Small Mobile Carriers To FCC: We Want iPhones!
These deals can mean that smaller carriers can't offer the newest phones for months or years. Most Vermont residents, as well as residents in rural areas of 15 other states, can't use the iPhone because AT&T offers only roaming coverage there, and other carriers who do offer cellphone service can't sell the iPhone, according to the complaint.
The trade group represents about 80 small and rural wireless companies, most serving fewer than 500,000 customers.
To which we say: Tough luck! We understand the value of a wireless phone as a utility/necessity. But that doesn't mean that Apple -- or any other company -- should be specifically required to offer its phone to everyone. We assume Steve Jobs weighed the pros and cons of excluding the Vermont market before deciding to work with AT&T (T) -- the nation's biggest carrier. And we assume that if AT&T saw any reason to offer service in rural Vermont, it would. And that's good enough for us.
But we're brazen free-market capitalists, so we'll ask you: What's worse: That only AT&T subscribers can (legitimately) buy iPhones in the U.S.? Or the idea that the FCC should regulate where companies can sell their gadgets?
See Also:
Apple's iPhone Market Opportunity Soars Near 650 Million Subscribers
Touchscreen, No-Keyboard BlackBerry Headed To Verizon
Five Things I Want From The 3G iPhone
Subscribe to SAI: RSS, email newsletter (no spam)
(Also, think of how this impacts the economies of these areas, who are trying to foster technology-based economies...I'd bet there will be no iFund applications for new mobile App development startups coming from Vermont, for instance...)
Open it up!
I'm a little rusty with macro economics theories but I recall something about providing choice to consumers and let the market regulate itself with the best products and services emerging on top. Where is the choice here?
If we follow the argument of self regulated market, how can we not mention the several hundreds of thousands unlocked iphones purchased on the "black market"? This sounds to me more like communist russia rather than a free market society!
I do agree though that things are unlikely to change soon; not because they shouldn't but due to the strength of the telecom lobby in DC on an election year...
So why are you against letting the market decide?
There is very little that Apple has done with their "exclusive deal" with AT&T that the free-market wouldn't have accomplished had the iPhone been sold unlocked.
Consider rates. If I remember correctly, there were bunches of people standing outside Apple Stores waiting for the opportunity to buy an iPhone. If I'd been AT&T, T-Mobile, or AllTel, I'd've set up a booth right outside every Apple Store saying, "Sign up for our great iPhone rates!" Competition would have done a better job of giving us lower-priced plans than any behind-closed-doors agreement between Apple and AT&T.
Consider Visual Voicemail. If Apple had produced an implementation of Visual Voicemail--say, running on Mac OS X Server--those phone companies would have lapped it up. That's an extra bargaining tool in winning customers. "Yeah, you could save $5 and go with AT&T," says AllTel, "But they don't have Visual Voicemail like we do. Isn't that slick? Isn't that worth an extra $5 a month?" Some will say yes, some will say no. AT&T might decide it's worth implementing Visual Voicemail as well--and offering it for an extra $2.50 a month. T-Mobile might decide that they'll implement it and offer it for free, forcing AT&T and AllTel to do likewise.
Basically, what you're saying is you're a firm believer in the rights of corporations to form partnerships in order to avoid having to compete.
Now, in European countries, all carriers use GSM, which allows for much more switching between phones and more competition- some mandate phone unlocking as well, like France, where you can get an unlocked iPhone (though it'll cost you) from Orange themselves. But CDMA has better voice quality than GSM, and is more secure- it's harder to listen in on CDMA-based calls than on GSM, which uses TDMA as its air interface.
No. Apple has every right to put whatever kind of radio in there they want. They went with GSM because it is far more prevalent world-wide than in the United States.
Apple doesn't have to change the iPhone in any way. They can sell whatever they want. In theory, Apple is going to want to sell something that people are going to want to buy and use.
The problem has nothing to do with the iPhone hardware. The issue is with Apple's exclusivity agreements which harm competition.
The confusion is my fault, though. I thought Alltel had a GSM network. It turns it that they're switching over to CDMA. It was my mistake. In place of Alltel, use SunCom Wireless.
video joiner for mac can Join multiple videos of same or different format and save it as single video.