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.
Obama Signs Cell Phone Unlocking Bill Into Law, iPhone Unlocking No Longer Illegal
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And what have you done with your life aside trolling my beloved forum?
So many conservatives here. Using apple products?! Crazy
I payed the termination fee and left months ago. I probably should have included that in my post. Sorry about that.
This thread is supposed to be about unlocking phones, but all it took to turn it instantly into all-out tribal warfare was to mention the name of the president. So sad. Welcome to the United States of Bosnia.
Ok, so that's what I thought, so I checked a few prices:
From Apple.com:
AT&T 64GB iPhone 5s is $399
SIM-Free 64GB 5s is $849 <-- so pay $450 more but save nothing on my bill but have the option to cancel at any time and also use in-country SIMs when travelling. I guess that's worth it?
But then AT&T's smartphone ETF is only $325 (minus $10 for each month you fulfill your contract). Should it $be 450? Or if I buy an unlocked phone shouldn't my bill be $450/24 or at least $325/24 less per month?
This all seems intentionally confusing, and I consider myself smarter than the average bear. And even though unlocking may not be illegal now, it still can be prohibited based on your contract???
One thing is becoming clear is that AT&T is not the carrier for someone who travels internationally................................
Also, you can take it to a cheaper carrier. For example, I think you can get a StraightTalk SIM for it and pay around 50$ a month (after taxes) for unlimited. That'd save you a lot of money over the course of your phone use. >_>
Glad people can now freely move their devices between carriers, but why people sign phone contracts is beyond me. Buying the iPhone upfront and paying for a prepaid plan saves one hundreds of dollars over two years, compared to a similar plan on contract.
It is your phone. The contract does not call it a lease of the phone. It is a payment system for the phone. The phone belongs to you so long as you maintain your contract. As such, you should be able to do what you like with said phone as long as you maintain your contract.
People that purchase a car with a 60 month payment schedule aren't forbidden to modify their car how they see fit.
With the phone unlocked, you are still required to complete your contract with the carrier.
Under the current scenario, the carrier is allowed to screw you every way if you want to do anything unique (like travel 600 miles north or south), simply because you have a contract that insures you pay them for 24 months. That's crazy.
What exactly makes you think that the insurance companies are going to pay for 1700/shot medication? Do you not think they are passing on the cost of that to me by TRIPLING all of our premiums or something?
1. Just because someone needs something does not give them or anyone else the right to stick a gun to my head, directly or through the government, to force me to give it to them.
2. This kind of scenario is exactly where charities are necessary and totally valid. Plenty of people contribute to charities all the time, and this scenario would be no different. Hell, we pay the premiums, then why wouldn't people VOLUNTARILY contribute money to charities if that's what was necessary? They're paying for it anyways.
And don't tell me about how he's "bringing our healthcare system up to other countries" by passing this, or any other regulation, because the other healthcare systems around the world suck way worse than ours. When someone wealthy around the world gets sick, they come HERE. They don't go to France, or Canada, or wherever the hell else you think exists the proper amount of government screw ups in the healthcare system. They come here because we're the LEAST screwed up, and therefore the most well off, because our system is the most FREE. Anyone who endorses these socialist healthcare systems doesn't know what they're talking about, and invariably either haven't experienced them, or haven't experienced anything else. Just look at the mess that is the VA. There's a little pocket of socialized medicine in the U.S. and it's abhorrent. I'll say it again because it bears repeating. Sick people who can afford it come HERE. To AMERICA. The FREEST healthcare system we have left. Period.
Your nephew got dealt some **** cards. It sucks. We all get dealt $h!t cards sometimes, some way worse than others. Your nephew, and his parents have every right to ASK family members for assistance, ASK friends, and ASK other people and charities for assistance, but they do NOT have a right to stick a gun to my head to FORCE me to buy insurance that I DON'T want, at a price that is 3 TIMES what it would have been before the law was passed, and STEAL my ability to save for MY LIFE, and TAKE from me by FORCE, MY ability to prosper, and to try to build a family of my own.
This country was built on the principles of freedom. It was those principles that allowed us to prosper, and enjoy the fruits of that prosperity today, and yet we are squandering those freedoms that we fought for more and more every day. Obama, and most of congress are NOT pro-freedom. I use the pieces of legislation they pass as evidence, including the massive FORCED redistribution of wealth that is Obamacare as proof. They do not believe in the voluntary exchange of value in a FREE market. They believe in regulation. They believe in legislation. They believe. In. FORCE. The very OPPOSITE of freedom. Therefore, these people ARE un-American. That is the simple fact. Whether you like it or not these statements are nothing short of true. They do NOT believe in freedom.
So no, it's not better than the alternative of doing nothing, and both of those options are far worse than simply embracing the freedom that built this country.
Last edited by a moderator:
Please tell us which other countries you think would pay $1.8MM/year for your nephew's treatment? I can think of a whole bunch that wouldn't.
Ya, I guess even at $450 premium for the SIM-Free model I'm going to easily save that even if I stayed with AT&T, but avoided paying their international package rates. But then I have the flexibility to move around.... and you're right I just looked at straight talk and it's pretty cheap...
Also can upgrade to new iphone without waiting for the upgrade cycle and selling my old model will be worth more as it will already be unlocked.
Thanks for the tip.
Citizens don't need to prove they've done something great with their lives to criticize people in power.
And conservatives do use Apple products. Rush Limbaugh has a new 12-core Mac Pro and gives out rMBPs and iPads to all his callers. Does that make you sad inside?
Ya, pretty much.
Only other thing that comes to mind is the massive gun sale boom we have had since 2009. I think the industry awarded Obama the salesman of the year award if I'm not mistaken.
Nice to see so many new faces out at the range.
I know some liberals who don't think he's really done anything, either. Not sure if they're Apple users.
I thought the Navy Seals got him.
You would think O was an operator with all the credit he gets for this.
I'm not sure what that sentence means, but I was able to personally unlock a couple phones of mine that were under contract for about a dollar each. So, again, my question remains. Does anyone think this will have any effect on the ability of eBay vendors to unlock iPhones?
It will takes us a long time to clean up the mess Bush and his cronies got us into.....
The law doesn't really change anything. Unlocking without your carrier consent was technically "illegal" but yet there were tons of websites and eBay sellers openly advertising device unlocks. I can't recall any of them ever being prosecuted for it. For those who were getting their devices unlocked by their carriers anyway, it changes nothing. This is just a mere formality.
You've piqued my interest. Can you walk us through the math as my wife's and son's contracts expire in a month or so and they really need to get new mobile phones. TIA.
Wow, people are blaming Obama for things that can be blamed on thousands of people in the government and the corporate structure of America. But should I be surprised? These are the same people that support corporate takeover of our country. After all, that's what led to unlocking becoming illegal in the first place.
No it doesn't
But it is sad that people listen to that smut.
----------
It's weird that people don't trust the president because he's black.
What led to unlocking being declared illegal was a law (DMCA) that Hollywood pushed through Congess and was signed by Bill Clinton.