or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Video speed test: 2.5G EDGE iPhone vs. mock 3G HSDPA iPhone
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Video speed test: 2.5G EDGE iPhone vs. mock 3G HSDPA iPhone - Page 7

post #241 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Samab's post uses activation numbers as proof of poor slaes. I find this to be illogical accounting.

I personally know many users on T-Mobile, though they may have to jump ship to AT&T to get 3G access in a month or two.

I find Tenobell's and Samab's methods a bit wrong because they do not take into account the iPhones that are not locked to any contract, such as mine, or the pay as you go contracts. I guess the best measure, or one sure fire measure would be to count total sales of all iPhone, and count the activation, and revenue share as separate.

Just my guess.
post #242 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

Nice article.Can't wait to see what they come up with. Better start saving my pennies though. I think Apple and Nokia are both in my future and in my pocket.

That article clearly shows that Nokia understands the importance of software and the advantage Apple has. Where they stand right now Nokia is pretty far behind Apple from a software platform standpoint. Symbian is nowhere near the sophistication of OS X. Nokia has no team of engineers developing software for desktop class OS, apps, and API's that are scalable to their mobile devices the way Apple does.
post #243 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

I find Tenobell's and Samab's methods a bit wrong because they do not take into account the iPhones that are not locked to any contract, such as mine, or the pay as you go contracts. I guess the best measure, or one sure fire measure would be to count total sales of all iPhone, and count the activation, and revenue share as separate..

The iPhones not locked to a contract don't matter. The phone had to be purchased, in the end its still a sale for Apple.
post #244 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

That article clearly shows that Nokia understands the importance of software and the advantage Apple has. Where they stand right now Nokia is pretty far behind Apple from a software platform standpoint. Symbian is nowhere near the sophistication of OS X. Nokia has no team of engineers developing software for desktop class OS, apps, and API's that are scalable to their mobile devices the way Apple does.

Now you are recycling defeated arguments. No one said Nokia was doing this, and if they do or don't I could not care less. Right now, today, at this moment, from a TELEPHONY stand point, they are beating Apple. Period. Nokia's phones have real, usable telephony features. Not saying that Apple can not add them, or that Nokia can't decide to develop a more sophisticated OS, but their phones work better. Another moving of the goal post moment.

Where in on the last Nokia development meeting where your comment:
Quote:
Nokia has no team of engineers developing software for desktop class OS, apps, and API's that are scalable to their mobile devices the way Apple does.

was discussed? I am not talking about what will be, but what is now. Right now, the iPhone, and you proved this your via post, is nothing more than an iPod Touch with a rudimentary phone. For me, I know the limitations that come with iPhone 1.0 and adjust to it. I have a Nokia N82 that picks up the slack of the iPhone and I drive on. Improvise, adapt, overcome.
post #245 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

The iPhones not locked to a contract don't matter. The phone had to be purchased, in the end its still a sale for Apple.


Didn't I say this in post #241?
post #246 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

There is no moving goal posts you are speaking in generalizations. You said the iPhone is an iPod with a phone. There are several iPods.



You are still making a flawed argument in attempting to discredit the iPhone comparing it to the Touch. The Touch is also clearly beyond a simple PMP. It will soon be a business class PDA, that will have over 200,000 developers and thousands of web based applications.

Their is no other device like the Touch, it is in a class of its own.

Yes there are several iPods, but which one closely matches the iPhone? You know this but in a failing argument, you turned to semantics. As you pointed out, remove the phone from an iPhone, or even the sim card, and you have an iPod Touch. WHich goes to prove my point again that the iPhone is nothing more than an iPod Touch with phone.
post #247 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Comparing population sizes does give any context to whether sales are good or not. Generally good sales are measured by profits.

You have said this many times but still have given any solid context. The iPhone sells at a premium far above what the average American pays for mobile phone service. What other phone that sells for $450 with a $90 contract sold better than the iPhone over Christmas?

Looking at the large gains in Apple's revenues and profits, how can you call the iPhone anything but a success.

From the carrier's point of view --- they are not in the business of selling handsets, they are in the business of selling mobile phone service. Ask any sales people at a Verizon or AT&T store --- they don't get extra commissions for selling you a $400 phone, but they get extra commissions for selling you a high price contract plan. Plenty of people have switched to the $99 unlimited voice plans since Verizon and AT&T adopted it.

Go and read the transcripts for both AT&T and Verizon quarterly earnings conference calls --- they are all talking about the pick-up rate for the $99 unlimited voice plan. And AT&T doesn't even talk about iphone activations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Samab's post uses activation numbers as proof of poor slaes. I find this to be illogical accounting.

I personally know many users on T-Mobile, though they may have to jump ship to AT&T to get 3G access in a month or two.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

I find Tenobell's and Samab's methods a bit wrong because they do not take into account the iPhones that are not locked to any contract, such as mine, or the pay as you go contracts. I guess the best measure, or one sure fire measure would be to count total sales of all iPhone, and count the activation, and revenue share as separate.

Just my guess.

If T-Mobile USA really attracted a big percentage of iphone users, they would have said so publicly --- it's good PR. Many of the "have nots" carriers (i.e. China Mobile and a swiss carrier) have talked publicly about how many iphones are on their network.

AT&T does know how many iphones have been jailbroken to be used as pay as you go iphones. They don't talk about it, but they would know by IMEI.

Anyway --- those numbers can't be too large to affect my estimates because the iphones in China and Russia has to come from the US (because the US iphone price is lower than the European iphone price). 400,000 iphones in China don't come out of thin air. Samething for similar levels of iphones in Russia.
post #248 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

Yes there are several iPods, but which one closely matches the iPhone? You know this but in a failing argument, you turned to semantics. As you pointed out, remove the phone from an iPhone, or even the sim card, and you have an iPod Touch. WHich goes to prove my point again that the iPhone is nothing more than an iPod Touch with phone.

I think you're backing yourself into a corner with this one and you might consider just letting it go.

Referring to the iPhone as "just an iPod with a phone tacked on" is clearly meant to denigrate the former.

Changing that to "just an iPod Touch with a phone", and calling the distinction "semantics" is totally incoherent.

If Apple brings out a tablet based on its touch interface, will that be "just" a big iPod? If Apple makes a full blown desktop with a touch screen, will that be "just" a big and powerful iPod?

Again, the Touch and the iPhone are powerful mobile computing devices, and Moore's Law bodes tremendous upside for such. "Telephony", as a measure of worthiness, completely misses the point.

I think it's pretty clear, now, that for this class of device, "telephony" will reflect on the platform exactly as "email" reflects on a laptop: that is, an app that is more or less robust. A sticking point for some, but nobodies idea of a defining feature.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #249 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I think you're backing yourself into a corner with this one and you might consider just letting it go.

Referring to the iPhone as "just an iPod with a phone tacked on" is clearly meant to denigrate the former.

Changing that to "just an iPod Touch with a phone", and calling the distinction "semantics" is totally incoherent.

If Apple brings out a tablet based on its touch interface, will that be "just" a big iPod? If Apple makes a full blown desktop with a touch screen, will that be "just" a big and powerful iPod?

Again, the Touch and the iPhone are powerful mobile computing devices, and Moore's Law bodes tremendous upside for such. "Telephony", as a measure of worthiness, completely misses the point.

I think it's pretty clear, now, that for this class of device, "telephony" will reflect on the platform exactly as "email" reflects on a laptop: that is, an app that is more or less robust. A sticking point for some, but nobodies idea of a defining feature.

Being that we are both from the US, we have things called opinions, and my opinion is that the iPhone is more an iPod than phone based on a lack (my opinion again) of telephony features is my opinion. No corners here, just plenty of opinions. You have yours, I have mine, Tenobell has his, and I respect them all. I just don't have to agree with them and neither of you have produced a compelling enough argument to convince me otherwise but I do appreciate the lively debate. With that, I will say thanks.
post #250 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

From the carrier's point of view --- they are not in the business of selling handsets, they are in the business of selling mobile phone service. Ask any sales people at a Verizon or AT&T store --- they don't get extra commissions for selling you a $400 phone, but they get extra commissions for selling you a high price contract plan. Plenty of people have switched to the $99 unlimited voice plans since Verizon and AT&T adopted it.

I'm not sure what the point of this is. Without the phone their isn't much you can do with the service.

Quote:
Go and read the transcripts for both AT&T and Verizon quarterly earnings conference calls --- they are all talking about the pick-up rate for the $99 unlimited voice plan. And AT&T doesn't even talk about iphone activations.

I'm not sure of your point here either. By your estimation AT&T is required to breakout iPhone activations every quarter otherwise its a sign of failure?
post #251 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I'm not sure what the point of this is. Without the phone their isn't much you can do with the service.

I'm not sure of your point here either. By your estimation AT&T is required to breakout iPhone activations every quarter otherwise its a sign of failure?

Without the iphone, AT&T gets to keep 100% of their revenue --- and they have been happy with the $99 unlimited voice plan pick up rate. Who cares about the $90+ iphone ARPU if they have to ship $10-15 back to Apple every month.

It's only a failure --- if AT&T suddenly doesn't talk about iPhone activations. Verizon Wireless doesn't break out what phone model sells how many units --- they just said that VZW is beating the crap out of AT&T's postpaid net adds. AT&T didn't have to give out iphone activations in previous quarters --- they gave those numbers out because the numbers were good. They stopped giving out numbers when the numbers aren't so good.
post #252 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

Without the iphone, AT&T gets to keep 100% of their revenue --- and they have been happy with the $99 unlimited voice plan pick up rate. Who cares about the $90+ iphone ARPU if they have to ship $10-15 back to Apple every month.

As most phones are subsidized to the point of being free, no one keeps 100% of their revenue.

Quote:
It's only a failure --- if AT&T suddenly doesn't talk about iPhone activations. Verizon Wireless doesn't break out what phone model sells how many units --- they just said that VZW is beating the crap out of AT&T's postpaid net adds. AT&T didn't have to give out iphone activations in previous quarters --- they gave those numbers out because the numbers were good. They stopped giving out numbers when the numbers aren't so good.

You keep mentioning Verizon's post paid net adds. These numbers would only relate to iPhone sales if those net adds were for phones that cost $450. Most of those net adds are surely for free phones with contract. Therefore do not compete directly with potential iPhone customers.

As far as iPhone activation numbers of course they were lower this quarter than over Christmas. But you still give no real information or context as to why that is bad. Especially in light of AT&T's growth in revenue and profit.
post #253 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

As most phones are subsidized to the point of being free, no one keeps 100% of their revenue.

You keep mentioning Verizon's post paid net adds. These numbers would only relate to iPhone sales if those net adds were for phones that cost $450. Most of those net adds are surely for free phones with contract. Therefore do not compete directly with potential iPhone customers.

As far as iPhone activation numbers of course they were lower this quarter than over Christmas. But you still give no real information or context as to why that is bad. Especially in light of AT&T's growth in revenue and profit.

The problem is that handset subsidies don't go into the $300-400 level per handset --- which is what Munster is saying about revenue share ($18 per month x 24 months).

If the carriers subsidize your phone for $200 and gets to keep every cent --- then they may be ahead $200 without the revenue share.

I don't need to find a reason why iPhone activation numbers is bad for the March quarter. The silence by AT&T is telling people that it is more than seasonal fluctuations in demand.
post #254 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

The problem is that handset subsidies don't go into the $300-400 level per handset --- which is what Munster is saying about revenue share ($18 per month x 24 months).

Munster's numbers are at best speculative and cannot be used as first hand information.

Quote:
If the carriers subsidize your phone for $200 and gets to keep every cent --- then they may be ahead $200 without the revenue share.

Without revenue sharing Apple is more than likely to sell the iPhone to carriers at a high premium which will force them to subsidize even deeper than they would for other phones.

Quote:
I don't need to find a reason why iPhone activation numbers is bad for the March quarter. The silence by AT&T is telling people that it is more than seasonal fluctuations in demand.

You don't need a reason because you have no reason.

This is an assumption on your part. Why would AT&T be expected to continue to break out iPhone sales every quarter. This is not something that is normally practiced. Their silence shows no direct evidence to your conclusion.
post #255 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Munster's numbers are at best speculative and cannot be used as first hand information.

Without revenue sharing Apple is more than likely to sell the iPhone to carriers at a high premium which will force them to subsidize even deeper than they would for other phones.

You don't need a reason because you have no reason.

This is an assumption on your part. Why would AT&T be expected to continue to break out iPhone sales every quarter. This is not something that is normally practiced. Their silence shows no direct evidence to your conclusion.

I love it when people on these forums quoting Munster's numbers when they served their argument and then quickly dismissing them when not.

Without revenue sharing and a price tag of $1000+ iphone --- the iphone either is as rare as those legendary high priced N series phones or that they are not carried at all by the carriers. The carriers don't have to carry the iphone --- like Verizon Wireless can look at the numbers and said no to Apple.

There was no obligation on AT&T's part when they released their iphone activation numbers. Like every other for-profit corporation, they will release PR stuff when the numbers are good. But absolute silence when things are bad. Nothing against AT&T or Apple --- the whole world does it.
post #256 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

I love it when people on these forums quoting Munster's numbers when they served their argument and then quickly dismissing them when not.

Depends on the situation. There are times when Munster has very good information that seems logical. In this particular situation there is no way to know the exact nature or structure of the revenue sharing deals.

Quote:
Without revenue sharing and a price tag of $1000+ iphone --- the iphone either is as rare as those legendary high priced N series phones or that they are not carried at all by the carriers. The carriers don't have to carry the iphone --- like Verizon Wireless can look at the numbers and said no to Apple.

Quite obviously they are carrying the iPhone and Apple ain't known for selling its products on the cheap.

Seeing as how Vodofone (which is half owner of Verizon) set a deal with Apple to sell the iPhone in 10 markets. I seriously doubt Verizon would turn down the iPhone today if offered.

Quote:
There was no obligation on AT&T's part when they released their iphone activation numbers. Like every other for-profit corporation, they will release PR stuff when the numbers are good. But absolute silence when things are bad. Nothing against AT&T or Apple --- the whole world does it.

Of course AT&T want to crow about 20,000 phones sold in one day. Or crow about its Christmas sales, Christmas is a particularly important time.

Of course if AT&T had sold as many or more iPhone in the first quarter of 2008. They would have a press release about it. I'm disagreeing with your assertion that simply because they did not break out sales automatically mean sales were bad. Doesn't necessarily mean that at all.
post #257 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Of course if AT&T had sold as many or more iPhone in the first quarter of 2008. They would have a press release about it. I'm disagreeing with your assertion that simply because they did not break out sales automatically mean sales were bad. Doesn't necessarily mean that at all.

Even if it wasn't the first debut quarter of the device or the holiday season quarter the assumption that the sales must be dismal because they didn't state the numbers is poor rationale. While it may be true and one can certainly use that as an initial basis for a hypothesis, in and of itself it is a logical fallacy.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #258 of 259
Sure, that is only an initial basis of hypothesis.

The interesting issue is that there are a million other things --- like none of the European carriers announced any numbers, China suddenly announcing 400K iphones, Russia suddenly announcing something similar in numbers, the MASSIVE drop in non-current deferred revenue for Apple...

You can look at Apple's SEC filing --- and look at their non-current deferred revenue for the iphone.
post #259 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post

On my iPhone I got SPEED: 112kbps

All time: average 130 kbit
24 hr: average 112

I'm lucky I get 150-170kbps if I have very good signal, 130 without.
Trainiable is to cat as ability to live without food is to human.
Reply
Trainiable is to cat as ability to live without food is to human.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Video speed test: 2.5G EDGE iPhone vs. mock 3G HSDPA iPhone