The Latest Indignity- NetShare for the iPhone Now, if we didn't have enough evidence of this, the most recent indignity came this past week from a company called Nullriver. Nullriver developed an application for the iPhone called NetShare, which allowed a user to tether their laptop to the iPhone and use the iPhone's 3G data capability like a modem. Tethering is nothing new, and we've had devices that did this for well over a decade. AT&T does offer tethering capability for the RIM Blackberry for an extra $20 to $30 per month. This was the first tethering solution for the iPhone, and best of all, it was free. "Free" in that you were already paying $30 per month for an unlimited data plan with your iPhone.
The $9.99 NetShare application was posted on Apple's iPhone store on July 31, but it was pulled within hours. It appeared again on August 1 but was immediately withdrawn. On August 4, AT&T clarified the issue: "The iPhone is not intended to be used as a tethering device and we have no plans to offer separate tethering plans for it," explained AT&T spokesperson Wes Warnock. On closer examination, we find the iPhone service agreement does explicitly prohibit tethering, but NetShare apparently slipped by the iPhone police.
Mr. Warnock went on to add " For customers looking for a smartphone with tethering capability, we have many other options," which apparently includes all of the ones they can charge you for.
Well thanks, Wes. I'm glad to know that AT&T has so many ways to stick it to me while making sure that any plan to actually save me some money will be nipped in the bud.
Conclusion- More of the Same AT&T's position would be surprising if it weren't so true to character in the cellular market. The idea of inhibiting the capabilities of mobile devices to optimize carrier revenues has been around since 2005 when Verizon nixed the USB capability in the Motorola V710 so customers could only download songs to the device using Verizon's network service.
None of this bodes well for capabilities like fixed mobile convergence, more functional mobile unified communications, or any of the hundreds of ideas that will allow enterprises to make better use of mobility. It only gives more fuel to the argument that we have to get the carriers out of the equipment business if the mobile industry is going to drag itself out of the stone ages.
While I have never been a fan of increased regulation, it is becoming abundantly clear that the FCC may have to start taking the consumer's side against the cellular carriers. As we have found time and again, technical advance happens much faster in a competitive environment, and while the entrenched interests rail against change, in the long run both they and their customers benefit. So we can be sure that any regulatory action to disentangle the cellular morass will be met with well-funded howls of protest. It's time for the FCC to save the cellular carriers from themselves.
