[OriginalMacRat]

cycomachead said:

Besides the fact that I don't think many people would pay $699 for T-Mobile.

What service do you think all those unlocked iPhones are being used on in the US?

And yes, T-Mobile has 3G. There's nothing special that REQUIRES ATT to use an iPhone.

[cycomachead]

[quote name='OriginalMacRat']
>

cycomachead said:

> 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.

There are 4 major carriers in the US.

Verizon is the only one that doesn't do GSM.

Correction: Sprint is the second of the big four that is CDMA. The Big 4 used to be 5 but Verizon bought Alltel which was also CDMA. Of the big 4 Sprint and Verizon have around 136 million subscribers and AT&T and T-Mobile total around 105-110. Also there's more minor CDMA carriers (Virgin, MetroPCS, Cricket) than GSM ones.

So, assume AT&T's 73 mil people all have iPhones. Remove exclusivity. You have 33-34 mil more from T-Mobile and others. It still doesn't help 50% of the people.

[OriginalMacRat]

cycomachead said:

Correction: Sprint is the second of the big four that is CDMA.

Sprint also does GSM.

So ATT, Sprint and T-Mobile can all service the existing iPhone.

Verizon is the only carrier that doesn't use the world wide GSM standard.

[cycomachead]

[quote name='OriginalMacRat']
>

cycomachead said:

Besides the fact that I don't think many people would pay $699 for T-Mobile.

What service do you think all those unlocked iPhones are being used on in the US?

And yes, T-Mobile has 3G. There's nothing special that REQUIRES ATT to use an iPhone.

All those? It's a relatively small number percentage wise around the world, and smaller in the US.
True, T-Mobile has 3G. But it's 3G doesn't work with the iPhone. They use different ranges of the cell spectrum and thus are not compatible.
I never said an iPhone required AT&T, but it does require carrier support for certain features. Visual VoiceMail is one, which needs proprietary software on the carriers end. MMS and tethering may or may not need certain support. The software is not all open standards. It's not a simple flicking of a switch. That's a big reason why you have provider-manufacturer partnerships the way that they are. (And because they're this way, they make no move towards open standards. That could be a benefit of non-exclusive deals.)


The thing is: the phone still could be designed for a specific network. Even with non-exclusive contracts. Unless people really took advantage and tried to use phones on "wrong" networks, and I mean a LOT of people, things likely wouldn't change.

[orgopete]

msteffer said:

Exclusivity deals drive down prices. AT&T fronts a large portion of the cost of the iPhone. Without these deals, iPhone prices would definitely go up. Maybe some day we (in the US) will only purchase SIM cards from our providers (a la most of Europe and Asia), and will be able to purchase whatever phone we want and just pop in the SIM card. This will come with more phone options at a higher pricer per phone, but service fees will remain the same. No carrier is going to lower their prices just because they don't sell phones anymore. So in the end, we will actually be paying more. Be careful what you wish for.

Apple and AT&T don't consult with me on their pricing, so I don't actually know how large the subsidy is. However, Dell sells a netbook for $299 without subsidy. Apple sells a 16 GB iPhone for $199 with an AT&T contract. The early termination fee is $175. Taxes and fees brings this to $400 and change. I am guessing here that AT&T does not lose money on early terminations, except the loss of a continuous revenue stream.

I own a T-Mobile pre-paid phone and I have a second T-Mobile pre-paid SIM without a phone (an iPhone, about $400 from Apple, unsubsidized ). The pre-paid phone was $25 with a $25 pre-paid credit and zero early termination fee. I purchase the $100/yr pre-paid minutes. I feel that is a pretty good deal.

If anyone has been to Europe, you can find many places where you can buy SIM cards and pre-paid minutes cheaply. There appears to be more and more pre-paid plans to compete with each other. If the cell phones were unlocked as well, it would be easier to invite more competition. I believe my T-Mobile plan is because they are competing with a GO phone, Virgin Atlantic, etc. There are more and more cheap pre-paid phones and plans available. I don't agree that by unbundling an unlocked phone, we will be paying more. (Bundling a locked phones essentially locks you to that carrier or the phone a throw away.) For carriers, it is the monthly fee where the money comes from, the phones are only part of their marketing. With service starting at $70/month or $840/yr for an iPhone contract for two years, I understand AT&T wanting iPhone locked to carriers.

[OriginalMacRat]

cycomachead said:

True, T-Mobile has 3G. But it's 3G doesn't work with the iPhone. They use different ranges of the cell spectrum and thus are not compatible.

ATT and T-Mobile may use different frequencies, but the iPhone supports more than one ATT uses.

