PDA

View Full Version : iPhone as a Widescreen iPod + Wifi without Contract?




MacRumors
Jul 2, 2007, 11:21 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

TUAW essentially describes (http://www.tuaw.com/2007/07/02/tada-the-6th-gen-contract-free-wifi-enabled-ipod/) how to unlock an iPhone for use as a Widescreen iPod + Wifi -- without a contract, and a $49.98 one time fee.

The first step involves faking bad credit (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2007/07/01/activating-ipod-video-wifi-on-iphone-with-contract/) by typing in "999-99-9999" as your Social Security number during activation to trigger the GoPhone/"Pick Your Plan" option which allows for contractless pre-pay plans. The cheapest version of "Pick Your Plan" is $49.98 (rate plans (http://www.tuaw.com/photos/iphone-prepaid-gallery/296285/)).

Then, according to TUAW simply taking out your SIM card (http://www.tuaw.com/2007/07/02/tada-the-6th-gen-contract-free-wifi-enabled-ipod/) allows you iPhone to continue to function as an iPod + Wifi device without any further hassle.

Removed SIM entirely. It complains but works at 6G WiFi iPod. Tried placing call. "No SIM card installed". Failed. Connected to iTunes. Synced without any problems I could detect. WiFi fine.

Presumably, you could then cancel your $49.98 month-to-month and use the iPhone as a Widescreen iPod + Wifi device.



pavelbure
Jul 2, 2007, 11:25 PM
$600 for a mediocre ipod and wifi. :eek:

arn
Jul 2, 2007, 11:28 PM
$600 for a mediocre ipod and wifi. :eek:

Low storage perhaps, but I'd say it's a pretty damn fine ipod.

arn

jericho53
Jul 2, 2007, 11:29 PM
$600 for a mediocre ipod and wifi. :eek:

I agree. Whats the point? Just go buy an iPod.

Fearless Leader
Jul 2, 2007, 11:30 PM
$600 for a mediocre ipod and wifi. :eek:

ahh but, It really is a great ipod, I wouldn't have bought it at 600 for the 8gb just as an ipod + internet device. but at 450 yes I probably would.

dmw007
Jul 2, 2007, 11:30 PM
Low storage perhaps, but I'd say it's a pretty damn fine ipod.


I would have to agree, it might not hold a million songs, but it has a ton of features that no iPod has had before. :) :apple:

arn
Jul 2, 2007, 11:32 PM
I'm sure there are people more than willing to pay $649 to get a full screen video ipod with multitouch and wifi internet. The contract has been a killer for some who have minimal mobile phone needs.

arn

j763
Jul 2, 2007, 11:32 PM
$600 for a mediocre ipod and wifi. :eek:

Remember that the TCO of iPhone is at least (cheapest rate plan) $2,100 over two years. A discount of $1,500 for not being able to use AT&T's craptacular wireless service -- which is virtually unusable where I live for much of the year -- is a fantastic deal.

jericho53
Jul 2, 2007, 11:32 PM
I would have to agree, it might not hold a million songs, but it has a ton of features that no iPod has had before. :) :apple:

Feature number one: $350 more than an iPod with less storage.

flir67
Jul 2, 2007, 11:33 PM
any one try getting a version of skype working that would be awesome.

wifi phone for the world and ipod.

phillipjfry
Jul 2, 2007, 11:38 PM
Most expensive iPod ever. (best Comic book store guy voice)
I wonder if the near-future ipod widescreen touchable will have some sort of wifi built in to share songs kind of like how the zune did it (please dont shoot me for wondering if a zune feature would be included in a future ipod release!!)?
:)

glennsan
Jul 2, 2007, 11:38 PM
I think the point of being able to use it for itunes and wifi without having to pay the AT&T rate is what is being missed here. I would consider it if I had wifi at my office.

pdpfilms
Jul 2, 2007, 11:38 PM
Watch out for that restore though... could cost you another $49.98.

A Pittarelli
Jul 2, 2007, 11:39 PM
this is silly, wait for a new ipod or just use it as a phone

AJ Muni
Jul 2, 2007, 11:39 PM
I'm sure there are people more than willing to pay $649 to get a full screen video ipod with multitouch and wifi internet. The contract has been a killer for some who have minimal mobile phone needs.

arn

Exactly. I saw the iPhone today in person for the first time, and my god that device is unreal. I knew it was a great device, and it was going to blow me away..but it really exceeded my expectations when I saw it. I would be tempted for this, but then again I read somewhere that future software updates on the iPhone would be able to shut this "hack" down. I guess I'll just wait for the new ipod this fall. I would be floored if apple hasn't unleashed anything new by the end of this year. Especially with Mr. Jobs going on record stating that an ipod running os x is in the works, and everytime apple has these "buy a mac, get a free ipod" deal, they always release something new. Patience is a virtue my fellow MR'ers.

arn
Jul 2, 2007, 11:42 PM
Exactly. I saw the iPhone today in person for the first time, and my god that device is unreal. I would be tempted for this, but then again I read somewhere that future software updates on the iPhone would be able to shut this "hack" down. I guess I'll just wait for the new ipod this fall. I would be floored if apple hasn't unleashed anything new this fall.

Right... and another thing that's possible is that the iphone could go back into lock-down mode after a certain period of time without a SIM. Just speculation, but it would make sense.

arn

mrkramer
Jul 2, 2007, 11:46 PM
so has anyone actually tried this or is it just speculation? It is too much money for me to want to bother with it, when I could probably wait until the end of the year and get an iPod with fullscreen for less.

smccostlin
Jul 2, 2007, 11:46 PM
if you are one of these people who actually does this to your iphone you are crazy. I think that apple will come out with a widescreen ipod that has touch features soon enough, and there is not need to kill your glorious iphone.

pdpfilms
Jul 2, 2007, 11:47 PM
Right... and another thing that's possible is that the iphone could go back into lock-down mode after a certain period of time without a SIM. Just speculation, but it would make sense.

arn
Jeez arn, you're really getting into the iPhone stuff! I don't think I've ever seen you post this much... ever!

bluebomberman
Jul 2, 2007, 11:52 PM
I'm sure there are people more than willing to pay $649 to get a full screen video ipod with multitouch and wifi internet. The contract has been a killer for some who have minimal mobile phone needs.

arn

At the same time, whoever pulls out a phone-less iPhone's going to look like a complete dork.

rstansby
Jul 2, 2007, 11:54 PM
Right... and another thing that's possible is that the iphone could go back into lock-down mode after a certain period of time without a SIM. Just speculation, but it would make sense.

arn

The way I read it, they never even cancelled the pay as you go plan. So it is entirely possible that after cancelling the plan the device would stop working the next time it was sync'd with iTunes.

Neptunian
Jul 3, 2007, 12:01 AM
Hi. I'm from Malaysia. No iPhone over here..... So cruel.... hehe...:) I want one! :mad: Hopefully it will be available in Malaysia early next year (as early as possible).

1984
Jul 3, 2007, 12:04 AM
I'm sure there are people more than willing to pay $649 to get a full screen video ipod with multitouch and wifi internet. The contract has been a killer for some who have minimal mobile phone needs.

arn

Why not just wait a few months for the touchscreen iPods to appear? Steve Jobs already let it slip they are working on iPods running OS X.

rlreif
Jul 3, 2007, 12:05 AM
i could see doing this...

i have been loud on these forums bashing the iphone for lack of 3g... im on att already, and i use their 3g network a lot, and am quite happy with it... im not giving up my unlocked htc tytn... yet.....

BUT i would love to have an iphone in my car just for music... my nano is only 4GB anyhow, and the iphone would be a great replacement


one other idea this gives me is as a way that someone on att who wants an iphone now but doesnt want to extend their contract for 2 years more... they could do this hack, then put their existing sim card in the iphone and not pay the $175 fee, or have to extend their contract

10th Wonder
Jul 3, 2007, 12:10 AM
i posted this on the Iphone board and barely got posted on. Plus i took the info from TUAW.com and gave credit to its OP.

Mr Fusion
Jul 3, 2007, 12:19 AM
I'm sure there are people more than willing to pay $649 to get a full screen video ipod with multitouch and wifi internet.
I would want more memory for videos for that kind of dough. The iPod equivalent will be worth the wait. :)

ppc_michael
Jul 3, 2007, 12:20 AM
Seems like this must violate some kind of EULA?

I could see the next software update disabling this hack, and making a bunch of people very angry when their iPhonePod suddenly doesn't work anymore.

mac 2005
Jul 3, 2007, 12:20 AM
C'mon, now. Isn't this a complete violation of the EULA?

I don't understand how these threads are okay, but any thread wherein someone discusses running OS X on a PC is silenced because of the EULA. Am I missing something?

FX120
Jul 3, 2007, 12:20 AM
I wonder how this will last...

tveric
Jul 3, 2007, 12:27 AM
Low storage perhaps, but I'd say it's a pretty damn fine ipod.

arn

He didn't say it was a mediocre mp3 player, he said it makes for a mediocre ipod. By that measure (up against other ipods), yes indeed, it IS mediocre, especially considering the price.

McBain2
Jul 3, 2007, 12:34 AM
Sure. Just give out a fake SSN. That sounds like a terrific idea.

dongmin
Jul 3, 2007, 12:35 AM
Why not just wait a few months for the touchscreen iPods to appear? Steve Jobs already let it slip they are working on iPods running OS X.Link?

Yes it's inevitable that some of the iPhone technology will trickle down to the iPod, but NO WAY is Steve stealing the iPhone's thunder (and pissing off a lot of customers and partners in the process) by releasing a full-fledged touch-screen iPod anytime soon. At most, you'll get the touch screen and cover flow, but in no way will it have wireless built in or offer anywhere near the software that the iPhone does.

Face it: if you want Safari, email, google maps, and YouTube in the palm of your hand, you're gonna have to fork over for the iPhone. Or wait 2-3 years.

SiliconAddict
Jul 3, 2007, 12:35 AM
Why not just wait a few months for the touchscreen iPods to appear? Steve Jobs already let it slip they are working on iPods running OS X.

When and where? to date there has been NOTHING on iPods. Frankly I don't expect Apple to release a new touch iPod until next spring for fear it would eat into iPhone sales.

exNavy
Jul 3, 2007, 12:36 AM
I think the point of being able to use it for itunes and wifi without having to pay the AT&T rate is what is being missed here. I would consider it if I had wifi at my office.

I think what's really being missed here is the fact that you have a $600 phone that can't make or receive calls.

SiliconAddict
Jul 3, 2007, 12:37 AM
Sure. Just give out a fake SSN. That sounds like a terrific idea.

Umm who cares? Its not like they are going to lock you up. And since they don't know who you are without it its not going to hit your credit rating. :rolleyes:


I think what's really being missed here is the fact that you have a $600 phone that can't make or receive calls.


But I thought it was, assuming you drink the Koolaid, an internet communicator first and foremost.

Flowbee
Jul 3, 2007, 12:39 AM
Alex King writes (http://alexking.org/blog/2007/07/02/iphone-without-service) that he just cancelled his monthly AT&T account, and his iPhone still works as an iPod and WiFi device. If you cancel within 3 days, you don't even have to pay the activation fee.

exNavy
Jul 3, 2007, 12:40 AM
Link?

Yes it's inevitable that some of the iPhone technology will trickle down to the iPod, but NO WAY is Steve stealing the iPhone's thunder (and pissing off a lot of customers and partners in the process) by releasing a full-fledged touch-screen iPod anytime soon.


And why not? Any new iPod won't have phone capabilities anyway. A new touchscreen iPod wouldn't cost $600 either I bet.

McBain2
Jul 3, 2007, 12:40 AM
Umm who cares? Its not like they are going to lock you up. And since they don't know who you are without it its not going to hit your credit rating. :rolleyes:


Better pay in cash then.

boobooq88
Jul 3, 2007, 12:40 AM
Grr.... I was thinking of getting an iPhone until SJ slipped some news on iPods w/ OS X... :o Better be out b4 christmas... only thing holding me back from gettin an iPhone is the 8 gb max storage space... which we all know is NOT enough for movies and stuff.

DopestGingah
Jul 3, 2007, 12:42 AM
$650 plus tax for some nice street cred! :cool:

arn
Jul 3, 2007, 12:50 AM
Alex King writes (http://alexking.org/blog/2007/07/02/iphone-without-service) that he just cancelled his monthly AT&T account, and his iPhone still works as an iPod and WiFi device. If you cancel within 3 days, you don't even have to pay the activation fee.

nice... and no pay-as-you-go nonsense. I guess he's the guinea pig.

arn

Black Tiger
Jul 3, 2007, 12:52 AM
Link?

Yes it's inevitable that some of the iPhone technology will trickle down to the iPod, but NO WAY is Steve stealing the iPhone's thunder (and pissing off a lot of customers and partners in the process) by releasing a full-fledged touch-screen iPod anytime soon. At most, you'll get the touch screen and cover flow, but in no way will it have wireless built in or offer anywhere near the software that the iPhone does.

Face it: if you want Safari, email, google maps, and YouTube in the palm of your hand, you're gonna have to fork over for the iPhone. Or wait 2-3 years.

