 
BodyBumper
join:2004-06-21
Beverly Hills, CA | - Do consumers want to pay full price on their phones?
I wouldn't mind because I hate being tied up in long term contracts. | |
|  | 
Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Austin, TX
clubs:
 ·VoicePulse
| Re: - There is nothing stopping you from buying a cell phone at full price, but you are still stuck with atleast the first round on a contract just to start service. (but you can get away with the 1yr that way)
--
Intel Quad Core QX6700 @3500Mhz/Asus P5N32-E SLI/4x 1024Mb Corsair/WD 74Gb Raptor/PNY 7800GTs SLI/Antec 550 True Control/Custom water cooler | |
| | | 
wifi4milez
In Need Of Garbage Pail Kids 1st Series
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Re: - said by Camelot One  :There is nothing stopping you from buying a cell phone at full price, but you are still stuck with atleast the first round on a contract just to start service. (but you can get away with the 1yr that way) Not anymore! Verizon and Sprint are "officially" no longer allowing new customers to sign up for less than 2 years!You can still wiggle your way into some 12 month terms on select business plans, but for the most part the 12 month terms have disappeared. I suspect ATT and Tmobile are not far behind.....
--
я люблю Денди! | |
| 
tmh
@qwest.net
 from:
TK Junk Mail
| Already possible They didn't mention that most of the time the provider subsidizes the cost of the phone. In return, they'd like you to stay on their service for a while.
If you want to pay $600-$900 for an unlocked GSM phone, you can do that now. You can take it to T-Mobile or AT&T anytime, no problem. | |
| | 
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Re: Already possible quote:
They didn't mention that most of the time the provider subsidizes the cost of the phone. In return, they'd like you to stay on their service for a while.
Actually, he specifically addresses this: quote:
The carriers defend these restrictions partly by pointing out that they subsidize the cost of the phones in order to get you to use their networks. That’s also, they say, why they require contracts and charge early-termination fees. Without the subsidies, they say, that $99 phone might be $299, so it’s only fair to keep you from fleeing their networks, at least too quickly.
But this whole cellphone subsidy game is an archaic remnant of the days when mobile phones were costly novelties. Today, subsidies are a trap for consumers. If subsidies were removed, along with the restrictions that flow from them, the market would quickly produce cheap phones, just as it has produced cheap, unsubsidized versions of every other digital product, from $399 computers to $79 iPods.
| |
| | | 
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
Albany, NY | Re: Already possible Got it in just a minute before me, Karl.  | |
| | |
tmh
@qwest.net
| That's only partially true. The local market is only a small portion of the global market for GSM phones. Most countries in Europe and many in Asia mandate equipment portability, yet prices are nowhere as cheap as the article suggests.
Instead, what has resulted is a truly extensive variety of equipment available, many with features considered advanced by the local (US) market. Since equipment is not subsidized, handset vendors have more incentive to bring out more feature rich phones with an eye toward making a profit, rather than selling a limited range to the provider.
For example, M1 Singapore offers the "entry-level" Ericsson T250i, with camera, mp3 player, FM receiver, WAP browser, and other features. Deal price is around US$180 (S$300). Not exactly cheap, and definitely not the sub-$100 product the article alludes to.
A high-end device like the Ericsson T650i with camera, video, mp3, 3G, html browser, bluetooth and several other things goes for about US$450 (S$888).
If you sign up with a contract, you can get them for $0 (free) and around US$160 respectively however. You can still take that device to another carrier at any time, but contract termination fees apply. | |
| |
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
Albany, NY
| Actually, the article does mention subsidies.
The carriers defend these restrictions partly by pointing out that they subsidize the cost of the phones in order to get you to use their networks. That’s also, they say, why they require contracts and charge early-termination fees. Without the subsidies, they say, that $99 phone might be $299, so it’s only fair to keep you from fleeing their networks, at least too quickly.
