[Macworld]

Post your comments for Senators challenge AT&T?s exclusive iPhone deal here

[PKGuy323]

Aren't we still a CAPITALISTIC society? Why is government interfering in the private sector? So what if Apple & AT&T choose to partner up? It's like Ford Motor Co. crying foul to sell Toyotas as well because they sell good. I don't see people clamoring for exclusivity on the cheap phone models that people really don't want or like.
We're in an economy crisis, at war, trying to salvage GM/Chrysler....yet the iPhone/AT&T deal warrants more time and money spent by our elected officials.
Wrong in SO many ways....

[cycomachead]

OK, here's what I don't get about all this. Luckily, they aren't focusing on just the iPhone, but none of this will help iPhone users in America. Ok, if you're in love with T-Mobile it might.
The fact is in the case of the iPhone there is NO amount of legislation that will get a phone on Verizon. Not until Verizon and AT&T use the same network hardware can anyone force Apple to make a Verizon phone-which kinda sucks actually! BTW, there's a chance of that happening between 2011-2014.
That said I think this could be good overall. However, it would drive up phone costs if people don't make carrier deals. So you could theoretically run an iPhone on T-Mobile but you'd pay the $699 and you wouldn't get 3G speeds. (Apple could sign a deal with t-mobile, but only if they wanted)

[flybynight]

Yep, this will work... just like the government was going to do something about those high cable prices.
Let government do the things it is good at - defense, roads and wasting money - then get out of the way of business and taxpayers. That would be change we could believe in. Pipe dream, I know!

[QCassidy352]

The very idea that not having access to the latest phones makes you a "second class citizens" trivializes the experience of those people and groups who have been and continue to be denied basic rights. Get a grip here people.

There's no RIGHT to own a particular model of cell phone. Maybe that kid has to choose between his deer stand and an iphone. There are lots of benefits to living in rural areas, but no, you're not going to have access to everything city-dwellers do. Cry me a river - life is about choices.

Oh well - at least the Senate is focused on important things like this rather than worrying about a wreck of an economy, 2 wars in the Middle East, spiking oil prices, and a deteriorating environment, to name a few trivial concerns they could be wasting their time on.

[orgopete]

This is pretty preceptive in considering the result of not just the Apple-AT&T deal, but the result of whether a phone manufacturer could or should dictate which carrier you can use. Will the Carterfone precedent apply to wireless? I think this is essentially what exists in some European countries.
I wonder what Apple's analysis suggests for the monthly contract versus selling an unlocked iPhone? While Apple has the right to keep the details of that contract secret, one might speculate that Apple cannot charge enough for an unlocked iPhone versus their share of the AT&T deal. None the less, buying a phone from AT&T, paying the early termination fee, and unlocking the iPhone with the iPhone dev team hack is all available and legal under existing law. Apple essentially sells unlocked iPhones in this manner and uses fear and inconvenience to retain sufficient market for them to be satisfied.

[jabsdad]

Second class citizens because they can't get the latest cell phone models? God what a sorry pile of ninnys. Living in a rural area you're lucky to have cell service that works at all and should basically be glad you have at least current signal technology. Cell phones aren't a right and no company is obligated to provide anyone with anything outside of contractual agreements. So what's the next technology or consumer product that's not readily available outside of metro areas that these people are gonna whine about? Porsche dealerships?

[jwilcox09]

First off if people (the other few commenters to start) actually read the news they would know that this is the only thing that the congress is doing. This is just one of many sub-committee's that looks into all kinds of issues. It's not the Committee of Commerce's job to worry about the war. Secondly, why shouldn't the rural folks be able to have the same privileges as people who happen to be in the an ATT (bad as it it) area. Also PKguy, your comparison with ford and toyota is not in any way related to this discussion since apple doesn't provide cell service, and att doesn't make phones.

I think its good that these type of issues are being looked and strongly believe that since we are in a "Capitalistic" society then competition drives effeciency and prices (Econ 101). If people can take the most popular phone to any carrier then the ability for phone companies to overcharge for that privilege gets diminished.

Im not saying that I want to be on T-Mobile, but it would be nice to know that I have a choice of a carrier and phone based on the best reception and data coverage in my area.

[jimmylittle]

i think the point the Senators have is that phone manufacturers should develop phones for all platforms, CDMA and GSM, but because of carrier deals (in this example AT&T and iPhone), Apple has no need to manufacture a CDMA version. If phones were not exclusive, Apple would be forced by the market (capitalism) to produce a GSM version and a CDMA version, allowing the iPhone to work on AT&T, TMobile, Sprint, Verizon, Boost, Virgin, Alltel, Cricket, or whatever carrier you choose.

Can also be applied to Sprint/Pre, Verizon/BBBold, or any other carrier/phone combo.

[wiz302pa]

why shouldn't the rural folks be able to have the same privileges as people who happen to be in the an ATT (bad as it it) area
----------------------------------------------------------------
By your logic, people living in the city should have septic tanks?

[jwilcox09]

Once again a compelety unrealated argument. Thanks for contributing garbage to a discussion.

[flowney]

Given the importance of wide area wireless connectivity to the economy, education, emergency services and even defense, one has to give serious consideration to nationalizing this critical resource. For profit enterprises are only going to do what is profitable and that is not enough. Let government build and maintain the next generation (4G) wireless network allowing everyone else to compete in the markets for the hardware and software to make good use of it. Rural Americans will then be on an equal footing with their urban fellow citizens. Pinning our hopes for economic recovery entirely upon urban Americans is unfair, unreasonable and unworkable.

[ibeetle]

The Senators are asking the right questions but wrongly.
Look at house phones. A person can go into any retailer that sells phones. Buy a phone. Take it to any home in America. Plug it into any phone jack and it will work. It does not matter what brand of phone or what phone company or what state.
The Senators are basically asking why none of that is true with the cell phone industry.

[seeknemo]

AT&T invested and took a risk when building features for Apple's iPhone, so they deserve some sort of financial reward. Verizon had their chance and they chose to keep a tight control of features on phones they roll out....take a look how well that worked out for the BB Storm. AT&T's exclusive iPhone deal isn't that bad. So what if you are on another carrier and can't get this phone, switch or stay with your current provider, it's NOT the end of the world that you don't have an iPhone. Maybe the Senate should take a look at pricing for texts. I'm on a pre-paid plan, for a voice call I pay 15 cents per minute but for a single text I pay 20 cents. Now how does that make sense, there is no way a text could take up more resources that a minute phone call. WAKE UP SENATORS!!!