While this is true, it's up to Apple to see this, not us. As I explained in my original post, I don't understand completely why they would do this, but, eh.
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.
AT&T and Apple Tightening Policies to Reduce iPhone Unlocking
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
While this is true, it's up to Apple to see this, not us. As I explained in my original post, I don't understand completely why they would do this, but, eh.
There's nothing like rules-of-thumbs learned in high-school forced into use in every way possible.
In fact, analogies (if used properly) is a very good way to show whether an argument is flawed or not. It's about testing validity of the argument at hand and is a classic way of doing it. "Reductio ad absurdium" does not mean "some absurd reduction" (i.e. "Ridiculous reduction").
I think it's kind of like seeing a cupcake in the bakery that has a $100 price tag (big exaggeration, I know). The cupcake "should" be cheaper as the "fair" price for a cupcake is much less, you could even take up the issue with the baker if you wish, but it isn't unjust or breaking any laws for the baker to set that price because you don't have to buy it. In fact, nobody buying the cupcake will probably have a good chance of lowering the price. Another one: I thought about buying a decent GPS system a little while ago and thought that the price was crazy. I didn't complain or try and sue, I just didn't buy it. It really is that easy. Or even compare it to average cell phone plans: I think $100 is crazy for unlimited minutes, but I don't have to buy it.
Anyway, I'll shut up now. I just think it would be more unfair than we think the price of iPhone + service is if companies couldn't set their own prices.
Dude... their goal is 10 million iPhones by the end of 2008.
Their stretch goal was to sell it in 25 countries. It will now be available in SEVENTY countries. The European Union alone is 700 million people, then there's 300 million Americans, plus Canada, then there's Australia, most of South America, and last but not least Japan... we're talking a potential customer base of, what, 2-3 billion people here. They will reach their goal of 10 million sold even if ZERO Americans buy it due to gripes with AT&T.
I agree completely. This is the essence of the free market. I can almost guarentee you if Apple sees only a tiny purchase increase (which they probably won't, because not everyone is a crybaby like me
) they'll change how they do it. Probably won't happen, though. Anyways, well written, I agree 100%.
AT&T doesn't provide Wi-Fi, and it will also not provide data service without you paying for it. Wi-Fi comes from a wireless router in your home or a hotspot, data service comes from cell towers.
If you really need a full explanation of Wi-Fi, I recommend Google or Wikipedia. The internet is full of information, just don't mistake it for wisdom or knowledge.
No I wasn't.
It was an reductio ad absurdum. If you don't get what that _really_ is, go here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum#Explanation
Yes, "pathetic" when people like you have no rebuttal. There isn't one. I've shot you down far too many times, and not a single thing you have said required a reply any better than: "Consider purchasing another product. Nobody is forcing you to buy this product, or limiting your purchasing options. There are many phones available out there for you to choose from if what Apple and AT&T offers does not meet your needs".
I just used a watered-down analogy because you couldn't conjure up a single, solitary rebuttal. I could water it down even further if it would make it easier for you to swallow.
PS: I agree with you that Apple should just sell the iPhone to everyone, but with the AT&T agreement, they can't. This scenario we have now isn't the original one Steve intended. That's clear. Steve likely wanted 1 price, unlimited internet, WiFi hotspots, visual voice-mail implementation, and some money from AT&T for their increased business. Whatever they're doing now is Plan B, and I'm sure Apple is just riding out this contract with AT&T, which ends in 2010 or so.
Until then, you do have other options. Nobody screwed you over. You're only screwed over if you sign up with AT&T just to get the iPhone, despite the fact you knew beforehand that their service didn't work where you live. However, that's just screwing yourself over.
Never really thought about that. 30 per phone. So, has it been done? A hacked phone? Not unlocked but hacked into 3G ATT?
I don't mind getting it for my wife but she will use it once a week, if at all, check weather, simple stuff. Reply to my emails, see, someone like her might benefit from pay as you use, then again, it is an iPhone, not a text based web smart (not really) phone.
Well, stock is up today 2.1% (atm)
It dropped massively yesterday before the anouncement, where's when i decided to buy some.
It's interesting to see the market reacts in realtime to what Steve is saying.
I can't seem to find it, but I am pretty sure you can use data without having a data plan. They would just charge you per kb.
Or at least it used to be that way.
Besides if you get rid of the data plan then how is Visual VoiceMail going to work?
In America if your a rich company you can pay lobbyist to make those parameters a non-issue.
Haha, yes, but let me rephrase that, then:
It doesn't mean that people should defend that behaviour.
Not at all. It's pure conjecture that this is "because of the dishonest people". Again, with that argument, ANY draconion measures can be defended. It's simply not a valid argument.
The issue is not one of human rights, obviously. It is one of consumer rights and anticompetitive business practices. Tying a phone to a carrier is considered to be illegal or underhanded in many markets (the US, unfortunately, is not one of them): disclosure is not the issue in question.
It's frankly disappointing that Apple are choosing to impose all of these restrictions on their consumers. I suppose that is their MO though... good products, horrendous company (has anyone been inside one of their retail stores lately - pathetic).
No, I understand this completely. My question was, Sprint has charged me before without warning me I had no data plan for that month (apparently my mom took it off or something) in the next bill, instead of warning me on the phone, or calling, when I tried to access the internet. I understand Wi-fi completely, my only concern was that the possibility of my Wifi, say, dropping for a minute while I'm using my iPhone, would result in me browsing the internet, then getting charged for it the next month.
Yes, I am sure this is how Apple wanted these phones activated from day 1. Come on, of course this is due to "jailbroken" iPhones. The bottom line is that the iPhone is tied to ATT for several more years and I am sure Apple has some contractual agreements it must fulfill in relation to keeping iPhones tied to ATT service contracts. I would imagine that this was ATT's idea. Apple still sells the phone but ATT has not been getting the contracts for the phones. It's not draconian, it's just a business contract!
NAFTA= Free Trade my but, it means, corporations ship jobs to below apple retail store employee's (and that's pretty bad, I think about minium wage), pay workers next to nothing to build the products, turn around pay the country a huge fee to ship it back, then put them back on our shelves. It took my wife a while to get the (turn it over and 80% is made somewhere else) concept in the store until the chinese started flourishing so much that they went from Bikes to Cars and therefore the gas rates have doubled/tripled in the past few years.
Not sure if a new prez is going to solve this. Perhaps as if they get hit with a huge tax, they might reduced their profit margins. We could see them step in and force the price down.
They would then have to abolish the NAFTA agreement and then make the iPhone free and on every network. LOL. But seriously, the govt. could step in and make broadband free all over the country. Some states have large cities with free internet.
I think a lot of the rage is two fold...
That ATT will hit you with a penalty, I don't think they can, and I can't foresee Apple activating phones, unless the release date is due to training them. Hey are they going to get commissions now? Since its subsidized this should mean insurance in 6 months, if not, class action time. On the other hand, it should stop the Chinese from getting the phones the way they used to, but one would think being made in China that they would have a source in addition to the rip offs. And they are probably the one's to thank for the jail break, maybe not.
Whoever ends up being responsible for getting the phone without DATA plan, or contract yet hacks into 3G network is going to be a savior.
Was reading last night, there was a way to get 3G free for $20.00. Said something about buying a go phone, activating it (of course, you lose your number), calling 800 number, asking for more services, then once its activated it goes into the iPhone as the phone itself (go phone) tracks the usage and how much 3G is used, then you have unlimited 3G, downside, I think it expires in 3-6 months of non use. Could have read it wrong. But it was something like that.
I will give American's this, where there is a will, there is a way, and if one thinks they are paying too much, (NAPSTER), there will be a lawsuit, (especially if the iPhone doesn't follow suit of other phones, such as INSURANCE after 60 days, REPLACEMENT very easy (no genius bar), and more.... which could also result in some hacking not only for the iPhone and other networks but hacking into the 3G network as I'm not sure how much I would use it either.
Both work and home are wireless so why would I pay $60 a month for wife and my phone to use the net on the way home from work? That's $1440 in two years for access 1/90th of the time. Actually more than what I pay for my 1.3MB (not megabit, megabyte) per second line ($24.99 a month).
OSX86, OSX86, OSX86, thank goodness for them, as they have now become a consumer rights activist group.
Maybe they can figure something out.But what if your theory is correct and then, (similar to the ATT/CINGULAR MERGER) all the data lines get jammed and 4G is not only a requirment, but a nessasity since everything is so slow, then what. What rights will we have. Surely, like a CABLE or DSL provider, you must, as a CONNEDsumer, have some rights to test the speed and say, "hey, I'm not getting this overall experience so I need a credit or the chance to cancel then...."
Can you answer me this...
How can California vote that homosexual marriage is not cool overwhelmingly (83+%) or that marijuana for medicinal use is okay, only to have 3 men (judges) say, no, no, no, sorry, but we don't think that's right. That my friend, it not democracy but a dictatorship covered in rights and spun anyway the media wants.
Just curious.
As I said: Pure conjecture from you. It's frightening you can't even see that and in order to defend the conjecture you come up with even more elaborate conjecture.
Ha ! . . that would have to be sooome feature LOL . My phone would have to have the ability to fly to me from my house if I forgot it, for me to link up with greedy AT&T's new plans.
Apple . . build towers already . .
No you are wrong. You think the $4.00, $4.50 is just at the pump? And soon to be $5.00?
There needs to be some action done about this. It's not just at the pump. This results in American auto makers losing billions if there cars are not up to par (30+ MPG), this turns into higher food, transportation, travel, entertainment, cosumer good products.... and affects Americans across the board, not just at the pumps.And for those in other countries that have higher gas, they have something to show for it. Example, in Holland, gas is very expensive, but in Holland, you can walk about 1 minute then get on a train that will take you anywhere at 70+MPH (although in kilometers), whereas here (California), public transportation is a joke. It's not the business class similar to Boston/NY, its mostly for the poor or car less and even when they do try something, (TRAINS TO PASADENA FROM HOLLYWOOD), they travel at 30mph, slow, far below the par of what I would call a successful transportation experience. Yet, this is what the taxes are supposed to be paying for.
In Holland (even Boston), you can get from point A to B in a fair if not better amount of time, in California, you have to take 3, 4, busses and it takes tripple the amount of time it would take had you driven, defeating the whole purpose.
This economy is screwed from homes to gas (which affects everything, everyone).
Time for Bush to issue a iPhone tax credit. (LOL).
I'm not sure why I haven't ever thought of this... but it will save an extra $10/mo... thank you!