But this whole cellphone subsidy game is an archaic remnant of the days when mobile phones were costly novelties. Today, subsidies are a trap for consumers. If subsidies were removed, along with the restrictions that flow from them, the market would quickly produce cheap phones, just as it has produced cheap, unsubsidized versions of every other digital product, from $399 computers to $79 iPods.
| |
| | | | |
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
Albany, NY
| Re: Already possible I actually just renewed this weekend and got a new phone (actually 4 new phones total on my account). I got the LG VX8350 from Verizon Wireless. While they were trying to sell me features, I mentioned getting a USB data cable from someone other than Verizon. The guy mentioned that doing that could void my warranty.
In addition, there are features on phones that Verizon locks down or tries to hide (like using your own MP3s as ringtones) because they want to sell you on their VCast service.
If an ISP told their users that they couldn't use their own music CDs to make MP3s and instead had to buy from the ISPs online shop for their music, those users would either protest loudly or flock to an alternative. | |
| | | | 
aaron8301
I can't get myself to go away.
join:2005-01-03
Clarkston, WA
 ·CableOne
| Re: Already possible said by Jason Levine :If an ISP told their users that they couldn't use their own music CDs to make MP3s and instead had to buy from the ISPs online shop for their music, those users would either protest loudly or flock to an alternative. Excellent point. That is exactly why I only buy Nokia or Windows Mobile phones. That way I have complete control over the files I put on them (ringtones, pictures, etc.). | |
| | | 
NOCMan
Verizon Fios User
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Flower Mound, TX
| Japanese phones have a plethora of features we do not have.
Look at Verizon Wireless and AT&T tout 2 megapix cameras like they're the latest in technology. Japanese phones are capable of much more than 2 megapixels, can pay bills and vending machines, shop, etc from their phones. Most other countries have open platforms on the phones where most java apps will run on them and the market benefits from it. There are dozens of companies that are out there building apps and there's an entire shareware community out there as well.
While in America were stuck between a good provider with a crappy standard and a bad provider with a globally accepted standard.
Overseas they have phones that can do many things the iPhone can do (Just not as sexily) yet here we all have to clamor that were trapped with a GSM only phone on a carrier who can give a rats arse about their customers or their network. | |
| | | | james1
join:2001-02-26
antarctica
| Re: Already possible I hope cell phones give everyone who uses them brain cancer. I'm tired of hearing idiots yammering about nothing in otherwise quiet, peaceful places. It makes matters worse that their provider is crappy, so they YELL into their phones. To be fair, the technology isn't the problem, it's the inconsiderate idiots who somehow make up the majority of our society. I have no idea how we've clung onto what we've got for so long without killing eachother in an orgy of blood and steel. Buut *crosses fingers* here's hoping  | |
| | | | | |
Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Austin, TX
clubs:
·VoicePulse
| Aside from the IPhone, where is this happening? Any other cell phone you can buy unlocked. The difference in the price between unlocked and "under contract" is made up by the carrier subsidizing the phone itself with your contract. As far as I know the IPhone is the only carrier locked phone (officially anyway), so is this a "what might happen" complaint?
I have no problem with the current model, other than the AT&T IPhone issue. (which I still don't understand the logic in) Sure my ISP doesn't get any control over what PC I connect to their network, but they also aren't offering me a $1000 PC for $59.95. Cell phone companies do exactly that, and thus recoup their $$ through the contract.
--
Intel Quad Core QX6700 @3500Mhz/Asus P5N32-E SLI/4x 1024Mb Corsair/WD 74Gb Raptor/PNY 7800GTs SLI/Antec 550 True Control/Custom water cooler | |
| | 
mindfrost82
join:2003-04-19
Cortland, IL
edit:
October 22nd, @04:37PM
| Re: Aside from the IPhone, where is this happening? With any CDMA carrier, you have to use their phones. Sprint, Verizon, and Alltel (among others) won't let you activate a phone unless it has their name on it. The ESN has to be in their system for them to activate it. So you can't buy an unlocked phone and activate it with them, and you can't use their phones on any other network.
EDIT: And the iPhone is a different example. The iPhone is locked because that's how Apple wanted it, not necessarily AT&T. So that is the case of a phone manufacturer locking the phone, not the cell phone provider.
--
F R O S T Y
www.mindfrost82.com | |
| | |
wifi4milez
In Need Of Garbage Pail Kids 1st Series
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Re: Aside from the IPhone, where is this happening? said by mindfrost82 :With any CDMA carrier, you have to use their phones. Sprint, Verizon, and Alltel (among others) won't let you activate a phone unless it has their name on it. The ESN has to be in their system for them to activate it. So you can't buy an unlocked phone and activate it with them, and you can't use their phones on any other network. EDIT: And the iPhone is a different example. The iPhone is locked because that's how Apple wanted it, not necessarily AT&T. So that is the case of a phone manufacturer locking the phone, not the cell phone provider. You are correct. I have multiple phones with multiple vendors for just this reason. Personally, I have had no contract with Tmobile for about 5 years (since my initial 12 month ran out ), and the same for my other providers. I usually pay $500 to $1000 for the phones I buy. Why you ask? Well, primarily because I dont need the 2 year contract extension just to get a subsidy on the phone. Furthermore, when you are an out of contract subscriber the carriers will do anything to keep you from leaving. I am at the point with Tmobile where I can simply call them and I will get the newest, pre-release phones for FREE shipped overnight to my door. Whenever they give me an issue I explain that over my 6 years of service at $100 to $400 a month I have more than paid for all the phones I could ever want. I then "mention" that I am sure Verizon or ATT would love to have my revenue stream, and thats about the time they ask who my preferred overnight shipping provider is!
CDMA (Sprint, Verizon) is a little different. Since you generally cant buy overseas CDMA phone and use them here, I just simply buy new phones at full retail on principal. I wont extend my contract, and if that means I pay a little more for a phone so be it. You can always find a used CDMA phone on Ebay and activate it, assuming its for your provider. The lesson here is dont get pushed around by the cell providers, if you spend more than $100 per month demand free phones (nice ones, not the crap $40 ones), and do not renew your contract for any reason!
--
я люблю Денди! | |
| | | | amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
clubs:
·Cox HSI
| Re: Aside from the IPhone, where is this happening? ahh, the art of haggling
...Wish my provider were as easy to haggle with.
Seriously, it'd be nice to get a good deal on a phone without them wanting me to re-sign some darn contract. I'm out, I'm free, but it doesn't seem like they want to do much for me 
Fortunately, I am friends with a few of the people, so maybe in a month or so I'll start "shopping" for a newer phone and then see what they'd like to offer...
About the article though, it's really not a totally fair analogy being used.
The cell networks have kept up pretty well, going from mostly analog, to digital. Only problem, is that they've been messing with too many standards for so long.
Computer networks did too - remember token ring? Yeah, try hooking that straight up to your average home router 
Take TDMA - I can't believe it's still in use, but it is. Worst service I ever had was with a TDMA phone. Gave me a ripping headache too, not to mention, if it rang while I had the radio on anywhere nearby, it'd create the most horrid BBBSZZZZZZZZZBZBBBBBZZ ripple through the speakers ... if any phones caused cancer, these would be prime candidates for study
Ok, so TDMA is still sort of used, even in slightly different ways... doesn't GSM use a form of TDMA??? Anyway, there's that, CDMA, AMPS, "PCS" and whatever else is on the horizon.
Taking one type of phone to a provider who ONLY uses another type of service is impossible, and it's because there isn't a nationwide standard. If we did have one, it'd be MUCH easier for ALL providers to use practically (that means within technical limitations) any hardware. Hmm, analog phones weren't as limited... wonder why...
Anyway, that's why computer networking has taken off. People, and their computers, have standardized on ethernet - 802.3 - more specifically, 802.3u (100BASE-TX) - along about 1995 - about the same time as the internet started ramping up like crazy... think about it... standards...
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.3
I don't blame the gov't here. BTW, Did they force ethernet standards??? | |
| | | dave
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| said by mindfrost82 :The iPhone is locked because that's how Apple wanted it, not necessarily AT&T. OT, but why would Apple want to limit the size potential custimer base? | |
| | | |
wifi4milez
In Need Of Garbage Pail Kids 1st Series
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Re: Aside from the IPhone, where is this happening? said by dave :said by mindfrost82 :The iPhone is locked because that's how Apple wanted it, not necessarily AT&T. OT, but why would Apple want to limit the size potential custimer base? They had to. That was the exclusive agreement with ATT.
--
я люблю Денди! | |
| | | | | dave
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Aside from the IPhone, where is this happening? said by wifi4milez :said by dave :said by mindfrost82 :The iPhone is locked because that's how Apple wanted it, not necessarily AT&T. OT, but why would Apple want to limit the size potential custimer base? They had to. That was the exclusive agreement with ATT. In other words, AT&T wanted it, not necessarily Apple. Which is the opposite of what mindfrost82 said.
It makes more sense to me that the restriction came from the telco, not Apple. | |
| | | | | |
wifi4milez
In Need Of Garbage Pail Kids 1st Series
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Re: Aside from the IPhone, where is this happening? said by dave :In other words, AT&T wanted it, not necessarily Apple. Which is the opposite of what mindfrost82 said. It makes more sense to me that the restriction came from the telco, not Apple. ATT "bought" exclusive rights to the iPhone for 5 years (I think), and that is why its locked down. In France however, it is against the law for the iPhone, or any phone, to be locked. The restriction in the US is ATT's doing.
--
я люблю Денди! | |
| | | | | |
mindfrost82
join:2003-04-19
Cortland, IL | I wasn't sure if it was AT&T that demanded it or if it was Apple. | |
| | Aleck79
join:2003-07-23
College Station, TX
·Grande Communicati..
| the problem is that companies have to work with the cell phone industry in order for the hardware vendor to even have a shot at having decent sales of the phone. It hinders hardware competition and limits consumer choice.
While yes, you may see it as a disadvantage that you will have to pay more for the device, but eventually competition will bring prices down as hardware vendors are able to sell their devices and get them out the door and into consumer's hands with more ease.
Ideally there should be an open standard for each providers network and testing to that meet that standard. That would make it a hell of a lot easier for the hardware people.
It would also make the hardware vendors free to explore added functionality. Anyone remember when it was hard as hell to get bluetooth to work with any device the customer chooses? I think it was Verizon that forced hardware vendors to lock down bluetooth. | |
| |
aaron8301
I can't get myself to go away.
join:2005-01-03
Clarkston, WA
·CableOne
| said by Camelot One :Any other cell phone you can buy unlocked. The difference in the price between unlocked and "under contract" is made up by the carrier subsidizing the phone itself with your contract. As far as I know the IPhone is the only carrier locked phone (officially anyway), so is this a "what might happen" complaint? You CANNOT go to Verizon, Sprint/Nextel, AT&T, T-mobile, Unicel, or Alltel and get post-paid cellular service without taking one of their phones and signing a 1 to 2 year contract.
Oh sure, you can get the service, THEN stick your SIM in the unlocked phone of your choosing (or in Verizons/Sprints case, have them associate your "unlocked" phone with your acconut), but that is still AFTER they force one of their phones and a contract.
So yes, you are correct, you can get almost any phone you want unlocked, but it won't do you a damn bit of good unless you've already signed a contract and taken a phone from your carrier. | |
|
Goliath28
@rr.com
| IMHO This never really made sense to me either. I am paying for the service, not the phone. I should be able to drop my carrier today put in a new code and puff am on another carrier no issue. Does the device I use really matter? No! It would behoove the carrier (ATT, SPRINT, etc) to accept any device, they would attract alot more customers. | |
| |
mindfrost82
join:2003-04-19
Cortland, IL
| Re: IMHO Sometimes it does matter, depending on the phone. You can't use a GSM phone on a CDMA network, and you can't use a CDMA phone on a GSM network.
It would be nice if they made more phones that supported both CDMA and GSM, then this wouldn't be an issue. So if I have Sprint now and wanted AT&T, I would have to get a new phone anyway, with or without the rule.
--
F R O S T Y
www.mindfrost82.com | |
| dcurrey
join:2004-06-29
·ViaTalk
edit:
October 22nd, @04:39PM
| Shouldn't the price drop? How much does the company artificial jack up the price to make the phones look like a good deal?
Would this also cause the cell phone to compete with each other in price and features? Samsunge Sanyo lg would have to compete for business without the carrier forcing you to use the ones they offer only.
