Yes, please do provide an authority for this "fact". As an AAPL shareholder, I have read through all of their financial statements, and have seen no evidence of any subsidization from ATT.
So please, enlighten us good sir. I await your response.
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.
Are Unlocked iPhones Getting Bricked? At Least Some.
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes, please do provide an authority for this "fact". As an AAPL shareholder, I have read through all of their financial statements, and have seen no evidence of any subsidization from ATT.
So please, enlighten us good sir. I await your response.
They did do a precheck-- they told you that if you've unlocked your phone, don't apply the update. It is quite possible that changes were made during the unlock that can't be detected from software.
I've heard mixed information on this. It appears that the IMEI does change in some cases, and in others it does not.
Can you identify the source of your quote? I find a Gizmodo page that quotes it out of context, as you have, but I can't find a primary source.
If I had to guess what's causing the bricking, it wouldn't be changes to the code itself, but more likely relocation of ROM data that is unique to the phone. Since Apple can't know where that was moved to, they can't avoid overwriting it.
On the other hand, it's quite possible that Apple simply decided it's not their problem to go through all these extra hoops to protect people who modified their phones improperly.
The iPhone Dev Team are being political, and quite frankly, they're covering their own asses and I can understand why. Some "unlocks" do NOT brick. Did you know that?
There's a problem when the original manufacturer tells you they don't support something they've seen out in the wild, and that it might create problems with an update. Meanwhile, the various unlocking camps aren't completely benefitting from a free and open flow of information. Some are selling, some are just trying to claim sole glory, others are making money on eBay offering pre-unlocked devices no doubt explictly sold AS-IS.
Now, after the update, users are looking to them for answers they don't have. Is that a motive to bend the truth about what Apple is and isn't capable of, demand support for their own profit centers and nascent efforts? Of course it is. If it were so simple, THEY should have designed something that prevents an update without warning the user that updating the firmware could cause issues. They could have tested it against existing "restore" methods. To ME, that is the ONLY thing that should have happened. I feel for the people buying unlocked phones, who aren't being properly informed about risk.
Read this article:
https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=4260052&posted=1#post4260052
~ CB
The iPhone is on sale at malls in Thailand. It just isn't "officially" available outside the USA.
The King is naked....everyone sees....
Aren't we are supposed to be living in a free society?
Free societies use "laissez faire economics" to do
business. In otherwords, free enterprise. Corporate Apple sells a product, consumer buys product and decides how they want to use it. They may choose to use it as a doorstop or a phone. It is ridiculous to think I am
barred from using my phone however I want, as long as it does not encroach on another. If it happens to not fit in the "box" that Apple thinks it should, but the consumer does, shouldn't they change their attitude (agreements)? What ever happened to the philosophy the customer is always right? The consumer will decide the best course of action for the product, but the company better listen to the consumer
or there will be a huge backlash. It happens with every business. ATT
is an outstanding example of a company that tries to do the opposite
of the free enterprise market philosophy. They simply don't care
about the consumer, but do care about total control over the consumer
the way "they think is best." ATT would like to change the name to
iControl, not iphone. If you have any doubt, read their agreement and
see how much in control they are. How much information they want from
you, including your SS#(talk about invasion of privacy! Aren't
these some of the reasons why they were busted up years ago? Most saw
them as a threat to free enterprise. Cannot believe Apple teamed up
with such a rough company. You can bet your last dollar they are
screaming at Apple to do something about the obvious popularity of
the unlock program. It is very legal to do and they know it. If ATTs
service were good and fair, they would not need to say a word. We
would all use it. That is the genius of free enterprise, the consumer
decides which carrier to use, not the other way around. You can bet
all carriers would compete in a most fair manner to win your
patronage. You are king and decide the future of Apple and ATT not
them deciding our future. If only Nokia, Samsung, Sony and others
would give them a run for their money. Apple and ATT would not behave
this way. Competition is always best for us the consumer. Without the
consumer Apple & ATT would not exist. There are many examples of
trying to lock the consumer out. Which history proves, only results
in bad PR for everyone involved. It takes years to get rid of a bad taste in everyone's mouth. That is precisely the reason the ATT name
was retired for such a long while, before they started the "New ATT"
with Apple. Those who fail to recognize history are destined to
repeat the same mistakes. Will they never learn?
Aren't we are supposed to be living in a free society?
