or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › FCC investigates Apple, AT&T for Google Voice app rejection
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

FCC investigates Apple, AT&T for Google Voice app rejection - Page 4

post #121 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

Just how is anyone screwed by voluntarily paying for a device and service at the rate the provider is asking for? Who is forcing anyone to buy an iPhone and at&t's data service? How did any of you fools who are screaming for the forced breakup and regulation of Apple arrive at the conclusion that, because a device is very desirable, that you have the right to have it in your possession on your terms, at the price you decide is fair? And where do you get off demanding that the government force the parties to comply with your desires? When did the ownership of an iPhone become a basic human right anyway? How dare you demand the right to set the price and terms of use of a non-essential, purely optional, luxury item?

This is sickening.


No what is sickening is not allowing carrier competition to bring down prices, bring up quality and introduce different use plans for different people's needs.

For instance, my flip Motorola phone cost $30 and I use anywhere from $10 to $15 a month in minutes on average, exact AT&T voice quality (no data obviously). What brought about this marvelous arrangement? Competition!

The government steps in when companies purposely conspire to create a unfair competitive advantage.


The government needs to step into the carrier/phone exclusive deals.

RIM is on nearly all carriers, so should the iPhone.
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #122 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post

Wouldn't it be great if there was a forum where all the republican/democrat sniping could happen without bothering the rest of us?

In the world we live in, political sniping seems to follow us everywhere we go.

It is always the other parties fault no matter what
post #123 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac Voyer View Post

Why? Is it so wrong for AT&T to reject a competing service on a device that it heavily subsidizes?

For the same reason you can choose your own long-distance carrier on your home landline phone even though the local telephone company owns the line. The local company had to open up their network. So, if we believe that was fair, I suppose we should believe that the cell companies should open up their systems, too.

If course, I'm not so sure that things are so much better since we broke up ma Bell. (Did I just write that?)
post #124 of 214
It is easy to bad mouth ATT, but it is important to look at their contributions to this country for over a century. In 1976, I came to US/Houston, TX from India. I had already been to Europe before. One of the most impressive things about the US was the phone system! Put a dime in pay phone and actually make a local call for as long as I wanted. If the call did not go through, I got the dime back. After I got an apartment, the phone guy came in and hooked up the phone like in 2 days... the whole set-up. It always worked, rain, storms, etc. Voice was clear and touch tone. No rotary wheel to turn. Dial the wrong long distance number? They gave my money back. The service is still reliable. The area I am in gets hit with storms, hurricanes... electrical power goes off, cell phones go dead, but the land line always works.

In India, it used to take over 5 years to get a phone like... and then you had to pay baksheesh too, or else, they lost the application and deposit. Terrible connections and they still do not work well after monsoons, etc. Europe was bad too. Of course, times have changed in EU and the phone system there is now better than ours in many places. Again, a lot of this was tech driven... with EU subsidies.

ATT with Bell Labs did make a lot of contributions to this country... with the transistor, cell phone technology, TDMA/GSM, fiberoptics. Their wired network after deregulation, allowed a lot of companies to free load over their network. Technology can change the dynamics of any industry and certainly changed telecom... and ATT went through changes too.

Got to give them credit for taking the risk with Apple and the iPhone. The bought on the concept sight unseen... especially after the dud Moto iPod phone. They incorporated the Visual Voice Mail even before the iPhone was released. Gave Apple total control. Verizon just thumbed their nose at Apple. Guess what? ATT deserves the rewards and why shouldn't they protect their investment from freeloaders like Google? If Google thinks their GV is the killer app, go peddle that stuff on their Android.

Again, as many have mentioned here, this is a free economy. Google, VZ, etc can peddle their own stuff. There is too much sense of entitlement to freeload these days.
post #125 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by iPhone1982 View Post

What part about where I asked if I could use it on another Carrier and an Apple Rep told me I could not don't you understand?

Apple is saying you cannot use the iPhone (in the USA) on any other carrier.

It's that simple. If that isn't against the law in the US than it should be. I own the phone as I do my non subsidized 1st Gen Phone yet legally I can't activate them on any other carrier.

