Speaking as a happy iPhone user, I don't think my annoyance at not yet being able to upgrade to the new iPhone 3GS has anything to do with entitlement.
It's simply the first step towards what should already be the case – widespread annoyance at the status quo foisted on us by mobile phone companies.
Seriously, let's recap. They want you to sign contracts of up to two years, at usually phenomenal monthly costs, under the expectation that you'll still be happy with the handset that you pretty much just bought sight-unseen.
Do you know what you'll want or be doing in two years? Nor do I.
In that time, you have pretty much no comeback if the service degrades, if you move somewhere that the network doesn't cover, or anything else that a sane system would allow for.
Never mind the march of technology, never mind the growth of new services and uses for the things, nor the simple fact that you might want a change and don't consider your phone a direct manifestation of your soul.
Right to complain
How in the seven hells did they persuade anyone that all this was a good idea? Worse, how did we reach the point where anyone complaining about this miserable treatment is accused of being a whiner?
Is it whining to point out the obvious: that on a product with a yearly release cycle, the stupidity is on the part of the company that wanted everyone to sign up for 18-month contracts this time last year, when it graciously let everyone give it more money to upgrade on time?
The whole mobile phone industry needs to be put in its place. As far as I'm concerned, a phone is just a tool. They're not lifestyle devices, they're not fashion accessories, they're not reflections of our innermost souls; they're devices to make calls, receive calls, access the internet and take a few pictures on the move.
If I had my way, the whole system would be completely overhauled. Forget heavily subsidised handsets, at least as the default business model. Enough of nonsense like 'Sign up with us for two years and we'll give you a PS3/netbook/ingot of solid gold'.
Perfect world
In my perfect world, every phone would be bought like any other piece of kit: right off the shelf. Pick up a new device, pop in your SIM card – Pay As You Go or contract as you choose – and enjoy.
As for the networks, they would no longer be the sole guardians of the mystical technology. Instead, their only responsibility would be making sure those handsets connected properly and, if they must, flogging some ringtones.
But wait! What about the extra cost in paying for the handset up front? Well, that's simple. If you can't afford the latest, shiniest piece of techno-love, that's too bad. Welcome to Real Life.
On the plus side, this system would make it so much easier for you to buy a cheap handset now, still getting the benefits of being on contract rather than PAYG, while letting you upgrade without any fuss later.
Isn't that better than the current system, where you usually end up having to settle for some plastic rubbish you don't really want for the next year, or being locked in over some gimmicky feature that turns out to be pretty useless once the shine has worn off it?
A good start
I hate to splash around words like 'utopia', but this wouldn't be a bad start. Try the chocolate fountain while you're here. You'll find some marshmallows under the pile of murdered bankers, next to the Pepsi river.
I appreciate that this 'no more free ride' policy might sound harsh, but let's be honest – it wouldn't be as big a deal as some people would love us to think.
The cost of mobile phones would drop pretty damn fast if the companies making them were competing on the open market, instead of selling to the networks and throwing us a bone if we're willing to drop hundreds and hundreds of pounds on some unlocked one. Just look at Apple.
The iPod touch and iPhone aren't physically identical, but are we really meant to believe that there's some £300 technical difference between them? No, of course not.
The difference between them is that the iPod resides in a market where people actually buy their hardware, and the iPhone lives in a land where the provider wields all the power in the business relationship. That situation has to change.
Apple has brought us a model where people want to upgrade on a yearly basis and where the mobile phone's status as a platform makes the idea of hanging onto the same outdated kit for years nothing short of ridiculous. Never mind what your contract says. Never mind if iPhone owners are asking for more than you currently get.
That's not the problem. What we need to be asking is how we deserve to be treated, and on this one, we iPhone users are correct. Victory here is a victory for everyone. But especially us, because our phone is best.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First published in PC Plus Issue 285
Liked this? Then check out Why Nokia doesn't get the same love as Apple
Sign up for TechRadar's free Weird Week in Tech newsletter
Get the oddest tech stories of the week, plus the most popular news and reviews delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up at http://www.techradar.com/register
Your comments (5) Click to add a new comment
optimaximal
August 31st 2009
5. The 24-month contract is akin to the 100% mortgage of recent years - they're just designed to give impatient people something NOW rather than having them wait and work for it and, as with the mortgages, they are weighted in favour of the seller of the contract.
Unless you can afford it, you don't really *need* that iPhone...
Alert a moderator
hillrhys
August 31st 2009
4. Could not agree more, would completely back an overhaul in the way mobile phones are sold. I think 24 months and even 18 months is too long. 12 months at most, and for companies like vodafone to sell all their phones sim free (lets hope not locked) for a reasonable price on the pay as you go. e.g. who is going to spend £250 on a pay as you go phone, let alone £440 for an iphone?
Alert a moderator
lyriki11
August 31st 2009
3. Subsidised handsets, like the situation you point out, are actually illegal in South Korea. It's a shame that we can't have the same system, as it would certainly help users who (like me) look forward to a new phone.
However, on the other hand, you can request a shorter contract usually, especially if you're a long term customer. Yes, you have to pay more at the start, but as you've said, this makes sense.
In fact, you can just take a rolling month to month contract and buy phones SIM free - but this is through online retailers and isn't always the cheapest. Plus the lure of O2 or whoever saying 'have it now free' is hard to resist.
Alert a moderator
steviesteve78
August 30th 2009
2. Anyone has had the option for quite some time - its called Simplicity on O2 and gives you a contract tariff at reduced rate with no long term commitment. Pair this up with a subsidised pay and go handset and its WIN WIN WIN!
Alert a moderator
dvs
August 30th 2009
1. Spot on! Phone prices are over-inflated because the manufacturers know that the networks want their phones and the networks add a premium. Phone prices would become more competitive if manufacturers sold direct to the consumer. Whilst the consumer gets the device subsidised when signing up to a new contract, the manufacturer also gets a subsidy. Manufacturers earn more by selling phones to networks than SIM-free. That's why SIM-free prices are so high.
This would be so much better for the environment too. So many people upgrade just because their contract is up - even if they don't need a phone and often if they don't really want to get a phone. They just feel that they should because their entitled to.
Alert a moderator
Tell us what you think
You need to Log in or register to post comments