AT&T Taking Action Against iPhone Unlocks?

[Rot'nApple]

Not necessarily. Don't you sign the contract at activation, and not when you buy the phone? If that's the case, you could buy an iPhone and then hack it to another provider. That's not breaking a contract if you never signed one.

And therein lies the rub! You, would not necessarily be breaking a contract with AT&T, but wouldn't Apple?

Apple would be breaking the contract it has with at&t regarding exclusivity of the iPhone if hackers find workarounds either through Apple's hardware component or software part. It's up to Apple to maintain the legitimacy of it's agreement with at&t by updating the iPhone to keep hackers from causing apple to break their contract with at&t. Not to mention, don't expect new iPhone apps if apple software team has to keep having their attention diverted to hackers who think they are in the right with regards to unlocking the phone.

 

[lazyrighteye]

Agree with you 100% here, and I'm somewhat disappointed in Apple for not doing this. Their stance is the only thing that is going to stop iPhone being a major winner. I also don't fully understand how tying the phone to one network actually improves the user experience, so I can only assume its partly greed from Apple in wanting the extra revenue.

However, assuming Apple take maybe $5 per month on each contract, surely their figures would be better if they simply introduced an updated model each year (ala iPod). People with 2 year contracts I guess are less likely to buy the new one every year.

Not picking on Chill, at all, who merely echos common dissatisfactions with Apple, AT&T and the iPhone. His post just happened to prompt me to chime in with my typical useless ¢2.

I think we all might be looking at this whole iPhone, one carrier, locked, unlocked business through too powerful a microscope. Let's all try and take a step back and see this from a less immediate/reactionary perspective. Approach this with a "bigger picture" mentality. Because, at first glance, it does seem odd Apple would pair with one service provider, offer a full-priced yet locked phone, etc., etc.
But on second glance, maybe not.

Can we agree on the following two statements?
1. Apple loves control.
2. Apple is extremely patient and does not get involved in businesses where they have no experience.

If so, I have a less discussed concept I think may warrant some pondering.

I'm guessing that Apple paired with one large US carrier mainly for research, plain & simple. Having practically zero experience in mobile communications, they are (basically) learning what (and how) a major US service provider (in this case AT&T) does right and what (and how) they do wrong. Apple will then take what they learn from this whole experience and in about (what?) 2 years (?), be in position to also act as service provider - ensuring total control over the end user's experience. Something that wreaks Apple and was surely their intent all along.

In the meantime, they will happily continue to charge $600 to customers for the right to (basically) beta test easily the best all-in-one 'phone-ish' device on the market. All while honing their game, so to speak.

So, while the total experience is not yet 100% Apple certified, I think they are well aware of this perception, but patient & smart enough to remain focused on their ultimate goal(s). Which is taking shape right under our noses.

So while today Apple's actions may seem odd, could it not be they have a bigger picture in mind: that their actions are part of a plan to ensure a better iPhone/Apple/Mac user experience in the future?

Thoughts?

 

[nemaslov]

Not picking on Chill, at all, who merely echos common dissatisfactions with Apple, AT&T and the iPhone. His post just happened to prompt me to chime in with my typical useless ¢2.

I think we all might be looking at this whole iPhone, one carrier, locked, unlocked business through too powerful a microscope. Let's all try and take a step back and see this from a less immediate/reactionary perspective. Approach this with a "bigger picture" mentality. Because, at first glance, it does seem odd Apple would pair with one service provider, offer an unsubsidized yet locked phone, etc., etc.
But on second glance, maybe not.

Can we agree on the following two statements?
1. Apple loves control.
2. Apple is extremely patient and does not get involved in businesses where they have no experience.

If so, I have a less discussed concept I think may warrant some pondering.

I'm guessing that Apple paired with one large US carrier mainly for research, plain & simple. Having practically zero experience in mobile communications, they are (basically) learning what (and how) a major US service provider (in this case AT&T) does right and what (and how) they do wrong. Apple will then take what they learn from this whole experience and in about (what?) 2 years (?), be in position to also act as service provider - ensuring total control over the end user's experience. Something that wreaks Apple and was surely their intent all along.

In the meantime, they will happily continue to charge $600 to customers for the right to (basically) beta test easily the best all-in-one 'phone-ish' device on the market. All while honing their game, so to speak.

