You're right, and they are also free to pass along the Apple tax to the customer, which is what it sounds like they are doing (with these European plans). If I was the carrier I would just make it clear that our plans are the same price they have always been, but Apple wants an additional cut from you each month.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
20% of iPhones in France Unlocked, and Other Stats
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You're right, and they are also free to pass along the Apple tax to the customer, which is what it sounds like they are doing (with these European plans). If I was the carrier I would just make it clear that our plans are the same price they have always been, but Apple wants an additional cut from you each month.
Oh god here you go again with facts and figures with no sources. Keep in mind that the EU has nothing to do with French mobile unlocking laws so please keep your rabid anti-Europeanism to a minimum.
Why is that so hard for us? Because it's bad for us, pretty simple really. We want the freedom to choose our phone and provider. And I wouldn't exactly go out and say that the iPhone is the best phone that exists, I don't think that is true. Either way I'm not the kind of person jumping to get one, I have a phone that does everything it needs to do perfectly: make phone calls and use SMS.Beefeater said:
I'm just trying to explain why Europe is "making such a big deal" out of this.
Another example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfaAiujrX_Y.Beefeater said:
Oh yeah? If it weren't for the government stepping up everyone here in the US would have to get a new number each time they changed their cell phone company. So yeah.. I do want the government to step up.
Careful what you wish for.While in some ways consumers really are better off here, in other ways we just get the shaft, all in the name of 'fairness.' In my opinion, it's really more a case of having laws brought about by a different mindset than it is a case of being better or more progressive...
...however, the US government tells lots and lots of Americans how to run their businesses. It's a different style of control, but the idea of the US market as a haven of free enterprise is a joke. To my knowledge, the closest thing to a free market these days is probably found in the Baltic states...if I had a lot of venture capital I'd be learning Estonian
Now that right thar is just good 'ol fashuned redneck thinkin': as if great products have never been invented outside the US. As if the US is even the world leader in consumer product innovation...as if, to consider just one relevant example, cell phone technology wasn't pioneered in Japan and Europe (Scandinavia in particular). Japan has one of the most protected economies in the world, and it's not stopping them from crushing the US in tech development. I go there regularly and HOLY SCHNIKIES they have cool toys! Always 2-3 years before I see them in the US. Even here in the alleged socialist paradise of France there are things invented here that you can't yet buy in the US...but that does, of course, go the other way too, depending on the type of product. I'm not saying anyone is better than anyone else; I'm just pointing out that innovative products are just as often determined by cultural priorities and weird geo-political goings-on as by (alleged) economic conditions.
This is a weird thing, I agree; I'm not in the market, but I've been to Orange stores just to see what's up with the iPhone and the option to buy one totally unlocked isn't marked anywhere, and in my experience most French consumers aren't the type to go asking for things not on display. Every single non-affiliated portable-selling store in Lyon, however, has giant signs all over the place advertising unlocked iPhones for suspiciously low prices. Don't know what that's all about.
Thank you for your thoughtful insights.
MacCurry - No. The French unlocked model requires a French iTunes account to unlock it once home (thus you need a French address/billing method). But if you had such a French iTunes account and did unlock the phone via iTunes then yes a T-Mobile card from the US would then work, or any other SIM.
To samab:
Where is it guaranteed, in writing, from AT&T that they will unlock these phones (assuming the phone lasts until the end of the contract)? The German and French unlocks (and all new 1.1.2 out of box phones) have a new boot loader version. It is said that the new boot loader is what allows the Apple sanctioned unlocks via iTunes. How could the old AT&T phones with the old boot loader do such a thing? Upgrading the boot loader is very risky and can easily brick phones whether they've been 'hacked' or not. It's not like a firmware update at all. So where is this statement that AT&T will grace you with this unlock after such and such time without charge for your iPhone?
Also I would like to see a authority for your comments regarding o2 uk stating that they will never unlock the phone and also a source for your statement that UK law doesn't allow unlocks?
