AT&T and Apple Tightening Policies to Reduce iPhone Unlocking

thechidz said:
makes no sense...:(

you are forced to register in store but if you dont sign up in 30 days you get penalized??? what are people going to do, wait for 30 days inside the store before they register it, thus getting the penalty?
Click to expand...
Exactly my thoughts. Surely one statement contradicts the other :confused:

*thanks the good o2-lord that there will be a PAYG option for unlocking*
 
frosse said:
I think this is BS, why would Apple want to restrict their users? Its not like the lose anything on unlocked phones.

What happens if I'd like to buy an iphone as a gift to my son? Will I have to drag him to a frikkin store then?

BS all the way.
Click to expand...

It is of course your right then not to purchase the phone.

Frankly, I'm sick of hearing all the bleating about about people's human rights and the requirement to have unlocked phones.

The product is sold as tied to a carrier - this is not hidden from you so there is nothing underhanded going on.

Your only human right is the choice of whether to purchase with that restriction in place or divert your cash to another product.

People need to get over the fact that the world doesn't revolve around them.
 
Still no clue at Mobistar

I just phoned customer support for Orange Belgium (Mobistar) and they have no idea either of pricing or the the plans they are going to offer

No information what's so ever...:mad:
 
Hmm, I'm not sure about the O2 option for Pay As You Go now:

"The 8GB device will cost £99 for users who subscribe to the £30 and £35 per month contracts, or will be given away free to customers who agree to the £45 and £75 monthly price plans.

The 16GB iPhone will be available for free to those signed up to the £75 per month tariff, or will cost £159 for those customers on the £30 and £35 contracts, and cost £59 on the £45 per month tariff.

The iPhone will also be available as a pay-as-you-go handset, although O2 is yet to announce pricing details for the device on this tariff. "

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2008/06/10/dliphone110.xml

Surely they can't contradict Uncle Steve's $199 price promise? :eek: :D

I will pay over the £99/£159 for the Pay As You Go- but how much more?
 
BlackBerry Bold..

.. Here I come!

I can't get credit - at all.

So there'll be no way of me getting an iPhone without paying O2 £400 "security" money - which I get back after 3/6 months.

I've been eyeing up a BlackBerry lately - I text and Facebook a lot, and whilst I find the iPhone convenient, I don't think its as convenient as a solid QWERTY.

Meh, maybe I'm just bitter because I can't get the new iPhone.

Still, if push comes to shove, I'll be more than happy with a MacBook Air (ordering end of this month) and BlackBerry Bold.

Plus, I'm already in a T-Mobile contract - so I can upgrade to a BB with no credit check.
 
Banjhiyi said:
It is of course your right then not to purchase the phone.

Frankly, I'm sick of hearing all the bleating about about people's human rights and the requirement to have unlocked phones.

The product is sold as tied to a carrier - this is not hidden from you so there is nothing underhanded going on.

Your only human right is the choice of whether to purchase with that restriction in place or divert your cash to another product.

People need to get over the fact that the world doesn't revolve around them.
Click to expand...

Is your last name "Incorporated" or "Limited"?
I think the companies have their right to come up whatever stupid rule they want. Now, sometimes so called common sense applies. That is why many countries don't let companies get away with tactics that go beyond what is FAIR. Fair competition for example.
From the company point of view, if the rule does not work (restrain people from buying the product) then it has to be adjusted.
"We don't want X to buy a CrapBerry, we want X to buy an iPhone" What can we do? Change the rule.
I am sure Apple, maybe AT&T, will listen to the +1000 negative comments about this and do something.
 
frosse said:
I think this is BS, why would Apple want to restrict their users? Its not like the lose anything on unlocked phones.
Click to expand...
OK, I'll play the devil's advocate here...

I think they're doing it because they want to ensure that users who buy iPhones get the full experience and enjoyment out of it.

Sometimes you need these creative big wigs to push for higher standards. Remember THX? Back in '77 when George Lucas released the first Star Wars film, it annoyed him to no end that theaters had such crappy sound systems. Many of them only had mono back then. So he had this idea that you could introduce a certification system, and by 1982 Lucasfilm and Tomlinson Holman had developed the THX certification system. People who wanted the best possible experience out of Return of the Jedi were told to find a THX certified theater. Soon enough THX was a worldwide standard that all theaters felt obliged to comply with. And if it weren't for George Lucas' geeky perfectionism back in the 70's we probably wouldn't have all these kickass home theater systems today.

Apple wants to push carriers to improve the infrastructures. By giving one carrier per country the exclusive right to sell iPhone contracts, they're making other carriers green with envy because they're all dying to peddle iPhones and will work to ensure that their 3G coverage is up to scratch in time for that joyous day when they can sell iPhones too!

OK, now I'm done playing devil's advocate.

Now read this and weep (especially the part about "tether cords")...

http://www.engadget.com/2008/06/10/the-iphone-3g-on-atandt-we-ask-the-burning-questions/
 
Ironic

Funny to see that the loudest people in here are MOSTLY those that say that they wont even get an iPhone. Its OK, you don't have to justify your choice of phone, be happy with what you've got.
 
yeah i also noticed that he ...was indeed very thin. his neck looks pencil.

