Jobsian drones shackle gamer with 'lifetime' iPad ban A US gamer has been banned from ever buying another iPad. Why? He reached his "lifetime limit". Who knew that such a limit existed? Not The Reg. Using the handle Protocol Snow, the now-banned iPad buyer tells his story of intrigue in a personal blog post. But be forewarned: as he notes, the post "is getting hammered with …
>Nothing is sadder than seeing the look on a little kid's face when you don't have the toy they want, because you just personally sold the last half-dozen to a shady guy in sunglasses who reeks of cigarette smoke<
Who's probably a paedophile to boot! A crazed murderous psychopath off his meds.
It would seem that Apple are getting crazier by the decision. I would imagine the next ban will be those accused of smoking as they would not be able to offer a warranty on any of their products.
'Atlas was permitted the opinion that he was at liberty, if he wished, to drop the Earth and creep away; but this opinion was all that he was permitted.' Kafka.
Does remind me of the Air hostess in Meet the Parents at the check-in queue :D
Don't you love it whenyou enter a dialog with someone that has low IQ but very clear instructions ? the shear frustration that you're fab education and self-aware intelligence tells you you will loose no matter what :D
A mate of mind brough 4 back from the US and he bought them all in a shap, using his same self, with, admitedly, 2 cards.
Your (you're? :) ) writing style is more Essex chav, and the mistakes more characteristic of an ill-educated native speaker than any characteristic problems that you see in EFL.
I suspect that you're a useless waste of skin, caught dry-humping the failboat, and now you're just lying and back-pedalling. Either way, thanks for the huge laughs provided by your hilarious comment.
"Don't you love it whenyou enter a dialog with someone that has low IQ but very clear instructions ? the shear frustration that you're fab education and self-aware intelligence tells you you will loose no matter what :D
A mate of mind brough 4 back from the US and he bought them all in a shap, using his same self, with, admitedly, 2 cards."
I don't know how the legal side works in the US, but I expect in this regard it's similar to the UK; a shop is never legally obliged to conduct a transaction with you. They are perfectly within their rights to refuse, on pretty much any grounds they like. This is why you can't, if a product has a mis-labelled price, demand that the shop sell you the product for that incorrect price. They can simply refuse to make the transaction with you.
Of course, doing this repeatedly pisses off customers, so it's not something shops do very often, but it is legal, I believe.
It strikes me as a perfectly sensible way for a vendor to behave if the supplies are limited, for some reason. I think the same thing's done for things like concert tickets, isn't it? To discourage touts? You put a limit on the number of tickets the punter can buy at once.
I agree the "lifetime limit" is bloody silly though, it's just unnecessary.
Was in a US apple store yesterday looking at an iPad - it did cross my mind to buy one to flog back in the UK to someone fool enough to actually want one. I didn't, though.
Actually, in the US you *can* buy something for what the product has been mis-labelled for. They will only check the mis-labelled price tag, and then proceed to sell it to you for that exact price. I think that the "transaction refusal" may also fall under discrimination laws as well, so I doubt that they'd be able to do this as well.
However, I've seen "quotas" on big events, like concerts and such so I'm not quite sure if quotas are also legal on things that aren't really that finite. You can always buy an iPad, but there is a finite amount of tickets for your standard Metallica concert, so quotas do make sense in the latter case.
As I understand it, in the UK if a price label is on the product itself then the store must sell it at that price. However, if the price is on the shelf and not the actual product then they are under no obligation to sell at the incorrect price.
This is why, besides the logistics, big stores price mark shelves and not individual items.
I wouldn't be surprised if the situation is the same in the USA.
The store is also at liberty to refuse to sell any item to any customer they feel like.
I would imagine that this chap encountered an over zealous shop assistant. We've all encountered jobsworths in our time, they are frustrating and more often plain wrong. I doubt very much that the notion a lifetime came from Jobs, more like the furtive imagination of the salesdrone--much like the furtive imaginations of a few of the commenters here...
Err, no:
If an item scans higher at checkout than the sticker price on the item itself or the price posted on the shelf, in Connecticut, you’re entitled to that item at no cost. You don’t pay the higher price OR the lower price. In fact, the store must give the item to you free, up to a value of $20.
http://www.ct.gov/dcp/cwp/view.asp?a=1629&q=454534
At non-grocery type stores you can insist upon the marked price so long as its reasonable. Ie, you can't buy a car for $20, but I have purchased a mp3 players for a fraction of the cost as scanned in based upon mismarking ($60 versus $20, IIRC).
I cannot believe that within the EU, including GB, that the consumer protection would be less than above. I flat out reject your contention that a shop can just decline a transaction. What about a "no irish or dogs" type sign? Get real.
I.e. What would the reasonable man think? Which is why you can't buy the car for $20. But we also expect a "reasonable man" to understand that mistakes happen and not to apply punitive measures to a shop that makes an honest mistake.
Let's say a camera was marked up at £180 when it should have been marked at £220. Why should the shop be punished by having to sell it at £40. The shopper has suffered no material loss by the camera being marked wrongly because until they actually try and buy the product and find it was marked wrongly no money has changed hands.
And the idea that the shop would have to give you the product free is just crazy! I'm assuming that in Connecticut (sic) they don't have a thing called "common sense".
The argument that it's about consumer protection doesn't hold water because over here we have other legislation that would stop a shop from repeatedly marking prices low on purpose in an effort to get people to buy them and then trying to charge a higher price.
Refreshing to see, for once, a UK person assuming that UK laws apply all over the globe ;-)
In lots of places across the pond (most, AFAICT), retailers do have an obligation to sell a mislabeled item at the advertised price minus a punitive compensation; it applies only to items that are not individually labeled (i. e. in supermarkets), and is indeed a way to protect customers against deliberate mislabeling (the compensation varies from place to place, and cannot exceed the value of the item, i.e. if the revised price is lower than the compensation amount they just have to give the article for free, you cannot ask for cash on top).
Voila voila.
Not that it has much to do with the present case of course.
. . . that you speak of would be down to the case of Boots the Cash Chemist vs Pharmeceutical Society of Great Britain, which enshrined in law the idea that the price on an object in a shop was a willingness to negotiate to sell at that price, not an offer of sale if you give them that amount.
One of the few actual pieces of case law I remember from Uni. Luckily IANAL.
that one has a "right" to buy something from a seller. Some years ago (OK, many years ago) I worked in a garage when there was a tanker driver's strike. The proprietors issued 'regular' customers with a card so they could buy petrol, but refused passing trade. Loads of non-regulars went mental when I told them they couldn't have any petrol. They all said "You can't do this, it's not legal, I've got a right to buy petrol if I want" - they just didn't get the idea that the petrol belonged to the garage & if they didn't want to sell it, they didn't have to.
I must admit it was pretty funny saying 'No' to them & watching them get their knickers in a twist ( I was 15)
They don't have to sell somthing to you at the price shown, and can refuse to sell, but if they do not realise untill after the sale, too late.
However, if a company continualy, or intentionaly, advertises at the wrong price they will fall foul of advertising laws and trading standards will prosecute them.
... it is the way as described by others - if a wrong price is noticed before the item is sold (before any money is handed over), the shop can refuse to sell it.
If the customer buys the item, then notices they paid the wrong price, they have to be refunded (as it counts as deceiving the customer).
Most shops, if the price difference is minor, will sell at the lower price, to avoid annoyed customers, then go correct/remove the price label.
I used to work at a large supermarket chain, and was trained as to the above ¬¬.
This is pretty much the policy regarding "goods in demand" (which meant nearly everything) that was operated in ex-USSR. You had to queue nicely for your stuff or buy it off the grey market for up to 1000% (yes 1000%) the price and you had daily and lifetime limits on purchase. A new Lada was 10K at the end of a 5+ year queue and 17k on the side. Washing machines, boats and even books were sold in such a pricing environment.
We should probably congratulate general secretary Jobs for successfully reinventing "developed socialism" and applying it as an essential part of a business model in a developed world economy.
Right.
So he'll be unable to purchase another iPad if he uses an alternate method of payment? (i.e. different debit/credit card, cash, cheque, wire transfer online etc.).
No, thought not. What a complete non-story. Still, fun to stick it to the man, isn't it?
The Apple Store manager spotted something fishy and took action, all kudos to him.
AHAAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAHAHAHAAAAAA 21 Downvotes (at time of writing)?!?!? That's gotta be a record man! Could it possibly be because you totally missed the point of the story?
Okay one more time for the synaptically challenged:
The story is NOT about purchasing methodologies. It's about Apple adopting a superficially reasonable sales-restriction policy of 2 iPads per day (and max 10 in total), BUT then implementing it in such a Stalinesque fashion that they leave entire countries scratching their heads in befuddlement that the Fruity Empire has managed to exist this long.
One of the other posters on this page has it bang on - being confronted by a droid with clearly limited intelligence who nonetheless is in possession of "The Policy" is one of the most frustrating experiences on God's green earth. Right up there with airport security guards who are 'Just Doing Their Job(TM)'.
Given that Apple has a market cap of $241bn (with $42bn in cash reserves) one can only assume they're doing something right.
Completely misleading story, btw. "A US gamer has been banned from ever buying another iPad".
Er, no he hasn't.
Now run along, peasants.
"Given that Apple has a market cap of $241bn (with $42bn in cash reserves) one can only assume they're doing something right."
NO The marketing dept got it right, they made it shiney with a couple of new features and marketed it to YOUR type. Bingo! The flocked followed...........
Really, you'll buy ANYTHING if its aimed at your EGO.
Never forget, the measure of a man aint his money.
Market cap means squat.
Look at the P/E when contemplating investing. Last time I looked (last week) AAPL's P/E was hovering around 30 ... that's firmly in the "bubble about to burst" territory. (Full disclosure: I just looked ... today it's 25.77 ... Still well out of the "safeish investment" range.)
Sensors detect a rabid fanboi is nearby... Set phasers to Mactard and execute evasive manouevre Ubuntu Beta 10.04..
Obviously the customer was an escaped mental patient and off his meds, a clear danger to himself and those around him. I applaud the manager's decision to prevent him self harming any further, kudos to him.
Now if only we could get that lifetime limit down to zero...
This a non-story? You consider this "normal"?
"The Apple Store manager spotted something fishy and took action, all kudos to him."
Somebody buys goods, where is the "fishy" bit? What they do with the goods afterwards is ENTIRELY up to them, including sticking them in a blender. I guess you're a fan of Sony's "we'll change your alloys for steel rim wheels a year later" approach to the PS/3 as well then? I find this totally and wholly unacceptable. The only acceptable restriction would be the number of units per customer per sale to preserve stock levels, that's a normal way to allow more people to buy. Anything else, and certainly not lifetime is exerting control over your buyers. "Lifetime" means you would never be able to use the device in business.
Actually, if they pulled this trick on my in the UK I'd have their nuts via the Data Protection Act - let them argue with the commissioner for holding data without notification/permission and in excess of requirement. Just because I can.
The whole point of a shop and of trade in general is to sell, and there is reselling too, that's called "business". What they have stated there is so full of holes I'm amazed there hasn't been attempt to claim "misunderstanding" yet (not that it would help, this seems to fit in 100% with the vastly increasing control freakery of Apple in general).
