Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Communications Businesses Wireless Networking Apple Hardware

iPhone Freed From AT&T, Twice 357

Posted by kdawson
from the everything-but-the-visual-voicemail dept.
A very large number of readers sent in stories about one or the other of the two new claims to have unlocked the iPhone for use on other GSM carriers. A New Jersey teenager, George Hotz, posted instructions for unlocking the iPhone using a soldering gun and a lot of patience. This is from coverage in a local NJ paper: "If someone handed him an iPhone new out of the box, he could modify it in 'about an hour,' he said. A person following his directions might take 'a good 12 hours,' the teen estimated." Hotz has put up a YouTube video substantiating his claim, and is conducting an eBay auction for one of his two hacked phones. The other hack is by a commercial outfit called iPhoneSIMfree.com, whose claim Engadget has verified. The company will be selling licenses to the hack, minimum quantity 500, at a price not yet announced. These hacks are much bigger news for those outside America. Expect to see an industry spring up to meet European (and Asian?) demand for freed iPhones.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

iPhone Freed From AT&T, Twice

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward
    I smell Lawsuits.
    • by djupedal (584558)
      The guy's blog is not responding - he's got to know this means nothing but heartache for him going forward. What was it...like four guys and three of them conned the kid into going public. Very public...?
    • by ackthpt (218170) on Friday August 24, 2007 @06:21PM (#20348863) Homepage Journal

      I smell Lawsuits.

      Lawyers my eye, this is probably covered by the DMCA reverse engineering, same as for unlocking XBoxes and so forth. Simply purchasing an iPhone does not convey complete ownership and the right to dismantle protections under such law. Worse, offering up the modified iPhone on eBay, which I expect to see cancelled, will not simply bring grief from AT&T, but Apple as well. (It's currently up to $15K, which I doubt will be honoured.) It's best if someone does unlock the iPhone for other GSM services to keep their yap shut and use it as they see fit. Sadly, ego must be fed, but at what price?

  • More Like.... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by phobos13013 (813040)
    Expect to see endless lawsuits spring up about this. But really, is there ground to stand on against this?
    • Re:More Like.... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by monktus (742861) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:21PM (#20347147)
      There's nothing to stop you unlocking any other phone (in Europe anyway), so I doubt the iPhone will be any different. If anything, if Apple tries to prevent it, I could see the European Commission stepping in.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by GuldKalle (1065310)
        Except (AFAIK) you need to have certified you equipment for radio transmission. And since you've physically hacked your phone, my guess is the Apple certification doesn't count anymore.
        • That's a problem for you as an individual hacker. I suspect it'll be less of a problem for that corp. that did the software hack; they'll just make their own official certification for iPhones hacked with their software.
        • Except (AFAIK) you need to have certified you equipment for radio transmission. And since you've physically hacked your phone, my guess is the Apple certification doesn't count anymore.
          There's nothing physical (hardware, that is) about this hack, at least not for the iphonesimfree.com hack. And as long as the software doesn't make any modifications to the way the radio behaves (which I would imagine it doesn't), it should be just fine.
      • They might step in but for one small problem: The iPhone isn't available in Europe right now.

        But other than that tiny detail, I agree with your post :)
    • Re:More Like.... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by owlnation (858981) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:28PM (#20347237)
      Unlocking a phone isn't illegal. (nor should it be)

      Apple doesn't lose out of this, so I can't see them rushing to redesign the hardware or software.

      The only loser it AT&T. And one can easily argue that if the provided a good connection product, at a competitive price and backed it up with quality service they'd have nothing to worry about.

      But, of course, the only reason for all service providers all over the globe to use lock-ins is because the last thing any phone company offers is any of the above.

      So, yeah, let's hear those world's smallest violins.
      • Re:More Like.... (Score:5, Informative)

        by OmegaBlac (752432) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:56PM (#20347503)

        Apple doesn't lose out of this, so I can't see them rushing to redesign the hardware or software.
        Doesn't Apple get a share of revenue from each AT&T contract? I would expect them to respond to this asap.
        http://www.mobile-tech-today.com/story.xhtml?story _title=Analyst__Apple_Gets_Healthy_Share_of_AT_T_C ontracts&story_id=102008J3T13I [mobile-tech-today.com]
        http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/07/19/anal yst_weighs_in_on_apples_rev_share_arrangement_with _att.html [appleinsider.com]
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by jbarr (2233)

          Doesn't Apple get a share of revenue from each AT&T contract? I would expect them to respond to this asap.

          Sure, they'll probably respond (and I'd wager that they'll wait until AFTER the phone sells on eBay--you know, to ensure some legal technicality ensues due to the sale) but really, if their business model relies (at least partially) on the revenue of another company, then shame on them.
          • Re:More Like.... (Score:5, Interesting)

            by Shenkerian (577120) on Friday August 24, 2007 @04:10PM (#20347627)
            Why do you say that? It's a perfectly legitimate business model to develop a platform that draws revenue from third-party licenses. The video game industry is an obvious example.
        • Re:More Like.... (Score:4, Interesting)

          by norminator (784674) on Friday August 24, 2007 @04:24PM (#20347805)
          But do they have more to gain from selling the hardware, or from their cut of the revenue? Estimates of profits on the hardware are anywhere from 23% ($138) [eetimes.com] to 55% ($329) [infoworld.com] of the cost of the phones (for the $599 iPhone, not sure about the $499 one). According to your links, Apple gets either $3 per contract ($72 over 2 years) or $11 ($264 over 2 years), depending on whether the AT&T customer is new to AT&T or not.

          Depending on the balance of new customers to old (and 4GB iPhones to 8GB iPhones), Apple may just make more money by letting people buy the phone and use it with any provider, especially considering that the legal fees to try to enforce the locked phone policy would probably wipe out any difference in revenue from lost AT&T customers. That's provided that AT&T doesn't make too much of a stink with Apple about it. In any case, I'm sure the number of people who actually will end up unlocking their phones will be relatively small, so even AT&T doesn't have much to worry about, and Apple can enjoy those few extra sales that they'll get from it.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by PopeRatzo (965947) *
          I think there's another way that Apple loses in this.

          Despite the exuberance of the dedicated fans, Apple needs to sell to average consumers if they're going to really succeed. It wasn't all the Mac fans buying iPods that made it so successful, it was the millions of regular, normal people who were drawn to a well-designed, innovative product and paying full price for it.

          Retail is tricky though, because you have to keep giving customers what they want if you're going to stay on top. One reason Apple is sti
    • Re:More Like.... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by chuckymonkey (1059244) <charles.d.burton@gma i l . com> on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:33PM (#20347273) Journal
      I really hope they don't go after that kid. We need more smart people like him around.
      • Re:More Like.... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by jcgf (688310) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:46PM (#20347395)

        We need more smart people like him around.

        Very true, but I fear the government wants less smart people around.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by jcgf (688310)
          The truth ain't flamebait assholes.
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Planesdragon (210349)

            The truth ain't flamebait assholes.

            Sorry, that's not the truth.

            The United States Federal Government lives and dies by smart people. It's the smart people in the government that keep the planes flying, the nuclear weapons from blowing up in our faces, the law making halfway descent sense, and who translate the will of the elected charismatics into something mostly practical.

            What the government doesn't want is smart rebels. Something entirely different from the larger subset of "smart people."

        • by ahoehn (301327) <andrew.hoe@hn> on Friday August 24, 2007 @06:16PM (#20348825) Homepage
          Grammar Nazi says, "Fewer! Anything that can be counted is Fewer! Less is for things that can't be counted, like water. Less water. Fewer smart people."

          Thank you Grammar Nazi.
    • I don't know what the Apple-AT&T contract looks like, but I know in Apple's iTunes contracts, the companies for which it provides protected music require Apple to make "corrections" when someone figures out how to break the protection on the songs.

      If the iPhone contract is similar, then Apple may be required to update the iPhone software to attempt to thwart this.

      Just keep your eyes open and see what happens to the two sites making claims. If they come down, Apple got to them.
  • by pjcreath (513472) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:19PM (#20347127)
    From the summary:

    The company will be selling licenses to the hack, minimum quantity 500, at a price not yet announced.
    iPhoneSimFree will be selling to end-users as well. From their front page [iphonesimfree.com]:

    Individual per unit licenses will be available starting next week
    • by RDW (41497)
      I wonder how many days they'll get away with selling this before (a) lawyers find a reason to shut them down, or (b) someone in the hacking community is motivated by this proof of concept to complete a free hack, or (c) someone reverse-engineers the existing hack and releases a free version..? (will iPhoneSimFree be cheeky enough to 'prohibit' reverse engineering _their_ reverse engineering in the license?)
  • Implications (Score:5, Insightful)

    by imstanny (722685) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:20PM (#20347133)
    AT&T might have a basis for a lawsuit, since it has a contract with Apple for exclusivity. For users with modified iPhones, I speculate the only negative externality will be a voided warranty.
    • Re:Implications (Score:5, Informative)

      by adam613 (449819) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:31PM (#20347257)
      AT&T most likely has a basis for a lawsuit, but that basis has nothing to do with the Apple-exclusivity contract, since people who hack the phone aren't parties to that contract. The lawsuit would more likely be based on violation of license terms prohibiting the defeat of whatever protection mechanisms are keeping the iPhone locked. And I have no idea whether this would hold up in Europe, where this hack is actually useful.
      • by jbarr (2233)

        AT&T most likely has a basis for a lawsuit, but that basis has nothing to do with the Apple-exclusivity contract, since people who hack the phone aren't parties to that contract.

        But wouldn't the purchaser be bound by some sort of EULA? Consider DirecTV a number of years back who, despite the end-user purchasing the hardware, owned the access cards. That was eventually stated on the box the end-user purchased. I haven't seen the iPhone packaging, but I presume there is some reference that the purchaser i

  • Why do all this... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by downix (84795) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:20PM (#20347139) Homepage
    When there are good projects like the Neo [openmoko.org] that are on their way?
    • by sokoban (142301) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:26PM (#20347211) Homepage
      Because there are good projects like the iPhone already here.
      • by legirons (809082) on Friday August 24, 2007 @05:27PM (#20348409)
        "Because there are good projects like the iPhone already here."

        STFU - iPhone represents the most proprietary item you can obtain, with a hardware supplier who's not letting anyone but them write software, a software supplier who's famous for not running on any hardware other than that which they created (software supplier and hardware supplier being the same company, for anyone interested in vendor lock-in), and doing an exclusive deal with a monopoly telephone provider, just to put the monopilistic cherry on the proprietary icing.

        How the fuck can you compare *that* with OpenMoko, a completely Free phone with a Free firmware, Free Operating System, Free applications, and community of Free Software guys prepared to spend $450 each just to debug the hardware for the benefit of humanity, so that for the first time ever, you can buy a phone that does whatever you want

        • How the fuck can you compare *that* with OpenMoko, a completely Free phone with a Free firmware, Free Operating System, Free applications, and community of Free Software guys prepared to spend $450 each just to debug the hardware for the benefit of humanity, so that for the first time ever, you can buy a phone that does whatever you want

          Fuck, to fucking compare the fuck out of that fucking comparison, I fucking could fucking point out that for fucking fuck's sake, that fuck, it's like fucking OS X, sure fuc
    • by *weasel (174362) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:28PM (#20347229)
      Because the Neo is a project and lots of people just want a product?
    • by xgr3gx (1068984)
      Indeed...2 words for you. 1) Neo1978 2)OpenMoko
      I think the first production run of the neo and openmoko is due out in October/November.
      I'm getting ready...it's gonna be schweet!
    • by Laebshade (643478)
      The iPhone has a bigger hard drive, for one.
      • but the Neo1973 has GPS. And removable storage. And replaceable battery.
        But No camera :-(
        • Having no camera is an advantage. If you can prove your phone has no camera, you can use it in places where cameras are forbidden.
    • by Chandon Seldon (43083) on Friday August 24, 2007 @06:54PM (#20349107) Homepage

      The Neo is neat and all, but you don't even have to be that open to do better than the iPhone.

      The iPhone is explicitly designed to create vendor lock-in with AT&T. If you want a fully functional smartphone that is unlocked by default, you can get something like a Nokia Communicator [wikipedia.org].

      In fact, there are great stacks of phones (all generally unavailable from carriers in the US) that are fully functional smart phones that run on industry-standard Symbian (some even on not-fully-open Linux; hell, even Windows Mobile is better than an iPhone) and have such amazing features as being unlocked and supporting 3rd party apps by default.

      Here are some more phones to compare the iPhone to:

  • by morgan_greywolf (835522) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:21PM (#20347145) Homepage Journal
    Tt's the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and phew, is it stinkin' up the place!
  • Yeah, but... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Mikachu (972457) <<ude.ynuc.retnuh> <ta> <ekrubjj>> on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:23PM (#20347177) Homepage
    but what are you going to do now that you just bought a 2-year contract with AT&T that was required with the purchase of your iPhone?
    • Re:Yeah, but... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by k_187 (61692) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:25PM (#20347195) Journal
      Given that activation of that contract doesn't occur at the time of sale, but upon activation later. Not much.
      • by Mikachu (972457)
        Interesting, I was under the impression that the price of the phone was subsidized like phones with Verizon and such, even at the $600 price tag. So the price of the phone is only under the condition that you sign the contract with AT&T.

        Am I wrong?
        • by k_187 (61692)
          Yes and no, from what I've gathered, the traditional subsidy that would go to you, goes to apple. I don't know what legal rammifications there are to skipping activation on AT&T's network, but it doesn't happen at the point of sale.
    • by TrentC (11023)
      but what are you going to do now that you just bought a 2-year contract with AT&T that was required with the purchase of your iPhone?

      A contract is not required to complete the purchase.

      One of my co-workers bought an iPhone and is using it month-to-month on AT&T. No trickery or hackery involved.
  • Meh (Score:5, Funny)

    by El Lobo (994537) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:23PM (#20347181)
    Bah, It's not like he made it's battery replaceable.
  • I'm not trying to belittle his achievement, but I think the fact that geohot autographed the phone with a marker pen can only detract from the value. After distributing instructions to do this yourself and acknowledging that similar auction lots are likely to appear before the end of his, he obviously believes that he's selling a part of iPhone of history. Odd.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by everphilski (877346)
      Well, seeing as the autographed phone has 23 bids and is going for in excess of 3,000, I guess I'd find your statement a little odd.
  • by tgatliff (311583) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:27PM (#20347213)
    Its great to know that they have figured out the JTag interface, but I question how useful any of this is. Meaning, even if you can make/take calls on all the networks, the visual voicemail and SMS would still be non functioning due to software needed on the AT&T network. The SMS probably can be easily fixed by using a different application, but the visual voicemail would definitely be more difficult to get around.
    • by brunes69 (86786)
      I am really sick of hearing this same, lame, usless comment. Who cares about visual voicemail? My cell plan doesnt even INCLUDE voicemail, and I have a Windows Mobile 2006 smartphone.

      Not everyone even cares about voicemail on their cell, let alone the visual kind. The iPhone has MUCH more going for it than that lame feature.

    • If you want to switch from AT&T to another carrier and you have a really expensive iPhone, a working phone with a few of the fancier features nonfunctional is still more useful than a phone that won't work on the other network at all.
      There is still voicemail--it just reverts to normal non-visual voicemail. There is still SMS--and on a phone which can use outright e-mail, why do you need SMS?
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by dlim (928138)
      If you don't mind getting a new phone number, you could use a free service like GrandCentral [grandcentral.com]. It gives you a single phone number that routes calls to your phones based on the caller and your rules, and lets you access all of your voicemail visually from the web. The website uses a flash plugin, but there's a mobile version. I don't have an iPhone, so I can't confirm if it works on mobile Safari.

