> But it is a requirement of marketing to do so, as long as your
> competitors are doing it--or, at least, claiming to do it, it doesn't
> really matter which. So, maybe Bret is right; if there were a strict
> and comprehensive regulatory ban on claiming anything is "unlimited,"
> ever, that might go some way toward solving that problem.
>
I am all for people advertising unlimited if it really is unlimited. I
just dont think they should say that if its not. Nor do I think people
should say "sign up today and get a $1,000,00 check" and then in the
TOS say that the check will be voided before being mailed.
> Nobody is five-9s[2], nobody's SLA is worth a crap, and nobody's "more
> bars in more places" or "always on" has any empirical validity from an
> engineering perspective.
>
you do realize that the bars metric is rigged right? It is not a true
signal strength measure like an S-meter would be. And the firmware on
some model phones has been shown to be intentionally high when it should
not be specifically so they can claim that :) So that one at least they
do have, or probably do have, since its a rigged scale.
There were some articles about this specifically relating to AT&T phones
and their more bars claim.
Unless you were referring to bop.gov, they have more bars in more places
too :)
--
Trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com Bret McDanel
pgp key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x8AE5C721
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
AstriCon 2009 - October 13 - 15 Phoenix, Arizona
Register Now: http://www.astricon.net
asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment