AT&T removed Qi wireless charging in the Lumia 1520 to make room for PMA

We recently reported on AT&T's launch page for the Nokia Lumia 1520 and how built-in wireless charging was absent. We noted how this decision would have not been to save cost or a few milometers on the device, but possibly affected by AT&T's involvement with Qi rival PMA (Power Matters Alliance). The company appears to have opted for wireless charging shells instead.

While the PMA group itself sounds like a group of superheroes from a Duracell advertisement, it's saddening to see the US mobile operator go down the route of removing the established Qi standard. Especially since it's the standard Nokia has adopted. Here's what Don Mooers, Director of Device Product Marketing at AT&T had to say in an email response to a Windows Phone Central reader:

"In an effort to move toward making this a reality for consumers worldwide, we’ve placed our support for the public ecosystem roll out led by Power Matters Alliance (PMA). The PMA continues to expand membership and is building a strong ecosystem for wireless charging. The PMA solution is already installed at leading coffee shops, airports, stadiums, restaurants, gyms and more, which enables customers to wirelessly charge their phone while on the go."

Lumia 1520 Battery
The AT&T Lumia 1520 product page

That's essentially the situation wrapped up in a nutshell. AT&T removed the built-in Qi wireless charging in favour of PMA with optional accessories. AT&T does note that they're working with device suppliers to embed PMA capabilities into the hardware beginning in 2014, but until then you'll be stuck with a PMA solution should you pick up a Lumia 1520 on AT&T.

So what does this mean for consumers? Qi and PMA will continue to battle it out and compete for world dominance. Until then, consumers will be stuck in the middle deciding which bandwagon they'd like to hop onto. Both continue to drum up support for either side of the fence. Think VHS versus Betamax all over again.

Head on over to our forum to join in the discussion. Thanks, darth_furious, for the heads up!



There are 344 comments. Sign in to comment

PeadarWagon says:

BS! I imagine that AT&T is in talks with Apple and Apple is planning on using PMA. Also, what's their excuse for downgrading to 16gb? To save on the weight of the phone?

poddie says:

I can't imagine that Apple will go with an actual standard... typically they would "invent" their own to lock you into their hardware.

PeadarWagon says:

Just makes me so angry. They are crippling something good on purpose. Politics have no place in the tech industry.

YesYesYap says:

I totally agree with you. My recommendation is to let it flop... no one should buy this phone from AT&T. 
then maybe nokia and microsoft will chose better partners or have stricter rules regarding AT&T leaving the features the phone has.
I am so pissed that if i would get this phone from at&t it would not be able to fully utilize all its capabilities 

Jack Larson1 says:

^^ 100% with you on this. They broke the standard, I'm certainly not going to get a phone where I have to pitch my wireless charger. Also, 16Gb is too small, 32gb should be a MINIMUM. Att should be worried about releasing gdr 3 and 8.1, not this " power conservation wireless something" crap.

SoCalBIGmike says:

I dont even know how to respond to this comment, its so full of fail...

Jack Larson1 says:

You don't have to respond if its just to condemn a old comment. Was just frustrated knowing Att would be the last to update, but switching standards is not great considering most (maybe one PMA) plates I've seen use Qi.

jmshub says:

I love that at&t is trying to avoid selling a product that is already in use by multiple manufacturers on multiple platforms because they got in bed with a competing standard that is almost vaporware at this point. How do cell companies avoid the evil eye of antitrust??

cool8man says:

With 1/2 the storage removed and wireless charging ripped out as far as I'm concerned the Lumia 1520 has been cancelled for the US market. The next thing to be cancelled will be my contract with AT&T.

AT&T has been a terrible partner. They've locked up every flagship Nokia exclusive, delayed OS updates or prevented them from being released and done such a poor job selling Windows Phones in stores and on phone that Verizon is already the top Windows Phone carrier in the US.

If any carrier wants to release the real Lumia 1520 or something equal to it they will get my money and a new 2 year contract. Shame that once again Windows Phone chance of success in the US has been torpedoed by AT&T.

StevePT says:

All of these kind of antics by ATT are why I left them a couple of months ago and went back to Verizon. I had been with Verizon since I first got a cell phone and always had good experiences with their customer service and their cell signal coverage is hands down better than everyone else. ATT drove the nail in their own coffin as far as me ever considering coming back to them in the future by not pro-rating my final bill. Verizon did this without me asking on my final bill when I switched to ATT, but when I switched back to Verizon I had gone 7 days into a new month and was responsible for paying for a full month. 
ATT is 100% focused on profits and 0% focused on customer service and it reflects in all of their decisions/policies.

poddie says:

The problem is, I don't like what Verizon does to the Nokia phones either.  No colors, and they make them more angular and ugly in my opinion.  And of course they then stick a HUGE awful looking Verizon check mark on there... the worst looking logo in history.
I will say their service was definitely better for me, and I don't feel like I'm saving any money at AT&T. 

Dont forget that Verizon also removes features from WP8. I was with them for a few weeks, long enough to notice that they removed group messaging and visual voicemail integration. The visual voicemail they want you to download their own shitty app and pay a large fee to use it. To me it is more important that I can use a phone purchased directly from the manufacturer and not ruined by the cell provider. Remember a phone purchased directly from Nokia with Qi will work at AT&T but not on Verizon.

JF Richard says:

Absolutely correct. I can buy an international version of most phones and use them on AT&T. If I could buy one and use it on Verizon they would still charge me an extra $25 month versus AT&T on a data plan. Left Verizon and not looking back.

sonic1519 says:

well said totally agree. 

saru4u says:

Unfortunately AT&T has only 16Gb of internl memory.Its not a problem because it has a microSD card slot.But wireless charging feature is missing. I saw some dots on this pic ,it should be having WC http://goo.gl/kF8w1y

Robert Grant says:

It's still a problem because you can't put maps, apps or app data on the storage device. If MS changed THIS, it would make my wife's 8S a totally new phone.
Come on, MS. Just a little code tweak. Not hard.

Not this time. I'm pretty sure they'll go PMA. AT&T is just giving them a hand by getting the foundation set early, therefore getting any kickbacks this industry can offer due to the volume of units that use PMA with them.

PeadarWagon says:

Apple doesn't always invent their own. They will buy something or implement and idea and pretend it's their own.

willied says:

That's probably why he put quotation marks around "invent."

poddie says:

Yup, you caught me!

Clavitox says:

I remember watching a video things that people think apple invented, and every single thing for traced back to someone else. So apple really doesn't invent anything

Choosing the best standard shouldn't be a Mobile-Phone Service Provider's business. Qi/PMA are nothing but a chip that goes inside the devices/smartphones, so sorting out which is the BEST is a process that is better suited for DEVICE/Smartphone makers than the CEO of AT&T.

For better or worse, AT&T has just killed Qi-Wireless standard as we know it, and here is why: AT&T not only is the most dominant GSM Mobile Service Provider in the US, it is the second largest Mobile-Phone service provider in US, just behind Verizon. The pending merger with the Leap/Cricket Wireless, should make AT&T ever closer to becoming the largest M.Phone Provider in US, surpassing 100 Million subscribers.

Furthermore, AT&T is almost always the first to launch new Smartphones into the market and some reason that is unknown to me; if a Smartphone is successful with AT&T, it also becomes successful with other carriers. Therefore, NO Smartphone/Device maker can afford not appeasing AT&T's demands. So, it is not a cost effective for Nokia or Samsung to continue making (if they still are?) a same smartphone model with PMA just for AT&T and then one with Qi for T-Mobile; Nokia somewhat tried that with its new Lumia 1520 - and - now, Nokia has changed its mind rather quickly. Nokia's global online is no-longer showing the Wireless Charger capability of its Lumia1520 global-version. In order to see the original hardware specification of Lumia 1520 (global version) with Wireless Charger which Nokia decided to delete, search "Lumia 1520" in www.archive.org (it might be too late, but try it).

However, Phone/device makers always want ways to reduce the final cost of their smartphone/device after the engineering, product testing and later supporting it. Now, the war of standards (Qi vs. PMA), for the Smartphone/Device makers it is no longer about choosing the superior standard, it is just about the bottom-line $$$/FINAL COST, ---and between the Qi and PMA, it is about; if you KNOW someone in the higher-ups, son, you are in!!!

Due to the AT&T's anti Qi-Wireless and paternal love for PMA standard (AT&T might have already notified their device/smartphone makers about the AT&T's PMA only policy), we should see more PMA products in the CES 2014 Las Vegas, NV JANUARY 7-10. - I will be there... In the meantime if you don't like what AT&T has done (Qi vs. PMA) sign the following petition or create a new one from the scratch - You will have my support :-) Remember, Freedom of Speech -- After all, this U.S.A - GB!!! http://www.change.org/petition... via change.org

They will change thier stance when the iPhone 6s begins supporting Qi or any other stupid Apple propietary BS!

georgeambriz says:

Lol people always finding ways to blame Apple

RedSamurai says:

Lol but can you really blame them?

PeadarWagon says:

It's an educated guess when you look at their market share and power they have over the carrier. Apple gets to call the shots and AT&T has to follow suit. Look at the bloatware on apple, android, WP and blackberry and tell me Apple doesn't have their hand in carrier politics.

greg2k says:

If you ask me, a 1520 without wireless charging and 16GB of storage should make it an entirely different device. Can't they just call the neutered AT&T version of the 1520 the 1521 or something like that?

zsgray86 says:

I think 1519 would be more appropriate....

PeadarWagon says:

You beat me to it!

infosage says:

Let's call it the AT&T Lumia 1420.  It's definitely not a true 1520, but better (and a lot more expensive) than a 1320.

The bad part is that Nokia has let AT&T now blocked the real 1520 from the entire U.S. market.  So Nokia goes into this years holiday season battle without their flagship phone in the US, nice.  

I have a Lumia 920 with AT&T, and yes I bought QI chargers from them, so I'm getting it twice from my buddies at AT&T.  I guess this is their definition of "loving customers".  I'd probably use a different term, but pretty mucht he same thing.  

Nokia Keeps Making a Bad Bet on AT&T: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2426085,00.asp

bsd107 says:

Apple will only do this by putting in a protected chip to make sure only their double-price chargers cam be used. Just like their Lightnin cables.

WilliamC1972 says:

Will an unlocked version of the 1520 work on, T Mobile US? 3g, 4g and there LTE?

pankaj981 says:

If Rogers gets one, then its unlocked version will

Steakman33 says:

That's what I'm going to do. Hopefully it's the full international version. I just looked on their website and there is no info on it so far. Screw ATT. I will probably still use their service because a get a major discount because of where I work, but I don't have to buy it from them. Besides, depending on how much either one is sold for it may cheaper to by it from Rogers due of the exchange rate.

trmnrs says:

Crossing my fingers Rogers gets this phone... We need options like this in Canada!

rory753 says:

if history repeats itself, then unlocked version will be showing up at expansys-usa.com, similar to how you can get an unlocked 1020/925/etc now. I'm going to wait for that one, since I really am tired of ATT's BS.

jfigge says:

I agree with this, but what annoys me is that you then end up paying the subsidy to AT&T for a phone you're not buying from them.  I very much like the way T-Mobile have gone where the phone purchase has been separated out from the contract, but AT&T's version (as expected) just screws you over even more and isn't what it claims to be.  I hate AT&T.  The only reason I'm with them is because my company gets 17% discount - It's Bitter-sweet (shimmer, haha)

rory753 says:

I have att, because I'm grandfathered into an unlimited data plan, and we have a 17% corporate discount. I'm going to be switching to T-Mobile because they offer a cheaper unlimited data plan with 2.5gb of tethering before any corporate discount. And free international roaming( I live in Seattle, so going to Canada makes this a useful feature). Basically, cost wise I have no reason to stay with att.

Munkeyphyst says:

You could get your discounted phone from them anyway and sell it to offset the cost of the unlocked phone you prefer.

cooldeal says:

People could use AT&T's GoPhone prepaid brand. You get LTE for significantly lower. For example, for $60/mo you can get unlimited calling, texting and 2GB data. The best thing is that the tax is only 50 cents more, not $10 more like on contract plans.

phirefly says:

Or Straight talk or AIO or Net10.  They all sell sims that use AT&T towers for a nice price.

bsd107 says:

Will an unlocked version purchased from expansys.com work on ATT, including tethering?

Credo93 says:

It would be nice to know that customers in the US can buy phones and use it on every carrier like we can here in Belgium. 
Very sad especcially those ugly logo's ...

DennisvdG says:

Lol I know right (Dutch)

Credo93 says:

Yeah, luckilly ... To bad Proximus, Mobistar and Base doesn't offer cheap 4G-options right now :( only 40+ Euro's per month, too expensive for me ...

Xaphoon148 says:

It's more than sad.
Luckily the only logo on my 1020 is NOKIA :)

alokinalset says:

Its really sad that the US user are having this problem, compare in Asia in which we can get it as what Nokia presented it.

Credo93 says:

Yeah i'm happy that we also get how Nokia presented it, very happy for that !

Jack Larson1 says:

You can, but it costs .99 cents per min for calling, too expensive unless traveling abroad.

Credo93 says:

Lolll way tooooooo expensive !! 

adrian1338 says:

And thats why AT&T is not a good partner for Nokia. Wonder when they will ever realise !

Exactly. Is not like AT&T has to spend $ on R&D or manufacture wireless chargers. They're just helping Windows phones less attractive by not having wire charging built in and in pretty sure that magically Apple will use PMA

I don't even understand why would AT&T have a word on the specifications of the phone. Nokia should sell it to them and that's it. Now there is 1520 with wireless charging and others doesnt have it. 
Why can't USA telecomunication companies be like every other company in the world ? They always have to have special phones for them, special specifications.. Such a mess.

khunhorm says:

Ever wonder why Sony smartphone chose to stay away from us market?

Exactly, the Nokia stock is already going down because investors know that units will no be sold in high #'s due to the missing built in wireless. Nokia should include a free wireless charger to give AT&T the finger.

mnjoe says:

Does this mean the AT&T 1520 wireless charging won't work with my existing charging pads for my 920 and 1020?

clappenings says:

It should still be ok

YesYesYap says:

So you want to go and buy something with your hard earned money that is just OK. that is why AT&T gets away with things like this... We as consumers accept the watered down crap they give us then justify it as ok... I think we should demand the most for our money when we buy a product and not always accept what they think they should give us...

Penny_1 says:

I don't think he meant he was OK with it, just that the existing wireless charger should still work...

YesYesYap says:

you are right... sorry... i am just a little charged 

ralexand56 says:

Hahaha, need a snickers?

Steakman33 says:

Not if ATT provides a PMA standard charging cover for it. The Nokia chargers that we have now are the QI standard. Hopefully Nokia will offer one of their own like they did for the 925 and 1020.

poddie says:

That's the thing... It doesn't sound like they will even have a pma option for the 1520. They just removed Qi to block further adoption of a competing standard. Sure, they'll sell it to you separately for another $50... But they know almost nobody will pay that. Assholes.

adrian1338 says:

It means that 1st your phone will not wireless charge at all and second that if wireless charging will ever be world wide acceppted you can be sure that your old charging pads either work or if not. if they work not due to AT&Ts help

rider2040 says:

It means that wireless chaging is not built into the ATT 1520.  If you want to use your existing charging pads on your 1520, you will need to buy an external snap on plate to add that function.

toph36 says:

It sounds like the QI shell will work fine.  It appears they are working on having a PMA shell as well, although not sure about that.

Jowarman says:

Actually, I just went to the AT&T store today to purchase a wireless charging case for my Lumia 925. I came home, and realized that it was not Qi!! So it wouldn’t work with my old wireless charger I had left over from my 920.  I went back to the store, and it turns out that ALL of their wireless cases are PMA! They then tried to upsell me one of their own wireless chargers that support PMA! Not only did I spend $50 on a wireless charging case BECAUSE they forced Nokia to get rid of Qi, but I ALSO have to purchase a new charger. This is ridiculous.

poddie says:

The headline makes it sound like they added something in exchange for removing Qi. They did not. This is just us getting screwed over politics. Welcome to America. Bastards. I am planning on potentially moving my three family accounts at the end of my contract if they don't stop this nonsense.

Rich Edmonds says:

I feel you. If our operators did such business over here we'd have riots in the streets.

lubbalots says:

America is too civilized for that. We bitch on the internet. Lolzz!

Rich Edmonds says:

Oh don't get me wrong, by rioting I mean drinking tea and playing cricket :-)

adrian1338 says:

You mean like they did in london 3 years ago :) 

Rich Edmonds says:

Ah, no that's a common misconception. See, those rioters were actually complaining they couldn't get a spot on Jeremy Kyle! :-)

Penny_1 says:

I think being too lazy is more accurate than being too civilized. There are so many things we don't like that is being done to us; we just don't bother to do anything about it.

MikeSo says:

"planning on potentially", "at the end of my contract", huh? Strong words there, fella. I'm sure AT&T is shaking in their boots. If you even remember why you were pissed off when that time rolls around.

poddie says:

I wasn't planning on purchasing this phone anyway.  I still have a year left on contract, and it's just too damn big.  I want whatever follows in the 1020's footsteps.  But if it doesn't have built-in wireless charging, 32GB+, and SD card due to AT&T then I won't be renewing my contract  when the time comes.  Wouldn't make a lot of sense for me to declare now that I won't, would it?  A lot can change in a year.  And that would also be why I stated "if they don't stop this nonsense".
I just don't like the precident being set here.
But thanks for making snap judgements with no information and being a jerk and all.

larspassic says:

The title makes it seem like PMA is built-in and Qi is optional. But it was a political decision by AT&T to "go with PMA."

poddie says:

That's what I was trying to say... I think the title of the article is very misleading... sounds like they removed Qi to make PHYSICAL space in the phone and put PMA charging in there. Very odd choice of title.

clappenings says:

Disappointing, but there's always a way around obstacles....

kevin sledge says:

Exactly the alternative is get the phone unlocked with everything originally included. It my not be able to apply to everyone but for the ones that can. I assume they will.

Charles Wang says:

I don't understand why carriers in the US have so much power compared to anywhere else in the world.

markdotinc says:

Exactly - how did they get in the position to command so much power & control?

Charles Wang says:

I had a look on Yahoo, if you mean market-capitalization, then:
Telstra - TLS: 62.95B
SingTel - SGT: 50.18B
Deutsche  (T-Mo): 49.15B
Voda: 180.95B
Vz: 144.50B
ATT: 183.92B
Telefonica: 80.10B
So if the rest of the world have similar market cap, how come the competition landscape is different? Also, the market-cap is only one measure, but if you look at earnings ... it's even more of a level playing field.

cannon#WP says:

It's more because the subsidies wireless carriers give to customers so that we're not paying $699 for the newest phone. Carriers are hellbent on not becoming dumbpipes and will pull these stunts to trap customers into no-win sitatutions. If you want the phone for $500 less & want to support your favorite OEM/ecosystem, then you'll buy it; but if you don't, or you buy it yourself unlocked, then we'll claim it's not selling/popular so we won't sell it anymore.

Charles Wang says:

I understand it from that point of view, but the fact that you are forced to enter into a contract for me seems rather ridiculous. I mean, they can price it such that it makes more financial sense to enter into contract with them, but if you have no option to buy unfettered, unadulted phone outright ... I mean, if you wanted a 32Gb with Qi built in 1520 in the USA, it's just not possible right? Not even if you're willing to pay for it. It's this lack of option that hurts the consumer. It's anti-competitive.

cannon#WP says:

I agree, but it always seems like these carriers are in collusion (although to public evidence exist) to keep these lack of options in place. It's possible to get a 32GB with Qi from places like Expansys, but again, there aren't many who are going to pony up $699, even if they can afford it AND you may not be able to take advantage of AT&T's LTE bands.

Azizelh says:

That doesn't make sense. In Europe, you would still get the phone at the $200-$250 price if it's on contract like here in the US.

Diamondx_8 says:

Because the consumers got hooked on subsidized phones.  No one wants to pay full price for a phone.  

Fritzly says:

Money spent to place their minions on Capitol Hill, supposedly acting as " People representatives" /s......

lubbalots says:

You have to ask yourself also, how the NSA still exist and continue to do what they do despite all those leaks.

Rishicash says:

Same can be said for banks, pharmaceutical companies.....

Jack Larson1 says:

Because the most powerful ones can hold a phone maker hostage (potentially make the phone flop) if they aren't No.1 in US. Its unbelievable and idiotic. Att stripping datasense after moths for gdr 2, still exclusive for 1520, and now they have stripped it to 16 gb and no built in WC, while collaborating with the enemy. Unreal.

Tjalsma says:

One of the MANY reasons AT&T will lose me as a customer in the beginning part of next year.

cannon#WP says:

And they couldn't care less. Because WP customers will leave, they'll claim WP is not selling and therefore, they don't need to carry the newest phones. It's a no win for us.

I remember a time when the carriers would at least have the illusion of serving their customers...

hipsterbot says:

At least att will stop hogging Nokia high end phones

Well, after next year, they'll technically be 'Microsoft' brand phones, not Nokia....as soon as the buy-out deal is completed at the beginning of next year.

crise says:

Can those carriers just fucking stop messing with devices. They should just fucking sell them.

cannon#WP says:

That's a future these carriers will make sure will never happen. They will fight tooth and nail with all of their money, legal powers and lobbyist to not be relegated to dumb pipes. They have too much money in this game and they fear that turning into a more European style carrier will eat away at their profits.

MadSci2 says:

Nailed it. They control the Politicians, and thereby, the ecosystem. See it as a glaring example of how effectively $ has taken control over the US 'democracy'.

KMF79 says:

You're more correct than you know.

YouTube or Netflix:
Zeitgeist: The Movie (first release)
Zeitgeist: Addendum (second release)
Zeitgeist: Moving Forward (latest release)

Watch them all, or at least one of them.

adrian1338 says:

Is there any phone that supports PMA out of the box at the moment?

Darkgift says:

As far as I know, no. I could be wrong, tho. Bit there are plenty of phones out there that have QI built in. It seems like AT&T is making sure no one puts wireless charging built in, while Verizon is making sure that they do. Carriers have too much say in phone manufacturing. They shouldn't have any at all. They're salesmen, not engineers.

tarzanmarzan says:

"they're salesmen, not engineers"

How simply put. Can't agree more

Charles Wang says:

Why do people insist on staying with their carriers? Is it because they have a monopoly in your area in terms of coverage / service? I really don't understand. If they have a monopoly, why isn't there any competition? Is the barrier of entry for other carriers so high in those areas?

jholso says:

For me at least, the only other option with good coverage around me is Verizon, and I would have no problem switching if it wasnt a CDMA network and I could use unlocked ATT/GSM phones on it. But because its very limited, and Tmobile in my area sucks Im sorta stuck.
Looks like Im buying the international version... Hmm Whats the eta for that?

Charles Wang says:

So why wouldn't T Mobile want to improve their coaverage in that area so they have more customers? That's the bit I don't understand.

jMawl says:

Unlike in Europe, there are parts of the US with very few people in them (e.g., a little place called Nebraska where I am from). At one time these places were only served by a single, small carrier (again, e.g., in Nebraska where that carrier was called AllTel). What has happened is these smaller carriers and their coverage areas were purchased by a larger carrier (usually Verizon) so that only that larger carrier has "good" coverage in the state. I no longer live there and am on ATT, but my parents still live there. If you look at a map of Nebraska, there are 2 cities (or large towns if you will). In Lincoln and Omaha and along interstate highways, most carriers have decent coverage. My parents live 15 miles outside of Lincoln, and I get 0 (zero) bars of service for all carriers except Verizon. The rest of the state is much the same.
Nebraska is just an example. Kansas, South Dakota, North Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, Colorado, Nevada, Utah, etc., etc. are much the same. Even some states in the relatively populous "East" and "South East" like Kentucky and Tennessee have terrible coverage for large stretches.

jMawl says:

My point being that for T Mobile there is little benefit to building out massive infrastructure to reach these people. All together it is a lot of customers, but we're talking about an area of land roughly the size of Europe as a whole.

andrewb65 says:

So basically, you have pretty much zero competition, shit coverage outside of large cities, you pay 4x what we do in europe and the carriers dick around with the specifications of the hardware before you get a chance to use it.
HA! HA! HA! It sounds really crap. Your government needs to step in and regulate. The market isn't working for you there. Unbridled market forces isn't always the correct way forward and regulation doesn't have to mean Marxism. The problem is your 'Public Servants'; they serve big business, not the public. Governments allowed global corporations to make massive profits thinking they'd be able to take a cut in taxes, but those corporations just hived it all off into off-shore accounts. This is why we have a global fuel crisis and inflation out-stripping wage increases too. It's the same in nearly every 'democracy' these days. We did it to ourselves.

MadSci2 says:

Yup. In the US, the Supreme Court created out of thin air the law that money=speech, and that Corporations=Citizens. Add to that that all US Politicians have to spend about half of their time raising $ in order to get (re)elected, and that's really all you need to know to understand why Corporations can do whatever they want here and screw the Public's interest.

infosage says:

Corporations are just figments of legal imagination. A designtion for a group of people, that own shares in a business.
I don't believe Corporations are Citizens, and should have protected free speech. They don't even exist, just try to touch one.  You have to touch a building, or an employee, but you can't touch a corporation.  Maybe the closest you can get is touching the paperwork that describes them.
That said too, they should not pay taxes either.  They have no production, can make no money, and it is impossible for them to pay taxes.  People, and only ever people, pay taxes.  If you try and charge taxes to a corporation (literally a legal figment), either the share holders pay the taxes (people), or the people that buy their services pay the taxes (people).  Why?  Because something that doesn't exist can't pay taxes.
Additionally, then I'm off my soapbox, corporations can't be evil, greedy, good, bad or indifferent.  Again, they are a legal figment.  Their leaders can be, but to say Big Oil is greedy is like saying Santa is good.  Both are impossible. (I hope that didn't burst anyones bubble).
We should all stop trying to anthropomorphize corporations.
Finally, and lastly, AT&T is evil, greedy, and sucks.  :)

Jack Larson1 says:

That, and the way a certain party completely unnecessarily shutdown our government, this back and fourth has been going for years. Some high fives even. The government is not going to step in.

no reply necessary

Depending on how rural the area is, it may not make fiscal sense to invest in new cell towers there. Companies like AT&T and Verizon already have large infrastructure investments in certain areas that pre-date cell phone usage.

Geography and cost.  The US is a huge nation. From your posts, it appears you are in the UK.  Look at the size of the US vs the UK.
 If you're a carrier and you don't have the existing infrastructure to cover a large geographic area, the cost of entry is prohibitive.  Verizon & AT&T have existing infrastructures and lots of money to expand them based off their historical businesses.  TMobile does not.  TMo focuses on covering as many actual people though by improving their infrastructure in large urban areas.  If you live in one of these areas, for the most part, TMo is great.  If you don't, you probably aren't going to be using TMo any time soon.

WYSIWYG editor is being wacky, here's the link I tried to put in original reply

Charles Wang says:

Yes, I am in the UK, but Australia has a similar geographic distribution profile as the US, if not more sparse, yet it doesn't suffer the same issue, at least not to the same extent. I mean, in Australia, Telstra is equivalent to ATT, they have the best coverage, both in terms of speed and area, especially in rural areas. But, they don't have the same amount of power ATT has in the US.
I mean, yes, it cost a lot to put up infrustructure in areas where there might not be much demand, but if you amortized the cost including urban areas,

sqlchicken says:

^^this. Also VZW nickel and dimes you to a ridiculous degree.

Darkgift says:

So does AT&T. More so in some areas (text messaging for instance). They're both absurdly expensive with shitty customer service. If Sprint picked up some good hardware, I'd be back there in a second. They're service is equally just as good as VZ and AT&T in my area (Central New Jersey), they just have low end phones.

JPDVM2014 says:

This, my only other option is Verizon or Sprint. I already left Verizon once, I'm not planning on going back. T-Mobile would be great except I would have 2g service pretty much everywhere I frequent( rural South Jersey). So sprint would be a good option, but they have pretty much the worst hardware, and they are CDMA so it isn't like I could bring an unlocked GSM phone. So AT&T it is, at least for the forseeable future.

terrokkinit says:

Verizon's 4GLTE network is GSM based, my friend ;)

jholso says:

I guess I should have been more specific with the "But its very limited" that was refering to their LTE because It has not reached my area yet, except where I work, but a cell phone that only works is few places around me is useless. :/

Darkgift says:

Well if 4g service is spotty, then ur screwed. Besides...i believe that's just data. Voice and text ate still cdma.

ImSoWade says:

I work for AT&T so I get a great discount

Rishicash says:

I wouldn't say that out loud in these here parts mister. It could get 'ya kilt!

ImSoWade says:

Haha! I don't work on the wireless side so I have nothing to do with this lol

ralexand56 says:

Hahahaha! Let's see some ID partner.

Jack Larson1 says:

Sneak in, burn att 1520 version blueprint, replace with Nokia version. Thx in advance!

Maaz Mansori says:

The general rule is the more expensive the carrier, the better coverage you get. But the US is such a big country that you have to evaluate coverage where you live and where you travel to and see which carrier works best for you. For most people, this is either Verizon or AT&T. However, those people are primarily stay in one area and T-Mobile happens to have good coverage there, they can save some money by going with T-Mobile. T-Mobile has been adding a significant amount of LTE coverage, city by city, but it's just not in their budget to expand as much as AT&T and Verizon. The other major thing is spectrum and the number of towers. Verizon and AT&T has far more than the smaller carriers and they aren't usually willing to sell them. In some places, especially rural areas, T-Mobile roams on AT&Ts network but those cities that T-Mobile already has coverage, this is usually not the case.
Another thing to consider is if T-Mobile did manage to grab more spectrum and had to raise prices to expand, a lot of people on a low budget would move to prepaid options on AT&T (or Aio Wireless) or other carriers.

txDrum says:

@the person from Australia, Australia may have the same kind of profile, but its much smaller. So again, its easier to cover the whole area with fewer towers, which is less expensive.

Ironically, Verizon's coverage is much better for me than AT&T. Their LTE is insanely better than everyone else combined. I pretty much have LTE everywhere I go unless I'm driving through country in Texas. AT&T's 3G hspa is better, but you have so much LTE coverage that it doesn't matter. The only thing I'm hoping is that windows phone becomes more easily available for us in the next year.

As far as service goes though, Verizon is best for me. And customer service in my town at both carriers tends to be great, so I generally just go in to the store to get help or warranty.

Maaz Mansori says:

AT&T works best for me. In my area, the coverage is equivalent to Verizon and the LTE speeds are slightly faster on AT&T, plus AT&T has a better Windows Phone selection. However, in many areas 50 miles away from my city, for example, AT&T may have good HSPA coverage but lacks LTE while Verizon has LTE almost everywhere now.
People in other countries assume AT&T has the best coverage though. It does in some areas and is tied with Verizon on others, but overall in the country, Verizon has more extensive coverage than AT&T, especially in rural areas.

omullins says:

This is RIDICULOUS. Nokia needs to get out of bed with AT&T and offer more devices on T-Mobile or give us more opportunities for unlocked, unbranded devices.

txDrum says:

T-mobile doesn't have the money or coverage. The reason that Nokia is with AT&T is that it was the least expensive, or the most profitable, when they had to choose one carrier. I'm seriously hoping that Microsoft's influence (read: money) will help with wider carrier availability.

Rishicash says:

Nokia has developed battered wife syndrome. She knows it should leave but just can't. Who else would want her?

YesYesYap says:

Preach it! i am right there with you.

Fndlumia says:

Wow Nokia this Alliance with AT&T is possibly the worst decision you have ever made and that includes symbian^3. AT&T molesting great phones and stalling updates since 1998

Bob Shiska says:

Eh, there is truth in PMA being much more widely adopted in the installed charger realm, where Qi seems to be bigger for handsets themselves. Nokia's gotten Qi charging in a few places, but most of the announcements I see seem to be PMA-driven.
The sooner a standard is adopted, the better. Hopefully this is a move in that direction.

adrian1338 says:

And which device supports PMA out of the box that their would be a reason to use PMA?

Darkgift says:

None, as far as I know. But you could buy a case/back. They crazy thing is, if there aren't any PMA phones, but there are dozens of QI,, the places installing these stations would us QI. I don't get it.

kullkid92x says:

lmao exactly! you see how dumb that cycle is lol most OEM's are using Qi, most locations are deploying PMA... who's going to use those stations if they have Qi... the cycle of dumbasses lol

Just like the article states, we're back to VHS vs. Betamax and until one wins, we the consumers, all lose -_-

Spicymikey says:

Sorry, this story sounds like BS.  Surprised WPC would post this. 
First, who is "Don Moorers".   I Binged him and there is no such person with a LinkedIn account or any search results with that name from that location for Microsoft.  There is a Don Moorers who is a politician in the Maryland area, but that was about it.    Even if I Bing/Google my name I will find several hits.   So that's red flag #1
Second, why in the world would "Don" reveal such a backroom strategy like that to a customer who was sending a complaint letter.  I think, if AT&T wanted to admit such a position, they would do it in a more formal way.   I suppose Don could just be an employee who went rogue and decided to talk straight to a total stranger via email, but highly unlikely.   Flag #2
Third, why in the world would AT&T even take such a position.  Why would they care what inductive power strategy was adopted.  Why would they want to alienate one of the top 3 phone manufacturers in the world, soon to be part of Microsoft.  Why?    Flag #3
I am still pretty sure they are stripping it out for the same reasons they are stripping out RAM.  Cost.  Unless there is a conspiracy to cause a colapse of memory chip manufacturers too :)

adrian1338 says:

Why they care about what standard wins? because they are member of the PMA and not of the QI Wireless alliance.. thats why. they pump the money into PMA and support Qi afterwards.. i dont think so

Huime says:

You are really bad at internet searching. #1 I found news about him albiet working for a different department in ATT dated back in 2009. #2 There is a Don Mooers in LinkedIn listed under Tele Comm. #3 Vadofone got a 32G 925 and everyone else got the 16G. Its called a "Deal".

Spicymikey says:

Thanks for clarifying.  I still don't see who you are referencing on LinkedIn but I'll take your word for it.
I still find it hard to believe this info would come out this way at this time.  It's just my opinion, but I'm sure all the angry attacks will come questiioning my inteligence, and mothers character. :)

jMawl says:

Did you use Bing or Google?

Spicymikey says:

Bing    I use it by choice, not because I am trying to support Microsoft (or get my Bing points) but because I do a lot of microsoft technical searches related to SQL Server, Azure, Visual Studio, etc.  Understandably Bing is far superior in the finds on those subjects.   But I wouldn't doubt if Google would have been better in this case.  Should have tried that also.  Regardless, not that big of a deal.  I'll take Huime's word for it that this "Don" guy exists

wpguy says:

Why choose either when you can choose both! http://www.bingiton.com/

Spicymikey says:

Haha, not a bad idea :)   Bing's search challenge page could indeed be used the way you suggest.  It would get annoying if you wanted to do multiple searches in a row, but none the less, its a valid suggestion!

Rich Edmonds says:

Do you know how to use a search engine? That's a serious question.

Spicymikey says:

OK here it comes. Thanks Rich for questioning my intelligence. Yes, I am a moron who barely can figure out how to put on my pants in the morning, find the front door, and type a name into a search box. You are correct. have a nice day.

Rich Edmonds says:

Lol, I'm just messing, dude. It's Friday, we all have one of those days when the mind just wants to shut down ;-)

Spicymikey says:

Thanks Rich.  We're cool.  It's just some people on here are always ready to go to the mats over things.  We're just talking off the top of our heads giving random thoughts.   Lets everyone remember that.

Rishicash says:

This is how adults play. Good on 'ya lads!

Jack Larson1 says:

Lol, my favorite kind of sarcasm.

dancunder says:

This is ridiculous. I have 3 Nokia qi chargers at home and office. Planning to get the car holder installed in my car when available. Luckily I am not in the states, but I am afraid this is the sign of things to come... Mess of a fight where consumers get screwed.

adrian1338 says:

Well good that AT&T is just a US Carrier. Just hope that Nokia learned and put the Wireless charging in ALL their Phones not just the 920 so far

Fndlumia says:

Car holder with qi is great, have two, one in car and one on wall next to bed

theefman says:

Verizon supports Qi, I would suggest as many as possible switch to them. Tmo unfortunately seems to have no interest in WP so they're not a viable option. Or just import a device and go prepaid. There really isn't a reason why anyone should be stuck with such a lousy carrier as at&t. Vote with your wallets and boycott the at&t 1520!

MikeSo says:

This. It's the only thing that matters.

would we need to unlock a European devise or do they come unlocked?

DalekSnare says:

I wasn't going to get it anyway, but if they gimp the 920's successor I won't get it. I'll even switch carriers so I can have actual wireless charging, not vaporware supported by some coffeeshop chain I never go to.

Are those all Nokia Music pinned tiles in the picture? Looks good!

Reflexx says:

This sucks. Who the hell uses PMA right now?

cybermoose89 says:

Thank goodness the uk model is 32gb with the wireless charging

zorb58 says:

I wish there was enough choice in the marketplace for people to catch on and switch en masse away from AT&T.  We are seeing the reemergence of Bell Telephone.

