<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 7/11/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">David Goldstein</b> <<a href="mailto:goldstein_david@yahoo.com.au">goldstein_david@yahoo.com.au</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Hi all,<br><br>I'd put this posting below on my website - <a href="http://technewsreview.com.au/">http://technewsreview.com.au/</a> - and thought I'd post it here and see what the response was. It's based on an article in The Guardian today that makes a few more points on the new must-have iPhone. Well, must have only for those who are slaves to marketing hype. It makes points that have been made before.
<br><br>To have an iPhone one must agree to a contract with AT&T,</blockquote><div><br><br>Now that the iPhone has been cracked/hacked/unlocked you can take it to another provider. I guess you still have to buy an AT&T contract, but you could probably get a pay as you go one, and spend virtually nothing.
<br> </div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> previously described as one of the worst mobile phone service providers in the US. So if you want an iPhone, and you are already contracted to another company, you have to terminate that contract with the related fees that involves. Ben Scott's article also notes "if you are on a family plan, you may have to pay a separate fee to terminate all of your family's phones." And there's the point that that AT&T doesn't offer full coverage in more than a dozen states.
<br><br>Now, the real point the article makes I'd not thought of, and relevant to this list, is that the "practice of tying users to one provider is unique to the wireless world. Cable TV providers can't tell you what kind of TV to buy.
</blockquote><div><br><br>No, but you are "locked" to the CPE they give you (or sell you). A wireless CPE where I live now costs ~1000 USD. Most companies here will think long and hard before they switch providers because of the investment they have already made.
<br><br>Provider lock-in is nothing new, and not limited to this phone. </div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">And regular phone service will work on any phone you can find at your favorite electronics store. In the latter case, that's because there is a longstanding set of laws that guarantee consumer choice."
<br><br>In the USA, at least, this is "called the 'Carterfone' rules, these laws make it so you can use any device you want - phone, headset, fax machine or dial-up modem - on your telephone network, so long as it doesn't harm the network."
<br><br>The article then says, "But it gets worse: phone companies don't just hold the iPhone captive; they also routinely cripple features on handsets (like Wi-Fi, games, audio and video) so that you can only access their 'preferred' content. They also limit access to the network, despite marketing 'unlimited access'. And they reserve the right to boot you off the network if you do almost anything they don't like."
<br><br>"This kind of 'blocking and locking' behavior doesn't stop you from accessing the internet, but it does shape your experience and undermine the open, level playing field that consumers have come to expect online. The iPhone is simply the highest-profile example of a wireless internet market that is drifting further and further away from the free and open internet we've all come to expect.
<br><br>"The only solution to this problem is a political one. </blockquote><div><br><br>or technical, there is a beta OS version of this phone in stores now. <br></div><br></div>-- <br>Cheers,<br><br>McTim<br>$ whois -h
<a href="http://whois.afrinic.net">whois.afrinic.net</a> mctim<br>