Page 15 of 16 FirstFirst ... 510111213141516 LastLast
Results 281 to 300 of 319
  1. klmsu19's Avatar
    Posts
    103 Posts
    Global Posts
    104 Global Posts
    #281  
    very true, but a proper remedy should not be to spend more money on a bluetooth gps when many of use dont own them or have had previous gps phones and no need for one. A standalone+a-gps working together in a phone is just as reliable as any standalone unit (Tomtom, garmin, mio, etc). There is never a reason why anyone should have to purchase extra hardware for something advertised that doesnt work to remedy the situation. Its like buying a 4GB RAM advertised laptop and you pop off the cover and see 2x1GB chips. Theres no reason you should have to go spend more on 2 more GB to get the advertised level of item you purchased. That is why areas of law exist to provide monetary compensation for such situations.

    A proper legit/fair remedy here is simply for Palm to simply fix the problem- it sounds 99% like a programming thing and not lack of hardware that is capable. I highly doubt they purposely locked out stand-alone, it sounds like a programming error/bug. There would be no feasible explanation to lock out stand-alone. Even with a-gps you can still use 3rd party gps software, so that would negate the Sprint Nav theory. There's simply no rational explanation why they would purposely leave it out or block it when the gps chip is there/on board.

    The other major problem is standalone is something you wouldnt know was missing to test for within 30 days. Plus there are a lot of people, like myself, who bought our phones fro ebay/craigslist/etc so return is not an option. Its much more frustrating when value has dropped on a device say you paid 400 for but is worth 275-300 now and doesnt do something you want to have to sell off now at a loss. Im still keeping mine, but its jsut a point of view to consider that not everyone even had the 30 day return or can return if now even.
    Last edited by klmsu19; 08/29/2008 at 06:08 PM.
  2. aixguru's Avatar
    Posts
    195 Posts
    Global Posts
    206 Global Posts
    #282  
    Quote Originally Posted by darnell View Post
    Their talk about availability of GPS services has nothing to do with the terms "stand alone and assisted". Those are very industry specific terms. Every service provider notes services might not always be available. That's not the core issue, but rather the fact Palm and Sprint are marketing a device as having "stand alone and assisted" GPS when it does not.
    Not sure how you interpret the disclaimer any other way. My point is there's conflicting information which will make it tough to build a case one way or the other.

    Quote Originally Posted by darnell View Post
    Hey, I really didn't fully understand it all at first, but please read more of the comments.
    Thanks for the tip....
  3. klmsu19's Avatar
    Posts
    103 Posts
    Global Posts
    104 Global Posts
    #283  
    Quote Originally Posted by aixguru View Post
    Not sure how you interpret the disclaimer any other way. My point is there's conflicting information which will make it tough to build a case one way or the other.
    Not at all. Actually conflicting information helps the plaintiff to prove information was not projected consistently across the board.

    False advertising: "To be found guilty of false advertising, it must be shown that the advertisement was deceptive in nature. Proof that the ad actually harmed anyone is not important. Moreover, the intentions of the advertiser are irrelevant, including if the false or deceptive advertisement was a mistake"

    So, in theory since i can't give legal advice, you wouldnt even have to prove anyone suffered from the issue, nor does it matter Palm's intention or if it was even a mistake. You simply have to show that it was deceptive, which I would say it is showing one spec one place and one in another. Conflicting is deceptive.

    Furthermore, the Lanham Act says, in essence: To prevail on a false advertising claim under the Latham act, the injured party must prove that the advertisement is either literally false or that the ad is likely to mislead and confuse customers.

    Id certainly, again, say you could EASILY prove customers were misled. The discussions here show great confusion by purchasers who are knowledgeable in the field, not even the normal average joe type.

    A court would consider if even one "average" person read the statement in question and purchased under false pretenses. I 99% think a judge would side with conflicting specs to be deceptive in nature
    Last edited by klmsu19; 08/29/2008 at 06:32 PM.
  4. aixguru's Avatar
    Posts
    195 Posts
    Global Posts
    206 Global Posts
    #284  
    klmsu19,

    I agree with much of what you say. I was simply making an observation that there's conflicting information regarding the GPS. I went into my purchase assuming the GPS functionality was limited to carrier service areas only. My reasons for having a dedicated Garmin unit have more to do with needing to use the 800w as a phone and e-mail device during long commutes. Like I said, let's hope this and a few other issues are resolved promptly.
  5. #285  
    aixguru - How do you interpret the terms "stand alone and assisted GPS"?

    Keep in mind, you're about the only person who has come in with your point of view of it, so there's not a lot of people seeing any conflict in terms. The misleading advertising is pretty obvious to most.
  6. #286  
    Quote Originally Posted by darnell View Post
    aixguru - How do you interpret the terms "stand alone and assisted GPS"?

    Keep in mind, you're about the only person who has come in with your point of view of it, so there's not a lot of people seeing any conflict in terms. The misleading advertising is pretty obvious to most.
    No kidding. Seems pretty black-and-white to me. Palm even admitted to it being a bug that they may or may not be able to fix with a software update.
  7. #287  
    Quote Originally Posted by nsxprime View Post
    No kidding. Seems pretty black-and-white to me. Palm even admitted to it being a bug that they may or may not be able to fix with a software update.
    Exactly, even Palm admits it.

    They have confirmed it's not a hardware issue. So it should be patchable. They have the GPS locked (via software) to check for a data connection first and all they need to do is remove that check.
  8. aixguru's Avatar
    Posts
    195 Posts
    Global Posts
    206 Global Posts
    #288  
    Quote Originally Posted by darnell View Post
    aixguru - How do you interpret the terms "stand alone and assisted GPS"?

    Keep in mind, you're about the only person who has come in with your point of view of it, so there's not a lot of people seeing any conflict in terms. The misleading advertising is pretty obvious to most.
    I interpret the terms same as you, but I also take into account the disclaimer stating GPS may not be available is all areas. Not to mention the data service requirement. Again, my initial post was asking how someone would justify demanding something from Palm when there's conflicting information regarding GPS functionality. I don't doubt the specs are correct, but it begs the question why the disclaimer. Is there a remote chance they disabled this function to prevent the 800w from being ported to another carrier. I don't know, but find it interesting the specs and disclaimer are a direct conflict.

    I simply was asking a question after reading the thread. I think you're confusing me with someone who doesn't want this fixed. I'd like to prompt solution to this and a few other items.
  9. klmsu19's Avatar
    Posts
    103 Posts
    Global Posts
    104 Global Posts
    #289  
    I see youre argument but a lack of disclosure or ambiguous statement doesnt lift their liability for the issue at hand,

    Also, dont quote me, but i believe the main issue is they added that statement in AFTER the release anyways producing a bait and switch situation.

    Regardless of any disclaimer, specs specifically said a-gps AND standalone which would negate any disclaimer made after the fact about network or disclaimer. Hypothetically, you cant have a new monitor with an advertised resolution and then add a disclaimer later that you need x or y to make that so which conflicts with the original statement. The people "wronged" still have a case from the original official statement made- it doesnt negate liability on their part for selling a product under false pretenses. The real solution here is fix the problem without having to go the class-action route and drag it out. A very similar case was the VZW v710 where they advertised certain bluetooth profiles which the phone didnt have and then changed the specs after release, and they were sued and the plaintiff (users) won. Very similar situation here, and not all that hard to prove really and use that case as precedent among other.

    We all know its not a hardware issue, but a programming snafu, so the reality is it must be fixed
    Last edited by klmsu19; 08/29/2008 at 08:56 PM.
  10. #290  
    aixguru - You realize there is something not correct, but you're coming up with a viewpoint that fails to agree with even Palm's own response when the issue was presented to them. So while you have a differing viewpoint, it differs from all parties involved, including Palm who made the device. This has all been documented, and a link is in here somewhere, you'll have to check the old comments to find it. But regardless of whatever interpretation you have, it's not even the documented interpretation of the manufacturer.

    Really there is no ambiguity here. I mean not for most of us, Palm included.

    Read this to see if it helps you any: GPS vs. aGPS: A Quick Tutorial
  11. aixguru's Avatar
    Posts
    195 Posts
    Global Posts
    206 Global Posts
    #291  
    Quote Originally Posted by klmsu19 View Post
    I see youre argument but a lack of disclosure or ambiguous statement doesnt lift their liability for the issue at hand,
    Agreed.

