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."

8 of 565 comments (clear)

  1. Correction by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "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
    1. Re:Correction by blackholepcs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's the problem with companies today. They "lease" you the equipment, with hidden terms and rules, and bullshit marketing that omits important facts that relate directly to your decision to purchase (lease) their product. Cell phone companies are one of the worst for this.

      --
      Halitosis - (n.) Halle Berry's Camel Toe.
    2. Re:Correction by sirambrose · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You can also cancel your contract and keep the phone by paying a $175 termination fee. Since the new models are $200 cheaper than the old models, the new phone is still cheaper than the old one that cost $400.

    3. Re:Correction by ConfusedVorlon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's the problem with consumers today. They'd rather "lease" a discounted phone and pay more in the longer term with higher locked in rates.

      Cell phone buyers are the worst for this, they more or less destroy the market for buying phones seperately.

    4. Re:Correction by NtroP · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Slavery is a step up from living on the streets homeless and hungry (or being beaten to death), but that doesn't make it moral, nor something I should support if given the choice. I keep hearing your reasoning to justify using third-world slave labor, and I still find it unsavory.

      I grew up in a third-world country. It's not "Slavery". People are falling all over themselves to get and keep these jobs. If there is anything negative to be said it's that there is no job security. What we would consider "poor working conditions" and "low pay" is a gold mine to these people. Stop trying to help them out of their jobs. Talk to them and they will tell you that.

      Are there bad bosses? Sure. That happens everywhere. Are there some places that have poor working conditions? Sure. And we need to bring those to light and pressure them to improve. But for goodness sake, don't take these people's jobs away from them.

      --
      "terrorism" and "pedophilia" are the root passwords to the Constitution
  2. Re:Seems reasonable by Serious+Callers+Only · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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. Only reasonable if you don't realise that $325 price drop was taken out of your fees for the next x years of contract.

    We'd be much better off if mobile phones were sold as items like computers or telephones, without contract, and the phone companies concentrated on providing a good service, instead of 'adding value' by gimping phone software, charging insane amounts for data, or tying users into long term contracts.

    $500 is a reasonable price for the technological marvel which is a modern cellphone, if you can't afford that, perhaps you can't afford a highly priced monthly contract either.

    As it is in the UK the iPhone may be available without a contract from O2 via the Pay as you Go packages, but they're being remarkably coy about that, they probably want to sucker people into signing 18 month contracts for 30-75GBP a month first before unveiling PAYG.

    I see why Apple has done this (as you say it's standard practice) but that doesn't make it any more palatable.

    PS Can't translate a £ symbol !! WTF Slashdot, this is 2008.
  3. Thank goodness for Android by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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?

  4. Re:No turtlenecked CEO necessary by LKM · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Except when you can't. In the U.S, it's probably no big deal if you can't get unlocked phones. In Europe, where you can't spit without hitting two other countries, it is. The people here want phones to be unlocked by government mandate; some governments have followed the people's will. That's what typically is supposed to happen in a democracy.