Let me first begin with the fact that I look at things from a marketing perspective, and I apply the same generalizations Apple, Motorola, T-Mobile, and other PR departments of mobile/cellular companies use. Looking at the opinion article that Fandroid wrote, I feel I need to take the opposing side in defense of Motorola and Apple, of locking their handsets down and “protecting” consumers. I normally don’t agree with Motorola and Apple, but I am going to defend them because I am a child of dissent and argument, and I want to be flamed on my Twitter. So read on and Flame away.
The Motorola Atrix is indeed the current shining star of Motorola. It has all these features, like the dual-core processors, in hopes of future-proofing their device. Well, first off, the dual core processors aren’t compatible with every single app on the market (at this time). The threading processes will crash the app, limiting your Android experience to a handful of applications. As more and more phones feature and flaunt multi-core processors, the Atrix will, in time, shine brighter and brighter, and will hopefully last a year in the Android community before another company releases something bigger and better. I have to admit, Android devices have not been future-proof; something bigger and better was leaked/released/rumored every other week. Motorola is only trying to make their baby last a smidgen longer.
Now let’s look at MotoBlur. Its colorful, “pretty”, and a tad (I must admit) easier to navigate than the stock Android launcher for the average consumer. It’s not as commercially iPhone-esque as say, Samsung’s Touchwiz UI, but it’s a step towards the territory Apple staked out a few years ago when they released their iPhone. iOS is the basic of the basic, made for the everyday consumer, which is why just about anyone can pick it up and easily understand how it works. Motorola wants to dumb things down and appeal to the average consumer, not just to the typical phone geek like you and I.
Labeling the act of customizing a device as “unsafe” and attempting to prevent that in an excuse to “protect” the average consumer is proof to the fact that Motorola doesn’t want anyone to screw with their device. Motorola doesn’t want you to mess with the phone, they want it to “work” and be shiny at the same time. This applies to the iPhone as well. Apple doesn’t want you to screw around with their device, because according to them, it “detracts” from the total user experience that they’ve been advertising and flaunting around in their bleached white advertisements I see as I drive up Sunset Blvd.
We’re competing with Apple, people, a company that has a firm grip on the average person, and (apparently) 92% of the smartphone-using-employees at Clorox. And if the only way to attract the average consumer is to make a phone “pretty”, “shiny” and “easy-to-use”, then it looks like Motorola is doing the right thing.
Now the issue with Tethering is quite a black and white issue, because no one is truly right, and no one is wrong at the same time. Being a tether user myself, I can easily admit that it’s a fantastic feature that gets me Internet on my iPad 2 (flame away, nerds, I give you permission) while I’m at my grandmother’s house on the weekends. Regardless, the need for tethering is becoming lesser and lesser since WiFi-enabled areas are becoming a new trend all across the nation. Everything from coffee shops to burger joints are now offering free WiFi, so what’s the need?
One can argue that the cell phone companies are becoming exceedingly greedy when it comes to who gets the bulk of their data, and who doesn’t. T-Mobile issued a statement a few months ago saying that the top 5% of their data-enabled customers are using more than 7GB of data a month. Seven gigabytes of data, coming from upwards of 5 million users are using more than their “fair share” of data, consuming more data than a company can handle.
I’m sure you remember ATT going absolutely crazy trying to support the iPhone and all it’s data-intensive features. Back in 2007, YouTube on a cell phone was the next big thing, everyone wanted to watch Fred talk about his problems on a daily basis. It was cool, it was hip, and it was data intensive. ATT had to drop millions of dollars to try and support the new heavy data demand that the iPhone brought to the table. They weren’t able to make a profit until 2009, yes, 2 years after they started offering the first device, because they had to set up more and more radio towers with greater frequencies.
And now all the carriers are scrambling to update everything for the upcoming (so-called) 4G onslaught of phones that will be bombarding us Android fanboys this Summer 2011. Will they be able to handle the intense server strain that us users will be demanding from them? Or will everyone have intermittent data shortages due to server strain.
The carriers do have a point when they charge users a boatload who are blatantly abusing their phone’s capabilities–they are currently unable to support all this stress. Is it fair for a minority of users to hog up immense data, and everyone else suffers for it because carriers aren’t yet able to support all this data flow?
Let the masses plod on with their daily ignorance. Let them get what they paid for. Let them miss out on the loopholes that you and I have found and are mildly exploiting on a daily basis. Rules are meant to be broken by those who know how not to get caught, and loopholes are meant to be exploited by those who know how to apply common sense and logic to a set of rules. The rules were meant to have loopholes–read the fine print.
The statements I made above do NOT reflect my personal views on an open system and the current situation regarding rooting. This is merely an insight as to how these companies view us rooters, and how they function on a daily basis. Feel free to flame me on Twitter. Oh, and I typed this entire thing on my iPad while I was in class today.
About the Author
No. The problem isn’t that the carriers are charging us, it’s how they are charging us. I’m sure I’m in the majority when I say I would much rather pay a flat rate for unlimited everything that smaller fees for every little feature I do or do not choose to use.
Then, you would think the “majority” would be Sprint or T-Mobile, who do in fact have flat rate all you can consume plans. But obviously, this is not the case.
Well, I still want a strong network, lol. I just don’t understand why they have to make our charges as complex as the tax code
I think he is totally right on the majority of people wanting an unlimited plan, they just dont want a shitty network or dropped calls. Dealing with carriers is aleays a compromise.
And that is the point I was trying to make. We all have choices. Which compromise you pick is up to you.
Lol
I wouldn’t have a problem with the handsets being locked down if. . .
1. Android was optimally optimized on that handset to be as fast as it could be instead of putting a UI on it that makes it slow and what seems to be NO optimization at all sine the XDA community always one-ups the OEMS in performance and battery life.
2. I didn’t have a butt ton of useless apps forced on me that I can’t uninstall to reclaim much needed space.
3. I got timely updates and upgrades for AS LONG AS I OWN THE DEVICE or at least give me an option to pay a minimal fee to get the upgrades after a reasonable amount of time.
Apple at least makes sure that their device doesn’t ship with a butt load of bloat-ware, a slow OS, and they give timely updates and upgrades. . . .
There really is NO reason at all for OEMs to be selling devices with these 3 problems, yet the majority of Android devices do have these problems and the XDA community corrects them–why in the hell can’t OEMs do it right in the first place?
I was right with you… up until the “rules are made to be broken.” If you want to know WHY carriers want phones locked down (as opposed to mfrs, who want you to have their “pretty look”), it is because of the exploitation of these “loopholes.”
As I said previously, just because you do not agree with a carrier’s policy (standard disclaimer, I *don’t* agree with it, I do believe that 5GB of Data is 5GB of data, regardless of how it is consumed) does not give you the right to exploit a “loophole” to get around it. The “Robin Hood” mentality sounds great, but we all pay for the thieves, whether it is in the prices we pay, or the price we pay in having carriers force providers to lock down phones.
I have no problem with carriers charging foe data and I’m even willing to pay a tethering fee. My only gripe with a tethering fee is that If I pay for say 2gig of data per month..why does it matter how I use that set bandwidth they I pay for. Also T-mobile has unlimited but it isn’t really unlimited. After you hit the set data cap of 4gigs they throttle the hell out of you so once again why does it matter how I use the bandwidth I pay for?
I do however have a problem with companies who lock their devices because I own the phone. It would be one thing if the phone was leased to me as cable companies lease their cable boxes..but that is not the case. We as consumers pay $200 for a smart phone on top of signing up with the carrier for a 2yr period. Yes I realize I am getting the phone for less due to the 2yr contract…but then again how much do you think the carriers are paying for these devices….no where near what you pay for it with a 2yr contract let alone what they would charge you without a contract.
“…more and more radio towers with greater frequencies.”
“Greater” frequencies? What are you trying to say here? I’m not sure how that adjective could apply to a radio frequency.
As in the frequency of deployment.
But “greater”? Higher frequencies? More frequencies? Better frequencies?
OH, I see what you mean – putting up more towers faster. But is that what was meant here? It should have been “greater frequency” in that case.
“This person has protected their tweets”
Mmmmhmmm.
Yep. I’m a proud anal-retentive tweeter.
And just because my tweets are protected does NOT mean that you can’t do an @GoCkillaz in a standard tweet.
So, I’m guessing by the same idea, you CANNOT make any changes to your car?
Sorry, if I pay full retail for a device, I better d*mn well better be able to do with it as I please.
I’ve been an electronics tech for 35 years, ham operator for 21, computer for a little longer.
I know what I’m doing and it is MY device. The problem is that there are a ton of NOOBS that
will tinker into things they have no clue what they are doing, screw them up, brick the device,
THEN blame the carrier/manufacturer.
Why do I pay full retail? I want a carrier UNLOCKED device, designed, built and outfitted the way
the manufacturer intended, not the way Verizon/AT&T/t-mobile/sprint wants it to work with all of their
locked out features and bloated roms.
who cares if tons of noobs brick their devices…it would be easy enough for anybody who knows about the phone to determine the cause of bricking…lolz
It would be very easy for a provider to make customers awar of the fact that bricked devices due to failed flash/customization attempts of their phones will not be covered under any warranty. This will eliminate any problems the carrier has with moded devices because the rom I use or that apps I have loaded on my phone have zero ipact on the carrier. If the problem is that the carrier doesn’t have the resources to provide you with what you pay for then that is their problem and they shouldn’t be allowed to restrict the way you use your phone to cover up the fact that their network’s inadequacies. One more thing, just remember you were once a noob and we all have to start somewhere.
“Oh, and I typed this entire thing on my iPad while I was in class today.”
Hahahahahaha, that’s frigging classic.
good read. and viva the corporate lockdown to make more money to make better phones for us all!
I agree… great read, but the writer misses one fundamental point. Once you pay upwards of $400 for a device it should be yours to do with as you please, you can use it as a paperweight, tie it round a kitten’s neck to drown it, launch it in the air for skeet-shooting… because you now own it outright, the manufacturer no longer has a share in it. And neither does the carrier for that matter (regardless of the discount you received).
To illustrate the absurdity of the argument, this would be the equivalent of car company trying to ban customizations to a car once you buy it saying it somehow affects other car buyers, and then whatever local authority that manages your roads also stepping in saying that you cannot install 28in rims on your car because you will then be using more than your fair share of the road.