StraightTalk on iOS 6, downgrading, and My Letter to Apple

[dhlizard]

Originally Posted by cyks

Complain about getting ripped off by an overcharging carrier.

This made me smile with as big a grin as your icon !!

[Daveoc64]

Originally Posted by NathanA

I can't be the only one who interpreted that word the way that I did, especially since Apple doesn't actively torpedo the ability to use the phone on ALL unsupported carriers; see T-Mobile U.S., for example, which the unlocked iPhone has always worked fine on (assuming you're okay with EDGE service).

We need to be very clear here.

iOS has supported the ability to disable the "Cellular Data Network" menu FOR YEARS.

It's not something that Apple has just snuck in, it's something that AT&T has chosen to use NOW.

Apple hasn't done anything other than distribute the latest Carrier Settings file.

[NathanA]

Originally Posted by Daveoc64

iOS has supported the ability to disable the "Cellular Data Network" menu FOR YEARS. It's not something that Apple has just snuck in, it's something that AT&T has chosen to use NOW.

Trust me, we are clear on this. Actually, AT&T's carrier profile has blocked the "Cellular Data Network" submenu since day 1...that part isn't new either. The part that is new as of iOS 6 is that you can no longer edit the .plist file that contains the APN settings off-device in your iTunes backup set, restore the backup, and have iOS honor the changes you made to the .plist file.

It's just that there are some people participating in this thread who have been saying that Apple's use of the word "supported" in the paragraph describing the "unlocked" phone on store.apple.com means that Apple only intends for the unlocked phone to be explicitly used on (GSM) carriers that Apple has agreements with for iPhone already, and so StraightTalk was made not to work on purpose. I don't personally believe this is the case. So I was just taking that line of thinking to its absurd logical conclusion: if they are to be believed on this point, then logic would dictate that T-Mobile would either also be a target of Apple (it's not a supported carrier, and I guarantee there are more people using iPhone on T-Mobile U.S. than on StraightTalk!), or is destined to become one soon.

-- Nathan

[Daveoc64]

Originally Posted by NathanA

then logic would dictate that T-Mobile would either also be a target of Apple (it's not a supported carrier, and I guarantee there are more people using iPhone on T-Mobile U.S. than on StraightTalk!), or is destined to become one soon.

A target of Apple?

I thought you agreed this was a carrier decision, not an Apple decision.

It's quite clear that "unsupported" with Apple means just that - you can't call them and complain that it doesn't work.

It doesn't mean that they actively try to prevent you using the device in that way.

It just happens that if you want to use an MVNO on a supported carrier, you're out of luck if they disable the menu.

[NathanA]

Originally Posted by Daveoc64

A target of Apple? I thought you agreed this was a carrier decision, not an Apple decision.

As I tried to explain, I don't actually believe that Apple is targeting anything or anybody out of malice.

What is supposed to be the antecedent to 'this' in "I thought you agreed this was a carrier decision"? I think it's a carrier decision that the "Cellular Data Network" menu is blocked on AT&T, yes. But I don't think it's either a carrier or Apple decision that StraightTalk was intentionally targeted: they were simply caught in the crossfire. So the problem that people are experiencing with StraightTalk on iPhones isn't a matter of someone at either Apple or AT&T deciding it shouldn't be allowed on the phone. It's more a matter of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing.

My argument (as it has always been) is that Apple didn't even think through the possible implications of a design that allows carrier profiles to disable the "Cellular Data Network" menu, and how that might impact the usability of their phone on certain MVNOs. Furthermore, because there is no threat of abuse by exposing either the internet/data or MMS APNs to the user, at the very least, on an unlocked iPhone, those two APNs should always be editable, regardless of which way the bit for the "Cellular Data Network" menu is flipped in the carrier profile that controls that IIN.

Again, all I was doing in the part of my response that you quoted was running a reductio on those who kept arguing that Apple did specifically target StraightTalk. Perhaps I misread them, but it did seem as if some people in this thread were trying to make that claim.

Originally Posted by Daveoc64

It's quite clear that "unsupported" with Apple means just that - you can't call them and complain that it doesn't work.

