Why is it backwards for someone to want to have exactly what they got when they paid for something and something that works just fine for them and they don't need anything else? Not everyone needs something new and different just because. Fairly grounded and straightforward concept actually.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple is facing class action for iOS 7
- Thread starter MisakixMikasa
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Sorry - I'm content with what I have when I get it. But that doesn't mean I don't welcome and desire newer, better ways to do things.
For instance - AirDrop and Control Center are two features I wouldn't want to do without at this point. Too integral into how I use my devices daily. Staying on an earlier version would have caused me to miss out of these. And the trade off was a few bugs early on? Sure - especially since, as I've stated ad naseum on these forums, iOS 7 is iOS 1 in a sense. It's a building block - the base of the entire OS for the next 5+ years. It was a much bigger update than the last 4 had been so it isn't out of the realm of possibility to see more issues than usual.
It also makes sense why Apple would be so keen on getting people onto it. They likely have a plan and don't want people to miss it. That's how you think when you believe you make the greatest software and hardware on the planet - whether or not that's true doesn't matter. The mindset has to exist.
It's a stepping stone. Though I'll start lobbying Apple to let people stay (even though they already do) on their current software just so the complainers will shut up.....
Ahhh, who am I kidding. There's always something. And if its not iOS 7, its the width of the 5. Or the height of the 6. Or the hue of the Music icon. Or the layout of the settings menu. Or.....you get the point.
Notice the "I" part in all of that. Some people look forward to new things and changes, while others want exactly what they got when they got it and nothing else. Your personal preferences and desires and those of others have absolutely nothing to do with those of anyone else, and they aren't any more right or wrong or better or worse than anyone else's in that respect. You don't have to agree or even understand them, that's not required for people to have their own personal preferences about things of this nature. That's really all there's to it.
But as has already been said - you can stay on 6 if you choose. Still to say that Apple can be sued because you (or whomever) doesn't want to update his/her phone (and you aren't forced to)....
But hey - you're right. People don't want to try new things, that's up to them. Whatever.
Yes...except Apple had a huge security hole in iOS 6 that is also causing service to stop functioning (like FaceTime) because they aren't offering the fix that they already created and released for iOS 6 to all of the iOS 6 users. That doesn't leave someone with a device and services that they purchased, it takes away things from people who choose to stay simply because Apple screwed up and introduced a security issue (that has been there for a long time too) and now doesn't want to fix it for those people and would rather work around it by having them upgrade and change way more about their device than just restoring the broken functionality. There's certainly a difference there in all of that, and quite a big one.
Oh goodie, some already rich lawyers will get richer, and the plaintiffs in the class will get $3.52 to spend in the iTunes store for the settlement.
Right -- my mistake. So some idiot attorney was already desperate enough to take this absolutely pathetic loser of a case.
Seriously, though. Wifi and Bluetooth work as always. Functionality remains the same as always, with the exception of new features.
This was clearly brought by some bored attorney looking to take advantage of clueless people who were perturbed by the iOS 7 upgrade. Nothing more.
No one in his right mind who knows even the slightest about the legal system can believe this is a good case.
Well, if it actually goes through and all that, perhaps it will result in something more than that, like some changes in the way Apple deals with bug-fix updates to older versions and/or changes in their TOS in relation to that.
You didn't purchase the services. You purchased the hardware. Apple provides services like FaceTime and iMessage free of charge. If they decide they don't want to renew the license (which I assume costs money) for a relatively small portion of users, they have the right to. There's nothing there to sue.
As for the SSL issue, the fix is there. Update to iOS 7. Just because you (or whomever) don't want to isn't Apple's problem. Its yours. You make the choice to stay on 6 knowing what that entails.
Again, nothing to sue Apple about. And if you (or whoever) don't like the way Apple is doing things, there are always other options. Only about 5.3% of Android users are on the latest software. Sounds right up your alley.
You realize in the legal system the judge gets to decide what's a "pathetic loser of a case" or not. So, while it's nice that random people online might have this or that opinion about it, it doesn't matter in the least when it comes to reality. When an actual judiciary rules on it, that's the only reality that will matter when it comes to it (and even then there can be appeals). Online opinions one way or another don't matter, just the actual legal system does.
But that's the crux of the argument! Where most "updates" tend to be for the better, Apple pushed an "update" that was actually for the worse.
