backtop


Print 76 comment(s) - last by ira176.. on Oct 31 at 4:48 AM

If you want to purchase an iPhone from an Apple Store, forget about using cash or a gift card.

Apple is stepping up its efforts to limits resellers from getting their hands on the popular iPhone. Apple wants to crack down on those who buy, unlock and then resell iPhones to consumers.

Of the roughly 1.4 million iPhones that have been sold since its introduction in late June, Apple COO Tim Cook estimates that 250,000 iPhones have been purchased by customers who have the intention of unlocking the phones.

"Customer response to the iPhone has been off the charts, and limiting iPhone sales to two per customer helps us ensure that there are enough iPhones for people who are shopping for themselves or buying a gift," said Apple spokeswoman Natalie Kerris. "We're requiring a credit or debit card for payment to discourage unauthorized resellers."

Cash will no longer be an acceptable form of payment for iPhones and Apple has also reduced the purchase limit from five iPhones per person to two.

Today, however, Engadget is reporting that Apple has gone one step further than just denying cash customers. Apple is also denying the use of Apple Gift Cards to purchase iPhones. For those looking to get a stack of Apple Gift Cards for Christmas to put towards the purchase of an iPhone; you may want to rethink that idea.

Apple recorded 67 percent higher profits for Q3 2007 thanks in part to the iPhone. Apple's crackdown on resellers and those who wish to unlock the iPhone is no doubt a measure to protect the steady cash flow from AT&T.

According to Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster, AT&T is paying Apple an average of $18 a month for each iPhone customer. In other words, Apple receives $399 for each iPhone sold plus an additional $432 over the course of a two-year contract thanks to AT&T's exclusivity arrangement.



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: Why Apple Why?
By wordsworm on 10/29/2007 11:41:06 AM , Rating: 2
Look, Jason, you're saying all this as if this kind of behaviour is new to Apple. Fact is this is the attitude from Apple as far back as I can remember. It's a part of their preppy image. I'm wondering when they'll realize that they should lock their Apple computers to an ISP and lock out any 3rd party developers.

Apple kicked butt when Steve Jobs started the company, and it's kicking butt once again now that Jobs is back. Apple is a prep company. People who try to become a rebel and get burned aren't going to tarnish Apple's overall image or its core, and growing, customer base.

You're assuming everyone is like you, or close to it. The fact is that Apple is making a fortune off of folks with too much cash to spend. These are the same people who probably don't really care if their phone bricks or not. They'll just buy a new one. That's what Apple suggested, because they know their customer base. $500 is chump change to these people.

I don't like Apple. I'll never buy one of their products. I rebel against Apple and all those other brands as best I can. I've never bought a product from Apple: not so much as an iTune. Really, the funny thing is that my hatred for their products started with the MacIntosh II that were in the journalism labs at my old high school. Those stupid, tiny monitors killed me. I know they've come a long way since then, but somehow I've never really changed my opinion of them. My biological donor, aka 'dad', despite strong warnings, decided to go for an Apple laptop, and he consistently dealt with severe problems and paid through the nose for fixes. I've never had those problems with any product I've ever purchased *knock* *knock*. But just because I have these feelings doesn't mean I'm going to think that Apple would be better off suiting my own needs and wants. They have their customer base. I have the companies I 'trust.' In your opinion they may have degraded themselves, but really, what they've done recently is nothing different from anything they've ever done.

It used to be that there was a point to owning a Mac. Its ability to do graphics, and its impressive software suites from Adobe, Quark Xpress, not to mention audio recording software, was always superior to what PC offered. I think there's still some stuff that just won't run on PC. For the most part, most of that has changed and all that pro software can be purchased for PCs too. But the fact that I had to pay for both the expensive hardware and software always kept me away. With PC, at least I could get pirated software. When I was in high school living off of welfare, that old 486 running MS Office helped me develop many skills that have helped me advance to a fairly 'middle class' career and lifestyle. With Mac, there was never that pirate community. Anyways, I digress. My point was that I'm not saying all this stuff because I'm an Apple twink.


RE: Why Apple Why?
By msheredy on 10/29/07, Rating: -1
RE: Why Apple Why?
By chick0n on 10/29/07, Rating: -1
RE: Why Apple Why?
By Anh Huynh on 10/29/2007 1:20:29 PM , Rating: 1
I'll agree with you. My Apple products work. I'm still content with my PowerBook G4 12" (last of the G4). Despite its minor blemishes and quirks with aluminum, the whole notebook has held together very well after two years, unlike my old Compaq Presario 1720US, which fell apart after 2 years, and I rarely took it anywhere.

My PowerBook has been to China and back, and I toss it around. It'd cost me just as much to get a PC of similar durability. Yes, ThinkPad's are awesome, but Windows Vista is still lacking.

I can run Leopard on my PB just as fast as Tiger was, no slowdowns, no lagging. Every new OS runs slightly better than the previous for Apple. Microsoft on the other hand....every new OS requires more resources and power to accomplish the same tasks.

The Mac OS X user interface is also worlds ahead of Vista. Vista was a step in the right direction with animations and such, but its far from useful. Sure you have the Windows key + Tab, but how often are you going to hit that key stroke?

