Bridge App Not Available To AT&T? Cod Files Inside

**urbanguy** · 04-19-2011, 09:34 AM

This is so reminiscent of the old days when the cable companies and the phone companies felt that they had the right to limit the ways that you used their service with hardware that you owned.

There was a time when hooking up a splitter on your cable was illegal. There was a time when installing an extension telephone yourself was illegal. The FCC (and the CRTC in Canada) eventually stopped that nonsense, but here we are again. The same companies trying the same tricks.

Frankly I'm pretty shocked that BB Bridge includes a browser. Kudos to RIM for pushing the envelope. And a major fail to AT&T. I'm optimistic that eventually this will all get sorted out. But it'll probably take a few years.

**SaintThomasAquinas** · 04-19-2011, 09:35 AM

Originally Posted by Daps

No bridge(AT&T) no writing offline emails on your PlayBook.. That's bad mojo

They were talking about the ability to compose PIM stuff without the need of another device.

Actually I stand corrected with regard to the no bridge issue. My comment was a response to the, "no native e-mail concern."

Of course AT&T has seemingly either decided to cripple this feature and just let people find out on their own or has completely failed to make their policy known from the beginning which is much worse in my opinion.

**nyc_rock** · 04-19-2011, 09:43 AM

Originally Posted by Daps

I would be willing to bet RIM knew or someone was made aware of it.

Considering BB appworld shows that all carriers "except ATT" support bridge, I would tend to agree with you.

**Najo** · 04-19-2011, 09:45 AM

Originally Posted by garment69

Considering BB appworld shows that all carriers "except ATT" support bridge, I would tend to agree with you.

Actually the way that it reads seems like it was kind of a shot from RIM to AT&T.. basically saying everyone but YOU YA PUTZES!!!!

**jrcdpm** · 04-19-2011, 09:45 AM

Originally Posted by yolare

it seems the cod is different for storm2

on OS 5
can someone help to upload the COD?

Same problem. 9550 on Verizon. BBSAK cods but no success. Any help?

**trsbbs** · 04-19-2011, 09:46 AM

Originally Posted by kbz1960

So you get free tethering with yoiur i4 and ipad?

I would highly recommend people stop calling the Bridge function tethering
as it is not tethering.

If this goes to court against ATT in some way we need to be sure
that ATT can not use your words against us.

Call it bridging or remote, but it is not in any way shape or form tethering.

Tim

**SlcCorrado** · 04-19-2011, 09:48 AM

Originally Posted by josecarlosc

This sucks a lot

Edit : statated here BlackBerry App World - BlackBerry Bridge

AT&T is not a supported carrier for bridge app world page say that

Sooo... I was right haha

Coulda kept her locked

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

**BigPlayChad8** · 04-19-2011, 09:50 AM

I have AT&T and could not get the files to work on Page 1.

Can someone help?

**nyc_rock** · 04-19-2011, 09:52 AM

Originally Posted by Najo

Actually the way that it reads seems like it was kind of a shot from RIM to AT&T.. basically saying everyone but YOU YA PUTZES!!!!

Regardless, the point was that RIM knew.

**kbz1960** · 04-19-2011, 09:53 AM

Originally Posted by Daps

If he's jailbroken maybe but AT&T is cracking down on the free tethering too but I'm guessing his point was that he could just have that one data plan for his BB and share it with his PB for free. So ditching the i4/ipad and technically a tethering plan would save him money

Nothing AT&T does should come as surprise.

Ah I was asking him because he was saying he was going to ditch those for a bb/playbook combo but not now so I was wondering how much different the i4/ipad combo was. Of course there will always be tether for the playbook soon too.

**Najo** · 04-19-2011, 09:55 AM

Originally Posted by garment69

Regardless, the point was that RIM knew.

Stop it, there is no way for you to know that unless you have some concrete evidence of it, heck they could have sprang this on RIM at 11:59 so they did not have time to argue the point.....

**OMGitworks** · 04-19-2011, 09:55 AM

Originally Posted by urbanguy

This is so reminiscent of the old days when the cable companies and the phone companies felt that they had the right to limit the ways that you used their service with hardware that you owned.

There was a time when hooking up a splitter on your cable was illegal. There was a time when installing an extension telephone yourself was illegal. The FCC (and the CRTC in Canada) eventually stopped that nonsense, but here we are again. The same companies trying the same tricks.

Frankly I'm pretty shocked that BB Bridge includes a browser. Kudos to RIM for pushing the envelope. And a major fail to AT&T. I'm optimistic that eventually this will all get sorted out. But it'll probably take a few years.

Very true. Recently Time Warner got into a huge dispute with some cable channels about "rebroadcasting" their channels to IPAD2 over a wifi App. Since I already pay for the channels why does it matter if I watch them on my TV or my wife's IPAD2 over wifi? Just another battle on a new frontier but its the same old fight.

**dfaris** · 04-19-2011, 09:55 AM

All I have to say is Na, Na, Hey, Hey, Goodbye AT&T. This has to be one of the lowest cheap dirtiest things I have ever seen a company do, lets charge people twice for the same service because the Playbook acts like a mirror for a phone.

**BigPlayChad8** · 04-19-2011, 10:00 AM

I never have hated having AT&T... until now.

They are garbage.

**kbz1960** · 04-19-2011, 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by dfaris

All I have to say is Na, Na, Hey, Hey, Goodbye AT&T. This has to be one of the lowest cheap dirtiest things I have ever seen a company do, lets charge people twice for the same service because the Playbook acts like a mirror for a phone.

You can say the same for them all, lets charge people twice as much to tether to use the data they are all ready paying for just because they can get on their laptop and everyone is going to use it as their main internet connection.....not!

I get unlimited internet at home for $20 a month high speed. I'm sure the wireless carriers charge more for the convince but charging 2 to 3 times the amount is highway robbery!

**nyc_rock** · 04-19-2011, 10:07 AM

Originally Posted by Najo

Stop it, there is no way for you to know that unless you have some concrete evidence of it, heck they could have sprang this on RIM at 11:59 so they did not have time to argue the point.....

If they told RIM at 1159, however unlikely that seems, then RIM knew "prior to launch".

**garyf33** · 04-19-2011, 10:08 AM

Originally Posted by dfaris

All I have to say is Na, Na, Hey, Hey, Goodbye AT&T. This has to be one of the lowest cheap dirtiest things I have ever seen a company do, lets charge people twice for the same service because the Playbook acts like a mirror for a phone.

As I said before, it wouldn't surprise me if other carriers block this feature eventually once customers use outragous amounts of unlimited data.

I'm not surprised at all that AT&T blocked it.

**tojo68** · 04-19-2011, 10:09 AM

then RIM knew "prior to launch".

I wonder how they could NOT know with so much success riding on Torch and other ATT BB users buying the PB!

**Najo** · 04-19-2011, 10:15 AM

Originally Posted by garment69

If they told RIM at 1159, however unlikely that seems, then RIM knew "prior to launch".

Right, but given that scenario you cant blame RIM.....Fact is you have no idea what went down, none of us do. AT&T is the party responsible because they are blocking it. (.)

**Kerms** · 04-19-2011, 10:16 AM

Originally Posted by Najo

Actually the way that it reads seems like it was kind of a shot from RIM to AT&T.. basically saying everyone but YOU YA PUTZES!!!!

That may be what they're doing is taking a shot but still doesn't mean RIM didn't know of AT&T intentions.

If I was a VZW user I wouldn't get too comfy either. If AT&T doesn't change or figure a way to charge for the bridge, I'm thinking it will be included with tethering then look for VZW to do the same in the future.

Still I could see a carrier breaking the bridge browser but the PIM stuff that's a shame.

**ifarlow** · 04-19-2011, 10:17 AM

Several people here keep saying that they understand why AT&T did this. I don't. I would understand if AT&T was able to block only the browser/internet sharing portion of Bridge, but not the entire Bridge application. If AT&T is attempting to lock down internet sharing, they have succeeded in locking down one of the biggest features of the PlayBook: a live connection to PIM data on a BlackBerry phone.

**jonty12** · 04-19-2011, 10:18 AM

Originally Posted by SaintThomasAquinas

Your BB may work different than the ones I have used and currently have but I can write e-mails on my BB handset and without and radio coverage they will not be sent until I am back in coverage. So writing the same e-mail via bridge on your handset on a plane would be no different than writing it on your device. The e-mail would be saved and sent when coverage is restored. So a native app is available. The BB handset has native E-mail and PIM and the Playbook accesses these via the bridge and not have wifi or cellular access does not as far as I can tell preclude you from accessing and using these native apps on your BB handset. The distinction being Cell and wifi radio is not how the BB Bridge connects but rather via Bluetooth.

The point is with AT&T, Bridge is NOT AVAILABLE. You're describing exactly what I want to do. AT&T won't allow it. I'd like to be offline, bridged to my BB and reading/writing emails on my PB, while checking calendar availability etc for meetings. Without Bridge that's impossible. Exactly my point! I'm trying to get away from writing/responding to emails on my BB while on a plane. I'd like a larger screen. right now I use my laptop. I don't want to do that anymore.

**jonty12** · 04-19-2011, 10:24 AM

Originally Posted by ifarlow

Several people here keep saying that they understand why AT&T did this. I don't. I would understand if AT&T was able to block only the browser/internet sharing portion of Bridge, but not the entire Bridge application. If AT&T is attempting to lock down internet sharing, they have succeeded in locking down one of the biggest features of the PlayBook: a live connection to PIM data on a BlackBerry phone.

exactly. i don't plan to use bridge browser. don't see where I'd need to really. I do, however want to use bridge email, calendar, contacts, files.

**dfaris** · 04-19-2011, 10:25 AM

I have successfully downloaded OTA the Blackberry Bridge from the link on Crackberry's News page found here. http://crackberry.com/att-blackberry-bridge-download
It seems to work fine so far but I dont have a playbook to test it on. Does anyone have this downloaded and fully working with a playbook?

**BigPlayChad8** · 04-19-2011, 10:31 AM

Originally Posted by dfaris

I have successfully downloaded OTA the Blackberry Bridge from the link on Crackberry's News page found here. http://crackberry.com/att-blackberry-bridge-download
It seems to work fine so far but I dont have a playbook to test it on. Does anyone have this downloaded and fully working with a playbook?

Also downloaded it on my Torch 9800 and it works fine (from the above link)... though no PB to test it on. I will let you know when I get my PB during my lunch break.