Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
No conspiracy, it's just security

Sorry, but IMHO this is easy. Apple doesn't require carrier specific features for push to work - as push works with "officially" unlocked phones being sold in some countries, on unsupported carriers.

I think the real reason is how push works. When a push-enabled app wants to receive push notifications, it registeres with Apple's Push Notification Server (APNS). It sends the App ID and the iPhone/iPod's UID to the server. The server does its magic and sends a unique push token back to the device.

Now, if the iPhone hasn't been officially activated with iTunes, but instead "cracktivated", the APNS doesn't recognize the iPhone's UID as legit - because it's not activated after all - and doesn't generate the push token.

I don't think this was done on purpose to avoid people from cracktivating their iPhones, but to avoid abuse (spoofing) and attacks to the server. Yes, someone could make up fake UIDs and talk to the APNS, overloading and doing denial-of-service attacks to it by generating tons of tokens. By only issuing tokens to valid, active UIDs, this is made much more difficult.

So, no Apple conspiracy here, it's just plain network security.
 
im on ATT myself and my bill along with my wifes no data plan phone is $205/month. my buddy has 2 unlocked iPhones one for him and one for his wife and they run on our local Bell provider with unlimited everything for $125/month.

$80/month or more savings may be why some people choose to unlock.

he doesnt care about visual voicemail and although his internet is much slower all of his apps work and he is able to use MMS with no problems.

Not sure how many minutes you have, but man you're getting raped.
Because I have 3 phones on my line and it's only $170.00 a month for 1 Blackjack II, 1 iPhone 3G, and 1 Blackjack I. And they all have Data.
 
Gov't Intervention Needed

You know, Congress just had hearings on the effects of exclusivity agreements like the one that Apple and AT&T have. While I'm usually not to excited about government intervention in business deals, stuff like this makes me want the government to step in. Also stuff like AT&T handicapping apps like Skype and Slingbox makes me want some more competition in this area as well. If the service providers had to compete on "service" and not hardware exclusivity deals, consumers would be in a much better position I think.
 
i agree and Tmobile i hear is horrilbe if your not in a big city area if i would want to unlock my phone and if i could id go to verizon but since verizon is on CDMA thats not possilbe but heres hoping the iphone goes to veriozn in 2011
You heard wrong buddy ATT has more complaints then T-mobile users. I don't live in the country so I'm good.
 
Why are people unlocking iPhones still anyway?

Just to run on T*mobile? You lose half your features then, right? No visual VM.

And no 3G. Personally, not worth it to me, but cost is a pretty big motivator for some.

That's why apple is never going to get more market share, they have a tough nonsense controlled environment. It is crazy.

Um, they're getting more market share as we speak.
 
Why are people unlocking iPhones still anyway?

Just to run on T*mobile? You lose half your features then, right? No visual VM.

And you would have to buy a full-priced iPhone to do it. I don't get it.

frequently travelling in other countries and don't want to pay for roaming?
 
Sorry, but IMHO this is easy. Apple doesn't require carrier specific features for push to work - as push works with "officially" unlocked phones being sold in some countries, on unsupported carriers.

I think the real reason is how push works. When a push-enabled app wants to receive push notifications, it registeres with Apple's Push Notification Server (APNS). It sends the App ID and the iPhone/iPod's UID to the server. The server does its magic and sends a unique push token back to the device.

Now, if the iPhone hasn't been officially activated with iTunes, but instead "cracktivated", the APNS doesn't recognize the iPhone's UID as legit - because it's not activated after all - and doesn't generate the push token.

I don't think this was done on purpose to avoid people from cracktivating their iPhones, but to avoid abuse (spoofing) and attacks to the server. Yes, someone could make up fake UIDs and talk to the APNS, overloading and doing denial-of-service attacks to it by generating tons of tokens. By only issuing tokens to valid, active UIDs, this is made much more difficult.

So, no Apple conspiracy here, it's just plain network security.

That seems a lot more plausible vs people arguing that Apple is just being a meanie.

mythbusters_plausible_spray.png
 
They're paying Apple for hardware - not services... too bad. (in many cases, not even paying for the hardware - as they may have bought the phone used)

Actually, if I get an app off of Apple's App store, I am paying Apple 30%. It's not just hardware, it's a service. If Apple isn't providing that service, then I'd think that's in violation of the contract, and opening themselves up to a suit.
 
Well I hacked it to get push on my unlocked phone on TMobile without a problem. Will be interested if Apple shuts it down in the future though.
 
Bad move Apple. Very bad move.

AT&T pays Apple for the exclusive rights to the iPhone, which in turn pay for further development of iPhone software and hardware. You are angry with Apple for limiting the free ride of the unlocked phone users? I enjoy observing the innovativeness of the hackers in their desire to rid themselves of AT&T's poor service and high service fees, but it is ridiculous to fault Apple for making it hard on the hackers. I say good move, Apple, good move. Now, it will be fun to watch the hackers try to overcome this obstacle. I have confidence that they will figure something out. Now, if Apple will just recognize that AT&T limits their market share in the USA, then we can all look forward to lower fees and better service.
 
Well, I was wondering why I wasn't getting any push notifications. Now I know.

Why are people unlocking iPhones still anyway?

Just to run on T*mobile? You lose half your features then, right? No visual VM.

Yes. AT&T sucks. I rather enjoy 24-hour support, $50/month service, including EDGE and 50 free text messages. I like the iPhone, I like T-Mobile. I have no intent to change either of those.

Ouch! Do you think this is really because Apple doesn't want people to Jailbreak or could it be that they are being cautious in case a Jailbreak app tries to abuse the system?

Jailbreak != unlock.
 
Ouch! Do you think this is really because Apple doesn't want people to Jailbreak or could it be that they are being cautious in case a Jailbreak app tries to abuse the system?

This could be the case...It could also be that they are doing this to keep AT&T happy.

All I know is that I am going to be waiting for a while until I can get an iPhone on a different carrier with better coverage in my area. I have already waited this long. I might as well keep waiting....
 
I'm jailbroken and unlocked.. still getting my Push notifications fine. Got one earlier from the AP app. :D
 
That made no sense whatsoever. What do "carriers" have to do with this?

It makes no sense if you are a little slow...

Carriers pressure Apple into blocking this service for unlocked phones. Pretty simple concept. Why? Because its the main feature in OS3.0, and the carriers want exclusivity on it. They want people to want to be on their contracts.

Wow... Didnt realize it was that cryptic.
 
Right....

Actually, if I get an app off of Apple's App store, I am paying Apple 30%. It's not just hardware, it's a service. If Apple isn't providing that service, then I'd think that's in violation of the contract, and opening themselves up to a suit.

Let's just guess that Apple's contract with soft-developers states that all services are contingent on the enduser complying with service contracts and agreements. They are pretty thorough with contracts since the Microsoft GUI debacle of the 1980's.
 
That's why apple is never going to get more market share, they have a tough nonsense controlled environment. It is crazy.

I'm sure Apple's been thinking that! Wow, if only we could get a decent portion of the market share...



I'm not sure how the explanation of this article covers an iPod Touch. It just seems goofy.


But than again, why would you send data to devices that aren't authenticated to your network? If I were apple, and the device wasn't on my list... (Not trying to use specific terms, just trying to use an example/analogy).

Gary
 
Sorry, but IMHO this is easy. Apple doesn't require carrier specific features for push to work - as push works with "officially" unlocked phones being sold in some countries, on unsupported carriers.

I think the real reason is how push works. When a push-enabled app wants to receive push notifications, it registeres with Apple's Push Notification Server (APNS). It sends the App ID and the iPhone/iPod's UID to the server. The server does its magic and sends a unique push token back to the device.

Now, if the iPhone hasn't been officially activated with iTunes, but instead "cracktivated", the APNS doesn't recognize the iPhone's UID as legit - because it's not activated after all - and doesn't generate the push token.

I don't think this was done on purpose to avoid people from cracktivating their iPhones, but to avoid abuse (spoofing) and attacks to the server. Yes, someone could make up fake UIDs and talk to the APNS, overloading and doing denial-of-service attacks to it by generating tons of tokens. By only issuing tokens to valid, active UIDs, this is made much more difficult.

So, no Apple conspiracy here, it's just plain network security.

So if your theory is correct.. As long as iPhone was "activated" at SOME point - Push should work, even if it is unlocked to a different carrier later?

Although, something here still doesn't sit right with me... Push is also supported on iPod Touch over WiFi, and you never have to "activate" a Touch. So obviously, APNS is not restricted ONLY to activated devices..
 
i dont know why this is news. It's page 2 news, at best. Apple clearly states that they can not guarantee functionality of your iPhone should you choose to hack it.

You even go on to say, "Update: The iPhone Dev Team has reportedly been working on a fix for this issue for some time now, so it appears that there may be a solution for those users on unlocked iPhones."

So why is this news exactly?
 
Push is working flawlessly on my wife's 2g iphone which is unlocked and jb, but activated with the original AT&T and currently holding that sim (Sim is deactivated because we are living in the NL so she is sans calling ability at the moment). My phone which is unlocked and jb in the same way but holding Vodafone sim will not receive Push noti's at all. So there must be some truth to this revelation. I can't see how the Dev team is going to circumvent this if Apple is involved.:confused:
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.