Apple is loosing market share to Android mainly due to the iPhone being locked-down to a single carrier. AT&T does not have good coverage in all areas, but Android does since it's open to ALL carriers.
Don't specific Android smartphones work on specific networks? IIRC, unless you get the Google phone, aren't all Android phones in the US are all still carrier locked and wired to either GSM or CDMA? And the Google phone is still only GSM?
What Verizon would insist on would be along the lines of having a Verizon logo on the front and back, the phone would boot a Verizon logo instead of an Apple logo, the Apple interface would be modified to a Verizon-specific version with logos and apps that you can't move off the first screen. We'd have to use the Verizon version of a video player, the Verizon music player, only use ring tones bought from Verizon, and the apps will be crap designed by an engineer without the least bit of design background (not talking UI design, I mean *any* design).
I bought and used a smartphone sold by Verizon. It included none of the aspects you mention.
None.
The phone was made by a MUCH smaller company than Apple, and it sold MUCH less quickly than the iPhone.
It included none of the aspects you mention. None. It was sold exactly as designed by the manufacturer. Apps could be downloaded from any store of the owner's preference. Indeed, there was no way to access any Verizon anything.
On hind sight. Apple is now the #1 valued technology company in the world. At the time the original iphone was released, Apple was valued below Google....today they are worth almost $90B more than Google and $50B more than Microsoft - that's B as in Billions!
So, if you look at this objectively, Apple's moves have been the right business ones. Also, ATT was valued below Verizon at the time of the iPhone deal. Today ATT is worth almost 2x as much as Verizon.
As for desperation....IF Verizon turns down the iphone, it will be released on Sprint and T-Mobile...the impact will be quite devastating for Verizon, to say the least. They'll have to dole out all sorts of favors to Motorola to stay in the handset market, which means it will push others like HTC and Samsung even closer to the other networks. Verizon cannot afford to not have the iphone. Not if the other 3 networks get it.
Apple has become No.1 because they surprised the market with new WOW products which arguably, have no competition. After Android, it will be hard for Apple to maintain that spot, because they're locked down with one carrier and Android is, like MS can be installed on any hardware. The advantage Android has is that the marketing will be done by Google and any other company that utlizes Android. While Apple has to take on the burden of marketing all on its own.
Verizon has simply adopted Android as a competing product to the iPhone. And if you go to a Verizon store they'll convince you that the Android is better than the iPhone. Already several friends of mine chose Android over their iPhone. If Apple does not get Verizon on their side, Apple will continue to struggle in being No.1
As a longterm VZ wireless broadband customer, I have been getting regular updates from VZ regarding LTE. This week they even provided a coverage map that showed both EVDO RevA and LTE coverage that will exist on rollout. LTE is going to be fantastic IF you live in one of the 30 odd major metropolitan areas (fortunately I live in the DFW area), but if you live even remotely outside those areas, it will likely be another year or two after the initial rollout before LTE makes any real headway into the VZ goal of a total overlay of their existing EVDO network.
While building a CDMA only phone does add some complexity to the otherwise clean Apple iphone design, there are other carriers besides VZ using CDMA and at this point. Yes, I suspect that the next gen iphone will likely have a dual mode chip that allows Apple to once again build against a single design model, but in building a CDMA only model, Apple gets a few months of market penetration that otherwise would be left open to droid clones.
Great post.
The real problem with an LTE phone is that it has to have backward compatibility where there is no LTE coverage. And after the "there's a map for that" dustup between VZW and AT&T, you can pretty much guarantee that AT&T isn't going to let a Verizon LTE smartphone roam on their GSM network. So a Verizon LTE iPhone would still need CDMA support.
The hell of it is that AT&T will probably get blindsided again by Verizon over the LTE maps.
Personally, I don't think we'll see an LTE capable iPhone until the iPhone 5 in June or July, but that's just me guessing.
Don't specific Android smartphones work on specific networks? IIRC, unless you get the Google phone, aren't all Android phones in the US are all still carrier locked and wired to either GSM or CDMA? And the Google phone is still only GSM?
Android can be installed on any compatible phone, not just the "Google Phone". And being locked down to a carrier is different than being locked down to GSM or CDMA which are used by multiple carriers.
I recently updated my "Mark the Spot" app that ATT wrote to let them know where their dead zones are, since they apparently have no clue without my input. The reason for the update: bug fixes to stop crashes.
I thought part of the approval process for Apps was that they couldn't crash. I distinctly remember Jobs making a big point of this at the D8 conference.
So how come ATT was allowed to have an App in the store that was crashing all this time? Why does ATT get "a pass" for substandard service in the eyes of a company that demands excellence?
And you believed that JOBS CRAP FILLED STATEMENT?!
If that be the case, shut down the app store for a little app house cleaning, 'cuz I see plenty of updates of plenty of apps to fix "bugs" and stop "crashes" and just read reviews of apps other than AT&T, I see plenty of "still buggy", "crashes", "slow responsiveness", etc. Why were THEY allowed to 'get a pass' and have apps in the app store?
Sounds more like a little biased against AT&T, rather than a little rant, because your little rant is really a lot of FUD IMO!
Apple is loosing market share to Android mainly due to the iPhone being locked-down to a single carrier. AT&T does not have good coverage in all areas, but Android does since it's open to ALL carriers.
True. Apple has a huge unmet market opportunity to grow their market share with the iphone. Right now, Apple is selling 25% of all smartphones in the US while serving around 30% of the market. Android has 32% of the market while serving 100% of the market.
Simple logic would indicate that IF the iphone were available on 100% of the market it would probably have north of 50% market share.
But, the problem is that Apple currently does not have production capacity to meet more than their current demand. I see Samsung S family of phone already available in Buy One Get One deals and they can be picked up on a walk in basis (at least in DC), while the iphone 4 still has a wait list....so adding a new network for now will only increase wait times and not necessarily drive up sales for Apple. Apple has no excess production capacity. Even Att could sell more iphones if they had more supply.
I put my comments in bullet points. They proved point by point why you are wrong.
I'm not wrong about the fact that Apple would sell more phones if they opened to other carriers. And all I said was that if V Cast is the only sticking point, then put it on the phone and move on.
As for your other points, you must know that the original Apple TV was designed mainly for the purpose of iTunes consumption. Allowing NetFlix on the Apple TV was a major shift in the Apple TV "mission." I'm shocked Apple allowed it, but they did and the thing is selling like hotcakes.
If Apple found it in their DNA to partner with Netflix, can they not do it again with other cell providers and their content models? Would it be so bad?
By the way, you don't need to go to the trouble of making bullet points. Just speak with eloquence and wisdom and you will easily sway others to your way of thinking. Like I just did with you.
A controlled user experience. Otherwise known as a walled garden.
Sorry for the blaspheme. No offense intended in this particular case. I'll have to think of a synonym. How about delusions of grandeur??
Well, those "delusions" of Godhood/grandeur has made him the most admired CEO in the world, who has taken one company that people were saying should be liquidated, and made it one of the largest in the world.
Have you ever thought that, maybe, just maybe, this guy knows what the f*** he is doing? And you, random internet commenter, who thinks he knows better than that guy, might be the one with the actual delusions?
That Verizon would want to stuff their own crapware onto the phone. They are big on crippling smart phones so that they can only do what Verizon wants them to do. They don't want people putting music from other sources onto their phones; they want them to buy from their crappy VCast service. An iPhone on Verizon that worked like it does on AT&T would be fine, but one riddled with crapware and limited to vCast and the usual Verizon limitations would not be attractive.
Apple has become No.1 because they surprised the market with new WOW products which arguably, have no competition. After Android, it will be hard for Apple to maintain that spot, because they're locked down with one carrier and Android is, like MS can be installed on any hardware.