I agree. Most people don't mind carrying around an iPod and a phone, and the main draw of iPhone is its unique features. However, imagine some of the wireless benefits in a standalone iPod. Suppose iPod updates with iTunes wirelessly--we've already seen digital cameras that allow wireless transmission. What if Apple were able to do away with the traditional dock connector and simply use wi-fi or bluetooth to sync to other devices? Wi-fi internet could be used to download songs from the iTunes store directly on the device. Music stores could have kiosks that allow music to be bought and downloaded right in the store.

macmansc
Jul 3, 2007, 01:06 AM
Haven't used it, but this may allow calling...

http://beta.talkety.com/

bmb012
Jul 3, 2007, 01:18 AM
Well, if you were, say, waiting for your phone contract to run out, this could be useful, since it's more likely that Apple will release software updates instead of redesigning the thing in the near future...

edgarj
Jul 3, 2007, 01:22 AM
I would want more memory for videos for that kind of dough. The iPod equivalent will be worth the wait. :)

Yeah.... you should wait for the "just around the corner" iPod with Hi-def, 3D, and true sex-robot functionality (plus lots of realistic accssories to suit your preference). It's comming any day now, ya know. Don't waste your money on this primitive technology.

pika2000
Jul 3, 2007, 01:24 AM
If you cancel the contract, can you ask AT&T to unlock the phone then? I mean it's not like AT&T subsidize the phone in the first place. IMO if you cancel the contract, you should have the right to be give a way to unlock the phone. Am I wrong?

SeaFox
Jul 3, 2007, 01:28 AM
C'mon, now. Isn't this a complete violation of the EULA?

I don't understand how these threads are okay, but any thread wherein someone discusses running OS X on a PC is silenced because of the EULA. Am I missing something?

Since when are EULA's enforcable legal documents?

You don't sign it (with would be the first requirement for a legal document).
You can't refuse it, heck you can't even read it before you "break the seal" and have agreed to it.
You can't get you money back if you do "choose to decline it".

EULA's are just corporations' ways of bullying people into using a product in the way they desire, even though they have no legal right to.

netdoc66
Jul 3, 2007, 01:29 AM
i posted this on the Iphone board and barely got posted on. Plus i took the info from TUAW.com and gave credit to its OP.

Eat your cookie!:D

ezekielrage_99
Jul 3, 2007, 01:30 AM
$600 for a mediocre ipod and wifi. :eek:

All that effort and there already is an iPod out there.... I agree it seems kind of inane and redundant.

Royale w/cheese
Jul 3, 2007, 01:31 AM
wait for the "just around the corner" iPod with ...true sex-robot functionality

So are you using your current iPod/iPhone for "fake" sex-robot functionality? That's a new use for the headphone jack. :)

Object-X
Jul 3, 2007, 01:41 AM
$600 for a mediocre ipod and wifi. :eek:

Why not just wait for the 6th gen iPod that is certainly going to be a WiFi, widescreen, multi-touch, hard drive based, Internet communication wonder? I would. When they release it you're modded iPhone will seem really lame. But then again, why wait? :) Enjoy it now, then sell it on Ebay and get the iPod. :p

rob@robburns.co
Jul 3, 2007, 01:45 AM
To me there are several iPhone hacks that are likely to solve commonly stated issues:

1) this hack to allow iPhone use without cellular phone service
2) AT&T related
a) Unlock phone for use with other providers
b) getting AT&T voice with no-data
c) getting AT&T data with no voice
3) Dial-up Networking bluetooth profile to allow Edge connection from laptop
4) Mounting iPhone in disk mode (probably possible through terminal)
5) installing Apps on iPhone to replace or supplment those already on there (Apple could be using code-signing to prevent non-signed or even non-Apple-signed apps from running)

All of these hacks could add a lot of functionality for particular users. I'm hoping to hear more about this in the coming weeks.

And for those thinking this is a lame iPod, you obviously haven't tried it. It's an awesome iPod with not enough capacity (and you may not like that it can't display on a TV).

brandon6684
Jul 3, 2007, 01:59 AM
Haven't used it, but this may allow calling...

http://beta.talkety.com/

That still requires you to have a voice plan.

pieman02
Jul 3, 2007, 02:02 AM
Most expensive iPod ever. (best Comic book store guy voice)
I wonder if the near-future ipod widescreen touchable will have some sort of wifi built in to share songs kind of like how the zune did it (please dont shoot me for wondering if a zune feature would be included in a future ipod release!!)?
:)

I don't think Apple likes to release products that compete with eachother...that being said I think there will be no wifi in the next iPod because 1) It will consume more battery power that the hard drive will need 2) If you want a small device that can browse the web, you have to get an iPhone (think "if you want a laptop capable of running any games whatsoever, you need to spend $1000 more and get the MBP...)
:apple: :rolleyes:

Royale w/cheese
Jul 3, 2007, 02:04 AM
That still requires you to have a voice plan.

Yeah, I didn't understand that either.

rrijkers
Jul 3, 2007, 02:19 AM
omg expensive iPod! :eek: :p

Henri Gaudier
Jul 3, 2007, 02:40 AM
Do you really have to give over your social security number for this phone? Is that to make government surveillance easier; calls, gps etc.

Any observations on this?

SeaFox
Jul 3, 2007, 02:43 AM
Do you really have to give over your social security number for this phone?

That's generally how they do credit checks. :rolleyes:

Your records with the credit reporting agencies are listed under your SSN. Hence, a person entering SSN 999-99-9999 would be labeled as having poor credit, as nobody actually has that number, so there is no credit history with it.

AppleIntelRock
Jul 3, 2007, 02:52 AM
the iPhone isn't worth 600 dollars just based on iPod/Web features... now a 120 GB HDD might change that :p

personally, i love using it as a phone

ladeer
Jul 3, 2007, 02:58 AM
I always use ATT, so buying iPhone for me wasn't a big deal at all except extending my old contract which I had 1.5 years left anyway.

Crazy as it sounds, I found my BlackBerry 8800 from ATT is much superior as a phone and email device, so I just removed the SIM card from my iPhone and continue using my BlackBerry. It's like I paid $600 for a wide screen 8GB video iPod + Wifi browser.

Seriously though, without some important features such as saving an email, syncing note, or even copy-paste, there are too many things I cannot do with my iPhone...I just have to go back to my blackberry.

By the way, gmail on iPhone gives me a lot of problem too...sometimes emails will show no content, even it appears to be perfectly fine on gmail.com....

Cloudsurfer
Jul 3, 2007, 03:20 AM
So, if you cancel your AT&T plan, aren't you like, able to install any other SIM-card and make use of the phone anyway?

In Europe, the customer by law has to have the option to unlock the phone for free after one year of usage, or for a fee within a year of usage, to allow the customer to take it's phone to other operators.

I can't imagine the iPhone not having such option, or bringing it to Europe would be illegal.

mrkramer
Jul 3, 2007, 03:27 AM
So, if you cancel your AT&T plan, aren't you like, able to install any other SIM-card and make use of the phone anyway?

In Europe, the customer by law has to have the option to unlock the phone for free after one year of usage, or for a fee within a year of usage, to allow the customer to take it's phone to other operators.

I can't imagine the iPhone not having such option, or bringing it to Europe would be illegal.

The US version so far cannot be unlocked, but I'm sure some hackers will have figured out how to unlock it within a month or two. and The European version will probably be able to be unlocked.

rockosmodurnlif
Jul 3, 2007, 03:37 AM
I'm sure there are people more than willing to pay $649 to get a full screen video ipod with multitouch and wifi internet. The contract has been a killer for some who have minimal mobile phone needs.

arn

Gee, there must be more suckers born per minute these days ...

Umm who cares? Its not like they are going to lock you up. And since they don't know who you are without it its not going to hit your credit rating. :rolleyes:


You must still believe in the anonymity of the internet. Guess you've never heard of IP addresses being logged. It's not like it's fraud or anything to willfully use a social security number that isn't yours just so can listen to music, read email and watch youtube videos. Oh, and use a fancy schmancy virtual (ooooo!) keyboard.


But I thought it was, assuming you drink the Koolaid, an internet communicator first and foremost.

Because it's called the iInternetCommunicator.

So, if you cancel your AT&T plan, aren't you like, able to install any other SIM-card and make use of the phone anyway?

In Europe, the customer by law has to have the option to unlock the phone for free after one year of usage, or for a fee within a year of usage, to allow the customer to take it's phone to other operators.

I can't imagine the iPhone not having such option, or bringing it to Europe would be illegal.

Most interesting post in this thread. If the carriers in Europe can't guarantee users switching and staying, then there is almost no reason to bend over and accept Apple demands. AT&T can't guarantee it either but it sounds like they have a better chance in the states than a European carrier does. But all that is just pure speculation.

Speaking of speculation, I have changed my mind. I think Apple should release two new iPods, one with wi-fi, one without, and charge a premium of the wi-fi enabled iPods. If I could, I would.

HyperZboy
Jul 3, 2007, 03:48 AM
At the same time, whoever pulls out a phone-less iPhone's going to look like a complete dork.

Ummm, obviously you haven't seen one as it doesn't look like a typical dork's smartphone. In fact, the only feature I've yet to show anyone who I've shown mine to is, receiving a phone call!

That said, I find this news interesting not because I intend to try it (I've already activated mine), but in the fact that less people would be interested in this if it weren't for AT&T's terribly slow, crappy, EDGE network, which of course immediately crashed already yesterday! Maybe this will put a fire under Apple & AT&T's a$$es to fix this problem. Otherwise, people WILL hack solutions like this and I applaud them.

tobor68
Jul 3, 2007, 04:30 AM
well if you plan to unlock your iphone and turn it into the most expensive ipod ever, then you should be aware of these:

jajh for iphone (http://blog.jajah.com/index.php?/archives/220-JAJAH-+-iPhone.html) and talkety (http://beta.talkety.com/pages/iphone)

both are phone calls thru the web. these will certainly make things interesting...

Nikko1965
Jul 3, 2007, 04:57 AM
I think it's great that so much interest is made in someone buying a $600 product, disabling it's main purpose and then presenting it as a work of genius. I suspect if he gutted his 17" MacBookPro, put in some kettle filaments and used it as a portable trouser press he'd be nominated for a Nobel prize.

I can see our man sat in Starbucks or McDonalds or some other WiFi enabled fat factory browsing away and then realising he spent so much time on MacRumors reading about himself that he's late for his Dungeons and Dragons club, reaching into his pocket for his mobile phone to tell Azgraz the Loser he'll be late and as he dials on his AT&T mobile costing $80 a month the thought flickers across his mind that technology convergence might not be a bad thing.

Nermal
Jul 3, 2007, 05:16 AM
Since when are EULA's enforcable legal documents?

Does a phone even have a EULA?

Arcus
Jul 3, 2007, 05:33 AM
this is silly, wait for a new ipod or just use it as a phone

Where have all the geeks and hackers gone?

I think it's great that so much interest is made in someone buying a $600 product, disabling it's main purpose and then presenting it as a work of genius. I suspect if he gutted his 17" MacBookPro, put in some kettle filaments and used it as a portable trouser press he'd be nominated for a Nobel prize.

I can see our man sat in Starbucks or McDonalds or some other WiFi enabled fat factory browsing away and then realising he spent so much time on MacRumors reading about himself that he's late for his Dungeons and Dragons club, reaching into his pocket for his mobile phone to tell Azgraz the Loser he'll be late and as he dials on his AT&T mobile costing $80 a month the thought flickers across his mind that technology convergence might not be a bad thing.


Again more geek hate.What shame. Jealous maybe?

koobcamuk
Jul 3, 2007, 05:51 AM
Right... and another thing that's possible is that the iphone could go back into lock-down mode after a certain period of time without a SIM. Just speculation, but it would make sense.

arn

I'm surprised that AT&T haven't done what softbank in Japan have done to their phones. The phone needs contact with the network, or non of the functions will work. Mind you, Japan has nearly 100% mobile phone coverage and most of it's 3G.

I remember that my first iPod 3rdGen, 20GB was £300 ($600) when I bought is in 2003 or 4. Now that is a lot of money and looking back, it revolutionised the way I listen to music...

Manic Mouse
Jul 3, 2007, 05:57 AM
Don't expect the next iPod to have WiFi or internet abilities. It's clear that Apple is going to keep the iPhone low capacity, high functionality and vice versa for the iPod to prevent them cannibalising each others sales. Eventually the lines may converge into one be-all-do-all device (when flash capacity rivals HDDs at a similar price), but not yet.

Bern
Jul 3, 2007, 05:58 AM
Okay, now this whole iPhone thing has reached the pinnacle of stupidity.

tekcor
Jul 3, 2007, 06:18 AM
I would have to agree, it might not hold a million songs, but it has a ton of features that no iPod has had before. :) :apple:

I've been reporting bugs left and right for the iPhone. Apps are unexpectedly quitting (or what I expect is a "unexpectedly quit"), sometimes sorting is completely off, and the iPod always shuffles - regardless whether you tell it to or not. It also doesn't yet work with any FM transmitter, so I'm still using my 5G iPod in my Griffin RoadTrip until somebody creates something compatible.

My basic point is I love the device. I'm happy with the investment considering all the features, and I have internet at my fingertips everywhere I go. But as an iPod+WiFi - I'd be royally pissed off.

defeated
Jul 3, 2007, 06:32 AM
i don't think its practically useful, but its an interesting idea anyway, future iPod, probably will be like iphone minus phone, so..

michelle21
Jul 3, 2007, 07:08 AM
i posted this on the Iphone board and barely got posted on. Plus i took the info from TUAW.com and gave credit to its OP.

This is totally nuts... And than you wonder why cell phone providers have the policies they do. I'm like somekind of super hacker, but this stuff is just totally stupid. and I would never try it. Apple will come out with a widscreen ipod eventually.

whooleytoo
Jul 3, 2007, 07:12 AM
Okay, now this whole iPhone thing has reached the pinnacle of stupidity.

?

So, if I (hypothetically) wanted a large screen iPod, with touch-screen UI, that had the ability to browse the internet and receive email through WiFi, so I bought an iPhone and cancelled the contract - I'm stupid.

