This is the dumbest piece I have ever read.

The iphone's launch in Europe has definitely shot down all the idiotic arguments about how "open" European sim-locking laws are.

You can't unlock the iphone in UK --- O2 went as far as saying that they won't unlock your iphone even after your o2 iphone contract is over. T-Mobile only promised to provide unlocking codes after your iphone contract is over --- only when Vodafone sued them in Germany. At the very least, AT&T has promised (under no legal threat) that they will provide unlocking codes for the iphone after your contract is over.

What about France's so called "must provide a unlocked version of iphone" as well? Well, just charge 750 euro (which is like $1200 US) for the unlocked iphone.

UK + Germany + France = 200 million people --- that's 2/3 the size of US that have faced higher iphone hardware prices, higher iphone monthly fees and completely locked iphones.

I'm hopeing the thing (cell carriers/networks) opens up a LOT more in the comming years.

My contract (with Verizon) is up in november...I'm already thinking about what to do when its up. I am hoping that by then (or shorty after) that a good looking (not crazy pricey) phone with the android OS is out by then....if so, I'll likely get that.

I figure if google makes the OS, I'll probably like it, plus it would be able to run third party things...for free! I'm talking games, maps, music, ect. things I would like my phone to have...and not have to pay for.

I don't know that I agree that this piece is so dumb. Lots of phones that I seem to be attracted to (smartphones that are not so crackberry in appearance - decent processing power, features, multiple uses) aren't offered on TMobile. My contract is officially UP. I am not sure that I want to sign on for long term with them again. I have a decent plan and price since I've been with them for almost 4 years now... but now I have options and can just use the two phones I have or maybe switch to a Nokia N series of some sort (that I'd have to buy from overseas in unlocked format) to use and not be stuck on their network if I choose not to be. Sprint now as the "everything in unlimited capacity" for 100 bucks. thats a lotta bones but lots of service whenever I want it. What to do? Wait for the googlephones? I donno.

The makers of all these "super cool" mobile phones should start advertising heavily in the US and sell them via retail outlets. AND, from a technical standpoint, they should not just work under quad band EDGE, but all the flavors of the 3G spectrum as well. (THAT MEANS NORTH AMERICA, PEOPLE!!!) This is a major complaint I have against Nokia, Sony Ericsson, and HTC, to name a few. Its either: wait a year or so for a US version, or not make the North American flavor at all. It's annoying and really pisses me off.
I would not mind paying full price for a mobile phone, if it means that it will work they way I want it to work and not be dictated by the carriers.

Oh and BTW: the (present version) of the iPhone is an overhyped piece of cow patty. Steve Jobs and FCC Chairman Kevin Martin should both have their butts kicked for contributing to the dumbing down of humanity.

@John: The iPhone is the only phone which I know of which has such an agreement. Unfortunately, people are desperate enough for the iPhone that they're willing to put up with all of this. Apart from the iPhone, you can just about pick any phone and any SIM card, and everything Just Works - the US mobile comms market looks really broken from a UK perspective (*how* many mutually incompatible phone network standards?)

I work in the tlcs, so I know what I’m saying.
In Italy anyone can buy a prepaid sim card, and use it on whatever cell phone he wants.
It’s true that there are companies which link together services and phones when it comes to postpaid subscriptions, but it’s only a matter of customer’s choice.
As for iphone, it’s up to Apple that there will be an exclusive contract with only one carrier per country, so it’s not indicative of a regulatory trend.

I work in the tlcs, so I know what I’m saying.
In Italy anyone can buy a prepaid sim card, and use it on whatever cell phone he wants.
It’s true that there are companies which link together services and phones when it comes to postpaid subscriptions, but it’s only a matter of customer’s choice.
As for iphone, it’s up to Apple that there will be an exclusive contract with only one carrier per country, so it’s not indicative of a regulatory trend.

> By John at 9:12 PM ON 04/17/08
> This is the dumbest piece I have ever read.

And what planet you from? Maybe UK has brain-dead regulations, but you should try the rest of the world. 10 years ago, I bought a nokia 3210 and could call the US for $0.40 a minute.. I go home and its a brick, of course (no gsm in us then,) and have to use my qualcomm (piece of sh*t) for $1 a minute for a local call, and if I'm not in my home area, then its $1 a minute PLUS LONG DISTANCE CHARGES!!!

The US market is a joke, a bad joke and its not even funny. The should see the asian carriers. If there is land, then there is (usually) signal. They do occasionally sell locked phones, but all the phones that come to me to be unlocked are either american/european/australian.

Maybe I've been away too long, but its hosed, been hosed for a long time. Locked phone is ok, you get the phone cheap/free for a contract.. But being FORCED to buy a contract for an iphone or ANY phone is f*cked..

So, how's that a FCC problem?

Are you people saying that FCC should copy France in making a law to force cell phone carriers to sell a unlocked version of cell phones along with a locked version? How is that going to help American consumers --- if they just price the unlocked version at an insane price.

The American cell phone market is not broken. The European cell phone market is broken --- by the lack of transparency of their public accounting systems and the failure of EU regulation on mobile plan pricing.

European carriers chase "fake" customers --- so that they can make the analysts estimates.

I've always thought phones in general, and especially cell phones are way too expensive.
Along with the every rising cost of cable TV. There should a lock down on the continued rising costs.

Where in the rest of the world?

UK + France + Germany --- that's pretty much Europe in terms of population.

Japan is even worst than US in terms of cell phone carrier control. Korea only allows limited unlocking LAST month (limited means that you can only use a USIM from the same carrier on your korean phone).

Canada has the same cell phone market condition as the US.

I just name basically every country in the G7.

I agree with the concept of the article, but it's very badly written and could go into much more detail in many places, so to how the handsets are locked, the difference between CDMA/GSM from a locking perspective (which is probably a bigger reason for the US to seem less open), etc.

Here in Canada we have both CDMA networks (Bell and Telus) and GSM (Rogers and Fido). On the GSM networks, one can use any device simply by putting in your SIM card. We reguarly by newer phones off ebay and use them here. Doing that with CDMA networks isn't an option.

So basically, the US sucks because it uses CDMA and not GSM.

I'm a Canadian from the eastern sea board and we only have 3 carriers in this area, all which require you to use the phone designed for their network. I agree, this is a load of crap... you should be able to use a phone on any network.

Stupid piece. Phones are locked because there's some form of subsidy or another! Here in Russia no phones are locked, but the prices are nowhere near as cheap as they are in the US.

"The European cell phone market is broken --- by the lack of transparency of their public accounting systems and the failure of EU regulation on mobile plan pricing."

Um. Yeah, it's so broken here. That's why I can buy a prepay phone for £20 ($40 for any the evident morons reading this piece), and can get phones free on contract that will be unlocked at the end of the period. Buying phones without a contract or sim of any sort is possible, but is expensive simply because of the lack of operator subsidy. The iPhone is a laughable example of trying to import the US's approach to mobiles into Europe, and only the idiots who would pay £200 for a mobile are interested.

The UK market is the home base for cashbacks (a pyramid scheme), organized boxbreaking, VAT carousel fraud and cell phone carriers chasing fake subscribers --- it is broken beyond repair.

Worst article i've read in days.
Networks are not locked to phones in the US, phones sold by carriers are locked to networks. So even if you buy a locked phone from your provider, you can unlock the phone using zillion of tools or pay somebody to do it for you. If you want to buy an unlocked phone, there are many web sites which sell them, and i bet one mentioned above is on their list as well.
There are two things i would agree on, one being carriers not providing unlocked phones (which is a common sense), and carriers using different networks (GSM/CDMA)

"So basically, the US sucks because it uses CDMA and not GSM." -- ROB

Not only do I live in the US but I work for a CDMA service provider(verizon) and we have one CDMA competitor(Sprint) and 2 gsm competitors(ATT/Tmobile) so we're not all CDMA. its and even market..a lot of people prefer GSM because of the range of phones and other prefer CDMA because of the quality of the signal compared to gsm. personally I've had Both ATT and Verizon and I prefer Verizon..but like everyone else I'm waiting to see if the second gen Iphone will live up to the hype..if so im switching back to ATT

"So basically, the US sucks because it uses CDMA and not GSM." -- ROB

Not only do I live in the US but I work for a CDMA service provider(verizon) and we have one CDMA competitor(Sprint) and 2 gsm competitors(ATT/Tmobile) so we're not all CDMA. its and even market..a lot of people prefer GSM because of the range of phones and other prefer CDMA because of the quality of the signal compared to gsm. personally I've had Both ATT and Verizon and I prefer Verizon..but like everyone else I'm waiting to see if the second gen Iphone will live up to the hype..if so im switching back to ATT

I couldn't agree with the article more. It seems that people are so busy defending a company's "right" to limit consumer choice in order to maximize profits that they miss the big picture. The standards are in place. The paradigm is evident. The demand is there. The companies have agreed to do (at least part of) it. All that is left is for the FCC to light a fire under their asses.

This model for business should never have been allowed to happen. I would gladly pay top dollar for a quality phone (not these pieces of garbage the discount price is still to high for) that I can use for years on any network I want. Cell companies could still offer lower priced phones with a plan; and they might have some incentive to make those phones a hell of a lot nicer to entice people to their company. But an open network so that the consumer has some choice is only fair.

It is not written in stone that a company's bottom line should dictate all, to the detriment of the consumer and our rights to choose.

What does that have to do with FCC?

In every country that Apple has launched the iphone --- those national regulatory agencies have been just as useless in preventing Apple from charging a full priced, crippled handset with a long contract.

The grass on the other side of the road is not greener --- that's the lesson we learn from the iphone's European launch.

just buy your own phone which you know works for the network and use it. it may cost more initially but you'll get a peace of mind and an unlocked device.

just buy your own phone which you know works for the network and use it. it may cost more initially but you'll get a peace of mind and an unlocked device.

I couldn't agree with the article more. It seems that people are so busy defending a company's "right" to limit consumer choice in order to maximize profits that they miss the big picture. The standards are in place. The paradigm is evident. The demand is there. The companies have agreed to do (at least part of) it. All that is left is for the FCC to light a fire under their asses.

This model for business should never have been allowed to happen. I would gladly pay top dollar for a quality phone (not these pieces of garbage the discount price is still to high for) that I can use for years on any network I want. Cell companies could still offer lower priced phones with a plan; and they might have some incentive to make those phones a hell of a lot nicer to entice people to their company. But an open network so that the consumer has some choice is only fair.

It is not written in stone that a company's bottom line should dictate all, to the detriment of the consumer and our rights to choose.

What's with all these double posts?

You people say that FCC is at fault --- but what about the regulatory agencies in UK, France, Germany, Ireland and Austria --- they all allowed Apple to launch with their business model.

Japan, Korea and Canada are even worst.

What's with all these double posts?

Nothing to do with FCC --- when national regulatory agencies in UK, France, Germany, Ireland and Austria all allow Apple to do their iphone launch with their business model.

Wow what a silly article. No one ever seems to mention that the US cellular companies have to deal with more land than other countries. Sure it's easy to deploy one technology across Japan when it's the size of California. US has always been open to competition so no one was going to tell verizon or sprint that they must use the "global standard" gsm technology. These companies chose to go that route because CDMA has certain advantages. Now we're going to complain about phones being locked? Here's the business model: sell phones for LESS than it costs to manufacture them under the condition that you sign a contact. The money is made through the contract. If you want freedom - unlock your phone. It's not that hard - but you won't be getting much. Otherwise sign up with Cricket and enjoy your fine service - completely contract free.

Unfortunately, this is NOT an US problem only. It is indeed an american vision to say that only amricans get limited choices.

Many companies, around the globe, limit the choice they give their customers, because that way (not that I'm justifing them) they limit the tech support and customer service they have to give.

The carterphone ruling has nothing to do with wireless services.

I also love how they can get away with charging you for incoming text messages. There's no way you can know if someone's going to send you a message. And unlike phone calls, you can't simply refuse a text message, it gets counted whether you read it or not.
Also, why do we even need to pay for text messages? I don't have to pay extra to my ISP in order to use instant messaging, but somehow the phone companies can get away with charging for it!

Well, I work for a network operator in the UK, and the reason this particular company locks down their phones is because the company often subsidises or pays for the handset in full, so a phone costing about £175 from the manufacturer can be sold in store for about £99. This company also charges £20 for the unlocking and the handset needs to be on the network for at least 3 months - this recoups back some of that £75 or so that the company has paid.

I'm not a fan of locking, I'd like to try out other networks even though I've always been on this particular network, but I can understand why the companies do so.

Mobile telephony in the US is years BEHIND the rest of the world! In India, one can buy any GSM phone one can afford or want, and can use a SIM card in any phone. Local calls are as inexpensive as Rs 1.20 per minute(around 3 cents), and long distance calls to any place in India cost around Rs 2 per min (around 5 cents)! And these rates are "expensive" as these are for GSM phones. If you prefer to use the CDMA network, the prices are lower! And there are phones that support both GSM and CDMA; phones that support two SIM cards from two service providers, etc.... I dont event want to get into what the technological advance is in Japan and South Korea! US needs to catch up quickly!

You can buy any GSM phone in the world because they are all either stolen and then imported into India, counterfeit or went through a thousand round trip of VAT carousel fraud (in Europe).

India is imposing price control, export restrictions on rice because they fear their own people is going to starve. The last thing they should worry about is their millionth round of debating how to give out those 3G spectrums to local billionaires.

Japan and Korea have even worse consumer rights for the cell phone. USIM was locked to particular users in South Korea until last month. That means you can't even give your old phone to your kid brother because USIM was locked to particular users. Last month they finally relaxed it so that USIM is locked to a particular carrier.

I haven't even read the entire article, but I can tell you that US is the only country I've ever been with all of these available:

FREE phones when you sign up.
FREE nights and weekends
FREE calls within your network
FREE calls within your fave 5
UNLIMITED packages, such as voice, data, text.

If you live all around the world, having a GSM phone is great, but if you're like MOST americans, quit complaining and realize you live in one of the most free, affluent countries in the world.

This article is dumb, Americans always want what's free, hence the contract and the closed networks. If Europe and Asia clammered for cheap free phones like fat lazy amercians they'd be in the same shit boat that we are with cell phones. Congrats Americans you made your bed now lay in that cheap over priced underdelivered shit.

It's a great post. I found it usefull where you explain the descriptions of the items. And the image is nice. And It's easy for me to search the items that I need. Thanks.

Nic

It's a great post. I found it usefull where you explain the descriptions of the items. And the image is nice. And It's easy for me to search the items that I need. Thanks.

Nic

It's a great post. I found it usefull where you explain the descriptions of the items. And the image is nice. And It's easy for me to search the items that I need. Thanks. Nic

It's a great post. I found it usefull where you explain the descriptions of the items. And the image is nice. And It's easy for me to search the items that I need. Thanks. Nic

The big difference between North American mobile service and Europe (and maybe the rest of the World) is the carriers business model involves continuously renewing one or two year contracts in exchange for subsidized phone prices. From my consumer point of view it seems odd to lock me into a contract for two years when the phone only has a one year warranty. The industry also has ETF (Early Termination Fees) which are not prorated and are typically around $200. I've read that government has asked the carriers to prorate or reduce the ETF fees.

Like the phone companies, the cellular providers don't want to to compete on straight forward commoditized airtime or data charges, instead they have elaborate bundles of minutes, text messages, free nights or weekends, etc... They promote phones with proprietary (locked) applications so that you have to subscribe to extra services in order to listen to music or use the phones built-in GPS radio. If you want to use an open phone, like a PDA smartphone where you can load your own multimedia and maps, you'll find those smartphones have to be put on much more expensive plans - to compensate for the potential lost revenue of the user not having to buy extra network services.

While $60/month cellular service bills may seem normal to teenagers and young adults to whom mobile phones are a necessity, those rates are excessive to seniors and many on limited incomes.

I have significantly reduced my cellphone costs by using prepaid SIM cards and Skype - those details are off topic so I will omit them.

By John at 11:05 AM ON 04/18/08

"What does that have to do with FCC?

In every country that Apple has launched the iphone --- those national regulatory agencies have been just as useless in preventing Apple from charging a full priced, crippled handset with a long contract.

The grass on the other side of the road is not greener --- that's the lesson we learn from the iphone's European launch."

If the grass on the other side of the road is greener, it's because bullshit is a great fertilizer.

I have to agree with John that the European system is not transparent - layer after layer of subsidies from local governments and the EU make it difficult to judge the economic metrics of the cell phone markets in the US vs. EU, EMEA, etc.

We here in the US, on the other hand, are finally taking it in the ear for our own version of governmental subsidies - deficit spending AND artificially/astronomically cheap debt. The reason the US dollar is so low versus every other hard currency on Earth is that after eighteen years of the Federal Reserve Bank leaving the taps open on the money supply, we have too many dollars chasing too few goods.

The reason economics has such a crappy reputation is that its practitioners fib a lot. Greenspan and everyone else on the Fed should have known that they were setting the dollar up for destruction by making the money supply unrelated to the power of the economy.

I dragged that into the equation because I wanted to make sure the cell phone policy in US vs EU was being evaluated on its own merits, and not on the concomitant problem we're now having as the dollar is finding its own level on the world currency market. Eventually THAT will sort itself out, as US goods and services become attractive to overseas buyers and the trade balance shifts in our favor. But we need the Fed to stop twiddling with the dollar in the meantime if it's ever going to regain its value vs. other currencies.

I use Boost, paid $20 for my phone at a local Target, another $20 every six weeks or so for airtime, and am very happy with MY cell service. For $5/day ON DEMAND (in other words, just when I want to use it) Boost allows me to use my cell phone's GPS with an external provider's navigation service so that I have the equivalent of a Garmin/Magellan/TomTom in my pocket at all times. I'm able to instantly rent a GPS nav system over my cell phone with no special investment in hardware or purchased membership in a service plan over the $5/day rate.

If I had the money for a GSM phone, I suppose I'd be pretty angry at the lack of GSM coverage here in the 'States.

But the original article also neglects to mention that the cell phone providers layout considerable money for towers, power, connectivity charges to landline phone networks, payroll to their employees, overhead costs - it's hardly the "money for nothing" scheme that the author describes where the providers win the cell phone bandwidth lottery, kick back and enjoy the profits while providing no outlay in return. Even the decision to provide CDMA vs GSM is not cost-free.

Remember Heinlein's Law: "Never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity."

There's a corollary to that law: "Never attribute to stupidity a decision that was made by someone else with their own money. You may be in that spot some day."

To all those people that keep on bringing in Apple as a phone that contradicts all the others in Japan and Europe, it's because of Apple that they're locked not because of the network providers in those places.

The main issue with U.S. Network providers is how far behind they are in technology compared to Europe and Japan, both areas have far more advanced phones as this article stated, and I give witness to that, as well as faster transfer rates, if you're in japan many of the service providers have internet access that is equivalent to broadband if not better, while here you're lucky if you get anywhere near broadband, you might get dsl.

I think if the FCC continues pressuring them they will eventually unlock their networks and hopefully start setting some standards so that developers will have one plat to work with

This topic is one of my big gripes with the wireless system. It is nice to hear from others on this.

The wireless companies need to only offer unlocked devices; the unlocked option is a false choice. It is just too easy for them to offer choice at a price that no sane person would choose.

Quote from prbsparx:

"To all those people that keep on bringing in Apple as a phone that contradicts all the others in Japan and Europe, it's because of Apple that they're locked not because of the network providers in those places."

That's not the point for the original article. The original article is about FCC this and FCC that --- and how FCC is for giving Americans the shaft.

The British, French and German telecom regulators are giving the shaft to their own citizens as well --- by allowing Apple to launch a full priced crippled iphone with a long contract.

Enough about the hardware! What about the signal quality. I'll take any service plan that gives me the same coverage and quality as the good old landlines. As it is, I remain cell-ibate. And everytime I see somebody trying to talk on their cellphone, I ask myself "what am I missing"?

I am more worried about why USA citizens have to pay both ways for the cell phone use, i.e. calling and receiving. That is stupid. Mexico caught on to this farce and nipped it in the bud, Nov.4, 2006. Now, whomever calls, pays, period.
http://leeiwan.wordpress.com/2006/10/12/changes-dialing-long-distance-to-a-cellular-phone-in-mexico/