Slashdot Mirror
Why Unlocked Phones Don't Work In the US
schnell writes "Unlocked cellular devices have long been a part of the wireless landscape in Europe and elsewhere. But longtime industry analyst Andrew Seybold explains why that model doesn't work in the US due to technology and frequency differences, and why LTE adoption may not make things any better."
Technology and frequency differences? You've got to be shitting me. They don't work because the cell operators are greedy assholes.
I only use unlocked phones and prepaid plans, T-Mobile, PagePlus mostly. It can be done. There are plenty of unlocked phones available on NewEgg, Dell, Amazon, and Craigslist.
Most of the phones I've ever owned have been unlocked, purchased direct from Nokia. Never had any issues with them "not working" with any carrier I could purchases a SIM card from.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
The phone companies(at least in Germany) have sort of found away around having to deal with people with unlocked phones moving from provider to provider, namely it's impossible to find reasonably priced data plans without signing a 2 year contract. The only data plans you could get were per-day plans at a cost of 5 euros a day. If you just use your phone to check your email you are looking at 150 euros a month, 2.5x the usual Telekom unlimited data plan(without even factoring in the free voice minutes you get). And by the time you have signed a contract, you might as well get the subsidized locked phone because it's going to be obsolete in 2 years anyway.
Monstar L
Yeah, breaking up Ma Bell was a terrible idea. I just loved having to pay rent on every phone in my house every month, because you weren't allowed to own your own phone.
You know nothing.
Breaking up Ma Bell wasn't the best idea our friends in DC ever had.
I don't think that breaking Bell was bad. The problem was that the government let the companies to do whatever they wanted.
In Europe standardization is usually taken more seriously, thus avoiding each country doing whatever they want and things becoming a total mess. That should be easier to do in a single country, and it's really a shame the US has such problems.
I'm not sure why we put up with it
Because most people who consider a mobile phone in the United States find it preferable to the alternative: no phone service and no handheld device.
My 4-band Nokia GSM phone worked fine with AT&T and T-Mobile.
Well, I basically just make voice calls, so maybe that's the issue...
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
So buy the phone you want, then get the contract and swap the sim into the phone you wanted. Now sell the "free" phone on ebay.
I used to have a Motorola quad-band GSM phone on AT&T. I unlocked it so I could bring it to Australia and New Zealand when I went there a few years ago. Worked absolutely fine for me. I still keep the phone handy for if/when I travel abroad in the future.
he has analysed nothing. how much money these "analysts" are paid for stating the bleeding obvious is beyond me. this should be under the no-shit-sherlock dept.
I dunno; with the 2 clauses Google got the FCC to wire into the license terms, I had high hopes for LTE... Any app, any device; you can go far with that...
You might want to read this article, it was written in 1984 before the internets, it sums it up nicely. http://www.porticus.org/bell/whatkilledmabell.html
The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
They don't "not work" because of "technology and frequency differences,", they have trouble because the oligopoly of telecom providers has worked hard to actively prevent unlocked phones from being marketable.
NATO split up the spectrum after WWII so that European military radios were on the US civilian frequencies and vice versa. The reason was so the US military could take its radios into Europe and use their default channels and not conflict with the allied military radios that were already there.
Most of the phones I've ever owned have been unlocked, purchased direct from Nokia.
For one thing, only T-Mobile has a discount for bringing your own unlocked phone rather than taking one of the subsidized phones. AT&T has no counterpart to T-Mobile's "Even More Plus" plans that knock $10/mo off voice or $20/mo off voice+data for purchasing the handset and SIM separately. But other Slashdot users appear to be of the opinion that T-Mobile has the worst coverage among the big four. For another, before I buy an N900 phone from Nokia, I want to know whether I will like it so that I'm not out $80 for return shipping and restocking fees for a phone that I turn out not to like.
Seriously, compare our rates. Our plans. The contracts lengths.
There's a reason why cellphones aren't as popular in Canada as everywhere else on the planet. And Canadians don't throw their money around like Americans and that's another thing bugging the cellphone companies.
And extortion is EXACTLY what it is. I would love to have cool new phones, but Verizon is the only service that works at my house. If I want to get an Android device, I am FORCED into a data contract. Buy the phone outright? Sure - $30/mo for data please. Why? I'm at work/home, free wireless. I want the better camera/video. I want the portable video/audio playing. I want the better apps and organizer functions. Have no need to pay outrageous fees for data access when free access is all around me 99% of the time.
Renewing with data contract on all my phones would DOUBLE the price of my plan. Not gonna happen. Hell, they won't even discount the plan price if I DO buy a phone outright. The only thing they have going is that the damn phones work where I am. It ought to be illegal to force services on someone that they don't want or need.
> that model doesn't work in the US due to technology and frequency differences
That doesn't seem to have been a problem in Australia or New Zealand where there are also frequency differences between networks.
You just buy a phone with the right frequency for your network (850 or 900/2100) and you're right. Some new phones like the iPhone 4 support both sets of frequencies so are are non-issue.
The real reason that model doesn't work in the US is due to the carriers being allowed (by the buying public, or by regulators, depending on your politics) to impose such terrible prices and terms.
Yeah, breaking up Ma Bell was a terrible idea. I just loved having to pay rent on every phone in my house every month, because you weren't allowed to own your own phone.
You know nothing.
You know less than you think. AT&T was a heavily-regulated government instituted monopoly, and it was a lot easier to regulate that single entity that it was to regulate what was left of AT&T after the breakup, and the thirteen so-called "Baby Bells" that provided local phone service. And now, they've all come back under the umbrella of SBC, only now without much of the regulation, and are if anything are more abusive to their customers, and more generally corrupt, than the old AT&T ever was. So tell me again how the breakup was inherently a "good thing (tm)?"
It wasn't necessary to break up AT&T just to break the lock on subscriber-level equipment: that would have been an easy change to the relevant regulations: "AT&T doesn't own your phones anymore." Done. AT&T was broken up because it was a monopoly, and some people in government don't like monopolies. AT&T never really understood what the furor was about, considering that it was the Federal Government that granted them their monopoly in the first place, in exchange for a specific regulatory burden, quality-of-service standards and (most importantly) universal coverage. When you hear complaints about Comcast, Verizon, AT&T and the like cherrypicking what locales they service, well, now you know why. Also remember that, up until that time, AT&T did offer just about the most reliable telephone service anywhere on the planet. No, it wasn't cheap, I agree.
The Feds tried to break up IBM, and failed, and (if I recall correctly) the head attorney on the government's side said, "Well, big isn't always bad." So there's not a whole lot of consistency when it comes to antitrust enforcement. If any company was deserving of a breakup at the time, it was probably IBM. But they got a free pass, and AT&T got shattered. And in the end, because the rise of packet-switched networking and the Internet changed everything anyway, we all got those cool services that Judge Greene wanted us to have, and it didn't take a breakup to do it. I'm not saying that it was the wrong thing to do (or the right thing, for that matter), I'm just saying that you're incorrect in assuming that such a heavy antitrust penalty was required in order to let you buy your own phones.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Buy a phone from ebay. Some phones, incredible is one I think, support doing data only over wifi.
When the dominant model is to buy the phone with the plan, why should the networks pay extra for the millions of phones they ship with plans when the only benefit is to make it easier for the customer to switch to a competitor? Better for them to ship a cheap phone that can't use all the competitors' services.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Ownership of subscriber level equipment was just the tip of the iceberg of Ma Bells' abuses. If that's all you have to go on, it's obvious you aren't old enough to remember how bad it was. SBC's abuses aren't a patch on Ma Bell's.
No, Samsung use them.
According to w'pedia:
As of January 30, 2009 Micro-USB has been accepted by almost all cell phone manufacturers as the standard charging port (including HTC, Motorola, Nokia, LG, Hewlett-Packard, Samsung, Sony Ericsson, Research In Motion) in the EU and most of the world. Worldwide conversion to the new cellphone charging standard is expected to be completed between 2010 to 2012.
I bought a Treo on the used market a few years back. Verizon won't activate a data-capable phone unless you buy a data plan. That's just how they work. If you try to switch from a standard phone to a smartphone via the web site, it'll tell you to call customer service, and they will tell you you HAVE to buy the data plan. No alternative.
You will get an AT&T phone that will work on T-Mobile but unless the phone has both AT&T frequency bands and T-Mobile frequency bands, you wont get 3G data.
Ownership of subscriber level equipment was just the tip of the iceberg of Ma Bells' abuses. If that's all you have to go on, it's obvious you aren't old enough to remember how bad it was. SBC's abuses aren't a patch on Ma Bell's.
I guess you misunderstood me. The GP was saying that AT&T was broken up just because of their lock on subscriber equipment. Obviously there was more to it than that.
And the term "abuse" takes many forms. I do remember that AT&T's field service types were well-trained, and always did the job right. At least that was always our experience. Yet, ever since the breakup, the quality of field service has been dropping, to the point where I've had these guys just leave bare wires hanging from my ceiling. The last time I had service from SBC, the pricks charged me over $350 for "installation" when the house was already wired and the tech just plugged in his test set and got tone. They claimed the technician was in my house for five hours. I disagreed, and told them I wasn't going to pay, so they turned off my service. I went cellular for a while until I got Comcast Digital Voice (not that Comcast was much of an improvement.)
Never had a problem with anything like that when AT&T was running the show. So, there are tradeoffs. We broke up the monopoly and got more competition, but we failed to maintain a proper regulatory stance. AT&T's abuses were largely systemic, and yes that resulted in higher phone bills, but their service was pretty damn good. And they weren't allowed to cherrypick: you wanted a phone, you got it, whether you were in a city or on a farm.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Did you tell them it was a Treo?
My understanding was you just do not mention the type of phone and you are ok.
Asia has over 850 million mobile subscribers this year, mind you that's more than the living human population of the US and Europe combined! Asia mobile subscriber growth rates far exceed and are predicted to continue to exceed the US and Europe for the next 5 years, continuing to out pace both those markets. Asia is like Europe, in that you buy the phone and the service separately, they are not tied together (phones are not locked). Now why did the author not mention Asia?
Real men don't need signitures!!!
For USA cellular phone networks, It's all about the money. Period!
I'm using an Android phone with Rogers Pay as you go in Canada. There is a configuration setting to disable mobile data, it's very easy to turn off and use with Wifi only. They don't sell Android phones on pay as you go plans, but that doesn't mean you can't buy the phone outright, buy a pay as you go chip separately, and disable the mobile data option on the phone. I'd be quite surprised if the situation in the US were any worse than here.
It's popular to talk about why 'unlocked' phones, but I would wager that the vast majority of unlocked phone buyers do not care that the phone is unlocked. It's irrelevant. We're not planning to switch networks. It's the contract that is the problem. Locked phones are fine as long as they're off contract. And off contract is exactly where cell companies don't want their customers to be.
Exactly. This USED to be a problem back in the 90s and early 2000s when a lot of phones were only dualband (e.g. 900/1800). Any phone less than five years old will be at least triband now, and any phone that is less than 2 or 3 years old will be quad band or higher. Frequency differences are quickly becoming a non-issue in most GSM markets these days, provided you stick to one of the widely used frequencies: 850, 900, 1800, 1900, 2100.
They do. For as many places as they're in, their coverage tends to be rather iffy if you get out of the major metro areas.
Totally depends on what you're after. It's a so-so phone, but a pocket computer like none-other. Phone capabilities were tertiary (but still essential) for me, behind data and hackability. It's got some things that make no sense, and some that are just dumb, but I won't go to Android from here, never mind WP7 or the iPhone. And if you use Linux regularly, all the capability is there if you want it.
If you move the sim it will eventually update.
Dunno how accurate it is, but they may just move you to a data plan.
Kinda like what ATT threatened to do if they found you had an iphone on their network without a data plan.
I'm going to suspect this is more due to deficiencies in their network setup rather then just being plain evil. (Well, it is verizon so likely they are just being plain evil).
Years back the way sprint managed network access was through a wap proxy. If you just swapped out your own wap proxy in the configs you could bypass the data charge and simply consume normal minutes. (Free on nights and weekends!).
"You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
I am the GP, and I didn't say AT&T was broken up JUST because of their lock on subscriber equipment. It was just one blatant example of their abuse I could describe adequatly in a single sentence.
I'm using an Android phone with Rogers Pay as you go in Canada. There is a configuration setting to disable mobile data, it's very easy to turn off and use with Wifi only. They don't sell Android phones on pay as you go plans, but that doesn't mean you can't buy the phone outright, buy a pay as you go chip separately, and disable the mobile data option on the phone. I'd be quite surprised if the situation in the US were any worse than here.
Well, as an American I've heard stories about Rogers, as I'm sure you've heard stories about Verizon. More to the point, whatever you have heard about Verizon, well, it's true. They really do suck that badly. I'm fortunate that I can get T-Mobile: I wouldn't want Verizon, Sprint or AT&T at this point.
It is kinda ironic that one of the most consumer-friendly carriers in the U.S. is nothing more than the domestic extension of Germany's Deutsche Telekom, the obnoxious entrenched incumbent over there. Here they're the underdog, and that means they're willing to work more for their business. Well, they were: with this business about the G2 locking out third-party firmware I have to wonder (yeah, it's been cracked, but it shouldn't have to be.)
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
There was a lot more to it than this. AT&T was prohibited from being in certain markets (computers) because of the "regulated monopoly" status. They had fantastic technology available via Bell Labs, but they couldn't sell it directly. They also had UNIX. They owned it. But they couldn't make money off it.
The government wouldn't let AT&T sell computers because it was believed they would have an unfair advantage in the marketplace if they controlled everything from end to end. They could make their computers work better or cheaper on their networks. Few people remember now how much it used to cost to connect a third party modem to a Bell phone line. But you could rent a modem from Bell that would plug right in! And then you'd pay, and pay, and pay rent forever.
The management of AT&T decided it was better for the company to be broken up so they could get the new entities into markets they thought would make them more money than just carrying traffic. At that time, the small computer industry was beginning to take off, and they wanted a piece of that. They wanted to take on IBM, and even without the local providers, they were still about the only company large enough to succeed.
This isn't about technology, or customer service, it's about BUSINESS. Everyone who owned AT&T stock got shares in all of the new entities, and the idea was that the new entities, moving into new markets, could make more revenue combined than the old monolith. That translates into higher overall dividends, and higher aggregate share prices.
It's all about "maximizing shareholder value".
Sometimes in business, you have to think about what your company can be, rather than what it IS. If the railroads had thought this way, they could have been the first into the airline business, but they thought of themselves as RAILROADS, and not as "transportation providers", and by the time they realized what was happening, it was too late.
The management of AT&T tried to branch out, to get into the game, but unfortunately nobody thought of them as a computer company. They didn't discover how to properly market their new products till they were outclassed by the other players. Their early UNIX boxes were good products that just never sold well.
Unless it's changed very recently, Verizon doesn't use SIMs. You have to call or go in and activate it. And they can tell the model of phone from the serial number of the phone.
But, yeah, AT&T can also detect the model once you put your SIM in and many models get you an instant, forced "courtesy upgrade" to a data plan, though that may have changed recently with their data plan restructuring. Fortunately, they don't recognize my wife's Nokia 9800 ExpresMusic as a "smart" phone, so we can just use WiFi on it.
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
For the average US resident that has little reason to use their phone outside the US, the only reason to have an unlocked phone is simply to say one has an unlokced phone. For some people, buying the lock phone and breaking it is half the fun. For people who travel outside the US, it is probably more likley that there will be a cost advantage to buy a prepaid phone in the destination country if a phone is needed. For instance, AFIK, if I went to the UK a phone with a hour of air time and many text messages would be less than 30 GBP. It would probably cost me more to use my own phone with international plan charges and roaming charges.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Totally depends on what you're after. It's a so-so phone, but a pocket computer like none-other.
I'm not interested in a phone as much as a pocket computer. The problem is that I'm not a fan of paying upwards of $50 per month for phone service when I currently pay $5 per month to Virgin Mobile USA because I use fewer than 40 voice minutes per month, mostly to arrange a ride to or from somewhere. I'd even be satisfied with a Wi-Fi-only device, but chains like Sears and Best Buy don't have the Samsung Galaxy Player 50 or Archos 43 yet.
It's nice. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]
Oracle bought Ninnle, quietly fired all the Devs and shut it down.....Damn you to Hell, Larry! Why?
The main point of the article should have been that the EU created a competitive landscape by restricting competitors to interoperability standards that do not exist in the USA - i.e. allowing customers to go from carrier to carrier without the need for a new phone. Here in the US, you are automatically subsidizing a new phone when you sign up for service with any major wireless company - and if you don't use the subsidy by buying a new phone every two years, then you're leaving money on the table. Yes, a waste, but that's what evolved over here vs. the general EU model of the customer providing the phone and the carrier supplying the SIM (though subsidized plans exist).
Me, I'd prefer the ability to switch carriers and not to have this hidden subsidy. If the phone works and you're happy with it, why quasi-require the owner to chuck it for a new model? Just more e-waste with no tangible benefit except for those that like to further line the pockets of wireless carriers through the use of additional (previously unreachable) services. I also like that the EU mandates that the caller to the cell pays for the call. Seriously cuts down spam calls - because calls to cell phones are 5x more expensive than landline calls. An additional benefit is the possibility of giving a phone to your kid and being able to call them at will - but they cannot make calls unless they refill the SIM bank account.
Anyhow, IIRC, the iPhone 4 has two external antennas that are nominally tuned to certain frequencies but which through some electronic happiness inside can actually cover a wider variety of frequencies than the one that they are 'naturally' resonant on. So your signal quality on a 700MHz band using a nominal 850MHz antenna may not be great, but it may still work. The current iPhone 4 is capable of handling signals ranging from 850MHz-2.4GHz... so the current design limitations may be just that, limits by design to lock folk into AT&T in the US market. Then again, I don't know enough about all the technologies, compatibility issues, etc. to say for sure that it can be done.
$20 a month discount is almost $500 over two years. A Nokia N8 is $550 at Newegg.com, but I think one can do a bit better. Most good phones cost over $100 on a subsidized plan. So I think the case can be made for consumer appeal right now - regardless of whether you can change carriers or not. What I want my government to do is its job - foster competition by mandating that all US carriers have to offer non-subsidized plans with significant discounts to allow manufacturers to make phones and market them directly to consumers and not have the consumer screwed over by paying the same rate as someone who buys a subsidized phone.
Going forward, we really should be converging on not necessarily a single worldwide standard, but a group of standards and frequencies that can easily be achieved by phones that cost around $500 in a few years. Then it will be even better when you can move the phone across networks in the US. If only the majority of the US realized how often we are not #1 in a particular area (cell phone plans, internet, health care, transportation infrastructure, ...), maybe we could apply enough pressure to get our government to do something. But so many of us think that we do things best and the government should just get out of the way. Do we have to fall down completely before figuring out we can be better?
I'm from the US so obviously my math is really poor. So let me take my socks off so I can do some basic math. $2,000 is $83 a month. Are you saying you get an $83 a month discount for having an unlocked phone? That's fucking awesome! Where are you where they are so cool? I don't even pay anywhere near that per line to start with, so let's see. Time for some advanced math, let me take my underwear off so I can carry the one.
$120/month buys me a "family plan" with three telephones and AT&T provided all three phones for a penny a pop. So, if I understand your math correctly, each of those phones will cost me an additional $1,999.99 over the life of the two-year plan, totaling $5999.97 which is about $250 a month over 24 months. I'm paying about $120 a month, so if I had only bought unlocked phones AT&T would be paying me $130 a month, right? God, I'm such a fucking stupid American who is so bad at math I missed an opportunity for AT&T to pay me $130 a month to have their service!
Since most major carriers in the US give ZERO discount for buying an unlocked phone, we'd be paying the money anyway, might as well get a damned phone for it. Even the is a relatively progressive companies offer about a $30/month discount for unlocked phones. Over the two years that generally means a contract, that's $720. Now, don't get me wrong, you can get a pretty awesome phone for $720, but my American math is so stupid I can't figure out how I can save the other $1280 you say my phone would otherwise cost me over the two years. Not to mention the fact that there's no signal anywhere near where I live for any of the companies that offer a discount, so I could save the $720 to have a phone with zero bars and is incapable of making telephone calls. But I've saved $720, how fucking awesome is that, huh?
My wife has an unlocked phone, but only because it allows her to have a smart phone with WiFi and we don't have to buy a data plan. If she wanted a data plan, there'd be no point in an unlocked phone at all, since the data plan is $15-30 a month whether she uses an AT&T provided phone or we bought one. But she's OK with only having data while at home, so the $250 we spent on the phone will actually save us somewhere around a couple hundred bucks over the life of the contract. So we come out ahead $50. Over two years. Woo-freaking-hoo.
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
The point of an unlocked phone is not really international travel. It is being able to switch providers quickly and easily so that you can get a better plan. Let's say you are on carrier A. Six months down the road, carrier B comes along with a plan that kicks carrier A's plan's ass.
If your phone is unlocked/uncontracted, you can just go to carrier B's store, sign up and pop carrier B's SIM card in and off you go. Call carrier A to cancel your account with them.
Now as you say, in the US, this doesn't happen because the carriers don't even OFFER SIM-only/Bring Your Own Phone plans to begin with. But in most other countries where phones ~are~ unlocked, it is the ability to constantly change carriers as better deals come along that is the big attraction to them. Being able to go abroad easily is just a bonus.
The summary is idiotic. The article isn't explaining why unlocked phones can't work in the US. It's merely stating the obvious facts that unlocking an AT&T phone wont work out that well for you right now...
The big problem? The EU has one standard, while the US has two. The EU standard uses 3 frequencies, while each US standard uses four. Big deal. A trivial technical issue requiring a universal phone to cost 5$ more. They don't exist for one simple reason... the carriers in the US are allowed to lock you in, and its more profitable for them to do so.
That's not to say it matters. Cell companies do such a good job advertising, that people will complain endlessly about their phone bill, but never switch to some other service with unlimited calling/data for half the price. Even with unlocked phones, their behavor wont magically change.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
I have two unlocked Nexus One phones, one tuned for AT&T 3G and one for T-Mobile 3G. Either will work with any GSM service, but depending on the phone they may only get Edge/2g and not 3g for data. The key is in the on-board power amplifiers. All of the Nexus One phones handle all the available frequencies, but don't have power amps for all of them. A PITA, for sure, but for basic phone and data services, it's fine. I have an AT&T account and want/need the speed 3g gives me for some things when on the road, which is why I purchased the second phone. I was given the one tuned for T-Mobile, so it would only get Edge for data (200kbps vs. 2mbps for 3g) from AT&T.
Sometimes, real fast is almost as good as real-time.
Other than Apple who is not using the micro USB interface these days?
I would bet at this point I would be more likely to find an iPod charging cable in a store, than a USB cable.
Think about it. Imagine trying to buy a cable - I could see a handful of iPhone accessories in a 7-11, but probably not a micro-usb cable.
Normally proprietary cables are bad news, but ubiquity always trumps universality.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The subscriber level equipment was the best thing about Ma Bell. The stuff was indestructible. And if you could manage to break it, you were rewarded with a new one, free of charge. The only real issue I remember was line leasing abuses, which were quite extensive. Very similar to the old railroad monopolies. The breakup has given us comparability problems and little else. The actual monopoly is as powerful as ever.
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
OK, downvoted twice with no response. Interesting. So the mods think it *is* just a technical problem? Or took offense to me pointing out the lack of sane regulation?
If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
Don't worry, mods use overrated when they disagree and are too much of a pussy to actually respond with an argument.
And India is not even mentioned. China has even more.
I guess the number quoted by GP for Asia is way too understated.
That said, the trend of locked phones exits mostly in CDMA networks in India(less than 30% of subscriber base), and that too only for the ultra cheap phones which cost around 20$ unlocked.
On most networks, people buy phones of their choice according to their budget, and then chose the network.
My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
It hasn't changed, CDMA doesn't use SIMs.
I hate to tell you, but SBC is AT&T again...
The discussion above also confirms this - why everyone repeats this mantra about contracts? You buy contract only once with given provider, once it expires, stay on month-to-month, like in other parts of the world. And get a good unlocked phone.
Right now, Nokia phones on AT&T is the best possible money saver - AT&T does not have database with their IMEI, so they don't force you to pay through the nose for data. If you are individual, unlimited is just 15 bucks. Family? Granted, you already paying for unlimited messaging - then you just add $10 on top for unlimited data. That's it. Here is your $15-$20 monthly discount for unlocked phone.
And if you buy Nokia's latest N8, you get - imagine that! - 9 (nine) band phone, 4 GSM and 5 HSDPA bands, so you are 3G-covered not only in Europe/Asia, but in North America as well.
So, what is not working is the brain of some tech "journalists", unlocked phones are all good, for people, who know how things work.
I don't know if that is true or not. I did a month long road trip around the country this summer, and I got suprisingly good coverage from T-Mobile. Death Valley, Wyoming, North Dakota, Yellowstone and Yosemite all had no service. Pretty much everywhere else I got at least edge, and most places I got 3G. We were mostly on and around the freeways though. You also have to keep in mind that T-Mobile has a roaming agreement with AT&T. So, you will get voice and Edge anywhere that AT&T does.
Prior to T-Mobile, I was with Verizon, and I surprisingly found that locally I have gotten a little better coverage with a little lower quality with T-Mobile compared to Verizon. My travel generally runs from Santa Rosa, CA to Pittsburgh, CA
Quite right.
The technology, regardless of the band, is the same. Granted, the US operated in the 850/1900 FDD2/4/5 bands, and the EU not. Nearly 100% of all handsets support 4 bands GSM and 3 bands UMTS (FDD bands).
I know this since mobile phone certification is what I do for a living!
The SIM tech is not different. In fact, it's not allowed to be different. Not if they want to use GSM. They MUST conform to the core specs, otherwise they cannot certify their handset.
In the US, they must get PTCRB certification from a company like 7 Layers. In the EU, they normally should get GCF certification, though that is actually self regulated, while in the US, PTCRB enforces it's certification requirements for ALL GSM handsets.
Basically, the article is complete shit. When you get you information from a Carrier, you should expect them to explain why what they are doing is better for everyone.
The real reason is because Americans wont pay 600 bucks for a smart phone and a carrier wont subsidize the phone without knowing they can make the money back 3 fold over the contract. It's really rather simple.
Nice idea! Virtual mod point from me.
Four-band GSM phones work fine in the U.S., and all over the world. T-Mobile has a pre-paid plan for 10 U.S. cents per minute for those who don't often use a cell phone. T-Mobile will unlock the phones for you when you have been on their network for 3 months, if I remember correctly.
When you arrive in Campos do Jordão, Brazil, for example, just buy a SIM card for $7.50 U.S., and you will have a local number to give to anyone you meet there. And, of course, Google has cheap rates to every country, so people in the U.S. can call you while you are in Brazil.
See this article, which tested, and confirmed, the new Nokia N8's support for high-speed data on both major GSM carriers in the US: http://thenokiablog.com/2010/10/01/nokia-n8-3g-speed-test/
The Nokia N8 supports 3G on both AT&T and T-Mobile: http://thenokiablog.com/2010/10/01/nokia-n8-3g-speed-test
I don't get this. What keeps you from just buying the (unlocked) smartphone that you want and where you want and using that with a simple prepaid SIM card which works in the Verizon net? Maybe from a reseller, not directly from Verizon (if you have such in the USA).
In Europe, all cell phones will need to be chargeable via micro USB interface starting January 2011. This might sound like manufacturers have become all green and nice and wanted to cooperate, but it was really the result of pressure put by the commission. They do a lot of bad shit, but some things they do are worth noting, like this one. Link to article.
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,5852237,00.html
except it's actually lasseize-faire monopoly/duopoly subsidized by the FCC. By allowing different regions of the world to exist on different frequencies, they're effectively region-locking the hardware by default.
No hardware manufacturer has any incentive to provide any more support than the minimal required by regulation and necessity. Therefore, the USA is still a black-hole for any of the released devices because the frequencies are one-offs for anybody else in the world. Effective competition therefore cannot exist in such an environment.
Allowing this situation to continue into LTE is continuing the subsidizing of device lock-out monopolies.
Erm, I know that the plans here in Germany aren't the best, but you obviously haven't looked very hard at the deals out there as what you are saying in clearly false.
o2 Germany offer 1gig/month (there after at 2.5g speeds, unlimited) as a bolt on for 15 euros/month which can be cancelled with 3 months notice. 25 euros/month gives you unlimited 3g. In fact, if all you want to do is check email, 5 euros a month gives you 20mb of 3g speed and unlimited 2.5g a month. Couple that with a 10 euro base plan (which gives you 100minutes talk time and 100sms), that is only 15 euros a month. (www.o2online.de)
Then there is Blau.de which offer a similar package for under 10 euros/month for data and a 4euro option for voice. The blau plan runs on a month by month basis as well, so no 2 year contract. Oh, and you could look at e-plus as well, which offer similar priced plans.
About the only company out here that does tend to be expensive is vodafone.
I have never used a locked and subsidised phone here in Germany and have managed fine with reasonable rates. Maybe you need to look a bit harder for decent plans... (although it isn't that hard really). I think you need to change provider...
They must have gotten better from when I looked, I no longer live in the country, so oh well.
Monstar L
Link is down? Google cached here: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:HdaOm4yMaSkJ:www.fiercewireless.com/story/seybolds-take-fallacy-unlocked-phones/2010-11-10+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=ubuntu
. Are you saying you get an $83 a month discount for having an unlocked phone? That's fucking awesome!
I think you're missing the (rather badly made) point. Go to a Eurpoean mobile telco website (e.g. TMobile UK). It doesn't matter because the prices are all the same*. You can get a contract for £10, for a basic service, £15 with data and so on. That comes to £360 over two years = $580, give or take. So if your mobile bill is about $2000 over 2 years, you're effectively paying $1400 for the phone.
Of course, the US telcos are Evil(tm), so it's not like you have a choice anyway.
*is that collusion or market forces? who knows?
SJW n. One who posts facts.
All you have to do is rewrite the baseband radio tables. There are radio tables available for use in the iPhone that allow use on T-Mobile networks.
The iPhone antenna is not so optimized for the AT&T frequences that it can't work in the T-Mobile frequency ranges, despite what the article is claiming here.
-- Terry
Breaking up Ma Bell wasn't the best idea our friends in DC ever had.
Here in the Uk & Europe we've got loads of different phone companies - a monopoly isn't required for standardisation, just sensible regulation. We can standardise multiple companies over 24 countries, somehow you failed to standardise anything over a single country. Amazing.
If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
Are SIM cards a necessary part of GSM, and are they inherently not compatible with CDMA?
I.e., would it be possible to imagine a tech spec that used CDMA for radio transmission, and used SIM (or similar) cards to allow the phone know "what phone number am I"?
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
In addition to that, it's a virtuous cycle: You can change to a better plan because the phone is unlocked.
But also, because people have unlocked phones, carriers are more responsive, and offer better plans. After all, why bother to offer a better plan if your customers are captive?
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
Yeah, it has got a lot better in recent years. I know it used to be pretty bad, but when the iphone came out, the other companies had to change their pricing model to compete.
I agree with everything you say, but you still use the fucked up US terminology. A phone isn't "subsidized" to $100; you pay an additional $20 / month for 24 months or a total of $580 for it. Not paying $20 a month for a phone is not a "discount" if you don't get the phone. Allowing bundling of product and service in the US has let the carriers not only raise the price of the service to ridiculous levels but even define language to use their own doubleplusgood terms.
We have pretty much the same everything at the same prices in Finland, but all the parts are priced separately. When you pay 17 euros a month for you Galaxy S you don't call it "subsidized" or "free" even though there's no up front cost.
The problem with that logic, of course, is that in the US the telcos do not charge you a higher rate to subsidize your phone; rather, they lock you into a contract for a certain amount of time (usually 2 years) to guarantee a certain amount of cash flow from you.* Once the contract ends, you continue paying exactly the same rates. If you walk into a US carrier with an unlocked phone that you already own, you will pay the same rate as somebody who gets a "free" subsidized phone -- the only difference is that you will not be locked in to using their service for 2 years. Looked at from that perspective, you could argue that by not taking the subsidized phone you're paying hundreds of dollars to continue using the phone you already own (though a monthly rate plan is, of course, not your only option when you already own the phone, particularly if it is unlocked). * Unless, that is, something has changed in the 2-1/2 years since I moved outside of the US.
Thing is, companies keep building out to these different standards precisely because consumers let themselves be locked into one or the other, and didn't demand portability.
Free markets do a lot of things right. Here's a case, in my opinion, of them not working so well: consumers often fail to understand complex issues.
Understanding that you should pick the ice cream that says "vanilla" on the tin if you prefer that flavor to chocolate is something everyone can do, and the producers and retailers organize themselves according to the amounts demanded across the consumer base.
Understanding the long-term benefits of buying an open vs. closed platform---or more abstractly, buying a higher-level plan economy vs. free market---is not something people do well. Either that, or they prefer the benefits of closed systems more than I do :-)
For example, Microsoft likes to say that Windows is an open platform---anyone can write software that goes on top of it and Microsoft can do nothing to control people. The game console market functions differently; there's a lot of top-down control from the platform provider. Similarly for the Apple App Store.
Similar stories can be told about telecommunication and electricity: someone should operate the wires that make up the basic transmission system. Someone should deliver stuff via those wires (joules, voice calls, datagrams). If you own the base "platform" (wires), you might use that to control what the wires are used for.
People seem to prefer the iPhone to Android and Android to N900 (and the Freerunner). They like gaming consoles. They seem to be annoyed about incompatibilities and Little Dongly Things (http://www.douglasadams.com/dna/980707-03-a.html) but not do much about it in terms of their purchasing decisions. They tend to discount the long-term advantages of promoting open platforms and the greater amount of innovation that tend to happen on top of them. If people truly have short-term preferences, they're not wrong to do so, but see also Dan Gilbert and Daniel Kahnemann's TED(.com) talks.
(lesson from DNA: three things had to align; his preferences, the sales rep's understanding of those preferences and the sales rep's understanding of the product. By asking "are you sure?", you're not aligning any of those, you're just making the sales rep even more certain of their wrong conclusion. Instead, ask them directly about their observations, or ask about the same things in different terms, or ask about the negation; i.e. "does it have a power adapter? How does it look? How does it work?" Might help you do family tech support over the phone as well) /ramble (sorry)
You give them the MEID, and they look it up. They know. The web site won't activate a smartphone. It knows too.
I live in Europe, and have lived in other GSM countries. TA is indeed well written, but omits a crucial part of the story: how networks got their spectrum. Sure, GSM frequencies differ between carriers hindering mobility (in the go-somewhere-else meaning, not the look-I'm-driving-and-still-have-si......-hello? meaning), but I suspect it's because they applied for these differing spectra themselves. Of course you're not going to want to cohabit with your neighbour, it congests your frequencies (fallacious argument, European cities are DENSE) and encourages mobility. Funny that Europe should adopt standards that foster competition while North America is happy to indulge these companies and rip off the consumer just a little more.
No, but CDMA supports R-UIMs, which are compatible with SIMs (IOW, if you got a R-UIM from a CDMA operator, you should be able to use it in a GSM-based phone as a SIM).
But Sprint and Verizon don't want you to know that, just in case someone decides they should be required to:
1)Provide R-UIM-capable phones
2)Provide R-UIM cards
This lack of adoption of R-UIM by the US is harming global CDMA market share. In the end, I think CDMA is dead, because Sprint and Verizon seem more intent on competing with each other for the meagre (internationally) CDMA market, instead of throwing their weight in making CDMA as interoperable as GSM (in terms of SIM/handset swap, roaming, standardised international dialing etc. etc.).
Why is Android popular in the US? There's isn't much competition in CDMA except maybe Blackberry (no iPhone, no Nokia). Why isn't Android as popular outside the US? Very few CDMA-based Android phones support R-UIM, which is a regulatory requirement in some regions.