To HELL with APPLE & AT&T. They should be being investigated by the FCC and I hope they get burned on the stake with this one and their stock goes down. I sold all my shares in Apple when they hit 160.

I could care less what their stock does at this point. By the way. Google Android sold 1 million phones faster than Apple did. I see Google as the Future and Apple and Microsoft about the same on the "I don't care what my customers think" level.

Good morning!!!! AT&T officially said 2 years ago that they will never ever unlock any iPhone you buy from Apple or them in the US, which is locked to their network. Not even after you fulfill your contract. Not even after 2 years and not even when you pay the full price of the iPhone. The said it clear and loud. Why they said it? Because there is no law in the US against it. Yes I agree with you it sucks and the FCC should do something about that just like Europe. However, there is light. Verizon and Sprint settled a lawsuit last year and agreed to officially unlock any phone they sell if the buyer fulfill his contractual agreement (2 years contract). Right now, the same lawsuit is going on against AT&T and T-Mobile and hopefully they will agree to something similar.

My advice to you if you want 3GS is to jailbreak and unlock your iPhone 3G and sell it on ebay. I got $400 for mine when 3GS was released in Jun. Good luck.
post #126 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

RIM is on nearly all carriers, so should the iPhone.

But their phones aren't.
post #127 of 214
How dare they include Apple in this. Apple is the American dream. It is mom Wozniak and pop Jobs. It is America. Anyone who opposes Apple should be dragged out of their beds at night to an Anti-American Practices meeting, interrogated, and interned in camps with other undesirables (people who buy Japanese cars, Sony, Dell, Microsoft instead of Apple).

This is America we don't regulate our free markets otherwise how would you get success stories like Bear Stearns, Washington Mutual, Countrywide, AIG, etc.
post #128 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

Yes, I agree. The government should buy Apple, at&t, and Google. How dare such evil corporations even exist? If the United States Government took ownership of these sordid entities then we could all go to bed at night knowing that everything is fair, everybody gets what they want, and everybody gets the same thing. We could all then gather around the virtual campfire (the real thing would be so environmentally damaging) and sing happy songs as we all, both rich and poor, texted each other with our iPhones. Then we would all travel safely home in our GM electric cars.

Tulkas, you make me want to throw up.

Yes, Lkrupp. Its good to see you stand up for us against the evil, socialist government that is looming. If they would just keep their hands off so we all could be forced to work twelve hours a day, six days a week, in the worst of working conditions just like in the good old days we would all be so much happier. Libertarian paradise. Meanwhile we should probably dismantle schools, police forces, libraries, water works, sewer systems, roads etc. They really smack of 'government interference' and 'socialism' of the worst sort.
post #129 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac Voyer View Post

I'm with you. I truly do not understand the issue. This seems to be a fishing expedition to find some basis for a case against exclusive deals. Doesn't Palm have an exclusive deal with Sprint? Isn't that how all phones in the country are introduced? AT&T pays a great deal of money in subsidies to carry the iPhone and offer it at a low price to customers. Since when is that illegal? Who cares if everyone in America, or the world for that matter, can't get an iPhone? Why is that a crisis? What makes owning an iPhone a basic human right? AT&T does not serve everyone in America. So what! Dominos Pizza does not deliver to everyone in America. How did we get to be this entitled?

Hey Einstein! No one said anything was illegal. The FCC is not claiming this is a crisis. This is a regulatory branch of the government doing its job by investigating possible threats to the demand side of the supply-demand relationship of a free market.
The Mother of all flip-flops!!
Support our troops by educating yourself and being a responsible voter. Democracy and Capitalism REQUIRE Intelligence and Wisdom if they are to be worth a damn beyond...
Reply
The Mother of all flip-flops!!
Support our troops by educating yourself and being a responsible voter. Democracy and Capitalism REQUIRE Intelligence and Wisdom if they are to be worth a damn beyond...
Reply
post #130 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella View Post




The reality is that unlimited text messaging shouldn't cost more than $5 a month.

right on. Can't recall the name of the article but texting is a scam. The article went on to point out that it costs the carriers NOTHING as it uses down time and the way it's transmitted uses no bandwidth whatsoever.

I'm waiting for the smart phone that plays flash,allows me to watch any videos I want ala ABCs Lost and slingbox. As soon as that shows up, AT&T can have my early termination fee.

Let's see lost episode 2, season 4 free on ABC OR $2.99-$1.99 from iTunes.
Hmmmmmm

anywho. Google how text messages are actually free and how we pay for something that takes up ZERO bandwidth.
someone needs to come up with a iPhone limewire mpeg/avi to iPhone conversion.
post #131 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Good morning!!!! AT&T officially said 2 years ago that they will never ever unlock any iPhone you buy from Apple or them in the US, which is locked to their network. Not even after you fulfill your contract. Not even after 2 years and not even when you pay the full price of the iPhone. The said it clear and loud. Why they said it? Because there is no law in the US against it. Yes I agree with you it sucks and the FCC should do something about that just like Europe. However, there is light. Verizon and Sprint settled a lawsuit last year and agreed to officially unlock any phone they sell if the buyer fulfill his contractual agreement (2 years contract). Right now, the same lawsuit is going on against AT&T and T-Mobile and hopefully they will agree to something similar.

Actually, T-Mobile already does unlock. They unlocked my two phones when we were just 8 months into our contract (we were going to Toronto and wanted to put in a Canadian SIM).

I think people have told me that AT&T does unlock other phones - again, not sure if that's a one-time thing or if it's policy. Since I switched, I haven't asked them to unlock any phones yet, but will probably try on my next trip to Toronto.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #132 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacGregor View Post

Hey Einstein!...

Cripes, you and your knee jerk anti-Obama Hannity-philes make 9/11 conspiracy theorists look absolutely rational in comparison.

Wow! I think you have me confused with those who have made this thread about party politics. Somehow, I am not offended by being called an Einstein.
Apple has no competition. Every commercial product which competes directly with an Apple product gives the distinct impression that, Where it is original, it is not good, and where it is good, it...
Reply
Apple has no competition. Every commercial product which competes directly with an Apple product gives the distinct impression that, Where it is original, it is not good, and where it is good, it...
Reply
post #133 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


Now if it was something to do with those folks having to pay the same data plan but not being able to get 3g cause of coverage, sure, sue away. cause that just ain't fair.

I agree that those in the stix shouldn't pay the same for data if none, or only GPRS is available, but if they can sue, can I sue because I live in a top-100 US city and only get edge when the guy on the other side of the river enjoys 3g?

suing for data coverage differences sadly will not go anywhere, I am reminded of the time not too many years ago when Comcast in a mid sized town added over a dozen new channels (this was a long time ago, channels like espn2, BET, and MSNBC(when MSNBC was a tech channel)) while the rural comcast clients didn't get those channels for 3 years or more while paying the same exact cost for "expanded basic" cable. I don't know of any law suits, but I know the ultimate solution ended up coming with regional standardization of lineup with digital cable.
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
post #134 of 214
This investigation and the other investigations into wireless carrier practices are a good thing that will ultimately result in more competition, more consumer choice, lower consumer cost and better service in this industry. The carriers, who are using public airwaves, should be turned into dumb pipes that carry data traffic and keep their hands off the phones and what they are used for. There should be an end to phone locking, exclusive phone deals and forcing customers into contracts.

There is no reason why you need anything but a data plan for an iPhone. If you want a voice plan, it should be optional, just like it is with your cable company. If not, you should be free to use VOIP services, from third parties. This will also drive SMS pricing to the floor as competition for this service will quickly make apparent just how little cost is involved in providing it.

At this point, there is no difference between these wireless carriers and traditional wired services. Network neutrality should be strictly mandated for all of these services, regardless of the transmission medium. The wireless carriers are not some special case that should be allowed to operate under different rules than other network service providers.

Just because the industry has been able to operate like this in the past is no reason to allow it to continue to in the future. It's time for them to play by the same rules as all other carriers and the benefits will be increased competition, increased access and increased innovation, as well as better pricing for consumers.

The defenders of the status quo (at least some of whom are no doubt wireless company representatives, I mean, does anyone really think they don't have people on these forums trying to frame the debate?) will predict dire consequences for the industry and consumers, but no one should listen to them. Consumers will not be harmed by a leveling of the playing field and the industry will ultimately be the better for it, even if it doesn't go so well for individual companies.
post #135 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post

right on. Can't recall the name of the article but texting is a scam. The article went on to point out that it costs the carriers NOTHING as it uses down time and the way it's transmitted uses no bandwidth whatsoever.

Texting costs nothing as Texts are piggybacked on the phone idly pinging the Towers. That is why Texts have no guarantee of being speedy. What happens is, the phone regularly pings the towers to see which one it is within range of, how strong the signal is and what kind of signal it is, as well as letting the tower know that it (The phone) might need to use some bandwidth. There's about 140 characters wort of data free in that action, and that's where Texts are stored. So sending a text is not only free to the carrier, phones are performing the action virtually all the time.

MacBook Pro 15" | Intel Core2 Duo 2.66GHz | 320GB HDD | OS X v10.8
White iPad (3G) with Wi-Fi | 16GB | Engraved | Blue Polyurethane Smart Cover
White iPhone 5 | 64GB | On 3UK

Reply

MacBook Pro 15" | Intel Core2 Duo 2.66GHz | 320GB HDD | OS X v10.8
White iPad (3G) with Wi-Fi | 16GB | Engraved | Blue Polyurethane Smart Cover
White iPhone 5 | 64GB | On 3UK

Reply
post #136 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

T The carriers, who are using public airwaves, should be turned into dumb pipes that carry data traffic and keep their hands off the phones and what they are used for. There should be an end to phone locking, exclusive phone deals and forcing customers into contracts.

i agree with you, but what would Apple have to charge for the iPhone if they couldn't have: "phone locking, exclusive phone deals and forcing customers into contracts."?
ADS
Reply
ADS
Reply
post #137 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by sequitur View Post

i agree with you, but what would Apple have to charge for the iPhone if they couldn't have: "phone locking, exclusive phone deals and forcing customers into contracts."?

Most likely, the same price as they do now, perhaps less if competition in (optional) carrier subsidies drives it lower.

Oh, yes, and I forgot to mention in my previous post that it's time to put an end to the insanity of incompatible wireless technologies. Nothing holds progress in this technology/industry back more than the money wasted on duplicating wireless assets. FCC/Congress should mandate a standard with switchover date -- just as they did with HDTV -- and carriers with the 'winning' technology (most likely GSM) should be forced to share towers with those with the 'losing' technology. Obviously, some time will be required for this switchover, but it should be written into law now so that carriers stop wasting money on incompatible technologies, and share the costs of future wireless technologies. The wireless industry in this country is a huge mess because carriers have used technology as well as contracts to lock customers to their service, and it's time for that mess to be cleaned up too.
post #138 of 214
I think that the facts are somewhat beside the point on this whole imbroglio.

This is shaping up to be a PR disaster for Apple. They should address it, bring GV back - as many have pointed out, it's not such a big deal to do so, since the web version is a decent enough substitute - and move on.
post #139 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

This investigation and the other investigations into wireless carrier practices are a good thing that will ultimately result in more competition, more consumer choice, lower consumer cost and better service in this industry. The carriers, who are using public airwaves, should be turned into dumb pipes that carry data traffic and keep their hands off the phones and what they are used for. There should be an end to phone locking, exclusive phone deals and forcing customers into contracts.

There is no reason why you need anything but a data plan for an iPhone. If you want a voice plan, it should be optional, just like it is with your cable company. If not, you should be free to use VOIP services, from third parties. This will also drive SMS pricing to the floor as competition for this service will quickly make apparent just how little cost is involved in providing it.

At this point, there is no difference between these wireless carriers and traditional wired services. Network neutrality should be strictly mandated for all of these services, regardless of the transmission medium. The wireless carriers are not some special case that should be allowed to operate under different rules than other network service providers.

Just because the industry has been able to operate like this in the past is no reason to allow it to continue to in the future. It's time for them to play by the same rules as all other carriers and the benefits will be increased competition, increased access and increased innovation, as well as better pricing for consumers.

The defenders of the status quo (at least some of whom are no doubt wireless company representatives, I mean, does anyone really think they don't have people on these forums trying to frame the debate?) will predict dire consequences for the industry and consumers, but no one should listen to them. Consumers will not be harmed by a leveling of the playing field and the industry will ultimately be the better for it, even if it doesn't go so well for individual companies.

We are also talking about Google --- richer than God himself --- trying to change the rules on FCC spectrum auction WITHOUT any desire to actually bid to win the spectrum.

We are also talking about Google and Apple that are twice as big as the big bad red Verizon, about 10 times bigger than the average Hollywood studio, about 100 times bigger than the big 4 music label.

We are also talking about Google that owns basically the monopoly position in internet searches --- the biggest license to print money.

You guys got suckered into this garbage by ultra rich silicon valley billionaires who control much larger business empires than the relatively lowly and poorer carriers.
post #140 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

It's about time.

Exactly... I love Apple's products, but their attitude is very poor. Admittedly Microsoft has pulled all kinds of shaddy B.S. over the years (Gates was certainly a dirty weasel, although he has more than made up for it with the Gates Foundation), but I can only IMAGINE if MS pulled this kind of anti-competitive crap now.

the iPhone's smartphone share in the USA is pretty large already --- once they are on Verizon, Sprint, and TMobile, I guarantee you they will absolutely dominant with 2/3+ of smartphone sales.
They will not be able to pull this "app filtering" crap.

With the App store as the only non-circumvention route to application installation, it is completely unacceptable for Apple to deny applications because they compete with similar Apple applications, compete with existing AT&T services, or because AT&T is too ***** cheap to run a proper network capable of handling basic tasks like MMS. You pay $30 a month for "unlimited data" aka 5 GB, and you should be able to do whatever the hell you want to with that data, from DVR/streaming video to tethering to VOIP.

in other words, CARRIERS, GET OUT OF MY PHONE!
post #141 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

We are also talking about Google --- richer than God himself --- trying to change the rules on FCC spectrum auction WITHOUT any desire to actually bid to win the spectrum....
...You guys got suckered into this garbage by ultra rich silicon valley billionaires who control much larger business empires than the relatively lowly and poorer carriers.

Relatively lowly carriers? You mean like this one:

Verizon Communications Inc. (12 months ending 12-31-2008)
Revenue: $97 Billion
Gross Profit: $58 Billion
Employees: 235,000

Google Inc. (12 months ending 12-31-2008)
Revenue: $21 Billion
Gross Profit: $13 Billion
Employees 19,000


And even if Google was 20X bigger than Verizon, the point still stands. The carriers have consistently pushed and lobbied for anti-consumer practices. Everything from colluding to increase text messaging rates, to dictating the phones, software, and hardware features that customers can access and use on their personally-owned hardware. Additionally, they maintained a walled garden than gave them monopoly access to the software platform that stifled innovation and allowed them to extort software developers.

Google on the other hand -- while they indeed are in business to make a profit --- have continued to work towards and lobby for open information, free choice and consumer rights. In the spectrum auction, while of course open access rules would help them assuming they have the applications and services consumers most want, they were the major voice for consumers rights while using devices they own that work on airwaves OWNED by the public. The carriers believe they are the gatekeepers to everything even though they are using spectrum leased to them by the American people. It is OUR RESOURCE, and they will abide by pro-consumer rules if they want to use it.

In this case, Apple is acting just like the carriers. If they are going to be the single point of application entry, It in unacceptable for them to deny access to applications and services that compete with their own, or are otherwise a threat to AT&T's profit.
post #142 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by AjitMD View Post

It is easy to bad mouth ATT, but it is important to look at their contributions to this country for over a century...

...snip...