    Quote Originally Posted by klmsu19 View Post
    Also, dont quote me, but i believe the main issue is they added that statement in AFTER the release anyways producing a bait and switch situation.
    I agree the thought is the website was updated after the release. I doubt this was a bait-and-switch because information being distributed to Sprint sales folks prior to the release included the disclaimer adding "Within wireless coverage area only". Having the disclaimer in print on Palm/Sprint documents but purposely not on the website is hard to believe. Just my opinion though.


    Quote Originally Posted by klmsu19 View Post
    Regardless of any disclaimer, specs specifically said a-gps AND standalone which would negate any disclaimer made after the fact about network or disclaimer. Hypothetically, you cant have a new monitor with an advertised resolution and then add a disclaimer later that you need x or y to make that so which conflicts with the original statement. The people "wronged" still have a case from the original official statement made- it doesnt negate liability on their part for selling a product under false pretenses. The real solution here is fix the problem without having to go the class-action route and drag it out. A very similar case was the VZW v710 where they advertised certain bluetooth profiles which the phone didnt have and then changed the specs after release, and they were sued and the plaintiff (users) won. Very similar situation here, and not all that hard to prove really and use that case as precedent among other.
    Agreed.
  12. klmsu19's Avatar
    Posts
    103 Posts
    Global Posts
    104 Global Posts
    #292  
    well either way there was some kind of conflicting information and standalone was clearly listed. In something like this, the customer is always right. I mean who looks more shady in hypothetical court, the paying customer filing a complaint who did nothing wrong here at all, or the big corporation who cant get their specs straight no matter if they got it right in 20 places and wrong in 1 place or right in 1 place and wrong in 20?

    Disclaimer or not the specs said standalone at some point somewhere. Even if it was in one very very minute place on Palm's site, then thats all thats needed to say false advertising and that we didnt get the product fully as we expected it. You have to understand the law looks down upon big corporations lying to customers in ads and protects consumer rights over corporate interests (usually, not always). The disclaimer, whether it was there or added after the fact, doesnt "fix" the wrong.

    Again though, thats not the route anyone wants to see it go, this is just hypothetically.
  13. aixguru's Avatar
    Posts
    195 Posts
    Global Posts
    206 Global Posts
    #293  
    darnell - I don't disagree with what you say. I must have missed the section on Palm's website where they admit the 800w's GPS should function outside coverage areas. I was simply asking a question about demanding something from Palm when the specs say one thing yet a disclaimer says another. I've said enough.....will wait for a resolution.
  14. #294  
    If I may, I'd like to just make a quick point here. Even with a standalone GPS the disclaimer fits. Consider if you're down in a Mine shaft, no GPS would work there.

    I may be wrong, but the disclaimer does not seem to contradict any other statement, just an effort on a manufacturer to let people know that GPS does not work everywhere in the world, so that way they couln't be sued if someone took their phone spelunking and got lost cause their Standalone GPS enabled Treo wouldn't get a fix on their location 1000 feet underground. (Hey, it could happen. Frivolous law suits are plentiful these days. Remember the McDonald's coffee incident?)

    Somebody please feel free to correct me if I'm missing the point. I've done it before.
  15. klmsu19's Avatar
    Posts
    103 Posts
    Global Posts
    104 Global Posts
    #295  
    well that was the other point i started to make but deleted the paragraph. the statement is ambiguous. "not working everywhere" is TOTALLY different then "needs data to function" You can easily argue the disclaimer is totally ambiguous and does not imply you MUST have sprint date IN ORDER to use gps.


    GPS not available in all areas at all times. Requires an account and data services at additional cost

    that is the new disclaimer, but that certainly wasnt always there in the footnotes with that second sentence,
  16. #296  
    Quote Originally Posted by klmsu19 View Post
    well that was the other point i started to make but deleted the paragraph. the statement is ambiguous. "not working everywhere" is TOTALLY different then "needs data to function" You can easily argue the disclaimer is totally ambiguous and does not imply you MUST have sprint date IN ORDER to use gps.


    GPS not available in all areas at all times. Requires an account and data services at additional cost

    that is the new disclaimer, but that certainly wasnt always there in the footnotes with that second sentence,


    Somewhere in the 15 pages here I thought I read this thread was presented to Palm (maybe darnell sent it to Palm, can't remember). Do you think the footnotes were changed recently?
    ATT History- From 1997-2001-> Nokia 6362->Motorola StarTac->Nokia 8260.

