Earlier this year, FCC boss Kevin Martin said there was no need to force open access requirements onto American wireless carriers, insisting they would embrace openness on their own. But it looks like the big-name carriers are still wary of a mobile internet that's as wide open as its desktop cousin. Today, at the CTIA Wireless …
What do we really want?
I want to do only one thing with my phone; talk. If carriers give me unlimited access (incoming & outgoing calls), no access fees with answer machine + id, and I get all of this for $20 dollars. I wouldn't care for anything else.
I agree - the 'experience' on mobile is so much better than on open networks, like the Internet. </sarcasm?
The only real differences are that mobile is slower, more unreliable and much, much more expensive.
I thought this was illuminating though: "And they've always got to the option when things go wrong to walk into a T-Mobile store, a Sprint store, a Verizon Wireless store, an AT&T store. In an open environment, that's going to change."
Actually, being open leads to more competition, which is generally regarded as good for the customer. Which is probably why he fears it so much.
"you sub-optimize the innovation and creativity"
Truly a confused child of the 21st century.
Great Airwall of Carriers
"There needs to be some stewardship and control of that...if it goes true Wild West, the network quality experience, the security for the most personal information that an individual carries with them, [is compromised]."
Haha! oh, sorry. let me rephrase that: NOOB!
What happened to QoS and proper bandwidth limiting then? (No, i'm not talking monthly caps, get off) or did you wake up in cold sweat thinking you had to open up all registers for everyone?
And if you want to talk security, if you're so scared about that then what the hell have you been using to secure your network lately then? something that is not up to par with the latest tech perhaps? yeah thought as much, sheep the lot of you!.
Oh, and client security? since when were phones secure? Then again, since when were providers concerned at all about their client's security?
As for any computer people wish to hook into your network, Last I checked my internet provider didn't fret over such trivialities either, they offer some security software and filtering, but they don't force it on me (everything is opt-in). And so they should.
Their network is tightly secured and quite capable of automatically handling infected machines, they simply get forced onto a subnet behind a proxy that serves just one page: a warning to call your provider about why you're locked down!. Pfffftt... why can't you if you're so worried about starting a Western on your network?
They just don't get it do they?
How can the telco's continue to so spectacularly "not get it"? I'm in the UK, and use T-Mobile W'n'W, and it's fine for a bit of casual web-browsing, it isn't really much cop for anything else. It's like the debacle of Orange and Vodafone diabling VoIP "because we can't control it" (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/18/n95_crippled/ and http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/06/07/voip_continues/ and http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/19/vodafone_explains/)
This is the only reason.......
This explains why the majority of the American public is not aware of the options about purchasing unbranded phones.
"We have, as an industry, conditioned customers to very expensive computers put in their hands for very few dollars......"
Phone carriers get great incentives for pushing phones that are branded under their name. The average American cell buyer wants the best "deal". So they are brainwashed into believing that buying a phone from the operator is the only option, and it only cost $40.
This is a gas......
"But I would also tell you that the big double digital percentage of customers that put those devices onto out network have a less than good T-Mobile experience,"
The reason is not because it's a unbranded phone, rather it's an out dated network. I get a better experience with my SE unbranded than I did w/ my friend's SE branded. I almost spat my coffee over my computer when I read this. Does he really think that people would buy into his finger pointing?
"sub-optimize the innovation and creativity"
LOL... there were a few sub geniuses at that meeting...
I loved this quote: "all of us would probably agree that you probably [would have a] poor experience at the end of the day"
That's right, it would be a poor experience for the CTIA members who don't have a viable business model. It would be a better experience for the customer, however...
- iPad? More like iFAD: Now we know why Apple ran off to IBM
- Apple orders huge MOUNTAIN of 80 MILLION 'Air' iPhone 6s
- +Analysis Microsoft: We're building ONE TRUE WINDOWS to rule us all
- Climate: 'An excuse for tax hikes', scientists 'don't know what they're talking about'
- Black Hat anti-Tor talk smashed by lawyers' wrecking ball