Any body have an Iphone?

Most phones in the US market are locked into a single carrier, at least for some pre-determined amount of time. Most phones are disposable anyway. No one ever takes their phone to another carrier, and if they do, it's an infinitesimally small fraction. Who cares?

More to the point, it's not in AT&T's best interest to develop an open standard for visual voice mail so everyone else can use it. They'd never agree to that. For all of Apple's influence, they still had to make some compromises because they're at the mercy of the carriers. Don't you think they'd rather sell the product for every carrier they could if the carriers would agree to it?

No phone is "locked" into a specific carrier for ANY amount of time.

Well....other than the iPhone.

The only thing that locks a phone to anything is the technology.

CDMA vs. TDMA and now GSM vs. 3G

If i decided to get a phone from at&t tomorrow, I could take it to any other GSM provider that same day and activate it without a problem. The only issue I'd face would be getting charged an early disconnect penalty.

I've worked for both Verizon Wireless and Dobson Cellular. From the analog days all the way up through the beginning of GSM.

^^ No, because that's adding too many variables to the equation that they can't control. That's the whole point with Apple. The more they can control their product, the more reliable and consumer-friendly it is. If they were only interested in selling mass quantities, they would have opened their computer platform to third party builders (like Dell, Gateway, etc...). By keeping production to themselves, they were able to control the product, make it more reliable which also makes it worth more. This is no different than with the iPhone. Offer it on one network and they have way more control over how the device works, how much they can charge not over saturate the market with devices that only sort of work.

I don't think control is a bad thing, especially in a product like this. By the way, most phones in the US are not locked to a specific carrier. When you buy a RAZR at AT&T, you may be tied to AT&T for two years. But, your RAZR would also work on T-mobile or other carriers in Europe, etc... The point is, Motorola makes the RAZR for almost every carrier out there - worldwide. What you call "locked to" is merely a contract. The phone itself works elsewhere.

My point was the iPhone will ONLY fully work on AT&T's network. Even if you "unlocked it", it wouldn't function completely on T-Mobile's network. That was my point. This is a new concept in the mobile phone market. That's why they can offer unique features. *** Edited 7/31/2007 2:31:23 AM UTC by halltd***

halltd said:
...Motorola makes the RAZR for almost every carrier out there - worldwide.

Yeah, now they do, but when the RAZR first came out, that wasn't the case. Also, you make it sound as if the ~$150 early termination fee is a completely acceptable 'feature' that allows you to use a 'locked' phone on other networks. Are you kidding?

Even if you "unlocked it", it wouldn't function completely on T-Mobile's network. That was my point. This is a new concept in the mobile phone market.

No. Most carriers offer plan features that aren't offered by anyone else. Why aren't you whining about them?

^ Which Features.

I think his point is, you can unlock almost any phone out there (exept iphone) to work on another carrier.

if you really wanted to use a phone that was locked to another network, just ebay an unlocked one, they are easy to find, thats how I got my RIZR on AT&T.

You can also unlock most phones yourself.

^^
When the RAZR came out it was released to all carriers that wanted it.

There has been no exclusivity like this before. I don't care how many ways you try and spin it, Apple was the first to make a phone exclusive to a specific carrier. Again, other phones have been specific to technology, and still are, but NEVER to a specific carrier.

^^ So what? You can also 'crack' the iPhone, though almost nobody will, just as almost no one will unlock a phone.

And I'm not going to list the myriad of carrier-specific features. Suffice it to say that there are many.

^ Well, I certainly recall it being a timed exclusive deal with Cingular, though I'll concede I'm wrong, since you seem rather certain about that.

However, you're saying that no other phone has ever been exclusively tied to a carrier? Not ever?

There are many phone/carrier specific features that are critical to the function of a phone, but you won't even list one? That's interesting.

The only one I can even come close to comparing is a Blackberry. You need to use Blackberry servers for that function to work. However, you can use that service on any number of carriers worldwide on any number of phones.

No one unlocks phones, eh? That's funny. I bought a phone in Europe while on vacation and had it unlocked so I could use it in the Caribbean. Half the people I work with had their Cingular/AT&T phones purchased in the US unlocked so they would work here too. Big surprise those phones work EXACTLY as they do in the US on someone else's network.

Show me some hard data on how many people will take their phone to a different carrier, pay the early termination fee, etc.

Most of the criticism of the iPhone surrounds things that don't matter to the majority of people. In ten years of having mobile phones, I've always bought a new phone when switching carriers. I can be nearly certain that's true for all but a tiny minority. So again, why does it even matter?

^^ The reason I'm not going to go through and list the ridiculous carrier specific features is because most of them are similar to one another, aside from clever naming, and its ultimately irrelevant. Also, I never said critical - don't put words in my mouth, Tim.

And your using your extremely anecdotal experience about people in the Caribbean? Are you really going to attempt to pass that off as having any relevance Tim? That sample set is as irrelevant as it gets. You should know better. Or maybe not.

As has been pointed out countless times, all the crying going on about Apple's iPhone with regard to how 'evil' the whole deal is, is ridiculous and infantile. Other carriers have just as much fine print to read as they do.

You guys are obviously talking about something totally different. Never did I complain about the iPhone being locked to AT&T. Jeff asked why no one had come up with visual voice mail before. I said it was ONLY possible because Apple and Cingular were able to work simultaneously on a phone (technology) and the carrier (network).

That's when I brought up the point that this had never happened before with mobile phones. IE: a phone being developed with a specific carrier in mind and thus being able to offer a service like visual voice mail, "real" internet, etc... This is the service I mentioned as being CRITICAL to a phone because that's what the whole concept of the iPhone is hinged on. Without these features, it's not such a remarkable product.

That's where the discussion began. You and Jeff then started talking about service contracts and blah blah blah. That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. I was merely saying the technology in the iPhone is ONLY possible because it works hand in hand with the service provider. No other phone has this. I tried to prove that fact by saying if you unlocked the phone and used it on another network (which is possible if you read Apple's FAQs), features like visual voice mail will NOT function.

It was as simple as that.

The point remains though, that many many people unlock phones. I was using a PERSONAL example. I'm sure other people can give other examples. But, at least I GAVE examples to illustrate my point and didn't just state things as fact with absolutely no back up.

OK.

My parents (2), brothers (2), sister-in-law (1), cousins (12), uncles (5), aunts (5), grandma (1), neighbors (5) and people in my department (3) have never unlocked a phone. Furthermore, only one of them even knows what the hell that means.

Alas, that proves no one in the world ever unlocks a phone. Bravo!

How about those phone/network features like visual voice mail that exist on countless other phones?

It proves that just as your much less compelling, yet equally pointless, evidence proves otherwise.

And all I said was that other carriers offer unique services, and I never said anyone offered anything live VVM.

But those "unique services" that other carriers offer are NOT tied to specific phones that are ONLY available on their network.

That was the point in the beginning when visual voice mail was brought up. That's the only reason the "tied to a specific network" even came up.

Sure they are. I don't remember the carrier, but the first service that springs to mind is one that gives people the ability to see, on a map, where someone on their contact list is, geographically. Another would be the PTT service offered by Nextel.

Both of these examples require specific phones and carriers.

I love all of the banter back and forth about the I-Phone. I am an I-phone owner and user and I love the phone.

I think that the people who want one should go and buy one and those who don't want one don't buy one.

It is a simple matter of each person's preference!

PS. this post was done on my i-phone !!
*** Edited 7/31/2007 8:44:21 PM UTC by kbp1972***

lol no one unlocks phones? Spend a little time on ebay first.

And many company's (such as moto) release alot of their phones, only on gsm, not locked to any carrier unless that carrier picks it up, and in that case it is still not really locked to that carrier.

The RIZR was released over a year ago and just recently picked up by T-Mobile, it is very effecient to have a gsm phoen that is unlocked, especially if you travel.

So, eBay is the be-all, end-all for research now?

^ No, but there sure is a whole ot of phones being sold on ebay, and 90% of them are unlocked. I was sure you would get my point, guess not.