Category Archives: Telephone

Apple vs. AT&T

balsillie.jpg Apple has a reputation for “using its partners to its benefit”:
Blackberry Co-CEO Jim Balsillie sees the same thing happening with the recent launch of the iPhone.

Balsillie recently criticized Apple’s seeming willingness to commoditize the iPhone as an Apple product, rather than bringing AT&T Wireless in as an equal partner.

He also has issues with the iPhone being free of AT&T’s logo and with activation having to go through Apple’s iTunes music store rather than the AT&T Mobility site.“It’s a dangerous strategy,” says Balsillie.

“It’s a tremendous amount of control. And the more control of the platform that goes out of the carrier, the more they shift into a commodity pipe.”

— Blackberry CEO Says Steve Jobs & Apple Screwing Over AT&T. CEOSmack 7 July 2007

Meanwhile, AT&T is still locking the customer into a 2 year contract, even though the customer is paying full price for the iPhone, unlike most other phones AT&T sells. So it would appear AT&T is using Apple to gain AT&T customers.

And maybe Apple didn’t want AT&T as a full partner because Apple perhaps is preparing to have iPhone work on other networks, as well? That would be a good thing.

-jsq

700Mhz and Competition

markey.jpg Positions on future uses of the 700Mhz spectrum formerly occupied by analog TV aren’t just for presidential candidates anymore. Congress is hearing arguments:
Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), who chairs the subcommittee that handles telecommunications and Internet issues, urged the FCC to “seize this opportunity to create an open-access opportunity for wireless service in this auction.” He added that wireless carriers are “exerting far too much control over the features, functions and applications that wireless gadget makers and content entrepreneurs can offer directly to consumers.”

— FCC Auction Should Allow for Open Wireless Network, Say Lawmakers, By Kim Hart, Washington Post Staff Writer, Thursday, July 12, 2007; Page D08

Some search, VoIP, and computer companies say auctioning off some of that spectrum with open access requirements would promote competition, while telcos claim it would hurt their investments, stifle competition, and reduce revenues to the government from the auction. I think it may well reduce direct government auction revenues, but the economic benefits of real competition should be worth it. You’d think the nominally free market supporting telcos would agree with that. Continue reading →

AT&T’s Striped Bass

ph_striped_bass.jpg You may recall that the FCC at the last minute in 2006, after the elections and before the electees took office, agreed to some conditions on the merger of Bellsouth with AT&T. Among them was a $10/month DSL plan.
The merger commitment specifies that the plan had to be offered. That means to me that it has to be put forth as an option!!! (If there’s a fifty pound striped bass somewhere out there in the ocean, that’s not an offer of fish!)

So I don’t think AT&T is honoring its $10/month commitment.

— Is AT&T Honoring its Merger Commitments? David Isenberg, isen.blog, Friday, July 06, 2007

This is the same $10/month service USA Today announced AT&T was developing back in January. Maybe they’ll just keep “developing” it until the 48 month time limit expires, or make it available to a few people and claim they’ve honored their commitment.This is what SBC used to do: claim availability if one person per ZIP code could get a service, and the FCC let them get away with that.

Isenberg asks:

Do you think the FCC will investigate?
Continue reading →

iPhone Plus

You do want fries with that iPhone, don’t you?
Following up on the launch difference between AT&T and Apple stores, we’ve got three separate accounts of people reporting that AT&T is forcing them to buy accessories along with their iPhone at three different AT&T stores. This was definitely not the case at Apple stores, and for AT&T to decide this on their own to cash in on the launch is pretty damn shady.

— Breaking: Several AT&T Stores Forced Customers to Buy Accessories With iPhone By Jason Chen, Gizmodo, 30 June 2007

This is even though the iPhone costs about $500 because it is not subsidized by the telco (unlike most other phones they sell, which can cost $0), yet you’re still required to sign up for a two year contract. And AT&T is one of the companies we’re supposed to trust to provide us Internet service without charging extra for particular services.

-jsq

Framing Net Neutrality

db070114.gif Here’s an interesting exercise in framing net neutrality:
On the one side are traditional media – phone and cable companies, the carriers – in rare agreement. They do not want to be regulated, and they want to preserve the profitability potential that protects their network upgrades. They are therefore joined by some hardware tech firms. On the other side is what might be called the internet-industrial complex – consisting of idealistic net community folks, small start-ups, large Silicon Valley corporations pretending to be both – and Hollywood, in another strange bed fellowship.

The US Congress is in the middle; by the latest count six bills are pending, and while none is likely to be passed for now, the process itself has been a boon.

— A third way for net neutrality, By Eli Noam, Financial Times, 29 August 2006

Note “internet-industrial complex”, in analogy to Eisenhower’s phrase, “military-industrial complex”. Yet the cablecos and telcos are said to be “in rare agreement” when actually they have long been acting on the same side on this issue; after all, it’s in both their (short-term) interests to keep the number of players down. With no competition, there’s no real market, and thus no real competition (which long-term means they won’t be competitive with their international competitors, which are already offering speeds ten times faster for similar prices). Continue reading →

e911 vs. Net Neutrality

bob_cringely.jpg I don’t usually blog the same article twice, but Cringely said something else important (the all-caps emphases are his):
Now let’s look at this in the context of net neutrality. For the cable companies, at least, it probably doesn’t matter. That’s because while cable Internet service and cable VoIP service both use the CMTS, it is easy for the cable company to configure its VoIP product as completely separate from its Internet product. IF YOUR CABLE OPERATOR WILL SELL YOU VOIP SERVICE WITHOUT INTERNET SERVICE, THEN NET NEUTRALITY DOES NOT APPLY.

If excess Internet traffic causes problems for the VoIP services of these cable companies, they can prioritize their own VoIP packets with impunity because VoIP isn’t defined as an Internet service. And for that very reason, packet prioritization can — and will — occur even if the broadband ISP has signed an agreement promising net neutrality.

The next level of this ploy is to validate the un-Internetiness of the VoIP system through public service interconnects like 911. “Should calling the police get priority treatment?” will be the question and most courts won’t say “no.”

— Beyond Net Neutrality: If at first you don’t succeed, change the game. Robert X. Cringely, I, Cringely, April 6, 2007

The various VoIP companies better be worried about this trick, because it’s all the incumbent duopoly really needs to say their own VoIP is an essential public service and any others are interfering with public safety. Continue reading →

AT&T Attacks Content

Cicconi_sml.jpg
skull-crossbones-pirate-fla.jpg
Copyright is not just for Internet radio anymore:
AT&T Inc. has joined Hollywood studios and recording companies in trying to keep pirated films, music and other content off its network — the first major carrier of Internet traffic to do so.

…

As AT&T has begun selling pay-television services, the company has realized that its interests are more closely aligned with Hollywood, Cicconi said in an interview Tuesday. The company’s top leaders recently decided to help Hollywood protect the digital copyrights to that content.

“We do recognize that a lot of our future business depends on exciting and interesting content,” he said.

— AT&T to target pirated content, It joins Hollywood in trying to keep bootleg material off its network. By James S. Granelli, L.A. Times, June 13, 2007

Now it’s for Internet video. Which is what “James W. Cicconi, an AT&T senior vice president,” meant by “exciting and interesting content.” Nevermind participatory customer-generated content, or that customers might not want AT&T monitoring their content. Continue reading →

Big Ed Retires

“Who else they gonna listen to? The public?”
Savetheinternet.com produced a memorable satire on the policies of just-retired AT&T CEO Ed Whitacre. We’ve already seen that new AT&T CEO Randal Stephenson isn’t steering a much different course, and Time-Warner CEO Ed Parsons seems to think the cablecos and telcos are the original natives of the Internet and will win at Little Big Horn. Meanwhile, the FCC has time to try to regulate Cher. Maybe the FCC needs to hear some different opinions.

-jsq

No Blocking, No Throttling

David's Sling, by Bernini Big telcos have been blocking calls by conference call services that route through places such as Iowa that have low rural rates for backhaul. Now one of them, freeconferencecall.com, is declaring victory:
As most of you know, we have been engaged in a battle with several major telecom carriers over the last few months. While we continue to take every precaution to safeguard our customers, several have undoubtedly been affected by the carriers’ strong-arm battle tactics. Their decision to block incoming calls to our conferencing and voicemail numbers interrupted thousands of users including small businesses, non-profits, universities and entrepreneurs alike. We have taken this issue to the courts, the government and the press, but the pivotal difference has been the outcry and support from our customers. The Federal Communications Commission, the State Attorney Generals and the telecom giants heard your collective voice and agreed to stop all call blocking. We would like to thank you for getting involved and colleague. Together we can redefine the communications industry!

—Freeconferencecall newsletter, 27 May 2007

I don’t know about redefining the communications industry, but they do seem to have won this round. Even the FCC agrees. Continue reading →

Nickle and Dime Time

Verizon gets you for long distance you don’t use:
Now some phone companies are adding a new line item to monthly bills: a charge for not making long-distance calls.

The category of customers affected by the new fee is the shrinking subset of people who have no-frills home-phone service and don’t pay for a long-distance-calling plan.

Verizon last month introduced the $2 fee. It is charged to customers who could dial out for long distance, but don’t subscribe to a long-distance service and don’t make long-distance calls.

— Phone companies levy new fee for not making calls, John Murawski, Raleigh News & Observer, Thursday, May 3, 2007

Continue reading →