iPhone - Page 9

brundles · 10-09-2007, 23:02

Want an iPhone? Going on holiday?

Better leave it at home

**Hugh** · 28-09-2007, 14:14

Apple strikes back at the hackers....
BBC
An Apple software update is disabling iPhones that have been unlocked by owners who wanted to choose which mobile network to use.
Earlier this week Apple said a planned update would leave the device "permanently inoperable". "

That should make them popular.

**Chris** · 28-09-2007, 14:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by foreverwar

That should make them popular.

Not half as popular as this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBC

Some owners are reporting on technology blogs and Apple's own forums that the update is deleting contacts information, as well as photos and music, on iPhones that have not been modified in any way.

Ooops.

punky · 28-09-2007, 14:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by foreverwar

Apple strikes back at the hackers....
BBC
An Apple software update is disabling iPhones that have been unlocked by owners who wanted to choose which mobile network to use.
Earlier this week Apple said a planned update would leave the device "permanently inoperable". "

That should make them popular.

Apple have to be very careful... Deliberately bricking devices, even if they have altered, is illegal.

Still, I don't suppose it will come to anything. Apple have a massive team of a crack, battle-hardened lawyers.

brundles · 28-09-2007, 15:05

I'm not surprised they're doing this.

There have been rumours for a while that MS may use it's dashboard update feature on the X360 to brick flashed X360 consoles however given the risk and the fact they are the content stream (via XBL) they don't have to flex their muscles.

Apple however need to prove to the operators that are paying them large fees that they can ensure that the operator continues to benefit from the people that buy an iPhone - especially in this country where the operators subsidise the handset costs. O2 won't be too happy to subsidise an iPhone that then generates T-Mobile revenue because somebody unlocked it.

SMHarman · 28-09-2007, 16:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by brundles

<snip> especially in this country where the operators subsidise the handset costs. O2 won't be too happy to subsidise an iPhone that then generates T-Mobile revenue because somebody unlocked it.

Don't know how it is going to work in the UK because you sign up on iTunes here but this is largely irrelevant in the normal sense of phones and contracts. Just because you have unlocked the phone and are using it on another network does not get you out of the original contract. To exit that contract you would need to pay the appropriate exit fees, usually 18months minimum monthly payments. If that happens they make the subsidy back. Then O2 make money doing nothing and TMobile make money for coverage.

I thought the EU required that networks unlocked handsets at the end of contracts for a small fee. After all you are not tied to a contract and you bought the phone so they no longer have any leverage over how you should use it. Won't Apple / O2 be required to unlock these babys in 18 months anyway?

brundles · 28-09-2007, 16:17

You won't get out of the original contract, but the operator will still consider it a loss of revenue as they won't get the minutes/texts/data bills that you might have got had you stepped over your contracted allowances. I'd guess the iPhone would be considered as a greater potential loss because of the chargeable content they'll be wanting you to take on it.

Not sure about the EU side of things, but I suspect iPhone 2 or whatever it is will be out then and be being pushed as the new thing to have.

**Chris** · 28-09-2007, 16:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by SMHarman

<snip> Just because you have unlocked the phone and are using it on another network does not get you out of the original contract. <snip>

I'm not sure that this is how it works with the iPhone. You buy the handset from Apple/O2/CPW, but you activate it via iTunes, and it is in the activation that you are required to enter into the contract with O2.

http://www.carphonewarehouse.com/com...C.APPLE.IPHONE

(click 'Basic Requirements' link for a popup).

If you can unlock the phone and therefore never go through the official iTunes Activation, you will have opened the handset up to use on another network without ever signing up with O2 for anything.

At least, from the wording at Carphone Warehouse, that's how it looks to me.

downquark1 · 28-09-2007, 17:13

With the American one I think there was a get out period from the contract.

SMHarman · 28-09-2007, 20:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris T

I'm not sure that this is how it works with the iPhone. You buy the handset from Apple/O2/CPW, but you activate it via iTunes, and it is in the activation that you are required to enter into the contract with O2.

http://www.carphonewarehouse.com/com...C.APPLE.IPHONE

(click 'Basic Requirements' link for a popup).

If you can unlock the phone and therefore never go through the official iTunes Activation, you will have opened the handset up to use on another network without ever signing up with O2 for anything.

At least, from the wording at Carphone Warehouse, that's how it looks to me.

Thats how it works here. So who is subsidising this handset? Apple / CPW / o2? It could be Apple which is why they want 40% of the revenue stream.

---------- Post added at 14:05 ---------- Previous post was at 13:18 ----------

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7017660.stm
The iDoorStop prophecy has come true - apparently for some non hacked handsets also.

handyman · 28-09-2007, 21:46

I don't get how the iphone is supposed to be massively subsidised.

The ipod touch which must contain almost the same hardware less the phone bit is Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£199 the iphone is Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£70 dearer for the same 8gb model. Most mobiles are subsidised by upwards of Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£200. This money I'm betting gets paid to apple along with a portion of the contract money.

Cobbydaler · 02-10-2007, 21:10

Woman sues Apple over iPhone price cut...

Link

She hasn't got a snowball's chance!

brundles · 03-10-2007, 10:33

Quote:

Li claims the two-year contract requirement also constitutes unfair business practices.

She seems to be forgetting that nobody put a gun to her head and forced her to buy the iPhone or sign up with AT&T.

Stuart · 03-10-2007, 11:50

Does anyone else find it rather odd that if Microsoft did something like this (or, indeed, half the stuff Apple do), they would be accused of anti competitive practices (see the recent case between Google and Microsoft over the Vista search for evidence) and possibly taken to court, yet Apple, because they seem to be percieved as a nice company, get away with it?

punky · 03-10-2007, 12:03

Apple are like Virgin in many ways. They are the anti-company. They are multi-billion dollar corporations masquarding as small independent companies with charasmatic, young CEOs who are constantly fighting the evil, more conservative, perceived-larger companies. As such they do get away with blue murder.

Like with Virgin. They colluded with BA to fleece customers over fuel supplements. Although they did blow the whistle on it, they still still fleeced thousands of customers over it with no conscience/recompense. Yet BA still look evil and Virgin Atlantic look like heroes.

It constantly amazes me just how anti-consumer Apple can be yet they are still revered. Only since the iPhone have people within the Apple community really been starting to realise.