Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Communications Government United States Wireless Networking Hardware Politics

FCC Head Wants New Wireless Devices Unlocked 221

[TheBORG] writes with news that FCC chairman Kevin Martin wants 700-MHz wireless devices and services to be unlocked. Spectrum auctions for the 700-MHz airwaves, being opened up for fixed and mobile broadband, are scheduled for early next year. "The proposed rules would apply only to the spectrum being auctioned, not the rest of the wireless business, which still makes most of its revenue from voice calls. But Martin's proposal, if adopted by the FCC, could reverberate through a U.S. wireless industry that has tightly controlled access to devices and services... Like most devices sold in the USA, the iPhone ... allows only features and applications that Apple and AT&T provide and works only with an AT&T contract. The FCC chairman said he has grown increasingly concerned that the current practices 'hamper innovations' dreamed up by outside developers. One example:... 'Internationally, Wi-Fi handsets have been available for some time,' Martin noted. 'But they are just beginning to roll out here.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

FCC Head Wants New Wireless Devices Unlocked

Comments Filter:
  • Demand and supply (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @02:15PM (#19816115)
    "One example:... 'Internationally, Wi-Fi handsets have been available for some time,' Martin noted. 'But they are just beginning to roll out here.'""

    Is that because of lock-in, or just because there hasn't been enough demand for them in the states?
  • by cfulmer ( 3166 ) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @02:17PM (#19816141) Journal
    What is your alternative choice for deciding who gets the spectrum?

    The most compelling reason to ditch NTSC is that the spectrum it occupies is very valuable, in part because it is not as impeded by obstructions as other frequencies. The switch to HDTV is a catalyst that provides an alternative. A portion of the money gained from the auction of the previous UHF/VFH space will be used for vouchers for consumers to buy conversion devices for their TVs. I suspect, though, that these will be mainly unused, as the large majority of TV viewers are on either cable or satellite, neither one of which will be directly affected.

  • it ain't... sorry. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by RingDev ( 879105 ) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @02:17PM (#19816143) Homepage Journal
    I believe he is actually concerned with the effects on other businesses the spectrum lock is having. He sites technological advancement and sales as his concern, not the well being of the people. He believes that there is more of a profit to be made by opening the door, between new competition, new sales, and new taxes. And I agree. As an added bonus, the American people might get to see some new technology and alternative wireless communication devices.

    -Rick
  • by CajunArson ( 465943 ) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @02:18PM (#19816157) Journal
    OK, hold on, I think there is just a pinch of 'hate Bush no matter what' in your post. If none of the auctions were taking place, I could just as easily spin this as the Evil Bush administration staying in league with media giants to retain control over UHF and VHF spectrum that was being wasted (which it is in buckets by the way) and cut off from any and all new innovation. I could further decry the fact that the US was continuing to languish with the old NTSC transmission standard instead of moving into the 21st century with digital & HD standards, and how consumers were being hurt by the stifling entrenched interests that wanted to stop the growth of new technology. I have a question: If Hillary were auctioning off the spectrum would you still hate it, and if the Bush administration canceled the auction would you say it was a good idea?

  • by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @02:19PM (#19816173)
    Just like how there are hundreds of brands of PC's to choose from (this helps keep the price down, improve selection, and companies innovating) we need to have hundreds of brands of cell phones.

    We need to be able to home build cell phones. Personally I'd assemble myself a cell phone with a 3.5" (maybe only slightly higher) touchscreen 800 px wide display, 3G, Live Video Share and GPS. I'd run my own distro of Linux or OpenMoko on it.

  • by erroneus ( 253617 ) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @02:33PM (#19816333) Homepage
    I love that we cannot trust our government.

    I TOO had the same reaction... "Who is to benefit from this initiative? What's the catch?!"

    As a people, we're just unaccustomed to anything but self-interested actions by and through government activity. It's not cynicism, it's just the plain unbiased truth. The only time any government units will feel inclined to serve the people or community is near election time... it was kind of like the mysterious way gasoline prices dropped during the last elections.

    So I hope people have their thinking caps on and are considering if this may be yet another way to screw us. If they are pushing for something as simple as "no more locked devices" then I'll just be amazed.
  • by victorvodka ( 597971 ) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @02:40PM (#19816415) Homepage
    if iPhone was truly open I'd buy it as a PDA - i have no interest in using it as a phone. i like the touch screen interface and wifi - it would replace my laptop. but im not buying something that commits me to thousands of dollars worth of business to AT&T, a known monopolist (who, like the liquid metal terminator in T2, has reconstituted itself from its fragments).
  • We Win! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Bellum Aeternus ( 891584 ) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @02:44PM (#19816461)
    I had given up on waiting for the day that something the US government did made sense. Looks like somebody does have a clue. Too bad lobbyist, and greed mongers won't ever let this idea see the light of day.
  • To a certain extent (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Midnight Thunder ( 17205 ) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @02:50PM (#19816557) Homepage Journal
    The problem is that specific models are designed so that, even if you could unlock them, certain features will only work with a specific carrier. Even if you could buy an unlocked iPhone for example, most of its features are only going to work with AT&T.

    That may be true to a certain extent, but not totally true. For example the inability to install J2ME apps straight from your computer and the inability to use Bluetooth are examples of elements that are limitations that are imposed limitations and not technology limitations. There are some features that are actually provided by the network and can be added to any phone. For example when I traveled to New Zealand I had got my cellphone unlocked in Singapore and was using a Vodaphone pay as you go SIM. I suddenly found that you get a special Vodaphone sub menu with a whole bunch of extras.

    In many ways I support the move by the FCC, since it would help change the business method of cell phone carriers. It would also highlight the limitations of any given carrier, instead of making it seem to be the limitations of the cell phone. Sure it would mean that cell phone carriers would have to compete on both wireless packages and wireless phone prices, but if that helps drive the market then even better. In fact having the cell phone manufacturers play a more active role in the support of their phones would also be a welcome change, since delegating this to the carriers is usually just asking for trouble.
  • Re:WTF (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Zcar ( 756484 ) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @03:04PM (#19816695)
    My (simplified) understanding is that the frequency spectrum is public property and the FCC is tasked with administering that property for the benefit of the public. The money paid is not so much a purchase of spectrum but purchase of a license to use a block of spectrum. The unlocked device restriction is a term of that license. The constitutional mandate probably comes from Congress's Article IV Section 3 powers to "dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States".
  • by Vancorps ( 746090 ) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @03:41PM (#19817107)

    The problem with that is that it makes sense to us. Most people would see that cell phone companies raising the rates of their voice service though. They had a general trend of reducing the cost of voice calls before data arrived on the spot. Now that data is here it's being treated as a separate beast to consumers even though from a technical standpoint it's just a different QoS priority.

    It gives them a chance to charge more for added services which don't cost them anything additional so it's largely profit.

    Of course the other side of the coin is the problems they've had with SMS and how unreliable it was when it was initially rolled out. Why could I call my friend in the UK but I couldn't SMS her? So people got used to the other idea that the quality and reliability of one service was unrelated to the other services the same company offered. That means they can charge different rates as well.

  • I don't like this (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @03:52PM (#19817247)
    Why is the FCC telling businesses what they can or can not do with their phone offerings?

    Not that I'm complaining but this is the USA and I don't think its unreasonable to allow the market rather than government to dictate these kinds of additudes. Some providers may have good reasons in terms of certifying devices to play nice on their network.

    Ultimately I can't imagine this being a bad thing for us consumers but do the ends justify the means?

    Now whats with Sprint not allowing me to use any of the new kyocera offerings? Its really starting to piss me off.
  • by chernevik ( 1079091 ) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @04:29PM (#19817695)

    I love that we cannot trust our government.
    It's the founding idea of our constitution. The idea that _this_ administration is the only one that shouldn't be trusted is confusing and dangerous. It makes people vulnerable to trusting other administrations, or institutions like Congress or the courts, or politicians when really they all bear watching. None of them get anything like the scrutiny they deserve.
  • by frdmfghtr ( 603968 ) on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @04:35PM (#19817771)

    Meanwhile, other manufacturers will have added support for AT&T's new visual voicemail system, and other providers will have added support for those phones.
    I bet somebody with a good set of programming skills could write a visual voicemail app for any smartphone...

    From what I have observed, visual voice mail works by downloading a copy of the voicemail message to your iPhone, which then pairs up the caller ID phone number to your address book. When you play the message, it plays locally (I put my iPhone in "Airplane mode" to check this; wireless was unavailable but I could still play old messages) instead of over the wireless network.

    There could be an app written that, upon notification of a waiting voicemail message, would automatically call your voicemail number, send the password after waiting for some cue, record the messages, and hang up (like an automatic logon script). The calling number would be parsed via voice recognition (since the numbers are read back by a computerized voice), as would the end of the message.

    If handhelds can support voice dialing, they should have the horsepower to parse a computerized voice instead of a natural human voice (since it's a computer, it says the numbers the exact same every time).

    What do you think...make sense?
  • by Celandro ( 595953 ) <celandroNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @04:51PM (#19817973)
    Oh yes, nothing has been invented in this country for years which is why you are posting this from a US machine with US components on a US website, hosted on machines sold by a US company, with a cpu made by a US company likely running an OS created by a US company.

    Computers and the internet are the 2 greatest inventions in the last 100 years and both are the fruits of the US military/industrial complex. In addition, the innovations and progress in the field is faster than any other field in the history of the world.

    There is plenty of things wrong with the US, there is no need to resort to hyperbole.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10, 2007 @05:29PM (#19818455)
    People in Europe and other civilized parts of the world are already shocked by the whole concept.

The use of money is all the advantage there is to having money. -- B. Franklin

Working...