About 25 percent of iPhone buyers are 'switchers' to AT&T - firm - Page 2

Perhaps in 2 to 5 years we'll see how many at&t customers become 'switchers' to Apple's network...

No I won't. There are certain product intros that take a long time to evaluate. There are others that you realize will be a raging success or dismal failure pretty much right off the bat or shortly after. If you're still doubting that the iPhone has changed the cell phone business permanently, and that Verizon got caught on the wrong side of this wave, then I don't know what other evidence you're waiting for.

How did the iPhone change the celluar business? Things are still the same as it where before the iPhone came out.

I think BSN has a valid question. We don't know if the cellular industry is going to change their practices just for Apple or because of Apple. Only one company changed anything, and that was only for one product and in my opinion, the changes are relatively minor. Right now, iPhone is still technically an outlier, and for all we know, a flash in the pan. I hope it does more than that, but it's far from conclusive.

I would think that a cell phone with a UI that obsoletes everything else that came before it is a serious game changer. I think a cell phone that integrates iTunes, the most pervasive media and device management software on the planet is a serious game changer. I think a cell phone that is seen by its owner/user not just as a mere communications tool but as a source of pleasure and entertainment is a serious game changer. I think a change in mindset on the part of the carriers from 'these are the features we will let you have, deal with it', to one that's more open to customer needs is a serious game changer.

Oh ok, your personal opinion. I thought AT&T did something different with their network or something.

I would cheer for a change in the way the celluar companies operate, but I don't see a change coming anytime soon.

Well, it is our [differing] personal opinions that makes these discussions interesting after all, isn't it?

I thought you might have came across some site saying that AT&T was doing something different to their network due to the iPhone popularity. It was just wishful thinking.

I've read that it is the opposite in Europe. The manufacturers make phones with really cool features and the carriers are selling them with features intact. Innovations rules supreme over there and it's time the US carriers follows suit. STOP making the rules and dumbing down the phones feature (Verizon)! Maybe Apple will be the first to change things over here.

That is yet too be seen. The iPod didn't change the music industry over night. It took a couple years.

As for the topic. I think more than 25% of people switched to AT&T. In the line at the Apple store I was at, only about 1 in 12 were AT&T customers. If that. 1 in 12 is being generous to AT&T.

What phone do you have and if it was unlocked and its feature set was left fully intact from the get-go I'm going to imagine you didn't get it with any form of sign-up rebate direct from Cingular but instead paid full freight for it...

Dave

It was my first phone with Cingular. It's the Motorola MPx220 (which was sweeeet back in 2005). I got a $100 mail-in rebate. I think I paid $330 for the phone. My brother who is a T-mobile user, was able to put his sim card into my phone and it worked just fine. I'm not sure if all the T-mobile services would have worked, we didn't try.

In a way, it's pretty scary. Look at what the stock closed at today. This is well ahead of my expectations.

My wife today told me that on a crowded elevator in her place of business, one guy took out his iPhone, and everyone tried to crowd around to see it. This isn't a bunch of grocery clerks (nothing disrespectful meant there), but highly paid lawyers and business people.

I'm not so sure the Bluetooth is crippled after all. In a NYTimes article yesterday, a couple of headphone manufactures were quoted as saying that their stereo wireless headphones would be coming to the iPhone.

Now, it's possible that these phones don't use Bluetooth, but some other radio technology, as mice and phones for desktops have also used. But, maybe they do use Bluetooth.

Perhaps it's just that Apple doesn't have stereo BT phones, and so, in the normal manner of Apple, when they don't have their own product to support something, they say it isn't supported. They've done that numerous times in the past.

I'm hoping this is correct.

Saying bluetooth has been crippled is inaccurate. Not having official support for or not yet having adequate software for is not the same. To say it's cripples implies that Apple has created the software and then purposefully and willfully disabled it. Something that Verizon is certainly famous for. There are reports of handsfree working with some autos to a certain degree so expect a software update soon.


A manufacturer having control over a carrier.
A manufacturer getting a portion of the monthly dues from the carrier.
A carrier to alter how it's voicemail system works to accommodate the manufacturer's wishes.
Competing carrier finally willing to work with manufacturers to create integrated devices months in advance of the iPhone's actual release.
What the f@#k do you need before you see the shift in paradigms?


I'm happy about the stock prices today. I'm wondering if it will hold throughout Monday or should I dump it and buy in again after the dip. I expect $145-155 the AAPL releases its quarterly earning in 11 days.

RIMM is still surprising me with it's consistently higher jumps. CLWR has been okay but it's still to early to tell, I just I had bought in before the 30% bump.


Apple's marketing has something to do with the interest but the device is so cool. It seems everyone is interested in the damn thing. They should stop calling it the Jesus phone and start calling it the Devil phone. Even my parents know about the thing in detail... that is scary.

This has not been confirmed. Even if this is part of Apple's arrangement, it's not new, RIM gets a small sum per handset per month, though they can actually justify it.


What again?

So far, it only shifts for one manufacturer. So AT&T was willing to make concessions in exchange of locking in more people to their service. Carrier lock-in is the paradigm I would much rather see change. Stuff like visual voicemail is nice but also serves as a distraction.

The paradigm shift is the manufacturer no longer being a slave to the carrier. Are you trying to say this is not a different way of operating for AT&T or are you suggesting that it means nothing unless ALL carrier have their gonads squeezed by ALL manufacturers? It's a shift on the model, whether it's effecting one or all companies is irrelevant, the fact is that Apple has turned things on its head, has shown that it is possible. It's up to them to figure out how to make it work for them.

How is Visual Voicemail a distraction? Distraction from what? From having to call your cell provider to listen to your phone messages in order? I don't get it.

As for carrier/manufacturer lock-in and integration, they are the same in concept but how they are executed is everything. Visual Voicemail, as an example, shows that real integration can lead to things that should have been implemented a decade ago. Having a 'one size fits all' philosophy forces manufacturers to create devices that either cater to the lowest common denominator or are stuffed to the brim with overpriced and heavy hardware that probably won't be used. But is sure impresses the kids on IRC when they list their tech specs!

What we need is a worldwide standard but I'm not going to hold my breath.

There is nothing to suggest that this is anything but an anomaly, which Apple managed to do by exploiting what looks like only they can do. I don't see now Nokia, Ericson or any other brand can possibly do the same thing. It took Apple a decade to get where they are now in terms of brand identity, design reputation and most importantly, extraordinary to possibly unprecedented levels of consumer demand, something that only seems to happen once every few decades. The path may be possible, but I think a second manufacturer pulling that off may be an even harder thing to do than the first.


It is a distraction from the fact that you are now stuck with that carrier in order to be able to use the device at all, you are still just as stuck ball-and-chain with one carrier. That paradigm is still bolted down to the deck, though possibly even harder then before.

Bluetooth headphones could work just fine with the iPhone, and the bluetooth would still be crippled. \

Bluetooth consists of a number of profiles. When folks refer to it being 'crippled', usually that means that the headset profile and other more-or-less mundane profiles are enabled, but profiles that allow file transfers are intentionally disabled.

.

Actually they already did. They fixed/upgraded their edge network the day before the iphone launch!!!

No, its accurate, as of this writing. From Gizmodo:

... most Bluetooth phones sold by carriers in the US have been "crippled" in that sense, including the iPhone:

• It can't transfer files to a PC, or appear on a desktop for drag-and-drop file juggling.
• It can't send a photo to a Bluetooth printer.
• It can't stream audio via Bluetooth to a compatible speaker system or headset. (Video is out of the question.)

However, it can link with any Bluetooth headset on the market, including the Apple iPhone Bluetooth Headset that will soon be at an Apple Store near you.


Now, you can speculate that it's Apple's intention to UNcripple it in the future, via a software update or something, and I might even agree with you. But right now... yeah, it's definitely crippled. \

.

Seeing as how Apple isn't allowing any user controlled file transfers at this point I don't think we should be calling this "Bluetooth crippling."

It is what it is. I'm not pissed about it, as I won't be a buyer 'til at least 'iPhone 2'.

.

So, by your definition, if any feature you want is not included then it is crippled? I think crippled should be reserved for something that was present and then removed. Like Verizon is notorious for. At this point Bluetooth is simply unfinished, like a number of other features of the iPhone.

There really isn't any difference between Verizon turning off BT file transfers, and ATT/Apple doing it.

If Apple and ATT later turn ON said profiles, then that's great, but for now, the effect is the same. \



Unfortunately, that is only speculation, until said Bluetooth profiles actually are enabled. I hope you're right.

.

The difference is the phrase turned off


As is your speculation that it was turned off

As far as the price goes...
I have friends who bother with "puts", etc. But I don't bother. I'm interested in the longer term trend. If I'm positive about a company, I stick with it. It's never failed.

There are therefore two things of interest to me when I trade that affect my decision (other than the price itself).

The first is the brokerage fee. I don't like online trading. If you've heard of all the horror stories I have over the years with that, you wouldn't like it either. It's also not always good with large accounts.

Second, is the taxes involved. If you keep your securities for one year, you are only subject to the 15% Federal Capital Gains tax (plus any applicable state and local taxes).

But, if you sell more often, you are then subject to the standard tax rate you are hit with for your income in that year.

That could amount to far more taxes. Definitely so, in my case.

Therefore, it doesn't pay to bother with small rises and dips. The amount of profit squeezed out after the bother, and worry (it may not go the way you think it will!), isn't worth it to me.

For example. The stock closed at $137.73. If we sold it for that, and it drops $5 Monday, do we buy it back, or see if it drops further?

If we wait, and it goes back up, we just lost any profits, perhaps ending up with a loss if we then rush to buy it back. (You can report that as a loss in April, but you only make a portion of it back, the percentage you pay in taxes).

Even if we buy it back right away, how much did it cost to sell, how much did it cost to buy back, and how much taxes did we pay on the way?

Remember that $5 is only about a 3.63% drop. How much extra stock can we buy back after all those costs are taken out? The percentage left could be no more than a fraction of 1%, depending on your situation. At the most it would be (assuming that you do have online trading, and sell into the Capital Gains advantage, and have no state and local taxes) almost 3%.

So, if 3% profit, at most, on the two trades is worthwhile, go ahead.

But, remember this, for that tiny gain, you have given up your Capital Gains possibility for the next year. If the stock really goes up, and you have to sell, you will be hit by the much higher taxes, which will entirely wipe out any gain you made here, plus some.

It's up to you to decide. I'll wait it out.

As far as RIM goes, I don't think it's going to last for the medium term.

Too many people writing on the web are turning in their Pearls, and other newer models with poor keyboards, for iPhones. And with business software worked through AJAX here already, and more to come, the resistance in business will start to fall. That will, sooner or later, affect the more "traditional" keyboarded BB's as well.

I hate the word "crippled". It's a false term.

When IBM came out with the "Peanut" computer, now, many years ago, it was crippled. It had a chicklet keyboard that was very hard to type on, and it couldn't run many programs. That was a deliberate attempt to keep the machine from damaging sales to the business sector, which, at the time, comprised most of PC sales.

I don't see the fact that Bluetooth on the iPhone is lacking all of the features, is involved with Apple trying to prevent the iPhone from killing sales of any of its other products. Do you?

We also don't know if some of those features won't be enabled with future updates. Remember that Bluetooth on the Mac supported a very basic feature set at first. That has expanded.

Some of this is likely due to battery use, and possibly, the use as a modem connection (also on the far more capable WiFi), which is, so far, not enabled, is too. Though that could be because of arrangement with ATT. Though that would be a guess.

How do you know that they aren't "allowing" it?

Allowing, and crippled, are terms meant to confer the idea that it it something the company is doing deliberately.

We don't know that.

Most of this could very well be because it's difficult to do, and Apple didn't have the time to get it out the door.

I would wait on the use of the pejorative, until a few months have gone by, with at least one major update. Only then will we see if they are adding to those capabilities.

Right now, it's too new.

There is a company that claims to have a product that will allow file transfers. If they can do that, then Apple has done nothing to dis-allow it, which they could have.

Yawn. Bluetooth has a number of profiles. They all can work, the carrier and phone maker simply have to allow them to do. Or they can DISABLE some of them, TURN THEM OFF, BLOCK them, LOCK them, FEE-FI-FLOCK THEM... hey, whatever word or phrase blows your particular skirt up. This is nothing new, has been going on in the industry for many years now.

Next up... physguy inititates a hard-hitting debate over what the definition of "is", is. Story at eleven.

\


.

It doesn't matter what you or I think Mel, 'crippled bluetooth' is just what cell phone afficionados call bluetooth implementations that have the file transfer profiles disabled. That isn't going to change.

It may be unfair in that Apple is intending to at some point turn those profiles back ON, but for right now, far as those guys are concerned, yeah, the BT is crippled. Quibbling over terminology won't help. What will help is Apple finishing their file browser or whatever else is the reason why BT file transfers were disabled, slapping together a nice software update, and turning those BT profiles on.

Then there's nothing anyone can say about it.


Yep, that's a good possibility. I'm hoping they go that route.

.

I just prefer a bit less grouchiness. People should be calmer, and give Apple some time.

It's like saying that OS X was crippled when it first came out, and that Apple deliberately left out all of the features that have come since.

It's also like the lack of 3G right now. The in depth reviews I've been reading from ARs, Anands, etc, have all said that Apple made the best choice at this time.

If we don't see some of these features by the end of the year, then I'll agree with the views of those who think that it's "crippled".

Right now, I think that's it's unfinished.

I can see the point of giving Apple some time, as they are new to this market. But as you state elsewhere, if the Bluetooth is still crippled six months from now, I don't think anyone is going to owe Apple much of an apology on this one. \


I dunno Mel... I've read a veritable of mountain of reviews kidney-punching Apple for leaving 3G out. Pogue's NY Times review was particularly emphatic on the point, and even the AnandTech review you cite said that no 3G was a problem and that it'd be good if the next iPhone had it.

I think the majority of folks think it was a mistake (though not a fatal one), especially considering that it wasn't an 'either-or' thing... the iPhone could've supported 3G and EDGE. Several phones do so already.

Oh well... that's what the 'iPhone 2' is for.

.

[QUOTE=TBaggins;1111833]

The reviews that said that didn't do a technical analysis. this was just their opinion, based on what they wanted.

What the conclusion of that Anandtech review was actually this:


Which is something I agree with, and basically is what Jobs said as well.

Since your speculation knows no bounds I'll skip is (since that's been done before) and go right to can.

Of course all those profiles can work if their coded, tested, ported, debugged, etc. But are they? Since you seem to know what parts of OS X Apple has devoted their scarce (note the delay of Leopard for the iPhone if you haven't already) resources to porting, debugging, testing, and 'turning off' (I can use that again since we've already dealt with the definition) it would be great if you would let us know what other nuggets are just waiting for Apple to 'turn on' (definition should be clear as the opposite of 'turn off').

The problem with 'turning off' and 'crippling' is that they imply intent, which at this point is pure, yes there it is again, SPECULATION. All we know is that these profiles are not there. Why? Don't know. Could be turned off. Low probability (yes IMO) as that would mean they spent time 'turning it on'.

At this point I would definitely give Apple the benefit of the doubt. Apple and ATT already delivered more than they promised - Edge network upgraded right before release, much better battery time than originally advertised, glass screen (amazingly scratch resistant), You Tube integration.

The point is assigning INTENT at this point is pure speculation.

It is a bit shocking how quickly and "effortlessly" Steve+Apple has crafted the acceptance of iPhone into the global consciousness. Nearly every single person I've seen up close with an iPhone becomes positively rapturous when they hold it. Very bizarre. ...I wonder if the flicker rate of the iPhone is similar to that of television (30 fps)? If so, it may have a similar psychological effect. \

I am shocked. You willing to give apple the benefit of the doubt but not verizon. Have you ever read verizon excuse for why they cripple certain features on their phones (i assure you, none of their explanations mention money or profit). So, verizon is to be distrusted but apple, they have good intentions?. Hmmm.. interesting.

1) Have you used one yet? If not, you may not know what you're talking about.

2) "Things were the same" at a similar point in time in the MP3 business when the iPod was introduced; "things were the same" at a similar point in time in the auto industry when the Toyota Prius was introduced; "things were the same" at a similar point in time in the animation business when Toy Story was introduced; etc.

You are only kidding, right?

I mean, you don't live in a parallel universe or some such thing......

I live in the same universe as you.. i assume that is how we are able to communicate. I know what your PERSONAL opinion of why verizon cripple some services.. i am not really interested in your personal opinion or TBaggins (the original poster). what makes your or his opinion valid?.. my point is that people are willing to give apple the benefit of the doubt without so much as even knowing why apple crippled a feature (not unless he was an employee of apple with inside information). You or anyone else here has 0 (and i mean absolutely 0) clue as to why apple would not include a feature or cripple a feature in their phone.