Apple Removes '2 Year Contract Required' Note on Ads

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

When Apple posted (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/06/03/atandt-television-ad-says-iphone-on-june-29th/) the first of the iPhone ads on Sunday night, a small blurb was included at the end of each ad indicating that a 2 year contract is required for service.
Use requires 2 year activation plan
When Apple added the latest iPhone ad to their website (http://www.macrumors.com/c.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.apple.com%2Fiphone%2Fads%2F&t=1181187918), they replaced all the ads with new ones that have removed that line altogether.

Clearly, Apple made a conscious decision to remove the line from all the advertisements, but the quesiton is why? Will there be pre-paid options, or other flexible ways to sign up for an iPhone?

[iKwick7]

Very, very interesting- let the speculation begin!

[BigPrince]

this is absolutely amazing.

[Cindynjgirl79]

i would rather have the 2 year contract, less money than pre-paid. maybe?

[mrkramer]

Interesting, does this mean that you could buy it without a contract and use it on another network?

[sososowhat]

There's got to be a way for those of us already under contract with AT&T to upgrade to an iPhone. It doesn't make sense to me that there wouldn't be a way to just buy one.

[bentmywookie]

That's great news - I know it doesn't explicitly mean anything, but the 2-year contract required was probably the only thing detracting me from picking one up. (Not sure why though since for that much money I doubt I'd want to go to another carrier).

[Harpo]

Perhaps it just wasn't necessary to say?

[kainjow]

Perhaps it just wasn't necessary to say?

That's my thought. I wouldn't read too much into it.

[twoodcc]

this has to be good news. hopefully some light will be revealed next monday!

[Mgkwho]

Hmm...it was there for a reason originally...

-=|Mgkwho

[ISMPlus]

wooooooooooh! Very interesting... I so hope they won't tie us down with 2-year thing...!

[jicon]

this is absolutely amazing.

How exactly?

Are they legally required to give a contract requirement if they aren't even advertising a price?

[mi5moav]

No, one is sure yet...the iphone my friend saw last week had some minor changes to it from what he saw at macworld, especially with the volume rocker button and even the case itself was a little more angular then he remembers.

[DTphonehome]

There's got to be a way for those of us already under contract with AT&T to upgrade to an iPhone. It doesn't make sense to me that there wouldn't be a way to just buy one.

I'm pretty sure I read that existing customers can just buy one. And I don't think it extends your contract by two years, either.

[yzp]

they will get larger buyers part......

yah!!

Im already under rogers contract in canada! so, i might get unknown gift from rogers/apple? whats your thought?

any benefit for people already under contracts??

[DTphonehome]

Interesting, does this mean that you could buy it without a contract and use it on another network?

Nah, it's totally locked to AT&T.

[Peace]

Wonder if this and this topic (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=311190) are related.

[BigPrince]

How exactly?

Are they legally required to give a contract requirement if they aren't even advertising a price?

Just the fact they changed it gives me happiness.

[kcroy]

Innovative company, product, advertisement, and calling plan!

I've got to quit reading these threads...it's like teasing a kitten with yarn!:o

[ipearx]

Maybe it's for international reasons, as not only the US viewing those ads, and maybe contracts will be different internationally.

I really hope the SIM card is easily changeable...

http://bla.st/iphone/

[loudestnoise]

Isn't the reason for the removal obvious? SJ and his marketing team like to play games with potential buyers. This of course adds to the joy and confusion surrounding the release of the iPhone. I for one, think the idea of pre-paid use of the iPhone & AT&T is highly unlikely, but perhaps this is because I worked at Best Buy in the wireless department and know how much money carriers make from securing those beautiful 2-year agreements. Either way, I'm getting one, even if it was a 4 year contract. Ha, just kidding, that'd be totally not cool.

[digitalbiker]

Nah, it's totally locked to AT&T.

Yeah, Apple has already given a 5 year exclusive to AT&T. If you want to use another carrier forget it!

It probably means nothing. Maybe AT&T and Apple just thought it would be better for interested customers to find out details online with Apple or in an AT&T / Cingular store.

[gr8tfly]

My several phone upgrades with Cingular has always been the same: Once you qualify for an upgrade (1 or 18mo into the 2 yr. contract, I forget), you get the same price as a new customer. It's annoying, since you'd think a loyal customer would get more, but it hasn't worked that way.

I do qualify for an upgrade, but I'm expecting to pay the advertised price, based on signing up for another 2 years. Same as new customer signing up.

I sure hope I'm wrong and there is some meaning in Apple dropping the blurb from the ads, but I'm not holding my breath (for long, anyway ;) )

[tkidBOSTON]

I dont think this necessarily means that the requirement still isnt in place, they just dont want to advertise it. I dont think they have to disclose the information in the commercials since they dont make any promises that the contract would impact and given apple's history of wanting to tell as little as possible in advance of product releases, it might just be in the same vein.

But im just thinking aloud.

[Flyonblue]

Did anyone see that the article featured in the add was published on October 3rd, 2006?
http://travel2.nytimes.com/2006/10/03/business/03road.html

Wow, this ad agency had a very early start. Any comments?

[boxandrew]

I'm pretty sure I read that existing customers can just buy one. And I don't think it extends your contract by two years, either.

I wish this were true, but does it really make sense to lose the advantage of making the purchaser sign up to a two year contract?

[pyn]

There's got to be a way for those of us already under contract with AT&T to upgrade to an iPhone. It doesn't make sense to me that there wouldn't be a way to just buy one.

You can upgrade to any phone at any time... you just have to pay the full $$, but if you want the subsidy you just have to extend your contract 2 years [but supposedly, at&t isn't subsidizing the iphone]

[Dimwhit]

Personally, the 2 year contract requirement doesn't make much sense. The iPhone can only be used on AT&T, right? So why force a contract when you can't go anywhere else, anyway? The only reason is if AT&T (or Apple) has no faith that the quality of the iPhone will keep the customers. That doesn't seem to be the case.

Now I'm sure people will crack the phone to use on other carriers, but the number of people doing that will probably be insignificant (totally guessing on that, btw).

So, basically, it wouldn't surprise me to see no contract requirement. It's redundant, and removing it would only attract even more people.

[Eric1285]

I kind of read this as a marketing ploy to get more people to show up at the store on launch day. They might have taken it off because some people are getting confused and thinking that it means they have to be a new AT&T customer. Either way, I don't think you'll be able to get one without signing some sort of 2 year deal with AT&T.

Also, there's no way they'll sell unlocked iPhones or tell you how to unlock them. There's a reason why Apple signed an exclusive deal with AT&T.

[boxandrew]

Personally, the 2 year contract requirement doesn't make much sense. The iPhone can only be used on AT&T, right? So why force a contract when you can't go anywhere else, anyway? The only reason is if AT&T (or Apple) has no faith that the quality of the iPhone will keep the customers. That doesn't seem to be the case.

Now I'm sure people will crack the phone to use on other carriers, but the number of people doing that will probably be insignificant (totally guessing on that, btw).

So, basically, it wouldn't surprise me to see no contract requirement. It's redundant, and removing it would only attract even more people.

Good point. Perhaps I'm just being optimistic, but you could be right. Having said that, why put the line about a contract on the advert in the first place. Do you think it was some kind of mis-communication at the ad company?

[mcoyne]

I think they also changed the names of the people being called. Didn't they all say John Appleseed when they were first posted. Now there are a variety of names.

[kcroy]

Personally, the 2 year contract requirement doesn't make much sense. The iPhone can only be used on AT&T, right? So why force a contract when you can't go anywhere else, anyway? The only reason is if AT&T (or Apple) has no faith that the quality of the iPhone will keep the customers. That doesn't seem to be the case.

Now I'm sure people will crack the phone to use on other carriers, but the number of people doing that will probably be insignificant (totally guessing on that, btw).

So, basically, it wouldn't surprise me to see no contract requirement. It's redundant, and removing it would only attract even more people.

Good point, and I hope it's true.... AT&T would be out some money. AT&T would want you to sign a two year contract to ensure residual income. I would be surprised if they didn't insist on this.

[ethernet76]

I kind of read this as a marketing ploy to get more people to show up at the store on launch day. They might have taken it off because some people are getting confused and thinking that it means they have to be a new AT&T customer. Either way, I don't think you'll be able to get one without signing some sort of 2 year deal with AT&T.

Also, there's no way they'll sell unlocked iPhones or tell you how to unlock them. There's a reason why Apple signed an exclusive deal with AT&T.

It really depends on other networks. I took my GSM Cingular phone to Italy. Took the SIM card out of the crappy phone and put it into my phone. Worked like normal even though it was "tied" to Cingular.

Besides two years from now I doubt today's iPhone will still be what it is now. There will be some way to unlock your phone. Cingular has previously helped subscribers unlock their phone if they were traveling internationally.

[beginner0]

There will be the choice of 2-year contract, or a 3-year contract :rolleyes:

[Modrak]

Add $150 and buy a nice sim-free phone in your favorite Apple Store...

I know, I can wish ;)

[nagromme]

Rather than get hopes up, I'll assume the lawyers simply decided it was a detail they didn't have to state in the ads, so they removed it to avoid drawing attention to that and away from the good stuff.

However, I'm thinking that if the phone is not subsidized (which I don't think we know for certain) then a contract commitment must get you SOMETHING--probably a rate discount, just like when you sign a longer contract for an ISP, cable TV, or apartment rental. That might be something AT&T needs to do in order to get the monthly cost below some level Apple wanted. I can see Apple wanting a full data plan to be unusually cheap--cheaper than with those other unsubsidized phones--since Apple wants to bring advanced Internet functionality to a wider, less hard core audience. Maybe a contract commitment is a way that can happen. And if that's all it is--a monthly reduction rather than subsidizing the hardware--then I can see it being optional. Just like with your ISP or cable TV. Commit to a shorter time if you want, but pay more per month. I wouldn't be shocked to see that as an option.

Or, since the iPhone is supposedly showing signs of far more success than AT&T originally expected, maybe Apple has been able to persuade them to ditch the contract.

