Apple's iPhone "wrecking" the cell industry - Page 5

Your logic that a continuing upgrade path could ever be completed on a thriving carrier speaks volume for your lack of understanding on this matter.

Your definition that more towers, more 3G in ruraler areas, higher classes (read bandwidth via more antenees) of HSDPA and HSUPA, and a wider spectrum equates to a simple patch, not major upgrades, is also quite telling.

Tell us, what would be an upgrade if all those billions are just simple patches?

Really? And you know this because???

The fact that they don't have it up and running tells us that they had issues.

I am running v3.1 Beta. MMS will be available on AT&T when it hits the update servers. I have deduced this because the option to add and send MMS is not locked out with the new profiles. However, in testing this the MMS fails server-side. I've been trying every day or two to an AT&T phone that can recieve MMS, it times out.

Craig Moffett needs to better understand what he's talking about.

The issue that he surfaces is nothing more than a reflection of the mess in the US cellular industry. The rest of the world operates on one national or multi-national standard (typically GSM) and people purchase whatever phone they want.

The cellphone manufacturers sell phones through dealers or direct and the cellular operators provide service. Although you can purchase a cell phone outside a contract in the US, the rates you pay still contain a surcharge to recoup the discount the cellular operators incur on their phones. The result is higher than necessary rates, typically crap phones and limited competition.

This entire issue is nothing more than another mess created by the lack of standardization and the lack of competition within the industry. If Mr. Moffett would care to find something worthy to write about, perhaps he should read some of the comments on this site.

Phones are exclusive to carriers all the time. The most recent is the Pre with Sprint, but it's certainly not a new practice.


I don't get dropped calls, and I'm actually paying less with AT&T then I did with a Treo on Sprint. The real kicker? I use my iPhone ALLOT more then I used my Treo on Sprint - because it's actually useful!


Yes, there are pleanty of things in this thread that are ridiculous...


What's to say that if other carriers got the iPhone they wouldn't have the exact same issues? Or have even worse issues? Data usage on the iPhone is unprecedented...


If they unlocked it and sold it open tomorrow, your choice would be TMobile. Sprint and Verizon are incompatible with the iPhone - the radios and cellular protocols are totally different.


Yup, if you want an iPhone in the US you are pretty much stuck with AT&T (or you can get a 1st generation iPhone and go with TMobile). But it's certainly not anti-competitive. There are plenty of other companies that are free to compete with the iPhone and invent something better. Just because you don't get exactly what you want, doesn't make the existing situation anti-competitive


Must suck to be you.

Egad, are people really this entitlement based these days? Do you routinely throw temper tantrums when you don't get exactly what you want?


In your dreams, maybe. Will never happen because it doesn't exist.


If the dropped calls bother you that much, call customer service and get a service credit.


This right here shows your total unrealistic expectations. Land lines didn't always have perfect service - Ma Bell started over 100 years ago, yet it wasn't the 1950's that they started becoming prevalent in rural areas - heck, even into the 70's party lines were common.

In the US, the wireless industry is in it's infancy comparatively. Primarily because we had an extensive land-line infrastructure. Look at countries like India that didn't have an extensive terrestrial infrastructure - wireless is much more prevalent.

It's market forces, not some grand conspiracy Look at how AT&T is upgrading their infrastructure post-iPhone. They are scrambling to keep up with demand, and doing better at it in some areas then others...


What's not right are your over-inflated expectations and misguided sense of entitlement.

Unfortunately you aren't alone in your misgivings...

Japanese would never work in the US as they reverse the frequency as well as NTT Docomo's phones are all WCDMA 2100, which no carrier in the US uses. I lived in Sasebo for a few years and can tell you that the phones aren't cheap at all. Korean phones only work on Verizon's network or should I say did till Verizon stopped accepting Korean ESN's. The reason Verizon could use them is that they run on 1800 and I can tell you that a Korean handset will set you back more then any Japanese cellphone ever would. The US government is not protecting Motorola as they are a major player in the overseas markets and it is the carriers not moving those phones over as they would not be able to sell them. The carriers would have to subsidies the phones so bad they would not be making money back even with you locked in a contract. I will add a few pics of two of the phones I had when living in Japan.

/[img=http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/7470/photodld.jpg][/IMG]

CDMA carriers in the US as well as parts of Asia will get the iPhone once LTE is fully launched

You will only find LTE network hardware right now and not handsets or network cards. Qualcomm Gobi uses CDMA/WCDMA right now and Im sure they could make a chip that would work with LTE as well.

Stop trying to inject objectivity into an emotional argument!

We've all heard a lot of things, and we have no reason to think that anything we've heard is accurate.

False (all of it).

That amazes me because I'm in a borough of NYC and the AT&T service sucks. I get a very high percentage of dropped calls and in my apartment, which worked great with Verizon, I have to stand near the window for AT&T to work.

Having said that, if Apple were to switch to Verizon in the U.S., I have a feeling that especially in heavily populated cities, Verizon would have the same problems AT&T has had-- the network would be overwhelmed and web access would be very slow. And if it added enough subscribers, Verizon might start dropping calls as well.

Not in a way that helps your New Zealand comment stand up. Also we were running dual networks, GSM and CDMA up until a year ago.

Also IF AT&T's user base is 8x that of the whole population of Australia THEN your claim becomes even weaker. With 8 times the revenue they can't manage to upgrade a network.

At times the government here tips some money in but usually it operates in reverse as such where the government forces the main Telco to provide service to small communities.

The ACTUAL problem TenBell is that Australia's first 3G class network starting rolling out in 2002 NOT 2007, now we have no less than 4 GSM-3G networks as opposed to between half and ONE.

It's got nothing to do with the size of the country

It's got nothing to do with servicing more or less customers

It's got to do with being 5-6 years behind the rest of the world, well India and third world nations are about on par with the USA cellular network so not quite the whole world.

5-6 years ain't bad, the USA stayed about 30-40 years behind in TV format and what is it now 60-100 years behind in measuring format.

They don't have an eye roll, so

Just because you type the word doesn't make it so.

Apple is making more than the $199/$299 on the upfront iPhone sales.

How it gets the rest and how much seems to be between AT&T and Apple. Unless you care to share some inside information you have.

Actually Verizon has one of the best networks out there and probably wouldn't have that issue. Verizon spent close to 6 billion a fear years ago in a complete upgrade and spends millions more a year in maintenance. I could careless which network is better I will follow the iPhone.

AT&T is extorting people, but not like Verizon does

OMG such a bash! I cant believe we only have one and a half 3G GSM network. Im sorry that CDMA is more popular here then anywhere besides SK. 5-6 years behind? Where do you get these numbers? AT&T is already moving towards HSPA+ and is looking at having LTE out in a year or two. Sprint Nextel already has one of the worlds first 4G networks and Verizon is looking to start deploying LTE in the next year. What are you talking about with the TV format? The US has always used NTSC(now ATSC) and so does all of North and most of South America.

Everyone knows that Apple makes the $99-299 + the AT&T subsidy ($300-400) based on the PAYG prices. No-one calling BS on your comments has suggested otherwise.
It is your implication that Apple is making $$s off the contract revenue that is being called False. If you are remembering anything, it was that Apple got a share of the contract revenue on the 2G iPhones when they were sold unsubsidized. That was officially ended when the 3G came out at a subsidized price.
Apple still accounts for iPhones over 24 months for its own purposes to supposedly "to enable free updates to iPhone users" but that is another thread.

Really? If you and your brother had to start from scratch to install cell towers until you finished the job, and would only be paid once completed, would you rather spend years covering South Korea or many lifetimes attempting to cover the U.S.?

Regardless of what youve told yourself your whole life - size matters.

You also need to look at a topography map. Fewer cell signal obstacles in Australia VS. the U.S.

You might find it staggering that every nook and cranny of the U.S. has a population of cell phone users, from our rich populations to our poor populations. Top to bottom, side to side. China, like Australia, only has a coastal cell phone population, so their billion+ head count (most of whom are too poor to own a cell phone) doesnt make up the difference.

Covering the entire U.S. is a near impossible job. There is no other country in the world that compares for Land Area to Cell Phone Use Per Square Mile/Kilometer to the U.S.

Not even close.

Actually my original post on this sub-topic was replying to somebody who said iPhone buyers were not paying an Apple tax for the phone. And I called BS on that. And said something to the effect of "I imagine" Apple is making money on the contract. I am happy to be wrong on the details as I do not follow these things that closely. But the original item being replied to was in reference to the denied Apple tax. So in that regard I I think "False (all of it)." does not quite hit the nail on the head. Apparently I didn't either, but a person can't deny we pay more because of the little apple on the back of these things.

With the news coming out today that Verizon is going to build their own app store and that app store is going to be the only app store allowed to be installed on Verizon devices the Iphone will never go to verizon, there is no way Apple is going to bring a phone to Verizon that cannot have their own app store on it. If verizon sticks to this then there will never be an Iphone for Verizon, maybe T-mobile in 2010?

This is the explanation I was googling for last night and didn't find. Thank you.

Fascinating insights as always, Mel.

You dummy. It's not inside information. If you post crap and get called on it, changing what you said before doesn't make the original crap correct. Yes Apple makes $300-400 more than the retail price on each iPhone. But contrary to your very clear and very wrong post, they do not make any money off the monthly contract.

You spewed: "Apple continues to make money on you, per the monthly contract that it gets a piece of, for at least 2 years."

If only you weren't posting on a message board where what you said wasn't recorded. I did you the favor of posting what you said that was 100% wrong in my original reply. Here, I'll do it again for you. If you really think the below text can be translated to "Apple makes more than $199 off an iPhone sale" then you're delusional.

"While I understand that you are referring to the quote you cited above, I would have to say that you are quite delusional to think that there isn't an "Apple Tax" on the iPhone.

Apple continues to make money on you, per the monthly contract that it gets a piece of, for at least 2 years. Maybe longer and we have no idea exactly how much. I would imagine they make more off the lifetime of the contract than they do off the $199/$299 for the device at the store."

Do you understand now?

Here, I'll say it for you in a language you can understand.

ALL OF THE MONEY THAT APPLE MAKES OFF THE IPHONE, IT MAKES AT THE TIME OF SALE. IT MAKES NO MONEY AFTER THE $600 OR SO THAT GETS PAID BY THE PHONE COMPANY WHEN THAT PHONE COMPANY BUYS THE PHONE FROM APPLE SO IT CAN RESELL IT TO YOU.

Understand now?

AT&T's said that they have a long way to go. I don't doubt it.

Loser. You probably don't even own an iPhone.

I have no problems with the iPhone or AT&T, so the analyst can go suck it!

"wrecking" the wireless industry? He means "wrecking" the ridiculous, innovation-stifling, anti-competitive status quo where carriers have complete control over which devices can be used on their network and what software can be used on those devices.

Previous poster: [ATT could have had tethering and MMS easily]


Because 3rd world countries have it right now as we speak. With the iPhone 3G and over the next few months iPhone 3GS

Ah, everyday I sit back an enjoy my MMS and tethering. Actually, MMS is nonsense for me but tethering is a real bl**dy lifesaver. Evil locked or expensive pay-by-hour Wi-Fi networks! You shall not pass!

+1 rep point for you for attempting to use the word highlighted in red below.

There was nothing grammatically wrong with the spelling, except for that minor issue of it not actually existing as a word, yet.

Solipsism, you are behind the times on your comment. China Mobile never had any intention to sign up with Apple, they just held the 'carrot' for long enough that they can release their own handset - they announced the Ophone and Mmarket about a month ago.

http://deancollinsblog.blogspot.com/...marketcom.html

Cheers,
Dean Collins
www.Cognation.net

Why would China Mobile need to have false negotiations with Apple to then release their own handset and never sign a deal for the iPhone?

Sounds like a convoluted Bond villan plot.

OK, but let's look at usage. Half of all iPhones sold are in the US - the rest are distributed throughout the entire world.

That's a huge load on AT&T.

So yes, I'm sure they could flip a switch and turn on MMS and Tethering. And then watch their network totally collapse.

That would make everyone happy though, right? Because at least they would have MMS and Tethering? No way to use it mind you, but the geek checklist box would be checked and all would be right with the world.



Seriously, is anyone really paying attention other then obsessively repeating "I want I want I WANT"?!?!?

Or a ploy to pimp your blog \

The only way that such talks would help China Mobile is to keep China Unicom from getting the iPhone before the Ophone arrives, but as TenoBell stated it’s very convoluted way of doing things.

The most pressing issues I see here are that…

• Such a victory would be very short lived
• Unicom would be more likely to give Apple what it wants if the Ophone is imminent
• There is no reason that China Mobile could not have both the Ophone and iPhone in their arsenal of handsets
• Ophone is not an iPhone, which has been shown to be important as a status symbol with the number of expensive imports despite the knock offs available.

Not to mention that it presumes that Apple doesn't have the ability to negotiate with more than one partner at a time. Makes you wonder how they managed to launch the phone in 30+ countries (or whatever the number is now).

They kept all options open . They may still sell the iphone and there own Branded phone .

Have a lot of shorts on Apple stock, perhaps?