Jump to content
25 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

It would be nice of Apple to give the man the money but on the other hand, its the persons fault for hacking the iPhone in the first place. In a way, the man winning the lawsuit is unfair because that would be like Apple giving compensation to people who broke their computers by using OSx86.

y not lets sue apple for locking mac os X to apple hardware, forcing us to buy the pricy hardware and making every apple update break our hackintoshes?

 

we should sue apple for not allowing mac os x to run on generic hardware.... let gang up boys!!!

Whether or not rathalos was being sarcastic or not, there is now way there are going to win this case, Apple first of all warned people that the update would brick phones and Apple can lock the phone however they want.

Whether or not rathalos was being sarcastic or not, there is now way there are going to win this case, Apple first of all warned people that the update would brick phones and Apple can lock the phone however they want.

 

I'm hopeing for a setelment where they open the iphone for 3ed party development.

y not lets sue apple for locking mac os X to apple hardware, forcing us to buy the pricy hardware and making every apple update break our hackintoshes?we should sue apple for not allowing mac os x to run on generic hardware.... let gang up boys!!!
zomg but teh apple doeznt brick our generic hardware if we install teh OS X on it?! I cud install XP after np? wat gives??!

 

 

......Anyways, the guy really doesn't have a case because, like what was said, the software update WARNS before updating. But it's also in the software licence agreement that modifying the software voids warranty.Plus AT&T is breathing down Apple's neck, so Apple has no choice but to. This is 100% understandable. Do not unlock the iPhone. Period.

 

HOWEVER, LEGIT AT&T customers who recieved a bricked iPhone due to the software update DO have a case, and I hope Apple gets slapped around abit for that one.

The guy will get screwed but its about time someone stood up to a company over something like this, people need to stop being pussies and realize when they buy something its theirs and dont have to be told how or when they can use it!

The guy will get screwed but its about time someone stood up to a company over something like this, people need to stop being pussies and realize when they buy something its theirs and dont have to be told how or when they can use it!

 

ahmen

naw your example isnt right, it should be you buy an apple computer and add files to it so apple bricks your computer. That or you could use this as the example, you buy a phone from a company and they screw you over by cancling your service because you used it! The owners of a iPhone are iBitches, its a program that was written by masterful apple dev's to shove their foots up the phones owners ass and make them scream its such a pretty phone ;)

. He HACKED it (seriously, to run on different networks). Theres a difference between using and hacking.

 

Sure, if Apple wants their phone on AT&T only, thats fine. But, bricking someone's phone that they purchased is total BS.

Oh I guess you have a point there...I guess Apple could have released an update to just remove the hack, not brick the phone. But its still unfair for the guy to win the lawsuit. Apple will brick your OSx86 computer with their OS updates and no ones sueing Apple for that....

Apple stated clearly that they would brick the phones, but I'm not familiar with the california technology laws....( :unsure: ). Maybe if we made Terminator play on all of the iPhones then the guy would be put in prison by the governor.

×
×
  • Create New...