AT&T and Apple Tightening Policies to Reduce iPhone Unlocking

[ddrueckhammer]

ITT: People whining about paying for an AT&T contract when that's what's actually making the phone cheaper in the first place.

Cos, you know, it's the carrier subsidising the unit, not Apple.

So you are saying that the TCO is more then right? Some people don't care if the upfront cost is more or the monthly cost is more. The sad truth is that they didn't add much to the iPhone and are charging the same price as last year.

People are used to either getting a much better product or a lower total cost when a major update occurs. The iPhone is still a great product but there are others that are very close or will surpass it without all of the restrictions.

 

[jpine]

Sounds like the wireless industry is biting back. It's a shame this awesome phone is so locked down to AT&T.

ATT is the pits in my part of southern CA. When we go to the mountains, my phone is the only one that works (Verizon).

 

[Tosser]

ITT: People whining about paying for an AT&T contract when that's what's actually making the phone cheaper in the first place.

Cos, you know, it's the carrier subsidising the unit, not Apple.

That in no way means that they should charge an unethical monopolistic US$1680 for that subsidy as some other fanboy was so kind to calculate. Nor that Apple should pretend it has become cheaper, when in fact it hasn't become cheaper for the customer.

 

[BongoBanger]

So you are saying that the TCO is more then right?

I'm saying you get what you pay for. You want a cheap iPhone, fine: then you sign up to the carrier's contract. That's the way it works over here - for example, a Nokia N95 8GB will cost you about £400 from Nokia direct. You can get it for free on most of the carrier's networks but you will pay them £35 on an 18 month contract to do so which is where the carrier makes its money.

Cake or eat it. Pick one.

 

[jettredmont]

What did you think ? That AT&T was going to subsidize a phone so you could unlock it for another network.

A cheaper subsidized phone is now available.

Ummm ... "subsidized" is purely conjecture. There is no indication that AT&T is putting a single dime towards subsidizing the iPhone. The universal pricing structure Apple instituted, in fact, argues that AT&T is not subsidizing the costs at all.

 

[BongoBanger]

That in no way means that they should charge an unethical monopolistic US$1680 for that subsidy as some other fanboy was so kind to calculate. Nor that Apple should pretend it has become cheaper, when in fact it hasn't become cheaper for the customer.

Except it's not unethical. £35 a month is comparable to what you'll pay for most premium phones for a similar data package in the UK. If you can't afford it don't buy it.

 

[ruinfx]

Why do people keep saying that ATT will brick your phone? I know one can do an erase with exchange, but seriously, imagine ATT erasing all the phones in a corporate environment by mistake or because of a dispute. I seriously doubt they will be able to do so legally.

the SDK is rumored to have a remote lock/wipe feature to protect sensitive data on stolen corporate iphones. what makes you think att could not use this very "feature" to ensure that if a phone is not activated after 30 days it is a paperweight?

The funny thing is though, you act like the internet doesn't exist. It shouldn't be too hard to order one off of the internet from a country where offering locked phones is either illegal or no kosher and then do what you want with it.

Also, unlocking 1st gen iphones is neither dishonest or illegal as there was no upfront agreement to buy one.

importing an unlocked iphone doesnt deprive att of money from service that you would have been obligated to pay if you had bough a subsidized iphone and not honored the 2 year contract. its totally different.

 

[ruinfx]

That in no way means that they should charge an unethical monopolistic US$1680 for that subsidy as some other fanboy was so kind to calculate. Nor that Apple should pretend it has become cheaper, when in fact it hasn't become cheaper for the customer.

i own an n95 8GB actually, thank you very much. i would never by a crippled phone like the iphone, but that does not mean i cannot understand what apple/att are trying to do.

 

[BongoBanger]

Eh, they can kill your phone using its IMEI number. Pretty easy to do.

 

[ddrueckhammer]

I'm saying you get what you pay for. You want a cheap iPhone, fine: then you sign up to the carrier's contract. That's the way it works over here - for example, a Nokia N95 8GB will cost you about £400 from Nokia direct. You can get it for free on most of the carrier's networks but you will pay then £35 on an 18 month contract to do so which is where the carrier makes its money.

