3 ms·

I agree that patents are a problem. And, I saw Google's offer today for a free Android phone with a 2-year contract. I would love a deal on a phone, but I thin

I agree that patents are a problem. And, I saw Google's offer today for a free Android phone with a 2-year contract. I would love a deal on a phone, but I think it is unethical to bundle products in this way. I would rather have the opportunity to switch carriers anytime I want. I love mobile devices and mobile services, but the market conditions are too restrictive. I'd like to be able to (for example): o Have multiple devices from different vendors on the same carrier plan o Have multiple carriers for each of my devices, so I can use whoever has the best service at any particular location o Pay a fair price for the data I send and receive to/from each carrier, and not pay for what I do not use o Sign up only for internet service from a carrier, without anything else bundled in that I do not want, such as voice service, SMS plans, etc. Only internet protocol, thank you. o Use my phone, which I bought, on any compatible carrier, in any country in the world, for a fair price. If Google offers an android phone with these terms on their main search page, I will gladly pay a fair price for it.

ConstantineXVI 15y ago
You're more than welcome to forego the contract subsidy to buy a Nexus S (or many other phones) at full price and use it on any GSM network. Nothing stops you from pulling your SIM card out and using it in another device, provided said device supports your carrier's frequencies. The rest of your complaints are the fault of the carriers, not Google or OEMs.
- charlieok 15y ago
  And so I would like to see Google, who are so intent on fighting anti-competitive business practices, throw its weight behind this in their negotiations with carriers, so that they can make such an offer on their home page. I seem to remember them trying this originally, with the nexus one, and it didn't go very well. But, the nexus one was a mediocre phone and it was relatively early days for android. Now the phones are better, and android's market share greater. I want to see them take this idea seriously again. But yes, you are right. The real problem in this case is the carriers.
  - ConstantineXVI 15y ago
    Not quite; the N1 came out right as Android was exploding (thanks to the Droid/Milestone a few months prior), and IMHO (as well as many others) it was the best phone on the market. It failed because Google didn't bother to advertise it, and your average person will flip at the idea of paying $529 for a phone (and these people won't see/care about being in a contract). The Nexus S is the same concept as the N1, and it's also being sold off contract and unlocked. It's also being sold on a contract (but still not SIM-locked AFAIK), because that's what consumers "want" and it'd be another marketing failure otherwise.
    - charlieok 15y ago
      Interesting, maybe I misunderstood. I've had the horrible experience of trying to use a phone with a European carrier and finding that not only was it SIM-locked, but there was basically nothing above-board that I could do to unlock it. I guess I assumed this was a standard practice. If Google's phones are not SIM-locked, that's great :) My main remaining gripe is that if I can save on the price of a phone by entering a contract with a carrier, I want to also be able to go the other way: get more favorable contract terms if I already have a phone. Or get month-to-month service at a reasonable price without the need for any contract at all. To the extent that these options are not available, the market for mobile internet service is not as open and efficient as it really ought to be.

ConstantineXVI 15y ago

You're more than welcome to forego the contract subsidy to buy a Nexus S (or many other phones) at full price and use it on any GSM network. Nothing stops you from pulling your SIM card out and using it in another device, provided said device supports your carrier's frequencies. The rest of your complaints are the fault of the carriers, not Google or OEMs.

charlieok 15y ago
And so I would like to see Google, who are so intent on fighting anti-competitive business practices, throw its weight behind this in their negotiations with carriers, so that they can make such an offer on their home page. I seem to remember them trying this originally, with the nexus one, and it didn't go very well. But, the nexus one was a mediocre phone and it was relatively early days for android. Now the phones are better, and android's market share greater. I want to see them take this idea seriously again. But yes, you are right. The real problem in this case is the carriers.
- ConstantineXVI 15y ago
  Not quite; the N1 came out right as Android was exploding (thanks to the Droid/Milestone a few months prior), and IMHO (as well as many others) it was the best phone on the market. It failed because Google didn't bother to advertise it, and your average person will flip at the idea of paying $529 for a phone (and these people won't see/care about being in a contract). The Nexus S is the same concept as the N1, and it's also being sold off contract and unlocked. It's also being sold on a contract (but still not SIM-locked AFAIK), because that's what consumers "want" and it'd be another marketing failure otherwise.
  - charlieok 15y ago
    Interesting, maybe I misunderstood. I've had the horrible experience of trying to use a phone with a European carrier and finding that not only was it SIM-locked, but there was basically nothing above-board that I could do to unlock it. I guess I assumed this was a standard practice. If Google's phones are not SIM-locked, that's great :) My main remaining gripe is that if I can save on the price of a phone by entering a contract with a carrier, I want to also be able to go the other way: get more favorable contract terms if I already have a phone. Or get month-to-month service at a reasonable price without the need for any contract at all. To the extent that these options are not available, the market for mobile internet service is not as open and efficient as it really ought to be.