Thats why i think it wont happen. Why would att sell data only for the device if thessy can sell voice and text for like 30 bucks extra
Competition. Why do we have data-only plans in a lot of countries, including low-data plans? Because of competition. Having two incompatible network technologies, once you buy a device, carriers do not have to compete that much anymore. LTE will hopefully start to change that, as will CDMA/GSM dual-mode phones and devices.
One thing that bugs me about the 3G iPad is that AT&T and/or Apple doesn't allow you to txt to the phone number. I think there might be apps that work around this but I don't know of any. I also have an unlimited AT&T 3G card for a laptop and the built in software lets you txt just fine. I don't know why they don't allow it on iPad and if the Touch get 3G data, are they going to do the same thing?
Competition. Why do we have data-only plans in a lot of countries, including low-data plans? Because of competition. Having two incompatible network technologies, once you buy a device, carriers do not have to compete that much anymore. LTE will hopefully start to change that, as will CDMA/GSM dual-mode phones and devices.
So.. How would a 3g touch help with competition? We only have two carriers in america, and they use different tech for 3g. This device wont be lte. And thse companies can charge you way more for a "phone plan" than strictly data plan. This wont change competitive landscspe and i will poop my pants if they find a carrier for this (maybe sprint is desparate enough).
I believe that Apple would like to ultimately undermine the phone industry. This would be the device to drive the wedge to do so.
This would not undermine anything. It makes no sense to undermine an industry through dependency on that industry. The industry wouldn't allow it, for one. In the same way that the cable and satellite television companies are going to fight tooth and nail to hold on to their established revenue streams, so will the phone industry. As would anyone. For better or worse, the model may change over time and Apple may be instrumental in making this happen but you and I will still be paying over the odds for what we get. That is why neither the cable companies nor cell phone service providers will ever let you have unlimited data. You may be able to forgo your cable provider but you will have to pay for the added bandwidth now that you are streaming / downloading all your entertainment.
a device like this would save me tons of money. all my kids do with their iPhones is text and download apps.....
would be cool if true......
What Apple should produce is an iPod touch with voice only (no 3G), i.e. a dumb phone. My children have dumb phones because I do not want to pay $180/yr each for the data plan. And, they would easily exceed the 200MB anyway.
So.. How would a 3g touch help with competition? We only have two carriers in america, and they use different tech for 3g. This device wont be lte. And thse companies can charge you way more for a "phone plan" than strictly data plan. This wont change competitive landscspe and i will poop my pants if they find a carrier for this (maybe sprint is desparate enough).
The US is probably only about 20% of the total worldwide market for iPhones. In 80% of the market a 3G iPod touch will have a real effect.
What Apple should produce is an iPod touch with voice only (no 3G), i.e. a dumb phone. My children have dumb phones because I do not want to pay $180/yr each for the data plan. And, they would easily exceed the 200MB anyway.
Now this I can see happening. In fact that might easily fight back the cheap androids, since they seem to have lower app and internet usage.
What Apple should produce is an iPod touch with voice only (no 3G), i.e. a dumb phone. My children have dumb phones because I do not want to pay $180/yr each for the data plan. And, they would easily exceed the 200MB anyway.
That device would appeal mainly to the US market only (where carriers somehow, possibly illegally, prevent the use of non-data-plan SIMs in smartphones). My mother has a pre-paid voice-only SIM in her iPhone, works without any issues. I don't understand why carriers are allowed to block this in the US.
One thing that bugs me about the 3G iPad is that AT&T and/or Apple doesn't allow you to txt to the phone number. I think there might be apps that work around this but I don't know of any. I also have an unlimited AT&T 3G card for a laptop and the built in software lets you txt just fine. I don't know why they don't allow it on iPad and if the Touch get 3G data, are they going to do the same thing?
Isn't iOS5 supposed to let you send text-messages to any other iOS device for free? With a 3G-only device, that would essentially open the floodgates with untold amount of texting teenagers and tweenagers.
For those that really don't need a phone plan, this is a great addition.
I like having 3G on my iPad. I don't use it often, but when I do, it's great. Add to that a plan that only is in place when I need it and cancels afterwards. I like that. Hopefully AT&T will keep that kind of plan in place for the other devices should they be more fact than rumor.
Thats why i think it wont happen. Why would att sell data only for the device if thessy can sell voice and text for like 30 bucks extra ( if we assume ipad's 250 meg plan). I dunno with imessage this move could make the iphone absolete and overpriced (in an unlocked state). It took apple four generations to add a mic to the touch.
The only way this would be feasable is if the touch gets rediculousely low data plan, like 100 meg tops. We'll have to see but i am betting one dollar against 3g touch.
There may be a big market for this kind of device, and a good reason why the ATT's of this world will happily create 'competitive' data plans - kids. Kids being kids from 7-8 and up. Kids play games that require data. Kids also text like crazy but rarely use the phone. If they do need to call they have the ability through Skype or similar. The pricing structure will ensure that such a device will not eat into cell phone usage caused by people switching. In other words data will probably be quite expensive but as texting uses minimal data it may be worth it for the consumer.
I believe that Apple would like to ultimately undermine the phone industry. This would be the device to drive the wedge to do so. Besides, there must be some greater plan for the new Clouds they are building, beyond sync data, sell apps and run the voice command functions. These functions seem to overlap the very function of a phone company. Steve works slowly, but insidiously, in his plans. The only thing missing is the cell towers. And that might be only a matter of money.
Just a thought.
As I understand it, the TelCos cannot refuse to provide service to MVNOs. If they wanted to go this route, Apple could become an MVNO and resell the TelCos' services.
Apple undermining the phone companies with iMessage didn't work out so well. The monopolistic AT&T responds with one-plan-for-everyone texting.
Just venting. It's frustrating to see the carriers back to abusing their power instead of innovating. It took Apple to implement an obvious feature like Visual Voice Mail. It took Grand Central / Google Voice to advance home phone services.
And what does AT&T come up with? Forcing people to use expensive plans they don't need.
If AT&T feels they can do that with texting what's to stop them from only offering a 2000 minute voice minute plan? Buy the plan or pay 20 cents per minute for voice calls.
Kids also text like crazy but rarely use the phone. If they do need to call they have the ability through Skype or similar.
That is exactly why our friends Big Red and Ma Bell won't let this device happen. If you can charge through the roof for texts and calls that cost you nothing, why carry a device that allows you to do both for $15 per month?
Don't get me wrong, I want it. I wanted this to happen since iPod Touch 1, but now I gave up and own an iPhone. Specifically because I don't believe 3G touch will happen any time soon.
As I understand it, the TelCos cannot refuse to provide service to MVNOs. If they wanted to go this route, Apple could become an MVNO and resell the TelCos' services.
But they can restrict the use of voice-only SIMs in smartphones? And the use of iPad, data-only SIMs in smartphones? If the law requires them to server MVNO why can't it require them to sell device independent SIMs?
Comments
Thats why i think it wont happen. Why would att sell data only for the device if thessy can sell voice and text for like 30 bucks extra
Competition. Why do we have data-only plans in a lot of countries, including low-data plans? Because of competition. Having two incompatible network technologies, once you buy a device, carriers do not have to compete that much anymore. LTE will hopefully start to change that, as will CDMA/GSM dual-mode phones and devices.
Competition. Why do we have data-only plans in a lot of countries, including low-data plans? Because of competition. Having two incompatible network technologies, once you buy a device, carriers do not have to compete that much anymore. LTE will hopefully start to change that, as will CDMA/GSM dual-mode phones and devices.
So.. How would a 3g touch help with competition? We only have two carriers in america, and they use different tech for 3g. This device wont be lte. And thse companies can charge you way more for a "phone plan" than strictly data plan. This wont change competitive landscspe and i will poop my pants if they find a carrier for this (maybe sprint is desparate enough).
I think there might be apps that work around this but I don't know of any.
I use Viber.
I believe that Apple would like to ultimately undermine the phone industry. This would be the device to drive the wedge to do so.
This would not undermine anything. It makes no sense to undermine an industry through dependency on that industry. The industry wouldn't allow it, for one. In the same way that the cable and satellite television companies are going to fight tooth and nail to hold on to their established revenue streams, so will the phone industry. As would anyone. For better or worse, the model may change over time and Apple may be instrumental in making this happen but you and I will still be paying over the odds for what we get. That is why neither the cable companies nor cell phone service providers will ever let you have unlimited data. You may be able to forgo your cable provider but you will have to pay for the added bandwidth now that you are streaming / downloading all your entertainment.
a device like this would save me tons of money. all my kids do with their iPhones is text and download apps.....
would be cool if true......
What Apple should produce is an iPod touch with voice only (no 3G), i.e. a dumb phone. My children have dumb phones because I do not want to pay $180/yr each for the data plan. And, they would easily exceed the 200MB anyway.
So.. How would a 3g touch help with competition? We only have two carriers in america, and they use different tech for 3g. This device wont be lte. And thse companies can charge you way more for a "phone plan" than strictly data plan. This wont change competitive landscspe and i will poop my pants if they find a carrier for this (maybe sprint is desparate enough).
The US is probably only about 20% of the total worldwide market for iPhones. In 80% of the market a 3G iPod touch will have a real effect.
What Apple should produce is an iPod touch with voice only (no 3G), i.e. a dumb phone. My children have dumb phones because I do not want to pay $180/yr each for the data plan. And, they would easily exceed the 200MB anyway.
Now this I can see happening. In fact that might easily fight back the cheap androids, since they seem to have lower app and internet usage.
The US is probably only about 20% of the total worldwide market for iPhones. In 80% of the market a 3G iPod touch will have a real effect.
I dunno about 20%, I would say at least half, with the other being Europe and China.
Apple is still heavily US centric company, so if 3G touch does not work out in US they probably won't release it at all.
What Apple should produce is an iPod touch with voice only (no 3G), i.e. a dumb phone. My children have dumb phones because I do not want to pay $180/yr each for the data plan. And, they would easily exceed the 200MB anyway.
That device would appeal mainly to the US market only (where carriers somehow, possibly illegally, prevent the use of non-data-plan SIMs in smartphones). My mother has a pre-paid voice-only SIM in her iPhone, works without any issues. I don't understand why carriers are allowed to block this in the US.
One thing that bugs me about the 3G iPad is that AT&T and/or Apple doesn't allow you to txt to the phone number. I think there might be apps that work around this but I don't know of any. I also have an unlimited AT&T 3G card for a laptop and the built in software lets you txt just fine. I don't know why they don't allow it on iPad and if the Touch get 3G data, are they going to do the same thing?
Isn't iOS5 supposed to let you send text-messages to any other iOS device for free? With a 3G-only device, that would essentially open the floodgates with untold amount of texting teenagers and tweenagers.
For those that really don't need a phone plan, this is a great addition.
I like having 3G on my iPad. I don't use it often, but when I do, it's great. Add to that a plan that only is in place when I need it and cancels afterwards. I like that. Hopefully AT&T will keep that kind of plan in place for the other devices should they be more fact than rumor.
Thats why i think it wont happen. Why would att sell data only for the device if thessy can sell voice and text for like 30 bucks extra ( if we assume ipad's 250 meg plan). I dunno with imessage this move could make the iphone absolete and overpriced (in an unlocked state). It took apple four generations to add a mic to the touch.
The only way this would be feasable is if the touch gets rediculousely low data plan, like 100 meg tops. We'll have to see but i am betting one dollar against 3g touch.
There may be a big market for this kind of device, and a good reason why the ATT's of this world will happily create 'competitive' data plans - kids. Kids being kids from 7-8 and up. Kids play games that require data. Kids also text like crazy but rarely use the phone. If they do need to call they have the ability through Skype or similar. The pricing structure will ensure that such a device will not eat into cell phone usage caused by people switching. In other words data will probably be quite expensive but as texting uses minimal data it may be worth it for the consumer.
And if they left the same microphone/earpiece to make using VOIP eaiser - well then - all the better.
(I use the GPS chip for navigation apps and for Nike+.)
I believe that Apple would like to ultimately undermine the phone industry. This would be the device to drive the wedge to do so. Besides, there must be some greater plan for the new Clouds they are building, beyond sync data, sell apps and run the voice command functions. These functions seem to overlap the very function of a phone company. Steve works slowly, but insidiously, in his plans. The only thing missing is the cell towers. And that might be only a matter of money.
Just a thought.
As I understand it, the TelCos cannot refuse to provide service to MVNOs. If they wanted to go this route, Apple could become an MVNO and resell the TelCos' services.
Just venting. It's frustrating to see the carriers back to abusing their power instead of innovating. It took Apple to implement an obvious feature like Visual Voice Mail. It took Grand Central / Google Voice to advance home phone services.
And what does AT&T come up with? Forcing people to use expensive plans they don't need.
If AT&T feels they can do that with texting what's to stop them from only offering a 2000 minute voice minute plan? Buy the plan or pay 20 cents per minute for voice calls.
Kids also text like crazy but rarely use the phone. If they do need to call they have the ability through Skype or similar.
That is exactly why our friends Big Red and Ma Bell won't let this device happen. If you can charge through the roof for texts and calls that cost you nothing, why carry a device that allows you to do both for $15 per month?
Don't get me wrong, I want it. I wanted this to happen since iPod Touch 1, but now I gave up and own an iPhone. Specifically because I don't believe 3G touch will happen any time soon.
I dunno about 20%, I would say at least half, with the other being Europe and China.
Apple is still heavily US centric company, so if 3G touch does not work out in US they probably won't release it at all.
I think you are wrong, look at these numbers:
http://www.asymco.com/2011/07/27/the...on-small-bang/
I see about 14.4m outside the US and 5.9m inside the US, or about 29% inside the US. So, my guess was too low but we are far away from a 50/50 split.
As I understand it, the TelCos cannot refuse to provide service to MVNOs. If they wanted to go this route, Apple could become an MVNO and resell the TelCos' services.
But they can restrict the use of voice-only SIMs in smartphones? And the use of iPad, data-only SIMs in smartphones? If the law requires them to server MVNO why can't it require them to sell device independent SIMs?
I think you are wrong, look at these numbers:
http://www.asymco.com/2011/07/27/the...on-small-bang/
I see about 14.4m outside the US and 5.9m inside the US, or about 29% inside the US. So, my guess was too low but we are far away from a 50/50 split.
Doh. Still think that Apple won't release a device that won't accepted by carriers in US.