You phone is not useless. You can sell it and use the funds to by your next phone!
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.
ATT CEO office/Unlock
- Thread starter DerekRod
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You phone is not useless. You can sell it and use the funds to by your next phone!
It is useless to me I already bought a 4S unlocked probably just gonna sell the 3GS anyway before it gets declared End Of Life
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A406 Safari/7534.48.3)
Has anyone else here wondered:
What motivates guys like Cyks to be hostile and pro AT&T?
Why do people who attempt to stick-up for their consumer rights and mention things like FCC complaints or alternatives like Skype get ridiculed?
Why do people who question AT&T's motives or policies get voted down continually?
Has anyone else here wondered:
What motivates guys like Cyks to be hostile and pro AT&T?
Why do people who attempt to stick-up for their consumer rights and mention things like FCC complaints or alternatives like Skype get ridiculed?
Why do people who question AT&T's motives or policies get voted down continually?
Last edited by a moderator:
AT&T knows unlocked iPhones are big underground businesses.
Because of exchange rates in other countries. If AT&T decided to let its subsidized iPhone become unlocked. You would see a flood of used iPhones slowly enter Russia/Brazil/India markets.
Apple in turn would also be pissed because the competitors would undercut official Apple unlocked prices.
Let's see. AT&T customer sells used iPhone 4S that's unlocked by AT&T for $450 on Craigslist. Middle man than ships it to Brazil and sell its for $900 easily. In brazil iPhones 4S can cost easily $1000 and up.
That's why there is a huge demand for iPhone 3GS that can be unlocked. It's far cheaper to do business buying and selling used unlock iPhones in brazil to undercut official pricing.
Apple mad. AT&T mad.
http://9to5mac.com/2011/12/16/why-d...azil-and-what-does-apple-plan-to-do-about-it/
Because of exchange rates in other countries. If AT&T decided to let its subsidized iPhone become unlocked. You would see a flood of used iPhones slowly enter Russia/Brazil/India markets.
Apple in turn would also be pissed because the competitors would undercut official Apple unlocked prices.
Let's see. AT&T customer sells used iPhone 4S that's unlocked by AT&T for $450 on Craigslist. Middle man than ships it to Brazil and sell its for $900 easily. In brazil iPhones 4S can cost easily $1000 and up.
That's why there is a huge demand for iPhone 3GS that can be unlocked. It's far cheaper to do business buying and selling used unlock iPhones in brazil to undercut official pricing.
Apple mad. AT&T mad.
http://9to5mac.com/2011/12/16/why-d...azil-and-what-does-apple-plan-to-do-about-it/
Verizon unlocked my iPhone 4s for international SIMs. Couldn't I do exactly what you're talking about?
Last edited by a moderator:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)
Exactly. Why shouldn't AT&T unlock the iPhone? I think it might actually improve their customer satisfaction a bit.
aristobrat said:
Exactly. Why shouldn't AT&T unlock the iPhone? I think it might actually improve their customer satisfaction a bit.
and I'd pay em for the right to unlock my out of contract device...honestly I would...$10-20 bucks yep
I imagine that they could ask $50-$100 and people would still pay. IIRC, Rogers charges around $50 for a carrier unlock.
I wouldn't put it past AT&T for trying to charge for it, but with Verizon doing it for free (and AT&T doing it for free on every other model phone they sell), they'd get another public relations fire to deal with. LOL
Yeah, I don't know if Rogers charges for other phones to be unlocked. If AT&T did charge, I don't think there'd be people hesitating to jump on the offer. Of course, correspondingly, there'd also be a number of those who'd then move to t-mobile or a local gsm provider. 
oh... so it's Apple's fault
Just FYI I chatted today with CS at ATT and they gave me this baloney:
Allison: How can I help you today?
You: I just learned that iPhone 4s with Verizon and Sprint can be unlocked. Can I unlock my iPhone 4S with you?
Allison: Unfortunately not. Apple has not released any options for us to unlock devices at this moment in time.
You: Well. That sure it unfortunate.
Allison: I apologize for the inconvenience, once Apple provides us with options on unlocking we will be able to provide that.
You: So it's an Apple issue? even though Verizon and Sprint do it on their iPhones?
Allison: Yes that is provided to them by Apple.
Just FYI I chatted today with CS at ATT and they gave me this baloney:
Allison: How can I help you today?
You: I just learned that iPhone 4s with Verizon and Sprint can be unlocked. Can I unlock my iPhone 4S with you?
Allison: Unfortunately not. Apple has not released any options for us to unlock devices at this moment in time.
You: Well. That sure it unfortunate.
Allison: I apologize for the inconvenience, once Apple provides us with options on unlocking we will be able to provide that.
You: So it's an Apple issue? even though Verizon and Sprint do it on their iPhones?
Allison: Yes that is provided to them by Apple.
With AT&T, I am locked into a 2-year contract if I purchase a subsidized phone, with the idea being they will make up the upfront discount through two years of service fees. However, if I have an off-contract phone, those data rates are not reduced to account for AT&T's savings. On top of that, even if I fulfill my contract, they will not unlock the phone.
The whole thing is a mess.
The whole thing is a mess.
I know you're being sarcastic, but in some cases, yes it is better to be strong armed by the government. Ideally a government is supposed to represent the people who gave it power - the voters and taxpayers. A government can certainly abuse its power, but we as citizens can also vote representatives out of office. We have no such control over a company (our money will only go so far when you have monopolies and duopolies controlling "essential" services like telecom).
Unfortunately our political system has devolved to such a state where only extreme positions can get one in office. The system was much better when conservatives and liberals weren't the same things as republicans and democrats.
Very thoughtful and effectively expressed argument! (And no, there is no sarcasm in this post.
)Yeah you think so?NYC deregulated power cos that went well for the consumer....
----------
How about the article link that started this post?Just maybe thats my source....
Your OP doesn't have a link...
Thanks for that... I was simply asking for a source out of curiosity... wasn't trying to attack the OP or refute his claim... I'm just a curious person by nature and I like to explore things like that...
Last edited: