So... Sprint is considering charging a $1 more for these files that aren't downloaded from Sprint in an effort to protect the consumer from themselves and these malacious files ( 🤣 ) and not to simply increase revenue where they are losing it?

I'm glad ISP's don't work that way...

Try running 3rd party apps on verizon oh wait you can't can you?

LOL! They block URL's. 🤣

cant you just use opera mini for browsing? it works better than wap browsers. wap browsing was the title of this thread, not downloads, and you can get malicious virus-like problems from non sprint sanctioned downloads. If someone has a problem with their phone and they bring it into the store i used to work for (im at Radio Shack now where it doesnt matter, we send it to repair), first thing we were told to look for was ringtones and wallpapers NOT downloaded from Sprint...if they were there, to give phone back to customer and tell them that we cant do anything due to those downloads...

If you think about it captainplooky, Sprint is increasing revenue by charging $1, and if malacious files are inserted, guess what? Cha-ching! More revenue to service and repair. It's an option for the customer, that's if Sprint does charge for WAP browsing. And yes, some ISP's do work this way. There are some URL's, such as porn,etc., that can bill your ISP via IP address.

No ISP I'm aware of charges you an access charge, as well as, a charge for visiting particular websites.

Choosing to subscribe to a website's content is another matter completely.

Sprint is loosing revenue on URL sites such as 3gforfree.com and gritsandeggs.com. These sites don't charge a monthly service fee, in order for Sprint to gain some kind of revenue, they may start charging to access the URL. I know Sprint can block URL's, they've done it to some URL's that allowed Sprint users to watch free movies. There's a few out there still. We'll see what becomes of this WAP browsing fee. 🙂

Yup, and it's a huge conflict of interest that you get into when talking about service providers who also want to be content providers.

Interesting point. The problem I see is in the price you pay. You pay 'X' amount for the phone, 'X' amount for the service on top of 'X' amount for add'l services... I would think the consumer would insist that SPCS play tech support on the product. Kind of like buying a PC from Dell. You paid an add'l sum of money for 1yr/2yr support and proceed to d/l porn, malware, etc BUT YET you still have recourse to call Dell to have them help remove the schmutz just to get the machine to boot up to a desktop... G-d*mn Windows...

hell yeah its an effort to make more money. but its also a way to deter customers from downloading potentially harmful files onto thier phone. customers tend to be very ignorant about these things. thats why Premium SMS is the problem it is. youve obviously never taken a Tech call where the customers Treo 650 has lost its contact list due to receiving a file sent to them from a 3rd-party provider... i have. its not any fun.

-RCR

I have dealt with several devices losing their info. Yes, it's not fun, and the customer has to understand it's not our Sprint's or the manufactures fault. It is stated on the manufactures brochure. I know, I know, who reads the brochure.

which I doubt will happen with sprint phones.
Well, more than doubt, is hope. 😕