Slashdot Mirror


Tracking a Move Via "Find My iPhone"

dmolnar writes "I recently helped my girlfriend move her stuff from Chicago, IL to Oakland, CA. The movers were scheduled to arrive at 8AM on the 5th of July, and we were stressing the day before about all the things that could go wrong with a move. We realized that if we knew where her stuff was, it'd make us feel better. This is a story about using the $99 iPhone to track the move ... and about a somewhat surprising potential use of Find My iPhone to track your friends' iPhones without them noticing."

216 comments

  1. Much cheaper... by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Personally I would have gone with something from deal extreme, a GPSSMS bridge. It costs the same as the iPhone, but without the contract. You could have bought simple card from Walmart.

    Not to mention it would have been designed for this and probably last a bit longer. Put in eBay after you're done and recoup some of the costs.

    What does a iPhone cost without the data plan? (Say the phone broke and you need a new one, not to mention you just signed up for 2 years)

    http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.25332
    http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.21686
    http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.11314

    1. Re:Much cheaper... by siloko · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Isn't the whole point of the article about current users utilising existing features in new and innovative ways. i.e. with a marginal cost of zero.

    2. Re:Much cheaper... by speedtux · · Score: 5, Informative

      Isn't the whole point of the article about current users utilising existing features in new and innovative ways. i.e. with a marginal cost of zero.

      That would be using one of the many location tracking features that have been out for years for other smartphones. The total cost isn't $99+2 year contract, but simply $200 for the phone and no contract.

      These days, the simplest of the bunch is probably Google Latitude.

      No expensive iPhone needed.

    3. Re:Much cheaper... by davester666 · · Score: 0, Redundant

      No. He purchased the iPhone solely for tracking this move. Once the move was completed, he threw the iPhone away.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    4. Re:Much cheaper... by siloko · · Score: 1

      No expensive iPhone needed.

      However if I already have an iPhone it is a useful feature nicely outlined in the article. Although as pointed out by another poster the dude bought the iPhone specifically for the purpose which even he seems to regret come the end of the piece. So the moral of this story is RTFA or learn to mind-meld with blog authors at a distance . . . only one of which requires me to rescind my slashdot membership

    5. Re:Much cheaper... by YourExperiment · · Score: 2, Informative

      What does a iPhone cost without the data plan? (Say the phone broke and you need a new one, not to mention you just signed up for 2 years)

      From reading the article (I know, sorry!) it seems they believed there was a clause in the AT&T contract which allowed them to cancel within 30 days and keep the iPhone.

      I think they might have been mistaken about that, since AT&T are unlikely to make much money giving away iPhones for free. To use everyone's favourite analogy, it's like renting a car for a week, but if you cancel within 24 hours you get to keep the car.

    6. Re:Much cheaper... by Ma8thew · · Score: 1

      No, there is a clause which allows you to cancel within 30 days, and return the iPhone.

    7. Re:Much cheaper... by YourExperiment · · Score: 1

      That makes a lot more sense, though not in the context of the article. They shelled out another $200ish on extra batteries, MobileMe subscription etc. I can't imagine all that's refundable too, and neither is it a great deal of use without an iPhone.

    8. Re:Much cheaper... by digitalchinky · · Score: 5, Informative

      So all your belongings are in boxes, including this GPS with SMS bridge business you speak of, all of which is buried under clothes or whatever, sitting deep inside a moving truck which just happens to be built out of sheet metal, strengthened by a steel or alloy frame of sorts (Last time I checked, all of them were built this way) A nice little Faraday cage yes?

      Your solution would not work, this guy lucked out in that the system was using cell towers to triangulate the phones location, if it was true GPS it would not have worked.

    9. Re:Much cheaper... by hattig · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wouldn't you rather have the iPhone in your pocket, to receive calls?

      However if you have a *spare* iPhone 3G or 3GS, it's a great idea. How many people have spare iPhone 3Gs?

    10. Re:Much cheaper... by hattig · · Score: 1

      It was cheaper than the alternatives they had, at short notice, on a day where all the stores had sold out of cheaper hardware.

      The external battery could be sold on eBay I'm sure. Maybe one of them has a Mac and can use MobileMe, otherwise that is lost money.

      I can't help but think that with a normal phone, they would have had to pack a midget as well to change the phone battery. Surely this is an example of external battery packs being more sensible than swappable batteries!

    11. Re:Much cheaper... by Hurricane78 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How did you come up with that conclusion.

      The only point of that article is to advertise the crappy iPhone, which nobody would buy, were it not for the bubble of love they create around you and it. ^^

      (Hmm... Sadly I think it may be more serious that I wished it to be.)

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    12. Re:Much cheaper... by Wingsy · · Score: 1

      Waiting for someone to bring this up. Now I don't have to.

      --
      If I didn't have absolutely NOTHING to do, I wouldn't be here.
    13. Re:Much cheaper... by Gulthek · · Score: 1

      Actually it isn't. If you were to RTFA:

      While the movers packed and loaded boxes the next morning, I went to the nearest Best Buy. In about an hour, I had a $99 iPhone 3G, an extra battery pack ($79), and a year's subscription to MobileMe ($99). Another hour or so, and I'd updated the iPhone to the 3.0 firmware, charged the extra battery, and checked that Find My iPhone successfully located the iPhone. I dropped the phone and extra battery into one of the boxes.

    14. Re:Much cheaper... by Sj0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My phone doesn't have a camera. It doesn't have internet. It doesn't have ringtones. It doesn't have GPS. It doesn't run programs.

      My phone makes phone calls, and I love it to death.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    15. Re:Much cheaper... by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Hence the entire reason for using the iPhone and not the GPS only stuff.

      The cell phone triangulation is good enough for the purpose of this article. Nothing else is.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    16. Re:Much cheaper... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Yeah, well, actually, lots of moving vans aren't built entirely of sheet metal, they've got plenty of non-metallic components - sometimes roofs, sometimes the walls are plywood or other composites, etc. All metal's often too expensive, and too heavy.

    17. Re:Much cheaper... by mdwh2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      However if I already have an phone it is a useful feature nicely outlined in the article.

      Fixed that for you. Yes, that was his point - this has been available on phones for years. Why do we need an article specifically for the Iphone, just because it finally joins the club? I thought Slashdot was once a place to find news on cutting edge technology - okay, I know we joke about stories turning up late, but...

      What next? "Using Your Iphone To Talk To People"?

    18. Re:Much cheaper... by smallfries · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If the truck acts as a Faraday cage why would it block GPS but let through cellphone traffic? They are both just radio on different frequencies after all.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    19. Re:Much cheaper... by dmitrygr · · Score: 2, Informative

      A faraday cage blocks signals IFF it is grounded. Last I checked trucks are on RUBBER wheels on a non-conductive road. Even wonder why you get cell reception in elevators? Same reason. Please go redo your college physics course.

      --
      -------
      1. Enjoy your job
      2. Make lots of money
      3. Work within the law

      Choose any two.
    20. Re:Much cheaper... by profplump · · Score: 1

      First I'm wondering why the faraday cage you propose blocks only GPS and not cellular radio -- while you could certainly construct such a thing it doesn't seem like something that would happen accidentally.

      Second, you should be aware that a full-metal case is not an incredibly typical construction for semi trailers. Many have plastic top, since the top bears little load and plastic can be made translucent to allow outside light into the trailer. Many also have wooden bottom, as wood is much cheaper and easier to replace than sheet metal would be, and the floor is subject to a lot of abuse. It's also not uncommon to have non-metal sides, or sometimes even tensioned-fabric sides, on trailers where there is not likely to be a lot of lateral stress.

    21. Re:Much cheaper... by MeatBag+PussRocket · · Score: 1

      ahhh slashdot, where the informative members of society are apperntly by definition, trolls. admittedly, not the politest response i've seen but certainly more contributory to the topic than many "trolls"

      --
      i wage a holy war against the apostrophe.
    22. Re:Much cheaper... by ahecht · · Score: 1

      The last few moving trucks I rented (Penske -- I wouldn't touch U-HAUL with a 10 foot poll) had the basic box frame made of metal, but the walls and roof were fiberglass reinforced with wooden studs.

    23. Re:Much cheaper... by ptbarnett · · Score: 1

      If the truck acts as a Faraday cage why would it block GPS but let through cellphone traffic?

      GPS signals are much lower power than cell phone signals. They are just barely above the noise level, and receivers depend on digital signal processing of several seconds of data to "lock".

    24. Re:Much cheaper... by rhsanborn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I suspect it acted much less like a Faraday cage than just a poor place to get much of a signal. But I also suspect they'd have a much better chance getting a cell signal than a gps signal.

    25. Re:Much cheaper... by dougmc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Just so there's no confusion ... the parent post is incorrect. Faraday cages do not have to be grounded. There are reasons to ground them, but they can work just fine as a faraday cage even if not ground.

    26. Re:Much cheaper... by rnelsonee · · Score: 1

      Well, by RTFA, you'd know that you don't need a 2 year contract. You can get an iPhone, with no long-term commitment for $275, and based on eBay's prices, you'd actually make a profit selling it after using it for this pet project.

    27. Re:Much cheaper... by RenderSeven · · Score: 1

      ... probably Google Latitude.

      Maybe OT but does anyone know Google figures location when GPS isnt available? I assume it has access to raw tower data i.e. signal strength and tower location(s) and it triangulates from there. But the accuracy in sparsely-towered areas surprises me, and Im not sure how they would subscribe to a carriers tower data. Im guessing they also use some pretty tricky map heuristics to fine-tune location based on estimated location and speed compared to known roads.

    28. Re:Much cheaper... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      My phone doesn't have a camera. It doesn't have internet. It doesn't have ringtones. It doesn't have GPS. It doesn't run programs.

      My phone makes phone calls, and I love it to death.

      If you love your non-smart phone so much, why feel the need to post in a thread on smart phones, if not to troll it?

      Just goes to show the mods don't understand the difference between 'insightful' and 'off topic', as slight as that minor difference might be...

    29. Re:Much cheaper... by Xyde · · Score: 1, Funny

      Who the fuck keeps modding this shit up? I'm sick of this phone minimalism circle jerking I'm seeing so often on here (you know, this nerd & technology oriented site). Yes we all know you're in love with your Nokia 1100/3210/whatever - now how about you go and choke on it.

    30. Re:Much cheaper... by DJRumpy · · Score: 1

      Actually, depending on the backup battery, it can be attached directly to the interface on the phone, just like a charger.

    31. Re:Much cheaper... by gpalyu · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can get a free MobileMe 60 day trial too.

    32. Re:Much cheaper... by tholomyes · · Score: 5, Funny

      It doesn't have ringtones...

      My phone makes phone calls, and I love it to death.

      You should really upgrade to a newer model. They can receive calls now, too!

      --
      When did the future switch from being a promise to a threat? -C. Palahniuk
    33. Re:Much cheaper... by DJRumpy · · Score: 1

      Even a car acts as a Faraday cage in part (for instance when struck by lightning, car passengers are unaffected).

      From Wikipedia:
      "However, radio and cellular phone signals can still reach inside the vehicle since their wavelengths are significantly smaller than the windows and other openings in the vehicle's conductive frame, though internal signal strength may be diminished."

      I gather from this that unless the truck is completely shielded (no gaps, wood body pieces, no moon roof openings, etc), there is chance that GPS could lock, although I tend to doubt it given the low signal strength. In any case, for the purposes of the article, it would function just fine with WiFi data as it's typically accurate to a couple of blocks.

    34. Re:Much cheaper... by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      I just did a cross-country trip using Google Latitude. It worked great, but there were some problems that make it less suitable for this use.

      First off, whenever we were out of range of a tower, the whole program stopped until you dimiss a popup dialog informing you of this fact (with a tiny "OK" button).

      Secondly, it chewed through my battery power like it was going out of style. I could get perhaps 4 hours max out of it before having to put it on the charger. If your movers have your stuff for less than four hours, I'm really impressed.

      I'm now living in fear of the contents of next month's phone bill...

    35. Re:Much cheaper... by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      You need to learn how to comprehend context and juxtaposition.

      Doesn't it strike you as odd that the post I was replying to was going on and on about how there's this love-in with the iPhone? Gee, I wonder if there's some sort of subtext there?

      Naw, I'm just hating on the iPhone, obviously. Both of our posts should be modded out of existence because the only context worth considering is what's in the summary of the article -- fuck threaded conversation.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    36. Re:Much cheaper... by AdamTrace · · Score: 2, Funny

      Fascinating.

      Up until this moment, I had no idea there was a Penske vs. U-HAUL religious war, complete with fanboys! I learned something today!

    37. Re:Much cheaper... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So it really isn't "a $99 iPhone". It is a $99 iPhone, a $79 battery, and a $99 contract, which is actually $277. Just under $300 just to try and see if the movers are actually going on the route they have planned. Brilliant. You deserve to be an iPhone owner.

    38. Re:Much cheaper... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is like arguing that the tricorder on TOS is better than the tricorder on TNG

    39. Re:Much cheaper... by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      But I can listen to MP3s for a full 24 hours on my iPod and STILL make a phone call!

      --
      It's been a long time.
    40. Re:Much cheaper... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google latitude?

    41. Re:Much cheaper... by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 1

      it's like renting a car for a week, but if you cancel within 24 hours you get to keep the car.

      Hey, let's work some bailout money into that deal... Then you rent the car for a week, cancel in 24 hours, and you get to keep the rental company... but you have to pay everyone involved a bonus for doing such a good job.

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    42. Re:Much cheaper... by UnrefinedLayman · · Score: 1

      My phone has a camera. It has Internet access. It has ringtones. It has GPS. It runs programs.

      My phone makes phone calls, and I wish to death it would stop.

    43. Re:Much cheaper... by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

      That describes my first phone about 6 years ago, and it would suit my needs now, except that I like bluetooth, and I don't know how often that appears in the feature set of more basic phones. But I understand the allure of having a phone that can go a couple weeks without charging. That's one thing I definitely miss!

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    44. Re:Much cheaper... by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      My phone doesn't have a camera. It doesn't have internet. It doesn't have ringtones. It doesn't have GPS. It doesn't run programs.

      My phone makes phone calls, and I love it to death.

      Skroeder: Maybe it's pissed off.
      Newton Crosby: It's a machine, Schroeder; it doesn't get pissed off. It doesn't get happy, it doesn't get sad, it doesn't laugh at your jokes.
      Newton Crosby, Ben Jabituya: It just runs programs!

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    45. Re:Much cheaper... by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      Ah, I'd forgotten. That's the one feature it does have, bluetooth. I'm happy about it because my car has the Ford Sync system, so it automatically pipes phone calls over the stereo system.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    46. Re:Much cheaper... by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      So it really isn't "a $99 iPhone". It is a $99 iPhone, a $79 battery, and a $99 contract, which is actually $277. Just under $300 just to try and see if the movers are actually going on the route they have planned. Brilliant. You deserve to be an iPhone owner.

      A $99 iPhone which can be returned in 30 days for a refund, a $79 batter, and a $99 MobileMe contract which could have been a free 60-day trial. So, in all, $79 if he opted for the returns (assuming there's no free returns on used rechargeable batteries).

      Now throw in a large capacity (say 1500VA) UPS, silence its alarm, and plug the phone's charger into it with the batteries and it would last a lot longer inside a mover's box (and the weight wouldn't be noticed).

      This story reminds me of my warsmailing challenge, a kind of a wardriving-by-US-mail-proxy. Though I considered package shipping companies as well, I hadn't thought of moving vans.

      Can you get netstumbler or similar software onto an iPhone to search for and log open wireless access points with GPS coordinates? It wouldn't have to store the data on the iPhone; it could transmit it to another server instead over 3G or even the open access ports it finds (doubles as proof of accessibility).

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    47. Re:Much cheaper... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      First I'm wondering why the faraday cage you propose blocks only GPS and not cellular radio -- while you could certainly construct such a thing it doesn't seem like something that would happen accidentally.

      It doesn't take a much to block GPS; I can't get a good GPS signal in my house -- and I get fine cellular reception there.

    48. Re:Much cheaper... by lewiscr · · Score: 1

      It doesn't have ringtones...

      My phone makes phone calls, and I love it to death.

      You should really upgrade to a newer model. They can receive calls now, too!

      That's a feature? The first thing I do to get into the coding Zone is turn off the ringer on my phone.

    49. Re:Much cheaper... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell me how I can do the same thing with a Verizon phone, or a TMobile phone, please. Can I look up the location from a web browser?

    50. Re:Much cheaper... by Sparr0 · · Score: 1

      You can use http://www.google.com/latitude/intro.html on phones from most providers, with little or no additional software on the phone. This is old technology. As grandparent said, why is this news just because the iPhone does it now too?

    51. Re:Much cheaper... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Even the very-large 44+ foot trucks (ie, think: trans-shipping) are made out of non-metal components these days. the sides and roof are largely there for decreasing wind resistance.

      Of the large vans used to move band and stage equipment around for events that I've seen, many of them have a steel (or aluminum) substructure frame, with either plastic, metal and plastic, or some sort of fiberboard construction. Even the older ones don't use all-metal cladding - it's too expensive!

      Put the device at or near the top of the stack and I suspect there'd be less signal impedance than if it were in the back seat of your car.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    52. Re:Much cheaper... by Falconhell · · Score: 1

      I have found the latest GPS much better at getting a lock inside my house. I have A Garmin 72 and a compact flash GPS which cannot get a lock inside. My newer Leadtek bluetooth unit and IPAQ 312 both get a lock easily. I believe they use the sirf star chipset.

    53. Re:Much cheaper... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      What next? "Using Your Iphone To Talk To People"?

      OMG you can talk to people on it? FINALLY.

    54. Re:Much cheaper... by jfanning · · Score: 1

      They could have gotten a cheap Nokia S60 phone, installed the Mobile Web Server http://mymobilesite.net/ on it and use the positioning information from that. It would have been cheaper still.

      Plus, they were not "current users". They bought an iPhone especially to do this.

    55. Re:Much cheaper... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      exactly, during a move is a time when you absolutely need your mobile phone. I would not leave it in the truck.

    56. Re:Much cheaper... by ahecht · · Score: 1

      It's not Penske vs. U-HAUL, it's anyone vs U-HAUL. The last few U-HAUL trucks I've been in have had between 300,000 and 400,000 miles on them, and they were just cut-down pickup trucks with a box crudely welded on (they even still had the rear-view mirror on the windshield, pointing at nothing). The AC didn't work in any of them, and the shocks were long, long gone. However, when I've rented from Penske or Budget, I've gotten purpose-built trucks with under 30,000 miles that were clean, in great condition, had working AC and radio, and drove as well as the average van would. The guy at Penske told me that like most rental car companies they sell their rental trucks once they reach 36,000 miles, so their stuff is always in good condition.

  2. Iphones are not $99 by diakka · · Score: 4, Informative

    Do people really buy in to the BS about an Iphone being $99? IT's only $99 if you sign your soul away for 2 years. The mobile carriers here are so fortunate to have an ignorant populace that is eager to go through the mental gymnastics required to truly believe that their iphone only costed $99.

    --
    -- Knowledge shared is power lost. -- Aleister Crowley
    1. Re:Iphones are not $99 by aristotle-dude · · Score: 0

      Do people really buy in to the BS about an Iphone being $99? IT's only $99 if you sign your soul away for 2 years. The mobile carriers here are so fortunate to have an ignorant populace that is eager to go through the mental gymnastics required to truly believe that their iphone only costed $99.

      So.... how do you use any phone with out service? The contract really means nothing the US since AT&T is the only major GSM carrier in the US that supports all of the features of the iPhone. The price of the service would be the same with or without a contract so the subsidization is just a business expense AT&T incurs to get some sort of guarantee of future revenue. What carrier would a person switch to without losing features? The argument is effectively moot given the lack of choice in providers.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    2. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      From TFA:

      "AT&T has a clause in their contract where you can opt out within 30 days without paying the early termination fee."

    3. Re:Iphones are not $99 by mr_matticus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you also return the hardware, sure.

      That caveat works fine for a scenario like this, until it's systemically abused, prompting AT&T to change its policies when it has too many returned phones (not just iPhones, but any other data-enabled device that might be used for just such a trick).

      It works now because of the balance--it's a good supply of refurbed phones, which are still profitable for the carrier, to a point. As with most things, it's all about balance.

    4. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Moridineas · · Score: 0

      God, that is such an elitist prick attitude. Those stupid sheeple don't understand what a "2 year contract" is--really?? Do you REALLY think that people would be so much happier paying $600-$700/etc for an iphone and lower monthlies? Just because you have a philosophical / ideological / whatever objection to signing a business contract doesn't mean that everybody who chooses to do so is an idiot...

      How much lower would the monthlies be? Single line iphone is what--$70/mon for 2 years at minimum? A new iphone 3gs without a contract is I believe around $600? So, if you pay for that over 2 years, you get $25 a month...monthlies would be down to $45/month. So where exactly is the ripoff? Is it a ripoff to pay $70/month for minutes and unlimited data? Is $45/month for the same thing a ripoff?

    5. Re:Iphones are not $99 by speedtux · · Score: 4, Informative

      So.... how do you use any phone with out service? The contract really means nothing the US since AT&T is the only major GSM carrier in the US that supports all of the features of the iPhone.

      You can get an unlocked Nokia N78 for about $230 with no contract. Then, buy AT&T prepaid. It's a lot cheaper than an iPhone with a 2 year contract and has the same functionality.

      What carrier would a person switch to without losing features?

      Works fine in Europe, where phones and service are a lot cheaper, all carriers are compatible, and people can switch freely (unless they sign a contract, which also exist if you want the phone discount). There's no reason it couldn't work here.

    6. Re:Iphones are not $99 by QuantumG · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I too enjoyed the part where he advocated defrauding AT&T. I sure hope they give him a call.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    7. Re:Iphones are not $99 by QuantumG · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sorry, but the article specifically said the immortal "it's only $99!!!"

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    8. Re:Iphones are not $99 by speedtux · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What they don't understand is that they have good alternatives. Get an unlocked Google, Nokia, or Windows Mobile phone and a prepaid plan and you pay much less for a smartphone that gets the job done (and actually is nicer for text messages and a lot of other uses).

    9. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Timmmm · · Score: 1

      You buy a contract separately from the phone. You *do* realise that the contract price you pay (e.g. £35/mo) *with* the phone is simply the normal SIM-only contract (£17/mo with data on O2) plus some money to cover the cost of the phone?

      Like the original poster I am amazed how many people thing these phones really cost $99 or that the carriers 'subsidize' them.

    10. Re:Iphones are not $99 by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

      Uh, where's the fraud? AT&T put a clause in the contract which he took advantage of.

    11. Re:Iphones are not $99 by shinmai · · Score: 1

      > The contract really means nothing the US
      Exactly. Unfortunately the terms for getting an iPhone are essentially the same everywhere, except countries like Italy and the Neatherlands.
      Here in Finland I opted to buy an HTC Touch HD for 690 euros and keep my original contract instead of paying 190e for the iPhone upfront, and continuing to pay 32 euros every month for two years to what I hold to be the worst cellphone operator in Finland. I'd have to have 11 euro phonebills for two years to get the same total price, but I don't mind spending an extra 250 euros during the course of 24 months for the freedom to change my contract whenever I please.

    12. Re:Iphones are not $99 by QuantumG · · Score: 5, Interesting

      hehe, you think people haven't, for decades now, been buying shit with the intention of using it for n days and then returning it? You think there hasn't been a court case finding on it? It's well established law. If you buy something with the intention of returning it, you're not acting in good faith. It's simple fraud.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    13. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Namarrgon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wow, what set that rant off? I don't think the OP said anything about a ripoff. It sounded more like surprise that so many people seem to focus exclusively on the $99 upfront cost and (apparently) ignore the monthly, as if that was irrelevant. Another example of this attitude is the fuss a lot of people made over the extra fee required to pay off the rest of their iPhone 3G contract when upgrading.

      By way of comparison, in AU there is a fairly wide range of upfront vs monthly options. I pay full price for an unlocked phone and pay only $10/month (not unlimited, but sufficient for me), so 2 years of $60+/month extra payments would nearly double my overall cost, despite subsidies.

      --
      Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
    14. Re:Iphones are not $99 by diakka · · Score: 1

      Had the movers lost his stuff and it wasn't insured, then i guarantee it would be more than $99 to replace it. As for me, I have a prepaid plan and a razr, which costs me on the order of $150 per year. Contrast that with about $70 per month over a 2 year period, The total cost is about $1816 (phone, voice plan, data plan, activation) over the life of the contract. Versus, $360 (used razr, prepaid minutes, activation) for me. Granted, for your $1816, you get a better plan and a better phone, but i bet that at least $300 is paying for your phone. The whole reason the carriers want to bind you to these contracts is that it makes it so much harder for a consumer to get an apples to apples comparison needed to make an informed decision, and thus reducing competition in the marketplace

      --
      -- Knowledge shared is power lost. -- Aleister Crowley
    15. Re:Iphones are not $99 by YourExperiment · · Score: 1

      I'm on prepaid myself, but most people over here in the UK also get a phone on contract. They pay out hugely inflated monthly fees to get far more minutes and texts than they need, so they can kid themselves they're getting a brand new handset every year or two for "free". Perfectly good handsets get thrown away - it's a huge waste of resources both economically and environmentally.

    16. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So.... how do you use any phone with out service? The contract really means nothing the US since AT&T is the only major GSM carrier in the US that supports all of the features of the iPhone.

      You can get an unlocked Nokia N78 for about $230 with no contract. Then, buy AT&T prepaid. It's a lot cheaper than an iPhone with a 2 year contract and has the same functionality.

      What carrier would a person switch to without losing features?

      Works fine in Europe, where phones and service are a lot cheaper, all carriers are compatible, and people can switch freely (unless they sign a contract, which also exist if you want the phone discount). There's no reason it couldn't work here.

      u surely didnt hear about french carriers

    17. Re:Iphones are not $99 by spire3661 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Story writer is an irresponsible asshole. "O, Ill just use it and then return it, who cares if it costs other people time and money." What a prick.

      --
      Good-bye
    18. Re:Iphones are not $99 by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      You hit it right on the head. His INTENT was to defraud ATT. He wanted to take a new product, use it for personal gain, and then return it with no repercussions. Honestly hes lucky he kept it, if he hadnt ATT/Apple would have a nice case against him, confession and all. Either way hes a prick.

      --
      Good-bye
    19. Re:Iphones are not $99 by FireFury03 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      hehe, you think people haven't, for decades now, been buying shit with the intention of using it for n days and then returning it? You think there hasn't been a court case finding on it? It's well established law. If you buy something with the intention of returning it, you're not acting in good faith. It's simple fraud.

      Eh? If I buy a product that comes with a contract saying "you can return it for whatever reason within the first 30 days for a full refund" then returning it for any reason is _not_ fraud.

      Taking advantage of the agreed terms of a contract is perfectly legal.

    20. Re:Iphones are not $99 by William+Ager · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's only $99 if you sign a two year contract and you aren't already an AT&T customer. Otherwise, not only do you have to pay significantly more ("discounted" prices of $300 for a 3G, $400 or $500 for a 3GS), you also have to pay an "upgrade fee" of $18, and sign a new two-year contract. Every other phone AT&T offers only requires a set price for current customers, making the iPhone essentially unavailable to us.

      If I wanted an iPhone, it would actually be significantly cheaper for me to cancel my account and open a new one. Luckily, I'm quite happy with the e51 I bought myself.

    21. Re:Iphones are not $99 by dzfoo · · Score: 3, Informative

      That clause is predicated on your good faith intention of actually keeping the item until, for some reason, you decide it did not meet your expectations and so you return it. If you intention from the start was to take advantage of this clause by using the item and returning it before the deadline, you are not acting in good faith; your intent is to defraud the company.

      It would have been an easy case for AT&T to make, given the guy's confession and all.

      Check out "Wardrobing" or "renting":
                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Return_fraud

                -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    22. Re:Iphones are not $99 by rikkards · · Score: 1

      I think the "for whatever reason" nixes the fraud (I am sure the wording isn't exactly that but you get my point). His reason was he never intended to keep it.
      However I think if he did take it back, he probably would never have put up the web page.

    23. Re:Iphones are not $99 by icebraining · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Here in Portugal we have the *right by law* to return those kind of products before 15 days after buying them. ISP contracts too, if you find that it sucks (for example, you have massive ping or you only get 3 of the 15Mbps from any servers but their own) you can cancel it, with full refund.

      But I don't believe it gets much abused. What are abused are nice warranties like some shops give you: My friend bought a 20GB IPod, an year after goes to the store and complains about it shutting down randomly (false) and they give him a new *40GB* version. And year after, he repeats it and gets a 80GB version.
      This is why we can't have nice things :|

    24. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      The actual cost of the phone is rather more transparent in Europe, where it's available contract-free due to legislation. It costs a little under one thousand dollars.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    25. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Unless you have a mindreading device and a time machine, good luck proving that.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    26. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Contract law is a lot more complicated than that. (And good thing, too. What you suggest is bad for honest consumers and retailers.)

      Have a read:

      http://www.expertlaw.com/library/business/contract_law.html

    27. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Sj0 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actual citation needed.

      The RIAA called downloading music a crime before it became criminal, there's nothing in that article to support the assertion that it's illegal to 'wardrobe'.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    28. Re:Iphones are not $99 by EMeta · · Score: 1

      For the most part, phone companies want customers who think that. People are lazy and easily swayed, and the telcoms figure they can get more profit off the ones who end up keeping it (like, I may add, the story writer decided) than the restocking costs them. They don't offer the 30-day deal because they have to.

    29. Re:Iphones are not $99 by bentcd · · Score: 1

      Eh? If I buy a product that comes with a contract saying "you can return it for whatever reason within the first 30 days for a full refund" then returning it for any reason is _not_ fraud.

      Taking advantage of the agreed terms of a contract is perfectly legal.

      The following is a good rule of thumb: A contract is not a computer program. (Also, a law is not a computer program.)

      A contract is an agreement between human beings and as such all sorts of social constructs and cultural traditions come into play that are usually not specifically mentioned in the contract. If a judge finds that you entered into a contract dishonestly, or in bad faith, or with the intention of sticking it to the contractual counterpart, he is quite likely to come down on you like a ton of bricks. That sort of business environment is just not healthy to society at large and needs to be aggressively guarded against. (Also: judges aren't computer programmers, they're lawyers. It's a different discipline even if there may be similarities.)

      As a corollary for programmers: Just because you think you have found an exploitable loophole in the "system" doesn't mean that you actually /have/.

      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    30. Re:Iphones are not $99 by tgd · · Score: 1

      Sign your soul away?

      Its $60 a month.

      Personally, if such a thing as a soul existed, mine would be worth vastly more than $60 a month.

      But it did sound dramatic, I suppose.

    31. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been using AT&T (Cingular) for about 8 years. I just signed up for a contract for the 2nd time. I was buying phones already unlocked for the past few years but to be honest it wasn't worth paying more. I haven't had a problem with the service, and in all that time I have had maybe a dozen dropped calls. Just got myself and the wife new iphones. She got the 8GB 3g, and I the 16GB 3GS.

      I was already using ATT so there was no reason not to have a contract for 2 years in order to save money on the phones.

      Not everyone jumps around on phone carriers like they are cheap whores. Some of us stick with what works. Exclusive phones should be outlawed and all phones available to all carriers. The only problem is that then everyone would go to the most reliable carrier with the best service.

    32. Re:Iphones are not $99 by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      Indeed - by that reasoning, most phones, even the high end ones, are "free" [if you take a contract].

      This idea of paying for the phone and signing yourself into a contract sounds like the worst of both worlds, but maybe that's just because of what we're used to in the UK.

    33. Re:Iphones are not $99 by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

      As a corollary for programmers: Just because you think you have found an exploitable loophole in the "system" doesn't mean that you actually /have/.

      Except we aren't talking about a loophole, we're talking about an explicit contractual term.

    34. Re:Iphones are not $99 by subreality · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's well established law. If you buy something with the intention of returning it, you're not acting in good faith. It's simple fraud.

      Citation needed.

      I've just spent some time googling around on this one. The term for this seems to be "Wardrobing". There's a stub article, but nothing about law. Nor did any turn up in any of my searching. If it's well-established law, I'd expect it to be a FAQ answered by many retailers. It's not.

      I also fail to see how it is fraud, unless there are complicating circumstances, such as trying to return an item purchased at another store, or keeping the accessories, or other underhandedness... But if there's no deception, and they have a "for any reason" return policy, how could it be fraud?

      On a practical note, several times I have returned things to a local chain with a 100% refund policy, and stated directly that I had no intention to keep it unless I was either too lazy to return it, or unexpectedly impressed with the product, and since neither had happened, please take it back... And they always have. They've certainly never suggested that it was illegal, or even against the spirit of the return policy. (I also think it's ethical, given the circumstances. That's certainly debatable, but outside the scope of this post.)

    35. Re:Iphones are not $99 by lwright84 · · Score: 1

      lol.. I get what you're trying to say, but it in absolutely NO way has the same functionality whatsoever. That's like saying my Geo Metro has the same functionality as your Lexus since they both use gasoline in their engines (both comprised of a number of cylinders!) to drive from point A to point B).

    36. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As an established family and working man I would like to be able to make a phone call when i need to. cell phone - check
      As a Gemini that likes to know a little about a lot of things I would like access to my RSS feed reader when i want to. smart phone with data plan - check
      As a easily distracted person on a train I would like access a reasonably priced library of time wasters. DS Lite, PSP, Yo-yo - check
      As a person with ears ... MP3 - check

      I would expect these things to not change in 2 years considering my youngest child is 5 now and I have joined the _V_ictory Club.

      So whats so bad about being in a contract for a phone with features that i want in a price point i can afford? nothing.

    37. Re:Iphones are not $99 by bentcd · · Score: 1

      Except we aren't talking about a loophole, we're talking about an explicit contractual term.

      Actually, no. The contract doesn't say that you are free to ruthlessly exploit the returns clause for your own benefit and established social norms dictate that you shouldn't. For this reason your day in court may end up a disappointment to you.

      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    38. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 1

      Yes, but ATT pay as you go plans no longer allow for unlimited data.

      --
      If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
    39. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your wikipedia link clearly calls that particular behaviour 'return abuse' as opposed to other behaviours there clearly called 'return fraud'. It's abusive, not fraudulent, ergo bad but not a crime.

      besides, how is the intent here not the case, anyway? They definitely intended to keep the device for as long as the move would take. After that, they would discover not to have a need for the device anymore, because they are no longer moving... Is there a contract that specifically requires an intent with a specific minimum term of the intent? No, the contract says 'you must pay every month and keep it for 2 years or bring it back before 30 days'. Well, that means you can intend and choose to bring it back before 30 days.

    40. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Sun.Jedi · · Score: 1

      The only problem is that then everyone would go to the most reliable carrier with the best service.

      That doesn't sound, look, or feel like a problem unless the rates changed as a result.

    41. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      Do people really buy in to the BS about an Iphone being $99? IT's only $99 if you sign your soul away for 2 years. The mobile carriers here are so fortunate to have an ignorant populace that is eager to go through the mental gymnastics required to truly believe that their iphone only costed $99.

      What set the rant off -- like I said, elitist prick hyperbole :)

    42. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Sancho · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's all that unreasonable. Intent is very important in law. If he bought the phone with the intent of using it and then returning it, I could believe that a judge would find that fraudulent.

    43. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      Given that in RingTFA, it also specifically said they planned to return it within 30 days, it literally IS only $99. For them.

      I was therefore eligible for the $99 iPhone. What's more, AT&T has a clause in their contract where you can opt out within 30 days without paying the early termination fee. So, an iPhone would be cheaper than a dedicated GPS device (most of which don't play music), and I could return it when we were done.

    44. Re:Iphones are not $99 by oblivionboy · · Score: 1

      They probably understood it perfectly well. Its not like you have a monopoly on smarts in the world. Its amazing the amount of hostility there is to the iPhone on slashdot sometimes. It makes me think you guys are missing the point. Its obvious there were a million other possible solutions, but the iPhone is KNOWN to work with AGPS (cell tower assisted -- otherwise I doubt the whole thing would have worked, given that it were probably inside a big truck), and its also well understood.

      But the point is that what they WANTED to use was an iPhone. So they did. So DEAL WITH IT.

      Sheesh.

    45. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Graymalkin · · Score: 1

      Yeah that's not going to really work in the United States. AT&T ended their unlimited data plan for GoPhone users back in November of last year. This leaves two data options there, ad-hoc which is 1/KB or the data packages which are 1MB for $4.99 (0.5/KB) and 100MB for $19.99 (0.2/KB). These prices are the same for the GoPhone (pay as you go) and monthly prepaid plans. At those data rates browsing the web is pretty damn expensive. Take the Engadget mobile page, it weighs in at about 128KB without clicking on any of the individual stories. Using the above prepaid prices a single load of the page will cost you either $1.28, $0.64, or $0.25. Using the web on a smartphone isn't terribly attractive if a mobile version of a web page costs you a quarter to view. The RSS feed is about 160KB but at least gives you all the front-page stories in a single go (for $0.32).

      Sprint doesn't offer prepaid plans. Verizon has 99 "mobile web" offerings on their pre-paid plans but it doesn't detail what exactly that entails as they also have a $15/day "mobile broadband" plan. Verizon also requires any smartphones to be purchased with a contracted data plan (attached to a voice plan). It makes sense then to assume their 99 "mobile web" is only available on their pre-paid handsets which are most assuredly not smartphones. T-Mobile no longer offers pre-paid unlimited data plans for phones or data cards. The only pre-paid plan they have available is a data plan for the Sidekick.

      --
      I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
    46. Re:Iphones are not $99 by intheshelter · · Score: 1

      Like it or not, they ARE $99. The rest of those costs are part of your contract. Same with ANY other phone.

