EU Regulators Questioning Carriers Over Apple's iPhone Contract Demands

[Sincci]

wait are you serious or is that just some sarcasm? You honestly think that if you buy an unlocked phone that its ok that you dont have LTE on it because that carrier is not an offical Apple partner? It's like you would buy a car and if you dont go to a certain gas station pump company your car would only go to 100km/h and no more. Seriously? No wonder Apple does these kind of stupid things if people like you think that this is completely normal.

Yeah, the "we need to test the networks first before we can enable LTE on them" excuse is just BS. I find it hard to believe that Apple is the only manufacturer who needs to test their phones on all european lte networks separately before they can approve it while every other manufacturer have no issues with those networks (and how can you actually test the performance/coverage properly if you can't even support all the necessary bands to begin with..). Even if there were some issues with the network, it's really not Apple's problem and if the customer still wants to use his/her phone on such network then it's their own problem. And really, if Apple would really care about customer's experience with 2g/3g/lte networks, they wouldn't have released the iPhone on any US operators in the first place

 

[69650]

Apple should stop selling in Europe all together. Screw the EU and their ********* tactics. Then you'd see a true European revolution by the people.

Revolution? LOL. They'd just buy their phones, tablets and computers from somebody else instead. In the end the customer is always king.

 

[Verbatim Cookie]

People will not rise up for anything anymore...

Arab Spring? And in Europe, most recently, Stockholm.

 

[Daveoc64]

Apple should stop selling in Europe all together. Screw the EU and their ********* tactics. Then you'd see a true European revolution by the people.

Apple's not doing that well here.

Consumers in Europe aren't swayed purely by Apple's marketing - they often look at specs vs. cost. The iPhone is simply more expensive than alternative products, appears to do less and has lost a lot of its "cool" factor

----------

Why has Apple only allowed O2 in the UK to enable and support visual voicemail?

It's actually the exact opposite.

Apple always used to force carriers to offer Visual Voicemail, but when they started dropping exclusivity agreements, they dropped that requirement.

Three and Vodafone have always stated that it would cost them too much to implement.

Orange/T-Mobile took a similar stance until recently.

----------

I don't think there's anything wrong,you buy an unlocked phone but you know certain features are only on official carriers.

Why?

That's not the case with any other product on the market?

Where exactly are people supposed to find these things out?

 

[DMH3006]

wait are you serious or is that just some sarcasm? You honestly think that if you buy an unlocked phone that its ok that you dont have LTE on it because that carrier is not an offical Apple partner? It's like you would buy a car and if you dont go to a certain gas station pump company your car would only go to 100km/h and no more. Seriously? No wonder Apple does these kind of stupid things if people like you think that this is completely normal.

If the phone only supports a certain number of LTE bands and the carrier doesn't use those what do you expect Apple to do? create a specific version for each carrier? Its an hardware limitation for most cases,besides if you bought it unlocked im sure you can sign up for PAYG plan on a supported carrier and get LTE,issue solved.

Drop the all is owed because its unlocked,its unlocked but certain features are exclusive to certain carriers. same as FaceTime over cellular not working on AT&T for all users and hotspot functionality.

 

[Daveoc64]

If the phone only supports a certain number of LTE bands and the carrier doesn't use those what do you expect Apple to do? create a specific version for each carrier? Its an hardware limitation for most cases,besides if you bought it unlocked im sure you can sign up for PAYG plan on a supported carrier and get LTE,issue solved.

Nobody is talking about hardware limitations. These are artificially-imposed software limitations.

Drop the all is owed because its unlocked,its unlocked but certain features are exclusive to certain carriers. same as FaceTime over cellular not working on AT&T for all users and hotspot functionality.

Pretty terrible examples - those sorts of features are rarely blocked in Europe.

 

[DMH3006]

Apple's not doing that well here.

Consumers in Europe aren't swayed purely by Apple's marketing - they often look at specs vs. cost. The iPhone is simply more expensive than alternative products, appears to do less and has lost a lot of its "cool" factor

----------



It's actually the exact opposite.

Apple always used to force carriers to offer Visual Voicemail, but when they started dropping exclusivity agreements, they dropped that requirement.

Three and Vodafone have always stated that it would cost them too much to implement.

Orange/T-Mobile took a similar stance until recently.

----------



Why?

That's not the case with any other product on the market?

Where exactly are people supposed to find these things out?

How about on the iPhone box where it says LTE is only available on certain carriers? or is too much for people to be informed on what they're buying,dear god you're making a purchase you're supposed to know what you're buying or do most people just look and buy at things without gathering information/comparing with other devices?

 

[Daveoc64]

How about on the iPhone box where it says LTE is only available on certain carriers? or is too much for people to be informed on what they're buying,dear god you're making a purchase you're supposed to know what you're buying or do most people just look and buy at things without gathering information/comparing with other devices?

It does not explain that Apple artificially limits the product so that it will not work in scenarios that the box (and Apple's website) says should work.

Apple is the sole manufacturer in the world that does this.

It really is just indefensible.

 

[DMH3006]

It does not explain that Apple artificially limits the product so that it will not work in scenarios that the box (and Apple's website) says should work.

Apple is the sole manufacturer in the world that does this.

It really is just indefensible.

where did they limit a product where they say it works and it doesn't?

They say it works with GSM carriers,do you not get a signal and HSDPA? they never said LTE worked on any carrier,this a new LTE/Unlocked-gate or something?

On my iphone 5 box it clearly states that LTE may not be compatible or available on the carrier.

 

[Daveoc64]

where did they limit a product where they say it works and it doesn't?

They say it works with GSM carriers,do you not get a signal and HSDPA? they never said LTE worked on any carrier,this a new LTE/Unlocked-gate or something?

They provide a list of specifications, as we've already noted, no other phone ever produced does this, why should consumers be expected to go out of their way to check what Apple does and does not permit?

Why is it ok for someone to use the phone on any GSM or UMTS network without Apple approving it first?

They've decided that we can use the phone on any GSM or UMTS carrier, but not an LTE one. Why? Why is there a double standard? Why should consumers be expected to know this?

Often with this sort of thing, "supported" simply means that you can go into a shop and get help with it, not that the manufacturer designs the product to prevent anything other than that working.

 

[retroneo]

The carriers in question use 1800MHz, and Apple supports LTE using the iPad on these carriers - but not the iPhone.

The iPhone 5 works perfectly using LTE on these carriers when a carrier profile containing the LTE setting is installed, however Apple has only enabled it for the iPad for an unknown reason.

 

[Swift]

This should be front page news instead of some home button part leak, or an analyst taking ********.

You can bet that under the surface, there's a lot of dirty tactics going on, that you as consumer should be aware of.

Indeed. On all sides, I'm quite sure. But Apple has become a piñata.

I can't say much about Europe, because I don't know what overall conditions are. What would they be doing that is unfair to the public? What might create monopolistic behavior? Dunno. Requiring a certain size purchase to acquire the phone? I think that's a business deal. You'll find that it's worked out for the networks. Their iPhone sales were huge, and they still are. Probably, the competition is tighter now, so they'll lose some of the premium. I'll tell you, consumers are better off because Apple was high-handed with the networks. The devices are the kings. The networks are a commodity.

 

[Daveoc64]

Indeed. On all sides, I'm quite sure. But Apple has become a piñata.

I can't say much about Europe, because I don't know what overall conditions are. What would they be doing that is unfair to the public? What might create monopolistic behavior? Dunno. Requiring a certain size purchase to acquire the phone? I think that's a business deal. You'll find that it's worked out for the networks. Their iPhone sales were huge, and they still are. Probably, the competition is tighter now, so they'll lose some of the premium. I'll tell you, consumers are better off because Apple was high-handed with the networks. The devices are the kings. The networks are a commodity.

You're applying traits of the US market to Europe.

It just doesn't work.

Consumers have higher expectations here, prices are lower, carrier policies are more flexible.

Other manufacturers are either more Europe-centric or can just cope better with these different approaches to both business and technology.

 

[Laird Knox]

It seems not a day goes by that APPLE isn't under the microscope somewhere.
An excellent incentive to run the company squeaky-clean. What other company could stand this kind of intense scrutiny? Go

I work in a heavily regulated industry and what I find humorous is that, for us, things are much more lax in the EU than in the US.

 

[JAT]

Why are the 'telcos' evil and Apple are not?

I do not understand how you can label one Corporation evil over another, when the ethos of a corporation is to capitalise on anything and everything.

Anyway..., did we not spend last week debating and then being forced to concede that Apple and other corporations can anything they want, whether it is morally reprehensible or otherwise, as long as they do so within the law?

Therefore, if Apple or any other company has breached an EU competition law they should not be above it.

----------



Exactly.

Why has Apple only allowed O2 in the UK to enable and support visual voicemail?

I can tell you are from Europe, even without the note under your name. You obviously are not familiar with the conniving ripoff artists that are USA cellular companies.

Hating Apple must bring such joy to people like you. Glad you have something.

 

[AppleMark]

I can tell you are from Europe, even without the note under your name. You obviously are not familiar with the conniving ripoff artists that are USA cellular companies.

Hating Apple must bring such joy to people like you. Glad you have something.

The original poster made a ridiculous blanket claim, that somehow telecoms companies were evil because they were somehow taking business away from Apple and giving power to 'Android'. You are just as ridiculous if you feel this way.

Hence my question, as to why is one corporation more 'evil' on this basis? All companies will screw everybody for what they can get away with, Apple are no different.

Unlike you (appear to be) and many others, I am not a mindless fanboy and will post accordingly to my point of view, even if this is not favourable to Apple and it's religious followers.

But do I hate Apple? No, but I am amused by your baseless assumption otherwise. LOL'

 

[j_maddison]

Indeed. On all sides, I'm quite sure. But Apple has become a piñata.

I can't say much about Europe, because I don't know what overall conditions are. What would they be doing that is unfair to the public? What might create monopolistic behavior? Dunno. Requiring a certain size purchase to acquire the phone? I think that's a business deal. You'll find that it's worked out for the networks. Their iPhone sales were huge, and they still are. Probably, the competition is tighter now, so they'll lose some of the premium. I'll tell you, consumers are better off because Apple was high-handed with the networks. The devices are the kings. The networks are a commodity.

The main thing to note about the EU is that they are not elected. They actually stole money from the people in Cyprus recently, not the government the actual people by taking it out of their bank accounts.

Just imagine the States with local government and then a totally unelected Federal government ........ That's what the EU is

----------

Why are the 'telcos' evil and Apple are not?

I do not understand how you can label one Corporation evil over another, when the ethos of a corporation is to capitalise on anything and everything.

Anyway..., did we not spend last week debating and then being forced to concede that Apple and other corporations can anything they want, whether it is morally reprehensible or otherwise, as long as they do so within the law?

Therefore, if Apple or any other company has breached an EU competition law they should not be above it.

----------



Exactly.

Why has Apple only allowed O2 in the UK to enable and support visual voicemail?

I think you'll find all of the carriers are allowed to offer it, they chose not to. EE have just launched it, but are refusing to offer it on T mobile for example.

Visual voice mail requires investment at the network level, Voda, 3, Orange, and T mobile refused to make the investment. Your statement is untrue.

 

[Frado]

The main thing to note about the EU is that they are not elected. They actually stole money from the people in Cyprus recently, not the government the actual people by taking it out of their bank accounts.

Just imagine the States with local government and then a totally unelected Federal government ........ That's what the EU is

You should tell the whole story.. Savings accounts in Cyprus sometimes got up to 15% profit, vs 1-2% in the rest of all the EU countries. People could have expected this, it was only a matter of time before the bubble bursted
So you think it would have been better if they cut off Cyprus, going out of the EU and go back to their original currency? THEN you would actually see money being taken from the local people.

Ah well, I don't expect Americans to understand Europe. It's too different. But I know I'll take the EU over USA any time, consumer is better protected and you can fall back on something when you get sick/.... Downside ofcourse being that you will always have abuse of that system.

Anyways, reply to few posts above me: the iPhone in Europe is an international model with a few LTE bands, it's not a hardware limitation, it's just limited by Apple because they won't sign those carrier profiles.

And yes, that 'testing network' story is BS, the official carrier here has worse LTE coverage and they are supported. It's all about contracts and moneyz

 

[j_maddison]

You should tell the whole story.. Savings accounts in Cyprus sometimes got up to 15% profit, vs 1-2% in the rest of all the EU countries. People could have expected this, it was only a matter of time before the bubble bursted
So you think it would have been better if they cut off Cyprus, going out of the EU and go back to their original currency? THEN you would actually see money being taken from the local people.

Ah well, I don't expect Americans to understand Europe. It's too different. But I know I'll take the EU over USA any time, consumer is better protected and you can fall back on something when you get sick/.... Downside ofcourse being that you will always have abuse of that system.

Anyways, reply to few posts above me: the iPhone in Europe is an international model with a few LTE bands, it's not a hardware limitation, it's just limited by Apple because they won't sign those carrier profiles.

And yes, that 'testing network' story is BS, the official carrier here has worse LTE coverage and they are supported. It's all about contracts and moneyz

It isn't for me to question what a country does in their own state. They're free to give as much interest as they like, the point is that it's not democratic to take money from people if they haven't voted for you.

While the alternative might have been worse, it should have been the choice of the Cypriot people, not a choice that was taken out of their hands.

 

[Oletros]

Of course they can't,Apple probably signed exclusivity agreements with those carriers,same as AT&T until the launch of the iPhone 4 Verizon.

No, it has nothing to do with exclusive agreements. By the way, locking smartphone to just some carriers with unlocked phones is not legal in Europe

 

[Frado]

It isn't for me to question what a country does in their own state. They're free to give as much interest as they like, the point is that it's not democratic to take money from people if they haven't voted for you.

While the alternative might have been worse, it should have been the choice of the Cypriot people, not a choice that was taken out of their hands.

As far as I know they imposed a tax for accounts with + 100 .000 euro in the accounts ,targeting people who put their money in Cyprus but don't actually live there.

I think it's normal that the EU wants to see some change when they give a 10 billion bailout.
The government ( elected) had a choice to fix the crisis, if they decided to accept the EU bailout they also accepted the demands from the EU.

 

[Oletros]

If the phone only supports a certain number of LTE bands and the carrier doesn't use those what do you expect Apple to do? create a specific version for each carrier? Its an hardware limitation for most cases,besides if you bought it unlocked im sure you can sign up for PAYG plan on a supported carrier and get LTE,issue solved.

It has nothing to do with not supported bands.

----------

where did they limit a product where they say it works and it doesn't?

They say it works with GSM carriers,do you not get a signal and HSDPA? they never said LTE worked on any carrier,this a new LTE/Unlocked-gate or something?

On my iphone 5 box it clearly states that LTE may not be compatible or available on the carrier.

LTE is compatible and available and the iPhone won't conenct.

 

[Smartass]

If the phone only supports a certain number of LTE bands and the carrier doesn't use those what do you expect Apple to do? create a specific version for each carrier? Its an hardware limitation for most cases

Hardware limitation? It's not a hardware limitation, it's just Apple being Apple and screwing everybody else except for those few operators with whom they had a deal before the launch and nothing more.

besides if you bought it unlocked im sure you can sign up for PAYG plan on a supported carrier and get LTE,issue solved.

And thats where the main problem lays - people are forced to go to the "apple-friendly" carrier just because they bought a phone that was marketed as an LTE device but in reality it really isnt so.

Drop the all is owed because its unlocked,its unlocked but certain features are exclusive to certain carriers. same as FaceTime over cellular not working on AT&T for all users and hotspot functionality.

I wouldnt say if Facetime or any other crappy and useless feature would be an exclusive to a carrier - let them have it. But LTE, which is the new standard for high speed data transfer being exclusive only to certain carriers just because Apple can afford to "forget" adding one more LTE band (even thought we all know that they can turn it on any time via software) to the phone? Well in this age there really isnt any good excuse for this other than having exclusive deals with certain carriers and limiting the competition.
Just imagine how pissed people would be when they bought iPhone 3G and only then they would realize that it doesnt support their network because Apple doesnt have a deal with their operator. Fortunately for Apple 90% of people still dont know anything about LTE and what it does.

 

[Mackan]

Indeed. On all sides, I'm quite sure. But Apple has become a piñata.

I can't say much about Europe, because I don't know what overall conditions are. What would they be doing that is unfair to the public? What might create monopolistic behavior? Dunno. Requiring a certain size purchase to acquire the phone? I think that's a business deal. You'll find that it's worked out for the networks. Their iPhone sales were huge, and they still are. Probably, the competition is tighter now, so they'll lose some of the premium. I'll tell you, consumers are better off because Apple was high-handed with the networks. The devices are the kings. The networks are a commodity.

Everyone is striving for control, that benefits their business. So shifting control from a company to another company may just give the same end result. I am not sure the consumer will ever benefit here... All companies just want our money, nothing more.

For example, now they carriers need to enter an agreement with Apple before LTE can be enabled on the iPhone for that carrier's network.

I thought that LTE produced cell phones are compatible with LTE networks. I mean, that's how they are tested according to specification, or how could they otherwise be approved for production?

But now Apple suddenly controls this, via a software update. What is the reason for this?

Actually, I will quote another person below here:

This i've noticed that also, you cannot use LTE with my operator since apple didnt "approve it" (because they're not selling iphones). How dumb is that, year 2013 and you need an "apple approved operator" so you can have LTE on your phone?

 

[j_maddison]

As far as I know they imposed a tax for accounts with + 100 .000 euro in the accounts ,targeting people who put their money in Cyprus but don't actually live there.

I think it's normal that the EU wants to see some change when they give a 10 billion bailout.
The government ( elected) had a choice to fix the crisis, if they decided to accept the EU bailout they also accepted the demands from the EU.

I did give a one sided view yes, but many Cypriot citizens were caught up in the cross fire. While it could be argued that the ends justified the means, the way it was done and by an unelected body didn't give me much faith in the system. It set a dangerous precedent.