Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Tether Says Apple Pulled iTether App Over Carrier Burden

FYI in case it ever returns to the app store, I finally got a chance to play with iTether and it works very well. It's not nearly as feature-rich as some Cydia apps, but is simpler to use than NetShare.

It does need to be running in the foreground on the phone (calls interrupt it).
 
I feel sorry for americans :(

I have service with 3 UK, £10 p/m for 1GB data, 100 mins and 3000 texts (proving texts cost them nothing)

Its all I need, and they dont really care if you tether using the IP4 wireless access point option, "just dont take the piss" the bloke said on the phone when I signed up lol.

For those who truly want to do it properly though, its £25 p/m for "all you can eat" data, including tethering, and boundless minutes and texts which you will never use.

Left orange and never looked back, what happens in the states is effing criminal tho, I dunno how the government can allow these exorbitant charges?!
 
Last edited:
mutantteenager said:
When you buy into the ios, you leave choice at the door. Apple are pretty shabby in the way the treat customers who pay a premium for a device they supposedly own. Only to restrict the way they use it.

Tether would do well to concentrate on platforms that allow their customers to use their devices how they see fit.
Click to expand...

Yeah too bad Apple customers are the only ones who pay for Apps.
 
Tummy said:
I said additional bandwidth, and even italicized additional for emphasis. I read that sms messages are delayed and put into the control channel at a convenient time, into space that would otherwise go unused. So the additional cost to the carrier is nearly nothing since they are transmitting it anyway. A while ago there was a graphic that explained it, but I can't find it right now.
Click to expand...

Yes, and we heard you.

And Rodimus and I are saying that the claim of not using additional bandwidth is wrong, unless you're redefining bandwidth in a non-obvious manner. Are you?

----------
Diode said:
Efficient is exactly the word I am looking for. The FCC grants each carrier the right to use a given amount of spectrum in the market (Now done through public auctions). This encourages carriers to buy up as much as they can to block others from competing against them, creating a situation where they have X amount of recourses but are not using them to their full potential.
Click to expand...

Ah I see what you mean. The first thing that came to mind when reading was about whether or not each tower could be made more efficient, which isn't what you were talking about.

My bad; we're actually talking about the same thing then.
 
hchung said:
Simple to explain: Watch the traffic.

Example: If you have something sent over port 80 (http) and the headers say "Windows XP / IE 8 / x86" or "Mac OS X / Firefox 3 / ppc7400" , it's probably not a phone. Therefore, tethered.

Another example: Recent ARMv7 chips (A4 and newer, maybe the iPhone 3GS too), it was quite possible that you couldn't actually make full use of your 3G radio. Like, your phone's processor might not have been actually powerful enough to be able to push enough data or accept enough data from the radio at full speed. So you could get the peak data transfer rates on rare occasions where you're actually not doing any useful work (like a speed test), but when you're actually trying to download something or view a web page, there's no way you could have actually maxed out your connection without being backed by a real full blown laptop. So if there's more traffic than possible for your phone (which they know what you're on), then it's obviously tethered.

Actually... for LTE and HSPA+... I don't know if the latest mobile chips could max those out yet either. But that's a separate issue.
Click to expand...

You call that Simple

Its much simpler than that.
What do you think network administrators are for?
Every single device on the network has a Mac number and an ip number, they can see the whole network which is behind their servers.
Example:
Anyone which has a problem with their internet connection and calls their provider knows they most of the time solve the problem remotely.

So, simply by looking at their network they can tell if you share/thether your connection
 
royboy325 said:
I bought the app yesterday as a solution to not having to keep my phone jailbroken ... updated to iOS 5 and lost the app ... even after backing it up ... and no luck about it being in the cloud. I'm REALLY REALLY upset. Is there any chance anyone is willing to send over the .IPA file? It should work because iTunes has a record that I've payed for it ... Right? Anyone?:(
Click to expand...

You backed it up to iTunes and it got lost after updating to iOS5? Or you only backed up to iCloud? I think iCloud only backs up apps and music that exists in the iTunes Store. So if it is gone, iCloud won't see it.
 
besweeeet said:
It would work if someone sent you their IPA file, but they would have to authorize their iTunes account to your machine or else it wouldn't work. There are alternative ways to get it to work, though. PM me for details.
Click to expand...

I just signed up for an account on here, so I can't yet send PMs ... can you send me one? I'd love to find a solution to my problem! thanks, man.
 
charlituna said:
Actually if you had read the actual app info you would see that it works WITH your carrier plan. The app was created because iOS will only tether iOS devices You can't use your iPhone as a true Mifi. But with this app you could have.
Click to expand...

That is total BS. I have paired a Windows PC, my MacBook and an Android tablet with my iPhone 4S when it has been acting as a hotspot. It works EXACTLY like a MiFi
 
royboy325 said:
I just signed up for an account on here, so I can't yet send PMs ... can you send me one? I'd love to find a solution to my problem! thanks, man.
Click to expand...

The solution that this person is offering up requires that one pay money to some unknown website so they can sign you up on their developer account and register your phones identifier. I have chosen to pass on this since it is an unknown website wanting money up front.
 
B00KemDAN0 said:
I feel sorry for americans :(

I have service with 3 UK, £10 p/m for 1GB data, 100 mins and 3000 texts (proving texts cost them nothing)

Its all I need, and they dont really care if you tether using the IP4 wireless access point option, "just dont take the piss" the bloke said on the phone when I signed up lol.

For those who truly want to do it properly though, its £25 p/m for "all you can eat" data, including tethering, and boundless minutes and texts which you will never use.

Left orange and never looked back, what happens in the states is effing criminal tho, I dunno how the government can allow these exorbitant charges?!
Click to expand...
Three is wonderful isn't it. Now they have got over their customer service issues, I haven't looked back after making the switch from O2.
 
justperry said:
You call that Simple

Its much simpler than that.
What do you think network administrators are for?
Every single device on the network has a Mac number and an ip number, they can see the whole network which is behind their servers.
Example:
Anyone which has a problem with their internet connection and calls their provider knows they most of the time solve the problem remotely.

So, simply by looking at their network they can tell if you share/thether your connection
Click to expand...

Not quite that simple. What happens if your phone runs NAT? Proxies?
Then the IP/MAC addresses are masked.
 
This isn't the first time Apple has approved an app, only to pull it after it has been released. In my opinion, they really need to improve on the app submission process. It sounds as if they made the developers jump through hoops to get it approved, which they did. After Apple agrees to approve an app, unless it proves to be doing something malicious, they shouldn't be able to just yank the app so easily. It seems like a one sided contract, that is costly to developers. Right now, Apple is really the only game in town for app developers looking to make a profit, but if the market should shift a little, moves like this will not win much loyalty from developers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back