Microsoft & Windows Phone have lost a customer (and fan)

[mlm1950]

That's everyone's mindset, but it's not true. And it's that mindset that keeps us from moving forward. If you have an unlocked (preferably pentaband) phone, you have a lot of options. Sure, in terms of major carriers, you're looking at either AT&T or T-Mobile, but there's a plethora of viable MVNOs that offer great deals. And in terms of "paying for the privilege" to leave a carrier, that is only true if you've signed a contract...I can leave whenever I want without paying a dime.

If we as consumers had demanded (and expected) such freedom of movement between carriers, maybe we'd see more reasonable price competition and we might not have ended up in the LTE frequency mess we're in now.

You have a lot of MVNO options now, and you don't need an unlocked phone, though U.S. MVNO's generally are limited in what they offer as opposed to the carrier whose spectrum they are using.

I don't disagree that it would be great if people could move around at their whim, but the U.S.wireless companies operate in a completely different manner than most of the rest of the world, and there are fewer options.

 

[HeyCori]

Why do they make it so hard in the states?

I picked up my HTC 8X on the day it was released here in the UK and I bought it unlocked. Paid cash up front. Put my sim card in and that was it. Job done.

I don't understand why they make it so difficult for you guys over there. That would be pretty frustrating. I understand that the device might be an exclusive for certain networks but damn, it still sucks.

My guess is that carriers don't like to share spectrum because they have to license it from the FCC. They reluctantly share spectrum because the FCC tells them to, but I bet most wouldn't if given the chance. It makes sense in a way. AT&T paid for exclusive rights to a spectrum so they want their customers to be exclusive to their service. However, that barrier has broken down a lot over the years and carriers are more willing to allow device unlocking.

My other guess is that they're just being massive d-bags. :grin:

 

[mtmjr90]

My guess is that carriers don't like to share spectrum because they have to license it from the FCC. They reluctantly share spectrum because the FCC tells them to, but I bet most wouldn't if given the chance. It makes sense in a way. AT&T paid for exclusive rights to a spectrum so they want their customers to be exclusive to their service. However, that barrier has broken down a lot over the years and carriers are more willing to allow device unlocking.

My other guess is that they're just being massive d-bags. :grin:

AT&T licenses from the Federal Government a resource that is legally public. Technically speaking, we the people own it. I agree that AT&T believes it makes sense to jealously guard it, but that's for perceived business gain...not because they own it. Fwiw, I do not believe such anti-consumer behavior is/will be more profitable in the long run...but who am I...

A pertinent analogy that I got from the Verge would be to imagine if all the car companies licenses all the roads in the US such that only Fords could drive on certain ones, Toyotas on others, etc. (It's not a perfect analogy but it's close enough.) It's a ludicrous situation...but so is our wireless industry. It's absolutely ridiculous that one person standing in a given spot can have no reception while someone else on another network standing right next to them has solid reception. This really should be a public utility.

 

[snowmutt]

First off, I am sorry for your aggregation. There is very little about your post which I do not understand. I am a lifetime AT&T mobile user, but that is mostly due to the small burb I live in. Very few options (no T-Mobile, No US Cellular, 1 small regional carrier whose network is horrid, track phones, Sprint reception is amazingly bad) and just general convenience.

But that doesn't mean I am not wishful. Would love to pick a device and head to the carrier of my choice.

Too much to hope for LTE to bring this State side?

 

[Nogitsune Micah]

That's everyone's mindset, but it's not true. And it's that mindset that keeps us from moving forward. If you have an unlocked (preferably pentaband) phone, you have a lot of options. Sure, in terms of major carriers, you're looking at either AT&T or T-Mobile, but there's a plethora of viable MVNOs that offer great deals. And in terms of "paying for the privilege" to leave a carrier, that is only true if you've signed a contract...I can leave whenever I want without paying a dime.

If we as consumers had demanded (and expected) such freedom of movement between carriers, maybe we'd see more reasonable price competition and we might not have ended up in the LTE frequency mess we're in now.

In most cases, most people who have smartphones don't care about Unlocked phones here in the US......Prepaid is popular for those who maybe WANT A smartphone but don't really care if it is the latest Galaxy model or whatever. These are the same people who are excited that phones like the Galaxy S2 is now on Virgin or Boost after the phone is a a year old. Or who got real excited when the Iphone 4 or Iphone 4s came to prepaid.

Those who DO CARE will buy their phone unlocked(and recognize that by buying Off-contract from a carrier is not buying unlocked & thus realize an unlock code isn't necessary for the carrier to provide)...these are the same people who will buy brand new phones unlocked and import them from overseas for 600-900 dollars...and for them MVNOs are good. I have a friend who brought a Galaxy Note 2 i believe unlocked and he uses it.

Most normal people do not go...hmmm today i feel like using t-mobile and then tomorrow i want to use Straight-talk or i want to use H20.
I guess it does annoy me slightly when i see Avid tech fans and pros speaking for the whole world when in reality only a small amount of people who own smartphones actually care about unlocking them so they can swap sim cards.

the mindset doesn't keep us from moving forward because as stated above, those who want the freedom will pay for the freedom and those who are fine with contracts will usually pay for the contracts because nowadays most people are unwilling to pay 700 dollars for a phone that they can get free-200 dollars on contract even if it would cost them cheaper down the road.

 

[mtmjr90]

Most normal people do not go...hmmm today i feel like using t-mobile and then tomorrow i want to use Straight-talk or i want to use H20.
I guess it does annoy me slightly when i see Avid tech fans and pros speaking for the whole world when in reality only a small amount of people who own smartphones actually care about unlocking them so they can swap sim cards.

While I agree that the majority (at least in the US) does not care about this stuff, this fact does not inherently make carrier practices right. In fact, it stifles true competition in the mobile services industry and suppresses innovation in the space. I'm sorry, but as with most industries, change starts with those who are the early adopters, the forward-thinkers, the obsessive you might say. The majority, as you state, do not (and should not) care either way, so what is it to them if the small percent who DO care push for a more open mobile services ecosystem? They may not care now, but they'll certainly care if increased competition leads to more reasonable pricing and a higher level of customer service. And they'll have us to thank. (Again, sounds lofty and idealistic, but how else do things change?)