Slashdot Mirror


AT&T To Offer No-Contract iPhone

rfc1394 writes "While the regular price of an iPhone is $199 if you take a 2-year contract with AT&T, if you're willing to pay a lot more you can get one without a contract. An article in InfoWorld mentions that 'Freedom will come with a price — $599 for an 8GB device and $699 for a 16GB — but this will mark the first time consumers in the United States are able to buy an iPhone without being tied down to a two-year contract. The phone probably would still be locked for use only on AT&T's network, said Jupiter Research analyst Michael Gartenberg. But buyers could choose a pay-as-you-go plan for voice service.' The question still remains, does it make any sense to pay that much for a phone that is still locked to AT&T's network even if you aren't bound to a contract?" Update: 07/05 18:21 GMT by T : An anonymous reader suggests that there is a convoluted but possibly cheaper route to an new, unlocked iPhone.

193 comments

  1. iWouldn't by Hatkirby · · Score: 0, Troll

    I wouldn't buy an iPhone even if it was completely free. It's made by Apple, people! Apple = bad!

    --
    Four
    1. Re:iWouldn't by Rei · · Score: 1

      Really points out that the Neo Freerunner isn't really a bad deal, like some people were trying to claim in an earlier thread. Hardware capabilities almost as good as or matching an iPhone, and *no* contractual obligations, for $400. If $600-$700 is what they'd need to sell an iPhone for when the "locked into a contract" subsidy is removed, it sounds like the Freerunner is at a very reasonable price point, just ignoring all of the "open" aspects to it.

      --
      "That's Nietzsche. He killed my father." -- Jesus, "Jesus Christ Supercop"
    2. Re:iWouldn't by MightyYar · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Insightful? Mods are confused by homonyms. The word you were looking for is inciteful.

      Just out of sheer morbid curiosity, what phone companies are on your list of "good"?

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    3. Re:iWouldn't by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Not really comparable. The iPhone has a multitouch touchscreen (the Freerunner might, eventually, if someone puts a lot of effort into the driver) and is 3G (in the version being discussed now), while the Freerunner is crippled with GPRS.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  2. This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by It+doesn't+come+easy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So I buy a phone outright for $599/$699, or I buy a phone for $199/$299 with a 2 year plan ($36 activation fee) then cancel the contract immediately for $175...net cost $410/$510. Hmmmm.....

    --
    The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
  3. Still locked? by MacDork · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Fail

    1. Re:Still locked? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fail

      Damn straight!

      You folks who want this phone need to keep your money and force AT&T and Apple lower their prices. This is just more gouging.

      And before someone posts "well it costs Apple so much and AT&T so much so they have to..." as a justification, and it's only a rationalization, just keep in mind that unless you have personal access to their numbers, they can tell you anything they want as to their "cost".

    2. Re:Still locked? by arth1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Indeed. If the manufacturer won't sell you a phone that hasn't been locked to a provider /in the first place/, don't buy from that manufacturer. There are other phones than iPhone -- some of them far more convenient or flashy. That's two of the three reasons for buying an iPhone -- the third is if you're a lemming.

      I've bought my phones unlocked directly from the manufacturer. All features work, and I'm not fettered to a specific program on the computer, or subject to DRM.

      Planless phones and unlocked phones are not the same as a lockfree phone.

    3. Re:Still locked? by sacrilicious · · Score: 1
      I've bought my phones unlocked directly from the manufacturer.

      I've been considering the same. I'm worried about problems arising which cause finger pointing games between the manufacturer and the carrier... any words of advice?

      --
      - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
    4. Re:Still locked? by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Only that you make sure you do not allow any "upgrades" from the phone carrier, only the manufacturer.

      The only two problems I've encountered are:

      1: Every single time I log in to T-Mobile's web site to pay my bill online or check my usage, it wants me to select which phone I have, and every single time I have to scroll past a long list of images (this is made for people too stupid to find a model name) and choose "None of the listed phones". It refuses to remember that as a choice, so this has to be repeated each and every time. Other carriers might be better.

      2: I can't access the T-Mobile support pages either. You have to select one of their phones before you're allowed to use the support pages, even if what you look for is generic info not specific to any phone. Not that their support pages would be any help, of course -- they're made for non-technical people, so you won't find any useful info there, like the exact internet settings to use for the service. Luckily, many people have put that kind of information out on the web.

  4. Is this the "Tax" price in CA? by nweaver · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As the ETF is probably only $150-200 or so, just get a phone for $200 and when you decide you hate AT&T, just break the contract.

    What I worry about is this is the "tax price", so that in CA (and other states), you may pay $200, but you are paying tax on a $600 phone, which would up the cost to the end user an additional $33.

    --
    Test your net with Netalyzr
  5. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Robert1 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Most phone companies have a stipulation in the contract that forces you to return the phone if you cancel the contract soon after starting it. In this case I would think that time would be about 6 months or so - enough time for them to squeeze out the 600/700 dollar cost.

  6. Paging Mr. Hobson... by goodmanj · · Score: 5, Funny

    "does it make any sense to pay that much for a phone that is still locked to AT&T's network even if you aren't bound to a contract?"

    As Henry Ford once said of his Model T, "the customer can have any color he wants, so long as it's black." But only a cellphone company could call that a "custom color choice" and charge extra for it.

    1. Re:Paging Mr. Hobson... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      As Henry Ford once said of his Model T, "the customer can have any color he wants, so long as it's black."

      Ever wonder why he said that? The reason was the fastest-drying paint Ford could find was black, so that allowed the assembly line to run faster.

    2. Re:Paging Mr. Hobson... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Apple did that as well, with laptops. As I remember, it was called "good business sense" (on /.) when they did it.

  7. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What if the phone gets "stolen"?

  8. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by grumling · · Score: 2, Informative

    Well, you should have bought insurance.

    --
    "Well, good luck finding a judge that doesn't run a bestiality site."
  9. Bad PR and no skillz by mattr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The price quoted probably is a fair price. They are subsidising it. But that is priced out of the U.S. market, it is even at the high end of the Japanese market.

    That price is what the Apple should sell the phone for to other phone companies, and they will then be able to provide service and subsidize some portion of it. The only value this announcement has is to tell people how much the subsidy was. The other poster has it right, Fail.

    1. Re:Bad PR and no skillz by hkmarks · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's a comparable price with a high-end Blackberry, Treo, or HTC, and those sell just fine in the US market. It's not riding coach, but it's not riding first class either. Expensive... but it's a smart phone, not a plain cell.

      I don't use my cell much -- I could easily get away with 50 minutes a month. I don't text much. I don't need much data transfer since I'm usually have wi-fi access. But I love a PDA. Sticking the two together but letting me stay on a pay-as-you-go plan would be perfect -- it'd save a light user like me about a grand over 2 years ($70*12*2 + 199 vs. $15*12*2 + $599). They'd get one more hardware sale out of it. Win/Win.

      Too bad Rogers isn't doing the same... yet. (Actually, I'm holding out for Android or the next OpenMoko... but still.)

    2. Re:Bad PR and no skillz by perlchild · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If only I had mod points.
      The only thing that makes sense is for Apple, to sell in-store, the unlocked model. AT&T selling it(and locking it) just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

      The phone is made under agreement to Apple. It should be supported by Apple(with full Apple care please) for use on any network. Period.

      What it also tells us is that AT&T is hurting for publicity. Everyone knows it's an Apple iPhone, not an AT&T iPhone. I want AT&T to shut up about "iphones" they are providing GSM service, I want them to talk about gsm devices. What device I use on their network(provided it respects the GSM standard, is NONE of their business, and the public should not be letting them charge extra for certain devices.

  10. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by It+doesn't+come+easy · · Score: 4, Informative

    Maybe but in the case of AT&T they do not:

    Cancellations/Early Termination Fee: An Early Termination Fee of $175 may be assessed against you in the event that you terminate your Wireless Service Agreement and/or selected plan before the expiration of its term. For Service activated on or after May 25, 2008, the Early Termination Fee will be reduced by $5.00 for each full month toward your minimum term that you complete. You may cancel your service, for any reason and without incurring the Early Termination Fee, within thirty (30) days of signing your Wireless Service Agreement, PROVIDED, however, that if you cancel service you will remain responsible for any service fees and charges incurred. If you cancel within three (3) days of signing your Wireless Service Agreement, you will be entitled to a refund of your activation fee, if any. If you exercise this option, you may be required to return devices and associated accessories purchased in connection with your Wireless Service Agreement.

    So you wait until the 4th day.

    --
    The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
  11. Looks to be more interesting here by jrothwell97 · · Score: 1

    In the UK, it looks like O2 will offer the iPhone on pay-as-you-go (that is, without contract), but for £199-ish (~$399), or, at the outside, £299 (~$599). The first is looking more likely. Nothing's been confirmed yet, though.

    --
    Those using pirated Tinysoft signatures(TM) are a real threat to society and should all be thrown in jail.
    1. Re:Looks to be more interesting here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you think O2 is likely going to sell the PAYG iPhone for the same price as an iPod Touch, you're either very optimistic or very naive.

    2. Re:Looks to be more interesting here by jrothwell97 · · Score: 1

      Not my words. Blame Macworld, that ever-reliable fountain of information (yeah, right).

      --
      Those using pirated Tinysoft signatures(TM) are a real threat to society and should all be thrown in jail.
  12. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by xeena · · Score: 5, Informative

    You would need to pay for 1 month of your contract ($70 is the cheapest?), if you cancel before 30 days you have to return the phone. Also, there has been no confirmation of the early termination fee being $175 for the iPhone. (if it were to be $175 you would still end up getting the phone a bit cheaper than going with the no commitment option).

  13. Still being tied to AT&T??? by mattMad · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I think what people really want is an iPhone that can be used with any GSM carrier. For that, it would be worth paying more - but not for another way of still being tied to AT&T...

    1. Re:Still being tied to AT&T??? by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      {I think what people really want is an iPhone that can be used with any GSM carrier. For that, it would be worth paying more - but not for another way of still being tied to AT&T..."

      Well, the only other choice is T-Mobile. Is T-Mobile that much better/cheaper than AT&T?

      Sprint, Verizon and the others are not GSM....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  14. $80 to cancel in Oz by nighty5 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Australians will enjoy the ability to buy a pre-paid iPhone and unlock it to work on any network for $80.

    They have allowed unlocking because the laws here don't allow you to lock a phone to a given provider without a reasonable option.

    1. Re:$80 to cancel in Oz by Corporate+Drone · · Score: 3, Informative
      Australians will enjoy the ability to buy a pre-paid iPhone and unlock it to work on any network for $80.

      Yes, but you'll be paying 800 $Aus (just for the phone) to do so, won't you?

      at $880 (which is about $840 USD), that's a heck of a difference from the AT&T price!

      --
      mmm... yeah... You see, we're putting the cover sheets on all TPS reports now before they go out...
    2. Re:$80 to cancel in Oz by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

      Apple should ask itself "We are shipping a new concept and device in 2000s, it is our first phone, why do we need to do things which are even forbidden by law in some countries?"

      Of course, if there is anyone at Apple iPhone business division with a sane mind.

    3. Re:$80 to cancel in Oz by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Absolutely it is.

      But in Australia, Apple fans are used to being bent over by Apple:

      • MBP, 17"
        • US: $2,799
        • AU: $3,799 (US$3,660 - 31% markup)

      • 2GB memory upgrade for same
        • US: $200
        • AU: $300 (US$289 - 45% markup)

      • Apple 30" Cinema Display
        • US: $1,799
        • AU: $2,798 (US$2,696 - 50% markup)

      Blame it on shipping? No. Shipping from Asia to Australia is cheaper than to the US. Tariffs and taxes? Fifty per cent tariffs on this stuff? I think not. Apple just is quite happy to gouge the holy hell out of anything it can.

  15. Parent is insightful: not funny! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The cell phone industry is the most hated industry in America - beating the airlines, which says something. One of the reasons is their locking of phones along with their shitty customer "service" and contracts.

    If it weren't for the fact that I'm part of a family plan (my leash), my cell phone would be gone.

  16. Canadians by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 0

    All we need now are for some Canadians to reiterate how shafted they feel by their only GSM provider :)

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    1. Re:Canadians by Tiberius_Fel · · Score: 1

      Not feel. Are.

      --
      Join the Empire! http://www.empirereborn.net/
    2. Re:Canadians by loconet · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yup.

      Here is Roger's Early Cancellation Fee for the IPhone:

      "The ECF is the greater of (ii) $100 or (iii) $20 per month remaining in the service agreement, to a maximum of $400 (plus applicable taxes), and applies on each line in the plan that is terminated."

      So waiting a month and then canceling will cost you $700 vs $175 with AT&T

      --
      [alk]
    3. Re:Canadians by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

      So waiting a month and then canceling will cost you $700 vs $175 with AT&T

      If that is indeed the case, then I would be tempted to buy the iPhone elsewhere unlocked and just limit my data usage to wi-fi hotspots. I would be curious to see when the iPhone 3G comes out what ratio of people are using unlocked iPhones to Rogers purchased iPhones in Canada. Sure there is Fido, but that is Rogers by another name. Maybe the British were thinking of the Canadians when they coined the verb roger.

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    4. Re:Canadians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      All we need now are for some Canadians to reiterate how shafted they feel by their only GSM provider :)

      Not just the monopoly GSM provider, but the CDMA providers as well.

      Canada is in the dark ages when it comes to cell phones & service. The CEO of RIM (maker of the blackberry, a Canadian company) has said many times that the ridiculous prices of Canadian cell phone companies are impeding progress.

      Canada has the highest prices in the western world when it comes to cell phones & service. As a result, just over half of the population has a cell phone. Compare with most of Europe when almost everyone has a cell phone.

      The previous Liberal government fucked up big time when they allowed two big mergers (BC Tel with Telus, and Rogers with Fido), reducing the number of large providers from 5 to 3. Not surprisingly, prices went up quite a bit post-merger.

      Canadian cell phone companies will whine and claim their costs are higher because Canada is such a large country with a small population. While that is true, the vast majority of the Canadian land mass has no cell phone service. The carriers are not incurring costs to provide service to areas of low population, they only provide service to cities & towns with sufficient population. As an example, Rogers (the only GSM carrier) provides service to about 2% of the land area of the province of Saskatchewan.

      Canada's laws prohibit a foreign firm from operating a cell phone network. It's time to revisit this.

    5. Re:Canadians by wasteofspace77 · · Score: 1

      Here is Roger's Early Cancellation Fee for the IPhone: "The ECF is the greater of (ii) $100 or (iii) $20 per month remaining in the service agreement, to a maximum of $400 (plus applicable taxes), and applies on each line in the plan that is terminated." So waiting a month and then canceling will cost you $700 vs $175 with AT&T

      I think that it will be a max of $400, not $700. The line you quote caps the max ECF at $400.

      What I find more appalling is that it is a 3 year contract. That is a long time to be tied to one carrier.

    6. Re:Canadians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blaming the liberals?

      If it were left to the conservatives, there'd only be one.

  17. I don't think so... by microcars · · Score: 1

    ...If you exercise this option, you may be required to return devices and associated accessories purchased in connection with your Wireless Service Agreement.

    So if you cancel your contract you don't necessarily get to keep the iPhone after paying the Early Termination Fee.

    --
    I like microcars
    1. Re:I don't think so... by antifoidulus · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, you don't get to keep it if you cancel within the 30 day "trial"(for lack of a better word), and DONT pay the early termination fee.

    2. Re:I don't think so... by It+doesn't+come+easy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I see how you are getting this interpretation...

      It's interesting to see just how ambiguous this section of the contract seems to be. Obviously, AT&T would agree with your interpretation. A court may not. Of, course, we don't want to pay court costs just to argue to try and save $189 dollars.

      On the other hand, there have already been many iPhones bought and contracts cancelled, so if AT&T has NOT been demanding the hardware back after the 30 day period then they would be hard pressed to start doing so now. Anyone know if AT&T has been requiring the hardware back when a contract is cancelled?

      --
      The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
    3. Re:I don't think so... by Joren · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hey, um...did you read GP all the way? He's saying wait until day 4. Go back and read about one sentence before the part you quoted; it says you have to return the equipment only if you want to exercise an option to refund your activation fee and cancel within three days. We're not using this option - we're cancelling the normal way, by waiting until day four and paying the activation fee and early termination fee, so this doesn't apply to us. Even with all those fees added up, it's still cheaper.

      I personally wouldn't buy the thing either way...

      --
      -- Joren
    4. Re:I don't think so... by It+doesn't+come+easy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is getting better and better...

      They have a special iPhone section ((4) iPHONE TERMS AND CONDITIONS): Terms Applicable to AT&T Nation/FamilyTalk® GSM Plans: Credit approval required. Subscriber must live and have a mailing address within AT&T's owned network coverage area. An early termination fee applies if service is terminated before the end of the contract term. The fee will begin at $175 per device and decrease by $5 each month for the term of the agreement. If phone is returned within 3 days, activation fee will be refunded. If phone is returned within 14 days in like-new condition with all components, early termination fee will be waived. Service may be cancelled after 14 days but within 30 days and early termination fee will be waived, but equipment may not be returned. All other charges apply. Some dealers impose additional fees.

      So they explicitly say that you can cancel the service between 14 and 30 days, avoid the early termination fee, but don't have to return the iPhone. As an aside, this section also implies that the "you may be required to return devices" in the other part of the contract indeed only applies to the first 30 day period, but the explicit iPhone section makes the various interpretations of the other section mute for this question.

      So, we can buy the iPhone outright for $599/$699 or we can get a contract and cancel it after 14 days (but before 30 days) and pay a net of $235/$335. As my son would say Sweeeet.

      --
      The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
    5. Re:I don't think so... by mysidia · · Score: 1

      You are sort of quoting the parent out of context.

      The sentence appears directly after a sentence offering an option to have activation fees refunded, if you cancel within 3 days.

      You may cancel your service, for any reason and without incurring the Early Termination Fee, within thirty (30) days of signing your Wireless Service Agreement, PROVIDED, however, that if you cancel service you will remain responsible for any service fees and charges incurred.

      If you cancel within three (3) days of signing your Wireless Service Agreement, you will be entitled to a refund of your activation fee, if any. If you exercise this option, you may be required to return devices and associated accessories purchased in connection with your Wireless Service Agreement.

    6. Re:I don't think so... by Coppit · · Score: 1

      For the record, I canceled my service within the first 3 days on my iPhone and they didn't ask me to return it. I suspect they would with the new no-plan policy.

    7. Re:I don't think so... by Cyberllama · · Score: 1

      I suspect "return the phone" meant "return it for a refund". I bet still expect you to "surrender it" -- in other words, you don't pay the ETF, but you end up without a phone and without your $199.

    8. Re:I don't think so... by TriggerFin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "This option" can refer to the entire "Cancellations/Early Termination Fee" clause rather than just the preceding "three day" sentence, and likely does.

      --
      Here's your sig.
  18. Why buy an iPhone by desertrat_it · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When an OpenMoko is cheaper and has better hardware specifications?

    1. Re:Why buy an iPhone by nuggetman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because there's something to be said for having walk-in support at the Apple store, the Apple user interface, access to the app/music store... shall I go on? People buying an iPhone likely aren't buying it based on specs.

      --
      ...and that's all there is to it.
    2. Re:Why buy an iPhone by BitZtream · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because the software is shit? No one can even make the example videos of it look like its decent. I expect my phone not to lag, have you seen OpenMoko in use? Its a joke.

      I know I'm going to be modded as a flame, but seriously, no one who wants a phone to USE will want OpenMoko. It looks cool as hell from a developer/hacker point of view, one of the guys I work with ( who loves his windows mobile phone, heh ) intends to order one to play with, but he just replaced his old phone with another Windows Mobile phone so he had one that actually worked along side the OM phone he hacks around on.

      But ... no one who just wants a usable phone wants to deal with an OS thats ... pre-alpha at the very best, and will come with absolutely 0 support from your carrier.

