←back to thread

197 points LorenDB | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.209s | source
Show context
tptacek ◴[] No.41908565[source]
This is a good way for Ars to generate clicks and a more honest headline probably wouldn't move the needle much, but it's worth being clear for HN that the objection here is not that locked phones are good for consumers, but that the subsidization deals locked phones enable are.
replies(11): >>41908581 #>>41908673 #>>41908679 #>>41908875 #>>41908906 #>>41909375 #>>41909380 #>>41909447 #>>41909558 #>>41911205 #>>41911215 #
IshKebab ◴[] No.41908673[source]
Locked phones don't enable subsidized deals though. We still have subsidized deals in the UK but locking is a thing of the past. In fact they have started explicitly calling it like it is and breaking the price down into payments for the plan and payments for the phone, which stop once you've paid it off.
replies(3): >>41908694 #>>41908956 #>>41909705 #
tptacek ◴[] No.41908694[source]
That is a perfectly reasonable argument. My point was that Ars' headline was deliberately misleading. Note that the article doesn't go into any real depth about alternative financing plans.
replies(1): >>41909043 #
1. johnnyanmac ◴[] No.41909043[source]
If you really don't like the article, you can always read the FCC statement instead: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/1017178290200/1

But I know linking to a PDF will put some people off. It's a fairly short response this time as well.

----

>handsets that are free or heavily discounted off the manufacturer's suggested retail price.

You do it by increasing contract prices and being able to collect a phone if you don't stay with the often 2-year contract for stuff like this. The final price is also much more expensive than buying outright.

This is a bit silly in am age where phone tech has plateaued and you can often get last year flagships for half the price at launch. Consumers don't need the newest phone at all.

>T-Mobile’s current unlocking policies also help T- Mobile combat handset theft and fraud by sophisticated, international criminal organizations.

All androids and iphones have built in find - my - phone features these days, as well as the ability to wipe remotely. Phones are one of the least useful things to try and steal these days as a result, up there with a credit card. You can still get info and pawn off a wiped phone, but I don't see what T-Mobile does to prevent that further.

>because the proposal would force providers to reduce the line-up of their most compelling handset offers. T

Sprint already was reducing lineups, even before the acquisition. And they don't really subsidize anymore. That's why I started buying my own phones. The T-Mobile store was just the Galaxy/IPhone store, featuring overly expensive otter cases.

>T-Mobile maintains that the Commission lacks authority to adopt the proposed rule

They really pulling off the Chevron defense (assumedly, it's in another document) with no hesitation, huh? I guess we'll see how that goes. I'm not going to pretend I know the full ramifications of how it will affect the FCC.

>however, a provider subject to FCC-imposed asymmetric regulation on handset unlocking seeks to modify its commitments

Sounds like a horrible loophole to extend the policy as long as possible. So, no. They don't even provide much of an argument for when and where and what should be modified.

-----

Clickbait or not, I'm not really liking the arguments either way.