Re: Can someone explain the locked contract iphone reasoning/
06-30-2012 01:03:27 PM
i'm surprised no one has jumped in and criticized this last post about fanboys and stuff! I got it way worse in this thread and all i did was ask questions!
while i generally agree with your views, you bring up one original question we haven't discussed yet in this thread:
you said "2 year contract minimums locks you into the line, not the phone"
this is one core issue - WHO/WHAT is contracted - the device or the person? if we say both, there are problems. did the phone sign the bottom line? does the phone pay the monthly fees?
i have checked the contract terms, and it doesn't say anywhere that it's illegal to sell, give away, whatever, your iphone while *still under contract.* The limitation they do hold is that they won't unlock it until the *two year contract* is up. Are they saying the iphone is 'Still under contract'? and if so, what is the basis, logic, and ethics for this?
why does it matter to At&t which device a customer is using? they're obviously ok when a customer accidentally drops and destroys the phone and uses a replacement - so what's the difference if they do whatever else with it?
i just had a thought. i suppose using an smarphone on a limited data plan potentially makes more money for carriers since the devices easily use a lot of data. maybe if they keep customers on a smartphone during the two year contract it increases the possiblity of users going over their data allotment and paying extra. that's the very first actual advantage i could think of. it's shady, but at least there's logic.