      The people who will buy an OpenMoko device are developers, not users. The people who buy an iPhone are users who don't want to be developers to know how to use their phone. They just want a phone thats intuitive and works.

      These two devices do not in any way target the same market at this point in time.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    3. Re:Why buy an iPhone by cos(0) · · Score: 4, Informative

      Are the hardware specifications of a cell phone the only relevant thing? Absolutely not. Hardware defines the device's potential, but the device's quality is determined in a large part by its software. And Openmoko Freerunner's software stack is pretty sucky right now.

      Right now Freerunner's battery life is something like 5 hours, and there are many other issues.

      A great example of why all but a handful of people may prefer an iPhone to a Freerunner is this month's discussion of filesystem images on the mailing list. Apparently there's an FSO image ("make and receive calls. That's about it."), an ASU image ("qtopia apps don't start if I have the SIM in the phone"), a GTK image ("more or less what the phone came preloaded with"), a ScaredyCat image ("mostly works"). This should make it pretty clear that a Freerunner is not a consumer-ready device and is definitely NOT an iPhone equivalent.

      A Freerunner should only be purchased by those who are fully prepared to deal with it as a hobby rather than as a consumer-ready phone/PDA. Posts like yours are misleading and do a disservice both to the consumer and to the Openmoko project.

    4. Re:Why buy an iPhone by desertrat_it · · Score: 1

      so, let me get this straight... asking a question is "misleading and do(es) a disservice to the consumer". Please explain how this works?

    5. Re:Why buy an iPhone by cos(0) · · Score: 1

      If you meant your question sincerely, then I apologize for overreacting.

      I read your question as being similar to those commercials that ask a rhetorical question designed to mislead the customer, such as: "What have you got to lose???!??" Realistically, the answer is always "money, time, and effort", and those who ask this question know that. They do not sincerely want to know the answer to the question -- they want to put the consumer in a certain mindset.

      If you were unaware of the sad software situation of the Freerunner, then I apologize. Now you know. :-) Cheers.

    6. Re:Why buy an iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They just want a phone thats intuitive and works only with AT&T.

      Fixed it for you.

    7. Re:Why buy an iPhone by gruntled · · Score: 2, Informative

      Except, in my opinion, it doesn't work. Or, to be more precise as a pocket computer, it's amazing. As a phone, however, it's craptacular. Phone calls on it are unbelievably bad. Like Eighties analog cell coverage in the mid-West bad. It's inexcusable.

    8. Re:Why buy an iPhone by desertrat_it · · Score: 1

      It was an open question (as it were!). I have not had my hands on one, have not read any reviews of the final product, and don't know anyone who has one. For me, the deciding issue on anything I buy is the licence. What meets my needs is open standards, non-proprietary hardware, and free software. For me, the deciding issue with the OpenMoko is the fact that *I* will own the device, *I* can replace defective components, and that there will be software hackers out there who will provide the extra functionality that *I* will find useful. I do not like proprietary software or closed hardware, but that is a personal thing for me: I don't tell people they are dumb for liking Apple or Microsoft. I may ask them some questions to clarify why they like it, but I accept that everyone has different things that float their boats and won't flame people (or call them "fanbois") for liking Apple or MS products. So there you go :)

    9. Re:Why buy an iPhone by NJRoadfan · · Score: 1

      This always seems to be the case with "gadget phones". They can do all these wiz bang things but absolutely fall flat when it comes to radio performance and voice quality. Whats the point of buying a phone that you can't use as... well...a phone. Having to walk around hunting for a signal and then sounding like you are shouting from the bottom of a sewer to the other caller was expected in the 1990s, not now.

      Oh, and no I am not going to let you use my "low tech" phone because your koolaid phone is a brick. Besides it might be embarrassing in front of your friends if you are caught using my ugly and unhip circa-2004 Toshiba 1X CDMA phone.

    10. Re:Why buy an iPhone by Lershac · · Score: 2, Informative

      in Baton Rouge, La... its just peachy call quality.

      --
      Chuck
    11. Re:Why buy an iPhone by Blkdeath · · Score: 1

      For me, the deciding issue on anything I buy is the licence. What meets my needs is open standards, non-proprietary hardware, and free software. For me, the deciding issue with the OpenMoko is the fact that *I* will own the device, *I* can replace defective components, and that there will be software hackers out there who will provide the extra functionality that *I* will find useful.

      I gave up on those ideals years ago when I realized they were just ideals and they were getting in the way of my productivity. Now, I'd just rather have something that works properly all the time. It's a cell phone, not a political platform.

      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

    12. Re:Why buy an iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And it was just a bus.

      Of course there really isn't a comparison, but the gp should use whatever they want to express their views. That is how things change. Some make a statement and share their views with others. This gets the others thinking that there is other ways of doing things. If its a good idea and reaches enough people then change will come.

  19. No lock for no-contract phones by BitZtream · · Score: 3, Informative

    Once you are out of contract, they are required by law to unlock your phone for use on any carrier, so selling a no-contract phone thats locked doesn't make a whole lot of sense, as they'd just have to provide an unlock code at your request anyway. I guess they'll probably do it just to make people who don't know any better use AT&T anyway.

    Either way, the price makes buying an unlocked phone absolutely retarded. You pay the $199/$299 and pay the $175 contract early termination fee and save yourself some money. After paying the termination fee, they have to unlock your phone so you can take it where ever you want, sans visual voicemail of course.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    1. Re:No lock for no-contract phones by Leebert · · Score: 1

      Once you are out of contract, they are required by law to unlock your phone for use on any carrier

      I'm sorry, what law is this?

    2. Re:No lock for no-contract phones by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Once you are out of contract, they are required by law to unlock your phone for use on any carrier

      I'm sorry, what law is this?

      /. law; similar to the /. girlfriend and laws of economics; otherwise known as "what color is the sky in your world, anyway?"

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    3. Re:No lock for no-contract phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Incorrect.

      There is no law requiring them to unlock your phone.

    4. Re:No lock for no-contract phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's a law that needs to be named...something akin to Murphey's law for technological restrictions.

      Anything technological measure that artificially restricts the usage of a given item can and will be circumvented in under a month.

      So if you buy the no-contract iPhone, they will be compelled to unlock it for you. It's just that they in this case does not refer to AT&T, it refers to iPhone hackers.

    5. Re:No lock for no-contract phones by bherman · · Score: 1

      If you are talking about the US, there is no law I am aware of that REQUIRES the carrier to unlock the phone after the contract has been fulfilled. AT&T has a 90 day policy where they will provide the unlock code for customers in good standing that need the code (traveling overseas), but the iPhone is specifically exempt from that.

      The closest thing we have in the US to a requirement is that the copyright office ruled that unlocking phones is not against the law.

      --
      Error: Sig not found.
  20. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by It+doesn't+come+easy · · Score: 1

    The contract reads: You may cancel your service, for any reason and without incurring the Early Termination Fee, within thirty (30) days of signing your Wireless Service Agreement, PROVIDED, however, that if you cancel service you will remain responsible for any service fees and charges incurred. If you cancel within three (3) days of signing your Wireless Service Agreement, you will be entitled to a refund of your activation fee, if any. If you exercise this option, you may be required to return devices and associated accessories purchased in connection with your Wireless Service Agreement.

    Now, one could argue whether the last sentence applies to the 3 days or the 30 days. To me it looks like it only applies to the 3 day period. However, since we're trying to get the iPhone for as cheap as possible, and therefore we really don't want to argue it in court, we can use the 30 days, pay for phone service for a month--cheapest plan of course (after all, you are going to pay SOMEONE for phone service so why not AT&T for the first month?) -- then cancel the service.

    As an aside, the $175 early termination fee for ALL contracts actually highlights that the fee has nothing to do with the supposed "charge to recover the cost of subsidizing the hardware". If it did then the fee would be tied to the cost of the hardware....but that's a soapbox for another time...

    --
    The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
  21. iPhone- future of computing or just a phone by AdmNaismith · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Here in the States, you are always locked into a provider, even if the phone is popular enough to be sold be more by than one provider. If the iPhone is supposed to be the future of computing in general, I don't know why it's only being sold as a phone. Or is it really only best used as a phone with a few other features? With the software base so limited, it's hard to tell. I would think Apple would sell these outright to people who want a portable computer (and then force you into AT&Ts maw if you still wanted to poen up the phone function). Palm was brilliant to open development to all comers, but Jobs' need for control is crippling an otherwise highly advanced piece of electronics.

    1. Re:iPhone- future of computing or just a phone by plover · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Here in the States, you are always locked into a provider, even if the phone is popular enough to be sold be more by than one provider.

      No, you can buy a phone directly from a manufacturer without it being locked to a carrier. I purchased my unlocked Z6 from the on-line Motorola store. Of course nobody subsidized me for $175, either, so I paid full price for it. But I now have a phone that I can actually use if I travel abroad and buy a local SIM.

      --
      John
    2. Re:iPhone- future of computing or just a phone by BitZtream · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The iPhone is certainly not a general computing device. I love my iPhone, and I actually enjoy the iPhone SDK, but ... it will never replace my laptop when I want to get something done.

      Typing on any phone sucks. Some suck less, but they all suck, even the ones with the keyboards that cover the full size of the phone ( HTC Tilt as an example ).

      The iPhone does some tasks great. Its a good 'phone' imo. Its obviously a great iPod, some would argue that there are better portable audio players, but I've never used a non-iPod player so my opinion is obviously biased. Its not as good as my old Palm V or Windows Mobile devices for taking notes or managing tasks by a long shot, but it does the job well enough.

      With the SDK release, it'll have a few cool/good apps for it come out soon, but its not a PC and never will be.

      As far as Palm being great because of open development, this is a double edge sword. Do you know how many absolutely crappy palm apps exist? I'd guess about 10 crappy apps exist for every half way decent app. The advantage to making it 'harder' to developer for the iPhone is that in itself will weed out many of the crappy apps written by people who wont put much effort into it.

      With Job's evil grip over apps with the AppStore and digital sigs, some types of malicious apps can be stopped as well.

