Originally Posted by dasanman69
Actually innovation would probably go thru the roof. Exclusivity benefits the carrier most.
Really? What incentive do you think Apple had to create the iPhone?
Do you think if they had to deal with Verizion's historic restrictive and draconian controls over handset design that Apple would have ever developed the iPhone? I don't think so. Through their exclusive deal with AT&T Apple was able to wrestle control away of the handset from the carrier and for the first time (in the US anyway) give it to the consumer!
AT&T's reward for this risk - exclusive distribution of the iPhone guaranteeing a growth of their customer base.
It's a quid pro quo - each party gets a benefit. That's how business is supposed to work. Lop sided deals are unpopular for a reason.
I love how the significant the power shift that the iPhone brought to the US cellular market is continually overlooked and marginalized by people such as yourself. Shows a pretty shallow grasp of the significance of the iPhone in the US cellular market by people who make such comments. To put it another way:You would not have the Droid on Verizon without the iPhone
Pretty damn innovative to me!
Look at how many customers ATT has gotten because of the iPhone.
For a darn good reason - they went totally out on a limb with a totally unknown player in the handset manufacturing space. That was their risk - the reward was exclusivity if the handset turned out to be compelling. It was and paid off in more ways then they expected
If the iPhone were available on all the networks it would force the other makers to up their game
I dunno, the entire industry seems to already be chasing (and failing to catch) the iPhone with it just on AT&T.
in turn making Apple up theirs
Yes, because all the manufacturers were doing such a good job of driving Apple before the iPhone
Actually they did drive Apple - their universally crappy products drove Apple to come out of no where and show them all up with Apple's very first entry. An entry, although universally derided by the tech industry for having "fatal" flaws, that managed to change the smartphone market literally overnight.
Your absolutely right - Apple needs the rest of the industry to drive them
Phones here in the states are still yrs behind in what they can do overseas. We would be at their level if the playing field were even.
Your mixing handsets and networks. Many "overseas" locations cover a fraction of the surface area of the United states, and several countries had abysmal land line infrastructures. Rather then upgrading them, they skipped to wireless - double benefit on that, lower capital costs on wired infrastructure combined with dramatically less square milage equals a much better mobile network.
As for handsets, no one has bested the iPhone and since all I am interested in is an integrated smartphone, the rest of the industry is pretty irrelevant for me. #2 contender is coming from Google, another US company. Yup, we are so behind the rest of the world. As for semi-smartphones like many of the Nokia semi-smart and feature phones or dumb phones from other makers - oh well. High volume, low profit. Like much of the PC industry. I doubt Apple cares much about capturing that market, just like they couldn't care less about the bulk of the PC market. Not enough reward (profit) for the hassle. For all the millions sold, Netbooks haven't done much positive for the PC vendors - in fact, it seems to have hurt their bottom line pretty significantly for companies like Dell, cannibalizing their profits of other models pretty hard. Nokia, for all it's market share, has seen it's revenue take a pounding. We are lucky that Apple doesn't focus on market share and instead focuses on the true measure that counts: revenue!
Here's the bottom line: Apple doesn't need Verizon
Some people want an iPhone on Verizon. Verizon (now) want's the iPhone. But looking at Apple's balance sheet, they are doing just fine with their current strategy.
Indeed, by keeping with AT&T, they can remain in the drivers seat, asking for features or accommodations that they wouldn't be able to get if they had no leverage like an exclusive agreement to use. If every carrier had the iPhone and Apple wanted to implement something like visual voicemail how would they be able to get the carriers to do it? Historically carriers haven't exactly been known for innovation - or if they do add a feature like visual voicemail it typically comes with a fee (hello Verizon)
So no, I'm pretty happy with the way things are, thank you. Despite your argument, the real innovation happened BECAUSE of the iPhone exclusivity. The iPhone currently exists because of Apple's original exclusive agreement with AT&T - and AT&T gets FAR too little credit for making a MAJOR break with how business was done in the US cellular market. If you don't like AT&T, then get on other companies to suck less then the iPhone (or radical thought, pass Apple).
But inane comments like "the iPhone should be legislated on every carrier" are just nuts. If a carrier want's the phone, they should have to pay for it, not just get it handed to them. Want to talk about stifling innovation - what if it was mandated that handsets had to be on all carriers? Would there be near this excitement over the Droid? Would people even care? Then you would have the equally inane whiners carrying on about Apple's "monopoly" (just like with the iPod)