Slashdot Mirror
Wireless Carriers Accused of Antitrust Violations
phoneboy writes "From Wireless Consumers Alliance: A class-action lawsuit was filed on April 5 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of wireless consumers seeking to end the control of the handset market by wireless carriers. Read the Antitrust Complaint. While the complaint is fairly short and easy to understand, a summary is in order: The carriers basically dictate required features to handset manufacturers. Phones are tied to specific carriers and cannot be moved between carriers. Carriers refuse to allow handsets on their network they didn't approve. Handset manufacturers thus cannot sell handsets that aren't approved by carriers because carriers will not allow them to be used. All of this rises costs for the consumer, making it difficult and more expensive to switch carriers, and unfairly restrains trade for both handsets and cellular services. As someone who recently tried subscribing to AT&T's new GSM service with an unlocked GSM phone (they didn't allow me to "activate" the service unless I bought one of their phones), I'll be watching this case very closely."
They ALL suck. I work for a small company, very tight, but small. There are 8 people in the US, spread out pretty even. We all travel and visit each other. We all picked our own service. Combined, we have tried, SprintPCS, Cingular, AT&T, Verizon, VoiceStream, just about everyone. Of the 8, 5 of us switch yearly looking for something better. Guess what? NOTHING IS BETTER. They all suck, on diffrent but equal levels.
And lastly, New York City? Bah. Your trolls phase me not. No Troll, I drop 3 calls a week in NYC right now with SprintPCS (what I count as MY drops). Total, I drop about 8 a week calling other guys in my company (one AT&T and one Verison) in NYC. NYC to NYC calls, droped.. CONSTANTLY. Not a troll. Given that no matter wich of us three call who, they are always droped calls, I would have to say, even NYC doesn't have cell service. You? (Minus October of 2001, at which point NO ONE DROPED A CALL FOR A MONTH!!! They trucked in towers and put them everywhere for a month after 9-11, but it's dropping back down to shit service again).
Yes, you named a ton of companies that have agreements.. and SHARE towers. But, it's not the same.. at all, and I can prove it beyond a doubt, if you care to learn a little.... See Below:
Look at a local Cell tower. How many antennas do you see? 2 types? 3 types? 4 types? Of what, the 5-6 avaliable services? Consider Europe, where there is only 2 general types (Both GSM, if you can call that 2 types). And they are everywhere in EU, yet there are countless places you can find no service in the US.
So, shareing service is there in the US, but that doesn't conclusively prove that 25 cell companies using 6 shared services would be better coverage than 25 services sharing 1 universal service type.
Face it, if you ever used a cell phone in the EU and the US, you KNOW the service is better than the US. If you ever bought a Coke or paid for a parking meter with your cell phone, you are LAUGHING at US cell phone service with the rest of the world.
Thats like requiring car manufacturers to make sure all their vehicles can use diesel, gasoline, petroleum, electricity, fuel cells and ethenol, and have them interchangable.
No, it's like telling a gas station that regardless of if you're driving a Chevy Impala, a Ford Mustang, or a Mercedes that they have to be able to fill your tank up.
"Oh, sorry, we're allied with GM. Did you consider selling your VW and buying a Geo? That way, we could sell you fuel."
If you're in a town where only general motors cars can get fuel, and you really need gas for your BMW, you're S.O.L., even though there's not a good reason why you can't buy fuel there: it'll still work in your car.
If a place only sells diesel fuel and you need regular unleaded, that's one thing. But two cars that both can use premium should be able to buy premium from the same vendor.