      The only apps that may not be released on the iPhone are ones with a GPLv3 or like license due to the retarded restrictions in it that are supposed to help support my 'freedom' to do what I want with the software, but ARE restrictions to what I can do with it. Any GPLv2 or BSD or (insert any of the thousand other sane distribution licenses here) will be available, if not by the original authors, by someone else who is part of the SDK program, someone will probably make a service for OSS developers who don't have the money to blow on the iphone dev program.

      Even GPLv3 apps aren't ruled out. The original authors can do whatever they want with the software, they are not under the restrictions of the distribution license so they CAN release an iPhone version should they choose to, OR, they can grant someone else the right to do so.

      BUT ... in all of these, 99% of the apps out there, don't belong on the iPhone. Its a phone/entertainment device, with some basic computing abilities, nothing more.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    3. Re:iPhone- future of computing or just a phone by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Palm was brilliant to open development to all comers, but Jobs' need for control is crippling an otherwise highly advanced piece of electronics.

      Hey, that's paraphrasing me: Gates was brilliant to open development to all comers, but Jobs' need for control is crippling an otherwise highly advanced piece of electronics.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    4. Re:iPhone- future of computing or just a phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BS! Sorry, but the apps are locked down. You cannot put them on a website and say "come and get it!". Apple cannot distribute GPL apps unless they also have a mechanism for distributing the source. Failure to do so leaves them open to copyright theft. Bye bye hacker community.

      BTW the iphone makes a crappy ipod. The LCD is the worst I've used on any portable device, and the lack of storage is awful. Maybe when they're not using screens from the gutter and have at least 64GB, they'll be a "great ipod". And yes, the touch is just as shit. Worst viewing angles I've ever seen, and I've never seebn blacks crushed as much as my iphone and touch, even budget devices have better picture quality.

    5. Re:iPhone- future of computing or just a phone by MrOctogon · · Score: 1

      I believe what you want is an ipod touch. Its a portable computer that is not a phone.

    6. Re:iPhone- future of computing or just a phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gpl3 will only restrict you if the system hides the program / installation or source is unobtainable. In that case you are already screwed. Installer.app and jailbreaked phones should be ok just as windows is ok.

      Gpl3 forcing good behaviour and open systems (if you want to use the licensed code) is a GOOD thing. Without ppl like stallman taking a stand the world would be in much worse shape.

  22. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by BitZtream · · Score: 3, Informative

    You can't buy insurance from the carrier for high dollar phones such as the iPhone. People that buy them will buy another one if it gets stolen ( Well, okay, I'm buying another one to replace my stolen iphone on the 11th ). And its not really profitable for them to charge you a $20 insurance fee for a phone that they actually have to pay for, unlike all the other give-away phones that they don't mind insuraning because they are so cheap that the fee they charge you when you make a claim is more than the phone costs them.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  23. New 3G Data plan is $30/month by foniksonik · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just FYI... the new data plan with AT&T is $30/month while the old plan (Edge) was only $20/month

    SO with the new phone you're already paying $120/year more than previous... which means people are actually paying more money over the 2 year period... $199 + $240 (2 year contract) = $459

    --
    A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    1. Re:New 3G Data plan is $30/month by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      199 + 240 = 439

    2. Re:New 3G Data plan is $30/month by philhyde · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Just FYI... the new data plan with AT&T is $30/month while the old plan (Edge) was only $20/month

      ...and what's wrong with a 3G data plan costing more than a 2G data plan? I personally don't have an issue with paying more $ for a faster connection.

    3. Re:New 3G Data plan is $30/month by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What's wrong is that it's simply too expensive. I'd like to get an iPhone 3G but there's no way I'm going to pay $70/month for a telephone. $60 was right on my threshold for buying, and $70 is just too much. It may be necessary, reasonable, or whatever, but from my perspective as the customer it's just too much money.

      The cell phone situation in the US sucks pretty hard right now for a medium-light user. There's essentially no way to spend less than $45/month (including taxes) on a cell phone, even though I use perhaps 1/5th of my plan. Prepaid might save me a little money, but they don't get to be really sensible until you're calling much less than I am each month.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    4. Re:New 3G Data plan is $30/month by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

      What's wrong is that it's simply too expensive. I'd like to get an iPhone 3G but there's no way I'm going to pay $70/month for a telephone.

      Yeah, I have the same problem with Ferrari. They should make them cheaper so I can afford them.

    5. Re:New 3G Data plan is $30/month by philhyde · · Score: 1

      What's wrong is that it's simply too expensive.

      Funny thing is, $30 is what 3G data costs now with AT&T. So, it's not iPhone specific pricing.

    6. Re:New 3G Data plan is $30/month by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1

      The other big problem with this is that there is no US carrier where a "$70 unlimited plan" means that your monthly bill will be anything less than $90+, what with "taxes, fees, service charges, taxes on fees, taxes on service charges, service charge for collecting tax on service charge, etc, ad infinitum). My wife and I are on a "$90" plan. Our monthly bill is usually $130 (with no 'overages').

    7. Re:New 3G Data plan is $30/month by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your old iphone is worth $450-$500 on eBay

    8. Re:New 3G Data plan is $30/month by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spending less than $45/month for service;

      Just don't get a stinking cell phone in the US!

      The reason the rob everyone in the US is because Americans bend over and take it up the rear. Stop doing it and you and your butt will feel better...and they will stop robbing you.

      the iPhone is cool. But that coolness is not worth the monthly fee + the upfront cost + all the additional fees plus there is no way in the world any coolness is worth using AT&T!!! If fact, using AT&T cancels out all coolness completely. So your AT&T iPhone is completely NOT cool.

      Everytime I see someone in the US pull out an iPhone the first thought that comes to mind is, "Total Brainwashed Consuming SUCKER!"

    9. Re:New 3G Data plan is $30/month by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      Just don't get a stinking cell phone in the US!

      Great plan there, buster. What should I do, get one in Canada? I can't realistically go without one.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    10. Re:New 3G Data plan is $30/month by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can buy a new phone on eBay and activate it with PagePlus cellular for tremendous savings, depending on your usage. I do care about the network I use, and don't want AT&T. If I traveled outside the USA, I might want that type of technology.

    11. Re:New 3G Data plan is $30/month by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      Their rates aren't bad, and coverage looks decent. The roaming charges are painful, but I shouldn't hit those areas too often.

      Do you happen to know whose network(s) they use?

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    12. Re:New 3G Data plan is $30/month by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      good point but... We don't have a choice. Afaik you can't get a new iPhone with edge.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    13. Re:New 3G Data plan is $30/month by Isaac-Lew · · Score: 1

      Have you checked with your (or your wife's) employer to see if you can get a discount? I get 17% off my Sprint bill monthly (except for the phone insurance plan). AT&T would be 10% discounted, T-mobile would be 8% & Verizon Wireless 17%.

    14. Re:New 3G Data plan is $30/month by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      www.sprint.com/sero

      $30/month = 500 anytime and unlimited data/text messaging

    15. Re:New 3G Data plan is $30/month by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      Yeah, sorry, plans which require a referral from an employee don't count.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
  24. The summary is completely wrong. by slashkitty · · Score: 1

    The iphone was always available WITHOUT the 2 year contract from apple. I certainly never paid a 2 year contract when I bought my phone 9 months ago. Some people were able to activate w/ att without a contract is their credit was bad. Now, with the new plan, they're going to allow a subsidized version with a contract.

    --
    -- these are only opinions and they might not be mine.
    1. Re:The summary is completely wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An incorrect summary on Slashdot??

      Well spank me sideways and call me Shirley!

    2. Re:The summary is completely wrong. by devjj · · Score: 2, Insightful

      FWIW, the iPhone box clearly states a 2-year agreement is required, as did/does the web site. One can be forgiven for not knowing about the prepaid option.

    3. Re:The summary is completely wrong. by Auckerman · · Score: 1

      The box I keep my Slashdot Karma in says any readers of my posts have to give me $10, by contract, every month for the next two years.

      --

      Burn Hollywood Burn
    4. Re:The summary is completely wrong. by devjj · · Score: 1

      Your analogy doesn't hold. The 2-year mobile phone contract is fairly standard at this point, and governs what is fundamentally a data service that costs money to provide to a device that cost money to build. It is not like an EULA that dictates the use of software as it might be enforced by DRM.

      I don't like mobile phone contracts, or agree with Apple and AT&T's handling of the iPhone 3G. That doesn't mean they can't legally enforce the terms they've outlined. There's no justifiable claim of plausible deniability here.

    5. Re:The summary is completely wrong. by Osty · · Score: 1

      Some people were able to activate w/ att without a contract is their credit was bad.

      I was able to activate my iPhone with AT&T without a contract, without going pre-paid, and with excellent credit. How did I do it? Simple -- I've been a Cingular/AT&T Wireless customer for years (6 years at the time I bought my iPhone). My original 2-year contract ran out 4 years earlier, and I was not required to re-up another 2-year contract in order to activate my phone. I just added the $20/mo contractless data plan to my existing month-to-month plan and I was good to go. Granted I didn't get a subsidy like AT&T is offering on the 3G iPhones, but $400 for my 8GB was totally worth it to me.

    6. Re:The summary is completely wrong. by slashkitty · · Score: 1

      Huh? My iphone box says nothing about a contract. When I ordered it, it said I needed a contract for phone service with AT&T, but the hardware itself was no strings attached. Sure, there was the minor bit of software locking to prevent other cellphone providers, but that fell quickly.

      --
      -- these are only opinions and they might not be mine.
  25. No thanks by mrslacker · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just ordered my FreeRunner. Yes, it's $400, and yes it doesn't work perfectly yet but it's a big step up from what I have now (no phone at all) and the approx $10/month I will make in calls will be just fine with T-Mobile's PAYG vs being locked into yet another telco service contract.

  26. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by isepic · · Score: 2, Informative

    The 3 day "trial" is a full 100% refund. The 30 day "trial" is the same thing, but you don't get your activation fee refunded ($36) (for days between day 4 and day 30). Given this, after 30 days, you have to pay (1) 1 months worth of service (2) $36 activation fee (3) 199/299 for the phone, and (4) termination fee of 175 - and quite possibly a pro rated second month of usage (if any).