As Microsoft and Google have shown, it is possible to release updates that speed up older devices, or at least don't slow them down. Heck, Microsoft took WP7, swapped out the kernel for WP8, and didn't break app compatibility. That's been described as swapping out a transmission of a vehicle while driving.
Google is on track to do the same And if I were to power up my WP7, it would still work.Meanwhile Apple may as well as had a time bomb on iOS 6 in the form of FaceTime, and the only way to fix it was to "upgrade" to an OS that's slower and buggier. And I'm certain that no one wants to push an update that causes the email app to forget email accounts, but when you're sold a functional phone and an update causes it to become non functional, what should a consumer do?
In my girlfriends case, after the major 7.1 patch came along and didn't fix anything, she got her 4s replaced (which didn't fix anything, BTW). In the case of the guy who's filing a lawsuit, well, he filed a lawsuit to try to get it fixed.
Who says they have a right to that? The TOS? Does that necessarily make that ethical or even legal? That's kind of the whole point behind something like this to perhaps challenge that to see if it truly holds up. Just because a company or organization or some entity makes up some rules about things and what's expected or not, doesn't necessarily make them right.
Are you saying that if your car's headlights stopped working due to a manufacturer defect and the only way to fix them was for the manufacturer to replace them but at the same time repaint your car and add on a spoiler to it, because it's a much nicer color that more people seem to like and because the spoiler can help with tight turns, would that by any stretch of imagination be actually OK with pretty much anyone? Or, would you think that people would want the issue to be fixed but the color of their car and anything else to be left alone, because, you know, they actually wanted it that way and paid money for that specific color and style of the car (despite any "advantages" the new color or spoiler might bring with them)?
Last edited:
As a matter of fact, I'm fully aware of how that works in our legal system. I'm an attorney. I've even worked on a class action.
I just don't see the merits here, and it has nothing to do with me being an iSheep. I'll be surprised and highly disappointed if a judge allows this case to proceed.
I didn't really call you anything, just pointed out that the system will work it out, and not really any internet opinions (even if they might come from attorneys or judges, as they are uninvolved in the case and wouldn't be making the decisions in relation to it no matter what they might think about it).
That said, as an attorney surely of all people you would (or at least should) understand that there are far too many nuances in most cases beyond what's presented in some general articles or even in the filed papers. Making opinions based on that limited and incomplete information even for discussion purposes doesn't really end up holding much water.
Subjectively. There isn't any proof iOS 7 "broke" anyone's phones. In fact, iOS 7 introduced new features to those phones - some would consider that better.
As Microsoft and Google have shown, it is possible to release updates that speed up older devices, or at least don't slow them down. Heck, Microsoft took WP7, swapped out the kernel for WP8, and didn't break app compatibility. That's been described as swapping out a transmission of a vehicle while driving.
Difference being Apple is going from a streamlined iOS 1-6 to a more robust iOS 7-?. They started off very lean and have added features and such over time. Whereas the other two have always been big bloated messes (Android especially) and are now becoming more efficient.
And please - Android 4.4.2 is on roughly 5% of Android devices. Android 4.0-4.4 MAY be on a majority, but I don't know. So please....spare me the "Android can run on old hardware" nonsense. Other than rooting and flashing various kernels (which can be modified, manipulated and finetuned), 4.4.2 isn't on anything older than last year's Android devices. Heck 4.3-4.4 isn't on anything past 2012.
Apple choses not to spend money to renew a license for software thats outdated and currently on only about 10% of their devices? Its a FREE service they offer you and I. They are in no way obligated to do anything about it.
Also - have you used 7.1 on a 4 or 4S? "Slower" maybe - though again, I argue those devices will be slower regardless than the day they were bought. But buggier? Hardly.
Again - two anecdotal pieces of evidence that can be countered by at least 2 pieces of anecdotal evidence on the other side. Point is - tech is buggy. This is nothing abnormal - and nothing that can specifically be tied straight back to iOS 7.
My coworker has a 4S. Had problems on iOS 6. Has problems on iOS 7 (really weird stuff too like the lock screen zooming in and becoming unresponsive). These problems didn't arise because of iOS 7 or any nefarious activity by Apple. The phone is breaking down (and has been well used by multiple people on our sales team). It's almost 3 years old - unfortunately our company bought it right at the end of its first year so he can either wait an extra month or so to get the 6 or get the 5S this summer.