[iggybird]

PKGuy323 said:

Aren't we still a CAPITALISTIC society? Why is government interfering in the private sector?

We are also a DEMOCRATIC society with market regulation. The FREE MARKETERS lost the last few elections (big time), and in this case our elected representatives gathered "to study the effect that long-term exclusivity deals have". In other words, somebody complained about a fishy situation and they're checking into it.

Quote

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.

This is called governing. The neocons created all of the enormous issues you listed because they either can't or won't govern. Bigger crises or not, the role of the government is to protect the people (not just from terrorists).

you are
> Wrong in SO many ways....

[tfrogh]

Apple was wise to partner the iPhone with one major company. Here they are, new kid in the market. Let's say they sold it to any carrier. Joe Bob's Cellular in west BF sells it to its local customers. Those users have a lousy experience with the iPhone because Joe Bob's network cannot handle to internet, email and other data traffic from the iPhone users. Those customers start screaming foul! Joe Bob gets a PR black-eye. Apple gets a class action lawsuit because they sold a product that inferior networks cannot handle. 24/7 news hawks get lots of fodder for their web and TV publications crucifying Apple and showing the simple folk being horribly harmed by their over zealousness to create an amazing phone. Apple turns into a punching bag.
Don't believe me, look at all the lawsuits suing Apple because ATT's network can't handle the iPhone in all places.
The iPhone is a success because it is brilliantly engineered AND Apple has kept in a network with a reasonable chance of supplying the services iPhone users need.
I would rather see Congress mandate one network type for all. Death to CDMA.
my 2 cents
t.

[iggybird]

flybynight said:

Yep, this will work... just like the government was going to do something about those high cable prices.

The government is ineffectual in many cases because there is a struggle between those that want to govern in a way that benefits society and those that want to govern in a way that lets the privileged have free reign.

>Pipe dream, I know!
Unrealistic dream more like it. Do you anarchists really believe we'd all be better living like it's the wild west? Why on earth would we want to revert back to the hierarchy of classes that would surely ensue (that we already have)?

[cycomachead]

[quote name='OriginalMacRat']
>

cycomachead said:

> Correction: Sprint is the second of the big four that is CDMA.

Sprint also does GSM.

So ATT, Sprint and T-Mobile can all service the existing iPhone.

Verizon is the only carrier that doesn't use the world wide GSM standard.

Where have you seen this? All their phones run on CDMA. Yes, they have International phones that run of GSM networks but that's only for international use (unless you hack...)

[cycomachead]

[quote name='OriginalMacRat']
>

cycomachead said:

> True, T-Mobile has 3G. But it's 3G doesn't work with the iPhone. They use different ranges of the cell spectrum and thus are not compatible.

ATT and T-Mobile may use different frequencies, but the iPhone supports more than one ATT uses.

Again, correct. BUT T-Mobile uses the 1700 mhz spectrum. The iPhone radio doesn't support the 1700 mhz spectrum because it is uncommon.
Not to mention T-Mobile 3G is still only available in just over 100 cities.

[OriginalMacRat]

cycomachead said:

Again, correct. BUT T-Mobile uses the 1700 mhz spectrum.

T-Mobile uses 1700 and 2100

iPhone supports 850/1900/2100

[cycomachead]

[quote name='OriginalMacRat']
>

cycomachead said:

> Again, correct. BUT T-Mobile uses the 1700 mhz spectrum.

T-Mobile uses 1700 and 2100

iPhone supports 850/1900/2100

It appears they now do. Which may work in some areas for T-Mobile 3G. However, it also seems that more than half of their 3G network may be using the 1700mhz. So it's kinda hit and miss, if you even live in a supported city.

[chrisdpratt]

We are in a capitalistic society, and exclusive contracts are actually opposed to capitalism. These type of deals essentially create mini-monopolies, or perhaps more appropriately highly-specified monopolies.

I own an iPhone and I switched to AT&T to get it. Now, I'm locked in. I can't take my iPhone to another carrier, even when my contract is up. I have to use AT&T in order to use my iPhone, so competition is out the window, and there can be no capitalism without competition.

Conversely, if the iPhone were available on every carrier, customers would have freedom of choice. Carriers would have to compete for that sector of business (which is very, very lucrative). You would see better features, better pricing, better networks, etc. As it is, AT&T is and continues to be a stagnant giant. In the two years since they first got the iPhone, they've done no major improvements on their infrastructure. They actually resist adding features to their service plans (MMS, tethering).

Want capitalism? Then throw your support behind open wireless phones.