  27. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by mosherkl · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It usually works that if you cancel within the 30 days, you return the equipment and you don't need to pay the ETF. However, if you decide you want to keep the equipment, you'll probably be required to pay the ETF even though you're within the 30 days.

    Probably the same with the 3 day thing (though the wording is rather ambiguous). If you decide not to receive a refund of the activation fee, as well as pay the ETF, you can probably still keep the hardware.

  28. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can in the UK (O2) - £7 a month.

  29. Re:No-contract iPhone by devjj · · Score: 1

    You either have bad credit or used the all-9's trick when you activated it. There was no publicized, formally sanctioned means for going prepaid with the original iPhone. I personally went the path of entering all 9's for my SSN, and I won't be buying an iPhone 3G. I wanted a significantly better iPhone; not this.

  30. Huh? by kingcool1432 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Wouldn't it make more sense to get the phone for $199 and pay them $200 for the contract termination fee?

  31. Is this a joke? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

    Because I seem to hear lots of people laughing. Or are they crying? Hard to tell...

  32. No pay as you go by my reading by RalphBNumbers · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The phone probably would still be locked for use only on AT&T's network, said Jupiter Research analyst Michael Gartenberg. But buyers could choose a pay-as-you-go plan for voice service.

    AT&T has explicitly said that even without a contract you still have a locked phone and the same choices for plans (i.e. minimum $70 a month +taxes and fees for voice/data, with no sms).

    That doesn't sound like pay-as-you-go is allowed to me. Which is a shame, because if it was I might actually be interested. A $500 phone, $30 a month for data, and a hundred bucks for a year worth of minutes and SMSes is a better deal for me than a $200 phone plus $75+taxes+fees every month for more minutes than I use in a year.
    AT&T needs to let people who don't use their phone as a phone that much buy what they want.

    --
    "The worst tyrannies were the ones where a governance required its own logic on every embedded node." - Vernor Vinge
  33. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Sorry you're wrong. Insurance is definitely offered on iphones. I guess you don't know what you are talking about or regret not buying the insurance yourself because I have an iphone and I have insurance @ 4.95 a month w AT&T. That's pretty standard for a smartphone. Verizon charged me the same insurance fee when I had a treo.

  34. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Lars+T. · · Score: 1
    Well, maybe you should check the current Terms of Service:

    30-DAY CANCELLATION PERIOD/TERMINATION You may terminate this Agreement within thirty (30) days after activating service without paying an Early Termination Fee. You will pay for service fees and charges incurred through the termination date, but AT&T will refund your activation fee, if any, if you terminate within three (3) days of activating the service. Also, you may have to return any handsets and accessories purchased with this Agreement. If you terminate after the 30th day but before expiration of the Agreement's Service Commitment, you will pay AT&T an Early Termination Fee for each wireless telephone number associated with the service.

    Seems clear to me. You go through with the contract or you pay the Early Termination Fee or you "may have to" return the phone - period.

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  35. now THAT is interesting by microcars · · Score: 1

    Service may be cancelled after 14 days but within 30 days and early termination fee will be waived, but equipment may not be returned.

    thanks for digging that up.
    It is an interesting loophole and I wonder if they will close it or if it is there for some other reason it is worded like that.

    from the perspective of a Dealer, this seems like a raw deal. For example, lets say half the people who buy new iPhones bring them back on the 15th day and want to cancel their contracts.
    The Dealer has to do all this paperwork to cancel, they get no money for it and the customer gets to keep the iPhone.
    Perhaps they are hoping people trying to take advantage of this will forget about the 14-30 day window.

    --
    I like microcars
    1. Re:now THAT is interesting by It+doesn't+come+easy · · Score: 1

      If this were code for a program, I would say that someone has been hacking at the code trying to work around a problem.

      It seems like no one at AT&T has reviewed the full contract and how it all works together. Or, as you say, there is could be a hidden issue that dictates those precise words. Maybe they're trying to avoid class-action lawsuits concerning unreasonable contract requirements?

      As to changing the contract, I assume that is possible. While they list the iPhone on their web site, you can't actually sign up for one yet, so change is still possible.

      --
      The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
  36. And no SMS, but FAN now applies by Shawn+Parr · · Score: 1

    In addition to the added $10/month for the 3G plan, the new iPhone plans do not include any SMS. For $5/month you can get the 200 message plan that was included in the original iPhone data plan.

    Although there has been a lot of talk that corporate/educational discounts will be available on iPhone plans for the 3G. So that could be a bonus, or in some cases could end up making the differences a wash.

  37. Must be you by yabos · · Score: 2, Informative

    My iPhone sounds just as good as a land line.

  38. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that is incorrect. You have to be eligible for the 199 price. if you are not, its 399 + 175 early termination fee.

  39. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Kagura · · Score: 1

    So I buy a phone outright for $599/$699, or I buy a phone for $199/$299 with a 2 year plan ($36 activation fee) then cancel the contract immediately for $175...net cost $410/$510. Hmmmm.....

    They're tricking you into thinking you're winning... and you fell for it.

  40. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by It+doesn't+come+easy · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's better than I thought...current Terms of Service: ((4) iPHONE TERMS AND CONDITIONS): Terms Applicable to AT&T Nation/FamilyTalkî GSM Plans: Credit approval required. Subscriber must live and have a mailing address within AT&T's owned network coverage area. An early termination fee applies if service is terminated before the end of the contract term. The fee will begin at $175 per device and decrease by $5 each month for the term of the agreement. If phone is returned within 3 days, activation fee will be refunded. If phone is returned within 14 days in like-new condition with all components, early termination fee will be waived. Service may be cancelled after 14 days but within 30 days and early termination fee will be waived, but equipment may not be returned. All other charges apply. Some dealers impose additional fees. So they explicitly say that you can cancel the service between 14 and 30 days, avoid the early termination fee, but don't have to return the iPhone.

    So, we can buy the iPhone outright for $599/$699 or we can get a contract and cancel it after 14 days (but before 30 days) and pay a net of $235/$335.

    --
    The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
  41. Little Known Fact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you purchase the $199 original iPhone then fail the credit check when signing up for service (whether for real or by entering a bogus SSN) you will be offered a prepaid service (goPhone) option. This may or may not be the case with the new one, but I personally can vouch that this was still the case 6 months ago when I signed up.

  42. rediculous by jessica89 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So even if you fork out the full price for an unlocked iPhone you can still only use it on AT&T anyways? Absurd! With all of iPhone/Apple/AT&T restrictions it's amazing that people are still flocking in masses to buy the gadget. SHEEP!

    --
    Jessica
    1. Re:rediculous by Cyberllama · · Score: 1

      I think people are operating under the assumption that the newest iphone will be quickly hacked like the original in order to allow unlocking. Though I will say, AT&T's prepaid is currently about the cheapest way to get unlimited data (if data is your primary point of concern).

      There is actually a way to hack the original iphone to use a proxy server with T-Mobile's "T-zone" which basically gives you unlimited data for only 6.99 -- but T-Mobile frowns on this and will eventually find you and cut off your data and then charge you, I belive, 30 bucks a month for the exact same thing (well, an un-portblocked version of the same thing).

    2. Re:rediculous by jessica89 · · Score: 1

      Thank you for the info, the T-Mobile hack sounds pretty neat actually, even if they do find you and charge you $30 like you say.

      --
      Jessica
  43. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's always possible to game the system if you're willing to defraud it sufficiently. I mean, hey, I need more money, what if my bank gets "robbed"?

    --
    If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
  44. Yes it makes sense by Amamdouh · · Score: 1

    Yes it makes sense to buy the phone because you will get it unlocked and shipped to other countries that do not have an IPhone provider. Whether it makes sense for an enduser consumer is a different story.

  45. first time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, actually, AT&T did offer the iPhone without a contract the first time around--it was called taking it home and activating it on a Go plan, aka prepaid. They didn't advertise this because that was unlocking heaven, but they've closed that option off this time.

  46. Not really by ^_^x · · Score: 1

    If you're going to use it with them anyway, I think paying full price would only make sense if you got the phone fully unlocked that way and COULDN'T just plug it into your computer and run an app to hack it wide open.

  47. You aren't paying $70/month for a phone by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    You are paying $70/month for a portable communications device with full internet access, just about anywhere you go.

    There could be many people who do not care or need internet access. But I would think most Slashdot readers would not be among them.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:You aren't paying $70/month for a phone by darkwhite · · Score: 1

      There could be many people who do not care or need internet access. But I would think most Slashdot readers would not be among them.

      We care a lot about internet access. We're just not willing to pay $70/month for it.

      --

      [an error occurred while processing this directive]
    2. Re:You aren't paying $70/month for a phone by Cyberllama · · Score: 2, Informative

      Except that I'm getting the same thing out of my current iphone for $20 bucks a month (Gophone ftw). Sure a speed boost would be nice, but not 50 bucks a month worth of nice -- especially when the $20 bucks I'm paying per month now will work just fine an an iphone 3g for unlimited 3g data if I can get one without a contract.

      Not only that, but with gophone once every 45 days I can buy $10 bucks worth of credit on my sim card for only 2-3 bucks (via ebay, using a new prepaid code) and that I get periodic bonuses when I do refill? My 20 bucks a month ends up being more like $15 bucks a month that I've actually deposited.

      Now I do pay 25 cents a minute for the occasional phone call -- but I don't do nearly $55 dollars worth of talking at that price -- and if I did, there are voice plans available I could add to my service -- but I'm perfectly happy with $20 bucks a month data and no voice plan.

      Anything you can do to weasel out of being locked into an unreasonable inflated contract monthly cost is worth it.

    3. Re:You aren't paying $70/month for a phone by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      I recall reading that the Gophone plans are extremely expensive if you use data. Do you just avoid using cellular internet, or am I mistaken on this?

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    4. Re:You aren't paying $70/month for a phone by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      An utterly locked-down portable communications device, let's not forget.

