 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General General TopicsGSMBluetoothProviders AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizonManufacturers EricssonNokiaMotorolaCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics PocketPCPalmMore Topics ... |
Cellular Phone Forum / Manufacturers / Nokia / April 20056630 case without camera opening?
Anyone making a 6630 case that doesn't have an opening on the back for the camera? I'd like to have a way to just carry the thing into places that have asine poliicies about cameras. I'm sick and f.cking tired of security droids dictating what I can or can't take with me. If they don't want me taking pictures that's fine but demanding to confiscate it is ridiculous. I'm not supposed to scribble on the walls but they don't take away my pen. Anyway, does such a thing exist? > Anyone making a 6630 case that doesn't have an opening on the back > for the camera? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Anyway, does such a thing exist? You want to take a camera-equipped phone into places that don't allow them..? If it is the policy of the site into which you are going, then hard luck, don't take the thing in or risk the consequences if you get found out. Ivor > You want to take a camera-equipped phone into places that don't allow > them..? If it is the policy of the site into which you are going, then > hard luck, don't take the thing in or risk the consequences if you get > found out. Oh please, spare me the whole "gotta have permission" arguments. I'm most certainly not talking about taking any pictures in places that request (nay, demand) otherwise. That's of course a tremendously bad idea. What I'm talking about is not having to hand my damned phone over to some lazy-a.s security guard to put it in a completely unsecured location and risk it's theft, not to mention the inconvenience of not being able to USE the phone. Putting a dummy cover on the back of it would avoid the whole hassle. > Why don't you just turn of the phone & put in your pocket as I do when > entering such sights (they normally have a ban on mobiles as well as cameras > anyway) While this works in some cases it's more of a hassle. That and the whole extra effort of having to remember to sneak it past the nitwits at the gate. None of the sites that I'm talking about prevent use of mobiles. It's the camera portion they're all freaked out about. Putting a blank cover on it would just end the hassle. I don't make anywhere near as much use of the camera function as I do the other features of the phone. It'd be a lot easier to live with inconveniencing myself on the rare occasions I need to use the camera by swapping it's rear cover than to have to go without it for the entire time (sometimes several hours) I'm stuck in one of these places. >> You want to take a camera-equipped phone into places that don't >> allow them..? If it is the policy of the site into which you are [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Putting a dummy cover on the back of it would avoid the whole > hassle. Not if they don't allow phones with cameras. Covering it doesn't mean it ceases to exist. I repeat if you want to enter a site where camera phones are banned don't take it in. I have no interest in your arguments why you consider it wrong. The site owners have the right to impose the rule; don't like it..? Don't go in. Simple. End of argument. [rest of whining drivel deleted] Ivor > Not if they don't allow phones with cameras. Covering it doesn't mean it > ceases to exist. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > [rest of whining drivel deleted] Now all we have to do is delete you and your arrogance. I asked a simple question. Instead of actually answering you preach against it. Get lost. People like you are the ones that let people make stupid rules like these. Blindly toeing the line and railing against anyone that disagrees. You're worse that the problem, you keep it alive. >> Not if they don't allow phones with cameras. Covering it doesn't >> mean it ceases to exist. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > I asked a simple question. Instead of actually answering you > preach against it. Get lost. No thankyou, I like it where I am, I have no desire to get lost. > People like you are the ones that let people make stupid rules like > these. Blindly toeing the line and railing against anyone that > disagrees. You're worse that the problem, you keep it alive. Very probably. But I tell you what, you wouldn't get one foot through the door at any site I had anything to do with, phone or no phone. You may think rules such as these are stupid but they are usually there for a very good reason. The fact that you don't like or understand the reason is irrelevant. Ivor > > People like you are the ones that let people make stupid rules like > > these. Blindly toeing the line and railing against anyone that [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > good reason. The fact that you don't like or understand the reason is > irrelevant. Once again all you can offer is to fall back on "because" as your excuse. Being as I'm here in DC and well aquainted with the law and clearance issues I'm more than familiar with the situation. Having my phone confiscated because of it's ability to take pictures to go into an office building (not a courthouse) is just ludicrous. It's a matter of possession without intent. That I possess a device /capable/ of doing something doesn't mean I'm going to do it. But hey, at least you've proved you're a narrow-minded idiot that can't actually help answer questions people ask. [snip] > Being as I'm here in DC and well aquainted with the law and > clearance issues I'm more than familiar with the situation. Having > my phone confiscated because of it's ability to take pictures to go > into an office building (not a courthouse) is just ludicrous. It's > a matter of possession without intent. That I possess a device > /capable/ of doing something doesn't mean I'm going to do it. Again, totally and completely irrelevant. The *site owner* sets the rules as to what is and is not permissible on *their property* - if you don't like it, take it up with them, not me. > But hey, at least you've proved you're a narrow-minded idiot that > can't actually help answer questions people ask. I have answered it. You just don't comprehend the answer. Ivor > I have answered it. You just don't comprehend the answer. No, you've just been an arrogant a.s that only wants to tell other people what to do. >> I have answered it. You just don't comprehend the answer. > > No, you've just been an arrogant a.s that only wants to tell other > people what to do. *I* am not the one telling you what to do, the site owner is..! As I said, take it up with them..! By the way, how do you define me as a cross between a horse and a donkey..? You have no idea what I look like..! Ivor >> You want to take a camera-equipped phone into places that don't allow >> them..? If it is the policy of the site into which you are going, [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > entire time (sometimes several hours) I'm stuck in one of these > places. Well then buy a leather case for your phone, one without a hole for your camera. They are out there... "kraftee" <kraftee@spamoff&die> wrote in message news:426d3b26$0$42323$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp- > Well then buy a leather case for your phone, one without a hole for your > camera. They are out there... Good point, thanks for the useful suggestion. > Anyone making a 6630 case that doesn't have an opening on the back > for the camera? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Anyway, does such a thing exist? Why don't you just turn of the phone & put in your pocket as I do when entering such sights (they normally have a ban on mobiles as well as cameras anyway) "wkearney99" <wkearney99@hotmail.com> ... > Anyone making a 6630 case that doesn't have an opening on the back for the > camera? We're talking about the back side of the cover, you should have noticed that the rubber part is not glued or fixed, if you rotate it clockwise a bit, it goes away. Remove it and cover the now flat hole with a piece of duct tape (if your cover is already grey the solution could be even aestetic :-) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.