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?)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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."?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Comments
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
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?)
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.
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.
RIM is on nearly all carriers, so should the iPhone.
But their phones aren't.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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."?
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.