      If Apple would let me load any code I felt like onto the thing, I might be willing to pay $70. But the thing is extremely restricted, and I certainly don't feel like paying $70/month so I can get e-mail, a web browser, and not be able to put my own code on it.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    5. Re:You aren't paying $70/month for a phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Either say $20 or 20 bucks, not $20 bucks...it's redundant.

    6. Re:You aren't paying $70/month for a phone by Cyberllama · · Score: 1

      If you don't pay the 20 bucks for unlimited data, then yes, it's very expensive -- 10 bucks a megabyte.

    7. Re:You aren't paying $70/month for a phone by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      $20 for unlimited data? That's not bad. If I could get an iPhone 3G for $30 for data and the prepaid rates for talk time, I might just go for that... I'll have to look into it. Thanks for the tips!

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    8. Re:You aren't paying $70/month for a phone by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      An utterly locked-down portable communications device, let's not forget.

      Not so in two ways:

      1) You can in fact always jailbreak it and do anything you like, so by definition it is not locked down. Or unlock it to use on other carriers as it would seem tens or hundreds of thousands are doing so today.

      2) An "utterly locked down" device would not let me develop software for it, which in fact I am doing today.

      If Apple would let me load any code I felt like onto the thing, I might be willing to pay $70. But the thing is extremely restricted, and I certainly don't feel like paying $70/month so I can get e-mail, a web browser, and not be able to put my own code on it.

      The developer program is cheap and lets you load any code you like onto your own phone. Jailbroken phones have further freedom still as to what the software you load can actually do, but even the official development stuff has a great deal of room to develop in.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    9. Re:You aren't paying $70/month for a phone by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      An utterly locked-down portable communications device, let's not forget.

      Not so in two ways:

      1) You can in fact always jailbreak it and do anything you like, so by definition it is not locked down. Or unlock it to use on other carriers as it would seem tens or hundreds of thousands are doing so today.

      Jailbreaking is unreliable and risky.

      2) An "utterly locked down" device would not let me develop software for it, which in fact I am doing today.

      Nonsense. You get to develop software for it because the manufacturer decided that they wanted to let you. It's still utterly locked down, it's just that you have convinced the lockers to let you in. If Steve Jobs woke up tomorrow and decided that you should no longer be allowed to develop software for it, guess what, you would no longer be able to develop for it. Apple retains absolute control (unless you jailbreak), so you obtain access at their whim.

      If Apple would let me load any code I felt like onto the thing, I might be willing to pay $70. But the thing is extremely restricted, and I certainly don't feel like paying $70/month so I can get e-mail, a web browser, and not be able to put my own code on it.

      The developer program is cheap and lets you load any code you like onto your own phone. Jailbroken phones have further freedom still as to what the software you load can actually do, but even the official development stuff has a great deal of room to develop in.

      That's fine if what you want to do fits with their vision of the device. If I want to do something as horrific as, say, make my app run in the background, guess what: I'm shit out of luck.

      Not to mention that, as before, your existence in the developer program is entirely at the whim of Apple. Many people are having trouble getting accepted, and even once you are accepted Apple can cut you off at any time for any reason.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    10. Re:You aren't paying $70/month for a phone by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Jailbreaking is unreliable and risky.

      Now that is complete bullshit. It takes like a second, and while some of the apps you install might be more or less stable the underlying system tolerates abuse pretty well, and the quality of apps has generally been pretty good. It's only scary to you because it doesn't work nearly so well for other systems.

      There are a lot of very casual iPhone users that jailbreak now because it's so easy.

      Nonsense. You get to develop software for it because the manufacturer decided that they wanted to let you.

      Are you listening to what you type? "I'm only developing software because they let me". Well DUH.

      DUH!!

      That's true of ANY platform, you develop software at the pleasure of the platform OS writers.

      If Steve Jobs woke up tomorrow and decided that you should no longer be allowed to develop software for it, guess what, you would no longer be able to develop for it.

      Same is true of any other phone OS. Any slightly reasonable person knows Apple is not going to shut that door again - there is WAY too much money to be made and goodwill to be earned.

      Apple retains absolute control (unless you jailbreak),

      In other words, Apple retains no control. If at any time Apples terms become too onerous, or in the unlikely event Apple went insane and closed development - Jailbreak time. You use the same libraries and everything.

      You just argued away what little point you had!

      That's fine if what you want to do fits with their vision of the device.

      And it's fine by me because it's on a device that HAS a vision.

      If I want to do something as horrific as, say, make my app run in the background, guess what: I'm shit out of luck.

      Not if you jailbreak, or write a private app to suck down the battery as you please. I can run background apps, I know the App store would not accept them...

      Not to mention that, as before, your existence in the developer program is entirely at the whim of Apple. Many people are having trouble getting accepted

      That's because it's in BETA. People used to have trouble getting GMail accounts too.

      and even once you are accepted Apple can cut you off at any time for any reason.

      Unless you Jailbreak. Zing!

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    11. Re:You aren't paying $70/month for a phone by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      Jailbreaking is unreliable and risky.

      Now that is complete bullshit. It takes like a second, and while some of the apps you install might be more or less stable the underlying system tolerates abuse pretty well, and the quality of apps has generally been pretty good. It's only scary to you because it doesn't work nearly so well for other systems.

      There are a lot of very casual iPhone users that jailbreak now because it's so easy.

      Ah, maybe you could tell me why I couldn't jailbreak my iPod Touch, then. It came with the 1.1.4 firmware. I spent a couple of hours trying every possible jailbreaking application and web site. The best I did was to get it into a state which I thought was totally bricked, although after some panic I discovered that it could be reset with the magical button combo. So please, what was I doing wrong?

      Nonsense. You get to develop software for it because the manufacturer decided that they wanted to let you.

      Are you listening to what you type? "I'm only developing software because they let me". Well DUH.

      DUH!!

      That's true of ANY platform, you develop software at the pleasure of the platform OS writers.

      You're mixing up two completely different issues:

      1. Steve Jobs wakes up tomorrow morning and decides that third-party development will no longer be allowed on his platform.
      2. Steve Jobs wakes up tomorrow morning and decides that you, personally, will lo longer be allowed to develop on his platform.

      #1 is essentially a doomsday device. It would destroy the platform along with all of the third-party developers. It can therefore be safely ignored.

      #2 only exists on the iPhone. If Steve Jobs decides that you, SuperKendall, Slashdot UID #24094329 will no longer be allowed to develop for the iPhone, guess what, you no longer get to develop for the iPhone. Go find some other platform to work on. On the other hand, if Steve decides that you, SuperKendall, will no longer be allowed to develop on the Mac, well, there's absolutely nothing he can do to enforce that.

      Given the above, I must respectfully submit that your snide derisiveness is misplaced.

      If Steve Jobs woke up tomorrow and decided that you should no longer be allowed to develop software for it, guess what, you would no longer be able to develop for it.

      Same is true of any other phone OS.

      Would it bother you terribly if we agreed to omit all of the illogical, pointless, "but everybody else does it" arguments?

      Any slightly reasonable person knows Apple is not going to shut that door again - there is WAY too much money to be made and goodwill to be earned.

      Again, you're confusing "eliminate all third parties" with "cut off your personal access".

      Not to mention that, as before, your existence in the developer program is entirely at the whim of Apple. Many people are having trouble getting accepted

      That's because it's in BETA. People used to have trouble getting GMail accounts too.

      Absolutely nonsensical. People have trouble getting in because Apple acts as gatekeepers and reserve (and use!) the right to reject people for any reason whatsoever.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    12. Re:You aren't paying $70/month for a phone by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Ah, maybe you could tell me why I couldn't jailbreak my iPod Touch, then. It came with the 1.1.4 firmware. I spent a couple of hours trying every possible jailbreaking application and web site. The best I did was to get it into a state which I thought was totally bricked, although after some panic I discovered that it could be reset with the magical button combo. So please, what was I doing wrong?

      This didn't work for you?

      Also, since you have a working iPod touch it was not "bricked", you simply reset it.

      You're mixing up two completely different issues:

      No, you're taking one issue (can I develop for the iPhone/thouch) and artifically making them two.

      Absolutely nonsensical. People have trouble getting in because Apple acts as gatekeepers and reserve (and use!) the right to reject people for any reason whatsoever.

      Well people cannot program for actual Android devices right now for the same reason. There's a gatekeeper there too.

      What you are ignoring is that in the future, there is no real gate. If anyone can come and go, what matter it is that Apple trims the flowers on the side?

      I am all about answering questions in the practical sense. If you ask "can anyone develop for the iPhone" I have to say Yes, in ways Apple cannot stop (beyond simply not making products anymore but they cannot take what I already have). I have already shown why this is so, you are trying to twist small, and sometimes very temporary, facts around to suit your assertion the platform is closed. Theoretically it is, practically it is not. Why can't you just be happy that is so? The world is better off with more open devices.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    13. Re:You aren't paying $70/month for a phone by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      Ah, maybe you could tell me why I couldn't jailbreak my iPod Touch, then. It came with the 1.1.4 firmware. I spent a couple of hours trying every possible jailbreaking application and web site. The best I did was to get it into a state which I thought was totally bricked, although after some panic I discovered that it could be reset with the magical button combo. So please, what was I doing wrong?

      This didn't work for you?

      What "this"? In any case, nothing worked.

      Also, since you have a working iPod touch it was not "bricked", you simply reset it.

      Please learn to read. I very clearly stated that I "thought" it was bricked, until I discovered the magic incantation to make it work again. I.e. there was a period of time where I thought it was completely dead.

      You're mixing up two completely different issues:

      No, you're taking one issue (can I develop for the iPhone/thouch) and artifically making them two.

      You said that any platform owner can stop you from developing on their platform, and thus the iPhone is no different. This is not true! There is nothing like the iPhone's requirement for Apple-signed code on Mac OS X, Windows, or many other proprietary OSes.

      Absolutely nonsensical. People have trouble getting in because Apple acts as gatekeepers and reserve (and use!) the right to reject people for any reason whatsoever.

      Well people cannot program for actual Android devices right now for the same reason. There's a gatekeeper there too.

      If I were saying anything about Android at all then this might actually have a chance at being relevant. Alas....

      What you are ignoring is that in the future, there is no real gate. If anyone can come and go, what matter it is that Apple trims the flowers on the side?

      This is pure speculation on your part. You don't really know how Apple is going to manage the program in the future, you're just guessing. They have all of the controls in place; why would they not use them? If anyone can come and go, why are many people still not approved?

      I am all about answering questions in the practical sense. If you ask "can anyone develop for the iPhone" I have to say Yes, in ways Apple cannot stop (beyond simply not making products anymore but they cannot take what I already have). I have already shown why this is so, you are trying to twist small, and sometimes very temporary, facts around to suit your assertion the platform is closed. Theoretically it is, practically it is not. Why can't you just be happy that is so? The world is better off with more open devices.

      I agree with your last sentence, but the iPhone is not an open platform. If my only choices are to either go through an uncertain, paid developer program so I can get a cryptographic key that signs my code so the device will accept it, or go through a "jailbreak" process that has a non-zero chance of destroying the device, that device is not open.

      On a standard Mac I can turn the thing on, connect to the internet, download, and install new software from any web site without Apple ever getting involved. I just want this experience to exist on the iPhone as well. Is that too much to ask?

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    14. Re:You aren't paying $70/month for a phone by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Sorry, must have forgot to paste link:

      What "this"? In any case, nothing worked.

      http://www.ipodtouchhacks.com/ipod-touch/detailed-instructions-on-how-to-jailbreak-114/

      Worked for me...

      You said that any platform owner can stop you from developing on their platform, and thus the iPhone is no different. This is not true! There is nothing like the iPhone's requirement for Apple-signed code on Mac OS X, Windows, or many other proprietary OSes.

      Yes, by stopping sales of phones they can stop you. In all other regards they have just as much effect on your ability to develop software if you want to. Apple SDK program is additional functionality that other carriers do not have, but that does not take away from the FACT that you can develop anything on a jailbroken phone too.

      This is pure speculation on your part. You don't really know how Apple is going to manage the program in the future, you're just guessing.

      Based on what Apple has said they are going to do, not speculation.

      They have all of the controls in place; why would they not use them?

      Support issues and leaks.

      I agree with your last sentence, but the iPhone is not an open platform. If my only choices are to either go through an uncertain, paid developer program so I can get a cryptographic key that signs my code so the device will accept it, or go through a "jailbreak" process that has a non-zero chance of destroying the device, that device is not open.

      Since anyone can jailbreak, practically it is open.

      On a standard Mac I can turn the thing on, connect to the internet, download, and install new software from any web site without Apple ever getting involved.

      And a jailbroken iPhone/Touch does exactly that. It's just that there's ALSO an additional channel for software, from Apple. Is the PC less open because it has Steam? I think not.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    15. Re:You aren't paying $70/month for a phone by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      Sorry, must have forgot to paste link:

      What "this"? In any case, nothing worked.

      http://www.ipodtouchhacks.com/ipod-touch/detailed-instructions-on-how-to-jailbreak-114/

      Worked for me...

      Yep, I tried that, it failed.

      You said that any platform owner can stop you from developing on their platform, and thus the iPhone is no different. This is not true! There is nothing like the iPhone's requirement for Apple-signed code on Mac OS X, Windows, or many other proprietary OSes.

      Yes, by stopping sales of phones they can stop you. In all other regards they have just as much effect on your ability to develop software if you want to.

      And again, that "stopping sales" tactic is a doomsday device which doesn't apply. Apple, on the other hand, can stop you and only you from selling on the iPhone for any reason they choose. If they want to stop you from selling on the Mac there's jack-all they can do about it.

      This is pure speculation on your part. You don't really know how Apple is going to manage the program in the future, you're just guessing.

      Based on what Apple has said they are going to do, not speculation.

      I prefer to go by what they have done (not let people into their program, not given a reason for it, not given a projected timeframe for acceptance, not given any mechanism for appeals) than by what they say they will do.

      On a standard Mac I can turn the thing on, connect to the internet, download, and install new software from any web site without Apple ever getting involved.

      And a jailbroken iPhone/Touch does exactly that.

      Not without jailbreaking it first it doesn't. You may not consider that difference to be significant but it is there.

      It's just that there's ALSO an additional channel for software, from Apple. Is the PC less open because it has Steam? I think not.

      Would the PC be less open if the only legit mechanism for obtaining software was through Steam? You bet your sweet ass it would.

      Answer me this: is the PSP an open platform or a closed platform? It looks pretty much like the iPhone to me. The device as shipped only runs software approved by the manufacturer. To develop for it, you have to apply with the manufacturer and get approved into their developer program. To sell a product for the platform, you have to get it approved by the manufacturer. You can bypass these mechanisms by hacking the device and loading custom firmware, although the manufacturer routinely breaks these hacks when they release firmware updates.

      Sounds like the same situation as the iPhone to me, and I don't know any programmer who would dream of calling the PSP an "open platform" just because homebrew firmware hacks exist.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    16. Re:You aren't paying $70/month for a phone by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      And again, that "stopping sales" tactic is a doomsday device which doesn't apply. Apple, on the other hand, can stop you and only you from selling on the iPhone for any reason they choose.

      Jailbreak, Jailbreak, Jailbreak.

      People are selling Jailbreak applications today. I have no doubt tomorrow they will continue to do so. Apple has no power over me if I do not wish it.

      I prefer to go by what they have done (not let people into their program, not given a reason for it, not given a projected timeframe for acceptance, not given any mechanism for appeals) than by what they say they will do.

      So Apple is the only company on earth to have a Beta period that gets more restrictive when it is over instead of less. Give me a break. At this point I think you are just trying to save face. Not to mention, that before Apple ever even HAD the SDK, you could Jailbreak and develop that way!

      Not without jailbreaking it first it doesn't.

      A tautology.

      Would the PC be less open if the only legit mechanism for obtaining software was through Steam? You bet your sweet ass it would.

      Now see, here is the core I think of why you are so confused. Selling Jailbreak applications IS LEGIT. ANYONE CAN DO SO. APPLE CANNOT STOP IT.

      No my caps lock is not stuck, I think you need extra motivation to understand this key point that seems to elude you.

      Answer me this: is the PSP an open platform or a closed platform?

      Open of course, lots of homebrew there. It wasn't until that happened I thought of getting one (though in truth I still have not, I have a project for that on the back burner). Just like the DS, though both the DS and PSP are harder to jailbreak for and WAY harder to program for. Heck, you even use the same tools (XCode) for Jailbreak app development you do for SDK apps!

      I will not respond further, this conversation is beyond a waste of time as obviously you will not come to your senses on this. But one last thought - consider that even O'Reilly thinks that the iPhone is open.

      Are we to believe you, or freaking O'Reilly? If I were you I'd come to think that living in a world where everything is open to you is far superior to living in a world where stuff you consider to be closed, closes in all around you... the world is open to hackers my friend, and hacking is getting casual. Open your eyes to the practical reality instead of the veils manufacturers throw over things.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    17. Re:You aren't paying $70/month for a phone by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      If you think the PSP is open, then obviously we have no common ground upon which to continue the conversation.

      If you care to respond one more time, I'm very curious to know; what exactly is an example of a closed platform in your eyes? Seems like the very concept does not exist with your extremely liberal definition, since you can always get into a device with enough work.

      As far O'Reilly, I couldn't possibly care less what they think on this subject. They write some good technical books, that's as far as their expertise goes.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
  48. Which is why they improved the phone by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Personally I thought the current iPhone phone quality, has been OK. But in the next model they did improve the speakers, and possibly also the mic.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  49. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you frighten me lol

  50. fiasco! by Orig_Club_Soda · · Score: 0

    AT&T has soured the milk. We thought we were getting a cheaper iPhone but the fed are too high. As a current iPhone user the financial incentive is to keep the current phone. Even this no-contract deal is more expensive than breaking a contract.

  51. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you have to give the iphone back if you cancel, which would be dumb if you did, In the new contract for iphone it states that you must return the iphone if you cancel contract and they will replace you with another $200 phone

  52. Too much by SpacePunk · · Score: 1

    "The question still remains, does it make any sense to pay that much for a phone that is still locked to AT&T's network even if you aren't bound to a contract?"

    Even a penny would be too much to pay for a locked phone.

  53. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Kawolski · · Score: 1

    See those quotes around "stolen"? That means it's not REALLY stolen. So you buy the phone for $299, activate for $36, cancel for $175, and you can't be forced to return the phone because it got "stolen."

    Now from this point, is it as easy as going to another provider and having them swap the SIM?

  54. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

    As long as it's your own bank account, I don't think anyone will mind.

  55. So true price of iPhone is $600 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One should thank the ATT for revealing true price of iPhone. The cheapest model is $600. We finally got the number and I don't care if there is a way to trick and get cheaper iPhone, it is $600 similar to the fact that having hacked firmware option doesn't make it open to all applications.

    It became easier to compare iPhone to Nokia N95 now. iPhone is $600, Nokia N95 (8gb unlocked) is $573

  56. Re:No-contract iPhone by Lershac · · Score: 1

    no, you could just ask for a prepaid instead of a contract... I was in line on I-day 2007 and 3 people ahead of me in line did this with no problems.

    The fact that on all aspects of the service plans for the phone, there is a dearth of information and clarity just speaks to how sucky ATT is as a company to deal with tho. You could very well have had a completely different experience at your local ATT store.

    --
    Chuck
  57. false advertizing? by haasta · · Score: 1

    does any care that jobs said you can get the iPhone for $199, or $299 for the upgrade... how then can at&t legally gouge customers? especially if they are not allowing customers to extend contracts if you are within your first year on your current devices. sounds bunk to me.

    --
    --- haasta IT consultant | Web Programmer
  58. Re:No-contract iPhone by devjj · · Score: 1

    That's a really good point.

  59. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think GP's point was, claim the phone is stolen when you cancel the contract so you don't have to return the phone.

  60. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Good luck using it when they blacklist the IMEI from their network (and then publish it to the other networks).

    Can't say I wouldn't laugh, either - entering into an agreement with every intention of breaking it, and being willing to file a fraudulent police report just to save yourself some money? What a world class fucking citizen you are.

