05-27-10 09:31 AM
27 12
tools
  1. niderbip's Avatar
    Pete 6: thank you (if people feel it's really 'dorky' to use a holster, i'm sure they'd move on to another company that doesn't automatically supply one with every Bold they make).

    I am going to write a snail mail letter to RIM and ask that they at least give me back the option, as it was quick, easy and obvious that your device was dead secure, without having to go through a password protect exercise.

    this "new feature" is just nuts, and certainly a step backwards (if it's all a "let's save power" deal, at least give me back the option.....there are plenty of other ways to save power).

    doubtful if i get a reply, but i will at least go straight to the horse's mouth. i've always been one of those guys who found password protecting the bathroom stall (with the old pay-to-enter coin boxes on the door) was inconvenient, especially when all you really wanted to do is simply enter, complete your business and leave.
    05-27-10 07:15 AM
  2. MissGerman's Avatar
    The point was (yes, i was aware of this new "feature") I spoke directly with RIM; they could not see why this is even an issue. They took away (for no apparent reason) the option i was previously given in v.330 to let me decide for myself if i:

    wanted to actually see that the phone was indeed locked, and

    wanted to have my device to REMAIN LOCKED even when i removed from holster

    RIM didn't care; it ain't coming back. Tmobile is of course unaware of any of this (and offered as a 'solution' to send me a new device with the exact same OS).

    As far as i can tell, there was zero reason to take away the choice found in v.330.

    Thank you for the links, but as i read the detail on "how to lock pass/no pass", i just thought "wouldn't the locking ways of v.330 just been a whole **** of a lot easier?"

    +1!!!! Ugh its very annoying now.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    05-27-10 09:31 AM
27 12
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD