I was listening to one of Leo Laporte's podcasts yesterday and he said that nobody seems to have read the terms of use in the fine print because the iPhone WILL work if you cancel your AT&T account. But only for 3 months and then it's designed to turn back into a brick. He said there was some guy from Mexico that wanted to get one and take back with him after he got it activated and cancelled his AT&T account and he told him not to bother.
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.
iPhone as a Widescreen iPod + Wifi without Contract?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Back at the end of May, I posted this:
followed up with
That question was based on a rumor that I can't recall now that indicated basically the death of the Portal Player base of the iPod. The iPhone really confirmed this rumor. Apple's porting of OS X (also rumored long ago) to devices other than the PowerPC Mac (Intel and ARM, AppleTV, iPhone) shows that they really want to expand the influence and reach of OS X. Not only that, they now have the proven ability to do so.
Somehow we don't question that Windows was ported to mobile devices, yet the concept of OS X anywhere but a standard desktop or laptop system still confuses some people who cannot see beyond today.
So I believe that one of the next gen iPods will be widescreen, like the iPhone, large HDD, with OS X and the media player functionality of the iPhone. I think wireless and touch screen will really depend on battery issues (or inevitable Zune comparisons). The ability to buy songs directly would be nice, but I don't think Apple wants to completely sever the ties with a base station, if only for advertising that is possible on the iTunes Store with a full size screen.
Apple will update the iPod by Oct. 31. Will it be a 40-100 GB iPhone minus phone for $300-$400? No.
You may not be able to buy Tiger for Intel via retail in a universal version (and why should Apple make one available? No Intel Mac had anything lower than 10.4), but Leopard will definitely be available via retail. And how many of those 99.9% do think will pony up the $129 to buy a legit copy and try hacking it to work on their non-Mac boxes? Very, Very Very few, if any.
I doubt very much that Apple would cut down capacity of the high-end iPod in favor of flash drive iPhone-like PMP's. My guess is they'll convert all 'Pods to flash when the beefier models get cheaper per gig and get better capacity than what we have available now.
But WiFi browsing? I just can't see this happening, at least not for a while. If Apple created an iPod that was a spitting image of an iPhone, had all of its hotspot capabilities and interface, the iPhone itself would be cannibalized to death. Why buy an iPhone when I can just have a WiPod for all of that fancy stuff, and then simply have a simple cell phone to do the calling thing?
^^ Aren't you still overlooking the fact that you need to be in a WiFi hotspot in order to use that. What good is that going to do when you're one the road or in some other situation like that?
Jajah requires voice plan on cell phone.
I just tried out Jajah with my home computer, cell phone and home phone line. From my desktop I was able to initiate a call which made my cell phone ring, after it rang my home phone rang. The latency was much greater than normal for a cell to landline call. Also it was clear that it used my voice connection on my cell phone. So I really don't see the use of this, unless you want cheap international calls. JaJah will not allow you to make calls from an iPhone that doesn't have a voice plan.
Now if you are a matchmaker and you want to trick two people into talking to each other this site might be useful.
I just tried out Jajah with my home computer, cell phone and home phone line. From my desktop I was able to initiate a call which made my cell phone ring, after it rang my home phone rang. The latency was much greater than normal for a cell to landline call. Also it was clear that it used my voice connection on my cell phone. So I really don't see the use of this, unless you want cheap international calls. JaJah will not allow you to make calls from an iPhone that doesn't have a voice plan.
Now if you are a matchmaker and you want to trick two people into talking to each other this site might be useful.
"You don't know Arn"
You should ask Arn about his Newton collection...if he still has it.
Arn's been excited about this kind of device for a long time.
You should ask Arn about his Newton collection...if he still has it.
Arn's been excited about this kind of device for a long time.
yes right - it's a timing thing. Those features will be incorporated in the new iPods anyway. There are a lot of willing for whome $650 is nothing, but they are not all stupid
Now, as to my situation, I don't know: the iPhone addition to my current contract (cingular/att) would at $20 to my plan, which I hardly feel is a killer given that currently I have no data plan whatosever.
EXACTLY...
people, just because you are broke doesnt mean i am!
I have a phone that i am very happy with, and i use all the features it has that the iphone doesnt every day, and im not giving up 3g for anything!
but i need a new ipod, and this is the coolest ipod i have ever seen... my phone will continue to go everywhere with me, the phoneless iphone will sit in my car, and play music
I can think of a number of reasons, not the least of which is contractual obligations. While I (nor anyone here) is privy to the exact agreement between ATT and Apple, it is not hard to imagine that ATT set certain requirements in the software specifications. Specifically, it is very much in ATT's interests to have this become a brick if not activated.
ATT makes jack on an iPhone sale, and nothing from the majority that were sold at Apple Store. They are not in this partnership for altruistic reasons- they want subscribers, and lots of them. I am sure that insuring use on their network is a KEYSTONE of their side of the Apple/ATT agreement.. it has to be! Otherwise, ATT gets nothing.
Look at the iPhone requirements. It specifically states- in no uncertain terms- that a two year contract with ATT is required... not optional. It is well within Apple/ATT's rights to remotely disable an iPhone, or have a time bomb in the software that, when it cannot verify, will reset the iPhone.
So I am not surprised to see these working today, short term. Check again in November, it may be an entirely different story.
OK, let's say they get a cent- one thin penny- from every subscriber month. They are already in the black on iPhone itself. SO here is a new revenue stream that costs them nothing. Best current estimates are 500,000 phones sold over the weekend- that is 5 grand free and clear for nothing. I know that is not all that much for a large corp, but that'll keep Jobs in turtlenecks for a while.
Now we can guess that they make more than 1 cent, and we know the sales will only go up... and it is, in effect, free money, coming in every month for nothing on Apples part. Up that to 10 cents on each monthly 59.99 (which is still just a sliver) and Apple rakes in 50K this month. A buck cut- 500K. Now that IS serious money.
So, reason 2 for Apple locking the phone down- loss of part of this "free" revenue stream. And to discount a free money source- of any amount- is just not done.
Apple potentially loses a lot- ""free" cash for one, and could lose much more if it is in material breach of their contract, and there are fines or such imposed. Again, I do NOT know there is such a clause, but ATT would be stupid not to have an enforcement clause. You may not like ATT, but I doubt they are stupid on this count.
ATT joined with Apple on this to make money. And we know the terms are NOT good to the phone company- remember: Verizon turned it down. ATT must have some ace up it's sleeve, some way to insure their money stream, or Jobs would still be shopping this phone.
On the subject at large, I would be willing to bet that this will work for a while... but I also bet that come November, we will see a lot of whiners posting when they see they have a 600.00 brick.
my 2 cents.
i am now broke....
it will prolly be 299 & 399 for 40g and 120g... i have a hunch because seagate made 120 portable HD's last year
I only mean this in partial seriousness (I'm sure to get the iPhone when it has 3G), but...
If you don't need the phone part, for about $200 and the same amount of hacking effort, you can buy another elegant device with a nice 480x272 screen, 4gb storage, video, music, wifi, a good web browser, decent email client, IM, vnc, and whatever else the software community can dream up. Plus, it plays games pretty well.
True, it lacks the touch screen or Apple's slick OS. And true, the hacking requirement is a bit larger. But once you get your PSP on the open-edition firmware, you get quite a lot of mileage for your $200 -- not to mention an extra $300 in your pocket.
If you don't need the phone part, for about $200 and the same amount of hacking effort, you can buy another elegant device with a nice 480x272 screen, 4gb storage, video, music, wifi, a good web browser, decent email client, IM, vnc, and whatever else the software community can dream up. Plus, it plays games pretty well.
True, it lacks the touch screen or Apple's slick OS. And true, the hacking requirement is a bit larger. But once you get your PSP on the open-edition firmware, you get quite a lot of mileage for your $200 -- not to mention an extra $300 in your pocket.
Not True:
$499 iPods:
1) 1G 10GB (Early 2002)
2) 2G 20GB (July 2002
3) 3G 40GB (April 2003)
4) 4G 40GB Photo (July 2004)
$599 iPods:
1) 4G 60GB Photo (October 2004)
------
How quickly it's forgotten that until 2005, the high-end iPod has traditionally been "expensive", which is relative; I'm sure I was one of the very few hundred people to experience the first generation model [bought 11-12-01] and thought the $399 was VERY WELL SPENT and AMAZING VALUE. I believe at the time there were other HD-based MP3 players that might've been larger capacity [don't remember] but nothing worked near as well or was so easy to add music to or as quickly.
However, now that Apple has a $299 80GB unit, it's easy to pigeon-hole the iPhone as expensive, but really... compared to the value of earlier units with very small monochrome screen and mostly the ability to just play music (until the Photo model), what you get with the iPhone is unreal for the same money. Again, it's all about value. Other phones have the same and more features, but how many give the same experience? Zero. If someone tells you differently, they work for one of the other tech companies that make the iPhone's competition.
I seriously doubt it. With all of the SQUIRTING jokes at Balmer/M$'s expense and all of the 3-day limitations of keeping songs that were squirted (some not even able to be squirted), it seems like Apple would like to stay on the good side of the record companies and keep the "we're totally against piracy" PC viewpoint.I wonder if the near-future ipod widescreen touchable will have some sort of wifi built in to share songs kind of like how the zune did it (please dont shoot me for wondering if a zune feature would be included in a future ipod release!!)?
You can be sure Apple will come out with a "touch your music" iPod and I'm thinking/hoping it'll have an even bigger screen since the speaker/microphone won't be necessary, however: I think all of the heavier hardware/features will be left to the iPhone to keep its value as high as possible. Now, it's possible they add WiFi in a few years that will allow people to buy songs from iTunes and maybe some other stuff like Google/YouTube videos but probably not full access to the internet -- again, I think, to keep value high on the iPhone, I think big stuff like that will be left out of iPods.
Absolutely!!
I found this the other day when I was looking through the AT&T contract info on their website: http://www.wireless.att.com/learn/articles-resources/iphone-terms.jsp
Not a chance.
There are at least 2 ways out of the contract:
1. cancel within the first 30 days
2. pay the early termination fee
If the iPhone is disabled after following those provisions of the contract, then at the minimum whomever sold it (Apple or AT&T) is on the hook for the full, original purchase price.
$600 plus tax is easily recovered in small claims.
I doubt either Apple or AT&T want to see their stores have to refund that much money for a 3-6 month old used iPhone.
I'm sure your iPhone will continue to work very well as an expensive iPod without an AT&T phone plan as long as you want to it to do so.
There are at least 2 ways out of the contract:
1. cancel within the first 30 days
2. pay the early termination fee
If the iPhone is disabled after following those provisions of the contract, then at the minimum whomever sold it (Apple or AT&T) is on the hook for the full, original purchase price.
$600 plus tax is easily recovered in small claims.
I doubt either Apple or AT&T want to see their stores have to refund that much money for a 3-6 month old used iPhone.
I'm sure your iPhone will continue to work very well as an expensive iPod without an AT&T phone plan as long as you want to it to do so.
Well then, why not spend a little more money than the macbook and get a macbook pro and have an even bigger widescreen display? You see... the step up is always just a little more money -- where does it end?
A laptop is a laptop. A music player is a music player.
One weighs 5 pounds and sits on your lap. The other's 5 ounces and fits in your pocket.
I was NOT arguing that point. That is the ATT contract. The usage agreement (if you can call it that) for the iPhone is a different matter entirely. And that states that you must have a two year agreement with ATT for the iPhone to work. I would contend that if you do not fulfill that, you will see Apple/ATT deactivating the iPhones. Consumers were informed of this going in, and I would think that is enforceable.
I think a good analogy would be TIVO. I do not have one, so I do NOT know how this works... so if someone could chime in, that would be great. You DO by a TIVO unit, right... just like an iPhone. So, if you do not pay the TIVO monthly, what happens to the Box... does it stop working fully... stop working partially... or keep working? (Like I said, I do not know what happens- it just seemed like a good analogy.)
I think this is a bit of an uphill fight, especially for your option 1. Canceling within 30 days IN NO WAY fulfills your obligation to have and hold a 2 year contract- the contract is canceled as if it never existed.
There is a slightly stronger argument for your option two. If canceled according to the terms of the contract, you have fulfilled your terms of the agreement. I would THINK, in this case, as the two year agreement has terminated legally, that ATT/Apple should then unlock the phone for you. In fact, I hope someone tests this- the iPhone agreement says nothing beyond the termination of the two year requirement. If you pay the cancellation, you would have fulfilled this requirement- it SHOULD then be yours and work fine. You have complied with the terms as written. So, in this case, yes, I agree with you.
You forgot the part about if you win in court. If you break the contract (option 1), Apple/ATT are not liable. Bit of a stronger argument in option 2... but then, ATT can probably get better attorneys than you or I can.
They won't. They just tell you to get on a contract, and it'll start right back up again. Apple/ATT won't refund any hardware after 14 days... certainly not in 3 months!
Well, neither you nor I know for sure... nor are we going to convince the other to come to our side. The hacker side of me would love for you to be right. But when I think about it logically, I cannot see ATT just sitting there, letting people get off that easy, especially when it is well within there ability to control something like this.
I could be wrong, that is just how I see it. You and I will both know in 4 months, right? So, in November, let's meet and have a friendly beer. I will buy if I am wrong!
Its in their interests, but it's not their right to do it, you're confusing the two issues.
Required for purchase, not operation of all functions.
No, its not. You're so used to the way the U.S. cellular industry tries to work, that you're missing how they are working. The phone and the service are two different items.
AT&T and Apple are free to not sell an iPhone to you don't buy an AT&T contract as well, but once they sell the phone to you there are few things they can do. The phone is yours. Traditionally, a provider subsidizes the phone and you take a contract extension, so if you cancel the contract they charge you a fee to make up the money they lost on the phone. The iPhone is not subsidized, though. AT&T is not footing any of the bill for the iPhone getting to your pocket except the cost of stocking and marketing the device, which is not a cost the consumer has any responsibility to incur. AT&T has no basis for disabling the phone as they didn't pay for it, YOU did. Also, what if AT&T is unable to uphold their terms of the contract. If you can't use the AT&T service due to some action or inaction on their end (like not maintaining their network and a reasonable reliability of service) guess what. You can get out of the contract, that doesn't mean AT&T gets to take the iPhone back from you.
I guess it is easier to prove your point when you make things up.... but the fact is ATT contracts are NOT required for purchase. Ask the 300,000 people who bought one Friday- none were ever asked if they had an ATT contract.
If you actually READ the words from Apple, they plainly state:
Not "Activation" requires... Not "Purchase" requires... the iPhone requires. That is plain and simple.
I have NEVER said nor implied they would come take it from you. I have said I think they will deactivate it. BIG difference.
So, what about TIVO- what happens to that box if you cancel the TIVO monthly fees-
Because at that point it was assumed the iPhone was some impenetrable fortress. The people handing out the Phones are just AT&T lackeys, they aren't asking people if they have AT&T contracts because signing up for service is done from home for most people anyway.
It requires an active AT&T plan to use the phone fuctions. How is the iPhone supposed to know if you have fulfilled your contract or not? What about the people in on pre-paid with the iPhone? The whole point of pre-paid is no contract.
A non-existent iPhone and a bricked iPhone both are equally usable.
The customer paid $600 for a device that no longer works because of something AT&T did. There is little difference.
I'm not sure what a TiVo does without a subscription. It may not do anything, or it may require manual programming (by date/time/channel) to function if its subscription is not verified.
Keep in mind TiVo gave huge rebates on their boxes purchases, AT&T did not.