FCC Looks To Offer Consumers More Wireless Choice

An anonymous reader writes "The FCC is butting heads with wireless phone companies over 'wiggle room' the government organization wishes to allow consumers. Along with the move to the auction system, the government is removing restrictions on pieces of the wireless spectrum, which will allow a freedom of choice not usually seen with wireless communication devices. 'In the past, when the F.C.C. auctioned spectrum for cellular service, it allowed the winners to determine the equipment and applications that would run on their networks. That created the current status quo, in which a vast majority of American consumers buy a handset from a wireless service provider. The open-access rules, which will apply to about one-third of the spectrum being sold at the auction, represent a significant departure from past practice. They require the winners to let consumers use any tested, safe and compatible device or application on its network. Entrepreneurs could sell handsets with capabilities that are unavailable -- or unavailable at affordable prices -- from current carriers.'"

Comments

The devil is in the details.

[Andy Dodd]

One: The network owner can bastardize the definition of "tested, safe, and compatible" in any way they please. For example, "tested, safe, and compatible" is the excuse Verizon has for delaying the release of phones for 6-9 months past the same unit's release on other networks. (In reality, it's because they're crippling various features of the phone to make more money - see the manner in which they delayed the Treo 650 for at least six months and disabled Bluetooth DUN capability in the process.) This happens to be one of a number of reasons why I am no longer a Verizon customer.

Two: You can already use any FCC-certified GSM device on any of the GSM networks in the U.S. Just pop in your SIM and go. (Assuming that your handset itself is not locked to a different carrier.) For example, you can buy an unlocked HTC TyTn II directly from the manufacturer, pop in a T-Mobile or AT&T SIM, and be up and running immediately. Want a droolworthy device like the HTC Advantage series? Just pop in your SIM and go.

In the end, unless there's something "unusual" in the details, this doesn't appear to be much different (if at all) from the status quo.

Re:Good News

[ciscoguy01]

This will absolutely increase competition.
The current status quo where the carriers keep a stranglehold on the equipment supply and use it as a method of keeping their customers signed to two year contracts is outrageous.
We should be able to buy our equipment from any reseller and use it on any compatible network. Then there would be competition and the prices of phones would decline and the features we really want would be made available.

Where are the cheap BYOP service plans?

[tepples]

You already can buy equipment from any reseller and use it on any compatible network. You just have to pay for it without the Cell company subsidizing part of the cost. In other words you won't be paying $49.99 for that cell phone, you'll be paying it's REAL cost of $349.99. So why don't retail stores across the United States sell phones separately from service plans? And why don't the four major carriers advertise bring-your-own-phone plans with a lower monthly fee than the subsidized-phone plans?

Re:Where are the cheap BYOP service plans?

[Andy Dodd]

Because the market for such phones is not sufficiently large for their to be a significant B&M presence.

That's why you only see unlocked phones from specialty online retailers such as Mobileplanet and some manufacturers, such as Motorola.

Note: This only applies (essentially) to AT&T and T-Mobile, the two major GSM carriers in the U.S. Unfortunately, while the modulation scheme and protocol suite of cdmaOne/CDMA2000 are superior to GSM, GSM has one major advantage - The use of a standardized SIM (Subscriber Identification Module) is mandatory for GSM handsets, meaning all you need is a SIM from the carrier and a phone either from the carrier or a vendor of non-carrier-locked handsets (such as Mobileplanet).

AT&T and T-Mobile allow bring-your-own-handset but don't advertise it because, in reality, there is unfortunately no market for it, and they would prefer for users to use the carrier's handsets, for two reasons:

Sometimes features of carrier-branded handsets are crippled to make the user have to pay for extra features (See Verizon and Bluetooth DUN on the Treo 650).

Sometimes carrier-branded handsets have extra marketing/"features" designed to get you to pay for services from the carrier. (Such as the built-in "XM Radio" app on AT&T versions of HTC devices.)

Those two reasons are why you never see "BYOD" discounts, similarly you don't see service discounts for non-contract-subsidized phones from the carriers. Your "discount" is the fact that you are not locked into a contract.

FCC Commissioner Michael J. Copps

[not_hylas( )]

I'm not so "up" on this particular subject, but I did see this fellow speak to some committee a while back [CSPAN] on The Spectrum Sale, or something related.
In this administation of incompetence, this guy is a real relief to hear speak - about what is the people's, he is the real deal.

Bill Moyers talks with FCC Commissioner Michael J. Copps:

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08242007/watch.html

MICHAEL J COPPS: Now we're back at square one. It's all up for grabs. And if we are going to do better this time around, it's going to be because of input from folks like you.

MICHAEL COPPS: Well, we're going at it without a policy. We're going at it without a vision. We're going at it without realizing what these things mean to the future of our country. Whether it's broadcast or broadband.The public airwaves are to be used for serving the public interest. Expanding our cultural horizon, covering community news, enabling the democratic dialogue. Increasingly, we have moved away from that vision and they're being used for corporate profitability.

MICHAEL COPPS: Yeah. It appears 112 times in the Telecommunications Act. The term public interest convenience and necessity. So I know darn well Congress was serious about it.

BILL MOYERS: You're talking about the 1934 Act.

MICHAEL COPPS: Right.

You know it's BAD when you get excited about someone speaking "common sense" on CSPAN. The link is worth the time to view.

Where DO they hide these quality people - and who do we have to blow to get them in government?
[don't answer that]