Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 27
  1.    #1  
    Moderators, Perhaps this can be made sticky for a time? A story should also be posted on the home page. This concerns all Treo and wireless consumers in the US. Obviously, they are using iPhone as a catalyst for change.

    To all, please log in to the site and sign their petition. It takes a minute or two to fill out a simple form and send a letter to your congressman and the FCC. Those that have a personal relationship with a MOC should mention this as well. This is a very important campaign.

    http://www.freetheiphone.org/

    Quote:
    Apple touts the iPhone as the “Internet in your pocket” — but it’s not. You can’t use it without signing on with AT&T, and once you do they cripple services, limit what you can do and restrict where you can go on the wireless Web.

    We need Wireless Freedom — and our elected officials are the only ones who can give it to us: the freedom to use all Internet devices on any wireless network in a market that offers true high-speed Internet and real consumer choice.

    Take action today. Demand that the FCC and Congress free the iPhone — and future gadgets like it — and put the Internet in the hands of everyone.
  2. #2  
    It's called supply and demand. There was obviously a demand for the iPhone, and Apple supplied it. Same goes for Treos and Blackberries and what not. Sure, they could have sold more if there were games on it, or 3G, or whatever, but they're taking it in stride. If you come up with a great idea, do you take the final product to market to sell, or do you leave yourself room to better the product?


    And I hope you don't expect the public to pay for the internet in the new spectrum.
  3. #3  
    That's all we need. More government intervention in a free market economy.
  4. #4  
    The Treo already has unlocked versions of the 650/680/750 that you can use on any GSM network you want.

    Why is this iPhone post in the Treo General Chat?
    Treo 600 > Treo 650 > Treo 700p > Treo 700wx -> Mogul -> Touch Pro
    You may like to flash, but your phone shouldn't. LED Killer
  5. #5  
    I don't think Apple tricked anybody - Those who got into such a flurry to purchase one could have better used the time camping in line to familiarize themselves with the capabilities --and lack thereof-- of the AT&T wireless network.

    That said, those who are unhappy with their purchase should have been given 14-30 days to return their product and cancel their AT&T contract.

    Sprint Pre & Motorola H300 BT headset

    Dead devices: Palm Pro; Palm III; Treo 600, 650, 700p, 755p; Centro
    Yes, I finally updated my tagline!
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by HandyDJs.com View Post
    That said, those who are unhappy with their purchase should have been given 14-30 days to return their product and cancel their AT&T contract.
    I thought they were. Sure, there was a restocking fee, but is it Apple's and AT&T's fault they didn't do their research or play with the phone first? That's the price of being first adopters.

    And I think having unlocked phones is different from what the OP is trying to get at. As much as I wish I could swap out SIMs and take a smaller phone with me (I'd do it today when I'm headed to the big city for a day of fun), I never took advantage of that when I was with Cingular.
  7.    #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by stroths View Post
    The Treo already has unlocked versions of the 650/680/750 that you can use on any GSM network you want.

    Why is this iPhone post in the Treo General Chat?
    I think I made it clear why I put it here. It is because I think the issue is bigger than the iPhone and affects Treo and all other wireless products as well. I think that the petition deserves our support because they are advocating for rights that would ultimately benefit all wireless consumers.

    Everyone who has complained that the Treo doesn't have this or that feature or isn't available on a desired network (e.g. Sprint has DUN, Verizon doesn't; Verizon has this phone, Sprint doesn't; AT&T has the 680, T-mobile doesn't) should consider signing this.

    It is nice that folks with GSM have the option of buying expensive phones and running them to whatever network they want. But I have Verizon and that doesn't help me. It is technically possible for me to run a CDMA phone on any CDMA network I want. So why doesn't palm offer us unlocked CDMA phones? It is because CDMA carriers blacklist ESNs that do not belong to products they sell. Why? Obviously to lock us into oppressive contracts. After the contract I can't even take my Treo to a competing carrier, I need to purchase another one. That is ridiculous! It is time that this stopped.

    For those bellyaching about government intervention, I believe in capitalism and I invest in the stock market. And in the true American spirit I support initiatives that benefit my own interests, I consider this one of them for the reasons stated.

    I'll pose a question for the group. Would you tolerate your landline phone company doing the same thing? Telling you what phone or answering machine you can use and insisting you buy it from them? That used to be the case many years ago, remember Ma Bell? Guess what, the fact that you can decide what communications equipment you want to use is a result of government intervention. The FCC forced change. Government is our instrument let's put it to work for us. If anyone thinks that the market is going to force the carriers to stop their practices, dream on.

