I’ve been thinking about my earlier post a little more. You know, I’m no marketing guru or press relations expert, but I can’t help but think that Apple might have opened up a whole can of worms: a possible marketing disaster? I do appreciate that there is a breach of contract in play (by those folks who unlocked their iPhones), but if every contract was enforced in this way, where would we be? Surely customer alienation isn’t the right option?
I guess that Apple are simply covering themselves if AT&T decided to seek compensation for the lost revenue. Working out how much that compensation might be is anybody’s guess – are Apple able to identify and quantify all the unlocked iPhones that are in use? Probably not. Instead, they rely on the fact that folks always want the latest and greatest, so they release a firmware update that is capable of identifying unlocked iPhones at source, then it disables them. I would imagine that makes for one rather upset customer (“upset” probably doesn’t really do the customer’s feelings that much justice, but it’ll do for this blog, thanks!)
Has Apple shot itself in the foot?
Do you think Apple were right to release firmware that essentially disables the iPhone if it’s not on an AT&T network?
How else could Apple have dealt with this sitution?
Tell me what you think please!
On another note, I couldn’t help but notice my Google Ads on the iPhone post…the irony of the ads still offering iPhone unlocks!