ATT with Bell Labs did make a lot of contributions to this country... with the transistor, cell phone technology, TDMA/GSM, fiberoptics. Their wired network after deregulation, allowed a lot of companies to free load over their network. Technology can change the dynamics of any industry and certainly changed telecom... and ATT went through changes too.

Minor threadjack...

That AT&T/Bell Labs doesn't even exist anymore. It's all parts of different companies, spun off and/or reacquired and combined with other non-BabyBell acquisitions. It was actually SBC (one of the Baby Bells) that took over the remainders that was AT&T and took the name because of its history.

What was Bell Labs is now mostly parts of the French company Alcatel-Lucent.

The wireless company that partnered with Apple with the iPhone was really Cingular, which was an SBC subsidiary.

So lets not give the new AT&T too much credit for what the old vertically integrated company was able to accomplish (through sheer monopoly power). You may not remember, but it was that old monopoly that spawned the phrase: "We're the phone company. We don't care. We don't have to." Lest we remember them too fondly.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled intarwebz forum flamethrowing...

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply
post #143 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

What a mealy-mouthed evasion that was. Does anyone believe that the
agreement between AT&T and Apple does not require Apple to reject
applications which direct money away from AT&T on AT&T's behalf?

I have a GV number and don't see how it takes money away from ATT - i like that one number will ring where I specify it but for long distance I used my phone minutes or icall (which makes free us calls via their app) and for international I use skype which is still in the app store. I suspect that this has something to do with Google v Apple but what is hard to see. Or it could be as something as an over zealous Apple employee pulling the plug for some reason.
post #144 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Most likely, the same price as they do now, perhaps less if competition in (optional) carrier subsidies drives it lower.

Oh, yes, and I forgot to mention in my previous post that it's time to put an end to the insanity of incompatible wireless technologies. Nothing holds progress in this technology/industry back more than the money wasted on duplicating wireless assets. FCC/Congress should mandate a standard with switchover date -- just as they did with HDTV -- and carriers with the 'winning' technology (most likely GSM) should be forced to share towers with those with the 'losing' technology. Obviously, some time will be required for this switchover, but it should be written into law now so that carriers stop wasting money on incompatible technologies, and share the costs of future wireless technologies. The wireless industry in this country is a huge mess because carriers have used technology as well as contracts to lock customers to their service, and it's time for that mess to be cleaned up too.

By same price, I hope you meant the $599 and $699 unlocked prices. Otherwise, your comment is nuts.

As for government mandated standards, yes, most of the time they yield consumer benefits in the near term. But the flip side is that standards can also retard innovation and progress. In other words, if all carriers are forced to use one standard wireless technology (such as GSM), why would any carrier want to innovate and make a better one? Once you declare this portion of the business as a standard, you are forcing the carriers to compete in other ways, or you're leading them all into one big monopoly. So each industry/market should be carefully evaluated on its own merits before declaring anything standard. And btw, the government (US or even EU) doesn't have a good track record at doing this kind of stuff.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #145 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

Actually, T-Mobile already does unlock. They unlocked my two phones when we were just 8 months into our contract (we were going to Toronto and wanted to put in a Canadian SIM).

I think people have told me that AT&T does unlock other phones - again, not sure if that's a one-time thing or if it's policy. Since I switched, I haven't asked them to unlock any phones yet, but will probably try on my next trip to Toronto.

Both AT&T and T-Mobile do unlock the phones they sell you after certain period of time. However, there is no written policy that they will. They can, just like AT&T is doing with the iPhone, say we are not going to unlock your phone. What the lawsuit want is a written policy to force them to unlock their phones.
post #146 of 214
All I know is I get no 3G service in my small 150k person town
post #147 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Don't become a theorist.

Yeah, but... "That's usually the problem with government intervention; it often has unpredictable and unintended outcomes."

That's not a theory. That's fact.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #148 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macrooster View Post

All I know is I get no 3G service in my small 150k person town

Put up your own tower and lease it back if you can.
post #149 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

Here's a good article about this: http://seekingalpha.com/article/1530...pen-the-iphone

Some background: At the Mossberg's D Conference in 2006, six months before iPhone was introed, Jobs derisively referred to the cell carriers as "orifices", and compared the "walled" cellular networks with the "open" wireline networks.

Apple's clear stance has been that it wants the cell networks to be dumb pipes that don't interfere with what Apple wants to do.* AT&T has allowed Apple to do plenty, but not everything. So has Apple's stance changed? I doubt it.

* And of course, Apple wants to build its own unique ecosystem and experience on top of this open network. Even an Apple fanboy can see that, but fanboy will go along as long as Apple keeps innovating and improving that experience.

Very soon Wi-Max will be rolling out to many of the larger cities. Everyone remember what Wi-Max is, right? Everyone remember that Apple has been hiring Wi-Max experts? What do you suppose happens when you combine Apple and Wi-Max? (and don't say "AppleMax", "iMax", etc.)

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #150 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadkid08 View Post

I understand both sides of the argument but for this one, I'm going to have to side with Apple and AT&T. Here is my reasoning. I don't think its exactly fair for you to use your "competitor's" service(s) (in this case AT&T's cellular network) to "compete" with them ESPECIALLY when what you are offering is significantly underscores the price the other guy can set. This is what got Standard Oil in trouble in the late 1800's early 1900's. Google is being a leech using AT&T's services to introduce a free way to call and text. Now if everyone gets a Google Voice or a Skype and drops their AT&T plan AT&T does not make money. If AT&T doesn't get money they can't keep supporting the iPhone (or in worse case scenario not be able to support their cellular network) in which case they will drop it. If you don't have AT&T around you can't use your iPhone period. And the same would be true for any other cell network in regards to GV. Google Voice's practices are far more monopolistic than AT&T's. If Google wants to give you free Google Voice maybe they should think about starting up a Google Mobile division of their company in which they become a carrier. You can't just yell at the top of your lungs: "This is what's good for us consumers!!!" Like the App Store has treated you bad thus far. You have to weigh in all factors before you make a decision. What may be really good for you might be very bad for someone else which in the end is bad. You have to reach a happy medium. Self-Entitlement mentalities are never beneficial in the long run

At the risk of repeating myself.... at the risk of repeating myself...

Wi-Max rollout will address some of the Google Voice users concerns, after all Google is only one of the large companies who have poured money into Clearwire/Sprint.

Here are two rather illuminating articles:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-10300017-94.html

http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/01/l...-2009-rollout/

And another note of interest:

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscente...ext_month.html

(Full disclosure: I am a CLWR and AAPL investor)

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #151 of 214
Hey in my smudge size town get 3g bfe on weekends I get
1.4, Sunday mornings get2.4 never without 3g and the local
store 2 miles from me treats me nice
I guess being in a small town helps me so
I have no reason to switch unless another carrier
could be substatially cheaper WITH MY IPHONE
I'm not giving up my iPhone
I love AT&T
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
post #152 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOFEER View Post

Hey in my smudge size town get 3g bfe on weekends I get
1.4, Sunday mornings get2.4 never without 3g and the local
store 2 miles from me treats me nice
I guess being in a small town helps me so
I have no reason to switch unless another carrier
could be substatially cheaper WITH MY IPHONE
I'm not giving up my iPhone
I love AT&T

You are one of the lucky ones, Nofeer. A relative of mine is buying an iPhone and has had major problems with at&t just GETTING a phone, much less using one! \

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #153 of 214
I'm getting sick of AT&T dictating stuff. Not being able to call on skype over 3G is annoying enough. Even more annoying is that I live in Australia so why is some stupid lame communications company in a different country dictating my iPhone experience!!! Sooo frustrating.
post #154 of 214
I live in Australia too, and we can't even get Google Voice, it's time for the UN to step in and force these companies to make it available to everyone everywhere.*

Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchymitch View Post

I'm getting sick of AT&T dictating stuff. Not being able to call on skype over 3G is annoying enough. Even more annoying is that I live in Australia so why is some stupid lame communications company in a different country dictating my iPhone experience!!! Sooo frustrating.


*Disclaimer most of or all of the above post may contain sarcasm and thus not reflect the true views of the poster
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #155 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

By same price, I hope you meant the $599 and $699 unlocked prices. Otherwise, your comment is nuts.

No, I mean the same price they are now. Anyone who reads these forums regularly has seen comments from iPhone users in markets where there is competition -- i.e., no exclusive deal -- who are getting iPhones for the same or lower cost -- including $0 in one market, if I recall correctly -- as US users on AT&T. The idea that competition will result in higher prices for consumers is what is nuts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

As for government mandated standards, yes, most of the time they yield consumer benefits in the near term. But the flip side is that standards can also retard innovation and progress. In other words, if all carriers are forced to use one standard wireless technology (such as GSM), why would any carrier want to innovate and make a better one? Once you declare this portion of the business as a standard, you are forcing the carriers to compete in other ways, or you're leading them all into one big monopoly. So each industry/market should be carefully evaluated on its own merits before declaring anything standard. And btw, the government (US or even EU) doesn't have a good track record at doing this kind of stuff.

The internet has standards, and a well established standards process, and it doesn't seem to have retarded innovation. And, yes, that's exactly the point, force them to compete in other ways: on price, on service, etc. The government track record of regulating industries is just fine. What doesn't have a good track record is lack of competition and deregulation, which often fails spectacularly or leads to corporate abuses.

I fully understand that the wireless carries don't want to have to really compete against each other. I'm sure they are very happy with and will fight tooth and nail to maintain the status quo, but allowing them to do so goes against the public interest and causes continual harm to consumers. I welcome forceful government intervention in this market and we will all benefit in the long-term from it. The idea that government is not a good regulator and that government intervention typically causes more harm than good is a pernicious fiction perpetrated by people who don't believe in, or don't want, government acting for the public good.
post #156 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

I live in Australia too, and we can't even get Google Voice, it's time for the UN to step in and force these companies to make it available to everyone everywhere.*

I know. I think we should threaten nuclear action against AT&T or capture one of them hostage and torture them.
post #157 of 214
Maybe we should start with sanctions, no McDonalds for lunch today, I'm off to the pie shop.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchymitch View Post

I know. I think we should threaten nuclear action against AT&T or capture one of them hostage and torture them.
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #158 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchymitch View Post

I know. I think we should threaten nuclear action against AT&T or capture one of them hostage and torture them.

Be a dweeb somewhere else and stop having a conversation with yourself.

I'll chalk this up to sarcasm attempting to be serious and mocking the entire thread.

None of this thread is of any value as we have zero input on contracts.
post #159 of 214
Wouldn't surprise me if the big telcos get together on this and use it to get a national franchise law passed. Bush tried to have it passed years ago but all the tiny towns fought it. It would give the telcos permission to build infrastructure anywhere without going through a local government which usually makes them waste money building a yarn museum as well
post #160 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Good morning!!!! AT&T officially said 2 years ago that they will never ever unlock any iPhone you buy from Apple or them in the US, which is locked to their network. Not even after you fulfill your contract. Not even after 2 years and not even when you pay the full price of the iPhone. The said it clear and loud. Why they said it? Because there is no law in the US against it.


yes and no. they were given the exclusive rights to the iphone and so long as they have that right they won't give anyone the legit unlock code.

once they don't have that exclusive right they can't stop the unlocking so long as you have fulfilled your contract obligation. I dare say that it will be Apple you'd get the code from. but ATT won't be able to stop it. and even if they try, they will be hit with a ton of lawsuits from folks that either finished or paid to break a contract.

you are however 100% correct that in the US simlocking is totally allowed and there is no master law that says a carrier has to give you the unlock code after X time. so perhaps the solution is to fight that law. get it forced for all devices to be open to all carriers that can handle the technology. in other words, Apple has a GSM phone so any company that can service GSM can have the iphone. so ATT and T-Mobile both can have it. they can do subsidies if they want or you can buy it full price and come and go as you please. if Verizon or Sprint goes GSM they can have it also.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › FCC investigates Apple, AT&T for Google Voice app rejection