Just about everyone is saying they are going to get one but they are skeptical if it is going to be successful.
I wonder If the kickback from Cingular only applies if the new customer signs up through an Apple retail store? Or if it will be tiered...$300 if Apple signs them up...only $150 if Cingular signs them up.
Also I'm so looking forward to the carriers trying to squeeze even more profits out of customers to compensate for declining growth. Isn't the future glorious?
History will repeat itself just like the iPod.
I remember friends saying "You spent how much for a MP3 player?!?!?! My CD walkman only cost $99!"
But then I pull my iPod out of my pocket and let them try it out.
Once they get it in their hands and caress the scroll wheel, their jaw drops and the drool starts to flow.
Before long they decide to get one and they start telling their friends about it.
I don't know. If the exclusivity is truly five years as reported and if AT&T/Cingular sells as many as they seem to think they will, they will have every incentive to re-up the exclusivity with Apple at the end of five years.
This could either be a head start for AT&T/Cingular or the beginning of a longterm exclusive alliance; I wouldn't just assume the other carriers will be on board in a few years.
During the exclusivity period, WiFi/WiMax networks will continue to roll out
at an accelerated rate across the US. It could be that in five years there will be
a satisfactory nationwide mobile VOIP capability in place. If it turns out that
way, Apple may not have to partner with a traditional phone company at all.
i don't know what smartphone you've used, but none that I've used had "endless submeus". But looking at who Apple is trying to attract with this phone, which I believe is the tech savy consumer, the price seems high. But it'll take the iPod route and get less expensive as the years pass.
I'll give an example.
To open a web link on the Blackberry. You use the scroll wheel to toggle up or down to highlight the link. You press the scroll wheel, that opens a drop down menu. You use the scroll wheel to toggle down the menu to "get the link". You press the scroll wheel and the link is opened. On top of that because the Blackberry does not support all web protocols parts of the web page will not be shown.
As demonstrated on the iPhone. To open a web link you press the link with your finger and it opens. Why would this need to be targeted to the tech savvy? It gets no more simple.
Anyone else becoming deathly afraid of the dark overlord of communications that AT&T is becoming (again)? Let's look at what services they want to offer you:
Home Telephone (with long distance)
Cell Phone (with data)
High Speed Internet (with e-mail)
Satellite TV (until they can offer...)
IPTV
AT&T frightens me. There really is something appealing about not putting all my "eggs" in AT&T's "basket".
My Treo 700p does everything this does except for WiFi. Being on Sprint, I can also watch live tv, should I be interested.
When I go to buy a program, and I have many, I don't have to get what is filtered through Palm. I can choose among thousands.
I also have two book readers, and keep about two dozen books on my memory card at any one time.
I won't argue the ergonomics of the iPhone, or the better screen, and hopefully, better keyboard, but that doesn't make it "more" than a smart-phone. jobs was very insistent that it be considered as a phone, not a computer.
I also use Sprints far faster data service.
Perhaps, sometime in the future, it will be different. But, we can only go by what we know, anything else is not valid.
Anyone else becoming deathly afraid of the dark overlord of communications that AT&T is becoming (again)? Let's look at what services they want to offer you:
Home Telephone (with long distance)
Cell Phone (with data)
High Speed Internet (with e-mail)
Satellite TV (until they can offer...)
IPTV
AT&T frightens me. There really is something appealing about not putting all my "eggs" in AT&T's "basket".
The FCC's agreement that broke up AT&T was fine at the time. But, around the world, these companies are simply getting bigger and bigger. to compete with that, US companies have to merge again. Good, bad? Whatever.
Everything? Your Treo has multi-touch and runs OS X?
That has nothing to do with it.
Wake up!
OS X is Apple's OS, The Palm OS is on mine. Multitouch has nothing to do with it being a computer or not. If you read my earlier post, I granted that the iPhone has a better "keyboard".
Anyone else becoming deathly afraid of the dark overlord of communications that AT&T is becoming (again)? Let's look at what services they want to offer you:
Home Telephone (with long distance)
Cell Phone (with data)
High Speed Internet (with e-mail)
Satellite TV (until they can offer...)
IPTV
AT&T frightens me. There really is something appealing about not putting all my "eggs" in AT&T's "basket".
I hear you. With their recent acquisition of Bell South, they have gone a long way toward
reassembling the original AT&T, which was broken up for being monopolistic. Note, however,
that your model for the future has everything they offer going over high speed internet.
The home phone and cell phone will eventually be made obsolete by VOIP phones, and
as you state, satellite TV will be made obso by IPTV. If the only thing they charged me
for was high speed internet, it would be a single monthly fee rather than the confusing
complicated menu they currently use. Plus, I believe there will be several competitors who
will offer high speed internet as well. It will be much harder for them to be a monopoly
this time, than it was with the original AT&T with land line telephones.
This all assumes that we have "net neutrality", which everyone should make an effort
to support. Without it, big companies still would control too much.
The iPhone is more than only a mobile phone in the strictest sense I don't know if there really is a category for the iPhone. Its potential uses exceed current smartphones and is closer to the UMPC market. Except it does not literally take a desktop and shrink to a small device.
Everyone repeat after me. THIS IS A PHONE! It may have the functionality beyond what typical or even current phones have, but the iPhone is just that, a phone. Anybody want proof. Try to use it with out a contract with a cellular service (ie Cingular/ATT). It won't work. Apple doesn't tell you what you can and cannot do with your Mac once it is yours. Your mac doesn't stop working if you for some reason you don't pay Apple 5 years down the road; Apple and ATT restrict what you can do with the phone and worse - they disable it (so you must throw your $500 in the crapper) when you stop paying the monthly extortion.
First and foremost it uses OS X with applicable API's. Symbian, Palm, nor RIMM are not built on that type of foundation. Linux and WinCE are the only two that could adapt to become more of what the iPhone can be.
None of the current smartphones are designed to optimize human interaction with graphics the way that iPhone does. You don't control the software through buttons you touch the software itself. None of the current smartphones are built to be so graphically amorphous which inherently lends it self to various types of software.
Quote:
When I go to buy a program, and I have many, I don't have to get what is filtered through Palm. I can choose among thousands.
A lesson that seems to resonate through electronics choice without a unifying vision does not really create the best end result.
Quote:
Perhaps, sometime in the future, it will be different. But, we can only go by what we know, anything else is not valid.
I agree we can only speculate at the moment. But the signs are pretty clear. The iPhone will be an important platform for Apple. Its importance was highlighted being the only new product showcased at MWSF.
Some people were disappointed because they feel Apple only showed a phone. But this is more than only a phone.
Multitouch has nothing to do with it being a computer or not. If you read my earlier post, I granted that the iPhone has a better "keyboard".
I understand your point: you can do everything on your treo that you can on the iPhone. But from a functionality standpoint there is no difference between a hammer and a rock (both can be used to hammer nails), but that doesn't make them funtionally equal...
My point was not that multi-touch makes the iPhone a computer (perhaps others are arguing this, I am not). I'm just questioning your assertion that your Treo can do everything the iPhone can. The treo does not have multi-touch, so in that specific regard your generalization is wrong.
It has nothing to do with the fact that you don't want to spend any money for the services you want.
Um. Excuse me, but I am more than willing to pay for services I want, but when their contracts state you have a particular set of minutes (m2m - anytime etc.) and they pull from the most expensive set of minutes first (to rack your bill up), that is crooked. I hardly use my current plan which is worth about $50/mo - yet my phone bill is regularly $80+.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
It has to do with the simple fact that as more people get cells, there are less people as a percentage of the population left who don't have them.
Repeat after me. THIS IS A PHONE! It may have the functionality beyond what typical or even current phones have, but the iPhone is just that, a phone.
Yes it is a phone, yes a lot of its functionality is already in current phones. Lets say communication is the killer app. Ultimately that is what a computer and internet are mostly used for is communications in various ways.
What I'm simply saying is that Apple created a device that is optimized for various types of communication outside of wireless voice communication. They have done so in a way that is evolutionary and easier to use than most of the current devices.
First and foremost it uses OS X with applicable API's. Symbian, Palm, nor RIMM are not built on that type of foundation. Linux and WinCE are the only two that could adapt to become more of what the iPhone can be.
But, that's not true. While I don't use CE or Symbian, the Palm has all of the relevent API's. Show me differently.
OS X mobile, or whatever it is is no different.
My Palm can be used on the internet. I can buy any program anyone cares to write for it. I can get full sized keyboards. It can print to printers. I can listen to music or watch video. I can do my own programming if I become a developer. It has a camera, and I can manipulate the images, with the proper program.
What can't I do that the iPhone, used as a computer, which Jobs insists it's not, can do?
Quote:
None of the current smartphones are designed to optimize human interaction with graphics the way that iPhone does. You don't control the software through buttons you touch the software itself. None of the current smartphones are built to be so graphically amorphous which inherently lends it self to various types of software.
That means nothing. It's just the interface, which while great, doesn't give it any more computing abilities.
In fact, because it won't allow you to use anything other than a finger, it is FAR more limited than the one on my Palm. That is something that has disappointed me. I have drawing programs, which I use when barnstorming ideas. How can I do something like that on the iPhone, with just finger touch?
It eliminates possibilities that I have on my Treo.
Quote:
A lesson that seems to resonate through electronics choice without a unifying vision does not really create the best end result.
I don't know what that's supposed to mean. It seems as though the vision is limited to a smartphone right now.
Quote:
I agree we can only speculate at the moment. But the signs are pretty clear. The iPhone will be an important platform for Apple. Its importance was significant was highlighted as it being the only new product showcased at MWSF.
Some people were disappointed because they feel Apple only showed a phone. But this is more than only a phone.
It's not more than a phone right now. When it comes out, what will we be able to get with it? How many programs will be available? What kinds? Will Apple limit them to what Apple thinks we should have? What about keyboards, printers, exchanging information, programs, and phone data wirelessly? Will we be able to do that?
If we're able to get on the internet, why can't we just go to the iTunes store and buy content? Will they be monitoring our movements online?
Lots of questions.
There are too many questions that have to be answered. Jobs insists it is just a phone, as he has been doing, then we might find ourselves being restricted to what he thinks is appropriate, and you know just how determined he can be about that. He's screwed up products before when people started to do things with them that he didn't want.
Remember the original iMacs? They had that "porch" connector that companies were using to expand the unit's capability? Remember how he had it removed?
I'm sure others can point out many instances when he stopped something that went beyond what he wanted.
I understand your point: you can do everything on your treo that you can on the iPhone. But from a functionality standpoint there is no difference between a hammer and a rock (both can be used to hammer nails), but that doesn't make them funtionally equal...
My point was not that multi-touch makes the iPhone a computer (perhaps others are arguing this, I am not). I'm just questioning your assertion that your Treo can do everything the iPhone can. The treo does not have multi-touch, so in that specific regard your generalization is wrong.
Your not talking about functionality. You're talking about convenience, pleasure.
I grant all that. It has a great interface—for most things, though there are troubling holes.
You are confusing multi-touch with something else. Multi-touch is of a great help in the interface, but does nothing else. It doesn't make this phone any more computer-like. It makes the keyboard work better. It makes it somewhat easier to select or resize something. But, there is nothing fundimental that it adds.
The lack of the ability to use a stylus is a BIG loss if this is to be thought of as a computer.
Um. Excuse me, but I am more than willing to pay for services I want, but when their contracts state you have a particular set of minutes (m2m - anytime etc.) and they pull from the most expensive set of minutes first (to rack your bill up), that is crooked. I hardly use my current plan which is worth about $50/mo - yet my phone bill is regularly $80+.
Everything may not be rosy, but billions are already using cell plans across the world, and the plans are no worse than anything else.
Remember it took quite a while for broadband to kick out the monthly minute plans from the ISP's. This might happen as well. A lot of those fees are various taxes. It's a pain all around, but I don't see anyone being ripped off wholesale.
The FCC's agreement that broke up AT&T was fine at the time. But, around the world, these companies are simply getting bigger and bigger. to compete with that, US companies have to merge again. Good, bad? Whatever.
I disagree totally. The US companies may need to get bigger and bigger - but merging within the US only builds monopoly power, which is bad for many reasons. We need several options for competition to work effectively otherwise it all comes down to regulatory control which does not have the same pressures to improve.
If a telcos say they have to merge to grow - why not merge with a European Telco? or an Asian Telco? Telstra (in Australia) is a controlled monopoly - I'd rather that Telstra sold off 50% of its business to a big US competitor, AND used the money earned from that to buy a smaller US competitor (for example).
All that said - sure AT&T is getting back to its original size - but do you still have multiple options available to you in any given market? The key to competition is not needing to use AT&T at all if you don't want to.
Comments
Just about everyone is saying they are going to get one but they are skeptical if it is going to be successful.
I wonder If the kickback from Cingular only applies if the new customer signs up through an Apple retail store? Or if it will be tiered...$300 if Apple signs them up...only $150 if Cingular signs them up.
Also I'm so looking forward to the carriers trying to squeeze even more profits out of customers to compensate for declining growth. Isn't the future glorious?
History will repeat itself just like the iPod.
I remember friends saying "You spent how much for a MP3 player?!?!?! My CD walkman only cost $99!"
But then I pull my iPod out of my pocket and let them try it out.
Once they get it in their hands and caress the scroll wheel, their jaw drops and the drool starts to flow.
Before long they decide to get one and they start telling their friends about it.
And so the circle of life is complete.
I don't know. If the exclusivity is truly five years as reported and if AT&T/Cingular sells as many as they seem to think they will, they will have every incentive to re-up the exclusivity with Apple at the end of five years.
This could either be a head start for AT&T/Cingular or the beginning of a longterm exclusive alliance; I wouldn't just assume the other carriers will be on board in a few years.
During the exclusivity period, WiFi/WiMax networks will continue to roll out
at an accelerated rate across the US. It could be that in five years there will be
a satisfactory nationwide mobile VOIP capability in place. If it turns out that
way, Apple may not have to partner with a traditional phone company at all.
i don't know what smartphone you've used, but none that I've used had "endless submeus". But looking at who Apple is trying to attract with this phone, which I believe is the tech savy consumer, the price seems high. But it'll take the iPod route and get less expensive as the years pass.
I'll give an example.
To open a web link on the Blackberry. You use the scroll wheel to toggle up or down to highlight the link. You press the scroll wheel, that opens a drop down menu. You use the scroll wheel to toggle down the menu to "get the link". You press the scroll wheel and the link is opened. On top of that because the Blackberry does not support all web protocols parts of the web page will not be shown.
As demonstrated on the iPhone. To open a web link you press the link with your finger and it opens. Why would this need to be targeted to the tech savvy? It gets no more simple.
Home Telephone (with long distance)
Cell Phone (with data)
High Speed Internet (with e-mail)
Satellite TV (until they can offer...)
IPTV
AT&T frightens me. There really is something appealing about not putting all my "eggs" in AT&T's "basket".
In what way is this more than a smart-phone?
My Treo 700p does everything this does except for WiFi. Being on Sprint, I can also watch live tv, should I be interested.
When I go to buy a program, and I have many, I don't have to get what is filtered through Palm. I can choose among thousands.
I also have two book readers, and keep about two dozen books on my memory card at any one time.
I won't argue the ergonomics of the iPhone, or the better screen, and hopefully, better keyboard, but that doesn't make it "more" than a smart-phone. jobs was very insistent that it be considered as a phone, not a computer.
I also use Sprints far faster data service.
Perhaps, sometime in the future, it will be different. But, we can only go by what we know, anything else is not valid.
Average phone = phone + PDA functions
Treo 700p = PDA + phone
iPhone = computer + phone
Anyone else becoming deathly afraid of the dark overlord of communications that AT&T is becoming (again)? Let's look at what services they want to offer you:
Home Telephone (with long distance)
Cell Phone (with data)
High Speed Internet (with e-mail)
Satellite TV (until they can offer...)
IPTV
AT&T frightens me. There really is something appealing about not putting all my "eggs" in AT&T's "basket".
The FCC's agreement that broke up AT&T was fine at the time. But, around the world, these companies are simply getting bigger and bigger. to compete with that, US companies have to merge again. Good, bad? Whatever.
In what way is this more than a smart-phone?
My Treo 700p does everything this does...
Everything? Your Treo has multi-touch and runs OS X?
Average phone = phone + PDA functions
Treo 700p = PDA + phone
iPhone = computer + phone
I will repeat. It is NOT a computer. What can this do, as a computer, that my 700p can't?
Everything? Your Treo has multi-touch and runs OS X?
That has nothing to do with it.
Wake up!
OS X is Apple's OS, The Palm OS is on mine. Multitouch has nothing to do with it being a computer or not. If you read my earlier post, I granted that the iPhone has a better "keyboard".
Anyone else becoming deathly afraid of the dark overlord of communications that AT&T is becoming (again)? Let's look at what services they want to offer you:
Home Telephone (with long distance)
Cell Phone (with data)
High Speed Internet (with e-mail)
Satellite TV (until they can offer...)
IPTV
AT&T frightens me. There really is something appealing about not putting all my "eggs" in AT&T's "basket".
I hear you. With their recent acquisition of Bell South, they have gone a long way toward
reassembling the original AT&T, which was broken up for being monopolistic. Note, however,
that your model for the future has everything they offer going over high speed internet.
The home phone and cell phone will eventually be made obsolete by VOIP phones, and
as you state, satellite TV will be made obso by IPTV. If the only thing they charged me
for was high speed internet, it would be a single monthly fee rather than the confusing
complicated menu they currently use. Plus, I believe there will be several competitors who
will offer high speed internet as well. It will be much harder for them to be a monopoly
this time, than it was with the original AT&T with land line telephones.
This all assumes that we have "net neutrality", which everyone should make an effort
to support. Without it, big companies still would control too much.
The iPhone is more than only a mobile phone in the strictest sense I don't know if there really is a category for the iPhone. Its potential uses exceed current smartphones and is closer to the UMPC market. Except it does not literally take a desktop and shrink to a small device.
Everyone repeat after me. THIS IS A PHONE! It may have the functionality beyond what typical or even current phones have, but the iPhone is just that, a phone. Anybody want proof. Try to use it with out a contract with a cellular service (ie Cingular/ATT). It won't work. Apple doesn't tell you what you can and cannot do with your Mac once it is yours. Your mac doesn't stop working if you for some reason you don't pay Apple 5 years down the road; Apple and ATT restrict what you can do with the phone and worse - they disable it (so you must throw your $500 in the crapper) when you stop paying the monthly extortion.
In what way is this more than a smart-phone?
First and foremost it uses OS X with applicable API's. Symbian, Palm, nor RIMM are not built on that type of foundation. Linux and WinCE are the only two that could adapt to become more of what the iPhone can be.
None of the current smartphones are designed to optimize human interaction with graphics the way that iPhone does. You don't control the software through buttons you touch the software itself. None of the current smartphones are built to be so graphically amorphous which inherently lends it self to various types of software.
When I go to buy a program, and I have many, I don't have to get what is filtered through Palm. I can choose among thousands.
A lesson that seems to resonate through electronics choice without a unifying vision does not really create the best end result.
Perhaps, sometime in the future, it will be different. But, we can only go by what we know, anything else is not valid.
I agree we can only speculate at the moment. But the signs are pretty clear. The iPhone will be an important platform for Apple. Its importance was highlighted being the only new product showcased at MWSF.
Some people were disappointed because they feel Apple only showed a phone. But this is more than only a phone.
That has nothing to do with it.
Multitouch has nothing to do with it being a computer or not. If you read my earlier post, I granted that the iPhone has a better "keyboard".
I understand your point: you can do everything on your treo that you can on the iPhone. But from a functionality standpoint there is no difference between a hammer and a rock (both can be used to hammer nails), but that doesn't make them funtionally equal...
My point was not that multi-touch makes the iPhone a computer (perhaps others are arguing this, I am not). I'm just questioning your assertion that your Treo can do everything the iPhone can. The treo does not have multi-touch, so in that specific regard your generalization is wrong.
It has nothing to do with the fact that you don't want to spend any money for the services you want.
Um. Excuse me, but I am more than willing to pay for services I want, but when their contracts state you have a particular set of minutes (m2m - anytime etc.) and they pull from the most expensive set of minutes first (to rack your bill up), that is crooked. I hardly use my current plan which is worth about $50/mo - yet my phone bill is regularly $80+.
It has to do with the simple fact that as more people get cells, there are less people as a percentage of the population left who don't have them.
Yeah. Thanks for the economics lesson.
Anyone else becoming deathly afraid of the dark overlord of communications that AT&T is becoming (again)?
Completely. I was blown away when they merged with SBC. I guess the DOJ has better things to do other than it's job.
Repeat after me. THIS IS A PHONE! It may have the functionality beyond what typical or even current phones have, but the iPhone is just that, a phone.
Yes it is a phone, yes a lot of its functionality is already in current phones. Lets say communication is the killer app. Ultimately that is what a computer and internet are mostly used for is communications in various ways.
What I'm simply saying is that Apple created a device that is optimized for various types of communication outside of wireless voice communication. They have done so in a way that is evolutionary and easier to use than most of the current devices.
First and foremost it uses OS X with applicable API's. Symbian, Palm, nor RIMM are not built on that type of foundation. Linux and WinCE are the only two that could adapt to become more of what the iPhone can be.
But, that's not true. While I don't use CE or Symbian, the Palm has all of the relevent API's. Show me differently.
OS X mobile, or whatever it is is no different.
My Palm can be used on the internet. I can buy any program anyone cares to write for it. I can get full sized keyboards. It can print to printers. I can listen to music or watch video. I can do my own programming if I become a developer. It has a camera, and I can manipulate the images, with the proper program.
What can't I do that the iPhone, used as a computer, which Jobs insists it's not, can do?
None of the current smartphones are designed to optimize human interaction with graphics the way that iPhone does. You don't control the software through buttons you touch the software itself. None of the current smartphones are built to be so graphically amorphous which inherently lends it self to various types of software.
That means nothing. It's just the interface, which while great, doesn't give it any more computing abilities.
In fact, because it won't allow you to use anything other than a finger, it is FAR more limited than the one on my Palm. That is something that has disappointed me. I have drawing programs, which I use when barnstorming ideas. How can I do something like that on the iPhone, with just finger touch?
It eliminates possibilities that I have on my Treo.
A lesson that seems to resonate through electronics choice without a unifying vision does not really create the best end result.
I don't know what that's supposed to mean. It seems as though the vision is limited to a smartphone right now.
I agree we can only speculate at the moment. But the signs are pretty clear. The iPhone will be an important platform for Apple. Its importance was significant was highlighted as it being the only new product showcased at MWSF.
Some people were disappointed because they feel Apple only showed a phone. But this is more than only a phone.
It's not more than a phone right now. When it comes out, what will we be able to get with it? How many programs will be available? What kinds? Will Apple limit them to what Apple thinks we should have? What about keyboards, printers, exchanging information, programs, and phone data wirelessly? Will we be able to do that?
If we're able to get on the internet, why can't we just go to the iTunes store and buy content? Will they be monitoring our movements online?
Lots of questions.
There are too many questions that have to be answered. Jobs insists it is just a phone, as he has been doing, then we might find ourselves being restricted to what he thinks is appropriate, and you know just how determined he can be about that. He's screwed up products before when people started to do things with them that he didn't want.
Remember the original iMacs? They had that "porch" connector that companies were using to expand the unit's capability? Remember how he had it removed?
I'm sure others can point out many instances when he stopped something that went beyond what he wanted.
I understand your point: you can do everything on your treo that you can on the iPhone. But from a functionality standpoint there is no difference between a hammer and a rock (both can be used to hammer nails), but that doesn't make them funtionally equal...
My point was not that multi-touch makes the iPhone a computer (perhaps others are arguing this, I am not). I'm just questioning your assertion that your Treo can do everything the iPhone can. The treo does not have multi-touch, so in that specific regard your generalization is wrong.
Your not talking about functionality. You're talking about convenience, pleasure.
I grant all that. It has a great interface—for most things, though there are troubling holes.
You are confusing multi-touch with something else. Multi-touch is of a great help in the interface, but does nothing else. It doesn't make this phone any more computer-like. It makes the keyboard work better. It makes it somewhat easier to select or resize something. But, there is nothing fundimental that it adds.
The lack of the ability to use a stylus is a BIG loss if this is to be thought of as a computer.
Um. Excuse me, but I am more than willing to pay for services I want, but when their contracts state you have a particular set of minutes (m2m - anytime etc.) and they pull from the most expensive set of minutes first (to rack your bill up), that is crooked. I hardly use my current plan which is worth about $50/mo - yet my phone bill is regularly $80+.
Everything may not be rosy, but billions are already using cell plans across the world, and the plans are no worse than anything else.
Remember it took quite a while for broadband to kick out the monthly minute plans from the ISP's. This might happen as well. A lot of those fees are various taxes. It's a pain all around, but I don't see anyone being ripped off wholesale.
Yeah. Thanks for the economics lesson.
Happy to have been of help.
The FCC's agreement that broke up AT&T was fine at the time. But, around the world, these companies are simply getting bigger and bigger. to compete with that, US companies have to merge again. Good, bad? Whatever.
I disagree totally. The US companies may need to get bigger and bigger - but merging within the US only builds monopoly power, which is bad for many reasons. We need several options for competition to work effectively otherwise it all comes down to regulatory control which does not have the same pressures to improve.
If a telcos say they have to merge to grow - why not merge with a European Telco? or an Asian Telco? Telstra (in Australia) is a controlled monopoly - I'd rather that Telstra sold off 50% of its business to a big US competitor, AND used the money earned from that to buy a smaller US competitor (for example).
All that said - sure AT&T is getting back to its original size - but do you still have multiple options available to you in any given market? The key to competition is not needing to use AT&T at all if you don't want to.