@GGG Phones don't sell like that in America. Everything needs to be bound to a company. There are no unlocked phone sold in a best buy here. It is quite disappointing.
Dell needs to guarantee sales of this device. Choosing a carrier helps this especially since the subsidized price can help. Just throwing into electronic stores will take the risk of making it two much work to buy it then go to a carrier to use it.
Also, when Dell uses a carrier, the carrier will pre-purchase a certain amount of devices. This shows up as instant sales for Dell whether the phone ever really sells well at ATT.
but what's the point of exclusivity? It just means the carrier has to be extra lucky to get a deal for the right phone. if there is no exclusivity all carriers can sell all phones which certainly makes their lives easier. and it gives consumers a choice.
@GGG You'd think that'd be for the best but it seems the general american populace is not educated to the fact that they're getting shafted by carriers here. I live here and it is far and away the most irksome thing about owning a cell phone. I can't fathom why they would think this sort of behavior is OK.
@GGG Without competition, they get exclusive deals that bring customers in so they can keep higher monthly charges. Essentially, they go into bidding wars on these things because it keeps their margins higher, they get to charge more for service while getting the phones in to attract customers. The U.S. market needs a lot of help in this area if they want real competition, what the carriers do is borderline collusion in this and other regards.
@GGG It hasn't really been explained very well yet, so let me give it a go. The thought of exclusivity is that customers will switch networks to get the phone. If you can only use AT&T and you want the phone bad enough, you'll switch networks. Phone networks know this so they invest a lot of money into the manufacturer, effectively "buying" exclusivity. This is an effective business model, but it only works with the highest profile phones (iPhone, EVO, Droid...). I doubt the Dell Streak has that appeal, but maybe more people than I think want a phone the size of my face?
@GGG It wouldn't be half as bad if it was T-Mobile, they at least carrier unlock any of their devices after 90 days. Good luck getting a cheap LG flip phone unlocked by AT&T.
This is why it's factory unlocked for me...or bust. Yet another way the Nexus One is [ or was :-( ] our savior.
@kjb434 While part of what you say may be true, the only phones Dell should be selling as simlocked are those AT&T intends to sell as subsidized units. It sounds like this is the same bullshit Apple pulls with the iPhone. You sign up for a 2 year contract, and even after the contract expires you have to jump through hoops to unlock a phone YOU own. AT&T and Dell should both be slapped down on this one. If you pay full price for ANY device, screw both a carrier and manufacturer for forcing you to use a particular carrier. I'm betting, if someone digs a bit deeper, that it's not even legal to do so.
@GGG Dell doesn't want to deal with mass retail distribution - they'd prefer to use AT&T's stores around the country to do it. However, that still doesn't explain why you couldn't buy one from their own mail-order website unlocked. They offer a bunch of other phones that way (e.g. the N900.)
Regardless, this whole thread is basically arguing about $20, which is my guess what the unlock codes will cost when they start appearing on eBay. Granted...we shouldn't have to pay that.
@GGG Dell pulled the same crap with O2 in the UK - even the full price £400 model on PAYG is SIM-locked. That, and the Android 1.6 OS, eventually tipped the balance in favour of my new Galaxy S :)
@kjb434 But the Kins at Verizon were sent back to Microsoft. I guess it's all in the contract.
I think the big thing is that AT&T gives Dell $$$ to have their phone exclusively, independent of how many they sell. Getting an exclusive phone, and expanding the customer's choices (based on certain price-points) is a good way to retain customers, and sometimes bring in new ones.
@GGG If every carrier sells the same phone, they're consigned to competing on the strength of service and lifetime contractual value, as offered to the end customer. With an exclusive, shiny new gadget in the window they know that customers are more likely to ignore their common sense (and crap coverage/cust service/value, etc.) and sign a contract. For that reason alone it's worth the networks while to pay for exclusivity.
The manufacturer benefits by knowing that the carrier will sell the shit out of the device over a longer period in order to shift enough units to cover their investment. If they sold into every channel the device would lose standout and quickly slide into obscurity once the next new toy was released.
@GGG I'm from the US, and I don't get it either. It's mind boggling how people here love paying for locked phones. I've met countless people that actually defend the practice, and defend their respective carriers to no end. I mean just read some of the comments here. Truly mind boggling.
The new FiOS HD DVR, arguably the biggest update since Verizon released a DVR, thanks to its external storage support, enhanced multi-room functionality and slick new 16x9 HD user interface.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
I'm sorry if i don't understand this, i'm from Europe.
But why doesn't Dell just send a bunch of these Streaks to electronics stores so they can sell them the way they came out of the factory?
@GGG
What i mean is: just where does AT&T enter the equation and why does Dell feel a need to be affiliated with them in this way?
@GGG I think because they've made a deal with AT&T to be exclusive to them.
@GGG $
@GGG Phones don't sell like that in America. Everything needs to be bound to a company. There are no unlocked phone sold in a best buy here. It is quite disappointing.
@(Unverified)
Dell needs to guarantee sales of this device. Choosing a carrier helps this especially since the subsidized price can help. Just throwing into electronic stores will take the risk of making it two much work to buy it then go to a carrier to use it.
Also, when Dell uses a carrier, the carrier will pre-purchase a certain amount of devices. This shows up as instant sales for Dell whether the phone ever really sells well at ATT.
@GGG
http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/10/confirmed-apple-and-atandt-signed-five-year-iphone-exclusivity-de/ ?
@GGG
I'm from America, and I never understood it.
These companies don't reflect the general ideologies of the people.
@GGG
but what's the point of exclusivity? It just means the carrier has to be extra lucky to get a deal for the right phone. if there is no exclusivity all carriers can sell all phones which certainly makes their lives easier. and it gives consumers a choice.
@GGG
You'd think that'd be for the best but it seems the general american populace is not educated to the fact that they're getting shafted by carriers here.
I live here and it is far and away the most irksome thing about owning a cell phone.
I can't fathom why they would think this sort of behavior is OK.
@GGG Without competition, they get exclusive deals that bring customers in so they can keep higher monthly charges. Essentially, they go into bidding wars on these things because it keeps their margins higher, they get to charge more for service while getting the phones in to attract customers. The U.S. market needs a lot of help in this area if they want real competition, what the carriers do is borderline collusion in this and other regards.
@GGG
It hasn't really been explained very well yet, so let me give it a go. The thought of exclusivity is that customers will switch networks to get the phone. If you can only use AT&T and you want the phone bad enough, you'll switch networks. Phone networks know this so they invest a lot of money into the manufacturer, effectively "buying" exclusivity. This is an effective business model, but it only works with the highest profile phones (iPhone, EVO, Droid...). I doubt the Dell Streak has that appeal, but maybe more people than I think want a phone the size of my face?
@GGG It wouldn't be half as bad if it was T-Mobile, they at least carrier unlock any of their devices after 90 days. Good luck getting a cheap LG flip phone unlocked by AT&T.
This is why it's factory unlocked for me...or bust. Yet another way the Nexus One is [ or was :-( ] our savior.
@kjb434 While part of what you say may be true, the only phones Dell should be selling as simlocked are those AT&T intends to sell as subsidized units. It sounds like this is the same bullshit Apple pulls with the iPhone. You sign up for a 2 year contract, and even after the contract expires you have to jump through hoops to unlock a phone YOU own. AT&T and Dell should both be slapped down on this one. If you pay full price for ANY device, screw both a carrier and manufacturer for forcing you to use a particular carrier. I'm betting, if someone digs a bit deeper, that it's not even legal to do so.
@GGG Dell doesn't want to deal with mass retail distribution - they'd prefer to use AT&T's stores around the country to do it. However, that still doesn't explain why you couldn't buy one from their own mail-order website unlocked. They offer a bunch of other phones that way (e.g. the N900.)
Regardless, this whole thread is basically arguing about $20, which is my guess what the unlock codes will cost when they start appearing on eBay. Granted...we shouldn't have to pay that.
@GGG Dell pulled the same crap with O2 in the UK - even the full price £400 model on PAYG is SIM-locked. That, and the Android 1.6 OS, eventually tipped the balance in favour of my new Galaxy S :)
@kjb434 But the Kins at Verizon were sent back to Microsoft. I guess it's all in the contract.
I think the big thing is that AT&T gives Dell $$$ to have their phone exclusively, independent of how many they sell. Getting an exclusive phone, and expanding the customer's choices (based on certain price-points) is a good way to retain customers, and sometimes bring in new ones.
@GGG If every carrier sells the same phone, they're consigned to competing on the strength of service and lifetime contractual value, as offered to the end customer. With an exclusive, shiny new gadget in the window they know that customers are more likely to ignore their common sense (and crap coverage/cust service/value, etc.) and sign a contract. For that reason alone it's worth the networks while to pay for exclusivity.
The manufacturer benefits by knowing that the carrier will sell the shit out of the device over a longer period in order to shift enough units to cover their investment. If they sold into every channel the device would lose standout and quickly slide into obscurity once the next new toy was released.
@GGG
I'm from the US, and I don't get it either. It's mind boggling how people here love paying for locked phones. I've met countless people that actually defend the practice, and defend their respective carriers to no end. I mean just read some of the comments here. Truly mind boggling.