If Ma Bell had not been Broken Up Would We have Smartphones Today?

[bob012345]

If Ma Bell had not been broken up would we have smartphones today?

 

[phinds]

If Ma Bell had not been broken up would we have smartphones today?

Yes

 

[berkeman]

If Ma Bell had not been broken up would we have smartphones today?

I know this is the GD forum, but can you please provide some supporting links for this type of debate?

(Disclaimer -- I went through Graduate School on a Bell Labs scholarship and worked for Bell for a few years...)

 

[bob012345]

I know this is the GD forum, but can you please provide some supporting links for this type of debate?

(Disclaimer -- I went through Graduate School on a Bell Labs scholarship and worked for Bell for a few years...)

It's a question for thought so I do I have to have a firm position? If you require one I would guess no, but we would have very small high tech landlines.

 

[berkeman]

It seems like a very interesting question, but some links to supporting information one way or the other would be helpful. For now I'll close this thread until you or others can supply some useful links. They must exist...

 

[fresh_42]

All found on Wikipedia:

The 1982 United States v. AT&T antitrust lawsuit resulted in the divestiture of AT&T's ("Ma Bell") local operating subsidiaries which were grouped into seven Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOCs), commonly referred to as "Baby Bells", resulting in seven independent companies, including Southwestern Bell Corporation (SBC).

The first commercial automated cellular network (1G) analog was launched in Japan by Nippon Telegraph and Telephone in 1979.

 

[berkeman]

Thread reopened.

 

[Borek]

I understand we discuss the subject under an assumption that rest of the world was not capable of coming up with an idea of a cellular network?

Bold assumption I must say.

 

[russ_watters]

If Ma Bell had not been broken up would we have smartphones today?

It doesn't strike me that one thing has anything to do with the other. Can you explain why you might think there could be a connection?

 

[bob012345]

I suspect that no, we would not have smartphones or at least not like we do now because there would be little motive when one has a monopoly already.

https://www.cio.com/article/228691/...ll-system-breakup-isn-t-a-model-for-tech.html

https://fee.org/articles/ma-bell-suppressed-innovation-for-thirty-grueling-years/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch...e-users/185c55de-505f-4f1b-98e8-e1e2bf3b67b2/

 

[russ_watters]

Imo, the important thing to recognize is that smart phones are not primarily phones, but mainly computers. The computer is the primary component, the phone is the add-on. That's why they came from a computer company, not a phone company.

 

[bob012345]

It doesn't strike me that one thing has anything to do with the other. Can you explain why you might think there could be a connection?

I suppose radio telephones could have independently morphed into modern smartphones competing with Ma Bell.

 

[russ_watters]

I suppose radio telephones could have independently morphed into modern smartphones competing with Ma Bell.

I think you're looking at the question backwards. Look at my next post...

 

[Klystron]

From this article

A car phone is a mobile radio telephone specifically designed for and fitted into an automobile. This service originated with the Bell System, and was first used in St. Louis on June 17, 1946.

Not definitive but Bell certainly encouraged mobile radio telephony. Add a tiny computer, tv screen and camera for 'smarts'.

[edit: saw @russ_watters post after posting above. 1946 date for car phones amazes me.]

Early computers were not always equipped with network cards. Often relied on phone modems for communication. Smart phones converge several technologies. Tends to support the 'yes' reply to the OP.

 

[bob012345]

Imo, the important thing to recognize is that smart phones are not primarily phones, but mainly computers. The computer is the primary component, the phone is the add-on. That's why they came from a computer company, not a phone company.

How do you suppose Ma Bell would have reacted to computer companies pushing to make phones an add on to digital devices? Embrace or hinder? Or, would a wireless internet be independent of Ma Bell's reach allowing independent internet phone technology?

 

[russ_watters]

How do you suppose Ma Bell would have reacted to computer companies pushing to make phones an add on to digital devices? Embrace or hinder?

Without looking into the details of the history, the iPhone was first released in partnership with a baby bell. I don't see why or even how they would/could hinder.

 

[Hornbein]

If Ma Bell had not been broken up would we have smartphones today?

Ma Bell tried to suppress the development of MCI by refusing to interconnect with it. MCI sued and won. This led directly to the breakup of Bell Telephone.

If a communications monopoly or oligopoly refused to connect with smart phones that would pretty effectively kill the market. We see this today with Huawei smartphones. If said oligopoly were worldwide then smart phones would be a dead duck.