France's Orange may be next to cut iPhone price, eat losses - reports - Page 7

Apple could have released the same featured rich with mediocre use phone as many of its competitors. But Apple never does this with any of its products. They always take an alternate route.

The alternate route was developing a few well written high quality applications. Using hardware centered around media and graphics display as well as extending battery life. This gives Apple a strong foundation to further add more hardware and software.

I think we can all see what Apple is trying to do. The question is, will it fly in various markets around the world? Will Apple, the new kid on the block in phones, be taken seriously?

In the US, where Apple's popularity is the highest and their brand the strongest, they have been. Europe, and Asia? The verdict's still out.



.

The choice between "more features but lower quality" and what Apple did release in the Euro market only happens with an early (some would say premature) release into the Euro market. Presumably the 3G iPhone that Apple is likely going to release in June will not be "low quality"/"early Hyundai" in any way, shape or form.



The prob is that I don't think the average Euro customer would give the 2.5G iPhone all the accolades you just did above. So what we have here is a "fundamental disagreement on the nature of reality", as the political pundits like to say.

Given that, no, of course you aren't going to see or agree with what I'm saying, I'm sure. It's like the age-old debate on US domestic cars... one side says, "You have to improve quality or the Japanese are going to eat your lunch", while the other insists, "There's nothing wrong with American cars, Japan is all hype, JD Power and Consumer Reports are all biased", yadda yadda.



It's not really a matter of being "offended". In the very competitive European high end cellphone market, all it really takes is a "Meh, that bit of kit is only okay, not great. What was all the fuss about again?", for Apple's brand to diminish in that market.

Remember, the hype was quite enormous after the US launch. A lot of Euros were expecting something quite special, and Apple appears to have underwhelmed, judging from sales. You only get one chance to make a first impression. So now the pressure is on Apple to make an extremely good second one.



They really haven't even sold that many phones in Europe, as of yet. The lion's share has been the US.



Well, we have their European partner carrier targets, which I'm sure were set with input from Apple no doubt, and which were missed all the way around pretty much. \

I don't think Apple believed that they were going to take Europe "by storm" with the US model iPhone (though I'm sure they had hopes), but I do think they believed that they were going to do quite a lot better in the Euro market than they have, and were caught somewhat by surprise by the reception they're getting.

Which is far from ideal, certainly, but doesn't have to be fatal, so long as Apple adapts quickly and well to this turn of events.


.

I can't speak for Sapporo, who originally raised the complain, but I too have noticed a tendency for you to move the goalposts.

For example, regarding Euro sales, in our early discussions, you steadfastly refused to acknowledge that Apple wasn't doing well over there. Then later you did, but with provisos like "Apple is doing well for a new phone maker up against big phone makers like Nokia" or "they're doing well for being overpriced" etc. etc.

I mean, c'mon. \



Euro 3G use isn't that high yet? Wait a month.

Seriously, you know as well as I that 3G penetration rates in Europe are increasing, and that 3G should be the majority of Euro cellphone users quite soon. But that's the Euro market as a whole. What do you think 3G penetration rates are among high end cellphone users in Europe, i.e. Apple's segment of the market? What do you think user expectations are as to whether high end phones should have 3G or not?



Sure, Safari + MultiTouch + big screen = better internet user experience = more browsing. I've said that for a long time. But why hobble that better user experience by forcing the user to surf over a dialup speed connection (GPRS), which is what 2.5G is in a lot of Europe?

And ppl here still wonder why Euro sales are slow? It boggles the mind.



Well, at least now you get that they need 3G. And yes, they will absolutely annihilate everyone in data marketshare once they've got it.



Hmm, you must have not checked out iChat's bandwidth requirements.

For 1-to-1 video conferencing:

Good (160x120): 100 Kbps Internet connection (up/down) \t
Better (320x240): 300 Kbps Internet connection (up/down) \t
Best (640x480): 900 Kbps Internet connection (up/down)

For 4-way video conferencing:

To intiate:

Good (160x120): 384 Kbps Internet connection (up/down) \t
Better (320x240): 600 Kbps Internet connection (up/down) \t
Best (640x480): 1800 Kbps Internet connection (up/down)

To participate:

Good (160x120): 100 Kbps Internet connection (up/down) \t
Better (320x240): 200 Kbps Internet connection (up/down) \t
Best (640x480): 300 Kbps Internet connection (up/down)

On EDGE, you might get some low-res (160x120) iChat video conferencing going, assuming of course the iPhone's cpu is up to it (if not now, it eventually will be in future models).

But in Europe, they don't even have EDGE for their 2.5G in a lot of places... they have GPRS, which is 30-45 kbps. Think you're gonna do much video with that?



I think we more or less agree here.



Cool.



I don't think the iPhone is a "failed" product in Europe. It's fairer to characterize it as "down, but not out". Price cuts have helped some in the short-term (as one would expect), but long-term, you have to give the market what it wants, and that means an improvement in the feature-set.



Well, on that we can agree, at least.


.

I'm sure that exact same argument was used against ppl who said the following:

"I don't think the G4 Cube will sell well."
"That new AppleTV gizmo just doesn't seem very compelling."
"You know what? I think iPod sales may be due to plateau soon."



Sometimes, boardroom info is overrated. We, the buying public, ultimately determine what fails and succeeds, by voting with our pocketbooks. And sometimes (just sometimes, mind you), despite the best efforts of all the marketers and product people, we have a better take on what is or isn't going to work, because we're not inside the bubble.

After all, if boardroom info and being a marketing guru really WAS the hand of God, instead of an advantage, NO products would fail, and all the suits would be happy and dancing a merry jig in the streets, eh?



Not exactly. For example, Italy's 3G penetration rates are over double American ones:

3G penetration rates in Italy are already at 29%, Spain and UK are at about 18%. Even the USA is getting well along into 3G, with 13% having migrated to 3G.

http://3g4g.blogspot.com/2007/09/random-statistics.html

Now add to that that, with the iPhone, we're talking the high-end segment of the market, where 3G is more expected (and more likely to be use) than the market as a whole.

Going with EDGE first with the iPhone was mostly correct in the US, but not really in Europe, and certainly wouldn't be in Asia, specifically Japan and Korea, whose 3G penetration rates are among the highest in the world.



I'd agree that price is an issue, but it's far from the only one. Price alone won't turn things around long-term in Europe, not with the iPhone's current feature set. Fortunately, help appears to be only two months away or so.



Yup. As I've said many times.



The lunacy is that Apple did know this, and yet still thought they'd run roughshod over it anyway, with what was basically the US 2.5G model. After all, Euro sales are underwhelming, why, again?

Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot... it was all part of Apple's master plan. Apple never makes mistakes. Apple has the Euro market "right where they want them"... etc. etc.

Look, while I believe that Stevie J is the closest thing the industry has to a reliable techno-visionary, at least at the CEO level (and certainly much better than Gates the Fraud, who initially missed the Internet ), NO ONE is Nostradamus in this industry. Apple's slipped on banana peels before, and it'll do it again. That's not so important. What is important is how they respond to it.



So part of Apple's problem in Europe is simple xenophobia? In a market that has THAT many different cultures, languages, traditions? Um... okay.

I think perhaps in highly homogenous Japan, you could make that argument, but not so much in Europe. After all, do the Germans, French, Italians, Spanish, Flemish, etc. really love the Finland (home of Nokia) so much? No, but they certainly buy their phones in epic numbers, because their phones are good, for the most part.

If your argument is more along the lines of the fact that there's a "Euro" way of doing things, certain expected features, etc., then I can get with that. In fact, that's what many Euro posters here have been saying for a long time.


.

If Apple had not deferred iPhone revenue its bottom line would have an additional 2 billion. Unlocked iPhones are being used in every industrialized nation in the world. I think its safe to say its going pretty well so far.

I always kept my argument in context of Åpple being new to mobile communications and the iPhone being more expensive than its competitors. I never said the iPhone was going to outsell its competitors.

Most of you were arguing that the iPhone was a failure in Europe compared to its US sales. This was a very flawed argument. I always maintained that as long as Apple was making profit and its carriers were adding subscribers the iPhone was doing fine. Its a failure if everyone is either loosing money or making no money from it.



So hobbled that the iPhone beat everyone except Nokia in data marketshare.

The reason is because right now I use the data applications on my iPhone with little regard for battery life. What would be the point of faster data connection if you would quickly kill your battery. People would use the data applications much less.


What in the world are you talking about?


The iPhone is over 5 months old in Europe. The fact that it sold through its stock in days after the price cut shows their is a demand for it. It just cost too much.

See, you keep saying stuff like this, but if anyone points it out you claim to be merely disinterested and analytical.

The whole nut of your attitude on the European roll-out of the iPhone hinges on this idea that Apple thought they could ride "roughshod" over that market. It obliges us to assume that Apple, AKA Steve Jobs, were so blinded by arrogance that they couldn't make basic calculations regarding 2G vs. 3G coverage and uptake.

What you haven't done is explain why selling what phones they could, when they could, was a mistake. Your take is predicated on the idea that the only possible reason Apple would have for introducing the phone at all was to "ride roughshod" over the market, but there is absolutely no reason to assume that. We could just as easily assume that Apple felt they could make some modest inroads, hash out the distribution model, and follow up with a 3G model ASAP, which of course is what they're doing.

You've vaguely alluded to the idea that even daring to introduce a high-end 2G model hurts the brand, but that seems just wrong to me. Again, are you actually claiming that people who might have otherwise purchased a 3G iPhone will now refuse to do so, just because there was a 2G phone on the market before it?

If you can't make a convincing case that a 2G model will have hurt sales of a 3G follow-up, and we can agree that the idea that Apple "thought" they were going to do anything in particular with the European market with a 2G phone is just speculation, then what are you arguing?

It seems to me that you're arguing that Apple is an arrogant company that got their comeuppance and the hands of discriminating European consumers and only now is "making amends", in some sense.

You say you're not, but I can't figure out any other way to read it.



See above. I was the one to use the term, and I meant European xenophobia directed at America.

And I never claimed that that was the iPhone's "problem", I said that some of the comments in this thread seemed to proceed from something like that, insofar as they hinged on this weird idea that it is sort of satisfying to see a 2G iPhone sell modestly in Europe since, apparently, arrogant Apple thought the would corner the market. That whole idea is fraught with a peculiar kind of chauvinism, and, since everybody is claiming to have no particular animus against Apple per se, what else should I chalk it up to? Maybe we should call it "nationalist tech chauvinism"?

Look, I have no problem with the idea that Europeans have different expectations from Americans in terms of features, distribution and cost when it comes to cell phones. Why would I?

I just don't see why it's necessary to read any more into what's happened than "Apple sold the phone they had, made some money off it, and will presently sell the phone they've had in the pipeline all along, when it's ready, and which will probably be a better match for the European market."

Penetration rate calculations in Europe are useless --- because they count SIM cards which everybody have multiple SIM cards. It's not a coincidence that Italy with a 90% prepaid vs. 10% postpaid --- have a overall penetration rate of 150% and have the highest 3G penetration rate in Europe. It's a meaningless statistics.

58% of Verizon Wireless subscibers have 3G ev-do handsets --- this is a company that doesn't have SIM cards and 90+% are postpaid.

http://rcrnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art...651076448/1002

But that statistics is also meaningless --- because we don't know how many people just buy a 3G ev-do phone because that's what Verizon offers (it's hard to find a 1x only phone from Verizon) and we don't know how many of them even use any of the 3G data functions.

Wow... you sure do read a LOT into a single use of the word "roughshod". LOL.

I'm sorry, it seems like you're the one with some sort of emotional axe to grind here, not me. To go on and on over the use of one word, and not even a particularly emotionally charged one at that? Egads.

All I can say is, you need to chill. I'm not a Euro chauvinist, I'm a Californian. But guess what? Euro chauvinists can say their piece, and it doesn't bother me one whit. I'll give 'em the brush back when they get overly nationalist and anti-American, but that's been rare here.

Finally, regarding the "if you can't formulate a convincing argument" BS... please, give us all a break, that's Internet Debate 1A. I have formulated a convincing argument, just not to your particular point of view. As I already said, what we have is a disagreement on the nature of reality. I'm pretty sure I'm right, but to each their own.




I think you're way too worried/obsessed with sort of thing.


.

I think it's way too early to say much except

- the iPhone is doing well in the US
- the iPhone is not doing well in Europe

The unlocking story is a nice sideshow, but not one Apple wants, as they don't get their monthly kickback from the carrier on those...


.

I don't understand how people conclude that iphone is doing well in the US --- the US ain't doing well if 50% of the sales have gone to China, Russia and the rest of the world.

AT&T is no longer giving out iphone activation numbers --- that tells you how bad it is.

Not really. Apple has publicly set a goal of 10 million iPhones sold in calendar 2008. Maybe half of those they'll get in the US, though that's iffy due to the US entering recession. \

The remaining half has to come mostly from the other two big world markets... Europe and Asia. So yes, Apple does have to sell well in Europe, to be a success by its own metrics. It doesn't have to sell quite as well in Europe as it does in the US, but the sales can't suck either.



Why stop there? Why not beat Nokia too? 3G will do that.



The thing about 3G is, you can turn it off if you need to.



You mean, you're not aware that video confercing and video apps in general need good bandwidth in order to provide a good user experience? Whoa.



Anyone can generate a short-term sales spike via pricecuts. The trick, as you're probably aware, is to bring sales up long-term.

In a market as competitive as Europe, that's going to require more than a pricecut... it's going to require giving the Euros the iPhone they've been asking for, features-wise. But you knew that.

.

Great point, actually. US numbers will mean more once the iPhone is launched in places like China, Russia, etc.

I do recall ATT saying that only 900k iPhones were activitated in Q4, even though Apple claimed 2.3 million US sales for that quarter. Sure, some of the gap may've been Xmas presents that hadn't been activated as of Dec 31st, but still, it'd be a stretch to say that represents 1.4 million phones...

And Apple doesn't really want a lot of unlocked iPhones, because they then don't get the monthly carrier kickbacks from the revenue sharing deals.

That said, even giving a significant chunk of US sales away to foreign export/unlocking, US sales still aren't what I'd call bad. Apple would be under more pressure to do well in Europe and Asia, however.


.

(shrug) Roughshod means what it means, and of course it's emotionally charged. You could have used a lot of other words. I guess if you're saying you don't really mean what you say, then whatever.


Why would I need to chill? I'm not upset or angry or dismayed in any way. I am puzzled by a tone, taken by you and others, and I'm talking about it.


Expecting you to make sense is Internet Debate 1A? OK.

So you made an argument, or not so much an argument as just kind of a bald assertion regarding Apple's attitude, and I have suggested reasons why I think that doesn't hang together. Rather than explain where I'm mistaken, you just blow the whole thing off. Which is fine, but I remain oddly unpersuaded. It's not really a disagreement on the nature of reality, we disagree on a couple of key points.

So you can decisively put me in my place: show me where Apple asserted they were going to storm Europe with the iPhone, run roughshod, or whatever word you prefer now, over existing vendors with a 2G phone. If that's what they were saying, then you're are absolutely right and I stand corrected-- Apple had unwarranted expectations for a 2G handset and has been schooled.

If not, none of this makes any sense at all, and is just elaborate projection on what after all is business minded corporation who might actually have some people on board that would be aware of what is apparently so blindingly obvious to consumers in the market they were entering.


Actual internet debate 1A often involves claiming the other guy is irrational or obsessed or overly emotional.

Anyway, and again, I have no idea why you would think I am "worried." There is a strain of feeling in this thread regarding the relative sophistication of the European phone market vs. Apple's arrogance that I've commented on, because I think it doesn't make any sense and is based on a false premise.

You know, the internet. Really not that big a deal.

Addabox, I don't know what your problem is, and frankly, I don't care. If I'm not talking to you much, it's because I've come to the conclusion that you're a little bit strange.

Be paranoid on someone else's time. Thanks.


.

Uhh, how exactly is any of that post paranoid and/or strange?

Yeah. I think that speaks for itself.

Worrying so much that you obsess that the "Euro chauvinists are out to get ya" is both paranoid and strange.

So's trying to rake someone over the grill over the subtext of the word "roughshod". I really don't like being accused of things over nothing.

Now, if you'll excuse me, Klaus, Francois, Bjorn and I are in the middle of meeting to plot the overthrow of Apple. Thanks.



.

Whatever gets you through the night. 'bye.


.

What does any of that have to do with what the iPhone sold in 2007?


That's your goal. Not necessarily Apple's.

Apple's goal is to make money. You can have the highest 3G use and not make any money at it.


That would defeat most of the function of the iPhone. Its better to wait for energy efficient 3G that you don't have to turn off.


iChat is mostly used for IM. Why even bring up video conferencing when their is no way to even do that on the iPhone. It makes absolutely no sense to try and argue this.


This would not work for every product. First their has to be a demand. MS could cut the price of the Zune and it would not sell out in days.

It doesn't really make much difference. An iPhone sale is an iPhone sale for Apple no matter where its used. An unlocked phone in China or Russia does not effect AT&T because they don't provide service in China or Russia. Unlocked phones going to T-Mobile would effect AT&T but that does not appear to be a big problem.

Lets say AT&T did sign only 900,00 iPhone users. 900,000 user of a $450 phone with a $90 contract. In exactly what context is that a bad number?

Apple is staunchly protecting its revenue sharing deals. That is why they currently sell unlocked phones in France and are reported to sell unlocked phones in Australia, Italy, and Belgium.

It only makes a difference when we actually look at American sales as actually American sales --- otherwise it loses all meanings.

It's a bad number for AT&T that only 40% of them are new subscribers and probably upward of $18 a month goes to Apple, not AT&T. It's a $72 contract, not $90.

It is so bad that AT&T doesn't give out activation numbers anymore. All that distraction --- Verizon managed to get more net adds in Q1 than AT&T.

How many of the French iphones were bought for 749 euro (i.e. totally unlocked iphone)?

Orange said 5%. The French iphone plans are not that great either --- which shows that all the French consumer laws are useless.

Nobody actually said that Australia and Italy will have unlocked iphones. All the rumors actually said is that the iphone will be available to multiple carriers in Australia and Italy --- which can mean that they will be locked to multiple carriers in Australia and Italy.

Of course mistakes can be made between knowing the demographics and creating & selling the product successfully. Products fail all of the time, execution isn't perfect, or interpreting the demographics isn't done correctly. It doesn't negate the fact that they knew the demographics, what people wanted, knew what they were trying to do, and had good reasons for going where they want to go. They had a leg to stand on. It also doesn't negate the statement that people who make proclamations of some products success in absentia of actual data don't really know what they are talking about. They are at best making a guess, and sometimes they turn out right. That's luck.

You don't invest tens or hundreds of millions of dollars in product development and business development based on luck and hunches. I don't think you would. There are people who do, but they aint wandering around on the Internet.


3G statistics are indeed random. I wonder how long you searched to even find that piece of info. I've seen USA/European subscriber rates vary from 10% to 30% in the last 6 months. The only commonality I've seen is that Korea/Japan are highest (40 to 50%), Spain/Italy (30$) next, and USA/UK/Germany/France varying between 10 to 25%.


Well, ideally, a company would be able to release a specific product suited to a specific market at the right time for the right price using the right business model. They could be like Nokia with lots and lots of handsets. But obviously not. Nokia isn't even this fictional company as they have their "failures". Apple has their business plan and built a cell phone to a specific set of form factor, battery performance, profit margin, schedule, usability, and business plan constraints. You live with what you can do, and do it well.

There's always going to be someone, even not considering the Internet peanut gallery, who will think you've done something wrong. It's at best a guess if you don't have the data or the development/production/business plan. Even in the USA, Apple's plan is rife with questions as they are only selling to 30% of the market (through AT&T, but not T-Mobile, Verizon, Sprint, Alltel, etc) in the USA. Was that mistake? In an idealized world sure, but unfortunately we do not, and there are a lot things that must be decided and managed.


Price is the dominant factor. If they don't have the right business plan, the features won't matter. We're not talking about pathological differences between the features sets of these devices either. They'll be relatively close depending on the specialty of the device.


Underwhelming is what you think. "Conquering the European market" is what you think Apple is doing. Don't be surprised to hear people say that you don't know what Apple is planning or what they are planning on doing. Until you really know the business plan, or Apple reports as such, all you are doing is creating a strawman to knock down and look smart.


You should give Gates his due respect. You don't survive as a titan of the business for almost 30 years as a fraud. He also deserves much more respect for his post-retirement work as well.


Sure, it's only natural. I don't really see it as being a controversial statement at all. Generally, people favor things in a tiered way: family, friends, neighborhood, school, city, state, country, continent, hemisphere. It's a very natural human response to not like what you don't know. Companies counteract that by producing strong brands such as Nokia, Mercedes, or Samsung, making this foreign thing feel trustworthy and familiar. Any international company must take this into consideration.

Since Apple is a tried and true American company, specifically, a California Bay Area company, it has its image and the perceptions that run with it. It also has a brand image that's different from its geography, and it is perceived differently in the USA, Europe and the rest of the world. So my question to you would be, if Apple was a company in say northern Italy with as strong a brand as they have in the USA, how do you think it would be treated by Europeans as compared to now?


That's certainly a brand argument where Nokia has developed a very strong brand; almost throughout the world except for in the USA. How well does Siemens do in Finland? What about Samsung/LG/SE in Finland?

You are the one who brought up 50% of iPhone's going to China and Russia. I'm saying Russia and China have no impact on AT&T whatsoever.

You are still just quoting percentages and not giving any context to why those numbers are bad and what would be better. The iPhone is far above the average price americans pay for phones or contracts. What other phone sells more at that price point?

We don't know how much AT&T is paying in the revenue sharing. I've seen reports widely go from $5 to $30. Here you say $18. Where did you get that number from?

Yes Verizon did add 200,000 more subscribers than AT&T over the quarter. For Verizon that number is 200,000 less than last year. Both companies are doing well and nearly tied in revenue. Verizon reported 11.7 billion in wireless revenue, AT&T 11.8 billion. AT&T wireless revenue increased 18.1%, data revenues are up 57.3% over last year.

AT&T will need to aggressively roll out network improvements to maintain its lead. If Apple executes iPhone 2.0 properly it will weigh heavy on AT&T competitors. Verizon still has no one phone directly comparable to the iPhone.

Of course very few people but that is the point. Its an economic disinsensitive to get them to sign with a carrier.


How do you lock a phone to multiple carriers who all use the same mobile network standard?

From what I've read the phone will be sold to the carriers at an unlocked price. The carriers will be free to subsidize the phone at whatever price they want.

How the hell do you get that out of anything I've said? Are you, perhaps, a crazy person?


"Accused of things"? In a post explaining why I'm paranoid? WTF?


OK, here's an accusation: you don't know how to read, you're oddly thin-skinned for someone who doesn't mind dishing it on the internet, and you have no coherent defense for your completely speculative theories on why Apple was wrong to intro the 2G iPhone in Europe.

That's what we're talking about right? I have an opinion, I tried to convey it reasonably, and you get all wooga-wooga, for reasons unknown. Fucking irritating, dude.

I didn't say American iphones exporting to China and Russia are affecting AT&T. I said that it affects US sales data for the iphone. I said US sales aren't US sales if a big bunch of them are going overseas --- did I say anything about AT&T in that statement.

What Verizon does or does not do --- affects AT&T. AT&T reported that 4% of their subscribers are taking the $99 unlimited voice plan --- which in numeric term is bigger than their iphone subscriber base. Plenty of people are willing to pay for high monthly plans for voice which takes less bandwidth than the iphone.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/0...ing-prices/?hp

$18 comes from Munster --- which everybody here uses his numbers when they served their purposes.

Notice that they have approx. the same revenue but AT&T had to do it with 4 million subscribers.

What point is that? A theoretical point that has no effect to the real world just to win an argument in a internet forum.

How does any carrier lock a GSM phone? They all use the same GSM network standard.

Carrier A will simlock the iphone to carrier's A network. Carrier B will simlock the iphone to carrier's B network. You can't just take a AT&T iphone and put in a O2 UK SIM card --- even though O2 offers the iphone in the UK.

From a technical point of view, do you know what you are talking about here? It does not look like it. If you want, I can either explain it to you or you can Google it.

You mentioned back a few posts about 3G draining the battery, power hungry apps (paraphrase), yada, yada, yada. Once again, this comes from someone that has no practical experience with a 3G device. I will gladly clue you in. I have a Nokia N82. A HSDPA phone. It shows constantly that it is connected to 3G. Does this mean that I am using 3G or that it is connected to a 3G network? Hint: It is connected waiting to do something. Now if I make a VoIP call, it will then initiate a SIP connection and 3G will come into active play. Thus it will then make tax the battery. Sooooo your continued comments about battery life, yada, yada, yada, are a bit uniformed and misleading.

Anyway, carry on with the Apple love-fest.

Addabox, received your private message. Apology accepted.

It's okay to be hardcore, but the 'Spanish Inquisition' aspect was what wasn't appreciated. At least you you were big enough to admit you went too far (a fair number of ppl on AI aren't), and its appreciated.




NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!



.

Is this a trick question?




This seems like a waste of effort. People can easily switch sim cards. Apple would have to deal with stocking phones with sim cards for each carrier.

The iPhone is designed to be used liberally and frequently for data. That is the reason it comes with an unlimited data contract. The iPhone ships with 7 apps that require a data connection and their are over 1,500 web apps that require a data connection.

It would defeat the design and purpose for most of the iPhone apps if the user did not use the data connection.

What if I don't want to use web apps but want native apps. Apple gets to dictate how I will use my device.

This isn't much of a hypothetical since we know native apps are coming next month.

At the same time not everything needs to be a native app. Many services and functions work perfectly fine as a web app.

As I said earlier --- you said that it's technically impossible to simlock a GSM phone --- but that's how 3 billion GSM phones have been sold.

Apple doesn't have physical stores in Australia. The carriers have to insert their own sim cards into the iphones. That's how billion of GSM phones are sold --- the carriers insert their own sim cards.

You made it sound like you have never touched a GSM phone before and doesn't know how the world works.

I didn't make a declarative statement, I asked a question: How do you lock a phone to multiple carriers who all use the same mobile network standard?

The answer is you can try, but you can't really.


As far as been reported the iPhone ships with a sim card. France doesn't have Apple store's either. Does O2 insert its own sim cards?

Billions of GSM phones have been sold with this "time-consuming" method of simlocked phones with carrier's sim cards inserted. Most of those GSM phones come with a box that would have the carrier's name on it, a firmware that is specific with the carrier, a piece of paper that describe the terms and conditions of the carrier.

It's not that "you can try, but you can't really" --- billions of GSM phones have been sold that way.