carriers
Latest
FCC approves rules for 700MHz frequency auction
The FCC has just approved rules on the highly-sought after, Google-attracting 700MHz wireless frequency band auction which will take place sometime next year. The agency has decided that one-third of the soon-to-be-empty band will be available to consumers under FCC chairman Kevin Martin's "open access" plan, which forces the winning bidder to keep the band accessible to any wireless device or application regardless of the maker, opening up options heretofore unseen on established networks. The 700MHz range -- which is being vacated by television broadcasters going digital -- is desirable because of its ability to travel long distances and easily penetrate walls, and Martin feels it could provide a "third pipe" to US homes, circumventing the established stranglehold cable and telephone companies have on bandwidth. A total of 60 megahertz will be auctioned off, with twenty-two of them "open," and another 10 set aside for a "national public safety" network. The auctioning off of the frequency is expected to raise as much as $15 billion for the federal treasury.
iPhone reveals carrier logos
For those of you readers who have been curious, here is the canonical list of carrier logos installed directly on the iPhone. I know we've bandied about a bunch of carrier names here at TUAW. And, yes, it's easy enough for Apple to change its mind as negotiations go on and just do a software update to add or change logos and/or carriers. Leaving all that aside, at this time, the built-in carriers appear to be Cingular/AT&T, T-Mobile, and Vodafone. Each logo appears in two files in /System/Library/CoreServices/SpringBoard.app, as Default_CARRIER and also FSO_CARRIER using a non-standard png encoding.
Congress bellyaches about contracts, termination fees
We don't like paying a couple bills to slide out from under a bunk two-year contract any more than the next guy, but at least we're cognizant of the tradeoff: subsidized hardware. Congress this week appears to have taken a special session to discuss state regulation of the wireless industry and turned it into a rant session, with several reps chiming in that termination fees and exclusivity deals (you can probably guess the device in question here) suck. We don't disagree, folks -- really, we don't -- but we hope these lawmakers (mostly rich people, we might add) realize the tradeoff of enforcing any sort of anti-contract, anti-exclusivity legislation will be higher prices on handsets. Naturally, carriers were quick to chime in that they're plenty competitive with one another and there's absolutely no need for any sort of government meddling. Let's start with significantly expanded carrier-subsidized lineups and greater manufacturer-direct unlocked presence before we start worrying about getting rid of contracts, shall we?[Via AppleInsider, thanks Warren J.]
Up next on the FCC spectrum auction block: 700MHz band
We know, jostling over the almighty 700MHz band may not be as exciting as tossing in your bid for the one and only PowerFest '94 cartridge, but for wireless providers and startups alike, this one is big. The FCC has finally announced technical specifications for the upcoming 700MHz band auction, which is being dubbed the "most valuable available slice of radio-frequency spectrum," but are holding out on the anxious bidders by "not deciding exactly how the spectrum will be divided and sold off." The Congressional Budget Office has reckoned that "as much as $15 billion" could be added to the federal treasury as a result of the auction, as the swath of airwaves in the 700MHz range is being "vacated by television broadcasters as they make the transition to digital TV," which makes for "prime territory for providing advanced wireless broadband services." The FCC Chairman was quoted as saying that this auction would hopefully enable a "third pipe to the home" to be constructed in order to provide "affordable broadband to all Americans." If all this sounds interesting, and you've got billions laying around collecting dust, it sounds like you're in for quite the battle come auction time.
Platform proliferation limiting mobile content?
So carriers have been preaching the need for platform standardization in the cellphone space for some time now, most notably with Vodafone's commitment to tossing anything that isn't Windows Mobile-, Symbian-, or Linux-based to the curb. The popular reasoning for the move, if you listen to the carriers explain it, is that the current sitch limits their ability to offer rich content and makes doing so significantly more expensive. Here's what we don't understand: only a small handful of mobile operating systems dominate carriers' smartphone offerings as it is -- Symbian (in its various flavors), Windows Mobile, Garnet, and BlackBerry -- and eliminating any one of those from the average carrier's lineup would rile up a healthy percentage of its customer base, while non-smartphone devices do a pretty good job unifying content as it is with Java, Flash, and the like. So what's the bellyaching all about? Are the carriers putting together a case for reducing handset offerings that are already, in some cases, embarrassingly anemic? Besides, the concern centers around their ability to offer content directly, a concern obviously rooted in profitmaking; some software publishers have apparently raised the same issue, but as long as every platform out there is shored up with a vibrant developer and enthusiast community, carrier-backed content can happily take a back seat as far as we're concerned.[Via Slashdot]
Regional carriers plead with FCC for compulsory roaming
It's no secret that rural and regional carriers don't enjoy the most amiable relationship with the Big Four here in the States; there's a plethora of reasons why the two groups don't always get along, but whether they like it or not, they're sorta stuck in the same boat. In terms of infrastructure, the national carriers obviously own (or hold exclusive leases to) far more property, leaving them holding nearly all the cards in the roaming game. That leaves the regionals in a bit of a pickle, and once again, they're turning to the FCC for help. This time around, the main complaint circles around the regionals' desire for the national carriers to be required to offer automatic roaming; that is, any carrier of the same technology (GSM or CDMA, that is) should be allowed to roam on their network at a "reasonable" price. Furthermore, they're asking the FCC to to require that any service offered by the nationals be offered to regional carriers' customers as well -- we're not really sure we're following that part of the argument, since it's the big guys that end up footing the bill for the technology build-outs (albeit by charging their own customers in kind) -- but then again, we're all about choice. Predictably, the nationals aren't happy; both T-Mobile and Cingular have come out against the proposal, and we're guessing Sprint and Verizon share the sentiment. It's not known when (or if) the FCC will make a ruling, but the outcome could ultimately determine the fate of some rural carriers relying heavily on third-party infrastructure to provide their user base with service.[Via The Wireless Report]
Verizon Wireless finds soul, wants to prorate early termination fees
We tend to give our wireless carriers a pretty tough time around here, but not without just cause. Case in point: early exit fees. It's semi-understandable to charge the $150 to $200 contract termination fee when folks cancel near the beginning of their two-year contracts, however, that's a bit steep if you cancel say, 18 to 23 3/4 months in. Verizon Wireless, however, has gone on record with plans to prorate early termination fees starting this fall. If so, they would be the first major US carrier to lesson exit fees on departing customers the closer they got to the end of their contract. That's certainly a nod in the direction of consumer satisfaction and welcome news for us early adoptin' nomads with an innate fear of committal. Sure, regulators must still "review the details" but the FCC chairman, Kevin Martin, already seems stoked by the benefit to customers in what "could signal a new trend among wireless carriers." We'll just have to sit tight for now and hope these dominos begin a rapid, and timely tumble.
No expedited shipping for Europeans
The above image says it all really. People purchasing Macs in the U.K. and, I assume, Europe are stuck with a vague 3-7 day shipping method while Americans get the option of a superior free 5 day service or the option of 2-3 day shipping for $18 extra. Why?