Yeah, just like what happened with the iPod.
Oh wait....
I will wait till a device running Android does not need to be heavily subsidized by a telephone carrier, and have no iOS competition on that carrier to be successful before I will chalk Android as the death knell of Apple.
I bought and used a smartphone sold by Verizon. It included none of the aspects you mention.
None.
The phone was made by a MUCH smaller company than Apple, and it sold MUCH less quickly than the iPhone.
It included none of the aspects you mention. None. It was sold exactly as designed by the manufacturer. Apps could be downloaded from any store of the owner's preference. Indeed, there was no way to access any Verizon anything.
I think you are wildly incorrect.
I'm basing this solely on my previous experience with Verizon phones.
You say "a smartphone sold by Verizon". Which smartphone are you talking about? Was it an Android phone? A Blackberry?
That Verizon would want to stuff their own crapware onto the phone. They are big on crippling smart phones so that they can only do what Verizon wants them to do. They don't want people putting music from other sources onto their phones; they want them to buy from their crappy VCast service. An iPhone on Verizon that worked like it does on AT&T would be fine, but one riddled with crapware and limited to vCast and the usual Verizon limitations would not be attractive.
I'm with you I have had att for almost 10 years never had a problem and I'm in Fresno California I get so tired of all the att bashing. THey F... up on my bill and they Fixed it no problems its called loyalty. AS quiet as its kept if it were not for att steppin up to get the iphone no one would have one!!
I never will understand Apple's partnership with AT&T. There such a crap company. As Jason Snell of MacWorld put it, they are a cancer on Apple's good name.
Umm, their network is GSM. One phone to rule the world.
I will say it Again to all you dummys that dont get it. If it were not for att you would not have an iphone.They stepped up when verizon wouldnt and because of that iphone is the number one device in the world. stop hating on the victor !! Shame on verizon for passing on the iphone = more dummies!
Android can be installed on any compatible phone, not just the "Google Phone". And being locked down to a carrier is different than being locked down to GSM or CDMA which are used by multiple carriers.
Doh! Nevermind, that's just me being daft and misunderstanding the argument.
Comments
Apple is loosing market share to Android mainly due to the iPhone being locked-down to a single carrier. AT&T does not have good coverage in all areas, but Android does since it's open to ALL carriers.
Don't specific Android smartphones work on specific networks? IIRC, unless you get the Google phone, aren't all Android phones in the US are all still carrier locked and wired to either GSM or CDMA? And the Google phone is still only GSM?
What Verizon would insist on would be along the lines of having a Verizon logo on the front and back, the phone would boot a Verizon logo instead of an Apple logo, the Apple interface would be modified to a Verizon-specific version with logos and apps that you can't move off the first screen. We'd have to use the Verizon version of a video player, the Verizon music player, only use ring tones bought from Verizon, and the apps will be crap designed by an engineer without the least bit of design background (not talking UI design, I mean *any* design).
I bought and used a smartphone sold by Verizon. It included none of the aspects you mention.
None.
The phone was made by a MUCH smaller company than Apple, and it sold MUCH less quickly than the iPhone.
It included none of the aspects you mention. None. It was sold exactly as designed by the manufacturer. Apps could be downloaded from any store of the owner's preference. Indeed, there was no way to access any Verizon anything.
I think you are wildly incorrect.
On hind sight. Apple is now the #1 valued technology company in the world. At the time the original iphone was released, Apple was valued below Google....today they are worth almost $90B more than Google and $50B more than Microsoft - that's B as in Billions!
So, if you look at this objectively, Apple's moves have been the right business ones. Also, ATT was valued below Verizon at the time of the iPhone deal. Today ATT is worth almost 2x as much as Verizon.
