A case for an unlocked iPhone?

Gene Steinberg laments that AT&T, or any other US carrier, does not offer reasonable international rates, and would not unlock his son’s iPhone to use in Spain, either.
.
I had a similar problem when I went overseas for three weeks last October. After a long to-and-fro with AT&T’s international ‘advisor’, she finally told me that under contract with Apple, AT&T cannot ‘SIM unlock’ the iPhone (I had the 3GS then), like they can any other handset when requested. I was forced to use another phone that I bought unlocked from Amazon.com, because I did not want to jailbreak.
.
I did use Skype over Wi-Fi since all my contacts were on the iPhone, praying that nobody will place a call to me from the US when I was talking on VoIP. The 3GS did not have a separate disconnect for Wi-Fi and Cellular, and it didn’t occur to me to take out the SIM!
.
I did write to Steve Jobs, then, to please issue an unlocked version of the upcoming iPhone. Apple has done so, but not in the US.
.
This is indeed preposterous; I know a couple of my friends had their SIM unlocked in other cellphones. Using a prepaid SIM in the country you’re traveling is the best option for voice and data. This is especially true in Asia, where rates are very cheap.
.

I had one other revelation: Carry an Airport Express on travels, especially overseas. While ethernet is available in homes and hotels worldwide, a Wi-Fi router is not that common everywhere. If you want to use Skype to place calls, you would need Wi-Fi.

Being evil?

Jason Hiner tells us The dirty little secret about Google Android: Google’s “…Android is enabling the U.S. wireless carriers to exert too much control over the devices and keep the U.S. mobile market in a balkanized state of affairs…

This is because “The carriers and handset makers can do anything they want with it. Unfortunately, that now includes loading lots of their own crapware onto these Android devices, using marketing schemes that confuse buyers (see the Samsung Galaxy S), and nickle-and-diming customers with added fees to run certain apps such as tethering, GPS navigation, and mobile video.

This is very much unlike Apple that took control of technical follow through from AT&T, and this is very likely the reason it had to have an exclusive with just one carrier at the iPhone launch in 2007. For example, Apple refused to throttle data speeds so the users cannot watch YouTube. All wireless carriers, and not just AT&T, disable hardware features on handsets all the time, so that the data demand remains low and not tax their underdeveloped infrastructure; in fact, Verizon is the worst. This assertiveness by Apple has proved to enhance user experience with the iPhone.

Google, however, has no such concerns. Customer experience is not its business model to make money. Its main revenue source is advertisements and all it wants is as many eyeballs as it can garner, whether it means giving the license to use Android for free to OEMs and letting them tweak it, or giving a free rein to wireless carriers to disable any features they want.

The Google-Verizon deal on net-neutrality should be looked in this light as well. If the “Voogle” understanding prevails, the wireless access to the Internet by mobile devices will have two tiers of service, the classification of which will be controlled by the telecom carriers. If a company pays a certain fee, or shares advertisement dollars, the carrier will let that company’s site be accessed at a faster speed. Smaller companies will less money to spare and common users without money, who do not have any such restriction now, will have their websites and blogs load at a much slower pace.

Google and the carriers know that the next big thing is mobile computing. The search giant has a lot of money to throw around and share, and will get preferential treatment. The faster Google sites, like YouTube, load, the user will have a better experience and is more likely to revisit them over others that load slowly. Google wins with being able to generate more ad revenue, and more dollars to share with the carriers. For Google and the carriers, it’s a virtuous cycle.

The sad part is that it is us users who will be at a loss. The breath of fresh air that Apple brought with having a tight control over the hardware and software of the iPhone will be lost pretty soon. We will once again become worse than a third-world nation regarding telecom services. We already pay more per user for the third-class services than any other nation in the world; we’ll be paying even more without any significant improvement in resources.

Customer inservice?

Candid answers from AT&T on the new iPhone data plans: Read and weep, if you use a lot of data. Two things really bother me: The tethering option is just a ‘permission’ to be able to use your phone as a modem, and that there is no roll-over for the unused data bytes.

I think it is time that we had a universal data plan that allows us to use it across all the devices we own: the laptop, desktop, phone, tablet, game console, etc.

Consumer unfriendly?

AT&T axes unlimited data plan, unveils tethering price: I have no problem with tiered pricing; the more you consume, the more you should pay. However, I do have two issues with AT&T’s plan pricing:

1. While you’re charged $20 extra to be able to tether, any data used while tethered counts against your 2G Data Pro plan. In other words, you pay $45 if you want to tether, for 2G of data. Any additional data is $10 per G, so a 5G usage will cost you $75, which is $15 costlier than their 3G modem for similar data size. This sucks.

2. I’ve noticed that I’m using more and more data for communication (SMS, Email, MMS) than voice minutes. Yet, I’m forced to buy the minimum package of $40 (450 minutes) to be ‘eligible’ to get a data plan for the iPhone. Why can’t I buy fewer minutes for a lesser price?

I feel I am subsidizing my data plan with my voice plan underuse. I’m never going to be able to use the thousands of rollover minutes I’ve accumulated. So, I feel AT&T is double-dipping and cheating me outright. Shouldn’t the DOJ/FCC look into it?

Further, Steve Jobs has said that you can’t tether an iPad to an iPhone, so one has to have to have different plans for each device.


I’ve been using less data on my iPhone since I bought my iPad, so I will get a 200MB data plan for it, and keep my unlimited data plan of $30 for my iPad (since I’ll be ‘grandfathered’). This will save me $15 a month, although I’ll still be upset for paying $40 for AT&T’s basic voice plan.


Although Apple has nothing to do with this, they should bring pressure on AT&T to be more reasonable, as this will affect people’s decision to buy their devices. In addition, I am less likely now to spring for the next iPhone with videoconferencing capability (to limit my data use) and wait for the iPad with similar abilities.