  61. Re:No-contract iPhone by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was in line on I-day 2007

    Big "days" in history:

    • D Day, 6 June 1944
    • VE Day, 7 May, 1945
    • I Day, 29 June, 2007

    Great moments in time. Well, if you believe the Apple faithful, anyway.

  62. Sprint is now doing the same thing by gelfling · · Score: 1

    With their "Slider" you have to buy a $100 'everything plan. So you get the phone for $130 and then you fork out $1200/year for the service.

  63. Re:No-contract iPhone by Lershac · · Score: 1

    Far from apple faithful here... though I do own a number of their products. Plenty of bad product launches on apples part, and plenty of poor customer experiences.

    Apple just seems to have hit on the correct stance to take when it comes to dealing with the media:

    Dont say anything unless you will benefit directly.

    They avoid all kinds of negative publicity this way.

    --
    Chuck
  64. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by maztuhblastah · · Score: 3, Funny

    What if the phone gets "stolen"?

    Then you might get accused of "fraud".

    There's no way (as of yet) to change the iPhone's ESN, so if you report the phone stolen, you can expect the ESN to be barred from US networks (and EU ones, come to think of it) -- and if you try to use it, an alert will be triggered (assuming that AT&T's policies are anything like the policies of the carriers in the EU when it comes to stolen phones.)

  65. How much did you expect? by argent · · Score: 1

    Hell, if the Nokia's technically comparable, that's a really low "Apple tax". Typically the Apple label costs more like forty percent, not thirty bucks.

  66. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What if the phone gets "stolen"?

    Then the phone gets flagged as stolen by AT&T, and the next person who tries to activate that particular handset is due for an interesting time.

  67. Except this doesnt work because... by Ceadda · · Score: 1

    If you cancel within 30 days you return the phone, not keep it.

    --
    *There's Klingons on the starboard bow, scrape em off Jim!*
  68. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Check your fire. No AT&T insurance for the iPhone.

  69. Easy Answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    does it make any sense to pay that much for a phone

    No.

  70. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the model I would get then head over to 3G iPhone Unlock and unlock it!

  71. iPhone are for suckers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a diehard Mac/Apple fan. Have been for decades. But there is absolutely nothing cool about the iPhone.

    When apple went with AT&T and all this nightmarish contract and price gouging nonsense then the iPhone is rubbish.

    It could have been something cool...but nope. Apple wrecked it...like many Apple projects. They invent great technology just to screw it up except this time they gave it to AT&T to complete screw it up.

  72. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure the bank will mind greatly if you steal money from your own account, then report it as stolen and tell them you expect them to refund you for failing to protect it.

    --
    If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
  73. Buy one in France by drix · · Score: 1

    It's the law in France that handsets have to be sold unlocked. So if you find yourself on the continent anytime soon, it would probably be a lot cheaper to just buy one there.

    (Incidentally, I'm going to France in October and plan on doing exactly this. Anyone do this with the 2.5G model and any tips? Thx)

    --

    I think there is a world market for maybe five personal web logs.
  74. Re:No-contract iPhone by cleatsupkeep · · Score: 1

    What more did you want that would have made it significantly better? Blowjobs?

    I kid, but I am curious what features you wanted.

  75. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

    If you have insurance, its because they don't realize you have an iPhone, did you have insurance before you bought the iPhone? Its likely the just didn't turn off the billing.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  76. Bit of a scam by SplatMan_DK · · Score: 1

    I am sorry to say that the "update" from www.phonenews.com looks like a bit of a scam.

    First of all because the whole sceme depends on your ability to sell multiple items through eBay. And secondly because the "story" is pushing readers to sign up for a contarct using a direct link in the article - but the link looks very much like an "affiliate link" for AT&T.

    If that is correct then www.phonenews.com is making money every time a users signs up for that contracts. And their credibility goes right down the drain.

    It leaves the readers with the following two questions:

    1.) Should I engage in the described theme which claims to get me a cheap iPhone but is in fact depending on selling stuff through eBay to cover the losses from the preceding transactions?

    2.) Did they write this article in order to cash in on the affiliate link, or did they write it because the actually believe it is a good way to get a cheat phone? (Which leads to a third question: Can I trust a "news site" which tries to trick me into signing a contract so they can make money from the referral?)

    - Jesper

    --
    My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
  77. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

    Most US carriers don't respect the ESN blacklist.

  78. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and what if i lost my phone overseas? also i don't think they could prove you comited fraud that is until some one passes a law saying they can search your house for your missing phone

  79. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by GigaplexNZ · · Score: 1

    How on earth is this modded flamebait? It is entirely accurate and represents what is wrong with the majority of slashdot moderators these days... are we advocating intentionally breaking the law for financial gain?

  80. Update is a blatent money-grab by Elastri · · Score: 1

    I'm kind of shocked that that update made it into the article. Aside from the fact that it isn't fully tested, they're asking you to "trust us" and click on the links in the article _which are all affiliate links_. This looks like a blatent money-grab and it shouldn't be part of the article.

  81. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

    I was thinking along the lines of withdrawal, not actual theft of your own money.

    Actually I wonder... You can't "steal" money from your own account, it's your own money! Legally I'm pretty sure the only illegal part would be to report it as stolen. But then again IANAL.

  82. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

    Yes, just like the only illegal part of having your iPhone "stolen" would be the report. It's fraud, not theft.

    --
    If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
  83. Wrong thread by starrsoft · · Score: 1

    An anonymous reader suggests that there is a convoluted but possibly cheaper route to an new, unlocked iPhone.

    Oops, wrong thread! The above post belongs in this thread: News: There's a Sucker Converted Every Minute . "What's the best tech scam you've heard of lately?"

    --
    Read my blog: HansMast.com
  84. iPhone Australia and Pre-Paid by ibentmywookie · · Score: 1

    If get a second mortgage on your home, you can buy a prepaid iPhone and pay to have it unlocked by the carrier in Australia.
    here

    • 8GB iPhone 3G (Black)= $729
    • 16GB iPhone 3G (Black or White)= $849
    • Unlocking fee: $80
    --
    -- The doctor said I wouldn't get so many nose bleeds if I just kept my finger out of there!
  85. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The published price being advertised all over for the new apple iphone 3G is $199â¦what they are not telling you is that price is only for new ATT customers and those current ATT customers who happen to be eligible for an equipment upgrade (according to ATT, upgrade eligibility is âoegenerallyâ determined by the amount of time remaining on a current contract). For all those current ATT customers who do not happen to be at the end of their contract, the actual price for you is $399 plus an $18 upgrade fee along with a new 2-year contract. ATT is penalizing their long-time, account in good standing, customers a whopping $200. Why is the actual price of the new iphone not being advertised for what it isâ¦$399? Itâ(TM)s the same price as the old iphone with an increase in the data plan.

    For more information refer to iPhone 3G at www.att.com/iphone

    Existing AT&T customers who are not currently eligible for an upgrade discount can purchase iPhone 3G for $399 for the 8GB model or $499 for the 16GB model. Both options require a new 2-year service agreement. In the future, AT&T will offer a no-contract-required option for $599 (8GB) or $699 (16GB).

    Current customers may also choose to wait until they become eligible for an upgrade discount. Eligibility is generally determined by amount of time remaining on a current contract and payment history.

    Current AT&T customers who are upgrading to iPhone 3G will pay an $18 upgrade fee and new AT&T customers will pay the standard $36 activation fee.

  86. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by ady1 · · Score: 1

    GSM phones have no ESN. IMEI is the keyword you are looking for.

  87. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So I buy a phone outright for $599/$699, or I buy a phone for $199/$299 with a 2 year plan ($36 activation fee) then cancel the contract immediately for $175...net cost $410/$510. Hmmmm.....

    That's not going to fare to well on your credit report. And this is not a good time in the economy to have any dings on your credit.

  88. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They typically don't give a rats ass about returning the phone if you cancel the contract - the phone is your property.

    What they do want out of you is a very high early-cancellation penalty, which is spelled out in the fine print of the contract you signed. And they won't accept returning the phone in lieu of this penalty.

  89. Aw, heck, I'll just wait for the Android platform by A+New+Normalcy · · Score: 1

    LB

    --
    ...Lorenzo / I'm into kinky crustaceans. I just discovered internet praWn.
  90. no it won't be a "first" by BonzinoMuschweshe · · Score: 1

    "...this will mark the first time consumers in the United States are able to buy an iPhone without being tied down to a two-year contract. The phone probably would still be locked for use only on AT&T's network, said Jupiter Research analyst Michael Gartenberg. But buyers could choose a pay-as-you-go plan for voice service.' The question still remains, does it make any sense to pay that much for a phone that is still locked to AT&T's network even if you aren't bound to a contract?"

    then it won't be. it isn't (does not *become*) a PHONE until it IS tied to the SAME single carrier. so, then this FA is, what, very poor writing? a FOX news audition? what?

  91. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not that the originator is the most up-and-up citizen I've ever heard of, but are you saying that the AT&T's and other large carriers are that much better because they've gotten lobbyists working for them to adapt laws to their favor?

    Charging for unclear calls, ridiculously high international rates and other excessive fees for a substandard system isn't the most consumer-centric paradigm I've seen, either.
    While breaking the law is not encouraged, at the same time, we are encouraging collusion and forced contractual commitments that favors only the provider with little or no consumer protection.

  92. Wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work for At&T as a Retail Sales Consultant and two things are wrong in a major way with this story. First, the no contract iPhone will not be available until some time (months) after launch. Second, the story implies a pre-paid option for the iPhone...there isn't one. Pre-paid is off limits for iPhone customers.

  93. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Add to that little calculation your first months bill, which will be pro-rated, and you have the no contract price again...

  94. Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... by FireBreath · · Score: 1

    This insurance concept on phones is interesting. Up here in Canada we definitely have no option to purchase insurance on our smartphones. I work for one of the major wireless companies up here, and regularly field calls where people have lost or had their phone stolen. Pretty much they're looking at purchasing a new phone, possibly with a discount, but no insurance policy replacements, that's for sure.