Cellphone Inventor Knocks Carriers, Smart PhonesIncumbent operators 'upside down' and 'backward' 09:01AM Wednesday Oct 29 2008 by Karl Bodetags: business · wireless · OdditiesMartin Cooper, a researcher at Motorola, made the world's first-ever call from a cellular telephone on April 3, 1973. This week, during a keynote address at the Embedded Systems Conference in Boston, Martin took aim at the wireless industry he helped spawn several decades ago, saying they engaged in "upside down" and "backward" practices. "We were promised affordable, ubiquitous broadband wireless for everyone," he told a crowd of engineers. "That promise is still just a promise." Cooper calls the locked down handset and closed network models of today's carriers reminiscent of AT&T's control of the landline system in the 1950's.
Related:- AT&T: We Are The Most Open Wireless Company
- The $85,000 Phone Bill
- NSA Pal AT&T Mocks The Privacy Conscious
- Tuesday Morning Links
- Sprint Realizes That Helping Customers Is Good
- Airline Broadband Fuels In-Flight Porn Debate
- Cindy McCain Gets Her Own Verizon Cell Tower
- Startup Offers Smart Phone Rentals
|
 
Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
clubs: | Promises..... Can be broken... | |
|  | 
Subaru
1-3-2-4
Premium
join:2001-05-31
Greenwich, CT
clubs: | Re: Promises..... that's the truth | |
| 
sousademiami
join:2003-02-04
Miami, FL
 ·Comcast
 ·AT&T Southeast
| Damn Skippy It's a FREE MARKET! Locked handsets and closed networks are all part of the innovation and great customer value offered in a true free market. You can always just switch carriers if you don't like yours!
Unregulated competition at it's finest!
--
OASAASLLS | |
| | 
mahony
join:2000-06-24
Modesto, CA | Re: Damn Skippy unregulated? LOL Our wireless services suck compared to most of the world. | |
| | 
blueeyesm
join:2003-09-05
Waterloo, ON | ..unless you are locked in a contract for three years, then you can't just "switch". | |
| | |
sousademiami
join:2003-02-04
Miami, FL | Re: Damn Skippy I gotta work on my sarcasm.
--
OASAASLLS | |
| | | | | | 
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| said by sousademiami  :It's a FREE MARKET! Locked handsets and closed networks are all part of the innovation and great customer value offered in a true free market. You can always just switch carriers if you don't like yours! Unregulated competition at it's finest! Actually, everything you just described is a result of it's not a free market. They don't have to compete, and they can keep competitors out.
The free market system is a failed economic theory, much like Marxism. Great on paper. Doesn't work in practice.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
| 
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
| What's He Talking About? quote:
Cooper calls the locked down handset and closed network models of today's carriers reminiscent of AT&T's control of the landline system in the 1950's.
If that's true then why is it possible to bring your own unlocked GSM/EDGE (3G if you know what you are doing) handset to either AT&T or T-Mobile?
--
"At the moment of conception." | |
| | 
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| Re: What's He Talking About? The problem has little to do with carriers, it has everything to do with people only valuing initial price when they shop for everything. People want a free handset, free talktime and all this other stuff, they don't care about anything else...that is until after they buy into a plan and then they bitch about everything else.
The problem with the free market is that it requires both sellers and buyers to think about how they interact with the market compare alternatives and then act in their best interest. The sellers are doing that, the buyers aren't doing anything but the bare minimum, they want the sellers to do the work for them to act in the buyers best interest which makes absolutely no sense (would you ask the guy robbing your house for recommendations of security systems).
Devo wrote a song about it:
»www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9hpMgKI_NU
"Freedom of choice
Is what you got
Freedom from choice
Is what you want"
--
The world’s elusive, remember
where love's the leaf
faith, the river
what's born as flame dies in ember
see for yourself! | |
| | | keyboard5684
join:2001-08-01
Youngsville, PA
 ·WestPAnet Inc.
·WestPAnet Inc. CA..
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: What's He Talking About? Of course you would ask the guy robbing your house on the best security system, who is going to know best?
I think shoppers are more aware, now, about what plans they are buying into than the phones and accessories. I disagree with you because by now every single one of us has in one way or another been raped by a "plan" that was supposed to save us money.
You say "both sellers and buyers to think about how they interact with the market" yet the buyer is going for just that, the bare minimum and the seller is going for the maximum. It is working how it is supposed to.
Your post almost sounds like an angry cell shop worker.
The point made is that this is not what was envisioned, this was not the plan, this was not what they wanted when they invented and released it.
We need to get away from this phone companies owning the phone. We need to get away from carriers charging so much for things like texting (I mean $10 a month for 300 messages?).
It ALL looks exactly like the AT&T bell system that was back in the day where the telephone company owned everything.
What will happen, is the same thing... revolution. VOIP in my mind is a small revolution and it will get far worse. People, when free, will break out of these locked in BS and go free.
Example, In my area it is very "hilly", the terrain is rough. Someone on top of what most would call a mountain (we call a hill), puts up a nice WIFI system ONLY for VOIP over WIFI systems. BAM, free calls (except the $4.95 to the VOIP provider and $30 per month to the bandwidth provider, no not verizon or any of those). Limited coverage but it is a start.
People want free... of course they do. But this is where both sides, the buyer and the seller, have to come together or the buyer will break away and the SELLER LOSES.
No one intended it to get this way, it did. Now something needs to happen before we see a cell bubble pop. | |
| | | |
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| Re: What's He Talking About? said by keyboard5684 :I think shoppers are more aware, now, about what plans they are buying into than the phones and accessories. Yes, but they still won't pay what the phone is worth to get higher level of service, they still go with the provider with the lowest upfront cost (without regard to actual to incidentals), and they still bitch when the bill comes due.
Consumers have removed their brains from the actual part of purchasing stuff. They want someone else to tell them what is a good value, and what it comes down to is that someone else is the Verizon rep they buy their phone from because they can't be bothered to actually look for themselves. Why the hell do you think the US economy is the way it is, how many people relied on a mortgage broker to give them advice on the loan that that broker stood to make money from? The answer there is pretty much everyone who is sitting on an ARM.
--
The world’s elusive, remember
where love's the leaf
faith, the river
what's born as flame dies in ember
see for yourself! | |
| | | | | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | Re: What's He Talking About? Around 60% of the US mortgage market are fixed rate, this being the only fact you supplied, I'll surmise the accuracy of the rest of your ancedotal comments. | |
| | | | | |
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| Re: What's He Talking About? I'm sorry, at what point does %40 not signify a large number. That also doesn't account for the number of people given good advice by their brokers, but that still relied solely on their brokers for advice.
I'm sorry I didn't give you a 150 page report on the issue but you'll understand that I'm a little strapped for time here. | |
| | | | | | | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
 ·Verizon FIOS
edit:
October 30th, @04:35PM
| Re: What's He Talking About? Sorry, misread your response. I thought I read "The answer there is pretty much everyone is sitting on an ARM." Missed the who.
That being said, I still don't think generalizations hold value. There are plenty of intelligent consumers. There are more dummies, but you can say that about everything. | |
| | | | | | | | 
phoneboy3
@shawcable.net
| Complete utter horse$hit!
The telco's are experts at maintaining a public facade of an open free competitive market while simultanously spending billions behind the scenes lobbying for laws that do just the opposite and putting small upstarts out of business. | |
| | nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| said by pnh102 : quote:
Cooper calls the locked down handset and closed network models of today's carriers reminiscent of AT&T's control of the landline system in the 1950's.
If that's true then why is it possible to bring your own unlocked GSM/EDGE (3G if you know what you are doing) handset to either AT&T or T-Mobile? OK,how about this:
"...reminiscent of AT&T's control of the landline system ...up until earlier this year." | |
| | |
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
| Re: What's He Talking About? said by nasadude :"...reminiscent of AT&T's control of the landline system ...up until earlier this year." This year?
I've been swapping out cell phones with AT&T ever since I got my first GSM handset back in 2002. I've used a few different unlocked phones, as well as locked phones that I bought from AT&T that I later unlocked.
I understand that this kind of choice may not work with Sprint, Verizon or Alltel, but I don't think most people really care about this non-issue. Every carrier offers many different kinds of phones at all price points. Couple that with the fact that most people are probably more interested in any carrier that has good service where they use their phones the most and I think the original complaint about a "lack of choice" is really more of a non-issue than anything else.
I really find it hard to fault a system that allows you to get a phone for literally nothing while simply paying for basic monthly service.
--
"At the moment of conception." | |
| | | | 
wifi4milez
Big Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
 ·BroadVoice
| Re: What's He Talking About? said by pnh102 :said by nasadude :"...reminiscent of AT&T's control of the landline system ...up until earlier this year." This year? I've been swapping out cell phones with AT&T ever since I got my first GSM handset back in 2002. I've used a few different unlocked phones, as well as locked phones that I bought from AT&T that I later unlocked. I understand that this kind of choice may not work with Sprint, Verizon or Alltel, but I don't think most people really care about this non-issue. Every carrier offers many different kinds of phones at all price points. Couple that with the fact that most people are probably more interested in any carrier that has good service where they use their phones the most and I think the original complaint about a "lack of choice" is really more of a non-issue than anything else. I really find it hard to fault a system that allows you to get a phone for literally nothing while simply paying for basic monthly service. I agree. People quickly forget that the reason 99% of wireless customers are locked into contracts or devices is because they want them for nothing. If you want an unlocked phone you can take with you and use around the world you need to pay full price for it. I have been paying up to $1000 for phones for years, and this gives me the flexibility to what I please with them. Look at it another way:
"YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY (OR DONT PAY) FOR"
--
Комитет государственной безопасности
| |
| | | | | touchtone561
join:2007-12-10
Lake Worth, FL
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: What's He Talking About? I agree somewhat. But the business models of AT&T and T-Mobile do not reward you from BYOD "Bring your own device" 
So although we can buy our own GSM/UMTS devices we still pay a subsidy surcharge in the service plans to run those devices at their full capacity / capabilities. Since the typical phone lasts 18 - 24 months, what is the benefit for the average user to buy them outright?
Now if there was a BYOD discount then...  | |
| | | | | | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | Re: What's He Talking About? Agreed. In fact it could be argued that NOT getting a subsidized phone is foolish as you're paying the subsidy anyway, so you're effectively paying twice for your phone. | |
| NewMariner
join:2005-06-24
| Maybe Regulation wasnt such a good thing They only do this to compete with other providers. They spend millions on ads, and trying to keep cost down with other providers. Maybe if things actually were a Monopoly we would have faster/better service. I remember service before 1983, and I have to say it was more reliable and a better overall experience then what we have today. Now they spend their money in ads instead of research.
Maybe one day we will realize competition doesnt spur innovation or lower prices one day... | |
| | 
N3OGH
Will it all be Obama's fault now?
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Maybe Regulation wasnt such a good thing said by NewMariner :They only do this to compete with other providers. They spend millions on ads, and trying to keep cost down with other providers. Maybe if things actually were a Monopoly we would have faster/better service. I remember service before 1983, and I have to say it was more reliable and a better overall experience then what we have today. Now they spend their money in ads instead of research. Maybe one day we will realize competition doesnt spur innovation or lower prices one day... Sure, some aspects of phone service were better before the breakup, but there are tons of technologies we would never have without it.
Things like;
DSL
VoIP
Fios (you would never have seen FTTH without the breakup)
Affordable long distance.
People tend to remember "the good old days" and filter out all the negative shit from the past. I'm guilty of it too. Sometimes I'm nostalgic for my high school days, and then I sit and really think about it. HS sucked a bag of dicks.
It's a defense mechanism built into the psyche of every human being. If we had to dwell on every little thing that sucked in our past, we would never be able to get out of bed in the morning.
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… | |
| | | | | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
·Verizon FIOS
| said by NewMariner :Maybe one day we will realize competition doesnt spur innovation or lower prices one day... Laugh, that's rich.
There are only three things that bring innovation. Real competition, Bored billionaires, and War. Let me know which one you'd like more of. | |
| | | NewMariner
join:2005-06-24 | Re: Maybe Regulation wasnt such a good thing LOL really, and have we seen that in the 25 years that we have had competition? | |
| | | | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Maybe Regulation wasnt such a good thing I said "real competition".
In any case, there actually has been quite a bit of innovation in cell phone hardware/software. It's the service that's duopolized by major carriers collusion. If all the services have almost the exact same price point, but all the providers have different costs, and company structures, it's a pretty big red flag. | |
| 
TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast
|  Cooper has conflict of interest on his major complaints
That cellphone companies infrastructure is wrong:
It's no coincidence that Cooper sees smart antennas as the savior of the wireless industry: He serves as chairman of ArrayComm, a company that develops software for using antenna arrays to calculate the origin of cell signals. Cooper founded the San Jose, Calif.-based company in 1992 after 29 years at Motorola That smartphones are too complex:
But the cellphone patriarch had less kind words for the smart phones that Android runs on and even fewer for the iPhone. Cooper advocates simpler, specialized devices--his wife is the creator of the Jitterbug, a hyper-simple phone for the elderly. And his complaint that wireless isn't ubiquitous:
"We were promised affordable, ubiquitous broadband wireless for everyone," he told a crowd of engineers. "That promise is still just a promise." Well, out of a population of 303 million, 85.7% of the people have cellphones. If you subtract the very aged and the very young, that is just about everybody. And that sure sounds ubiquitous to me.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? | |
| |
N3OGH
Will it all be Obama's fault now?
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Cooper has conflict of interest on his major complaints No shit.
It never fails man, always follow the money.
I HATE those Jitterbug commercials. Now I can't get that song out of my head. Thanks a lot....
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… | |
| | jay_rm
join:2002-04-12
Netville
·Fox Valley Internet
·ViaTalk
| said by TK Junk Mail :» www.forbes.com/technology/2008/1···per.htmlThat cellphone companies infrastructure is wrong: It's no coincidence that Cooper sees smart antennas as the savior of the wireless industry: He serves as chairman of ArrayComm, a company that develops software for using antenna arrays to calculate the origin of cell signals. Cooper founded the San Jose, Calif.-based company in 1992 after 29 years at Motorola That smartphones are too complex: But the cellphone patriarch had less kind words for the smart phones that Android runs on and even fewer for the iPhone. Cooper advocates simpler, specialized devices--his wife is the creator of the Jitterbug, a hyper-simple phone for the elderly. And his complaint that wireless isn't ubiquitous: "We were promised affordable, ubiquitous broadband wireless for everyone," he told a crowd of engineers. "That promise is still just a promise." Well, out of a population of 303 million, 85.7% of the people have cellphones. If you subtract the very aged and the very young, that is just about everybody. And that sure sounds ubiquitous to me. I was hoping someone would find all this stuff !
I hate to accuse 'ol Marty of being a shill.....but....
He's the Carrol Shelby of the wireless world (do you get it ?). | |
| 
ravital
Just Another Pesky Independent Nh Voter
Premium
join:2001-07-19
Merrimack, NH
| A different version of protectionism, that's all Imagine this: You can walk into any mobile phone store, and buy any mobile phone you like, with full, 100% confidence, that it will work with whatever carrier you choose.
Impossible? That's how 300 million Europeans shop for mobile phones and carriers. Why? Because European governments got together and said so. Period.
Result? In a country like Italy, to cite just one example, where they can't keep the trains running on time, the market penetration for carriers is 150%. No typo, one-hundred-and-fifty percent. That means, every 3 Italians, on average, own 2 SIM cards between them. That's right, people actually sign up for multiple plans and carry multiple SIM cards with them, because they like one carrier's evening rates, and a different carrier's weekend rates, and so on.
But here? Heaven forbid that mega-corporations should actually have to compete with each other.
I don't like government regulation, not one bit. But it does have merits, sometimes.
A few years ago, a wise DSLR member taught me something invaluable: "Telecommunications issues are complex, and require a lot of study, to be properly understood. But there is a useful mental proxy to this: Figure out what the incumbents want (which is easy, they'll tell you), and support the opposite."
--
"Eating and sleeping are the only activities that should be allowed to interrupt a man's enjoyment of his cigar"
Mark Twain | |
| |
See 7 replies to this post | |
jtudor
Xm 60's On 6 Freak
Premium,MVM
join:2002-12-07
Morganton, NC
·AT&T Southeast
| Yes, BUT........ So far as the unlocked conversation goes, one thing is being overlooked by everyone here:
If you take a phone with the manufacturers unlocked firmware on it to most any of the carriers, you will get no support from them "if" you have any problems with the phone.
The first time you have a problem that "might" be related to your handset, the finger pointing will begin and the tech support people will tell you that they only provide support for " X Branded" phones.
Not only will you pay a higher price, and have to shop around for support, you also will not be able use your carriers insurance against loss, breakage or theft, because they will only sell that to you if you buy a new phone from them.
I am not saying this in an attempt to try to discourage anyone from buying an unlocked phone, just wanting people to consider a couple of extra points before making that decision.
Again more of the carriers being protective of their profit plan, keeping that as a top concern instead of customer service being #1 or even trying to achieve a balance between the two.
--
Best of luck
"Do, or Do not, there is no try!" Yoda
| |
| 
mikeurl
join:2002-06-26
Whitestone, NY
| Feh, meh, and piffle I have little to no use for mobile computing. I carry a cell phone, off usually, for emergency purposes and I have the cheapest plan I can find.
If you had told him 48 years that everyone in the country would be able to have a cell phone the size of a credit card with a 10 day standby time for 20 bux a month he probably would have thought that was pretty good.
However, he is right in the sense that I won't tough the more complicated phones because they are all locked down steaming piles of fail. I don't like proprietary systems that proscribe what I can do with hardware I OWN. To the extent possible the technology should be open and interoperable with all networks. But since it isn't all I pay for is the ability to make phone calls (which, by the way, IS an open standard that is interoperable with all other phones). | |
| | 
ArgMeMatey
join:2001-08-09
Milwaukee, WI
·AT&T Midwest
| Re: Feh, meh, and piffle said by mikeurl :...I don't like proprietary systems that proscribe what I can do with hardware I OWN. That's a good principle. But a lot of people don't realize that they don't really "own" the phone until their initial contract term is up. (OK, well, I do own the phone but the company will write the contract to make sure I have no right to demand anything from them.) However once the term expires, no subsidy code should be required to get into the programming mode.
I want options! I want to bring my own damn phone, pay for my phone up front, or have it listed as a line item for x months on my bill. Discount for doing a 5-year contract? Pay more for month-to-month? No problem.
What it comes down to is two opposing ideas: Bundles give me more features, many of which I don't need or want, but that ensures consistent revenue for the provider. A la carte would cost me less but would undermine profits for the carrier.
The consumer's nirvana is a bill that itemizes all optional charges and none of the mandatory ones. Unfortunately carriers create the bills, so they bundle all the optional stuff to make sure you can't shave their profits, and they itemize the "taxes" to make government look like the villain. (Government may be a villain, but that's beside the point.)
--
USNG:
16TDN2870
Find your Lat-Long:
Geocoder | |
| | | jay_rm
join:2002-04-12
Netville | Re: Totally off topic, but..... yeah - in body, I'm not sure about mind... | |
| | | |
|
|
and 
Re: Maybe Regulation wasnt such a good thing
