• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Why is usa last?

It's because in most countries, Samsung can release an unlocked version, whereas in the US they can only release carrier-subsidized versions. Verizon and AT&T aren't just the two largest wireless carriers within the US. They are also the two largest (money spent) lobbyist groups. They write most of the US's telecommunications laws. As such, if you want to sell phones in the US, you have to get permission from a carrier.
 
Medion said:
It's because in most countries, Samsung can release an unlocked version, whereas in the US they can only release carrier-subsidized versions. Verizon and AT&T aren't just the two largest wireless carriers within the US. They are also the two largest (money spent) lobbyist groups. They write most of the US's telecommunications laws. As such, if you want to sell phones in the US, you have to get permission from a carrier.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I didn't realise us was so different. Imagine, letting the cell phone companies write the telecommunications laws. Somewhat like the pigs in Animal Farm.
 
Lol. Just like the oil companies being in the committee/board (I forget what it's called) that legislates what engines are safe to be used in automobiles.
 
America gets its share of handsets earlier than the rest of the world quite often too, and also gets a number of exclusive handsets. I'm sure Samsung would love to release it early in the States also, but there are barriers there as mentioned earlier.
 
1st, they have to redesign the phone for each carrier.
2nd, each carrier have to add all there bloat-ware.

If you are a ATT customer, i would buy the international version( faster updates and orginal design and no carrier bloatware
 
tvp2411 said:
1st, they have to redesign the phone for each carrier.
2nd, each carrier have to add all there bloat-ware.

If you are a ATT customer, i would buy the international version( faster updates and orginal design and no carrier bloatware
Click to expand...

It would cost a lot more but it'll be worth it.
 
tvp2411 said:
1st, they have to redesign the phone for each carrier.
2nd, each carrier have to add all there bloat-ware.

If you are a ATT customer, i would buy the international version( faster updates and orginal design and no carrier bloatware
Click to expand...

Forget that. I'd rather get the subsidy and root it. I mean, if I'm paying the monthly rate for data, I might as well be getting the device at a deep discount.
 
Actually that is not true. Samsung could sell an unlocked unsubsidized phone in the US without any carrier's permission.

It's just not seen as a wise business decision by Samsung because people think it's the only way...lol illegal or ignorance. So they do have cater to the dealers(carriers) demands....;-) Plus throw in the major differences between the carries(GSM, CDMA, Frequencies) and you have issues.

HP, Nokia, and Motorola have phones sold in the US unsubsidized without a contract not even in the with carrier's blessings. Most people however frown at these 300, 400, 500, or even 600+ dollar prices for a phone.

I myself had a Nokia that was never sold by at&t and noooo it wasn't an import. It was sold here in the US with a US warranty and designed to work on at&t's 3G frequencies. at&t had no problem with me using it. If the FCC says it's OK then that is about it.

It is just the mind set of American's. You buy your cell phones from the carriers that provide the service and you get it cheap...... Most people think that 99 dollars for that phone is the real price and if you told them it really cost 399 they would slap you in the face.
 
when it comes to cell phones america has always been last... with the exception of the iphone and droid
 
phoenixms said:
Actually that is not true. Samsung could sell an unlocked unsubsidized phone in the US without any carrier's permission.

It's just not seen as a wise business decision by Samsung because people think it's the only way...lol illegal or ignorance. So they do have cater to the dealers(carriers) demands....;-) Plus throw in the major differences between the carries(GSM, CDMA, Frequencies) and you have issues.

HP, Nokia, and Motorola have phones sold in the US unsubsidized without a contract not even in the with carrier's blessings. Most people however frown at these 300, 400, 500, or even 600+ dollar prices for a phone.

I myself had a Nokia that was never sold by at&t and noooo it wasn't an import. It was sold here in the US with a US warranty and designed to work on at&t's 3G frequencies. at&t had no problem with me using it. If the FCC says it's OK then that is about it.

It is just the mind set of American's. You buy your cell phones from the carriers that provide the service and you get it cheap...... Most people think that 99 dollars for that phone is the real price and if you told them it really cost 399 they would slap you in the face.
Click to expand...

I like your thinking, but this isn't entirely accurate. First off, CDMA requires whitelisting ESN's. A CDMA handset could be sold free and clear in the US, but Sprint and Verizon could simply refuse to allow the ESNs to be activated on their networks. Now you've got a lot of expensive bricks in your warehouse. AT&T and T-Mobile, on the other hand, could easily be used with unlocked units. But now you have a problem with the existing system where if Samsung just says, "hey, we're going to sell the GSII unlocked", now you have rubbed the biggest carrier in the country the wrong way. Good luck with future business. Yes, the smartphone is still up and coming, but Samsung sells a lot of basic and feature phones. A carrier like AT&T holds the threat of pulling ALL Samsung offerings which would hurt business. What you really need is a nationwide carrier that doesn't offer handsets, but rather SIM cards and subscription services on a BYOD basis. Here's the problem: what upstart can do this and provide nationwide service in a country that's bigger than all of Europe? There's a reason why it's easy to do this in other parts of the world. The countries are either A) the size of a US state, or B) the population is concentrated to certain areas (see China, Canada). The US is absolutely unique in its size combined with its population distribution. It has taken nearly a decade for Verizon to build out a nearly nationwide 3G network. While AT&T is nationwide, their HSPA network seriously pales in comparison to Verizon's. That's the sparsely colored blue map you see Verizon throwing up next to their near-blanket red one. AT&T's 98% coverage includes a lot of EDGE or GPRS-only coverage.
 