So, while the total experience is not yet 100% Apple certified, I think they are well aware of this perception, but patient & smart enough to remain focused on their ultimate goal(s). Which is taking shape right under our noses.

So while today Apple's actions may seem odd, could it not be they have a bigger picture in mind: that their actions are part of a plan to ensure a better iPhone/Apple/Mac user experience in the future?

Thoughts?

I would be curious to know how many of those commenting here are actually using the iPhone and what has there experience been so far...with ATT. It seems like most of us who are commenting have not used one at any length. Maybe I am wrong. I would love to hear feedback from day to day user.

Two friends of mine here in San Francisco have them and LOVE them. They use ATT and even with all our hills, say the coverage is good with a couple of fallout areas which every company has. They also travel (in advertising) and love that that don't have to have their laptops open all of the time....like in airports.

I played with it and LOVED it. There is a learning curve but the Web portion was amazing on WI fi and good-a bit sluggish on EDGE.

 

[emotion]

I would be curious to know how many of those commenting here are actually using the iPhone and what has there experience been so far...with ATT.

Who cares? Disatisfication with ATT is one of many reasons for unlocking.

 

[pocketrockets]

The way I see it, ATT loses and Apple wins.

1. You are not breaking the rules by unlocking the phone after you buy it and before you sign up with ATT.

2. I think its safe to say that most people hate ATT for exclusivity, even its customers and even Apple.

3. The Apple/ATT partnership is shaky, at best.

4. Apple's product is solid and its partnership with ATT is only a means to an end.

 

[lazyrighteye]

I would be curious to know how many of those commenting here are actually using the iPhone and what has there experience been so far...with ATT. It seems like most of us who are commenting have not used one at any length. Maybe I am wrong. I would love to hear feedback from day to day user.

Two friends of mine here in San Francisco have them and LOVE them. They use ATT and even with all our hills, say the coverage is good with a couple of fallout areas which every company has. They also travel (in advertising) and love that that don't have to have their laptops open all of the time....like in airports.

I played with it and LOVED it. There is a learning curve but the Web portion was amazing on WI fi and good-a bit sluggish on EDGE.

I suspect that most iPhone haters do not actually use an iPhone on a daily basis.

FWIW, I picked up my iPhone on June 29.
It also represents my only phone. No land line.
Having used a few different 'smart phones' over the past decade, this one is hands-down, the most useful one I have encountered.
EDGE is nowhere NEAR as slow as I was anticipating. Safari, on EDGE, is more than acceptable. Maps does not see any tangible lag due to EDGE. The keyboard is a non-issue for me. Sure, there are some things/features I would like to see eventually revised/included - but overall, straight out of the box, this device rocks.

I too travel a bit for work and this things is invaluable. No longer am I lugging around and/or opening up a laptop just to check a quick email or catch up on the latest macrumors. One device. Several useful functions. And with airport security beefing up, traveling light is paramount.

And in my experience, AT&T has been better than VZW (my previous carrier) or T-Mobile. Not only is my reception better (read: more stable, aka; I frequently dropped calls with VZW), my bill went WAY down while my functionality went way up. For me, leaving (yes, my contract happened to be up) VZW for AT&T and an iPhone was win win all the way.

The few people I personally know, using iPhones, they are equally as happy. But maybe we're the minority. Maybe not.
It might be worth noting people are more likely to post negatives than positives.

I'd be happy to elaborate on any specifics, for those more curious of day-to-day usage.

 

[nemaslov]

Who cares? Disatisfication with ATT is one of many reasons for unlocking.

Who cares?

I admit I do not have an iPhone, but I have been with AT&T (and who they were before: Cingular, SBC, Pacbell) for over 8 years and have had no real problems. No more than friends I have who use other providers. Things drop on occasion with them all.

So that's why I would care to hear from actual day to day users who have been in the trenches for the past two months.

 

[Stella]

Is it possible that T-Mobile might have liabilities or might not want to piss Apple off with the hopes of having the iPhone available to them in the future? Can T-Mobile refuses to allow an "unlocked" iPhone on to their network?

I doubt it would be possible to bar certain phones from the network.

Some one correct me, but the carrier has no idea what phone your using on their network - if they don't have the records already.

 

[DesignerOnMac]

Point being missed....

