As smartphone and communicator usage increases, so does the threat of carrier lock-in and lock-down. Larry Garfield offers some warnings in the hopes of avoiding the walled garden.
Last month, a consumer-advocacy group sued several wireless carriers for what it claims is the anti-competitive practice of locking GSM phones to a specific carrier. While the suit itself may or may not succeed, it highlights a very important and growing problem with the mobile industry today; it's extremely anti-competitive.
Unlike CDMA-based mobile phones, which are permanently locked to a carrier, GSM-based phones (and UMTS/WCDMA phones) have a wonderful invention called a SIM card that identifies the user and network, and that card can be moved to a new phone, or a new SIM card put into the same phone, making it almost trivial for a user to "mix and match" his handset and service carrier. That increases competition, reduces vertical monopoly, and makes life better for everyone.
Or at least, it would if it were that simple. In the US, most carriers offer discounts on phones bought with a service agreement, but then put a software lock on the phone so that if used with a SIM card from a different carrier it won't work. They claim that otherwise people would buy a new phone with service, cancel the service immediately, and then have a below-cost new phone. But isn't that what those steep early termination fees are for? European carriers didn't used to do that, but it is becoming a more and more common practice. Some carriers will unlock a phone once you've been with them long enough if you ask nicely, but they don't advertise that fact. The harder it is for a customer to "take his business elsewhere", the less competition there is and the worse the economy is for it. Repeat after me: Competition is good.
That is only the tip of the iceberg, however. A larger problem comes with phone lock-down, that is, application locking. Many carriers tightly regulate what applications a user can install on a phone. Their claim is that they have to in order to protect their network. That, too, is asinine. A well-designed network just offers a common carrier data channel, just as virtually all landline ISPs do. If wireless carriers are concerned about their radio integrity, then the answer is to address the problem directly and make the phone not able to go over-power or to improper frequencies, not to effectively block any applications they don't happen to like. Would you expect Ford to refuse to let you use anything but Ford gas in your car, or would you expect them to build a car that can take any brand gas of a certain octane rating? (All those who answered the former, you don't get a cookie.)
In neither case is the network at risk. What's at risk are guaranteed profit and control. Companies don't want their customers to have the option of leaving, but customers and the market as a whole depend on that ability. The new version of Palm OS has a number of new "security features" that are, actually, ways for carriers to lock-down devices against programs they don't like. Microsoft is no better, as they've openly stated that they will be doing the same thing even on the desktop in the next version of Windows. Clearly the user is not to be trusted with his own device, he has to be kept from doing anything but what the carrier or Microsoft says he can.
And expect a big fight when Apple's iTunes for Motorola phones bumps up against carriers' desire to monopolize over-the-air music downloads to phones. Both want to monopolize buyers' access, Apple with crippling "Digital Rights Management" features that keep users from transferring their own data and the carriers with application locks to force users to have only one monopoly choice for applications. Gee, doesn't locking out applications the company doesn't like defeat the purpose of having a device on which you can install native applications?
A mobile phone, smartphone, or communicator that you can't take with you when you leave or can't install arbitrary applications on is not yours. It does not belong to you. It, like all of the data about your life on it, is merely rented at the whim of the carrier. Do you trust your phone carrier or Microsoft enough to let them control your data and your life?
The outcome of the case won't be known for a long time, but there are things that buyers can do right now to help avoid even further lock-in and lock-down. Vote with your dollars. Before signing up with a mobile carrier, make sure that they will unlock your device after a short period, say 90 days. If not, don't buy from them and be sure to tell them why, otherwise they'll just assume they need flashier commercials. If you're shopping for a smartphone or communicator (or desktop for that matter), avoid it if there are any application signing or restrictions in place at all, and once again be sure the company knows why. Hopefully companies will get the message that customers don't like to be owned. You don't want to be owned by your mobile carrier, do you?
 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
Warning: include(/usr/www/users/infotv/us/ssi/views_right_promo.html) [function.include]: failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /usr/www/users/infotv/news/n/5185.html on line 346
Warning: include() [function.include]: Failed opening '/usr/www/users/infotv/us/ssi/views_right_promo.html' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/local/lib/php') in /usr/www/users/infotv/news/n/5185.html on line 346
|
|
|
Archive
