AT&T illuminate own Open-Access policy
6 December 2007 - 12:46In a move almost certain to be a calculated response to Verizon’s sudden bursting open of their CDMA network, AT&T has decided to begin publicising the fact that customers can use any GSM handset they wish with the company’s services, rather than needing to buy a vouchsafed model from AT&T’s range. That should go some way to excusing the carrier’s absence from Google’s OHA; while Android is not directly supported, handsets built on the platform should have no problems accessing AT&T’s service as long as they adhere to the GSM standard. It’s rather a case of making existing options better known than introducing new features; AT&T has had such an open-access policy for several years, but preferred to keep it quiet so as to encourage new customers to buy cellphones from them rather than reuse their old model.
Now, however, AT&T salespeople will be actively informing people that they do not need a new handset in order to subscribe to the network’s service and, in contrast to Verizon’s requirements that devices be vetted prior to use, the GSM carrier is boasting of their own relative flexibility:
“You can use any handset on our network you want. We don’t prohibit it, or even police it” Ralph de la Vega, CEO, AT&T Wireless
The option to continue using a handset already paid for could have dividends in more ways, with AT&T not requiring the typical 18 to 24 month contract that in effect underwrites the true price of a subsidised cellphone. While AT&T will likely follow Verizon’s example of not offering technical support on non-carrier-supplied hardware, the onus will be on them to provide a value-for-money service since contract-free customers will have greater degrees of migration flexibility.
One of the initial concerns from commentators on the Android platform was the absence of AT&T and Verizon support, which led them to believe that even if handsets that were attractive to consumers were released, there would be little chance of a network to use them on. While both carriers’ announcements smack of “me too” mimicry, beyond that the end result is far greater flexibility for Android users to take advantage of.
5 Comments | Tags: AT&T, Android, Google Phone, Open Handset Alliance, Verizon
06 Dec 2007 - 16:06
I signed up with Cingular back in 2004, got two phones then, added another line & phone since. When the renewal came up, I just went in and said 2 more years didn’t buy new phones or anything. Now, the phones are starting to go, and I am looking at GSM phones from Motorola that are unlocked to start with. Little more costly as I pay the full price of the phone, but the phone isn’t locked to anything.
07 Dec 2007 - 19:20
AT&T phones are locked when you buy them, so is T-Mobile. If a T-Mobile customer brings their phone in to AT&T to get service is AT&T going to unlock it or send them back to T-Mobile to unlock it? Cause we all know these carriers are not gonna sell those unlocked.
08 Dec 2007 - 7:23
All cellular companies in the U.S. sell their phones locked to their service, this is nothing new. As far as how “open” their network is is debateble, as far as getting a phone that is “unlocked” from the service your with, all it takes is a call to the company usually with your IMEI # and service information and they will generally unlock your phone for you, most times requiring that you fulfill some sort of time frame prior to doing so. With my AT&T Samsung Sync and Pay As You Go service, I was able to have mine unlocked after a 3 month service continuance with them but, this varies by company and plan. T-Mobile and AT&T both say you must first finish out the contract you have with them before they will unlock their phones, although as with my Pay As You Go service, that may not always be the case. According to AT&T, the only phone in their line-up you can’t get unlocked is the Apple iPhone, which may change after the lawsuits settle. Sprint, Verizon, and the other CDMA networks here all use an internal chip instead of a SIM card which makes it impossible for their phones to be used outside of their networks, even though they have been told by the courts they must unlock their phones for customers who ask, when they ask. So how Verizon plans on “opening” their network is still beyond me, unless they are going to adopt SIM card technology or switch to GSM for their network. I’d love to find out more about this from them, prior to making any judgments about it.
As I said, I’m not too sure what they are talking about when they say their network is “Open”, Open as in what? The fact you can use a non-branded or other networks device on their network? They have or are now allowing other companies to use their equipment to provide your service to you? What exactly are they even talking about? If service issue is what they are talking about, I’d love to know where AT&T is allowing for T-Mobile to use their equipment, because where I live you can’t even get T-Mobile signals, let alone service. Although AT&T’s service is strong at my location just off of I-75 a short distance from the towers, You don’t get any signals at all from T-Mobiles phones, even though they advertise it on their site, so I don’t see how that is “Open” at all. When AT&T starts doing like all Cellular Telecoms in France must do, and sell their phones UNLOCKED, then I will say AT&T has an “open” device segment, until then keep on dreaming AT&T!
08 Dec 2007 - 7:39
“So how Verizon plans on “opening” their network is still beyond me, unless they are going to adopt SIM card technology or switch to GSM for their network. I’d love to find out more about this from them, prior to making any judgments about it”
It’s a good question, and they’ve been less than clear about the mechanics of it. I can only assume that, since they insist on vetting each device before you can use it (i.e. different to AT&T who say you can just slot one of their SIM cards into any unlocked GSM device and start using it on their network), at that point they can register the unique internal chip inside your phone and allow it to access the Verizon network.
Sadly, all this is unlikely to mean anything like cell tower sharing; that would help out competitors to much.
12 Nov 2008 - 18:35
cv496mm4czx21aze