-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
iPhone - Official Thread
- Thread starter imastalker co.
- Start date
- Status
Liu Kang Baking A Pie said:
So it can seamlessly match with my potential black iPhone, next to to my black digital clock, on top of my black nightstand, near my black bedset, across from my black Desktop, adjacent to my black laptop, which isn't to far from my black 360, that is below my black HDTV, that sits on top of my black TV-Stand, which is surrounded by my fully furnished black apartment (with white walls and badge carpeted floors). Was that a good enough explanation?
Juice said:
I'll keep that in mind.
Well, I apparently have egg on my face. This is bullshit:
http://www.macworld.com/article/133988/2008/06/iphone3gfaqs.html
http://www.macworld.com/article/133988/2008/06/iphone3gfaqs.html
infiniteloop
Member
shantyman said:
That can't be true...
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
Wow! That's incredibly lame. I wouldn't be using it in that environment, but damn that's incredibly lame. if they want to compete on a corporate level witht he iPhone, they're finding ways to shoot themselves in the foot.
shantyman said:
The Internet is still not sure.
MacWorld today just put out their iPhone 3G FAQ and they put their money on Exchange costing the extra $15 a month to use on AT&T's network based on statements made:
MacWorld said:
Edit: posted without seeing yours above. Apology accepted!
Seriously, though. Does this mean I can use Exchange on my 2G unlimited plan for $20/month, but upgrading would cost me $45? Or are they suddenly going to demand I pony up $35 if I try to use it, even though my contract was for unlimited data without any stipulation about exchange one way or another (I presume)
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
Phoenix said:
Of course, but what is the point of charging an additional $15/month so that users can use the same network connections to access their own Exchange servers? Seems a bit like they're trying to cash in.
I should note, if the story is true.
Phoenix
Member
Kung Fu Jedi said:
Yes, AT&T is trying to cash in. All of the restrictions about not tethering, signing contract in the store, (potentially) not having SMS on the plan, etc. is about them trying to cash in as well. While Apple desired to give us a cheaper iPhone, it lead to AT&T being giving free reign to actively rape iPhone users the same as they rape other phone users.
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
Phoenix said:
True, I place the blame for this mostly on AT&T, but I think these actions will have an adverse effect on Apple trying to get the iPhone into the Corporate Market more. I suppose the data plans are about the same whether it's an iPhone, a Treo, or a Blackberry though.
Robobandit
Member
I highly doubt that exchange will be disabled unless you pay for the corporate plan. The feature is part of the 2.0 firmware, unless apple has decided to remove that specific part for the iPod Touch, I'm going to call bullshit.
It'll just be up to you to figure out how to connect to your exchange server. AT&T apparently works directly with company IT departments to provision mobile phones through company IT departments instead of individuals. i.e. a business user that is part of a large company would receive their iphone from the IT department pre-configured for business use. Corporate plans of course cost more, but I don't think there is a way (or that apple would allow them) to prevent the use of VPN or Exchange e-mail connectivity for people with first gen iPhones or iPod Touches or even the new iPhone.
People have been testing exchange activesync with first gen iphones running the 2.0 firmware for months now. Where do you think Apple's 35% of the fortune 500 being part of the program came from? It is highly unlikely that they were given access to a 3G iPhone and there were no leaks from anywhere. Also, apple demonstrated the feature on a first gen iphone using 2.0 back in march.
what that site said "which we took to mean people wanting to use these features will need a corporate plan, which is an extra $15/mo" means that is how they interpreted AT&T's statement that Exchange is for corporate customers. In large part, this is true, but not everyone connecting to exchange will have a corporate plan, and Apple has full control of the software... it doesn't benefit them in any way to allow AT&T to block firmware features since they don't even get a cut of the monthly bills anymore.
In summation... I say Bullshit.
It'll just be up to you to figure out how to connect to your exchange server. AT&T apparently works directly with company IT departments to provision mobile phones through company IT departments instead of individuals. i.e. a business user that is part of a large company would receive their iphone from the IT department pre-configured for business use. Corporate plans of course cost more, but I don't think there is a way (or that apple would allow them) to prevent the use of VPN or Exchange e-mail connectivity for people with first gen iPhones or iPod Touches or even the new iPhone.
People have been testing exchange activesync with first gen iphones running the 2.0 firmware for months now. Where do you think Apple's 35% of the fortune 500 being part of the program came from? It is highly unlikely that they were given access to a 3G iPhone and there were no leaks from anywhere. Also, apple demonstrated the feature on a first gen iphone using 2.0 back in march.
what that site said "which we took to mean people wanting to use these features will need a corporate plan, which is an extra $15/mo" means that is how they interpreted AT&T's statement that Exchange is for corporate customers. In large part, this is true, but not everyone connecting to exchange will have a corporate plan, and Apple has full control of the software... it doesn't benefit them in any way to allow AT&T to block firmware features since they don't even get a cut of the monthly bills anymore.
In summation... I say Bullshit.
Shawnwhann
Banned
What started as a no brainer to upgrade to the new version has been clouded with doubt as new details continue to dribble out regarding the repercussions. First, they charge an additional $10 bucks a month for data. Second, the 200 text messages are now an extra five bucks. And now third, rumors have it there will be an additional charge to use Exchange Active Sync....
Marty Chinn
Member
Wait, what, SMS is now not included? That's retarded. I'm not one who texts, as I send an average of 5 texts a month, sometimes I don't send any at all, but to pay extra is just retarded. I was happy with the 200 included because that more than covers my usage. So how much is it going to be to text if I don't get the $5 200 plan? God I hope that's not true. AT&T sure feels like they're nickel and diming me by raising the overall cost at least $15 now. I was ok with the $10 for 3G, but this is getting stupid.
Corwood Rep
Member
Marty Chinn said:
Yeah, 200 texts is about 150 more than I'll ever use, even in the most absurd of contexts.
Juice said:Edit: posted without seeing yours above. Apology accepted!
Seriously, though. Does this mean I can use Exchange on my 2G unlimited plan for $20/month, but upgrading would cost me $45? Or are they suddenly going to demand I pony up $35 if I try to use it, even though my contract was for unlimited data without any stipulation about exchange one way or another (I presume)
I'll never discredit the Rock again.
That would require the ability to run the app in the background though, to know when to wake itself and start downloading. And Apple's proposed notification service isn't going to solve that either, from the sound of it.SuperPac said:
https for email, contacts and scheduling? That doesn't sound right.shantyman said:
EDIT: I guess it does.
In any case, Macworld's "we took this to mean" wasn't exactly confirmation one way or another in the first place.
thegreyfox
Member
I didn't see it anywhere in the thread, but according to an alleged "leak" at ehmac.ca's forums, Rogers' pricing is data for $30 on top of existing plans. If that's the case, I'm so in.
In the big picture, that'll mean $60 (for the plan I need plus data), plus their lameass system access fee and tax. And I guess maybe $6 for voicemail too. Still, about what I had hoped for even though it's much more than I spend for my cell right now. I think I've officially entered techno-whore land.
http://www.ehmac.ca/ipod-itunes-iph...ctivation-data-plans-sign-up-process-etc.html
In the big picture, that'll mean $60 (for the plan I need plus data), plus their lameass system access fee and tax. And I guess maybe $6 for voicemail too. Still, about what I had hoped for even though it's much more than I spend for my cell right now. I think I've officially entered techno-whore land.
http://www.ehmac.ca/ipod-itunes-iph...ctivation-data-plans-sign-up-process-etc.html
Damn double post... anyhow, I did the math and became slightly less enthusiastic... if accurate, I think that means for any decent plan you're looking at:
$30 voice
$12 voice features (voicemail call waiting)
$30 data
$8 in stupid fees
Totalling $80 a month. Not great, but it sounds plausible. If it's true, I might just get a cheap incoming plan. Or I might avoid it altogether, although every geek fibre in my body tells me that's the wrong solution Still, it's just murmurs right now. It's probably pretty solid pricing for Canada, but to me it still seems kinda expensive. Then again, I currently pay slightly more than $20 a month for my cellphone.
$30 voice
$12 voice features (voicemail call waiting)
$30 data
$8 in stupid fees
Totalling $80 a month. Not great, but it sounds plausible. If it's true, I might just get a cheap incoming plan. Or I might avoid it altogether, although every geek fibre in my body tells me that's the wrong solution
Still, it's just murmurs right now. It's probably pretty solid pricing for Canada, but to me it still seems kinda expensive. Then again, I currently pay slightly more than $20 a month for my cellphone.with how ridiculous data pricing is in canada, $30 is incredible
my friend used an imported phone on rogers $7 unlimited data and got away with it... i told him to slow down his usage before he gets billed... so he did and still got a nice $600 phone bill
i haven't had a cellphone in like 5 years, but i paid like $50/mo for my fido when i did (it was when all the phones were black and white text only) so i'm excited to get an iphone as i love my touch
my friend used an imported phone on rogers $7 unlimited data and got away with it... i told him to slow down his usage before he gets billed... so he did and still got a nice $600 phone bill
i haven't had a cellphone in like 5 years, but i paid like $50/mo for my fido when i did (it was when all the phones were black and white text only
) so i'm excited to get an iphone as i love my touchPatrick Klepek
furiously molesting tim burton
Got a tech question. For some reason, my iPhone shows up as having all "orange" other data when I plug it into iTunes, and it won't sync. Is a restore in order, or is something else up?
Randam_Hajile
Member
I've got an unlocked iPhone running 1.1.2 on T-Mobile and I haven't updated in a while. What's the simplest way to update to the latest firmware?
Crazymoogle
Member
SickBoy said:Totalling $80 a month. Not great, but it sounds plausible. If it's true, I might just get a cheap incoming plan. Or I might avoid it altogether, although every geek fibre in my body tells me that's the wrong solution
That's ridiculously cheap compared to typical Rogers plan fees. In fact, I would seriously doubt the information until it's official; there were some threads on howardforums and elsewhere to indicate it may have just been an altered AT&T doc. Somebody else had a claimed leak with numbers - while ridiculous compared to US rates - seemed much more in line with Rogers plans historically.
Of course, I have to pay 80+ a month without data.
I miss Sprint. Sort of. bleh.
krypt0nian
Banned
shantyman said:
At the end of the day it's Apple. Their name is on the product.
And this is really turning into bullshit. I'm sticking with my iPhone until the market sorts this mess out.
I'm still hoping that this isn't the final plan as I could really use the GPS features on my motorcycle trips.
krypt0nian
Banned
Vyer said:I don't think all these extra fees are all on Apple's shoulders. it doesn't make sense 'at the end of the day' to decide to give ATT a pass.
Looks like dealing with the ATT subsidy comes at a price.
I just wish we could get some firm details.
AT&T was always scummy. They don't get a pass. But its Apple's iPhone. I'm certain any other carrier would bend over backwards for it.
krypt0nian said:
Is Apple a part to this? Sure, but AT&T is the primary reason for this. Juyt ask RIM, Nokia, et al.
krypt0nian said:
That is where you are wrong. Apple tried valiantly to change the wireless Telcos, and lost. AT&T was the only carrier willing to do bsuiness with Apple in the first place. AT&T did bend over for Apple, then Apple realized their way ($400-$600 phones) would not build marketshare. Hence, subsidized phones and no special rate plans.
krypt0nian
Banned
So they dealt with the devil for marketshare and this is what they get?
They chose to do the deal. I'm usually in Apple's corner but there is no excuse here.
AT&T may have been the only Telco at the time, but now anyone would love to have them I'm certain.
They chose to do the deal. I'm usually in Apple's corner but there is no excuse here.
AT&T may have been the only Telco at the time, but now anyone would love to have them I'm certain.
I'm not really defending Apple, it's just the reality of the wireless biz. I understand why a company wants to build marketshare.krypt0nian said:
What I am giving Apple a pass on is (and what I was referring to when you quoted me) is requiring the business plan for Exchange connectivity (if that actually comes to pass). That's all AT&T.
krypt0nian said:
Yeah, but they are still under contract, right? Going somewhere else isn't really an option.
Not to mention people angry over extra fees is nothing compared to current iPhone users angry over them suddenly switching carriers.
Not saying apple is totally blameless, but still not as simple as 'all on them' either.
krypt0nian
Banned
Vyer said:
Never said its all on them. But they should have had measures in place contractually to prevent random assrape.
The last thing they need for brand image is this nonsense.
Liu Kang Baking A Pie
Member
Absolutely. But AT&T bit first and trapped them in a five-year contract.krypt0nian said:
You're right to not immediately assume Apple isn't responsible for the shitty parts, but they really are the good guys in this situation (other than the App Store, depending on your point of view on it).
The whole cell phone market fucking sucks, and it fucking sucks more that broadband companies are starting to emulate them.
- Status