I know Farhad is talking about a software crack, but for those interested, this is worth a look:

http://iphonejtag.blogspot.com/

...and those who've always known t-mobile is the best cellular service out there.

Now, I'll give the Engadget guys the benefit of the doubt and assume they know what they're looking at when they say the phone is unlocked and running on T-Mobile--but you can replace the carrier logo with any graphic you want. Most of the jailbreak frontends (iFuntastic, etc.) have an interface for this. In fact, it would have to be the hack tool that put the logo there, since (as I recall) the phone doesn't come with the T-Mobile logo graphic in memory, just AT&T and some European carriers, and it doesn't pull it off the network.

Again, I do believe these guys have a software unlock tool, I'm just surprised Engadget pointed to the logo as evidence.

...isn't this fucking illegal???

Some people will do it anyway.

And, really, they bought it.

They paid for it.

They ought to be able to use it however they like.

If I had one myself I'd do it just out of spite.

Totally le-fucking-gal.

Check it:

http://www.makezine.com/blog/archive/2007/08/finding_jtag_on_the_iphon.html?CMP=OTC-0D6B48984890

The iPhone is not only unlocked in China, but it is also available in Chinese software versions in the markets. This is about a year before the scheduled release dates.

Its super expensive - last weekend it was about 8000 rmb (USD1100) but that too will change...

Call me old fashioned, but my daddy taught me that stealing was wrong -- even if one was stealing from "the phone company." "They won't miss it," I said to him, speaking about hacking long distance calls on pay phones back in the early 70s. "well," he said. "That doesn't matter." It's theirs, not yours. You just can't take things from their rightful owners."

How is hacking an iphone any different from stealing long distance minutes or fruit from the local grocer or, for that matter, an iphone from the local Apple store? AT&T paid for their exclusive rights to the iphone. No one has a natural right to take that from them -- no matter that they are "the phone company" (or any other corporation). It's stealing. We used to call that "wrong."

I'd love an iphone. I hate the AT&T network. I won't get an iphone until they clear up the network issues or release the exclusivity. Hmmm. Waiting for a toy or ripping off some company? Not a tough choice if your daddy taught you well.

And when they do, when it's decided that I only rent or license a phone THEN AT&T can demand that I be restricted in how I use it.

I am very surprised that anyone would believe that using something that you've purchased and paid for would be construed "illegal". You purchased the iphone, you pay for TMobile or another vendors cellular services; if you modify the vehicle (legally paid for) to work on a system (legally paid for) how can anyone possibly have a moral issue with it? It is the same thing as running windows software on a Mac.

When you purchase a piece of property, it's yours to modify. Hacking your iPhone doesn't let you steal minutes, it doesn't let you use "forbidden" services, it doesn't defraud a company in any way. You still have to pay for minutes on whatever network you use. The analogy of shoplifting is just nonsensical. You've paid for the device you're using, and you pay for the service. There's no theft involved.

In response to the posts noting:

You've paid for the device you're using, and you pay for the service. There's no theft involved...how can anyone possibly have a moral issue with it?

Three points:

1. AT&T CLearly thinks it has purchased something of value: It has paid for iphone exclusivity and sunk resources into adapting its network for the iphone. Who am I to say that I am not stealing from them if I circumvent that.

2. Purchasers of an iphone have signed a contract acknowledging the AT&T exclusivity. IN my mind, a contract has meaning -- even if it's a Byzantine mess as I hear told about the iphone contract. IN my world, a contract is no different than a promise, or my "word." Since when is it OK to go back on ones word when the only thing that is at stake is access to a cool toy.

3. IN the electronic age, where getting caught stealing little, ephemeral things (like bits and bytes of code and contract exclusivities) is so unlikely, we now build elaborate rationalizations around what used to be worthy of shame. I am reminded of the Bushies' view of privacy in the age of easy electronic surveillance: They just do it because it's so damn easy. What would have shocked our nation's founders, folks now just accept. Our newfound attitudes about stealing and violations of contracts are no different.

Three points:

1. AT&T CLearly thinks it has purchased something of value: It has paid for iphone exclusivity and sunk resources into adapting its network for the iphone. Who am I to say that I am not stealing from them if I circumvent that.

I am under no obligation to help maximize the profits of any particular company, regardless of what AT&T might "think" they have purchased.

2. Purchasers of an iphone have signed a contract acknowledging the AT&T exclusivity. IN my mind, a contract has meaning -- even if it's a Byzantine mess as I hear told about the iphone contract. IN my world, a contract is no different than a promise, or my "word." Since when is it OK to go back on ones word when the only thing that is at stake is access to a cool toy.

Which is why I picked mine up secondhand...although I still think making a personal promise and signing a legal document are two different things, with only superficial similarity, and to make them morally equivalent is in error.

3. IN the electronic age, where getting caught stealing little, ephemeral things (like bits and bytes of code and contract exclusivities) is so unlikely, we now build elaborate rationalizations around what used to be worthy of shame. I am reminded of the Bushies' view of privacy in the age of easy electronic surveillance: They just do it because it's so damn easy. What would have shocked our nation's founders, folks now just accept. Our newfound attitudes about stealing and violations of contracts are no different.

You still haven't shown how anyone using a hacked iPhone with T-Mobile service is stealing anything! In order to do so, you would have to strech the definition of theft out to include "making purchasing decisions that do not benefit AT&T". The iPhone hacks discussed aren't about getting free GSM service (which would be stealing); they're about using the service of one's choice.

If AT&T & Apple don't like this, they should've rented iPhones to people, and not sold them. Once the device is your property, you have the absolute, complete and unalterable right to modify it as you see fit, which woulden't surprise our nation's founders one little bit.