Possible volume scenarios:
- He buys for an organisation (let's say a school: "think of the children!", but, granted, he could be a catholic priest and we all know you're guilty until proven innocent)
- He has a really extensive disaster recovery strategy, or a large family
- He is planning lab tests, or is a product developer (I have 2 PCs and 2 laptops, and I don't even code)
- He wants one in every room and has a really large house. Damn, that means we'll never get the Paris Hilton logo here because she'd need far more than 10. Ah, Paris can buy them? So it's discrimination instead? Fire up the lawyers - they'll love you..
Imagine I run a company and someone has decided to use iPad for whatever reason (I'd say he'd be a marketing manager or something, but let's go with the idea). That strategy would fall on its nose, so well done Apple. As a matter of fact, this has made me think again about recommending ANY Apple products to customers (however safer and easier to use they are) until I have it in writing they won't pull a stunt like that where I live.
I will wait how this develops, but every time I'm about to advise a company on thinking about Apple products (safer and easier to use) they throw stupid crap like this. I think Jobs is losing it, but I give them another 2 years before the fanboys start realising it. About 2 years ago, the Apple brand was OK but of late I've heard so much weird crap that I would think twice about using their products without some hard, contractual assurances so I can sue their rear ends if they tried anything funny.
Nutcases, the lot of them.
Paris, because she's more decorative than Jobs
Yeah someone who's used an iPad and now wants another one? Fishy indeed.
So fishy in fact that he must be taking them apart and grinding down the memory chips to use in his meth lab. But Steve Jobs only likes LSD so that's a no no.
He had to make a reservation to be able to queue up to be able to buy it. Does the reservation process not involve some form of identification? If they have a lifetime limit policy I'd expect they have the ability to enforce it, at least to the extent that it's difficult to buy more than 10 without moving house.
Even if you are, I bet they'll want some address details and proof of ID! Even PC world have started requiring that kind of info if you buy a TV or something expensive.
Btw, what that conversation really reminds me of is the scene in fight club where he's backtracking all the plane tickets he's found and he's trying to talk to the guy in the dry-cleaners.
dry cleaner: I don't, erm, have that information, nor would I be able to disclose it to you at this juncture if I did have that information... (looks relieved to have finished the sentence)
Tyler; You're a moron!
A great example of the weirdly distorted form of logic used at apple. The real mystery though, is why anyone would want to buy a device which is missing so many facilities that have been standard on most computers for decades. There are several more capable tablet devices available out there and usually much cheaper too.
When will people learn not to be blinded by the hype-machine?
"The real mystery though, is why anyone would want to buy a device which is missing so many facilities"
No Michael, the real mystery is why anyone would want to buy a device which is missing so many facilities when they KNOW - KNOW - that Apple is going to steadily release new versions with one extra feature at a time until it finally does have a full set of features - WHICH IT COULD HAVE HAD FROM DAY ONE.
I have a family of 5, a lovely wife ( And I work in IT how cool is that), two boys and a girl. Supposing I was wanting to buy these over priced, oversized non multitasking A4 Pads for each member of my family so we could all look through our own "window on the world". I could have one, and my wife could, but not the kids? or the two boys and not the daughter or me and the wife?
So Herr Jobs won't let me? one more reason to stick with android and hopes HTC will bring out something- if a touch pad is better than a note book, I'm yet to be convinced....
You'd have to buy 2 iPads a day and the less fortunate members of the family would have to look on Padless until their turn came. God help families of 10+. Maybe Mormons, Catholics etc. could file religious discrimination suites against Apple?
I played around with an iPad for a while last week (thank you Ash Cloud of Death(tm)) - still can't think of a reason to buy one. So daily or lifetime purchase limits are somewhat irrelevant.
Except the Apple Shop droid did say you didn't have to take them out of your bag for airport screening. Hardly a compelling sales point ...
What it means is that, technically, you'd have to buy them over 3 days instead of all at once.
Although to be honest in this case that's probably a good thing. You could use the extra time to contemplate why the f**k you're spending over $2,500 on five identical devices for your entire family.
A family of 5. Each family member may purchase 2. That is 10 iPads per day. Is 10 enough for your family? Do you need 50? Then each member may purchase 2 per day for five straight days. Or an individual may purchase 2 per day. Simple enough. The real problem is trying to find any in stock anywhere. And now you have discovered the reason for the 2 per person per day rule.
...and yet there are STILL people out there who want to have anything to do with this bunch of control-freaks? Weird. Do they inject some sort of long-lasting hypnotic chemical into the aircon in Apple stores that induces lifetime worship and loss of critical facilities?
Watch out when they start offering free Kool-Aid with each purchase (although the lifetime limit of 2 drinks won't be a problem...)
The sales lit clearly says two per customer, and the iPad is hardly the only product that has limits. In the states, Prada and other luxury bags have limits. This allows us mere foolish mortals who wish to waste our money on such things the ability to purchase at list price. Most major entertainment events also has limits for the same reason. The idea is not just to clamp down on the grey market, but to limit the ability of guys like this creep to purchase all the stock, then resell at a profit. They may say they are only charging enough to cover costs, but who regulates the costs?
In the case of the poster who asked about the family of five, I hardly think that a limit on 'two per customer' would keep them from buying an iPad for each member. Bring one of the older kids and purchase six iPads, then sell one to help defray costs. OTOH, if I had been one of the fools waiting in line all night for an iPad and I did not get one because one person wanted 5 iPads, or even a family of 5 bought 10 iPads, I might think that was a little unfair.
A philanthropist ships COD and charges only the original purchase price. A business person tacks on 'just enough to cover his or her costs'.
Concert tickets are very finite; you'll have something like 20k tickets per event, and you can't quite fabricate more tickets for those. iPads can be manufactured, and if you want to buy a zillion of them, you should be able to do so.
Limits on products sounds more like the USSR brand of 'socialism' than luxury product sales policies. BTW, luxury stuff is bought on stores, someone stockpiling on luxury products is just wasting his/her time, as those who are interested won't buy them from a "shady guy" selling it at twice the price.
The way i see i is that they dont want these ont he grey market, simple as that, it's got nothing to do with people who smoke cigarettes and wear sunglasses cheating the kid's out of their new toys
(wtf)
every christmas now i have to go to an apple store and buy my brother in law an itunes voucher, they always ask for my details even when i pay cash, i just refuse and they look frustrated but theres not much they can do about it.
if you pay cash and refuse to give them your details then how can they stop you buying ore than 2 or 10 or 20?, just goto a different applestore.
this story is terrible by the way, slow news day?
aside, despite is being a strange business model, acxtually reducing your sales willingly, it's kind of up to them if they sell it to you or not
There's always a few people down-voting criticism.
With blind unquestioning devotion like that no wonder Jobs has some sort of warped messiah complex.
There is obviously something wrong with his mental health if he thinks it’s good business practice to put limits on what people can buy.
'There is obviously something wrong with his mental health if he thinks it’s good business practice to put limits on what people can buy.'
You (and a lot of others) are missing the point Marcus - Apple are smart. What is the single easiest way to make someone want something? Tell them they can't have it. The more they restrict their products the more they make them seem exclusive - They sell based on style, not substance. 'It must be good as I had to queue for three days and they only let me buy two'.
As others have pointed out that 2 per customer/10 per lifetime thing is actually totally unenforceable, but that doesn't matter - It has done it's job as it has created more free publicity for them with articles like this one further imprinting on the consciousness of society that 'Apple products are so good they can afford to turn away business'. This is really the very best sort of marketing for Apple - It makes people focus on how much they want the product not why they might actually need it.
LOL! Did you even READ my post Marcus?
My point was that Apple make money by making shallow people want their products through clever marketing. I called them smart because they are extremely good at generating fanboi hysteria - even to the point that some would buy any new product they release without even knowing what it is in advance.
The implication in my post is that I think their marketing is actually a lot better than their products. Not really something a 'corporate shill' would imply surely?
For some reason our office was going to equip the entire sales and account management teams with the jesus brick which was about 70 units.
Thank the great sky jockey that the iCommunism has prevailed and we wont be able to order them now.
Paris - multiple procurement is never a problem for her channel
I must be missing something because I know this many people cannot be so stupid.
The iPad is a hot product in an early launch phase.
Stock is very low or out in most stores.
Scalpers are hitting Apple stores in mass to ship iPads overseas at double the face value.
The two per person limit is a way to allow the end user a chance to purchase their iPad at retail price.
Seriously - what person needs more than 2 iPads per day unless they are selling them overseas? If you are really buying it for family then bring in your family so they can reserve their iPad. What is the problem?
if a product has a mis-labelled price, demand that the shop sell you the product for that incorrect price. They can simply refuse to make the transaction with you.
If a store has been repeatedly caught with mislabeled products (ie its advertised as lower price in the news paper or in the store but more at he register ) they have to sale it to you at that price . thats done to punish retails that like to mislead people .
I do believe I've reached my lifetime limit for ridiculousness from Apple.
Sure, this was probably just some store employee getting his wires crossed, but why the cloak and dagger "we can't tell you why" nonsense?
More importantly, with Apple's recent control freakish behavior a lifetime limit carved on stone tablets^W^W iPads by the very hand of Jobs himself actually sounds plausible at first glance, which doesn't speak well for the image they've been projecting.
What do they limit business customers to? I mean, should some zany business want to provide their 10+ sales reps with an iPad (for example), they can't?
I know there's a shortage of the things, but surely saying it's a lifetime limit is a bit arrogant... Daily limit is reasonable especially at lauch time, but anything more is pure stupidity.
Its the lifetime of the product, you morons: which is about 3 MONTHS till a new version with some improvements come along. Thats when the fanbois wil get another lifeline & lifetime purchase options!
Till then keep worshipping St. Jobs for scraps of manna from heaven and be grateful for small (lifetime) mercies.
Paris cos, she cant last a lifetime either.
You would think That these ipads are costing Apple money and that they are losing on each sale. I have never read such bullshit in all my life. As far as i can see all you ipad customers are just buying a netbook under a different title.Two per person crap.http://www.reghardware.co.uk/Design/graphics/icons/comment/unhappy_32.png
This post has been deleted by its author
...to the ridiculous. This cult is getting ever worse. It's especially telling that they equate someone trying to buy a $500+ consumer item as a "child ['s face] when their new toy isn't in stock." They obviously think all of their customers are eight years old.
Still, one must take one's comedy where one finds it. I, for one, continue to ROFL at every story published.
And if anyone tries to buy more than one of your shiny boxes, tell them they can piss right off.
You basically have to act like you don't even need customers, and the customers will start rolling in.
Also, send out a mailshot telling all your customers to queue up at one single store at one single time on one single day so that there is a huge queue you can photograph for marketing purposes.
Or if you don't trust your customers to be punctual (who does), take the fast route and hire a group of actors to line up and receive the empty packaging for "shiny boxes" and use your influence with the corporate controlled media to buy as many adverts^W news stories as you need. I'm not saying Apple does this, I'm just saying that I would if I was tasked with imitating them.
Good grief, haven't you lot got anything better to do than moan all the time? The iPad is a brand new shiny product. Lots of people want to buy one and currently demand is outstripping supply, so for the moment Apple have a policy (clearly stated on their web site) "iPad order limit: two per customer". In a month or two the supply situation will settle down and the policy will be relaxed. Lots of other companies do the same thing, so what's the big deal?
Ok, the challenge is known, the gauntlet thrown... who can buy more than 10 iPads!!
(You don't have to keep them.) First one to 11 gets... uhm... ...uh... a new legal pad for 'ensuing' litigations. More prizes... for the most iPads bought, the most (jail)/broken, the most autographed by S.Jobs (especially on the same 'Pad)... and for the most dumbfounding of Apple clerks. (How do I hook this to my PC again? Can I run Windo$e in Parallel with the Mac-O-SeX? See here, why can't I get my pron subscription full screen?)
I've been a self confessed Mac fanboy since I proudly lugged home my brand new SE/30 over 20 years ago.
They're starting to creep me out now though, especially the smarmy robotic droids in the Apple Stores.
It's high time they had some competition .... somebody? ... Anybody? (Not you tho Gates, we are talking realistic here!)
So, Jobs and his minions can limit the number of i-Nads that I could buy, yet Gordon Brown's proposal won't let me buy a pack of 10 cigarettes - but I'm 'limited' to a pack of 20????
Did this particular (me) Shit-for-brains miss something.
Christ, help me out someone. I remember where I came in.....
"Nothing is sadder than seeing the look on a little kid's face when you don't have the toy they want, because you just personally sold the last half-dozen to a shady guy in sunglasses who reeks of cigarette smoke. It gets old really fast."
Well, two points. One, drowning puppies. Drowning puppies are definitely sadder. Two, any kid who thinks the iPad is a 'toy' is already an overpriviliged little fucker who's probably going to go on to own a hedge fund, so really, where's the harm?
>Nothing is sadder than seeing the look on a little kid's face when you don't have the toy they want, because you just personally sold the last half-dozen to a shady guy in sunglasses who reeks of cigarette smoke<
This would make sense for a daily limit, but how about the lifetime one? This doesn't even make sense. It sounds like apple putting restriction in place just because they can.
Just because I wear sunglasses and smoke, doesn't mean they'll ever catch me buying even one iPad.
I have this great gadget called an iPhone, and when that reaches the end of its functionality, a PowerBook, and when that gets stretched too far a tower PC connected to my television.
There is no niche. Just as there is no spoon.
... bow down to his almighty Jobiness.
... pray before this saintly figure, who has bought forth much geek goodness
... dare not criticise, for his Jobiness works in mysterious ways
Makes me want to hand my MacBook Pro back to Apple and declare:
"I'm not worthy to own this product, for I have sinned. I did'st jailbreak my touch, breaking one of the many commandments of his jobiness"
"Prior to owning this MacBook, I committed a heinous sin, I built a Hackintosh - please forgive me oh great one"
Tomorrow I may go to my local Mac Store and beg for forgiveness.
I hope one of the spotty herberts - oops, sorry, glorious chosen ones, will accept my most humble of apologies.
His Jobiness, if your reading this ... I'm not worthy, truly I'm not...
As punishment, I will banish myself from this macbook and spend the day playing games on windows.
Apple are getting more weird by the day. I don't understand why anyone would want to deal with them.
Their OS is full of security holes and getting hideously bloated.
Their hardware is generally a couple of generations behind.
Their phone has horrible contracts no doubt signed in blood.
Power supplies on mobile hardware burn out with unfailing regularity.
Flat panels turn yellow for no apparent reason.
They have a habit of going out of their way to piss suppliers, developers and customers off and as a company the plot has been severely lost.
For all these benefits you pay a 40% premium over other non fruit themed hardware. I can only assume that their are a good many masochists out there that enjoy all this pain.
Dare I say it but even Microsoft are looking positively benign set against this type of corporate bollocks.
...turns out not to be the brightest bulb in the chandelier.
As was made clear *IN THE FUCKING ARTICLE*, the employee was *wrong*. The "lifetime ban" would require you buying *ten* of the things. I swear there are people reading this website who would have trouble understanding the "Janet and John" books.
This practice is SOP in many retail stores, not just at Apple's: they're not in the business of providing warehouse facilities for other retailers. (This isn't seen only in consumer electronics stores either: most toy stores have similar policies—especially around Christmas.)
Apple's products usually come complete with an ecosystem of accessories. Those accessories will often have a much bigger profit margin for the store, so stores won't be pleased about losing all those potential ancillary sales. They can add up to a lot of revenue.
This article is about some idiot whining about being mistaken for a middleman grey exporter. (Which, it turns out, he was.)
"Nothing is sadder than seeing the look on a little kid's face when you don't have the toy they want, because you just personally sold the last half-dozen to a shady guy in sunglasses who reeks of cigarette smoke. It gets old really fast."
Jobsian Control Freakery. It is getting old really fast. What will it be next week? You can't buy Apple if you currently own Microsoft?
It is a market economy. They make the product, we buy it. If a chain-smoking weirdo wants to buy a dozen to pour petrol over, set fire to, and post the resultant video to YouTube... what does it matter? Supply should meet demand, if it does not, that is not OUR fault. I do, presume, of course, that the staggered release is due to production not being able to meet the hype?
But saving the best for last - from the words of the Apple rep that said the above - it is a "toy". Nuff said.
I wondered how soon social exclusion by proxy might come about, I saw sentiments of this activity as soon as banks only released software for iphones to access banking accounts, now its yet another limit. Thankfully my exclusion is not to buy into the Jobsian dicatorial dream (no doubt there is a appleoser who would immediately react with well thats your choice is'nt it). So once you have been labotomised more than 2 times its dummy for life it would seem, I guess thats just the inclusive customer membership list any company could wish for, mindless clients. Well I for one am pleased not to be contributing to the sweatshop, carbon footprinting, and reckless mining that drives the need to produce a product that one might say keeps the user out of touch with reality.
