Why is Verizon afraid of Bluetooth?
Most of the members of this forum know about the Verizon policy of crippling OBEX file transfer between other devices to force all media transmission (whether personal or copyrighted) over the subscriber network.
I've read all of the excuses for the policy, copyright protection, GIN protection, etc. but nobody had been able to offer a viable reason for the policy.
Bluetooth file transfer is just another way to move the same files that can already be moved for free with a data cable or expansion card. It can't access anything special on the phone So why all of the fuss?
Why is Verizon afraid of Bluetooth?
I've read all of the excuses for the policy, copyright protection, GIN protection, etc. but nobody had been able to offer a viable reason for the policy.
Bluetooth file transfer is just another way to move the same files that can already be moved for free with a data cable or expansion card. It can't access anything special on the phone So why all of the fuss?
Why is Verizon afraid of Bluetooth?
...
I heard recently that Verizon is blaming the compnay that created the GIN software for their phones as the reason for the crippled bluetooth.
Apparently Verizon didn't want to cripple bluetooth but the GIN company told them to do it in order for their program to be on all the phones.
I don't know if I believe this or not. But who knows??
Apparently Verizon didn't want to cripple bluetooth but the GIN company told them to do it in order for their program to be on all the phones.
I don't know if I believe this or not. But who knows??
...
If you notice, PDA's do have BT file transfer abilities yet do not have GIN.....
...
There you go...that leads me to believe that Verizon may be right in it's statement regarding bluetooth and the software designers for the GIN program.
...
Verizon doesn't want to be the Napster of ringtones. Sure DRM could be programmed into all the files but that's a big hassle when all you need to do is prevent them from going anywhere.
Don't need a lock if there isn't a door.
Don't need a lock if there isn't a door.
...
L7jr said:
I heard recently that Verizon is blaming the compnay that created the GIN software for their phones as the reason for the crippled bluetooth.
Apparently Verizon didn't want to cripple bluetooth but the GIN company told them to do it in order for their program to be on all the phones.
I don't know if I believe this or not. But who knows??
Every GIN program has Digital Rights Management (DRM) Technology designed to manage, control, or track the distribution and/or use of copyright-protected data.
In phones, DRM is used to prevent or control actions such as sending downloaded ringtones, graphics, and video to other people.
Now, what's the reason?
https://www.phonescoop.com/glossary/te »...
(continues)
...
A phone having it's content protected by DRM doesn't mean anything.
What matters is the contract agreement between Verizon and the GIN developers.
Noone on this board will know because noone has access to the contracts Verizon signs with other companies. But, with all the piracy out there, it's almost a sure bet that it has something to do with copyrights [and money, of course].
What matters is the contract agreement between Verizon and the GIN developers.
Noone on this board will know because noone has access to the contracts Verizon signs with other companies. But, with all the piracy out there, it's almost a sure bet that it has something to do with copyrights [and money, of course].
...
I said I took a guess. It could be Verizon just wanting to get more money out ofits customers.
...
L7jr said:
I said I took a guess. It could be Verizon just wanting to get more money out ofits customers.
Then they should charge for it and give the people a choice. It would be like buying a PDA equipped with Wi-Fi and then paying Verizon per use.
You should see the painful process it takes to get a phonebook off the phone, onto a laptop computer and then transfer it many Bluetooth cars.
...
Everyone knows Verizon "cripples" their phones. Alot of people stay on their network because of it's reliabilty and dependability.
I can deal with the crippling of phones because of their good network.
I recently used Cingular for about 2 weeks and dropped more calls and had more trouble dialing out and connecting calls then I cared for in that short period of time. With Verizon I always connect right away and rarely if ever drop a call.
I don't want people thinking I'm a VZW fanboy. I'm just stating my opionion based on what I have experienced.
If T-Mobile ever got 3G released across the country and offered decent phones and a wider network, I would consider going to them when my contract with Verizon ends.
I can deal with the crippling of phones because of their good network.
I recently used Cingular for about 2 weeks and dropped more calls and had more trouble dialing out and connecting calls then I cared for in that short period of time. With Verizon I always connect right away and rarely if ever drop a call.