You bought the UNSUBSIDIZED phone knowing full well in order to use it you had to enter into a contract.

I'm baffled by the folks who assume that just because you enter into a two year contract you are entitled to something fee or discounted.

When you signed your first least, did you do so expecting cheaper rent or a fee month now and then? When you signed up for a 3 year car lease, did you get a lower price on the car?

NO, a contract and a subsidy do know go hand in hand, get over it.

If I remember correctly, Apple did approach a few other carriers, but all but AT&T said "NO"!

As I posted in another thread, you can buy ANY cell phone brand in South America and they are ALL unlocked! It is only the USA that requires you buy a phone and sign a contract! In South America you buy a phone card for whatever amount you want to use and go with the carrier for that card! End of story!!

I agree with others that now people are bitching about being with AT&T! All of you new that BEFORE you bought your iPhone!!! LIVE WITH IT, or do something else!

Also, there are countless phones you can buy online that are unlocked, pay full price, (some are as expensive or more expansive than the iPhone)! And then you have to find a carrier and 'pay the piper'....what's the difference??

Just by 2 cents!

 

[synth3tik]

I know everyone wants an unlocked iPhone, but people fail to realize that this was really the only way AT&T was comfortable with the demands of Apple. Once it gets to the point where you don't have to pay over $2K for an unlocked iPhone on ebay AT&T might simply say that Apple has not lived up th their end of the contract by allowing people to unlock the phone, and kill their contract with Apple, and then no one gets an iPhone.

Honestly AT&T is the same as all other carriers.

 

[pocketrockets]

September 5 announcement.

Begins with video of ATT globe exploding. and then...

 

[PNW]

ATT subsidizes this phone with the intention of making the subsidy back during the course of the contract. Not to mention the hours of work and millions of dollars spent on research and development.

Stealing is stealing. Its has nothing to do with "freedom"

So If I go down to the Apple Store, pay their asking price for an iPhone, and never start or sign a contract with AT&T exactly what have I stolen? This idea that companies have a right to unfettered access to my wallet is utter nonsense. To extend that further if I modify a piece of hardware I own to better suit my needs what exactly am I stealing? We're not talking about theft of service here (i.e. using a network without paying for it). So once again what is being stolen? If AT&T requires the contract to make their profit margin they shouldn't allow Apple to sell the phones without the contract.

If the local pub starts selling pints for less than they pay for them it's bad business on their part not stealing on the part of their clientele

 

[Ha ze]

September 5 announcement.

Begins with video of ATT globe exploding. and then...

I'm just gonna guess that that wont happen lol

 

[MacAerfen]

Again part of the condition for buying the phone and using it is accepting the end user license agreement which indicates you will not modify the hardware or software. Just like when purchasing a software program like Windows XP. You are purchasing the right to use the product, not take that product and use the research the devoloper put into it to make something else.

 

[diamond.g]

I doubt it would be possible to bar certain phones from the network.

Some one correct me, but the carrier has no idea what phone your using on their network - if they don't have the records already.

They would know what phone you are using, but couldn't stop you from using it.

 

[Apple Los Cabos]

You pay for the iPhone, it's yours.

I will be in agreement with AT&T if they were giving you the iPhone so as which you have the contract of two years with them, but it's not like that, you already paid for the iPhone and already it's yours.

 

[thejakill]

I would be curious to know how many of those commenting here are actually using the iPhone and what has there experience been so far...with ATT. It seems like most of us who are commenting have not used one at any length. Maybe I am wrong. I would love to hear feedback from day to day user.

i resisted getting one but when my birthday came i couldn't say no. it works great with att, better reception than i got with tmobile. there are places that i couldn't use my old tmobile phone that work perfectly with att. the visual voicemail is great. i was one of the those people that wanted a "phoneless" iphone, but after having one for a month now, i wouldn't want it without the phone and edge network. it's a bit slow, but works everywhere. that's one of the coolest things about it, that you can use the net and email anywhere. and the phone part is better than i expected, so no complaints here. the monthly plan isn't that much more expensive, and with free mobile-to-mobile i hardly use any minutes anyway. go get one!

 

[CWallace]

I would be curious to know how many of those commenting here are actually using the iPhone and what has there experience been so far...with ATT.

I've been with AT&T my entire cellular life (about a dozen years). I stay with them because they work and I feel treated fairly by them.

Quite simply, the iPhone is the coolest piece of tech I have used since my Amiga 1000. And like the early days of the Altair and Z-80 computers, seeing the thriving hacking/modding community continue to expand the capabilities and usefulness of my iPhone really has me excited and intrigued for the next "one more thing" they will bring forward.

 

[CWallace]

At what point in the buying procedure does the iPhone become mine? I'd guess after I hand over $599? Am I wrong?

You own the phone the moment you hand over the cash and take the drawstring bag. It's just if you want to use all of it's functionality, you need to activate it with AT&T.

Couldn't ATT or Apple include in the user agreement that there shall be no other network but ATT be used on the iPhone or something like that?

Probably, but enforcing it would be effectively impossible.

Let's look at this from a business standpoint...

Excellent summary.

I'm guessing that Apple paired with one large US carrier mainly for research, plain & simple. Having practically zero experience in mobile communications, they are (basically) learning what (and how) a major US service provider (in this case AT&T) does right and what (and how) they do wrong. Apple will then take what they learn from this whole experience and in about (what?) 2 years (?), be in position to also act as service provider - ensuring total control over the end user's experience. Something that wreaks Apple and was surely their intent all along.

A solid concept.

I doubt it would be possible to bar certain phones from the network. Some one correct me, but the carrier has no idea what phone your using on their network - if they don't have the records already.

Cellphones (or at least SIMS) do have unique identifiers. So when you call in with a problem and tell them you have an iPhone, they could block that SIM. After all, they need some way to cut you off when you stop paying your bill.


The biggest issue will be for the carriers themselves. They will probably have limited ability to troubleshoot service issues with the iPhones and you can be sure that if you don't activate your iPhone with AT&T, sending it in for service-related issues will be met with, at best, blank stares and, at worst, canceled AppleCare/warranties.

 

[mccldwll]

I would be curious to know how many of those commenting here are actually using the iPhone and what has there experience been so far...with ATT. It seems like most of us who are commenting have not used one at any length. Maybe I am wrong. I would love to hear feedback from day to day user.
.

I am a happy iPhone user. I hate contracts and have avoided them for eight years, paying more for no commitment plans, and even considered failing the credit check and going the prepaid route on the iPhone. Decided, however, that it really made no sense since the iPhone was actually a great deal. Anyone who thinks the situation would be better if at&t weren't directly involved just isn't dealing with the reality of introducing a new product in the telecom industry and wanting any semblance of quality control. And this isn't just some "stupid" phone which plays music and takes pictures, which many here seem to see it as. The iPhone is an amazingly sophisticated piece of technology, and it is essential, that apple retains as much control of ther experience as possible. I trust apple to get it right. I don't trust any of the telecoms (except google, but that's a future story). And for all the opiners here who believe you have any clue about what apple and at&t can't do, and what purchasers and hackers legally can do, unless you have a law degree AND an intimate familiarity with the issues involved, you don't. It's not as simple as you seem think it is. This is chess, not checkers. Things aren't a certain way simply because you want them to be.

 

[sanford]

Hated it on principle. Decided with new iPods coming had to see for myself. Figured I'd eat the restock fee when I was right all along. Plus have 90 days to go back to Tmo. Bought it. Love it. Makes me less computer-centric rather than more. Just as happy with ATT as Tmo in service quality and customer care. They really are trying to win us over. EDGE is just fine for everything but maybe playing Gears of War online. It's not really a smartphone, though. It's a whole new gig.

I suspect that most iPhone haters do not actually use an iPhone on a daily basis.

FWIW, I picked up my iPhone on June 29.
It also represents my only phone. No land line.
Having used a few different 'smart phones' over the past decade, this one is hands-down, the most useful one I have encountered.
EDGE is nowhere NEAR as slow as I was anticipating. Safari, on EDGE, is more than acceptable. Maps does not see any tangible lag due to EDGE. The keyboard is a non-issue for me. Sure, there are some things/features I would like to see eventually revised/included - but overall, straight out of the box, this device rocks.

I too travel a bit for work and this things is invaluable. No longer am I lugging around and/or opening up a laptop just to check a quick email or catch up on the latest macrumors. One device. Several useful functions. And with airport security beefing up, traveling light is paramount.