"Nothing is sadder than seeing the look on a little kid's face when you don't have the toy they want"
Isclearly how Apple see their fanboi customers and their own products.
"...who reeks of cigarette smoke". Or a free-marketeer. Or perhaps everyone who doesn't live the approved lifestyle of Apple HQ.
Each and every day I am getting more and more convinced that Apple are a bunched of crazed nutters belonging to a whacky sect. who suck in their disciples in a manner somewhat reminiscent of the not so Reverend Moon.
I agree. Apple seem to be scientologistesuqe.
Just a reminder to all: If your seen with iphone/ipad, dont be under any disillusionment, EVERY one else thinks your feeble of mind. Hype up a fish finger enough and sell them to you with weird terms/conditions and a jacked up price. Is there nothing you people will not follow?
Oh, and "Nothing is sadder than seeing the look on a little kid's face when you don't have the toy they want". WHO ARE YOU KIDDING, ITS GREAT watching their little faces when you tell them they're getting NOTHING.
Saturday was the first and last time I enter and Apple store, asked an employee for a dock adapter for an iphone 3gs and he had to ask to different people and search the internet before he knew what it was then had to check with another member of staff to see if they had any.....
20-25 mins to find out they didn't have them so he looked on the web again to see where to get one I said don't worry I can use bing.com to find that.
So I'm really not surprised by this story at all
He was acting as anUNAUTHORISED RESELLER, in every legal sense of the word. That, interestingly enough, is not permitted by nearly anyone that has their own retail channel.
So, he does something he must know is illegal, or he should if he had half a brain or had gotten an education at something other than playing Call of Duty, Apple catches him, and it's POOR PITYFUL HIM? No, he's a wanker.
Kudos to the Apple store manager, as said above.
And you know why that's good? That's to prevent a speculative market from driving up the price of EVERYTHING that is desirable or wanted badly. That's why Ticketmaster tries to control the purchase of tickets by scalpers, so that you and I can buy them for less than £500 a piece for bad seats. That is why Apple is trying to control the re-selling of iPads, so the price doesn't go to $1000 a piece when they are all bought up by e-scalpers (known as unauthorised resellers, above). How much he CLAIMS he was marking it up isn't the issue - Apple has no way to monitor that, he could sell two at near cost, and sell 20 more for double. The way Apple monitors that is by setting up AUTHORISED resellers of Apple equipment, who they can monitor. If he wanted to become an Apple authorised reseller, well then I'm sure there are a pile of forms he can start filling out...until then, he's a loser.
...I am not allowed to buy the iPad as gifts for my 10 nieces and nephews and nor can I purchase them as incentive gifts for my employees. There's a huge difference between scalping tickets and scalping iPads. EG a concert ticket has both a supply and time limit for its validity. As the finite number of tickets runs out and the event time draws nearer, the price of the ticket rises. The iPad on the other hand does not suffer from such limitations since Apple can choose to keep right on churning them out for as long as it wants. Thus it would be impossible to "corner the market" on iPads. No-one would pay a 100% to 200% premium on an iPad if they knew that a new batch were to be released shortly. Your analogy sucks.
Paris, 'cause she also sucks.
Most Apple (and other high-end) products these days are limited in supply due to component sourcing limitations - there are only so many screens being made that fit their specs (and usually single sourced because they are the latest and greatest, or close to it). Batteries too are usually hard to buy at the proper spec, as are memory chips at times. They can press all the plastic and aluminum CASINGS they want - but they can't fill them.
Over 6-12 months these supply issues loosen, as the providers ramp up quality and get more good units through the supply pipeline, and second source manufacturers begin to meet the need. But in the first go, advanced components, like concert tickets, are a limited supply item with a huge demand...and the demand curve versus time runs OPPOSITE for a tech product - it's most valuable close to time of release ("First on the block!"), and then ramps down, whereas a concert ticket ramps up towards the concert....
Paris, 'cause your about as bright...
'to prevent a speculative market from driving up the price of EVERYTHING that is desirable or wanted badly'
You're missing the point entirely. The whole point IS to drive up the price. If it were easy for people to buy them and resell them in other regions then simple economics would push the price of import i-pads down to the US Price + shipping + a small profit. This is designed to keep the price of grey import units unrealistically high, without actually stopping them all together.
Now, some people might say 'What's the problem? Apple will still make the same number of sales and the units are being bought at full retail price'. This misses the point entirely.
Anyone that thinks the scarcity of Apple products at launch is down to 'unexpected demand' is a complete idiot. The supply is very carefully controlled as a way to drive demand. Once they have milked the hysteria of the Apple faithful states-side they will move on to Europe - And likely charge comparatively more for the product than they did in the US (as is the habit).
People are not as likely to want to 'drink the kool-aid' if they have already been able to buy an import one for several months at a reasonable price. It will have lost it's glamour. They might even look at the product specification before buying it or consider why they might need it and that would be a disaster.
This policy will limit the number of grey import units that become available and as a result will drive their price up to something crazy, thus underlining again 'how amazing the product must be if people are willing to pay that' while leaving 99% of the sheeple herd ready for shearing.
"Anyone that thinks the scarcity of Apple products at launch is down to 'unexpected demand' is a complete idiot. The supply is very carefully controlled as a way to drive demand. Once they have milked the hysteria of the Apple faithful states-side they will move on to Europe - And likely charge comparatively more for the product than they did in the US (as is the habit)."
As I have stated elsewhere, the demand for Apple products exceeds supply...well, because the supply is limited by component availability. That's not just Apple's problem, but they have had it repeatedly, due to their use of newer technology than most competitors, and in larger volumes.
And frankly, as someone who has moved to the UK from the US, I think that Apple has one of the lower markups on EU pricing compared to the US. Take a look at HP's, Sony's, and others - mostly much higher mark-ups on non-US goods than Apple. And HP does even nastier things, such as selling their Envy laptops with a 1080 line screen in the US, but marking it up 80% and then selling it with an 800 line screen in the UK...
Aren't high price the reason why the grey market exists? An Ipad costs $X in the US, but the exact same item costs $XX in Australia, Europe etc; Kind of galling when stuff made in China is shipped across the same damned ocean, but in another direction, roughly the same distance, but still costs nearly double.
> he does something he must know is illegal
The fact that apple doesn't like it doesn't make it illegal. You buy something, you can do what the hell you like with it - use it, trash it, sell it.
> That's why Ticketmaster tries to control the purchase of tickets by scalpers, so that you and I can buy them for less than £500 a piece for bad seats.
So Ticketmaster charges extortionate fees to protect me from extortion? How altruistic of them.
Pull the other one, mate, it's got bells on.
Noooo, Ticket Master want to control tickets period... so THEY can charge 10% handling fee, 15% convenience fee, 15% just the f*** because fee, 8% postage fee, 9% will call fee, 7% print 'em yourself fee, etc...
Often there is more than 30% additional fees for tickets from TM. Outrageous.
Authorized sellers get special pricing. If I want to buy something at one price and I can sell it for more, that is called a free market. Supply and demand
Drives me crazy when companies bitch and moan because they can't rip you off themselves by imposing region coding and authorized distributors etc... Then they simply pay our politicians off and get it passed into law.
Disgusting.
That whole interchange with the Apple store employees reminded me of the Star Trek episode "I, Mudd". For those not familiar with the episode, the Enterprise crew had been imprisoned on a planet controlled by a race of androids. If the androids were asked a question to which they chose not to respond, they would reply "I am sorry. I am not programmed to respond in that area."
And the Enterprise crew built multiples of Mudd's nagging fishwife and left him to deal with it. Poetic justice akin to the "final solution" in "The Trouble With Tribbles".
Steve Jobs is a miserable man. You can see it in his private face and you can witness it in his methods. He has built the world in which he lives and he has to deal with it.
Planned obsolescence for the entire iPad concept, that is.
I mean, by saying there is a lifetime limit on units purchased, Apple is saying that the entire iPad concept has no legs, from a longevity perspective. It's a fad, at best, and even the fanbois will soon realize this reality. I'm guessing three, maybe four "new" models before it fades into obscurity. Pardon me while I dust off my Lisa and NeXT cube.
"(Less gorgeous: The whimper for a buck they offered--and for that price, couldn't they have more readily offered customers little perks like color video?)"
Eh? In 1990ish, a Motorola 68040 @ 33Mhz with 64 Megs of RAM was quite the enviable platform. Toss in a NeXTdimension video card for a second, color display, and you really had something ... The old girl still works, and is mostly used to keep an eye on more modern security systems here at the ranch. She's airgapped, so faggedaboudit.
Her name is "Wench", because I bought her when I lived on a boat in the Port of Redwood City, under "Charlie Brown's" restaurant, just across the water from where NeXT's home offices were. Some of us were Pirates before FSM was understood and TLAPD existed. ARRRRR!!! ;-)
Suddenly I feel I will need more than one, twenty perhaps, in my life time. There must be a black market to save my soul, I hope.
Just kidding, I am happy with zero.
Jobs has not got it yet, but he is getting closer.
Eventually he will see the light, and then caring parents will have to apply in advance on behalf of their unborn children.
I don't know if it's gray-market control or not. If so it could be understandable. What is truly glaring is that Apple is a corporation who's product is a COMMUNICATION technology product and Apple does such a POOR job of just that...COMMUNICATION...to it's employees and the customer both at times.
Gads, Mr Jobs your a marketing genius...so how about fixing this. Sheesh.... 9_9;;
Apple is (allegedly) running a retail operation whose purpose is to sell things; supposedly they carry stock for the purpose of selling it. My server farms has never been presented to the public as being for sale, so anybody wanting to buy it has an unrealistic expectation.
Just because a store has items for sale does NOT mean they HAVE TO sell it to you. The contract of sale only takes place once the AGREEMENT of both parties has been reached - i.e. the purchaser agrees to buy the goods and the seller agrees to sell the goods at an agreed price and including any other conditions attached to the contract (by either party) have likewise been agreed by both parties.
If you are in a retail business you can't refuse a sale and the exact displayed price in cash.
You can't in most countries in the world.
Something that is for sale MUST have a price displayed and CAN'T be denied sale at least against cash.
You can't offer a product at your whims and likes or dislike of the customers.
And that's good.
"f you are in a retail business you can't refuse a sale and the exact displayed price in cash.
You can't in most countries in the world.
Something that is for sale MUST have a price displayed and CAN'T be denied sale at least against cash.
You can't offer a product at your whims and likes or dislike of the customers.
And that's good."
In the UK, you can do precisely just that. A shopkeeper, retailer, supermarket, etc has no legal requirement to sell anything to anyone. They can simply refuse to sell anyone anything, without giving a reason. The price is an "invitation to treat", in other words, you do have the right to offer a different sum to the marked price.
