Nobody is perfect -- although sometimes it seems as if certain people come close. Take Steve Jobs. He has created two billion-dollar companies (Apple and Pixar), made entire product categories popular (iPods, podcasting), and thrilled millions of people along the way.

That's why it surprised so many Apple enthusiasts when word got out that some of Apple's iPhones turned into iBricks (nonworking iPhones) when users attempted to update their software. The iBrick mode happened to iPhones that had been set up by their users to run on networks other than AT&T (aka Cingular) or that had third-party software installed -- both situations that void Apple's iPhone warranty.

The cry from users was swift and painful. They each spent hundreds of dollars for the coolest phone on the market; and suddenly the phones became nonfunctional, thereby rendering their investments worthless. All because they decided to go through a software update, just like they regularly do on their computers. They expect this type of thing from Microsoft but not from Apple.

Yet Apple's actions were perfectly legal and perfectly legitimate. The company has every right to place warranty limits on their products and to ensure that the products are not used in ways that they are not intended.

The cell phone market typically awards users who don't switch carriers by giving them breaks on cell phone prices or special incentives. In this case, Apple had an exclusive arrangement with AT&T in which the iPhone would work on only the AT&T network -- and users who modified their phones to work on other networks were circumventing a business agreement in place between the two companies. Why shouldn't Apple protect it?

It is not only Apple's right to protect its relationship with AT&T, but we also can argue that it is Apple's responsibility. With this agreement, Apple changed the way the cellular game is played by having the customer activate his phone directly with the product manufacturer instead of with the service provider -- a situation that was risky to AT&T. So doesn't Apple have a responsibility to ensure that the product is used as intended?

Many consumers claim that companies should be held responsible for problems encountered with a product, even when used incorrectly. Yet in this case, they complain about a company that does something about it and doesn't let consumers go into incorrect usage mode.

Apple has had its share of black eyes in recent years -- from the design of the batteries in the iPod to this new iPhone business decision. But the company has stepped up when needed. And customers should appreciate the way Steve Jobs' team makes the effort to give superior products and improve them when possible.

The battery situation is a good example. The company designs the iPod with batteries that the user cannot replace himself. Once a battery loses its charge, the whole iPod needs to be sent out for replacement -- and if sent to Apple, the music is often lost. Users appropriately came down hard on Apple for this.

The company didn't change the battery design, but at least it started warning people about it. If you go to the iPod Web site, there are battery tests for various models, information about the battery technology and even a guide on how to increase battery life.

For some that's not enough, but millions of people keep buying new iPods. And Apple is still the indisputable market leader in portable music devices.

So maybe we don't need perfection. Maybe all we need is a product that does what we expect -- that we can buy from a company that doesn't surprise us negatively.