    Nextel History From 2001-2004-> Motorola i1000-> Motorola i90c-> Motorola i95cl-> Motorola i730->Motorola i850.

    Sprint History From 2005 - Currently->Sanyo 5500-> Sanyo 5600-> Sanyo-> 7400->Sanyo 8300->Sanyo->7500-> Sanyo 9000->Sanyo 8400->Sanyo M1->PPC-6700->Treo 700wx->PPC-6800(Mogul)-> Motorola Q9C-> Treo 800w-> Curve->Treo 800w->Touch Pro->Treo Pro> Curve "M"->HTC Hero.
  17. aixguru's Avatar
    Posts
    195 Posts
    Global Posts
    206 Global Posts
    #297  
    Quote Originally Posted by klmsu19 View Post
    well that was the other point i started to make but deleted the paragraph. the statement is ambiguous. "not working everywhere" is TOTALLY different then "needs data to function" You can easily argue the disclaimer is totally ambiguous and does not imply you MUST have sprint date IN ORDER to use gps.


    GPS not available in all areas at all times. Requires an account and data services at additional cost

    that is the new disclaimer, but that certainly wasnt always there in the footnotes with that second sentence,
    Hence, my initial bit of confusion and question on the topic of liability. (No further explanation needed). To add to my confusion the "Treo 800w Pocket Sales Guide" provided to Sprint prior to the release expands on the website footnote.

    "GPS not available in all areas at all times. Within wireless coverage areas only. Email and GPS require an account and data services at additional costs."
  18. klmsu19's Avatar
    Posts
    103 Posts
    Global Posts
    104 Global Posts
    #298  
    Quote Originally Posted by VibrantRedGT View Post
    Somewhere in the 15 pages here I thought I read this thread was presented to Palm (maybe darnell sent it to Palm, can't remember). Do you think the footnotes were changed recently?
    no clue, like you i abandoned the 800 for a while because of all the bugs and have only used it a day here and there since. I never really looked at Palm's site to get the exact jargon (not like i ever look at palm's site). but i WAS under the assumption it had standalone considering both HTC's and the q9c did (every other gps ppc sprint carries).

    id be willing to bet they were changed after release though which is a legal no no.
  19. klmsu19's Avatar
    Posts
    103 Posts
    Global Posts
    104 Global Posts
    #299  
    Quote Originally Posted by aixguru View Post
    Hence, my initial bit of confusion and question on the topic of liability. (No further explanation needed). To add to my confusion the "Treo 800w Pocket Sales Guide" provided to Sprint prior to the release expands on the website footnote.

    "GPS not available in all areas at all times. Within wireless coverage areas only. Email and GPS require an account and data services at additional costs."
    well i cant check every resource Palm put out, nor can i really ethically give legal advice. I can reiterate that if it said standalone in even ONE spot anywhere that was official (sprint's site, palm's site) then there is a huge liability question there. Remember the clauses i posted, "To be found guilty of false advertising, it must be shown that the advertisement was deceptive in nature. Proof that the ad actually harmed anyone is not important. Moreover, the intentions of the advertiser are irrelevant, including if the false or deceptive advertisement was a mistake" if they made one tiny mistake and said standalone then it can be said to be deceptive and mistakes dont matter in the elements.

    I cant say 100% a court will rule in our favor, but my guess is there's a pretty good case there to present.
  20. aixguru's Avatar
    Posts
    195 Posts
    Global Posts
    206 Global Posts
    #300  
    Quote Originally Posted by The Lepricon View Post
    If I may, I'd like to just make a quick point here. Even with a standalone GPS the disclaimer fits. Consider if you're down in a Mine shaft, no GPS would work there.

    I may be wrong, but the disclaimer does not seem to contradict any other statement, just an effort on a manufacturer to let people know that GPS does not work everywhere in the world, so that way they couln't be sued if someone took their phone spelunking and got lost cause their Standalone GPS enabled Treo wouldn't get a fix on their location 1000 feet underground. (Hey, it could happen. Frivolous law suits are plentiful these days. Remember the McDonald's coffee incident?)

    Somebody please feel free to correct me if I'm missing the point. I've done it before.
    I thought this too until I saw the following in a document provided to Sprint sales folks.

    "GPS not available in all areas at all times. Within wireless coverage areas only. Email and GPS require an account and data services at additional costs."

Posting Permissions