[JamminJ]

Quote:

---

it's not smart to force people to break contracts with other phone service providors just to get a new device.

---

You mean the same thing that EVERY phone company does?

[Wondercow]

Numbers would be in the 10's of millions (if not more) by now if Apple hadn't locked it into at&t only... Yet another bone-headed move by Apple...
Do you really think that Apple approached AT&T and said "hey, we've thought this through thoroughly and we think it'd be great for our customers to be locked into a contract with you for two years!"
Or is it possibly more realistic that AT&T said "if you want us to invest heavily in upgrading the technical functionality of our network, we need some assurance that we'll recoup those losses."
Personally, I think that the second scenario is much more likely.

[RoyceGB]

So much for the "iPhone will be cracked in two weeks"!

[Wondercow]

Well, since Apple DID design the phone from the ground up, they COULD have done it
I want an iPhone that works on my POTS line because I don't have a cellular phone. DAMN APPLE!! THEY designed it, they COULD have done it if they really wanted my business! There'd be hundreds of millions sold if they didn't cut out the largest user-base of telephony equipment! What were they thinking!!1!?!?!1?!!!one!!!
So your argument comes down to: sour grapes. Apple didn't do what you wanted, so they must be an evil company bent on depriving all consumers of reasonable options!

[Terrin]

I think Apple will try, but not to hard. Apple would rather make some money then no money. It knows many of the people unlocking the will not buy it otherwise, and that only real tech savvy people will unlock the iPhone. Moreover, the only thing Apple can do is re-lock the iPhone using a software update. The fact that the iPhone has been unlocked shows that it is a software lock. Finally, pretty much only people interested in using T-Mobile in the US could benefit from any unlock (I know there are a few smaller local carriers as well).
Apple can re-lock it today, but it will be unlocked again tomorrow. In addition, in the US it is legal for companies to unlock the phone so they will continue to do so especially when it is costing them little to do so. Finally, Apple will have problems with the whole locked scheme since many European countries do not allow locked phones.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Yes, but then when Apple puts out a software update, fixing bugs/stability, adding new features... and re-locking the un-locked phones, you will see all of these people lined up at the Genius bar, only to be told a big, fat TOO BAD!
That certainly is poetic justice, but the poor consumers will be mad at Apple, not at the people who sold them the "unlocking" software/code. And, that's not good for the consumer or for Apple.

---

Agreed that Apple will do whatever it takes to relock these phones, but I don't have any problem with people trying to unlock the iPhone, or any other phone. BlackBerries ship locked to a carrier. Most phones bought directly from a carrier come locked, and unlocking is a well-established method of switching carriers or making phones for valuable when it comes time to sell them on eBay. No, "millions" won't be lining up to unlock their phones, but that doesn't mean it isn't significant.
The issue I have with Apple is that for a company that says it likes open standards, they really did their best to lock down one of the most open standards in the world (i.e. GSM). The whole point about SIM cards and GSM is interoperability and the ability to switch phones or carriers by simply swapping cards. There are many legitimate reasons to unlock a phone, and it's a well-accepted practice among GSM phone users. First and foremost is the ability to use a local SIM card overseas and not pay an outrageous overseas roaming rate. Another is simply to have the option of switching carriers.

---

[DigiGuy]

"it's not smart to force people to break contracts with other phone service providors just to get a new device".

How was people forced? /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[marcotor]

Quote:

---

Another is simply to have the option of switching carriers.

