John Kerry trying to break up iPhone-AT&T alliance

I hope they succeed.

I've always thought these phone-exclusivity agreements seemed as a ploy to prevent carrier competition.

This exclusivity is bogus, I should be able to buy an iPhone and run it on any GSM network I choose (TMobile!).

The government certainly has no right to say that Apple and AT&T can't have an exclusivity agreement. And no one is forcing me to buy an iPhone. I could go buy a Pre, or a Blackberry (Sprint Verizon etc). Apple has every right (as well as AT&T) to make an agreement to operate only on the AT&T network!

We have choices a plenty, I choose Apple's iPhone, in order to get it, I have to be with AT&T. That's the fact of the matter and it is not unfair.

As much as I would like to see the iPhone with another carrier other than AT&T, this is not the way to go about it. Might as well let the government make Apple to allow OS X on hardware from any manufacturer. The government already owns GM and now looks to be trying to taking over anything when they don’t like how the company is run.

Companies like Verizon and Apple always have to have the upper hand and will not back down, AT&T was a dying wireless carrier that “allowed Apple to walk all over them” with distribution of the iPhone. It’s just the way it is...

I love this guy, if you look back in history he's done some crazy s**t that benefits all of us... (search john kerry cia, this is my favorite)

it is about time. I was just thinking about this today and how it is totally unfair that i 1.) can not take my phone to another service provider. 2.) forced to choose from a small grouping of phones because my provider makes these exclusive deals for ad dollars. when that manufacture just makes crap phones. I am with Verizon so i really don't need to explain what i am talking about!

I also find it interesting that Verizon hasn't been hit with a Anti-Trust suit. VZ loads every (98%) of their phones with their crippled software but still claims they do not locked down their phone.

Examples
1.) Microsoft with their IE they were bundling with their OS's.
2.) Verizon with their VZ Navigator. (have to pay to use their POS browser!)

The point is. clearly the market has changed since the 90's and i should have some choices here without having to change providers.

Spectrum is public property. We should take it back and have the government responsible for mobile broadband infrastructure! Why let fat-cats get rich off of something we all collectively own, the airwaves? We'd get better service by focusing on one standard and lower prices.

Even is Kerry succeeds it will take Apple a year to make a CDMA phone which coincidentally is when the AT&T agreement would be over.

As for all cellphones being on a common platform, that will start next year as AT&T and Verizon both battle to be first with the LTE standard.

What would be a miracle is if Verizon actually got a phone that syncs contacts and calendar with a Mac.

This is a load of c**p. I hope that the government stays out of the whole thing. Hey John Kerry, cell phone ownership is a privilege, not a right. The fact is, there are several wireless companies and several cell phone manufactures. There is plenty of competition. The fact that one builds a better mouse trap doesn't mean you need to get involved. This is nothing but TYPICAL INTRUSIVE GOVERNMENT. Punish success.

Take a good look people and remember which political party most of these people come from.

The government leases airwaves to these companies on our behalf. So, it's not government intrusion to put the companies on trial. These cellphone companies don't have any particular right to the airwaves. It's just the government letting companies get rich off of natural resources. Theoretically we should all own our one share of the airwaves. In practice, that would mean we would never have a mobile infrastructure, which is why they lease it to companies, who turn around and use our resources and make huge profit. I say we cut out the middle man and have the government (remember government is not a word for enemy, it's a word for "us" as in we the people collectively) run the infrastructure like they run the mail and trains, etc. Some things are better as public utilities and I think mobile broadband is one. We don't say it's intrusion that the government builds other infrastructures like highways, roads, bridges, trains, postal service, etc. What if they let companies buy up highways who then got to charge us for using them? And then the government wanted to look into why Joe Shmoe who got onto one highway couldn't get off of it because of an incompatible off ramp from another company.....OK maybe not the best metaphor, but you get the point.

Someone needs to do something before it's too late. This is the same as back in the 80's when land line cost so much, there needs to be a choice for everything so we all don't end up getting raped. If one company is able to do whatever they want they will. They know that there are enough dumb ASS people out there going to buy their product. (EG) iPhone 3gs.

And for the record. It also is possible to make phones that operate under both standards. Meaning that manufactures could actually make one phone. i would be all for phones costing more if they were network interchangeable.