![]() |
Re: RX-51 Tablet picture released at Engadget
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: RX-51 Tablet picture released at Engadget
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: RX-51 Tablet picture released at Engadget
Quote:
|
Re: RX-51 Tablet picture released at Engadget
Quote:
I know some of you don't like to hear that repeated, but I think there's also some of us that hoped Nokia would do something Internet-Tabletty--not cell-phoney. The maemo platform itself is quite fine and I'm increasingly happier with what the maemo group is doing. Don't mistake my disappointment for Nokia as disappointment for maemo. |
Re: RX-51 Tablet picture released at Engadget
Has Nokia been known for locking people into a contract with a carrier? I don't know, I'm not from the US and I've never owned a mobile phone. But my impression from reading the comments on this forum is that Nokia doesn't tend to play that game (and some people here say that it has hurt sales in the US)...
It seems to me that a Linux phone would be even less likely to be locked-in than a closed OS system, especially if the whole telephony stack is open, from the modem driver upwards. Looks like the UI is the only thing that won't be open, but we know that from the SDK. http://qole.org/images/oFono-architecture.png Again, I'm no expert here, and someone will probably point out that it is easy to lock down a phone even when everything is GPL like that... It just doesn't seem likely that they're going to be locking anything down, considering the direction Nokia is going with Maemo. |
Re: RX-51 Tablet picture released at Engadget
Quote:
|
Re: RX-51 Tablet picture released at Engadget
Quote:
Tim |
Re: RX-51 Tablet picture released at Engadget
Though there is an FCC investigation but I don't know if it'll change anything.
|
Re: RX-51 Tablet picture released at Engadget
I think all these kinds of tying arrangements are inherently anti-competitive. How can a small carrier compete? Just by virtue of its not being big, companies like AT&T and Apple (or Verizon and RIM, or ...) can make deals that exclude the small carrier. The small carrier ought to be able to compete head-to-head with AT&T on what they actually offer, on a piece by piece basis. All the carriers ought to be forced to offer a pure pipe, varying if they want on how much bandwidth is used; then they can all go head-to-head. Not forcing that on the carriers is inevitably bad for the consumers. Likewise allowing the carriers to force more than just pipe access on the consumers is anti-competitive.
If you had real Adam Smith capitalism, with hundreds of carriers, then some carrier would independently decide to offer a pure pipe as a means to compete against the ones who don't. But with only several carriers, there's an oligopoly and none of them find it worthwhile to compete that way, even if it's what customers most want. Instead they differentiate themselves by choosing what combination of crap they force on the consumers, and they make believe that's real competition. For many years, the American system generally has shown no interest in interfering with oligopolistic/monopolistic behavior, but it hasn't been so bad for a hundred years as it was under Bush. The current Supreme Court tilts pro-monopoly, too. Maybe under Obama things will get better. It's a better FCC for one thing. We can hope (with more reason than we had a year ago for hoping). |
Re: RX-51 Tablet picture released at Engadget
Quote:
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 13:04. |
vBulletin® Version 3.8.8