Anyone know why this bullshit is being allowed by govt?
How did voice over LTE end up needing carrier software approval on top of having the right hardware?
Is this telcos writing legislation for yet another ignorant communications minister?
All I see is limited consumer choice, generation of completely unnecessary e-waste and a giant βfuck offβ sign to international tourists.
a giant βfuck offβ sign to international tourists.
Thatβs what Iβm wondering about. Will data only tourist sim/esim work as usual, or will βincompatibleβ 4G devices be blocked in this situation, too?
One would think that tourist sims would work because they are data only, but who knows?!
Itβs pretty similar to the analogue tv signal shutdown in 2010. The difference though was you could buy a digital tuner and plug it into your tv and keep using it.
3G is taking up a lot of spectrum space and they need to free it up for future data technology. It is also used by a very small (and shrinking) percentage of people, while costing too much to maintain.
It has to die. Telcos gave more than a yearβs warning. Then an extended grace period. I donβt really know how they could have done this without annoying some people.
While I move in a bubble of nerds who tend to have decent gear, I donβt actually know anyone affected by this shutdown first-hand.
thereβs a few people I know thatβs been affected btw
i get that thereβs a need for 3g to be shut down but thereβs no need to ban phones with 4g data capability that canβt call without 3g (lacking voip implementation), the telcos couldβve just provided an app to do it because voip is just a protocol over ip
itβs pretty fucking obvious that the telcos bribed the government into forcing them to block these devices because they get more money that way, they donβt have to pay for the ewaste they artificially create and they donβt look bad because they can just say that theyβre βforced by legislationβ to do so
How do the telcos get more money? A few phone sales are not going to do anything to their profits. They own the 3G infrastructure, itβs theirs. They could have legally turned it off years ago and thereβs nothing anyone (including the government) could have done about it. Forcing them to sell a service is no different to forcing Woolies to sell your favourite brand of peanut butter. You can argue that the Government of the day should never have sold 100+ years of infrastructure investment and only privatised the retail side of Telstra - and would 100% agree with you. But that horse bolted 30 years ago. The simple truth is that all our phones rely on three companies and with few exceptions, there are no guarantees the service will work. As that Optus outage a year ago demonstrated.
Iβm all about bashing on the telcos when they deserve it. But theyβve handled this about as nicely as was possible. Theyβve been warning everyone for over a year. Theyβve been individually messaging affected phones for months. Nobody can really say they didnβt get warning.
I donβt really agree with blocking IMEIs of phones they didnβt sell because theyβre not sure theyβll work without 3G. But I see the reasoning for it. They canβt make a regular call today, but they can make an emergency call. They are forcing that pain now, while the phone can still call in an emergency instead of it dropping totally off the network at a future date when it canβt make any sort of call. Iβd have gone the other direction to give those customers more time. I recognise though that some people simply would not have done anything until they were forced to - no matter how much time they were given.
They gave minimal warning about the emergency calling issue, and only a few weeks warning on the fact that βnon-compliantβ devices would be outright blocked (and each network has their own method on deciding on what is or isnβt compliant).
And even the requirement for VoLTE support wasnβt communicated early on.
Nevertheless, I agree that 3g needs to go just that itβs been characterised by poor communication and heavy handedness.
But that Spectrum being used for 3G is beneficial. Not just for support of older devices but also increased, redundant coverage.
This purely Corporate Welfare legislation, which is going to backfire on the corporations when they realise they have to build more infrastructure to provide the same coverage.
It is going to be detrimental to product consumers because they wonβt have the same amount of coverage. Also, the higher bandwidth of 5G is going to increase backhaul requirements which mean that the person calling 000 using VoLTE will need to compete with the person steaming 4K Netflix while playing CoD.
The only winners in the long-term will be the advertisers and data miners, who somehow manage to bloat a 4kB website to 40mB.
Youβd think it would be a trivial task to check if an individual phone can make a VoLTE call, and simply put a flag on the account once it does.
All if the examples of blocking appear to be from Optus in the article. And anecdotally they seem to have been the most heavy handed with this. So while there might be further blocking over time on the other networks, Iβd start by switching to the Vodafone or Telstra networks if you end up blocked by Optus.
iirc itβs all because of legislation that all 3 telcos have to adhere to so theyβll all do the same shit, also Telstra uses a shitty proprietary voip implementation so things like lineageos might not work
This is true, but the way the telcos have been implementing it is different (even if the specifics of that remain unclear).
I expect some blacklisted devices will become whitelisted in the future on the various networks (and vice-versa). The whole thing has been poorly communicated and rather opaque.
Telcos encouraging users to shift their voice to Whatsapp nowβ¦
TBH, LTE certification always seemed like a way to force carrier locked phones to me.
Which makes it massively more difficult to switch.
IE vendor lock in.