[jaz419]

ive kinda been waiting for something like this...heres why.

if att were to offer the iphone on a 2 year contract, but not give any "new customer" deals on the price of the phone, and sell it at the retail price of 499 and 599 to everyone...then whats going to stop people from signing up with att, buying a phone like the samsung blackjack at the "new customer" discounted price AND buying the iphone, then just selling the blackjack on ebay to make a little money back. brand new blackjacks go for around 200$....thats a big time price relief for a lot of ppl. sooo, if you dont sign up for the 2 year contract, you cant get a steeply discounted blackjack to sell....

what do ya think?

[bretm]

I'm pretty sure I read that existing customers can just buy one. And I don't think it extends your contract by two years, either.

I'm completely sure you did not. Not from Apple, and not from AT&T.

[CaptainValor]

I actually work at a RadioShack, where we carry Cingular/AT&T phones and service. A rep from AT&T stopped by our store the other day and I asked him about the 2-year contract requirement for the iPhone. He said it will NOT require a 2-year contract at signup, and is meant to be "open and accessible to all customers, current and new, in the same manner as any other AT&T phone." That to me pretty much confirms that iPhone setup with Cingular will be quite flexible.

[bretm]

Personally, the 2 year contract requirement doesn't make much sense. The iPhone can only be used on AT&T, right? So why force a contract when you can't go anywhere else, anyway? The only reason is if AT&T (or Apple) has no faith that the quality of the iPhone will keep the customers. That doesn't seem to be the case.

Now I'm sure people will crack the phone to use on other carriers, but the number of people doing that will probably be insignificant (totally guessing on that, btw).

So, basically, it wouldn't surprise me to see no contract requirement. It's redundant, and removing it would only attract even more people.

It makes complete sense to require a 2 year contract. Even if the phone isn't subsidized by Apple, ATT has signed on to give Apple a cut of the profits. They want that contract then! End of story.

Now why anyone thinks you have to be a new customer is beyond me. The phone is not subsidized. If you want to buy a new iPhone and extend your contract 2 years, ATT is more than happy to oblige. And don't forget, they're probably already buying your current phone for you. You realize the crappy phones they give for free cost them hundreds of dollars. For many cell phone providers they don't make a dime of profit off the user until a year into their contract. That's why they charge money for data plans (which actually cost them less money than you using the actual voice communication). They need the cash.

Now, if the phone was subsidized, then they probably wouldn't let you upgrade until your current phone that is subsidized was mostly paid for. Usually about a year. But that 2 year contract they will require is normal for new customers, and for current customers it'll cover any subsidized phones they currently have and allow them to upgrade to the iPhone with a new contract renewal.

[bretm]

ive kinda been waiting for something like this...heres why.

if att were to offer the iphone on a 2 year contract, but not give any "new customer" deals on the price of the phone, and sell it at the retail price of 499 and 599 to everyone...then whats going to stop people from signing up with att, buying a phone like the samsung blackjack at the "new customer" discounted price AND buying the iphone, then just selling the blackjack on ebay to make a little money back. brand new blackjacks go for around 200$....thats a big time price relief for a lot of ppl. sooo, if you dont sign up for the 2 year contract, you cant get a steeply discounted blackjack to sell....

what do ya think?

I think that person would do better selling the iPhone on eBay. If there isn't sufficient supply of the iPhone, look for the Wii or PS3 effect to quadruple or triple prices of the phone.

Anyway, if ATT wants to, they simply won't allow what you're suggesting. But they shouldn't care. The iPhone isn't subsidized, so the 2 year contract you're signing is worth it to them to subsidize the other phone. No different than a current customer upgrading. See my above post.

[odHbo]

I'm sure Apple plays close attention to these boards and the sole fact that you are reading this means your a fan. If fanboys are disagreeing to purchase the biggest thing since the orignial iMac, there has to be something wrong.

The 2 year agreement was going to be a big hassle anyway, I called an Apple Store and asked exactly how this was going to work (where I would be signing the extended contract in the Apple store or at a near by AT&T store) and the rep had no idea. It would be beneficial for Apple and AT&T to remove that bogus agreement.

I would buy Apple Poop but not with a 2 year agreement.

[ajhill]

Well, as we get closer to the June 29th release there are really only two questions left to answer:

1. How much will the iPhone with unlimited data plan cost me per month?

2. How big of a chunk from my iPhone monthly bill goes directly into Apple's pocket?


I'm sure Apple and ATT are smart enough to price the phone/data plan $5 or $10 BELOW VERIZON in order to steal away customers from them. After all why would people leave a really fast network for a network that will be fast enough at best? There is a definite reason why Verizon turned Apple down. And it could be question #1.

Another reason Verizon probably turned down Apple, was the payment that Apple demanded be paid to them out of every month's iPhone bill. My gosh how much could it have been for Verizon to have said NO to this amazing technology? You know it is going to be a BIG NUMBER!

Wait till you see the stock move the day that this number is "Leaked" to the public. Right now it's still a secret. But how long can it remain so?

Al

[SiliconAddict]

Simple. The lawyers figure they are safe in that when they call up Crapular or show up at one of their stores they can inform them, then. So at least they have a chance at a sale vs. Someone like me seeing the ad and seeing that you NEED to sign a 2 year contract which automatically kills any potential sale. Its all marketing in the end.

[ajhill]

Hey all,

I would like to propose the following new 2 question poll:


1. How much do you think Apple/Att should charge for a basic voice and unlimited data plan?

2. How much do you think Apple's "Commission" will be for each month that an ATT client pays his iPhone bill? i.e. What's Apple's take per month? $2, $3, $5???

I am very interested in hearing your answers.

Al

[desimus]

Innovative company, product, advertisement, and calling plan!

I've got to quit reading these threads...it's like teasing a kitten with yarn!:o

I couldn't have said it better. I had basically talked myself out of buying one of these things until they release whatever the 2nd Gen will be... but the more i read these posts the more I think... "oh come on...you know you want one" ...

I've had decent service with Altell (which does well in Southwest Missouri) but my contract has been up for over a year now. When I bought the razr they asked if i wanted to renew my contract. I responded with... "no I'm going to wait and see what company the rumored iphone is on before i get a new contract, so there's a good chance I'll switch" ... the customer guy at Altell was none to pleased with my answer.

darn "Apple's Ball of Yarn" tempting me to buy one of these things before I should....

[bretm]

Just saw the ad on Mythbusters at 1:34 am on Discovery channel. The 2 year contract note is still there.

[mlrproducts]

As of 12:30am CST the ad with 2 year contract text is STILL AIRING on the discovery channel.

[gr8tfly]

Just saw the ad on Mythbusters at 1:34 am on Discovery channel. The 2 year contract note is still there.

Watching "Traveler" ABC - Saw the new ad ("not watered down") sans the note, then saw the "never been an iPod..." - it still had the contract note.

They probably just don't have the new version [of the original ads] in their system yet. I looked again on Apple's site, and all 4 ads are now "missing" the note.

[ibjoshua]

That's my thought. I wouldn't read too much into it.

Me too. I reckon it's just marketing. Bait 'n' hook. Not that Apple is going to need to stoop that low. These things are going to fly out the door.

ibjoshua

[threeonezero]

hi everyone... ive been reading the posts here for a long time and figured i should actually register. anyway, not sure if this has been mentioned in posts before, but i spoke to a cingular customer service on 611 yesterday and was told something surprising.

i had dropped and broke my motorola phone and needed to get a new one, i joked and said if only it would have lasted me a few more weeks so i could just replace it with an iphone. we ended up talking for a couple minutes and the customer service guy told me that since my contract wasnt up yet i wouldnt even have been able to get the iphone at the 499 or 599 price. he said that cingular/at&t will be selling the phone without contract for almost twice as much as the apple advertised price; but i could still purchase directly from apple without the increase.

that was the first i had heard of this, so who knows whats going to happen.
see you in line at the apple store!

[loudestnoise]

Rather than get hopes up, I'll assume the lawyers simply decided it was a detail they didn't have to state in the ads, so they removed it to avoid drawing attention to that and away from the good stuff.

However, I'm thinking that if the phone is not subsidized (which I don't think we know for certain) then a contract commitment must get you SOMETHING--probably a rate discount, just like when you sign a longer contract for an ISP, cable TV, or apartment rental. That might be something AT&T needs to do in order to get the monthly cost below some level Apple wanted. I can see Apple wanting a full data plan to be unusually cheap--cheaper than with those other unsubsidized phones--since Apple wants to bring advanced Internet functionality to a wider, less hard core audience. Maybe a contract commitment is a way that can happen. And if that's all it is--a monthly reduction rather than subsidizing the hardware--then I can see it being optional. Just like with your ISP or cable TV. Commit to a shorter time if you want, but pay more per month. I wouldn't be shocked to see that as an option.

Or, since the iPhone is supposedly showing signs of far more success than AT&T originally expected, maybe Apple has been able to persuade them to ditch the contract.

I hope all of this is true. And more. Maybe a free iPhone case?

[nagromme]

hi everyone... ive been reading the posts here for a long time and figured i should actually register. anyway, not sure if this has been mentioned in posts before, but i spoke to a cingular customer service on 611 yesterday and was told something surprising.

A random Cingular rep knows nothing about what's coming, though many have claimed to :o A few may guess right, the rest will be caught in their fictions.

[gr8tfly]

we ended up talking for a couple minutes and the customer service guy told me that since my contract wasnt up yet i wouldnt even have been able to get the iphone at the 499 or 599 price. he said that cingular/at&t will be selling the phone without contract for almost twice as much as the apple advertised price; but i could still purchase directly from apple without the increase.

that was the first i had heard of this, so who knows whats going to happen.
see you in line at the apple store!

This would track with my experience with Cingular. You would be still under the remainder of your current contract, however. This is what they've done with previous phones. But, Apple would be using same policies as Cingular (AT&T), whatever they end up being. I personally don't think they'd bother dealing with anything outside of a contract (new or existing customer).

[odHbo]

All of the ads at Apple.com are back and have mysteriously lost that 2 year agreement caption.

I smell 100,000 more iPhone were just sold. :)

Thanks Apple :D

[odHbo]

hi everyone... ive been reading the posts here for a long time and figured i should actually register. anyway, not sure if this has been mentioned in posts before, but i spoke to a cingular customer service on 611 yesterday and was told something surprising.

i had dropped and broke my motorola phone and needed to get a new one, i joked and said if only it would have lasted me a few more weeks so i could just replace it with an iphone. we ended up talking for a couple minutes and the customer service guy told me that since my contract wasnt up yet i wouldnt even have been able to get the iphone at the 499 or 599 price. he said that cingular/at&t will be selling the phone without contract for almost twice as much as the apple advertised price; but i could still purchase directly from apple without the increase.

that was the first i had heard of this, so who knows whats going to happen.
see you in line at the apple store!


I'm sorry, not to sound like a jerk but that makes no sense. I think that Rep was just talking and simply not thinking..

[mashinhead]

are they still showing the disclaimer in the broadcast spots, the ones actually running on tv?

[gr8tfly]

So far (see previous post), the new one doesn't have it, but the original ("never been ipod") still did. That was as of an hour ago. I think Letterman runs Apple ads, watching now.

[kingofkolt]

Maybe they're going to finally allow those "pay-as-you-go" cards that Tattoo so despises! :D :D :D

[IDANNY]

Maybe they're going to finally allow those "pay-as-you-go" cards that Tattoo so despises! :D :D :D

yah haha, also on the cingular/ At&t website i think it used to say requires 2 year contract on the iphone page and now its gone. I am not sure if it did I think it didnt but cant remember for sure.

[SAMTATSICPRO]

i think the reason they took it off was to get more people wanting it, and when they show up to buy it not knowing about a contract. they'll find out they need a contract and at that moment once people see the iphone they will sign up for a new contract. this is great marketing! I also think that apple will have enough phones for everyone because steve jobs did say that they want to sell 1%market share of 1 billion dollars by one year or so. = to 10 million phones by 2008 ....... oh yeah expect some yahoo applications on it.

[Brandon Sharitt]

If I do end up getting an iPhone, I'll probably go with a contract any way since those plans seem to be better deals that the GoPhone plans and it's not like the iPhone works anywhere else.

[gotohamish]

Interesting, does this mean that you could buy it without a contract and use it on another network?

Hard to say. They certainly didn't remove the "Only at the new at&t" so it looks doubtful, but here's hoping.

[shipdestroyer]

Maybe they just removed it because it never really needed to be in the commercial? Not explicitly stating a 2-year contract is required does not mean a 2-year contract won't be required.

[peharri]

It would make sense for Cingular to offer a GoPhone type plan for the iPhone, just to ensure the maximum available audience given a substantial number of people interested in the iPhone do not have substantial credit histories. Despite Apple's description of the phone as a "smartphone", this really isn't a competitor for the Blackberry/Treo/Nokia 9xxx series so much as it is a competitor for the Sidekick and other relatively locked down lifestyle devices. It's not a business machine, it's a pocketable Internet and multimedia device. It's a _consumer_ item. It needs to be available to _consumers_. And it needs to be available to young consumers more than older ones.

How many teenagers can either afford to commit to a plan or get the credit rating that allows them to sign up? A parent might be happy to commit to the $5-600 it costs as a one off, but how many are going to still be as happy paying that AND committing to a long term contract of over $50 a month?

T-Mobile's been doing the same thing with the Sidekick for a long time and given the fact they're still doing it, I doubt it's been a failure. I would imagine a substantial number of Sidekicks have only been sold on the basis of the dollar-a-day-used prepaid plan T-Mobile offers to make the system available.

Much has been made of the price, and of outrageous claims about what the device is. This may run OS X, but it's no more a computer or smartphone than my phone is an enterprise web application server (hey, my phone and enterprise web servers both run Java! That makes them the same, right?) The marketing confirms it so far. Apple wants you to know this is a device that provides you with the Internet, that has some great ways of making calls, that plays music and movies. It's not playing up the computer angle at all and I seriously doubt they ever will.

Even if AT&T doesn't do it immediately, I'd be very surprised if they don't ultimately offer the iPhone on prepaid.

As an aside, I wonder if the "smartphone" angle was deliberately played up by Apple to mislead potential competitors. Palm has been scrambling to catch up, when it really doesn't have a device that would appeal to natural iPhone customers and when the iPhone is unlikely to appeal to that many Palm users. Ditto Blackberry. Meanwhile, there doesn't seem to have been any significant improvements for more regular phones like the RAZR and its direct competitors. That may be a problem for Motorola, Nokia, et al.

(And having read all of what I just wrote, I'm now realizing why I really don't want an iPhone. Because the Sidekick was never quite what I wanted either. Heh.)

[Island Dog]

The original ad looked terrible. I would bet this was just a design issue.

[guzhogi]

I really hope we can get pay as you go. While it'll be good to have a cell phone (I don't currently have one), I don't think I'd use it that much. I don't call anyone that much nor does anyone call me that much, but good to have when there isn't a phone nearby in case of emergencies and stuff. Besides, watching movies/tv shows on it will be a lot easier than a video iPod.

[DaveGee]

this is absolutely amazing.

Amazing?!?!

Nah, it's just Steve screwing with our minds yet again... Nothing truly amazing about that! :D


D

[wigby]

it's obvious that nothing has changed. but apple knows 2 year contracts scare people before they get into the store and play with the iphone. once they touch the iphone, consumers will open their wallets and throw cancel their current phone contracts.

[gmanrique]

for the hardware you originally acquired with that contract.

I'm pretty sure I read that existing customers can just buy one. And I don't think it extends your contract by two years, either.

[EagerDragon]

Perhaps it just wasn't necessary to say?

Maybe, but it may mean that you can use it as an iPod and as a web communicator via WIFI if you do not have a contract or you cancel the contract.

[mrrory]

All I want to know is if they will assist in moving from another network mid-contract.

[daveschroeder]

I'm completely sure you did not. Not from Apple, and not from AT&T.

Actually, we have seen that from AT&T (granted, it's internal information, subject to change, etc.):

http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2007/04/25/iphone-qanda-for-atandt-employees/

Q: If I am an existing customer, can I upgrade and will you give me a credit/subsidy for this device?

A: An existing customer can purchase the iPhone for the same price as a new customer. However, no subsidies are being offered on the phone at this time.

To me, "no subsidies" means no subsidies.

---

Some other information:

- Jobs said during the keynote announcement that the SIM card slot was on the top of the phone, near the headphone jack. That implies an accessible SIM. From 12:50 in the iPhone introduction (http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/mwsf07/): "So let's take a look at the top now. We've got a headset jack, 3.5mm, all your iPod headphones fit right in. We've got a place, a little tray, for your SIM card. And we've got one switch for sleep and wake. Push it to go to sleep, push it to take up." Why would you mention, when talking about *external* physical features of the iPhone, that there is a place, "a little tray", for the SIM card if it wasn't externally/user-accessible?

- Even if AT&T is the "exclusive" provider for 5 years, it still remains to be seen how iPhones will be able to be obtained with/without calling plans/contracts/etc. iPhone may represent a new model of unsubsidized phone sales.

- Even if iPhone is "locked" to AT&T (a common practice for US GSM carriers), ALL GSM phones to date are able to be unlocked, e.g., for international usage with prepaid SIM cards, etc. If iPhone isn't able to be unlocked for such use, it would be the first phone from any US GSM carrier that I've seen that wouldn't be.

- There is NO TECHNICAL REASON iPhone couldn't work on any GSM carrier. *Of course* things like visual voicemail won't work, but GSM is a standard, and at a minimum, the basic data/voice functionality of the phone will work on any GSM carrier with a valid SIM. This presumes that there will be an way to get Cingular to unlock the phone, e.g., for international travel, which, yes, they do in fact do routinely, AND that the SIM slot is accessible. (If the SIM slot is not user-accessible, this may be the justification for keeping iPhone locked to only AT&T.)

- Some people have said some ridiculous things in other threads about "WiFi probably only works if you have a plan", etc. This is ridiculous. I don't even need to see the phone to know that WiFi will absolutely work without a plan. It would be stupid for the phone to be set up any other way. (Imagine a scenario where you are out of range of ALL GSM carriers - that's the only way iPhone would know if it has any sort of service agreement - in that scenario, why on earth would WiFi not work? Answer: of course it would. And it's silly to say that WiFi would only work if you had a plan; that's like saying the iPod functionality will only work if you keep paying your bill. The ONLY thing that won't work without a plan is things that depend on the phone functionality/GSM service).

[daveschroeder]

All I want to know is if they will assist in moving from another network mid-contract.

Why wouldn't they? All carriers to this to varying degrees.

[CharlieX]

This is easy.

The "2 year..." line is called the "legal" in the commercial broadcast world. They're generally considered exactly like the fine print in any other situation.... and generally considered ugly. Things that the lawyers working for ATT and Apple and the FCC all require to go on the commercial when it airs.

However Apple is a private website and are not beholden to those rules. They simple took it off (called a "Generic" version of the commercial) because it looks better.

[tribulation]

Probably just to get people into the store to see it for an impulse buy without scaring them off with a scary ad.

[bross00]

Things we've been told (and should assume are accurate):
1. The iPhone is not subsidized
2. The iPhone is exclusive to at&t / Cingular for five years

Thing that have been leaked (reliably?):
1. Existing customer can purchase an iPhone at the same price as new customers

Things we know:
1. Apple and at&t have invested significantly in preparing for the launch of the iPhone
2. Apple and at&t are in the business of making profits
3. Attracting and maintaining customers is a critical component (and major expense) of the cellular phone business.

Things we should all be able to deduce:

1. at&t will need to hold onto customers for some time to recoup their investment (preparing for visual voicemail, installing repeaters, advertising, staffing, onboarding new customers).
2. at&t will want to maximize that gain
3. Apple decided to go exclusive with a provider because they were dictating terms (new technology, apple store sales, support protocols, new business model) and will need to ensure at&t is rewarded for agreeing to adapt to their demands.

4. There will be contracts for new users and likely contract extensions for existing users. The cost of the phone will be the same for both parties.
5. The cost of services will be comparable to exisitng at&t plans, though they could create a special bundle.

Curiously, are there any smart-phone pay as you go plans that include data?

It should be noted that other markets use a buy the equipment and choose your provider model. In these markets the providers still, generally, require contracts (for premium services) or premium priced pay as you go plans (for basic services).