And in my experience, AT&T has been better than VZW (my previous carrier) or T-Mobile. Not only is my reception better (read: more stable, aka; I frequently dropped calls with VZW), my bill went WAY down while my functionality went way up. For me, leaving (yes, my contract happened to be up) VZW for AT&T and an iPhone was win win all the way.

The few people I personally know, using iPhones, they are equally as happy. But maybe we're the minority. Maybe not.
It might be worth noting people are more likely to post negatives than positives.

I'd be happy to elaborate on any specifics, for those more curious of day-to-day usage.

 

[Stella]

Its the SIM card. If you report your phone / stolen lost, they will 'disable' your SIM card, so others can't rack up a huge phone bill of X rated numbers to the other side of the world!

If you told another carrier that you had an iphone that is being used on their network, then your very stupid ;-) - to risk the SIM card being disabled. You could just whack another sim card in it and learn from your mistake!

Cellphones (or at least SIMS) do have unique identifiers. So when you call in with a problem and tell them you have an iPhone, they could block that SIM. After all, they need some way to cut you off when you stop paying your bill.

 

[unigolyn]

You bought the UNSUBSIDIZED phone knowing full well in order to use it you had to enter into a contract.

I'm baffled by the folks who assume that just because you enter into a two year contract you are entitled to something fee or discounted.

Are you on crack? Why on earth would ANYONE sign up for two years of indentured servitude unless they got something out of it?

When you signed your first least, did you do so expecting cheaper rent or a fee month now and then? When you signed up for a 3 year car lease, did you get a lower price on the car?

WORST car analogy ever. A car or an apartment is a physical entity that depreciates in value through use. A cell phone account is a service. Did you sign a two-year contract with your cable provider? Your ISP? Can you only get electricity at your house if you sign a two-year contract?

Long-term contracts were introduced to sell subsidized phones. Now that everyone's used to long-term contracts, the telcos want to pretend that it's somehow normal to have long-term contracts for their services, subsidy or not. I know why they love those contracts - they don't have to compete in per-minute pricing as long as the majority of their customers are contractually obligated to stay with them for years.

In those European countries where most people buy unsubsidized phones, you can pay about 5 cents per minute for outgoing calls and have unlimited calling to any cell phone in the same network. Incoming calls are never charged to you. So if you make 300 minutes of outgoing calls per month, you end up paying 15 bucks for it. The monthly for the contract itself is $1, unless you opt to get your bills emailed to you, in which case it's $0. The only caveat is that you have to make at least $5 worth of calls per month, or they charge you the $5 regardless. An unlimited 3G data plan is $27 per month. You're not charged anything for call display (hear that, Canadian telcos?)

And you can opt out and take your number to a cheaper competitor at any time. Unless you got a subsidized phone, in which case you have to pay the balance of the phone's full price to end your contract, at which point the provider is legally obligated to unlock your phone for you.

 

[hagjohn]

If Apple does nothing to "block" the hack, then I bet ATT will sue Apple for breach of contract. "Exclusive Provider" means Apple would have to go to some length to protect against "hacks". I would guess.

The way I see it, ATT loses and Apple wins.

1. You are not breaking the rules by unlocking the phone after you buy it and before you sign up with ATT.

2. I think its safe to say that most people hate ATT for exclusivity, even its customers and even Apple.

3. The Apple/ATT partnership is shaky, at best.

4. Apple's product is solid and its partnership with ATT is only a means to an end.

 

[unigolyn]

I hope that at&t or Apple's legal teams can block these unlockers. If people don't want at&t don't buy the iPhone. at&t paid big buck to be the exclusive carrier and there is no reason why some geek hackers should be allowed to bypass this.

Or I hope Apple can relock with each and every sofware update, and possibly a FORCED update!!

If you want an iPhone sign the at&t contract and shut up. If its not available in your country sit there and wait.

I don't give a flying f*** what AT&T paid Apple. The $599 is going directly to the manufacturer of the device, AT&T is not subsidizing it. What AT&T paid for was:

1. The right to be the only operator who can sell iPhones with contracts.
2. The right to be the only operator whom Apple provides activation for via iTunes.

If I want to use the device I owned with any other operator, and I can bypass the technical hurdles in doing so, I can do so legally, and AT&T can't do anything about it. They like to pretend they can, but they can't. End of story.