Cake or eat it. Pick one.

I just looked up the currrent cost of a N95. It is $430 (on Cnet) or £238.69. So the iPhone 3G is ~£40 (it is £199 right?) less without the 5MP camera, video recording, MMS etc. Of course it does have the nice touch screen and a better UI so I will call them even. Still, the N95 is unlocked and you don't have to deal with the games, and aren't required to obligate yourself to over $1600 in charges.

I expect the other phone manufacturers to have phones out that destroy the iPhone in cost and features by the end of the year. Certainly, the N96 will be this cheap by this time next year anyway.

 

[marcj]

Ummm ... "subsidized" is purely conjecture. There is no indication that AT&T is putting a single dime towards subsidizing the iPhone. The universal pricing structure Apple instituted, in fact, argues that AT&T is not subsidizing the costs at all.

I disagree. We know apple no longer gets revenue from the price plans, so their only revenue will now come from the sale of the iPhone. No subsidy would mean apple would go from taking $399 + a bit extra per month down to $199 and nothing more.

I don't know how much it costs them to make an iPhone but it would be a massive squeeze on their profit margin. AT&T (and all the other carriers) must be giving apple an initial chunk of money. It also explains all this activation nonsense

 

[koobcamuk]

I'm saying you get what you pay for. You want a cheap iPhone, fine: then you sign up to the carrier's contract. That's the way it works over here - for example, a Nokia N95 8GB will cost you about £400 from Nokia direct. You can get it for free on most of the carrier's networks but you will pay them £35 on an 18 month contract to do so which is where the carrier makes its money.

Cake or eat it. Pick one.

I'll have a SIM free iPhone then, please. Unlocked, £400, no problem.

 

[Tosser]

the SDK is rumored to have a remote lock/wipe feature for to protect sensitive data on stolen corporate iphones. what makes you think att could not use this very "feature" to ensure that if a phone is not activated after 30 days it is a paperweight?

Because that same "feature" would mean that not only would the company have the ability, but an entirely different company would be able to, which means you have just introduced another serious potential risk in that corporate system of yours. It could be wiped because of a dispute or simply by error.

Except it's not unethical. £35 a month is comparable to what you'll pay for most premium phones for a similar data package in the UK. If you can't afford it don't buy it.

Oh, I can afford it. I'm just not going to buy it. If for nothing else, then the lack of Disk Mode. It's frankly useless for me.

Also, I find even the prices you list exorbitant, and when we're talking about 24 months at those prices, it all ads up. Even if one can afford something, doesn't mean that one should let oneself be arsef.....

 

[BongoBanger]

I just looked up the currrent cost of a N95. It is $430 or £238.69.

It's the Nokia N95 8GB I'm not talking about not the Nokia N95-1. You might get the 8GB version for £370 if you're lucky but that's as low as it goes.

So the iPhone 3G is ~£40 less without the 5MP camera, video recording, MMS etc. Of course it does have the nice touch screen and a better UI so I will call them even. Still, the N95 is unlocked and you don't have to deal with the games...

Yes...? So...? What has this got to do with the iPhone?

I expect the other phone manufacturers to have phones out that destoy the iPhone in cost and features by the end of the year.

Perhaps. We'll need to wait and see although my personal opinion is the iPhone will be 'just another smartphone' - some will like it and buy it, others will go for something else.

 

[BongoBanger]

I'll have a SIM free iPhone then, please. Unlocked, £400, no problem.

Which you might get on O2's PAYG scheme.

 

[ruinfx]

Because that same "feature" would mean that not only would the company have the ability, but an entirely different company would be able to, which means you have just introduced another serious potential risk in that corporate system of yours. It could be wiped because of a dispute or simply by error.

att could just tell apple which phones to lock, they dont have to do it themselves. also like somebody said they could just block the IMEI. presto bricko.

 

[TwinCities Dan]

Well, orignally it was to get a cut of the monthly fees, but if they don't get that from ATT, I too have to wonder why Apple would stay exclusive with ATT now.

I believe Apple signed a 5 year deal to offer it ONLY to AT&T. (Maybe with no revenue sharing, this was unwise )

 

[LumbermanSVO]

I think the answer I was looking for was: a map

Also, not a jab, but my AT&T service was non-existent driving through Arizona, New Mexico and Texas on my Blackjack. Took it to an AT&T store and the girl suggested I get a GoPhone from Wal-Mart and swap in my existing SIM. Did that and everything was great, reversed the process when I arrived in Miami and all is well.

Maybe it's not the AT&T service being spotty, maybe it's just the (i)phone.

I have a 50 state + Canada truckers atlas plus maps for various states, but they still don't have enough detail. So I should have a map for every single city and town in the country? Even for the western 11 that would be a ridiculous stack of maps. It is just simply unrealistic. How long have you been driving a truck?

I'm not the only one who has had the same coverage problems with AT&T in these areas that the AT&T map clearly say they cover. They mis-represent their coverage, plain and simple.

 

[Tosser]

It's the Nokia N95 8GB I'm not talking about not the Nokia N95-1. You might get the 8GB version for £370 if you're lucky but that's as low as it goes.



Yes...? So...? What has this got to do with the iPhone?

Do you think the iPhone lives, sells and is used in a vacuum? No? Then that's what it has to do with the iPhone. It's a comparable product at a cheaper (much cheaper, if you count the 1680 us$ you have to pay over 24 months).

 

[zephead]

Wow. I gotta say, I was really looking forward to the day I could get an iPhone 3G, but this has me seriously rethinking it all. I'm shocked. Can't say much more than that. Maybe I should just bypass all this BS, buy a Touch, and keep my regular phone.

 

[koobcamuk]

Also, I find even the prices you list exorbitant, and when we're talking about 24 months at those prices, it all ads up. Even if one can afford something, doesn't mean that one should let oneself be arsef.....

well said, Tosser.

I want a SIM free one because I am in a contract for 12 more months.

 

[koobcamuk]

Which you might get on O2's PAYG scheme.

Then I will buy that, from the Apple store. Obviously has to be unlocked

 

[ruinfx]

Wow. I gotta say, I was really looking forward to the day I could get an iPhone 3G, but this has me seriously rethinking it all. I'm shocked. Can't say much more than that. Maybe I should just bypass all this BS, buy a Touch, and keep my regular phone.

you act like they att is asking for your first born child and your left nut. its just in store activation for crying out loud. only in america could such a simple thing get so blown out of proportion.

 

[BongoBanger]

Do you think the iPhone lives, sells and is used in a vacuum? No? Then that's what it has to do with the iPhone. It's a comparable product at a cheaper (much cheaper, if you count the 1680 us$ you have to pay over 24 months).

I'm not sure what you're on about. The iPhone is priced where is should be with any product of this nature. You'll pay about £100-150 as an early adopter on an 18 month contract costing £35 a month for a reasonable call/text allownace and unlimited data package for any new smartphone. The iPhone is just falling in line here.

Whether you think it's exorbitant or not is irrelevant because that's what you have to pay if you want a smartphone in the UK.

 

[Tosser]

att could just tell apple which phones to lock, they dont have to do it themselves. also like somebody said they could just block the IMEI. presto bricko.

Sigh! I'm not talking about Apple! And as far as I know, ATT is a company too.
I'm talking about the company that buys the damn phones for their employees:

The car company, the boat manufacturer, the bag-manufacturer etc. By buying and giving their employers a tool, let's call it "the iPhone", then (if what you guys say is true), they're introducing a potential serious risk, in that the phone company have access to delete the data on the indivual phones of the company. That is a serious risk to introduce, since if they can do it on purpose, they can do it by mistake, or, if some zealous worker see it fit, it can be done with ill intentions, or over a dispute.

Yes, blocking the IMEI is technically possible, but it only means the net won't allow you on.

Overall, though, I doubt that, since you bought the hardware, and therefore it is legally yours, that any of the suggestions you guys come with would be legal. Even in the Auld US.