Database Users

The guy who wrote this article is an ididot

I saw this on Digg, read it and left a very angry comment. This is a horrible article.
http://www.informationweek.com/blog...l;jsessionid=GPDCAHFFTFPQTQE1GHRSKH4ATMY32JVN
Yea I spelled idiot wrong, Its for dramatic effect.

kylepotts said:
I saw this on Digg, read it and left a very angry comment. This is a horrible article.
http://www.informationweek.com/blog...l;jsessionid=GPDCAHFFTFPQTQE1GHRSKH4ATMY32JVN
Yea I spelled idiot wrong, Its for dramatic effect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
kyle I think you misunderstood.
of course google is not producing the handsets, but rumors have it that they will realease an android phone manufactured/designed by them.
The guy that wrote the article didnt mean that google shouldnt develop android, only that it is a risky business for google to enter in, while they can just sit back and reap the benefits of the wide diffusion android is having.
and to be honest, in more than a way, i kind of agree with him.

Despite interpretations, that article is STILL retarded.
For example; how about the fact that Google *already did it* -- a year ago.
In fact, I have one.
It came in a box labelled "Android Dev Phone 1".
Second, this is *exactly* what the mobile phone business *needs*. It should be CRIMINAL for a carrier to peddle hardware.
The effect of separating the carrier from the hardware is this;
1) It destroys the links between plans and devices, i.e., they won't be saying that if you want X phone, you need to buy an X plan at $827.50/month.
2) It eliminated the subsidization component of phone plans, which given fair competition means that plans should drop in price.
3) It means that YOU as the customer get to choose the hardware that YOU want. Do you let your LANDLINE provider tell you what telephone to use? Or do you go to radio shack and buy whichever one you want? Do you let your internet provider tell you what computer to buy?
4) It means elimination of network locks, and freedom to change providers AT WHIM.
5) It means elimination of long term CONTRACTS, and freedom to change providers at WHIM.
6) It means that when a provider gets a customer, they need to continue to compete with other providers, otherwise the customer will switch.
7) Did I mention that competition leads to LOWER PRICES?

man, relax...
first of all I never said it wouldnt be a great thing for consumers if they do. I know it would, and agree with you that carriers have been playing consumers for years. the guy that wrote the article simply stated the reasons why google shouldnt do that, from a business point of view. it is a huge risk and i doubt the results would be the same as we are used to (Hero etc), at least initially.
(ADP1 was/is in limited availability.. IMHO they made that to 'test' the market reception towards a new mobile OS).

kylepotts said:
I saw this on Digg, read it and left a very angry comment. This is a horrible article.
http://www.informationweek.com/blog...l;jsessionid=GPDCAHFFTFPQTQE1GHRSKH4ATMY32JVN
Yea I spelled idiot wrong, Its for dramatic effect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This has to be one of the stupidest articles I have ever read. First Google doesn't even make the phones manufactures lie HTC do. Google creates the OS on the device. You says "Additionally, there's absolutely no indication that Google knows how to develop a high-end smartphone that will draw in the crowds." How is that even possible when Google doesn't create smart phones?
You say that Google will create a netbook with android on it, and then start talking about android on smartphones. Android on smartphones and android on netbooks are very different beasts.
Horrible article. Do you research next time
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
maybe YOU need to learn how to read and interpret information.
google is PLANNING on MAKING their OWN DEVICES and start a phone manufacturing business.
android is not made by google anyways.. INITIALLY it was developed by google,but NOW the Open Handset Alliance has taken over. this allows other companies like google,motorola,archos,asus,htc,etc to develop their own flare based on android.
"You says 'Additionally, there's absolutely no indication that Google knows how to develop a high-end smartphone that will draw in the crowds.' How is that even possible when Google doesn't create smart phones?
"
your question is just straight up dumb.. no **** google has never made an smartphone or netbook so therefore! no indication that Google knows how to develop a high-end smartphone
i mean really.. youre reading a business article but youre WAY to dumb to understand it.

brian_v3ntura said:
maybe YOU need to learn how to read and interpret information.
google is PLANNING on MAKING their OWN DEVICES and start a phone manufacturing business.
android is not made by google anyways.. INITIALLY it was developed by google,but NOW the Open Handset Alliance has taken over. this allows other companies like google,motorola,archos,asus,htc,etc to develop their own flare based on android.
"You says 'Additionally, there's absolutely no indication that Google knows how to develop a high-end smartphone that will draw in the crowds.' How is that even possible when Google doesn't create smart phones?
"
your question is just straight up dumb.. no **** google has never made an smartphone or netbook so therefore! no indication that Google knows how to develop a high-end smartphone
i mean really.. youre reading a business article but youre WAY to dumb to understand it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey come on? Do we really need to mud sling? I was just bringing this up. No need to call me dumb as it is my opinion.

kylepotts said:
Hey come on? Do we really need to mud sling? I was just bringing this up. No need to call me dumb as it is my opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you the one who made the most stupid comment on the article. even tho you was completely WRONG and irrelevant

Ok
It's not that big of a deal it's just his opinion!

rfj1979 said:
It's not that big of a deal it's just his opinion!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you rfj

nmesisca said:
kyle I think you misunderstood.
of course google is not producing the handsets, but rumors have it that they will realease an android phone manufactured/designed by them.
The guy that wrote the article didnt mean that google shouldnt develop android, only that it is a risky business for google to enter in, while they can just sit back and reap the benefits of the wide diffusion android is having.
and to be honest, in more than a way, i kind of agree with him.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that phone was the Motorola droid

lbcoder said:
Despite interpretations, that article is STILL retarded.
For example; how about the fact that Google *already did it* -- a year ago.
In fact, I have one.
It came in a box labelled "Android Dev Phone 1".
Second, this is *exactly* what the mobile phone business *needs*. It should be CRIMINAL for a carrier to peddle hardware.
The effect of separating the carrier from the hardware is this;
1) It destroys the links between plans and devices, i.e., they won't be saying that if you want X phone, you need to buy an X plan at $827.50/month.
2) It eliminated the subsidization component of phone plans, which given fair competition means that plans should drop in price.
3) It means that YOU as the customer get to choose the hardware that YOU want. Do you let your LANDLINE provider tell you what telephone to use? Or do you go to radio shack and buy whichever one you want? Do you let your internet provider tell you what computer to buy?
4) It means elimination of network locks, and freedom to change providers AT WHIM.
5) It means elimination of long term CONTRACTS, and freedom to change providers at WHIM.
6) It means that when a provider gets a customer, they need to continue to compete with other providers, otherwise the customer. will switch.
7) Did I mention that competition leads to LOWER PRICES?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sorry i had to
play captain obvious here:
1 plenty unauthorized dealers (mall kiosks, corner stores in the hood) will sell a smart phone and new contract without a data plan or other required add-ons. show em the money.
2 usually one company starts a trend and others will follow. I.e. myfavs, I forgot who started it but all the big dogs have it now
3 never ever had a phone company tell me what phone I had to use, only suggestive selling to suit my needs, and I can always buy one off the street an use. i took in my old dash to a t-mo corporate store and got my daughter on a one year contact, 300 min a month plan and didnt have to buy a phone or add ons.
4 unlocked phones are already on the market, online and certain retail stores, also applys to #3
5 plenty of no commitment options in almost every big and small carrier.
6 they do with quality customer service and incentives for long term customers. when a company lacks those 2 basic things people will take their mony elsewhere.
7 yea basic economics they don't teach anymore in public schools

Are you just plain thick? Or are you being intentionally obtuse?
We're talking about regular consumers here, not people who can figure out things on their own.
Point is this; how many phone manufacturer's advertise phones that AREN'T linked to some carrier?
How many RETAILERS *ADVERTISE* phones that aren't linked to some carrier?
How many CARRIERS *ADVERTISE* phones that aren't locked to their network?
Your regular stupid consumer who wants to buy a phone will see the sparkly ad on TV, will go to their nearest big-box store, and will get suckered into a lifetime commitment with some carrier just for the sake of having that sparkly phone that they saw on TV.
The OBJECTIVE is for phones to ALL be sold entirely in the free, so that joe consumer can go into the big box store, grab a phone off the shelf, pay in cash (no ID), sign NOTHING, walk out with it, and shove in whatever sim card they like with whatever plan they like.
The average consumer does NOT go down to a greasy store with no air conditioning that smells like barf to buy a phone that's been HACKED, and it is quite impossible to get a no-commitment phone from a big box store or off some carrier's website. Yes, if you *already* have a phone, the carrier should let you plug your card into it, but NO, most retarded consumers *DON'T KNOW THIS*.
The fact that it is damned difficult to get a no-strings-attached phone, and that the average idiot watching ads on TV doesn't even know that you can means that there IS a link between hardware and carrier. Which means that EVERY ONE of your arguments is entirely INVALID.
phatmanxxl said:
sorry i had to
play captain obvious here:
1 plenty unauthorized dealers (mall kiosks, corner stores in the hood) will sell a smart phone and new contract without a data plan or other required add-ons. show em the money.
2 usually one company starts a trend and others will follow. I.e. myfavs, I forgot who started it but all the big dogs have it now
3 never ever had a phone company tell me what phone I had to use, only suggestive selling to suit my needs, and I can always buy one off the street an use. i took in my old dash to a t-mo corporate store and got my daughter on a one year contact, 300 min a month plan and didnt have to buy a phone or add ons.
4 unlocked phones are already on the market, online and certain retail stores, also applys to #3
5 plenty of no commitment options in almost every big and small carrier.
6 they do with quality customer service and incentives for long term customers. when a company lacks those 2 basic things people will take their mony elsewhere.
7 yea basic economics they don't teach anymore in public schools
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

rfj1979 said:
It's not that big of a deal it's just his opinion!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
opinion of what? what his comment said on the article pretty much had nothing to do with what google is planning.

lbcoder said:
We're talking about regular consumers here, not people who can figure out things on their own.
Point is this; how many phone manufacturer's advertise phones that AREN'T linked to some carrier?
How many RETAILERS *ADVERTISE* phones that aren't linked to some carrier?
How many CARRIERS *ADVERTISE* phones that aren't locked to their network?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apples and Oranges.
Carriers and retailers don't advertise (or even carry) non sim-locked high end phones because most phones are subsidized with the contract. This doesn't mean that a a carrier doesn't welcome unlocked phones though. Selling service to a consumer that already has the equipment means that the service contract doesn't have to pay for the equipment and the carrier profits from the consumer much faster.
This also means that it is possible (how likely is up for debate though) for a carrier to enter a contract with Google and subsidize a part of the equipment cost and offer a locked version of the Google phone for much a cheaper cost to the consumer.
Just because Google may offer an unlocked version of a phone doesn't exclude the possibility of a locked/subsidized version from a carrier.
I think it is a great idea. The worst that could happen is that it doesn't sell and fades into obscurity. Worth the risk if you ask me.

