iPhone Unlocking Software in Action
Who needs warranties?
Tuesday, September 11, 2007 by Zoomba | Discussion: WinCustomize News
One of the most severe criticisms leveled against the Apple iPhone was that it was locked down to AT&T, one of the least popular of all US cell phone service providers. Poor customer service, spotty coverage, and the slowest data network of the major carriers are just a few of AT&T's major downsides, which left people scratching their heads over Apple making them the exclusive partner.
As was reported widely last month, folks figured out how to unhook the iPhone from AT&T and connect it up to any carrier in the US. The story got even more interesting when a group said they had a software solution they were prepared to sell so customers could free themselves from AT&T. There's been plenty of video and photographic proof to show it's real and doable. But until recently, no one had shown off the process from start-to-finish.
The guys over at Engadget have a HD video up showing the process from turning on the phone, all the way to getting it working with a T-Mobile account. If you're an iPhone owner and want free of AT&T, or would have considered one if it weren't for AT&T, this may be of particular interest to you.
 |
|
Page 1 of 2 | |
|
|---|
Jafo
Reply #2 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:23 AM
Reply #2 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:23 AM
according to you and a small amount of other people
Gee...all I ever hear is that AT&T is a dog of a co....and I'm 10 thousand miles away....
ZubaZ
Reply #3 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:27 AM
Reply #3 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:27 AM
They're coverage isnt spotty, atleast not where I am in the East Coast.
Tell that to the people in VermontApple iPhone won't be available in Vermont, other states
January 17, 2007
BURLINGTON, Vt. --Vermonters won't be able to take advantage of Apple's iPhone because it will be offered by a wireless carrier that doesn't maintain a network in the state.
The iPhone, which combines an iPod music player, cell phone and full-featured Internet browser, is due to go on sale in June, but only in areas served by AT&T's Cingular Wireless. Apple has an exclusive distribution deal with AT&T's Cingular Wireless.
The iPhone service won't be available in all or large portions of
Alaska, Colorado, the Dakotas, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Minnesota,
Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, upstate New York, Oregon,
Utah and Wyoming, among other places. . . .
Philly0381
Reply #4 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:32 AM
And I always heard that technology was making the world smaller and the people closer.
Reply #4 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:32 AM
and I'm 10 thousand miles away....
And I always heard that technology was making the world smaller and the people closer.
seldomseen
Reply #5 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:34 AM
O.K. Now I'm mad, too.
What was Apple thinking?!
A clear case of C.R.
[cerebral rectosis]
At least someone figured out the cure.
Reply #5 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:34 AM
Idaho
O.K. Now I'm mad, too.
What was Apple thinking?!
A clear case of C.R.
[cerebral rectosis]
At least someone figured out the cure.
Philly0381
Reply #6 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:35 AM
That pretty well defines spotty coverage!
Reply #6 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:35 AM
The iPhone service won't be available in all or large portions of Alaska, Colorado, the Dakotas, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, upstate New York, Oregon, Utah and Wyoming, among other places. . . .
That pretty well defines spotty coverage!
NightTrainthedark
Reply #7 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:38 AM
Of course, if you never leave your parents basement, you can't really test that.
Just kiddin.....but maybe not.
Reply #7 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:38 AM
They're coverage isnt spotty, atleast not where I am in the East Coast.
Of course, if you never leave your parents basement, you can't really test that.
Just kiddin.....but maybe not.
Philly0381
Reply #8 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:42 AM
I believe the proper name is The Man Cave.
Reply #8 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:42 AM
Of course, if you never leave your parents basement
I believe the proper name is The Man Cave.
ZubaZ
Reply #9 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:51 AM
Like you were EVER going to buy one of these!
Reply #9 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:51 AM
Idaho
O.K. Now I'm mad, too
O.K. Now I'm mad, too
Like you were EVER going to buy one of these!
Astyanax
Reply #10 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 12:59 PM
Every phone service has issues in certain states or places, no one is perfect. And if there was a perfect company their would be no competition.
Reply #10 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 12:59 PM
Tell that to the people in Vermont
Every phone service has issues in certain states or places, no one is perfect. And if there was a perfect company their would be no competition.
ZubaZ
Reply #11 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 1:24 PM
I have agree that different services have problems or that all have "issues" but locking users to AT&T (now unlocked) was a poor choice and was bound to fail. That, along with the price drop for late-adopters, and the HUGE out of network fees . . .well . . it's been a tough few months for the Apple PR machine.
Reply #11 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 1:24 PM
Every phone service has issues in certain states or places, no one is perfect. And if there was a perfect company their would be no competition.
You argued that Zoomba was telling a falsehood or jumping on a bandwagon. My point was just that his facts seem to be fairly factual.I have agree that different services have problems or that all have "issues" but locking users to AT&T (now unlocked) was a poor choice and was bound to fail. That, along with the price drop for late-adopters, and the HUGE out of network fees . . .well . . it's been a tough few months for the Apple PR machine.
Astyanax
Reply #12 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 1:59 PM
Of course, why else would they drop the cost of the iPhone AND give early-adopters $100 store credit? Sales where clearly going down and they figured a price drop would fix that.
You don't just lower the price $200 on something like that out of the blue.
Reply #12 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 1:59 PM
That, along with the price drop for late-adopters, and the HUGE out of network fees . . .well . . it's been a tough few months for the Apple PR machine
Of course, why else would they drop the cost of the iPhone AND give early-adopters $100 store credit? Sales where clearly going down and they figured a price drop would fix that.
You don't just lower the price $200 on something like that out of the blue.
The__Goo
Reply #13 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 3:10 PM
Reply #13 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 3:10 PM
Well. I believe that Apple did what they did because at&t took over the bell south and cingular networks and that ended up having them a very large customer base. They didn't do it for anything other than money. Customer satisfaction went out in the 60's, it's all about money.
2of3
Reply #14 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 3:24 PM
This is true. I live in a small country in Europe called Norway. In all my years here, I've never had problems getting a signal! I recently visited my parents in upstate N.Y. and when I wanted to make a call, I had to drive for a half hour with my phone held out the window just to get a signal!
Reply #14 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 3:24 PM
The iPhone service won't be available in all or large portions of Alaska, Colorado, the Dakotas, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, upstate New York, Oregon, Utah and Wyoming, among other places. . . .
This is true. I live in a small country in Europe called Norway. In all my years here, I've never had problems getting a signal! I recently visited my parents in upstate N.Y. and when I wanted to make a call, I had to drive for a half hour with my phone held out the window just to get a signal!
Surj
Reply #15 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 3:34 PM
Reply #15 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 3:34 PM
i can totally see at&t filing a suit against its competitors when they refuse to willingly lock out hacked iphones.
Surj
Reply #16 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 3:43 PM
Cingular (at&t) has really bad service in Idaho. You can get (without roaming) near the Moscow and Couer d'Alene area, and down in the Treasure Valley (Boise area), but its pretty vacant in the rest except for spotty patches...at least 2 years ago this was the case anyways. I had Cingular for a couple years in Idaho, but only because I was on the nation plan and didn't incur out of network or long distance charges.
I don't know if this is the reason for the Idaho exception, but anyways....
Reply #16 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 3:43 PM
Idaho
Cingular (at&t) has really bad service in Idaho. You can get (without roaming) near the Moscow and Couer d'Alene area, and down in the Treasure Valley (Boise area), but its pretty vacant in the rest except for spotty patches...at least 2 years ago this was the case anyways. I had Cingular for a couple years in Idaho, but only because I was on the nation plan and didn't incur out of network or long distance charges.
I don't know if this is the reason for the Idaho exception, but anyways....
phoenixma
Reply #17 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 4:29 PM
Reply #17 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 4:29 PM
I used to have AT&T before they merged with Cingular and the service was absolutely horrendous. The signal was bad everywhere, the phone would be roaming almost all the time. I don't know how it is now, but locking a phone to one company is a stupid move for any company in my book.
Excalpius
Reply #18 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 6:42 PM
Actually, they have been the worst US carrier for the past decade...period. Terrible signal, terrible pricing, terrible customer service, etc etc. They took forever to become competitive and were one of the main reasons people lobbied for the ability to move their phone numbers between carriers. They acted like they had a monopoly, so we all left. Then, without customers, shock of shock, they went out of business. Until Cingular bought them and the name change.
The consumer voted AT&T wireless DEAD. This is why they paid whatever it took to have something signature for the newly restored AT&T, ergo the iPhone.
And it's why the iPhone's sales with so far below expectation at release.
Hatred of AT&T >> Interest in iPhone.
And even the massive price cut won't help as much as Jobs needs/hopes. The iPod became ubiquitous because it was available EVERYWHERE. The iPhone will lose the chance to gain that level of success, unless unbundled officially from AT&T soon. Because Nokia, etc. are all working on iPhone clones. And they will all be out, affordable, and available from whoever you want to buy one from/for long before the AT&T exclusive deal expires.
Reply #18 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 6:42 PM
It seems that according to you and a small amount of other people when the name changed to AT&T it suddenly went from top to bottom? They're coverage isn't spotty, at least not where I am in the East Coast.
Actually, they have been the worst US carrier for the past decade...period. Terrible signal, terrible pricing, terrible customer service, etc etc. They took forever to become competitive and were one of the main reasons people lobbied for the ability to move their phone numbers between carriers. They acted like they had a monopoly, so we all left. Then, without customers, shock of shock, they went out of business. Until Cingular bought them and the name change.
The consumer voted AT&T wireless DEAD. This is why they paid whatever it took to have something signature for the newly restored AT&T, ergo the iPhone.
And it's why the iPhone's sales with so far below expectation at release.
Hatred of AT&T >> Interest in iPhone.
And even the massive price cut won't help as much as Jobs needs/hopes. The iPod became ubiquitous because it was available EVERYWHERE. The iPhone will lose the chance to gain that level of success, unless unbundled officially from AT&T soon. Because Nokia, etc. are all working on iPhone clones. And they will all be out, affordable, and available from whoever you want to buy one from/for long before the AT&T exclusive deal expires.
Excalpius
Reply #19 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 6:46 PM
They can't. By LAW, we're allowed to unlock phones so that we CAN take them to other carriers. It's one of the few places where congress has done a good deed for the consumer. I'm AT&T's lobbyists are working million$ towards repealing this ASAP, but for now, there's not a damn thing AT&T can do.
And Apple only has to make good faith efforts to keep up their end of the deal. After all, it's in their best interests (and those of their stockholders) to sell as many iPhones as possible.
Reply #19 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 6:46 PM
i can totally see at&t filing a suit against its competitors when they refuse to willingly lock out hacked iphones.
They can't. By LAW, we're allowed to unlock phones so that we CAN take them to other carriers. It's one of the few places where congress has done a good deed for the consumer. I'm AT&T's lobbyists are working million$ towards repealing this ASAP, but for now, there's not a damn thing AT&T can do.
And Apple only has to make good faith efforts to keep up their end of the deal. After all, it's in their best interests (and those of their stockholders) to sell as many iPhones as possible.
Agrabren
Reply #20 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 9:44 PM
Reply #20 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 9:44 PM
The iphone is a unique problem. I don't believe AT&T is subsidizing the cost of the units. For other phones, the carrier (not just AT&T) use the contract to help pay for the phone. Unlocking the phone is meaningless to them once you've signed up for a two-year contract, because that's what AT&T wants to have.
As for why Apple signed with AT&T? They needed a deal with a carrier to offer some of the features (only special one that I know of is visual voicemail, which is *NOT* available on an unlocked phone with any other carrier).
AT&T coverage: All carriers have areas where they are strong. New England has really good coverage with Verizon, because of the merger with Bell Atlantic Mobile. I had Sprint for a while, but it was spotty in both Florida and Massachusetts. The New England area is especially hard for coverage, because of the rock formation, which are not very good for cell signals. Not sure about other regions. But no carrier is great everywhere, so blaming the company for coverage in those areas is pointless. I'd love to blame Verizon for not offering FiOS in my neighborhood.
As for why Apple signed with AT&T? They needed a deal with a carrier to offer some of the features (only special one that I know of is visual voicemail, which is *NOT* available on an unlocked phone with any other carrier).
AT&T coverage: All carriers have areas where they are strong. New England has really good coverage with Verizon, because of the merger with Bell Atlantic Mobile. I had Sprint for a while, but it was spotty in both Florida and Massachusetts. The New England area is especially hard for coverage, because of the rock formation, which are not very good for cell signals. Not sure about other regions. But no carrier is great everywhere, so blaming the company for coverage in those areas is pointless. I'd love to blame Verizon for not offering FiOS in my neighborhood.
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 1 of 2 | |
|
|---|
Reply #1 Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:03 AM
It seems that according to you and a small amount of other people when the name changed to AT&T it suddenly went from top to bottem? They're coverage isnt spotty, atleast not where I am in the East Coast.
Everyone likes to be picky, sure why not. But I hate when others jump on the bandwagon after one person puts up accusations that arent entirely true.