Obese people are all over America lol, but those thin guys look just sick and abnormal.
 
Anuba said:
OK, I'll play the devil's advocate here...

I think they're doing it because they want to ensure that users who buy iPhones get the full experience and enjoyment out of it.
Click to expand...

They don't care about you or your enjoyment. They only care about your money.
 
TeddyBlack said:
Well, I for one am glad that they might make you activate them in store. When I originally got the iphone, I had to take it back to my local Carphone Warehouse store twice, because the screen on each one was suffering from the negative blacks problem.

Going back with it was a nightmare because on both occasions, I had to really stand my ground to get a replacement. They point blank refused to acknowledge it as a genuine reason. The fact that it would be in store would mean this problem (hopefully it won't exist in the new iphone) could be identified at point of purchase rather than having to go backwards and forwards. In the UK, there is almost an unwritten rule that once you step out of the store with your purchase, then it's 'bad luck buddy, it's now second hand/used goods'.

Sorry for the rant....:D
Click to expand...

You are totally wrong about the UK Sale of Goods Act.
It clearly gives very strong and power rights regarding goods purchased.
They are not second hand when you walk out of the door.
All products MUST be fit for use and of merchant-able quality, if they are not then you can return them for a refund / repair / replacement.

Just because CarPhoneWarehouse flout the Sale of Goods Act does not mean that we have weak laws in the UK. If you have faulty goods you should return them to the store and claim your rights under the sale of good act, if they will not provide the service you need report them to Trading Standards.

Read more about your rights here :-

http://www.berr.gov.uk/consumers/fact-sheets/page38311.html
 
Teddy's said:
Is your last name "Incorporated" or "Limited"?
I think the companies have their right to come up whatever stupid rule they want. Now, sometimes so called common sense applies. That is why many countries don't let companies get away with tactics that go beyond what is FAIR. Fair competition for example.
From the company point of view, if the rule does not work (restrain people from buying the product) then it has to be adjusted.
"We don't want X to buy a CrapBerry, we want X to buy an iPhone" What can we do? Change the rule.
I am sure Apple, maybe AT&T, will listen to the +1000 negative comments about this and do something.
Click to expand...

For all the chatter on here, it clearly isn't negatively affecting Apple's forecasts otherwise they would have shed the single-carrier model.

Just because it doesn't suit you or anyone else, it doesn't mean it's not suiting Apple or AT&T. It's their ball, they can limit use of it to whoever they want.

That's their choice. If it doesn't suit anyone else, then they can use their "common sense" and go elsewhere.

1k negative comments don't mean much to Apple and AT&T. If internet nerds bitching about their 'rights' was of any concern, we'd all be using Dell's with Apple stickers on them.
 
frosse said:
I think this is BS, why would Apple want to restrict their users? Its not like the lose anything on unlocked phones.

What happens if I'd like to buy an iphone as a gift to my son? Will I have to drag him to a frikkin store then?

BS all the way.
Click to expand...

Then don't get one, you are not being forced!
 
Parky said:
You are totally wrong about the UK Sale of Goods Act.
It clearly gives very strong and power rights regarding goods purchased.
They are not second hand when you walk out of the door.
All products MUST be fit for use and of merchant-able quality, if they are not then you can return them for a refund / repair / replacement.

Just because CarPhoneWarehouse flout the Sale of Goods Act does not mean that we have weak laws in the UK. If you have faulty goods you should return them to the store and claim your rights under the sale of good act, if they will not provide the service you need report them to Trading Standards.

Read more about your rights here :-

http://www.berr.gov.uk/consumers/fact-sheets/page38311.html
Click to expand...

This is one reason why I avoid the CPW like the plague. The alternatives are not much better, but at least you can get out of the store without being hassled to death if you don't choose to buy their crappy insurance and accessories.
 
Tosser said:
Oh, what a joke. I'm a dane, living in Denmark. How's that for being "narrowminded"? Sheesh!

Yes, the "price" (read: Outlay) is lowered. However, since you cannot take it out the door without signing a contract (I'm sure the O2 unlocked, carrierfree is pure hope from their part), the actual price will be higher.

In fact, that way of advertising is illegal in this country. You have to advertise what the TOTAL cost will be when the contract expires.



LOL, have you ever experienced that with an Apple-product?



No, but then again, I'm pretty sure that's very hardcore wishful thinking.

And now, I really should be going.
Click to expand...

Tosser (how apt),

In the UK the TOTAL cost of ownership for the iPhone has in fact reduced.

Ian
 
seppoj said:
Amen to that. I cannot see many business customers rushing to O2 shops with those contract prices.
Click to expand...

I have hope the french government, The Chinese Pirates and the elite spetnaz programmers will come together to unlock this puppy:D
 
Imagine that, a company protecting their product. All you negative voters need to seriously just switch to ATT or buy a different phone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top