Tether Launches HTML5-Based iPhone Tethering Solution

[gnasher729]

Do you think it is safer just to jailbreak the iPhone and download PDAnet since they have guaranteed their tethering can't be identified?

He just gave an explanation how this whole thing works, which I found very enlightening. If your ISP really wants to crack down on tethering without paying, then they will identify _any_ tethering software, for example by usage patterns. And the more you tried to hide it, the more will they be able to damage you legally. There would be a point where they can claim that tethering is not just in breach of contract, but illegal access to their computers.

 

[garylapointe]

...I have the grandfathered unlimited plan. Tethering for me would be a) more expensive and b) charging me more for data I already purchased.

Part of the buying point when I took the plunge for the iPhone was they were still offering unlimited data AND they had announced tethering. But by the time they actually implemented tethering, they refused to do it with unlimited data.

Very unfair in my opinion!

If they want to take away unlimited data from everyone that would make more sense. And that's pretty much what they're doing at this point. But to me, they shouldn't act like we're got unlimited. Just take it away, let us be grouchy, offer us some kind of retention deal for the next few years and move on....

Gary

 

[lazyrighteye]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B179 Safari/7534.48.3)

Why wouldn't carriers want to offer free tethering? Makes it easier for users to go over their data caps and into really profitable (for the carriers) overage fees.

 

[Luba]

I can't read Finnish, please explain why Apple would want the data restrictions? Perhaps there are other reasons Apple didn't want to work with ELISA. For example, when Apple was talking to US carriers about the first iPhone, Verizon wanted to put the Verizon name on the phone as they do with all their other phones. Of course, Apple said, no way, as it would take away from look of the iPhone. Verizon also wanted to add some things to iOS's user interface, for example their name on startup or crapware, but I believe Verizon was willing to let this go, but they wouldn't on having "Verizon" on the outside of the iPhone, thus no Verizon iPhone.

I believe Apple accommodates the carriers on their wishes for data and tethering restrictions because they in effect buy a certain number of iPhones upfront. So if tomorrow nobody likes the iPhone, Apple is guaranteed a certain amount of money from the carriers. In return for that, Apple tweaks the iOS for the carriers. I don't see how Apple would care how much data you would use on your iPhone, just as they wouldn't care how much data you would use on your iMac or MacBook.

No I'm afraid it is Apple who wants these restrictions in data plans. Why? i dont know but here in Finland the situation is that one year ago Apple refused to accept ELISA operator from its store and only allowed 2 major Operators which used Data limits per month.

I use Elisa Prepaid 3G mobile as my main internet connection trough a 3G-Modem Router and my data usage is about 30-40 gigs per month. No extra charge for tethering either. Costs about 20 euros per month, speed about 5mbit down/up both..

I have only one SIM card so when I get out of home, I put the SIM from my 3G-modem to my (android) phone and wi-fi tether the connection for my PowerBook

I just had to register here and comment on this data throttling/tethering thing because things just sound so weird to me how you guys do things in US...

Maybe you have lots of Wi-Fi networks available then? We dont have those at all...

http://www.digitoday.fi/data/2011/03/25/elisa-kieltaytyi-ipadin-datakatosta/20114242/66

Thats the link to news that Elisa 3G operator refused to put data limits for the iPad and it was Apple who wanted these data limits. Yeah I know that you dont read finnish but I know that here are some Finnish moderators who can confirm that I'm speaking the truth!

Yeah I use Powerbook, Android and build some hackintosh machines and play around with BSD and Linux.... So consider me not as a "fanboy" , more as a curious bystander and learner (no windows machines here at all though)

 

[wclyffe]

Netshare, now iTether, but I'd like to see...

I was very lucky years ago to snag Netshare before they pulled the app, and now iTether is essentially the same thing. Limited concept in a post PC world...

What I'd really like to see is someone, smarter than me, make a cable that I can plug my iPhone 4S into my Wi-fi iPad2 (dock to dock connector) and somehow borrow the 3G connection of the phone. Maybe it cannot be done, but the simplicity of this when you are traveling would be great for anyone who doesn't want to buy a 3G iPad.

Yes, I know you can turn on Personal Hotspot, but I'd like to not pay ATT anymore $$$ and go through the hassle of turning it back off for a short trip.

Any thoughts?

 

[Luba]

But the problem is that carriers don't have enough capacity. The build cell towers to meet demand and they are playing catch up. They don't have all these towers sitting out there under utilized. They don't tell you that because each carrier wants to project out an image to customers that there network is huge with tons of coverage everywhere, plenty of capacity.

To defend the carriers a bit. It is a pain to build a new tower, not just the construction, but setting up a lease to use the land or a building to put the tower. For example, in Manhattan where they need more towers, but where to put them?? It's also risky, Sprint went and built out their network on WiMax for their 4G and now they are back-tracking and switching to LTE!

And there must be other issues, why for example, are there dead spots for over 10 years and counting on some major highways?? I understand why the carriers don't want to spend money and put towers in rural areas with few people, but a major highway?!?

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B179 Safari/7534.48.3)

Why wouldn't carriers want to offer free tethering? Makes it easier for users to go over their data caps and into really profitable (for the carriers) overage fees.

 

[hacksr00t]

IPAD 3 w/ LTE + Unlimited?

So does this mean if I buy the itether service for my new IPAD3 with really fast LTE and carry over my unlimited plan from the first 3G IPAD I get unlimited tethering @ LTE speeds ? Thats pretty cool.. It will rock while it lasts.

-Scott

 

[justinfreid]

It can't. Apparently it works like this:

1) The user one-time installs a laptop program to proxy packets.

2) Whenever the user wants to connect, they must manually create an ad hoc network on their laptop.

3) The user then launches a web app on the iPhone that opens HTML5 Websockets to the special laptop software and to the Tethering.com servers. The web app acts as a go-between.

4) Packets to/from the laptop are tunneled through the web app on the phone to/from the Tether servers which connect to the Internet. (The yearly payment is to support those servers. If they go away, the app stops working.)

Laptop browser <--> Laptop IP proxy <-wifi-> web app <-3G-> Tether.com server <--> Internet

Thanks for clarifying - the method seems tenuous and annoying.

 

[zyuzin4]

That's perfectly legitimate Verizon Math. Get with the times!

beat me to it =)

 

[finchna]

what kind of security does this and other such tethering technology have/provide?

 

[Ronlap]

As much as I despise AT&T, lets be accurate.

As of now they don't "charge you twice" for the same data. They make tethering available on a 5 GB for $50 plan. They simply disallow it on any lower plan.

Not charging you twice at all. Simply micromanaging how you use your data, therefor forcing you buy more data, even if you need less, to get access to tethering.

This is true now, but the old tethering plans didn't add GB - just $. Even with tethering a few days a month while traveling, I still don't get close to 2GB, so I wish they would allow it on all plans.

 

[kalex]

But the problem is that carriers don't have enough capacity. The build cell towers to meet demand and they are playing catch up. They don't have all these towers sitting out there under utilized. They don't tell you that because each carrier wants to project out an image to customers that there network is huge with tons of coverage everywhere, plenty of capacity.

To defend the carriers a bit. It is a pain to build a new tower, not just the construction, but setting up a lease to use the land or a building to put the tower. For example, in Manhattan where they need more towers, but where to put them?? It's also risky, Sprint went and built out their network on WiMax for their 4G and now they are back-tracking and switching to LTE!

And there must be other issues, why for example, are there dead spots for over 10 years and counting on some major highways?? I understand why the carriers don't want to spend money and put towers in rural areas with few people, but a major highway?!?

There is no defense for carriers they caused this issue and instead of investing money to upgrade and get more towers they were paying out those profits to shareholders. Another issue is that there is no standard like there is in europe. Europe is based on GSM and its everywhere. In USA we have a hodge podge of incompatible technology everywhere. U want to use sprint u have to have sprint towers or Verizon with proper prls. Verizon is using its own, Tmobile came out with its own flavor. This is the biggest problem. If there was a standard from beginning then all these companies would have put up comptable towers and we wouldn't have this issue.

 

[skeleb]

I can't read Finnish, please explain why Apple would want the data restrictions? Perhaps there are other reasons Apple didn't want to work with ELISA.

The link says that ELISA turned down Apple's "offer", because Apple's terms included a data limit for traffic.

 

[rams]

love the idea

 

[brdeveloper]

Apple's next reaction: not supporting ad-hoc connections anymore. Tethering will only be allowed between Apple devices through a proprietary protocol over wi-fi.

I see a lot of workarounds for a problem that could be easily solved by Apple. Currently, when you buy an iDevice 3/4G you're just half-paying the product. The second part you'll pay monthly to the carriers.

 

[whidbeyben]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B179 Safari/7534.48.3)

Just signed up and installed the software on 10.7.3 MBP 2.66 i7 with iPhone 4s 5.1. Created network but tether couldn't connect for more than a few seconds at first, transferring some data, then it seemed like the connection deteriorated and is not completely unable to connect. Maybe AT&T and Apple are trying their best to sabotage this. So far, they seem to be successful. I'll see about the 30 day money back on the subscription.

 

[gnasher729]

Apple's next reaction: not supporting ad-hoc connections anymore. Tethering will only be allowed between Apple devices through a proprietary protocol over wi-fi.

What makes you think that?

Apple supports tethering for customers who pay for tethering. Apple rejects apps from its store where the only purpose is to support tethering for customers who don't pay for it (in other words, breach of contract), which is probably against the terms of the app store. That doesn't affect its users in any way; they are in the same position as if the app hadn't been written in the first place. And it's just the normal procedure that Apple followed in other cases; some app has been removed because it used copyrighted material and the copyright owner complained, some app has been removed because it was GPL licensed and one of the authors complained that it shouldn't be on the app store, and this app is probably removed because the ISPs complained that it is only used by people who want to breach their contracts with ISPs.

You are suggesting that Apple would invest lots of work and destroy value of its software (and ad-hoc connections have a lot of value; I can create a network with two Macs or iDevices with no router present) because of this? Total nonsense. If the ISPs want to do something about this, they can sue the "Tether" company.

Just signed up and installed the software on 10.7.3 MBP 2.66 i7 with iPhone 4s 5.1. Created network but tether couldn't connect for more than a few seconds at first, transferring some data, then it seemed like the connection deteriorated and is not completely unable to connect. Maybe AT&T and Apple are trying their best to sabotage this. So far, they seem to be successful. I'll see about the 30 day money back on the subscription.

I don't know about the quality of their software, but maybe it just doesn't work? Like bugs in the software, or a server that doesn't work properly? Apple surely doesn't care about this. And AT&T wouldn't "sabotage" this, they would collect evidence and send you a bill later. ("Sabotage" in quotes because preventing you from being in breach of a contract is not sabotage).

 

[chrispholt]

This is not apple, its your carriers.

In the UK I am with Three Mobile and its great. Tethering is allowed with no data limits, not even a fair usage agreement.
I am living in a flat on my own for 5 months so getting a phone line on a 12 month contract for broadband would be just stupid, I use my iPhone for internet all the time, even though I live in the country I get a really good 3G signal (for the UK) and reach 3.5 mb/s down and 2 up which is rivalling the broadband in the next village. I have had the contract for 3 months now and have racked up 70GB down and 30GB up with no complaint from three on my £25 a month contract. In fact I got cashback so its worked out free (for the first 3 months).

AT&T not apple.

 

[Luba]

Excellent point . . . a decision they made to enrich themselves versus fulfilling their obligation to customers.

Yes, no standard, probably coming from our fear of government involvement.

While I am at it, why is the government selling our spectrum to these carriers who aren't fulfilling their obligations. The government should just be leasing the spectrum to them, that would be another income stream and could reduce or should eliminate all the cell service taxes we pay.

There is no defense for carriers they caused this issue and instead of investing money to upgrade and get more towers they were paying out those profits to shareholders. Another issue is that there is no standard like there is in europe. Europe is based on GSM and its everywhere. In USA we have a hodge podge of incompatible technology everywhere. U want to use sprint u have to have sprint towers or Verizon with proper prls. Verizon is using its own, Tmobile came out with its own flavor. This is the biggest problem. If there was a standard from beginning then all these companies would have put up comptable towers and we wouldn't have this issue.

 

[burtba]

Can someone please explain the benefit of this to me over just createing a WiFi Hotspot with your iP4 then you can connect what ever WiFi device you want to it and use the iPhone as you Internet connection?
Does this do something else? I assume it must and I'm missing the point. Thanks in advance

 

[nagromme]

No I'm afraid it is Apple who wants these restrictions in data plans. Why? i dont know but here in Finland the situation is that one year ago Apple refused to accept ELISA operator from its store and only allowed 2 major Operators which used Data limits per month.

I can’t read Finnish on weekends, but I’m curious to know more: what it the source given by the article to show that Apple not working with ELISA is truly due to ELISA’s refusal to limit Apple devices? Is it ELISA simply claiming that’s the reason? Documents that have come to light?

Without evidence, that sounds like rumor more than news. Maybe in reality ELISA didn’t get the iPad for some other reason. (And maybe ELISA likes to tout their unlimited data, so it’s in their interest to drive buzz with a false scandal about it?) But I’m curious exactly what the article actually claims... and what the specific sources are.

I can think of many good reasons for an article to CLAIM that Apple wanted data limits (ad-baiting, misunderstanding, and ELISA twisting the truth, for instance). And I can think of reasons (pressure from carriers) for Apple to tolerate limits. But I can’t think of any good reason why Apple would really want limits and fight so hard to have them that they’d walk away from a deal they were supposedly interested in, just for that reason.

Apple gets no extra money when limits are hit. Apple loses money! Both directly (downloads) and indirectly (less-happy customers, bad press). And we’ve heard nothing about Apple opposing unlimited data from other carriers.

If anything, if Apple did walk away over that, I wonder if they might have been forced to by larger Finnish carriers threatening to drop Apple. In which case it’s still the carriers, not Apple, that wants these limits.

 

[kalex]

Can someone please explain the benefit of this to me over just createing a WiFi Hotspot with your iP4 then you can connect what ever WiFi device you want to it and use the iPhone as you Internet connection?
Does this do something else? I assume it must and I'm missing the point. Thanks in advance

The point is simple. On USA carriers hotspot access is not included and is provided for extra charge. Those who don't want to pay monthly extortion fee can use this with regular data plan they already have and pay for

 

[Michael Scrip]

Weekends make me sad...

This story will be on top until Monday morning...

 

[tbrinkma]

Well our carriers dont charge us for tethering if we get 500MB we get 500 MB for whatever we want but apple removed the app from the app store so i would blame them. they could have left it in the other countries you know?

If your carrier allows tethering on your plan, you have no need of the Tether.com app, because iOS supports tethering. The reason the app was removed is because it went directly against the terms offered by the carriers. (Personally, I wish it'd been left, but Apple had the choice of a) taking the app down, or b) facing a lawsuit as a defendant, right along side tether.com.)

 

[xinu]

I can’t read Finnish on weekends, but I’m curious to know more: what it the source given by the article to show that Apple not working with ELISA is truly due to ELISA’s refusal to limit Apple devices? Is it ELISA simply claiming that’s the reason? Documents that have come to light?

Without evidence, that sounds like rumor more than news. Maybe in reality ELISA didn’t get the iPad for some other reason. (And maybe ELISA likes to tout their unlimited data, so it’s in their interest to drive buzz with a false scandal about it?) But I’m curious exactly what the article actually claims... and what the specific sources are.

I can think of many good reasons for an article to CLAIM that Apple wanted data limits (ad-baiting, misunderstanding, and ELISA twisting the truth, for instance). And I can think of reasons (pressure from carriers) for Apple to tolerate limits. But I can’t think of any good reason why Apple would really want limits and fight so hard to have them that they’d walk away from a deal they were supposedly interested in, just for that reason.

Apple gets no extra money when limits are hit. Apple loses money! Both directly (downloads) and indirectly (less-happy customers, bad press). And we’ve heard nothing about Apple opposing unlimited data from other carriers.

If anything, if Apple did walk away over that, I wonder if they might have been forced to by larger Finnish carriers threatening to drop Apple. In which case it’s still the carriers, not Apple, that wants these limits.

Apple gets extra money when carriers like AT&T pay Apple 600 dollars for each phone, and then carriers must charge this money with data limits. No secrets there and wont require high IQ to fiqure that one out?

And the link I gave you, is from respected publisher Sanoma INC and not some rumor-web-page. The sources? Well Elisa the carrier was the source. They couldnt get iPad deals from Apple because Elisa (rightfully) refused to put any Datalimits to iPad buyers which Apple was demanding.

US Carriers are screwing you, big time. There should not be any data limiting or throttling we live the year 2012 now not the 90's when we had some GPRS data limits