Sure you can, but they may choose to not listen. Look: I get what you're saying. However, the "supported" verbiage is buried out of the way in a few discrete places as a "CYA" move by Apple, and not everyone who wants to buy an unlocked iPhone is going to see it. And as I have argued again and again, if you are going to use the word "unlocked" to describe a phone, there are certain connotations that word carries with it in this context that most people know and agree on and assume, and they are going to bring those assumptions to your product. If you don't want them to, then don't call it "unlocked".

Others here have argued that "supported" literally means the list of carriers that Apple officially sells and activates iPhones on. I would argue, on the other hand, that "supported" was included by Apple so that in the event there is some screwy carrier out there that does something in a non-standard way (runs their network on a band that few phones support, implements Visual Voicemail according to a standard different than the one that Apple supports, doesn't host an MMS proxy or the proxy is non-standard and usually requires a phone with custom firmware to be able to communicate with it, etc.), Apple can't be expected to make it work on iOS. Or maybe some idiot with an old iDEN phone with a SIM card in it that physically happens to fit in a GSM phone like the iPhone is complaining that they can't get the iPhone to work with their iDEN carrier. These screwball scenarios can and do exist, and it makes sense that Apple or any other phone manufacturer would try to protect themselves from them.

But that's not what is going on here. StraightTalk isn't just running a standards-based GSM/UMTS network: they're actually riding a standards-based GSM/UMTS network (AT&T's) that we know interoperates perfectly with iPhone and which IS a "supported" carrier itself. The ONLY thing preventing StraightTalk's interoperation with iPhone/iOS is a stupid arbitrary software thing that can be easily fixed.

I also still maintain that preventing software downgrades -- whatever the reason (we probably all know the "why" to this one, but still, it doesn't matter) -- is customer-hostile. In their zealousness to stop certain kinds of activity on their iOS devices, they have taken the position that those who might need to downgrade are acceptable casualties of war.

-- Nathan

[NedBookPro]

Originally Posted by NathanA

Hey, everybody,

1) That Apple created a broken provisioning system that can, in certain situations, make faulty assumptions about the network the user is on.

2) That Apple actively prevents the user from correcting those faulty assumptions.

3) That Apple broke the ability for people affected by this bad design decision to work around the problem in iOS 6 without providing their users with an alternative fix.

4) That Apple prevents users who are affected by this and who want to have a working phone again from downgrading back to iOS 5.

-- Nathan

Nathan, even though I am not affected by your problem, other problems exist since iOS6, and in my case it's problems with Exchange mail.

I agree with all your points, and in particular, am frustrated by the fact that you can't roll back to iOS5.
Not for love, nor money.
It would seem the only way to roll back - would be to buy a second hand phone not yet upgraded - and that is absurd.

I have emailed Mr. Cook, I have submitted feedback on apple's site many times, all dealt with by deafening silence.

I am a loyal apple customer, but as time rolls on, I find my frustration growing and growing. There will be a time I'll give up. I know leaving apple's world wont send shares diving... but over time, with enough people sick of apple's arrogance, they might be at a low point as they once were before they got Steve Jobs back in.

Nathan, my hat's off to you. you've got a lot of stamina, maybe you can get them to allow roll-back of software. Personally, I think that's an owner's right. On our computers, we can load whatever OS we want within reason. If I want to go back to Snow Leopard for example, I could. Why not with iPhone?

I just want things to work again. iOS6 is broken. I just want mail to work again. I use it work work. Is that too much to ask?
Tim? Jony? Is it too much to ask???

.

[NathanA]

Originally Posted by NedBookPro

It would seem the only way to roll back - would be to buy a second hand phone not yet upgraded - and that is absurd. [...] Personally, I think that's an owner's right. On our computers, we can load whatever OS we want within reason. If I want to go back to Snow Leopard for example, I could. Why not with iPhone?

Precisely. If, back when Microsoft released Windows Vista, they had managed to come up with a way to prevent anyone who had purchased an upgrade from going back to Windows XP after trying Vista and deciding that it wasn't for them, there would have been a HUGE uproar. Why iPhone (and iPad and iPod touch) owners just take this kind of abuse lying down and without questioning it is beyond frustrating.

