Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 65
  1. #41  
    The question is not who's right or wrong. The pictures you provide show a Sprint box. I look on my Handspring box (GSM bought from Cingular) and it only states SD I/O compatible. It makes no claim towards bluetooth or wifi. So then we have to ask, was it Sprint's decision to put that on the box? Then there has to be proof that Sprint acted with the intention of deceiving consumers for monetary gain by placing this text on their packaging. Because now two parties are involved, it would be a matter of passing the buck.

    In the courts it is not about who's right or wrong, it's who can proove their position. This could be a malicious business decision to attempt to draw buyers with those buzzwords. Or, it could be an honest mistake by marketing because they research SD I/O and find BT and Wifi cards assuming that since the Treo is compatible, why not place them on the box.

    If we look at the statement SD I/O compatible. I would like to see one SD I/O card that the Treo does support, not just SD/MMC media.

    c
  2.    #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by controller
    The question is not who's right or wrong. The pictures you provide show a Sprint box. I look on my Handspring box (GSM bought from Cingular) and it only states SD I/O compatible. It makes no claim towards bluetooth or wifi. So then we have to ask, was it Sprint's decision to put that on the box? Then there has to be proof that Sprint acted with the intention of deceiving consumers for monetary gain by placing this text on their packaging. Because now two parties are involved, it would be a matter of passing the buck.

    Maybe the first thing we should do is tally exactly what vendors make this claim. Is it just Sprint?

    What do everyone else's boxes say?
  3. #43  
    no matter who fault it is it will just get passed around with everyone's finger's pointed in the other direction. the 650 will not have everything everyone wants, but people will buy it. now that it is the first treo (i believe) to be released solely under palm1, i think things will be better defined. if you are that upset then buy something else.
  4. #44  
    I never trust any body who sais "We will add this eventually" Because as long as they never set a date, then they will ALWAYS have time.

    Example:
    A friend purchased a TV Tuner for their PC. On the box it said "IV Guide software*" and then at the bottom it said this "*-Currently in developement, will be made available eventually"

    Well he saw the first part, but not the second. He had me come over to find out why the TV Guide did not come up when he pressed the button the remote for it.. I showed him the box. He contacted them, and they company told him that the project has been suspended indefenitally, and that a release date could not be given.

    We both returned the card and I got him an ATI one, that already had the TV Guide software.


    However if a company gives me new features (For free) AFTER I purchase their product, then that makes me a loyal customer.
    ATI released a driver upgrade to some of their older all-in-wonder cards to allow you to watch live TV on any computer in your house (Lan) that happened to have ANY ATI video card. You can also program recording times and other cool stuff! FREE!!! It was not able to do that when I got it, but I am enjoying that feature NOW!!!
    Last edited by Tavisjohn; 10/07/2004 at 09:19 PM.
    Palm III > Palm IIIC > Handera 330 > Kyocera 6035 & Sony NR70V > Treo 600 > Treo650 & Palm LifeDrive > Modded LifeDrive w/16gig CF > Palm Pre
  5.    #45  
    @Kenny


    Such negativity... Who killed your kitten?



    @ Travis

    What flavor GSM have it?
  6. #46  
    werksman...my kitten is laying on my bed. i am not really that negative...its just people sueing everyone sets me off. sorry if anyone took offense. realistically i just dont think there is much we can do, i guess write a letter to palm one, sometimes letters get more attn. than email/phone calls. maybe try that, could get a better response (if they really are customer first, you should get something for your time)!
  7.    #47  
    Is anyone interested in this? Feel free to PM me if you prefer to not go on the record...
  8. #48  
    i was on the phone with sprint telesales today. i dont really think the girl had a clue what was going on, but she told me there was a bluetooth card either out or coming out for use in the treo and new samsung i600. neither have integated bt and both have SDIO slots...
    my guess is she wasnt capable of just making that up so it could be some marketing bs or maybe they really are making a BT card that works...

    Quote Originally Posted by RWerksman
    Is anyone interested in this? Feel free to PM me if you prefer to not go on the record...
  9. #49  
    I'd be interested in a potential lawsuit. I'm not a laywer though and have never really gotten them to work. Plus at this point I've moved onto the Treo 650, so while I was wronged in the past, it's not going to help going forward it seems.
  10. #50  
    You guys all need to settle down. You're bashing the wrong guy in the first place - they are both Sprint ads and not from Palm One.

    Secondly, if you have ever been involved in a lawsuit you would understand what a huge waste of time and money it really is (unless, of course you are a lawyer).

    With all due respect, I think this is a big waste of time for no possible gain.

    J
  11. pabo's Avatar
    Posts
    813 Posts
    Global Posts
    821 Global Posts
    #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnJ80
    With all due respect, I think this is a big waste of time for no possible gain.J
    not really. if your expectation of the 600 was to use it with BT, and this compatibility was advertised, you should at least get your purchase price back.

    Remember the palm device with the screen that was not as advertised - they had to buy them all back (or offer) if I remember correctly.
  12. #52  
    You are all missing the point. It was Sprint who advertised it, not PalmOne. And the Sprint ad clearly implies that it is "currently" available through third parties. If you did your research you would have found that that statement was wrong a year ago. I did, but bought it anyway for $250 from Amazon.com and got it just before Christmas last year.

