Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Communications Businesses The Almighty Buck Handhelds Apple Hardware

Does the UK iPhone Plan Add Up? 280

An anonymous reader writes "Is it just me or is the UK iPhone deal seriously more expensive than the US deal? If you look at what AT&T offers compared to what O2 offers, you get significantly less for your money in the UK than you do in the States. It's also significantly more expensive than other non-iPhone deals in the UK, which offer similar services. Steve Jobs response to the more expensive UK iPhone is that 'it's more expensive to do business in the UK', but what does that mean? As a UK resident I'm disappointed that we didn't get the same plan as the AT&T plan, particularly the free mobile-to-mobile calls. Is there some element of the UK iPhone service that I'm missing here?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Does the UK iPhone Plan Add Up?

Comments Filter:
  • by 2nd Post! ( 213333 ) <.gundbear. .at.> on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:05PM (#20686885) Homepage
    In the US, we pay for incoming calls.

    In other words, our minutes are eaten in half if we make as many calls as we receive. That's probably one aspect right there.
    • Unless I missed something it doesn't state that the inclusive minutes aren't X-network. Given that almost all bundled minutes are X-network in the UK what is the submitter talking about?
    • by Zelos ( 1050172 )
      Plus 17.5% VAT on the iPhone itself and the mobile tariff. Most business customers would be able to claim that back.
    • by Andy Dodd ( 701 ) <{atd7} {at} {}> on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:16PM (#20687135) Homepage
      In general, US and European providers have VERY different pricing structures, and so you will not likely ever see parity in plans available.

      Among other things, as I understand it:
      European wireless customers never pay for incoming calls. Calls are charged to the caller, whether the caller is a landline or mobile. U.S. wireless customers pay for all incoming and outgoing calls (well, the calls are deducted from their monthly airtime allowance...), subject to exceptions (mobile-to-mobile on the same carrier, off-peak times)
      European wireless customers only pay for outgoing SMS, not incoming. U.S. customers pay for both, with the above voice exceptions often applying to SMS.
      Few European wireless carriers offer flat-rate data plans, although their pay-per-kilobyte prices are typically far cheaper than U.S. pay-per-KB prices. U.S. carriers offer exorbitant pay-per-KB prices so that anything but a minimal amount of usage proves to be more expensive than the flat-rate monthly plans. This is the big problem with the iPhone in Europe - as a few other articles have indicated, it was basically designed around an unlimited-data plan and in fact AT&T won't sell you the unit unless you get unlimited data service.
      In general, Europeans jumped straight from GPRS to UMTS, skipping EDGE deployment. Bad for iPhone, no UMTS capability.

      To make a long story short - comparing pricing between a U.S. carrier and a European carrier is like comparing apples to oranges. It's much easier to compare pricing schemes between U.S. carriers, which all operate on similar principles. (One exception - I get the impression European plans are a much closer match to U.S. prepaid/pay-as-you-go plans, except they are far more reasonably priced. U.S. PAYG plans are massive ripoffs.)
      • by digitig ( 1056110 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:33PM (#20687431)

        European wireless customers never pay for incoming calls. Calls are charged to the caller, whether the caller is a landline or mobile.
        Unless they go to another country (geographically pretty much equivalent to crossing a state line in the USA), in which case incoming calls /are/ charged.
        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          Many people here in the US have cheaper regional plans that roam out of state. I think only the biggest carriers have relatively cheap nationwide service.
      • European wireless customers only pay for outgoing SMS, not incoming. U.S. customers pay for both, with the above voice exceptions often applying to SMS.

        And often US carriers do not provide a way to block unwanted text messages, causing me to have spent about a dollar over the life of my phone (I've had it for four years) on ten-cent text messages that someone who didn't know I don't use them sent me.

      • by nsayer ( 86181 ) * <nsayer @ k f u . c om> on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:46PM (#20687609) Homepage

        comparing pricing between a U.S. carrier and a European carrier is like comparing apple []s to orange []s.
        Yeah, they're different, alright.

      • by Snowgen ( 586732 )

        U.S. PAYG plans are massive ripoffs.

        Depends on how you use your phone. I use mine minimally, so I have a pre-paid "plan". I spend about $6.75 per month--true I only get 27 to 52 minutes for that, but I don't use that many (and *all* my unused cash balance carries indefinitely). The phone cost me about $100, and that was two years ago. Let's say I keep it for another year, so that works out to be about $2.75 month. So for phone and service, I spend just under $10/month. That's not even close to a "massive ripoff". If you can find me a

        • by ksheff ( 2406 )
          IIRC, I paid about $30-40 for my prepaid phone. The rates are 10 cents a minute for phone calls, 5 cents per SMS message. The accumulated balance will roll over.
        • by Andy Dodd ( 701 )
          Most of the PAYG plans I've seen have a rather short expiration time so if you spend less than $15-20/month your balance starts expiring.

          In the case of Verizon, their PAYG plan comes out to a minimum of $30/month, and a contract plan is only $40! I think my current provider (Just started an AT&T contract) is a bit better with PAYG but not that much from what I saw.

          Maybe you've found an exception...
      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by smallfries ( 601545 )

        Few European wireless carriers offer flat-rate data plans, although their pay-per-kilobyte prices are typically far cheaper than U.S. pay-per-KB prices

        Well apart from Verizon of course. I heard they had a deal for 0.002 cent/MB which seems amazingly cheap. And you get fantastic customer support to back it up...
      • I don't work for them - I'm just a satisfied customer - but I found that T-mobile's PAYG plan is pretty fair. If you can tolerate a higher front-end investment, you can buy 1000 minutes of time for $100, and those minutes don't expire for a year. If you don't use the phone except to make calls that really need to be mobile - e.g., "Honey, I'm at the grocery store, what do we need?" and ordering take-out as you're leaving the office - it's more than enough talk time, and it costs less than $10/mo.
      • by guruevi ( 827432 )
        Only western Europeans jumped on the UMTS bandwagon, the rest of the world kinda left it where it was. Why? To deploy EDGE you only need to upgrade some hardware, it works on the same frequencies and uses the same techniques as GSM while UMTS needs first a hefty license fee and then a hefty upgrade. Although it is faster, I doubt UMTS is really the demand for now. Hardly anybody uses their mobile carrier as a primary internet connection and the capabilities of most devices (iPhone included) don't require hi
  • by LanceUppercut ( 766964 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:07PM (#20686909)
    I'm un the US and with my provider/plan I don't get free mobile-to-mobile calls. Moreover, I have to pay for incoming calls and messages. This all depends on the particular provider/plan. It's about O2, not about Apple.
  • Cruel Britannia (Score:5, Informative)

    by samuel4242 ( 630369 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:07PM (#20686913)
    Alas, the tax rates are dramatically higher there and they probably sock it to the cell phone folks. There are many things to love about Britain, but it's not known for selling stuff on the cheap. Practically everything costs more there except, perhaps, for warm beer. And if memory serves me right, there was a raft of regulations that kept prices of beer cheap. That's a simple way to buy off the masses.
    • I know I will get flamed for this, but listen:
      If the taxes are too high in Brittain, all you've gots to do is find some burly chaps, load them up with beer, and dump the government's tea in the harbour. Right off the ships from India!
      Hah, it gets them every time! From there on, to my understading, the government pretty well folds in on itself, and you're the winner.
      Like I said: It. Works. Every. Time.
      (ps. If big media companies are listening, I'm available to make your new ad jingles. I. Am. Available. ;)
  • 02 (Score:4, Insightful)

    by SpectreBlofeld ( 886224 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:08PM (#20686937)
    "As a UK resident I'm disappointed that we didn't get the same plan as the AT&T plan, particularly the free mobile-to-mobile calls." This has nothing to do with the iPhone and everything to do with your carrier. Virtually all U.S. carriers include unlimited mobile to mobile, iPhone or not.
  • by hattig ( 47930 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:08PM (#20686951) Journal
    The free WiFi via TheCloud makes the wifi portion of the iPhone actually useful, as there are thousands of TheCloud WiFi networks around the country. I don't think that there is anything similar for the US iPhone.

    Also the unlimited data usage is probably underestimated. Sure, they say 1400 pages a day, but how big is a web page these days (excluding Flash)? 100KB? That's 140MB a day, which would cost a tonne over here with many other deals.

    The talk and text limits are rather poor of course. I pay £10 a month for 500 minutes and 100 texts with Three, so when £35 only has 200 minutes and 200 texts and no phone subsidy you have to worry.
  • Try lowering VAT (Score:3, Insightful)

    by iamacat ( 583406 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:11PM (#20687013)
    Then you can expect similar iTunes store or iPhone pricing as in US. Long-established british companies have probably learned on how not too pay the tax as many times on the same item as a foreigner new to the area would.
    • VAT's not a cascade tax. Any company with a turnover greater than £40000 p/a will be reclaiming the VAT on their inputs as a matter of course.

      It's simple accounting. Mind you, the UK's simple accounting is different to the US's. Everyone uses double entry here.
      • by iamacat ( 583406 )
        So how does that work? Say I am a company selling cell phones and I need to buy some expensive office equipment to do business. I also have to pay higher salary to my employees because most of the things they buy will be subject to VAT. Can I really reclaim both of these expenses on account that my own product is subject to VAT?
  • by Jethro ( 14165 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:11PM (#20687025) Homepage
    Apple pushing a product that's more expensive than competitors and expecting people to flock over and buy it just because of they style and hype surrounding it? Why that would NEVER work!
  • by Enlarged to Show Tex ( 911413 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:12PM (#20687027)
    I was given this rule prior to my first overseas trip, and I've found it to be generally accurate for the UK:

    Take an item in the US, and it will probably cost the same in GBP in the UK as it does in USD in the US. With the current exchange rate, this means that most items cost a little over twice as much in the UK vis-a-vis the US.
  • Rip-off Britain (Score:5, Informative)

    by payndz ( 589033 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:15PM (#20687115)
    Everything is more expensive in the UK than in the States, even though wages are lower on average. Why do companies charge more for the same product over here?

    Because they can.

    British consumers have become numbed to paying more for less over the years, so companies clap their hands with glee at the thought of increasing their profit margins by 50% or more over the US for exactly the same product. "Oh, but you use PAL." "Oh, but you use 240 volts AC with three-prong plugs." "Oh, but you have VAT." Always the same excuses, and they're pretty much bullshit - but nobody questions them any more. We've been ground down by decades of being ripped off.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:21PM (#20687231)
      I have no idea if the parent is correct or not but I'm British, God damn it, and I demand the right to go red in the face and get outraged about being ripped off.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by hattig ( 47930 )
      Last I read the UK average wage was around £25k ($50k) a year, and the US average wage was around $40k a year. I'd hazard that was due to poor states dragging the average down?

      However once you take tax into account then what you say is true. I don't know what US income tax rates are, and I know US goods have (~8%) sales tax applied over the sticker price unlike here, but with the UK's 22% income tax (not including first £5k earnings) plus 12% National Insurance, and then 17.5% VAT on most goods
      • and the US average wage was around $40k a year

        $48,201 [], a fair bit closer to $50k than $40k
      • Re:Rip-off Britain (Score:5, Insightful)

        by vidarh ( 309115 ) <> on Thursday September 20, 2007 @05:03PM (#20687941) Homepage Journal
        Actually, someone making an average salary in the UK will pay 16% income tax - the tax free allowance and the 10% band pulls it down quite a bit.

        And because of the primary threshold on NI, they'll pay 8.8% national insurance (11% between the primary threshold and upper earnings limit).

        So income tax + NI for an average earner is below 25%. Of the remaining 75%, a typical family easily spends a third on things like mortgages or rent and other things that are not subject to VAT. That leaves about 50% of their money that they pay 17.5% VAT on, or 8.75% of their income. Add it up, and the tax burden including VAT is more like ca. 34% total rounded up.

        For comparison, a US average earner at $40k would pay about 19% federal income tax and social security tax (FICA) after deductions. Depending on which state they live in they'll pay anything from nothing (8 states) via 3% flat (Vermont) to around 7-8%, I believe (some states have higher max state income tax rates, but only at higher income levels). So that gives a tax range from 19% to around 26-27% plus sales taxes.

        Of course these figures are not at all directly comparable to UK tax levels, since UK national insurance actually includes comprehensive health insurance and partial dental, to the point where only a tiny fraction of British taxpayers see any value in private health insurance.

        But in any case, when you add up local taxes (in which case you need to take into account council tax in the UK too, though certain cities in the US have local taxes that can far outstrip the UK council tax), state taxes and federal taxes in the US, the UK and US have pretty similar tax levels even ignoring the fact that NI includes health insurance.

        I did the math for myself a couple of years ago, and realized that moving to the US (which was an option due to work) would not have saved me any tax at all unless I moved to some backwater I wouldn't be prepared to live in - in fact I might have ended up paying slightly more, and I would have ended up paying a lot more if I wasn't in a field where full health insurance typically is provided as a benefit.

      • I don't know what US income tax rates are, and I know US goods have (~8%) sales tax applied over the sticker price
        The federal (and state) income tax rate varies depending on many factors. Sales tax is collected by some states, but not others. If there is no sales tax, the state will make that money through higher rates in other taxes.
    • by JordanL ( 886154 )

      "Oh, but you have VAT."
      That's actually a pretty significant cost in the UK, despite what you might think about the big, bad, evil corporations.
    • Yeah. Well you deserve what you get. I rarely buy on the high street these days. There's always someone willing to cut the margins to reasonable levels.

    • by mihalis ( 28146 )

      If you hate getting ripped off in Britain and think things are much better in the US, well then move to the US.

      You can earn a lot more and buy a lot more electronic gadgets.

      How do I know all this? Well, because that's what I did, ten years ago.

      Is it all quite that simple? Well, no, but this IS slashdot.

    • by Malc ( 1751 )
      This is why it's called "Treasure Island" by businesses, especially the car industry a few years ago.
  • "laws" (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    If I had to guess, I would bet it has something to do with the fact that the UK has these things called "laws" that protect consumer rights. In the long run, that costs corporations money that would otherwise be acquired through shafting the consumer.
  • by The Mutant ( 167716 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:18PM (#20687171) Homepage
    Consumer Protection Laws are far more rigorous [] in the UK than the US.

    I'm American but have lived in London for ten years. Yes, (some) things are more expensive here. I was curious and looked into it. Excepted from the above link:

    When you buy goods from a trader, such as a shop, market stall, garage, etc, you enter into a contract, which is controlled by many laws including, the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended by the Sale & Supply of Goods Act 1994 and the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002). The law gives you certain implied, or automatic, statutory rights, under this contract.

    The Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) says that goods should be :

    • Of satisfactory
    • Fit for the purpose
    • As described

    Store policies don't matter; this is the law and retailers must incorporate this cost into selling prices.

    • How is this any different from the Uniform Commercial Code Article 2, which covers contracts over the sale of goods?

      2-314. Implied Warranty: Merchantability; Usage of Trade.

      (1) Unless excluded or modified (Section 2-316), a warranty that the goods shall be merchantable is implied in a contract for their sale if the seller is a merchant with respect to goods of that kind. Under this section the serving for value of food or drink to be consumed either on the premises or elsewhere is a sale.

      (2) Goods to be

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by sjf ( 3790 )
        The difference is in the very first clause of the very first section: Unless excluded or modified

        A consumer's statutory rights may not be excluded or modified in the UK. A retailer can only grant additional protection to the consumer, NEVER remove a statutory right

        US retailers can put up a sign saying: "no returns on sale items." In the UK this is utterly unenforceable. US retailers, as a matter of course, print post-partum conditions of sale on the receipt that they hand you after you have paid for th good

        • by Ajehals ( 947354 )
          Just to take your last paragraph, I wish more people knew about the various less obvious rights they have. A number of useful ones are

          If you buy goods that turn out to be faulty, the seller is in breach of contract, you are entitled to the usual remedies, either they fix the problem quickly (replace, repair or refund..), or you fix the situation yourself and require that they foot the bill (go buy a new one, ship broke one back to them, ask them for the difference).

          These apply to new goods AND used goods,
        • by Valdrax ( 32670 )
          Now that's important. The UCC allows you to waive certain warranty rights, but only if they're explicitly waived in an explicit contract or if the goods are sold "as is" or using other language that explicitly notes that it may be defective.

          I kind of like the UK's rules better for buying goods at a store, but I'd hate to be seller on eBay or their equivalent of craigslist.
          • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

            by matthewp ( 19841 )
            Valdrax wrote: I kind of like the UK's rules better for buying goods at a store, but I'd hate to be seller on eBay or their equivalent of craigslist.

            Those requirements only apply to sales by traders. Items sold by private individuals only have to be 'as described'.

            A particularly active eBay seller might be considered a trader, but people trying to get rid of their old stuff don't need to worry.

    • That may well be true, but unfortunately the vast majority of consumers are unaware of their rights and companies will do their best to make it hard for you to exercise them.

      Things in UK cost more because people aren't so price-conscious as our American cousins. It's not as socially acceptable to talk about money as it is in the US. Same thing effects wages - it's a taboo to discuss what you earn for us Brits (and is often actively discouraged by employers).
  • The answer (Score:5, Informative)

    by Mr_Silver ( 213637 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:20PM (#20687199)

    Is it just me or is the UK iPhone deal seriously more expensive than the US deal?

    It's not called Rip Off Britain [] for nothing you know.

    Seriously though, yes our prices include VAT at 17.5% which people often forget to take into account but, even so, there are plenty of products which have such a colossal additional mark-up on them (Windows Vista is twice as expensive which tax and shipping costs cannot explain away) compared to our European and American counterparts that it is hard not to feel cheated.

    The Wikipedia article [] on it is worth reading and notes that these items cost significantly more in the UK:

    • CDs and DVDs
    • iTunes Store songs, tv programmes, iPod, and iPod games
    • Computer Software - the most notable example being Microsoft Windows Vista
    • Books
    • Electrical Goods
    • Houses
    • Petroleum and diesel fuel

    Unfortunately as we put up with paying those prices, we allow companies to continually screw us.

    • by vidarh ( 309115 )
      Fuel is a special case and has little to do with companies wanting to screw us - the fuel prices in the UK consists of about 70% taxes, and it's a conscious policy to tax fuel that high, as in most of the rest of Europe (though UK is towards the high end even in Europe).
      • by terrymr ( 316118 )
        The UK does have more miles of government maintained road per head of population than anywhere else in the world which helps to explain the fuel tax a bit.
    • I really wish people would stop parroting these Daily Mail catch phrases. They're so bad at them. Surely people can come up with something that isn't completely lame. The current one just asks for the "well move somewhere else then" response.
    • Software (Score:3, Funny)

      by Animaether ( 411575 )
      There is, of course, the translations part.. translating Windows can't be cheap; though it surely can't be -that- expensive either.

      Note that Adobe and Autodesk also have vast price increases up to well over 2x as expensive; not including the 17.5% / 19% VAT that gets added on top. With the sucking U.S. dollar, that's only getting worse and worse. It'll be interesting to see if Adobe / Autodesk / etc. will adjust their non-U.S. pricing to adjust for this, as currently it is much cheaper to import from the
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Haeleth ( 414428 )

        There is, of course, the translations part.. translating Windows can't be cheap; though it surely can't be -that- expensive either.

        What translation? It's not like they offer Windows in Welsh or Gaelic.* Microsoft cares so little about Britain that they can't even be bothered to take five minutes to change "color" to "colour". No, I don't think they can claim translation costs are what's pushing the price up.

        * Yes, I know a Welsh interface pack does finally exist now, and a Gaelic equivalent is apparently

    • At the very top of the Wikipedia link:

      This article does not cite any references or sources.

      Shock, horror - some things are more expensive in some locales and cheaper in others. If you don't like it, put down the Daily Mail, stop whinging, and move.

      There are significant differences in prices and wages across the UK (and of course across the US and other countries as well). There are no inverse price restrictions ensuring that "iTunes Store songs" (there's a staple, obviously...
    • by 15Bit ( 940730 )
      Quit whining - i live in Norway. Britain is where i go for cheap shopping....
  • O2, not Apple (Score:3, Informative)

    by saterdaies ( 842986 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:34PM (#20687449)
    Looking at O2's website, we see this breakdown in plans: 200min plus 400 text: 25pounds 750min plus 100 text: 35pounds 1350min plus 100 text: 50pounds [] [] THESE ARE ONLINE-ONLY SPECIALS. One has to assume that the iPhone will cost 10pounds more per month than the normal plans (since they cost an extra $20 more per month over here). So, the iPhone charges 10pounds more at the 200min level (but you loose half the texts), 10 pounds more at the 750 minute level (loosing 150 minutes, but gaining 400 texts), and 5pounds more at the 1350 minute level (again loosing 150 minutes and gaining 400 texts). They MIGHT be a worse deal than the AT&T plans over here, but not by much. They're pretty much standard O2 rates plus 10 pounds. Since the AT&T plans are the standard AT&T plans plus $20, that's pretty equivalent. NOTE: In both cases, the premium you're paying for an iPhone plan is getting you unlimited data and so if you're already paying for that, you might not consider it an increase in fee at all.
    • by jrumney ( 197329 )

      the premium you're paying for an iPhone plan is getting you unlimited data

      Only its not. Its getting you "unlimited" data, which you'll use up if you view 1400 webpages in a day, according to the announcements at launch. Who knows how many "webpages" constantly polling for mail in background is going to use, but judging by the $25,000 bills that some US users have ended up with after roaming, its probably quite a few.

  • It's hard to imagine how a country that pays more for everything is surprised that the iPhone's service plan isn't the same price as the US version. Of course, that gives the ignorant shills an opportunity to spew such silliness as "Apple takes 40% of O2's revenues!!!" and other made up factoids.

    BBC Prints Irresponsible Rubbish on Apple []
    The BBC has joined the London tabloid press in printing a series of articles skewering Apple over invented suppositions based entirely upon misinformed speculation and some o
    • "It's not just the American media that is desperate to publish misleading or downright false information in attempts to prevent the erosion of existing barriers to innovation"

      But the iPhone doesn't innovate. It's actually an extremely limited handset that uses outdated connection formats at a time when people want 3G, picture messaging, video messaging and downloadable content. The nokia N95 does much more than the iphone and is several hundreds of pounds cheaper.

      "Apple takes 40% of O2's revenues!!!"

      The iPh
  • Steve Jobs is still mad at Gordon Brown because of that incident last month.
  • not comparable (Score:5, Interesting)

    by fermion ( 181285 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:39PM (#20687511) Homepage Journal
    I doubt that an arbitrary wireless plan in the US can be compared to an arbitrary wireless plan in Europe. For instance, the ATT plan allows free roaming around an approximately 3 million square mile area, as well as roll over minutes, and lots of free times. Saying that a UK plan does not offer such luxuries or that the US plan is cheaper makes no sense as the market features are not the same.

    There is nothing special about a Mac or iPhone or iPod. The Mac provides me a great deal of value, so I buy it. The iPhone does not provide the value that the additional costs would warrant, so I won't buy one. I think people miss this simple point when they complain about the price drop of the iPhone. Current users effectively spent $2000 for the phone. This amount of money meant that the phone must have had some significant value to them, especially those that bought the first week. The $200 discount then represents a mere 10% discount, and 10% is an exceptional price to become an early adopter. I was not an early adopter my normal tolarance for contracted costs is about a third of what Apple and ATT wanted.

    I hope we don't have to endure another year of moaning about the cost of the phone, or the cost of the plan, or the cost of early adoption. Those who have it find some value in it, and that is really all there is to it. Apple sells expensive machines, and those that need or want them buy them. Those that do not don't. If one needs or wants an iPhone, the costs will be worth it. Otherwise buy something else and apple will out the costs until it is low enough to attract the expected number of consumers.

  • by BlueParrot ( 965239 ) on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:43PM (#20687563)
    I'm sure the European commission will LOVE apple locking the iPhone to O2, and I'm sure they will LOVE how it will operate together with iTunes. I'm also sure the European market will LOVE that it has shoddy 3G support. Also, I'm sure the lack of big Telecom monopolies in most EU countries will make it just as successful to do this over here as in the US. Don't get me wrong. Apple will make money here. It just won't be because the iPhone or the price plan, or service, or provider will be any good, but rather because the marketing and the hype will be. In short, they are going to offer a very sucky deal combined with a massive marketing campaign, and a lot of idiots will think the iPhone is actually remarkably innovative, when it really isn't even equal to a lot of phones already on the European market.

    Then, if it actually does become a large success the EC will want to have something to say about the relationship between the iPhone, iTunes and the iPod, and also the deal with O2. If they actually decide to do something about it then a bunch of people who can barely find Europe on the map, let alone know anything about its legal history, will moan and accuse the EU of being partial against US companies, and as a result get flamed on slashdot [for great justice]. Politics at its finest...
  • Who cares? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 20, 2007 @04:46PM (#20687599)
    You're the douche who bought an iPhone.
  • You guys get free access to a nationwide wifi network! We here in the USA wish our iPhone plans included such a bonus.
  • The stated 'fair usage' limit in the article is a tiny 200Mb a month. It's possible to exceed that by downloading just 4 albums of music from the iTunes store!

    I can't see O2 being able to enforce such a ridiculous limit, it clearly falls foul of the UK's law that states unfair contract terms cannot be enforced.

Marvelous! The super-user's going to boot me! What a finely tuned response to the situation!