Originally Posted by solipsism
1) Was this really Googles doing or Motorola who make the Droid and who get the OS for free, since its open source.
2) Obviously some things have changed with Verizon. Are they not requiring the Verizon Store as defaultor at allsince the Android App Store has a couple thousand of apps?
3) Apple having 2-3$ of the worlds cellphone market is huge for a smartphone, especially one so expensive. It reportedly took 32% of all phone revenue last quarter. With just over 2 years since release that seems pretty phenomenal.
4) It is early in the game and I see Apple surpassing RiM even though RiMs unit sales and marketshare will also grow, but we really should look at the profitability of the devices to see which are actually successful in the space.
5) I predict that Android will be the most popular phone OS. Besides people in general moving to internet-capable phones, Android is free, has a decent SDK, UI and App Store. Like the Mac, its not for everyone. The phone OS that can work on multiple hardware platforms is bound to be the dominate one, but that doesnt mean it will be the most profitable.
6) Anyone notice the Droid was licensed from Lucas. This should means a whole line of Droid phones from Verizon.
1)I suspect it was the doing of both Verizon and Google. Google clearly has some requirements to get the "Google Experience" brand but likewise Verizon has really opened up to realizing that people want internet everywhere and bundling. They are now offering cell service bundled with their FIOS service. They are allowing WIFI on the phones because they know people will give them more money per month and the majority won't fully utilize all of what they have purchased.
2) I've heard of both. I read that on BB devices both stores are loaded but then again, RIM requires BIS service with part of that money clear not going to Verizon so it seems fair Verizon would make that demand in return. I can tell you that lately Verizon has been pushing apps out to smartphones like Last.fm as an example. I would suspect that even if their apps don't start off on the phone, they will reserve the right to push them out to the phone.
3) Apple has done a great job but past success doesn't guarantee future success. It is also clear that some of the folks lining up this time are the contenders rather than the pretenders.
4) RIM is very curious to me. I see the BOGO offers as much more than just something that expands marketshare. It clearly does so at the cost of present profits but it also helps get rid of legacy issues and costs more quickly. Look at the release of the Storm 2 while simultaneously releasing the exact same software for the original Storm. To me it feels like they totally understood the legacy software issues that could hold them back and the clear inferiority of their own software solutions due to these legacy issues and also due to coming more from the business/email side. So they are quickly handing out the 5.0 platform to whatever will run it, even at the cost of present phone sales, and if your hardware won't run it, they'll practically give you the new phone to run it with the offers (BOGO) while possibly sucking in a new friend or family member. They didn't get clean slate Google did but it feels like they are doing the best they can with what they have.
5) I think we are very early in this game. I think people are thinking this is a settled matter when it feels to me much like Windows 3.1 versus OS/2 versus Mac. In those days Apple was riding high due to the inability of anyone else to not only match the Mac OS, but to even create a good enough solution. Suddenly Win95 was good enough graphically and on a few points (multitasking) was better and Apple was quickly falling into the toilet going from huge profits and sales to massive losses.
6) I suspect you are right. Verizon has really helped their phone makers in this regard. My wife could care less about electronics but knows she likes EnV-stuff. If Verizon offers her an EnV3, EnV-Touch, EnV-Chocolate, etc... she will automatically be interested due to branding.
Originally Posted by samab
Verizon is co-existing with RIM and Google app stores. If Apple doesn't like it, then it's Apple's problem, not Verizon's.
What limitations to future growth? A extra $5 million to design a CDMA iphone and maybe a handful of percentage of profit margins.
I never said that Apple is insane or stupid to refuse to create a CDMA iphone. I said that it's not that hard or that expensive to make a CDMA iphone. Of course, Apple likes a 50% profit margin more than a 45% profit margin.
What you are describing above is the classic mistake Apple made early in the Mac development. No cloning, total control, high margins until something was good enough at a third of the cost and no means to quickly adapt to that. Apple isn't quite so bad off here but the point is they can't stand still and turn down easy money.
Originally Posted by addabox
Actually I would say it is Verizon's problem, in that the iPhone would do them a lot more good than partnering with Verizon would do Apple. At any rate, RIM and Google's app stores are pretty meager and have little mass recognition; augmenting them with a carrier store doesn't really change much. Apple, on the other hand, is obviously the 800 lb gorilla in this arena. Being obliged to channel any of their operation through a carrier would be ludicrous. Who does that benefit, other than Verizon?
The limitation on the number of CDMA phones that can be sold via Verizon now and in the near future, compared to the vast opportunities presented by a global GSM phone.
But if it's not that hard, and only involves a few percentage points off Apple's margins, and would mean lots of extra money, then what could Apple's motivations be, outside of incompetence, perversity or madness?
You're saying that Apple is forgoing a great deal of revenue for no earthly reason. I'm saying that seems unlikely, so there must be more to it than meets the eye. You might consider what the terms of Apple's exclusive deal with AT&T might be, for instance.
Apple is forgoing a great deal revenue for no earthly reason. I'll say it. Analysts have said it as well. There isn't more to it than meets the eye. Apple is secretive and has no reason to discuss anything until the AT&T agreement is done or extended. Everything until then is up for negotiation. You ask what could be the motivation for not doing this and I say Apple has a historic blind spot with regard to believing that good enough technology can suddenly overtake great technology. The only time they have successfully managed to avoid this blindspot was the iPod. They relentlessly drove down the price, improved the product and created several price points and models that differentiated their offerings. Because of this the iPod became the more than just a temporary thing, but the generic term for the category and the absolute market leader. Ask yourself if we see this happening with the iPhone and the answer is no. There have been dozens of threads asking when is Apple basically going to expand the iPhone BRAND instead of just offering a slightly better iPhone.
At this stage on the iPod, Apple was offering the Mini and the 4G classic (yes two and a half years in they were on their fourth model already) By a little after the beginning of the third year, they were offering the Shuffle and had discontinued the iPod photo. We see absolutely nothing like this happening with the iPhone. We can believe this is because of the exclusivity agreement and will change or we can ponder if Apple has returned to the mean of past behavior.
Originally Posted by John.B
Even if Apple added CDMA to the iPhone (and that's a big "if"), Verizon would have to move to EVDO B
to be able to support simultaneous cell phone calls and data connectivity. They don't have that that now. That big red "there's a map for that" map they show on TV is all the EVDO A
towers they got from buying out Alltel, but EVDO A kills the 3G data connection when the phone rings
Rather than try to fix the old technology this year (which would mean updating all
of those EVDO A towers to EVDO B), Verizon is rolling out their 4G LTE infrastructure next year. And that's where the iPhone could start to be available on Verizon.
But there is no way that Teh Steve is going to modify the existing iPhone and drive up manufacturing costs just to support Verizon's old, soon-to-be-abandoned. US-only 3G technology. Not when there is a future-proofed direction that will be able to meet the new LTE 4G standard that will be going worldwide anyway.
Apple puts up with carrier limitations now and people accept the limitations when the phone is capable but the network is not. No one stopped buying the iPhone when it could do MMS but AT&T could not offer it. Most have not stopped buying the iPhone because it can offer tethering but AT&T cannot. Apple can release the CDMA variant that can do data/voice and perhaps even is ready for LTE and let Verizon take the heat for what is offered or not offered. This is why Apple's rep has gone up and AT&T's down with the iPhone.