As Congress continues to look into early termination fees (ETFs) charged by cellular carriers for leaving a contract before its date of maturity, it would be interesting to explore imagine a world without such penalties.

Financially, carriers expect a customer to stick around for the entire length of their contract, most often providing the incentive to enter into such a contract by subsidizing the upfront cost of a handset. If a subscriber wishes to duck out early, an ETF is assessed for essentially breaking this contract. But what if Congress passed a bill that would outlaw the use of ETFs altogether? If that were to happen, I would expect a colossal change in the cellular industry, one that would bring a contract-free cellular environment.

How so? If carriers don’t have the legal capacity to charge ETFs that penalize the customer for breaking a contract, the need to enter into a contract for cellular service would cease to exist altogether. The end result would be a cellular environment that centers around contract-free, pre-paid cellular service without ETFs.

But don’t get your hopes up just yet, since the possibility of Congress completely outlawing ETFs is very low to say the least.

It seems to be an agreed-upon point of view within the Digirati crowd that AT&T is killing the iPhone. If “killing” is not your bowl of soup, then we can substitute “is highly detrimental,” “the Achilles heel,” or “the main reason I switched to another smartphone.” But aside from the few high-profile and outspoken members of the Digirati community, what real reasons exist to prove that AT&T is really the “dark side” in the relationship? In this article, I dissect the great plethora of FUD, bogus, and unfounded claims about AT&T wireless as it relates to the Apple iPhone.

It’s the network, huh?

Those who have voiced and continue to voice their opinions about AT&T’s quality of cellular service as it relates to the iPhone seem to be focusing their attention on one falsely-conceived assumption: that the iPhone would be better off on a different network, such as Verizon Wireless. However, those who think so haven’t thought it all the way through. Here’s why: the iPhone is the kind of device that is extremely easy to use. It makes many features very user friendly – SMS, email and web browsing all shine on the device thanks in part to its awesome user interface. Remember when those features were completely not user friendly on other phones? Both of my parents (who have never used mobile web browsing, SMS, or email on their Motorola RAZRs) now use SMS, email and the browser regularly on their iPhones. In that regard, the iPhone – by its very nature – increases the usability of data by an enormous amount! It’s a device that takes what have been “geek only” features and brings them to the mainstream.

Knowing this, we can conclude that iPhone users consume exponentially more data than non-iPhone users. So here is my question to all those who think that the iPhone would be better off on Verizon/another carrier: do you really think that another carrier would be able to handle the exponentially greater data load brought on by the iPhone any better than AT&T does?

Think about it before you answer. Seriously, keep thinking. If you think that GSM/HSDPA (AT&T network technology) is in some way inferior to CDMA (Verizon network tech) and you are not a wireless network engineer, you have no idea what you’re talking about. There, I said it! I’ve spoken to dozens of cellular network engineers around my area from all four major carriers, and all of them state that while the underlying technologies differ greatly, what really determines the quality of the network is its implementation and the quality of the backhaul.

So who is to say that Verizon, Sprint, or T-Mobile would do a better job than AT&T is doing with the iPhone, given the increased data load the device brings on the network?

Personal experience

Everyone has a personal experience with their cellular device. You hear these stories all the time: “I hate (insert carrier name here) because when I step into the very South East corner of my apartment, put on my cowboy hat, place my left hand on my right ear, and then stand on my tippy-toes I lose service.” Know what I’m talking about? Sure you do! Let me tell you my experience with iPhone 3G S: ever since it fell into my hands on June 19, 2009 (launch date), I have not had one dropped call and have never lost service (had zero bars). You read that right – it has never happened to me. Sure, I’m not in the Digerati capital of the world (San Francisco area). But I’m not in the boonies either – I live less than five minutes driving distance from Boca Raton, FL. Sure it’s not as densely packed as an urban conglomerate such as New York City or San Fran. But everyone I know has a cell phone and so do their 10 year-old kids (iPhones, even).

Show me the evidence!

Having said that, I see absolutely no reason to wish that the iPhone be available on a different exclusive carrier in the U.S. So after thinking it through, you should be careful what you wish for – as the saying goes. Actually, there is one reason that I want the iPhone to be available on multiple wireless carriers: competition, which can happen on multiple levels: plan price, quality of service, or device price, among others. But let me be clear: competition is good for the consumer (and in some cases, for the companies). I’m in no way dissatisfied with AT&T wireless when it comes to the iPhone.

Really?

Perhaps I’m not understanding exactly what is going on here and iPhone users in San Francisco are suffering terribly from dropped calls and poor service. If that is the case, AT&T should look into fixing its service in that area. But – again – let me point out that the dissatisfaction with AT&T as it relates to the iPhone is overblown, overhyped, and – in my experience – only affects the (very) outspoken few. So leave AT&T alone!

In a future post, I will discuss the technical reasons why it’s not in Apple’s best interest, or the interest of me as a consumer, to switch iPhone exclusivity from AT&T to another carrier.

Democratic lawmakers are calling for states to ban texting and emailing while driving. The movement comes in light of recent studies that show the practice is more dangerous than drunk driving.

Since 2005, texting has grown eleven-fold – from 10 billion to 110 billion text messages sent per month in December of 2008, according to CTIA – the cellular phone industry’s trade group. As such, an increase in overall use of text messaging would naturally lead to an increase of doing so in the car. A recent study from Virginia Tech Transportation Institute found that when drivers of heavy trucks texted, their collision risk increased by 23 times. Dialing a cell phone and using or reaching for an electronic device increased risk of collision about six times in cars and trucks. The researchers said the risks of texting generally applied to all drivers, not just truckers. A separate study by Car and Driver magazine found that texting and driving is more dangerous than drunken driving.

To date, 14 states as well as the District of Colombia have passed laws banning text messaging while conducting a vehicle. States that don’t implement the proposed laws would face highway funding cuts of around 25 percent. The legislation would be patterned after the way Congress required states to adopt a national drunken driving ban. However, some don’t think that the proposed laws would be effective enough.

Steve Largent, a former Oklahoma congressman who leads CTIA — The Wireless Association, said his organization supports “state legislative remedies to solve this issue. But simply passing a law will not change behavior. We also need to educate new and experienced drivers on the dangers of taking their eyes off the road and hands off the wheel.” The Governors Highway Safety Association, which represents state highway safety agencies, said it does not doubt the dangers of texting and driving but does not support a ban because it would be difficult to enforce: “Highway safety laws are only effective if they can be enforced and if the public believes they will be ticketed for not complying. To date, that has not been the case with many cell phone restrictions,” said Vernon Betkey, the highway safety association’s chairman.

This all looks to be a problem that should be solved by superior technology rather than increased lawmaking. The market should drive the tech industry to develop and improve in-car speech recognition and synthesis systems that would read incoming text messages or emails, and allow the driver to dictate a response to a message – all without having to look at the cellular device. Microsoft’s SYNC system (TNR coverage) is the most advanced in the marketplace in having both features, although it still needs to be improved in the areas of accuracy. Only available in Ford products (Ford, Lincoln, Mercury), the system also needs to become more widely available.

(via Yahoo! News)

Late Friday evening, Apple issued an update to the iPhone operating system in a response to a well-known security vulnerability. iPhone OS 3.0.1 fixes a potential exploit which could allow a remote user to hijack any iPhone by sending a simple series of SMS (text messages).

This update was expected to be released before the BlackHat 2009 security conference last week, where a pair of security researchers who have discovered the flaw presented their findings. Back in 2007, Charlie Miller, security researcher and co-author of The Mac Hacker’s Handbook, demonstrated a WebKit security hole that allowed the hacker to obtain an iPhone user’s personal information. Apple patched the exploit a few days before the demonstration. By contrast, the SMS exploit was patched after Mr. Miller presented details about it. In the days leading up to the patch, I have expressed my frustration with the way Apple and AT&T handled the entire situation from a customer communication and customer service perspective.

I’ve received several responses to that post since the time it was published, most of which directed me to this post, which states that O2 – carrier of the iPhone in the UK – has issued a statement saying that the patch was forthcoming. One carrier in one country communicating to its customers? I think that says enough about how poorly Apple handled the situation.

Any unpatched iPhones are still vulnerable to the attack, so we recommend you run out and update your iPhone ASAP. So far, it looks like the sole purpose of software update 3.0.1. is to fix the security threat, so don’t expect to be surprised with any new features.