Free societies use "laissez faire economics" to do
business. In otherwords, free enterprise. Corporate Apple sells a product, consumer buys product and decides how they want to use it. They may choose to use it as a doorstop or a phone. It is ridiculous to think I am
barred from using my phone however I want, as long as it does not encroach on another. If it happens to not fit in the "box" that Apple thinks it should, but the consumer does, shouldn't they change their attitude (agreements)? What ever happened to the philosophy the customer is always right? The consumer will decide the best course of action for the product, but the company better listen to the consumer
or there will be a huge backlash. It happens with every business. ATT
is an outstanding example of a company that tries to do the opposite
of the free enterprise market philosophy. They simply don't care
about the consumer, but do care about total control over the consumer
the way "they think is best." ATT would like to change the name to
iControl, not iphone. If you have any doubt, read their agreement and
see how much in control they are. How much information they want from
you, including your SS#(talk about invasion of privacy! Aren't
these some of the reasons why they were busted up years ago? Most saw
them as a threat to free enterprise. Cannot believe Apple teamed up
with such a rough company. You can bet your last dollar they are
screaming at Apple to do something about the obvious popularity of
the unlock program. It is very legal to do and they know it. If ATTs
service were good and fair, they would not need to say a word. We
would all use it. That is the genius of free enterprise, the consumer
decides which carrier to use, not the other way around. You can bet
all carriers would compete in a most fair manner to win your
patronage. You are king and decide the future of Apple and ATT not
them deciding our future. If only Nokia, Samsung, Sony and others
would give them a run for their money. Apple and ATT would not behave
this way. Competition is always best for us the consumer. Without the
consumer Apple & ATT would not exist. There are many examples of
trying to lock the consumer out. Which history proves, only results
in bad PR for everyone involved. It takes years to get rid of a bad taste in everyone's mouth. That is precisely the reason the ATT name
was retired for such a long while, before they started the "New ATT"
with Apple. Those who fail to recognize history are destined to
repeat the same mistakes. Will they never learn?
The King isn't naked, he's wearing a black turtleneck and jeans.
And he is ejecting hackers from the court.
And he is ejecting hackers from the court.
You are free to not buy the iPhone.....
The iPhone, whether you like it or not, is a package of a piece of hardware, made by Apple, and a communications network, provided by AT&T.
The decision you, as the consumer, get to make is whether or not the iPhone package suits your needs. If it does, and you want to, buy it and enjoy. If it does not, don't buy it. That's how you decide how you want to use it. You can also write Apple and AT&T and request they add whatever you believe is lacking in their product package. That is "free enterprise" at work.
Ah yes, let do.
I think your use of laissez-faire is a bit misguided. You're not talking about regulation restricting, stifling, or otherwise impeding business. In fact, it's that we're somewhere along the path to laissez-faire that makes all of this (Apple's move into the wireless space, etc) possible in the first place, so I'm dubious of your equating their particular EULA with external (governmental) regulation.
Sure, I happen to think that some would be better served in the end if Apple had a truly open stance on a number of fronts, but they don't and that is well within their corporate rights (at least in the current business/regulatory environment in the US).
I know this argument has been getting kicked back and forth by a number of posters in a number of forums and there's little point in my jumping in at this point, but such general ideological confusion and your conflation of "free society" and "laissez-faire" with "I can do whatever I want with my stuff" got my goat.
I'm sympathetic to many of these ideas, but it's helpful to keep them straight.
I think your use of laissez-faire is a bit misguided. You're not talking about regulation restricting, stifling, or otherwise impeding business. In fact, it's that we're somewhere along the path to laissez-faire that makes all of this (Apple's move into the wireless space, etc) possible in the first place, so I'm dubious of your equating their particular EULA with external (governmental) regulation.
Sure, I happen to think that some would be better served in the end if Apple had a truly open stance on a number of fronts, but they don't and that is well within their corporate rights (at least in the current business/regulatory environment in the US).
I know this argument has been getting kicked back and forth by a number of posters in a number of forums and there's little point in my jumping in at this point, but such general ideological confusion and your conflation of "free society" and "laissez-faire" with "I can do whatever I want with my stuff" got my goat.
I'm sympathetic to many of these ideas, but it's helpful to keep them straight.
I understand your sentiment but it is being openly sold in countries it isn't licensed in. They do not explain hacks and technical information with potential customers. It is being sold in Bangkok for around $750 dollars and nobody is informed of hacking.
Some people imported it and are making a huge profit off of it which is also free enterprise at work. apple already got paid from the proceeds and ATT doesn't exist here. I do not think Apple should brick people's phones that bought it and didn't know any better. Not everybody that will buy one reads these forums.