UMTS is based on GSM: "UMTS requires new base stations and new frequency allocations. However, it is closely related to GSM/EDGE as it borrows and builds upon concepts from GSM. Further, most UMTS handsets also support GSM, allowing seamless dual-mode operation."
The CDMA carriers in the U.S. have been distinctly inferior to the GSM carriers. Perhaps that is because CDMA was in the U.S. before GSM.
But if you don't already like S60 you will probably hate the N8.
It is one of the love hate type of things
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Have a look:
http://arstechnica.com/telecom/news/2009/06/10-companies-agree-to-standardized-mobile-phone-charger-in-eu.ars
Not long before that, they've forced mobile providers to drop roaming costs to 70 cent max. Now tell me how bad the government imposed competition and "regulation in general" is.
Unless it's a Blackberry Storm or Tour.
-- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
Dude, android's and operating system.
You're thinking of Droid, which is a Verizon exclusive.
Android is across the board GSM & CDMA with AT&T/T-Mobile/Sprint/Verizon/Cricket/etc.
-- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
But other Slashdot users appear to be of the opinion that T-Mobile has the worst coverage among the big four
Yeah I've never quite understood where people are getting these ideas from.
I have T-Mobile, and have absolutely no problem at all with coverage. At the same time, I have people all of the time saying how they have T-Mobile and their coverage is horrid and they wish they never chose them. I ask them for details and it always boils down to a situation which I've actually been in... and it works fine. (like, the exact same area...)
I'm at a loss, but hey...
-- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
so if Apple does it it's okay?
It's not OK if anyone does it.
It's not OK if anyone doesn't do it.
It just... is. The FACT is that because of the iPod, there are iPod dock connector to USB cables EVERYWHERE. Even in places where, as I said, you would not go for what are considered ordinary computer cables.
That doesn't mean proprietary is better than non-proprietary if "Apple does it". It just means when something is common, it gives you the SAME benefit of having an "open" (open being defined as something tightly defined by a small set of member companies) standard. And that is OK when it happens, although in general it's very unlikely to happen.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
What do you think will happen when EVERY phone (bar iPhone) uses Micro USB as standard?
That places with phone cables will probably carry one. I'm sure they do already.
What you and so many others are totally missing is how many devices that use the Apple dock connector ARE NOT PHONES. Not only the iPod touch and the iPad not phones, but there's of course the many years of domination that the iPod itself has enjoyed that has led to widespread distribution of iPod compatible cables, in places where there's never going to be phone stuff and therefore also no USB cables.
Hell, go into a hotel room. Are you going to find a mini-USB provided for you? probably not, but chances are actually pretty good that there's a radio in the room with an iPod compatible dock connector that you could charge pretty much anything but an iPad with....
Now perhaps you are starting to understand the full extent of distribution of the market, and that is really thanks to the iPod way more than any of the newer devices.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I'm confused.
How does a contract have anything to do with a locked phone? The two are mutually exclusive.
Most people don't pay $2,000 over 2 years for their phones... most people are at ~$80-$125/month total.
That's $1,920-$3,000 for the entire BILL for 2 years.
I don't agree with contracts when it comes to a phone, but let's be accurate here. Considering most companies other than T-Mobile don't offer a discount for using your own phone, the only upside is not having a contract.
So bite it, you commie.
-- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
Yes, there are more than just the one. Still, there are many GSM phones which don't.
How hard would it be for them to ADD a micro USB connector?
It would make sense, too -- the micro USB port would be a lot more durable than the dock connector, which is kind of fragile.
Make sure you tell the carrier after you do the swap and before you sell the old phone. Don't want them banning the old phone on their network for the person you sell it too.
The phones are all the same. Justify the fucking providers give you by pointing out they try to lock you in by having their own frequencies is retarded. People seem far too happy in the US to be screwed over by their mobile providers. I just can't see the joy in owning a mobile in the US.
Hey, I just bought an N900 a few days ago. I haven't bothered to get a phone contract for it yet because, well, that's not terribly imperative for me yet. However, I have done some research. I know T-mobile offers an unlimited data (and possibly unlimited text?) for ~ $25 per month. You can couple that plan with prepaid voice minutes (refills, topups, whatever) to keep your bill low if you really use such low amounts of voice data. Currently, I am using my N900 like a stylus driven laptop and I love the damn thing. I've sent e-mails with it. I've accessed my home network with it. Hell, I have Pidgin, Google Voice, and Skype running on it in such a manner that I can keep in contact with every person I know that uses the internet (the only reason I need voice, seemingly, is to talk to the folks that don't, like my Mom).
Anyways, the moral of the story is that, for someone like you that uses very few voice minutes and just wants a hackable pocket computer, the N900 really is a great platform. I've had mine two days and I can already tell it will be worth the investment.
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
So in the future allow all carriers to license the same frequencies like in Europe or makes all phone be able to communicate on all the frequencies. Yeah, it wouldn't work with our current model, but who is to say the model can't change? Technology progresses. Duh.
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
You need laws protecting you from being ripped off by your data plans. You guys pay a ridiculous amount while we get unlimited data plans. We have laws that protect the consumer too, they are just different.
I suggest you try traveling the world a bit. We are all a bit more similar than the stereotypes would imply. You learn that some countries do things better and some do them worse. We have so much more in common than we do different. For example, there are plenty of douches in America who act just like you.
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
They do. For as many places as they're in, their coverage tends to be rather iffy if you get out of the major metro areas.
To be fair, having used Verizon (work phone) and T-Mobile (personal) for the 5-6 years I was in the states, I found that going out of the cities meant negligible coverage even for Verizon, so even when we say Verizon has the best coverage (very expensive and very bad lock-in tactics though), for a European (used to getting coverage from the subway to the middle of nowhere) it is still abysmal. And while on average I did see Verizon getting better signal in some suburban areas etc, in NYC T-Mobile was definately the better choice, as I was enjoying 2+ Mbps data transfer on my N900 (HSPA - I hear it is now called "4G" in the US hehe).
Totally depends on what you're after. It's a so-so phone, but a pocket computer like none-other. Phone capabilities were tertiary (but still essential) for me, behind data and hackability. It's got some things that make no sense, and some that are just dumb, but I won't go to Android from here, never mind WP7 or the iPhone. And if you use Linux regularly, all the capability is there if you want it.
Well said. I don't think it is worse as a phone than say the Windows Mobile (pre-7) phones, but the iphone is a more polished experience in that respect (although not even close to the easy to use plain ol' non-smart phones). But, being a computer geek, I could not see myself going to even Android (I won't even mention iOS), the phone functionality is bare but not annoying to make me can consider giving up the amazing capabilities. I will just wait until the next MeeGo devices (hoping that MeeGo will not be worse than Maemo).
All slashdotters should do themselves a favor and check it out. I imagine the average response will be:
- It's - a - UNIX - system... I know this... ;)
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
I hate to tell you, but SBC is AT&T again...
Well, sort of. More like AT&T has become SBC in an alien-parasite-converts-human-tissue-into-bug-eyed-monster sort of way ... and anyone who thinks that SBC (Stupid Bastards Club, Southern Boys Club, Sodomized By Cowboys, whatever) is in improvement over the old AT&T is mistaken. That's why I was trying to say in my earlier posts: that the breakup of AT&T, while presumably well-intentioned, did not have the desired effect, and in fact has resulted in a corporate and regulatory environment conducive to even greater abuse. Probably greater profit too, given the caliber of the people who ran SBC. Edward J. "These are my pipes!" Whitacre comes to mind.
.... works fine in Chrome on Windows though.)
Stephen Colbert had an hilarious take on the subject (search Youtube for "stephen colbert AT&T", I'd link to it but for some reason Chrome isn't letting me copy & paste between tabs. Oddly, I can cut & paste into a text editor. I'm on Ubuntu at the moment
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
What I meant is that there is no SBC. It is again under the AT&T brand (albeit Inc as opposed to Corp).
What I meant is that there is no SBC. It is again under the AT&T brand (albeit Inc as opposed to Corp).
My understanding is that there is no AT&T. The original parent company was subsumed by SBC.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
I agree with general spirit of your post - however, "ridiculous amount" for data plans is not really the case.
For example I get 4GB for $17, prepaid (without any contract), valid for 2 months (and if I recharge before that time, unused data credit is kept) - I wouldn't call it ridiculous, and contract rates are still lower.
One that hath name thou can not otter
Which was then assimilated back by AT&T in 2005.
Huh? Nobody here cares which phone you actually use with the sim.
One that hath name thou can not otter
You mistyped "the wrongly perceived alternative: no phone service and no handheld device" there...
One that hath name thou can not otter
It seems likely that T-Mobile might be very similar or even notably better in DE - but relatively to the state of the market in a given place, they would look either obnoxious or quite nice...
And you know, Verizon is largely Vodafone - a revenge? ;)
One that hath name thou can not otter
It's called new company, or daughter one at most...
(and I'm sure for railways the biggest surprise was with how ridiculous amounts of subsidies and bail-outs airlines can get away with)
One that hath name thou can not otter
Only in very few places where are iPod is common...
I take it you've never travelled internationally. I've seen iPod accessories sold on road side carts in Cairo...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Quote from that web page: "Please note that since the original release of their paper, WCDMA was rebranded as 3GSM to avoid confusion between the WCDMA and CDMA2000 technologies."
Huh. Must be some cell-phone-company employees moderating today.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
It seems likely that T-Mobile might be very similar or even notably better in DE - but relatively to the state of the market in a given place, they would look either obnoxious or quite nice...
And you know, Verizon is largely Vodafone - a revenge? ;)
Well, from a friend of mine who lives in Germany, Deutsche Telecom exhibits all the characteristics of an entrenched monopoly, that's about all I know on the subject. And if Verizon is Vodafone's revenge for DT's extension into the U.S. ... well, I'd say it was successful!
It's funny though, a lot of people complain about U.S. corporate influence throughout the world, but you don't hear much about foreign influence into our little continent. All the big media companies are largely foreign-owned and controlled, for example, and China is angling to buy a stake in General Motors and would love to outright buy some of our oil companies.
I guess it goes both ways. Still, whatever the Germans do or do not have to put up with, I'm perfectly happy with T-Mobile for now.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
You claim that the alternative of doing without is wrongly perceived. Could you explain what other well-known choice a U.S. individual user has between a phone that is locked to a carrier (whether through recognizing only one carrier's SIMs or through supporting only one carrier's frequency bands) and no phone at all? Most people don't know about buying an unlocked phone, and even those who do know won't buy if they can't get good signal coverage from T-Mobile, the only carrier with unlocked-friendly plans and frequencies. Handsets designed to work only on Wi-Fi (and which thus aren't marketed as phones) aren't readily available in brick-and-mortar stores except from Apple.
For example (not the case of "well-known choice" is the point with false perceptions)
One that hath name thou can not otter
Only one of the 48 U.S. MVNOs on your list runs on T-Mobile's network: Simple Mobile. (Verizon and Sprint don't use removable CSIM cards, and AT&T uses a different set of frequencies for 3G.) I checked Simple Mobile's list of unlocked GSM phone dealers, and they're all e-tailers. Unlocked phones don't work in the United States for two reasons: 1. Simple Mobile doesn't advertise, and 2. if you buy an unlocked smartphone from an e-tailer and end up not liking its ergonomics, you're out $100 for shipping, return shipping, and a 15% restocking fee. Locked phones, on the other hand, can be tried in carriers' brick-and-mortar stores.
Not sure about coverage, but considering they won't even sell you a phone if you live in my state (Vermont), it kind of makes it a moot point.
If you want to try and sell up T-Mobile, they need to actually offer service first.
Oh no, no - I had a much older possible grudge on the part of UK-based Vodafone in mind, one revolving around avoidance of sending funds to the British ;>
Though I have no idea how that would fit with ze Germans, out of all, being better ;) - but BTW I have T-mobile DE across the border, plus locally a major telecom (with few nice prepaid brands) owned by them - and while not "leading", they are decent.
(ha! But who kept in power families controlling those assets?! ;) )
One that hath name thou can not otter