      I'm sure it requires more effort than the built in solution, but it doesn't care who your phone company is.
  • by llZENll (545605) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:31PM (#20347253)
    Apple and AT&T have undoubtably already discussed what they would do if this happened, as it undoubtably would, Apple will probably have to pay a fine to AT&T as per contract, or attempt to fix the issue. Most likely though neither side will care much as the majority of users will simply switch to AT&T rather than trying to install an unlocking utility, as this is Apple's whole mantra and reason people buy Apple products, they would much rather pay for convienence and an easy to use device than having to hack, adjust, and tweak it.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      From the engadget article mentioned in the summary:

      The unlock process took only a couple of minutes. From our end it was totally painless.

      Remember it's a simple software patch. That doesn't sound like much inconvenience. Put a nice, simple UI on it and there's nothing left preventing the "simple folk" from "hacking" their iPhones.

      Actually, from what I understand, AT&T themselves did a terrible job at activating iPhones [engadget.com] during the launch. Still no problems selling, apparently.

  • Functionality (Score:3, Insightful)

    by martinelli (1082609) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:32PM (#20347267) Homepage
    I wonder how the functionality of the iPhone is affected - visual voicemail, uploading video, etc. Does anyone know if these are AT&T specific functions?
    • I know this is a groundbreaking concept, but have you tried to maybe RTFA?
      • by frdmfghtr (603968)

        I know this is a groundbreaking concept, but have you tried to maybe RTFA?
        This is Slashdot, you insensitive clod! We don't RTFA around here!
  • Still... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by prxp (1023979) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:34PM (#20347285)
    You still have to go through the activation process. There are tons of methods to bypass it though. Those thinking it's just to unlock the iPhone and get worry free should be aware. If you have a non-ATT iPhone, You'll still need to re-activate it after every software update from Apple. That's because iTunes checks your phone for consistency and hacked phones don't pass this test. iTunes will demand a full restoration of the hacked iPhone that creates the need for re-activation. It's not that difficult to crack the activation process, but if you are not tech savvy you may get into trouble. After every software update, Apple may change things in iPhone's OS which includes the activation process. So all activation hacks may stop working overnight. Of course the iPhone hack community will eventually modify the hacks so they adapt to the changes, but keeping track of all of that might be hard for the technological challenged.
  • by budword (680846) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:36PM (#20347301)
    You would think any company with a goal of making money by out competing it's competitors in the market would take this moment to jump in the air and yell, "Holy bat shit Bat Man, we have a hell of hit on our hands. We've hit a home run ! People are willing to spend 12 hours moding our gear to get it the way they want it. I bet they'll be willing to spend a ton of money on our stuff. This is fantastic. Lets give them what they want ! We are going to be rich !" I don't think that's what they are going to do though, I think they are going to sue some people. Sorta lets you know where they are coming from doesn't it ? They want to compete by locking you in. Sorta like some other large company I can't remember the name of just now.
    • by faloi (738831)
      They want to compete by locking you in. Sorta like some other large company I can't remember the name of just now.

      You're probably thinking of Apple and the way they lock people into using iTunes store on their iPod.
      • by outZider (165286)
        *eyeroll*

        Most people choose the iPod for that. Kinda like how the Zune locks you into the Zune store. You could get a WM player, which allows you access to... a lot of stores with the same pricing and content. *twirls finger* It's all about making it easy.

        Hoser.
  • Licensing a hack? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by djcatnip (551428) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:39PM (#20347333) Homepage Journal
    how the hell do you license a hack? That's like selling someone the way to snap their fingers.
    • by Nikker (749551) on Friday August 24, 2007 @04:02PM (#20347543)
      Well I guess the guy found a bunch of people who don't know how to snap their fingers ;)
    • by setirw (854029)
      For the same reason that it's perfectly legal for my private high school to "sell me the way" to solve second order differential equations, or for my violin teacher to "sell me the way" to play Bach...
    • by Nasarius (593729)
      Indeed...you can sign contracts with each customer saying they're not allowed to disclose the process or else, but once it's inevitably "leaked", it's just out there. You certainly can't set the legal system against some random third party who got the information from a website and is now selling their own hacked iPhones.
  • they'll never get away with selling it.
  • don't care (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Lord Ender (156273) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:50PM (#20347441) Homepage
    Personally, I don't even care about the iPhone until it has GPS. As much as I hate the unresponsive and convoluted interface interface, the clumsy buttons, and the general ugliness of my iPaq, having GPS-enabled google maps in my pocket is now an absolutely mandatory requirement for me to even consider another mobile device.
    • Why is GPS primary? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by SuperKendall (25149)
      GPS is only good for one thing - telling you where you are.

      Yet almost all the time, I know exactly where I am. What I want to know is where something else is, and how to get there. Thus for me of primary importance is the map browsing, and at that the iPhone excels since it's so easy to do local searches on an area you are viewing, have it generate directions you can follow a turn at a time, and browse nearby streets to be sure exactly how to get there once you are close. Panning and zooming in and out a
  • by Rob T Firefly (844560) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:51PM (#20347443) Homepage Journal
    This seems to be the phone equivalent of a modchipped game console, which eBay has explicitly banned from their site. Given the insane amount of attention this is getting and will continue to get, is it likely that they'll simply pull the auction, possibly after receiving a nastygram from AT&T and/or Apple?
    • I think eBay's reasoning behind preventing modchipped consoles from being auctioned is that they're often used to play pirated games. This iPhone hack allows one to use a different operator, which is not illegal AFAIK.
      • I think eBay's reasoning behind preventing modchipped consoles from being auctioned is that they're often used to play pirated games. This iPhone hack allows one to use a different operator, which is not illegal AFAIK.

        Chipped consoles are also used to play backups and homebrew, though, and are not in themselves (AFAIK/IANAL) illegal to own. They are, however, strongly discouraged by the big corporations who make the consoles, and who have aquarium tanks full of lawyers at the ready... as do ATT and Apple.

  • Hack licenses? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by CheeseTroll (696413) on Friday August 24, 2007 @03:51PM (#20347451)
    They're selling *licenses* to the hack? And will they send the BSA after someone if they suspect they're under-licensed?
  • Not Illegal (Score:2, Informative)

    by Dusty00 (1106595)
    This is actually explicitly legal. In an attempt to defend their lock-in business model the phone company previously tried to prohibit flashing their firmware under the DMCA. They later decided the only purpose to of this was to support a business model and hence they added it to the DMCA exception list.

    DMCA on cell phones [wired.com]
  • This is national news now. CNBC is covering it and Apple's stock [yahoo.com] jumped $3.60 or so because of the news.

    It will be very interesting to see how the players react. My prediction?
    Apple: won't care. more customers = better
    T-Mobile: won't care.
    AT&T: Pissed!

    It is very important to distribute the "how-to" as quickly and widely as possible. I hope he published them before they sue his ass and try to silence him. Because I think AT&T will do exactly that...

    Remember folks, sometimes it
  • Soldering on jumper wires is only for experimenting. If it really can't be done from software alone, what's needed is a a PC board test fixture. [testelectronics.com] Once you have one of those set up for the job, connecting to the right spots is easy. With that, and a control PC programmed to do all the necessary downloads and updates, the whole operation can be done in a minute or two per phone.

    Coming soon to the back room of an off-brand cell phone store near you.

  • CNBC Coverage (Score:4, Informative)

    by DaveAtFraud (460127) on Friday August 24, 2007 @04:33PM (#20347887) Homepage Journal
    The kid got an interview on CNBC. Not quite fifteen minutes of fame but at least a couple. He also managed to get in a plug for "information wants to be free" and to note that what he did is explicitly legal.

    Cheers,
    Dave
  • by Rexdude (747457) on Friday August 24, 2007 @04:56PM (#20348095)
    You don't buy an internet router from your ISP.
    You don't buy cars from the Highway Department (or equivalent)
    You don't buy your TV,dishwasher,microwave or other electrical appliances from the electricity company.

    So why on earth do americans still meekly accept the logic of buying mobile phones from service providers?

    The sooner unlocked phones proliferate, there won't be a need to jump through such hoops to unlock an iPhone, or any other phone.
  • by houghi (78078) on Friday August 24, 2007 @06:11PM (#20348775)
    In Belgium sim-locking is illegal. It is expected for the end of 2007, so probably X-mas.

"Say yur prayers, yuh flea-pickin' varmint!" -- Yosemite Sam

Working...