Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 114
  1.    #1  
    Four U.S. senators asked the Federal Communications Commission to review exclusive deals between wireless-phone companies and handset makers to see whether the arrangements unfairly restrict consumer choice.

    AT&T has an exclusive arrangement to offer Apple's iPhone on its network, and Sprint Nextel has sole rights for Palm's Pre. The lawmakers announced their inquiry in an e-mailed news release Monday.

    (They didn't care when it was only ATT and iPhone)
  2. #2  
    They should do this with video game consoles too. Oh, the monopoly.
  3. #3  
    and contracts should be a thing of the past....
  4. #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by sake View Post
    and contracts should be a thing of the past....
    AMEN!!
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by sake View Post
    and contracts should be a thing of the past....
    Yeah! Then you'll have to pay 800.00 for the newest technology....No contract, no subsidy. Good Luck
    .
    .
    .

    What we do in life echoes in eternity.....

    "Four things come not back:
    the spoken word,
    the sped arrow,
    the past life,
    the neglected opportunity."
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by twizardt View Post
    Yeah! Then you'll have to pay 800.00 for the newest technology....No contract, no subsidy. Good Luck
    Fine by me. Product quality would go through the roof as would network and customer service quality. Leverage has a price tag, but it's worth it.

    (and I can live without "the newest technology")
  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by sake View Post
    Fine by me. Product quality would go through the roof as would network and customer service quality. Leverage has a price tag, but it's worth it.

    (and I can live without "the newest technology")
    Then just buy the phone now at full retail and you don't have to worry about a contract. I hate contracts too, but I can see why they do it.
    .
    .
    .

    What we do in life echoes in eternity.....

    "Four things come not back:
    the spoken word,
    the sped arrow,
    the past life,
    the neglected opportunity."
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by sake View Post
    Fine by me. Product quality would go through the roof as would network and customer service quality. Leverage has a price tag, but it's worth it.

    (and I can live without "the newest technology")
    But you can pay full retail right now if you don't want to be under contract. At least with the carriers subsidizing handsets via contracts, users have the option to get them at a lower price.

    But back to the main topic, I dont think this is something that the government needs to be getting involved in. Is this really a big issue?
  9. d94
    d94 is offline
    d94's Avatar
    Posts
    272 Posts
    Global Posts
    304 Global Posts
    #9  
    oh yah no contracts!!!
    then we can all rave how great a deal the pre is $600+...
    palm pro > visor > m100 > visor prism > clie sl30 > zire 71 > dell X5 > toshiba E755 > clie NX70 > ipaq 2200 > Treo 700w (verizon) > Treo 700wx (sprint) > Treo 755p (sprint) > HTC Mogul > HTC Diamond > HTC Touch Pro > Pre
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by d94 View Post
    oh yah no contracts!!!
    then we can all rave how great a deal the pre is $600+...
    I have a feeling they'd figure out how to reduce the costs anyway.... you guys are thinking too inside-the-box.
  11. #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by twizardt View Post
    Yeah! Then you'll have to pay 800.00 for the newest technology....No contract, no subsidy. Good Luck
    Maybe for the highest end phones, but prices would come down just like anything else.

    Phones are the only gadget we do this for. What if everytime you wanted a new digital camera you had to sign a contract. Its nonsense & needs to go away.
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by gabbott View Post
    But back to the main topic, I dont think this is something that the government needs to be getting involved in. Is this really a big issue?
    With all that's going on in the country today, this is all those DIZ-bags have to worry about? And especially now? The freakin iPhone has been exclusive for how many years? please...
    .
    .
    .

    What we do in life echoes in eternity.....

    "Four things come not back:
    the spoken word,
    the sped arrow,
    the past life,
    the neglected opportunity."
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by peestandingup View Post
    Maybe for the highest end phones, but prices would come down just like anything else.

    Phones are the only gadget we do this for. What if everytime you wanted a new digital camera you had to sign a contract. Its nonsense & needs to go away.
    I totally agree with you! I'm just saying that this is the arguement that they are going to use to keep contracts when they get called before congress.
    .
    .
    .

    What we do in life echoes in eternity.....

    "Four things come not back:
    the spoken word,
    the sped arrow,
    the past life,
    the neglected opportunity."
  14.    #14  
    That's what I'm talking about.

    How long has iPhone been on AT&T? Are they afraid of what the Pre can become? I would like to see phones available on all networks.