To samab:
Where is it guaranteed, in writing, from AT&T that they will unlock these phones (assuming the phone lasts until the end of the contract)? The German and French unlocks (and all new 1.1.2 out of box phones) have a new boot loader version. It is said that the new boot loader is what allows the Apple sanctioned unlocks via iTunes. How could the old AT&T phones with the old boot loader do such a thing? Upgrading the boot loader is very risky and can easily brick phones whether they've been 'hacked' or not. It's not like a firmware update at all. So where is this statement that AT&T will grace you with this unlock after such and such time without charge for your iPhone?
Also I would like to see a authority for your comments regarding o2 uk stating that they will never unlock the phone and also a source for your statement that UK law doesn't allow unlocks?
The freedom you want is not free, it hurts the cell carrier & the cell phone maker.
Not sure why you posted it but Robot is cool, more power to them..
You have a good point, I have less of a problem with this, it seems it hurts no one. You are already leaving the company & their not going to get your money anyway so no really gets hurt.
Now this I don't understand: how on earth does that freedom hurt Apple? It means more buyers which means more profit, no? The carrier will loose some business, yes. And they will have to actually create a plan that the consumer wants instead of a plan that the consumer has to take (like now in the USA) in order to raise profit. Which is the way it should be.Beefeater said:
Just an example of technology where Japan beats the USA any day.Beefeater said:
Why is it then that Apple wants to lock their phones? You think they just don't want to sell than many?
"Japan beats the USA any day" This is one example, give me a break. I'm sure there is a long list of things that the USA is more advanced then Japan...So they invent a robot, that makes them king of tech?
It is not guaranteed in writing, but senior executives at AT&T have stated publicly that they will unlock the iphone at the end of contract.
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/wireless/2007-08-22-cellphones-abroad_N.htm?csp=34
With regard to O2, it's in their terms and conditions that the iphone is useless without the continue usage of the iphone service plan --- even after your initial 18 month contract is expired.
http://www.o2.co.uk/termsconditions/iphone
But the carriers didn't have to pass the cost to their own subscribers. The iphone plan in the US is nothing but regular priced voice plan plus regular priced data plan --- AT&T ate the additional cost all by themselves.
I think it's more like anti-Americanism instead of anti-Europeanism. All the talks have been that the European system is a paradise --- simlocking laws, simfree handsets vs. US system is hell (simlocked handsets).
You know what? It ain't that bad in the US.
It doesn't hurt the cell carrier, it forces them to have a more competitive network and pricing structure, the very things you seem to argue that the EU laws prevent.
It also doesn't hurt the cell phone maker, they would sell far more phones if everyone could buy it and not just people on a certain network.
Yes, they would rather sell less phones and take a cut of the profits from their partnership with an exclusive carrier than to sell more phones. That's a guaranteed income stream. It looks better in annual reports.
Nor is it that bad here. So who ****ing cares either way? The term 'European system' is the issue here however, since this is France we're speaking of and not Europe as a whole. Also, every carrier in the world offers free handsets or discounts with contracts, so again, who ****ing cares?
However I do want to mention in my opinion that a promise from someone at AT&T to unlock the phone years down the road when the phone is practically out of date is not much of something to cheer about. Regardless the fact is in the US it's not too big of a deal to be able to choose your carrier because in all actuality how often do you really leave the country? Unless you live in Detroit and work in Ontario or whatever how often do you worry over international rates?
In Europe most of the countries are smaller than most US states. The EU is not one country so we get hit with international rates very regularly. Thus it's much more convenient to have the unlock option and it makes sense why some countries like France have favourable unlock laws. I say favourable because otherwise you'd be stuck paying international fees as opposed to simply swapping the SIM to a low rate pay and go carrier while at work, or travelling, etc (in another country). Thus you can't compare the US in this way at all.
This discussion really shouldn't be we're better than you and vice versa as circumstances are different.
One last thing too (not trying to create another wave) but those links you gave don't really support what you said 100%. The AT&T article quotes an executive saying that after the contract is up for a phone we'll gladly unlock it. He didn't say that when the contract is up for the iPhone we'll gladly unlock it. Secondly the O2 contracts do say you cannot unlock or it makes it an iPod touch and it does say 18 months, but it doesn't specifically state that after 18 months you must continue with them for it to work. Thus unless there's something more concrete in both examples what you're stating is just an assumption, especially in regards to AT&T as it was a general comment made which didn't appear to be specifically aimed at the iPhone. Also it doesn't answer how they could unlock the phone with older boot loaders since there is a new boot loader appearing on the newer iPhone's which made the sanctioned Apple unlock via iTunes possible.
Remember AT&T volunteered to do this --- all by their own, without any simlocking laws, and without any lawsuits. T-Mobile Germany promised to give out unlocking codes at the end of the contract --- only after Vodafone managed to get a temporary injunction. You have to give credit where credit is due.
Vodafone, Orange, T-Mobile, and Telefonica operates in most of the European countries. If you are a Vodafone UK customer and got killed with international fees when you are roaming on Vodafone Germany --- that's Vodafone gouging you.
For those interested, here's the "iPhone purchase exeperience" in France :
My mother wanted to buy an iPhone, and she didn't want to buy it with a contract, but SIM-Free ( 649 btw!)
The sales rep at Orange really began being rude and stuff, since she wasnt going for the 49/ month contract. The guy was like real rude, wouldnt explain her how to insert the SIM card, and he even checked his computer where the guys received a internal memo entitled "what to do when the customer does not choose a contract?" The answers where more or less "try to convince the customers, by any means necessary"
What the Hell ?
I was so pissed when she told me that, I mean, that's so bloody rude, insulting and disrespectful towards a lady !
Hope it's not like this for you guys over there (oh no, you people have to get the contract as well).
My mother wanted to buy an iPhone, and she didn't want to buy it with a contract, but SIM-Free ( 649 btw!)
The sales rep at Orange really began being rude and stuff, since she wasnt going for the 49/ month contract. The guy was like real rude, wouldnt explain her how to insert the SIM card, and he even checked his computer where the guys received a internal memo entitled "what to do when the customer does not choose a contract?" The answers where more or less "try to convince the customers, by any means necessary"
What the Hell ?
I was so pissed when she told me that, I mean, that's so bloody rude, insulting and disrespectful towards a lady !
Hope it's not like this for you guys over there (oh no, you people have to get the contract as well).
Yes it does. However, the example was meant to be *generic*. If it wasn't for government regulation, you'd be getting a lot more price controlling from businesses to keep prices higher and thus screw over consumers.
This is one example of how government 'interference' is good.
I'm glad you like being screwed over. I find it amusing how people can make excuses to justify businesses screwing over its consumers. There's a difference between a healthy profit and excessive profits.
This is one example of how government 'interference' is good.
I'm glad you like being screwed over. I find it amusing how people can make excuses to justify businesses screwing over its consumers. There's a difference between a healthy profit and excessive profits.
Some McDonald's restaurants are owned by the corporate giant themselves, other McDonald's restaurants are owned by individual franchisees. They all agree to sell the Big Mac for $1.99.
That's not price collusion --- they are just setting a standard price for a Big Mac.
Samething with the iphone.
You miss my point completely.
P.S in your MacDonalds example I know it isn't price collusion, since its the same company.
No, they are not the same company. The McDonald's franchisee is 437954 Ontario Inc. The franchisor is McDonald's Canada. And the price of a Big Mac is governed by the franchisee agreement.
BTW, I am from Toronto as well.
Maybe I've just had strange experiences but I've seen radically different pricing of menu items from one McDonald's to the other (as well as with other chains).
Way to lose that commission on a phone sale, then...
In the past several months, I actually saw a MacDonalds store that *closed* down! That was about the first I've seen closing.
One of the main reasons why Verizon said no to the iphone is the distribution model --- Apple won't let independent Verizon franchisee agents selling the iphone.
Literally 3 days before the iphone launch in the US, AT&T employees were wondering out loud if they are going to get paid with the iphone activation at home.
http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php?t=1187868
Well that's how it is. They are different countries. The EU is not one country. You pay international rates if you leave the country. The circumstances are clearly different and comparing the two is therefore irrelevant.
Further from what I've seen AT&T volunteered nothing without proof. A generalised statement not specifying the iPhone is not proof. And again, even offering to unlock something when it's likely to be out of date is not a huge favour.
So what's this argument about really? You can get an unlocked iPhone in France and pay more, which again makes since due to the geography of Europe and you can do it NOW (and pay more, but again if you travel often or work in another country it's worth it). So what is the issue?