Apple to Pay $250 Million to Settle Class Action Over Delayed Siri Features

[germanbeer007]

You can play a semantics game of “I literally did not say or use the ‘in-fact’ phrase myself” but, you otherwise are declaring in no uncertain terms that prices will go up. So what’s the difference?

I didn't represent it as a "fact". Adding "in fact" changes the epistemic modality. It rhetorically treats a future event as if it were a past event or settled in nature with mathematical certainty.

Saying something that "will happen" without adding "in fact" on a discussion board implies that there's larger room for debate, treating it as a personal belief rather than a universally known truth.

 

[iPhoneFan5349]

Mate, to me, a long time Apple user, it is a known fact that hardware and software are generally released in September and generally parts of the software aren’t out tell much later. Hence, future features.
iOS 27 and the iPhone 18 have been having leaks now since like last year. Doesn’t mean everything will make it into the device.

People should have educated themselves and if they planned on being day one buyers, see if those supposed features had been truly included.

I am all for Apple being hit over False/Misleading Advertising, but if I was the judge, I wouldn’t reward a penny to consumer, but to a fund to help educate people as a whole to make smarter decisions with their money.

So a company lies, makes mockups passing them as real features, promises them by a sue date, advertises said features in every commercial of the new phone, tells you how you will be able to use the new feature and then never releases it but it’s the customers fault? At what point you make the company responsible for their blatant lying and deception?

 

[31 Flavas]

I didn't represent it as a "fact". Adding "in fact" changes the epistemic modality. It rhetorically treats a future event as if it were a past event or settled in nature with mathematical certainty.

You aren’t fooling anyone. Don’t be so intellectually dishonest.

Saying something that "will happen" without adding "in fact" on a discussion board implies that there's larger room for debate, treating it as a personal belief rather than a universally known truth.

Look, there have been many successful lawsuits against Apple that have resulted in large cash payouts or expensive repair programs. Which should be reflected in retail pricing since according to you “they'll just pass the cost onto you”

But you’re arguing semantics instead of responding to the question I posed.

 

[vantelimus]

Who said anything about IBM? What a non sequitur...

I was responding to the allegation that Apple's failure to deliver AI was a scam. A scam involves fraudulent intention. I mentioned an adjudicated defining case of fraudulent intention in the computer industry to highlight the difference between intentional deception and managerial incompetence. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear.

 

[germanbeer007]

You aren’t fooling anyone

Not my issue if you're not understanding what I said. I'm pretty clear in my original point and in my supplemental follow up.

Which should be reflected in retail pricing since according to you “they'll just pass the cost onto you”

You're saying Apple hasn't raised prices in any of their products lines and/or have not created higher end trims? Simple search on the web can tell you that's false. And it's not hard for Apple to cut back on features like instead of supporting iPhone 11 for one more year, just cut support one year earlier and that'll bump up the profits to break even.

Lol, have a good one. I'm out.

 

[Premium1]

If I remember correctly, the iOS feature was announced at WWDC, months before the iPhone 16, hence a future feature.
As far as I remember, the iPhone 16 line was advertised as having the power to run said feature. Said feature was marked as coming soon(tm) then dropped.
I am all for a case of False Advertising (which includes misleading advertising), and as I have said repeatedly, I don’t buy hardware based on ‘future’ features, but on does it meet my needs today and potential needs later. Yes/No.

I would rather spend $700 on a phone and not get crapwear that was advertised, then spend like $45000 + and extra like $3k for a self driving package that never came out, that was also advertised as a future feature for a tech item.

Not sure how two completely different companies plays any role in this but two things can be ****** at the same time (and both are wrong).

 

[AgentOSX]

hardware and datacenter manufacturers are selling the shovels.

IF they were in appreciable numbers then we would not have the RAM and SSD shortages we do.

It is a strange situation... AI capability is impressive, the expenditure is stupid. OpenAI pulling the scam they did I think was a key trigger to this waste of hundreds of billions of dollars. AI money is flooding the market by prospectors, and at levels that make profitability suspect.