    One more point to think over. As long as the carriers are in control of the devices, innovation will always be stifled by the carriers' profit motive. Why allow free WiFi, free GPS, etc when I can disable those features and bill, bill, bill. What about VOIP? There are numerous technologies that by all rights should be prevalent in smartphones that aren't there because carriers do not know how they could profit from them. You know what, that is not my problem. Palm, Apple, RIM etc. should be CATERING TO ME, NOT VERIZON, etc...

    I hope that those that agree with me will sign. Those that do not, I respect your opinion.

    Sam
  8. #8  
    Although I got your point from post #1, I appreciate the history lesson. The current situation does leave a lot to be desired. If it was truly a free market as one poster alluded to...you would be able to move about freely. The free market includes the decisions you make too, It’s not limited to the Robber barons.
    Iago

    "Good name in man and woman, dear my lord, Is the immediate jewel of their souls: Who steals my purse steals trash . . . But he that filches from me my good name Robs me of that which not enriches him
    And makes me poor indeed."


    Criminal: A person with predatory instincts who has not sufficient capital to form a corporation.
    - Howard Scott
  9. #9  
    I kinda agree with you - it's hwy i love the GSM model....but even on Capitol hill I'm sure it's money first pleb rights last...but maybe I shouldn't comment as I'm not American but it's usually a case of the haves restricting the havenots globally!
  10. #10  
    Guess what, the fact that you can decide what communications equipment you want to use is a result of government intervention.
    Actually, that is precisely backwards. Ma Bell was a government created, sponsored and enforced monopoly. Congress and the FCC, in fact, created their monopoly in the belief that only a monopoly could afford to create and build the networks needed for phone service nationwide.

    The monopoly was broken by the courts, who removed the power of Congress and the FCC to intervene in the market in such a fashion.

    You are asking for Congress to start exercising such power again. Whenever the government intervenes in markets, it is never good for the consumer.

    The reason that we have low cost, high speed landline networks today is because the government is not intervening and not creating a monopoly. Prior to the breakup of the Ma Bell monopoly you had roughly two phone choices, no phone service choices and no alternative if you didn't like Ma Bell. This was a result of government intervention and regulation. It was not a result of the government not intervening.

    Check your history. Government intervention in the market inevitably favors monopolies.
    Palm IIIxe --> Tungsten C --> Treo 650 GSM --> Treo 755p EV-DO
  11. #11  
    One more point. It was only through the tireless efforts of Motorola in the late 70's and early 80's that we actually had any competition in the cell phone space. And the fact that there is not more competition is due entirely to the FCC's continued regulation of cell networks and frequencies, not to the equipment manufacturers. That regulation enables companies like Sprint, Verizon, etc. to dominate the market place and makes it almost impossible for new entries to be competitive.

    Your "history lesson" is really not accurate.

    See this Wikipedia entry, which is fairly accurate. Specifically, read the section called "A National Monopoly". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America...egraph_Company
    Last edited by ecowper; 07/15/2007 at 06:25 PM.
    Palm IIIxe --> Tungsten C --> Treo 650 GSM --> Treo 755p EV-DO
  12. #12  
    Where do you wish to use your WiFi and VOIP phones? At home? Can't you do that already?

    I think market forces would help this problem a lot more than government intervention. All it needs is for a current carrier, or a new one, to get on board with this initiative and maybe carry phones that have WiFi and are capable of VOIP. Wait, aren't there phones like that already??

    Maybe the market just doesn't want it. Smartphones are, as of now, a niche market. Many who sign up for cell phone service either choose a free phone or one that's really inexpensive (sub $100).

    Let the market dictate what the market wants, not government. Why is it ok to trample on the rights of businesses by forcing them to do what government wants and it's not ok for an individual to willfully choose which provider they want to go with which happens to cripple some services on their phone. You say they have a right to those services, but where does that right come from? They're not paying for it. They have not contracted for it. There is no right to it.
  13. #13  
    Nice points David. I have another question. Since when did the privilege of buying a service or piece of property from the owner of said service/property become a "right"? It's not a right, it's a privilege. It's crucial to understand the difference.
    Palm IIIxe --> Tungsten C --> Treo 650 GSM --> Treo 755p EV-DO
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by ecowper View Post
    Nice points David. I have another question. Since when did the privilege of buying a service or piece of property from the owner of said service/property become a "right"? It's not a right, it's a privilege. It's crucial to understand the difference.
    Oh don't start throwing around that "it's a privilege" crap. It's not like these carriers are doing us a favor by letting us sign contracts to be their b*tches for two years.
    Last edited by IsLNdbOi; 07/15/2007 at 07:58 PM. Reason: Added the quote.
  15. #15  
    Are you forced to sign a contract? If you were, you can get out of it without penalty. Having a cell phone is not a need.
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidg4781 View Post
    Are you forced to sign a contract? If you were, you can get out of it without penalty. Having a cell phone is not a need.
    Depends on who you are and what you do. I don't have a landline so I need my cell phone so my employer, family and friends can contact me. The cell phone is also useful for emergencies.
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by IsLNdbOi View Post
    Depends on who you are and what you do. I don't have a landline so I need my cell phone so my employer, family and friends can contact me. The cell phone is also useful for emergencies.
    So what? It's their property and their service. You have no "right" to either.

