Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
U.S. Department of Justice Investigating Claims AT&T, Verizon and GSMA Colluded to Prevent Customers From Easily Switching Carriers [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I prefer physical sims. Without them there would have to be a governing body over it creating more regulation.
Additionally the manufacture can decide what companies it will support
Additionally the manufacture can decide what companies it will support
I am not aware of the iPad having an eSim. I was under the impression the iPad had whats called a universal sim that could be activated on any carrier if that carrier supported universal sims. Although you should still be able to use a traditional sim like the iPhone. But the Apple Watch does have a eSim and will lock to what ever carrier you activate it on first. Or at least that was how it was explained to me.
[doublepost=1524286918][/doublepost]
I prefer physical sims to as I switch between phones all the time. It makes it easy to just pop your sim from old phone to new phone with out having to call or go into a store. I use mostly apple products but have the Google Pixel 2 that I need to swap my sim into for one reason or another every so often.
Last edited:
This is somewhat true and may have been more true in the past. Most new top end phones (iPhones Samsung and Google) now come from the factory with GSM and CDMA antennas. The real problem is that your new phone may not support all the band withs from another carrier then the one is was bought for. I think thats the major problem at this point. While your phone might work on another carrier as long as it was unlocked by the original carrier it might sacrifice signal quality as it may not connect to all the bands for that new carrier. Also not all features may work like wifi calling, hot spoting, or voice over LTE. I have a Google Pixel 2 that I bought on Verizon I use on AT&T and for the most part no problems. Wifi calling for me is very minor and voice over LTE not a big deal as I don't make many phone calls off of that phone (used mostly for the data).
given that Apple is one of the groups that filed complaints, if they were a carrier it would probably be unlocked sims so if you left you didn't have to do a huge ordeal like at the other carriers. i mean crap like I pay off my phone with ATT and they wanna make me wait another 30 days to unlock it. I don't owe you a penny on that phone anymore, you better unlock it now
If you want to bring Steve back to life, put dual sim drawers on an iPhone. He will literally raise himself from the dead and beat Tim Cook and Jony Ive half to death.
Switching SIM cards is simple.
From my experience the carrier lock has always been on the actual phone. So switching the SIM card wouldn’t work because the phone itself was locked to the carrier.
Locking the phones themselves isn’t really unethical if you have elected to have your carrier subsidize the cost of your phone.
If you purchase your phone outright (as in full retail purchase up front), then the carrier has no right to lock the phone. And if it was locked by them before your purchase, I’ve always had them unlock it immediately after I pay for it. That’s never been a hassle. Even with AT&T.
After the actual phone has been unlocked (because I own it), I can switch carriers and SIM cards all day long. Nobody cares.
But, if you elect to have the carrier subsidize your phone, the reality is that you do not “own” the phone until you have completed your contractual agreement. That agreement usually stipulates that you will make payments of X amount for Z number of months while maintaining an active service for that phone with said carrier for Y number of months without being delinquent in your payments.
Until you have completed every part of the X Y Z agreement, you do not own the phone.
Once you do own the phone, every carrier I’ve ever dealt with has immediately agreed to unlock the phone if I ask them to.
I can then insert a SIM card (or switch SIM cards) any time I like, and use another carrier.
Sure an eSIM might be more convenient. But a standard SIM doesn’t make it difficult to change carriers. And it doesn’t increase costs. I have never paid for a SIM card. I’ve always had them handed to me for free. Obviously the carrier has to give you some method of connecting to them. So if you subscribe to their service, obviously they’re going to give you the card that makes it possible and leads to them getting monthly service payments from you.
[doublepost=1524293422][/doublepost]
Every iPhone I’ve ever seen for sale at Walmart or Best Buy has had the fine print that the advertised price is contingent on the buyer subscribing to one of the preferred cell phone carriers for service. So you’re locking yourself in at the time of purchase. Essentially the same as a subsidized phone purchase in contract terms.
If you want to avoid such terms, don’t buy it from someone who requires you to use a particular carrier as part of the purchase terms.
Either pay full retail at the carrier and have them unlock the phone for you. Or, buy an unlocked phone at full retail from Apple. And clarify with your carrier when you activate the phone that it is yours and you want it to remain unlocked.
The SIM isn’t where the magic is happening. The lock is a carrier lock on the phone itself at the time you activate service with the carrier.
I’ve never had a SIM cause my phone to become locked. But I have had carriers assume that they could lock a phone to their service until I pointed out that I brought the phone to them, that it is unlocked, and I have no contract obligations on the phone.
Until you own the phone with no outstanding small print terms hanging over you, you are essentially locked. But not by the SIM. You’re locked by the terms of the contract you agreed to. And they enforce that contract by locking the actual phone (not the SIM).
From my experience the carrier lock has always been on the actual phone. So switching the SIM card wouldn’t work because the phone itself was locked to the carrier.
Locking the phones themselves isn’t really unethical if you have elected to have your carrier subsidize the cost of your phone.
If you purchase your phone outright (as in full retail purchase up front), then the carrier has no right to lock the phone. And if it was locked by them before your purchase, I’ve always had them unlock it immediately after I pay for it. That’s never been a hassle. Even with AT&T.
After the actual phone has been unlocked (because I own it), I can switch carriers and SIM cards all day long. Nobody cares.
But, if you elect to have the carrier subsidize your phone, the reality is that you do not “own” the phone until you have completed your contractual agreement. That agreement usually stipulates that you will make payments of X amount for Z number of months while maintaining an active service for that phone with said carrier for Y number of months without being delinquent in your payments.
Until you have completed every part of the X Y Z agreement, you do not own the phone.
Once you do own the phone, every carrier I’ve ever dealt with has immediately agreed to unlock the phone if I ask them to.
I can then insert a SIM card (or switch SIM cards) any time I like, and use another carrier.
Sure an eSIM might be more convenient. But a standard SIM doesn’t make it difficult to change carriers. And it doesn’t increase costs. I have never paid for a SIM card. I’ve always had them handed to me for free. Obviously the carrier has to give you some method of connecting to them. So if you subscribe to their service, obviously they’re going to give you the card that makes it possible and leads to them getting monthly service payments from you.
[doublepost=1524293422][/doublepost]
Every iPhone I’ve ever seen for sale at Walmart or Best Buy has had the fine print that the advertised price is contingent on the buyer subscribing to one of the preferred cell phone carriers for service. So you’re locking yourself in at the time of purchase. Essentially the same as a subsidized phone purchase in contract terms.
If you want to avoid such terms, don’t buy it from someone who requires you to use a particular carrier as part of the purchase terms.
Either pay full retail at the carrier and have them unlock the phone for you. Or, buy an unlocked phone at full retail from Apple. And clarify with your carrier when you activate the phone that it is yours and you want it to remain unlocked.
The SIM isn’t where the magic is happening. The lock is a carrier lock on the phone itself at the time you activate service with the carrier.
I’ve never had a SIM cause my phone to become locked. But I have had carriers assume that they could lock a phone to their service until I pointed out that I brought the phone to them, that it is unlocked, and I have no contract obligations on the phone.
Until you own the phone with no outstanding small print terms hanging over you, you are essentially locked. But not by the SIM. You’re locked by the terms of the contract you agreed to. And they enforce that contract by locking the actual phone (not the SIM).
You basically said the same thing I did, however not all iPhones come with cdma anymore hence the iPhone 8 and X from T-Mobile and AT&T. Also, voLTE is data, so that should work anytime you have LTE. Verizon is really not much of a CDMA carrier these days as the majority of their voice is now voLTE. There is still of course the suppotted LTE band issue but an eSim is much easier to use than a physical sim. I love how easy it is to switch carriers with one.
You may not but maybe millions of foreigners living there or those that travel or those that have varying cell reception for example may
About.... Friggin'... TIME someone took these sleazy-Carriers to task for not using available eSims as an option! Old fashioned physical-sims are just another Revenue Enhancement and Subscriber-leash for them.
Aside from that... a physical SIM slide-tray and door (and the room they take up) is still another location for water to seep into. Even with the typical 'water-seals' you want to remove as many points of physical failure as possible.
Aside from that... a physical SIM slide-tray and door (and the room they take up) is still another location for water to seep into. Even with the typical 'water-seals' you want to remove as many points of physical failure as possible.
Last edited:
I don't think blocking the use of esims is such a bad thing and entirely getting rid of a physical sims isn't a better solution!
If an Esim was implemented purely in software, there might be issues with managing those contracts or deals from providers EVEN MORE SO than with current sim tech. Just imagine the abuse that could occur if old esims are deactivated for spite if you leave a provider or your provider requires you to not deactivate or switch from their esims as part of your contract.
I love the idea of getting rid of essentially dead space inside a phone but I'm not sure there are any tangible benefits to the consumer other than being able to have burner numbers, but it introduces issues with standards and practices. Users might be LESS inclined to switch carriers, especially if the software to switch and manage sims is complex and UI and process is different on each phone, keeping numbers is another issue. If you are to implement esims the whole system needs to shift and be updated at the same time. A bit like voicemail was on an iPhone imo.
If an Esim was implemented purely in software, there might be issues with managing those contracts or deals from providers EVEN MORE SO than with current sim tech. Just imagine the abuse that could occur if old esims are deactivated for spite if you leave a provider or your provider requires you to not deactivate or switch from their esims as part of your contract.
I love the idea of getting rid of essentially dead space inside a phone but I'm not sure there are any tangible benefits to the consumer other than being able to have burner numbers, but it introduces issues with standards and practices. Users might be LESS inclined to switch carriers, especially if the software to switch and manage sims is complex and UI and process is different on each phone, keeping numbers is another issue. If you are to implement esims the whole system needs to shift and be updated at the same time. A bit like voicemail was on an iPhone imo.
Tmobile uses SIM cards as a hidden upgrade fee when getting a new phone.
All these companies are shady.
ESim will win out in the end, even though it’s not too popular at the moment. Companies like Apple value space too much to continue using a wasteless piece of hardware in their phones.
SIM cards will be dead in two years. Glad the government is getting involved before the major push.
All these companies are shady.
ESim will win out in the end, even though it’s not too popular at the moment. Companies like Apple value space too much to continue using a wasteless piece of hardware in their phones.
SIM cards will be dead in two years. Glad the government is getting involved before the major push.
You're missing the point. Swapping the SIM isn't the difficult part (though it certainly is more annoying and time consuming than selecting from a list).
The hindrance is getting a new SIM in the first place. Imagine a world where you couldn't change your browser or default search engine without going to a store or waiting for the mail. Do you think that wouldn't affect competition?
This is especially true when traveling. If I go somewhere for a week, chances are I'm not going to research rates and find a place to buy a SIM. I'll just live with the outrageous roaming charges and limit my usage. But if it's just a tap away, I'll certainly do it.
Why? Is it so important that everyone walks in lock-step with everyone else? I think fully paid for phones should be immediately unlocked, they are the sole property of the owner. But I also don't believe that the way one country sells an item is automatically the best way for another to sell it. There are a lot of factors and costs that people here don't consider when comparing one country's practices with another's. Just because it works well in one area of the world doesn't mean it well somewhere else.
Can you imagine how cool it would be for your device to automatically scan for available networks and you would be able to switch and pay for service directly on your device? That would be too easy I suppose. I guess the network would also have to be broadcasting their info as well. Not sure how well that would work.
My verizon store must have been spoiling me. I bought all my phones on craigslist/apple last year (our foray into smart phones) and the guy not only gave me the sims for free, but he even popped them out of the credit card package. I went in three seperate times to get the sim cards without an issue. We just enabled the phones online. Most painless process ever. I even enabled a stolen phone on my account without problems! (Long story, beware craigslist phones).
I finally decided to go with Apples upgrade program. Its a tad more of a hassle having two separate payments instead of one... but i prefer having Apple be in control of the hardware purchase, and not being committed to any carrier.
The point is with physical sims you need to carry them without losing them or breaking them, etc. With Esims you can change your carrier multiple times a day based on changes in location, rate differences, poor reception, etc.
[doublepost=1524321896][/doublepost]
The issue is locking, not esim vs physical sim.
The carriers allegedly conspired to add esim locking to the spec (maybe something like what att does to the Apple sim in iPads. Once you turn on att you can no longer switch).
I think you are misunderstanding
no one is suggesting one way, simply that you may not have the same freedom of choice offered elsewhereThere is - they're called the Sherman Act, Clayton Act, and Federal Trade Commission Act, collectively known as the US Antitrust Laws. This investigation is occurring because of those.
You actually do own the locked phone. The lock-ness is just collateral for the loan.
Hmm. I thought it was a lake in a country ruled by England! Oh, they spell it different
.