Not to mention if we don't like the current carrier without a contract we could cut and run. No problem. Now they have to offer decent service also. | |
| 
woody7
Premium
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA
·DSL EXTREME
| pffttt..... I think the point that is trying to be made is like the tail wagging the dog or the other way around. they really could if they wanted to, is to let you bring your own phone. As with any appliance, the price will eventually go down. To me, if someone wanted all the bells and whistles,or a "free" phone, they can opt for the subsidized phone. I have a friend overseas that has a phone only we can dream about( will never be available here), and it wasn't that expensive. As I have stated before, it is about protecting an archaic revenue stream.
--
BlooMe | |
| 
alanhdsl
Premium
join:1999-10-09
Phoenix, AZ
·Qwest.net
| Spell out the subsidy Since the "subsidy" is really just a way of paying over time, make it explicit. You sign a one year contract with a "free" $120 phone for $50/mo. ($40/mo. + 12 payments of $10), or a one year contract where you bring your own phone for $40/mo.
Those that would prefer to pay over time can, and those that don't want to don't have to. | |
| |
aaron8301
I can't get myself to go away.
join:2005-01-03
Clarkston, WA
·CableOne
| Re: Spell out the subsidy said by alanhdsl :Since the "subsidy" is really just a way of paying over time, make it explicit. You sign a one year contract with a "free" $120 phone for $50/mo. ($40/mo. + 12 payments of $10), or a one year contract where you bring your own phone for $40/mo. Why would you need to sign a contract at all if you bring your own phone? That's my issue with the cellular industry. Years ago, a buddy gave me his old Verizon phone. I took it to Verizon and said "hey, will you give me service?" They said, "sure, if you sign a 2 year contract and buy a new phone." | |
| 
jlanci
join:2005-08-30
Staten Island, NY | picture Am I the only one that thinks that the picture for this article looks like a really cheap knock off of the iPhone? | |
| |
See 14 replies to this post | |
lordofwhee
join:2007-10-21
Everett, WA
| Can't say I'm surprised... Companies will always do stuff like this with a capitalist market, because it guarantees them more money, and because they all do it, and entry into the cellular market now is basically impossible without a huge network, there's no downside to it. If you want a cell phone, you have to deal with these stupid restrictions.
The government won't do anything, because like virtually all large businesses, they have a huge say in what does and doesn't pass into law.
This is just what happens with a mostly-corrupt democracy. Eventually, the US will end up like the Soviet Union, and I, for one, will most likely hop the pond over to England. | |
| 
Richard B
Fur It Up
join:2007-06-22
Portland, OR
·Comcast
| Mossberg Right and Wrong I can see his point on hardware as long it relates to voice. I should and do have a good selection of phones. The problem is added services. let us not forget we are talking about technology that was design to carry the human voice. I feel were trying to shove to many features on the network. I do not want the networks to open up because the last thing I need is to have a medical emergency and cannot get through because some sap is using his phone to watch videos. | |
| benc
Premium
join:2007-06-17
Glen Carbon, IL
·Charter Pipeline
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Callcentric
·AT&T Midwest
| This Is Of Serious Importance, I Think Serious reform is needed here, I think.
Some Changes That I Think Need To Happen:
- No more contracts. Mo-to-mo only, no more ETFs. In fact, this should be the case for all ISPs as well.
- No more subsidies, in the way the mobile operators do it.
- No more locked phones. If the technology fits, then it must be allowed.
- Start the transition to a single standard, ideally GSM since it's the standard used everywhere else in the world.
- CDMA mobile phones must use RUIM.
- Free incoming calls, outgoing costs more. But not a big deal since with free incoming calls fewer minutes are used. This is what it's like in most if not all European countries, as far as I know.
- Must maintain backwards compatibility for five years after a new technology or standard is deployed, so people don't have to buy new as often. Thankfully, this particular thing hasn't been an issue as far as I know.
About the concept of subsidies, I'm not totally against it. I'm just against the way mobile operators do it. As a substitute, I propose short-term loans that would be paid back within a year or two. It would allow additional flexibility. It could allow the customer to buy the device upfront and not pay interest. It could also allow the customer to subsidize the entire cost of the device, even if it's high priced (I-Mate JASJAM, for example). The interest charged would vary depending on his credit rating, so people will good credit will benefit (which is definitely fair).
I once posted something like this, and someone else said "You don't need the government to do those things." Yes you do. Why? Although theoretically the companies can choose to do this of their own free will, I doubt they ever will without government pressure. If they choose to do this, this might actually give the consumer additional choices and they might actually have to work hard to have customers keep them as their provider. It makes the bottom line harder to meet.
So far, I've yet to see anything quite as disgusting as the state of the mobile phone/operator industry. The way things stand now, it's like you buy the phone, but if you buy it then you can only use it with one carrier. To switch carriers, you need to buy a new phone. That's one cost-of-exit barrier. This barrier can be quite considerable when the phone is a high-end expensive model. Then there's contracts, and their ETFs. That's an additional cost-of-exit barrier. Sometimes there are situations where it literally makes financial sense NOT to cancel, even when you are seriously dissatisfied. Absolutely horrible! To add insult to injury, if your phone breaks for whatever reason, you have to buy a new one, without the subsidy. The operators won't provide a new one for you or fix your phone for free. And of course the new phone would also be locked to the operator's network, furthering the cost-of-exit, since people want to get their money's worth out of the phone.
For Joe Public and Jane Doe, this is a reality. For tech-savvy people who know better, there are unlocked GSM phones which solve part of the problem. Although it still doesn't result in a lower monthly service fee (although it really should).
The closest thing I see that's like the thing I'm talking about is T-Mobile Flexpay. It's mo-to-mo and it's GSM (so you have unlocked phones as an option). Also, any service or feature they offer is available with flex-pay, even Internet access and their "MyFaves" thing. However, there are two downsides. One downside is the fact that T-Mobile is the only carrier without 3G, so forget about using it for Internet access for a PC. Another downside is the monthly fees aren't any cheaper. Never mind the fact that on that plan they don't have to finance subsidies. In fact to get Flexpay you have to pay full price on the phone if you get it at the store.
Now before anyone mentions Ma Bell, remember that not only did they provide the phones, but they also to keep them working. If the phone broke, they had to fix it for you, free of charge. I daresay that Ma Bell was a better company than the mobile operators are today.
Oh, but what about pre-pay? I know some of you are thinking this. It's definitely a niche market. Unless your usage is low, it's cost prohibitive. Also, you can't get Internet access through pre-pay, which is a problem for some. Except for T-Mobile, it's not possible to get mobile phone Internet without a contract.
However, I do have to give credit to the mobile operators of today for certain things. Domestic long distance is now always included, although it's still pricier than a home phone for what you get. They also usually have free phone-to-phone (on the same network) calls. Imagine if Ma Bell did that! However, nowadays all the major telcos have an option where the home phone costs the same no matter how many calls you make or what number you call (as long as it's within the U.S., including PR and the Virgin Islands). It's great for me since over half my calls are long distance. | |
| 
batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ
clubs: | Unlocked and unbranded. With GSM one can use any unlocked/unbranded phone. | |
| | 
CylonRed
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-06
Bloom County
·Speakeasy
| Carriers in the US have to run one network to have unlocked phones first then the unlocked phones can happen but I highly doubt the customers will like the increase in price to pay for the network.
One reason I loved Cincy Bell - cheap phones and NO contract. They also did not force you off the price plan you were on if they dropped it - you still paid the same amount as long as you never switched pricing plans. They still have people on plan from a few years ago - $75.00 unlimited everything.
We switched to Verizon and I do nto get new phones - I have zero need for ringtones, iPhones, cameras, web browsing, or even texting. I get one of the cheapest phone they have and my contract ran out earlier this year and still have the phone. It works perfectly fine and I don't plan on getting a new one any time soon.
--
Brian
Free health care is 100% a misnomer - it is not free and never will be free. | |
|
Mr Anon
@il.us
| Add to the list. That carriers also should not be allowed to decided what features of the phone do not work so long as they don't have to have provide additional software.
IE: if your phone is capable of letting you add content such as ring tones, games and other media via pc-sync, then it shouldn't be upto the company if that features works or not. | |
| | | |
|
|
The flip side of this argument - Be worried