backtop


Print 67 comment(s) - last by Brockway.. on Nov 12 at 9:17 AM


  (Source: Projectionist)

  (Source: Limited Edition)
Did Apple trick customers to force upgrades?

Apple received national criticism in 2007 when it "bricked" unlocked iPhones via an OS update, rendering the phones useless.  That move led to multiple lawsuits and a firestorm of negative publicity.

Now Apple has been accused of a different kind of bricking.  According to a suit filed in Superior Court in San Diego this time around Apple used an OS update not to render useless just unlocked iPhones, but locked and unlocked models alike in a bid to force users of older iPhone models to upgrade.

The suit stems from the fact that the iOS 4 upgrade leaves the iPhone 3G unresponsive and hard to use.  Despite the fact that this phenomena appears almost universal, Apple urged unwitting iPhone 3G users to upgrade to the new operating system.

States the complaint, "The true fact of the matter, as verifiable by information technology experts, is that the iOS 4 is a substantial 'downgrade' for earlier iPhone devices and renders many of them virtually useless 'iBricks'.  Nonetheless, in reasonable and detrimental reliance upon Apple's false representations, false statements and false claims of full compatibility, thousands upon thousands of iPhone 3 users were intentionally misled into installing iOS 4 on their devices."

The suit notes that Apple provides users with no means to perform a re-install of an earlier operating system version.  Apple's promotion of iOS 4 to iPhone 3G users when it likely knew that it would render their phones useless and that they would be unable to restore their phones, was likely a scheme to force users of older models to upgrade.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of plaintiff Bianca Wofford, a iPhone 3G owner and is seeking class action status.  Ms. Wofford recalls that after installing iOS 4, as suggested by iTunes, that her iPhone 3G's performance greatly suffered.  She states, "While not completely disabled, the operability of the device was significantly degraded and the device was no longer reliable."

DailyTech reported on this issue with older iPhones back when iOS 4 launched.  iPhone 3GS models also reportedly suffered a performance hit, though not as big a one.  Apple's forums are filled with a deluge of complaints about the poor performance of iOS 4 on older model phones.

Ms. Wofford is seeking for Apple to reimburse every plaintiff in the class the cost of their phone, plus $5,000 in additional damages.

Apple would not comment to us on this lawsuit, and their standard policy is not to comment on lawsuits (which they've had more than a few of).




Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Understandable
By inighthawki on 11/5/2010 12:40:56 PM , Rating: 2
No that action is a response to people not wanting to deal with Apple, not those who are affected by something Apple did to them while using their phone.


RE: Understandable
By The Raven on 11/5/2010 3:19:01 PM , Rating: 2
Listen to yourself man!
quote:
that action is a response to people not wanting to deal with Apple

Hmmm... who wouldn't want to deal with Apple? Hmm...
I got it! Maybe...
quote:
those who are affected by something Apple did to them while using their phone.


RE: Understandable
By inighthawki on 11/5/2010 4:25:16 PM , Rating: 2
No that is not what I meant. Avoiding buying their phone is action that is taken by someone who doesn't have one (aka, those who don't want to deal with Apple).

Just throwing away your phone and buying a new one because Apple slowed your current phone to a crawl to get you to buy a new one is not an acceptable solution by any means.

People want a fix, not to throw down another $400+ on a new phone because their contract hasn't ended (don't qualify for a renewal) or they need to pay a termination fee (switch to other carrier).


RE: Understandable
By The Raven on 11/5/2010 6:27:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
People want a fix, not to throw down another $400+ on a new phone because their contract hasn't ended

I think you are missing the point of the article. This article is about.
quote:
Now Apple has been accused of a different kind of bricking. According to a suit filed in Superior Court in San Diego this time around Apple used an OS update not to render useless just unlocked iPhones, but locked and unlocked models alike in a bid to force users of older iPhone models to upgrade.

They are people who are saying, "Darn, my iPhone doesn't work like it used to. Well, I better buy the newer model."
This is not about phones that plain just don't work or people who will have to go without a phone.

I think there is some confusion going around in these comments about upgrade v. update. Upgrade in this case means 'buy a new phone'.


RE: Understandable
By inighthawki on 11/5/2010 8:25:29 PM , Rating: 4
I am 100% aware of the point of the article, you seem to be missing the point though. If you upgrade, it requires a new phone, yes we all get that, but some people DO NOT WANT TO. They want their current phones to just work properly to begin with.

You originally stated:
quote:
The action that should be taken is getting a phone from a different company


To which I am saying that that is a completely unacceptable solution to the people who already have this problem and do not want to upgrade/buy a new phone at all. That proposed solution ONLY works for people who do not have the phone to begin with. Buying a new phone does not solve the problem at hand.


RE: Understandable
By The Raven on 11/8/2010 1:25:12 PM , Rating: 2
test


"Well, there may be a reason why they call them 'Mac' trucks! Windows machines will not be trucks." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki