We don't know AT&T won't do this as well for an iPhone. But you can be sure they'll be skeptical of a new customer calling after 30 days asking to unlock all five iPHones.
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.
Unsubsidized iPhone 3G Still Locked
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
We don't know AT&T won't do this as well for an iPhone. But you can be sure they'll be skeptical of a new customer calling after 30 days asking to unlock all five iPHones.
Plus activation fee of $36 = $480. That's assuming an ETF of $175.
Rumors is that the ETF on the iPhone will be around $300...
That would just add fuel to the fire for FCC regulation of ETF's. As they are usually standard across the board (within a company) right?
Oh I think most people understand this. What isn't understood is why a "contract free" iPhone requires the same "contract" plan as the so called subsidized iPhone. Really if AT&T isn't subsidizing the iPhone because you are paying full price then you service should be correspondingly cheaper.
That is what burns my ass, what is the point of a contract free iPhone if you still have to pay the same amount for the service? AT&T doesn't have anything to recoup at that point so I see such as nothing more than gouging. That and the whole idea that the iPhone still remains locked just doesn't make sense.
As has already been mentioned one of the compelling reasons to have a contract free and unlocked phone is to allow the use of alternate sim cards as you travel the world. Now I don't do that (travel) as much as I use to, but the point remains if you spend time in alternate countries you need a phone you can slip sim cards into freely. It is like Apple / AT&T still don't grasp the needs of business people and frequent travellers. So this is strike two against a contract free iPhone if the reports are indeed true that it will be unlocked.
Dave
Burns me too, as I for one would pay the cost of the non-sub phone -IF- I could get the same data rates I get now for the first one. But that's the thing, Apple did try this the first time, outright buy on the hardware, and you pay less for data as AT&T made a different plan for the iphone than others.
Didn't get them where they wanted in a number of areas, one of which is the fact that non-techie americans (not going to speak for the rest of the world) have become so conditioned to "cheap" or "free" phones due to subsidies, they simply won't buy a $4-600 phone.
A lot of folks that follow this stuff are gonna be ticked that they would have to pay extra for arguably the same or less data. For me it wouldn't get me any better data coverage (no 3G in NH) would cost more and get me GPS. I'm not paying $15 more for it until they can come up with better coverage. For people who wouldn't buy a $400 phone, the lower upfront may look better and they may not notice the data coverage fees the same as it's all they have really compared it to. It's in line with all the other 3G data plans except the old iphone.
Personally to me the GPS is the most exciting part. They could have called it the GPS iPhone and I still would have drooled - yay for geotagging, location-aware computing, and never being lost again!
me too!
don't realy need the 3G internet connection, i could still use wifi on any hotspot, i don't use the internet on my phone that often, + 3g is very expensive in my country
Nope. It's the price of the components. It does not even include the cost of assembly
So what would be the benefit of buying a $599 no-contract iPhone versus getting a $199 phone and paying the $175 early termination fee ($374)?
you'd have to wait 30 days.... :[
it matters if you're not from the US, and have a citizen contact there... just like i dont.... but maybe my friends have... :/
i guess... but some rumor says the ETF won't be under $250
don't know for sure... not until 11 july
None contracted phones in the UK have to be unlocked on request, if it is locked operator can unlock it, not just O2. This is the law and Ofcom are on top of such this.
All GSM phones are unlocked using the same by the same method, and they all have to have the same SIM card reader. If not, it is not 2G/3G, and would not be allowed to be sold here in the UK.
O2 will unlock any contracted iPhone 2G if you upgrade to the 3G and restart the contract, O2 will charge £15 for unlocking when I asked. The phone on upgrade will be your own property and O2 said that any operator can unlock it if needed, or even someone who runs a market store that unlocks phones for example can do it.
What would you need to wait 30 days for? Again, where did ANYBODY see a rumor that the ETF won't be $175.00?
well, the rumor goes about, just because the ETF price usualy starts much more above $175 , so it's just suspicious that it will be $175 especially for this kind of product..
you would have to wait more than 30 days so you could keep the device, then you pay 175 and -5 for each month you were in the contract. if you want to terminate the contract in less then 30 days, you have to return the device.
let me know if i didn't get it right
Many people on the forums have mentioned the contract between the two is exclusive for five years. In that case, it's not tied to a particular generation of iPhone. If Apple tried to break the contract, then AT&T would've been able to sue them for breach of contract law--and rightfully so.
(I'm not a lawyer, but I did stay at a holiday inn express last night)
Verizon and Sprint would still have to agree to Apple's terms (e.g., keeping their store off the iPhone, etc.), which they might not be willing to do. AT&T was willing to do that; hence, they got the iPhone.
Esther
I realize that their ORIGINAL contract was exclusive for 5 years. However, they revised that contract because I'm pretty sure that revenue sharing had to be revised (basically removed) from the contract. However, when you revise that contract, doesn't that mean the old one is essentially nullified? That said, because Apple and AT&T were coming up with a new contract, details such as an exclusivity clause could be revised. That's what I'm trying to get at: that period when they were coming up with a new contract, why not just sign with someone else.
I'm sure Sprint, Verizon, T-mobile would have been more than happy to accept that they made a mistake by not offering the phone to them the first time around that they would be more than willing to give into Apple's demands (given the iPhone's international success)
Verizon cripples their phones so much I dont think the iPhone would work with them. They would hate the App store...
What mistake? Verizon has been beating AT&T's net adds since the iphone's launch and the LG Voyager has beaten the iphone in US numbers since its launch. Sprint's iphone clone is doing great in sales.
Or if you, you know, don't want to use AT&T as your carrier.
You could still use the iPhone for Wi-Fi browsing. Yeah, you could get a frst Gen iPhone and do that, but the 3G is slimmer, doesn't require an adapter for the headphone port, and in general will have all sorts of tiny hardware improvements from lessons Apple learned from the "Revision A" model.
Apple could just make a new smaller phone (maybe a flip-phone style) and call it the "NanoPhone". There. It's not an "iPhone" so it doens't have to go to AT&T.