Originally Posted by trumptman
You could be right or it could just be
Apple's way of covering their butt legally since they have been sued so many times for offering features and not having the AT&T network keep its end of the deal.
Now you're getting it.
We just don't know the reason, but we know enough to know we don't have all the information to make a determination.
Apple has a very unique and exclusive deal with AT&T. You note why didn't AT&T step up and create an app, I'm not aware of any other apps that AT&T has created for the iPhone for services they offer.
I didn't say that AT&T would be creating the app. They didn't create the phone or SMS app that is used on their network. I suggested that if AT&T really wanted an MMS app on the EDGE iPhone they would have had one (made by Apple). Of course, some other deal could have pushed it away in favour of something else, but I don't see what Apple would have against the relatively simple addition of MMS... unless they and AT&T were planning all along for some Super MMS for their 3G network. Again, we are missing an important part of the puzzle.
Claiming I don't have the information presumes someone else here does and of course they don't. So don't make a demand of me that you cannot meet yourself.
So knowing something is false requires knowing what is the truth?
Apple clearly wanted to create a different market model with the iPhone. They wanted unsubsidized prices and to stop having as many services being offered by the cell carrier. They wanted to minimize the cell carrier. The last couple years have been us watching Apple refine and alternately cave in various forms on this model. The offered the iPod touch which does eliminate the carrier. They had to cave on price, allow the data plan to be raised and move to the subsidized model everyone else uses. They wanted a simplified data plan and so they offered SMS and email. Now their users will have the option of MMS and tacking that onto the data plan (thus raising costs) as well.
Yes, they did want a new model. This US model is broken and we get companies like Verizon who take advantage, but it's not that great with any carrier. But they didn't cave in the US, they caved elsewhere and reportedly had to beg AT&T to let them go back to the old model of business, which required a 2 year extension on the exclusivity contract. I think AT&T really liked not having to push a few hundred dollars up front to the vendor for costs they weren't going to recoup in a net profit for nearly a year. I think they saw no real downside to let Apple deal with many of the iPhone customers and letting consumers activate their phones at home, away from their retail employees. It is time consuming in a store.
The Touch only eliminates the carrier if you don't want a phone. I don't think it has baring on your comment about Apple caving. I also don't see how not offering MMS made things simple to the consumer. We know it's a cash cow for carriers so we have to figure out why AT&T didn't want it, or why AT&T was okay with Apple not including it and why Apple didn't want to include it. You don't have those answers!
Your last sentence doesn't seem to fit except to be negative. The cost of MMS would still be there with the original iPhone had they added it. I don't understand why people are so intent of paying such outrageous fees to send MMS and SMS through a carrier anyway. I understand that it currently connects to more phones than email but the data to cost ratio is so outrageous.
[quote]Apple can require it because they want to require it. Why did they make the latest lessons on Garage Band require a G5 when simple hacks have them running just fine on G4? Why is it likely they will exclude PPC from Snow Leopard when it is clear G5 class machines could run it just fine and it is nothing more than a compiling issue? Apple does this sort of stuff all the time. Most people create hacks that simply disable the installer check and it works just fine. Those who don't care go and buy new equipment.
Your last paragraph was complaining about Apple having to cave to [foreign] carriers. Now your complaining that Apple can do anything it wants but for some reason choose not to do be "doodieheads". I don't think you are being rational or fair in your evaluation. The Garage Band issue is like any other issue. Apple has to draw the line somewhere. I bet I can get Garage Band to run on any Mac that runs Leopard, no matter how old it is, but that doesn't mean it will run well. As a company you have to consider these things. People are suing Apple because AT&T's network isn't as fast for 3G than they thought it would be or that 3G isn't in their area. Do you think that Apple wouldn't get sued for making an app and saying that it can run on any of their HW running OS X and not have unhappy customers if it's too slow to be useful. They made a blatant cut off at G4, that is a marketing decision that makes it easy for the consumer to understand, even at the risk of losing a few dozen sales on fast G4's that it will run well on.
As you note, why would they prevent SwirlyMMS from the app store when they would make a percentage of the $8 they charge? Well because Apple has engineered a closed-wall garden and clearly has said no to apps that compete in areas they want to own. Also the make a lot more from the sale of a new iPhone.
Again, you state for a fact that it's Apple, when I see no reason why having MMS wold compete with Apple's business model since it would only add an app to the iPhone and make them money on each sale. You coming it from a PoV that Apple is in the wrong before you look at the facts. I'd guess that Apple under contract can't have other MMS apps on their device.
Will MMS get people to buy new iPhones? Of course it will. Most people are not technical at all.
The people that most likely use MMS are younger and therefore more technically inclined due to our culture.
Cell users are already conditioned to a two year upgrade cycle. AT&T wants a new two year contract and Apple wants the sale of a new iPhone.
If that is the case then why is Apple updating all those 2 year old iPhones with v3.0. It surely doesn't bode well for selling new iPhones if they are getting a major firmware overhaul to extend their usefulness. We aren't just talking bug fixes.
Me, I might pick up one of these now "useless" iPhones on the cheap just to play with. I mean when I hit the selling owner with the information that their radio is "outdated" and that "no one is going to want it since it won't do MMS" I'll get it for even cheaper.
If that were the case then the original iPhone wouldn't have been so popular. I sold mine for more than I bought for after a year of use on that "useless" phone.