Noooo....Apple's iPhone does better because it appeals to more people, because there all stupid. Android users phiddling with an iPhone is like giving Einstein some paper and a box of crayons

Why doesn't T-mobile ever step up.....

On things like this to offer their customers.......WTF???
http://phandroid.com/2010/09/03/sprint-to-get-the-samsung-galaxy-tab-this-november/
Even if Sprint does NOT get it why doesn't Tmo say "hey we'll take it!!"

When it comes to agreements between 2 or more business goliaths, I don't think its as simple as we'll take it. Lots of legal matters to get sorted out. Just look at all the drama it took to get the iPhone on AT&T to start with. They battled over details for awhile and still had issues after the release. Don't even wanna go into foreget tablets. Can we at least get a good list of smartphones on T-Mobile? One great phone and one very respectable phone (see Vibrant then MyTouch Slide) does not make for good choices when time to upgrade.

I was extremely excited about this Galaxy Tab, but in reality, the price is kind of a dealbreaker, and as far as I can tell, there is no wi-fi only version. I am not paying for another device on the network.
But as far as why T-mobile doesn't step up: it is just like mmalott says. Contracts have so many intricacies, so many things that have to get ironed out.
But for what it's worth, you don't know that they won't make it available for T-mobile yet. Maybe Samsung will go to all 4 carriers with it, you never know. We'll have to wait and see.

gthmcty1 said:
On things like this to offer their customers.......WTF???
http://phandroid.com/2010/09/03/sprint-to-get-the-samsung-galaxy-tab-this-november/
Even if Sprint does NOT get it why doesn't Tmo say "hey we'll take it!!"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess the G2 doesn't count? WTF is your problem? If you love Sprint so much cancel your contract and go with them.

The price is way to high for what is. For that price I can get a small fully functioning laptop that folds into a touch tablet.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk cause the XDA app sucks

I'm happy that T-Mo is not trying to get all these first-gen experimental devices but focusing on the few solid and core devices along with providing great services.
This is what a normal consumer really needs.

MilkPudding said:
I'm happy that T-Mo is not trying to get all these first-gen experimental devices but focusing on the few solid and core devices along with providing great services.
This is what a normal consumer really needs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So true...

mmalott said:
When it comes to agreements between 2 or more business goliaths, I don't think its as simple as we'll take it. Lots of legal matters to get sorted out. Just look at all the drama it took to get the iPhone on AT&T to start with. They battled over details for awhile and still had issues after the release. Don't even wanna go into foreget tablets. Can we at least get a good list of smartphones on T-Mobile? One great phone and one very respectable phone (see Vibrant then MyTouch Slide) does not make for good choices when time to upgrade.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that. plus there's the fcc approvals needed for each band/network it supports.

I've seen websites saying Verizon is getting it to, it's not unlikely that they are just releasing on all the carriers like they have with the Galaxy S series. They aren't even out of here yet are they? Didn't this happen before with the Galaxy S series, one company said we are getting it then the others followed?

heygrl said:
I guess the G2 doesn't count? WTF is your problem? If you love Sprint so much cancel your contract and go with them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My man/girl where on earth did you get the notion that I was Sprint fan? I have been with Tmo for 7+ years and would not even think about switching services!!! My original point being is why doesn't Tmo "make a play" for things such as the Tablet or even a good , better, best smartphone, even if we do not get them?
Granted given the response by "mmalot" looking at it that way I completely see why Tmo has taken the path it has.
I am happy with Tmo no doubt but I just wish their aggressiveness would equate to a better selection of phone choices, granted the Vibrant which I love is no slouch even with it shortcomings is still a great phone in its own rights.
Regarding a phone such as the G2 which has not come out yet I am sure it will be a worthy opponent I am NOT bashing Tmo I am suggesting that they become slightly more aggressive.
Make sure you have a valid point or even comprehend the statement that is in front of you before you go "bumping your gums" and comment such as you have done.
And in closing I do not have a problem with Tmo as I stated have been a loyal customer for 7+ years (when they were voicestream wireless)and will remain a customer but I like everyone else am entitled to their opinion and I will exercise it at will "heygrl", so please do not try and come at me like I am coming from left field, it was a "freedom of speech" moment.

I do know that a lot of the times the carriers have to bid on the phones/devices that they get. Depending on the manufacturer/device. Would you rather have a g2, mytouch hd, and possibly 2-3 other big devices by the end of the year, or would you rather have a galaxy S that is a little bit larger, without the Super amoled? Do remember that T-Mobile is dropping a ton of funds on rocking out the HSPA+ across the country super fast, and they're the 4th largest carrier. They have to choose a lot more carefully about where to invest then the others.

If someone has a vibrant now, the g2 wil be irrelevant by the time they have to upgrade again. Should not be releasing phones so fast, imo.
Also I may etf my contact and move off android because the fragmentation and slow updates/buggy devices are unbearable.
Almost regret not staying on at&t and getting am iphone. This is ridiculous.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

L8ter n8ter
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

Actually it's: l8er n8er, but nice try at being witty without actually responding to the content in my post. These forums seem ripe with trolls.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

AT&T doesn't release an iPhone every year? T-Mobile releases 2 high-end devices within a few months and suddenly they need to slow down... according to other people they need MORE.. just stfu already.