Point being - if the phone isn't working, upgrade to a newer phone. Blaming Apple for imagined slights and suing is frivolous and stupid.
Doesn't matter what you or I think is "right". Apple is a private company and as such they have jurisdiction over the services they provide. If they stop providing iMessage because they deem it too costly, that's their prerogative. There's nothing in the TOS or anywhere that says the customer is OWED anything.
Would that be a bad move? Heck ya - because Apple's services are part of what makes them better IMO. But that doesn't mean you or I are ENTITLED to them just because we own the devices. Again - we didn't pay for the services. Those are offered by Apple for those in the ecosystem - but they didn't enter into any type of buying agreement with respect to said services.
Not in any way the same. FaceTime is an added feature - not a necessary component of the hardware. Your analogy is more akin to saying "My processor went out in my phone (which I've had happen)" and the only way to fix it would be to upgrade the device. Now this could happen if the device no longer exists or is serviced - but for the purposes of our argument about the 4S, that isn't the case. The 4S is still sold and serviced.
It would be like buying a car that comes with free satellite radio. Then, 6 months in, that satellite radio is no longer offered - but you could get it back if you upgraded your vehicle. Its a service offered IN ADDITION TO, not AS PART OF.
Therefore, there really is no recourse here. Apple isn't forcing you to update your software. The device still functions and all hardware parts work (with the normal wear and tear). Service offerings have expired for said older software and Apple has decided not to renew their cost. If you want the additional service + new feature set, you could update the software or upgrade your device. But you have the option not to. In the end, the onus is on the customer - and as in most cases the customer feels entitled.
So you equated a processor in the iPhone to my specific analogy to something much less extraneous yet still important like headlights. Sure, that's certainly to show how something isn't similar. It's nice to call something like FaceTime as this "in addition to" type of thing and not an actual inherent part of iOS and the Apple ecosystem where it comes natively installed and can't even be removed if a user would want to. How about security, is that an "in addition to" as well? You get security but then Apple can decide to stop enforcing security checks in iOS that you have and basically leave you vulnerable unless you completely upgrade. I wonder how many would even remotely think that's an "in addition to" type of thing and not one of the more important and inherent "part of" things when it comes to an OS.
In any case, I didn't say what was right or wrong really, I said that powers that be will decide that, and that everyone arguing that it's frivolous and all that doesn't really make it so just because they say so, whether or not they think they may have arguments to back that up. Someone else will be in power to make that decision, and the arguments here about it won't affect or change it.
*insert innocuous iPhone part here* If I had said a headphone ribbon connector, would that have worked? If the exact piece of hardware was what you focused on, you missed the point.
So those of us claiming its frivolous are wrong because we don't know the whole story and a judge will decide. But you're here telling us its valid based on....what? Are you the judge?
This is a discussion. And, unfortunately frivolous lawsuits are a problem in our society. I work in an industry that is bombarded by them.....if you have a case, you bring it to the court. But for something like this - where there really isn't any leg to stand on, its wasteful and stupid.
Again - whatever. This is getting tired and old. As I said earlier, if people aren't complaining about one thing, its another so really who the hell cares.
To say that there's nothing to it is one thing, to say that there is is another thing, to say that there just might be, and it's somewhat silly and essentially inconsequential to just jump on and argue just one side or another, that's quite a bit different.
We'll see what comes out of it.
Last edited:
I don't know how people drink the coffee in US but around places where I have been (Europe) is usually hot. There are some other kinds (like iced frape) but the traditional ones are as hot as it can be. Common sense and natural instinct tell us to be careful with it. If you happen to have a freaking incident and shower yourself with it...... then sure, you can try to find someone to blame except yourself (and in the end get lucky). From what I have read, people is US seem to love suing.
I guess you know nothing about that case since you just called her a stupid lady.
1. McDonalds was sited/fined many times for brewing their coffee at dangerous temperature. Apparently the higher the temperature the more coffee can be extracted from the same amount of coffee beans.
2. The Lady did not spill the coffee on herself. The coffee was so hot the bottom of the cup literally disintegrated and all its contents poured into her lap while the cup was upright.
I'm glad she got awarded the money she did. You DONT put your customers in danger just to save a few bucks here and there.
And once again commenting on something without even looking into and/or understanding it, despite that already being pointed out a number of times in the thread. Not surprising unfortunately.