In addition to saving iPhone customers the step of having to visit a mobile provider to obtain a carrier-specific SIM, a programable SIM could also enable users to roam across regions and obtain service without requiring a unique SIM for each different location.
It would be a major benefit for frequent travellers if you could use an iPhone/iPad app to locate the local service provider and purchase PAYG call/data credit without having to switch the sim card.
wow, this is going to be huge... world phone would be much better as when we are travelling we no need to buy a new sim just activate the local number... amazing, can't wait to actually see it happen...
This is BAD, and anti consumer!
The idea is not to eliminate the "need" to buy a new sim, it is to PREVENT the ability to buy a new sim. Even with a factory "unlocked" iPhone, Apple will be able to control which carriers it will enable your phone to work with and you can bet your ass there will be restrictions. Perhaps if you have a US iPhone and iTunes account you will only be able to enable the phone for one of the 4 US carriers. You want to travel in Europe? No problem, pay an approved carrier for an international roaming plan that is only a few hundred percent more expensive than a local sim.
This will give Apple more leverage with the carriers because even in countries where the phones are "unlocked" a carrier will have to play nice with Apple to get their netwrok in the iTunes store. They may even have to share revenue with Apple, and if that is the case, expect them to pass higher costs on to iPhone owners.
Why would AT&T go along with this, unless there was a way for them to permalock the phone at activation?
Because if there is no sim to switch, consumers will only be able to leave AT&T with Apples consent and assitance, and AT&T can negotiate with Apple on what assitance you get and when. This has its plusses and minusses for the carriers, but the consumer will be the loser.
It would be a major benefit for frequent travellers if you could use an iPhone/iPad app to locate the local service provider and purchase PAYG call/data credit without having to switch the sim card.
Assuming you could choose any local service provider and the rates were as good as those available to everyone else, you would be correct. That does not fit with Apple's history and business model though. Think restricted options and a 70/30 split between the carriers and Apple, with prices higher than those offered through other sales channels to make up for the 30% overhead.
Did I read this correctly....Apple is going to have chips in the iPhone so you can shop for the cheapest cell service, month to month?
I think, in a way yes, but not so much different than today. In markets with multiple compatible carriers, Apple already sells this way. You can buy an unlocked phone at full price and shop around for the best plan from the carriers. But you pay full price for the phone. I expect, that if they introduced this programmable on the fly integrated SIM, that it would work the same say. The only difference from a consumer point of view is that with the current model, whenever you change carriers with your unlocked phone, you need to acquire a new carrier SIM, where you wouldn't with this new design.
For locked models, again it would work the same, the phone IMEI number would be registered with Apple as a locked unit, either to a specific carrier or would lock to a carrier on activation. This is basically how they work now too. Here in Canada 2 or the 5 carriers are owned by the same company and run on the same network but have two different carrier ID's. There have been reports that if you bought a phone from one and immediately inserted a SIM from the other, that it would lock to the send carrier. Not sure if that is in fact the case, but multiple people reported it.
It seems that all this new design would do is allow customers to activate on their carrier without having to acquire and insert a SIM. Big deal. For unlocked units, you could change carriers without a new SIM too. I don't see the bug difference from today. In fact, with SIMs, swapping lines with unlocked units is as easy as swapping your SIM. If you have multiple lines (with one or multiple carriers), how would you swap between then, on the fly, with this new design? Would you have to connect to a PC/Mac every times you want to change accounts?
Why would AT&T go along with this, unless there was a way for them to permalock the phone at activation?
No different than now for AT&T. Today, you buy your phone and it is locked to AT&T. With this new design, you buy your phone and it is locked to AT&T. It is just a matter of how you get onto their network. Today, you get a SIM and activate it. With the new design, you connect to your PC/Mac and activate the built-in chip.
Edit: just saw AIAddict's response and yes, I would agree, it would make it even more difficult to jailbreak and unlock and use on another carrier, because "The flash component will receive the carrier related data via a local connection which could be the PC or a dedicated device, so it can be activated on the network. Gemalto will provide the back-end infrastructure that allows service and number provisioning on the carrier network." Since it gets activated over the network from what is essentially a third party, Apple controlled authorization server, if it isn't authorized, it does get activated on another network.
