Oh, Apple, I wanna sue you for (...)!
Ars Technica: Apple purposely transformed older iPhones into iBricks by upgrading to iOS 4:
Right. This could be named “forced no back compatibility”, as opposed to “forced back compatibility” of which we already know it’s a disaster (see Symbian or Windows).
Apple might be forced to allow customers to downgrade their iBricks to iOS 3.x, and this could be the legal way of solving the issue. But not necessarily the appropriate one.
Logical counter arguments:
-
The upgrade from iOS 3 to iOS 4 was not forced on any iPhone owner;
-
Downgrade will automatically mean security vulnerabilities and bugs re-exposed;
-
Apple knowing about this issue is neither a secret or an argument against Apple: they said from the beginning iOS 4 will not run on iPhone 2G and the specs of iPhone 3G are barely enough.
Commercial counter arguments:
-
There is now way making a Windows Vista or 7 work on a AMD K6 with 64 MB RAM, although you might have paid for that OS. Of course you can and may go back to your previous OS, but never get the money back from Microsoft for that Vista!
-
What iPhone 3G users bitterly call an “irresponsive device” is what the most happy Android users get after 10 mins of backgrounding services and apps;
-
70% of total sold iPhone 4 are bought by already existing iPhone customers, as an upgrade. Therefore, almost the same amount of old iPhone devices will be second handed to non iPhone users, for which the difference will not exist. This is a LOT of happy users!
Moral counter arguments:
-
Apple never advertised iOS 4 ran faster than iOS 3, but only it had more features. So, when you plugged the iPhone into iTunes eager to see how it works, you freely opted in to see features, not speed increase.
-
I remember it was Google “doing no evil”, not Apple. If they lose the case, they’ll pay; if they win, they’ll not pay.
-
“Wofford believes that Apple did this all to leave iPhone 3G users with unusable phones, forcing them to upgrade”. Is this a joke? I believe Google is selling my profile without my consent, will that make a winning case?
-
It’s good to have justice, 21st century laws and vigilant people, but making a case out of a piece of hardware that’s taking 5-10 seconds longer to open a 100 item inbox…! I don’t know what you guys have been playing with these years, but could you stop whining and try a 2008 Symbian device or a 2008 Android one and count those seconds for me?!
Crazy arguments:
-
Oh, Mr Jobs, I’ve got carpal tunnels because of intensive use of your device! I want to sue you for concealing this disease was predictable!
-
Oh, Mr Jobs, my boss is firing me for playing Angry Birds all day instead of doing my job! I wanna sue you for not securing a corporate phone against user’s installs!
-
Oh, Mr Jobs, my homophobic dad saw my SMSes to my boyfriend! I want to sue you for not letting me securing the access to my inbox!
-
Oh, Mr Jobs, we’ve got so used to iPhone’s swift and responsive GUI and to those 300,000 apps! We wanna sue you for anything you’d be doing that withholds us from benefitting from them!
-
Oh, Mr Jobs, we are strongly educated to believe anything a salesman says! We wanna sue you for the 10 second delays occurred to a 2 years old device that’s out its 1 year warranty!
Jobs should show good will only if this way he can benefit of some almost free PR, but not else.