N8ter said:
Actually it's: l8er n8er, but nice try at being witty without actually responding to the content in my post. These forums seem ripe with trolls.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you like locked down fancy looking feature phones and a barely working network then ATT is for you, and they'll gladly take your money, enjoy you iPhone 4, we don't care, it's your money

At the end of the day the real reason we're all with tmobile (don't lie) is because of their great plans/ pricing and awesome customer service. If that wasn't the case we'd be all on verizon. I think their approach with the vibrant/g2/faster network this year will play out very well for them.

I hate when people get offended if you tell your opinion about a company. Heygrl the way you reacted on the last page was childish. Grow up, I dont understand why people pledge loyalty to a company then act like blinded fanboys if you tell the truth about them.
T-Mobile obviously needs to step up. Whether they get this tablet or not isn't a dealbreaker for me. Especially if there is no wifi only version. However they need more phones, more high end state of the art phones. Verizon and Sprint are rumored to release 1.5 Ghz phones this year, they are not slouching. The G2's hardware will be completely obsolete by 2011, it will be a new generation of hardware. People seem to think this phone is the best ever because of HSPA+. What happens when you never reach those plateaus of speed and the first dual-core devices drop this year? Gonna feel buyers remorse huh.
It's also rumored that Samsung is working on the Galaxy S2 phone with a 2Ghz processor, 4gb of rom, 1gb ram, super amoled2 and 340ppi. Now THAT'S a revolution, but you ignorant fanboys would never see that because your devoted loyalty to a company makes you think the G2 will be the best phone ever. Such a joke...
HTC has a conference in a week or so, you think their best announcement will be the G2? Come on now. They are working on 1.5-2ghz phones, new battery and screen tech, and dual core devices.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

Even though I don't always agree with Tmobile's business sense I do like their more conservative nature. I don't need 3-5 phones with 2ghz cpus and the latest greatest iPhone at the cost dealing with the stereotypical corporate giant. All I ask for is at least 1 -2 comparable smartphones (MyTouch Slide & Vibrant delivered beautifully), good customer service, and keep your hands out of my pockets. I think T-Mobile has done an outstanding job at doing this. Dealing with Tmo has been a personal experience as compared to dealing with AT&T which was the usual your-the-little-guy thing.
Tmo has left me in wonder plenty of times. Where I live just got 3g but they were trying to sell me a 3G phone prior to that? Why are you guys selling the MyTouch Slide for only $20 less then the Vibrant? Am I missing something there? You guys are rolling out 4G!? But... there's plenty of places that don't even have coverage, EDGE, or 3G yet? Just some of the things that make me scratch my head sometimes but in the end, AT&T and Verizon don't leave me with the satisfaction that T-Mobile does.
Personally I don't want or need 20 smartphones to choose from. Too many problems for the network, the consumer, and the manufactures which will leave more often then not unhappy under the quantity over quality method of thinking.
At the end of the day its your choice based on your experiences and opinion. And this is a forum where people voice experiences and opinion. Just wish people could be more civilized about it so that others can hear/read them without the annoying gibberish.

I guess the real reason that people are so upset with T-mobile is because T-mobile was the first with an android phone and the first with the Google Nexus One phone, and they have lost that crown.
After Sprint got the HTC Hero, T-mobile wasn't the only android carrier anymore, and when Verizon got the Droid, they decided to buy up 95% of the high-end android smart-phones for the next 1.5 years.
AT&T rode iPhone popularity to the top. T-mobile failed to do this with Android. Looking at Android growth & popularity, locking up a few high end exclusives over the next 2-3 years could have propelled T-mobile into 3rd place in terms of subscribers. If I were to guess, then I would say that this is the reason why the CEO got the boot.
T-mobile is not doing that bad...what they aren't doing is beating out the competition with any of their handsets. Everything they release is done bigger or better by another carrier.
Its not as exciting as a 4G release, or a heavily marketed branded line of android phones like Verizon does... but clear away the smoke and mirrors and you'll have to admit that T-mobile is probably tied for 2nd at best (with Sprint), or at worst 3rd overall on android handsets.
The only thing they are missing is a 4.3" high end device to be the definitive 2nd place android carrier.
As for being #1... it won't ever happen. Verizon has 3x the subscribers and charges 20% more for service. They have the cash to burn to stay on top in terms of handset selection.... which they pretty much have to because iPhone lovers will never leave AT&T until the handset is available elsewhere

Why I hate Verizon even more now

Have you read what they're doing lately? To me, this is such a disrespectful move towards Google and the Android OS. Yeah, Android is open source, but you shouldn't let the carriers abuse and diminish Google and the Android name.
I will NEVER join Verizon. Google needs to make a stand for their OS, for their revenue stream, for their stance in the mobile world.
And they need to make a ****ing Nexus Two and sell it better, market it better, offer it for cheaper and sell it online. I believe that they could revive their online phone store if they had the right marketing people to do it. They need to come out with a device that does MORE than everything currently available. They need to put the "making of phones" politics down, put everything in a device that will do everything. I hate it when manufacturers only put current specs, or a little over current specs just to put out a device four months later with a couple upgrades.
Google needs to stay true to its OS, and to its phone line. I would buy every Nexus phone here on out because it has simply been the best phone i have ever owned out of like 20.
/rant over, hope you all agree with me

zachthemaster said:
Have you read what they're doing lately?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Um... You mean about the default search? Yes, I have... But you might want to actually explain it or link to it, otherwise your post makes no sense and hence 0 replies

Google won't be mass-producing phones, and there is no "Google phone line". They offer developer phones for developers, they don't produce the phones - they outsource the production to actual phone manufacturers, they did that ever since Android, and that's what they'll do. They won't market their phones, they won't sell their phones, because they don't want to. Go search "Open Handset Alliance", read, and use some brain to understand, why it's not going to happen. Not hard, really.
Google can respond easily, and it already did. Google search in on the Market, anyone can install it. And it just needs to make easily installable VoIP app.

Tried posting a link but don't have access yet. Besides the default search they are bringing the VCast app to android in hopes to compete with the market.
Sent from my Nexus One

Welcome to android "openness".
IMO that is neither better or worse than all the manufacturer customizaton crap.

nexusdue said:
Welcome to android "openness".
IMO that is neither better or worse than all the manufacturer customizaton crap.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As a consumer, it is YOUR responsibility to only support products and companies that serve YOUR needs. Giving money out is a way of saying "hey, I like this."
Well DON'T.
If you don't like verizon or what they do, don't give them any money. If everybody shares your opinion, then NOBODY will support verizon and they WILL go under.

+549638465649874
I'd rep you if i could. I too would buy every nexus here on out, by far the nicest phone ive owned and at least 90% of my friends would say the same (that 10 being iphone users )

I just moved from ATT to T-Mobile. Got one of those MyTouch 3G Slides for my mom and the bloatware on it wasn't as bad as what I saw from ATT and Verizon.
Now I read a thing on En or Giz, can't remember which, about Verizon also making its own Android App store and Google are fine with that because they say they want Android everywhere. That's their current goal. In my opinion, it's a double edged sword. On one hand, I think Google should work on a wall for its "garden." But, on the other, it'll no longer be a completely open environment.

Jack_R1 said:
Google won't be mass-producing phones, and there is no "Google phone line". They offer developer phones for developers, they don't produce the phones - they outsource the production to actual phone manufacturers, they did that ever since Android, and that's what they'll do. They won't market their phones, they won't sell their phones, because they don't want to. Go search "Open Handset Alliance", read, and use some brain to understand, why it's not going to happen. Not hard, really.
Google can respond easily, and it already did. Google search in on the Market, anyone can install it. And it just needs to make easily installable VoIP app.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, I think that Google search is blocked from the market by Verizon ...

zachthemaster said:
Have you read what they're doing lately?
/rant over, hope you all agree with me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LMAO, no, I don't agree with you.
It's a business.
I like the phones that HTC makes. I like the phones that Google calls their Developer models (G1 & N1). So, I bought both those phones.
As mentioned by lbcoder, it's YOUR MONEY.
Don't support Verizon.

The only US carrier to respect Android at all has been T-Mobile, who have added some network apps to their phones, but they are removable (i think) and don't change the actual phone experience. Other than that they've supported vanilla Android and Google search- I will stick with them for Android. AT&T and Verizon would not be able to ruin the iPhone like this because of Apple, Google need to step in and stop this disgrace to the market.

Fence
What Android needs is not a wall but a wooden fence- more positive restriction rather than totalitarianism. Like Android is socialist while Apple is fascist.

This is why it's OUR RESPONSIBILITY to root every Android™ device we come into contact with
To free our Family & Friends from the blood sucking tentacles of evil carriers like AT&T and Verizon!

OrganizedFellow said:
This is why it's OUR RESPONSIBILITY to root every Android™ device we come into contact with
To free our Family & Friends from the blood sucking tentacles of evil carriers like AT&T and Verizon!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is Sprint evil? lol

What you all should do, its stop buying subsidized of the carrier, even off the carrier at all. Buy off internet, third party or the like. The only way too hurt carriers and show them your not happy its to hurt their wallets
Why whinge about it then go down to carrier and buy a phone? They will keep doing it if people keep buying phones
Rellikzephyr
Sent from my Nexus One using Tapatalk

RellikZephyr said:
What you all should do, its stop buying subsidized of the carrier, even off the carrier at all. Buy off internet, third party or the like. The only way too hurt carriers and show them your not happy its to hurt their wallets
Why whinge about it then go down to carrier and buy a phone? They will keep doing it if people keep buying phones
Rellikzephyr
Sent from my Nexus One using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Only one problem with that theory!!! 90% of people buying cell phones dont want to spend 400 or more on a phone..( they want that free or spend as less as possible ) lol But I totally agree with you.. Cause I buy phones off craigslist half the time..

RellikZephyr said:
What you all should do, its stop buying subsidized of the carrier, even off the carrier at all. Buy off internet, third party or the like. The only way too hurt carriers and show them your not happy its to hurt their wallets
Why whinge about it then go down to carrier and buy a phone? They will keep doing it if people keep buying phones
Rellikzephyr
Sent from my Nexus One using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How does that make sense if you then end up paying for the same data and voice plan? By not buying the carrier phone you are essentially GIVING the carrier $400+ for free!
They offer your $400 as a subsidy for a phone if you use their service ... if you don't take the subsidy but use their service, you only shoot yourself in the foot.
Check out this thread on the topic: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=781833

nexusdue said:
How does that make sense if you then end up paying for the same data and voice plan? By not buying the carrier phone you are essentially GIVING the carrier $400+ for free!
They offer your $400 as a subsidy for a phone if you use their service ... if you don't take the subsidy but use their service, you only shoot yourself in the foot.
Check out this thread on the topic: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=781833
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Like I pointed out in the forum you referenced, a lot of T-Mobile plans are $10 or $20 more a month if you sign up for a 2 year contract. That means subsidized phones on contract cost an additional $240 to $480 more than just the original outlay... Do the math, and see what works for you...
My wife's phone was subsidized by $270 by T-Mo, so I signed up for the contract to get the $270 saving, then paid the $200 early termination fee (saving $70).
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App

I have N1 on TMobile. My wife has Droid on Verizon. I love my phone, and I like the fact I don't have any bloat-ware, but the Verizon network is way better. Her phone never drops from 3G (not to mention faster in many cases, her phone can pull up web pages faster than mine in most cases even though my phone is faster) and never drops a call. Verizon has to pay for their infrastructure somehow and trying to lock in unsuspecting customers who don't know they have search choices or other choices and use whatever in the default services provided is one of those ways...

nexusdue said:
How does that make sense if you then end up paying for the same data and voice plan? By not buying the carrier phone you are essentially GIVING the carrier $400+ for free!
They offer your $400 as a subsidy for a phone if you use their service ... if you don't take the subsidy but use their service, you only shoot yourself in the foot.
Check out this thread on the topic: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=781833
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not exactly sure how your plans work in America, I'm Australian. They make their money off us here by charging slightly higher call rates on subsidized phones
But to think that a company whose aim is to make money, will give you a $500 phone absolutely free to you, and a cost to them. Thinking that way doesn't make sense
Rellikzephyr
Sent from my Nexus One using Tapatalk

Interesting speculation. Apple buy Sprint?

http://goo.gl/M16Ct
Sent from my PC36100 using xda premium

iphone5 only at sprint?
http://apple.slashdot.org/story/11/10/03/2114206/sprint-bets-big-on-the-iphone

I hate to say this I really do.
But they have the cash... The cash can easily be spent on making the network the fastest there is. I wish a company with the $$$ would do this.

This is the first thing that I have ever read that involves Apple that sounds like a good idea to me. If Apple does buy the network they WILL put the money into the network to make it much better. Most likely the fastest of ALL networks not just the major 4. I hate Apple, I mean I really hate Apple,but if this does happen we could have a major overhaul of our network and we would actually get great speeds as opposed to the decent speeds in some areas and terrible speeds in other areas. I say for the first time ever to Apple, GO FOR IT!

Antitrust.
KJ

Noncon said:
Antitrust.
KJ
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, there's just no way this would be allowed.
And to the person that thought this was a good idea... yeeaaaahhhhh not sure what you're smoking.
We think At&t and Verizon [and really the whole industry anymore] are bad with the lock downs and penny pinching?
Let Apple own a carrier.

Evo4eva said:
This is the first thing that I have ever read that involves Apple that sounds like a good idea to me. If Apple does buy the network they WILL put the money into the network to make it much better. Most likely the fastest of ALL networks not just the major 4. I hate Apple, I mean I really hate Apple,but if this does happen we could have a major overhaul of our network and we would actually get great speeds as opposed to the decent speeds in some areas and terrible speeds in other areas. I say for the first time ever to Apple, GO FOR IT!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree but I also have some reservations on this, mainly pricing. Everything apple makes tends to be on the expensive side. I'm on Sprint not because it carries the phone I want or because it's got the best coverage, but because it's the cheapest carrier for high end smart phones that include everything you need. No extra charges for GPS access or unlimited texting or anything goofy like that. Point I guess is that if Apple does buy Sprint I hope the pricing stays the same. Otherwise I'll probably have to move back over to Verizon or T-Mobile.

Evo4eva said:
This is the first thing that I have ever read that involves Apple that sounds like a good idea to me. If Apple does buy the network they WILL put the money into the network to make it much better. Most likely the fastest of ALL networks not just the major 4. I hate Apple, I mean I really hate Apple,but if this does happen we could have a major overhaul of our network and we would actually get great speeds as opposed to the decent speeds in some areas and terrible speeds in other areas. I say for the first time ever to Apple, GO FOR IT!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes...and a 50% hike in your bill. And data throttling. And great data plans like "2GB for 25 bucks a month," And all the crap that goes along with Apple.....
Horrible idea.

RoC1909 said:
Yes...and a 50% hike in your bill. And data throttling. And great data plans like "2GB for 25 bucks a month," And all the crap that goes along with Apple.....
Horrible idea.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're a moron. Apple is not the cause of the throttling.

Apple makes hardware, and they've chosen a business model to make hardware for certain carriers, either because it made sense, or because that particular carrier bought exclusive rights. Don't quote me, but I think they sell the iPhone in a lot of countries. I don't think it would make much sense for Sprint, but then again they've been doing a lot of little stuff as side-business/sub-business because there is a market for it.

^^ ^^ Apple makes software. Not hardware. They buy hardware from multitude of companies
Sent from my PC36100 using xda premium

I don't really think that would be a good thing. If Apple buy's sprint then I think Apple will start trying to close the market off for google's Android.

Man Steve must be rolling over in his......Oh wait too soon
Sent from my NOCTURNAL SUPERSONIC EVO using Tapatalk

I don't buy it.
As mentioned above, Apple is a software/niche hardware company. They sell an image as much as anything. They would not want to get slogged down with wires and towers and coast-to-coast utility servicing....it just isn't what they do (or would be good at).

Noncon said:
Antitrust.
KJ
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1st off I'll let everyone know that I'm not a complete moron. I admit I can't build my own ROM but I can't see why this would violate any antitrust laws. How would this be any different than when the iPhone was only on AT&T? If you wanted an iPhone then you basically were stuck with AT&T. Plus when you have as much cash as Apple has you can "buy" a waiver from the government. Unless I'm missing something I can't see any way Apple buying Sprint would/could harm other mobile carriers other than those carriers couldn't sell the iPhone.

Antitrust, anticompetition, and a step toward monopolizing the industry. FCC cockblocked the at&t/t-moble merge, making the mere notion of Apple owning it's own carrier ludicrous at best.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

shochu808 said:
Antitrust, anticompetition, and a step toward monopolizing the industry. FCC cockblocked the at&t/t-moble merge, making the mere notion of Apple owning it's own carrier ludicrous at best.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

shochu808 said:
Antitrust, anticompetition, and a step toward monopolizing the industry. FCC cockblocked the at&t/t-moble merge, making the mere notion of Apple owning it's own carrier ludicrous at best.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A carrier owning their own Network is completely fine under the law. If they wanna pay for it, it's theirs to have. As long as they aren't limiting peoples choice of networks, it's all fine. Clearly Apple would not be doing this. There are other carriers, and nothing Apple can ever do will make you unable to simply switch to one of them. Even if they made future iPhones Sprint exclusives, in the eyes of the law that is their god-given right and there's nothing shady or illegal about it. You *still* have a choice of networks, no one said you have a right to buy an iPhone.
And anyway, Apple will NEVER(mark my words) make an iPhone Sprint exclusive(except maybe for a few weeks at launch). This would be a slap in the face to all the people who support them(literally EVERYONE OF THEM at this point) by buying iPhones while on other networks. Not to mention Sprint is a very small Network and will always be compared to the big two, and nothing Apple can do is gonna change that. So why would they limit themselves in that way?
But despite everything you might read, Apple likely has NO interest in buying Sprint. Why the hell would they? Give me one logical reason? It just makes no sense what-so-ever. But those of you are are using Anti-Trust Law as a reason why it wouldn't be possible really need to look up Anti-Trust in a dictionary because Apple having a foothold in 2 entirely separate but logically linked fields isn't even remotely close to a monopoly. A monopoly of what? Them owning Sprint can't effect your choice of carrier OR handsets. Them owning Apple can't either.

@ landora, in your honest opinion, do you think this would pass through the FCC?
However, I totally agree with your business angle. It would shock me if Apple ever made an attempt to either merge or takeover one of the existing carriers. Cost would make it a huge risk, and too much capital and attention would be devoted toward raising customer satisfaction levels that meet their high standards.
I never said it was against the law, I listed reasons the FCC might consider if this ever got thrown their way. If this crazy notion ever made it through...and not that it would make business sense, what's stopping them from mailing free iPhones to their competitor's customers offering them better carrier service and pricing. Owning both entities could eventually pay off. Initially take a loss on the phone, a later profit from carrier fees. Existing carriers begin to fold not able to compete as Apple gains market share.
All this said without factoring in the broadband packages they could offer if customers purchasrd their macbooks or macpros.
This analogy is extreme, but how different would this be if say British Petroleum decided to by Toyota or Ford?
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

To keep it simple
Hell freaking no.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

The stupidity of our government and the new rules regarding unlocking our devices

I saw this on fb this "mourning" and thought I'd share...
http://www.xda-developers.com/andro...rs/ShsH+(xda-developers)&utm_content=FaceBook

Re: The stupidity of our government and the new rules regarding unlocking our dev
Dude the united States government can blow me. Point blank. **** all their "new and proposed laws" I'm going to do whatever the hell I want because last time I checked I had freedom. This isn't ****ing north Korea. As you can tell I hate our lying ass president Barack Obama and wished someone would take his ass out of office. And the rest of your crooked government
Sent from my PG06100 using Tapatalk 2

It's disgusting our government continues to repeatedly enact laws to promote/preserve the bottom dollar of large corporations like this; this promotes monopolies, crushes diversity and goes against the very idea of free Enterprise. How can one alter, root, replace, enhance aspects of a devices firmware and it is perfectly legal, but when it allows the user to switch carriers it becomes illegal? The very idea that this is a copyright issue is ridiculous.

BigSplit said:
It's disgusting our government continues to repeatedly enact laws to promote/preserve the bottom dollar of large corporations like this; this promotes monopolies, crushes diversity and goes against the very idea of free Enterprise. How can one alter, root, replace, enhance aspects of a devices firmware and it is perfectly legal, but when it allows the user to switch carriers it becomes illegal? The very idea that this is a copyright issue is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well the whole idea is kinda idiotic anyways... if you get a phone from the carrier you are under contract... the contract is what shields the carrier from loss. What is the purpose of the law other than them being greedy.

But what about the users like me who buy all the phones they use at MSRP? I pay full retail to take my devices with me. With sprint alone I dropped around 1300 on 2 original evos and an evo shift.
So would any of this concern me? Since I did not get a subsidized price on anything?

strapped365 said:
But what about the users like me who buy all the phones they use at MSRP? I pay full retail to take my devices with me. With sprint alone I dropped around 1300 on 2 original evos and an evo shift.
So would any of this concern me? Since I did not get a subsidized price on anything?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
People like you are the only ones this law is really effecting... And its definitely not in a positive way.

Actually it affects all of us. Because believe it or not we all pay Full price for our devices. Because whether they say it or not. We are all paying for our devices. The Carriers have that all factored into the cost of your plan. You never actually get a discount. They make sure that there is at least a 300% mark up on every device.

prboy1969 said:
Actually it affects all of us. Because believe it or not we all pay Full price for our devices. Because whether they say it or not. We are all paying for our devices. The Carriers have that all factored into the cost of your plan. You never actually get a discount. They make sure that there is at least a 300% mark up on every device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes but if someone pays full price up front they should be able to take the phone where they want No matter what... Any gsm across the world can do that providing the networks are compatible.. it really hurts travelers too
Lol go to Canada or Mexico unlock it and come back... they surely didn't make it illegal to possess an unlocked device... loophole

prboy1969 said:
Actually it affects all of us. Because believe it or not we all pay Full price for our devices. Because whether they say it or not. We are all paying for our devices. The Carriers have that all factored into the cost of your plan. You never actually get a discount. They make sure that there is at least a 300% mark up on every device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well 1299.97 plus tax should allow me to do whatever in the hell I want with my devices.
I wonder how much more popular Google GSM Unlocked Nexus devices are going to become .

strapped365 said:
Well 1299.97 plus tax should allow me to do whatever in the hell I want with my devices.
I wonder how much more popular Google GSM Unlocked Nexus devices are going to become .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol true
Its just at&t and those people complaining about it because in the end, google really doesnt care
I still feel its unnecessary to do this, theyre just trying to lock in customers as much as they can and prevent them from finding better deals where they might pay less monthly or have better coverage in their specific area for less
Sent from my PG06100

strapped365 said:
Well 1299.97 plus tax should allow me to do whatever in the hell I want with my devices.
I wonder how much more popular Google GSM Unlocked Nexus devices are going to become .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sony and Nokia sell gsm unlocked phones too... most of the international gsm companies do. Again showing how dumb our government is.

bilgerryan said:
Sony and Nokia sell gsm unlocked phones too... most of the international gsm companies do. Again showing how dumb our government is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Biggest disappointment is that while the law allowed for devices to be unlocked, exemptions were made or devices ignored. You couldn't unlock an iPhone, or at least they sure didn't want you to. Maybe I have my facts confused though.

Eh this does bother me so much because all you have to do is get permission to use the phone on another carrier. I HIGHLY doubt they will tell you no. And if they do... Well this is XDA, we do what we want to do. Guides will still be posted on flashing to other carriers. They can't stop us
Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

Update:
If as many people as possible could sign this, it would be incredibly awesome.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7
Sent from my PG06100

CNexus said:
Update:
If as many people as possible could sign this, it would be incredibly awesome.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7
Sent from my PG06100
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I signed it today and forwarded the link.

Look at the petition results... http://www.xda-developers.com/andro...-developers/ShsH+(xda-developers)&utm_content

The article on Android Police HERE might interest a few of you.

Email I received this morning:
It's Time to Legalize Cell Phone Unlocking
By R. David Edelman, Senior Advisor for Internet, Innovation, & Privacy
Thank you for sharing your views on cell phone unlocking with us through your petition on our We the People platform. Last week the White House brought together experts from across government who work on telecommunications, technology, and copyright policy, and we're pleased to offer our response.
The White House agrees with the 114,000+ of you who believe that consumers should be able to unlock their cell phones without risking criminal or other penalties. In fact, we believe the same principle should also apply to tablets, which are increasingly similar to smart phones. And if you have paid for your mobile device, and aren't bound by a service agreement or other obligation, you should be able to use it on another network. It's common sense, crucial for protecting consumer choice, and important for ensuring we continue to have the vibrant, competitive wireless market that delivers innovative products and solid service to meet consumers' needs.
This is particularly important for secondhand or other mobile devices that you might buy or receive as a gift, and want to activate on the wireless network that meets your needs -- even if it isn't the one on which the device was first activated. All consumers deserve that flexibility.
The White House's position detailed in this response builds on some critical thinking done by the President's chief advisory Agency on these matters: the Department of Commerce's National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). For more context and information on the technical aspects of the issue, you can review the NTIA's letter to the Library of Congress' Register of Copyrights (.pdf), voicing strong support for maintaining the previous exception to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) for cell phone carrier unlocking.
Contrary to the NTIA's recommendation, the Librarian of Congress ruled that phones purchased after January of this year would no longer be exempted from the DMCA. The law gives the Librarian the authority to establish or eliminate exceptions -- and we respect that process. But it is also worth noting the statement the Library of Congress released today on the broader public policy concerns of the issue. Clearly the White House and Library of Congress agree that the DMCA exception process is a rigid and imperfect fit for this telecommunications issue, and we want to ensure this particular challenge for mobile competition is solved.
So where do we go from here?
The Obama Administration would support a range of approaches to addressing this issue, including narrow legislative fixes in the telecommunications space that make it clear: neither criminal law nor technological locks should prevent consumers from switching carriers when they are no longer bound by a service agreement or other obligation.
We also believe the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), with its responsibility for promoting mobile competition and innovation, has an important role to play here. FCC Chairman Genachowski today voiced his concern about mobile phone unlocking (.pdf), and to complement his efforts, NTIA will be formally engaging with the FCC as it addresses this urgent issue.
Finally, we would encourage mobile providers to consider what steps they as businesses can take to ensure that their customers can fully reap the benefits and features they expect when purchasing their devices.
We look forward to continuing to work with Congress, the wireless and mobile phone industries, and most importantly you -- the everyday consumers who stand to benefit from this greater flexibility -- to ensure our laws keep pace with changing technology, protect the economic competitiveness that has led to such innovation in this space, and offer consumers the flexibility and freedoms they deserve.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Well that certainly sounds good. I remain sceptical though. It is our government talking here...

You guys should check the article in the link below. Might be a step in the right direction.
http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/0...locking-phones-for-interoperability-purposes/