But if I wanted all that and paid 59 dollars per month for 2 years, it would make more sense?

Uber-supersizing your McDonalds meal for 10c still isn't good value if you don't want to eat that much - paying for what you don't want or need is never good value.

If people just want the functionality listed above, it makes no sense NOT to cancel their contracts.

Bern
Jul 3, 2007, 07:21 AM
?

So, if I (hypothetically) wanted a large screen iPod, with touch-screen UI, that had the ability to browse the internet and receive email through WiFi, so I bought an iPhone and cancelled the contract - I'm stupid.

But if I wanted all that and paid 59 dollars per month for 2 years, it would make more sense?

Uber-supersizing your McDonalds meal for 10c still isn't good value if you don't want to eat that much - paying for what you don't want or need is never good value.

If people just want the functionality listed above, it makes no sense NOT to cancel their contracts.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck... it must be a duck :D

caccamolle
Jul 3, 2007, 07:25 AM
$600 for a mediocre ipod and wifi. :eek:

exactly - totally irrelevant piece of news.

Leoff
Jul 3, 2007, 07:26 AM
?

So, if I (hypothetically) wanted a large screen iPod, with touch-screen UI, that had the ability to browse the internet and receive email through WiFi, so I bought an iPhone and cancelled the contract - I'm stupid.

But if I wanted all that and paid 59 dollars per month for 2 years, it would make more sense?

Since when did you equate yourself to being an "iPhone thing?"

caccamolle
Jul 3, 2007, 07:30 AM
I'm sure there are people more than willing to pay $649 to get a full screen video ipod with multitouch and wifi internet. The contract has been a killer for some who have minimal mobile phone needs.

arn

yes right - it's a timing thing. Those features will be incorporated in the new iPods anyway. There are a lot of willing for whome $650 is nothing, but they are not all stupid :)

Now, as to my situation, I don't know: the iPhone addition to my current contract (cingular/att) would at $20 to my plan, which I hardly feel is a killer given that currently I have no data plan whatosever.

doemel
Jul 3, 2007, 07:34 AM
if you are one of these people who actually does this to your iphone you are crazy. I think that apple will come out with a widescreen ipod that has touch features soon enough, and there is not need to kill your glorious iphone.

Right. And what if Apple decides that the iPhone is selling well enough that they see no reason to offer such great features in an iPod? From a marketing position one could ask why they'd sell you an iPod at a lower price if everybody's gonna plunk down more cash for an iPhone?

Lord Blackadder
Jul 3, 2007, 07:35 AM
It isn't $600 for a mediocre iPod & Wifi device...it's $600 for a sneak peek at the 6th gen iPod.

Too risky though - Apple and AT&T could pull the plug on these loopholers at any moment.

I imagine that Apple already has beta prototypes of a new iPod based on the iPhone - we should see it soon!

doemel
Jul 3, 2007, 07:37 AM
Why not just wait for the 6th gen iPod that is certainly going to be a WiFi, widescreen, multi-touch, hard drive based, Internet communication wonder? I would. When they release it you're modded iPhone will seem really lame. But then again, why wait? :) Enjoy it now, then sell it on Ebay and get the iPod. :p

The point is, even the "uncrippled" iPhone is going to look like a lame duck if your iPod can do all that minus the phone part for a lot less money...

Yankees 4 Life
Jul 3, 2007, 07:58 AM
hey I agree whybwould you not want to activate and pay for the service? You didn't just drop 650 on the phone like I did only to not activate it...thais stupidity at its best...LOL plus arn may be right on this one

buymeaniphone
Jul 3, 2007, 08:08 AM
What if you change your mind and then want a phone plan after doing this, will it let you go back to using it as a phone?

Rojo
Jul 3, 2007, 08:09 AM
The point is, even the "uncrippled" iPhone is going to look like a lame duck if your iPod can do all that minus the phone part for a lot less money...

Exactly.

And I really don't understand why so many people are convinced the 6gen iPod will have wifi anyway. JUST wifi is going to be limiting to a LOT of people, and unusable in most places. If you're going to have a true internet device, you're going to need some kind of cellular connection (for now) to browse the web in most areas.

Triplenickle
Jul 3, 2007, 08:09 AM
Actually, I see the next step by Apple is to actually offer a iPod/Widget/Web combo with wifi and BT DUN....it wouldn't surprise me. They would sell a ton of these too. I need at least a 40GB one. I could then replace my IPod video/Nokia 800 combo... and use my Treo 755p as a modem.

dogbone
Jul 3, 2007, 08:14 AM
...That's a new use for the headphone jack.

So that's why it's called a head phone jack.

Donnacha
Jul 3, 2007, 08:16 AM
An iphone with no contract would be awesome for those of us in the UK who want one for software testing.

Can anyone tell us if the $49.98 "Pick Your Plan" scheme requires an American address?

And, if so, do they check it?

Would I get away with using my hotel address?

And how quickly can these "Pick Your Plan" contracts be canceled?

Does anyone in the UK want to pool together to buy a bunch of iphones in this way?

doemel
Jul 3, 2007, 08:26 AM
and use my Treo 755p as a modem.

See, this is somewhat hackish and most certainly not the way Apple envisions ease of use. In other words: forget it.

Porchland
Jul 3, 2007, 08:27 AM
I'm sure there are people more than willing to pay $649 to get a full screen video ipod with multitouch and wifi internet. The contract has been a killer for some who have minimal mobile phone needs.

arn

Or, you know, wait three months until Apple comes out with the new iPod.

My guess: You lose the phone capability but pick up a bigger HD, better battery life and (wild guess/fingers crossed) an iTunes Store app that will allow you to buy tracks over WiFi and sync them back to your main iTunes database.

40GB/$299 and 100GB/$399.

dartzorichalcos
Jul 3, 2007, 08:31 AM
I would still buy the iPhone if it didn't have phone capabilities. I just wish the iPhone was cheaper.

localoid
Jul 3, 2007, 08:38 AM
Or, you know, wait three months until Apple comes out with the new iPod.

My guess: You lose the phone capability but pick up a bigger HD, better battery life and (wild guess/fingers crossed) an iTunes Store app that will allow you to buy tracks over WiFi and sync them back to your main iTunes database.

40GB/$299 and 100GB/$399.

Yeah right, sure... the same functionality of the iPhone (sans the phone) and Apple will be able to (and want to) sell this device for much, much less than the iPhone.

Dream on.

Jblack4083
Jul 3, 2007, 08:40 AM
Does the 49.98 include iPhone service or is it only a GoPhone minutes plan. If the 49.98 includes the unlimited data and visual voice then I'm going to get an iPhone on Saturday when i get my Macbook Pro.

Can anyone verify if that's true?

phatspider
Jul 3, 2007, 08:58 AM
An iphone with no contract would be awesome for those of us in the UK who want one for software testing.

Can anyone tell us if the $49.98 "Pick Your Plan" scheme requires an American address?

And, if so, do they check it?

Would I get away with using my hotel address?

And how quickly can these "Pick Your Plan" contracts be canceled?

Does anyone in the UK want to pool together to buy a bunch of iphones in this way?


Mine is en route - so i will try this method once it gets here at the weekend :)

network23
Jul 3, 2007, 09:02 AM
Until the iPhone and iPod converge, and that won't happen for YEARS, the iPod will never have WiFi beyond the ability to sync with your local computer.

As stated previously, Apple will want to keep the iPod and iPhone markets as distinct as possible. Phone cababilities and WiFi go hand-in-hand. To me, the iPhone put the last nail in the coffin for ever seeing WiFi for the iPod.

You WILL see widescreen and multitouch. Hopefully before October, but more than likely, MW2008 in San Francisco.

Yankees 4 Life
Jul 3, 2007, 09:05 AM
trust me, im no doctor, but i can tell you doing this might be dangerous for your iphone... especially if you have to reset/restore

Yankees 4 Life
Jul 3, 2007, 09:10 AM
So that's why it's called a head phone jack.

haha... so true...

dukishdary
Jul 3, 2007, 09:20 AM
I agree. Whats the point? Just go buy an iPod.

you obviously aren't an iphone owner....yet :)

Seidoger
Jul 3, 2007, 09:20 AM
Ok, it frees the iPhone from AT&T, but it is still NOT unlocking!

Unlocking = Ability to pop in any SIM card from any GSM carrier in the world and have it work.

Can't wait for that.

woogli
Jul 3, 2007, 09:21 AM
Have you considered that Jobs et. al. might release a widescreen ipod with wifi etc specifically to throw the phone companies on their heads?

Apple has likely had a hell of a time getting to the point where they have locked in AT&T, but that's only in the US. If they want to offer something world-wide, they have to jump through lots of hoops to do it, even if they play hardball. Jobs wants to run things his way; he has vision. He likely can't stand the various monopolies he's having to deal with right now (music, movies, and now cell carriers). You can bet he's looking for ways to continue to throw the three 'industries' on their heads. Look at the recent posturing from Universal Music as an example of the problems with dealing with these monopolies.

A wide-screen iPod with wifi ... they could release that world-wide! Think of how many of those they would sell. Then imagine them offering VOIP software (skype, or their own). Then consider the number of major cities either implementing or pondering city-wide wireless hotspots... It doesn't seem to make sense for them NOT to release a wifi ipod, when you look at it from a world-wide standpoint, rather than a US-centric one.

I will wait patiently (well, somewhat impatiently, I suppose), as a Canadian on this one...

-t

CaptainHaddock
Jul 3, 2007, 09:26 AM
I'm surprised that AT&T haven't done what softbank in Japan have done to their phones. The phone needs contact with the network, or non of the functions will work.

I'm not sure what you mean. My Softbank phone works fine when it's off the network.

whooleytoo
Jul 3, 2007, 09:27 AM
Since when did you equate yourself to being an "iPhone thing?"

Err.. pardon?

Perhaps if I rephrased it: "If one wanted an iPhone but not the phone functionality, why should one pay for it? One would be silly.." ;)

Avatar74
Jul 3, 2007, 09:29 AM
I have a fully-activated iPhone and I agree that this is a silly idea, chiefly because equally-advanced iPods are likely to be on the way in a very short time.

In fact, I think more mobile computers will be on the way from Apple... I use the word "computers" because essentially at their heart there is a computer, but in the contemporary sense "computer" has become an anachronism... So, call it mobile computing, mobile communications, mobile entertainment, whatever... The devices that we're likely to see in the next three to five years will blow you away.

What Apple is doing with the iPhone seems to me to be a "toe in the water" feeler product that they typically start with, and then various offshoots come out of that in both directions from the original offering and price point... i.e. larger, more features, and smaller, fewer features. The thing is, as an ipod and wifi computing device alone, iPhone doesn't really cut it. I don't mean in terms of features... I mean in terms of the overall user experience. As an iPhone/iPod/wifi mobile the whole package is definitely, absolutely worth it. However, there are other UI enhancements that could make for a better standalone iPod or iPod/wifi communicator.

That being said, if people want to tinker... so be it. I don't begrudge them that, and I'm not telling them to do other than they're set on. But for those of you sitting on the fence wondering whether this is the way to go, I will remind you that Apple's product lines always evolve and mushroom and given the general reception to the user interface concept at work (not just the multitouch but the departure from conventional pulldown menus, etc.) has been positive enough that we're likely to see even better-tailored iPod offspring very soon.

localoid
Jul 3, 2007, 09:30 AM
... A wide-screen iPod with wifi ... they could release that world-wide! Think of how many of those they would sell. Then imagine them offering VOIP software (skype, or their own). Then consider the number of major cities either implementing or pondering city-wide wireless hotspots... It doesn't seem to make sense for them NOT to release a wifi ipod, when you look at it from a world-wide standpoint, rather than a US-centric one.

I will wait patiently (well, somewhat impatiently, I suppose), as a Canadian on this one...

-t

Apple may or may not want to do this, so it may or may not happen -- regardless, anyone that thinks such a device would sell for much, much less than an iPhone doesn't understand the technology. Just leaving out the phone circuitry is only going to lower Apple's production costs by only a few dollars...

Yankees 4 Life
Jul 3, 2007, 09:33 AM
Apple may or may not want to do this, so it may or may not happen -- regardless, anyone that thinks such a device would sell for much, much less than an iPhone doesn't understand the technology. Just leaving out the phone circuitry is only going to lower Apple's production costs by only a few dollars...


you forgot they have to add a hard drive into the costs

guzhogi
Jul 3, 2007, 09:33 AM
While it's nice to have a pay-as-you-go option, but $50+/month?!? That's still a lot. For $10/months and a contract more, you get 250 more minutes/month, 5000 night and weekend minutes and unlimited mobile to mobile. In comparison, my family has a regular pay as you go phone (just a phone, no music, no pda stuff, just a phone) where it's $20 every 3 months or whenever you run out (whichever comes first). That's $6.66/month and something like $0.0025/minute. The iPhone is cool, but way too expensive.

Maccus Aurelius
Jul 3, 2007, 09:35 AM
Wow fake SSN, sounds glorious :p

Well, it's different strokes for different folks I guess, but I myself see little worth in plunking down $600 for an 8GB device, then cutting off its main reason for existence just to have it become what is, in my opinion, a handheld which is essentially dwarfed by my much cheaper 80GB iPod. While the multitouch and WiFi hardware is nice, it lacks some of the little niceties that my iPod possesses, such as video out, having a drive capable of justifying its video capabilities.

Frankly, I'd much rather have my coverflow on my macbook, then have the ability to store dozens of movies on my current iPod than have these two things converge into a thing which is both half the price of my computer, twice the price of my iPod and then only have 4 to 8 gigabytes to play around with. I'd probably be a little bothered at the fact that there would be phone-centric widgets on the device that are rendered useless.

I'm not so sure about this future WiPod stuff, so I don't really worry if Apple ever really decides to make it a reality.

Rocketman
Jul 3, 2007, 09:45 AM
I'm sure there are people more than willing to pay $649 to get a full screen video ipod with multitouch and wifi internet. The contract has been a killer for some who have minimal mobile phone needs.

arn

Here in southern California of all places there are pockets where AT&T service sucks. People in that situation might have a strong incentive to do these tricks to activate the iPhone but cancel service.

I have not yet heard of a specific VoIP thing for iPhone but it cannot be far away.

Rocketman

manhattanboy
Jul 3, 2007, 09:52 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

TUAW essentially describes (http://www.tuaw.com/2007/07/02/tada-the-6th-gen-contract-free-wifi-enabled-ipod/) how to unlock an iPhone for use as a Widescreen iPod + Wifi -- without a contract, and a $49.98 one time fee.

The first step involves faking bad credit (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2007/07/01/activating-ipod-video-wifi-on-iphone-with-contract/) by typing in "999-99-9999" as your Social Security number during activation to trigger the GoPhone/"Pick Your Plan" option which allows for contractless pre-pay plans. The cheapest version of "Pick Your Plan" is $49.98 (rate plans (http://www.tuaw.com/photos/iphone-prepaid-gallery/296285/)).

Then, according to TUAW simply taking out your SIM card (http://www.tuaw.com/2007/07/02/tada-the-6th-gen-contract-free-wifi-enabled-ipod/) allows you iPhone to continue to function as an iPod + Wifi device without any further hassle.



Presumably, you could then cancel your $49.98 month-to-month and use the iPhone as a Widescreen iPod + Wifi device.

THIS IS A MIRACLE FOR COLLEGE USERS WHERE THE ENTIRE CAMPUS IS WI-FI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:D :D :D

stompy
Jul 3, 2007, 10:07 AM
Or, you know, wait three months until Apple comes out with the new iPod.

My guess: You lose the phone capability but pick up a bigger HD, better battery life and (wild guess/fingers crossed) an iTunes Store app that will allow you to buy tracks over WiFi and sync them back to your main iTunes database.

40GB/$299 and 100GB/$399.

Update your calendars, "October 3: Pick up uberPod at AppleStore."

Ramsos
Jul 3, 2007, 10:12 AM
When do you guys think apple will release the 6g iPod? I know they don't want to affect their iPhone sales I'm thinking next year but I'm hoping for winter.

Porchland
Jul 3, 2007, 10:12 AM
Yeah right, sure... the same functionality of the iPhone (sans the phone) and Apple will be able to (and want to) sell this device for much, much less than the iPhone.

Dream on.

So what do you think Apple is going to do with the 6G iPod -- nothing? No multitouch? No coverflow? No widescreen display?

Admittedly, even without the phone functionality, the iPhone is a big step forward from the 5G iPod. But if some of those new features don't trickle down to the 6G iPod, Apple will have no reason to refresh the iPod at all. I don't see it going in a radically different direction than the iPhone.

xfiftyfour
Jul 3, 2007, 10:17 AM
I get it that the iPhone has a lot of features that the iPod doesn't, but it still seems ridiculous to me to pay $650 ($700, really, after taxes and the one month) right now for 8gbs of space when it'll only be a few more months before an actual iPod comes out with a lot of the same features and for cheaper.

I guess if you have money to blow, though...

padmasana
Jul 3, 2007, 10:24 AM
I'm fully intent on switching to AT&T, but dang, I'll have just over two months remaining in my Sprint contract when my iPhone arrives. Besides, I'll actually save some dough switching since my girlfriend is already with AT&T and I can get a cheaper plan.
So it would be very tempting to have a 2/3 working iPhone for a couple months in order to save myself from a $150 Sprint contract penalty. I'm sure this has the same appeal to others near the end of their contracts.

princealfie
Jul 3, 2007, 10:31 AM
Does the 49.98 include iPhone service or is it only a GoPhone minutes plan. If the 49.98 includes the unlimited data and visual voice then I'm going to get an iPhone on Saturday when i get my Macbook Pro.

Can anyone verify if that's true?

Yes, this is true! :)

Fwink!
Jul 3, 2007, 10:35 AM
I expect to see many of the iPhone features on next gen iPods.

It wont need blue tooth or phone capabilities, though wifi for browsing, etc. would be nice.

Cover flow, blah.
Finger flicking interface, eh.
Pinch scaling, hmm.

An Fm tuner, and recording capability would sure be nice though. But we know they've already poo pooed these ideas.

In fact, if they don't do a iPhone form factor iPod with most of the iPhone's features. I probably will look elsewhere for a music player. And it can't cost $500 either. And it better not have a reduced capacity due to using flash drives.

And I better be able to unscrew an access door (with a tiny Torx driver, of course) to replace the battery.

ccrandall77
Jul 3, 2007, 10:35 AM
Why not just wait a few months for the touchscreen iPods to appear? Steve Jobs already let it slip they are working on iPods running OS X.

But how is anyone to know if that iPod will have WiFi and the ability to do email, browse with Safari, etc.?? For everyone ripping on people who want a phone-less iPhone, just calm down. If it doesn't work for you, then don't do it. I for one am definitely interested in a phone-less iPod even if it does cost $600. Hell, I paid $750 for a Clie UX-50 when it came out and that doesn't have a fraction of the functionality of a the iPhone.

I'm looking for a decent PMP that works seemlessly with a Mac that also has decent PDA functionality that syncs seemlessly with a Mac. Guess what, the iPhone is the only device that fits the bill. And even at $600 it's only marginally more expensive than getting an 8GB Nano and a Palm TX... and you don't have to carry 2 devices and it does a heck of a lot more than the TX out of the box (granted there's more SW available for Palm, but I'm sure in time more will be available for the iPhone).

I would definitely recommend to anyone contemplating this to check with Apple Tech Supp and AT&T. Even then, I'd be very concerned about being stuck with a brick should Apple decide to deactivate the features of the iPhone down the road for those w/o a valid SIM. The Apple "Genius" at the local store handed me a load of BS (i.e. can work w/o a contract, no restocking fee, etc)... so I'm not sure I'd take any one person's word for it either.

RichP
Jul 3, 2007, 10:50 AM
The Gen 6 iPod will be similar to iPhone in interface. Touchscreen, coverflow, all works out well for music and movies. There *might* be a wifi component for iTunes access and streaming music to/from your other apple "stuff" There will NOT be web browsing, that takes the device too close to the iphone. (The only rational for apple to bring web browsing to the next ipod is support the adoption of Safari by web developers)

CaptainValor
Jul 3, 2007, 10:50 AM
I saw one person comment on this briefly but I think it bears more discussion. Now that the firmware image for the iPhone is out there and Apple-savvy developers are undoubtedly experimenting with third-party App creation, I think their first focus should be on porting Skype to and integrating it with the iPhone. One could buy it unactivated, pop the SIM, load Skype and have a (practically) zero-cost phone service in areas with WiFI. Now of course, this wouldn't work particularly well for rural customers like me. But heck, it's better than getting locked into a pricey 2-year agreement or even paying $50/mo for a paltry 200 "minutes."

Bottom line: Skype support could change everything. I believe it should be a priority. :)

woogli
Jul 3, 2007, 10:50 AM
Apple may or may not want to do this, so it may or may not happen -- regardless, anyone that thinks such a device would sell for much, much less than an iPhone doesn't understand the technology. Just leaving out the phone circuitry is only going to lower Apple's production costs by only a few dollars...

I agree with you, and I wasn't indicating that the iPod - if it ever happens -- would cost considerably less. Indeed, they wouldn't have to make it cost considerably less. Since it would be something they wouldn't have to count on the phone carriers for, they could release it world-wide. Since people would probably desire an iPod of that nature, given the lack of iPhone availability, it could leave Apple in a position to leave the price close to the iPhone. It seems likely there would be a lot of interest outside the US (maybe even inside?) for something like this.

cheers,
-T

ProstheticHead
Jul 3, 2007, 10:52 AM
Why would Apple want to disable these phones? Quite frankly, how much money is Apple making from the calling plans anyway?

If I were Apple, I'd let these exploits go on for as long as possible. Apple doesn't lose anything from people performing these tricks. They still made the money selling the phone, and as I mentioned before, how much money are they making from AT&T through the calling plan? Probably not a whole lot.

So all in all, Apple is selling iPhones. So what if there's no calling plan? They're still taking the sales straight to the bank.

gnasher729
Jul 3, 2007, 10:53 AM
C'mon, now. Isn't this a complete violation of the EULA?

I don't understand how these threads are okay, but any thread wherein someone discusses running OS X on a PC is silenced because of the EULA. Am I missing something?

Yes. These discussions are usually not silenced, but discussed. What happens is that many people believe it is wrong to run MacOS X on a generic PC, they know that the MacOS X EULA doesn't allow it, and they therefore believe that the MacOS X EULA makes it illegal to run MacOS X on a generic PC. In reality, what _is_ completely illegal is to make a _copy_ of MacOS X and install it anywhere (including a generic PC), and since about the only way to get a _legal_ version of MacOS X for Intel is to buy a Mac, we can assume that 99.9 percent of those who want to install it on a generic PC actually start by making an illegal copy.

kirk26
Jul 3, 2007, 10:54 AM
Might have to try that...:p

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

TUAW essentially describes (http://www.tuaw.com/2007/07/02/tada-the-6th-gen-contract-free-wifi-enabled-ipod/) how to unlock an iPhone for use as a Widescreen iPod + Wifi -- without a contract, and a $49.98 one time fee.

The first step involves faking bad credit (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2007/07/01/activating-ipod-video-wifi-on-iphone-with-contract/) by typing in "999-99-9999" as your Social Security number during activation to trigger the GoPhone/"Pick Your Plan" option which allows for contractless pre-pay plans. The cheapest version of "Pick Your Plan" is $49.98 (rate plans (http://www.tuaw.com/photos/iphone-prepaid-gallery/296285/)).

Then, according to TUAW simply taking out your SIM card (http://www.tuaw.com/2007/07/02/tada-the-6th-gen-contract-free-wifi-enabled-ipod/) allows you iPhone to continue to function as an iPod + Wifi device without any further hassle.



Presumably, you could then cancel your $49.98 month-to-month and use the iPhone as a Widescreen iPod + Wifi device.

Yankees 4 Life
Jul 3, 2007, 10:55 AM
Update your calendars, "October 3: Pick up uberPod at AppleStore."

i would like bet my salary for this to actually happen

I expect to see many of the iPhone features on next gen iPods.

It wont need blue tooth or phone capabilities, though wifi for browsing, etc. would be nice.

Cover flow, blah.
Finger flicking interface, eh.
Pinch scaling, hmm.

An Fm tuner, and recording capability would sure be nice though. But we know they've already poo pooed these ideas.

In fact, if they don't do a iPhone form factor iPod with most of the iPhone's features. I probably will look elsewhere for a music player. And it can't cost $500 either. And it better not have a reduced capacity due to using flash drives.

And I better be able to unscrew an access door (with a tiny Torx driver, of course) to replace the battery.

well you might want to go look for some archos.. cuz aint no way they put a flimsy batter cover in the ipod...

gnasher729
Jul 3, 2007, 11:03 AM
I'm surprised that AT&T haven't done what softbank in Japan have done to their phones. The phone needs contact with the network, or non of the functions will work. Mind you, Japan has nearly 100% mobile phone coverage and most of it's 3G.

The iPhone is sold at full price. In other words, if you go to an AT&T store, buy an iPhone, and then do with it whatever you want (without entering a phone contract with AT&T), AT&T still makes a bit of money from the sale of the iPhone. So why would they stop you from doing this?

letterexchange
Jul 3, 2007, 11:05 AM
I was listening to one of Leo Laporte's podcasts yesterday and he said that nobody seems to have read the terms of use in the fine print because the iPhone WILL work if you cancel your AT&T account. But only for 3 months and then it's designed to turn back into a brick. He said there was some guy from Mexico that wanted to get one and take back with him after he got it activated and cancelled his AT&T account and he told him not to bother.

SeanMcg
Jul 3, 2007, 11:08 AM
So what do you think Apple is going to do with the 6G iPod -- nothing? No multitouch? No coverflow? No widescreen display?

Admittedly, even without the phone functionality, the iPhone is a big step forward from the 5G iPod. But if some of those new features don't trickle down to the 6G iPod, Apple will have no reason to refresh the iPod at all. I don't see it going in a radically different direction than the iPhone.

Back at the end of May, I posted this:
...
And a question: does anyone else feel that we may have seen the end of the PortalPlayer interface on the iPod in favor of an embedded OS X?

followed up with
After seeing the media player on the iPhone, I felt that we were seeing the future of the media player interface on the top iPod. So maybe I should have cut off the question at "Are we seeing the end of the PortalPlayer interface?"

That question was based on a rumor that I can't recall now that indicated basically the death of the Portal Player base of the iPod. The iPhone really confirmed this rumor. Apple's porting of OS X (also rumored long ago) to devices other than the PowerPC Mac (Intel and ARM, AppleTV, iPhone) shows that they really want to expand the influence and reach of OS X. Not only that, they now have the proven ability to do so.

Somehow we don't question that Windows was ported to mobile devices, yet the concept of OS X anywhere but a standard desktop or laptop system still confuses some people who cannot see beyond today.

So I believe that one of the next gen iPods will be widescreen, like the iPhone, large HDD, with OS X and the media player functionality of the iPhone. I think wireless and touch screen will really depend on battery issues (or inevitable Zune comparisons). The ability to buy songs directly would be nice, but I don't think Apple wants to completely sever the ties with a base station, if only for advertising that is possible on the iTunes Store with a full size screen.

stompy
Jul 3, 2007, 11:13 AM
i would like bet my salary for this to actually happen.

Apple will update the iPod by Oct. 31. Will it be a 40-100 GB iPhone minus phone for $300-$400? No.

SeanMcg
Jul 3, 2007, 11:23 AM
You may not be able to buy Tiger for Intel via retail in a universal version (and why should Apple make one available? No Intel Mac had anything lower than 10.4), but Leopard will definitely be available via retail. And how many of those 99.9% do think will pony up the $129 to buy a legit copy and try hacking it to work on their non-Mac boxes? Very, Very Very few, if any.

Maccus Aurelius
Jul 3, 2007, 11:57 AM
I expect to see many of the iPhone features on next gen iPods.

It wont need blue tooth or phone capabilities, though wifi for browsing, etc. would be nice.

Cover flow, blah.
Finger flicking interface, eh.
Pinch scaling, hmm.

An Fm tuner, and recording capability would sure be nice though. But we know they've already poo pooed these ideas.

In fact, if they don't do a iPhone form factor iPod with most of the iPhone's features. I probably will look elsewhere for a music player. And it can't cost $500 either. And it better not have a reduced capacity due to using flash drives.

And I better be able to unscrew an access door (with a tiny Torx driver, of course) to replace the battery.

I doubt very much that Apple would cut down capacity of the high-end iPod in favor of flash drive iPhone-like PMP's. My guess is they'll convert all 'Pods to flash when the beefier models get cheaper per gig and get better capacity than what we have available now.

But WiFi browsing? I just can't see this happening, at least not for a while. If Apple created an iPod that was a spitting image of an iPhone, had all of its hotspot capabilities and interface, the iPhone itself would be cannibalized to death. Why buy an iPhone when I can just have a WiPod for all of that fancy stuff, and then simply have a simple cell phone to do the calling thing?

RationalAntaxia
Jul 3, 2007, 12:18 PM
well if you plan to unlock your iphone and turn it into the most expensive ipod ever, then you should be aware of these:

jajh for iphone (http://blog.jajah.com/index.php?/archives/220-JAJAH-+-iPhone.html) and talkety (http://beta.talkety.com/pages/iphone)

both are phone calls thru the web. these will certainly make things interesting...

^^ Aren't you still overlooking the fact that you need to be in a WiFi hotspot in order to use that. What good is that going to do when you're one the road or in some other situation like that?

skellener
Jul 3, 2007, 12:27 PM
iPhone as a Widescreen iPod + Wifi without Contract?
$600 for 8GB:eek:

No thanks.

rstansby
Jul 3, 2007, 12:57 PM
well if you plan to unlock your iphone and turn it into the most expensive ipod ever, then you should be aware of these:

jajh for iphone (http://blog.jajah.com/index.php?/archives/220-JAJAH-+-iPhone.html) and talkety (http://beta.talkety.com/pages/iphone)

both are phone calls thru the web. these will certainly make things interesting...

I just tried out Jajah with my home computer, cell phone and home phone line. From my desktop I was able to initiate a call which made my cell phone ring, after it rang my home phone rang. The latency was much greater than normal for a cell to landline call. Also it was clear that it used my voice connection on my cell phone. So I really don't see the use of this, unless you want cheap international calls. JaJah will not allow you to make calls from an iPhone that doesn't have a voice plan.

Now if you are a matchmaker and you want to trick two people into talking to each other this site might be useful.

leontief
Jul 3, 2007, 01:06 PM
Jeez arn, you're really getting into the iPhone stuff! I don't think I've ever seen you post this much... ever!

You should ask Arn about his Newton collection...if he still has it.

Arn's been excited about this kind of device for a long time.

nickgwyn
Jul 3, 2007, 01:25 PM
he?

rlreif
Jul 3, 2007, 01:33 PM
yes right - it's a timing thing. Those features will be incorporated in the new iPods anyway. There are a lot of willing for whome $650 is nothing, but they are not all stupid :)

Now, as to my situation, I don't know: the iPhone addition to my current contract (cingular/att) would at $20 to my plan, which I hardly feel is a killer given that currently I have no data plan whatosever.

EXACTLY...
people, just because you are broke doesnt mean i am!

I have a phone that i am very happy with, and i use all the features it has that the iphone doesnt every day, and im not giving up 3g for anything!

but i need a new ipod, and this is the coolest ipod i have ever seen... my phone will continue to go everywhere with me, the phoneless iphone will sit in my car, and play music

carfac
Jul 3, 2007, 01:42 PM
Why would Apple want to disable these phones?

I can think of a number of reasons, not the least of which is contractual obligations. While I (nor anyone here) is privy to the exact agreement between ATT and Apple, it is not hard to imagine that ATT set certain requirements in the software specifications. Specifically, it is very much in ATT's interests to have this become a brick if not activated.

ATT makes jack on an iPhone sale, and nothing from the majority that were sold at Apple Store. They are not in this partnership for altruistic reasons- they want subscribers, and lots of them. I am sure that insuring use on their network is a KEYSTONE of their side of the Apple/ATT agreement.. it has to be! Otherwise, ATT gets nothing.

Look at the iPhone requirements. It specifically states- in no uncertain terms- that a two year contract with ATT is required... not optional. It is well within Apple/ATT's rights to remotely disable an iPhone, or have a time bomb in the software that, when it cannot verify, will reset the iPhone.

So I am not surprised to see these working today, short term. Check again in November, it may be an entirely different story.

Quite frankly, how much money is Apple making from the calling plans anyway?

OK, let's say they get a cent- one thin penny- from every subscriber month. They are already in the black on iPhone itself. SO here is a new revenue stream that costs them nothing. Best current estimates are 500,000 phones sold over the weekend- that is 5 grand free and clear for nothing. I know that is not all that much for a large corp, but that'll keep Jobs in turtlenecks for a while.

Now we can guess that they make more than 1 cent, and we know the sales will only go up... and it is, in effect, free money, coming in every month for nothing on Apples part. Up that to 10 cents on each monthly 59.99 (which is still just a sliver) and Apple rakes in 50K this month. A buck cut- 500K. Now that IS serious money.

So, reason 2 for Apple locking the phone down- loss of part of this "free" revenue stream. And to discount a free money source- of any amount- is just not done.

Apple doesn't lose anything from people performing these tricks. They still made the money selling the phone, and as I mentioned before, how much money are they making from AT&T through the calling plan?

Apple potentially loses a lot- ""free" cash for one, and could lose much more if it is in material breach of their contract, and there are fines or such imposed. Again, I do NOT know there is such a clause, but ATT would be stupid not to have an enforcement clause. You may not like ATT, but I doubt they are stupid on this count.

ATT joined with Apple on this to make money. And we know the terms are NOT good to the phone company- remember: Verizon turned it down. ATT must have some ace up it's sleeve, some way to insure their money stream, or Jobs would still be shopping this phone.

On the subject at large, I would be willing to bet that this will work for a while... but I also bet that come November, we will see a lot of whiners posting when they see they have a 600.00 brick.

my 2 cents.

Yankees 4 Life
Jul 3, 2007, 02:04 PM
Apple will update the iPod by Oct. 31. Will it be a 40-100 GB iPhone minus phone for $300-$400? No.

i am now broke....

it will prolly be 299 & 399 for 40g and 120g... i have a hunch because seagate made 120 portable HD's last year

maknik
Jul 3, 2007, 02:12 PM
I only mean this in partial seriousness (I'm sure to get the iPhone when it has 3G), but...

If you don't need the phone part, for about $200 and the same amount of hacking effort, you can buy another elegant device with a nice 480x272 screen, 4gb storage, video, music, wifi, a good web browser, decent email client, IM, vnc, and whatever else the software community can dream up. Plus, it plays games pretty well.

True, it lacks the touch screen or Apple's slick OS. And true, the hacking requirement is a bit larger. But once you get your PSP on the open-edition firmware, you get quite a lot of mileage for your $200 -- not to mention an extra $300 in your pocket.

JGowan
Jul 3, 2007, 02:46 PM
Most expensive iPod ever. (best Comic book store guy voice).Not True:

$499 iPods:

1) 1G 10GB (Early 2002)
2) 2G 20GB (July 2002
3) 3G 40GB (April 2003)
4) 4G 40GB Photo (July 2004)

$599 iPods:

1) 4G 60GB Photo (October 2004)

------

How quickly it's forgotten that until 2005, the high-end iPod has traditionally been "expensive", which is relative; I'm sure I was one of the very few hundred people to experience the first generation model [bought 11-12-01] and thought the $399 was VERY WELL SPENT and AMAZING VALUE. I believe at the time there were other HD-based MP3 players that might've been larger capacity [don't remember] but nothing worked near as well or was so easy to add music to or as quickly.

However, now that Apple has a $299 80GB unit, it's easy to pigeon-hole the iPhone as expensive, but really... compared to the value of earlier units with very small monochrome screen and mostly the ability to just play music (until the Photo model), what you get with the iPhone is unreal for the same money. Again, it's all about value. Other phones have the same and more features, but how many give the same experience? Zero. If someone tells you differently, they work for one of the other tech companies that make the iPhone's competition.

I wonder if the near-future ipod widescreen touchable will have some sort of wifi built in to share songs kind of like how the zune did it (please dont shoot me for wondering if a zune feature would be included in a future ipod release!!)? :)I seriously doubt it. With all of the SQUIRTING jokes at Balmer/M$'s expense and all of the 3-day limitations of keeping songs that were squirted (some not even able to be squirted), it seems like Apple would like to stay on the good side of the record companies and keep the "we're totally against piracy" PC viewpoint.

You can be sure Apple will come out with a "touch your music" iPod and I'm thinking/hoping it'll have an even bigger screen since the speaker/microphone won't be necessary, however: I think all of the heavier hardware/features will be left to the iPhone to keep its value as high as possible. Now, it's possible they add WiFi in a few years that will allow people to buy songs from iTunes and maybe some other stuff like Google/YouTube videos but probably not full access to the internet -- again, I think, to keep value high on the iPhone, I think big stuff like that will be left out of iPods.

Royale w/cheese
Jul 3, 2007, 02:58 PM
i would like bet my salary for this to actually happen
And I, would like to bet my carrot. :)

mrrory
Jul 3, 2007, 03:26 PM
The contract has been a killer for some who have minimal mobile phone needs.

Absolutely!!

I found this the other day when I was looking through the AT&T contract info on their website: http://www.wireless.att.com/learn/articles-resources/iphone-terms.jsp

Service may be cancelled after 14 days but within 30 days and early termination fee will be waived, but equipment may not be returned.

Swytch
Jul 3, 2007, 03:49 PM
Wouldnt it make more sense to spend a little more money and buy a macbook and have a bigger widescreen display with wifi, plus it can also be used for many other things....

ncbill
Jul 3, 2007, 04:14 PM
Not a chance.

There are at least 2 ways out of the contract:

1. cancel within the first 30 days
2. pay the early termination fee

If the iPhone is disabled after following those provisions of the contract, then at the minimum whomever sold it (Apple or AT&T) is on the hook for the full, original purchase price.

$600 plus tax is easily recovered in small claims.

I doubt either Apple or AT&T want to see their stores have to refund that much money for a 3-6 month old used iPhone.

I'm sure your iPhone will continue to work very well as an expensive iPod without an AT&T phone plan as long as you want to it to do so.

Look at the iPhone requirements. It specifically states- in no uncertain terms- that a two year contract with ATT is required... not optional.

It is well within Apple/ATT's rights to remotely disable an iPhone, or have a time bomb in the software that, when it cannot verify, will reset the iPhone...

On the subject at large, I would be willing to bet that this will work for a while... but I also bet that come November, we will see a lot of whiners posting when they see they have a 600.00 brick.

JGowan
Jul 3, 2007, 04:15 PM
Wouldnt it make more sense to spend a little more money and buy a macbook and have a bigger widescreen display with wifi, plus it can also be used for many other things....Well then, why not spend a little more money than the macbook and get a macbook pro and have an even bigger widescreen display? You see... the step up is always just a little more money -- where does it end?

A laptop is a laptop. A music player is a music player.

One weighs 5 pounds and sits on your lap. The other's 5 ounces and fits in your pocket.

twoodcc
Jul 3, 2007, 04:49 PM
i knew someone would figure it out. hopefully apple will just release a new ipod soon

carfac
Jul 3, 2007, 05:01 PM
There are at least 2 ways out of the contract:

1. cancel within the first 30 days
2. pay the early termination fee

I was NOT arguing that point. That is the ATT contract. The usage agreement (if you can call it that) for the iPhone is a different matter entirely. And that states that you must have a two year agreement with ATT for the iPhone to work. I would contend that if you do not fulfill that, you will see Apple/ATT deactivating the iPhones. Consumers were informed of this going in, and I would think that is enforceable.

I think a good analogy would be TIVO. I do not have one, so I do NOT know how this works... so if someone could chime in, that would be great. You DO by a TIVO unit, right... just like an iPhone. So, if you do not pay the TIVO monthly, what happens to the Box... does it stop working fully... stop working partially... or keep working? (Like I said, I do not know what happens- it just seemed like a good analogy.)


If the iPhone is disabled after following those provisions of the contract, then at the minimum whomever sold it (Apple or AT&T) is on the hook for the full, original purchase price.

I think this is a bit of an uphill fight, especially for your option 1. Canceling within 30 days IN NO WAY fulfills your obligation to have and hold a 2 year contract- the contract is canceled as if it never existed.

There is a slightly stronger argument for your option two. If canceled according to the terms of the contract, you have fulfilled your terms of the agreement. I would THINK, in this case, as the two year agreement has terminated legally, that ATT/Apple should then unlock the phone for you. In fact, I hope someone tests this- the iPhone agreement says nothing beyond the termination of the two year requirement. If you pay the cancellation, you would have fulfilled this requirement- it SHOULD then be yours and work fine. You have complied with the terms as written. So, in this case, yes, I agree with you.

$600 plus tax is easily recovered in small claims.

You forgot the part about if you win in court. If you break the contract (option 1), Apple/ATT are not liable. Bit of a stronger argument in option 2... but then, ATT can probably get better attorneys than you or I can.


I doubt either Apple or AT&T want to see their stores have to refund that much money for a 3-6 month old used iPhone.

They won't. They just tell you to get on a contract, and it'll start right back up again. Apple/ATT won't refund any hardware after 14 days... certainly not in 3 months!

I'm sure your iPhone will continue to work very well as an expensive iPod without an AT&T phone plan as long as you want to it to do so.

Well, neither you nor I know for sure... nor are we going to convince the other to come to our side. The hacker side of me would love for you to be right. But when I think about it logically, I cannot see ATT just sitting there, letting people get off that easy, especially when it is well within there ability to control something like this.

I could be wrong, that is just how I see it. You and I will both know in 4 months, right? So, in November, let's meet and have a friendly beer. I will buy if I am wrong! :D

SeaFox
Jul 3, 2007, 05:06 PM
I can think of a number of reasons, not the least of which is contractual obligations. While I (nor anyone here) is privy to the exact agreement between ATT and Apple, it is not hard to imagine that ATT set certain requirements in the software specifications. Specifically, it is very much in ATT's interests to have this become a brick if not activated.
Its in their interests, but it's not their right to do it, you're confusing the two issues.

Look at the iPhone requirements. It specifically states- in no uncertain terms- that a two year contract with ATT is required... not optional. Required for purchase, not operation of all functions.

It is well within Apple/ATT's rights to remotely disable an iPhone, or have a time bomb in the software that, when it cannot verify, will reset the iPhone.

No, its not. You're so used to the way the U.S. cellular industry tries to work, that you're missing how they are working. The phone and the service are two different items.

AT&T and Apple are free to not sell an iPhone to you don't buy an AT&T contract as well, but once they sell the phone to you there are few things they can do. The phone is yours. Traditionally, a provider subsidizes the phone and you take a contract extension, so if you cancel the contract they charge you a fee to make up the money they lost on the phone. The iPhone is not subsidized, though. AT&T is not footing any of the bill for the iPhone getting to your pocket except the cost of stocking and marketing the device, which is not a cost the consumer has any responsibility to incur. AT&T has no basis for disabling the phone as they didn't pay for it, YOU did. Also, what if AT&T is unable to uphold their terms of the contract. If you can't use the AT&T service due to some action or inaction on their end (like not maintaining their network and a reasonable reliability of service) guess what. You can get out of the contract, that doesn't mean AT&T gets to take the iPhone back from you.

carfac
Jul 3, 2007, 05:21 PM
Required for purchase, not operation of all functions.

I guess it is easier to prove your point when you make things up.... but the fact is ATT contracts are NOT required for purchase. Ask the 300,000 people who bought one Friday- none were ever asked if they had an ATT contract.

If you actually READ the words from Apple, they plainly state:

iPhone requires a new two-year AT&T service plan.

Not "Activation" requires... Not "Purchase" requires... the iPhone requires. That is plain and simple.

that doesn't mean AT&T gets to take the iPhone back from you.

I have NEVER said nor implied they would come take it from you. I have said I think they will deactivate it. BIG difference.

So, what about TIVO- what happens to that box if you cancel the TIVO monthly fees-

SeaFox
Jul 3, 2007, 05:59 PM
I guess it is easier to prove your point when you make things up.... but the fact is ATT contracts are NOT required for purchase. Ask the 300,000 people who bought one Friday- none were ever asked if they had an ATT contract.
Because at that point it was assumed the iPhone was some impenetrable fortress. The people handing out the Phones are just AT&T lackeys, they aren't asking people if they have AT&T contracts because signing up for service is done from home for most people anyway.

If you actually READ the words from Apple, they plainly state:
iPhone requires a new two-year AT&T service plan.
It requires an active AT&T plan to use the phone fuctions. How is the iPhone supposed to know if you have fulfilled your contract or not? What about the people in on pre-paid with the iPhone? The whole point of pre-paid is no contract.

I have NEVER said nor implied they would come take it from you. I have said I think they will deactivate it. BIG difference.
A non-existent iPhone and a bricked iPhone both are equally usable.
The customer paid $600 for a device that no longer works because of something AT&T did. There is little difference.

So, what about TIVO- what happens to that box if you cancel the TIVO monthly fees-
I'm not sure what a TiVo does without a subscription. It may not do anything, or it may require manual programming (by date/time/channel) to function if its subscription is not verified.

Keep in mind TiVo gave huge rebates on their boxes purchases, AT&T did not.

shigzeo
Jul 3, 2007, 06:52 PM
i posted this on the Iphone board and barely got posted on. Plus i took the info from TUAW.com and gave credit to its OP.

someone pass the tissue eh?

ncbill
Jul 3, 2007, 07:06 PM
I'm not not referring to merely disabling the ability to make phone calls, but other, non-phone functionality.

BTW, there are often no attorneys allowed in small claims.

It will be the consumer, with a totally unusuable, "bricked" phone, versus the local Apple or AT&T store manager.

And that manager won't have an adequate explanation for the judge as to why the iPod function (not the ability to make/receive calls) no longer works on the customer's phone.

BTW, once you win that judgement in small claims, in many states the plaintiff can pay a small fee to have local law enforcement go right down to the store and collect the judgement, IN CASH, straight from the store's register.

That's not a scenario either Apple or AT&T wants.

I can't fathom why people would spend $600 for a 8GB touchscreen iPod, but I'm sure they'll be able to use the iPhone that way after they're out of the phone contract.

Send me a PM in November! :)

Hopefully by then we'll have the iPhone 2, "with DTT"


You forgot the part about if you win in court. If you break the contract (option 1), Apple/ATT are not liable. Bit of a stronger argument in option 2... but then, ATT can probably get better attorneys than you or I can.

carfac
Jul 3, 2007, 07:29 PM
Because at that point it was assumed the iPhone was some impenetrable fortress. The people handing out the Phones are just AT&T lackeys, they aren't asking people if they have AT&T contracts because signing up for service is done from home for most people anyway.

The Apple Employees are ATT lackeys? (They were selling iPhones, as i recall). The reason they are not asking for proof of ATT contracts is because the existence of a contract is NOT a requirement for sale- only for the USE of the iPhone. Show me anywhere in any official document is shows otherwise- back up your statement that an ATT contract is required for activation.


You can't, because your suppositions are made from thin air. The Quote I shared (which states that ATT contract is required to USE and iPhone) was from Apples own documents on their sight... not made up hyperbole.

My Statement is also backed up by real world experience- neither the ATT or Apple store requests or requires a contract for the sale of an iPhone... but every iPhone is requiring an ATT contract to get running. Back your statement up with a single instance of proof of a contract for sale.

It requires an active AT&T plan to use the phone fuctions. How is the iPhone supposed to know if you have fulfilled your contract or not? What about the people in on pre-paid with the iPhone? The whole point of pre-paid is no contract.

How does iTunes know if you are on a computer authorized to play protected AAC files? There is this thing called the INTERNET... and applications can use this to phone home and see if they are authorized or not.

So, I know what you are thinking... You just won't sync to iTunes, then the phone won't know. Strangely enough, the phone itself has wireless systems, so it itself can phone home after a specified interval, if so programed (note you can even call 911 on an unactivated phone... so phoning home for authorization is no great jump in the capabilities of this phone).

So, maybe you do not sync to iTunes... why can't the iPhone check every, uh, 5 days say to see if it is authorized. If no sync, it can easily call the ATT mothership and find out the contract has been canceled. OK, turn yourself off. No big deal for a phone.

A non-existent iPhone and a bricked iPhone both are equally usable.

I have no clue what you mean here. A non-existent iPhone doesn't exist. A bricked phone can probably be reactivated once a new contract is instituted. If what you mean both are equally usable by being unusable, point taken. Otherwise, I have no clue what this sentence is supposed to prove.

The customer paid $600 for a device that no longer works because of something AT&T did. There is little difference.

Wrong again. ATT did NOT cancel the customers contract, the customer did it. ATT is enforcing their rights. And the customer is going forward KNOWING the contract is required, and trying to weasel out, trying to get something beyond the scope of the original contract. Customer deserves to get burned .


I'm not sure what a TiVo does without a subscription. It may not do anything, or it may require manual programming (by date/time/channel) to function if its subscription is not verified.

Do you agree this might be a good analogy? I wish someone would pipe up on this, because I think it makes a good precedent for the Apple iPhone. Consider: both have a separate hardware and subscription service. If you cancel either service, you get to keep the hardware. It is the resultant usability of that hardware that is in question.

Keep in mind TiVo gave huge rebates on their boxes purchases, AT&T did not.

So what. Tivo gives a discount... so does my gas card. What does that have to do with this argument.

carfac
Jul 3, 2007, 07:39 PM
I'm not not referring to merely disabling the ability to make phone calls, but other, non-phone functionality.

So am I.

BTW, there are often no attorneys allowed in small claims.

When you sue a corp (see below) someone has to represent the corp- that is a lawyer, and would be allowed.

It will be the consumer, with a totally unusuable, "bricked" phone, versus the local Apple or AT&T store manager.

And that would be thrown out in a hardbeat. The defendant should be the corp. the store manager has no liability for the practices of their parent corps. IF a SM was sued, they just show up, tell the judge, and case dismissed instantly.

And that manager won't have an adequate explanation for the judge as to why the iPod function (not the ability to make/receive calls) no longer works on the customer's phone.

Moot point as far as the store manager... but it is quite simple- the specifications of this product REQUIRE a two year ATT contract. No contract, the hardware ceases functioning. That is not a hidden fact or anything, Apple and ATT are quite up front about that, as numerous threads here attest to.

BTW, once you win that judgement in small claims, in many states the plaintiff can pay a small fee to have local law enforcement go right down to the store and collect the judgement, IN CASH, straight from the store's register.

Again, you would have to win... and that is not going to happen with the case you presented.

That's not a scenario either Apple or AT&T wants.

I can't fathom why people would spend $600 for a 8GB touchscreen iPod, but I'm sure they'll be able to use the iPhone that way after they're out of the phone contract.

See- we can agree on something! :D

Send me a PM in November! :)

Hopefully by then we'll have the iPhone 2, "with DTT"

If I am wrong- I am happy to eat crow at your expense! But I just can't help looking at this and think is ATT that stupid? They are a lot of things.... but I think they have the power behind them on this one.

BTW, do you know the answer to my TIVO question? Is that a valid analogy to make?

The Monkey
Jul 3, 2007, 07:54 PM
On the subject at large, I would be willing to bet that this will work for a while... but I also bet that come November, we will see a lot of whiners posting when they see they have a 600.00 brick.

my 2 cents.


Many share this prediction, namely that Apple will lock it down. Why would this not be an antitrust violation?

Multimedia
Jul 3, 2007, 07:57 PM
Does the 49.98 include iPhone service or is it only a GoPhone minutes plan. If the 49.98 includes the unlimited data and visual voice then I'm going to get an iPhone on Saturday when i get my Macbook Pro.

Can anyone verify if that's true?Yes, this is true! :)I don't think it includes Visual Voice Mail since you will have no phone service after you cancel the service to have iPhone w/o phone service. Perhaps you meant the pay as you go plan not deactivated? In that case yes.

SeaFox
Jul 3, 2007, 08:18 PM
The Apple Employees are ATT lackeys? (They were selling iPhones, as i recall). The reason they are not asking for proof of ATT contracts is because the existence of a contract is NOT a requirement for sale- only for the USE of the iPhone.
So maybe the existance of an AT&T contract is not a requirement for sale. There was an anecdote of an individual who wanted to buy an iPhone over the weekend and they were turned away because they were not a current AT&T sub and wanted to pay cash for the iPhone. The policy may vary by store.

You can't, because your suppositions are made from thin air. The Quote I shared (which states that ATT contract is required to USE and iPhone) was from Apples own documents on their sight... not made up hyperbole.

My Statement is also backed up by real world experience- neither the ATT or Apple store requests or requires a contract for the sale of an iPhone... but every iPhone is requiring an ATT contract to get running. Back your statement up with a single instance of proof of a contract for sale.
The fact there are individuals using the iPhone with a disabled SIM card right now is the evidence. It supports that the iPhone's iPod functionality does not require active phone service (let alone a lock-in contract). Why didn't the whole device just sit there on the invalid SIM card screen instead?

With no valid SIM, AT&T sure can't disable anything else. Heck, they have no communication with the phone now. Apple could disable the phone, assuming it is synced to a computer with internet access. But internet access is not a requirement for iTunes to function. iTunes does not verify anything for the iTMS or otherwise once you've purchased your songs and downloaded them. Also, your idea that Apple could disable the rest of the iPhone at anytime would require a coordination between AT&T's billing systems and Apple. Cooperation that generally does not happen due to privacy laws and technical issues.
How does iTunes know if you are on a computer authorized to play protected AAC files? There is this thing called the INTERNET... and applications can use this to phone home and see if they are authorized or not.

When you purchase the songs off the iTMS, they are tagged with your info and your iTunes database is updated to show you "own" those two songs. iTunes does not check periodically the internet to make sure you are still authorized. You can defeat the limit on the number of computers by simply not updating iTunes on those machines and never reinstalling Windows on them, and then mass-deactivating the accounts from another machine. As long as you don't visit the iTMS on those machines, they will stay authorized.
So, maybe you do not sync to iTunes... why can't the iPhone check every, uh, 5 days say to see if it is authorized. If no sync, it can easily call the ATT mothership and find out the contract has been canceled. OK, turn yourself off. No big deal for a phone.
Do you have any evidence to support that the iPhone "phones home" or is this just paranoia now.

Do you agree this might be a good analogy? I wish someone would pipe up on this, because I think it makes a good precedent for the Apple iPhone. Consider: both have a separate hardware and subscription service. If you cancel either service, you get to keep the hardware. It is the resultant usability of that hardware that is in question.
As far as I can see they're all scared they'll be stuck with a brick so few try it. I don't hold TiVo Corp to the same standards I do Apple, by the way.

So what. Tivo gives a discount... so does my gas card. What does that have to do with this argument.
TiVo partailly subsidizes the price of their box on the idea they'll get a customer for their box with the deal. AT&T is not. TiVo actually has a leg to stand on when it comes to bricking devices.

tmiw
Jul 3, 2007, 09:35 PM
Not sure if this has already been mentioned, but Apple could easily just spit out an error message if you use 999-99-9999. Note the list of valid digits (http://www.ssa.gov/employer/stateweb.htm) (999 is not on there, but xxx-99-9999 is theoretically a valid SSN). You could try to make it "look" like a valid SSN, but you run the risk of using someone else's SSN# to go prepaid.

I wonder if AT&T actually keeps the SSN# on file to remote-disable people...

ccrandall77
Jul 3, 2007, 10:02 PM
Do you agree this might be a good analogy? I wish someone would pipe up on this, because I think it makes a good precedent for the Apple iPhone. Consider: both have a separate hardware and subscription service. If you cancel either service, you get to keep the hardware. It is the resultant usability of that hardware that is in question.


I owned a Series 2 Tivo. If the subscription was cancelled it didn't render the Tivo unusable, you just didn't get the Tivo service... television guide, season pass, etc. It was still perfectly usable in the same fashion as a VCR.

This is what I would expect from an iPhone. As long as you have the ATT service, the phone, text messaging, etc. works. When you cancel it, anything that requires ATT service no longer works and anything not requiring that service continues to work.

IANAL, but it would seem ******* at best if Apple completely disabled the iPhone if it did not have ATT service after it's already been activated through iTunes and at worst it would seem to be something that would be contestable in court.

I just don't see it being a smart move for Apple to brick iPhones that don't have active ATT service unless ATT made it a stipulation in their contract with Apple.

nydoofus
Jul 4, 2007, 12:23 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

TUAW essentially describes (http://www.tuaw.com/2007/07/02/tada-the-6th-gen-contract-free-wifi-enabled-ipod/) how to unlock an iPhone for use as a Widescreen iPod + Wifi -- without a contract, and a $49.98 one time fee.

The first step involves faking bad credit (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2007/07/01/activating-ipod-video-wifi-on-iphone-with-contract/) by typing in "999-99-9999" as your Social Security number during activation to trigger the GoPhone/"Pick Your Plan" option which allows for contractless pre-pay plans. The cheapest version of "Pick Your Plan" is $49.98 (rate plans (http://www.tuaw.com/photos/iphone-prepaid-gallery/296285/)).

Then, according to TUAW simply taking out your SIM card (http://www.tuaw.com/2007/07/02/tada-the-6th-gen-contract-free-wifi-enabled-ipod/) allows you iPhone to continue to function as an iPod + Wifi device without any further hassle.

Presumably, you could then cancel your $49.98 month-to-month and use the iPhone as a Widescreen iPod + Wifi device.

Sneaky method. I like it :). I'll probably just wait for the inevitable iPod replacement.

MagnusVonMagnum
Jul 4, 2007, 02:20 AM
I think it's great that so much interest is made in someone buying a $600 product, disabling it's main purpose and then presenting it as a work of genius.


If making and receiving calls is iPhone's "main purpose" then you'd have to be one heck of a sucker to not just go get a FREE cell phone to do the EXACT SAME THING.

What makes iPhone different is its NON-PHONE capabilities and seeing as it can use WiFi, that means you do NOT lose its REAL main purposes if you could remove the AT&T subscription part. In fact, the only thing you're really doing by KEEPING the AT&T subscription (assuming WiFi zones are good enough for your needs) is agreeing to pay AT&T at least another $1440 over the next two years! Hmmm, I could buy TWO MORE iPhones for that cost (or better yet, a nicely equipped Macbook to go with it!)

Ah, but I must be one of those D&D nerds sitting at McDonalds to not have your amazing leaps of illogic.

elavrov
Jul 4, 2007, 02:47 AM
Don't try this method. Is risky. Read what happened to me here:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=324962

kildjean
Jul 4, 2007, 07:47 AM
From the DVDJon Page: http://nanocr.eu/2007/07/03/iphone-without-att/#comments

Iíve found a way to activate a brand new unactivated iPhone without giving any of your money or personal information to AT&T NSA. The iPhone does not have phone capability, but the iPod and WiFi work. Stay tuned!

Update:

Magic iTunes numbers:

Offset 2048912: 33C0C3

Offset 257074: 28

Offset 257013: 33C9B1

Add ď127.0.0.1 albert.apple.comĒ to c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts

Download Phone Activation Server v1.0 (http://nanocr.eu/wp-content/PhoneActSrv-v1.0.zip) to activate your iPhone for iPod+WiFi use. Note that this application will not do anything unless you understand the magic numbers as well as add the hosts entry. Phone Activation Server (PAS) requires that you have the MS .NET Framework 2.0 (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=0856EACB-4362-4B0D-8EDD-AAB15C5E04F5&displaylang=en) installed.

Download PAS v1.0 Source Code. (http://nanocr.eu/wp-content/PhoneActSrv-v1.0-src.zip)

The sweet irony is you need windows to crack it...

peharri
Jul 4, 2007, 07:51 AM
Don't try this method. Is risky. Read what happened to me here:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=324962

I am somewhat surprised the whole "Put in 999-99-9999 as your SSN" thing isn't raising a lot of red flags on MR.

Here are two alternatives people might want to consider:

1. Pay the damned disconnection fee. It's $150. You are not locked into a two year contract by buying and activating an iPhone.
2. Don't buy the thing in the first place, unless it's already been activated. That is, buy someone else's who has either got it on a GoPhone plan or bought their way out of their contract, or switched to a different phone.

Obviously the former option is slightly more expensive than the method documented here, but not significantly. The latter means the whole instant-gratification thing isn't going to be satisfied.

The iPhone is no panacea. There are many devices out there that offer real Wifi web browsing, from the Nintendo DS ($130 + $30 DS Browser (Opera) cart) to the Nokia N800 ($300, WebKit, also supports any Bluetooth based connection), and the iPod you already have is still a worthy music player. Buying an iPhone purely for use as an iPod with a web browser will, for the majority of people, not be a cost effective solution.

And allow yourselves to wait. Steve Jobs has hinted that the next generation of iPods will be running "OS X." There are good reasons to assume the next iPods will be similar in concept to the iPhone, sans GSM. You're going to feel like an idiot if in a few months the device you wanted to get actually comes out, and you're stuck with a $70/month recurring bill to support a more expensive, first generation, product.

JeffDM
Jul 4, 2007, 08:25 AM
Feature number one: $350 more than an iPod with less storage.

Don't be like a twat politician. Don't mangle word meanings to suit your arguments. It would be an iPod + PDA with the best UI and best screen put into an iPod.

At the same time, whoever pulls out a phone-less iPhone's going to look like a complete dork.

How is anyone going to know unless the owner point this out to them?

it will prolly be 299 & 399 for 40g and 120g... i have a hunch because seagate made 120 portable HD's last year

That I remember, Apple's never used the largest hard drive available, their choice was usually one notch below the biggest. When the 60 Gig unit was announced, an 80 Gig was available. When the 80 Gig unit was announced, there was already a 100 Gig drive. I don't think there's enough of the biggest size available to support Apple's sales volume, even though they usually don't sell very many of the biggest ones.

JeffDM
Jul 4, 2007, 08:54 AM
Sure. Just give out a fake SSN. That sounds like a terrific idea.

I don't think it is illegal, and I wouldn't call it unethical. I am more disturbed that they ask for it. Your number is not supposed to be used with anyone but the government.

When and where? to date there has been NOTHING on iPods. Frankly I don't expect Apple to release a new touch iPod until next spring for fear it would eat into iPhone sales.

I don't know, I think they will have to do a meaningful update to the product line, which they've done for each of the last three winter seasons anyway. The holiday shopping time is Apple's biggest quarter for iPod sales.

All that effort and there already is an iPod out there.... I agree it seems kind of inane and redundant.

You are completely ignoring the new UI, PDA capabilities, nicer screen, nice keyboard and so on. The screen might have twice the screen area as the iPod with Video. There *might* be a 6G iPod this fall, or there might not be. We really don't know. The ability of Apple fans to predict when or if a feature hits Apple products has always been poor.

well you might want to go look for some archos.. cuz aint no way they put a flimsy batter cover in the ipod...

Battery covers don't have to be flimsy. My Tapwave's case is pretty darn tough. But I don't think Apple will do this unless there's a customer revolt - and I don't think that is coming, unless Apple screws up something much bigger than that.

Nikko1965
Jul 4, 2007, 10:01 AM
If making and receiving calls is iPhone's "main purpose" then you'd have to be one heck of a sucker to not just go get a FREE cell phone to do the EXACT SAME THING.

Imagine thinking that something being called "iPhone" would be considered as being primarily a phone. Blimey. That's a mighty "If" you pointed out.

What makes iPhone different is its NON-PHONE capabilities and seeing as it can use WiFi, that means you do NOT lose its REAL main purposes if you could remove the AT&T subscription part. In fact, the only thing you're really doing by KEEPING the AT&T subscription (assuming WiFi zones are good enough for your needs) is agreeing to pay AT&T at least another $1440 over the next two years! Hmmm, I could buy TWO MORE iPhones for that cost (or better yet, a nicely equipped Macbook to go with it!)

Ah, but I must be one of those D&D nerds sitting at McDonalds to not have your amazing leaps of illogic.

So, Mr Logic, if all you want is a WiFi web browser you can stick in your pen pocket why not just buy a Nokia N800 for half the price, a fraction of the hassle and the same net result? In fact FIVE MORE with the money you'd save not buying a phone to use as something else that's already widely available.

JeffDM
Jul 4, 2007, 10:10 AM
So, Mr Logic, if all you want is a WiFi web browser you can stick in your pen pocket why not just buy a Nokia N800 for half the price, a fraction of the hassle and the same net result?

If the definition of same net result being looking at web pages, then OK, but I don't think the Nokia is nearly as nice at doing that. Even if the back end engine is the same, the front end is very different.

blindzero
Jul 4, 2007, 10:14 AM
this is silly, wait for a new ipod or just use it as a phone

Exactly...I think it's already about 100-150 bucks too much for what it does as a phone. Don't get me wrong. I love it. But as just an ipod/wifi it's way overpriced. New IPOD models will be out in the fall. The Fall is only 3-4 months away. Hang in there. Save the 600 bucks now. You could buy 2 IPODs later.

edited to say : NEW IPOD models instead of New Models.

CJD2112
Jul 4, 2007, 11:45 AM
Why spend $600 for a device then cancel one of its crucial features? After all, it IS called the iPHONE right? Just wait for the widescreen WiFi 6th generation iPods, we all know they are coming.

carfac
Jul 4, 2007, 11:53 AM
Hi:

Yesterday, I took on arguing with ncbill and SeaFox that I did not think this would be possible, or if it was possible, ATT/Apple would shut you down. Well, it looks as if DVD Jon has proven me wrong in my assessment, and that anything Apple can do, hackers can undo rather quickly.

So I wanted to post a public apology to ncBill and SeaFox. You guys look to be proven right! NCBill, I owe you a beer!

I did enjoy our discussions, and had a lot of fun in them- hope you guys did too. No hard feelings i hope? It was sort of fun playing devils advocate on those discussions!

CJD2112
Jul 4, 2007, 11:56 AM
Hi:

Yesterday, I took on arguing with ncbill and SeaFox that I did not think this would be possible, or if it was possible, ATT/Apple would shut you down. Well, it looks as if DVD Jon has proven me wrong in my assessment, and that anything Apple can do, hackers can undo rather quickly.

So I wanted to post a public apology to ncBill and SeaFox. You guys look to be proven right! NCBill, I owe you a beer!

I did enjoy our discussions, and had a lot of fun in them- hope you guys did too. No hard feelings i hope?

See, this is what I like to read. People respecting each other and showing decency. It's nice to know that in all the online flaming and insults, there are some decent people out there (ok, I've channeled Dr. Phil enough for one day lol).

mklos
Jul 4, 2007, 09:32 PM
I have yet to find the EULA on my iPhone? There is a section called Legal under the About section of the iPhone, but I can't see where it states that Apple has the right to disable the phone if no active phone service is on it. Has someone looked this up? Where exactly is it? Apple's website hasn't been updated with the iPhone EULA from what I saw.

BTW....I did the SSN# thing and it does work. I didn't cancel my plan though. I just wanted a pay as you go plan so I wasn't pinned down to a 2yr contract. I plan to keep the pay as you go for a month or so to see how this works out. I'm sure Apple and/or AT&T will put a stop to this eventually somehow.

The Monkey
Jul 4, 2007, 10:18 PM
I have yet to find the EULA on my iPhone? There is a section called Legal under the About section of the iPhone, but I can't see where it states that Apple has the right to disable the phone if no active phone service is on it.

It probably isn't there because no such "agreement" would be enforceable.

SeaFox
Jul 5, 2007, 05:42 AM
I have yet to find the EULA on my iPhone? There is a section called Legal under the About section of the iPhone, but I can't see where it states that Apple has the right to disable the phone if no active phone service is on it. Has someone looked this up? Where exactly is it? Apple's website hasn't been updated with the iPhone EULA from what I saw.

I believe this (http://www.mattbinkowski.com/images/iphoneagreement.gif) is what you're looking for.

mccldwll
Jul 5, 2007, 07:08 AM
I have yet to find the EULA on my iPhone? There is a section called Legal under the About section of the iPhone, but I can't see where it states that Apple has the right to disable the phone if no active phone service is on it. Has someone looked this up? Where exactly is it? Apple's website hasn't been updated with the iPhone EULA from what I saw.



Whiners stop whining. Apple and AT&T don't have to disable the iPhone so you can't endrun it by not syncing to iTunes. A two year contract is required to use it. You agree to the terms. It says that updates and upgrades may be required to continue to use iPhone. Again, updates and upgrades may be required to continue to use iPhone. If you don't continue to sync, you'll lose out on what will prove to be an essential update/upgrade. It's reasonable. And smart.

mklos
Jul 5, 2007, 08:06 AM
Whiners stop whining. Apple and AT&T don't have to disable the iPhone so you can't endrun it by not syncing to iTunes. A two year contract is required to use it. You agree to the terms. It says that updates and upgrades may be required to continue to use iPhone. Again, updates and upgrades may be required to continue to use iPhone. If you don't continue to sync, you'll lose out on what will prove to be an essential update/upgrade. It's reasonable. And smart.

Dude...****! Thats not what I asked. I didn't asked to be lectured! I asked where the EULA is. If you don't want to help then don't post.

mklos
Jul 5, 2007, 08:06 AM
I believe this (http://www.mattbinkowski.com/images/iphoneagreement.gif) is what you're looking for.

Thank you seafox...THIS is what I asked for.

peharri
Jul 5, 2007, 08:09 AM
Per John Gruber (http://daringfireball.net/linked/2007/july#tue-03-iphone_sans_att), in turn per Alex King, all this nonsense involving faked SSNs is completely unnecessary.


I canceled the AT&T service for my iPhone as planned and the iPhone seems to work just fine as a wifi-only device. Excellent! [Ö]

Per AT&Tís terms of service: If you cancel your AT&T service within 30 days you do not have to pay an early termination fee; and if you cancel within 3 days you get a refund of your activation fee.


So, buy your iPhone, activate it, and then immediately cancel your contract during AT&T's "buyer's remorse" period. Tell them you can't get a signal in your bedroom if you need an excuse, and you're absolutely desperate to lie having been deprived of the chance to pretend your SSN is a sequence of 9s.

Donnacha
Jul 5, 2007, 08:49 AM
Per John Gruber (http://daringfireball.net/linked/2007/july#tue-03-iphone_sans_att), in turn per Alex King, all this nonsense involving faked SSNs is completely unnecessary.

So, buy your iPhone, activate it, and then immediately cancel your contract during AT&T's "buyer's remorse" period. Tell them you can't get a signal in your bedroom if you need an excuse, and you're absolutely desperate to lie having been deprived of the chance to pretend your SSN is a sequence of 9s.

Look. All this "nonsense" of faked SSNs is THE WHOLE POINT for some people: they don't want to give such a key personal identifier to Apple or AT&T.

Now, however, giving fake SSNs has been superceded by Jon's activation method, which saves you the trouble of going through the sign-up process, of going through the cancelation process and of giving anybody any SSN, fake or real - you just hand over your $599, bring it home and activate it yourself. Simple.

The Monkey
Jul 5, 2007, 09:04 AM
Whiners stop whining. Apple and AT&T don't have to disable the iPhone so you can't endrun it by not syncing to iTunes. A two year contract is required to use it. You agree to the terms. It says that updates and upgrades may be required to continue to use iPhone. Again, updates and upgrades may be required to continue to use iPhone. If you don't continue to sync, you'll lose out on what will prove to be an essential update/upgrade. It's reasonable. And smart.

Reasonable only to those people who don't think it is an antitrust violation.

mccldwll
Jul 5, 2007, 10:40 AM
Reasonable only to those people who don't think it is an antitrust violation.

Not to get too far into "it depends on what 'is' is" country, it's only an antitrust violation if it's an antitrust violation. Or, to put it another way, it may be abusive, monopolistic, overreaching, greedy unfair and generally no fun for those who want it otherwise, but I'm fairly certain that the aapl and T legal teams structured the entire deal so that while close, it is not an antitrust violation (which I've suspected from the day aapl announced its accounting method).

mccldwll
Jul 5, 2007, 10:49 AM
Dude...****! Thats not what I asked. I didn't asked to be lectured! I asked where the EULA is. If you don't want to help then don't post.


mklos
Sorry about the bad quote/editing on my part. It really wasn't intended to be directed at you. You are 100% correct. All you asked for was a citation.

The Monkey
Jul 5, 2007, 10:53 AM
Not to get too far into "it depends on what 'is' is" country, it's only an antitrust violation if it's an antitrust violation. Or, to put it another way, it may be abusive, monopolistic, overreaching, greedy unfair and generally no fun for those who want it otherwise, but I'm fairly certain that the aapl and T legal teams structured the entire deal so that while close, it is not an antitrust violation (which I've suspected from the day aapl announced its accounting method).

I understand your point, but disagree; the legal teams structuring the deal are the last ones I would entrust to ensure there are no antitrust violations. It seems to me that the companies have decided that this endeavor is worth the legal risk. That's a business decision that seems justified. But, in my opinion, they are on very thin ice w/r/t antitrust issues if AAPL disables a product purchased at full retail if the consumer does not also purchased a tied-in contract for services from AT&T.

mklos
Jul 5, 2007, 10:59 AM
I dont intend on canceling my account. I just didn't want to be tied to a contract. That was if it didn't work I could easily just cancel it. I had no intentions of just using the iPhone for iPod/WiFI only use. It seems to work where I didn't think it would, but I may be roaming. The phone doesn't tell you when you're roaming apparently.

mccldwll
Jul 5, 2007, 11:25 AM
But, in my opinion, they are on very thin ice w/r/t antitrust issues if AAPL disables a product purchased at full retail if the consumer does not also purchased a tied-in contract for services from AT&T.


As I said, for antitrust reasons I don't think they'll disable it, per se. You can buy it, activate it, drop service, and have a functioning device for other things, for a while. However, I seriously doubt an antitrust attack would prevail if a device which is advertised as requiring updates and upgrades to continue to work properly fails to work properly for those who don't take advantage of those updates and upgrades (because they dropped service).

Donnacha
Jul 5, 2007, 11:34 AM
If hackers have already worked out how to activate it I'm sure they will work out how to self-install updates.

cliffjumper68
Jul 5, 2007, 12:00 PM
Not to get too far into "it depends on what 'is' is" country, it's only an antitrust violation if it's an antitrust violation. Or, to put it another way, it may be abusive, monopolistic, overreaching, greedy unfair and generally no fun for those who want it otherwise, but I'm fairly certain that the aapl and T legal teams structured the entire deal so that while close, it is not an antitrust violation (which I've suspected from the day aapl announced its accounting method).

It is not a anti-trust violation if all terms of use are presented at purchase. The phone is clearly advertized as a ATT exclusive with terms of "use". In order to claim anti-trust you would have to prove that this relationship undermines the original value/purchase proposition.

The Monkey
Jul 5, 2007, 12:28 PM
It is not a anti-trust violation if all terms of use are presented at purchase. The phone is clearly advertized as a ATT exclusive with terms of "use". In order to claim anti-trust you would have to prove that this relationship undermines the original value/purchase proposition.

What are you relying on for the above proposition? I'd be curious to see your source (not flaming, btw). The elements required to prove an illegal tying claim are: (1) the existence of two separate products or services; (2) the sale or agreement to sell one product or service that is conditioned on the purchase of another; (3) the seller's sufficient economic power in the market for the tying product to enable it to restrain trade in the market for the tied product; and (4) a not insubstantial amount of interstate commerce in the tied product is affected. Regardless of whether or not the terms are disclosed, illegal tying is illegal tying no matter how you cut it. A lawsuit regarding tying was tossed a few years ago, but the iPhone presents a different situation potentially ripe for revisiting.

peharri
Jul 5, 2007, 01:36 PM
What are you relying on for the above proposition? I'd be curious to see your source (not flaming, btw). The elements required to prove an illegal tying claim are: (1) the existence of two separate products or services; (2) the sale or agreement to sell one product or service that is conditioned on the purchase of another; (3) the seller's sufficient economic power in the market for the tying product to enable it to restrain trade in the market for the tied product; and (4) a not insubstantial amount of interstate commerce in the tied product is affected. Regardless of whether or not the terms are disclosed, illegal tying is illegal tying no matter how you cut it. A lawsuit regarding tying was tossed a few years ago, but the iPhone presents a different situation potentially ripe for revisiting.

Neither AT&T nor Apple have anything close to a monopoly on anything other than their version of their products. Unless and until that changes, it's highly improbable anyone will go after them on anti-trust grounds.

As far as getting an untied iPod+Safari combo, the advice still stands: either cancel the contract as soon as you agree to it, as per AT&T's terms, or wait (which is better) for the iPods that Steve Jobs has implied are forthcoming that will be running OS X, and see whether or not these iPods have the functionality you're looking for.

mccldwll
Jul 5, 2007, 02:27 PM
What are you relying on for the above proposition? I'd be curious to see your source (not flaming, btw). The elements required to prove an illegal tying claim are: (1) the existence of two separate products or services; (2) the sale or agreement to sell one product or service that is conditioned on the purchase of another; (3) the seller's sufficient economic power in the market for the tying product to enable it to restrain trade in the market for the tied product; and (4) a not insubstantial amount of interstate commerce in the tied product is affected. Regardless of whether or not the terms are disclosed, illegal tying is illegal tying no matter how you cut it. A lawsuit regarding tying was tossed a few years ago, but the iPhone presents a different situation potentially ripe for revisiting.

Post #189 is just plain wrong, unless I was asleep that semester. The above is fairly accurate, but I still contend that AAPL/T in all liklihood followed the roadmap and structured it in such a way that there are no antitrust violations. It would be an interesting analysis to read, however.

amin
Jul 5, 2007, 03:22 PM
I'm sure there are people more than willing to pay $649 to get a full screen video ipod with multitouch and wifi internet. The contract has been a killer for some who have minimal mobile phone needs.

arn

8GB and no storage card is pretty weak for video though. It shouldn't be hard for Apple to make a 100GB widescreen iPod just in time for Christmas :p.

The Monkey
Jul 5, 2007, 05:48 PM
Neither AT&T nor Apple have anything close to a monopoly on anything other than their version of their products. Unless and until that changes, it's highly improbable anyone will go after them on anti-trust grounds.


True re AT&T. Arguably not re the iPhone. As usual, it would all depend on how one defines the relevant market. If this thing succeeds as predicted, AAPL likely will have sufficient market power to restrain trade.

Post #189 is just plain wrong, unless I was asleep that semester. The above is fairly accurate, but I still contend that AAPL/T in all liklihood followed the roadmap and structured it in such a way that there are no antitrust violations. It would be an interesting analysis to read, however.

Perhaps, but let's also remember that the antitrust issues often get, er, a bit glossed over during such transactions. ;)

mcameraguy
Jul 26, 2007, 01:26 PM
I tried to activate an iPhone using the "fake bad credit" hack identified here to get a pre-paid plan, and AT&T caught the ruse right away and sent a message saying to call them.

The only know correct way to get "offered" the option of a pre-paid plan is:

1. To enter your true ss#, and actually fail the credit check. Ha, I did. But paradoxically that get's me a pre-paid plan with no 2 year committment. This is good.

2. AT&T will then send you an email that offers you the GoPhone Plan. You connect your iPhone and are then walked through setting up the prepaid plan.

3. It took a few hours for AT&T to get my new number reported back to me so when I connected the phone again in several hours there was my new phone number.

4. After you get the new number, you are given the opportunity to provide debit and credit card info and enter funds into the account.

5. By the way, the prepaid plan has unlimited data plan too. But you have to pay extra for SMS messages.

AJsAWiz
Jul 26, 2007, 01:54 PM
I tried to activate an iPhone using the "fake bad credit" hack identified here to get a pre-paid plan, and AT&T caught the ruse right away and sent a message saying to call them.

The only know correct way to get "offered" the option of a pre-paid plan is:

1. To enter your true ss#, and actually fail the credit check. Ha, I did. But paradoxically that get's me a pre-paid plan with no 2 year committment. This is good.

2. AT&T will then send you an email that offers you the GoPhone Plan. You connect your iPhone and are then walked through setting up the prepaid plan.

3. It took a few hours for AT&T to get my new number reported back to me so when I connected the phone again in several hours there was my new phone number.

4. After you get the new number, you are given the opportunity to provide debit and credit card info and enter funds into the account.

5. By the way, the prepaid plan has unlimited data plan too. But you have to pay extra for SMS messages.

Good luck with that