AT&T claims completely open network, too -- "the most open," even!
By Ryan Block 
posted Dec 6th 2007 2:31AM
posted Dec 6th 2007 2:31AM
Who'd have thought the end of 2007 would see US cellphone carrier heavyweights duking it out with PR one-upsmanship to be... open? Seriously, someone pinch us, it's as amazing as it is farcical. So the latest development in big network "openness" has USA Today running off in the opposite direction with AT&T CEO Ralph de la Vega's comments that "You can use any handset on our network you want... We don't prohibit it, or even police it. ... We are the most open wireless company in the industry." We think the headline "AT&T flings cellphone network wide open" kind of says it all.The reality of the situation? Nothing has changed between yesterday and today, and, as de la Vega told us a couple of weeks ago, AT&T customers can continue expect the status quo from the nation's largest carrier in terms of their level of openness and flexibility. Granted, it's one thing for Verizon to say they're going wide open (especially being ridiculously closed CDMA carrier they are), but it's quite another for AT&T to lay claims as though it's somehow more open than any other carrier in the world when that argument comes as an extension of its core network technology. Yes, you can take your AT&T SIM, put it in an unlocked device, and run it on their network without much hassle -- but that doesn't make AT&T any more "open" than the final-say testing facility Verizon intends to use in "openly" making approvals (and disapprovals) of devices and software.
[Thanks, epi117]
From a world perspective, a GSM provider is definately the most open network. AT&T wins in my book.
Ok, explain!
Alright. GSM holds 80% of world cellular coverage. CDMA holds 13.2%. Which means most of the phones in the world are GSM. As long as you have an unlocked GSM phone, it will work with an AT&T sim card. Also, most GSM networks have some kind of co-op agreement with global roaming. A quad band AT&T phone can be used in any country that has GSM, and vice versa.
But, I believe the most important part of what US provider's mean by "open", is the "openness" of devices avaliable. AT&T will support ANY non-provider-locked GSM phone that supports it's frequency. (Most tri-bands and all quad-bands will work)
Ok, now that you've explained how GSM works, which was a given, explain how AT&T is MORE open than other GSM networks...
Because they said it before T-mobile
Well you see, I believe all GSM networks in US (or anywhere) are pretty much equal in terms of "openness". AT&T just happens to be the largest.
is this guy from Columbia ?
Can I use WiFi Skype handset on AT&T network ?
Hey Ryan, I hear what you're sayin, but does it really matter?
The fact is that AT&T IS very open and it's not ONLY because they're GSM. It could be much worse, sure allowing SIM card swapping relates to GSM, but that doesn't mean that they can't do the same crap to their phones that Verizon and Sprint do. Especially Verizon... They don't butcher their phones OR their features (except maybe Wifi in some cases), or require new contracts when changing plans, which are things I think they deserve props for. I'm not sure how cell phone providers operate overseas, but I know in the US the combination of things ATT offers IS unique (GSM, open phones, 3G, tons of phone options, etc...), especially where laws tend to favor corporations.
Summary: Sure GSM is a part of it, but it's not the whole story and I think you're short-changing AT&T when you reference that...
Ryan,
Honeslty? Don't you think everyone's been giving Verizon a free pass on "openness"? Why pick on AT&T for a comment like "the MOST open"? I think being the first GSM carrier here in the U.S. to have "unlimited" Internet plans is very significant. Also, Verizon seems to surcharge you for using a smart phone on its service... to the tune of $20 (deals and offers not withstanding). Has T-Mobile adopted pro-rated cancellation fees yet? They just got unlimited Internet months ago. AT&T has seemingly employed a more WiFi friendly policy of late, although I haven't looked nearly closely enough.
Seriously... Verizon was VERY closed. I read this whole right up thinking you guys would slow the horse down, and outline criteria that either you personally thought applied to "open" or that you thought AT&T might apply to "open" as a concept. How can you say "doesn't make it any more open than [Verizon]", when you're still waiting to see what Verizon's "open" finally looks like? That's pretty bad.
Just because AT&T has BEEN open, why kick them in the teeth for saying, "Yup, we're the most open"? I mean, nothing in this post even disproves that they are. Pretty unfair.
The ONLY unopen thing it sounds... like there is, is AT&T's iPhone deal. If this had been a Verizon deal, I somehow doubt they'd change anything about it either. Why give Verizon some false-sheen of "openness" with they're freaky "we can and may BAN your device from our network if we don't like the smell of it" CDMA network? I remember reading about the situation on that network, and thinking... WOW, no one seems to give Verizon a hard time or points out the general haze over usage between compatible networks.
That it... I got it. Engadget, someone needs to draw up an "openness" chart. Shows compatibility between networks 2G-3G, general global coverage 2G-3G, carriers by country, pay-as-you-go & Internet practices, and roaming practices/options. You could make it Interactive, so that prices could be computed/converted into any currency on the fly for clear comparison.
I'll even help. Let me know.
I remember reading an article on locked phones, and the section on locked CDMA phones was REALLY cut and dry.
"We are the most open wireless company in the industry" Please.... Example in Nordic EU countires it's illegal to carrier to butcher their phones and phone locking is rare(especially iphone like locking couldnt happen just simply because it's illegally).
Ryan, you're right that that AT&T doesn't have to do anything special to allow arbitrary phones on their network. But so what? The customer doesn't care about *how* it's done; all they care about is the results. AT&T has no history of crippled Bluetooth, no BREW, and no requirement that your phone be validated by their testing lab--you can use any GSM device in the world. I could go buy a Gumstix with the GSM module and make my own phone, and use it on AT&T. Try that with Verizon.
OK LADIES (pun intended) & RYAN BLOCK (of course you’re no lady cause I hope you will hire me one day ;^),
LET A GUY IN HERE THAT ACTUALLY KNOWS SOME STUFF! What makes AT&T more “OPEN” than ANY other carrier (we are talking GSM, so Verizon isn’t even close to being in the mix here), is that they (AT&T) DOES NOT deploy EIR functionality (that’s Equipment Identity Register, for the n00bs)!
Almost all of the EU (and many other GSM) operators have some type of EIR deployed (in some countries the courts mandated it to help control phone theft). An EIR gives the mobile operator the ability to black list-deny, white list-allow and grey list-track IMEIs. So swap SIMs all you want, if, (for example) o2 didn’t want your phone on their network, it aint getting on.
This IMEI blocking data is also shared cross carriers in some cases so don’t try to activate that “questionably acquired” device on any of the other operators. This in some ways similar to Verizon’s ESN deny functionality. SO TECHNICALLY DE LA VEGA IS CORRECT IN HIS STATEMENT!!
Sincerely
Professor Frank Black
Future Engadget
(or Engadget Mobile writer ;^)...
If we're going to take that tack then T-Mobile is just as "open" as AT&T.
I'm kind of an idiot - Could someone explain the concept of being "open"? I mean, my phone will work on other people's networks too...It's called "Roaming"...But I'm pretty sure that's not what they're talking about here. I don't get it.
CDMA (Verizon) and GSM(ATT) won't roam on each others networks
//Tmobile is the most open IMHO
From Wikipedia: Global System for Mobile communications (GSM) is the most popular standard for mobile phones in the world. Its promoter, the GSM Association, estimates that 82% of the global mobile market uses the standard.
at&t says they are "open" because you can take a phone from anywhere in that 82% of the world, so long as it 1) supports 850mhz or 1900mhz gsm...most do at least 1900mhz, but quad-band is popular now and 2) is unlocked, pop an at&t SIM card in it, and go.
Case In Point: I didn't like AT&T's Nokia E62 because they removed the WiFi, so I bought the European E61 off eBay (unlocked) and put my at&t sim card in it. Works like a champ (minus the 3G...).
if by open you mean lame, then yes, you are the most open. With Verizon being close second.
Sign up for my cell phone service, we offer -by far- the most openest network.
And for some reason Firefox doesn't tell me openest isn't a word...Must be proof that what I'm saying is true.
Tmobile is way more open, only until lately att even allowed the unlocking of phones. plus u cannot do dialup dialing on att's network like u could do on tmobiles
You clearly have no idea what you're talking about...
Seriously... It's been three years since AT&T (Cingular) unlocked my Treo 650. They did so just three months into my contract, and without any fuss. The only trouble that AT&T has ever given me was some billing F-ups that took a little more time on the phone to resolve than I thought was necessary.
When they mean "it's" "the most open", they mean their network is completely open to the US Government.
Here in my lab, my door is the most open in the corridor :p
I can imagine CEOs staying in a room and talking to each other "Open Handset Aliance is CHANGING THE GAME IN TOWN! We should be OPEN!!" :)
Ryan, do you really think the timing vs. Google's open wireless bid is purely coincidental?
Verizon and AT&T are bluffing. They are trying to convince Google that they will be "open enough" so that Google doesn't have to win the wireless bid to open up the cellular networks.
It feels like a corporate scramble to me, this is good for the consumer. Now if we can only get them in a contest to see who has the least expensive wireless networking then I will be all set.
meh..
I can use a sim card from any carrier in any mobile phone here in India...
number portability(no change in number when changing carriers) will also be implemented next year ^_^
Next year? We've had that for a few years now. What are you specifically trying to say?
As much as people dislike AT&T, it offers the best combination of phones, service plans, terms, and flexibility. T-Mobile coming in a close second. Vz and Sprint have issues IMO . . . especially Sprint considering that everyone is dropping their service like a bad habit.
By the way, the guy on the photo (Ralph de la Vega I presume?) seems heavily photoshopped. If he was a phone, I would call him a fake.
well... I still don't get the idea of that statement from at&t. i live in london in great britain(thats in europe if some1 doesnt know) and well... there are few mobile providers and for the last five years I swapped the networks, kept same number, used same sim card with different handsets (unlocked of course) swapping even few times a day, sometimes when going abroad I take my private number and swap it with business one in one handset and no network ever denied me access to the connection, so really... I understand that States is different economy than europe but seriously waht is the big deal about at&t staement?
or maybe I dont know, but in europe we are already offered some services as standards, that americans are still denied? and if I get it all wrong, can someone kindly eplain why that at&t statement is sooooo SPECIAL. thanks.
Let me switch carriers without paying a damn penalty!
That has to be one of the most ignorant things I've ever heard...
You pay a penalty because the carrier SUBSIDIZED the phone for you, idiot...
The fact that I'm not allowed to use my iPhone on a business account with AT&T means they're not the most open in the US. That's probably T-Mobile. I think we have to wait to see what Verizon actually does before we can make a claim either way.
The thing that kills me is all these companies advertise an "unlimited plan" but if you read the Ferengi print it's spells out the limitations very clearly.
I think the open-ness goes beyond just using a different phone (Wait did AT&T just say could use a Venus or Voyager? I didn't think so!)
I think this needs to be about have carriers SUPPORT, not just allow us to use our own services on ANY phone (I'm excluding SmartPhones from this)
Or go with supporting my own instal of a completely different OS (Android). And I think open needs to mean not charging $400 and over for a phone with out a contract. With Verizon and Sprint, there's not an easy way to do this as nearly every CDMA phone is locked and Vz won't unlock them for you - until late next year.
Now I'm not expecting prices to be dirt cheap w/o contracts of course, just a bit more than what we pay for current phones w/ 2yrs.
No matter how 'open' these networks are people aren't going to pay close to $500 for a standard phone unlocked to work with any network. With that I'm surprised the iPhone has done as well as it has, though $400 is not horrible, it should be a bit less with 2 yrs contract.
Once phones become separate from the network that's when the prices will drop and the innovation will increase. And the networks will have to keep up with the phones.
ALso if any of you guys in the UK want to give me a short explanation of how you cell industry is, please do so.
I think the open-ness goes beyond just using a different phone (Wait did AT&T just say could use a Venus or Voyager? I didn't think so!)
I think this needs to be about have carriers SUPPORT, not just allow us to use our own services on ANY phone (I'm excluding SmartPhones from this)
Or go with supporting my own instal of a completely different OS (Android). And I think open needs to mean not charging $400 and over for a phone with out a contract. With Verizon and Sprint, there's not an easy way to do this as nearly every CDMA phone is locked and Vz won't unlock them for you - until late next year.
Now I'm not expecting prices to be dirt cheap w/o contracts of course, just a bit more than what we pay for current phones w/ 2yrs.
No matter how 'open' these networks are people aren't going to pay close to $500 for a standard phone unlocked to work with any network. With that I'm surprised the iPhone has done as well as it has, though $400 is not horrible, it should be a bit less with 2 yrs contract.
Once phones become separate from the network that's when the prices will drop and the innovation will increase. And the networks will have to keep up with the phones.
ALso if any of you guys in the UK want to give me a short explanation of how you cell industry is, please do so.
Oh thats brilliant, I haven't laughed so hard in ages. And such straight delivery, brilliant!
Yes AT&T an open network, dropped calls, dropped network, voice mail a day late but yes you can run unlocked phones.. mostly at the speed of EDGE.
However as a Verizon Voyager customer I can attest to the stupid and arbitrary crippling of features. But Verizon simply works and EVDO is fast compared to EDGE.
Yes AT&T an open network, dropped calls, dropped network, voice mail a day late but yes you can run unlocked phones.. mostly at the speed of EDGE.
However as a Verizon Voyager customer I can attest to the stupid and arbitrary crippling of features. But Verizon simply works and EVDO is fast compared to EDGE.
You are mentioning service. This is a discussion about the openess of both networks. Maybe AT&T stinks for your use, but you like VZW. I am sure their are other people in the exact opposite situation. VZW stinks where I live. VZW is "The Network", of dropped calls that is, where I live.
Why would you compare EVDO to EDGE....
Why don't you compare EDGE to 1xRTT which EDGE is 3x faster
or HSPA to EVDO where HSPA is ALSO 3x faster
AT&T's CEO is Zorro's grandson????????
AT&T's CEO is Zorro's grandson????
open... yes... open in terms of sharing caller information with national security...
zing!
Yes, this from the same company which told me just two days ago, "Sure you can get an account and bring your own phone, but we'll charge you an ETF when you leave early anyway!"
Amazing the hypocrisy of this company.
There are a few forms of 'open'-ness:
1) The ability to bring your own compatible phone to the network. And to leave with that phone and bring it to another network. Just because CDMA phones typically do not have a SIM card, does not mean that an operator cannot provision a phone for their particular network. All the information required for a CDMA network that is stored on a GSM SIM card is stored and available in an unlocked CDMA handset.
2) The ability to use the resources of the network for your own purposes (legal, of course). This includes running safe applications on your phone from 3rd parties. This also means the ability to access third party internet sites with those applications to download information.
3) Allowing third parties to access their customers’ handsets - somewhat the same as 2, but google mail can be seen this way with their ad-supported searches, etc. Certain push SMS / MMS applications fall into this category.
Obviously with the limits of a mobile network much tighter than fixed networks, fair use policies are required for the good of everyone. Also, I see any of the above uses as being within the current rate plans as outlined for all users, but often the operators see it differently. i.e. they would like to get a piece of that music download from iTunes.
CDMA networks typically have not allowed you to bring a phone from say - Verizon to Sprint, but any US-sold CDMA phone would work to the same standards and hence this would be possible. T-mobile & AT&T have let you use your own GSM handset for a long time.
If AT&T wants to really be open they would offer more cell phones and offer discounts on non-branded cell phones with contracts. Their selection of phones isn't that great. European GSM carriers have a better selection of phones. A lot of people who know about phones have to spend retail prices, instead of discounted prices, to buy decent phones. I think it's better for carriers to offer good handsets instead of just touting that you can pay retail prices for other phones to use on their network.
I don't know if it's changed, but AT&T/Cingular didn't used to be comfortable with you using other phones on their network. It was trouble to get internet and MMS working on your non-branded phone. They didn't support it and when you went to them for help they wouldn't help you.
Remember that ATT is regulated by something we like to call the FCC. The FCC restricts the phones that are able to be sold in the US. Do what I do, go to China town pick up the phone u want, unlocked, go to ATT get a contract (free phone for backup), slide your sim in your phone and off you go...
u guys are funny.
An open network is a network where other companies are allowed to sell subscriptions under their own brand, so that they can plug a box into the mobile phone provider's network which "their" traffic goes through, so that they can make their own deals on how the mobile phone reaches a landline, calls abroad, and various services. This leads to virtual operators using different physical networks based on location if they want to, and most importantly: Lots of price competition.
This is the model used in most of Europe btw.. Of course, this requires a strong government which operates in the interest of the people, not corporate interests. The network owners are always moaning about the prices the virtual operators pay.. When you buy a bandwidth license you're also required to reach a certain amount of the population as well.
And of course you can buy any handset for the network, many phone shops even lets you see the possible rebate price list if you want to tie it to a network or subscription for 12 months.
^ butt hurts cause he works for a carrier
I agree with the statement that AT&T is the "most open" although I admit TMobile could be, I don't have enough experience with them. I've had VeriZon, Sprint and Cingular/ATT. Oh, and my definition of "open"? The carrier that most allows you to modify and use your phone in any fashion you want.
Sprint? Not open, you have to use their phones. Ability to add software is limited. Coverage is pretty sad, at least in the Northeast US.
Verizon? Pure evil. Disabling bluetooth and USB file transfer to force people to incur data charges whenever they move data on and off their phones is nauseating. That sounds like the exact opposite of "open" to me.
AT&T? Here's my experience. I have an HTC P3600, similar to but not the same as the Cingular 8525 (no thumboard, has GPS). Bought it myself. I have loaded updated basic ROM software, updated the radio software, added all sorts of WM6 software like video players, etc., basically done whatever I wanted with the phone. When I have had problems with the phone (such as setting up email, and once problems getting text messages), I called up regular support and they helped me the same way they would any other customer - having a non-Cigular phone didn't faze them one bit. They walked me through checking the ISP, etc.
The one "restriction" I've seen is internet access is really flaky unless you use their "MediaNet" proxy server, which I hear might block streaming TV and video (which place a high demand on bandwidth).
They even have a somewhat decent webgroup where people share ideas about customizing and otherwise "hacking" their phones. They have banned discussions about how to replace ROMs, but I'llbet that's more to keep people from calling customer service after they brick their phones.
Does that sound like the epxerience you'd get with Verizon or Sprint? Nope - locked down. TMobile, I don't know.
Before I had my iPhone (sorry I had to throw that in there), I had a Cingy 8525 and used the wap settings all the time cause I'm cheating and use the Media Max 20 bucks/month package. I used it to stream Orb ALL THE TIME. As a matter of fact, there were times I had over a GIG of data usage in a month using just the 20 bucks/month and the WAP access point settings...Just FYI
I think networks will be more open when they stop locking all the phones they sell with contract...