Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Very interesting. I think Apple keeps the unlocking technique on their servers with IMEI numbers. I guess that your iPhone's IMEI have to be verified by the Apple server, else it would not unlock. I doubt hackers can use this technique.

If there's any interaction with a server on the net, which is very likely, there's always a way to make your iPhone think it's connected to Apple's server whereas in reality it connects to some other server that'll make it think it's unlocked and fancy-free now...
 
So does anyone think Apple is tracking IMEI numbers so that unlocked phones don't end up stateside without AT&T? My friend has T-mobile here and doesn't want to switch, but does want an iPhone? Would it be illegal for him to bring a phone back form europe and use it here with T-mobile, of course without the Visual Voicemail, ect?

-Brian

My UK iPhone doesn't show the FCC mark, only the CE mark, so I would guess that it is illegal to use a European iPhone in the US in the same manner that a US iPhone can't legally be used within the EU.

The lack of FCC mark does make me wonder as to whether they've had to change something internally for the EU market.

In terms of unlocking, I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't a way of tricking iTunes to send the IMEI number to Apple instead of the phones real IMEI number. It just creates a game of cat and mouse as Apple removes IMEI numbers used by the hackers from their database.
 
Wow, a few seconds for the actual unlock, that is awesome. This gives me hopes for a soon to appear emulation of the iTunes legit unlock process so that I no longer have to got though a half assed hack to get a new firmware onto my iPhone every time.

This is seriously too cool.
 
My UK iPhone doesn't show the FCC mark, only the CE mark, so I would guess that it is illegal to use a European iPhone in the US in the same manner that a US iPhone can't legally be used within the EU.

Of course mobile phones are supposed to be used in other countries - that's why we have quad-band phones and roaming!
 
My UK iPhone doesn't show the FCC mark, only the CE mark, so I would guess that it is illegal to use a European iPhone in the US in the same manner that a US iPhone can't legally be used within the EU.

The lack of FCC mark does make me wonder as to whether they've had to change something internally for the EU market.

In terms of unlocking, I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't a way of tricking iTunes to send the IMEI number to Apple instead of the phones real IMEI number. It just creates a game of cat and mouse as Apple removes IMEI numbers used by the hackers from their database.

Interesting about the FCC mark, perhaps a licensing fee issue.

Removing IMEI numbers from the database could lead to legit customers being denied service (only for a short time because they could phone up, assuming they have another phone, and complain). However that would be unacceptable and would potentially cause an outcry.
 
My UK iPhone doesn't show the FCC mark, only the CE mark, so I would guess that it is illegal to use a European iPhone in the US in the same manner that a US iPhone can't legally be used within the EU.

It's only illegal for Apple to sell it. It's not illegal for you to use it in the US. In fact I'm using my UK iphone in the US to write this mesage.
 
My UK iPhone doesn't show the FCC mark, only the CE mark, so I would guess that it is illegal to use a European iPhone in the US in the same manner that a US iPhone can't legally be used within the EU.

The lack of FCC mark does make me wonder as to whether they've had to change something internally for the EU market.

In terms of unlocking, I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't a way of tricking iTunes to send the IMEI number to Apple instead of the phones real IMEI number. It just creates a game of cat and mouse as Apple removes IMEI numbers used by the hackers from their database.

the FCC is mandatory only for SELLING electronic devices, not using them. Of course you can use your CE'd phone anywhere in the world.
 
If there's any interaction with a server on the net, which is very likely, there's always a way to make your iPhone think it's connected to Apple's server whereas in reality it connects to some other server that'll make it think it's unlocked and fancy-free now...

exactly, my bet - it's coming in about a week ;)
 
Interesting about the FCC mark, perhaps a licensing fee issue.

Removing IMEI numbers from the database could lead to legit customers being denied service (only for a short time because they could phone up, assuming they have another phone, and complain). However that would be unacceptable and would potentially cause an outcry.

I realise removing IMEI numbers will cause problems, but presumably they're only needed once to actually unlock the phone. I suppose it's possible that the phone is tested each time a new sync occurs, and relocked if there's no match.

I imagine this process because companies use it to protect against software downloaded illegally.

As for FCC, I had read somewhere that the lack of CE mark did in fact make it illegal to use in Europe. That could well be wrong though. As for roaming, thank you everyone for enlightening me about that, it's not as if I've worked in Greece and Turkey as well as visited lots of different countries with my UK phone before. However, my UK phone and in fact my 1st Gen iPod have both the CE and FCC marks.
 
To be fair...

Most unlocked smartphones are generally pretty expensive, £300-400 here in the UK anyway.
 
Apple is expecting to make $432 per iPhone from the $18/month they are getting from AT&T over the course of a two-year contract. Whether you think Apple should get that is another matter, but it is what they are expecting. Now, if AT&T is out of the picture, i.e., via an unlocked iPhone being used on another carrier, then that's $432 Apple isn't getting and that is what they are trying to make up for. I can't explain the 999 Euros vs. $432 USD difference, but the $432 is part of the discrepancy.

My guess (and it is only a guess) is that the rest of the discrepancy is going towards making up the money T-Mobile is losing from not having the unlocked iphone owner as a customer. It's only a guess, but since T-Mobile is doing the actual selling of the phone (unless I read something wrong?) they'd want to make some sort of profit as well as Apple.
 
Is there any way to clone an IMEI number, and therefor apply it to another phone ?
Would iTunes then be fooled into thinking you've got a German based iPhone and unlock it ??
 
What happens next?

a) there is more to the iPhone than the internal parts, e.g., costs to repair under warranty, costs to provide wireless iTunes, etc. so to say profit is based on the internal costs alone is silly. b) Apple is expecting to make $432 per iPhone from the $18/month they are getting from AT&T over the course of a two-year contract. Whether you think Apple should get that is another matter, but it is what they are expecting. Now, if AT&T is out of the picture, i.e., via an unlocked iPhone being used on another carrier, then that's $432 Apple isn't getting and that is what they are trying to make up for. I can't explain the 999 Euros vs. $432 USD difference, but the $432 is part of the discrepancy.


I'm interested in what happens after the 18 month / 2 year contract!!
Do you automatically have the right then to 'legally' unlock and go with whatever carrier you want or are you bullied into re-signing for the current carrier and apple get more of the proceeds? Does the contract price drop because Apple have got their cut now? What happens for new customers then? Do they get unlocked iPhones available from the shops at a less heavily penalised rate? I wonder..............
 
Very interesting. I think Apple keeps the unlocking technique on their servers with IMEI numbers. I guess that your iPhone's IMEI have to be verified by the Apple server, else it would not unlock. I doubt hackers can use this technique.

Hacked did use this technique when the iPhone first came out, to jailbreak (fake activate) the phone, but not for SIM unlocking if I remember.

---------
Revision
"Hacked" should be Hackers
 
The lack of FCC mark does make me wonder as to whether they've had to change something internally for the EU market.

Why on earth would there be a FCC mark on a phone meant to be sold in Europe. FCC means Federal Communications Commission. Thats a US govermental agency. CE mark is the European equavalent.

Lack of FCC mark doesn't mean anything else excpet that you bought your phone in Europe instead of USA.
 
unlocked phones are ehh, i guess cool.. i mean, i love at&t, and would never switch to anything else, and really, the only other GSM carrier in the us is T-Mobile (worst carrier ever, had a sidekick for a while) i kinda view it like, if you want a ram truck with a hemi engine, youre going to have to get a dodge. i can understand for the people that do not get service where they live, but for the others that "just" hate at&t, it kinda sucks for them.
 
I've one of these $1,500 iPhones and 4 days after buying it's still locked. T-Mobile has been completely incompetent in unlocking it and its telephone "customer service" representatives are totally clueless, not to mention those in the shops. Apple has been more professional in their responses, but basically they just blame each other for the delay. In the meantime, I am sitting here with the most expensive paper weight in the world.
 
.... b) Apple is expecting to make $432 per iPhone from the $18/month they are getting from AT&T over the course of a two-year contract. Whether you think Apple should get that is another matter, but it is what they are expecting. Now, if AT&T is out of the picture, i.e., via an unlocked iPhone being used on another carrier, then that's $432 Apple isn't getting and that is what they are trying to make up for. I can't explain the 999 Euros vs. $432 USD difference, but the $432 is part of the discrepancy.

Just to get something cleared up: The public does not know how much Apple is getting from AT&T. Estimates are all over the map, with the $18/month used often accepted as fact since it came from Gene Munster, one of the more credible aapl analysts. But again, just one guy's guess. It may or may not be accurate, but I seriously doubt it's that simple--probably different amounts for new customers vs. existing, shifting amounts as different sales figures are reached, different for different plans, etc..

As far as the additional amount to be paid for unlocked iPhone (beyond that to Apple), the carrier was required to make up front expenditures to ready the network for the iPhone. Even advertising. Those costs need to be amortized/recovered over an expected number of iPhones to be sold/used on the network. No real profit until those costs recovered. The additional @$400 may sound extremely steep, but probably can be justified on paper, with a straight face, at this stage. That amount should decline as more are sold/activated, and costs are recovered.
 
I remember MR did a breakdown of the cost of parts in the iPhone, and it totaled to somewhere around $250. They're making almost $1250 in profit here! That price of €999 was clearly set just so people wouldn't buy it.

Those breakdowns really don't express the true cost of a product. While the actual components might cost $250, that doesn't take into account customer service under warranty, the 100s of millions of dollars of R&D put into the phone, they price they pay the manufacturers to actually assemble the product, the packaging, shipping....etc...

I would be interested to know how much Apple spent on R&D over the last 5 years, and then divide that by how many phones they have sold thus far + $250, as that would be closer to the true price of the phone.
 
mmm hmm.

Most unlocked smartphones are generally pretty expensive, £300-400 here in the UK anyway.

Similar situation here in the States. Much noise is made about other phones here, but getting one of the really hot Nokia models will set you back $600-800 . . . sometimes more. (Heck, a brand new Blackberry will still hit you for $500 under contract.)
 
Just to get something cleared up: The public does not know how much Apple is getting from AT&T. Estimates are all over the map, with the $18/month used often accepted as fact since it came from Gene Munster, one of the more credible aapl analysts. But again, just one guy's guess. It may or may not be accurate, but I seriously doubt it's that simple--probably different amounts for new customers vs. existing, shifting amounts as different sales figures are reached, different for different plans, etc..

As far as the additional amount to be paid for unlocked iPhone (beyond that to Apple), the carrier was required to make up front expenditures to ready the network for the iPhone. Even advertising. Those costs need to be amortized/recovered over an expected number of iPhones to be sold/used on the network. No real profit until those costs recovered. The additional @$400 may sound extremely steep, but probably can be justified on paper, with a straight face, at this stage. That amount should decline as more are sold/activated, and costs are recovered.

I don't imagine the contract is too complicated. Remember, Steve threw away that $65 million dollar contract from IBM because he thought the contract was too long at 100 pages. He insisted that the contract be 10 pages or shorter.(http://lowendmac.com/orchard/06/1220.html).
 
unlocked phones are ehh, i guess cool.. i mean, i love at&t, and would never switch to anything else, and really, the only other GSM carrier in the us is T-Mobile (worst carrier ever, had a sidekick for a while) i kinda view it like, if you want a ram truck with a hemi engine, youre going to have to get a dodge.

Get your car analogies straight. Dodge=Apple, Ram truck=iPhone. AT&T=Shell. Wanna buy gas at Esso or Texaco? Tough luck.

I don't understand why some people are so gung ho about supporting this dumb carrier tie-in decision by Apple. Would you buy a TV that only worked with one cable provider? Would you buy a computer that worked with only one ISP?

The most popular mobile device this decade is the BlackBerry, and the BlackBerry is NOT carrier-exclusive. Yes, carriers still brand them and subsidize them, but Apple is doing neither with the iPhone on AT&T. Just sell the damn thing like any other phone - unlocked unless the carrier sells it subsidized.

Also, when the hell are we going to get the iPhone in Canada? Or TV shows on iTunes? Or prices that reflect the actual value of the Canadian dollar?
 
hmm..old news

Well, I remember T-Mobile offering their MDA Pro model

t-mobile_mda_pro_rus_add_82.jpg


for almost € 800,- (+/-$ 1,189) without a contract back in 2005.

http://msmobiles.com/news.php/4242.html

So it has always been like that over here in Germany / Netherlands. Not really suprised about the whole 999,- thang.

Here is an interesting list of simfree phones offered by the phonestore in the Netherlands (e.g. the friggin' MDA Vario2 device €749,90 = +/- $ 1113,- LOL!!! ) to give you an example

http://www.phonehouse.nl/index.php?active=227&type=HS&koopjes=0
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.