MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Feb 04, 08 - 11:38 am Comment from: Ampar

"Is Crum a liar, too lazy to take a few seconds to check prices, or just ignorant?"

How about lazy, stupid liar? He should run for office.

Motorola would would give their left nut to have this so called problem with their phones.

Unlocked iPhones present dilemma for Apple

Hmm...

1: Cost to make iPhone $250
2: Sell iPhone for $399 = $149 profit
3: Make even more profit off of extended warranties and other products, battery replacement. Content sales.
4: Make a per month kickback from select carriers.

What dilemma?

Feb 04, 08 - 11:46 am Comment from: Jay-Z

@ Old Geezer:

The "dilemma" is that unlocked phones do not offer #4. Some see this as an issue; others, including myself, don't.

According to the numbers, it's smart to:

1: Buy a iPhone
2: Jailbreak it
3: Shop for the cost effective per month rate plan.

Becaue if you go with the "authorized carriers" your going to be paying more in monthly fees. The basic service AND Apple's monthly kickback.

It's not a lie when millions of people are jailbreaking their phones that something wasn't planned right with this phone.

I think its good for them in the negotiations with the local carrier. Demonstrates strong demand.

But the quote about the iPhone being among the more expensive cell phones is totally correct. Most phones sell for less than 400$ (unlocked). iPhone might be a well-priced "smart phone" but it is expensive as a "phone".

The "dilemma" is that unlocked phones do not offer #4. Some see this as an issue; others, including myself, don't.

Neither do I.

Apple is making a heft profit or even more of a hefty profit.

No dilemma.

Feb 04, 08 - 11:54 am Comment from: Randian

"Cheap, cheap, my kingdom for anything cheap! If it ain't cheap, it ain't worth having. If it ain't hackable, it ain't worth having." So says the average consumer in my beloved America, which explains both McDonalds and Microsoft. God bless us, every one.

Isn't it a sign that the problem lies with ATT when people want the iPhone, but not ATT's service?

Feb 04, 08 - 11:56 am Comment from: Not Bill

So, iPhones are ranked as the most expensive of wireless phones on the market and the extent of unlocking shows the breadth of demand for one of the most-hyped technological products of the decade.

This fellow thinks the iPhone is too expensive for his budget because he is not willing to pay for quality in his life. More is better you know. The cheaper it is the more you can get. He also thinks the iPhone is popular because it is "the most-hyped." It must be the hype. Its not cheap, so why else would so many people buy them. He thinks, companies give me my phones. No hype there.

Over 2 million iPhones unlocked?

I think Apple realizes that if they REALLY lockdown their iPhone that they will loose MILLIONS of future units sold.

In the phone buisness, the numbers of devices in use is EVERYTHING.

Apple should have offered a unlocked iPhone to begin with and then when zillions of them sold the carriers would have come begging to support it.

Feb 04, 08 - 12:04 pm Comment from: MizuInOz

@ ak1808

I am not sure where you live but an iPhone in Oz is not even close to the most expensive "smart phone" out there! I have a Motorola K1 and it cost me WITH A PLAN $1300 AUD over 2 years! (or about $1180 USD). Hmmmm let's see how many iPhones can I buy for that?

I have no problem with a hacked iPhone - next purchase when I am in the States next week, in fact. Yep, I have an American Bank credit card.

So I guess the number will be 1,000,001or 2. Heeh!
Yes, I now the score is more... I am just kidding!

Why would anyone want ATT's <lackof>service</lackof>

Stupid... You can't use an iPhone where ever you want I hate apple for this. You can use a computer anywhere.... You can wear clothes from here and in japan. You can use a camera here and anywhere, but God forbid you use an iPhone anywhere in the World You are the Devil and going to Hell... Oh yeah i also have an iPhone

Apple should charge a one-off $99 fee to bring all unlocked phones back on board with 1.1.4 after the SDK is released... They'd let people use whichever carrier they wanted... They'd earn God know how much one-off cash. Seems an idea.

I'd pay it.

Richard + iPhone
Bangkok

People seem to think it's to do with expensive service plans.

It isn't, the unlocking is (mostly) in places in the world where there is no iPhone plan provider.

@RJS - I think that is a good idea, hope they hear it.

Feb 04, 08 - 12:36 pm Comment from: mozart11

quote " Crum a liar, too lazy to take a few seconds to check prices, or just ignorant?"

All three.

The true reality is cell phone users have been unlocking every phone that is manufactured that is locked, FOR YEARS.

I unlocked every Sony Ericsson and Motorola I've owned. When the V3 RAZR came out, I unlocked the 4 I bought. I've bought unlocked phones.

My point is unlocking an iPhone is NOT usual. And EVERY article or report convey the opinion that unlocking is a new thing with the arrival of the iPhone. People unlock their phones for many reasons. And switching carriers is one. But not the over-riding factor of unlocking.

Every article written about the iPhone is from the point of view that Apple is stupid, can control it, ATT is rotten etc…

NO ONE WRITES HOW EVERY VERIZON PHONE IS LOCKED TO VERIZON.

NO ONE WRITES HOW EVERY SPRINT PHONE IS LOCKED TO SPRINT.

Who cares? And I don't believe Apple does either.

"iPhone is not "the most expensive wireless phone on the market." Not even close. Is Crum a liar, too lazy to take a few seconds to check prices, or just ignorant?"

Is MDN too lazy to take a few seconds to check prices? I do not see you guys refuting his argument with facts... just emotional rants. I know the iPhone is not the most expensive... but don't accuse someone of something you are not willing to do!

Most people jailbreak their iPhones so they can install third party apps on it, not so they can use an unauthorized carrier.

There are people who do unlock their iPhone so they can use it with an unathourized carrier, but most of them do so because the iPhone isn't available to them in their country through an authorized carrier.

Crum knows diddlysquat. Apple makes money off of all the sales especially to those where no forward revenue stream is possible due to lack of present distribution channels. So what? No big deal that they don't make money off of a revenue channel they invented to go with iPhones they invented.

Feb 04, 08 - 01:07 pm Comment from: HMCIV

Crum's statement just needs to be properly qualified. It's the most expensive phone anyone cares about.

Feb 04, 08 - 01:23 pm Comment from: Demon

Apple didn't make a mistake. They wanted to make the iPhone hackable. The problem has come because people started making money off of hacking the iPhone.

But who would want to risk FCC fines if the hack they used on their iPhone caused a cell carrier or cell tower outage. When you start modifying the Cell Radio's code you run to risk of violating FCC regulations and could damage a carriers network or cell tower outage, Receive/Send bleed through, Signal walkover or frequency clashing. So, using a hack could end up costing you tens of thousands of dollars in FCC fines.

think before you click

Feb 04, 08 - 01:46 pm Comment from: HotinPlaya

I have an unlocked iPhone in Mexico, I want to get another for my wife (so she will return mine).

But my understanding is they have not unlocked (for cell phone ) the 1.1.2 version (or 1.1.3)

anyone know different?

Opened...even the latest one, I think.

Feb 04, 08 - 02:18 pm Comment from: elgruga

WHY do so many people hate Apple?
They must feel threatened by them.
Every day we have another stupid article about an Apple product and its always full of bs and lies.
The iPhone isnt even really a phone, its so much more.

Most of these idiots havent even tried one.

Now you can see how the US Govt. got away with the 911 scam - people are simply stupid and believe anything.

Hail to the Chief, Macdonalds and junk-food induced mass hypnosis.

Feb 04, 08 - 03:07 pm Comment from: ken1w

Unlocked iPhones are indeed a "good problem to have" for Apple. Officially, Apple must act concerned and take steps to remediate the issue because of the exclusivity deals. However, Apple still makes a healthy profit on every iPhone sold, whether it's used on the exclusive carriers or not. Of course, it would make more through ongoing revenue if it was used on the "approved" networks. But the unlocked iPhones are not reducing the number of iPhone activations with the exclusive carriers. They are being used by people who refuse to switch carriers or are in an area that does not officially have the iPhone yet. In fact, these unlocked iPhone numbers demonstrate iPhone's popularity and should give Apple additional clout in negotiating future exclusivity agreements worldwide. So how is this a "bad" problem? It's not.

Oh, lighten up for cryin' out loud.

MDN makes as many mistakes as anyone and no one can equal this publication's lack of objectivity.

The most interesting element of iPhone is the visual e-mail. It required the networks to invest in equipment to achieve and Apple therefore had to give something to a network to take it on. The popularity of the device is now assured.

How long before the competition provides the network hardware capability to capture and retain the unlocked phones.

cheap mobile data plans on all networks will be a real benefit to all mobile users - particularly in the UK

Anyone ever consider how all those "extra" off network iPhone sales affect actually help Apple by:

A.) the increased number of units sold reduces the variable cost of production per unit, increasing the profit per unit on the "sanctioned" units sold.
B.) contribute to R&D;... a portion of those gross profit dollars plowed back in to R&D;to create even better products.
C.) and further the "halo" effect? How many of those hacked iPhones were bought by non Mac users... who discover the elegance of design and intuitive interface of Apple, then go buy a Mac.

Maybe thats why they said "it's a good problem to have" because they understand these never considered factors the "talking head" analysts do not.