    47. Re:Iphones are not $99 by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      I've been on the net too long. I saw "wardrobing" and parsed it as "war-drobing" and wondered how the war- prefix (a la "wardialing", ref. the sequential dialing program from WarGames) could possibly applied to data storage robots.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    48. Re:Iphones are not $99 by ITIL+Prince · · Score: 1

      You obviously don't run a business. By allowing a "loophole" such as this, AT&T and Best Buy are counting on human nature. If you actually read the article, at the end he mentions that it has become "precious" to him and that he might not return it. The "try before you buy" model is tried and true. It works, because people don't always return the stuff. Maybe they're lazy and don't around to it, maybe they decide to keep it on purpose. Rebates work the same way - would you say that someone who filed their rebate is irresponsible? Read more Wired articles. Free is a good business model, as long as not everything you do is free. The key to success is knowing what to give away and what to charge for. You see, even if he returns the phone now, he's still going to pay for the first month of service, and that's money that AT&T keeps. There was a sale made here.

      --
      -Somebody stole this sig.
    49. Re:Iphones are not $99 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. Note that two of the primary sources for that wikipeda article are the "National Retail Federation" and the "Loss Prevention Research Council".

    50. Re:Iphones are not $99 by mr_matticus · · Score: 1

      "Wardrobing" is not unlawful when there is a return policy specifically governing interactions with the customer, and the customer operates within the confines of that policy.

      The good faith requirement does exist, and can be pursued as a form of fraudulent misrepresentation. where there is no return policy or where the return policy is sufficiently qualified, because your contract requires a good faith intent of entering into the mutually agreed transaction.

      However, because the more typical retailer practice is to engage in a transaction referencing and incorporating a general return policy, that policy becomes the governing document. Return fraud is real, and it is illegal, but "renting" is neither. It's unethical and has an unmistakably negative impact on other consumers and the business itself, but it is also recognized as part of the cost of doing business. If your intent is to utilize the store's written and published policies, what you are doing is merely opportunistic, greedy, and unethical. It is not, however, illegal, let alone a crime.

      The above is true for California and most states adopting the Uniform Commercial Code. There are some states, however, where this practice may indeed be illegal by statute--as I recall, some of the upper Midwestern states may have passed more restrictive return fraud laws.

      Of course, as I've said previously, it's all about balance and acceptable risk. When a liberal return policy is abused to the point of causing unusually high losses, that policy will be reconsidered and tweaked. Ultimately, it is further restricted, which harms those customers who legitimately had cause to return the item, and because of more restrictive policies, no longer can. Abuse of return policies was, after all, the impetus of restocking fees.

      Note the kinds of products most often carrying restocking fees: GPS units, portable computers, cellular phones--all the kinds of things that might be purchased for a specific purpose (a vacation, a cross-country move, a road trip) and then returned.

      Though this practice is not fraudulent and not illegal as return fraud, depending on how high profile it is, it might be unjust enrichment--your use of the product for a period of time had some material value to you, and the retailer bore all the risk and suffered the entire loss of value in the product. Of course your liability there would only be the retailer's losses as a result of your action, and only if they bothered to pursue it.

    51. Re:Iphones are not $99 by subreality · · Score: 1

      Put it in another light: He signed a contract with the intention to exercise the "return the phone and cancel the contract" clause. Is exercising that clause illegal just because he was 100% sure he wanted to do it instead of only 20% sure?

      I agree a court COULD find it fraudulent (I don't think they would, but juries are fickle), but I disagree with the GGP's assertion that this is established case law, because I'm completely unable to find any cases.

    52. Re:Iphones are not $99 by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1
      I thought we were talking about iPhones, not some crappy Nokia device that is nowhere near comparable hardware wise as well as software? If a Nokia N78 only costs 230 unlocked, how can you think of calling it comparable?

      You seems to completely miss out on my point of missing features like Visual Voicemail which is not available on T-Mobile in the US and T-Mobile also does not use a frequency supported by the iPhone for their limited 3G service so you are stuck with Edge.

      Regardless, I'm not an American and I"m quite happy with Fido up here in Canada where I pay about 79 CAD plus tax for my service with a data plan that is more than sufficient for my needs.

      I never had any problem getting service when I was in Europe on my iPhone as I kept my data roaming switched off like it is by default.

      I don't think you understand the appeal of the iPhone. It is more than just a phone. It is also an iPod and it has a vast library of applications unmatched by any other mobile platform.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
  3. $99 iPhone ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where did you manage to get an iPhone without a contract? All the iPhones I've seen have cost way more than $99

    1. Re:$99 iPhone ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why, off the back of a truck, of course!

    2. Re:$99 iPhone ? by mr100percent · · Score: 0, Redundant

      The iPhone 3G is now priced at $99 with contract, and the 3G S is now priced at $199 and $299, depending on 16 or 32GB

    3. Re:$99 iPhone ? by StackedCrooked · · Score: 2, Informative

      675 EUR for an iPhone 3GS (32 GB) that is unbound to a provider or contract. That's the price here in Belgium.

    4. Re:$99 iPhone ? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      675 EUR? Is that 200 + VAT + Recycling tax?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    5. Re:$99 iPhone ? by StackedCrooked · · Score: 1

      It's 557.84 + VAT. I don't know about recycling tax exactly..

    6. Re:$99 iPhone ? by StackedCrooked · · Score: 1
  4. Only if you have access to the hardware by sxeraverx · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    From TFA, the "hack" only works if you have physical access to the phone. Security always fails when you give someone physical access. Nothing to see here, move along.

  5. Moving company? by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What peace of mind do you get from knowing where your stuff is? Is there anything you can do with that information?

    I wonder if it isn't more a matter of control that you feel like you're giving up by letting professionals do their job. Do you also insist on driving everywhere instead of taking a plane or bus?

    1. Re:Moving company? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      It might be easier for them to watch the location of the delivery, as opposed to repeatedly calling the removal people to find out where they were.

      I am interested in getting phones with something like google latitude because a lot of our calls amount to "where are you" or "when will you be home", etc. And I hate talking on a phone when I am in transit.

    2. Re:Moving company? by iffer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I see the point of knowing here your stuff is if you have stuff that you absolutely cannot loose, but in thit case you probably wouldn't send it using a relocation company.

    3. Re:Moving company? by Malc · · Score: 1

      It's how much you trust the moving company, isn't it? I've used movers/removers for both international and in-city moves, and there's a world of difference between them.

    4. Re:Moving company? by webreaper · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The parent's point was that why do you need to continually call the removal people to find out where they are?

      If you trust the company to move your stuff, then they'll get it to your new place as soon as they can. If they're late, they should call you. If you don't trust the company to move your stuff, then hire somebody else, or hire a van and move the stuff yourself.

      Seems totally paranoid to want to 'track' the removal company, if you ask me!

    5. Re:Moving company? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, a friend of mine lost his stuff in a move, and it took the moving company some eight months to find it. They wouldn't admit it was lost (so he could claim insurance and buy replacements), but I don't know what else it was doing for all that time. So, in at least one case, it would have been helpful to be able to tell them "it's on pier 8 in Rotterdam" (or wherever). The original author wasn't trying to control the people doing the move, just wanting to know how it was going.

    6. Re:Moving company? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, it helps you plan and anticipate.

      "Do we have time to go eat something before they arrive ?"
      "Will they be on time to do X or Y today".

    7. Re:Moving company? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      I suppose it depends on how much trust you have in the moving company. Taxi drivers in my city are notorious for taking the long way to their destination to get more money. Maybe these movers charged by the hour.

      Its an interesting hack all the same. I think people will take this kind information for granted in the near future.

    8. Re:Moving company? by hattig · · Score: 1

      If you read the article, you would find out that the delivery company arrived several days early, and they wouldn't have known because they thought it was a bright idea to not travel to their new house and set it up, but to visit a relative a plane flight away instead.

      I mean, it's bloody obvious to me that once they've got the lorry loaded, they're going to drive straight there and then want to unload it. They don't make money unloading it into temporary storage, or hanging around waiting.

      --
      "You must wait a little bit before using this resource; please try again later." WHY? How can I have a quick 5 minute Slashdot browse, write a few replies at the same time, and then have to wait 5 minutes to be able to post each one! FAIL. FAIL. FAIL. Just let people post at most ten times in an hour or something, not this useless scheme.

    9. Re:Moving company? by PhilJC · · Score: 1

      Surely its obvious what's happening here...

      1. Boy wants new toy
      2. Wife/Girlfriend says no
      3. Boy invents spurious tech excuse to create the illusion that it would actually being useful/needed
      4. Profit (for Apple anyway)

      This episode of Sesame Street was bought to you by the word: Machiavellian.

    10. Re:Moving company? by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      You fail psychology forever.

      Knowing definitively where your things are probably does help you feel like you've got more control over the situation, which does give peace of mind.

      Emotions and logic aren't remotely related. The reason for the peace of mind doesn't mean it's not peace of mind. "Where's my stuff?! -- oh, there it is."

      --
      It's been a long time.
    11. Re:Moving company? by webreaper · · Score: 1

      If the guy was moving house, and packed the van and then went to visit a relative, then what's happening here is that the guy is being a complete and utter fool.

    12. Re:Moving company? by fast+turtle · · Score: 1

      Nope: what the real problem is, is they want to know where their stuff is so they can plan on being at the new flat to receive it. Otherwise, they can go to a ball game, museum or simply stay in their hotel until they get called the day after the truck arrived to deliver and their stuff is now in storage at the companies warehouse at $99 per month plus it'll now take them 4 days to get it delivered from the warehouse, meaning they spend another week in the damn hotel.

      --
      Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
    13. Re:Moving company? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi, I wrote TFA.

      1) Yes.
      2) It was her idea.
      3) See 2)
      4) Everybody wins! Isn't capitalism great?

  6. Hmmm... by Facegarden · · Score: 1

    I, too, want to advertise for free on Slashdot. Who do I contact?
    -Taylor

    --
    Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
    1. Re:Hmmm... by daveime · · Score: 1

      Steve Jobs.

      Once your hardware / software has gone through a rigorous screening process (which basically involves adding a lower-case "i" in front of the name, and painting it some gaudy colour like neon pink or turquoise), you may then advertise it free free on iSlashdot for life.

  7. Google Lattitude by iffer · · Score: 4, Informative

    Won't google lattitude achieve exactly the same thing? I have it installed on my BB and I can get the location of half a dozen of my friends that have added me to their "friends" list on their devices (both BB and iPhones). There is also a google maps gadget you can use to check the location from your PC. What advantages do you get from using MobileMe and Find My iPhone ?

    1. Re:Google Lattitude by jdgeorge · · Score: 1

      Won't google lattitude achieve exactly the same thing? I have it installed on my BB and I can get the location of half a dozen of my friends that have added me to their "friends" list on their devices (both BB and iPhones). There is also a google maps gadget you can use to check the location from your PC.

      What advantages do you get from using MobileMe and Find My iPhone ?

      What? Google just wants to own all your information and provide The Man with the means to track your entire life and show you diabolically targeted advertisements that are horrifically targeted to your needs.

      The iPhone, on the other hand, gives you unique style and coolness, and frees you from the fear that someone might be tracking your every move.

    2. Re:Google Lattitude by JHromadka · · Score: 1

      Does Latitude work with iPhones now? It didn't used to.

      --
      "The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved." -- John Ashcroft
  8. "find my iphone" is EXPENSIVE by Werrismys · · Score: 2, Informative

    The "find my iphone" feature requires a MobileMe account. MobileMe is an expensive set of web based services that can easily be substituted with Flickr and Google's stuff. So, 79â a year for tracking my phone i n case I lose it? No thanks.

    --
    'Once scientists, even the dim-witted social scientists, get muzzled, the Western Civilization is finished.' - oldhack
    1. Re:"find my iphone" is EXPENSIVE by Mordaximus · · Score: 1

      You don't pay cash for google and flickr. Don't presume there aren't costs to you though.

    2. Re:"find my iphone" is EXPENSIVE by MrCrassic · · Score: 1
      It's even more expensive, considering the following caveats:
      • It has horrible uptime. When I had the service, it worked extremely well...until it didn't, which was very often. I pay a LOT less for Exchange via Activesync and got three nines.
      • Google Latitude is free, and works with ANY phone that supports Google Maps. This includes Blackberry, Symbian and Windows Mobile. I just tested mine on my T-Mobile Dash, and it gives me my location on the screen.

      Apart from that, each and every service offered by MobileMe can be replaced with something that's either free or inexpensive. It's a trap, though it looks good with your Macbook while sipping on a Choco Mint Frap and reading the New York Times!

  9. Who moves from Chicago? Obamaland! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who in their right mind moves from Chicago to Oakland?

    At least Chicago has a local hockey team.

  10. Privacy concern? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you can track the iPhone of someone else if you know their MobileMe password. Duh, I would never have guessed that you can actually change someone's settings if you have their password (and user name)!

    1. Re:Privacy concern? by iffer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Its much easier to track someone with Lattitute. Send them a request from your phone and when you get a minute with their phone acceept the request and you're away. When you can exit google maps it still continutes tracking the phone so unless they manually turn off the lattitude feature (and it does ask you every time you exit the app) they will be none the wiser. I'm not a lawyer but I would bet this is probablt illegal.

    2. Re:Privacy concern? by MrCrassic · · Score: 1

      It's not illegal, nor is it stalking (technically). The person being tracked did allow the tracker to find his or her location, whereas stalkers usually have to trespass or violate privacy to track their "targets."

    3. Re:Privacy concern? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does Google Latitude work on the iPhone? When I go to google.com/latitude, I see a "coming soon" on the iPhone.

  11. Is this even legal in most places? by syousef · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I thought you needed a warrant or at least a private investigator's license to track people by GPS without their knowledge.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    1. Re:Is this even legal in most places? by syousef · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ahh... yes.
      And Cheney had a valid warrant for every single act of spying he did.

      But a bunch of college kids don't have the handy excuse, nor the political clout to keep themselves out of prison over a silly stunt.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    2. Re:Is this even legal in most places? by freedom_india · · Score: 1

      Touche my friend.
      Well said and well deserved[by me].

      --
      "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
  12. Cheap cell gps tracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I've been using my i415 with prepaid boost mobile and a program called Instamapper. Instamaper is free and for me it works without a data plan. So I don't pay anything extra to use it.

    -t0ny

    1. Re:Cheap cell gps tracking by mgblst · · Score: 1

      Then go fucking do something interesting with it, right up a fucking story, and you may get it published. What is the point of every wanker coming up and saying the same shit. Maybe it takes an iphone to actually get people being creative, and having the fucking amazing ability to create a story about it, rather than writing some wanky useless comment.

  13. Re:Who moves from Chicago? Obamaland! by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 1

    I've been through Oakland. It's nice.

    Just lock your doors, keep the windows rolled up, and don't make eye contact with anyone. And for chrissakes, don't stop!

  14. Think of the lawyers! by fantomas · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Only in the USA do people shout "think of the lawyers!" before considering innovations in technology.... ;-)

    The guy is only tracking his own stuff. He doesn't know who's driving the truck, if they changed every 100 miles and different people are in the cab from when they picked up his stuff, if they are in the cab when the vehicle is stationary or if they've gone off to a cafe or home to sleep for the night. He only knows where his iphone is. For all he knows his stuff might have been shifted to another vehicle, he doesn't even know if it's in the same truck.

    1. Re:Think of the lawyers! by syousef · · Score: 1

      Only in the USA do people shout "think of the lawyers!" before considering innovations in technology.... ;-)

      Well that's hilarious considering I'm posting from Australia.

      I'm not saying he should be sued, but I am saying that risking doing something so illegal for no good reason is silly. He could easily inform the trucking company that he was tracking the truck and if they don't like it he can go with another.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    2. Re:Think of the lawyers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm unconvinced that it's illegal.

    3. Re:Think of the lawyers! by scuba964 · · Score: 1

      Only in the USA do people shout "think of the lawyers!" before considering innovations in technology.... ;-)

      It's a shout of warning, not concern.

    4. Re:Think of the lawyers! by VoltageX · · Score: 1

      If they're a decently sized company, they probably track their own trucks, too.

      --
      "Anonymous could not immediately be reached for further comment." - International Business Times
    5. Re:Think of the lawyers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I apologise on behalf of australians for the crap this bloke posts.

  15. So much for RTFA... by KlaymenDK · · Score: 2, Informative

    "As for returning the iPhone, I keep meaning to, but somehow it has become...precious...to me. Maybe Apple will claim a new iPhone user out of all this after all."

    Where does it say he threw it away? That would be an idiotic thing to do in any case.

    1. Re:So much for RTFA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wooosh?

    2. Re:So much for RTFA... by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1
      I think it must've been a little more like this:

      As for returning the iPhone, I keep meaning to, but somehow it has become...precious...to me. *gollum* *gollum* Maybe Apple will claim a new iPhone user out of all this after all.

      At least, that's the first thing I thought of, reading that line.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
  16. More accurate summary by kklein · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Guy wants to do something bizarre and paranoid. Looks for an honest way of doing it. Concludes that would be too expensive, and notices that if he pretends to want a new cellphone, and pretends to want a set of web-based services for it, he can get them for $99, claim he doesn't like the phone or service, and cancel them up to 30 days later.

    Plan works as intended and results in the exact same situation as if he didn't do the bizarre and paranoid thing (movers tell you they'll be at the destination at one time, but come at another).

    Guy expresses shock that setting a phone up to report its location to a web service results in --gasp!-- the phone reporting its location to a web service!!! Notes that if you don't keep your web password or your phone secured, your security could be compromised!

    Finishes by admitting he likes the phone, which is a relief because this isn't a story so much about hardware, but someone's lack of honesty and willingness to rip companies off in order to do a bizarre and paranoid thing.

    1. Re:More accurate summary by Renraku · · Score: 1

      Oh, come off it.

      People should be exactly as honest to companies, as the companies are to them. If the company said, "Look, this phone is $200, and you can pay for it now, or you can pay half of it now, and we can lock you into an agreement for two years and recoup the cost tenfold" it might be fine, but they instead say, "Look, this phone is $600, and you can pay for it now, or we can give you $500 off the retail price*."

      Cell phone companies make it clear that it's just about the mighty dollar, and why should we treat them any differently?

      *Must sign up for two year agreement full of bells and whistles that you probably won't use much of, and if you do use them, they're capped, throttled, and reduced to near uselessness to save a few bucks per account-year.

      --
      Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
    2. Re:More accurate summary by gravyface · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't understand the point of this entire exercise. Where did he think the truck was going, on a Ferris Bueller-esque "joy ride" across the country?

      He had his dates mixed up as well: movers were scheduled to come in at 8am on the 5th, Best Buy was open at 10am on the 5th, and after buying the phone, he says the movers are coming the next morning, which would would've been the 6th.

      I don't have an iPhone, but would it get a signal while packed in a cardboard box while in a fully-enclosed metal container?

      --
      body massage!
    3. Re:More accurate summary by Sj0 · · Score: 0

      I don't have an iPhone, but would it get a signal while packed in a cardboard box while in a fully-enclosed metal container?

      PROTIP: This article is about an iPhone packed in a cardboard box while in a fully-enclosed metal container.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    4. Re:More accurate summary by FatAlb3rt · · Score: 1

      Get them before they get you? That's a pretty crappy approach in life, IMHO.

  17. UK Phone Contracts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    My Contract Mobile is less than £15.00 per month with 200 minutes included.
    Compare that to Vodaphone Pay as you go at 37p per min. It does not take a rocket scientist to work out the crossover point (40mins approx). I generally use between 100 & 130 minutes per month. That is not exactly expensive

    However back on topic, I wish I could get an iPhone for the equivalent of $99.00.

    1. Re:UK Phone Contracts by YourExperiment · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's very nice Mr. Cowardon, but you're not the demographic I'm talking about. I'm referring to the people who sign up to £30 or £40 contracts without even thinking about it, so they can have the very shiniest new handsets. Perhaps the minority require a thousand SMS and several GB of data a month, but I expect they're in the minority.

    2. Re:UK Phone Contracts by jd678 · · Score: 1

      37p per min? Where the hell are you getting that figure from. Vodafone is currently 20p/min payg.

      And even then vodafone's a bad example. There are cheaper payg providers that'll place your 130 minutes at less than £15 per month.

    3. Re:UK Phone Contracts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      A nice example is my brother & sister in law. Combined their paying £110 per month for their shiny blackberrys.

      Oh, We get free email! We get free IM! We can call each other for free!

      sure, sure, whatever...

    4. Re:UK Phone Contracts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Compare that to Vodaphone Pay as you go at 37p per min

      Are you serious? In Germany I pay EUR 0.12 per minute (or per SMS) for all domestic calls.

    5. Re:UK Phone Contracts by marsu_k · · Score: 1

      Even that seems expensive. Payg here in .fi is (depending on the telco) about 0.065€ /min or /SMS, which would translate to about 0.056 £.

    6. Re:UK Phone Contracts by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      The British just pay too much for things.

      My phone is about £.18/min during the week before 8pm, and £.01/min on evenings and weekends.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    7. Re:UK Phone Contracts by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      Except Vodafone's (and other mobile companies) have lower margins in the UK then the rest of Europe. I blame Carphone Warehouse myself.

    8. Re:UK Phone Contracts by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      So the British part of the company pays too much for things too. There's no "except" about it.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    9. Re:UK Phone Contracts by teh+kurisu · · Score: 1

      I'm one of those people that has more inclusive minutes and texts than I'll ever use, and although I'm probably paying over the odds it means that I can use my phone to my heart's content without every worrying about exceeding my limit and incurring extra charges. The fixed monthly fee makes it easy to budget for.

      What I do think is unfortunate is that because handset subsidy is so common, there isn't nearly as much choice between contracts if you want a SIM-only contract.

    10. Re:UK Phone Contracts by YourExperiment · · Score: 1

      What I do think is unfortunate is that because handset subsidy is so common, there isn't nearly as much choice between contracts if you want a SIM-only contract.

      Spot on - you've put this much better than I could. My post came across more like I was moaning about people on expensive contracts, but of course they can do what they like, it's no concern of mine. :)

      What really bothers me is that I spend very little on actual calls or texts, but my phone is still very important to me for all of its other features. I'd love to have a new smartphone, but SIM-only contracts offer very limited choice, and if you try to buy one SIM-free the prices are truly ridiculous.

  18. Obligatory Bugs reference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They should have turned left at Alberqueque.

    (see map on TFA)

  19. Cheap GPS logger? by mu22le · · Score: 1

    Question on a related problem:
    I'm looking for a cheap GPS logger that can save a timestamp - coordinate pair every few seconds. Main requisite is a long lasting battery and memory (an SD card slot is fine), bonus points if it has bluetooth that can be turned on if needed. Any advice?
    It won't tell you where your stuff is but will reveal a lot of interesting info on where it has been :)

    1. Re:Cheap GPS logger? by corsec67 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I bought a Garmin Venture CX for a similar purpose; to record where I have been so that I can interpolate the location of pictures I took with where I was, based on the timestamp of the picture.

      It has a feature where every day can be logged to the MicroSD card, so while the built-in memory is a bit limited, you can have basically unlimited storage in the MicroSD card.
      Get some good batteries and it lasts a while. (Hybrid batteries like the Sanyo Eneloops are very much recommended.)

      No Bluetooth, but it does have a USB interface that works well in Ubuntu, and as a bonus you can power it off a laptop/cell phone charger. My GPS has spent a while on the dash of a firetruck plugged in recording where I have been.

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
    2. Re:Cheap GPS logger? by ezzzD55J · · Score: 1

      iblue 747.

    3. Re:Cheap GPS logger? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      Look for stuff photographers use for geotagging. Sony makes a good one (expensive). Some you can set to do every second, minute, hour, everytime object moves X distance.

      Check http://www.bioneural.net/2008/03/05/an-abc-of-geotagging-photos-on-the-mac/ out. I think that's the right page, I'm on dialup atm.

      You basically get to select your features: Battery life, standard AAs or built in Li-ion. Plain USB device or custom software. Etc.

      The most 'open' mount as thumb drives and have a text file in a standard format.

  20. Not better than commodity GPS trackers? by w0mprat · · Score: 1

    These are remarkably common gadgets and can be had surprisingly cheap. http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_pg_2/103-3580931-0563800?ie=UTF8&rs=&keywords=gps%20tracker&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Agps%20tracker&page=2

    Plenty of choice, and some for even about half the price, and in theory do a better job than the iPhone with more battery life.

    --
    After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
  21. Ahem...not the right device for the job by FreeUser · · Score: 1

    This device wouldn't have been fit for purpose:

    quoting the first and second link you provided:

    [...]
    - Built-in SIRF StarIII Chipset, excellent for fixing the position even at a weak signal status.
    - Built-in GSM/GPRS module, supports 2-frequency GSM 900/1800 MHz, working in Europe (not in America).
    [...]

    (emphesis mine)

    Since he wanted to track goods shipping from Chicago to California (i.e. in America), this device wouldn't have worked for him at all. US GSM carriers use different frequencies than Europe (which is why those of us using cell phones in both places need Quad-band phones). Now there may well be a North American variant of this device that would work (I don't have time to dig it up if it exists), but the links as shown do not provide a viable alternative for task.

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
  22. Oakland tech by kyashan · · Score: 1

    Right, also Oakland was famous for this "high-tech system" to triangulate gun shots 8)

    --
    "La presi e te la pagai (480.000 Lire)"
  23. apologies and serves my bias right by fantomas · · Score: 1

    Apologies and serves my bias right, I just assumed somebody shouting "what about the legal issues" was from the USA seeing as it's such a lawyer heavy culture. Apologies all US citizens.

    Too many lawyers there, too many in the UK from where I am posting, in my opinion sounds like you've got a few as well...

    I'd argue my original point: you could say he's not tracking the people, he's not tracking the truck, he's tracking his phone. He could argue that he has no idea about the whereabouts of anything else. If he'd stuck it onto the truck or on the truck driver's clothing maybe you could argue he's tracking them?

    1. Re:apologies and serves my bias right by bentcd · · Score: 1

      I'd argue my original point: you could say he's not tracking the people, he's not tracking the truck, he's tracking his phone.

      I don't think there's anyway that defense is going to fly or law enforcement would have used it decades ago. "No, Your Honor, we weren't tracking the suspect we were tracking the tracking device that we initially put in the booth of his car."

      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    2. Re:apologies and serves my bias right by syousef · · Score: 1

      Thanks for your apology and explanation. Rare here on slashdot these days. Much appreciated.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    3. Re:apologies and serves my bias right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Police are held to different standards (somtimes higher, sometimes lower.)

      In my state, it's illegal to monitor people with closed circuit video cameras without their consent. However, it's not illegal to monitor equipment or property with closed circuit video cameras, even if the same people are sitting at the same equipment day in and day out. Sounds very similar to the GPS analogy.

  24. Bizarre and paranoid? by argent · · Score: 1

    Maybe for a machine, but it's pretty normal for us mere humans to worry about where our stuff is.

    1. Re:Bizarre and paranoid? by n7ytd · · Score: 1

      But the deal is, he paid supposed professionals to handle this for him.
      You pay a moving company to take care of your stuff. You get insurance for any stuff that's broken or missing when they arrive.
      If his plan was to avoid the headache of moving everything himself by paying somebody to take care of it, why bother to give yourself a headache second-guessing the movers? If you are concerned about the safety of your stuff because you don't trust the movers, you've hired the wrong movers.

    2. Re:Bizarre and paranoid? by argent · · Score: 1

      But the deal is, he paid supposed professionals to handle this for him.

      I've had supposed professionals make mistakes in the past, now and then. That's why the smart money keeps an eye on the job they're doing, if that's feasible. Well, normally you don't get that option with movers...

      why bother to give yourself a headache second-guessing the movers?

      I don't see any place he said tracking the movers gave him a headache. It sounded like he had a blast.

  25. settings... by robogobo · · Score: 1

    *switches Find my iPhone off*

  26. Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    News @ 11, product (with additional services) works as advertised (badly)!

    Why is it, when some arsehole uses an Iphone to do something, we're all meant to be amazed? And there is no such thing as a $99 Iphone. You are only kidding yourself.

  27. You've All Missed The Point by brundlefly · · Score: 1

    You have all missed the point of the article. It's not that you couldn't have done this 10 years ago with any GPS-enabled tracking device. It's that iPhone users are *doing it now*, and they are *smarter* and *cooler* than you.

  28. Paranoia is a good thing, sometimes by BenEnglishAtHome · · Score: 1

    It's a common scam for fly-by-night moving companies to offer a great price in return for full payment up-front. You pay them and they pick up your stuff. Then they cart it to the new place, park a half a block away, and knock on your door. They tell you they can't unload unless you pay them another thousand dollars or so. (The excuses they come up with range from stupid to outrageous to simply "We've got your stuff and we're holding it for ransom.")

    Under the laws of my state, since you've already paid money, their failure to turn over your goods isn't a criminal theft in which the police are willing to become involved. Rather, it's simply a civil contract dispute. After all, you gave them permission to take possession of your goods; now you're just arguing over the price. (Getting a patrol officer to take real, physical action to secure your belongings pursuant to the obvious criminal fraud is theoretically possible but, in practice, almost never happens. All the moving company has to do is drive away when you call the cops. The police aren't going to pursue until they hear what you have to say. Once you've had your say, even if the cop agrees with you, department procedure will probably require the incident be turned over to a detective to make the fraud case. By that time, your stuff is long gone.) You can sue to get your stuff back but that usually doesn't work. The fly-by-night simply flies away and you never see your stuff again.

    In those cases, it sure would be nice to know where your stuff is located so you can load up a few friends, grab a couple of shotguns, and go get your stuff back.

    1. Re:Paranoia is a good thing, sometimes by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1

      In those cases, it sure would be nice to know where your stuff is located so you can load up a few friends, grab a couple of shotguns, and go get your stuff back.

      Thus escalating what is, as you described, a 'civil contract dispute' into armed robbery, threatening with menaces? Nice. Not that I'm condoning the moving company in that situation, far from it, but when -they- call the cops, regardless of who was in the right, if you and your pals are there with weapons, it's not the moving company employees that are going for a ride downtown in the back of the cop car.

      Even if you got your stuff back, what makes you think when you got home (you know, after unloading their truck onto what, exactly?) that the cops wouldn't be waiting there? Remember, the movers know where you live. Or maybe they might take offense (again, I have zero sympathy for them in this situation) and come pay you a visit themselves, and see how you like a shotgun in your face...

    2. Re:Paranoia is a good thing, sometimes by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      They tell you they can't unload unless you pay them another thousand dollars or so.

      Most people won't have a grand on-hand in cash, so they must be writing checks. Why not just call your bank at the first possible opportunity and stop payment on the check?

      Random online bank says:

      We will begin processing the stop payment at the time of the call; if the check has already cleared or in the process of clearing, the stop payment may not take effect prior to payment.

      I doubt any of these shysters are going to be bringing you to small claims court, they'll move on to their next mark.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  29. $99 iphone by martas · · Score: 1

    since when does an iphone cost $99? i thought it was $200 + sell your soul to at&t...

  30. Calm down, killer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The guy is only tracking his own stuff.

    No he's not. There are five paragraphs at the end of the article in a section called "Tracking Your Friends' iPhones". Really!

    Only in the USA do people shout...

    Does "syousef" look like an American name to you? ;-)
    Be careful, if you start throwing stereotypes around like that, you're liable to splash a little bit on yourself too.
    (Especially since you were intentionally vague about where YOU are from.)

  31. Unethical... by mi · · Score: 1

    I was therefore eligible for the $99 iPhone. What's more, AT&T has a clause in their contract where you can opt out within 30 days without paying the early termination fee.

    He bought the phone without even considering keeping it, thus acting in bad faith... If AT&T learns about this, I wouldn't blame them for refusing to let him off. Either way, the guy's action was unethical, and the claim, that it "only costs $99" is misleading...

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  32. OK, if you want to be serious. by BenEnglishAtHome · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I was making a bit of a joke but if you want to be serious, I can do that, too.

    I know of two cases where this scam was successfully overcome by the victim. In both of them, the victim told the guy who knocked on the door to come on in and get his money. When the fraudster stepped inside, the victim's mate (in both these cases, the scammers thought they were dealing solely with a defenseless woman) proceeded to beat the scammer varying degrees of senseless and then walk him back out to the truck to order the cargo unloaded. The cargo was duly unloaded (in one case, they just put everything on the front lawn, but at least they unloaded) and the scammers then beat a hasty retreat, never to be heard from again.

    People who pull scams like this generally have been on the wrong side of encounters with the cops before. They don't want to involve them again and are loathe to dial 911 unless the shit has really hit the fan and someone's bleeding. Thus, the judicious application of force or the threat of it, if done properly and in a low-key way, is a valid negotiating tool with cretins like this.

    Now, arming yourself and starting a confrontation is probably a bad plan. But arming yourself, finding your stuff, and stealing it back when the bad guys aren't around may be a workable one. YMMV.

    Personally, I've only used movers three times in my life and I've been very careful to select established, reputable firms. I don't hook up with dodgy characters to save a few buck. I think that's a better strategy, overall. But I am willing to grant that some physical force or the threat of it, employed properly so that the authorities are never involved, can be a reasonable approach.

    Sound better?

    PS - I had a scumbag brother-in-law who used this kink in the law to great advantage. He ripped off dozens of old ladies by finding out when coin collectors died. He would then approach the widows, offer to market the collections of their deceased spouses, pay them a small "advance" on what he assured them would be a big return, then leave with the coins. He never paid them another dime. There were a number of criminal complaints filed and his defense was always the same. "I paid her for the coins. There was no deal for anything else. This was not a theft. It's just a contract dispute." He beat the rap several times before, finally, the state got so many complaints that they opened a combined fraud case on him He settled for some pitiful amount of restitution and five years probation. From personal experience, I believe that people who pull these kinds of scams are cowards who won't call the police unless they're forced to and deserve a beating for their actions. So I don't apologize for taking a hard line on these situations.

  33. Or by Evro · · Score: 1

    ... you can use InstaMapper, which has an iPhone app, and works with some other devices.

    http://www.instamapper.com/howto.html

    --
    rooooar
  34. Apparently by Colin+Smith · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's primarily angst ridden geeks who worry about all the crap they've accreted.

     

    --
    Deleted
  35. Not about the iPhone by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    Fixed that for you. Yes, that was his point - this has been available on phones for years. Why do we need an article specifically for the Iphone, just because it finally joins the club? I thought Slashdot was once a place to find news on cutting edge technology - okay, I know we joke about stories turning up late, but...

    This story isn't about the iPhone. It's about a clever application of technology.

    If there's a similar older story about something similar being done a couple years ago with another phone (realtime, not the I-mailed-my-GPS-logger stories), then I'm speaking out of turn, but this seems new.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    1. Re:Not about the iPhone by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      But that's just it - it isn't new. You won't find a Slashdot story about it however, because no one considers it news - unless it mentions "On Your Iphone", which then turns the most mundane of stories into a front page headline (as with that recent story of "You can read our website ... On Your Iphone").

    2. Re:Not about the iPhone by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      But that's just it - it isn't new.

      I took a look yesterday before posting, and I couldn't find any similar stories that involved COTS parts and didn't required dedicated hardware or GPS reception or that could last the trip on batteries (everybody says Google Latitude will drain a battery in 4 hours, for example).

      If you have a link, please share, I'd love to know about non-Apple options.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    3. Re:Not about the iPhone by Jake+Griffin · · Score: 1

      everybody says Google Latitude will drain a battery in 4 hours, for example

      I don't. I've got Google Latitude on my G1, and it runs all the time, and I can go for up to 2 days without charging my phone, and that's with normal phone use too. If I didn't use it, it would probably last at least 3 days.

      --
      SIG FAULT: Post index out of bounds.
    4. Re:Not about the iPhone by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Good to know. Must be hardware-specific. The G1 looked like a really nice device (too bad there's no service in these parts).

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    5. Re:Not about the iPhone by Jake+Griffin · · Score: 1

      The next one coming out, the HTC Magic (aka "myTouch" on T-Mobile), is pretty cool too. It has more memory which supposedly does WONDERS for the speed of the thing, and a few other improvements as well. It's significantly smaller/more lightweight as well, which is a plus. It's not a slider though, so it doesn't have the built in keyboard the G1 has, which is a dealbreaker for me. The current virtual keyboard just isn't there yet in my opinion. The iPhone one is just barely good enough IMHO, but the Android one just doesn't even come close, so I gotta have the hardware keyboard...

      --
      SIG FAULT: Post index out of bounds.
    6. Re:Not about the iPhone by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      It's not a slider though, so it doesn't have the built in keyboard the G1 has, which is a dealbreaker for me.

      Yeah, same here. The Pre *might* finally be the phone I want (I need something that'll run on Verizon, the only real coverage around here), but the G1 has most of it, just can't make any phone calls. :) I wound up getting an LG EnV2 the other day as a hold-over (hard keyboard, will tether my eeePC).

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  36. Cheapest option by paihk · · Score: 1

    1. buy a GSM module. The cheapest ones don't even have GPRS. Ex - wavecom fastrack go. (http://www.wavecom.com/modules/movie/scenes/products/index.php?fuseAction=wirelessCPU&productName=fastrack_GO)
    2. Write a small application on the module to do the following:
    i. read the location using LBS(location based service) on the GSM network. It basically gives you the cell-id of the nearest GSM cell site (200m-1km accuracy)
    ii. send out an sms after every hour containing the location
    Total cost = $20-$30 for the module + $30 for a pre-paid sim card + $0.15/sms

  37. Two days before the day after tomorrow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Unfortunately, none of these were easily available on the day after the 4th of July."

    I'm pretty sure he meant to say the day before the 6th of July.