AT&T To Offer No-Contract iPhone 193
rfc1394 writes "While the regular price of an iPhone is $199 if you take a 2-year contract with AT&T, if you're willing to pay a lot more you can get one without a contract. An article in InfoWorld mentions that 'Freedom will come with a price — $599 for an 8GB device and $699 for a 16GB — but this will mark the first time consumers in the United States are able to buy an iPhone without being tied down to a two-year contract. The phone probably would still be locked for use only on AT&T's network, said Jupiter Research analyst Michael Gartenberg. But buyers could choose a pay-as-you-go plan for voice service.' The question still remains, does it make any sense to pay that much for a phone that is still locked to AT&T's network even if you aren't bound to a contract?" Update: 07/05 18:21 GMT by T : An anonymous reader suggests that there is a convoluted but possibly cheaper route to an new, unlocked iPhone.
Is this the "Tax" price in CA? (Score:3, Interesting)
As the ETF is probably only $150-200 or so, just get a phone for $200 and when you decide you hate AT&T, just break the contract.
What I worry about is this is the "tax price", so that in CA (and other states), you may pay $200, but you are paying tax on a $600 phone, which would up the cost to the end user an additional $33.
Bad PR and no skillz (Score:3, Interesting)
The price quoted probably is a fair price. They are subsidising it. But that is priced out of the U.S. market, it is even at the high end of the Japanese market.
That price is what the Apple should sell the phone for to other phone companies, and they will then be able to provide service and subsidize some portion of it. The only value this announcement has is to tell people how much the subsidy was. The other poster has it right, Fail.
$80 to cancel in Oz (Score:4, Interesting)
Australians will enjoy the ability to buy a pre-paid iPhone and unlock it to work on any network for $80.
They have allowed unlocking because the laws here don't allow you to lock a phone to a given provider without a reasonable option.
Re:iPhone- future of computing or just a phone (Score:5, Interesting)
Here in the States, you are always locked into a provider, even if the phone is popular enough to be sold be more by than one provider.
No, you can buy a phone directly from a manufacturer without it being locked to a carrier. I purchased my unlocked Z6 from the on-line Motorola store. Of course nobody subsidized me for $175, either, so I paid full price for it. But I now have a phone that I can actually use if I travel abroad and buy a local SIM.
Re:I don't think so... (Score:3, Interesting)
It's interesting to see just how ambiguous this section of the contract seems to be. Obviously, AT&T would agree with your interpretation. A court may not. Of, course, we don't want to pay court costs just to argue to try and save $189 dollars.
On the other hand, there have already been many iPhones bought and contracts cancelled, so if AT&T has NOT been demanding the hardware back after the 30 day period then they would be hard pressed to start doing so now. Anyone know if AT&T has been requiring the hardware back when a contract is cancelled?
Re:This is a response to iPhone unlocking... (Score:2, Interesting)
It usually works that if you cancel within the 30 days, you return the equipment and you don't need to pay the ETF. However, if you decide you want to keep the equipment, you'll probably be required to pay the ETF even though you're within the 30 days.
Probably the same with the 3 day thing (though the wording is rather ambiguous). If you decide not to receive a refund of the activation fee, as well as pay the ETF, you can probably still keep the hardware.
Huh? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Bad PR and no skillz (Score:3, Interesting)
If only I had mod points.
The only thing that makes sense is for Apple, to sell in-store, the unlocked model. AT&T selling it(and locking it) just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
The phone is made under agreement to Apple. It should be supported by Apple(with full Apple care please) for use on any network. Period.
What it also tells us is that AT&T is hurting for publicity. Everyone knows it's an Apple iPhone, not an AT&T iPhone. I want AT&T to shut up about "iphones" they are providing GSM service, I want them to talk about gsm devices. What device I use on their network(provided it respects the GSM standard, is NONE of their business, and the public should not be letting them charge extra for certain devices.
Re:Paging Mr. Hobson... (Score:1, Interesting)
As Henry Ford once said of his Model T, "the customer can have any color he wants, so long as it's black."
Ever wonder why he said that? The reason was the fastest-drying paint Ford could find was black, so that allowed the assembly line to run faster.
Re:No-contract iPhone (Score:5, Interesting)
Big "days" in history:
Great moments in time. Well, if you believe the Apple faithful, anyway.