Re: Maemo, What's the Carrier's Argument?
 

class action? on what grounds...
Outright theft?

Re: Maemo, What's the Carrier's Argument?
 

Collusion, violation of trade laws, etc. There have in fact already been successful class actions against the carriers here in the US.

Re: Maemo, What's the Carrier's Argument?
 

Signing up for a 2 year contract without testing transfer rates first seems a bit silly :)

Re: Maemo, What's the Carrier's Argument?
 

Are you serious ? Here in the US you are sold a "Unlimited" plans with caps on bandwith uploads and downloads as a standard practice. And you will be fined based on the finest fine-print.

Re: Maemo, What's the Carrier's Argument?
 

No I'm not kidding. You can usually arrange a 2 week trial if you go to a physical store, to test the transfer rates at the places you're going to use it at.

The coverage maps only tell you what signal strength to expect, and aren't that accurate or up to date (when the operators build 1000 new transmitters per year and update map twice a year, it's always out of date). Besides, signal strength doesn't translate into transfer speed. The speed will depend on how many users in a cell, how heavy they use the service, the amount of channels allocated to that cell, and the size of that cell's uplink. The operators consider that information, as well as the actual location of their base stations, proprietary information and wont tell you. The only way is to test.

There are no transfer limits or extra charges. Some operators explicitly forbid p2p traffic, and all of them prioritize voice over data.

Re: Maemo, What's the Carrier's Argument?
 

Nah, the operator I'm switching to definitely has far better network than my old one, and probably less overloaded one than the one claiming to have the best, so I expect it to be at least decent. Besides, I'm pretty sure I'll be able squirm out of the hook if they won't be able to deliver the promised speed :)

Also, there shouldn't be any caps, limits or traffic shaping. I hope.

Re: Maemo, What's the Carrier's Argument?
 

Uhmmm, so I'm assuming (only because of the responses here), that carriers don't have to be convinced that they should support Maemo/FOSS users of this type because our business is better for them than the rest of the business cases out there - most of which they are already employing?

So essentially, on some basis of "we just know better" they should support Mameo devices and/or different types of purchasing models, no matter if its easily supported or profitable (to them or us or both) at all?

Eh... and here I was hoping to find some business savvy/sense amongst the reams of conversation here. Guess its more or less like they know best, we know best, and our best is better than theirs - though theirs built and owns the networks we'd be using best.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to be an apologist for carriers nor their schemes; I'd like to know the other side of the discussion. Because for all the eyes that Maemo is getting now, if this community cannot speak towards that (whether we believe there's a benefit to carriers or not), then why should any of our opinions about how they use networks have substance?

Re: Maemo, What's the Carrier's Argument?
 

I hate all this talk of using force to change the way the wireless companies work.

Change them with the use of your dollars. This is not a worthy cause for force.

Re: Maemo, What's the Carrier's Argument?
 

Your unlikely to get a better rate. Maybe from TMobile, but most companies don't give discounted rates unless you ask them for it (for example, negotiate with them after your 2yr contract is up. they'll usually throw something in for free or give u a slightly better rate) Maybe a difference in lockin though. e.g. instead of yearly contracts you can get them monthly.

Re: Maemo, What's the Carrier's Argument?
 

Well. I would very much like like to see Apple brought down by the bureaucrats (yet again one model example why: http://discussions.apple.com/thread....art=0&tstart=0)
However, as there IS viable competition, I choose to vote with my euros and buy Nokia. Simple. But how do I vote with money when there is only one provider offering what I need?
Telecommunications is becoming more and more a necessity. The same way water, heating an electricity have been for a while now. You can't just go and start up your own small, local telco, either... Investments needed for infrastructure are just too huge.

You can call me a commie and crucify me on the wall for it, but imho the business needs to be carefully controlled to ensure customers have their choice of services. To make sure people CAN vote with their money.