Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 37 of 37
  1. #21  
    I am not "speaking for the manufacturer".

    A verbatim quote of what the manufacturer posted on their web site is, like it or not, the manufacturer itself speaking for the manufacturer.
  2. Danitaz's Avatar
    Posts
    295 Posts
    Global Posts
    296 Global Posts
    #22  
    Originally posted by SeldomVisitor
    It is a given that the manufacturer knows of conditions under which their warning applies (otherwise - duh - they wouldn't give the warning). It easily could be that half the users saying "Works fine for me!" haven't the faintest idea that it could work even finer.
    On the other hand, I don't actually have a "Cingular" optimized phone any longer, as 2 weeks ago I applied Firmware 2.08 and have today applied 2.09 - so I have a "generic international" Treo 600 which in reality should work on any network as well as any other "generic" phone does.

    Danita
  3. #23  
    Originally posted by Danitaz


    On the other hand, I don't actually have a "Cingular" optimized phone any longer, as 2 weeks ago I applied Firmware 2.08 and have today applied 2.09 - so I have a "generic international" Treo 600 which in reality should work on any network as well as any other "generic" phone does.

    Danita
    Danitaz do you have a link to the 2.09 Firmware? Thanks in advance
    No good deed goes unpunished
  4. #24  
    Originally posted by SeldomVisitor
    I am not "speaking for the manufacturer".

    A verbatim quote of what the manufacturer posted on their web site is, like it or not, the manufacturer itself speaking for the manufacturer.
    Just upgraded to 2.09........... S-M-0-0-0-0-0-T-H
    No good deed goes unpunished
  5. #25  
    Originally posted by Prismatic


    Just upgraded to 2.09........... S-M-0-0-0-0-0-T-H
    Prismatic,

    Do You have a link to update 2.09? Thanks!
    -- "In the country of the blind, the one-eyed man is king" --
  6. #26  
    Ok, I'm not here to flame (or even disagree with) SeldomVisitor. And, to cut off another argument, I'm not here to rebut palmOne's statement on the webisite (which has been posted ad naseum). However, I will offer two alternative explanations for the posting of said statement other than the current assumption that it's due to possible technical difficulties:

    1) Perhaps palmOne issued the statement because they wish to maximize the number of Tmobile users that buy a phone from Tmobile (if/when it becomes available). Why should they care? Because if everyone buys a Cingular phone and then switches to Tmobile, Tmobile will have no way to know the success of the phone, since they didn't sell them!

    One could make a (rather weak) argument that Tmobile could simply search a database of IMEI that reveals the type of phone used, but is that as feasible as seeing a sales report with 100k T600s sold with 20k new contracts signed? I seriously doubt it.

    Furthermore, palmOne *desparately* wants every carrier to maximize every dollar from these phones with additional contracts, minutes sold, data plans, etc. This way, they can point to the carrier when they offer their next device and say, "Look, we made you $X/year more than you made before you sold our phone. You must sell this one too." But again, this must be tied to carrier-specific store sales to have any sort of reasonable accountability. Their business model is wholly dependent on carrier satisfaction with the sales of this product.

    2) Liability. In this day and age of tort liability (specifically product liability) in what is a very new and edgy technological field, it would be ill-advised for palmOne to allow it to become common knowledge that the Cingular version of the phone is unlocked and can be used on any carrier without making some statement that the user bears the responsiblity if something bad happens when used on another carrier. Does this mean they truly believe something bad will happen? Not necessarily. But McDonalds didn't expect to lose $2M over hot coffee either.

    To further the argument that it likely isn't due to some significant technical difficulty, it stands to reason that the GSM roaming capability would be crippled if there were a problem using a network for which your phone was not specifically designed. Ie, if there is some largish technical hurdle against using a Cingular phone on Tmo, then doesn't it make sense that a Cingular phone using Cingular's service but roaming on Tmo would suffer those same problems? That sounds to me like a problem of epic proportions on a gsm phone. That tells me (at least) that the reason behind the statement isn't wholly technical.

    Now, all that said, I haven't tried either, and have no way of knowing if it works, doesn't work, blows up, etc. Just wanted to offer an alternative view for those asking "Why did palmOne say that?"

    Jeff
  7. #27  
    Can we get back to that 2.09 FW upgrade? Anyone have a link?
  8. #28  
    Originally posted by flipp
    Can we get back to that 2.09 FW upgrade? Anyone have a link?
    I don't have a link DanitaZ passed me a copy if someone would agree to host the file, I'll be glad to pass it along.
    No good deed goes unpunished
  9. #29  
    I will be happy to host it if yowant to send it over.
  10. #30  
    It's possible palmOne is lying about the reason not to use a Cingular phone (and only a Cingular phone, BTW) elsewhere.

    Note, however, that a blatant going-to-be-found-out lie opens them up to massive lawsuits by both investors and customers.

    Yeah - that's the ticket - they're lying.
  11. #31  
    That's odd, I just reread my post and I still can't find where I said "lie" anywhere in it. In fact, I can't see where I even implied it. I just offered an alternative possibility other than the one you proposed.

    I suppose that there might be an explanation other than the one you've proposed didn't sit well with you?

    Furthermore, I was referring to strict liability and product liability in my second explanation. Can you explain to me in specific legal terms how you've turned around my explanation for less liability with the statement and somehow increased their potential liability? That's pretty far fetched for a disclaimer to increase liability...

    Jeff
  12. #32  
    Oh, and can someone send me a the 2.09 firmware. Pretty please? :-)

    /wonders why someone doesn't host the file
  13. #33  
    Missing the forest for the trees.

    PalmOne says "Don't for technical reasons" (not political ones as you mentioned). They say this only about the Cingular phones (so far - no Orange, no AT&T, no Sprint).

    If palmOne is saying this for political reasons then they are lying, they will be found out, they are opening themselves to massive etc etc etc.

    -----

    In any case, palmOne says "Don't.".

    If one wants to spend $400+ on a device the manufacturer says "Don't." about, that certainly is one's own choice.

    But telling someone ELSE "Go ahead, do it!" is wrong.

    At least until treocentral says "Oh what the hell, let's run that article even though it may affect us financially" and explains what this is all about...
  14. #34  
    If you would like to pass on the 2.09 firmware i will host it.
  15. #35  
    both the 2.08 and 2.09 firmware are here
  16. #36  
    Originally posted by hopscotching
    both the 2.08 and 2.09 firmware are here
    Lot of people asked but no one has said thanks, Let me be the first, 'THANKS' hopscotching for hosting the files.
    No good deed goes unpunished
  17. #37  
    Originally posted by SeldomVisitor
    Missing the forest for the trees.

    PalmOne says "Don't for technical reasons" (not political ones as you mentioned). They say this only about the Cingular phones (so far - no Orange, no AT&T, no Sprint).
    Did you ever stop and think that they only pointed out the Cingular phones because "THEY WERE THE ONLY TREOS NOT LOCKED TO THEIR OWN NETWORK" ie:unlocked Not because of any particular technical problem specific to Cingular phones.

    Originally posted by SeldomVisitor
    But telling someone ELSE "Go ahead, do it!" is wrong.
    [/B]
    All that is being done here is offering up personal experiences with our own personal choices, no one is (or should) make a decision based on one opinion. The Breadth of opinions including yours is 'EXACTLY' what makes this forum valuable.

    There is absolutely nothing 'WRONG' with offering advice as no one is making anyone do anything. I officially give up trying to help you understand this and other points made on this thread.
    No good deed goes unpunished
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions