering and lying.
that's nothing at all like apple's situation.
as usual, you are so full of hate you can't see the actual facts nor do
you want to see the facts. you just want to hate.