I'd love to get a free iPhone with unlimited voice and data for $40 a month. But I stopped smoking pot some time ago. Also, the way apple controls their product distribution I suspect it will never happen (lest it's bought used on ebay and a few years have passed for the cost of service plans to come down).

[Gators Fan]

The cell phone industry "standard" seems to be 2-year service contracts, especially when it comes to getting deep discounts on the equipment. I'm thinking Apple dropped mention of contract requirements so as to not discourage potential customers, as in "Let them find out what's required when they come into the store, but don't do anything to turn them off beforehand." Then, again, it could be that there's to be a smorgasbord of choices --"A one-year contract pays this much, and a two-year contract pays this much," etc.

I'm interested in what insurance or extended warranty plans will be available, how easy it'll be to update firmware and software "patches," etc, and whether each six months will bring a new model to market ("iPhone 2"), as in the case of the iPod ("Just out. . . the iPod Redux Platinum Maximus").

Quick! Pinch me before I faint from the anticipation.

[odHbo]

- Even if iPhone is "locked" to AT&T (a common practice for US GSM carriers), ALL GSM phones to date are able to be unlocked, e.g., for international usage with prepaid SIM cards, etc. If iPhone isn't able to be unlocked for such use, it would be the first phone from any US GSM carrier that I've seen that wouldn't be.


Case and Point-

Tmobile SideKicks... I have yet to see an UNLOCKED Tmobile SideKick through it's 4 generations which didn't require hours of hacking and OS reprograming.

The iPhone being locked to AT&T is very possible. It's just that locking the iPhone down will be more detrimental to Apple and Cingular seeing how this phone will be more World-bound than the Sidekick will ever be.

[hilgers08]

ya they prob will require some service, but just wont advertise it

[peharri]

Curiously, are there any smart-phone pay as you go plans that include data?


Again, it's important to note that the iPhone is not really a smartphone.It's a consumer level communications device that does phone, web browsing and multimedia. It's more like a Sidekick than a Treo, in terms of intended market, though neither does the multimedia side that well.

To that end, T-Mobile USA does, indeed, do a Sidekick prepaid plan ($1 per day of use, unlimited data, plus 10c per minute airtime.)

There are no specific data-phone plans on AT&T, but AT&T's basic GoPhone rates, both PAYG and monthly plan (yes, AT&T's prepaid service includes a set of monthly plans similar to their post-paid plans) do have a rate for data. It's just relatively expensive, at 3c/kb for anything that isn't WAP browsing from a cellphone.

[wigby]

- Jobs said during the keynote announcement that the SIM card slot was on the top of the phone, near the headphone jack. That implies an accessible SIM. From 12:50 in the iPhone introduction (http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/mwsf07/): "So let's take a look at the top now. We've got a headset jack, 3.5mm, all your iPod headphones fit right in. We've got a place, a little tray, for your SIM card. And we've got one switch for sleep and wake. Push it to go to sleep, push it to take up." Why would you mention, when talking about *external* physical features of the iPhone, that there is a place, "a little tray", for the SIM card if it wasn't externally/user-accessible?

- Even if AT&T is the "exclusive" provider for 5 years, it still remains to be seen how iPhones will be able to be obtained with/without calling plans/contracts/etc. iPhone may represent a new model of unsubsidized phone sales.

- Even if iPhone is "locked" to AT&T (a common practice for US GSM carriers), ALL GSM phones to date are able to be unlocked, e.g., for international usage with prepaid SIM cards, etc. If iPhone isn't able to be unlocked for such use, it would be the first phone from any US GSM carrier that I've seen that wouldn't be.

- There is NO TECHNICAL REASON iPhone couldn't work on any GSM carrier. *Of course* things like visual voicemail won't work, but GSM is a standard, and at a minimum, the basic data/voice functionality of the phone will work on any GSM carrier with a valid SIM. This presumes that there will be an way to get Cingular to unlock the phone, e.g., for international travel, which, yes, they do in fact do routinely, AND that the SIM slot is accessible. (If the SIM slot is not user-accessible, this may be the justification for keeping iPhone locked to only AT&T.)

- Some people have said some ridiculous things in other threads about "WiFi probably only works if you have a plan", etc. This is ridiculous. I don't even need to see the phone to know that WiFi will absolutely work without a plan. It would be stupid for the phone to be set up any other way. (Imagine a scenario where you are out of range of ALL GSM carriers - that's the only way iPhone would know if it has any sort of service agreement - in that scenario, why on earth would WiFi not work? Answer: of course it would. And it's silly to say that WiFi would only work if you had a plan; that's like saying the iPod functionality will only work if you keep paying your bill. The ONLY thing that won't work without a plan is things that depend on the phone functionality/GSM service).

jobs only said that so that skeptics wouldn't ask "well how does he make calls if it's not fcc approved yet". there will be no slot for apple users to swap out sim or memory or any cards. apple has and never will do that. of course you could technically modify the iphone to do gsm or whatever. no one who buys an iphone is going to waste time on this unless they're being payed to or have an extra iphone to screw with. apple users want simplicity that just works, not kludgy electronics. apple has never recommended users to alter their hardware. the only possible exception being the apple tv but even that's just an absence of a warning and it's only for software not the hardware.

[YoYoMa]

According to the Macbreak Weekly podcast, the iPhone will be $999 without a contract.

[sbbruiser]

Isn't the answer here pretty straightforward?

Carriers force people into two year contracts so that they can recoup the value of the subsidy they give consumers on their phones. You are more than welcome to get service from most any carrier without a long-term contract, but you will have to pay the full price for the handset.

On the iPhone, there is no subsidy, so there is also no reason to hold anyone to a two year contract. Even if Ma Bell offers a discounted data or voice plan for iPhone users, there would be no need to lock in customers to long-term contracts because they won't need to recover any initial outlays.

Also, as far as prepaid plans go, there seems to be little reason that T wouldn't offer them for the iPhone, but I doubt that they would concentrate heavily on this market. Prepaid users are a lower income demographic who do not use their devices as much. People who are willing to pay $500+ for a cell phone aren't likely to go with the more expensive prepaid minutes and data plans.

[bross00]

jobs only said that so that skeptics wouldn't ask "well how does he make calls if it's not fcc approved yet". there will be no slot for apple users to swap out sim or memory or any cards. apple has and never will do that. of course you could technically modify the iphone to do gsm or whatever.

"to do GSM or whatever"?!? The iPhone is a GSM phone. GSM phones rely on SIMs to identify the phone number / user. It will "do GSM" because it depends on GSM.

Of course, I don't know for sure, but I can see no logical reason that the iPhone wouldn't have a SIM card slot accessible by the user. Of course, most users never swap out a SIM card (at least in the US).

On an unrelated topic: other than wishful thinking why would anyone believe the iPhone would be unlocked? 5 year exclusive in the US with at&t. If it is unlocked or readily unlockable the exclusive deal with at&t has no legs and therefore little benefit to at&t.

I suppose there are two possible scenarios. Unlocked, 2 + year contract. Locked and shorter terms. But, that seems to over complicate things in an un-apple like way.

I suspect you'll see it sold locked to at&t with required contracts. It's a bold new model. No subsidy and no benefit to the customer. But it's business. (Personally I'll be thrilled if it is unlocked but requires contracts; that arguably rewards at&t and us).

[sananda]

Maybe they're going to finally allow those "pay-as-you-go" cards that Tattoo so despises! :D :D :D

oh i hope so. i was a contract customer ten years but am now a pay as you go person because i hardly use the phone in the country where i had the contract.

tattoo would hate me. getting my top up cards from the convenience store. and i drive a bmw. so he'll hate me more as he thinks pay as you go people like me shouldn't have a bmw. :)

[ncbill]

Or buy the European model.

As numerous posters have pointed out, it is illegal in some countries over there to sell phones locked to one provider.

I suppose there are two possible scenarios. Unlocked, 2 + year contract. Locked and shorter terms. But, that seems to over complicate things in an un-apple like way.

I suspect you'll see it sold locked to at&t with required contracts. It's a bold new model. No subsidy and no benefit to the customer. But it's business. (Personally I'll be thrilled if it is unlocked but requires contracts; that arguably rewards at&t and us).

[JGowan]

this has to be good news. hopefully some light will be revealed next monday!

I just don't know if it's the good news you all are hoping for.

I believe it was removed for the simple reason that it was a DOWNER. That's all. Apple shows you the coolest device and you're drooling for it and then, WHAM: they throw cold water in your face with a contract notice.

I think they'd rather a person find out that information when they're at the store, holding the thing and having to decide than for some viewers to never make it into the stores because of the disclaimer and being turned off in their living room.

[sbrownla]

This is easy.

The "2 year..." line is called the "legal" in the commercial broadcast world. They're generally considered exactly like the fine print in any other situation.... and generally considered ugly. Things that the lawyers working for ATT and Apple and the FCC all require to go on the commercial when it airs.

However Apple is a private website and are not beholden to those rules. They simple took it off (called a "Generic" version of the commercial) because it looks better.

Exactly. The "2 year..." line is still on tv. Just saw the advertisement 5 minutes ago.

[artifex]

I really hope the SIM card is easily changeable...


Have you seen an access port for a SIM card?

[caliguy]

The Ad:
http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/1751/picture1fu0.png
Three rows of buttons. Four, four, and three icons per row.

Old Ad:
http://img103.imageshack.us/img103/9773/picture2im5.png
The last row of buttons (row three) now has four icons. Unveiled icon not shown?

New Ad:
http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/8215/picture3qk2.png
Apple chose to cover this up and simply zoom in on these shots. They do this on each of the first three ads.


Also an unimportant change: The updated ads do not have the vertical black bars covering part of the picture as seen above.

I'm finished scrutinizing :)

[HitmanX]

I hope if you sign up for 2 years the phone will be under $600. Maybe $500/$600 was the phone price without a plan, no reason for apple to announce the price of the phone with a plan, thats AT&T's job.

[PSPFourLife]

Maybe we won't need a "Two Year Contract." Hopefully we can just buy the phone. And, if you do get a contract, you can get X amount of money off.

It could go any way, really.