Digg

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Unbricked iPhones Now Fully Working, Calls Included

gizmodo.com — Today we have discovered that you can send and receive calls, SMS and mails too, as well as surf the Web with it.

Bury

lisapham 1 year 52 days ago, made popular 1 year 52 days ago

1165 diggs
digg it

68 Comments
Who Dugg It?

lisapham, on 10/10/2007, -5/+12What's the next move Mr. Jobs? Perhaps making the iPhone SDK open source???
- lothar250, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1Maybe they're gonna do that when all the contracts expire... But since the phone is released in like summer '08 in some countries, that could take quite a while...
  - kingkilr, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10ATT is exclusive for 5 years, personally I hope someone goes all the way with the FCC, they mandate that you can unlock your phone as long as it is for the exclusive purpose of using it with a different carrier.
    - MaxPayne3476, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5We already have that! It's perfectly legal to use a technique to unlock your phone for the sole purpose of carrier freedom. It's also legal for Apple to not support it!
HiCaP, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10Wait, this was just Round 1
lisapham, on 10/10/2007, -4/+25Actually this is more like Round 3
- konspence, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Off topic, but I like digg's implementation of the reply feature.
Mytheral, on 10/10/2007, -6/+28Woot Jesus Phone walks AND TALKS again
- djsim, on 10/10/2007, -2/+46Let this day be known as Jesus Phone Easter- the day the Jesus Phone is ressurected from the dead!
- insomniac8400, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2What are you going to call the newton phone when it's out 6 months from now? The god phone?
  - jonshipman, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5The Budda phone
jaimeshm, on 10/10/2007, -6/+7how about handing over the whole iPhone OS to the open-source community. I would love to see how fast the software would grow and how much more powerful the device would become. This would be great for the consumer, but would ultimately suck for apple. We cant live in a perfect world. :-(
- h3llscaper, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3We can always hope for an internal leak of the source. :)
- leunghoi, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10As the story unfold, I am really sad to find out that Job is actually more anti-competitive than Gates. I hope the other electronic companies can beat Apple with better products soon...
- tyrione, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0It's Mac OS X you twit. Why the hell would you give the Crowning Jewel to the FOSS Community? Thanks for playing. Think of how many Linux modifications to copy is what would happen, not OS X exploding into every device.
aamittle, on 10/10/2007, -22/+8How about Apple said NO 3RD PARTY APPS on the iPhone a full 6 months before it ever shipped. What part of NO do you not understand?
- Bardak, on 10/10/2007, -2/+14Apple can`t tell me what to do
  - aamittle, on 10/10/2007, -7/+4And Apple doesn't care about all of the fanboy whining, so please join me in telling them to STFU.
- kingkilr, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Umm, no, they said no SDK at WWDC, not MacWorld.
  - Bardak, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7but I don`t have to listen
    - locojones, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1And they don't have to fix your device when you break it either.
- h3llscaper, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7"No" just means the somebody will try that much harder to do what they don't want them to. Please see the PSP homebrew scene to see how many times they were all told "No".
- MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -4/+11It's your phone, do as you please. However the next time Apple "updates", can we all be spared the "OMG! APPLE BRICKED MY PHONE WITH IT'S UPDATE!!! STEVE JOBS SUCKS BECAUSE HE DID WHAT HE SAID HE WOULD DO!"
  Either buy the phone knowing its limitations and be aware of the risks or buy a different phone. Thank you
  - MaxPayne3476, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Amen! Shouldn't you realize that you don't update until someone else takes the plunge and tells you the results? Its like jumping out of the plane with a homebrewed parachute. It MIGHT work.. but chances are your *****.
Matty2Jay, on 10/10/2007, -6/+11Jesus phone my arse, this phone is the Undertaker (WWF of course).
- zerhynn, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8True. The undertaker keeps dying and coming back, and I see many more deaths and rebirths in the iPhone's future. Maybe iPhoneix is a more suitable name.
sonicularulus, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3cat and mouse game..tee hee hee..
Phantom1045, on 10/10/2007, -7/+5You guys saw it! 1(408)996-1010. Go to work diggers!
- the_snitch, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1bah! It just calls an Apple store, with a frog-sounding robot answering the call.
- Unixed, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0I would, but don't you remember that Apple iBricked me.
jhonizzle, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2http://www.phonenumber.com/search/ReversePhone?pho ...

Apple Corp's phone number
captgary, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14And if you didn't upgrade like an idiot after being warned it would brick your phone you wouldn't have to go through the hassle of downgrading to get it working again.
- alobos, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1That's not the case always. There's today an 80% chance to buy a new iPhone that comes with 1.1.1. That's an iBrick that has to be resusited.
kkiran, on 10/10/2007, -6/+3Apple should stop being stubborn now. How I wish they din't sign a contract with AT&T , even if they did, AT&T should have subsidized the iPhone and then they could expect us to sign a 2 yr contract with them. AT&T and Apple are the bad people whereas the community is the hero!!
- Drizzit, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Hate to break it to you, if the iPhone is successful other companies will quit subsidizing their cell phones as well.
- hellotyler, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I would have bought one if it wasn't locked into ATT, lets leave it at that.
wumps, on 10/10/2007, -2/+17That sure is a lot of work to make a phone call.
zsection, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0I love these guys...
scottix, on 10/10/2007, -5/+4Yes the iPhone is be littled by not allowing third party apps...one of the main reasons I don't have one. The other is that it doesn't have 3G which is lame.
obeygiant, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5um. i may be crazy, but all of this 'work' to just use a damn phone is seeming to be a bit kind of crazy now... (after the 15th update, i've had enough)

i'll just stick with my at&t iphone.

a phone is something i use quite frequently, so i wouldn't want to take a chance to have a brick in my pocket....

am i crazy or do other people feel the same way?
- bobnease, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I have to say I'm with you on this one. I got my iPhone for my business, not to hack it. However, I figure if people are willing to risk breaking their phone to push the limits of a device like this, I'm not going to oppose them... they know the risk they're taking.
petrax, on 10/10/2007, -10/+4I know this is an unpopular but, companies and individuals selling or giving away tools to unlock or open the iPhone to other carriers and third party software are in the strictest terms breaking the law. Using these products is also in violation of the iPhones Software License Agreement. While Apple has not yet gone after anyone legally and they may never choose to do that, the option is still open.
The iPhone is a subsidized phone, when you purchase it and open the box you are agreeing to an a 2 year contract with AT&T, If you do not sign-up and activate the iPhone with AT&T you can still be held liable for the full cost of the AT&T 2 year contract, at some point AT&T might choose to track and enforce that part of the contract. If you go into a Sprint.Nextel store and buy a HTC Mogul for $299.99 took it out of the store and unlocked it to use it with T Mobile would you expect to be charged the full cost of the 3 year Sprint/Nextel contract? If not, how come? The retail price of the HTC Mogul phone is $549.99 if you were to purchase one that is not subsidized. The iPhone is an AT&T subsidized phone, Apple receives monetary compensation form AT&T for the exclusive rights to provide services to all iPhones Apple sells in the US. Apple has used the subsidy in 2 ways. 1. They negotiated a better rate on full unlimited data plans for their iPhone customers (don't believe me compare the AT&T iPhone plans with the same AT&T rates with any other subsidized smart phone. 2. Apple is receiving monetary subsidy payments from AT&T.
So, you think well I went into the Apple Store or Ordered it directly from Apple so the iPhone is not subsidized so I should be free to do with it what I want. Not so fast, Apple wanted the user experience of buying the iPhone to remain within it's control, and the understood that if you had to go to AT&T to buy your phone and have it activated in the store AT&T store would not be able to handle the volume and the store would stop promoting this overwhelming burden that the iPhone would be come.
Hacked iPhones aside, the iPhone is the easiest and most pleasant cell phone to buy and get activated on the market. You walk into an Apple or AT&T store you buy the phone and you walk out, at home you plug-in the iPhone to your computer open iTunes fill in some info and submit it in the privacy and comfort of your own home and with-in a few minutes you have an activated ready to use iPhone (and you could do it in your underwear if you wanted to), any other phone you answer endless questions you pay your money and you wait around the store for them to activate your phone (15 to 45 minutes in some cases).
So keep this in mind while you bitch about Apple Bricking your iPhone, You knowingly bought an AT&T subsidized iPhone you hacked and unlocked it to use it on another carries network so you in reality you are using a phone you will not fully own until you've fulfilled your 2 year obligation to AT&T, so your basically stole the subsidized iPhone and said well it's my phone and I can do with what I want too and AT&T that owns part of my phone can just piss off..
- SoBayJake, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I have just a plain iPhone, nothing unlocked, etc.
  But I'd like to see where, when I bought the phone at the AT&T store, I signed a contract requiring me to sign a 2-year contract? Yes, I know I did that in iTunes when I activated it, but NOT when I bought it. This phone is NOT like a subsidized phone you get at the store. In no way did me paying for it in the store obligate me to a 2-year contract. Check your facts.
  
  As for your comment on the "user experience," who cares? I could have paid my money, and thrown it away. Good luck to AT&T getting another dime out of me for not using it on their network. Yes, Apple didn't want us to wait in store forever to activate it, which was nice. But that has NOTHING to do with subsidized or un-subsidized.
  
  Oh..and AT&T doesn't own my phone, or any part of it. Most likely, they still won't unlock it after 2 years. Maybe when the 5 year exclusivity agreement is up, but I doubt it.
- petrax, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1It's called an implied contract, Apple and AT&T announced that the iPhone was exclusive to AT&T's Network and would require a 2 Year contract, when you purchased the iPhone you accepted this exclusivity there for you entered into a contract to activate and use the iPhone only on AT&T's Network. While I admit that the iPhone contact differs from a standard subsidized phone, the iPhone is by all practical purposes subsidized by AT&T. I know my facts as I've had very long talks with my Mother-in-Law on the subject and she would know has she owns an iPhone and is a Federal District Court Judge. While you might not agree with it my facts are correct from a legal point of view.
  - SoBayJake, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Ya, because judges are NEVER wrong. Their decisions are NEVER overturned.
    I would think your mother-in-law would know better, as least I hope. I'd like to see WHERE this "implied contract" came about. Like I said, I could throw my iPhone in the trash, and AT&T has NO way to get more money out of me. So where is this implied contract? Maybe your mother-in-law can chime in here.
- tucsonwc, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4The iPhone is not subsidized by AT&T.
  Locking cell phones to providers is wrong.
  Charging .99 for ringtones is wrong and violates fair use.
  - petrax, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1In the legal view the iPhone is subsidized as Apple is receiving monetary considerations from AT&T for all iPhones activated. As a purchaser of an iPhone you accept the this exclusivity and the terms of all the contracts implied and written. Apple and AT&T have made every required legal disclosure and then some on the fact that a 2 year AT&T contract is required with the purchase of an iPhone.
    As far as ringtones go, My mother-in-law sees it differently based on the cell carriers and recording industries past standard practices. Apple's deal with the recording industry is somewhat unprecedented as the cost is only .99 cents, you get to make it yourself and you can keep it as long as you like. The Industry standard is two to three times that price, you take what they give you and it expires after 30 to 120 days or you have to pay for it again. Ringtones and full music tracks have been considered different products by both the cell carriers and the recording industry from the inception to use parts of a song as ringtones. Because of this fair use does not apply in the case of using part of a music track as a ringtone. Don't blame Apple, blame the music industry and the cell carries for creating the hole in fair use by treating ringtones from music tracks as a product.
- perral1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3"You walk into an Apple or AT&T store you buy the phone and you walk out, at home you plug-in the iPhone to your computer open iTunes fill in some info and submit it in the privacy and comfort of your own home and with-in a few minutes you have an activated ready to use iPhone (and you could do it in your underwear if you wanted to)"
  
  Funny thing - the latter is exactly what I did. Long story short, I took a shower while my old copy of XP installed so I could actually use it (lack of vista 64-bit support!!) and was all ready for bed when I finally got to activate it - in my underwear.
  
  I don't really have any issue with AT&T, in fact, in view of the "$2000 iPhone" as some people are saying, I got mine free. I'm spending about $75 less for my family plan with three iPhones than I was with Verizon (for the same number of minutes plus with included text messages that I didn't have before) paying for all three of them, plus the cancellation fees from Verizon, in the next 2 years.
  
  The blocking of 3rd party apps, on the other hand, pisses me off. Granted, I can choose not to upgrade (which is what I've done) but what's with the statement it's making? What does Apple gain by locking us out of the phone?
AndrewWiggin, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Do you have to pay for this to work?
I don't have an iPhone yet so I'm not familiar with all the different unlocking services.
petrax, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3In the legal view the iPhone is subsidized as Apple is receiving monetary considerations from AT&T for all iPhones activated. As a purchaser of an iPhone you accept the this exclusivity and the terms of all the contracts implied and written. Apple and AT&T have made every required legal disclosure and then some on the fact that a 2 year AT&T contract is required with the purchase of an iPhone.
As far as ringtones go, My mother-in-law sees it differently based on the cell carriers and recording industries past standard practices. Apple's deal with the recording industry is somewhat unprecedented as the cost is only .99 cents, you get to make it yourself and you can keep it as long as you like. The Industry standard is two to three times that price, you take what they give you and it expires after 30 to 120 days or you have to pay for it again. Ringtones and full music tracks have been considered different products by both the cell carriers and the recording industry from the inception to use parts of a song as ringtones. Because of this fair use does not apply in the case of using part of a music track as a ringtone. Don't blame Apple, blame the music industry and the cell carries for creating the hole in fair use by treating ringtones from music tracks as a product.
jthomp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Told you.
betojf, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Ramzi hacked it!
jakbrud, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Dugg for calling the apple store to prove it
seek205, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2To bad you have to buy a turbosim to make it work...
zdiggler, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1some what like PSP homebrew dev's and Directv Testers,
PSP sort of still work like same position as iPhones and their hackers.

Directv testing was like that too but now Directv has won, They got locked down their access card tight, they're also coming out with new cards like every month
bobnease, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I'm interested in how Apple will respond to this... I'm happy with my unlocked iPhone, but I'm also happily watching as everybody else pushes the limits. I figure the harder the iPhone Dev Team works, the more likely we will be to see Apple put more native Apps on iPhone, and hopefully open up to 3rd Party Developers. Only time will be the tell...
zongamin, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Are people unlocking there phones just for the hell of it? Surely you still have to pay your AT&T contract - so why no use it? Are you paying for 2 line rentals and just not using one?
anarchy99, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"Directv testing was like that too but now Directv has won, They got locked down their access card tight, they're also coming out with new cards like every month"
thats because we stopped trying
take a look at dish and bev, when its working you can have both the Canadian and american dishes at the same time if you have all the need equiptment
plus direct has less of movies and such but more sports.
dish channels wise rules then add bev and FTA its obvious why directv "testing" died
kineticarl, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Let the unwavering love resume. We shall not speak of this incident again.
akatsuki, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Isn't it time for openfirmware for the iPhone? It is better looking than that OpenMoko thing anyway.
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

Unbricked iPhones Now Fully Working, Calls Included

Login or register to add a comment