AT&T offers SIM-only service, attempts to maintain "most open" status

It looks like all that shouting AT&T has been doing lately about its "openness" is starting to manifest itself in the way the company does business. It's come to our attention that the mobile telco has started offering a SIM-only plan, thus providing the ultimate in open options. The idea being, of course, that you can bring any random / crappy / salvaged GSM-compatible handset the provider's way, and it'll let you hook a towline onto its satellites. Of course, you could just get one of those cheapo giveaways and pop out the card, but this is so much more open and free, like San Francisco in '69, a car-less road, some land of your own, and a good old-fashioned whiskey on the rocks. Oh, you still have a sign a two-year agreement... enjoy your freedom!

[Via The Boy Genius Report]

[Johnny @ Jan 20th 2008 7:40PM]

Ah. Sim cards. Shame I'll never know them. Stuck on Sprint.

[David @ Jan 20th 2008 10:37PM]

@ Johnny, or anyone else

if Sprint indeed closes and I still have ~7 months on my contract left, does this mean that I can go out and find another carrier or will Sprint sell the rest of it to another company?

Anybody know? I really want a SIM card phone so I can use it in Korea!

[BigD @ Jan 21st 2008 1:17AM]

Dude...Korea uses CDMA primarily....and WCDMA to a lesser extent. If you had a phone that was WCDMA with a USIM it would be possible...but not a GSM sim. Don't get your hopes up.

[cswallow01 @ Jan 20th 2008 7:40PM]

Umm...

Well, atleast AT&T doesn't lock down their bluetooth profiles, like some other companies we know...

Verizon & Sprint come to mind!

[Jacqueline @ Jan 20th 2008 8:12PM]

Sprint doesn't lock down their bluetooth profiles. Been speeding with their EV-DO just fine and dandy! :)

[trancer @ Jan 20th 2008 8:18PM]

uh..yes they do...

[Octothorpe @ Jan 20th 2008 8:20PM]

What evidence do you have that at&t doesn't modify their bluetooth stacks? I coulsn't get my phone to tether until I got a data tethering plan ($70/month), than it magically works. (at&t, blackberry 8820)

[roflercopterer @ Jan 20th 2008 9:03PM]

wut u talkin bout trancer?

[Prokanda @ Jan 20th 2008 9:13PM]

the question is, does it really matter? I can have headsets on my voyager... I can send pictures to others... I can print wirelessly... I can send/receive files over OBEX... that's how I was getting my sounds/wallpapers to my voyager until bitpim (easier to use the cable that verizon included for free.. faster and charges the phone)... so it looks like they're actually lifting the bans... really easy on their smartphones.. (I've had two verizon winmo phones).

so all you GSM guys will have left is "it's compatible in another country" pretty soon... and I don't travel.. so not being able to make a call in my house with GSM phones has been a non-issue for a long time.. now MAYBE if t-mo had some decent phones on HotSpot it would be a different story.. but forget AT&T.

[Mobius_1 @ Jan 20th 2008 9:13PM]

EVDO? that doesn't sound like Bluetooth to me...

[ZackDanger @ Jan 20th 2008 9:32PM]

It was my understanding that this has always been an option... Allbeit I less known one.

For the privilege of signing up contractless, one would have to give up M2M and other specials.

[tekdemon @ Jan 21st 2008 6:18PM]

My sprint bluetooth profile isn't locked, and I don't believe my brother's bluetooth profile is locked either (I have a Treo he has a KRZR).
They did lock mp3 ringtone support on the Centro (and I think the Treo also), but since it's a Palmphone its not entirely impossible to bypass, heh.

Either way, it's a lot less restrictive than Verizon and their idiotic way of making everyone use that hideous GUI.

[ChrisG @ Jan 20th 2008 7:41PM]

That's not exactly free and open if you have to sign a two year contract. Look at T-Mobile they're doing the sim only service with out contracts.

[3rdsun @ Jan 20th 2008 9:46PM]

yeah how an you enjoy your freedom when you have to sign a contract

[nick @ Jan 20th 2008 7:42PM]

Uh, satellites? Nice try. This is AT&T, not Inmarsat.

[ethan @ Jan 21st 2008 2:37AM]

well, yeah, but the cell towers use a satellite signal.

[Pavan @ Jan 22nd 2008 6:08PM]

Well, yeah, except you're wrong again. But the only satellite signal that a tower would use is a GPS one for timing...they have T1s going to them - or some relay off of each other when you're in places like BFE, Iowa. Perhaps I should submit your ability to pull stuff out of your ass with no source/prior knowledge and present it like it's fact to our friendly friends at Fox and friends? Asshat

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_site

[dan @ Jan 20th 2008 7:43PM]

I dont see why anyone would do this when you can just get a free phone for signing up anyway..