I don't want people thinking I'm a VZW fanboy. I'm just stating my opionion based on what I have experienced.
If T-Mobile ever got 3G released across the country and offered decent phones and a wider network, I would consider going to them when my contract with Verizon ends.
...
I agree that Verizon has the best network and their phones usually perform very well on that network.
The problem lies when they try to dictate to 50 million subscribers how the OFF NETWORK services are going to work on the limited number of handsets they offer.
Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, cameras, calculators, alarm clocks and similar features really have nothing to do with the subscriber network. Why should the carriers have control over those features?
I can deal with the crippling of phones because of their good network, but why should I?
The problem lies when they try to dictate to 50 million subscribers how the OFF NETWORK services are going to work on the limited number of handsets they offer.
Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, cameras, calculators, alarm clocks and similar features really have nothing to do with the subscriber network. Why should the carriers have control over those features?
I can deal with the crippling of phones because of their good network, but why should I?
...
I agree with your statement about having to deal with the crippling of phones and the quality of Verizon's network.
Who would you go to if you were to ever leave Verizon. I know I wouldn't go to Cingular. I also probably wouldn't go to Sprint because of their poor CS.
So who is left for the choice of carriers??? There is T-Mobile. Their is also Nextel which has a poor network other than their DC and Nextel will be fully integrated into Sprint's network in a couple of years anyway.
Who would you go to if you were to ever leave Verizon. I know I wouldn't go to Cingular. I also probably wouldn't go to Sprint because of their poor CS.
So who is left for the choice of carriers??? There is T-Mobile. Their is also Nextel which has a poor network other than their DC and Nextel will be fully integrated into Sprint's network in a couple of years anyway.
...
It depends on what area you were in to make a decision on Verizon or who else. Some people only have a single carrier to choose from.
The problem really is that choices get limited when the carrier won't allow third party handsets, so there is no versatility, except among carrier selected brands.
Check out this bill working itself through the 109th Congress:
http://www.canyouhearusnow.net/Wireless%20Telecommun ... »
This was the first draft:
http://www.canyouhearusnow.net/action/ »
The problem really is that choices get limited when the carrier won't allow third party handsets, so there is no versatility, except among carrier selected brands.
Check out this bill working itself through the 109th Congress:
http://www.canyouhearusnow.net/Wireless%20Telecommun ... »
This was the first draft:
http://www.canyouhearusnow.net/action/ »
...
It's interesting to see that Congress actually cares about this to a certain extent. I was surprised to see the statement about the locking down of phones to third party sellers and the consumers.
...
Another major reason for this block. VCast, GetItNow, and their $25 charge to do the transfers in the store.
It's a hiddden reason, but they will not re-enable the file transfers. They'd rather make their customers buy the items trough them.
(Ringtones, games, graphics cannot be transferred through the cable...so you have to repeatedly buy them. They also recently disabled phone as modem so that users have to buy a card and their $59-79 rate plan that goes with the card as well.)
It's about making money...
It's a hiddden reason, but they will not re-enable the file transfers. They'd rather make their customers buy the items trough them.
(Ringtones, games, graphics cannot be transferred through the cable...so you have to repeatedly buy them. They also recently disabled phone as modem so that users have to buy a card and their $59-79 rate plan that goes with the card as well.)
It's about making money...
...
jmac32here said:
Another major reason for this block. VCast, GetItNow, and their $25 charge to do the transfers in the store.
It's a hiddden reason, but they will not re-enable the file transfers. They'd rather make their customers buy the items trough them.
(Ringtones, games, graphics cannot be transferred through the cable...so you have to repeatedly buy them. They also recently disabled phone as modem so that users have to buy a card and their $59-79 rate plan that goes with the card as well.)
It's about making money...
$25 charge for transfers?
Disable phone modem?
Dude if you don't know your talking about don't post it. All you just did by posting that crap is tell me to never b...
(continues)
...
I didnt say they were disabled on phones customers currently have. But, according to my roomate and boyfriend who works for Verizon, the new phones in the stores don't support phone as a modem.
I do my best to stay current, specially since my close work with wireless technologies.
(BTW-3rd party results for Cingular shows they have the fewest dropped calls, for the areas that they do have coverage. I'm not saying any one carrier is perfect..they all have their ups and downs.)
I do my best to stay current, specially since my close work with wireless technologies.
(BTW-3rd party results for Cingular shows they have the fewest dropped calls, for the areas that they do have coverage. I'm not saying any one carrier is perfect..they all have their ups and downs.)
...
Okay but just so you know vzw is opening tether ability for vcast phones to give broadband they started it on the BB 7139 now have it on the 8100 the 9800 the RAZR and the E815 probably more to come. The ups and downs comment I agree with
...
🙂 Thats good to hear...however in my market, after a 2 hour convo with my friend and Verizon Customer Care, the only thing they told me is I cannot use my E815 as a modem..even though i am paying for VCast.
If there is a way...do tell..
If there is a way...do tell..
...
btw...gave a my buddy a call
apparently I can tether my phone, he did tell me however the price to do so is exactly the same as using the notebook card.
From what I've read the software and cable is sold seperatly...and some places you can find the card for cheaper. So..I guess it depends on how you plan on using it...they will charge the same anyways.
apparently I can tether my phone, he did tell me however the price to do so is exactly the same as using the notebook card.
From what I've read the software and cable is sold seperatly...and some places you can find the card for cheaper. So..I guess it depends on how you plan on using it...they will charge the same anyways.
...
jmac32here said:
btw...gave a my buddy a call
apparently I can tether my phone, he did tell me however the price to do so is exactly the same as using the notebook card.
From what I've read the software and cable is sold seperatly...and some places you can find the card for cheaper. So..I guess it depends on how you plan on using it...they will charge the same anyways.
So if you can do yhat with a notebook card, isn't that another reason why Verizon should not be afraid of Bluetooth?
...
Okay yes, and the ups to the tether is its only a feature (no contract) it can be added or deleted at anytime, for 59.99 broadband service with no contract, its a pretty good deal.
...
ok..the downfall for me is family share two phones with vcast and unlmt txt. Already paying 130 every month. Kinda dont want to pay more to use my existing v-cast on my comp.
I heard a rumor that Sprint doesnt charge extra to their customers that have their Vision pack.
About the bluetooth thing...I don't get it.
If theres no way bluetooth can access the programs their afriad it would, then why not allow obecs?
To be honest, from what I've read and heard, I think it may be just something for them to make more money. Somone plz find out what up with it. (I seriously want the "Hellomoto" ringtone..but cant get it..and GetItNow doesn't have it available.)
I heard a rumor that Sprint doesnt charge extra to their customers that have their Vision pack.
About the bluetooth thing...I don't get it.
If theres no way bluetooth can access the programs their afriad it would, then why not allow obecs?
To be honest, from what I've read and heard, I think it may be just something for them to make more money. Somone plz find out what up with it. (I seriously want the "Hellomoto" ringtone..but cant get it..and GetItNow doesn't have it available.)
...
1) You *CAN* use your phone as a modem without purchasing the $59.99 Unlim data package, however there is a radar system in place to find people stealing the service, and VCast does not (no matter how much you want it to) cover BBA (BroadBand Access).
2) Why doesn't VZW allow OBEX on GIN phones? Because piracy is everywhere.
3) If you download a ringtone/game/etc you can get it credited in warranty situations. What you can't do is "take it with you" to your upgraded phone for obvious reasons. If my friend and I wanted the same game on our phone, I'd put his phone on my acct, purchase it, then switch back to my phone and tell VZW I'm taking it with me, then he uses his phone again and gets the game for free?
4) $130 for a family plan...
(continues)
2) Why doesn't VZW allow OBEX on GIN phones? Because piracy is everywhere.
3) If you download a ringtone/game/etc you can get it credited in warranty situations. What you can't do is "take it with you" to your upgraded phone for obvious reasons. If my friend and I wanted the same game on our phone, I'd put his phone on my acct, purchase it, then switch back to my phone and tell VZW I'm taking it with me, then he uses his phone again and gets the game for free?
4) $130 for a family plan...
(continues)
...
jmac32here said:
(Ringtones, games, graphics cannot be transferred through the cable...
It's about making money...
Sure, there are lots of ways to transfer files from your phone to computer. Mobile Phone Tools, Motorola Phone Tools, Mobile Action Software, Avanquest, to name just a few will transfer through the data/ charging port.
The GIN games and stuff can not though, they are protected by a DRM scheme so they will only run on the phone they were purchased on.
And GIN apps can not be accessed via Bluetooth, so why is Verizon afraid of Bluetooth?
...
There's many things verizon could do with FTP or OBEX. From what I "think" its GIN that puts a stop to full b/t with Vzw. I agree with you on some of your points. Vzw could open Obex and just put a block to turning mp3s into ringtones, that would still create alot of revenue being that ring tones are a big part of GIN revenue, games and pix could be blocked from being moved "from" the device and all in all would make alot of people happy with having the luxury For the whole FTP like contacts I believe that should be opened for car kits and backing up the device to a PC/laptop. Really though I believe it should be open for the customer to do whatever he wants with his phone, but having obex/FTP blocked does create ALOT of revenue for VZW, you...
(continues)
(continues)
...
I'm not sure why people are still arguing this? Noone will ever know why Verizon is "afraid" of OBEX. We will never see their contracts with other vendors and it very well could be in those contracts stating NO OBEX.
Oh, and if a bill was EVER passed by congress demanding phones have OBEX it wouldn't matter, because the new law can't negate the contract established prior to the creation of the law. ;-)
Oh, and if a bill was EVER passed by congress demanding phones have OBEX it wouldn't matter, because the new law can't negate the contract established prior to the creation of the law. ;-)
...
temp_name said:
Oh, and if a bill was EVER passed by congress demanding phones have OBEX it wouldn't matter, because the new law can't negate the contract established prior to the creation of the law. ;-)
Right and I agree. You can't make a law which demands a carrier to retail a Bluetooth phone with OBEX.
What you can do is to make a law which allows third party handsets onto a public subscriber network. Remember, Bluetooth is an "off network" feature, which has nothing to do with a CDMA network.
http://www.canyouhearusnow.net/action/ »
...
🤣 The website you continuously quote is a joke. Poor Mr/s. Chu spent a lot of wasted time making his/her ideal dream list of how the cellular industry should be. The problem is s/he lacks the knowledge of the industry. The owner of that site is probably just one of those people who are upset that their v710 couldn't copy ringtones for free because their precious OBEX was missing. Alas, there probably isn't anything else better to do in Vermont than to make a website that seems legit. 😉
...
temp_name said:
The website you continuously quote is a joke. Poor Mr/s. Chu spent a lot of wasted time making his/her ideal dream list of how the cellular industry should be. The problem is s/he lacks the knowledge of the industry. The owner of that site is probably just one of those people who are upset that their v710 couldn't copy ringtones for free because their precious OBEX was missing.
No, you're guessing wrong. Don't be fooled by the rants posted there when the blog began. That site was 6 months ahead of everybody else on what was coming on the V710 Settlement. Back then everybody in this forum thought the notion of a Class Action was a joke too. Read the first and last posts of this thread and s...
(continues)
...
temp_name said:
Let's just leave it at, ain't ever gonna happen ;)
Nope. It happened already on the Verizon V3c, releases 2,4,5 and the Nokia 6256i, and now the Alltel and Bell Mobility phones already.
Look at the other new Verizon phones too.
The V710 Class Action suit is ending up costing $6.1 million in legal fees plus $84 million in remediation costs directly and indirectly, plus horrible publicity.
Also, look at the suits coming for those car crashes in the Midwest from the people who had accidents attributed to intentional car kit non-connectivity.
How does that weigh against intentional file transfer connectivity crippling, do you think?
No, I think that Verizon hacking phones for hope...
(continues)
...
