And AT&T settled the class action suit. Now are legally required to unlock their phones after a period of time (10 months in most cases).... Except the iPhone
For one I want to know why the iPhone was excluded. Second an official unlock would make treveling a lot easier.
I hope Apple doesn't do the same lame stunt with bringing out the 4th generation and then selling the 3rd generation for $99 bucks. This Walmart deal makes it apparent they will do the same lame offering. Who want last year technology? I sure don't.
It would be interesting to see if Apple actually sold a boat load of 3G phones over the 3GS phones. I'd bet they didn't.
I hope Apple doesn't do the same lame stunt with bringing out the 4th generation and then selling the 3rd generation for $99 bucks. This Walmart deal makes it apparent they will do the same lame offering. Who want last year technology? I sure don't.
It would be interesting to see if Apple actually sold a boat load of 3G phones over the 3GS phones. I'd bet they didn't.
Wow, because YOU don't want last year's technology EVERYONE doesn't want it?
Okay God, now can you bring world peace or don't YOU want that either?
There are people who want an iPhone but can't afford the newer stuff but are happy with the current tech and don't see much value in the new stuff anyway.
Just because YOU don't see a need doesn't mean there isn't one otherwise Apple wouldn't do it and clearly Apple is a whole lot smarter than you... unless of course you actually run a $50 billion dollar computer company.
It is almost irrelevant how much you pay upfront $200, $100, $0 or -$100 if you take into account 2-year ownership cost.
While you are correct, I think that most people look at immediate expenses differently than future expenses. And besides, the monthly service is the same no matter what you pay initially.
For one I want to know why the iPhone was excluded.
Dave
I guess mainly because they know it is an easy hook to keep you on their network. If they have to unlock their phones and if they were allowed an exception, then the iPhone would be the one to pick. My question would be why was the iPhone allowed to be an exception by the lawyers repping the plaintiffs. Seems like it is the perfect example of why the class started the suit anyway...that being AT&T using carrier locks to prevent customers from bailing with the phones after their contract is up.
I would like to see this forced on all carriers in Canada. There is no good reason, from a customer point of view, in allowing carriers to prevent me from using my device on another compatible network once I have repaid my subsidy and met my contractual obligations. It is then my device free and clear and they should not be allowed to place restrictions on how I use my property.
Wow, because YOU don't want last year's technology EVERYONE doesn't want it?
Okay God, now can you bring world peace or don't YOU want that either?
There are people who want an iPhone but can't afford the newer stuff but are happy with the current tech and don't see much value in the new stuff anyway.
Just because YOU don't see a need doesn't mean there isn't one otherwise Apple wouldn't do it and clearly Apple is a whole lot smarter than you... unless of course you actually run a $50 billion dollar computer company.
I have to agree. The 3GS is still a great phone even after the 4G or whatever drops, and many would love to have the 3GS over whatever crap they might be running. great idea for apple and helps saturate the market more with phones using their platform. There's bee too much talk about fragmentation, it's called... "legacy".
I hope Apple doesn't do the same lame stunt with bringing out the 4th generation and then selling the 3rd generation for $99 bucks. This Walmart deal makes it apparent they will do the same lame offering. Who want last year technology? I sure don't.
It would be interesting to see if Apple actually sold a boat load of 3G phones over the 3GS phones. I'd bet they didn't.
So, why would any of that make you hope they don't do it? Do you somehow believe that if they sell the previous generation for a lower price that you are somehow forced to buy the older model, even though you want the new one?
If you don't want the 3GS and instead opt to get the 4G, why would you even care if they are selling the 3GS? I like my MacBook Pro. Should that mean I hope they stop selling the MacBook?
So, why would any of that make you hope they don't do it? Do you somehow believe that if they sell the previous generation for a lower price that you are somehow forced to buy the older model, even though you want the new one?
If you don't want the 3GS and instead opt to get the 4G, why would you even care if they are selling the 3GS? I like my MacBook Pro. Should that mean I hope they stop selling the MacBook?
Too many people here want to choose a team to back exclusively. They do it in weird contexts.
Liking Apple stuff somehow means that they must dislike other choices. Liking the older Apple model is disloyal to the curreent company edict.
I'm surprised that no one has discussed the ramifications to Apple's image and branding by selling the iPhone (even an older model) at Wal-Mart. One can argue that Apple should take care of every sales opportunity it can. On the other hand, Apple purposely reduced its dealer network around the time it opened its own stores, not so much to eliminate competition, but because Apple was unhappy with the way that most retailers presented its products.
Does anyone really think that WalMart is going to present Apple's products well? Even a computer chain, like CompUSA, did a lousy job of presenting Apple's products.
And selling an unlocked phone for a higher price is a non-starter. Almost no one is willing to pay $600 for a phone, even if there's a cost savings in the long run. And even if Verizon did get the iPhone, I have a feeling that they will not get into a price war with AT&T, so monthly charges will remain high. You would think that with high cell phone penetration, the only way to get new business would be to capture business from another carrier, and therefore there would be more price wars, but that doesn't seem to be the case.
I'm surprised that no one has discussed the ramifications to Apple's image and branding by selling the iPhone (even an older model) at Wal-Mart....
Does anyone really think that WalMart is going to present Apple's products well? Even a computer chain, like CompUSA, did a lousy job of presenting Apple's products.
While you are correct, I think that most people look at immediate expenses differently than future expenses. And besides, the monthly service is the same no matter what you pay initially.
True, but... currently, the least expensive voice and data plan from AT&T is $70 a month. Offer a plan for people who don't need 450 minutes a month and unlimited data, for under $50 a month, and iPhones fly out the doors whether the phones themselves are priced at $99 or $199.
Message to those who can't read between the lines of all these prices saying $97, 99 or $199. It's not true. New iPhones are not available at those prices, but Apple marketing is delighted if you think that it is.
Yeah, at this point I'd rather pay $500 for an unlocked iPhone and pay $40 a month (including data). Oh wait, that's what I already pay with my iPhone on T-Mobile
Wow...an iPhone on T-Mobile. So you have an iPhone with limited features, no 3G access, and lousy coverage areas. Sounds like a great deal.
Comments
Best Buy has been giving away the 3G for free with 2 year contract for the last two weeks...
so this was to be expected...good for Walmart to get in on the fun...hey what's next 7-Eleven's?
oh well...more the merrier...
Funny with the '7-eleven' comment!
Radio Shack...I mean the 'Shack!' <yawn>
This further confirms that next iPhone models are gonna be $199?32GB and $299?64GB white.
White at both levels, along with black.
It could just as easily come in the same 16 and 32 GB versions, with faster, newer internals and a new design.
Same price points? Probably.
32 GB and 64 GB. Maybe.
Confirmation? Nope.
Do I hope you're right? Yes!
And AT&T settled the class action suit. Now are legally required to unlock their phones after a period of time (10 months in most cases).... Except the iPhone
For one I want to know why the iPhone was excluded. Second an official unlock would make treveling a lot easier.
Dave
That's one way to clear inventory. Give Walmart a good price for a couple weeks before the new iPhone comes out.
Inventory clearance? Didn't the 3G stick around for a year at the lower price?
It would be interesting to see if Apple actually sold a boat load of 3G phones over the 3GS phones. I'd bet they didn't.
I hope Apple doesn't do the same lame stunt with bringing out the 4th generation and then selling the 3rd generation for $99 bucks. This Walmart deal makes it apparent they will do the same lame offering. Who want last year technology? I sure don't.
It would be interesting to see if Apple actually sold a boat load of 3G phones over the 3GS phones. I'd bet they didn't.
Wow, because YOU don't want last year's technology EVERYONE doesn't want it?
Okay God, now can you bring world peace or don't YOU want that either?
There are people who want an iPhone but can't afford the newer stuff but are happy with the current tech and don't see much value in the new stuff anyway.
Just because YOU don't see a need doesn't mean there isn't one otherwise Apple wouldn't do it and clearly Apple is a whole lot smarter than you... unless of course you actually run a $50 billion dollar computer company.
so this was to be expected...good for Walmart to get in on the fun...hey what's next 7-Eleven's?
Could work if you could buy them as prepaid like in Europe.
Not sure how it is news.
It is almost irrelevant how much you pay upfront $200, $100, $0 or -$100 if you take into account 2-year ownership cost.
While you are correct, I think that most people look at immediate expenses differently than future expenses. And besides, the monthly service is the same no matter what you pay initially.
For one I want to know why the iPhone was excluded.
Dave
I guess mainly because they know it is an easy hook to keep you on their network. If they have to unlock their phones and if they were allowed an exception, then the iPhone would be the one to pick. My question would be why was the iPhone allowed to be an exception by the lawyers repping the plaintiffs. Seems like it is the perfect example of why the class started the suit anyway...that being AT&T using carrier locks to prevent customers from bailing with the phones after their contract is up.
Anyway, if you want to read the docs from the case the Notice of Settlement is up as well as other info.
I would like to see this forced on all carriers in Canada. There is no good reason, from a customer point of view, in allowing carriers to prevent me from using my device on another compatible network once I have repaid my subsidy and met my contractual obligations. It is then my device free and clear and they should not be allowed to place restrictions on how I use my property.
Wow, because YOU don't want last year's technology EVERYONE doesn't want it?
Okay God, now can you bring world peace or don't YOU want that either?
There are people who want an iPhone but can't afford the newer stuff but are happy with the current tech and don't see much value in the new stuff anyway.
Just because YOU don't see a need doesn't mean there isn't one otherwise Apple wouldn't do it and clearly Apple is a whole lot smarter than you... unless of course you actually run a $50 billion dollar computer company.
I have to agree. The 3GS is still a great phone even after the 4G or whatever drops, and many would love to have the 3GS over whatever crap they might be running. great idea for apple and helps saturate the market more with phones using their platform. There's bee too much talk about fragmentation, it's called... "legacy".
I hope Apple doesn't do the same lame stunt with bringing out the 4th generation and then selling the 3rd generation for $99 bucks. This Walmart deal makes it apparent they will do the same lame offering. Who want last year technology? I sure don't.
It would be interesting to see if Apple actually sold a boat load of 3G phones over the 3GS phones. I'd bet they didn't.
So, why would any of that make you hope they don't do it? Do you somehow believe that if they sell the previous generation for a lower price that you are somehow forced to buy the older model, even though you want the new one?
If you don't want the 3GS and instead opt to get the 4G, why would you even care if they are selling the 3GS? I like my MacBook Pro. Should that mean I hope they stop selling the MacBook?
So, why would any of that make you hope they don't do it? Do you somehow believe that if they sell the previous generation for a lower price that you are somehow forced to buy the older model, even though you want the new one?
If you don't want the 3GS and instead opt to get the 4G, why would you even care if they are selling the 3GS? I like my MacBook Pro. Should that mean I hope they stop selling the MacBook?
Too many people here want to choose a team to back exclusively. They do it in weird contexts.
Liking Apple stuff somehow means that they must dislike other choices. Liking the older Apple model is disloyal to the curreent company edict.
Does anyone really think that WalMart is going to present Apple's products well? Even a computer chain, like CompUSA, did a lousy job of presenting Apple's products.
And selling an unlocked phone for a higher price is a non-starter. Almost no one is willing to pay $600 for a phone, even if there's a cost savings in the long run. And even if Verizon did get the iPhone, I have a feeling that they will not get into a price war with AT&T, so monthly charges will remain high. You would think that with high cell phone penetration, the only way to get new business would be to capture business from another carrier, and therefore there would be more price wars, but that doesn't seem to be the case.
I'm surprised that no one has discussed the ramifications to Apple's image and branding by selling the iPhone (even an older model) at Wal-Mart....
Does anyone really think that WalMart is going to present Apple's products well? Even a computer chain, like CompUSA, did a lousy job of presenting Apple's products.
WalMart has been selling iPhones since just after Christmas. IIRC, there was quite a spirited discussion at the time whether that fact would affect iPhone branding.
While you are correct, I think that most people look at immediate expenses differently than future expenses. And besides, the monthly service is the same no matter what you pay initially.
True, but... currently, the least expensive voice and data plan from AT&T is $70 a month. Offer a plan for people who don't need 450 minutes a month and unlimited data, for under $50 a month, and iPhones fly out the doors whether the phones themselves are priced at $99 or $199.
Seriously stop. Or I'll call in Cesar Cupertino - the Geek Whisperer:
"but 2 year..*TSSSSST!* ...contract *TSSSSST!* (grumbles under breath)*TSSSST!* (sits quietly at desk waiting for treat)"
Yeah. Geek Whisperer.
you can break the contract anytime if you are not happy....
Yeah, at this point I'd rather pay $500 for an unlocked iPhone and pay $40 a month (including data). Oh wait, that's what I already pay with my iPhone on T-Mobile
Wow...an iPhone on T-Mobile. So you have an iPhone with limited features, no 3G access, and lousy coverage areas. Sounds like a great deal.