There doesn't seem to be any advantage for the consumer with this change, other than the convenience of not having to pop in a SIM. But for the carriers, they save on having to provide SIMs and perhaps get an iPhone that is more tightly locked to their networks.
wow, this is going to be huge... world phone would be much better as when we are travelling we no need to buy a new sim just activate the local number... amazing, can't wait to actually see it happen...
Probably not. Your phone will still be locked to AT&T, just as it is now. The fact is, that you will NOT be able to just buy a new SIM in another country and pop it in. Even if your phone is factory unlocked, if the activation has to go through Apple, you might only be able to activate on an Apple Approved 3G network. If your phone is jailbroken and unlocked, I can't see AT&T's contract with Apple allowing them to activate your phone on another network without their permissions (i.e. they gotta get paid).
For the same reason Apple sells carrier locked phones now and will not unlock it at your request to use on other networks, they will now simply allow you to activate your future locked phone on another network either. Just because the SIM will be integrated and programmable on the fly to use a specific network doesn't mean they are going to stop locking the phones.
I would love it if they did. Remember how disruptive the original iPhone was to the wireless business model? Imagine if Apple really decided to disrupt the industry and only sold unlocked phones or phones that automatically unlocked when the original contract term expired. This would bring fairness to the industry, where you are locked to your carrier by a contract you agreed to, instead by a technical lock that artificially binds you to the carrier even after the subsidy is repaid and the contract expired. The carriers would never go for this, but maybe since Apple has now achieved the status they have in the industry, they could get away with it. No one else could and it would take balls the size of mountains for Apple to try.
The Carrier method will continue for a while longer. But Apple knows where things are heading.
With LTE flaring up here soon and across the world later. Supposedly data will be able to fly at greater speeds.
We already know that Skype is upgrading their system and along with that so will Fring and the other VOIP providers.
But Apple will start becoming more appealing because of the greater acceptance of FaceTime.
Once that gets on board Microsoft phones. And you know very well ALL Android phones will also have FaceTime. (Google wants all of Apple's apps on their system).
Once the world starts going HEAVY on this type of calling, they will finally be turned into dunb pipes for sure.
Because if there is no sim to switch, consumers will only be able to leave AT&T with Apples consent and assitance, and AT&T can negotiate with Apple on what assitance you get and when. This has its plusses and minusses for the carriers, but the consumer will be the loser.
The "consumer" always loses. Hence the term "consumer" rather than "customer."
But Apple will start becoming more appealing because of the greater acceptance of FaceTime.
HUH? How can you even mention the acceptance of FaceTime in the same breath as Skype? What is the usage ratio of the two services right now? 1,000,000 to 1 or is it more like 10,000,000 to one? FaceTime is for all intents and purposes, still in an early beta phase. It is not even an option for more than 90% of the worlds mobile device owners or computer owners. Most of the people who do have Facetime on one of their devices rarely if ever use it. Maybe it will grow in the next 18-24 months to the point that it is relevant enough to be in the conversation, but for now it is not exactly tearing up the industry.
Quote:
Once that gets on board Microsoft phones. And you know very well ALL Android phones will also have FaceTime. (Google wants all of Apple's apps on their system).
Yes, because Microsoft is a major player in the phone market these days, and everyone will have FaceTime now that Apple made the specs public like promissed...Oh wait...where is the link to the specs again?
For now NO Android phones have FaceTime. No Symbian phones, no Blackberry phones, no Palm phones, no Microsoft phones, no tablet devices, no linux devices, and no Windows devices either. 3 months in and no one has written even a basic Facetime app for any non-Apple device, and in fact no one has announced that they are working on one or even planning to.
You realize that profits for Apple are expenses for you and me, right?
Yes, and since Steve refuses to pay out any of the cash horde in dividends, the profits don't even go to the shreholders either. Great system as long as they can get away with it huh?
Comments
In addition to saving iPhone customers the step of having to visit a mobile provider to obtain a carrier-specific SIM, a programable SIM could also enable users to roam across regions and obtain service without requiring a unique SIM for each different location.
It would be a major benefit for frequent travellers if you could use an iPhone/iPad app to locate the local service provider and purchase PAYG call/data credit without having to switch the sim card.
wow, this is going to be huge... world phone would be much better as when we are travelling we no need to buy a new sim just activate the local number... amazing, can't wait to actually see it happen...
This is BAD, and anti consumer!
The idea is not to eliminate the "need" to buy a new sim, it is to PREVENT the ability to buy a new sim. Even with a factory "unlocked" iPhone, Apple will be able to control which carriers it will enable your phone to work with and you can bet your ass there will be restrictions. Perhaps if you have a US iPhone and iTunes account you will only be able to enable the phone for one of the 4 US carriers. You want to travel in Europe? No problem, pay an approved carrier for an international roaming plan that is only a few hundred percent more expensive than a local sim.
This will give Apple more leverage with the carriers because even in countries where the phones are "unlocked" a carrier will have to play nice with Apple to get their netwrok in the iTunes store. They may even have to share revenue with Apple, and if that is the case, expect them to pass higher costs on to iPhone owners.
Yes, I can't wait to see this happen.
Why would AT&T go along with this, unless there was a way for them to permalock the phone at activation?
Because if there is no sim to switch, consumers will only be able to leave AT&T with Apples consent and assitance, and AT&T can negotiate with Apple on what assitance you get and when. This has its plusses and minusses for the carriers, but the consumer will be the loser.
It would be a major benefit for frequent travellers if you could use an iPhone/iPad app to locate the local service provider and purchase PAYG call/data credit without having to switch the sim card.
Assuming you could choose any local service provider and the rates were as good as those available to everyone else, you would be correct. That does not fit with Apple's history and business model though. Think restricted options and a 70/30 split between the carriers and Apple, with prices higher than those offered through other sales channels to make up for the 30% overhead.
Did I read this correctly....Apple is going to have chips in the iPhone so you can shop for the cheapest cell service, month to month?
I think, in a way yes, but not so much different than today. In markets with multiple compatible carriers, Apple already sells this way. You can buy an unlocked phone at full price and shop around for the best plan from the carriers. But you pay full price for the phone. I expect, that if they introduced this programmable on the fly integrated SIM, that it would work the same say. The only difference from a consumer point of view is that with the current model, whenever you change carriers with your unlocked phone, you need to acquire a new carrier SIM, where you wouldn't with this new design.
For locked models, again it would work the same, the phone IMEI number would be registered with Apple as a locked unit, either to a specific carrier or would lock to a carrier on activation. This is basically how they work now too. Here in Canada 2 or the 5 carriers are owned by the same company and run on the same network but have two different carrier ID's. There have been reports that if you bought a phone from one and immediately inserted a SIM from the other, that it would lock to the send carrier. Not sure if that is in fact the case, but multiple people reported it.
It seems that all this new design would do is allow customers to activate on their carrier without having to acquire and insert a SIM. Big deal. For unlocked units, you could change carriers without a new SIM too. I don't see the bug difference from today. In fact, with SIMs, swapping lines with unlocked units is as easy as swapping your SIM. If you have multiple lines (with one or multiple carriers), how would you swap between then, on the fly, with this new design? Would you have to connect to a PC/Mac every times you want to change accounts?
Why would AT&T go along with this, unless there was a way for them to permalock the phone at activation?
No different than now for AT&T. Today, you buy your phone and it is locked to AT&T. With this new design, you buy your phone and it is locked to AT&T. It is just a matter of how you get onto their network. Today, you get a SIM and activate it. With the new design, you connect to your PC/Mac and activate the built-in chip.
Edit: just saw AIAddict's response and yes, I would agree, it would make it even more difficult to jailbreak and unlock and use on another carrier, because "The flash component will receive the carrier related data via a local connection which could be the PC or a dedicated device, so it can be activated on the network. Gemalto will provide the back-end infrastructure that allows service and number provisioning on the carrier network." Since it gets activated over the network from what is essentially a third party, Apple controlled authorization server, if it isn't authorized, it does get activated on another network.
There doesn't seem to be any advantage for the consumer with this change, other than the convenience of not having to pop in a SIM. But for the carriers, they save on having to provide SIMs and perhaps get an iPhone that is more tightly locked to their networks.
wow, this is going to be huge... world phone would be much better as when we are travelling we no need to buy a new sim just activate the local number... amazing, can't wait to actually see it happen...
Probably not. Your phone will still be locked to AT&T, just as it is now. The fact is, that you will NOT be able to just buy a new SIM in another country and pop it in. Even if your phone is factory unlocked, if the activation has to go through Apple, you might only be able to activate on an Apple Approved 3G network. If your phone is jailbroken and unlocked, I can't see AT&T's contract with Apple allowing them to activate your phone on another network without their permissions (i.e. they gotta get paid).
For the same reason Apple sells carrier locked phones now and will not unlock it at your request to use on other networks, they will now simply allow you to activate your future locked phone on another network either. Just because the SIM will be integrated and programmable on the fly to use a specific network doesn't mean they are going to stop locking the phones.
I would love it if they did. Remember how disruptive the original iPhone was to the wireless business model? Imagine if Apple really decided to disrupt the industry and only sold unlocked phones or phones that automatically unlocked when the original contract term expired. This would bring fairness to the industry, where you are locked to your carrier by a contract you agreed to, instead by a technical lock that artificially binds you to the carrier even after the subsidy is repaid and the contract expired. The carriers would never go for this, but maybe since Apple has now achieved the status they have in the industry, they could get away with it. No one else could and it would take balls the size of mountains for Apple to try.
The Carrier method will continue for a while longer. But Apple knows where things are heading.
With LTE flaring up here soon and across the world later. Supposedly data will be able to fly at greater speeds.
We already know that Skype is upgrading their system and along with that so will Fring and the other VOIP providers.
But Apple will start becoming more appealing because of the greater acceptance of FaceTime.
Once that gets on board Microsoft phones. And you know very well ALL Android phones will also have FaceTime. (Google wants all of Apple's apps on their system).
Once the world starts going HEAVY on this type of calling, they will finally be turned into dunb pipes for sure.
Can't wait for the day.
Such uniformity would certainly help to keep their manufacturing process clean & simple. Very profitable & smart idea
You realize that profits for Apple are expenses for you and me, right?
NFC is being built into SIM cards, not the phone itself, so they can provide this functionality for every iPhone ever sold.
NFC is still being battle it out --- everybody wants a cut (the banks, the carriers, the handset manufacturers, the SIM card manufacturers...).
Because if there is no sim to switch, consumers will only be able to leave AT&T with Apples consent and assitance, and AT&T can negotiate with Apple on what assitance you get and when. This has its plusses and minusses for the carriers, but the consumer will be the loser.
The "consumer" always loses. Hence the term "consumer" rather than "customer."
But Apple will start becoming more appealing because of the greater acceptance of FaceTime.
HUH? How can you even mention the acceptance of FaceTime in the same breath as Skype? What is the usage ratio of the two services right now? 1,000,000 to 1 or is it more like 10,000,000 to one? FaceTime is for all intents and purposes, still in an early beta phase. It is not even an option for more than 90% of the worlds mobile device owners or computer owners. Most of the people who do have Facetime on one of their devices rarely if ever use it. Maybe it will grow in the next 18-24 months to the point that it is relevant enough to be in the conversation, but for now it is not exactly tearing up the industry.
Once that gets on board Microsoft phones. And you know very well ALL Android phones will also have FaceTime. (Google wants all of Apple's apps on their system).
Yes, because Microsoft is a major player in the phone market these days, and everyone will have FaceTime now that Apple made the specs public like promissed...Oh wait...where is the link to the specs again?
For now NO Android phones have FaceTime. No Symbian phones, no Blackberry phones, no Palm phones, no Microsoft phones, no tablet devices, no linux devices, and no Windows devices either. 3 months in and no one has written even a basic Facetime app for any non-Apple device, and in fact no one has announced that they are working on one or even planning to.
You realize that profits for Apple are expenses for you and me, right?
Yes, and since Steve refuses to pay out any of the cash horde in dividends, the profits don't even go to the shreholders either. Great system as long as they can get away with it huh?