    If companies had to compete based on service and quality of networks there would be more competition among companies. Customers would benefit

    If all phones had to compete with each other, phones would improve.

    Contracts with subsidies is another problem. Sure it helps us get a $300 - $400 phone for $99, but would the price go down with competition? Look at digital cameras they keep prices up, but they have to keep improving to demand the higher prices. Companies like the contracts so they can count on a certain amount of income. But, does this cause them to sit back and not work so hard on improving things? How do countries without contracts compare?
  15. #15  
    I would like to see an end to exclusivity in all fields. As someone mentioned above consoles and games are ridiculous. How is it not a monopoly that the only NFL video game can be made by EA? Or the only MLB game can be made by 2K? I know MLB has the show but that's Sony only.

    Anyway, I agree that without contracts cell providers would be forced to improve coverage. I'd much rather pay a higher price for my phone if it meant my coverage and plans would be more competitive.

    As someone said we each have the option of not getting a contract, but that doesn't really affect the providers. If EVERYONE could jump around when they wanted it would force them to do more to keep you. Of course it could make a mess and force more surcharges to cover people who port their number every week.

    Can the OP post a link to the article that's being discussed?
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by Technologic 2 View Post
    Four U.S. senators asked the Federal Communications Commission to review exclusive deals between wireless-phone companies and handset makers to see whether the arrangements unfairly restrict consumer choice.

    AT&T has an exclusive arrangement to offer Apple's iPhone on its network, and Sprint Nextel has sole rights for Palm's Pre. The lawmakers announced their inquiry in an e-mailed news release Monday.

    (They didn't care when it was only ATT and iPhone)
    Is the Everything plan requirement legal? - SprintUsers.com

    It's about time.
  17. #17  
    I must say, this is one of the most disturbing threads I've read, in any tech forum. I'm absolutely appalled that anyone could be so comfortable with--no, so anxious for--government to violate our individual rights by destroying our ability to enter into contracts. Just in case anyone's wondering, that's one of the underpinnings of a free society--the ability to enter into voluntary agreements with others and have those agreements protected by law.

    And some folks are willing to toss that away so that they can get a smartphone without a contract--all the while being so incredibly short-sighted as to think that anyone would make the sorts of investments necessary to create those smartphones in the first place when their right to achieve a return can so easily be legislated away. Unbelievable.

    People who think this way are going to be mighty surprised with the results. You want a government that protects you from making your own decisions? You're pretty damn close to getting just that.
    Treo 600 > Treo 650 > HTC Mogul (*****!) > HTC Touch Pro (***** squared!) > PRE! > Epic
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by wynand32 View Post
    I must say, this is one of the most disturbing threads I've read, in any tech forum. I'm absolutely appalled that anyone could be so comfortable with--no, so anxious for--government to violate our individual rights by destroying our ability to enter into contracts. Just in case anyone's wondering, that's one of the underpinnings of a free society--the ability to enter into voluntary agreements with others and have those agreements protected by law.

    And some folks are willing to toss that away so that they can get a smartphone without a contract--all the while being so incredibly short-sighted as to think that anyone would make the sorts of investments necessary to create those smartphones in the first place when their right to achieve a return can so easily be legislated away. Unbelievable.

    People who think this way are going to be mighty surprised with the results. You want a government that protects you from making your own decisions? You're pretty damn close to getting just that.
    Dont make it sound like its just two fine town folks signing a contract to sell bread & baked goods to one another or something. These are giant telecom companies that are using a lot of unfair tactics to get people locked in to them for years. Sure you can break it & go somewhere else, but there aint that many places to go. Having an exclusive when you're already basically a monopoly is BS.
  19. #19  
    Look at it from the other side of the fence. Have the newest flag ship phone on someones crappy network and have 10 times the buyers remorse and complaints. At least this way you can localize and possibly fix any problems that do occur. It basically like Apple vs MS. If you make the HD and OS for only something you design you can give a overall better customer experience. Notice i didn't say the best or greatest experience. But you can limit what can and cannot happen and be able to fix or at least address problems as they occur. Not exactly the best way to do business for the customers, but in terms of corporate view point. Win/Minimize loss
  20. ieko's Avatar
    Posts
    354 Posts
    Global Posts
    361 Global Posts
    #20  
    I'm pretty sure I saw an article about Congress/Senate being annoyed with contracts/phone exclusivity in the last year before the Pre was around... I'd find a link but I figure if anyone is curious enough they'll look into it. Anyway I figure this is more talk than walk.
Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions