Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Iphone Wireless Networking Apple

The iPhone's Role In Crippling T-Mobile 325

Posted by Soulskill
from the doubles-as-a-ninja-star dept.
GMGruman writes "The feds may be blocking AT&T's buyout of T-Mobile, but T-Mobile is in poor shape to continue as is. Parent company Deutsche Telekom's decision not to invest in U.S. spectrum a decade ago constrained T-Mobile's ability to grow, especially through 4G networks now finally emerging. But from a customer point of view, it was the iPhone that has threatened the company the most. Or, more precisely, its lack of the iPhone."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The iPhone's Role In Crippling T-Mobile

Comments Filter:
  • Fanboi rant (Score:4, Insightful)

    by kurt555gs (309278) <kurt555gs@ovi. c o m> on Saturday September 03, 2011 @03:28PM (#37298006) Homepage

    Are you kidding? Unless you are paid by Apple or a Zombie, can do you really believe and iPhone is any better and a T-Mobile G2 or any high end Android handset?

    Really? Want some Apple flavored Kool Aid?

    • Re:Fanboi rant (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ScrewMaster (602015) on Saturday September 03, 2011 @03:41PM (#37298094)

      Are you kidding? Unless you are paid by Apple or a Zombie, can do you really believe and iPhone is any better and a T-Mobile G2 or any high end Android handset?

      Really? Want some Apple flavored Kool Aid?

      I agree. Why is it that Apple fans have to make everything about the iPhone? Considering that the handset market is owned by Android, not by Apple (half a million Android phones light up every day) the claim that T-Mobile is being hurt by the lack of that product is remarkable. Now, the tablet market is a different matter entirely, but we aren't talking about tablets here.

      More to the point, when you look at the total number of handsets sold, smartphones are a drop in the bucket. Supersmart phones such as the iPhone and high-end Android devices, even more so. Cellular outfits did just fine before the iPhone came along, and they'd do just fine without it. About the only thing the iPhone did for AT&T was allow them to sell voice/data plans at the subsidized price for unsubsidized phones!

      The fact that millions of iPhone owners fell for that ongoing scam still amazes me. Those people who bought a Nexus One from Google and went with T-Mobile found themselves getting a discount, because T-Mobile wasn't providing the phone. Just good business. Now, I suppose in that context the iPhone did hurt T-Mo, because AT&T was making extra money to not supply a device to the consumer. Really says a lot about AT&T's management than anything else. Says even more about your average iPhone user.

      I also agree with you about the T-Mobile G2 / HTC Desire Z ... I have one of those and you'll pry it from my cold dead fingers. It's rooted and running Cyanogenmod 7 (no choice in operating system is yet another reason why I detest Apple and AT&T.)

      • Apple Fans (Score:2, Insightful)

        "Why is it that Apple fans have to make everything about the iPhone?"

        It really is sad. Apple fans were never like this years ago. I know I certainly wasn't. Yes there was fanboyism. But somehow Apple's move into the cellphone market turned Apple fans into foaming at the mouth batshit insane cultists.

        One just has to see what has become of major Apple sites like AppleInsider:

        * Apple invented EVERYTHING

        * Anything not made by Apple SUCKS

        * Anything not made by Apple would be AMAZING if Apple did it

        * 'Teh OMG!!!

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Antisyzygy (1495469)
          Im sorry, but Apple fans were always like this. When I became aware of it they were talking about how superior the G3 processor was over anything offered by Intel or AMD. This is in spite of actual evidence showing that other processors were superior at many things. I remember an ad campaign when Apple talked about how "Your Macbook is a super-computer, doing XXX gigaflops". Funny thing about that is they were making up lies by using an older standard of what a super-computer is. Apple fan-bois have always
        • Re:Apple Fans (Score:4, Informative)

          by ehrichweiss (706417) * on Saturday September 03, 2011 @04:55PM (#37298594)

          No, they've been like this for a long, long time. About 18 years ago I got into 3D animation with the Amiga/VideoToaster(because Lightwave was still tied into the VT hardware back then) and was interested in talking with others in the field. Lo and behold one of the first people I meet is some little twerp telling me how Apple was going to rule the 3D world like it did desktop publishing...Lightwave was lame and never going to go anywhere and Strata3D was the best software there was. Less than a year later Babylon 5 came out and about a year after that I never heard anything about Strata except as some form of lame utility or something...but Lightwave is still going strong AFAIK. That's not entirely directly related to Apple but he was an Apple user and had the same fucking nasty attitude that we see today...

          • Lo and behold one of the first people I meet is some little twerp telling me how Apple was going to rule the 3D world like it did desktop publishing...

            He was wrong but it was a good bet at the time. Back then you had Apple and Amiga machines which were capable of doing the graphics work. The suggestion that the PC would wipe them both off the map would either result in a laugh or a fart noise. Funny how that played out.

            ...but Lightwave is still going strong AFAIK.

            I'm sorry to tell you, but it's not what it was. They're working on rectifying that, though.

            That's not entirely directly related to Apple but he was an Apple user and had the same fucking nasty attitude that we see today...

            No, it's not. I knew those Mac zealots back then and right now you're on easy street in comparison. I have no doubt in mind that the guy you

        • Re:Apple Fans (Score:5, Insightful)

          by MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) on Saturday September 03, 2011 @05:00PM (#37298628)

          But somehow Apple's move into the cellphone market turned Apple fans into foaming at the mouth batshit insane cultists.

          Apple fans turn up, they babble a lot. Android fans turn up, they babble about how sheeple'ish Apple fans are. Apple fans fight back, pointing out strengths in their choices. Android fans fight back, pointing out the strengths in their choices. Apple gets bad news, Android fans laugh. Android gets bad news, Apple fans laugh louder. Then it escalates from there.

          Let's just face facts, we like the side we're on and we like antagonizing the other side. There really is no real substance here outside of that.

          • by shutdown -p now (807394) on Saturday September 03, 2011 @06:47PM (#37299240) Journal

            Let's just face facts, we like the side we're on and we like antagonizing the other side. There really is no real substance here outside of that.

            I have an Apple tablet and an Android phone.

            And I have to warn you - all that antagonizing myself hurts. Stick to a single vendor for the sake of your mental health! ~

      • by guspasho (941623)

        "About the only thing the iPhone did for AT&T was allow them to sell voice/data plans at the subsidized price for unsubsidized phones! "

        What did the cell phone market look like before the iPhone came out? Where was Android? Nowhere. What was the big thing in 2006? Oh yeah, RAZRs. LOL

        In 2006 everyone had the same selection of crappy phones that are pretty good at making calls and SMS with T9 but little else. Everyone also had two-year contracts, which made it really hard to pick up market share from othe

        • by KDR_11k (778916)

          I guess the two year contracts must be a thing in your country because in mine we have a ton of pre-paid options and most people who don't phone a lot have pre-paid cards.

    • by Salvo (8037)

      I think T-Mobile was hurt more by the Microsoft Sidekick debacle than the iPhone.

      • by PopeRatzo (965947) *

        I think not having the iPhone definitely hurt T-Mobile to some extent.

        Now if you were AT&T and you wanted to buy T-Mobile (The #2 buying the #4) it would be in your best interest to have T-Mobile be doing as badly as possible when you closed the deal.

        Since these deals are months if not years in the planning, I wouldn't be surprised to find that AT&T played some sub rosa role in T-Mobile's problems, And I wouldn't be surprised to find that Apple was involved too. When you've got a war chest as big

    • Re:Fanboi rant (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Lemmy Caution (8378) on Saturday September 03, 2011 @04:16PM (#37298300) Homepage

      I prefer Android phones, and I am a T-Mobile customer, yet I think the original post is correct. People left T-Mobile so that they could get an iPhone, and - despite glowing reviews of T-Mobile's service - decided against becoming T-Mobile customers due to the lack of an iPhone.

      I think that the pull of the iPhone is weaker than it used to be: many people who I know would have been "iPhone or nothing" 2+ years ago are either buying Android phones now or, at least, see them as real alternatives. But the damage done to T-Mobile's numbers has already happened.

    • After using the iPhone (both original and 3G), and owning an iPad, after switching to an Android handset in February of this year (HTC Desire), I can personally say with full confidence that yes, I prefer the Apple iPhone and iOS ecosystem to my Android experience.

      I can't wait to switch back to the iPhone early next year, nothing about my Android experience has impressed me at all, and while my iPhone 3G did have a lot of niggles under iOS4, it was never as bad as what I am experiencing with the Desire. Wi

      • After using the iPhone (both original and 3G), and owning an iPad, after switching to an Android handset in February of this year (HTC Desire),

        Well, okay. You have a G2 with the stock firmware, probably using the stock Android launcher. Yeah, it works, but it's not the best, I agree. However, unlike the vaunted iPhone, you'll find (with a little research) that you can completely change your experience. Try playing around with some different home apps in the market: some of them are very good and might very well change your opinion. Download something like Home Manager to help you switch among the different environments until you find one that suit

        • by Wovel (964431)

          So Android is better if you are willing to rebuild it yourself and spend time vetting all the applications you install. Excellent. Mjust what everyone wantsnin a phone :)

          • So Android is better if you are willing to rebuild it yourself and spend time vetting all the applications you install. Excellent. Mjust what everyone wantsnin a phone :)

            ???

            It's better for some people. It's better for me. I don't think I made the claim that it's better for all people. But at a half million units activated per day, I'd say that the stock Android (regardless of how it compares to the iPhone in sales) is something that one hell of a lot of users find perfectly acceptable. That's just reality, even if it doesn't fit into the Apple fan's view of the world.

            Also, time to face a few facts. There are people (now this may be hard for you to accept, but please b

          • So Android is better if you are willing to rebuild it yourself and spend time vetting all the applications you install. Excellent. Mjust what everyone wantsnin a phone :)

            And just to clarify, downloading a replacement home app from the Android Market does not count as "rebuilding it yourself." Anyone can do that with a couple of taps, and can then have an entirely different, generally more capable, user experience. Furthermore, a number of cell phone vendors have taken it upon themselves to replace the stock Android home app with their own, with varying degrees of success. That kind of flexibility generally seems to unnerve iPhone people for some reason, but to me it's a def

    • Re:Fanboi rant (Score:5, Informative)

      by Karlt1 (231423) on Saturday September 03, 2011 @04:24PM (#37298362)

      Are you kidding? Unless you are paid by Apple or a Zombie, can do you really believe and iPhone is any better and a T-Mobile G2 or any high end Android handset?

      Really? Want some Apple flavored Kool Aid?

      http://www.intomobile.com/2010/11/05/t-mobile-says-lack-of-iphone-is-hurting-performance/ [intomobile.com]

      I guess the CEO of T-Mobile is a "fanboi"

      Deutsche Telekom CEO Rene Obermann says, âoeâConsumers like T-Mobile but they also want to have the iPhone.â

    • by kinabrew (1053930)

      Having owned an iPhone and having worked in an environment where I've used and configured Android devices, I can absolutely believe that an iPhone is a better device than Android phones.

      From what I've seen, iOS is significantly easier to use than Android.

  • Insane premise (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 03, 2011 @03:29PM (#37298016)

    The iPhone has 5% of the mobile market. T-Mobile is not failing because they don't have a slice of that 5%. That did not cripple them in any way. Lack of investment in coverage area hurt them, but not having the iPhone is insignificant next to that.

    It sucks they're declining, because they were the only company that you could ever pay off a subsidized phone - at the end of your 2 year contract, your rate went down unless you got a new phone. It should be illegal to keep charging you for the phone once it's paid off, but that's what all the other companies do.

    • Re:Insane premise (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Belial6 (794905) on Saturday September 03, 2011 @03:45PM (#37298112)
      What hurt them the most was the announcement that AT&T was going to acquire them.
      • What hurt them the most was the announcement that AT&T was going to acquire them.

        Now that is probably true. And you know what? For all we know, that was the whole idea all long.

      • by Kenja (541830)
        I know thats why I didn't switch over to them.
    • by trout007 (975317)

      I hardly use my cell phone. Tmobile has the best plan I could find. $100 prepaid for 1000 minutes that are good for 1 year. And if you don't use up those minutes in a year they roll to the next year if you buy another $100.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by rabtech (223758)

      Don't forget that one customer is not equivalent to another. The iPhone carries with it a premium data plan, resulting in higher revenue for the network operator.

      Both T-Mobile and Sprint have admitted publicly (via their CEO's statements) that they are losing these high-value *profitable* customers due to the iPhone. There is little to dispute here. If their CEO admits that publicly I'd wager he/she is far better informed than any slashdot commenters.

      I'd also point out that iPhone customers buy more apps a

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by ScrewMaster (602015)

        and I love not having to install a virus scanner on my phone

        What? If you were talking about Windows vs. Mac I might believe you. But closed-source operating systems are not inherently more secure than open source OSes ... usually quite the opposite. Your feeling of security is probably misplaced.

  • by tycoex (1832784)

    Sprint seems to be doing fine. And are we already forgetting that Verizon just recently picked up the iPhone?

    As far as I know Verizon was still more popular than AT&T even before they had the iPhone.

  • That's why Verizon was such a niche cell provider prior to them getting the iPhone.

  • Uh, data please? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Rich0 (548339) on Saturday September 03, 2011 @03:33PM (#37298030) Homepage

    I don't see any data presented in the article. The claim is made that smartphone users are leaving in droves. So, where is the chart of smartphone market share per carrier?

    I switched TO T-mobile to use a smartphone, since neither Verizon nor ATT had decent options (2.5 years ago). If you want an iPhone then you're going to ditch T-Mobile, but the last time I checked most smartphone users don't use iPhones.

    And the last time I checked I had 4G service just about everywhere I actually go with T-Mobile, which includes a moderate amount of travel. If you like to go fishing in the mountains then you'll do better with a different carrier, but if you actually spend your time where the population density is greater than 3/km^2 you'll almost certainly have 2G with T-Mobile, and most likely you'll have 4G as well.

    • by Belial6 (794905)
      I did a 6 week road trip last summer, I didn't take the time off work. I sat in the back of the rented minivan working while my wife drove. Except for the national parks and Wyoming, I had a good 3G signal on my Nexus One almost the entire way. It really was amazing just how good the cell coverage was.
  • Either AT&T buys them, or they go under. Apparently Sprint realized they do better if T-Mobile goes under, as they can pick off some of the customers that way. Sprint had no interest in converting T-Mobile's terrible network to their own terrible cellular standard. T-Mobile was a sinking ship by their own incompetence and horrible network prior to now, and prior to the iPhone.
    • by Belial6 (794905)
      T-Mobile does not have terrible cellular. That is a myth that anyone on T-Mobile can verify.
      • by Macrat (638047)

        T-Mobile does not have terrible cellular. That is a myth that anyone on T-Mobile can verify.

        Especially anyone who has carried both AT&T and T-Mobiles phones around. AT&T has the terrible network coverage.

        • I'm on T-Mobile and where I live they are hands down the worst network for cell. I can't drive from home to work without passing through at least one dead spot - and those dead spots are marked as "1-2 bars" on their map. And no, it isn't my phone's fault, I've seen the same dead spots with 4 different phones of my own, as well as 3 different phones belonging to my wife.

          There is even a T-Mobile dead spot at my work, which is a spot that no other network has a problem with.

          And that is to say nothin
      • by ScrewMaster (602015) on Saturday September 03, 2011 @04:23PM (#37298346)

        T-Mobile does not have terrible cellular. That is a myth that anyone on T-Mobile can verify.

        I agree ... I've been on them for about three years now, and where I live I've had no problems whatsoever. I've had AT&T, U.S. Cellular and Sprint, and I've had the best coverage on T-Mobile. Period. And actually manage to pull in about 10 mbits/sec on my data channel, so I'm a happy camper. And the GP's talk of "incompetence"? Where did he get that from? I experienced an incredible degree of incompetence dealing with AT&T and Sprint: billing error after billing error to the point that I switched to T-Mobile. If nothing else, the Germans know how to run an accounting system.

        On top of that, for the $25 I'm spending each month on 3G/4G, I get unlimited data and voice roaming. So I can go anywhere in the U.S. and not worry about coverage. Drove cross-country last year through a dozen states, and had data, voice, tethering and Google Nav all the way, and I lost track of how many different networks I went through.

        AT&T and Verizon can take their pretty little floating colored maps and stick them where the Sun don't shine. This merger is certainly not in my best interests, I'll tell you that. All this talk about "savings" and "scaleability" and "service" is a smoke screen. AT&T doesn't do anything like this to benefit the consumer. They do it to benefit AT&T, and that letter that got accidentally posted to the FCC's Web site last month made that pretty damn clear. AT&T can go to hell in a handbasket so far as I'm concerned.

      • by tsotha (720379)
        Sure, if you can get ahold of them.
    • by guspasho (941623)

      Is T-mobile actually under any threat of going under, or did you just make that up? This is the first time I've ever heard about it, and I've paid close attention to the merger attempt. I've read statements from both companies and neither ever mentioned any risk of failure.

  • by MrDoh! (71235)

    From the article, "People are fleeing to AT&T"? Really? Don't know what TMobile are doing wrong (decent range of phones, cheaper plans), but I'd be curious on the fleeing to AT&T part.
    Time for my weekly rant;
    Just open up the airwaves and share bandwidth whilst keeping separate customers. Phones ID' themselves when they connect so you could work out who should be paying who for the use of the towers, there'd be reason to install multiple towers to improve speed/reception, and far out in the wilds

    • "far out in the wilds customers wouldn't need a tower for each network,"

      actually the situation is a bit more complex than that.

      the actual tower itself may not be the problem since its the backhaul lines and being the FIRST to put up a tower thats the real killer.

      a lot of towers actually have multiple transmitters since once you have the permits to put the tower up its a lot easier to have multiple transmitters (which could be owned by multiple companies) on one tower. plus of course there are "roaming" arra

    • People are fleeing to AT&T"? Really? Don't know what TMobile are doing wrong (decent range of phones, cheaper plans), but I'd be curious on the fleeing to AT&T part.

      Yeah. I thought that people were fleeing T-Mobile specifically to get away from AT&T after the merger attempt was announced.

    • by guspasho (941623)

      Did you read the summary, or even the title? They left T-mobile for the iPhone. Until earlier this year the only company that you could get an iPhone with was AT&T.

      In the cell phone business most customers are locked in to two-year contracts that prevent them from easily switching carriers, so the carriers are pretty much stuck with whatever market share they currently have. It's very difficult for them to jockey for market advantage, especially when they all offer essentially the same selection of hand

  • by zmooc (33175)

    Carriers leasing phones, but only a specific subset of what's on the market. Best idea since sliced bread. It'd be totally awesome if I'd also be able to lease my shower from the water utility and then be stuck with them and my water-utility-branded shower until the lease expires:P Lol.

  • I was a loyal and happy T-mobile customer since the Voicestream days, just before they became T-mobile. I waited as long as I could for them to get the iPhone, I considered the G2 and myTouch phones, but ultimately my job (iPhone app development) required that I own an iPhone, so I could wait no longer. So yeah, I'm one of those who left T-mobile to get an iPhone.

    • I was a loyal and happy T-mobile customer since the Voicestream days, just before they became T-mobile. I waited as long as I could for them to get the iPhone, I considered the G2 and myTouch phones, but ultimately my job (iPhone app development) required that I own an iPhone, so I could wait no longer. So yeah, I'm one of those who left T-mobile to get an iPhone.

      Can't argue with your decision since you're a developer, but you should understand that you're far in the minority. People left AT&T in droves to go to T-Mobile, and that had much more to do with T-Mobile's reasonable policies and pricing than choice of smartphone. The same thing happened to Comcast when AT&T U-Verse became widely available. If your decision isn't based around the availability of a specific piece of hardware, but instead revolves around overall value ... well, odds are you'll make a

    • by Macrat (638047)

      I was a loyal and happy T-mobile customer since the Voicestream days, just before they became T-mobile. I waited as long as I could for them to get the iPhone, I considered the G2 and myTouch phones, but ultimately my job (iPhone app development) required that I own an iPhone, so I could wait no longer. So yeah, I'm one of those who left T-mobile to get an iPhone.

      Funny, I'm using a factory unlocked iPhone 3GS on T-Mobile.

      And as a developer, you would appreciate T-Mobile's Pay-as-you-go service so you can have active sims for all your development phones with no monthly charges. You only pay for the calls and sms you use and they have a "day pass" for when you need to do network development/testing. When your development phone is sitting unused, it isn't costing you anything.

  • by 93 Escort Wagon (326346) on Saturday September 03, 2011 @03:43PM (#37298102)

    I left T-Mobile because their network didn't cover all the areas I needed cell reception in. That's it. T-Mobile's network in the Pacific Northwest is better than Sprint's, but when you get away from the interstates (especially east of the Cascades) there are huge gaps.

    Now, when I originally left Verizon and switched to T-Mobile... that was because Verizon was evil. Verizon had coverage everywhere, but their fundamental evil-tude overrode that.

  • by Hazel Bergeron (2015538) on Saturday September 03, 2011 @03:44PM (#37298106) Journal

    Even the most arch-capitalist of pre-welfare-state Western thinkers a century ago would have laughed at the idea that you could sell radio frequencies to private groups. "I get exclusive right to send waves of THIS length."

    They'd also laugh at the idea of intellectual property as opposed to temporary copy right.

    What exactly is our current regime, anyway?

    • Even the most arch-capitalist of pre-welfare-state Western thinkers a century ago would have laughed at the idea that you could sell radio frequencies to private groups. "I get exclusive right to send waves of THIS length."

      Yeah, the idea that that radio frequencies could be licenced certainly didn't exist a century ago [wikipedia.org]. Nope, no way.

      • Licensing to users of particular services, e.g. allowing ships to share maritime frequencies or amateurs to share amateur frequencies, is not the same as selling to the highest bidder.

        It's the difference between a privately owned road and a public road. Anyone with a driver's licence and a willingness to obey road traffic law can use the latter.

    • Spectrum and the amount of data that can be carried over it is a limited resource (and even with improvements in technology, information theory puts a cap on how much data can be pushed through at a given frequency). If the spectrum is not licensed for use then two things happen. 1) The number of users skyrockets and the overall throughput available for user goes down and 2) the quality of signals degrades and the overall throughput goes down. This is why wi-fi in many areas of NYC sucks, even though it'
      • by hitmark (640295)

        I wonder how much that has to do with people never changing the channel of the hotspot. Still, one 3 B channels are really separate, the rest overlap with neighbors to some degree or other.

        Btw, i think there was a recent announcement of a wifi router that would automatically change channel if it detected too much noise or something. I wonder how this will work out of there are many of those in a area tho. I can see them continually hopping around in some kind of pattern, much like one can detect bot pattern

    • by slimjim8094 (941042) <slashdot3NO@SPAMjustconnected.net> on Saturday September 03, 2011 @04:48PM (#37298540)

      The protection of radio spectrum goes both ways, though. I'm a pretty fucking big fan of the idea that there's nobody else on the frequency my ambulance squad uses to communicate with our dispatcher and the police, or the paramedics, or other agencies. And that's only because the FCC has a very big stick to hit people with if they violate it. If people or businesses thought they could get away with co-opting public safety frequencies, you bet your ass they would.

      And you don't have to think very hard to come up with countless other problems with an unregulated spectrum. Everything from cordless phones to RC cars to WiFi would become useless as people just shat all over the spectrum because it was easy and convenient to do so. Things like allocation and emissions regulations keep the spectrum useful in the same way that a drivers' license keeps the roads useful to everybody. Even the most anarchist person must recognize the tragedy of the commons, even if he doesn't like the solution - at least if he's intellectually honest.

      • by Hazel Bergeron (2015538) on Saturday September 03, 2011 @05:01PM (#37298634) Journal

        There's a mile of difference between regulating usage for the benefit of a particular service and selling to private bidders according to who pays the most.

        • by Rich0 (548339)

          Well, yes and no.

          So, you decide that some frequency range is for cellphone service. Who gets to use it? If you just designate the purpose then everybody will use the whole thing and it won't work for anybody.

          So, the FCC took each geographic area and put it up for auction, which is a pretty standard way of figuring out who should get what when you have a finite resource. That's how a bank or sheriff figures out who to sell a house to. In theory whoever can put the band to the most use will be able to bid

    • by guspasho (941623)

      Duh. By the money, of the money, for the money.

  • by crhylove (205956)

    The iPhone has PLENTY of stern competition from Android phones. T-Mobile crippled itself in 4 simple ways:

    Not competing on price with the big 3, and following Boost's lead.
    Not competing on contract length, or better yet ditching contracts altogether.
    Not updating existing Android phones to newer builds in a timely fashion.
    Entering into talks with AT&T in the first place.

    I was a happy T-Mo user for many years. But the second my current contract is up (which is way too high, and I'm still on a Froyo devi

    • by pavon (30274)

      What are talking about?

      Not competing on contract length, or better yet ditching contracts altogether.

      T-Mobile does have contract-free plans, and are the only major carrier to do so.

      Not competing on price with the big 3, and following Boost's lead.

      T-Mobiles with contract prices are significantly cheaper than AT&T and Verizon, and their contract-free plans are even cheaper than that.

      Not updating existing Android phones to newer builds in a timely fashion.

      I agree with you there. They took the lead with the G1, and but since then all the flagship Android phones have gone to other carriers.

      I don't know of a single person who is leaving them, and know a couple that have gotten sick of Verizon's prices and are moving to T-

    • Why are you posting on Slashdot and complaining about being on Froyo? Root the damn thing.

      • Why are you posting on Slashdot and complaining about being on Froyo? Root the damn thing.

        Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Bought my original G1 from T-Mobile and rooted it a couple of days later. I'm on a G2 now (HTC Desire Z) and haven't run the stock firmware longer than it takes to put Cyanogenmod on it.

        • I upgraded from the original mytouch (that I rooted) to the Samsung Galaxy S 4G and it took me a weekend to root it because of its special complications... but it is seriously a better world when you root an android phone... unlike jail breaking an iPhone where you live with worry over the next x.y..z release of the iPhone firmware.

  • T-Mobile is still a buyout target, and at this point I think Google or Microsoft could pick them up for less than AT&T offered. Since T-Mobile is more Android friendly than WP7 I think Google would be a more likely suitor.
    • T-Mobile is still a buyout target, and at this point I think Google or Microsoft could pick them up for less than AT&T offered. Since T-Mobile is more Android friendly than WP7 I think Google would be a more likely suitor.

      I've thought about that. Not sure the regulators would go for it, although I think it would be better for consumers if Google got T-Mobile than American Terrorphone and Terrorgraph.

      The recent purchase of Motorola puts Google in a unique position, communications infrastructure-wise. I could see Google buying out T-Mobile, and offering data-only phones and plans that don't use any voice frequencies, and eventually re-purposing that spectrum for more data usage. Put it this way, Android (since Gingerbread)

    • by trout007 (975317)

      Or what if Apple bought them and made it the only network for iPhones and iPads?

      • Or what if Apple bought them and made it the only network for iPhones and iPads?

        Apple hasn't got the back-end infrastructure and services to make that worth the effort. Besides, they're making billions doing just what they're doing now.

        Google, on the other hand ... Google has a hand that hasn't been played yet. If AT&T doesn't succeed in eliminating T-Mobile as competition and taking over their spectrum, Google may become a player here. Time will tell.

  • by willoughby (1367773) on Saturday September 03, 2011 @05:54PM (#37298928)

    I use a T-Mobile MyTough 4g which I purchased outright from T-Mobile & then flashed with Cyanogenmod. I pay $60/month for unlimited talk, text & data with a 2gb soft cap. If I go over 2gb I'm shifted to edge speed for the rest of the billing cycle. I'm not shut off or charged extra.

    The T-mobile network lets me do everything I want my phone to do everywhere I go. I've never had a complaint about coverage, data speeds, or anything else.

    When ATT, Sprint, or any other carrier can match that deal, I'll consider switching.

Work without a vision is slavery, Vision without work is a pipe dream, But vision with work is the hope of the world.

Working...