As for desperation....IF Verizon turns down the iphone, it will be released on Sprint and T-Mobile...the impact will be quite devastating for Verizon, to say the least. They'll have to dole out all sorts of favors to Motorola to stay in the handset market, which means it will push others like HTC and Samsung even closer to the other networks. Verizon cannot afford to not have the iphone. Not if the other 3 networks get it.
Apple has become No.1 because they surprised the market with new WOW products which arguably, have no competition. After Android, it will be hard for Apple to maintain that spot, because they're locked down with one carrier and Android is, like MS can be installed on any hardware. The advantage Android has is that the marketing will be done by Google and any other company that utlizes Android. While Apple has to take on the burden of marketing all on its own.
Verizon has simply adopted Android as a competing product to the iPhone. And if you go to a Verizon store they'll convince you that the Android is better than the iPhone. Already several friends of mine chose Android over their iPhone. If Apple does not get Verizon on their side, Apple will continue to struggle in being No.1
As a longterm VZ wireless broadband customer, I have been getting regular updates from VZ regarding LTE. This week they even provided a coverage map that showed both EVDO RevA and LTE coverage that will exist on rollout. LTE is going to be fantastic IF you live in one of the 30 odd major metropolitan areas (fortunately I live in the DFW area), but if you live even remotely outside those areas, it will likely be another year or two after the initial rollout before LTE makes any real headway into the VZ goal of a total overlay of their existing EVDO network.
While building a CDMA only phone does add some complexity to the otherwise clean Apple iphone design, there are other carriers besides VZ using CDMA and at this point. Yes, I suspect that the next gen iphone will likely have a dual mode chip that allows Apple to once again build against a single design model, but in building a CDMA only model, Apple gets a few months of market penetration that otherwise would be left open to droid clones.
Great post.
The real problem with an LTE phone is that it has to have backward compatibility where there is no LTE coverage. And after the "there's a map for that" dustup between VZW and AT&T, you can pretty much guarantee that AT&T isn't going to let a Verizon LTE smartphone roam on their GSM network. So a Verizon LTE iPhone would still need CDMA support.
The hell of it is that AT&T will probably get blindsided again by Verizon over the LTE maps.
Personally, I don't think we'll see an LTE capable iPhone until the iPhone 5 in June or July, but that's just me guessing.
Don't specific Android smartphones work on specific networks? IIRC, unless you get the Google phone, aren't all Android phones in the US are all still carrier locked and wired to either GSM or CDMA? And the Google phone is still only GSM?
Android can be installed on any compatible phone, not just the "Google Phone". And being locked down to a carrier is different than being locked down to GSM or CDMA which are used by multiple carriers.
Little Rant:
I recently updated my "Mark the Spot" app that ATT wrote to let them know where their dead zones are, since they apparently have no clue without my input. The reason for the update: bug fixes to stop crashes.
I thought part of the approval process for Apps was that they couldn't crash. I distinctly remember Jobs making a big point of this at the D8 conference.
So how come ATT was allowed to have an App in the store that was crashing all this time? Why does ATT get "a pass" for substandard service in the eyes of a company that demands excellence?
And you believed that JOBS CRAP FILLED STATEMENT?!
If that be the case, shut down the app store for a little app house cleaning, 'cuz I see plenty of updates of plenty of apps to fix "bugs" and stop "crashes" and just read reviews of apps other than AT&T, I see plenty of "still buggy", "crashes", "slow responsiveness", etc. Why were THEY allowed to 'get a pass' and have apps in the app store?
Sounds more like a little biased against AT&T, rather than a little rant, because your little rant is really a lot of FUD IMO!
/
/
/
Apple is loosing market share to Android mainly due to the iPhone being locked-down to a single carrier. AT&T does not have good coverage in all areas, but Android does since it's open to ALL carriers.
True. Apple has a huge unmet market opportunity to grow their market share with the iphone. Right now, Apple is selling 25% of all smartphones in the US while serving around 30% of the market. Android has 32% of the market while serving 100% of the market.
Simple logic would indicate that IF the iphone were available on 100% of the market it would probably have north of 50% market share.
But, the problem is that Apple currently does not have production capacity to meet more than their current demand. I see Samsung S family of phone already available in Buy One Get One deals and they can be picked up on a walk in basis (at least in DC), while the iphone 4 still has a wait list....so adding a new network for now will only increase wait times and not necessarily drive up sales for Apple. Apple has no excess production capacity. Even Att could sell more iphones if they had more supply.
I put my comments in bullet points. They proved point by point why you are wrong.
I'm not wrong about the fact that Apple would sell more phones if they opened to other carriers. And all I said was that if V Cast is the only sticking point, then put it on the phone and move on.
As for your other points, you must know that the original Apple TV was designed mainly for the purpose of iTunes consumption. Allowing NetFlix on the Apple TV was a major shift in the Apple TV "mission." I'm shocked Apple allowed it, but they did and the thing is selling like hotcakes.
If Apple found it in their DNA to partner with Netflix, can they not do it again with other cell providers and their content models? Would it be so bad?
By the way, you don't need to go to the trouble of making bullet points. Just speak with eloquence and wisdom and you will easily sway others to your way of thinking. Like I just did with you.
A controlled user experience. Otherwise known as a walled garden.
Sorry for the blaspheme. No offense intended in this particular case. I'll have to think of a synonym. How about delusions of grandeur??
Well, those "delusions" of Godhood/grandeur has made him the most admired CEO in the world, who has taken one company that people were saying should be liquidated, and made it one of the largest in the world.
Have you ever thought that, maybe, just maybe, this guy knows what the f*** he is doing? And you, random internet commenter, who thinks he knows better than that guy, might be the one with the actual delusions?
Apple has become No.1 because they surprised the market with new WOW products which arguably, have no competition. After Android, it will be hard for Apple to maintain that spot, because they're locked down with one carrier and Android is, like MS can be installed on any hardware.
Yeah, just like what happened with the iPod.
Oh wait....
I will wait till a device running Android does not need to be heavily subsidized by a telephone carrier, and have no iOS competition on that carrier to be successful before I will chalk Android as the death knell of Apple.
I bought and used a smartphone sold by Verizon. It included none of the aspects you mention.
None.
The phone was made by a MUCH smaller company than Apple, and it sold MUCH less quickly than the iPhone.
It included none of the aspects you mention. None. It was sold exactly as designed by the manufacturer. Apps could be downloaded from any store of the owner's preference. Indeed, there was no way to access any Verizon anything.
I think you are wildly incorrect.
I'm basing this solely on my previous experience with Verizon phones.
You say "a smartphone sold by Verizon". Which smartphone are you talking about? Was it an Android phone? A Blackberry?
It sounds like you aren't still using it... Why?
That Verizon would want to stuff their own crapware onto the phone. They are big on crippling smart phones so that they can only do what Verizon wants them to do. They don't want people putting music from other sources onto their phones; they want them to buy from their crappy VCast service. An iPhone on Verizon that worked like it does on AT&T would be fine, but one riddled with crapware and limited to vCast and the usual Verizon limitations would not be attractive.
^^^^^^ This!
Little Rant:
I never will understand Apple's partnership with AT&T. There such a crap company. As Jason Snell of MacWorld put it, they are a cancer on Apple's good name.
Umm, their network is GSM. One phone to rule the world.
Android can be installed on any compatible phone, not just the "Google Phone". And being locked down to a carrier is different than being locked down to GSM or CDMA which are used by multiple carriers.
Doh! Nevermind, that's just me being daft and misunderstanding the argument.
Move along, nothing to see here...
I'm sorry, but I don't see Apple caving on that one.
They way I read this they haven't.
Umm, their network is GSM. One phone to rule the world.
Umm, their network is not everywhere. How are you going to rule the world like that?
Leave off the "umm" next time will you?