I hope no one's taking offense to any of these postings on the forum. It's just a place for discussion. It's not a proving ground or the venue for anything other than sharing thoughts, ideas, and facts.
My perspective on free markets is that costs don't always go down unless there are some fixed controls involved. Those controls don't have to be people or regulatory - they can be individual factors in the market. And markets are so micro-defined now that it's truly hard to even say direct competitors are direct competitors because most companies now seek to compete on distinction rather than offering something at a lower price.
Costs for consumers certainly don't go down if there are a limited number of providers with differing options. There are more sources of fuel now than ever but costs continue to rise. There is more food produced in this country for domestic consumption than we could ever consume but prices still rise. Theoretically, solar, wind, and water power should be more plentiful and cheaper than oil, gas, and coal. But they're not yet primarily because operational, labor, and investment return costs play into to pricing. That's not even taking into consideration the legal hurdles that get in the way of delivering fuel and power sources. Even the buying experiences of the Evo proves that the market isn't always free and open. BB isn't blanket matching RS $20 accessories - they're making the consumer ask and giving the store manager's discretion as to whether they match. That might change, but it's not for now. Even BB itself sometimes won't allow BB stores to match BB-online or other online site's prices. In that case, they consider the market "any retail locations within a X-mile radius."
My point is the wireless market isn't truly subject to pure market forces. Different carriers providing different services, devices, and technologies yet competing for the same customers. Why don't I have solar electricity in my house - because the providers have made it prohibitively expensive to buy and install for a number of reasons. They continue only to compete directly with other solar providers because until it's value-comparable I can't really afford any solar provider.
I wanted Google to succeed with N1. But the cold reception from the carriers made it clear that they were not interested in competing in an open market so much as they were competing by saying our market is better. Even the great Google couldn't crack this nut yet because it found that carriers were willing to work more with OEMs that already freely licensed Android and would produce carrier-specific phones more quickly, profitably, and readily while keeping N1 on the back-burner until it's no longer the "best" phone available.
I also don't like the charge, but it's what Sprint offers and is better than I can get anywhere else right now so I'll grudgingly pay but won't think about it once I've parted with the $10 and am just data-chomping to my heart's desire. I'm moving to Sprint/Evo for the phone/data combination, not because I want to make phone calls. Not telling my family that though.
