In short, Apple is becoming an MNVO. With Mobile Network Virtual Operators, you don't know which carrier your connection is actually going over.
Apple is signaling to the rest of us that the "dumb pipe" future which carriers are facing is quickly approaching.
None of us will care who provides the future 4G/5G/6G connection; we'll just go with the cheapest carrier at the time. Apple here is just streamlining this process so their customers won't have to waste their time and money figuring it out, and they probably won't be alone in offering this type of service to the public.
---
Edit: The article makes a big deal about not being able to remove the SIM card from your phone. CDMA phones have never had SIM cards - to switch phones with Verizon or Sprint, you have to update which MEID or IMEI (number from the phone) is attached to your account. For many years, we were locked into brand-only phones because they were the only ones in the "allowed" database.
I think the author confuses MNVO and SIMless phones. Typically, MNVO just rents the physical network and the SIM works just like before.
The usual MNVO in Europe is a 'dumber pipe' option, with cheaper plans but they state clearly which network they are on. Further, MNVOs get often acquired by the network provider, and continue operating just as a subsidiary with a differentiating marketing strategy / target audience.
Great thing about MNVOs is that they could possibly use multiple network providers, and work seamlessly also globally using the available networks with constant pricing. For some reason, this hasn't happened yet.
Apple could become a MNVO, but not SIMless because of regulations. However, they can bundle the SIM with the phone and provide custom services only on their network, which gives a better experience to the customer and little reason to change network.
I look forward to the moment when I can buy a world-wide subscription from Apple as an MNVO that just works all over the globe without the almost criminal roaming rates and hassles that we currently have.
Earlier this year I was on a trip to Europe and accidentally turned on my iPhone in Paris. It automatically checked my email and I probably reloaded my twitter stream. It was just 700 KB but I was charged a good $25 for that. That roaming rate translates to roughly 35000 CAD/GB.
THIRTY-FIVE-THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR ONE GIG OF DATA
Someone please end this madness. Please let this be Apple.
In my experience, Apple actually made this process of "global roaming" worse, not better.
Case in point: I spend about 2 months a year in Japan and a month in London. I live in the US and have a plan through ATT. I used to have an iPhone 3gs, and then a 4 (now a Galaxy Nexus).
The first time I travelled to London with my iPhone, I knew enough to be paranoid about overages and activated my global roaming service and bought 25MB of data coverage just so I could use it in a pinch. ATT customers were supposed to be able to get free WiFi at Starbucks. That turned out to be false. Fortunately, almost every pub in London has free wifi and I tend to spend more time in pubs than Starbucks anyway.
The second or third day I was there I called ATT to try to get them to give me the unlock code so I could swap my US SIM out for one from O2. After about 30 minutes on the phone, I finally got someone who put it plainly, "Sir, if you had any other phone besides the iPhone, we'd be glad to let you unlock your phone so you could use the SIM from the local carrier. But we are under strict orders from Apple not to." I bought a 20£ throwaway Nokia the next day which had a free 30£ top-up with it and used it for the duration of the trip.
I have had similar experiences in Japan, except I have always had a Japanese phone (because I use the NFC-based Suica card for the Metro and in convenience stores). A couple years ago, I needed to be on-call whilst in Tokyo and wanted to be able to answer my iPhone if it rang. Long story short, my iPhone didn't even work in Tokyo ... regardless that the global roaming was turned on (and I was paying for it).
Was in Tokyo from Nov-Jan this last year. Brought my [unlocked] Galaxy S2 I had at the time. Went to Softbank with my wife, and went through the normal procedure of proving citizenship (hers, not mine) etc. to get Japanese rate plans. Also had brought my Japanese phone. SIM swapped into my GS2, worked perfectly. No more global roaming/iPhone drama. Had tried to do similar with iPhone previously, carriers in Tokyo wouldn't touch it. Same thing, "Under strict orders from Apple not to …"
Went back with my Nexus recently. Put SIM from GS2 into Nexus. Worked flawlessly, as unlocked phones have been doing forever. I do not yearn for an Apple-controlled MNVO. a) I like specifically choosing whatever carrier works best for my needs at the time (via a SIM card) b) my experiences roaming with iPhone so far have been much MORE expensive than with any other phone.
Edit: wanted to make it clear that the "unlocked" GS2 was an ATT GS2 which ATT voluntarily gave me the unlock code for when I called and told them I would be travelling with it.
I have a Verizon iPhone 3GS, which I bought specifically so that I could use it in the US and the UK. After three months, which is Verizon's minimum wait period, I called them up and had them unlock the phone for an international SIM. On traveling to the UK, I cut my trusty Orange SIM card down to size and inserted it. Everything worked perfectly.
things may be better now. the trip to london I was speaking about was with a 3GS in 2009-2010, and at that point the (sole) carrier in the US (ATT) apparently couldn't offer unlocked service. i could have unlocked it myself and voided the warranty, i guess, but didn't opt to do that at the time.
of course, now americans can just buy unlocked iphones. so problem solved, i guess. remarkably happy with the nexus and don't plan to go back to the iphone, so i guess i won't find out.
All the things you describe are carrier business model problems and have nothing to do with Apple. You can blame yourself for not buying an unlocked phone or for not having a separate unlocked phone for traveling.
I disagree. The fact that ATT unlocked my Galaxy S2 last November for me without hesitation when I told them I would be out of the country 3 months each year says otherwise. Even last year, with my iPhone4 they wouldn't do this for me. ATT essentially said the same thing they had in 2009, "we're sorry, if you had any other device but an iPhone we'd be glad to unlock it, but we're prohibited by Apple from doing so..."
Maybe Verizon is better for customers who travel abroad often. But ATT showed me they were willing to unlock my non-iPhone without hesitation, so I still blame Apple. And the number of shady iPhone unlocker operations in both London and Tokyo tells me I'm not alone in their aggressive lock-in practices.
Maybe Verizon customers get a better deal, and I know unlocked iPhones are available now. Honestly, for the hefty price tag I've never considered unlocked iPhones here in the states. Sim-free plans in the US don't seem to offer the same level of discount that they do elsewhere in the world. Here it seems better to just sign the contract and take the carrier subsidy (something which I fully blame the carriers, not Apple, for).
It wasn't until Google started selling the Galaxy Nexus through the Play store for $399 that I even considered buying an unlocked phone. I am still under contract with ATT, but for this price the extra freedom I get is worth it to me. Definitely not gonna pay > $600 for it though.
FYI, I do have a number of unlocked phones I carry in other countries. But honestly, wouldn't you rather carry just one phone, the one you use for all your contacts and as a camera, music player, etc ... than having to carry two phones all the time? Kind of a PITA.
I think it is complete utter BS that "apple prohibits unlocks" .. why would Apple care? This is just AT&T afraid to lose a customer with an unlocked phone.
You might want to disable the data roaming setting in the "Cellular Data" section of the phone's Settings. It actually defaults to off in my experience, but maybe some SIM-locked ones have it enabled by the carrier by default?
Otherwise, I agree, the typical data roaming charges are ridiculous. I don't see why they should be more than, say, twice your home rate (as there are 2 companies involved). Many of the mobile networks are giant multinationals anyway - the fact that roaming in, say, Vodafone.de's network as a Vodafone.co.uk customer, costs a made-up amount of money is just ridiculous. Hutchison 3G ('3') actually have a system called '3LikeHome' in some countries, which let you roam in foreign '3' networks for the same price as your home network - this only includes calls and texts to other 3 numbers, but also, crucially, data. It's great, but there aren't many countries covered by it. And I can only assume it's not driving enough customers away from other operators to affect their bottom lines. But then most people don't seem to choose their phone tariffs rationally anyway. (OMG! A free phone! Only €50 a month! [NB: minimum contract 2 years])
I'm just fearful that taking the SIM card out of the equation will leave us in a worse position, where we can't even work around the problem by buying prepaid SIM cards when abroad.
I guess the problem is it's a shared medium. In many European countries, LTE (4G) rollout has been used as an excuse to halt investment in the DSL connectivity of rural areas. The results thus far have been disappointing, with LTE cells already becoming overloaded where no sensible DSL speeds are available. And that's with the severe volume caps that come with LTE contracts.