The least they should do is possibly restore the phone if it is broken by updates or do a trade in program where you can send the hacked one in and pay to have it work again later with the appropriate carrier (if one is ever available).
All the information is there if you only look for it. As I say, this kind of subsidy is absolutely standard practice in the mobile phone industry - it's the reason why phones cost much less, or are even given away free, if you choose to sign up with a specific service provider at the point of sale (you understand that, right?). The service provider is subsidising your purchase because it will make more out of you as a customer than it loses on the subsidy.
But since this thread contains people who apparently seem to think that because the iPhone contains about $200 of parts, Apple only needs to sell it at $201 to cover its costs and make a profit, I shouldn't be surprised at a general lack of awareness of how the mobile phone market works.
why isn't anyone angry at the "companys" or hacker that are providing the unlock solution? Why not sue them for not taking into account what Apple may do in the future. Isn't that the same as some of you saying "Apple should take in to account what the hackers did"? How does, for example, what iUnlock states in it's disclaimers that "You understand that you, as Apple's customer, are unlocking your phone. We are only the agent that assists you to make the unlocking possible. You are responsible for any warranty consequences that may arise as a result of unlocking." or "We do not guarantee that future updates from Apple will not re-lock your phone or prevent future unlocking" prevent backlash to them?
Apple states that it checks your software and hardware by sending non personal data to apple periodically. If that doesn't match what they have on file, then you are terminated from the agreement. Furthermore "Upon the termination of this License, you shall cease all use of the iPhone Software and iPhone Software Updates." that means you OWN a great piece of hardware that you need to now provide software for. Good luck writing that software.
Apple states that it checks your software and hardware by sending non personal data to apple periodically. If that doesn't match what they have on file, then you are terminated from the agreement. Furthermore "Upon the termination of this License, you shall cease all use of the iPhone Software and iPhone Software Updates." that means you OWN a great piece of hardware that you need to now provide software for. Good luck writing that software.
you don't have any authority for saying "I am *not* assuming. IT IS A FACT - in exchange for the exclusive carrier contract, AT&T are part-subsidising the cost of the iPhone to make it more affordable for end users". if you did have any authority you would have pointed us to it (after two requests from two separate forum members).
it seems to me that you are, in fact, making assumptions based on your knowledge of what usually happens with contracts and subsidies. you have no specific knowledge of the arrangement between apple and at&t.
i also suspect that you do not understand what a fact is.
Apple is WRONG to brick phones. They could have prevented it
I don't own an iPhone.
I am an Apple stockholder.
This is very bad publicity for Apple from what I've heard.
Agreed that modifying the software on your phone is bad, yada yada...
It is a SOFTWARE change. Worst case, Apple should be able to restore firmware on the phone to put it back in its original state. That firmware can be the latest (unhackable) version.
It is in no way acceptable for Apple to brick phones when applying their update, and provide no recourse for customers who've paid good money for their phones to get them working again.
If there was a way to perform a full restore, the 3rd party apps would be gone, the phone is locked again. No harm to Apple nor AT&T. Apple would be forcing the customer to abide by the rules.
But bricking a phone that has no hardware problems is completely wrong. Rather then encourage a customer to follow the rules, Apple had punched them in the gut and smashed their $500 phones. These customers will hate Apple. They would likely go out of their way to never buy another Apple product. This is very bad PR, very bad way to treat customers.
Its as if a cop caught you speeding in your car. Rather than give you a ticket and let you go on your way, they crush and melt down your car. That will teach you to speed! You broke the rules, you were using your car in an unauthorized manner.
Is that Apple's point? Are they trying to teach customers a lesson? If so that lesson will be to never buy Apple products.
I think Apple makes great products. But they also sometimes make some really bonehead PR moves which destroy their potential. After the $200 price drop, I thought it was sensational PR to give everyone a $100 credit. Great way to encourage folks to spend even more money in Apple stores given the 95+% customer satisfaction with the iPhone. Now this draconian move to destroy customers phones. Its beyond belief.
This started days ago, yet just today of a customer in our local Apple store becoming very upset, upset enough that they started throwing his bricked iPhone around until the display was smashed. All the Apple store person would say is that they won't do anything to help hacked phones.
Not a good show. Not good at all. Apple will learn, but at what price. Apple's arrogance out to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
I don't own an iPhone.
I am an Apple stockholder.
This is very bad publicity for Apple from what I've heard.