On my Mac, I can drag the mouse cursor to any of the four corners of my screen to bring up Expose, Spaces or even Dashboard. With my little 1024x768 display, the OS X window manager is far superior.

Microsoft simply doesn't get it. Vista is nice, but without dual monitors, usability kinda sucks. </end rant>


RE: Why Apple Why?
By omnicronx on 10/29/2007 2:43:50 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
On my Mac, I can drag the mouse cursor to any of the four corners of my screen to bring up Expose, Spaces or even Dashboard. With my little 1024x768 display, the OS X window manager is far superior.
ObjectDock by stardock (http://www.stardock.com/) does the same thing, I am using it with vista right now. Of course its not native to vista, but there are so many windows enhancements out there if you really want to customize windows.

Mac's are nice for day to day use, but you can do so much more with windows, or even a linux OS... and for half of the cost.


RE: Why Apple Why?
By Anh Huynh on 10/29/2007 3:23:17 PM , Rating: 2
I don't like installing any extra for customization. I accomplish just as much in OS X as I can on my dual-monitor desktop.


RE: Why Apple Why?
By omnicronx on 10/29/2007 4:45:29 PM , Rating: 2
Not having to install something extra just makes things easier, it does not necessarily make things better. As i said, my Windows and Nix setups far surpass the basic install.


RE: Why Apple Why?
By essjae on 10/29/2007 9:34:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I can run Leopard on my PB just as fast as Tiger was, no slowdowns, no lagging. Every new OS runs slightly better than the previous for Apple.....every new OS requires more resources and power to accomplish the same tasks.


Then why is the minimum req for Leopard an 867MHz G4? Try running Leopard on a G4 Cube and make the same statement.


RE: Why Apple Why?
By Anh Huynh on 10/29/2007 9:56:04 PM , Rating: 2
The G4 Cube was released like what....6 years ago? Do you honestly think it should still be supported? The oldest PowerMac G4 Quicksilver was introduced in 2001, to think the Apple still provides support for a system that old is just amazing in itself.

My PB is 2.5 years old, and the design was introduced nearly 3 years ago. Only upgrade I did to it was add 1GB of ram, for a total of 1.25GB. Now let's see you try to run Vista on a system that's 2.5-3 years old, and see how it fairs.


RE: Why Apple Why?
By DandDAddict on 10/30/2007 5:30:23 AM , Rating: 1
Its running very nicely on this duron 900 with 256 megs of ram and a 16 meg geforce4 igp, no aero but other than that its fine and very responsive, hell you can even play older games on it for that generation of gpu/cpu/ram just fine. Tho honestly the machines mainly a test/ide hd holder but its still a living case that Vista is completely usable on older hardware.

Lets see the socket 754 laptop Im using to type this is fairly old and running Vista Ultimate with all of the bells and wistles maxed out, even manages to play Rise of Legends, Fear, so on just dandily on the higher settings. So ya Vista works fine on older hardware.

Mac Ive had more trouble with and pissed me off to the point of all my mac ppc machines now run linux. What really ticked me off was the whole bombarding me with ads for OSX every couple of seconds when I went to update OS9 , I mean come on I should only have to click once or twice to tell you to screw off and I dont want your product when Im trying to get updates for your previous product, god knows MS and no other companies have pulled this shit on me. I actualy did check to see if I could run OSX and well apprently OSX requires a firewire port according to the website if I recall correctly, so I cant run it anyway and they still were shoving that crap at me.

Also MS is providing support still for OSes more than 6 years old both free and extended. Ive sent in hardware with lifetime warrenties for replacement and its been honored in the form of upgrades, so id say long term support is fairly normal, not to mention i didnt have to pay out the nose for it.

Anyway ye it annoys me to no end that I must own and learn about macs cause god they are extreamly annoying and inconviant, but thats business for ya. Tho the swap to intel makes it easier, now I can just run the Mac OSes on my main x86 rig which is handy for the few times I need to use it.


RE: Why Apple Why?
By Inkjammer on 10/30/2007 1:51:47 PM , Rating: 2
Well said!

Myself, I started with an Apple iPod 20GB 4th Gen, and recently went to a 80GB 5th Gen. I bought the iPod for one of several reasons, the manufacturer was the least them.

I'm a PC fan through and throughout, but when I shop, I go for the product that appeals to me most in terms of looks, functionality, usability and more. People seem to argue left and right that Apple's fanboys only buy the product for the looks or the "status" it brings. I've seen the competition's offerings, and short of the Zune, the mobile MP3 market is full of a lot of fugly products with little to no market support (e.g. docks, external players).

I chose the iPod because it had the best periphial support, the best drive space and the best tools to suit my needs. I can't stand using Mac OS, and I really don't like Macs, especially for work (and I'm a freelance graphic designer/animator!). Everybody has their preference, and their needs vary.

Kudos for bringing a solid argument to the table. It's refreshing, though rare.


"Mac OS X is like living in a farmhouse in the country with no locks, and Windows is living in a house with bars on the windows in the bad part of town." -- Charlie Miller

Related Articles













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