    And frankly, a complete lack of understanding of economics as well. You only "need" this stuff so long as the service and phone costs less than you are willing to pay for it. If the cost were higher than its value to you, you wouldn't pay for it. We often confuse things we want with something we need. We then think that because we have a (false) need for it, that we have a "right" to it.

    A thing's value is the price we are willing to pay for it.

    If you really don't like it, sign up for pay as you go cell phone service. You won't have a contract, you won't be locked in for 2 years, etc.

    You have plenty of options.

    You would have more if the government could control their urge to intervene. Don't like how things work right now, lobby for the FCC to get out of the business of regulating telecom and intervening on a continuous basis in ways that hurt consumers.

    I do not work for, and have no affiliation with, any telecom provider at all.
    Last edited by ecowper; 07/15/2007 at 09:12 PM.
    Palm IIIxe --> Tungsten C --> Treo 650 GSM --> Treo 755p EV-DO
  18. #18  
    You have that freedom now, just go buy a HTC (or whatever) wifi enable unlocked GSM phone.

    And you can save the pityful iPhone crying at home.

    edit: just to make myself clear, do you make an internet petition if BMW equire you to use official BMW brand oil?
  19. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by ecowper View Post
    So what? It's their property and their service. You have no "right" to either.

    And frankly, a complete lack of understanding of economics as well. You only "need" this stuff so long as the service and phone costs less than you are willing to pay for it. If the cost were higher than its value to you, you wouldn't pay for it. We often confuse things we want with something we need. We then think that because we have a (false) need for it, that we have a "right" to it.

    A thing's value is the price we are willing to pay for it.

    If you really don't like it, sign up for pay as you go cell phone service. You won't have a contract, you won't be locked in for 2 years, etc.

    You have plenty of options.

    You would have more if the government could control their urge to intervene. Don't like how things work right now, lobby for the FCC to get out of the business of regulating telecom and intervening on a continuous basis in ways that hurt consumers.

    I do not work for, and have no affiliation with, any telecom provider at all.

    So it's the FCC and / or the government's fault that we can't use our Sprint phones with any other service provider or that we can't use phones from other providers on Sprint's network?

    I need this stuff so I don't get fired. how would my employer get in contact with me if they need me right away and I'm not at my computer? I need this stuff so that I can call 911 if I ever need to. What is this other stuff you're talking about? I don't recall stating that I don't like my service.

    I can switch to whatever service provider I want to when I can. I stay with Sprint because their wireless service works just fine with me.
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by IsLNdbOi View Post
    So it's the FCC and / or the government's fault that we can't use our Sprint phones with any other service provider or that we can't use phones from other providers on Sprint's network?
    The FCC is part of the government.

    Regulating a market makes it more difficult to compete. Less competition makes it easier for companies to behave in a monopolistic fashion.

    I need this stuff so I don't get fired. how would my employer get in contact with me if they need me right away and I'm not at my computer?
    If your employer needs to get in touch with you 24/7 perhaps they should provide you with a cell phone or pager? Mine will either give me a BB or pay for another smartphone service of my choice.

    I need this stuff so that I can call 911 if I ever need to. What is this other stuff you're talking about? I don't recall stating that I don't like my service.
    Pay phones, landlines, etc. don't exist? You can call 911 without a cell phone.

    You clearly do dislike some aspects of your service. You dislike the contract. That is part of the service.

    Still, you do not "need" a cell phone. If the costs of cell phone service were more than you were willing to pay, you wouldn't pay for it. What do you suppose people did "back in the day" when cell phone service and cell phones were much more expensive?

    I remember getting my first cell phone in 1997. My plan offered 100 free minutes, period. No nights/weekends for free. Everything above that was $.20/minute. Roaming was $.20/minute. Long distance was $.20/minute. Most people still didn't have cell phones and I was unusual for having one. I was willing to pay the cost, but most people were not. It wasn't about "need", it was about cost.
    Palm IIIxe --> Tungsten C --> Treo 650 GSM --> Treo 755p EV-DO
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions