Cameras may be one of those areas where you need a really experienced sales force. I know several shutterbugs who *only* shop at small, local stores because of the enthusiast factor.

The truth is I am an iPhone guy, I have a barcode app and the fact this is where technology is leading . Maybe sad but true but retail stores need to roll with punches.

Just added to the thoughts of a retail sales guy, this was all typed on my iPhone.

I can see that or something similar as the business card of the future or present for geeks like us

I really don't know the intricacies of the law though. Like I said, a store blocking my cell signal would cause me to shop somewhere else though.

I'd find it hard to believe that you could be held responsible for passively blocking cell phone signals. I don't get very good coverage in my house due to the trees and tin roof. I normally have to go outside to talk. No one would expect me to loose my roof just in case there is an emergency.

My understanding of the laws surrounding jamming of cell phone signals is they have nothing to do with the fact you are preventing someone from making a call, it's the fact that you are broadcasting unauthorised radio transmissions. You'd have to get a permit for it.

Perhaps the government would allow it in certain circumstances such as research projects and possibly even to prevent cell phone communication from your premises. If the shopping center had a permit to broadcast locally on frequencies required to jam cell phones they could do so without breaching any other laws.

http://theappslab.com/2008/09/29/why-stickers-a...

I don't know the law, but I think in the US that preventing people from dialing 911 on cell phones feels like it should be illegal. Aside from that one pretty key point, I agree that a business could *legally* block cell signals. It's just bad customer service, and I, for one, would vote with my feet.

And of course, as you suggest, there are ways around even this method. The desire to save money finds a way, geeky or otherwise.

There is nothing illegal about covering the store in electromagnetic shielding (I don't think that's considered 'jamming', but it's much cheaper and more effective. It's your property, you can do what you like. The only illegal thing is if you tried to do it by emitting radio interference. Which is not only illegal, it's dumb.

If they did that then you would just get people with offline databases on their hand sets.

Bargains rule, but like David, I am completely willing to pay more in certain cases, e.g. for local and natural food products, when service is awesome, to keep a local Mom and Pop store in business.

I tried to stay measured on this, so it wouldn't seem like I'm an Apple fanboi screaming foul about my precious iPhone.

You raise some interesting points but I don't think anything can be done to stop consumers searching for the best deal. The technologies may change but bargain hunting is a human survival skill

By choice, I don't shop at Walmart or Sam's Club, but if Costco built an iPhone app, I'd be on that in a hurry.

That rumor about the Walmart discount iPhone has legs, but I've heard one if not both attributes of the story are wrong. I think definitely the $99 part.

These metrics would help understand how much of a deal this really is.

Beyond that, good service is highly valuable, yet surprisingly lacking. I wonder if the chase for the highest margins possible has sucked the life out of customer service by way of the lowest possible wages.

I also discussed the future of m-commerce a bit. http://blogs.oracle.com/retail/2008/11/does_mob.... I think retailers see a lot of potential from smartphones but are still searching for the killer app.

Also note that Walmart will be selling $99 iPhones by the end of the month. http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=wal-mart-to.... That could significantly increase the market for retailer apps.