    In other words caveat emptor my friends. I admit to hoping that it would come true, but I won't sue for something that was clearly wrong at the time.
    George
  13. pabo's Avatar
    Posts
    813 Posts
    Global Posts
    821 Global Posts
    #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by gsmith53
    In other words caveat emptor my friends. I admit to hoping that it would come true, but I won't sue for something that was clearly wrong at the time.
    Uhhh, not really. You are far more informed than the average consumer if you fgured out this was "clearly wrong". TC even offered a significant bounty because they thought it WAS possible. caveat emptor does not apply to a statement that is unsupportable. You just can't do that. Is it overkill to get a great phone and use it for a year and return it on a technicality, maybe. But it is certainly no more wrong than making a false statement about your product.

    As I understand it, it was on the "Sprint" box that was wrapped around a Palmone phone. THis does not happen without P1 approval. P1 is complicit in this.

    I agree, a lawsuit should be unnecessary - P1 SHOULD make this right if someone were to request a refund.
  14. #54  
    Lawyers have no need for terms such as "responsibility" - they will sue EVERYONE and let the courts (or, more typically, settlement) figure it out.

    So what'll happen is a nice-sized-dollars settlement will happen, the law firm will get 30+% right up front, and the 500,000 Sprint TREO 600 owners will get the rest split up 500,000 ways.
  15. pabo's Avatar
    Posts
    813 Posts
    Global Posts
    821 Global Posts
    #55  
    Quote Originally Posted by SeldomVisitor
    Lawyers have no need for terms such as "responsibility" - they will sue EVERYONE and let the courts (or, more typically, settlement) figure it out.
    You're right - they are all evil and need to be outlawed...... except for the ones that got that pesky exploding Pinto off the market, and the ones that helped get Vioxx off the market, and the ones that are taking Enron to task, and the ones that got .......

    generalizations never work.

    Oh, by the way, if corporate execs were such a stellar example of ethics, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
  16. z3bum's Avatar
    Posts
    717 Posts
    Global Posts
    723 Global Posts
    #56  
    Ah the US... a nation of whiners. How about a show of hands, a 512mb sd card with buetooth or wifi and drivers for the Treo 600? Want it? Great everyone wants one or the other. Ok, is it worth $595 to you? Because my guess is that's what it would cost. Suddenly it doesn't seem worth it does it? My point? If Palm One thought it was worth the R&D cost they would have done it or had another company do it. Become a developer and you'd see, they don't stand in anyone's way, they provide a lot of info about devices and how to program them. But, it's hard for a company to make money on and add-on SD card that is for a limited number of devices and a limited number of users within that device base. And you really can't sue a developer for not designing something that won't make enough money to cover the R&D costs. You want Bluetooth? Buy a Treo 650. 'nuff said.
    Palm III -> Palm V -> Blue Palm Vx w/Omnisky -> Treo 270 -> Treo 600 -> Treo 650 -> Treo 680
  17. pabo's Avatar
    Posts
    813 Posts
    Global Posts
    821 Global Posts
    #57  
    why is this so hard for people to grasp.

    Yes - let the market dictate whether a product is developed or released or what it is sold for. It is a VERY different issue to make a specific statement, ie, "capability available" when it is not, either because it is impossible technologically of commercialy.

    People (and lawyers) spend a LOT of time reviewing what is put in product documentation and on packaging. If this was such an unimportant issue, why what it even asserted. The only reason it was asserted was because it would directly and positvely impact someone's buying decision. Back to my point. If you make the assertion for a reason, and then cannot support it, you were either mistaken (possible) and need to correct the error, or fraudulent and need to correct the mistake and be punished.

    The common thread is to correct the mistake.
  18. pabo's Avatar
    Posts
    813 Posts
    Global Posts
    821 Global Posts
    #58  
    Quote Originally Posted by z3bum
    You want Bluetooth? Buy a Treo 650. 'nuff said.

    ...forgot one....

    If you told me the 600 had BT supported "by others", and i spent $599 on it a year ago, why am I required to pay another $599 this year ? and people ***** about Microsoft, they only ding you for $100/year.
  19. #59  
    Quote Originally Posted by pabo
    Uhhh, not really. You are far more informed than the average consumer if you fgured out this was "clearly wrong". TC even offered a significant bounty because they thought it WAS possible. caveat emptor does not apply to a statement that is unsupportable.
    It was clearly wrong AT THE TIME. Please don't quote me out of context. The Sprint Box clearly stated "including third-party developed Bluetooth and Wi-Fi cards (sold seperately through select retailers)".

    One year ago, there was no WiFi or Bluetooth card available on the market compatible with the Treo600. Simple as that. People hoping that it would happen, but none available at the time.

    The statement was WRONG AT THE TIME. The box doesn't say "If someone decides to develop and retail it." Caveat Emptor.
    George
  20. #60  
    Quote Originally Posted by gsmith53
    You are all missing the point. It was Sprint who advertised it, not PalmOne. And the Sprint ad clearly implies that it is "currently" available through third parties. If you did your research you would have found that that statement was wrong a year ago. I did, but bought it anyway for $250 from Amazon.com and got it just before Christmas last year.
    I bought my Treo 600 from Handspring's website and it was advertised on the box I received. How is that "Sprint's advertisement"? At the time I bought it (Oct 2003) research to the contrary didn't exist. Though you shouldn't have to research feature claims on the box and that's kind of the whole point.
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions