Weekly Edition
Return to the Announcements page
| |||||||||||||
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine)
PC Magazine says that open phones are failing because mobile carriers are afraid of them. "The networks can take a few mavericks that are willing to pay high prices, seek out obscure sales channels, or risk turning their phones into doorstops through jailbreaking. But the carriers know that as long as they subsidize phones, they'll control the phones are sold en masse. And those aren't going to be open devices."
(Log in to post comments)
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 17:58 UTC (Fri) by rillian (subscriber, #11344) [Link]
Story pulled? That link (and the same url, listed by PC Magazine's search engine) just shows the front news page for me.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 18:09 UTC (Fri) by proski (subscriber, #104) [Link] The link is working for me.
Still there for me Posted Dec 4, 2009 18:09 UTC (Fri) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] Interesting...I still have no trouble viewing the article here.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 19:01 UTC (Fri) by rillian (subscriber, #11344) [Link]
I'm in Canada, maybe that's the issue? I can wget the article on a server in the US, but not on my own machine.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 18:11 UTC (Fri) by davide.del.vento (guest, #59196) [Link]
I'm from Europe. In Europe subsidized phones are almost non-existent. You buy the phone at its real price, and it's always unlocked. You can use it on whatever network you like: all the carries must use the same technology to have a license. Contracts are non-existent as well: 99% of the time you pay as you go. 1% of the time you have a 1-month lock-in (it's not at typo, 1/24th of typical US lock-in) with no early terminations fee, besides the monthly fee that you've already paid. You switch carrier every time you like, keeping the same phone (and its settings): you just switch the people you owe money. Competition is good, prices are low.
To me, the problem are not the carriers. The problem is the lazy customer. If you lazy customer don't care, the carrier will exploit and lock you down as much as possible (because of greed and fear).
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 18:19 UTC (Fri) by sharms (subscriber, #57357) [Link]
That is a bit harsh. I really don't think putting much extra effort into a
cell phone results in a tangible gain when there is so many bigger things to worry about.
Maybe your cell phone is a priority, but I pay a fair rate and don't live
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 20:36 UTC (Fri) by davide.del.vento (guest, #59196) [Link]
Well, if I understand what you are say, that is: I'm happy for what I get. If so, why are you reading this article, which is for people unhappy with their current phone?
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 18:21 UTC (Fri) by kragil (subscriber, #34373) [Link]
That is only true for your particular version of Europe.(which is it?)
In my version (Germany) subsidized phones are still alive and well (although O2 has started to abandon them.)
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 18:38 UTC (Fri) by michaeljt (subscriber, #39183) [Link]
Not to mention that (apparently) about 15% of the German market belongs to the discount provider segment, who don't subsidise any phones either.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 20:42 UTC (Fri) by davide.del.vento (guest, #59196) [Link]
Well, of course Europe is big, and countries are different (I'm from Italy). There could be some lock-ins, but not as bad as in the US. For example there aren't all the weirdest kind of protocols like CDMA. In all the Europe I've traveled in, EVERY phone can technically work with EVERY carrier - no questions to be asked! And, as you (and another user said) the few carriers that have subsidies are abandoning them.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 6, 2009 9:08 UTC (Sun) by danieldk (guest, #27876) [Link]
Well, here in Netherlands, practically all carriers do subsidizing. And most people (including me) could care less. Subsidies make phone very affordable, e.g. my subscription rate is pretty ok for what I get, but it also subsidized my iPhone (making it 30 Euro). Financially, it's easier to pay a smartphone in this manner, than paying the phone in one go.
Most carriers also offer SIM-only subscriptions that are cheaper. Many people take such a subscription when their subsidizing subscription term is over.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 7, 2009 5:44 UTC (Mon) by davide.del.vento (guest, #59196) [Link]
See my other comment about leasing.
In the US most carriers (none?) don't offer cheaper SIM-only subscriptions.
And phones from a carrier often don't work for another (sometimes for difference in transmission standards, sometime because they are locked).
Even with the subsides, the Netherlands is much better than US.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 8, 2009 17:53 UTC (Tue) by martinfick (subscriber, #4455) [Link]
The ATT gophone is not a true pay as you go the way Europe phone's can be, but it is much cheaper than the alternatives. You can refill a card for $25 every three months if you barely ever used your phone. There are other plans, like Net10 which give you similar "cheap" options. You have to look for these, but most people could care less.
Americans like credit, that's what a phone "subsidy" really is. There's a reason the carriers do a credit check when you get one of these. When I got a T-Mobile plan that wasn't a contract, the sales agent didn't even know how to deal with it. The system is built around it. He asked for my SS#, I was shocked, but I did eventually convince him that it was not actually needed since I was just paying up front for one month service (I had a phone already). But, then he still inadvertently tried to sign me up with a contract saying, "oh I thought you wanted it". I asked, what would be the benefit, he replied, nothing (obviously). It's easy to blame the carriers, but it really is cultural, most people here like it that way.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 9, 2009 19:35 UTC (Wed) by nevets (subscriber, #11875) [Link] but it really is cultural, most people here like it that way. Yes it is cultural, but it is not because people like it that way. It is because they don't know of any other way. I lived in Germany for three years. I bought a pre pay phone from ePlus and had it unlocked after two years of service. I sometimes use it in the US with AT&T, since the phone is pretty rugged. The biggest difference between US and Germany to me is that in Germany (and perhaps all of Europe) you don't pay anything to receive a call or text. But in the US you do. I did notice that it costs more to call a cell over a land line in Germany, thus I guess the cost just goes to the caller. I like it better that way. I had to change my plan to unlimited texts because I could not control the number of texts that people would send me.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 18:30 UTC (Fri) by charlieb (subscriber, #23340) [Link]
You say that consumers are lazy, but perhaps this is the key:
You can use it on whatever network you like: all the carries
Open standards. Are they guaranteed in the US? Will carrier X support you if you don't buy their subsidized phone and locked-in plan?
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 20:49 UTC (Fri) by davide.del.vento (guest, #59196) [Link]
Well, yes, you are right, consumers are just half of the problem. The other half is regulatory: the band of radio waves the companies use are licensed by the FCC, and they should require something more to give the license. IMHO they should require also the use of a standard which will guarantee that every phone is compatible with every carrier, but such a requirement would make sense only if consumers are interested in it, which sadly is not the case in US (for example see above the reply from sharm)
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 21:07 UTC (Fri) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
requiring that every phone be compatible with every carrier would also prevent any progress in implementing new standards.
currently europe is benifiting from not having had good infrastructure for a while, so they are all on GSM right now, but as the next generation of protocols come out you will have the same situation where some carriers upgrade before others, and some phones will implement some protocols before others.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 21:35 UTC (Fri) by davide.del.vento (guest, #59196) [Link]
That's a non-issue. New standard can either be extensions of older ones, or completely new ones. In both cases, the point is that the carrier is OBLIGED to use a standard, they cannot roll-out they own weird protocol. So yes, what I said is slightly incorrect, in that:
a) older phones cannot be used anymore, because there isn't any 1G network around
b) GSM phones work with every carrier right now (think about talking, texting and very slow internet)
c) UMTS (think about videocalls -yes, there are cellphone videocalls in Italy at least since 2006 - and fast internet, besides talking, texting), of course work only with 3G networks. And not all the carriers have 3G networks, and those who have it might have different coverage. The key point here is that if a carrier wants to go beyond GSM, their only option is UMTS, which is compatible with everybody else (or they can stay with GSM, and wait for the next protocol accepted by the standard).
Everybody can lobby the government to have their favorite protocol accepted.
Think about appliances and electricity. What if you have to buy completely different gear because the different power companies didn't agree on the 110V/60Hz standard? It's exactly what's going on for wireless phones in the US! Yes, there can (happily) be more standards for power, to serve different goals (e.g. 220V triphase for industrial applications), but the important thing is that each standard is, well a standard, that is the same for everybody.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 6, 2009 4:52 UTC (Sun) by MarkWilliamson (guest, #30166) [Link]
I'm not sure that Europe is widely restricted to GSM. Certainly not the UK:
GPRS was the first GSM successor I remember here and it's been around for ages, 3G phones have been on sale here since at least 2004. Maybe (some?) of the other European countries are behind, infrastructure-wise but I'd actually be quite surprised if the big, wealthy countries like France, Germany, Italy etc didn't have rather decent mobile set ups.
Europe has had a very rapid take-up of mobile phones. Originally I think
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 6, 2009 23:29 UTC (Sun) by intgr (subscriber, #39733) [Link]
Huh? GPRS is not a "successor" of GSM, it's an extension. And it's only used for Internet access. A GPRS-capable phone works on a non-GPRS network and vice versa. Ditto other extensions like EDGE.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 7, 2009 7:52 UTC (Mon) by Los__D (guest, #15263) [Link]
What? Is there any European countries where 3G is not the norm by now?
I can only speak with certainty for Denmark, but here 3G (UMTS + HSPA) coverage is 90%+ (though not from the same network, 3.dk is the leader with 86% 7,2 MB/s coverage), and has been close for 3-4 years (I think), I thought that it was the same for most of Europe?
Here, GSM is mostly something you use if you are clinging to your old phone (like me).
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 19:00 UTC (Fri) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link] In the USA you don't have to buy subsidized phones if you don't want to. You don't have to go into locked in plans or sign 2 years contracts or anything like that.The 'lock-in' is purely a matter of effective marketing. They just don't mention the alternative plans or per-month subscription. People volunteer for the lock-in because by buying a plan they can get phones a substantial discount. This allows them to purchase phones that otherwise they cannot afford. The 2-year contracts trade-off is not a big deal in most people's eyes. For example for the top of the line IPhone 3GS typically costs 700+ dollars retail vs 300 dollars for the contract. For most people it seems that saving 400 dollars is a acceptable trade off for being unable to escape from 2 year contracts. The only serious problem with USA phone carriers is that pay-per-minute is expensive compared to what it should be. That and they charge outrageous prices for SMS. (SMS protocols use side bands required to maintain the radio network, but it usually unused. So the net cost for them to support that in terms of bandwidth usage is pretty much $0 dollars; which they lie through the teeth about.)
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 19:02 UTC (Fri) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
Oh and in terms of open source phones it's the lack of ability to restrict
users is preventing them from getting the same huge discounts that come along with the 2-year contract.
So the problem is not that contract lock-in exists, it's the fact that you
They don't want to pay 400 dollars for a 400 dollar phone when they can get
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 19:46 UTC (Fri) by Cato (subscriber, #7643) [Link]
It all depends on whether an open source phone can still be effectively SIM locked - I suspect it's harder to do this with open source, but many consumers would still not know how to re-flash their phone firmware to unlock their phone, or not be confident of not ending up with a brick. Many phones can be SIM unlocked for US $20-30 or so today, anyway.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 20:18 UTC (Fri) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
Well I think it is more of a matter that it's easier to extract money from
people with locked-down phones then with open phones. The reason for the subsidy is because carriers know that they can make up for the up front costs with only providing firmwares that require consumers to go through more pay-for services then they would otherwise use.
For example my Sony Walkman phone, which I have had for a while, can only
SIM Locking is part of it, but the main restriction preventing users from
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 21:01 UTC (Fri) by davide.del.vento (guest, #59196) [Link]
Is the carrier giving you a gift of $400? No, they are giving you a lease. You'll pay them back, with interests AND you will be locked-in. That's the point.
If I don't have the money to spend on the handset, but still want it, in Italy (and several other EU countries), I can pretty easily have a lease for my phone from the shop where I buy it, and still be completely free to use the carrier I want. The carriers have to fight every single day, with good service and good price, otherwise I can walk away. Here you are locked in, so why should they compete? Imagine if you were locked into a Grocery Store for 2 years, without possibility to switch to another one with better products at a lower price! Is this free market??
The US method of having subsidies (=lease) from a carrier that (besides interests) also locks me in is simply braindead (for the consumer, you can call it smart if you work for a carrier).
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 5, 2009 18:25 UTC (Sat) by Tuna-Fish (subscriber, #61751) [Link]
>They don't want to pay 400 dollars for a 400 dollar phone when they can get
>a 700 dollar phone for 300 dollars.
correction: They don't want to pay 400 dollars for a 400 dollar phone when
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 10, 2009 6:22 UTC (Thu) by fdr (subscriber, #57064) [Link]
For most carriers I cannot get a worthwhile discount by buying my own phone.
I'm really given no sensible economic choice. It's not only about marketing...
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 19:03 UTC (Fri) by foom (subscriber, #14868) [Link]
T-Mobile USA just recently announced, as an option, no-contract plans without subsidized phones.
They look to be $10/month cheaper than the 2-year contract/subsidized-phone plans, which they also still offer, so that makes it basically a pure win to choose the no-contract plans.
All I can say is: about time a major US carrier did that, and I hope it spreads to the other carriers
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 20:47 UTC (Fri) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link]
Link? I'd really like to know; I'm looking at the n900 + T-Mobile, but need convincing.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 21:48 UTC (Fri) by khc (subscriber, #45209) [Link]
It's their Even More Plus plans, which you can see if you just go to their home page...
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 10, 2009 2:19 UTC (Thu) by jackb (subscriber, #41909) [Link]
Those new Tmobile plans are the reason that I finally decided to buy a
smartphone. They basically started offering unlimited data plans at half price.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 19:43 UTC (Fri) by Cato (subscriber, #7643) [Link]
That's only true in some European countries with specific government regulations that encourage a no-subsidy market. In the UK, phones are usually heavily subsidised - although the carriers are trying to move away from this, you can still get entirely 'free' phones if you sign up to a contract.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIM_lock#Laws_on_SIM.2Fnetwo... for some details on SIM locking in various countries, which goes with a subsidy of course.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 21:16 UTC (Fri) by davide.del.vento (guest, #59196) [Link]
Well, as I wrote Europe is big, and there are differences, but your comment (and the one below from Hungary) does not change my point at all. On the other hand, your view reinforce what I said, as follows:
1) in all the UE countries I'm aware of, you CAN get a free locked phone, you don't HAVE TO. I haven't find any shop in the US who sell unlocked phones. There are a few online retailers, but they have a very very small range of phones to chose from.
2) In UE any phone technically work with every network. Good luck to have an US iPhone working on Verizon or Sprint (although you might get it working on T-mobile)
3) even if people in the US crack their phones all the time, DMCA is a really harsh law, which doesn't have a counterpart in UE
4) as you and other have said, in the UE the carriers are trying to move away from te subsides. And that's good news for the honest consumers (I wrote above why, grep gift/lease). It could be bad news for the fraudulent consumer, but that's good news for the rest of us, since less frauds means more profits for the companies and thus better deals for everybody else.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 5, 2009 2:50 UTC (Sat) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link]
Comments about subsidised phones not being non-existent don't change your point, but they do question your definition of non-existent. In fact, subsidised phones are widespread and heavily advertised, although in various countries the "total price" has to be stated: that 1 phone is actually 1000 over a two year binding contract, for example.
Points (1) and (2) I won't contest, but point (3) ignores the EU Copyright Directive, and I don't see much evidence of point (4) myself. Carriers seem most interested, at least where I live, in offering expensive "super size" contracts where the customer pays a ridiculous sum every month for a large block of voice minutes or SMS messages at a rate which isn't necessarily a discount on what other, more flexible contracts offer. In other words, the carriers are just trying to guarantee as much of their revenue as possible by making the customer commit money up front, just like many kinds of utility companies do these days. They often use a new model of phone as bait for people to switch to more expensive contracts, although the pricing must still be transparent.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 4, 2009 20:41 UTC (Fri) by NAR (subscriber, #1313) [Link] In Europe subsidized phones are almost non-existent. You buy the phone at its real price, and it's always unlocked.If you're talking about Europe, the continent, than this statement is quite far from the truth. For example at T-Mobile.hu, one can by a Apple iPhone 3G for less than 4 euros with 2 year lock-in and for 500 euros without the 2 year lock-in. Quite substantial difference. I wonder if there are any private persons who buy phones without lock-in - those, who don't want that, can always crack the phone.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 7, 2009 9:32 UTC (Mon) by fb (subscriber, #53265) [Link]
In the past 7 years, I've had unlocked phones and a SIM-only contract. Every time I was to buy a new phone, I calculated the full price of both options, and was never cheaper with a "free" phone. About 10 months ago, I bought a G1 coupled to a t-mobile contract. With a SIM-only + Internet subscription wasn't cheaper than a phone+contract.
What I think the E.U. lacks is even more regulation forcing telecoms to offer sensible choices (like 6 months contracts, so I can hop to another company if the Telecom nnetwork becomes overloaded).
I do also notice that the Dutch minister of finances is openly lobying for ending the maximum price on international mobile calls and sms's in Europe. According to her, this would create great competition, and the prices would fumble. http://www.nu.nl/internet/2136659/kroes-wil-af-van-info-s... (Dutch link)
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 12, 2009 19:43 UTC (Sat) by anton (guest, #25547) [Link] I bought a phone without lock-in as a private person. It cost me EUR 80, there are cheaper ones. The shop also gave me a prepaid SIM card with EUR 5 when I bought it (a bait from a provider), but I used my existing pre-paid SIM card.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 5, 2009 1:09 UTC (Sat) by paravoid (subscriber, #32869) [Link]
I'm from Greece (Europe) and phones are subsidized.
You get ~100-500 EUR for a 1-year contract (new or renewed) to buy whichever phone you want. The phone is unlocked and you can change SIM cards whenever you want.
You can break the contract whenever you want but you have to pay the remaining (i.e. months remaining/12) subsidized amount.
Entirely fair from my PoV.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 7, 2009 3:48 UTC (Mon) by dgm (subscriber, #49227) [Link]
Much better than here in Spain. Here phones are subsidized too, but locked. You have a minimum duration of the contract, during wich you can only change carrier by paying an onerous penalty.
There are places where you can change most phones' firmware and OS as to unlock them, but it's not completely legal, and you can end with a bricked phone and no one to complain.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 5, 2009 20:20 UTC (Sat) by smadu2 (subscriber, #54943) [Link]
UK phone companies do provide 18-36 month contracts with early termination fee (the termination fee equals the full rental for the remaining amount of contract) where as in US, I believe its about 10 USD per month of the remaining period.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 6, 2009 4:39 UTC (Sun) by lambda (subscriber, #40735) [Link] Lazy consumers? What does that mean? I live in America, and I would like to have a cell phone, but I would never do business with the current carriers we have. I would much prefer the European system. But what can I do? I have never owned a cell phone, so I am already withholding money from them. What would you suggest as a less "lazy" way of fixing the cell phone industry, other than doing serious, personal lobbying of the government and the industry to change the laws and their practices (which is not something that's terribly practical for me). What have you done that is less "lazy" to change the industry to be the way that you wanted it?
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 6, 2009 12:47 UTC (Sun) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link]
Consumers are lazy everywhere. A consumer is lazy by mere definition. The
difference is not consumers, it's regulation. GSM did not come out of the blue. Just do some historical research on GSM, Qualcomm, etc.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 7, 2009 5:40 UTC (Mon) by davide.del.vento (guest, #59196) [Link]
I live in America too (moved here from Italy three years ago) and I do the same thing, and that's what I would call "non-lazy". But we are exceptions, most people simply don't care and give their money to the carriers, who are encouraged to do whatever they like, since people continue to give them money. If more people were withholding (and say why) like we do, carriers must change to survive.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 7, 2009 7:05 UTC (Mon) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link]
> To me, the problem are not the carriers. The problem is the lazy customer.
If you are a regular mobile phone user, then subsidised phone on a contract is better value. It is usually as simple as that.
Let's say that your usage warrants a $50 cap. This means that over two years, you are committing to $1,200. If you can get a $650 phone thrown in and still get the same amount of calls, SMS, e-mail, Internet usage etc., then why would you spend an extra $650 for the same thing? It just doesn't make sense.
Talking from personal experience based on Australian mobile phone market.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 7, 2009 13:22 UTC (Mon) by RainCT (subscriber, #57473) [Link]
Not everywhere in Europe. In Spain almost all of the phones are subsidized by the carriers, locked-in and with 1.5 year contracts.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 14, 2009 9:18 UTC (Mon) by juanjux (guest, #11652) [Link]
What country?
I live in Europe too and subsidiced and contract phones and contracts are
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 7, 2009 4:39 UTC (Mon) by nwmcsween (guest, #62367) [Link] A very large percent of phones use opensource software specifically the L4 microkernel from OK-labs.com, The whole reason GNU/Linux/FreeBSD opensource isn't used is 1. License issues 2. Zero stable driver API dingo and some old open project from SCO that tried to unify drivers across *nix. 3. Stability of the kernel itself, contrary to popular belief most phones/embedded/critical devices don't use a monolithic kernel and don't really suffer in terms of performance.
Why Open Source Phones Still Fail (PC Magazine) Posted Dec 7, 2009 12:31 UTC (Mon) by alankila (subscriber, #47141) [Link]
1. GPL2 not good enough for you? It seems that neither Google nor Nokia are too afraid of this license.
2. Many phones come with hardware driven by binary blobs. When no source is available, even community projects dutifully seem to retain binary compatibility. (They have no other choice.)
3. If this "stability" means "it works", well, my phone hasn't crashed yet, and it runs Linux. If this stability is about API, then see 2).
Fortunately, the USA is a tiny minority Posted Dec 7, 2009 10:51 UTC (Mon) by forthy (guest, #1525) [Link] At least for the cellphone market. Globally, Asia and Europe are much bigger cellphone markets, and they are all more open; to different degrees. In Europe, unlocked, pre-paid phones and contracts (or contracts on a monthly termination base) are available, in some contries even the rule. Only a few cell phones are exclusively tied to a provider, and even that not in all countries (if you want an unlocked iPhone, buy in France or Italy). In Germany, O2 dropped the lock-in style contract system, probably other providers will follow. In Asia, it goes even further. In China, most phones have two SIM slots, just to make it easier for the customer to use the provider du jour - since China has many local providers, you may need one SIM for your home town, and another one for the town you work in (with 400 million migrant workers, the market for dual-SIM Chinese cellphones is bigger than the entire US market). Phone shops and providers are clearly separated. This is partly "lazy consumer", partly failed regulation. Free markets need regulation, since companies tend to form cartels; companies tend to be organized crimes, if not stopped by the authorities. In a democratic country, you are the authority, so failure as voter is also your failure. Funny: the least democratic nation in my observation has the best network regulation with the greatest choice and the lowest price (China). So on a global view, I predict that the USA will have an 80% market share of locked in iPhones and Androids in 5 years, while the rest of the world will use free unlocked GNU/Linux-based smart-phones.
|
|||||||||||||