Not Exactly Win Phone Related But...

[AKA Preluva]

Can you use a non Sprint phone on the Sprint network as long as it had the same 3G specs as a 3G Sprint phone? :straight:

 

[palandri]

They won't let you do that.

 

[jdevenberg]

The short answer is no.

The long answer is that if you can get a rep to add the IMEI number to Sprint's data base, then yes. Doing that will not be easy though, and you may never be successful at it. I have heard of people doing it, but for every one person who has had success there are 50 who have failed.

 

[AKA Preluva]

Well that just blows donkey arse! I really don't see why any carrier would have a problem with this, I mean you still have to pay them to use it. :straight:

 

[fwaits]

Because American carriers suck. Here is a nice article that came out today on the subject and partially explains why this is the case.

Five years after the iPhone, carriers are the biggest threat to innovation | The Verge

 

[cedarlog]

Because American carriers suck. Here is a nice article that came out today on the subject and partially explains why this is the case.

Five years after the iPhone, carriers are the biggest threat to innovation | The Verge

that's completely crazy :shocked:

 

[HeyCori]

First, I would like to point out that... Verizon gets mentioned a lot in that article, lol.

However, I think the article fails to mention the effect the iPhone has had on innovation. Take this paragraph:

The HTC One X is a high-end flagship device designed to compete squarely with the iPhone and Samsung's Galaxy S III, but Verizon and Sprint aren't carrying it: instead, Sprint offers a variant called the Evo 4G LTE, and Verizon is selling a downgraded device called the Droid Incredible 4G that simply doesn't match up to higher-end competition. How is HTC to compete for Verizon customers with a weaker device? Why should HTC depend on struggling Sprint to market and sell a custom phone when it could just leverage its existing One X campaigns to take on Apple directly?

What the writer doesn't mention is that Apple practically bullied Sprint into carrying the iPhone. Sprint had to commit to spending 15 billion before Apple would release the iPhone on their network. There's little room for innovation when you're contractually obligated to spending 15 billion on one device. And how much cash will Sprint have to pony up when the iPhone 5 is released? The iPhone's death grip on the mobile industry is not doing any favors for the carriers or consumers.

Just look at the tragic story of Palm, which went from darling of CES 2009 to legendary failure in just 31 short months. The company initially wanted to ship its Pre smartphone on Verizon, but the carrier backed out and Palm was forced to languish on Sprint, where it was unable to compete directly against the iPhone. When Verizon finally picked up the Pre Plus the next year, the carrier ordered millions of devices and then flippantly refused shipment and decided to focus on the Motorola Droid, leaving Palm sitting on millions of unsold units that couldn't be used on any other carrier in the world. The decision cost Palm hundreds of millions of dollars and led directly to the company selling itself to HP — and the once-promising webOS platform slowly dissipated into a puff of mismanaged open-source smoke.

"If we could have launched at Verizon prior to the Droid, I think we would have gotten the attention the Droid got. And since I believe we have a better product, I think we could have even done better," said Palm CEO Jon Rubinstein in 2010, trying to explain why his company was failing. But his exclusivity deal with Sprint means he was never given the chance to fairly compete.

And you know what I say to you, Jon Rubinstein? Your hardware sucked. I know, it was terrible of Verizon to order millions of devices and then change their mind, but your hardware was so not ready to compete against the iPhone.

And what did Palm do after being acquired by HP? They continued to release woefully unimpressive hardware. The Motorola Droid was in a much better position to compete against the iPhone. Back then Verizon needed a phone with the hardware and software to compete against AT&T and the iPhone. WebOS had one but not the other. The Motorola Droid had both. Granted the Droid was far from perfect but was definitely a step up from Palm's offering.

But the wireless spectrum AT&T and Verizon use to build their networks is a scarce public resource literally leased from the people of the United States — shouldn't we have some say in how this market operates? Shouldn't the rules be set up to favor consumers instead of blocking innovation and increasing prices?

I'd say incompatible wireless networks and carrier subsidies are the biggest deterrents to innovation. I paid full price for my Lumia 900 but it's locked to AT&T's network. Getting it unlocked is a hassle and the only other GSM network available is T-Mobile which can only offer me terrible download speeds and spotty coverage. And Sprint/Verizon isn't even an option because of incompatibility. Spectrum hogging is why carriers don't have to compete on price. They know customers can't easily jump from carrier to carrier in hopes of a better deal. Then they also get you by offering that amazing, cutting edge, $700 dollar phone for a low subsidized price of $200 dollars... and a 2 year contract.

IMO, that makes OEMs focus on selling the next device, not the best device. If I could make an analogy to the console industry... You buy an Xbox 360 at launch. Over the next few years (and a few RRODs ) you eventually see your 360's hardware get tapped out. However, you also paid top dollar for your 360 and you expect a little bit of longevity.

Not so with phones. You buy a top of the line phone for a subsidized price and you hope to get 1-2 major software updates, and you hope that some new service or feature might get released but there's no guarantee. That's why companies like Intel say that Android makes woeful use of dual core processors. "Bell also goes on to say, “having a second core is actually a detriment, because of the way some of the people have not implemented their thread scheduling.” And that article is from last month. OEMs aren't investing in their hardware after it's released. They'll give you a few bug fixes and maybe one major update and it's off to the next device.

Your phone's potential will never be realized because there's little incentive for them to do so. Not when you can grab another subsidized phone in 2 years. That's more money in the manufacturer's pockets and the carrier's pocket. There's no incentive to take a product and make it "innovative" post the shipping date.

 

[AKA Preluva]

Because American carriers suck. Here is a nice article that came out today on the subject and partially explains why this is the case.

Five years after the iPhone, carriers are the biggest threat to innovation | The Verge

This would explain a lot but it's incredibly stupid! Either way you have to go to them for service so what device you use shouldn't matter.

"If we could have launched at Verizon prior to the Droid, I think we would have gotten the attention the Droid got. And since I believe we have a better product, I think we could have even done better," said Palm CEO Jon Rubinstein in 2010, trying to explain why his company was failing. But his exclusivity deal with Sprint means he was never given the chance to fairly compete.

And you know what I say to you, Jon Rubinstein? Your hardware sucked. I know, it was terrible of Verizon to order millions of devices and then change their mind, but your hardware was so not ready to compete against the iPhone.

I've heard people complain about the Pre but mine has worked wonderfully. I've even gotten it wet and it still works just fine. The major problem with it was it was too [censored] small to be of real use, plus no flash support!

As for longevity does the average phone buyer care? Seems like most people change phones like they change their underware! :dry I at least try to get my money's worth out of the phone before recycling it. Right now there is nothing being made that has excited me enough to want to switch phones. Well except the PadFone but that seems to be forbidden fruit so I dunno where I'll end up next.