There is no more obligation for the seller to sell than there is for the customer to buy.
whatever your thoughts on reselling are Apple have been able to get more hype and free publicity out of this story. fanboi's will still spooge anti apples wile still be anti this story changes nothing but gives apple lots more free advertising.
dont like the way apple are being ? dont buy there products, no doubt the people this guy was buying for will be up in arms and "shocked and appalled" by the way apple are being etc but i bet they will still be first in line on UK/EU release ready to hand over the $/£/buttons
Jobs is sounding more and more like the 'church of scientology' every day, he believes he is some kind of diety and you have pay a fortune to be in 'the know', to be part of the group, with fanbois ready to jump to his defence online and elsewhere at a moments notice, that forego all sensical reason and law to buy what is just a light weight tablet PC or a very expensive phone with features found elsewhere. As well as the belief he is above 'common trade laws' with regards the sale of goods act. A person buys it and then sells it on is legal.
God bless America for supporting this nutter. Without you we wouldn't have Jobsian stupidity (Or indeed the church of scientology.)
All that aside.
Somebody can have my quota for free, no seriously you can have my 10 any time you want. No thanks needed. I will even throw in my iphone, iphone 3g and iphone 3gs quotas as well, or perhaps the 4g when it gets released. I don't want any of them, so again, no thanks needed.
Anon because the church of scientolgy were mentioned.
...but after seeing the hoops I have to jump through to make it work the way I like it best, and after seeing the ONLY product which Jobs allows it to properly synchronise with, and after realising that the only way to fill it with music is NOT drag and drop, it's synchronising....
He can go fuck his i<insert natty name here>. I want nothing more to do with iPads, iPhones, iPods, iMacs... you name it. Steve Jobs gets more headscrewed with each and every day and I will not buy another one of his Apple branded products. My "Upgrade" comes up on the 20th May - and I will be getting myself a Desire (anti-google privacy people PLEASE forgive me). Bring on the dragging and MP3 dropping. Bring on the wealth of calendar and email synchronisation options. Bring on the storage of documents and Other Files on my phone. Bring on the upgrading of my device with more memory when I feel like it. Bring on customising the display to my own desires. Bring on the choosing of literally billions of ringtones/SMS tones by simply selecting a sound file from the memory card. Bring on being able to buy as many or as few as I choose.
Apple (forgive the overdramatisation) are DEAD to me.
hate the cult of fruit more with every passing day they do sort of have a point here, he was actually exporting them to overseas customers without permission (for profit or not is not relevant).
I really want to be on the customers side, but really I can't this time around.
I'm off for a cup of tea and a lie down after that horrific experience, please do not make me side with Apple ever again >.< :D
The Limp and Fruity One had best hope the transplant bank is a bit more humane than he and doesn't adopt his policies. Chances are in about five years old L&F is going to need a part upgrade. I'd like to be a fly on the wall during that conversation. What goes around comes around and, indeed, "Time Wounds All Heels".
So if you're a business owner with 9 employees who you want to outfit with iPad's you can only buy ten? And if you hire 8 new people, you cannot buy any more? Way to go STEVE!!! WE WON'T BE BUYING ANY OF YOUR iPAD'S then. We'll wait for anyone and everyone else to come up with a tablet PC that runs anything yours won't and does not impose any purchase limit. YOU JUST SHOT YOURSELF IN THE FOOT AND GUARANTEED FAILURE OF YOUR i Pad, MATE!!!
Well one of them:
- is a nut job cult, veiled as a new science religion
- Use PR stunts to bring false information to the public.
- Uses legal threats as a way to quell discent
- uses elitism to spurn non-members and force a feeling of belonging to something
- uses tricks, half truths and brute force to try to get every last penny out of their members
- Leverages any foothold it has to stop other groups from getting into the same area.
The other one does all those same things but was founded by a jerk who stated publicly that he intended to swindle people by inventing a religion. And those nuts are rumored to have actually killed people and commited other serious felonies in the name of their nut group.
So to my knowledge the difference is Apple fans aren't quite as stupid as the Scatologists (Scientologist), since Jobs did not come out in the pubic and say he was going to create half-assed restricted technology and charge out the ass for it. (Mind I'm not saying this wasn't his plan all along, he just didn't state it publicly to my knowledge.)
And PLEASE PLEASE el REG and dear readers lets never refer to them as "Scientologists" again:
Scientology has NOTHING to do with SCIENCE. They are however VERY FULL OF SHIT. So there you go, when some says Scatology or a Scatologist - you know just what nut jobs they are talking about.
It is seriously disheartening to know that some people are so unbelievably stupid to believe in such a baseless and unsupported pile of garbage, that is truly without any redeeming merit of any kind.
Apple constantly try and control their stuff. Hopefully this lifetime ban is enough to put everyone off wanting an iPad (although I know it wont be).
I have never owned an iPhone/iPad/iPod and wouldn't want to. I can't see what the point is in them.
There are plenty of other Third party products already available that are better than Apple's stuff, it's just Apple monopolises certain things that run on it (like the music format).
And what a lot of people don't seem to notice is most of what Apple do is a copy off other companies failed products, and just by sticking the Apple logo on it and making it work with iTunes they can sell it.
E.g. The iPhone - years ago I had the Motorola A1000, I could do nearly all the same stuff on the A1000 that the iPhone could do (apart from the accelerometer and use iTunes) and this came out 5 years before the iPhone.
The iPod - there was Mp3 players years before iPods, the only difference was you could put iTunes onto the iPod which you couldn't put on Mp3 players.
Of course this restriction soon changed once Amazon started offering their songs on Mp3, funny enough a few weeks later Apple copied Amazon and started offering iTunes on MP3 (wasn't that convenient?).
At one point I used to like the Apple Mac's as they were good machines, but now Apple is going more and more like Microsoft and Sony every day. Not caring about their customers, just concentrating on gaining control on everything and bullying people into submission.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