Robewms says:

We need to shift the power by just saying NO, and everyone move to another provider, which in turn would give them instant control of the cell industry, then we the consumers can say what we want from a provider, but since a mass movement of consumers is so unlikely due to contracts and provider hype that would be tough to do, basically give us what we want or we're outta here.....lets do it.....

sManowar says:

Very disappointing. I've already invested in various Qi chargers for my 920 and 1020. Does this mean no future Qi implementation at all on any phone released on ATT? [Big sigh].

bguy_1986 says:

I hate AT&T with a passion........

gentry33 says:

Any chance I can get a European model and use it on AT&T network. I can't believe that they are allowed to cannibalize the hardware.

s13dayday says:

Im looking to go the same route.  I cant believe they would drop the devices internal storage to 16gb and I use my wireless changing matt quiet frequently and am upset about at&t changing over to pma.

Painbearer says:

PMA should give up, Qi has way more market presence internationally. PMA is fighting a losing battle.

Doesn't Samsung use Qi?!?! How can they possibly think a different standard has a chance? I believe the new Nexus 7 uses Qi as well. Between Google and Samsung, that is a good chunk of the android market.

cannon#WP says:

Yup, LG, Samsung, HTC, Nokia & Sony are all apart of the WPC which push Qi BUT...and this is a big BUT...LG, Samsung, HTC & Sony are ALSO apart of the PMA. The split here is that Verizon is with the WPC but AT&T is with the PMA.


The ONLY reason I stay with ATT is that for whatever reason Verizon has almost no signal where my work location is in Boston.

This crap they keep pulling is just killing these great Nokia phones. 16GB, are u kidding me? This phone better be no more than $199 on contract or they are going to have a hard time selling this over the Note 3. Actually $149 would be a better price so we can say it ks half the cost of the Note 3.

I truly have you ATT!

Charles Wang says:

So why is it that there are no alternatives to ATT? As in, why do they have a monopoly in coverage?

For any Windows Phone on AT&T, all you have to do is wait 1-2 months, and it is almost free. Just don't be a part of the I have to get it day 1, and you will get an amazing deal. Everyone wants the cameras on the Nokia phones, but nobody wants the lack of apps that comes with it.
I'm on my 3rd windows phone (a Lumia 1020 because of the camera), but I carry an HTC One around because I truly prefer the way the apps run (the selection of good apps is key too) and how much better of a job it does on my WiFi than my Lumia...an HTC One based windows phone would be just about the best thing ever.
I too was totally excited about the 1520 until I saw how AT&T gimped it. I guess they did me a favor. I'll just stick to my 1020/HTC One wonder twin combo!

GSOgymrat says:

Anyone know how bulky these charging shells are?

lubbalots says:

It will obviously add bulk.

Robewms says:

Government is supposed to work the same way, give us what we want or You're outta there

lubbalots says:

Lolzz! You're kidding yourself. I haven't seen any of those government cronies leave office since I was born. They bitch about those government officials but never vote them out or they vote in a clone. Like ATT customers, they never leave despite the fact.

wpguy says:

I tried, but was only allowed one vote per office...

bbraune says:

Will there be two different charging shells offered:  one for Qi and one for PMA?

Here in Uk never heard of PMA. Never heard of Qi before Nokia. Just use qi because I got a free charger with my phone.

Why Not says:

America sounds like an awesome place.

lubbalots says:

Wish I had money to move to Europe.

Th1ckNasty says:

So does Qi work with pma charging at all? Or can pma cases work with my current Nokia charger?

Why is pma so much better over Qi which has been great so far?

I'm mad that it doesn't have wireless charging, but it isn't a deal breaker. They should have made the device have it built in for day one!

Maybe amazon will sell an unbranded phone that you can then tie to att if you need/want their service.

doubledeej says:

They aren't compatible.
PMA devices more-or-less don't really exist.  It's a standard with almost no products using it.  It seems more like a bunch of companies trying to get together to create a brand new standard rather than adopt the one that the most consumers are actually using.
Qi has been available, at least as an option, if not included out of the box, on many high end phones for at least a couple of years.  As far as I know PMA hasn't actually been included in any phones to date.  So at this point it is more of a theoretical standard rather than a practical one.
My guess is that PMA is gaining partners because industry heavyweight Duracell is behind it.  Qi, on the other hand, is backed by a much smaller organization.  So even though Qi had appeared to have emerged as a common standard that was being used by real devices by real consumers, Duracell has somehow managed to convince manufacturers and carriers that their standard is better even though nobody is actually using it.

penetronn says:

Forget AT&T. Verizon all the way once my contract is up. Too slow on updates, too many dead zones, no NFL mobile

The problem with Verizon is that you can't use that phone on a GSM network which is lets face it the whole Europe uses. So no Verizon for me.

Seems to me PMA has already won...the fact that AT&T are pushing for it here, means it will be the new standard

Darkgift says:

How do you figure? I don't know anybody who uses PMA. I mean when the PowerMat first came out yrs ago, sure. But nobody since. Nobody wants those ugly shells on their phone. But I know plenty of people (Wp and Android) who use QI. I'm gonna have to disagree.

rahul.sharma says:

I don't get it. How in the world ATT can control what components phone manufacturers can use in the phone. It is like your ISP is saying they won't provide service if your PC does have ram from Samsung. BS, this is bullying and no one can do anything in here???
Can someone explain if this is even legal what ATT is doing?