kyler13 said:
I like your thinking, but this isn't entirely accurate. First off, CDMA requires whitelisting ESN's. A CDMA handset could be sold free and clear in the US, but Sprint and Verizon could simply refuse to allow the ESNs to be activated on their networks. Now you've got a lot of expensive bricks in your warehouse. AT&T and T-Mobile, on the other hand, could easily be used with unlocked units. But now you have a problem with the existing system where if Samsung just says, "hey, we're going to sell the GSII unlocked", now you have rubbed the biggest carrier in the country the wrong way. Good luck with future business. Yes, the smartphone is still up and coming, but Samsung sells a lot of basic and feature phones. A carrier like AT&T holds the threat of pulling ALL Samsung offerings which would hurt business. What you really need is a nationwide carrier that doesn't offer handsets, but rather SIM cards and subscription services on a BYOD basis. Here's the problem: what upstart can do this and provide nationwide service in a country that's bigger than all of Europe? There's a reason why it's easy to do this in other parts of the world. The countries are either A) the size of a US state, or B) the population is concentrated to certain areas (see China, Canada). The US is absolutely unique in its size combined with its population distribution. It has taken nearly a decade for Verizon to build out a nearly nationwide 3G network. While AT&T is nationwide, their HSPA network seriously pales in comparison to Verizon's. That's the sparsely colored blue map you see Verizon throwing up next to their near-blanket red one. AT&T's 98% coverage includes a lot of EDGE or GPRS-only coverage.
Click to expand...

Thanks. The point I was trying to make is that it's not illegal but almost impossible. Carriers control coupled with the US market mindset and well you know.

With that said....I have found at&t to be the most welcoming with this route. The last two phones I have owned were Nokia models that were sold here in the US(not by at&t) with warranties mind you. at&t was also selling Nokia models at the time also some even being the same model. at&t even assisted me with an MMS issue once.

I wish I could see a unlocked SGII but I doubt it. Like he said Samsung really doesn't want to Rub at&t the wrong way.
 
phoenixms said:
Thanks. The point I was trying to make is that it's not illegal but almost impossible. Carriers control coupled with the US market mindset and well you know.

With that said....I have found at&t to be the most welcoming with this route. The last two phones I have owned were Nokia models that were sold here in the US(not by at&t) with warranties mind you. at&t was also selling Nokia models at the time also some even being the same model. at&t even assisted me with an MMS issue once.

I wish I could see a unlocked SGII but I doubt it. Like he said Samsung really doesn't want to Rub at&t the wrong way.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I see that you were mostly making the same point. I just skimmed your post earlier. I think the major addendum to what you were saying was that with CDMA, you're 100% at the carrier's mercy. It's a major technical hurdle whereas with GSM, it's more of a "political" hurdle.
 
As a USan I am happy to let the Brits and Koreans have the phone first. As we say here, "you can always tell the pioneers - they're the ones with the arrows in their backs."
 
phoenixms said:
Actually that is not true. Samsung could sell an unlocked unsubsidized phone in the US without any carrier's permission.
Click to expand...

It was poorly worded on my part. I didn't mean that literally, but again, the downsides to typed text.

While Samsung or any other company can sell an unlocked phone, it would never be as successful within the US as it is overseas. We have four carriers on different technology and/or bands. Only one phone I'm aware of supports 3G on both TMO and ATT (Nokia N8) because it's pentaband. Verizon and Sprint don't let you bring unlocked phones. The ESN has to be in their system.
 
I dont mind being last. Work out the bugs in the other countries first. I dont like getting the first batch of anything.
 
You have longest to wait because your telecoms companies want to screw up the SGS2 as much as they can. Screwing stuff up good and proper takes time.
US companies are very sympathetic to each other so they don't want Apple loosing out to Samsung. The longer the delay the better for Apple.
 
redmotion said:
You have longest to wait because your telecoms companies want to screw up the SGS2 as much as they can. Screwing stuff up good and proper takes time.
US companies are very sympathetic to each other so they don't want Apple loosing out to Samsung. The longer the delay the better for Apple.
Click to expand...

They can add all the want to. Ill root mine day 1 and delete all that crap they add so i dont care what they do to it. Apple dont need to worry about Android. They will lose some customers with these phones coming out but the are doing just fine. All Apple has to do is go to every carrier and they will get more people buying their phones. It was their screw up to be exclusive to AT&T.
As for me, i wont be going back to an iPhone. Im very happy with Android.
 
I like the delay (sorry you folks in the U.S) but I wanna see the face-off between Samsung Galaxy S II and Apple's iPhone 5 this summer or post-summer. >:D It'll be interesting

SGS II will kill it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom