Apple is not being investigated because they are a bit player in mobile advertising. They are being investigated because they are the 800lb gorilla in mobile apps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab
Privacy has nothing to do with whether your company is big or small.
How does either of these views square with the fact that Google Search captures far more information, and from far more people, and they seem to be getting a free pass.
I'm not saying Apple shouldn't be investigated (and I'm not saying they should), what I'm saying is that you'd almost have to do a deep dive into Google first if actual user privacy (and not politics) was the driver in this.
That's sort of a half truth. AT&T has more spectrum and can handle more capacity, they just drug their feet on network investment. Now your statements on ANSI and MAP really do not prove anything since you have no stats to back that up. Meanwhile I can cite advantages MAP has like SIM cards, not having to dial out for call forwarding, not having the clock on calls start as soon as you hit the Send button and the like. Yes the CDMA air interface may have been better comparing EDGE. You're missing the real point, that AT&T sucks and that most global GSM/UMTS providers are not having the issues AT&T are having.
It has been Verizon that really started the $99 unlimited voice plan (and then the later price drop as well).
If one carrier has the spectrum efficiency and offers more voice minutes, then even the carrier without that spectrum efficiency technology has also have to offer more voice minutes.
Verizon also nickel and dimes for everything. Yes their network coverage is better, I don't dispute that AT&T sucks. However, can Verizon really cede control to Apple? I can't see it. Yes the iPhone is locked down but so are the new iterations of Motorola Droids that brick if the firmware is altered, I would say that's just as locked down as Apple and AT&T's arrangement. Nevermind Google markets Android as open, but let's not mistake openness for carriers with openness for consumers. The key difference is that Apple never claimed to be anything but locked down. Even if Apple unlocked here in the US, there is the matter of our disparate mobile frequencies and standards.
You're missing the real point, that AT&T sucks and that most global GSM/UMTS providers are not having the issues AT&T are having.
AT&T only "sucks" --- because Americans are comparing them with Verizon.
When we look at something like wired.com's 3G iphone speed survey, AT&T tied for third in the world for speed. O2 UK crippled your 3G iphone speed if you are a PAYG subscriber. Quite a few iphone carriers around the world were giving out 250 MB per month allowance --- what good is it for these carriers to give you "free iphone tethering" when you are able to max out your monthly allowance in a day.
Verizon also nickel and dimes for everything. Yes their network coverage is better, I don't dispute that AT&T sucks. However, can Verizon really cede control to Apple? I can't see it. Yes the iPhone is locked down but so are the new iterations of Motorola Droids that brick if the firmware is altered, I would say that's just as locked down as Apple and AT&T's arrangement. Nevermind Google markets Android as open, but let's not mistake openness for carriers with openness for consumers. The key difference is that Apple never claimed to be anything but locked down. Even if Apple unlocked here in the US, there is the matter of our disparate mobile frequencies and standards.
Whatever happens with Android has nothing to do with Verizon. Android's kernel is linux and linux is under GPL v2 which allows tivoization --- which is what signed bootloaders are about. Android itself is under Apache is allows Motorola to make improvements and still keep the source code.
No, Apple claims to be different, to be not the big brother.
Even if you are able to buy unlocked iphones in Europe --- it doesn't matter in real life because you can't get out of contract without paying off the rest of your contract. ETF (let alone pro-rated ETF) doesn't exist in Europe. Having a single wireless standard and having unlocked phones --- is meaningless because it is financially not viable for the average consumer to switch carriers without pro-rated ETF.
Comments
Apple is not being investigated because they are a bit player in mobile advertising. They are being investigated because they are the 800lb gorilla in mobile apps.
Privacy has nothing to do with whether your company is big or small.
How does either of these views square with the fact that Google Search captures far more information, and from far more people, and they seem to be getting a free pass.
I'm not saying Apple shouldn't be investigated (and I'm not saying they should), what I'm saying is that you'd almost have to do a deep dive into Google first if actual user privacy (and not politics) was the driver in this.
It has been Verizon that really started the $99 unlimited voice plan (and then the later price drop as well).
If one carrier has the spectrum efficiency and offers more voice minutes, then even the carrier without that spectrum efficiency technology has also have to offer more voice minutes.
Verizon also nickel and dimes for everything. Yes their network coverage is better, I don't dispute that AT&T sucks. However, can Verizon really cede control to Apple? I can't see it. Yes the iPhone is locked down but so are the new iterations of Motorola Droids that brick if the firmware is altered, I would say that's just as locked down as Apple and AT&T's arrangement. Nevermind Google markets Android as open, but let's not mistake openness for carriers with openness for consumers. The key difference is that Apple never claimed to be anything but locked down. Even if Apple unlocked here in the US, there is the matter of our disparate mobile frequencies and standards.
You're missing the real point, that AT&T sucks and that most global GSM/UMTS providers are not having the issues AT&T are having.
AT&T only "sucks" --- because Americans are comparing them with Verizon.
When we look at something like wired.com's 3G iphone speed survey, AT&T tied for third in the world for speed. O2 UK crippled your 3G iphone speed if you are a PAYG subscriber. Quite a few iphone carriers around the world were giving out 250 MB per month allowance --- what good is it for these carriers to give you "free iphone tethering" when you are able to max out your monthly allowance in a day.
AT&T is really not that bad.
Verizon also nickel and dimes for everything. Yes their network coverage is better, I don't dispute that AT&T sucks. However, can Verizon really cede control to Apple? I can't see it. Yes the iPhone is locked down but so are the new iterations of Motorola Droids that brick if the firmware is altered, I would say that's just as locked down as Apple and AT&T's arrangement. Nevermind Google markets Android as open, but let's not mistake openness for carriers with openness for consumers. The key difference is that Apple never claimed to be anything but locked down. Even if Apple unlocked here in the US, there is the matter of our disparate mobile frequencies and standards.
Whatever happens with Android has nothing to do with Verizon. Android's kernel is linux and linux is under GPL v2 which allows tivoization --- which is what signed bootloaders are about. Android itself is under Apache is allows Motorola to make improvements and still keep the source code.
No, Apple claims to be different, to be not the big brother.
Even if you are able to buy unlocked iphones in Europe --- it doesn't matter in real life because you can't get out of contract without paying off the rest of your contract. ETF (let alone pro-rated ETF) doesn't exist in Europe. Having a single wireless standard and having unlocked phones --- is meaningless because it is financially not viable for the average consumer to switch carriers without pro-rated ETF.