Why would they? Out of benevolence? I'm all for carriers becoming dumb pipes, but I seriously doubt situations will improve if device makers become opaque data service providers.
It was just 700 KB but I was charged a good $25 for that. That roaming rate translates to roughly 35000 CAD/GB.
What I do when I travel: remove my sim card and put it in a CD sleeve. That way, I can still listen to music and use the device on WiFi, and not worry. Another option, in case you think you'd lose your sim, is to put the phone on "Airplane" mode but turn on WiFi.
This would also prevent you from seeing potentially important phone calls. Technically speaking airplane mode with wifi is no longer airplane mode. Your phone should have a "don't use data when roaming" option, use it.
This would also prevent you from seeing potentially important phone calls.
I didn't want to get calls at all while overseas.
Technically speaking airplane mode with wifi is no longer airplane mode.
For one thing, this is how the iPhone UI presents it, and since "Airplane Mode" is just an arbitrary UI thing, that's as valid as anything. For another thing, many airplanes now have WiFi during flight, so it seems you'd be hoist on the level of pedantic you're currently invoking.
However, using the "Data Roaming" option is a good idea.
Nah, it's the airlines/regulators that are being hoisted. Normally you are 'required' to shut down all transmitters in your devices during flight, and this is what airplane mode would do. As has been discussed over and again, the reasons for this are mostly bunk, which is underlined by allowing transmitting 802.11 (only if there's money in it, natch). I can't speak for how Apple chooses to represent concepts in their UI...
Your home carrier is mostly just passing on the roaming cost billed to them from whatever network you were using while abroad. How much leverage do you think Apple would have over carriers around the world? Keep in mind that in many places cellular service is a government-run monopoly. If you want your phone to work, you have to take their prices.
That's pretty funny. I live in the same country as st3fan and my home carrier charges anywhere from 1.75 times less, through 7 times less in Paris, up to 35 times less in the U.S. for roaming data than his carrier apparently does (Wind, $20/MB, $5/MB, $1/MB respectively). They must have one hell of a negotiating team.
Needless to say, neither Canada nor France are cellular-monopoly countries.
Fixed-line broadband is just about as close to a 'dumb pipe connection' as you can get, and I still find it valuable to pay a premium for a better service.
Given all the myriad ways technical investment can improve the user experience of a mobile connection (additional cell sites, properly located microcells, sufficient backhaul bandwidth, sensibly sized buffers, etc), as well as less tangible benefits like better customer service, there will always be reasons to choose one carrier over another. Those still apply even if they all sold an 'identical' product consisting only of connectivity.
(Now, getting your average consumer to care about a technically better service instead of the flashiest subsidized handset for the bundle price? That might be a bit harder. Operators have been trying to differentiate with value-add services for years in the UK, and I don't know many people who care.)
Of course, with only four operators in the UK and a bunch of MVNOs it's a little trickier to find a 'niche, focused on quality-of-service' operator for mobile. In the fixed-line broadband market, I can choose between a couple of hundred ISPs, many of whom run their own infrastructure to a greater or lesser degree.
Verizon's new LTE phones have sim cards, although I'm not sure if they are for the phone's LTE radio only - I just got a warranty replacement phone and the activation process was simply switching the sim card.
Verizon's LTE phones do use SIM cards, but it would probably be futile to try to use them on Sprint or AT&T's LTE networks, since they run on different frequencies, and you wouldn't get standard voice or 3G data coverage.
Apple is signaling to the rest of us that the "dumb pipe" future which carriers are facing is quickly approaching.
None of us will care who provides the future 4G/5G/6G connection; we'll just go with the cheapest carrier at the time. Apple here is just streamlining this process so their customers won't have to waste their time and money figuring it out, and they probably won't be alone in offering this type of service to the public.
---
Edit: The article makes a big deal about not being able to remove the SIM card from your phone. CDMA phones have never had SIM cards - to switch phones with Verizon or Sprint, you have to update which MEID or IMEI (number from the phone) is attached to your account. For many years, we were locked into brand-only phones because they were the only ones in the "allowed" database.