Is it because of the lack of carrier discount? If that's the case, people have already voted with their money on what they value more.
Is it because of the lack of carrier discount? If that's the case, people have already voted with their money on what they value more.
We may have voted, but "own my hardware and just pay for service" wasn't on the ballot.
Yes, but when they voted (before jan 26), it was legal to unlock your phone. This law is like changing the terms of the contract mid-term.
1. We do not vote with money in America. Poor people get as much of a vote as rich people in this country.
2. By making jailbreaking illegal, the government is giving carriers a special legal status that makes it harder for anyone else to compete. If you want a market-based solution to life's problems, you cannot have the government swoop in and give special privilege to certain players.
Which is all that matters. How it should work in theory, matters very little.
> If you want a market-based solution to life's problems
Big "if", for many things, many don't want the depth of their wallet to determine their access to necessary services.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollar_voting
I'd disagree with the notion as applied here, though, because buying an unlocked phone is rigged to be a bad choice because so few carriers offer cheaper service prices for unsubsidized handsets.
Not entirely sure this applies across ALL carriers, but it does apply to ATT/Sprint/TMO I believe.