[Ragbert]

Wow, thank you so much for that articulate explanation, Troy. Being in the US, I've never completely understood until now why people in other countries can switch Sims around so easily, or can buy multiple phones cheaply and juggle their use at will. Or why their carrier service is so cheap.

What a racket the carriers run here! Buying a phone and cell service in the US is a major investment for many of us, in which we are trapped for 2 years. ::sigh::

Typed on my Q10, SQN100-2, 10.2.1.2141 :-)

[crazigee]

Wow, thank you so much for that articulate explanation, Troy. Being in the US, I've never completely understood until now why people in other countries can switch Sims around so easily, or can buy multiple phones cheaply and juggle their use at will. Or why their carrier service is so cheap.

What a racket the carriers run here! Buying a phone and cell service in the US is a major investment for many of us, in which we are trapped for 2 years. ::sigh::

Typed on my Q10, SQN100-2, 10.2.1.2141 :-)

It's much worse in Canada. Prices are much higher.

Posted using my Z10 via CB10

[Troy Tiscareno]

With older technologies (1G analog, and 2/3G digital), there are simply way too many users to serve with just standard GSM alone, at least without having to install a ton of low-powered/short-range towers all over the place to accommodate them, plus, CDMA offered some real advantages early on. But we are finally on track to move to a real, open, standardized service with LTE, which is an extension of GSM. In order for that to happen, voice calls will have to be moved off of legacy frequencies (GSM/CDMA) and on to LTE, via VoLTE (Voice over LTE, which is the cellular version of VoIP). That's going to start happening by the end of this year, but it will be another 3-4 years before most folks will have replaced their legacy phone with a phone that supports VoLTE, and the legacy tech can be turned off and the frequencies re-farmed for expanded LTE coverage.

With chipsets that offer 40-channel LTE already being available, it won't be long before phones support every LTE frequency, making it a non-issue to move a phone from one carrier to another, and because LTE is an extension of GSM, they require separating the authentication from the phone, via a SIM. We'll finally have inter-network mobility in the US that most of the rest of the world has enjoyed for over a decade already.

[Omnitech]

That's why the US carriers do such extensive testing, and make no mistake: they do it for ALL carriers, even Apple. The difference is that Apple submits their updates to the carriers and those updates contractually go to the front of the testing line, and only once all 4 carriers approve the update does Apple schedule a rollout. Apple's ability to do that isn't technical, it's contractual, and it's completely unique among phone manufacturers, because Apple had the clout do demand this and get it, because the carriers understood what a huge deal the iPhone was going to be for them. [...]

Apple just has a "fast-pass" to get to the front of the line immediately, and knows how to SHUT UP and not leak any info until all the approvals are in and they can do a world-wide rollout.

While I mostly agree with that post, I will add some things on Apple.

First of all, Apple has a very large direct-to-customer support organization, from their worldwide Apple retail stores, to their phone support team. This makes it much less of a burden on carriers for Apple to push updates on their own schedule because there is significantly less customer-support that a carrier would have to do for Apple customers if something went awry with an update, than it would have to do for a company like BlackBerry which has a very small direct support team and no company-owned retail presence at all.

Secondly, Apple is reputed to own and operate a complete RF testing lab, just like the ones large testing organizations run, and this allegedly allows them to pre-qualify many aspects of their device/SW performance and self-document this before they even submit a device for carrier testing, which probably shortens the process considerably.

As for having all the carriers pre-qualify OS updates, I doubt that's the case 100% for Apple because when they have had to release a security or safety patch in the past, they have been able to do it almost instantly (ie within a few days of bug reports) and I rather doubt the carriers are all going to drop everything else they are doing just to test Apple's latest quick-release patch. (Maybe they do, but I'd be surprised)

[RubberChicken76]

Its frustrating but the carriers are all bad for anyone besides Apple.

A lot of this had to do with Apple being heavy handed up front ... probably as a result of seeing how the carriers treat updates on other platforms. Initially, it was "AT&T, you want exclusives on the iPhone? You will agree to ...". Then when they took the iPhone to other carriers after AT&T was successful, they could say, "You want this fancy phone that AT&T has? You will agree to ..."

[Troy Tiscareno]

First of all, Apple has a very large direct-to-customer support organization, from their worldwide Apple retail stores, to their phone support team. This makes it much less of a burden on carriers for Apple to push updates on their own schedule because there is significantly less customer-support that a carrier would have to do for Apple customers if something went awry with an update.

Yes, exactly. I've mentioned this in the past - this was one of the other reasons that Apple was able to get the carriers to agree, and another BIG reason why no other manufacturer could get the same concession from the carriers - only Apple has such a network of stores to provide their own direct-to-customer support.

Secondly, Apple is reputed to own and operate a complete RF testing lab, just like the ones large testing organizations run, and this allegedly allows them to pre-qualify many aspects of their device/SW performance and self-document this before they even submit a device for carrier testing, which probably shortens the process considerably.

Samsung and Sony have these as well (that I know of), but I can't say for certain if Apple's testing is more comprehensive and/or tests everything that the carriers would, compared to the others. Still, it's another factor that gave Apple leverage, I'm sure.

Great points, Omnitech.

[joeldf]

I wonder if all the recent constant iOS 7 updates has been the cause of the delay in getting BB10.2.1 approved by the U.S. carriers.

If Apple gets to go to the head of the line, and they've been pushing a string of updates these last few months.


Posted via CB10

[jgrobertson]

BlackBerry was wrong in the US anyway.

Posted via CB10

[crazigee]

BlackBerry was wrong in the US anyway.

Posted via CB10

What does that even mean?

BlackBerry was a leader in the US just as they were everywhere else. They just made a series of critical errors.

Posted using my Z10 via CB10

[djdes10e]

Come on Sprint!

Q10. #Omaha

[all3n7]

Forget Sprint. Go to Sachesi. I just did my updates lastnight. It took an hour, but it so WORTH IT.!!!!


"Initiated from my Q10 "

[Carterbits]

Here's the deal:

In the US (and, yes, I know this is true in Canada, but only relatively recently true in Europe), phones are bought from the carrier (usually subsidized and on contract), and it is the carrier, not the manufacturer, who is responsible for providing after-sales service. Europe's history is mostly of buying your phone separately, and then taking it to a carrier for service, though that has changed someone with the rise of high-priced smartphones.

The point is that, because the carrier is on the hook for support in the US, US carriers are FAR more sensitive to phone issues, because it is they who have to pay for them. If a bad OS update rolls out and bricks phones, or causes, say, a reboot bug, they get thousands (maybe hundreds of thousands in some cases) of people coming into the stores demanding a new phone, or extensive troubleshooting, and that costs the carriers a ton of money, plus it distracts the sales reps from their primary job of selling new phones (and more importantly, contracts). The US market is huge, and is very demanding, so a problem with an OS update causes immediate, expensive "pain" for the carrier.

In countries where phones are mostly sold unlocked, if your phone breaks because of an OS update, that's between you and the manufacturer, or perhaps the retailer, which often is an electronics store rather than a carrier, so the carriers don't care nearly as much. Also, because most other countries are all GSM, if their phone has a problem, they can always switch their SIM to their old phone, or buy a cheap feature-phone to get them by until the issue is fixed (if it's a serious issue). This also takes the pressure off of the carriers.

The US is unique in another way in that we have 2 CDMA carriers, which don't use SIMs and can only be activated by a carrier on an individual basis, plus our 2 GSM carriers don't use the same frequency bands, so many phones can't be moved from one carrier to another. That means even more phone-to-carrier lock-in than in other countries, which then puts more onus on the carrier to resolve any issues with "their" phones.

That's why the US carriers do such extensive testing, and make no mistake: they do it for ALL manufacturers, even Apple. The difference is that Apple submits their updates to the carriers and those updates contractually go to the front of the testing line, and only once all 4 carriers approve the update does Apple schedule a rollout. Apple's ability to do that isn't technical, it's contractual, and it's completely unique among phone manufacturers, because Apple had the clout do demand this and get it, because the carriers understood what a huge deal the iPhone was going to be for them.

All the other manufacturers, with the sole exception of GSM (but not CDMA) Nexus phones, have to submit their OS updates to the carriers and wait for the carriers to complete testing and be put on the release schedule. That includes Samsung, HTC, LG, Sony, Motorola, ASUS, Nokia/MS, BB, and everyone else who isn't Apple. Folks here often seem to believe that only BB has to "suffer" through this process, when the truth is that all manufacturers do - Apple just has a "fast-pass" to get to the front of the line immediately, and knows how to SHUT UP and not leak any info until all the approvals are in and they can do a world-wide rollout.

Is it possible that the carriers prioritize their testing schedule? Yes, that's absolutely possible, and I believe it to be true; I'm sure that flagship phones from Samsung, HTC, Moto, and Sony (probably in that order) get priority over Nokia, BB, and other phones, because those are the (non-Apple) phones that make the carriers the most money. BB, being such a tiny percentage of marketshare, probably gets assigned a low priority, but if you were running the carrier, you'd probably make the exact same decision if you took your emotional ties to BB out of it.

The US cellular market is unique in several ways, as I covered above, and you simply can't compare them to other, all GSM countries where phones and carriers are easily separated. It's just not like that here.

Nice treatment of the topic =D

I'm planning to buy my next BlackBerry from shopblackberry.com if possible.

Download Noted, my 5-star rated, native BB10 notepad app.

[jeffbb10]

If only that were true, att still not out! Half way through March already and nothing but excuses from att.

Posted via CB10

[Jerale]

It's all "Supply and Demand". BlackBerry being the manufacturer is only a supplier. I have to say Troys post was pretty spot on. I hate to say this but I actually enjoyed reading his post.

Posted via CB10

[gruv4u]

AT&T is Tea-bagging their BlackBerry customers! The way BlackBerry is moving right now, it seems as though they have something up their sleeve. It looks like Mr. Chen is slow walking a plan. Hope it works! I still have an idea that BlackBerry hasn't thought about!!!

Z10 (STL 100-3) Superphone with vitamin 10.2.1.1925