Agreed that modifying the software on your phone is bad, yada yada...
It is a SOFTWARE change. Worst case, Apple should be able to restore firmware on the phone to put it back in its original state. That firmware can be the latest (unhackable) version.
It is in no way acceptable for Apple to brick phones when applying their update, and provide no recourse for customers who've paid good money for their phones to get them working again.
If there was a way to perform a full restore, the 3rd party apps would be gone, the phone is locked again. No harm to Apple nor AT&T. Apple would be forcing the customer to abide by the rules.
But bricking a phone that has no hardware problems is completely wrong. Rather then encourage a customer to follow the rules, Apple had punched them in the gut and smashed their $500 phones. These customers will hate Apple. They would likely go out of their way to never buy another Apple product. This is very bad PR, very bad way to treat customers.
Its as if a cop caught you speeding in your car. Rather than give you a ticket and let you go on your way, they crush and melt down your car. That will teach you to speed! You broke the rules, you were using your car in an unauthorized manner.
Is that Apple's point? Are they trying to teach customers a lesson? If so that lesson will be to never buy Apple products.
I think Apple makes great products. But they also sometimes make some really bonehead PR moves which destroy their potential. After the $200 price drop, I thought it was sensational PR to give everyone a $100 credit. Great way to encourage folks to spend even more money in Apple stores given the 95+% customer satisfaction with the iPhone. Now this draconian move to destroy customers phones. Its beyond belief.
This started days ago, yet just today of a customer in our local Apple store becoming very upset, upset enough that they started throwing his bricked iPhone around until the display was smashed. All the Apple store person would say is that they won't do anything to help hacked phones.
Not a good show. Not good at all. Apple will learn, but at what price. Apple's arrogance out to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Pull on the jackboots...
ah dmelgar,
Dave would not not only condon the frustration, he would encourage the apple employees to laugh hysterically at the frustrated user. I love Apple, but their PR at times is so lacking. I completely agree that any new updates should simply reset the phone to a pristine state with the latest software. Do I believe Apple actively tried to "brick" phones? No. Do I believe they should have realized this was coming? Yes. You can't dangle cake before a baby and not expect them to taste the frosting...
ah dmelgar,
Dave would not not only condon the frustration, he would encourage the apple employees to laugh hysterically at the frustrated user. I love Apple, but their PR at times is so lacking. I completely agree that any new updates should simply reset the phone to a pristine state with the latest software. Do I believe Apple actively tried to "brick" phones? No. Do I believe they should have realized this was coming? Yes. You can't dangle cake before a baby and not expect them to taste the frosting...
Okay, I have bought my phone unlocked on ebay. But after a week or so, my family switched to AT&T and I got my 2 year contract. The person at the AT&T store said that my phone is all good and i can use the updates without problems and stuff. Now my iphone is bricked. What now? Do I have a better chance to getting my phone back up?
Did you get the AT&T guy to give you the "my phone is all good" in writing? If so, then they would be liable for replacing your phone. Of course, the AT&T guy might not have any concept of an unlocked iPhone, so he just assumed that because you had an iPhone, you MUST have gotten it from AT&T somehow.
i'm not sure where i can find the "its all good" writing stuff, maybe its in the invoice? i'll check later
For all of you who have unlock Iphones, the best advice is not to update the firmware. Stick with your original! I may have the 1.0.2 version and missing out some great features like the built in itunes but what the heck! I haven't had any trouble with mine and my phone is working flawlessly. 
Power To The Hackers
I have always been an "Apple User" because it is a superior OS and hardware base, nevertheless: as far as the iPhone goes, Apple stands out as the only cellphone provider out there that demands a share of subscriber revenue - something around 20% to 30%. Not only is this extra cost layed onto you in your service contract, but it clearly shows Apple no longer gives a damn about it's user-base and has become a greedy monster with the iPhone. Apple itself has brought the hacker community directly to it's own doorstep because it has restricted the "freedom of use" of the iPhone. I will not change my mobile provider to give Apple extra cash out of a locked iPhone deal with another provider at all. POWER TO THE HACKERS who will hopefully hack it to hell and back.
All of those who believe that everyone should follow the greedy rules that Apple has set for the iPhone is a sucker in every respect: not only do you pay your mobile provider, you also continue to pay Apple their percentage throughout the contract, yet you have already payed for their phone as well.
I have always been an "Apple User" because it is a superior OS and hardware base, nevertheless: as far as the iPhone goes, Apple stands out as the only cellphone provider out there that demands a share of subscriber revenue - something around 20% to 30%. Not only is this extra cost layed onto you in your service contract, but it clearly shows Apple no longer gives a damn about it's user-base and has become a greedy monster with the iPhone. Apple itself has brought the hacker community directly to it's own doorstep because it has restricted the "freedom of use" of the iPhone. I will not change my mobile provider to give Apple extra cash out of a locked iPhone deal with another provider at all. POWER TO THE HACKERS who will hopefully hack it to hell and back.
All of those who believe that everyone should follow the greedy rules that Apple has set for the iPhone is a sucker in every respect: not only do you pay your mobile provider, you also continue to pay Apple their percentage throughout the contract, yet you have already payed for their phone as well.
and that continued money that we pay is why we get the 1.1.3 update and the extras for free - and no doubt the ability to use 3rd party written apps will be free too
but the Touch users, who don't pay a monthly subscription and have only paid for the device, they have to fork out $20 each time they want to play with the new toys
i'm not saying it is right or wrong, i'm just saying that the percentage of the contract that goes to apple is not money for nothing.
Apple's claim is that they can give iPhone and
tv users free updates that add functionality because they spread the income for those devices out over the course of months. It's called "subscription accounting," even though you're not paying a 'subscription' for the device. Lots of accountants have weighed in that Apple's claim that they can't offer new features without charging for them on non-'subscription' products is bogus, though.Of course, with the financial trouble Apple has gotten in to, I can see some point that they want to play it ultra-safe; but I do think that it is odd that they claim that they can't add Mail/Maps/Stocks/Weather/Notes to the iPod touch without charging $20.
Just a side note as a small business owner, accounting is painful. I have to assume that Apple's team of accountants can handle 'subscription' vs. non-subscription stuff without much difficulty, though. You'd think that any product that has even the potential to be software-upgraded in the future can be accounted for as 'subscription' without causing major harm to Apple's bottom line. After all, it all gets applied as income eventually, anyway.
(Short form of this post: I can vaguely comprehend Apple's explanation, but still think it's bogus.)
For new available iPhone version 1.1.3, which is the best unlocking software available on the internet? Has anyone tried any software which provides all the features on unlocked phone as well
iJailbrake will do the trick (mac computer needed)
I have bought an unlocked iPhone but I messed thinks up with an update (I was told it should work but it didn't) so I ended up with a bricked phone. The story is that this program is written by a 13 year old genius. It's working like a sharm and you end up with an unlocked and/or unjailed phone. Not all the free software is working but I'm not sure if this is because I run 1.1.3 and the software isn't ready for this version or because there are some problems with permissions and ownership in the OS of the iPhone because I didn't use it with a virgin iPhone but with one that I had messed up.
What we see is the battle of business models. I'm free to do with phones I buy whatever I like to do but I have to accept that I loose the warranty. For all the buyers outside the US warranty is just theory from the start. How to claim it when something isn't ok? Going to an Apple store won't help. Apple is loosing the battle because their lack of success in keeping the phone closed while this is the key element of the whole business model and the fact that if you want to run some real cool applications on the iPhone you have to unlock and jailbrake it and use the installer to pick this (mostly free) application from the available list. The only innovative aspect of the iPhone is the user interface and that is really perfect, for the rest it's just a materialized old day non substainable marketing concept, blocking technical and functional innovation.
I have bought an unlocked iPhone but I messed thinks up with an update (I was told it should work but it didn't) so I ended up with a bricked phone. The story is that this program is written by a 13 year old genius. It's working like a sharm and you end up with an unlocked and/or unjailed phone. Not all the free software is working but I'm not sure if this is because I run 1.1.3 and the software isn't ready for this version or because there are some problems with permissions and ownership in the OS of the iPhone because I didn't use it with a virgin iPhone but with one that I had messed up.
What we see is the battle of business models. I'm free to do with phones I buy whatever I like to do but I have to accept that I loose the warranty. For all the buyers outside the US warranty is just theory from the start. How to claim it when something isn't ok? Going to an Apple store won't help. Apple is loosing the battle because their lack of success in keeping the phone closed while this is the key element of the whole business model and the fact that if you want to run some real cool applications on the iPhone you have to unlock and jailbrake it and use the installer to pick this (mostly free) application from the available list. The only innovative aspect of the iPhone is the user interface and that is really perfect, for the rest it's just a materialized old day non substainable marketing concept, blocking technical and functional innovation.