---

And, hopefully that is what Apple wants to change. The unlocker segment will be a small percentage of users.
How about we forget about carrier subsidized phones.
Let me choose to pay $299 or whatever for a phone I like, and negotiate carriage with whomever I want. This would also have a spiral effect - Motorola wouldn't have to make 4 different types of the same model phones, which would help drive prices lower. Carriers can ditch expensive "secret technology" networks, and consumers would be better off in the long run.
Why won't it ever happen? Because then carriers would be forced to add something of value to you as a customer to retain their services, like.. I dunno. Good support? Music? Ringtones? Good coverage for all? /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

[adobephile]

What would keep Apple from not honoring unlocked iPhone warrantees and/or not allowing software updates? It would be an easy matter to simply check one's phone number before allowing such requests.
No visual voicemail would give me pause, for one thing. But what about other functions or services which may be available only because of the AT&T/Apple partnership?
I think this unlocking frenzy is just more "noise" from the same camp which squawks about .Mac subscriptions and having to pay for each new OS X version and who get all damp over the prospect of class action suits against any company which has money in the bank.
The net gain of unlocking iPhones could possibly be a negative for those duped into doing so.

[MacCheetah3]

Hi
You best hope those claims of medical issues with using cellular phones are not true. 4 hours talking on a phone per day ( average ) can't be healthy despite any physical effects from the phone itself. There is no other way you could spend $300 per month. A 6,000 minute plan is $220 taxes / fees. This doesn't include if you talk to AT&T [/ Cingular] customers or if you talk during nights ( 9P.M. to 9A.M. ) or weekends because those don't count against your anytime minutes.

Anywho...

As pointed out, GSM has extremely little to do with negative quality / reception. CDMA is old, so, the entire country was TDMA / CDMA for a long time. That, of course, means the most towers ( coverage ). Carriers started to replace these towers with GSM. Verizon hasn't yet upgraded but they're skipping GSM and going from CDMA to WCDMA. AT&T is now transitioning to WCDMA ( 3G ). AT&T has recently purchased Dobson Cellular and is putting a lot into upgrading to 3G in a reasonable timeframe.

Another factor is that T-Mobile and AT&T customers share networks, since it is the same technology. So, you get the combined coverage. This was a different factor a few years back when we had roaming [charges] but now both companies have nationwide coverage with no roaming [charges] off of their networks. I don't know how it will play out but things may change if all three major U.S. carriers have their networks WCDMA and UMTS / HSDPA.

Back to your call problems. Albuquerque, NM doesn't seem to have any roaming coverage and it isn't a huge layout but the plus side is that the towers in the main area have already been upgraded to 3G. This is great for those who have purchased 3G phones and for the next or so revision of the iPhone -- most likely to include 3G. Full signal and call problems? /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif I don't have call troubles with 2 bars or sometimes even 1 bar. My area will see some of the bigger coverage improvements from the Dobson acquisition. Cellular One was a pretty large contributor to MN cellular network towers. I was also told we should be moving into the 3G arena in October for my area. Great since I have a 3G phone.
Finally...About the actual unlocking. At this point, I thought that one had to activate the iPhone using iTunes before any feature outside of the emergency call ( 911 ) will work. The least one will do is have to go through a hassle of canceling an AT&T account.

[JamminJ]

Quote:

---

" It's just in this country that we've adopted the silly model where most people buy phones directly from carriers. It's like being forced to buy your television from Comcast or AT&T, and not being able to use your Comcast TV if you later switch to satellite."

---

So how is this ATT fault or Apples fault. We continue to buy the 'plan'. Don't like it, don't buy cell phones, live without for a few years, you aren't going to die. But we like what we have, we like to complain, yet do nothing to change it. Instead we expect APPLE to change the model. It's up to YOU. Don't like ATT, Verizon, Sprint... stop buying their products/service!!!!! Many people on these boards tout that they won't buy the iPhone, they don't need/want it (or the service), if everyone felt this way, things might change. Hate cell phone companies SO MUCH, stop buying from them. You will live without a cell phone. If it is SO IMPORTANT to you, you will pay the price. Simple as that. Get over it.

[Outdo13]

Everything I have read on iPhone unlocking involves activiating the iPhone, which I take to mean signing up a contract with AT&T. So, to unlock, 1) you have to buy the iPhone ($500 or $600), 2) then pay a $200+ termination fee to AT&T, 3) then pay whatever is the cost of the unlocking effort (such an Bladox Turbo-Sim) and 4) then sign up (or use existing) subscription with some other provider. And you still risk an update from Apple which negates the whole effort.
Europe comes online in November (?), so for Europeans getting an iPhone early isn't that great a motivation (to me). Thus, my question, is do this motivated by trying to avoid a termination fee on the current carrier or just an (unsubstantiated, to me) dislike of AT&T service. (Most of these services seem pretty much the same to me).
This seems like a lot of expense and effort on the part of the consumer. (I get the hackers motivations).

[Terrin]

Yes, but there are ways to activate the iPhone without signing a contract. Also, you can activate the iPhone, and cancel the service within thirty days. You end up paying like a hundred bucks that way because you have to pay for the month of service and the activation fee, but that way doesn't involve any hacks.

Quote:

---

Everything I have read on iPhone unlocking involves activiating the iPhone, which I take to mean signing up a contract with AT&T. So, to unlock, 1) you have to buy the iPhone ($500 or $600), 2) then pay a $200+ termination fee to AT&T, 3) then pay whatever is the cost of the unlocking effort (such an Bladox Turbo-Sim) and 4) then sign up (or use existing) subscription with some other provider. And you still risk an update from Apple which negates the whole effort.
Europe comes online in November (?), so for Europeans getting an iPhone early isn't that great a motivation (to me). Thus, my question, is do this motivated by trying to avoid a termination fee on the current carrier or just an (unsubstantiated, to me) dislike of AT&T service. (Most of these services seem pretty much the same to me).
This seems like a lot of expense and effort on the part of the consumer. (I get the hackers motivations).

---

[lsmaster]

Quote:

---

Everything I have read on iPhone unlocking involves activiating the iPhone, which I take to mean signing up a contract with AT&T. So, to unlock, 1) you have to buy the iPhone ($500 or $600), 2) then pay a $200+ termination fee to AT&T, 3) then pay whatever is the cost of the unlocking effort (such an Bladox Turbo-Sim) and 4) then sign up (or use existing) subscription with some other provider. And you still risk an update from Apple which negates the whole effort.
Europe comes online in November (?), so for Europeans getting an iPhone early isn't that great a motivation (to me). Thus, my question, is do this motivated by trying to avoid a termination fee on the current carrier or just an (unsubstantiated, to me) dislike of AT&T service. (Most of these services seem pretty much the same to me).
This seems like a lot of expense and effort on the part of the consumer. (I get the hackers motivations).

---

They have multiple applications in which you can activate the iPhone without a contract.

[Terrin]

You know I am a big Apple fan, and will stick up for the company at times when perhaps I shouldn't. I also understand why it signed an exclusive contract with AT&T.
Nonetheless, when I pay for a device, I expect to be able to do what I please with the device. I understand the seller of the device may not aid me in that goal, but I do not expect them to stand in my way either.
Moreover, when you buy an iPhone from Apple the warranty doesn't prevent you from not activating service. If you cancel AT&T's service before the first month, or after the two years, if there is a warranty in effect, Apple has to honor it. So, having a AT&T phone number is irrelevant.
If you modify the hardware, of course you risk losing warranty protection. However, if you alter the software, and then restore the software to the original state, you should still be covered.
As far as services and function on the iPhone that are available only because of the Apple ATT partnership, Visual Voice mail is the only one I am aware of. That is a nice feature, but I could live without it.

Quote:

---

What would keep Apple from not honoring unlocked iPhone warrantees and/or not allowing software updates? It would be an easy matter to simply check one's phone number before allowing such requests.
No visual voicemail would give me pause, for one thing. But what about other functions or services which may be available only because of the AT&T/Apple partnership?
I think this unlocking frenzy is just more "noise" from the same camp which squawks about .Mac subscriptions and having to pay for each new OS X version and who get all damp over the prospect of class action suits against any company which has money in the bank.
The net gain of unlocking iPhones could possibly be a negative for those duped into doing so.

---