Slashdot Mirror


Android Susceptible To Apps That Turn On Roaming

fermion writes "If seems that Google's Android and T-Mobile have not learned from the bad experience and wrath Apple incurred with roaming charges on the iPhone. Applications can switch to roaming and data operation without the user's knowledge. Also, according to The Register, there is no way to switch off roaming. Given the backlash that Apple experienced over international roaming charges, one would think that T-Mobile would have built a phone to prevent such unexpected charges." From the wording of the article, the inability to turn off roaming seems to be on a per-application basis; users can evidently disable it globally.

136 comments

  1. Solution: by Spazztastic · · Score: 5, Funny

    When traveling, only do so in a faraday cage.

    --
    Posts not to be taken literally. Almost everything is sarcasm.
    1. Re:Solution: by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      Yeah.

      And who's been drinking my turpentine?

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    2. Re:Solution: by davester666 · · Score: 1

      But...I read somewhere the user is warned before they purchase the app that it will continue to use the internet no matter what their settings are?

      That's fair warning. Of course, user's have to remember which applications have which warnings, and delete them off the phone before their trip...

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  2. Roaming charges are ridiculous. by theaveng · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What reasonable explanation can exist for charging me an extra 50 cents per minute, just because I made a call from Maryland instead of Pennsylvania? I can't think of any. Cingular used to do that to me, but now I use Virgin Mobile which did away with that nonsense (I pay a flat 18 cents anywhere in the U.S.). That's how all cellphones should operate.

    --
    FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    1. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by geekmux · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What reasonable explanation can exist for charging me an extra 50 cents per minute, just because I made a call from Maryland instead of Pennsylvania? I can't think of any. Cingular used to do that to me, but now I use Virgin Mobile which did away with that nonsense (I pay a flat 18 cents anywhere in the U.S.). That's how all cellphones should operate.

      Ah, to summarize with maximum efficiency negating your "reasonable" request for an answer: Because they can.

    2. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by maxume · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It wasn't just Cingular, it was the company that they were buying the airtime from.

      Virgin Mobile skirts the problem by *only* working on Sprint's network. You simply don't have the option to use other networks, even if Sprint doesn't have coverage.

      See, each company only has towers in some areas, and you probably actually have less coverage with Virgin than you did with Cingular+roaming.

      Maybe you had a regional plan (where you get more minutes for less money, in exchange for less coverage), but I bet that it was a tower issue.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What reasonable explanation can exist for charging me an extra 50 cents per minute, just because I made a call from Maryland instead of Pennsylvania? I can't think of any. Cingular used to do that to me, but now I use Virgin Mobile which did away with that nonsense (I pay a flat 18 cents anywhere in the U.S.). That's how all cellphones should operate.

      Why do you hate capitalism?!?

    4. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Moraelin · · Score: 1

      Well, even with a flat 18 cents a minute, if I write an app that uses that connection all the time, it's going to cost you 24*60*0.18=259.2 dollars per _day_.

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    5. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Sockatume · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think the whole "it's expensive to buy airtime from our roaming partners" thing is a crock of shit. If they all charge eachother some ridiculous rate for roaming onto their network, and that is passed straight to the end consumer, then it's price fixing. It was more transparently stupid here in Europe when you were roaming from T-Mobile UK to T-Mobile Germany and being charged through the nose for roaming onto a network that belongs to the same parent company. There was no excuse along the lines of "we charge ourselves a lot for roaming", so ultimately it was very easy for the parliment to demand a drop in roaming fees and, when the companies disregarded this, legislate a maximum fee.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    6. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by theaveng · · Score: 1

      Well Cingular owns virtually every tower in Maryland, so I shouldn't have been paying any kind of roaming charge.

      --
      FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    7. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by thrillseeker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ah, but this isn't capitalism - this is regulations, bught and paid for, allowing avoidance of capitalism. Capitalism allows competition - we have given competition away (ok, ok - sold out cheap) in exchange of supposed expensive infrastructure.

    8. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by RingDev · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It costs millions to build and maintain a tower.

      When you go into roaming, you are using your provider's competitor's network. The competition wants to make money to pay for their tower, and you are not their customer, so they are going to bill your provider an arm an a leg for access, and your provider will pass those costs on to you.

      Even more so, the more the competition charges for roaming calls, the more upset you will be with your provider, and if you need to go into roaming often enough, you will be more likely to leave your provider and join up with the very competitor that had been billing 50 cents a minute for the same call you are now making for 10 cents a minute.

      Although, with all the new peering and leasing agreements going on, we'll likely see less and less of roaming fees from any provider that owns some amount of their own towers.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    9. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by rickb928 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It wasn't that long ago that in the Augusta, Maine area an AT&T or T-Mobile customer was confronted with a carrier that did not negotiate a roaming agreement. They just refused to. So if youmade a call, you got the recording telling you how to give your credit card number and the charges that would apply.

      I suspect it had something to do with Augusta being the state capital, and legislators from all over coming into town for the current session. Bringing their phones from Fort Kent, Portland, Boothbay, Farmington, etc., and all the AT&T/TMob subscribers just thinking it would work.

      Later on, AT&T and/or TMob got service in the area. This carrier, if it latched onto your phone, would not let it go, especially if you came into town from the North or West. You had to get downtown and power cycle your phone usually, and maybe do that three times.

      This humored me when I had a Siemens S46, the dual-mode-phone-from-hell. This carrier kept me on TDMA at all costs, even when I could have gone to GSM and gotten T-Mobile.

      But that's another story. Sometimes, roaming isn't so nice. It ought to be different, but then again so many things ought to be different.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    10. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by theaveng · · Score: 1

      >>>if I write an app that uses that connection all the time

      Why on earth would you do that? You definitely wouldn't get away with it though, since my phone only had $60 on it. It would drain dry in 5 hours and I would dispute the charge with my company as being "ridiculous; I wasn't talking for 5 hours today".

      --
      FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    11. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by maxume · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Sure. The roaming minutes do represent an ongoing cost though, as opposed to the regular minutes, which are essentially a fixed cost, so part of the high charges is to discourage use.

      The U.S. cellular system is a disaster anyway; the FCC should have licensed two networks and then regulated the shit out of them (basically, let them have customer facing operations, but force them to sell bulk rate airtime at or near cost). Instead, we have 3.5 incomplete networks. The huge investment in CDMA was nice for the rest of the world though.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    12. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by maxume · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Okay, then you almost certainly signed up for a regional plan in order to get more minutes/dollar (versus a national plan)

      AT&T will sell you either, so you are basically complaining that they offer the option.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    13. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It costs millions to build and maintain a tower.

      Sure, if you maintain it for 27 centuries.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    14. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Moraelin · · Score: 0, Troll

      Why on earth would you do that?

      A bug? Using some third party library which talks to itself over the external IP address? Sheer incompetence?

      Don't underestimate the sheer amount of bloody stupidity in the industry.

      Note that it doesn't even have to actually stuff the pipe all the time. It just needs to ping something once a minute. It's an easier task to achieve by sheer idiotic mistake than you'd think.

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    15. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What reasonable explanation can exist for charging me an extra 50 cents per minute, just because I made a call from Maryland instead of Pennsylvania? I can't think of any.

      I can... it makes them RICHER.

      Your cellphone company hates you and wants to rob you blind. When you understand that fact, you will have a far better understand of how Corporations do business.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    16. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Serious+Callers+Only · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ah, but this isn't capitalism - this is regulations, bught and paid for, allowing avoidance of capitalism. Capitalism allows competition - we have given competition away (ok, ok - sold out cheap) in exchange of supposed expensive infrastructure.

      Truly free capitalism degenerates pretty quickly into monopolies and cartels (which are illegal for a reason). Once someone has a stranglehold on the market it does not allow competition as it is not in the interests of incumbents to give up power, and they have the means to easily crush any smaller companies (price fixing, bribery, coercion, subsidies below cost until the competitor goes under, etc etc).

      The only way to ensure that doesn't happen is to introduce the regulations that you affect to despise.

    17. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      Right, roaming charges themselves are justifiable (you're getting access to a range of extra networks you wouldn't normally use), which is easy to forget when getting wound up about how large they are.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    18. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by ACMENEWSLLC · · Score: 1

      >>Virgin Mobile which did away with that nonsense (I pay a flat 18 cents anywhere in the U.S.). That's how all cellphones should operate.

      No nono -- I pay a flat .10/minute and .05 per message with Net10 which runs through Tracphone which in turn is AT&T's network. Why would I want .18/minute? No monthly fees, no $10/mo taxes, notta. Just .10/minute and that's it. $30 for two months of service and 300 minutes, which includes tax.

      That's how it should be :)

    19. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Heembo · · Score: 1

      What reasonable explanation can exist for charging me an extra 50 cents per minute

      You signed a contract and they want your money. Seems very reasonable to me.

      --
      Horns are really just a broken halo.
    20. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Why is it my phones and minutes have both been so cheap if things are such a disaster?

      I haven't been charged roaming in 6 years, I consistently pay less than friends in Europe, and my phones are usually free.

      OK, I admit, when i was in Europe, I payed roaming, even on my own network (but kept my US number), and the furthest I've ever been without roaming is 2000 miles.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    21. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      18 cents a minute is extraordinarily expensive.

      Very quickly you get into the unlimited everything monthly rate plans other carriers offer.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    22. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by maxume · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Probably because you spend most of your time in areas with good coverage and think that present prices for minutes are cheap. I am presuming that better regulation could actually result in even lower prices (which I would claim is a good thing for consumers), and better overall coverage.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    23. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by molotovjester · · Score: 1

      Ah to summarize the rebuttal with maximum efficiency to which no further argument can be made:
      NO U

    24. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by lysergic.acid · · Score: 1

      which is why we should replace closed/proprietary cellular networks with open wifi access. rather than putting artificial limits on technology to suit the telecom industry's outdated business model, we should be doing away with these restrictive business models as they are quickly becoming a technological anachronism.

      it just doesn't make sense to maintain a bunch of redundant specialized communications networks that are wholly owned and tightly controlled by a handful of telecoms who continually ream the public with extortionate rates and arbitrary penalties. what we should instead be doing is laying out more fiber to increase FttN/FttH penetration (and catch up to Europe, Russia, Japan, South Korea, etc. in broadband speeds/pricing), and then roll out municipal WiFi/WiMax networks, replacing cell towers with open wireless access points. and with ubiquitous wireless internet access, VoIP handsets can be developed that aren't crippled by cellphone carriers, don't have roaming charges, and don't charge you for sending or receiving text messages.

      the internet is a public network that's been established with open standards and is suited for all types of digital communications, whether it's text, audio/voice, video, or just binary data. and unlike with cellular networks, you don't need any kind of carrier approval to design/sell hardware that connects to the internet. as a result, anyone and everyone is free to develop new applications using the network. that is one of the main reasons for the internet's rapid growth and unparalleled usefulness. cellular networks, OTOH, by their closed/proprietary nature actually impede the development of new applications & technologies. just compare the innovation and technological progress achieved using the internet over the past decade with the limited progress achieved by cellular networks in the same time span.

    25. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      It's an easier task to achieve by sheer idiotic mistake than you'd think.

      There speaks the voice of experience...

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    26. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bringing their phones from Fort Kent, Portland, Boothbay, Farmington, etc., and all the AT&T/TMob subscribers just thinking it would work.

      Yeah, well, that's just crazy, expecting phones which are technically capable of using a network to "just" do so.

      IMHO there should be a separation between network operators and billing operators. Phones should simply request a desired service from the network and offer fixed-value tokens in return, which the customer buys from the billing operator. The network operators can then redeem the collected tokens for payout of the tokens' nominal value. Billing operators would compete on the asking price of the tokens, network operators would compete on the amount of tokens per unit of service.

    27. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by RingDev · · Score: 1

      Your inability to calculate TCO doesn't actually make it cheaper:

      From a Cingular Press release.

      Cingular Wireless has spent almost $90 million building more than 30 new cell sites throughout Indiana in 2005. This includes key sites in the following Indianapolis areas...

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    28. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by RingDev · · Score: 1

      Later on, AT&T and/or TMob got service in the area. This carrier, if it latched onto your phone, would not let it go, especially if you came into town from the North or West. You had to get downtown and power cycle your phone usually, and maybe do that three times.

      That is actually pretty standard. Once your call roams to another network, the other network's hand off mappings are only configured for their own towers. So the only way to get off of a "roaming" network is to end your call, disable the roaming feature on your phone (or return to an area where your carrier has the best signal).

      It's been a few years since I've been in the industry, but I would be surprised if the major players haven't been optimizing their phones and networks to try to get off network calls handed off back to the carrier's network.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    29. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Although, with all the new peering and leasing agreements going on, we'll likely see less and less of roaming fees from any provider that owns some amount of their own towers.

      True, despite all the ads, Alltel's and Verizon's networks are essentially identical today. My alltel* phone will work anywhere the identical model Verizon branded one will.

      No roaming or long distance charges in 99.9% of the USA that gets cellphone coverage.

      *Because Alltel offered me a plan that works out ~$5/month cheaper.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    30. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by RingDev · · Score: 1

      Same is true in Wisconsin. In the late 90's early 2000's US Cellular covered Wisconsin in CDMA towers and networks.

      At first Sprint and Verizon were only covering major metros and interstates. But in order to be competitive in the area they needed more coverage. And US Cellular, while having an awesome network, didn't have the cash on hand to advertise and push demand. So Verizon buys (or leases, I have no idea on the details) service on US Cellular's network. Verizon went from insignificant coverage to almost total coverage of the state and US Cellular gets a nice chunk of change to pay for the network and their own growth.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    31. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      I mentioned this because at the time it was not the norm. I regularly was in roaming, and would switch back easily (or at least quickly) when the home network was in range.

      Now, along Route 1 on the coast, there was a stretch from about Bath to Rockland where I could NOT get service. After a particularly long session with AT&T (My T637 at the time), we found that my phone was indeed properly configured but no answer as to why I couldn't get service they said was available from 3 different roaming partners. After a few weeks, magic, it worked! I called back to the tech I was working with, and after a half-hour of finding who did it, turns out they had never properly configured the roaming arrangements, and had been paying for access and never using any minutes - no one could connect due to the software errors.

      Amazing.

      Now, the August carrier was a different breed of cat. When I called their customer service number and asked if they couldn't work out some roaming arrangement with AT&T, the first rep immediately became hostile. His response was that 'they don't want to work anything out. Call AT&T and tell them to get their head out of their ^&*". I called AT&T. A much more gracious supervisor reported that they had been 'unable' to work out an agreement. After 3 years of this B.S. I met a former network technician for the Augusta carrier. he told me, in confidence at the time, that his boss wanted an outrageous roaming plan, close to a dollar a minute, and no reciprocity. I thought this was pretty much baloney, but it turns out:

      1. When AT&T first approached them, there was no service nearby, just this carrier. They had AT&T over a barrel, and asked for too much. No deal.

      2. A year later, AT&T got permission to build in the area, but not in the neighborhood, go figure. The local carrier tried everything to stop them, and it was scorched earth after that.

      3. The local carrier's policy was to blam AT&T. They may have been right, but no one I knew who had worked for them considered it a positive experience.

      4. I heard from a buddy that the roaming thing is fixed in the phone configs now, and this carrier is limped along until TDMA died. I think they sold out to Verizon, since their towers would be the only asset worth a buck. And good riddance.

      Cell service out in the hinterlands is an interesting experience. I once ran up a $1200 roaming bill in a month. About 450 minutes, IIRC,back in the old NAMPS days. I was the second-highest bill in the entire state of Maine that month. Woot!

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    32. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by theaveng · · Score: 1

      Uh... actually my complaint is more about a single company charging me different rates simply because I crossed a state border. IMHO if they charge 25 cents a minute when I'm home, then that same company should charge 25 cents when I'm in Maryland. Charging me 75 is ridiculous.

      For example when I cross the border, my bank doesn't charge me different rates for services. Why should the cellphone company?

      --
      FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    33. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Moridin42 · · Score: 1

      I'm going to assume you're talking about a standard mobile contract, rather than a pre-paid phone. Mostly because I don't know how pre-paid phones deal with roaming.

      So, under that assumption, you paid 75 cents because you chose the option where your minutes per month were higher. But you couldn't use them outside of your region. To use your example, your bank probably doesn't offer you additional (or better) service for using a particular branch.

      In other words, your minutes were cheaper because you agreed not to travel extensively. You had the option to not be charged for roaming anywhere on Cingular's network, anywhere in the continental US. You didn't take it. If you'd taken the national plan, you'd have gotten maybe 60-75% of the minutes of a regional plan. But no roaming on their US network. As with nearly all options, there are tradeoffs.

      --
      I don't expect morality, equality, consistency, or justice from the law. I expect only legality.
    34. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Panspechi · · Score: 0

      These quotes seems exaggerated. I have worked here in Canada with engineers in the cell industry and they quoted more like 70k -100k per antenna. Although these numbers don't include property fees where you install those antennas and electricity, they include the antenna and the back-up power.

    35. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by maxume · · Score: 1

      Because you agreed to it.

      Every national carrier offers nationwide, and phones generally have an option not to roam on other networks (which often still costs money, even with nationwide coverage), so you either didn't bother to turn off other network roaming, or you had a regional plan (for a smaller geographic area), that included more minutes for the same price, but charged you a roaming fee if you left that area.

      Basically, you are complaining that you didn't understand the agreement that your cell phone was offered under (Maybe I didn't help the situation when I referred to AT&T, but the company that was Cingular is now part of AT&T).

      If you had paid attention, you could have gotten the national plan, and then you would have what you asked for (but maybe you would be complaining that you don't get as many minutes as people with a regional plan, I'm not sure).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    36. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by isomeme · · Score: 1

      It costs millions to build and maintain a tower.

      Sure, if you maintain it for 27 centuries.

      Excellent, a new profit center for the Avout! I'm sure there are cellular antennae somewhere on the upper reaches of the Mynster.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a skull.
    37. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by sunderland56 · · Score: 2, Informative

      On the T-Mobile Android data plan, there are no roaming charges in the USA.

      Unlimited data per month, too - unlike that other phone that begins with 'i'.

    38. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by geekmux · · Score: 1

      which is why we should replace closed/proprietary cellular networks with open wifi access. rather than putting artificial limits on technology to suit the telecom industry's outdated business model, we should be doing away with these restrictive business models as they are quickly becoming a technological anachronism.

      Hrm, "outdated" you say? Let's see, what have the telecoms brought us on their outdated tech? Switched from analog to digital, forever abolishing the $0.29 per minute peak rate plans.(yeah, few of us remember THOSE days). Then, EVDO. Offer true Global coverage with quad-band hardware. How about faster EVDO and 3G/4G tech out there for the masses. Somewhere in this mess, they "invented" the ringtone, followed quickly by the ring-back tone. Of course, now text messaging rules the cellular world, and then, as a final measure of financial wizardry, let's get tens of millions of people to pay US for the privilidge, nay RIGHT, to cast THEIR vote for the next American Idol. Yes, that's right, I'm going to create a multi-million dollar revenue stream from something that has NOTHING to do with the celluar industry at all.

      Call it "restrictive" all you want. To an extent, I agree with you. But, from a financial standpoint, you'll find these business models in the CPA exam filed under "sheer fucking genius".

      In the meantime, we're still sitting over here on overcrowded network pipes running IPv4 into the damn ground while we sit around demanding for "someone" to come along and give it all to us for...wait, what's that...you said free, right?!?

      No, I don't work for a telecom. Can't stand them for many reasons. But one thing is for certain, you have to hand it to them for finding revenue streams, and somehow making it acceptable to the masses that we should actually PAY MONEY for a service instead of assuming it should somehow be suddenly free.

    39. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      AT&T canceled my sister's contract because she moved to an area outside their coverage. They gave her 90 days of notice IIRC, and didn't charge her early termination since they were the ones terminating the agreement. So not only do they try to keep calls on their networks, but they'll take steps to make sure at least a certain portion of your calls are on their network rather than roaming.

    40. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by lysergic.acid · · Score: 2, Informative

      um, i never said it wasn't viable. the telecoms can do whatever they want because they have a natural monopoly (oligopoly in some places, but in practice there's not much difference) and telecommunications is a service with inelastic demand. these days a cellphone is almost a basic necessity if you live in most places. but their making buttloads of cash doesn't change the fact that:

      • SMS messages cost 10~15 cents each (in the U.S.) while it's just a stripped down proprietary version of e-mails or IMs. no one in their right mind would charge/pay to send and to receive text messages over the internet.
      • cellphone carriers are still charging mid-90's prices for mobile internet access, and even charging per MB for data transfer still.
      • roaming & long-distance charges make no sense whatsoever in the age of modern digital communications.

      we have the technology and resources to deploy a nationwide public wireless broadband network. and with ubiquitous wireless coverage, VoIP would eliminate the need for cellphone carriers and their ridiculous rates & terms. paying up the ass to use cellular networks and their 3 Mbps asymmetric EV-DO connections is just stupid when there are alternatives that can provide almost 22x the speed with symmetric upstream/downstream speeds.

      but maybe you're right. maybe we should just wait for 3G to reach the masses so that everyone can enjoy the decade-old technology (yes, EVDO was developed in 1999). and if you think bringing up how much worse things were in the past changes the fact that telecoms are still impeding technological progress, then let me just say that i think Alabama is a shining beacon of progress because black people are no longer being lynched there.

