Carriers Object to Apple's Plans for Built-In iPhone SIM Even as GSMA Moves Forward

[MattInOz]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)

If apple does make built in sims it would suck. If you buy the unlocked version and want to travel with your iphone how do you change sims? you don't the micro sim cars is already a problem because you need to cut any Pay as you go card in order for it to fit. SO i see no good reason in making permanent sims.

Martin

www.locker314.com

Apple are proposing a software sim on built in hardware. So carriers could just load the information they need on to the built in sim and it would be like you've physically changed the sim as far as the network is concerned.

There is one problem though phone numbers how would people know which one to call you on if each sim profile has a different one. Maybe this is more for the LTE iPhone have two active sim profiles one for data which can change to get the best signal/deal. The other for your fallback phone account which will be connected to your number.

 

[fabianjj]

This is inevitably going to happen no matter how much European cell phone companies cry about it.

It is funny how everyone talks about how awesome they are and better then the American companies, yet they want to block the thing that really will free consumers form the companies.

People saying that this restricts movement or limits their freedoms simply don't understand it.

Well if this will be the future of all cell phones, then that means that in order to change the plan/provider on my phone i must go to the manufacturer to get the account settings changed, instead of just popping out the sim card and inserting a different one.

Or did I miss something? This really does seem like lrestricting my movement from different carriers or plans

 

[Daveoc64]

CDMA phones can be reprogrammed by the end user (provided you had the phones security code) to be moved to another compatible carrier.

Not always.

Some CDMA carriers don't allow you to use phones from other carriers on their network.

 

[wirelessmacuser]

I could see this reaction coming from miles away...

 

[coleridge78]

That's not the scenario that was being discussed.

I'm saying that in the UK, I can put the SIM from my phone into any other phone that works with it (i.e. any GSM or UMTS phone).

-I'm allowed to do that under the terms of my contract
-It's totally legal
-It's technically possible

The main reason I can do this is because I have the SIM in my hands. I can put it wherever I want to! With an electronic system, I have much less control.

It's already an electronic system, and you have exactly as much control as the law and the carrier allow you. Which, coincidentally, would still be the case under the proposal...

I think you're confused about the point here.

You said a non-removable SIM makes it easier to crack down on people using their SIM in another device. Quote:

Currently carriers don't really have any say in what you do with the SIM. If you put it in another phone, they might come up with a convoluted way of detecting that you've changed the phone and to contractually require you to take up a data plan, but other than that, they have no way to stop you doing it.

If you MUST tell them every single time you change your phone, then they have an opportunity to require you to accept new terms or to take additional tariffs.

I said, no, it doesn't, because they already can do that. Whether they choose to enforce it or not is a separate issue that won't change with different technology.

You replied:

No UK carrier that has the iPhone requires you to take a data plan. I can't find any evidence to the contrary on this forum or on Google.

Which was the root of the problem here, because it doesn't seem to have any discernible relation to your previous post. Care to clarify?

 

[rjohnstone]

Not always.

Some CDMA carriers don't allow you to use phones from other carriers on their network.

That is mainly a policy choice, not a technical one.

 

[Daveoc64]

I said, no, it doesn't, because they already can do that. Whether they choose to enforce it or not is a separate issue that won't change with different technology.

This is where I disagree. As I noted above, AT&T is one of the companies that has some input on the requirements that this new system would have. They currently enforce (very strictly) mandatory data plans with certain devices.

They would likely want to see something to enforce that added to this new system.

If that then became part of the spec, other carriers might see the feature as one they'd like to use as well. They wouldn't invest in it themselves, but as the feature is there they might as well use it.

DVDs had more copy protection and restrictions (like not allowing you to fast forward through the FBI warning) than VHS did. A new technology provides the opportunity to add additional "features" like this.

Which was the root of the problem here, because it doesn't seem to have any discernible relation to your previous post. Care to clarify?

The real issue is not whether you can use a SIM from one phone in another phone, but the reason why the network wouldn't want you to. In the US, that is AT&T forcing people to take a data plan with an iPhone. Other networks do it with similar devices.

If I wanted to use a SIM that didn't have an iPhone plan in an iPhone temporarily (say because my other phone was broken), would I be allowed to? Would the system be able to restrict this? If a carrier like AT&T suggests this sort of restriction during the consultation, then any carrier could use it.

 

[Daveoc64]

That is mainly a policy choice, not a technical one.

That's the whole problem!

This system would give carriers more freedom to impose policies like these that don't make any sense from a technical standpoint and that are harmful to consumers.

 

[Pared]

Something we already have today and with the added benefits of SIM swapping!

Sim swapping is pointless when:

-Phones are locked to their carrier
-There are multiple types of sims.

The rolling eye smiley was for nothing.

 

[samab]

That's the whole problem!

This system would give carriers more freedom to impose policies like these that don't make any sense from a technical standpoint and that are harmful to consumers.

You have a myopic world view.

The iphone's worldwide launch has taught one thing --- the level of competition in the carrier industry matters a lot more than these so-called policies.

Some of the most idiotic iphone plans come from countries with the least amount of competition. Norway (2 carriers). France (3 carriers). Canada (3 carriers).

Just look at France --- outlawing the iphone exclusivity agreement, have strict policy on when and how unlockings codes are given out. The French consumer is screwed simply because they have only 3 national carriers. They didn't auction a 4th license until December of last year (which the 4th carrier's network isn't functional yet).

You as a Brit is already screwed because your government allowed the industry to shrink from 5 national carriers down to 4 national carriers. Nothing is going to change that.

 

[coleridge78]

That's the whole problem!

This system would give carriers more freedom to impose policies like these that don't make any sense from a technical standpoint and that are harmful to consumers.

It would? Describe how. There seems to be an idea out there that because SIM cards and the handsets are discrete, the carrier doesn't know what handset you're using. But this is incorrect. They do, and whether they care or not is a policy choice that has nothing to do with the proposed system. They already have two very simple and effective means of enforcing any contractual restrictions: termination of service for the SIM in question, and/or fees. The new spec would not affect this.

Edit to add: I'm not saying *you* have this idea, precisely, just that a lot of people in this thread do and that seems to be the source of some confusion.

 

[Daveoc64]

It would? Describe how. There seems to be an idea out there that because SIM cards and the handsets are discrete, the carrier doesn't know what handset you're using. But this is incorrect. They do, and whether they care or not is a policy choice that has nothing to do with the proposed system. They already have two very simple and effective means of enforcing any contractual restrictions: termination of service for the SIM in question, and/or fees. The new spec would not affect this.

Edit to add: I'm not saying *you* have this idea, precisely, just that a lot of people in this thread do and that seems to be the source of some confusion.

At the moment, it's harder to restrict the use of SIMs in other phones. It requires extra effort on the part of carriers. There's nothing that they get "for free" that does it. If they really want to enforce their policies, there are additional systems that they can spend money on to do it (even then, you can never stop people doing it physically).

With this system, it would be inherently easier for them to do it - hence why I think more would deem it worthwhile to do so. If it was as easy as configuring a few settings, then many carriers with fewer resources would jump on board.

 

[coleridge78]

At the moment, it's harder to restrict the use of SIMs in other phones. It requires extra effort on the part of carriers. There's nothing that they get "for free" that does it. If they really want to enforce their policies, there are additional systems that they can spend money on to do it (even then, you can never stop people doing it physically).

With this system, it would be inherently easier for them to do it - hence why I think more would deem it worthwhile to do so. If it was as easy as configuring a few settings, then many carriers with fewer resources would jump on board.

I just think that assertion is unfounded. They don't have to "spend money" on systems to do what they do right now, inasmuch as they have to have those systems in place anyway for other business reasons. And we have no idea what they will get "for free" in the new scenario. I don't see evidence that it will be anything significant.

 

[Daveoc64]

And we have no idea what they will get "for free" in the new scenario. I don't see evidence that it will be anything significant.

Well, if you're asking them to move your account to a new device then they know the one thing you don't want them to!

 

[samab]

At the moment, it's harder to restrict the use of SIMs in other phones. It requires extra effort on the part of carriers. There's nothing that they get "for free" that does it. If they really want to enforce their policies, there are additional systems that they can spend money on to do it (even then, you can never stop people doing it physically).

With this system, it would be inherently easier for them to do it - hence why I think more would deem it worthwhile to do so. If it was as easy as configuring a few settings, then many carriers with fewer resources would jump on board.

The carriers don't enforce certain policies because of business reasons --- like how you Brits for the longest time thought incorrectly that you have simlocking laws that force carriers to give you unlocking codes.

You are screwed because 5 UK carriers shrank to 4 UK carriers. They are going to enforce a bunch of policies and terms of usage --- simply because there is less competition in the UK.

 

[samab]

Well, if you're asking them to move your account to a new device then they know the one thing you don't want them to!

They already know that because of IMEI.

Carriers in the past --- let it slide --- simply because there were more competition. Carriers in the UK knew that they didn't have to give you the unlocking codes --- they did it anyway because there were more competition and they didn't want to lose you as a customer.

 

[Daveoc64]

The carriers don't enforce certain policies because of business reasons --- like how you Brits for the longest time thought incorrectly that you have simlocking laws that force carriers to give you unlocking codes.

You are screwed because 5 UK carriers shrank to 4 UK carriers. They are going to enforce a bunch of policies and terms of usage --- simply because there is less competition in the UK.

I don't see how 4 is any worse than 5!? We had 4 networks until 2003 and competition was probably better!

It's not like the networks have ever differed on anything really. Pricing has always been about the same.

Coverage is about the only thing that each network has going for it right now.

Orange and T-Mobile are still competing with each other in various ways.

 

[pmjoe]

It is funny how everyone talks about how awesome they are and better then the American companies, yet they want to block the thing that really will free consumers form the companies.

Sorry, but I don't equate this in any way to freedom. Sounds to me like if you put this in software then both the carriers and the manufacturers will have more control over what we do. The carriers don't want this because it gives the manufacturers more control. The last thing consumers should want to do is give either of them more control (the carriers don't lose any control here).

I hate to claim that the physicality of SIM cards and the ability to move them between devices gives us more "freedom" (because the reality is that we could have equivalent freedom in software) - but it does do exactly that.

Some folks in this thread are banking on manufacturers working in the consumers' interests - they aren't.

 

[Jetaray]

I feel Apple’s motive for replacing a mechanical SIM card (one that can be physically removed) with a programmable chip is monetary and nothing more. A simple way to increase profits on the product it sells, the same reason they have made other changes in the iPhone. This is just good business practice.

Is it possible it could add a convenience for the customer? Yes. Is it possible the carriers could take advantage of a phone that can not be used with out its involvement? Yes. Currently a user can use an activated GSM SIM in any compatible unlocked phone. The only exception I know of in the USA is the Tracfone. Currently Tracfone SIM’s can only be used in a Tracfone phone.

Now take this scenario into consideration. I am an international travel who wants a cell phone but refuses to pay international rates when out of my home area. I purchase prepaid SIM at a fraction of the cost I would pay if I had to pay roaming international calling rates. Once I return home I simply place my original SIM in my unlocked phone. Now if I have a programmable SIM chip in my unlocked phone I simply call my carrier or do what ever the required steps are to activate my phone for use in the location I am in.

I think the fear about a programmable SIM chip is the fact you must now include the carrier in the process of activating and reactivating a phone when returning to their service area. This inclusion requires some type of action by the carrier be it an automatic system or physical action of the carrier. This process most likely will not be done for free, not because it cost a lot but because a few people will abuse the system (change locations and carriers every few days).

The truth of the matter is the majority of cell phone users could careless if their phone has a SIM card or a hardwired SIM chip. Those of us who learned how to enhance the usefulness of our phone by taking advantage of SIM card portability will most likely lose this convenience in the future, simply because we are the minority.

 

[amanset]

Sim swapping is pointless when:

-Phones are locked to their carrier
-There are multiple types of sims.

The rolling eye smiley was for nothing.

But phones are not always locked to their carrier. Here in Sweden it is quite simple to buy an unlocked phone - you just buy it from a retailer (example: Webhallen) without a contract or PAYG attached. Buying a phone as part of a contract is a convenience that spreads the cost of the phone over a period of time, but it is not the only way of buying a phone. As always, for convenience you give up a little freedom. Some people like this, some don't. As far as I am aware the only phone I have had over the past decade that has been locked was my iPhone 3G.

It is noticeable that just about the only manufacturer that doesn't allow this is Apple. All the other major ones - HTC, Nokia, Sony Ericsson and whatnot do. Check the Webhallen link above - can you find the Apple mobiles?

For me the real problem is trust. People here may disagree, but I do not trust Apple to let me do what I want to do - the way they have locked down the iPhone up until now is all the evidence I need. Right now if you have chosen (and it is a choice, as long as you don't want an Apple phone) to buy an unlocked phone then you can put whatever SIM in it that you choose. If we go SIM-less then an element of control is lost - it is trivial for Apple to add checks so that a phone cannot be used with a certain operator.

Apple are control freaks and, in my opinion, the idea that Apple wants to do something regarding contracts that makes it easier for the consumer is absolutely absurd. They would LOVE to be in complete control, the consumer at the mercy of their app as to whether they can connect to a certain network or not.

Regarding multiple types of SIMs, as far as I am aware (and I am prepared to be wrong) there are only two, the standard SIM and the new mini SIM. The mini is something that isn't that popular (I personally haven't even seen one yet - my HTC Desire certainly takes a "normal" one) and even then there is an adapter so that it can be converted into a "normal" SIM.

 

[amanset]

That is mainly a policy choice, not a technical one.

And the reason why that policy will not be continued in Apple's brave new world of the SIM-less phone is?

 

[amanset]

It would? Describe how. There seems to be an idea out there that because SIM cards and the handsets are discrete, the carrier doesn't know what handset you're using. But this is incorrect. They do, and whether they care or not is a policy choice that has nothing to do with the proposed system. They already have two very simple and effective means of enforcing any contractual restrictions: termination of service for the SIM in question, and/or fees. The new spec would not affect this.

Edit to add: I'm not saying *you* have this idea, precisely, just that a lot of people in this thread do and that seems to be the source of some confusion.

I am not saying you are wrong, but I honestly have never come across this in my life. I've never even heard of it until this thread.

Whereas I have heard of Apple restricting which carrier I can use my phone on, due to the contracts they do with the telcos. I really think that is what is worrying me - an app to change carrier puts the power in Apple's hands. The carriers themselves have proven to me that they are accepting of the movement of SIMs between phones. Apple, however, have proven to me that they'll do everything in their power to stop me using my iPhone 3G on whichever network I choose.

 

[samab]

I don't see how 4 is any worse than 5!? We had 4 networks until 2003 and competition was probably better!

It's not like the networks have ever differed on anything really. Pricing has always been about the same.

Coverage is about the only thing that each network has going for it right now.

Orange and T-Mobile are still competing with each other in various ways.

The iphone paradise is Hong Kong --- 6 carriers. It had an iphone exclusive carrier (until last year) and governmental policies allow simlocking --- but you know what? The iphone was sold completely unlocked and cheap.

The iphone's worldwide launch is a great source of information --- and often bursting the bubbles of long held belief.

Brits have better iphone deals than the French --- despite the fact the French outlawed iphone exclusivity and have explicit unlocking policies. The main difference is 5 national carriers vs. 3 national carriers. You go down to 3 national carriers --- you are in my country (Canada) with 3 year contracts.

It also bursted the belief that expensive 3G auctions would raise monthly tariff prices. Sweden and Norway gave their 3G licenses away for peanuts --- they have some of the worst iphone plans on the planet. UK had the highest 3G auctions on the planet, but have the cheapest iphone plan in the G7.

 

[Daveoc64]

The iphone paradise is Hong Kong --- 6 carriers. It had an iphone exclusive carrier (until last year) and governmental policies allow simlocking --- but you know what? The iphone was sold completely unlocked and cheap.

The iphone's worldwide launch is a great source of information --- and often bursting the bubbles of long held belief.

Brits have better iphone deals than the French --- despite the fact the French outlawed iphone exclusivity and have explicit unlocking policies. The main difference is 5 national carriers vs. 3 national carriers. You go down to 3 national carriers --- you are in my country (Canada) with 3 year contracts.

It also bursted the belief that expensive 3G auctions would raise monthly tariff prices. Sweden and Norway gave their 3G licenses away for peanuts --- they have some of the worst iphone plans on the planet. UK had the highest 3G auctions on the planet, but have the cheapest iphone plan in the G7.

I have one simple counter to this:

All five networks have roughly the same prices.

O2 has not changed its pricing since it lost exclusivity.

You seem to be suggesting that there was some sort of price drop once they lost exclusivity - that didn't happen. If anything, the other networks charge MORE than O2 did.

Competition DID NOT REDUCE PRICES!

Competition only works if you have someone willing to undercut the others. To do that, you need a lot of things to line up and I don't think with the iPhone Apple will allow that.

The networks don't really want to compete on price. That's not something they can win on.

They market themselves on:

-Coverage
-Quality of Service
-Additional Benefits (like Orange Wednesdays)
-Home Broadband services (O2 and Orange are doing well in this area)
-Customer Service

Every market is unique and trying to compare them doesn't generally work.

 

[samab]

All five networks have roughly the same prices.

O2 has not changed its pricing since it lost exclusivity.

You seem to be suggesting that there was some sort of price drop once they lost exclusivity - that didn't happen. If anything, the other networks charge MORE than O2 did.

Competition DID NOT REDUCE PRICES!

Every market is unique and trying to compare them doesn't generally work.

You started off with the wrong direction.

UK prices are already lowest in the G7 --- with or without iphone exclusivity. And it is the cheapest because UK was the only G7 country with 5 national carriers. My Hong Kong example clearly illustrates that --- Hong Kong (up until last year) had an iphone exclusive carrier, but it was the iphone paradise since day 1. Why would I care if Hong Kong has an iphone exclusive carrier?

Of course, the iphone plans would go up after O2 lost its exclusivity --- the UK carrier market just went from 5 carriers down to 4 carriers. Of course, other UK carriers would sell the iphone plans at higher prices, they have fewer competition now.

The iphone's international launch makes international comparison easy. You don't need to know Swedish or French or German to compare prices with other countries. It bursted long held bubbles about their laws and regulations. For example, some people still claimed so-and-so country has "broad" consumer protection laws that makes simlocked phones illegal --- I can just refute that by looking up the iphone sales in that country, and they sell the iphone simlocked. Which means ONLY one thing, simlocking is legal in that country and that these internet forum posters mis-understood these "consumer protection laws".