Free the iPhone from AT&T

Acererak was one of several readers who noted that DVD Jon has released information on unbricking an iPhone. You sacrifice all cel phone functionality of course, but you have an iPDA that will work on your WiFi. Currently the hack is windows only but it doesn't look very complicated.

Yeah make it worthless, then I can afford one!!

[HouseArrest420]

Why would you pay that much money for a PDA, when you can get other devies whose only purpose it to be a PDA for less?

Re:Yeah make it worthless, then I can afford one!!

[thebrieze]

Cool factor, User Interface, Wifi, Almost full featured browser, Full screen, Video player.

Granted its still an expensive, but there isn't another device that does all of the above with quite as nice a user interface, and which has quite as much cool factor.

Re:Yeah make it worthless, then I can afford one!!

[appleguru]

It's not just a PDA. It's a SWEET solid state iPod... In fact, it;s currently the only flash based iPod that can play videos; and it has a kickass screen and touch interface to boot... the iPhone is apple's best ipod to date. While the price may seem high, there is clearly a demand for an iPhone-like iPod, and I imagine one at a lower price point than the iPhone will be released soon. Time will tell if the new ipod has any connectivity features built in (wifi, bluetooth, etc), but I hope so!

Unlock??

[brunes69]

I am much more looking forward to unlocking the iPhone so you can use it with any GSM card - including those up here in the great white north.

Re:Why is DVD Jon focused on Apple?

[Aladrin]

He earned his name long ago. He has no need to 'justify' himself to anyone, and he certainly doesn't owe us anything. He can do whatever he damned well pleases, and you should be thankful for anything that happens to help you, instead of disrespecting him for the stuff that doesn't.

Re:Unlock??

[SpinyNorman]

Even if that becomes possible, I think you'd lose the "Visual Voicemail" feature (email-like random access to voicemail messages) since they said at the launch that it required AT&T back end development, and minimally has to be closely tied to the AT&T way of retrieving voice mail messages.

Re:Right

[The One and Only]

Indeed, especially since iPhone has two pre-set-up accounts, "root" and "mobile" [slashdot.org].

Re:Yeah make it worthless, then I can afford one!!

[Otter]

Because the way you get to be "DVD Jon" is by bragging about trivial "hacks" to high-profile Apple hardware and services.

OK, you get to be him by taking credit for someone else's DVD player hack. But you stay "DVD Jon" with noisy, pointless attacks on Apple gear.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Why "Of course"?

[russ1337]

I personally think it is fair that a telco wants you to sign up for a 2 year contract when they give you a subsidized phone, especially when they want to give you an expensive phone at (what appears to be) a bargain.

What I think is a little unfair is paying full price for the device and being locked in for 2 years to a company that appears is not subsidizing the phone. AT&T must have wanted the lock-in for them to justify spending money on the extra services the iPhone offers such as video mail, which they would have made money on anyway if they were first to market or offered the best service.

In a truly competitive market the iphone would be free to connect to any telco (and because the phone meets FCC requirements they should not legally be allowed to turn the customer away). Problem is, the Telco's are too accustomed to locking down their services and features and couldn't bear the customer having a choice.

IMHO of course.

Re:Why is DVD Jon focused on Apple?

[Ant P.]

Why is DVD Jon focused on Apple?

Because HD formats aren't worth anyone's attention.

Re:Unlocking a Cell Phone is LEGAL

[MCSEBear]

It's just a function of the fact that telecoms have buckets full of money and congress-persons like buckets full of money.

You notice that congress never said telecoms can't reduce consumer choice by locking cell phones. Instead, the head of the copyright office decided to make an exemption to the DMCA to cover unlocking cell phones. Perhaps the telecoms forgot to offer the head of the copyright office enough buckets full of money. Heck, I suppose it's even possible that this official is honest and has the consumers best interests in mind.

Sadly, the US totally lacks a political party that is willing to protect consumers when there is the possibility of gaining access to said buckets full of money. There was a lot of talk about network neutrality from the Democrats before they took control of congress. Now that they are in power and those buckets full of money are in the offing, they seem to have suddenly shut the fuck up about the importance of network neutrality. Sigh. Libertarians, anyone?

Re:Why "Of course"?

[inviolet]

Good post. Just one gripe:

In a truly competitive market the iphone would be free to connect to any telco (and because the phone meets FCC requirements they should not legally be allowed to turn the customer away). [emphasis added]

Don't equate 'truly' with 'instantly', or else you'll inadvertently summon the regulators, akin to accidentally blurting out Beezelbub's name and having him appear before you in a cloud of cinders.

Re:Why "Of course"?

[LearnToSpell]

Here's a choice: DON'T BUY IT.

Jesus. /. drives me nuts sometimes. Everybody wants an iPhone for 99 cents, with 10,000 free minutes a month, unlimited texting, unlimited bandwidth, and a personalized letter from Steve Jobs thanking them for making a difference in the world. How the fuck is any of this unfair? There are other phones. There are other PDAs. Want a competitive market? Get Samsung to make a hot phone, and hook it up to another network. Talking about how you don't have a choice is truly idiotic.

Re:Unlocking a Cell Phone is LEGAL

[MCSEBear]

I don't think Sim locking makes sense to any reasonable person. Now if a provider wants to subsidize the cost of a cell phone and then make me reimburse them for ONLY the cost of said subsidy if I cancel my contract early, that makes perfect sense.

In any event, AT&T is not subsidizing the cost of the iPhone in any way. Locking the iPhone to their network when they are not paying any portion of it's cost for the consumer is just plain evil. Apple, by extension, is also guilty.

Re:Its very hard to understand this

[DiscoOnTheSide]

Sprint and Verizon each use phones specifically tailored for their service. Unlocked phones that'll work with both are a rarity and never quite work well. For it to be unlocked it'd have to be GSM, which leaves AT&T and T-Mobile. Features on the phone that Apple wanted to implement were carrier dependent (visual voicemail, etc)

Also the main reason: I'm a T-Mobile dealer that also sells unlocked phones. Both AT&T and T-Mobile want absolutely nothing to do with you if you're using an unlocked phone. They will literally get you off the line ASAP if they hear you're not using one of their branded phones... Plus typically some features are only locked to carrier locked/branded phones. This doesn't quite translate well to the "Mac experience" being "It just works, and if it doesn't we'll take care of it for you" So for them to offer the "experience" that makes Apple products unique.... they'd have to pair up with a carrier.

Re:Its very hard to understand this

[mla_anderson]

Should be pretty obvious why they have the network lock: visual voicemail. Visual voicemail is a major change to the carrier's voicemail system, to get a network to agree to make the change Apple has to agree to the lock-in.

For me, the visual voicemail is the big win for the iPhone, the ability to have random access to voicemail is great. The other features are pretty, but visual voicemail is what makes me drool.

Re:Why "Of course"?

[cdrguru]

You misunderstand consumer electronics. Person buys phone and wants to use it with Verizon. Verizon is a CDMA carrier, not GSM. The phone will never work with Verizon. Do you feel like you would like to be the support person explaining this on the phone to the customer that just bought a $500 paperweight and believes it is his right to have the phone work for him?

So then the guy goes down the street to T-Mobile (a GSM carrier) and gets a SIM card. The phone now works. But the really nifty voicemail feature doesn't work. Neither is there a button on the phone that works with the voicemail features that T-Mobile has. Would you like to be the support person at T-Mobile or Apple that gets to explain this? Again, the customer just spent around $600 for something that does not work completely.

People want things that work 100% and aren't going to like it much when the spend lots of money and can only be told that 98% of what they bought will work. And absolutely nothing can be done about it.

Re:Unlocking a Cell Phone is LEGAL

[Captain_Chaos]

You are allowed to unlock your cell phone no matter what Apple or AT&T think about it.

What does unlocking a phone have to do with circumventing copyright protection? Surely the DMCA does not apply and it would be legal whether or not the DMCA had exemptions covering it, as long as you're not interfering with the built-in copy restriction measures of the phone?

Would like to use iphone sans data plan

[jaypaulw]

I'd like to use the iphone as an ipod and a phone and save $20 /month on the data plan. (save $480 and not give up that much) Any hacks for that?