    41. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the wisdom and efficiency of the free market that the libertarians here are always telling us is infallible.

    42. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry but wifi for phones is ridiculous. Out west, cell sites in a few states will cover a 20 mile radius, with 10 being not to uncommon outside of towns. Wifi "can't" reach that far. (Well it can but not with conventional antennas.) Within town, having more than a few users trying to use wifi would be collision city and it'd grind to a halt. I've had problems *within my own trailer*, 1 access point on it's own channel, with two active users.. one or the other will just end up totally masking the other one. With the CTS/RTS wifi mode, this goes away but capacity of the channel is very low.

                Wimax fairs far better, there are actual deployments using stuff like wimax, cutting out the local phone companies, cellular, cable, etc., and getting highs speed data right to people's houses. In a few cases they've been able to do like "wireless cable", they supply them with a cable-style set top box or a DVR that just pulls it's video over ethernet or wifi (which then goes to the wimax box...) instead of cable. Someone could make a wimax phone and get acceptable performance too, i wonder if the phones could do some direct point-to-point connection if 2 people calling each other were closer to each other than the wimax site? That'd be a nice trick. Note you *don't* want a mesh network with phones, the phone batteries would drain far too fast.

    43. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No they won't, a regional plan is old and grandfathered in. Verizon also did but haven't for years.

                And, it's true roaming charges are a crock.. at least in-country, Verizon and AT&T's plans for years have not charged roaming either.

                As for rates, I have heard that the "big boys" such as Verizon and Alltel (Alltel is a very big one due to having so much coverage in the West) exchange minutes at under 8 cents a minute, and in several cases carriers have a no-cost reciprocal roaming agreement -- it fills in a gap in the large carriers coverage at a definitely nice cost, and gives the small carrier a definite advantage in their market of being able to have cheap national plans, since most of the roaming will be free to them. A few carriers still try to get over $1 a minute, typically the "big boys" refuse to roam on them (you lose a little coverage over older plan but don't get a surprise bill), I guess some charge $0.40-$0.60 or so a minute still, the carriers typically suck it up and let you roam free in these areas.

                Internationally, roaming is ridiculous. Obviously most of this is markup (when it's almost always like 1/10th the price or less to use a local SIM or calling card, there's some obvious markup.) I don't know if it's the US carriers marking it up, or the foreign ones. In some countries, I'm sure it's the local telecom monopoly slapping on plenty of tariffs as well. The EU is looking into this, it's gotta be worse there, with so many different countries. Does somebody like Vodafone charge huge rates too if you have like Vodafone UK and you're on Vodafone Spain or whatever?

    44. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Always been like that for mobiles in Australia afaik. Mind you land lines arent so lucky when calling a different state.

    45. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by lysergic.acid · · Score: 1

      that's why i wrote WiFi/WiMax. you lay down fibre to connect the backhauls or for FttH and FttN connections. residential areas would have the option of using mobile WiMax or WiFi (there would be plenty of spectra blocks to share if current cellular/radio/tv frequency ranges are given to wireless broadband deployment), which would be faster. and, no, using VoIP on a WiFi network when you're at home isn't not ridiculous. unless you have a really crappy router/access point, there should be no problem making a VoIP call with a 300 Mbps connection. if you're sitting at home rather than driving around, then it would make more sense to hop on the WiFi network rather than the mobile WiMax.

    46. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yeah, I had an S46. I loaded the main WAP browser page, looked at the KB count and did the math and figured it cost 79 cents or something. I didn't browse after that, that would have racked up fast 8-).

                Here in Iowa, and SW Wisconsin (going up from Iowa City to almost Madison) both 850 providers were TDMA and are now CDMA. In town the 1900 TDMA was fine, and the 1900 GSM was too, but along 151, it literally only covered 151.. pull over to get gas, no GSM.. that S46 would do it's reboot and get a 850 TDMA signal.

                  Recently I Wireless has built out some GSM around here I guess, but when I got the note about the TDMA being shut down for my phone I got a CDMA phone 8-). Problem solved. And later an aircard. When there's not any wifi, having a megabit or two in a lot of places and about 128kbits everywhere else is not too bad.

    47. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Roaming may be ridiculous, but if you don't do it often, you can pay less than 5 cents a minute for 1000 minutes under Verizon, including free long distance. Since there is no data-plan attached, I was told that it was included -- they just charged connect time. But then it's a plan that existed before there were data plans...so I really don't know. :-)

    48. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Your inability to calculate TCO doesn't actually make it cheaper

      I confess, I cannot calculate TCO from purely hypothetical and fictional numbers.

      From a Cingular Press release...

      An accurate and unbiased source, if ever there was one.

      ...Cingular Wireless has spent almost $90 million building more than 30 new cell sites

      You sucking figures out of Cingular's ass doesn't make it true.

      Three million per tower just to build? Did they subcontract the job to the CxO's brother?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    49. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by RingDev · · Score: 1

      You sucking figures out of Cingular's ass doesn't make it true

      As opposed to your arm chair estimates with no understanding of TCO, the technology, the business, or the construction? I'm not claiming to be an expert, but I've seen enough of the industry to have an idea, and Cingular's press release doesn't seem out of line with what I would expect to see.

      Odds are some of those towers were more than 3 mil, and some were well under. If they spent 10 mil on a single tower, the average for the other 29 towers would drop to 2 mil, which really isn't that big of a jump.

      Depending on the land leases they can get (I've heard of everything from $250,000 up front with a $50k annual down to 12k annual with 5k up front in Wisconsin) the costs can vary wildly. Toss in another 1/4 mil to get a large monopole tower up. Another 100k for the antenas and electrical. Another 60k for a site structure. And another 100k to get a OC* burried from the tower to a provider.

      Now that the tower is up you need a drive crew to map out signal strength and interaction between different towers. Then you need the engineers to come up with alignment changes and hand off patterns while the tower crew tweeks the tower and the drive guys keep circling.

      Then you figure each tower is going to need some number of hours of skilled labor inspection every year and will have a set amount of maintenance they will have to pay for. Not to mention the continuing expense of the OC* line.

      If the tower has an expect life of 20 years, 2 mil is by no means a stretch and 3 mil is totally possible. And if they are trying to build larger towers or get into more densly populated areas, they are going to be paying more for every single part of the project.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    50. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I understand that quoting TCO without a time period (as you did) is meaningless.

      The press release clearly stated cost to build. The waffle you just posted mixes up-front and ongoing costs almost at random.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    51. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      What reasonable explanation can exist for charging me an extra 50 cents per minute, just because I made a call from Maryland instead of Pennsylvania?

      Did they advertise it as 0.50 cents, or is it only Verizon who struggle with decimals ?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    52. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by RingDev · · Score: 1

      Ehh, my presentation wasn't that great. But I'm not lobbying the CEO to buy a new beowulf cluster here ;)

      But the point is you can just build a tower and throw an antena on it and call it finished. There is a lot more that goes into building cell towers.

      My assertion, that it costs millions to build and maintain Cell towers is provably accurate. I could post press release after press release from all of the major providers showing average investments from 1.5 to 4 million dollars per tower. But I'm sure you are just as capable of googling such information on your own.

      As for believing them, yeah, I do. They are publicly traded companies, making false press releases and publicly advertising fake costs would bring a world of pain down on them, and to what gain? The company doesn't gain a whole lot be releasing a statement saying they're spending $40 mil in a geographical area instead of $20 mil or $60 mil.

      If you have any factual evidence to back up your opinion that it does not cost millions to build and maintain a commercial carrier grade cell tower, please post it. Prove me wrong and I will gladly change my stance.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    53. Re:Roaming charges are ridiculous. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      My assertion, that it costs millions to build and maintain Cell towers is provably accurate.

      Mintain it for how long?

      making false press releases and publicly advertising fake costs would bring a world of pain down on them, and to what gain?

      No it wouldn't. Press releases aren't company accounts.

      If you have any factual evidence to back up your opinion that it does not cost millions to build and maintain a commercial carrier grade cell tower

      Maintain it for how long?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  3. Not true, marketplace apps tell exactly info by LingNoi · · Score: 4, Informative

    Sounds like BS to me..

    1) go here: http://tmobile.modeaondemand.com/htc/g1/
    2) click Simulation
    3) Click the arrow icon on the screen to the right
    4) click market
    5) select any app
    6) click install

    Look at this screen. It tells you exactly what the app does.

    1. Re:Not true, marketplace apps tell exactly info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [original research]

    2. Re:Not true, marketplace apps tell exactly info by One+Monkey · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      1) go here: http://tmobile.modeaondemand.com/htc/g1/
      2) click Simulation
      3) ...
      4) Profit!

      There, fixed that for ya.

      --
      www.nodicerpg.com - Some RP stuff for free, some not so for free, but still cheap.
    3. Re:Not true, marketplace apps tell exactly info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [Please wikify this article or section]

    4. Re:Not true, marketplace apps tell exactly info by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      But the big thing about Android is that you aren't limited to the Market Place for apps.... And who gets to write that text anyhow? The developers? Google?

    5. Re:Not true, marketplace apps tell exactly info by LingNoi · · Score: 2, Informative

      I can only assume here, but it's probably auto generated by looking at what parts of the android API your program accesses.

    6. Re:Not true, marketplace apps tell exactly info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correct. Your application has to explicitly define what permissions it will need. The user is then prompted to grant those permissions to the application before installation.

    7. Re:Not true, marketplace apps tell exactly info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That information is not written by anyone it's based on the actual APIs the application uses.

      You have to dig in to the settings and explicitly allow non-market apps if you want to use them so you're taking responsibility for choosing apps at that point.

  4. Bad summary by jettoblack · · Score: 5, Informative

    The problem is that the Android OS doesn't strictly enforce its global "Disable Data Roaming" option. Apps are supposed to respect this setting but some do not, thus a user who thinks it is disabled can still end up with $thousands in international data fees.

    1. Re:Bad summary by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You would have thought that the sandbox would prevent applications from doing unsanctioned things. This also gives more credibility to Apple's policy of validating third-party applications, despite possible flaws in the process.

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    2. Re:Bad summary by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Summary's not bad, just incomplete because it doesn't tell you the worst part. Not only can you not turn off roaming, it makes you think you have when you haven't.

    3. Re:Bad summary by LingNoi · · Score: 1

      No, that's wrong.

      It's turned off however if you use an application that accesses the internet, that application may not respect the setting.

      Hence it's the application maintainers fault, however it's also Android's fault for not forcing this in the first place.

    4. Re:Bad summary by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 1

      Why? Do you honestly think Apple would catch something like this? They didn't the first time, and it was their own applications! The vetting process is not QA.

      The problem is the disconnect between "roaming" and "network access". Roaming is not a technical issue. Roaming is not a security issue. It is an arbitrary external billing issue. The sandbox probably should enforce it, but I'm not surprised it is merely a suggestion. As far as I know, none of the other platforms include it in their set of capabilities.

    5. Re:Bad summary by Ilgaz · · Score: 3, Informative

      It doesn't give ANY credibility to Apple.

      J2ME security model, Symbian Security model which nears a billion installed base wouldn't do a mistake like that and yet there is no "Nokia Store" prison or "Sun Store" lock in.

      Here is Symbian security model (295K pdf) http://www.symbian.com/files/rx/file3202.pdf

      J2ME security (Symbian also carries J2ME) http://developers.sun.com/mobility/midp/articles/permissions/

      It can't be used as excuse for Apple draconian policies. Apple's security policy on iPhone is: Nobody should never, ever compete with their iTunes on device.

    6. Re:Bad summary by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 1

      You would have thought that the sandbox would prevent applications from doing unsanctioned things.

      I agree. It's pretty disappointing.

      This also gives more credibility to Apple's policy of validating third-party applications, despite possible flaws in the process.

      Not really. It just gives credibility to testing the platform in general. Now this Android flaw is known and can be fixed. A central authority validating each app might have even ended up hiding the flaw.

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    7. Re:Bad summary by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      It's turned off however if you use an application that accesses the internet, that application may not respect the setting.

      If an application can choose to ignore the off setting, it isn't turned off. It's suggested off, hinted off or wished off.

      A master setting isn't much of a master setting if it can be ignored.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    8. Re:Bad summary by grs1969 · · Score: 1

      By coincidence I was reading about how applications work on Android earlier this week and was quite impressed with the security model.

      Application packages have to declare the permissions that they need and those permissions are then granted or denied at install time. So presumably an application should have to declare that it wants to be able to control roaming and the phone user can deny it the ability to do so.

      I would want to know if Android supports defaults for permissions, so that permission for turning on roaming can be set to always denied.

      Also, do the global phone settings always override requests from apps to change them ? For instance, at some time the user might want a app to manage roaming for them, but at another they might want to firmly turn roaming off.

    9. Re:Bad summary by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      Why? Do you honestly think Apple would catch something like this? They didn't the first time, and it was their own applications!

      Nice try, but those are two completely different things.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  5. There is a toggle for roaming (just checked) by binary.bang · · Score: 1

    Just checked my G1, there's a setting to enable/disable data roaming. Maybe they're referring to Apps that can toggle that setting?

    1. Re:There is a toggle for roaming (just checked) by LingNoi · · Score: 2, Informative

      T-Mobile has issued an official response (posted in full after the break) to clear things up, and the gist of it is this: for users with a bone stock G1, the "Off" selection in data roaming should work fine, but third-party applications can essentially override this command and wreak havoc on one's phone bill. From the horse's mouth: "Some third-party applications available for download on Android Market require access to the internet and have the ability to turn on data roaming when in use. Customers are informed whether an application will use this feature prior to downloading, but should also be aware when traveling outside the country."

      So in short, disable data roaming and don't use the apps which access your internet.

    2. Re:There is a toggle for roaming (just checked) by Dynedain · · Score: 0, Redundant

      If I disable roaming from a system-wide preference. It should do exactly that, disable roaming. 3rd party apps should not be override that. It's assinine to expect users to remember all the details about how every program on their system may or may not use various system resources.

      This is the kind of thing, user experience, that Apple gets right and why Android isn't an iPhone killer.

      --
      I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
    3. Re:There is a toggle for roaming (just checked) by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      When it is an "open" platform, applications can do whatever in the heck is possible. If the application requires Internet access to be useful, people would complain that the application did not work when data roaming was disabled. So the application authors take it upon themselves to insure that their application functions properly at all times.

      Now, is this the right way to do it? Possibly not, but it is a choice that application authors can make for themselves.

      Such devices are entirely too complicated to require each individual user run through a list of authorizations for each application. Blackberry has this and it would be a nightmare if it was really exposed to individual users. Normally, this is something the administrator does through authorizing the phone on the company BES system.

    4. Re:There is a toggle for roaming (just checked) by mrboyd · · Score: 1

      The problem is deeper than that. You can't be sure that the application is not running. Any application you install could register an "intend" listener that would automatically wake up the application when for example an SMS or a Call is received. Or every 10 minutes.. or for whatever other reason.
      The fact is the Android platform gives the user zero control on what an application can do once it is installed. Authorization are set at installation time and definitive.

    5. Re:There is a toggle for roaming (just checked) by Dynedain · · Score: 1

      This should be trivial to implement, even with the system being open.

      If roaming is turned off as a general system level preference, the TCP/IP stack (substitute appropriate data network interface) should be disabled when the phone is in roaming mode. Open or not, that's something easy to enforce at the system level.

      If I turn off TCP/IP in Windows, I get no TCP/IP traffic, regardless of whether programs want it or not. The only option at that point is for a program to provide its own TCP/IP stack which there really isn't much incentive to do except in very specialized situations. Disabling data roaming should work the same way on an Android and is something fully within the power of Google to dictate and setup.

      Assuming developers will check general system config files and respect them is a flawed development model that leads to the kind of security problems that Windows has. If the setting isn't enforced, then what is the point of having the setting?

      --
      I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
  6. If they couldn't... they'd still bitch... by argent · · Score: 1

    If applications were restricted from using the full functionality of the phone, then people would complain about that.

    Either you trust your applications, or you don't. If you don't trust them, you run them in a sandbox. If you trust them, and a third-party application does something you don't like, blame the application.

    1. Re:If they couldn't... they'd still bitch... by Chrisq · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No this is not the way things should work. The "roaming disabled" should be like a firewall. It should be possible to add exceptions for explicit applications, and those apps could recommend you did this during install - but it should be up to you.

    2. Re:If they couldn't... they'd still bitch... by argent · · Score: 1

      I have no dog in this hunt. My desktop operating system of choice has a variety of security features that restrict applications from blithely changing settings, and has had since before Windows was a twinkle in Bill Gates' eye. I'm just noting the existence of an existential tension in the commentary on Slashdot. :)

    3. Re:If they couldn't... they'd still bitch... by Sockatume · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd say that a program that disregards your preferences is already falling short of using the full functionality of the phone.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    4. Re:If they couldn't... they'd still bitch... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Applications are always restricted from using the full functionality of the computer, that is what separates them from operating systems. Now, it is certainly possible for applications to suffer under far greater restrictions than merely being confined to OS provided abstractions(and that is indeed worth complaining about); but I'd argue in this case that roaming/nonroaming, like other network related things, is a perfectly valid thing to hide behind an abstraction controlled by the system(at the user's behest, of course). Just as, while I'm typing this, Firefox doesn't have direct control over my NIC, IP address, DNS settings, etc. and relies on OS provided abstractions.

      Some sort of OMGTRUSTED_DRMAPPLICATION_CONTROL!!! strategy, which forces approved applications to allow the system to control their operations according to roaming/nonroaming status would be incredibly stupid; but allowing the user to configure the system to treat "roaming" as equivalent to "no connection" is simple, noninvasive, and quite useful.

    5. Re:If they couldn't... they'd still bitch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for pointing out the obvious...

  7. They got what they asked for... by Duradin · · Score: 0, Troll

    Well, wasn't the big draw of Android supposed to be that the big mean ol' bad Apple man couldn't tell your apps what they could or couldn't do? Complete freedom from turtlenecked oppression?

    1. Re:They got what they asked for... by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      Well, wasn't the big draw of Android supposed to be that the big mean ol' bad Apple man couldn't tell your apps what they could or couldn't do? Complete freedom from turtlenecked oppression?

      A corporate authority (i.e. Apple) not being able to dictate what an application can or can not do is different than the user being able to dictate what an application can or can not do.

    2. Re:They got what they asked for... by sjames · · Score: 1

      I MAY want to not have Apple (or whoever) telling apps on my phone what they may or may not do, but that doesn't mean *I* don't want to tell them what they may/may not do, especially when it could cost me a small fortune.

  8. Thanks for the explanation by Chrisq · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This looks like a platform flaw to me.

    1. Re:Thanks for the explanation by Ilgaz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They should buy a Symbian S60 or even a modern J2ME handset and see how strict you gotta be on communications network which user pays for bytes. Google embraced and extended J2ME but passed its sandbox/security model?

      Everyone keeps hating Symbian and J2ME security model but it seems as the only way to make best of both open competition and security. Nokia and others learned it very hard and expensive way.

    2. Re:Thanks for the explanation by jmpvm · · Score: 1

      It has nothing to do with sandboxes or security models. Nor does this have anything to do with Google not "screening" applications before they go on Market.

      This has to do with the fact that the API allows applications to toggle this setting. The decision to expose that can (and should, in my opinion) be scrutinized, but it has nothing to do with security models, sandboxes, or "Apple being better". (To also comment to some other's responses)

    3. Re:Thanks for the explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Android is *NOT* J2ME. It's closer to J2SE, the desktop version of Java. Android does have a security model, but not being able to disable network access seems like an oversight.

  9. Ka-ching by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 1

    Didn't we learn anything from the refusal of the big telecoms to give their subscribers the option to opt-out of incoming spam text messages? These guys make their huge profits by nickel and diming us into oblivion, and roaming charges are part of the big picture.

  10. Aren't people kind of asking for it? by morgauo · · Score: 1

    Why do people buy a mutlti-hundred dollar phone capable of running pretty much the same apps as a home computer and not get a Nationwide plan with unlimitted data. Don't get me wrong, those plans are expensive and not everyone needs them... but... for those that don't just get a plain old cellphone!

    1. Re:Aren't people kind of asking for it? by _Swank · · Score: 1

      and when you travel internaationally and bring your phone for its other functions? ooops...

    2. Re:Aren't people kind of asking for it? by radish · · Score: 1

      It's international roaming that is the issue, there's pretty much no such thing as regional roaming any more (at least I haven't seen such a plan for a long time).

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    3. Re:Aren't people kind of asking for it? by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      A lot of people in my area still go for the local phone company's cell phones, and they're roaming outside of the area outside the state/a bit of the neighboring. A bunch more go for regional phones.

      Me, I travel several times a year, so have a national, but regionals are still offered. I went with the national because it was only like $2 more a month.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    4. Re:Aren't people kind of asking for it? by morgauo · · Score: 1

      Ok, I see the point regarding international roaming. I was more directing my statement towards those with regional phones. If you spend $200 or more on the phone but then skimp on the $2 nationwide plan or go with some tiny local telco maybe it's time to re-evaluate something, either the phone or the service. For people who frequently travel internationaly I guess this is a valid problem until Google (or the Android OSS community???) fixes it.

    5. Re:Aren't people kind of asking for it? by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Most of those types get the 'free phone with x year contract', and are happy enough - they don't travel.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
  11. Change APN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I think atm the only solution is changing the APN, so the G1 can't log on to the 2G/3G Data network.

  12. Killer App indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this is the kind of thing that might kill the platform. Get a couple well publicized incidents where customers have thousands of dollars charged due to downloading some "app" and the lack of controls/oversight on their application store will become glaringly obvious.

    Perhaps some "mission critical" devices should NOT be open source? (for your average Joe consumer anyway).

  13. "T-Mobile would have built a phone..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find it annoying that people get so confused about where their phones come from. The phone's software was created by Google and a company they acquired. The hardware was made by HTC. T-Mobile slapped their logo on it and probably made very small modifications to the software. If T-Mobile "built" this phone, then we have just radically redefined the meaning of "to build".

    People need to stop saying "the T-Mobile phone", "the new Verizon phone", etc. None of these phones are actually made by the carriers. Let's not legitimize their anti-consumer-freedom lock-in scheme by giving them too much credit.

  14. International by Rinisari · · Score: 1

    To my knowledge, this is international roaming, folks. When this story first broke approximately a week ago, I called T-Mobile to ensure that all phone and data roaming in the US was covered and they said it was.

    However, this might be just for my plan (MyFaves 600 and unlimited G1 data).

  15. heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    T-mobile is very, very evil company, actually in general all of T-com is super evil. In my country they like to put "T" stuff in software of the phone when you buy it from them. I remember few years ago they used to lock one of soft key buttons on the phone to their mobile web page.. And don't get me started about T-com's land line monopoly we have here... As i said evil.

  16. wesw02 by wesw02 · · Score: 1

    It would be possible to create a 3rd party app that detects if the phone is roaming and switches the phone to airplane mode (I.E. disabling all radio transmissions). Not quite desirable because this means that you can't use it to make or receive calls when roaming (without manual override), but it could be a lot better than the alternative.

  17. that's why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Software needs to come with a warranty as to suitability for purpose. Stuff like this that does considerable economic harm to the end user when they aren't doing anything wrong needs to be slammed right back at the developers and distributors economically until they cover the damages and fix what is broken or they can admit reality they are in over their head and go do something else for a living or just code games that aren't designed to be networked on the internet/telco system. That EULA nonsense that says "nothing is our fault" is beyond BS at this time. 40-50 years ago maybe software needed a little time to get up to speed to be classed and treated as normal consumer products, but not today, they should be treated like any other consumer product. They want the profits, they should be able to have a warranty.

    1. Re:that's why by WCguru42 · · Score: 1

      Amen. Wish I had mod points because you put it well. Software EULA statements are the most outrageous things in the world. We click accept because we want to use the programs and there doesn't really seem to be an alternative. But if people understood the language in these I think there would be more of a backlash to them. It's like a car company saying that they're not liable if their transmission falls off the chassis, it's just insane.

      --
      "Educate the mind but never at the expense of the soul."~Blessed Basil Moreau
  18. Why would the turn it off? by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

    If brings more money that any lawsuit could cost them, doesn't it?

    company :: [Consumer] -> Money
    company consumer:consumers =
        let screw consumer contract =
            if ((cost (possibleLawsuit (terms defaultContract)) consumer) > (projectedProfit contract consumer))
                  then (profit (makeContract defaultContract consumer))
                  else (screw consumer (tryToFix defaultContract))
        (screw consumer defaultContract) + (company consumers)
    company [] = bailout

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  19. Wow, seriously... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No roaming.

    Two simple words that customers from AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, and the rest of you village idiots will never hear. We T-Mobile customers have been hearing them for over a decade now. My Mom had a cell phone with Powertel (one of those old Nokia 9000 communicators) and we have been T-Mobile customers for all 14 years since. How much have we ever paid for roaming? I'll give you a hint: one whole number greater than -1. We have never, ever paid a single red cent for roaming or long distance, because T-Mobile has never, ever charged for it.

    So unless you're one of those people on AT&T trying to use a G1, this article is irrelevant simply because T-Mobile HAS NO ROAMING. When roaming all over the entire planet is free, who cares how much you do it?

    1. Re:Wow, seriously... by hplus · · Score: 1

      Bullshit - international roaming is not free with T-Mobile.

    2. Re:Wow, seriously... by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      But, on the other hand, it's not that expensive either.

      /T-mobile customer
      //travels often

    3. Re:Wow, seriously... by WCguru42 · · Score: 1

      That's only if you make sure to buy it in the plan when you're leaving the States. If you have the barebones plan with t-mobile I would think that the extra charge for international roaming might be quite high. Not that this is any different than the other providers, and it might be easier on t-mobile to switch to a cheaper international plan than with the others.

      --
      "Educate the mind but never at the expense of the soul."~Blessed Basil Moreau
  20. Triple core typo fail fix... by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry. I meant:

    It brings them more money than any lawsuit could cost them, doesn't it?

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  21. Bugfix company-0.1.1.hs by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

    company :: [Consumer] -> Money
    company consumer:consumers =
            let screw consumer contract =
                    if ((cost (possibleLawsuit (terms contract)) consumer) > (projectedProfit contract consumer))
                                then (profit (makeContract contract consumer))
                                else (screw consumer (tryToFix contract))
            (screw consumer defaultContract) + (company consumers)
    company [] = bailout

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  22. Why be surprised ? by WildStreet · · Score: 1

    As pointed out repeatedly, "Because they can" is exactly true. There is no incentive to give the customer help, information, or respect. All they want is the cash out of your pocket. Forget the "Jobs will be lost" crap. They have us addicted, and will not give that leverage away until we just plain stop buying their service. As for me, I have never paid for a personal cell phone service, and never will. I get along very fine thank you. A lot of people need mobile service, I understand this. So, when I say "I refused to be laughed at during the next board meeting" please don't take it personal.

    1. Re:Why be surprised ? by justinlee37 · · Score: 1

      Board members would laugh at you for owning a cell phone? Those dinosaurs.

      Your post is stupidly hysterical, you've gone out on a huge limb and decided that because some cell phone companies are pushy, there must be something wrong with cell phones.

      I use "Cricket" and it's been a godsend. Their business model is to give everyone unlimited minutes / SMS texting, but limit the non-roaming service range to the local metropolitan area. It's targeted towards people who use their phone a lot but don't leave the city often.

      On top of being able to get unlimited service for $45/mo., the best part is that there are no contracts. That's right, you don't have to agree to a 1 or 2 year service period ... you pay month-to-month and there's no penalty for discontinuing service.

      This might still seem superfluous, but you must understand that I don't pay for a landline telephone ... the cell phone is the only phone I'll ever need.

      Really, couldn't you hysterically bitch about almost any company in any industry re: how "all they want is the cash out of your pocket?" Of course I think companies realize (at least some of them) that good customer service makes people more willing to take the case out of their pockets.

      In summary ... man, lay off the crazy pills.

    2. Re:Why be surprised ? by WildStreet · · Score: 1

      AH! So you did take it personal.

    3. Re:Why be surprised ? by justinlee37 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Yeah, sue me, I couldn't help it =P

    4. Re:Why be surprised ? by WildStreet · · Score: 1

      I maybe should have been more detailed anyway. My point was on the hidden charges, the surprise charges, and the way the cell providers milk the extra dime. It would appear at first blush that I think cell phones are a bad thing. Far from it. This will of course cause me to review my posts a little closer, even though I will not stop taking my crazy pills. :)

    5. Re:Why be surprised ? by justinlee37 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I hate that stuff too, which is why I wouldn't dream of leaving Cricket for any of the big-name companies like AT&T, Verizon or T-Mobile.

  23. Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm Android G1 owner, and can show that roaming can be switched off with single check-box.

    1. Re:Bullshit by egomaniac · · Score: 1

      No, you can demonstrate that there is a checkbox which claims to disable roaming. The whole point of this article is that it doesn't actually do so.

      --
      ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
  24. get a haircut and a job and a shower by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Forced? Regulated? Let them do this, stop them doing that? Fuck you and all the other stinking communist hippies.

  25. Mistake? by StikyPad · · Score: 1

    Oh.. yyyeah. We're real sorry about that "mistake", guys. Never meant to make a shitload of money through roaming charges. It's of the utmost importance that we prevent our customers' money from falling into our hands, and we'll do anything necessary to prevent it.

    Love always,
    T-Mobile

  26. Throwing out ten thousand babies by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Truly free capitalism degenerates pretty quickly into monopolies and cartels (which are illegal for a reason).

    Not always, but even when so you can still make exploitation of monopoly status illegal (remember, it's not illegal to be wildly successful - only to EXPLOIT that position for unfair gain) while leaving the market otherwise open and unregulated.

    Instead what you have with lots of regulation is the muct worse case where you have a cartel that cannot be expelled from the market by a better competitor - because over time regulations are worked to favor the existing players in the market. That's why you see so much ossification around things like car companies, electronics makers, etc. etc. - just the cost of complying with regulations is a wide moat to cross for a small company.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Throwing out ten thousand babies by Serious+Callers+Only · · Score: 1

      because over time regulations are worked to favor the existing players in the market.

      Perhaps this points to a bankrupt political system which allows bribery to influence or even buy officials, rather than some fault in regulations per se? My point is that these issues should be approached in a pragmatic way, not with some dogma about 'regulations are evil', or even 'capitalism is evil'.

      I agree that regulations can sometimes lead to ossification and restrict competition, but in the case of the US, and the cell phone market in particular, regulations are simply not in place to restrict predatory practices like overpricing of roaming calls. Perhaps they should be?

  27. Another issue with automatic SMS.... by mrboyd · · Score: 1

    You are correct. Sadly this is a design flaw that was probably understood as a feature by Google with hope it would force all network to come up with unlimited data plan.

    More precisely you have absolutely no control on which applications does what on the network once they are installed. Authorization to use the network (any network type, wifi, 3g, edge etc.) is given at installation time and is unrevocable.

    This is a terrible mistake. By definition the environment of a mobile phone will change, people will travel, some carrier do not have unlimited data plan. It's obvious that at some point someone will connect a G1 to another network than t-mobile and pay for that mistake.

    When I travel, sometime for extended period of time, I use local SIM cards to avoid paying roaming fees to my operator (not t-mobile). I had to turn off 3g connections by deleting all APN entries to make sure that no applications would use those network.

    There is Another niceness which this time is T-Mobile US fault and not google's that didn't get any exposure. The MyFaves application that is hidden deep inside the contact manager needs to update it's status by automatically sending SMS to T-Mobile. When the phone is used on another network than T-Mobile the application bugs and starts sending SMS every few minutes potentially costing a fortune to the owner. There is no way to remove it for the retards at T-Mo decided the best way to implements the feature was to butcher the default contact provider (the "library" that every other application uses to read the contact list) of the android codebase instead of creating a standalone application.

    Some smart people at xda-developer (http://forum.xda-developers.com/forumdisplay.php?f=448) have found a way around it for the lucky few who have one of the original firmware that can be rooted and upgraded with a custom image.

    For other people even if they have received their unlock code from T-Mobile, if they have tried to put another SIM they might end up with a very ugly bill at the end of the month.

  28. Mini tinfoil hat by Krneki · · Score: 1

    I have no idea how this Android works, but all you need is a confirmation box before your applications starts to call, SMS, browse the net ...

    And maybe an internal trust application system, where you can customize what is allowed. Totally inaccessible to [u][b]all[/b][/u] the application or we end up with another Windows firewall who can be opened by any kid script.

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
  29. Uh, no. by Kazin · · Score: 2, Informative

    From what I can tell, this is a case of people not really knowing what they're talking about. There is no documented way to turn on this setting from in an application. And just because an app has permission to use the internet does not say it can change this roaming setting.

    Some reference: http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers/browse_thread/thread/ee7bc6309c865672/77003d32c992752c/

  30. ifconfig ... by NuShrike · · Score: 1

    ifconfig cel0 down

    wtf

  31. Flex Plan fixes this.... by TheNarrator · · Score: 1

    I got a T-Mobile flex plan. You always pay the same amount every month. A separate flex account is provided for roaming and other charges. You refill your flex account over the phone or online as needed. If your flex account runs dry your roaming is disabled and you have to add money -- but at least there aren't any surprise bills.

  32. Check your account online by soundguy · · Score: 1

    Anyone that gets billed for "thousands of dollars" by T-mobile is a fucking idiot. They have an online near-real-time account statement that shows all your calls and fees. If you're too goddamn lazy to check your account once in awhile to see if you are getting financially sodomized, then you deserve exactly what you get.

    If your online statement starts showing unusual activity or fees, SHUT THE DAMNED PHONE OFF until you can figure out what the problem is!

    I'm also getting pretty sick of all the cheap fucks around here whining about per-message SMS fees. THERE ARE NO FEES if you just buy the damned unlimited messaging plan for about ten bucks a month. Anyone that gets an SMS bill for hundreds of dollars is too stupid to live.

    --
    Nothing worthwhile ever happens before noon
  33. No need by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    I agree that regulations can sometimes lead to ossification and restrict competition, but in the case of the US, and the cell phone market in particular, regulations are simply not in place to restrict predatory practices like overpricing of roaming calls. Perhaps they should be?

    Why though? There's no point when it used to be the case that you'd have roaming calls traveling around the U.S. - but that's not true today. All of the roaming under discussion is international roaming, which we can't help much via regulation... inherently the cure has to come from companies realizing that some things work better with coopetition, just as they have already in the U.S.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley