Apple now selling unlocked GSM iPhone 4 in US, starting at $649 - Page 2

I don't know what roaming rates are like with American carriers but I know that a trip abroad with an unlocked phone saved me enough to buy a new phone. And that was a one week affair. Rogers in Canada has insane prices when roaming.

The only thing stopping the iPhone from working on Sprint is Sprint. CDMA carriers have control over their carrier crap on CDMA phones. Whine to Sprint about unlocking your Verizon iPhone, then.

.....

well you buy a un lock iphone direct and shop around a little with the phone in hand as opposed to sitting w/ verizon/att and getting confused/screwed .

anyway iphones sales will sky rocket now .
and apple has taken the first step on the way to taken control OVER phone/voice/data costs in the clients favor and pushing the carriers aside a little .

I can now see a nano phone coming one day .


9

Except you still have to pay AT&T/T-Mobile their standard monthly fees. So it's absolutely no better.


Nope. Because there's only one GSM carrier with compatible 3G, and T-Mobile won't even exist in a few months.


I refer you to the first half of this post.

That's really the carrier's prerogative, not Apple's.

A blatant attempt to grab the tourist dollar!

I don't even know where to begin saying you're off-base about this...

I'm not sure what Europe is like, I haven't been there for many years now, but in all of the USA and Canada cell companies operate like an oligarchy or cartel and have for many many years now.

For some reason, even though the USA is the "land of the free" and rabidly capitalist, this anti-comptetitive collusion/price-fixing is considered a good thing.

Canada, which typically protects individual freedoms more than the US, for some reason also bows to the cell carriers and in fact is a lot worse. We have five major carriers, but they all collude on pricing so it really doesn't matter which you pick. Also, because we are all forced into three year contracts for the same phone, we not only have no choice, we have to pay 30% more for the handset.

Currently, (in Canada) I buy my phones contract free and unlocked just on principle, but I still have to pay 70 or so a month (closer to 80 with tax), for the plan, and yet if I paid just for the data and phone service I actually *use* ... it would be closer to five bucks a month.

Lets face it, governments are weak nowadays and work for industry more than they do for the people anymore. I wouldn't expect anything to change until the market gets some real competition, and that means outsiders moving in and disruption of the cell companies themselves. It will take a while for sure.

Guess the people on here who bashed and mocked that Chronic guy who tweeted this over the weekend owe him an apology.

I hope the "iPhone 5" will be unlocked, since I sometimes travel out of the country I'd be willing to pay $650 for an unlocked iP5.

I agree. When I went to London, I bought an international data plan from AT&T for my time there. When I came back I canceled it and they essentially charged me by the day, so I just paid for the days I was there. I didn't bother with the international voice plan because I wasn't expecting to receive/make that many phone calls and the price differential on the calls wasn't that much (as I remember it.)

(And by the way, my phone worked spectacularly in London - it even worked on most of the underground stations and the speed was terrific in most places. Proved to me that there was nothing wrong with the phone and much wrong with AT&T in the U.S.)

In the U.S., there isn't much choice of a carrier anyway. Unless I was travelling all the time, an unlocked phone for $649 wouldn't make any sense for me and I suspect, not for most people. If you keep the phone for two years, AT&T would have to reduce the cost of their plan by more than $27 per month to receive any benefit. Do they?

Not really. Just how many people do you think will be willing to pay an extra $450 to get an iPhone and still have to pay full price for the service? This will mainly appeal to frequent overseas travelers or people really, really desperate to stay on Tmobile.

The only financial incentive for other people is if you want to get a voice-only plan and only use data via wi-fi. That's assuming you can find a voice-only plan that comes with a microSIM card that fits in the iPhone. The $30/month you save would cover the $450 increase in purchase price after 18 months. [Then again, how many people desperate to save $30/month can afford an extra $450 in upfront costs?]

Yeah. There's really no point in paying $650 for an iPhone if you're going to use AT&T anyway; and lets be honest, who's going to pay that much to only use it on T-Mobile's EDGE network? I'll stick to paying less than a third of that for the phone and upgrading every two years.

iPhone on Sprint for Q4'11.

Yeah, I'm wondering/hoping this might mean we could see an unlocked CDMA iPhone4 soon, or at least maybe in the next model (4s/5 whatever they call it).

It would be nice to be able to one working on Sprint or US Cellular.

I"m not that shocked. THe contract with ATT is over and they were likely going to do this with the iphone 5 which they likely planned to release around this time anyway. But the earthquake in Japan destroyed several factories that were probably going to be making parts for the new iphone so they were forced into a delay. So rather than hold the unlock until the iphone 5 and even the white iphone they just went ahead and did it.

Still that said, it bugs me that I know that I"ll be paying the same monthly fees as someone with a subsidized phone. That irks me to no end. It makes me very very tempted to go find one of these mom and pop smaller carriers like simple mobile and just cut down their card to make it work. Might even be able to go pay as you go on some features like voice (which I pretty much never use these days)



Unlikely. Due to the nature of CDMA tech they aren't locked in the same way as a GSM which can change networks by changing a SIM card. THere is no SIM to change. The phone's details are hardwired into the carrier in a way that can't easily be changed if at all. Making the phones carrier locked by their nature.



Now if Apple could and did release that e-sim in a dual service phone you might have a different game.



Or not. Because he claimed the numbers were for new unlocked phones being sold in the stores. And there's no proof of that. This appears to be and could remain an online only choice where they are essentially 'custom built' with no lock applied and no sim put in. Not something you can get in the stores. Making him still wrong with what he said was going to happen.

Yeah, I realize that it isn't so much locked internally in the phone, it's locked because Sprint/US cellular can't add the ID numbers into their system or whatever. But, I'm hoping that this change for the GSM version, which makes it so the GSM phone can be taken back and forth between AT&T, T-Mobile, and some other smaller GSM carriers might convince the CDMA carriers to all start supporting the ability to move the phones around between carriers like customers will be able to on GSM.

I think it is more of a change the carriers Verizon, US Cellular, etc. have to make, not one Apple really has to make, but I'm hoping this might push them in the right direction.

One iPhone 5 that could work on any GSM/CDMA carrier in the US would be a huge seller, and would cause the cellular companies to actually start competing in price/services again, instead of these back room deals to secure exclusive rights to certain phones to get customers.

They don't matter anymore, and doing that doesn't matter anymore. LTE uses SIM cards. We'll have the switching ability in less than three years. Sprint already said they'll switch from WiMAX if LTE proves better. It's proving better. CDMA is dead. The amount of time it has left won't matter where carrier switching is concerned.


No, it wouldn't. Why would you think that? If they keep colluding, all of their plans will be the exact same price and it won't matter where people use their iPhones. They don't care.

AWESOME! i'm going to sell my recently purchase t-mobile phone and get an iphone.

(okay, it probably won't sell and i may have to give it away, but still...)

I think you might benefit from a contract to keep your rates after AT&T takes ownership and control. If you're without contract, you have no assurance that AT&T won't monkey with your rates.

I'm sure I'm in Avery small minority, but IF my phone was factory unlocked o probably wouldn't jailbreak it, and IF I hadn't jailbroken it I would never of downloaded a pirated app for it.

And personally I would instantly switch my iPhone 4 to T-Mobile and get a 4G LTE personal hotspot for my all my devices on one data plan.

Haven't people been unlocking their phones since day one? Do a google search and you'll be swamped with solutions. I like the idea of http://rebelsimcard.com/ though I have to admit I have never tested it.

I was just doing some poking about for sim-only offers, and found GiffGaff. I would be on that service in a heartbeat if they offered it in the States. $16 for 250 minutes talk and unlimited data? That's all I need.

Well, since 1.0.2. We didn't even have Hactivations on Day One.

Day five's a different story. Ahh... good times. Had to do it through the Terminal back then. You kids don't know how easy you have it [/oldtimer]

Overseas?? Dude.. want me to send you a map?? Just go south and you will find 20+ with GSM networks ready. Sin card goes around 1 to 5 dollars. Some small data packages for $10.
Then... do you forget that unlocks get break with updates, reset of the phones??? Unlocking your iPhone void Apple warranty.
An unlocked iPhone has so many advantages. They will sell quite good now. Saving for mine

I think there is a difference between being in denial and pretending collusion is a good thing.


There have been unlocks for every model since a few months after the original. The quality of a given unlock seems to vary, and most people don't have the ability to know whether there's any funny business going on, so picking the best one can be a bit tough. It's still something of an underground activity.

Why is it so expensive? Shouldn't it be priced around a similar sized iPod Touch + the telephony components??

Have you unlocked at least a single one??? Each update you have to wait for a new version of the unlock and avoid update in iTunes and boy..... lot of people forgets and they update, loose the jailbreak and can't use the phone for a while. Funny you are telling that to Jeff lmao!

Thing is, everyone is paying this price. It gets worked into the contract. If you get tied to a 24 month contract and Apple take $20 per month off the tariff, you are paying $480 + $199 to get the phone = $679.

AT&T will get say the remaining $20 from the tariff + $15/m data +$20/m texting = $55/m * 24 = $1320. You don't have to take the texting package but I'm sure a few people would.

It's just an expensive phone, unlocked or not. I don't really see why it is the case though because while the 8GB iPod Touch has some inferior specs, it's way down at $229. I don't see how adding some phone parts and a nice camera adds over $400 to the price.

The sooner manufacturers get the iPod Touch mods that give you a basic phone add-on to an iPod Touch the better.

It is a bit higher price than the carrier pays to Apple. Main difference is that there is no subsidy. You pay that very same amount in a contract. Just bit by bit. Carriers price after the 2 year contract is about 600 and above depending on model. They will never loose the difference you think you are saving. ($450)

It is great if you want to use just Wi-Fi, which I currently use. So, I don't pay a data plan. I am on T-Mobile with a 3GS iPhone.

Yes, but you have more options. I am not tied into data and don't need it. That saves me over thirty dollars a month. That is a savings of $720.

Yes, they have, but it isn't super easy and you often have to wait. It is also risky because if the break doesn't work.

QUOTE=paxman;1882103]Haven't people been unlocking their phones since day one? Do a google search and you'll be swamped with solutions. I like the idea of http://rebelsimcard.com/ though I have to admit I have never tested it.[/QUOTE]

It does seem a bit much, I agree on that. There are inexpensive unlocked Android phones if one were so inclined, I really haven't compared them to the iPhone 4.

You are missing my point. Isn't the iPhone an iPod Touch with a telephony component? The telephony component adds approximately $130 retail (based on the costs to add telephony to an iPad 3G) and the 16GB iPod Touch is $299. $299 + $130 = $429.

$649 for essentially the same thing seems very high to me... Carriers or not.

Expensive for a phone that is 2-3 months from being obsolete.

It will be interesting to see if Apple offers a single world phone that also has T-Mobiles frequency for the iPhone 5. Even if T-Mobile cant stomach the prices through subsidizing, there would be consumers who would easily dump the 650 on an unlocked device if it meant using it on any carrier.

Not from around here, are you.

What you are missing is that in the US, if you buy the unlocked phone you are paying twice. First, you pay the full price for the phone. Then you pay the full price (ie, the same price as somone who got the phone for $450 less), for the service plan (aka, tariff).

In your normal/locked scenario, Apple gets it's $20/month and ATT get it's $20 a month (excluding data and texting).

In the unlocked scenario, Apple gets it's $480 upfront, but you still pay ATT $40/month and they keep it all instead of giving $20 to Apple. It's actually quite a bonanza for ATT, the only risk being that you don't stick with them for the full 24 months. But in the US, where else are you going to go?

The only reason it works is be too many of my fellow Americans are too cheap and/or short sighted that all we focus on is the initial upfront cost. So subsidized phones look like a great deal. If there were more people willing to buy unlocked phones, there'd be a bigger market for the carriers to compete by offering discounted service plans for non-subsidized phones.

The other annoying thing is that carriers are really "double-locking" us into their service. First, they only sell locked phones. Second, they make you sign a two-year contract. Why do they need both? Subsidizing an unlocked phone by tying it to a two-year contract is just as effective as locking the phone, especially with the high early termination fees. There's a risk that after the contact ends we'll take our phone to another carrier, but most people get a new phone every two years or so anyway, so it's irrelevent if it can be moved to a new carrier or not.

Maybe once both ATT and Verizon have their LTE networks more fully deployed, and if Apple continues to sell unlocked iPhones of the LTE variety, then we might get a little competition between carriers for earning the business of unlocked iPhone owners. But untiil then, it will have very little effect.

The iPhone also has a better screen than the Touch, a larger battery, a much better camera, an ear piece, and proximity sensor to dim the screen when you hold it to your ear. It all starts to add up. Also, the iPad only handles data. Handling voice and/or data, sometimes simultaneously, adds complexity so there may be more to the "cellular" part of the iPhone than there is to the cellular part of an iPad (extra antennas, extra chips, etc).

It may not account for the entire $220 price difference in your example, but it likely accounts for a pretty big chunk of it.

A more interesting comparison is between the iPhone and iPad. Leave the touch out of it as there are too many differences, as noted above.

32 GB unlocked iPhone: $749
32 GB unlocked iPad 3G: $729

That, more than the Touch comparison, suggests that either the unlocked iPhone is very overpriced, or the iPad is very aggressively priced (or both).

Its not the same, what about the bezel, design, research and development, marketing, licenses, etc
Wont be the same never, also you can not buy those component at retail. iFixit tear downs state an approximate of the price in bulk that apple gets from the provider (millions of those parts) it could be less or higher price.

Just think how long took design the bezel then start adding the aluminium blocks, the special CNC machines Apple designed, made build and placed at factories, all theses things comes more expensive compared to the ipod touch more simple design and cheaper materials.

No, a product should be priced at a level that allows you to sell all units you are able to produce. As long as Apple can sell a product with 60% product margins and has trouble keeping up with production for the good part of a year, it is not priced too high.
Naturally, it helps a lot if people don't realise that you have a 60% product margin, and the non-explicit carrier subsidy does a great job of hiding the fact that Apple's product margin on the iPhone is much higher than on the iPod touch.