Slashdot Mirror
Apple Cracks Down On iPhone Unlockers
An anonymous reader writes "It looks like Apple and its wireless operator partners have finally figured out a way of cracking down on iPhone unlockers by making it a requirement to sign up for a contract before you can get your hands one. "It's obvious why this has happened though. This method means you're tied into a contract, or you're paying O2 and Apple a massive wad of cash for the privilege of owning a 3G iPhone. We're disappointed about this decision, but it does make business sense." Both ATT in the US and O2 in the UK are implementing the new activation system on July 11th, when the iPhone 3G goes on sale."
"a massive wad of cash for the privilege of owning a 3G iPhone" If you're not allowed to do what you want with the device, you do not own it.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
Um, this has always been the case, since the first round of the first models started being resold without contracts Apple instigated this. Old news, non-story, and hasn't actually stopped anyone from doing this.
A nontechnical solution to an ultimately nontechnical problem.
One has to wonder, is ATT really such a necessary evil or can innovations like visual voicemail be rapidly available other ways than lock-in?
This seems like a normal practice to me to be honest. Almost every smartphone that people will buy will come with a contract at the time of purchase to get the price lowered to a point that is reasonable. It happened with my old 8525 to get the $600 phone down to $285, and now it's happening with the iPhone to get the $400 phone down to $200. It just seems to be the industry standard, and before people start to complain about not being able to use it with t-mobile or another GSM carrier, I just want to say that you don't NEED to get an iPhone. You can get whatever smartphone comes with your service. If you want to travel with a smartphone, then you can get a different one too to put different SIM cards in and only pay for those times you use it.
PouchPC 2.13ghz C2D, 8gb ram, 9800 GT, 1.5tb, Vista Business.
Apple is going to have a serious problem applying this in a lot of European countries. They have laws that actually forbid this sort of tying 2 vendors into 1 product.
I know for a fact that France and the Netherlands have laws for that, and if I remember correctly, Germany has as well.
So either they're not going to be able to sell iPhones there, or they have to be sold seperately, which then opens them up for unlocking anyway.
Coz eternity my friend, is a long *ing time.
What happens in places where it must be unlocked?
I was seriously considering getting one of the new 3G iPhones, but now I will definitely not.
The more they tighten their grip, the more customers will slip through their fingers...
O2 are crap, most people in the UK realise this, it's one of the main reasons the iPhone has failed to take off in the UK.
At least before they could make some money on the handsets selling them to unlockers, now in their greed to get people on the contracts as well they're going to lose sales.
Unless Apple can get Vodafone/Orange on board with the same processes in place this is only going to make the iPhone even less common in the UK.
That said, presumably this is why the new 3G iPhone will only be £100, because unlike before, they're following the same route as other phone suppliers by using the contract itself to cover the rest of the handset costs. I'm not convinced they'd be making a loss selling it for £100 though still, I'm pretty sure they can manufacture, box and get them in stores for a lot less than that so the previous situation would still surely have been better for sales.
If a local company doesn't seel it with their hefty contract attached to it then Apple didn't intend for it to be sold there.
The contract lock-in insures that the new iPhone is more expensive than the last.
If you do the iPhone math, the new phone will cost you more than the older phone despite the "half the price" ad campaign.
If AT&T really drops free sms, it'll cost even more.
I don't mind paying more. However, for somebody like me not in a G3 area, why should I have to pay the G3 transfer higher prices?
It was announced today that two carriers (at least) in Australia (Optus was one) will be offering the new iPhone on "prepaid" schemes. i.e. No contract. How much the phones will cost is not mentioned but if they are just $A/$US equivalent then they will be very cheap phones for the price. Enough to drive most others off the market.
Read parent in gollum voice for maximum amusement.
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
From my understanding, nothing is preventing you from getting it unlocked. The official carriers are subsidizing the hardware and to recover that cost, they require you sign into a service contract. Once you have the phone you can use it however you like. You're paying for the service, but you don't have to use it. You can probably even pay a cancellation fee and get out of it. Either way, the carrier recovers the hardware subsidy.
As far as I recall, Apple was actually shopping around for a few different providers. Apparently when they were in talks with Verizon there were too many demands on Verizon's end. (Surprised?) AT&T was the largest carrier available willing to let the phone be what Apple wanted it to be. Just something to think about.
Those who believe the Internet is private,
find their privates are on the Internet.
They will be sold unlocked, probably at a higher price than the $199 which is going to be price in most countries. And certainly many of those phones will find their way to countries where you can only buy iPhones that are tied up to a operator. Still, none of this will prevent Apple from cashing in a very thick wad of cash from the sheeple that buy one in countries where they are tied up to operator X.
"I have downloaded hundreds and hundreds of records, why would I care if somebody downloads ours?" Robin Pecknold
What did I say yesterday? I said (repeat after me): he iPhone is a phone, not an iPod.
Bah. No one ever listens to me.
My blog
Too bad. I was going to buy one.
Don't most contracts have a 10 day clause in them, or some time frame? Also, what is the termination fee? For Verizon, it is $175. I believe once the contract is signed I have like 10 days to cancel it without paying the fee. What is to stop people who want the iPhone from doing the same thing?
I'm sure if a company wants to get Iphones for all of their technical support people, they don't want to go to the store and activate each freaking one in turn ...
It was nice of your phone to click "preview" and then "submit" for you, Mr. FunnyManWithOriginalJokes
Since the new iphone will be FREE in the UK if you sign up to special tariff with will be either 45£ or 75£ a month, I can see this been enforced....
Can't we all just get along.... also snippy correction is disrespectful to those of us who have legitimate problems with not being able to see misspellings/bad grammer... also this is just a message board, chillax. Now let us have no more on the matter.
In the not too distant future, next Sunday A.D.
While carriers might still be able to lock Android phones, there will undoubtedly be unlocked phones available, since there is no monopoly on the platform.
Apple + AT&T = single point of failure
Think about how absurd it would be if, in the old days, you had to buy your computer from the phone company because it had a modem?
If you are going to quote someone, you need to say who you are quoting. "The summary of this article just puts things in quotation marks at random."
I'm not new here, and I know it is the same every single day.
Time will likely solve this issue as Chinese reverse-engineering development teams (and "ghost shifts" at probably the same factories making current 'official' 3G iPhones get to cranking out 'overages' lol)
Then again, if the killer app is not the device but the method by which it is unlocked.... surely this will not increase handset theft or there is always the 100% 'honest' 3G iPhone vendor unlocking the phones in house for some under the table cash?
Just what is so technically savvy about the new unlocking method or is this simply some lawyer-authored bulletproof contract that one must sign in fresh blood?
I for one compliment the cloners in order to avoid those ridiculous lock-in contracts. This is the world of competition, and the nature of global competitors.
How useful would it be for Asus' eeE PC to only work under contract and only from an Asus Wi-Fi router? It is a matter of time before someone creates a truly unlocked Wi-Fi handset that VoIPs whenever possible with Vonage et al, and other times uses the SIM for whatever carrier you choose to use that day. I can use my laptop with a variety of pay ISPs even at the same time. A few more evolutions of these devices and stiff competition will likely leave consumers getting a better product not crippled deliberately. This is why I despise the iTunes lock-in on iPods (and will not own one as a result). I remember when MP3 Players were as easy to access as USB memory sticks and they played nearly anything despite its source... Given Apple does make some sharp looking items, but they are not consumer-friendly due to their hardware lock-ins. I'd love to use Tiger or Spotted-Leopard or whatever it is called these days on my Intel PC hardware, I'd love to just use windows explorer to copy MP3 files onto my Nano. I'd love to swap SIM chips in my iPhone and use whatever carrier I am using at the time... But NO.. They are lawyer-empowered consumer-restraining capitalists above all else. So I pay for and own NONE of the Apple devices mentioned above.
steve jobs got you where he wants you again. keep throwing cash at the new emperor! hail caesar!
Gee thank's guy! This editors blatant disrespect and poor education offended me so much. Its too bad we dont have more bold, courageous fellow's like yourself to stand up to tyrant's like these. You deserve a medal, honestly! From the bottom of my heart, thank'''''''s!
In the UK O2 have said the iphone 2 will be available on Pay as You Go. Which is effectively the same as going into the shop paying for the phone and walking away with out signing a contract :) They haven't yet said how much the phone will cost on pay as you go. But Apple did say $199 was the most you would pay for the basic model. So we can only hope.
I'm sick to death of being some big company's bitch. I don't get dinner and a drink before they ask me to drop trou, grab my ankles and spell run. The hell with Apple and AT&T. It's a bloody phone, people! It is supposed to make and receive voice calls. Instead, it's a portable porn viewer that makes calls. Idiots. When will upgrade fatigue hit the Mac fanboys?
Pax Vobiscum
I have been looking for a new phone starting last week. My first choice was a iphone, oops cannot
get one anywhere even the old model since everything has been showing out of stock for the last month. So I said the hell with apple and bought a lg vu. If it turns out I do not like the vu it
is getting returned for a good ole reliable always kicks ass only needs charging every 4 days software rich blackberry for $99.
Got Code?
There are places where the phone can't be locked to service contract so how will apple deal with that?
The US should adopt the European model. You purchase the hardware and then use the SIM chip from your provider. Don't get me wrong, if the service providers want to provide a phone free with a contract, they should do so. But it would be nice if they would all recognize our right to OWN our hardware and choose the provider we wish. Just like you do with land line, cable and internet.
TANSTAAFL GIGO Acronyms to live by!
I thought the free market was where the customers dictated which direction the market should go. Apple should see this as a problem with their partnership and not a problem with their customers.
Can I bum a sig?
If O2's network was good enough I wouldn't have so much of a problem with this. However, O2's network is simply not worth being tied into. I put an O2 sim into my HSDPA phone (TyTN II) and I swear it wasn't even getting 64kb/s, so it's not going to benefit much from the 3G version. If this were on Vodafone in the UK, I would extend the contract as that was several times faster than O2's when I tested it (It felt about 5x faster at least).
So while you're at it, as you'll be buying a phone and a contract anyway why not the phone company giving you some rebate as they're going to make wads of cash from the monthly fee any way ?
The only current problem with the iPhone is that they have exclusive contract with some service providers.
Whereas, in several European countries (including here in Switzerland, but also mandated by law in France as reported recently on
The two aren't even bound together (the phone was just taken from the shelf) and nothing forces you to use this contract and this phone together (you could cheaply get and extra handset by extending your own current contract and give the phone as a present to you S.O.)
Some service providers have their own shop which may sell some special package with a "special edition phone" (= read : the provider logo on the phone's shell, 1 additional customized screen background and ringtone, and some preinstalled crap that you won't use at all).
But in most shops and malls, you just pick up the phone you want, and eventually the contract you want from the provider of your choice.
The idea of subsidizing phone with provider contract isn't stupid. It's the complete lack of choice for those contract that is debilitating.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Different price plans mean different initial outlay.
How else would you sort out the purchase of the iPhone?
As they have different initial outlay, they aren't going to let you pick up an iPhone for £59 then choose a cheaper tariff. The only way to offer the different initial costs is to make sure that the tariff you have matches.
It really isn't some conspiracy. It isn't to crack down on phone unlockers. There is nothing to stop you unlocking after purchase.
They are just covering the subsidy through the tariff.
chris at darkrock dot co dot uk
http colon slash slash www dot darkrock dot co dot uk
It seems existing UK iphone users will be able to upgrade before their O2 contracts expire... And the phone will be available in a far more similar fashion to standard contracts, namely...
The new iphone is available for a cost to people subscribing to the cheaper O2 contracts...
It will also be available on prepay contracts, again at a cost...
People subscribing to the more expensive O2 contracts can get the phone with no upfront cost, included in the price of the contract.
Interestingly, people who already have an iphone contract from O2 will be able to upgrade on the same terms as someone taking out a new contract, not sure if this will require renewing the contract at that stage tho.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
My hands want one, but my wallet keeps saying "no."
If you want to kill your customer base, be my guest. When's that Android phone coming out?
Every phone contract I know of has a 30 trial period where you can opt out of the contract. How could you pay for 2 years of service, have the service not work near your home and not be able to cancel your contract?
I would imagine you could cancel the new account within 30 and keep the phone, although I wouldn't be surprised if you don't 'own' the phone and have to return it if doing so (which is legal). So it's $400 to buy the phone, $200 to lease it.
The article I just read seems to indicate otherwise in Australia:
http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,25642,23839650-5016091,00.html
In fact the opening blurb of the article states: "THE next-generation 3G Apple iPhone will be available in Australia on prepay plans without a contract when it is released here next month."
This is how things normally happen over here. You can buy the phone outright at a premium or go with a contract and a reduced (initial) price.
So basically, you will be able to buy the phone unlocked but it is going to be a tad more expensive than the $199 / $299 price points that were mentioned.
And exactly what ethical duty to us would they be upholding by offering an unsubsidized, contract-free iPhone?
I'm curious to hear your answer because, while the grandparent was right about the ethical duty of fulfilling a contract you agree to, I don't think Apple owes an ethical duty to us that would require them to offer an unlocked phone.
Boom Shanka
Oh, Jesus fuck, seriously? Do we have to listen to people bitch and whine about this again? OK, for those who didn't get it last time:
Don't like the restrictions on iPhones? DON'T FUCKING BUY ONE THEN.
You know what makes business sense to me? Not buying an iPhone.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Wasn't even a smartphone. Was just a Motorola V195. Generic looking el-cheapo GSM phone that worked well for me.
Asked them about buying a new one without touching my contract. Was told that it would cost $120. Asked if I could buy a prepaid one instead -- exact same model sells for $30 through the prepaid group. Told that it wouldn't work. Bought the prepaid model anyway and put my postpaid SIM card in it -- guess what? Works just fine.
This whole incident begs two questions: 1) Why is the exact same phone $90 cheaper if I buy it through the prepaid group? 2) Why lie to your customers and claim that something won't work when thousands of people (and the GSM specification) say otherwise?
Don't get me wrong, I still love T-Mo -- they are the best of the worst -- but this whole incident really annoyed the hell out of me.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
RUIM's act like a SIM card for CDMA networks. All they'd have to do is decide that they want to use them and give control to their users instead of locking them into the walled garden.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
I don't see why this is a big deal. I get better signal with AT&T than I did with my last 2 cell providers. Obviously that'll vary by location but (shrug)...is this just the principle of the thing, a "because we want to" kind of thing, or what's the motivation to unlock in the first place?
On a side note, I wonder how many of the people bitching that they won't buy one this time because of the subsidized price, were the same ones bitching last time because of the unsubsidized price.
Rogers doesn't charge a cancellation fee for contracts under 14 days old. So buy phone, with contract, cancel it with less then 30min of use on phone, get the contract monies refunded, unlock and sell. problem solved.
-Ours is the wisdom of Solomon, the magic of Merlyn, the fall of Icaris.
WAAAAAAAAH!
(I wanted one badly)
You bitched about the non-subsidized price, so now there is a subsidy which makes the phone much more affordable, but you have to commit to a contract.
I think you assholes who are bitching are just the type of people who will always find something else to bitch about.
I expect now that there's an iPhone with 3G and GPS, you'll piss and moan about the slightly lower battery life because of the power draw from those things.
Hey, it is spelled "grammar", by the way.
I'll upgrade as soon as I can jailbreak it. I live in a rural area. The only cell providers here are AT&T (who hasn't tried to screw me yet), Verizon (who already tried screwing me over twice and I don't wish to give them a third chance), NEXTEL (who has the worst cell service I have ever experienced) and a couple of also-rans with generally crappy service. I got the phone so I could hack on it. I like the idea of having a unix-based computer in my pocket. The fact that it's got a phone and an ipod so I don't have to carry those as well is just icing on the cake. I don't care about unlocking as long as I can have a shell on my phone. My biggest wish for the 3G phone is more space on the OS partition so I can install more stuff to flesh out the environment a bit.
The error with "it's" is so common, you might assume in many cases it's not a careless typo, but a genuine lack of understanding of the proper use of the word.
Good spelling and grammar are important. Calls to "chill out" are just another way of promoting the "dumbing down" of the community. Smart people should take pride in their command of the language.
There is nothing good to be said about a slack attitude toward basic reading and writing skills. Bad spelling and grammar are sloppy, sloppy, sloppy. There is no excuse.
It is more like a car loan when you buy a car. Rarely people have the money to buy a phone up front. So cell phone companies check your credit and finance about $200 over the course of the wireless contract. This is why early termination fees exist since if you leave the contact they have to recover the cost of the phone. This is why the contract prices of phones are discounted about $200, even more for phones that really need expensive data plans. That is why the first iPhone was such a huge rip-off because you were paying outright for the phone and both Apple & AT&T were pocketing the extra $200 over the course of the contract. This time they are following the model of financing you the phone with the contract. A buyout option would understandably be $200+ higher but the lack of that option is grounds for people to be upset. Yes you own the phone but just like when a bank has a lean on your car through a loan they can require certain things like collision insurance etc.
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" Franklin
Your links are broken, they point to something that is not quite as good as, much less superior than, an iPhone... even the current one. Especially so though after the July 11 software update and app store.
but it's not subsidized by the voice and data plan, so you pay a penalty for buying one.
It's very nice but it's simply no iPhone. It's not even as good as potential Android devices quite honesty, why you would buy an N95 now without considering an Android device coming before too long seems like a weird choice.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Hey guys, as one person who got sick of apple fanatics long ago, I have this to say.
HA HA HA
It was not until deregulation (carter era?? I cant quite recall when it happened now) that you could buy any old phone and attach it. It may also surprise you to learn there was only one phone company too.
At the time it made a lot of sense. The networks made a lot of assumptions about what was connected to them. They trusted the hardware. they trusted signals coming in from other nexuses. trust trust trust.
but just like trusting client side authentication leads to grief, the rise of phone phreaks injecting their own signals into a trusted network led to free phone calls.
I can still see why the cell phone company has reasons that they don't just want to permit any possible activity on their network. They are all about quality of service for as many possible people not an all-you-can buffet where a few people can pig out.
But I digress. Leasing telephone equipment has been the norm since alexander graham bell. this little experiement where you "purchase" a phone then lease the line has been pretty short lived so far. So get over it.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
I'm sick of the AT&T monopoly on iPhones. What will it take to make CMDA iPhones available to Sprint and Verison? Does the Justice Department have to break up another AT&T monopoly?
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
The wireless networks must be opened to competitive access exactly the same way the wired networks were opened. The monopoly abuse of the market in wireless is even worse than it ever was over wires.
Not only for great justice. But opening the networks will expand economic opportunity for a wealth of new services. Telcos will hate it, but that's a sign of success.
--
make install -not war
Maybe not in the US. But take a look on a map over Europe. Lots of countries. Roaming can be really expensive. So people that travel regularly between countries (which many do) need to buy a local SIM card when entering a new country for cheap access. This only works if your phone is unlocked and accepts foreign SIM cards.
)9TSS
As the US telecom laws are horribly out-dated, I would think this same law would apply to cell phones. A cell phone company can not force me to use their brand of phone, and a phone manufacturer can not force me to use a particular carrier.
I'm not asking about the technical aspects of CDMA vs. GSM, just about the legal aspects.
If the operator sells the phone with a contract, why do they have to lock the phone? You are still bound by the contract. If you get an additional SIM card or another contract and use it with the phone, then so what? The operator still gets their monthly fee from their contract.
This is how many phones are sold in Sweden (there are locked phones too, but some are sold unlocked, with a contract).
Is there any source saying that the iPhone will be sold locked only?
)9TSS
The new iPhone again will not be available in Russia or in China (currently the two countries with the most iPhone users after the USA). However, I am sure that the people there will have their 3G toy almost as fast as the rest of the world.
Many "Businessmen" will buy the phone from one country (Germany, India, etc.) for 199, sell the contract there and then sell the phone to eager customers in China and Russia, who can't buy it directly, for 399. This scheme has been wildly in use for quite some time now and I don't think that Apple can do anything about it.
ATT charges $20/mo for unlimited data. Rogers in Canada charges $7/mo for "unlimited data". Roger's version of "unlimited data" is a few websites, but not Google Earth, not email, not downloading any pictures or movies or songs, and not tethering your device to a laptop. Those all cost $0.05/kB. So a 10MB mp3 will cost you $500. A 600MB ripped movie will cost you $30k.
Maybe Apple will force Rogers into a reasonable data plan such as $20 to $25 for true unlimited data just like a normal Internet connection (SSH, _real_ web browsing, email, etc.)
It appears that O2 (in the UK) is going to offer the iPhone on a Pay-As-You-Go (PAYG) deal. This is a non-contract way of running a phone over here. You buy top-up cards with airtime (say £10 or £20) when you run out.
If the premium on the phone isn't huge (you usually pay more for PAYG as it's not a guaranteed income to the operator), it could be a good way of getting a non-contract iPhone to jail-break. If it can be jail broken (I give it 10 hours, any advances).
More info : http://www.o2.co.uk/iphone/paygo
"If A equals success, then the formua is A=X+Y+Z. X is work. Y is play. Z is keep your mouth shut" - A Einstein.
Is it possible to get one with a data-only plan? I would rather not do the whole phone call thing, but I'd love to keep the option open for the future, and be able to use the 3G network for data anywhere AT&T provides service. Mobile inner-net in my pocket? Hell yeah. Adding in the voice portion makes it prohibitively expensive.
Informatus Technologicus
"a massive wad of cash for the privilege of owning a 3G iPhone" If you're not allowed to do what you want with the device, you do not own it.
Am I the only person here who doesn't really like the look of the iPhone and doesn't want one?
I am not bashing Apple machinery here: although I have been a Linux user since 1994, I also have an iBook G4 which still works too well to deserve replacement, and I now have two iPods.
But when I replaced my phone a few months ago, I opted for the Motorola Razr2 V9, of which I much prefer the interface, even if the cross-platform support is not stellar by any standard.
The change to a contract-based solution is yet another admission that software-based protection systems fail in a world of hackers and the net.
...but isn't this how pretty much every other phone is sold in the States? Except maybe that there won't be an option to purchase it without a contract. Apple tried to do things differently when the original iPhone was released, but apparently that model came back and (so to say) bit it in the butt with a significant quantity "MIA" from the point of view of the AT&T and the company (whose name I forgot) that processed the activations.
What absolutely brilliant business people.They've thought so far ahead as to include reasons to:
1.Steal and unlock the phone in question.
2.Alienate the Mac-ies that usta love them with what will surely be a pathetic contract for the customer,ensuring that it will be the last "Mac" equipment they ever buy.
3.Repeat all the same mistakes they made over the years with their ever regrouping and reinvented computer hardware line.(more customer alienation)
Its always nice to see someone who's learned from their mistakes.I'm certain they can repeat them exactly.
I'll wait for other manufacturers to come up with similar features on phones that can be used with the service of my choice(and it won't be long)and possibly better hardware as it's seen what bugs the i-phone spews forth.It's a given that anyone else will be cheaper as the laws of competition dictate.
I suggest Appletosh jettison those in charge who "think different" and replace them with those,like me,who "think ahead".
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
Why you buy a mobile phone "on contract" in the UK, the terms and conditions that come with the airtime contract specifically separate the performance of the phone from the airtime contract.
So that if the phone is crap, you can't use it as an excuse to get out of the airtime contract.
If you ask for your phone to be unlocked most providers will do it but you are still committed to the the airtime contract and may have to pay for unlocking.
There's going to be some interesting court claims around this if they really try to do this.
why do some of you include the cost of the plan in the TCO for the iphone? the new pricing model is the same for all phones (go to ATT and check - the data plan is for PDA/Smartpone, there isn't a line item for the iphone) - so regardless of the hardware you buy your plan is the SAME (minus PAYG which has been dropped for the iphone) ATT PRESS RELEASE: http://www.att.com/gen/press-room?pid=4800&cdvn=news&newsarticleid=25791 The new agreement between Apple and AT&T eliminates the revenue-sharing model under which AT&T shared a portion of monthly service revenue with Apple. Under the revised agreement, which is consistent with traditional equipment manufacturer-carrier arrangements, there is no revenue sharing and both iPhone 3G models will be offered at attractive prices to broaden the market potential and accelerate subscriber volumes. The phones will be offered with a two-year contract and attractive data plans that are similar to those offered for other smartphones and PDAs. AT&T anticipates that these offers will drive increased sales volumes and revenues among high-quality, data-centric customers. Currently, less than 20 percent of AT&T's postpaid subscribers have integrated devices capable of voice, Web and data applications. Based on the company's experience, average monthly revenues per iPhone subscriber are nearly double the average of the company's overall subscriber base. With a two-year contract, the price of an 8GB iPhone 3G will be $199; the 16GB model will be priced at $299. Unlimited iPhone 3G data plans for consumers will be available for $30 a month, in addition to voice plans starting at $39.99 a month. Unlimited 3G data plans for business users will be available for $45 a month, in addition to a voice plan.
If you OWN the phone, you are allowed to do anything except make copies to sell to others
... (own it today!))
If you rent/lease/license the phone then you do NOT own it and cannot (or should not) hack it/ unlock it.
If they say that for $400 you OWN it *and* forbid you to do as you please with it, then this is called false advertising. (OTOH, all media companies are doing this
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
Your going to have to wait 6 months before your out your old contract before you can get this. since apple\AT&T or O2 forced you to have a 18 month contract and it only came out 12 months ago. Lessons learned ?
Profit margins in Europe are much better than margins in the US, especially factoring in the very weak USD. Those in the market acknowledge that most of Apple's net income growth is attributable to it's revenue increases from the European marketplace.
Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
Sorry for harsh subject but everyone out there knows what kind of locked device iPhone is, what a Network locked thing it is and by ignoring Flash, it is clear that Apple intends to create a Mac II or a Lisa.
There are hundreds of different choices available from Nokia, Sony Ericsson and now Samsung with Symbian. If you can stand to MS, there are also Win CE choices.
People on Mac channels on IRC were almost insane and delusional acting like Apple invented freaking GPS on phone, they now ordered and today they are bugging their friends at IT media bitching, whining about how evil is Apple to do that, do this and lock that.
As a person having 3 Macs at home, I decided iPhone is not my type of device, I cant stand to any locked thing like that along with completely false and pathetic excuses to lock it like java is not needed, multitasking eats battery and Flash is bad for it. What do I do? I simply buy Symbian Nokia device, use it as I ever need to. Does it have some stupid issues? Yes but I am type of person who cant stand to a single theme more than 3 days.
If you buy iPhone, you are making a choice. Grow up and learn to live with your choices. As we, Nokia Symbian owners live with our choices too.
if they say that for $400 you OWN it *and* forbid you to do as you please with it, then this is called false advertising. (OTOH, all media companies are doing this ... (own it today!))
You do not get it. You own the phone. The service contract contains several constraints. If you agree with such constraints then good for you, if you do not, then go look for another contract (with their respective telephone).
The telephone is yours to hack, crack, spit, throw over a cliff, put on fire or whatever. However, do not expect the company to continue giving you the service if your actions do not abide by the contract.
Again, if you do not like the contract, just do not follow that deal, and find another.
Not that such thing is good (IMHO it is really bad... that is why I just own iNothing, for I do not like being iLocked-down).
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
Apple + AT&T = single point of failure
Think about how absurd it would be if, in the old days, you had to buy your computer from the phone company because it had a modem? After seeing Youtube guys can ship a working player for Java, I can easily add decent J2ME to smart phone choices.
There are hundreds or thousands of different choices on mobile platform which arent locked in any way even including MS!
You dont need a saviour. You have three or four choices if we include Linux.
J2ME had some interface problem but after Sony Ericsson came up with using Flash for UI, it is soon over too.
Lets not forget Flash Lite 3, Adobe Air, MS Silverlight all on way to mobile platforms.
I think that John Gruber nailed it. By halving the price and rolling out in 70 countries simultaneously, Apple is going for market share in a huge way. If you thought the hype leading up to the US launch last June was over the top, I think you'd better go hide in a cave in the weeks leading up to July 11th. The global excitement and anticipation will feed on itself and drown out any other consideration, as far as the general public is concerned. The iPhone noise is going to be so loud that other mobile manufacturers are going to be completely drowned out, and they damned well know it. Nothing they do between now and the launch of iPhone 2.0 will even register on the public consciousness; they see the train coming and can't get off the track. I strongly suspect that July 11th will ring in like the crack of doom for most of them.
Ah, but don't you see, like most Slashdotters, you fail to realize that you are not an ordinary consumer of electronics. The iPhone wasn't designed for you, and the marketing isn't aimed at you. The general public, however, is going to leap at the iPhone like a trout going for a fly. As bizarre as it may seem to people on this and other tech forums, in-store activation is going to be seen as a huge draw for Joe and Jane Consumer, to whom even the relatively simple iTunes activation is a pain in the butt. They want the instant gratification of buying their new iPhone and being able walk out of the store boasting to their friends: "OMG Joanie! Guess what I'm using to call you!!"
I think that Gruber is absolutely correct: the iPhone only has two new hardware features, namely, 3G networking and GPS, which means Apple was concentrating on getting a cheaper 3G iPhone into the hands of as many consumers as possible. Money quote:
"The physical phone is not the story. A year from now, the iPhone 3G will be replaced by another new model. The platform is the story. Platforms have staying power, and, once entrenched, are very hard to displace."
Bold emphases mine. The platform is indeed the story, and Microsoft is painfully aware of what Apple is trying to do (and may very well succeed at doing), namely producing the gateway device to Web 2.0 and their true bid for world domination, the iTunes Store. People pay billions each year for ringtones for God's sake, not because they're worth that much, but because of the convenience of being able to get it instantly. You had better believe that they'll happily pay through the nose for the convenience of having music, video, games, etc. right at their fingertips. It's all about impulse purchasing, something retailers have known about for decades, which is why candy and other high margin items are located right at grocery checkout stands. People will pay for instant gratification and not regret it.
I think the bigger story here is that Apple will not be selling them online. As far as I know, the first Apple product not to be sold online since they started the Apple Store.
From the Apple Store Online:
Where to buy:
iPhone will be available in 8GB (black) and 16GB (black or white) models1 at Apple Retail Stores and AT&T Stores.
The absence of "right here on this page" is sad. If you want one, you're going to have to sit with the mob on July 11th. Boo.
I just wasted your mod points! HA!
You (and a lot of Slashdotters) should consider taking a Property Law class if you ever get a chance. The first thing they teach you is that property ownership is like a bundle of sticks, each stick representing an aspect of ownership. For example, it's possible for me to own the title rights to property, but not the possessory rights.
What this means is that you can own something, but *not* get to do whatever you want with it. It also means you can trade sticks around in exchange for other things. This is a *good* thing.
In this case, AT&T and Apple say they will sell you a phone that you can own, but you have to agree to do certain things with some of you sticks. This doesn't mean you don't own it.
Boom Shanka
If anything this is going to do wonders for Apple iPhone sales in a downward direction. Make it even harder for them to reach the magic 10 million sales in a year -- make that 18 months now.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
When AT&T noticed the difference between sales of iPhones and AT&T acctivations they went ballistic. The clear implication was that unlocked phones were being used in the US and elsewhere with OTHER providers thus depriving AT&T part of their revenue stream in the deal. Apple had all sorts of possible remedies (mostly involving changes to the software stack) that could have prevented non-AT&T use, but instead, put up only token resistance because, let's face it, they're making a lot more from the handset sale than the minor tithe that AT&T gives them for the acct. Which makes me beleive this crackdown on illict usage is more window dressing to appease AT&T or other authorized telcos. Watch and see, this won't make much difference to the unlocking trend - because Apple chooses to let it happen.
So, I buy a contract, buy a phone, go back to the shop and cancel my contract under the 7 day cooling off period. What can go wrong?
It would be honest to break out the charges indicating that you are buying your phone over time (typically the 2 years of your contract), and here are the actual cost of your phone, voice, and separate data charges you're paying. Then, like credit APR's , they should be required to print in the largest type in the ad/contract the cost per minute of voice, and the cost per minute/megabyte of data. That would make comparisons at least reasonably possible.
So where are the advertising watchdogs?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
BUT, your claim that the take-home lesson of Economics 101 is that people are rational is ludicrous. People are clearly not rational in their economic decision-making, and this is why so many of the principles of Economics 101 fail in the real world.
I stole this sig from someone cleverer than me.
I think this is vastly preferable to the weirdo EULA approach of merely claiming that someone signed a contract when in fact they didn't. What Apple is doing in this case, even if it is in opposition to the will of the users, is fair because the users can Just Say No. They are informed that they will be assraped before it happens, and can opt out by buying someone else's phone instead.
This addresses my biggest objection to "implicit contracts," where one of the contracted parties don't even know that they supposedly entered into any kind of agreement. That is a ridiculous situation and I applaud Apple for not doing it. Of course, they're doing the right thing for bad reasons (they want an evil contract to be bullet-proof enforceable) but that's a pretty minor quibble. I prefer selfish people, even ones who conduct themselves as enemies, over dishonest fraudsters, any fucking day. As long as people know what they're getting into and can Just Say No, I'm fine with that.
Needless to say, I wouldn't buy one of these phones, but my opinion of Apple has gone up. Maybe some day I'll buy one of their products again; by using real sales contracts instead of shrinkwrap EULAs, I feel they've become a little more trustworthy.
To put it in D&D terms: You can work with lawful evil people, unlike the situation with chaotic evil.
In the UK, it will be available on Pay As You Go (obviously for more money than the contract) - O2's website currently says PAYG iPhone is coming in July. This could be bought, unlocked, no contract. So the choice is the trade off, do you take the subsidy, or pay for the phone in full and unlock it?
> We're disappointed about this decision, but it does make business sense.
Yes, with iPhone clones coming on the market offering phone, keyboard, music, video, email, full live internet connectins and the like, it makes perfect sense. Apple loves their 6-10% market share with the Mac, so they wanna duplicate it in the multi-function wireless device.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Previously, the iPhone was $400.
Now, the iPhone is $200 + $175 termination fee.
It's cheaper now than it was before and has GPS/3g goodness. I don't get all the complaints.
* Apple's iPhone
* AT&T Phone Service
* The purchase of an iPhone is conditional on signing a contract for AT&T phone service.
* AT&T is one among a few phone providers for which the iPhone could be used and contains a substantial portion of that market
* AT&T is a national cell phone service provider who can directly impact the success of other national providers which are otherwise capable of using the iPhone on their network
More tales of my favorite little crack chick.
And speaking of Apple: The iPhones SIM-Lock can't be that good, or how else are they gonna protect it from unlocking? You had a contract stapled to your left ear previously, and now you also do? What's the news?
--
Read my journal!
you are a collossal mac faggot and most folks don't want to be like you.
Too much actual intelligence in this thread. This can't be slashdot. (goes over to other thread segments and sees guy who claims that there is a "moral duty" of hardware manufacturers to provide documentation to create GPL drivers and another idiot who claims that the principle of "fair use" means that you can format-shift for the purposes of piracy - ahh.. that's more like it.)
02 are advertising a pay as you go option http://www.o2.co.uk/iphone/paygo
'Customers will soon be able to enjoy all the great features of iPhone without a monthly contract with the iPhone for Pay & Go'
Ok. All Apple did is get rid of the 0.01% chance that I'd EVER buy an iPhone. Thank you Apple. You just saved me about $800. Retards.
"I hope you know how very lucky you are to know me, because I am so incredibly incredible."
hay buddie, y dont u just stop on the internet nazi of the grammer??? u think ur so smart and stuff cause u can "read" and "spell" and use those ' things!
Get an opensource solution like OpenMoko which will happily let you run whatever you want, even VoIP over free WiFi (Or if you don't like hacking, get one of the Skype VoIP WiFi phones). Thus you'll have your phone without giving any money to those evil corporations.
Big News : Phone service cost you monney. Either get along with it or move to something else (free WiFi).
Or simply get an iPod Touch.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Sure, the phone got invented here, but if you look at how things work in other countries where they skipped the whole landline crap things are way different. For example China and India, where cellphones have revolutionized communications. There may only be a couple providers in China, but you can buy any phone with a gsm chip in it to use on their networks.
Trusting the client is a bad model, its not robust and its not as scalable. Of course we can see their interests in remaining in control, especially as they consolidate more and more back to Ma Bell.
Whats scary is that you are OK with this. Why should we "get over it" when we see things working much better in other countries? You may be fine with taking it up the ass from monopolies, but I would rather be able to treat voice communication as a commodity that I consume with whatever interface I prefer.
"how can they call it a MINE if everything here is THEIRS?!?!" -Straight Jacket
It is simple.
Over several hundred years, companies/shops have been selling stuff. Over the same time certain rights for the buyer have been established - first sale doctrine, laws against monopolistic actions, etc.
Now companies see that they can potentially make more money by not selling you stuff - I give you this, you give me money, the thing is yours. Instead they want to make more complicated agreements as a loophole through these rights. You give me money, you sign on the dotted line, and then we'll see.
As with most loopholes, it is a temporary thing. Eventually lawmakers will make new laws, that will close these holes, and everything will be again as intended. It also depends on the country. The type of actions that apple does seem totally illegal in Belgium, partially illegal in Germany and France, etc.
How long this will take to close the holes depends on how much consumers complain. The more they (we) complain, the faster it will happen. The more money companies will invest in lobbying/bribing against it, the slower it will happen.
So this is what we do here - complain.
I fully believe companies have a right to sell devices as they see fit. They invent produce and sell the device... if they think the best idea for sale is to say you have to buy it in a certain way, well, if you don't like that, you can go buy something else.
-Daniel
This is totally unconfirmed and still qualifies as blatant rumor. The people saying this are using unconfirmed sources. This information entirely contradicts what Apple is saying and it does not fit with Apple's business model.
This is the same shit AT&T was claiming just after the iPhone was released the first time.
The iPhone alternative (for freedom lovers)
"This article explains how to get an even better mobile Internet experience, without having to do business with either AT&T or Apple--with no contracts and no $60 per month bill just to surf the Net."
(Surveillance State blog)
Agreed.
In fact, you know what this reminds me of? The iTunes Music Store. Here was the upstart company (Apple) dealing with a megalith (the recording industry), making demands in certain places ($.99 tracks, piecemeal rather than bundling in albums) and offering concessions in others (DRM) in order to carve itself a niche in an industry where everyone was absolutely sure it didn't belong.
And yes, it's an imperfect analogy because iTMS was just a distribution system (which Apple got a small share of). The iPhone is a physical product. But I still stand by it. (The analogy, not the product.)
Given the arrangement, AT&T is still going to make out like a bandit, even with the subsidy, because Apple is only selling the razor, man. AT&T is selling the blades. (Oh, and Apple is starting up a quaint little shaving cream concession on the side in the form of the App Store.)
The trick for the upstart in any such case is to know what demands to make and what concessions to offer to carve first a niche and grow from there.
You cannot truly appreciate Dilbert until you read it in the original Klingon.
mod grand parent down as wrong
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Signing up ATT with four more years of exclusive contract guaranteed I won't own iphone ever.
Microsoft is officially more open than Apple, at least on the mobile front.
You can get a Windows-based phone made by HTC and take it to the provider of your choice. And unlike the iPhone, Windows phones don't prohibit third-party applications.
Microsoft actually did something right for once.
I love my HTC Wizard, and I intend on upgrading to an HTC Kaiser (TyTN II/P4550) one of these days. I'll never consider an iPhone; it's too closed-up compared to Microsoft's openness.
I support the Center for Consumer Freedom
In Australia, at least one of the carriers will be offering a prepaid option. So no contract.
According to a Vodafone salesman (who admittedly seemed very unprepared for the iPhone release), unlocked iPhones will indeed be available. Want to take a guess at the price? $1400 (AU) Can you say Ouch? It's not totally impossible, I've seen high end phones in the past here go for $1200 out of contract, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Disclaimer: The above comment was made while under the influence of too much coding and not enough sleep.
iPhone - 3G + hype = $599 iPhone + 3G - hype = $199 iPhone = Apple crack your skull Oh ... I forgot to calculate the contract costs?
Man ... I just want a smartphone
How is switching to contract pricing a sign of "cracking down on iPhone unlockers" when it's more easily explained as "switching to a pricing model more likely to sell phones"?
How will this make it harder to jailbreak iPhones?
I was just wondering if it is possible to install the iPhone OS on another phone? When it comes down to it, it seems that the main selling point of the iPhone is the OS. I currently use WindowsMobile and hate it :(
Close but no cigar. You're thinking of the Carterfone ruling.
what a bunch of neo-liberal nonsense.
they made it. you gave them money. it's yours.
very simple.
besides that, if we are talking USA, the law relevant here SPECIFICALLY ALLOW unlocking of mobile phones. i am not entirely sure if that includes the right to unlock them from itunes and the apstore, but i suspect it would take someone and their day in court to find out.
as for the UK, i have never even heard anyone mention it is illegal. i think they just rely on you sticking out your contract or paying the ETF, either way they are rolling in money.
... clone it too? The NY Times had an article on this very topic 6 months ago, it fails to answer the specific question: What use is cloning the form without the Iphone OS. The experience, the applications, the je ne sais quoi is missing!
If Samsung, LG, Opera can't produce a fab browser how the fuck is some cloner going to do it! To wit, Google SMS is badazz useful, most times, as is goog411, Tellme networks, but even with my Garmin's insufficient database of restaurants, shops, etc. sometimes I just want to whip out a browser and search, visit these dolt web sites for the relevant tidbit of information I need then and there. By extension I have little faith in the rest of a clone iphone.
However, if the Chinese cloners were to extract a copy of the iphone OS and include it, that would be something I'd buy.
Unless one of our Hong Kong or China or Taiwan friends can enlighten how these clones are otherwise superbe I don't get why a China clone is a real option.
If you read the article you'll see you can buy at electronic stores unlocked genuine Iphone easily. That service I'd buy in the USA. Indeedy!
Contracts should be evaluated on their merits (do I want to commit for 18 months to pay x, and what do I get in return), as you suggest happens in Switzerland or France (I suspect because of the laws against bundling - weren't they obliged to sell the first version separately as well?). The only reason the phone operator offers you a shiny gadget with a 'price drop' is to distract you from the benefits (or not) of the plans on offer and stop you evaluating which plan you need/want.
Extensive tying and exclusive contracts lead to unhealthy situations like that with the iPhone where you can only use it with one provider, on a very restricted set of plans. If you think it through from the providers point of view, this is their preferred option - captive customers who will pay a hefty price every month just to use their phone.
You're right to point out that the exclusive contract is a serious problem, but I'd also say tying it to a limited selection of plans is a problem - particularly when the price hike of those plans neatly covers the supposed 'discount' on the iPhone price. In my opinion both should be banned, and Apple is cashing in for the short term at the expense of their customers here.
It's nice to be able to go out and by an iPhone at a subsidised price WITHOUT starting the said contract... ...but it's unfair for the mobile operator. If the unsubsidised iPhone is expensive, this is Apple's pricing problem.
So the move to require you to pre-sign the contract in order to buy a subsidised iphone seems fair to me.
I am considering to buy one, if and when it becomes available as-is (without a contract) and at a decent price.
I'm no longer fed up with MS Windows: I go rid of them
I see Apple & AT&T stock dipping hard because of this news. Watch & see!
They lied to people by not revealing the truth about the extra costs up front during the iPhone 3G presentation and that's going to hit them both very hard in terms of invester's perspectives & stock value.
Once this news sinks in to the heads of the majority of prospective buyers they will not make the purchase. I was all over it until I heard that AT&T was going to fine people who didn't activate within 30 days.
Who do they think they are, the iPhone police?
Now, I will just wait until they show up on craigslist for half price (even if the wait is another year). In this economy, the world isn't ready for the 3G iPhone until the price is actually $199.00 OTD without a commitment!
For now I will be buying put options on both AT&T as well as Apple because i guarantee their stock values are heading south just because of this news. This sentiment will surely grow by leaps & bounds as this news proliferates (especially after I post this comment on every blog I can find). HA HA!
Just checked on Yahoo Finance, Apple stock is down 2.08 percent already! You shouldn't have mislead your consumers Steve!
Pretty pls, somebody get the electric specs for sim cards and start selling usb dongles with sim slots, my laptop can trounce ANY fsckin' phone on the market. i just want to use it as a phone with infanat extendability and wireless WWW.
OR
hold on, WiMAX is geting along great, speed/price near cable/DSL/LAN. i'll just use skype with a handsfree. who needs phone, we got fuckin PC!!
now, seriously what the market realy needs is an OLPC on steroids. best wi-fi, long batery life powerfull enogh to be used as general purpose pc by most, why not just improve the concept, and add an optional sim slot? not like providers can lock us in this time. all the sim card 'sees' is el. imulses, all the towers 'hear' are radiowaves.
they cant under any condition diferentiate between a given phone, and a properly programed SDR.
</wishfullthinking>
I know full well that tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack
Somebody advocating for the freedom of companies to create cartels, as part of upholding freedom.
Un-fucking-believable.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.