And this is certainly not the first time that Apple has made a mistake which has impacted users. Show of hands: who here remembers the "coma bug" in iOS 3.1? It seemed to disproportionately affect 3G phones, which were still downgradeable back in those days, but there were some reports of 3GS phones also suffering from the bug, and those users couldn't downgrade. Instead, the only thing they could do was wait for Apple to come out with a fix.

Do you know how long they had to wait?

29 days.

Yep: a month. 3.1 was released September 9, and 3.1.2 came out October 8. Now, I personally wasn't affected by this one: I had to wait a few days after it was released before I could set aside some free time to do the upgrade, but by then I had already read some of the anecdotes of early adopters and decided to sit that one out, so I ended up going straight from 3.0.1 to 3.1.2; I lucked out and avoided that catastrophe. But I remember thinking back then that I would have been livid if I had been affected by a bug of that magnitude and was forced to live with it for an entire month before Apple released a fix, with no way to downgrade.

Now I know what some of those people must have felt like.

And this certainly won't be the last time that iOS will have either a crippling bug or some implementation detail that changed which ends up negatively impacting some users. Software, much like the authors who craft it, is imperfect. Which is why this "no downgrading" policy is horrible and absolutely absurd. If you are going to do that to your users, then you are on the hook for never ever messing up ever again and for writing perfect, bug-free software. Oh, that's impossible to do, you say? Then don't stand in the way of your users when they need to downgrade!

In fact, allowing your users to downgrade to an earlier release of your software is such an obviously common-sense policy that it is infuriating to me that we even need to waste time debating this issue. It should just be a given that people can back-level software when they need to.

-- Nathan

[RedGeminiPA]

I've sent two different email to Tim Cook about this. No reply, of course.

I was pretty blunt to mention that Straight Talk encourages iPhone users to jailbreak.

Oddly, it was only a couple of weeks later when Straight Talk stopped selling AT&T SIM cards, and all but eliminated any mention of AT&T from their site.

I also threw in the jab about Android phones LOCKED to AT&T allow access to APN settings.

I really hope T-Mobile updates my area SOON. I'll be jumping to Solavei as soon as they do. For only $4 more per month, AND no restrictions on how you use data, AND a "soft-cap" of 4GB per month, AND the potential to actually have a free phone bill AND make some extra money, AND they claim to support Visual Voicemail. Count me in! I'm just waiting for T-Mobile to get it done.

[bboyredcel]

I too have this exact belief (as OP) and have taken similar actions. I had a personal apple rep for about 2 weeks before she stopped returning my calls. My goal of the calls were to attain a signed carrier bundle for straight talk that included my mnc and mcc and excluded the carrier entitlements of the at&t bundle. I sent her my imei, iccid, serial number and everything. She sent my case and a request for resolution to the development and tech team. Im assuming they came back with a response along the lines of discontinuing conversation with me cuz thats what she did after that conversation occurred. she was a great person, very nice and eager to help. im sure she got told to ignore me because it was a politically inspired flaw in the OS that they couldnt address. I have a $650 iphone 5 that i bought unlocked.

Im sorry for those who have at&t phones who use straight talk and have this problem, but u should expect this behavior as your phone IS LOCKED to AT&T. If AT&T wants to block the CDN menu on phones locked to their network, then thats their prerogative. You have a locked phone, at&t says the CDN is a no-no to you, you have to deal with that.

BUT for a completely unlocked phone, most importantly those purchased at full retail price ($650+), the fact that this menu is disabled by a carrier we're not even doing business with, let alone sim-locked to, or in contract with, is complete ********. The phone should see the "unlocked" flag and immediately override the carrier entitlements. Its an outrage that such simple logic is not employed. That, my friends, is the core issue. AT&T has no right to these devices, yet they take liberties against them and people who have no relationship with them.

This is 100% ******** and is a result of apple being in bed with at&t. Its unfortunate, anti-consumer, and complete horse ****.

Here is my case number for anyone calling who wants to give the rep a case to reference.

383416521
My name is Craig Keller.

Hope this helps. I hate AT&T so hard for ruining the iPhone, and im seriously disappointed in Apple for allowing them to do it.