[Anthony @ Jan 20th 2008 8:02PM]

More specifically find a mobile shop that can get the unbranded/unlocked phone you want and sign up for a new contract through them. I got a new [unbranded/unlocked] K850i for $250 when I signed up.

[Trav @ Jan 20th 2008 8:34PM]

Because this way youll still be able to get an upgrade discount on your next phone purchase, and you wouldnt if you got the upgrade at time of signup

[Amrit @ Jan 20th 2008 7:45PM]

if they aint giving any phone free with it... then why the 2 year contract ? i thought the 2 year contract was to recover the cost of the phone.. ( though the iphone defies this logic ).

and of you are anyways gonna get roped in for 2 years.. better get one with a phone. you can always pop the SIm card in your phone and use the free one as a backup.

I really dont get the logic behind this scheme !!

[Brian Prows @ Jan 20th 2008 8:46PM]

The cost of the phone on a two year contract has never been the main reason for the contract (with the iPhone an exception, due to AT&T's payment to Apple). 1-2 year contracts with all carriers take care of customer-acquisition costs (advertising, line provisioning, network maintenance, customer service call centers and non-paying subscribers.) The same principle applies to credit cards

Do the math. If the average carrier's customer AMR (average monthly revenue) is, say, $50, the customer is agreeing to pay at least $1,200 over a two-year term. Plus, along the way, many customers will purchase additional products and services (ringtones, wallpaper, text messaging and, best of all, data plans). Data plans, whether for BlackBerry email or smartphone Web access) produce the highest profits.

Now that AT&T has 65 million customers, it can afford to do what carriers in Europe, the U.K. and Asia have done for years--give you a SIM card. The big difference? If you live in EuroAsia, you can buy SIM cards in multiple countries and swap them out of your GSM phone as you travel, without a contract in most cases.

Verizon and Sprint customers. Although your phones don't have SIM's (your service is tied to ESN's hard-wired into your phones), the amount of $$$ you're committing to V and S over a two year contract is similar.

[JamBob @ Jan 21st 2008 5:58AM]

I don't understand it either.

The whole point of SIM only deals (in Europe, at least) is that the carrier isn't subsidizing the price of the phone.

Thus, you get cheaper line retail and a 1 month minimum contract period.

AT&T seem to be giving customers the worst of both worlds!

[Amrit @ Jan 21st 2008 8:44AM]

i agree with you JamBob. in the name of openness, its like we are being cheated. if they would just remove the clause for the 2 year contract, i would truly believe AT&T is trying to become a more "OPEN" carrier.

[DanITman @ Jan 21st 2008 8:37AM]

I wonder what the no contract version cost?

[Chris @ Jan 21st 2008 9:50AM]

no US carrier offers a "plan" with no contract, only the pay-as-you-go

[Dan Wesnor @ Jan 20th 2008 10:01PM]

So, what's the benefit? Can't I just get one of their free phones and swap that SIM card into an unlocked phone and save the $5, plus have a back-up phone? If there's no discount on service and you still have to get the contract, what's the point?

[Dylan @ Jan 20th 2008 11:11PM]

I'm wondering the same thing. If you're getting a 2 year contract anyways, why not get a free backup phone?

[fubufighters @ Jan 20th 2008 7:55PM]

T-Mobile Flexpay for the win!

[Liam @ Jan 20th 2008 8:00PM]

In the UK, you can pick up a pay-as-you-go sim for free. This is probably because it costs the makers nothing, and can only bring them in revenue due to people switching (if it costs nothing, why not). However, everyone's uses contracts anyway, so it doesn't matter that much.

[gfunk @ Jan 20th 2008 8:12PM]

Europe and even Latin America have been ahead of the US in phone services like those... For people that travel a lot, those pay as you go sims are priceless. I really don't understand why the US is so behind of the curve.

[Liam @ Jan 20th 2008 8:29PM]

Yeah, it's a bit wierd that a country where 'consumer choice' and 'competition' are supposed to drive growth there isn't much of either.

[Iain @ Jan 20th 2008 9:13PM]

Two points.

1. This isn't a PAYG SIM - it's a SIM-only contract like O2's SIMplicity.
2. Most people aren't on contracts, PAYG users out-number contract users by a huge margin.

[Fernando @ Jan 20th 2008 11:30PM]

I got my prepaid sim from AT&T free here when getting it for my N95, maybe it was a isolated case?

[Morel @ Jan 20th 2008 8:05PM]

LOL sign a 2 year contract? Nonsense, I walked into my local ATT retail store with a unlocked 8125, they gave me a sim card, and BAM, month to month service with no contract :)

Note I did this 1 1/2 years ago :)

[Graham @ Jan 20th 2008 8:39PM]

well duh! one and a half years ago. I mean this isnt exactly the same offer they had a while ago, hence the reason they are posting it...I doubt that engadget is a year and a half behind

[Stephen Levinson @ Jan 20th 2008 8:07PM]

Can someone please fill me in. Would it be possible to give the
iPhone 3G capabilities if it had an iPhone designed 3G chip? Opposed
to having built in 3G? Thanks. -Steve

[fsx @ Jan 20th 2008 8:15PM]

you're talking nonsense

[Stephen Levinson @ Jan 20th 2008 8:19PM]

Why? If this chip can bring 3G to other devices why can't it be adapted to the iPhone? That doesn't sound too ridiculous to me.

[Mark @ Jan 20th 2008 8:27PM]

You don't get 3G from a little SIM card! If your phone doesn't have a 3G radio in it, then...NO 3G FOR YOU!

[Liam @ Jan 20th 2008 8:27PM]

The chip basically tells the provider who you are. It might store texts and contacts too. It has very little to do with the actual telephony of the device.

[DT @ Jan 20th 2008 8:51PM]

Oy vey.

[ALLurGroceries @ Jan 20th 2008 8:54PM]

just sprinkle some crack on it

[derX @ Jan 20th 2008 9:12PM]

C'mon, give him a break, not all of us are cell phone mavens. Stephen, it's what Mark said, the ability to receive the 3G signal depends on the phone's hardware, not the SIM card.

BTW, remember fellow Engadgeteers, this is a forum allowing the for free enchanging of knowledge, it's not like Stephen was arrogant or anything. Remember, the only time we flame is when people ask:
Does it blend? Or, my personal not-favorite: Does it play doom?


--------
Also, "just sprinkle some crack on it" = xDDDDD

[Matt @ Jan 22nd 2008 12:37AM]

To all the guys with stupid comments. There's really no need to act like a BITCH. Stephen is asking a simple "non techy" question so it would be polite to answer appropriately. Really no need to stop being a lady.

[Corvillus @ Jan 21st 2008 10:08PM]

As has been said here before, the SIM doesn't do anything for 3G. Having such a SIM doesn't won't add 3G capabilities to your iPhone as it doesn't have the hardware support for it.

In fact...the pictured SIM is the exact same type that comes in the iPhone...3G fireball icon and all.

[Anon. @ Jan 20th 2008 8:13PM]

"The idea being, of course, that you can bring any random / crappy / salvaged GSM-compatible handset the provider's way, and it'll let you hook a towline onto its satellites."

One can also bring in cool FCC unapproved/pending approval handsets into the country and use them here if you travel alot. This is a good thing for me because America has really shitty phones.

[Brian Prows @ Jan 20th 2008 9:01PM]

No. You can not use any old handset--especially older AT&T Wireless TDMA phones. In fact, when Cingular merged with Bell South and AT&T Wireless disappeared, many former AT&T Wireless customers were livid, because they were getting excellent reception on AT&T's analog network. Switching to Cingular's digital network, in many cases, lowered signal strength and call quality when analog handsets were swapped out with digital handses. A digital handset is required for AT&T service.

[Joel I. Johnson @ Jan 20th 2008 9:57PM]

I think it's understood that there exist a constraint on "any headset" that it must be compatible with AT&T's current wireless network.

I don't think this offering is very novel as I have friends and family that have activated SIMs with the network previously known as Cingular to avoid having a contract. Looking at AT&T's page for this offering I think it is even less attractive than when we did activations before; there appears to be a 2 year contract attached to this (and I'm used to only commiting to a contract if I am getting a discount or something else significant in excange for the commitment).

But I agree, American phones are rather lack luster. I stick to ordering euro-spec phones since there seems to be far less feature supression going on outside of the US.

[AndrewNeo @ Jan 20th 2008 8:15PM]

Er, I'm fairly certain AT&T was doing this before.. my friend bought an imported v3x from Amazon, went to AT&T (Cingular at the time) and asked for a SIM card with a service contract, and they gave him one. He never got a subsidized phone, just the SIM.