This doesn't really surprise me with AT&T. Do you know I'd the numbers are similar for Verizon? I'm guessing not.
It surprises me because all I kept hearing for 4 years is that the only reason AT&T can sell a single iPhone is because it's not on any of the other carriers. I was informed many, many times on this forum that soon as Verizon got the iPhone that no one would ever sign up with AT&T for the iPhone again but that everyone would cancel their contracts, pay the fee, and move to Verizon.
That's because the US is not the world, and as Apple's CEO had mentioned the growth lies elsewhere for Apple [notably China]. Number-wise, perhaps, there are as many affluent Chinese as the total of US population of 310 million people. Sadly, the majority of US adults are deeply in debt. And, yes, these Chinese bought Apple's stuff using cold hard cash. It's staggering to think how the Chinese indirectly support the US bankrupt economy in which its public debt has ballooned to almost 16 trillion dollars [that is 16 with twelve zeroes] by buying the US bonds and other instruments. They probably think the US will never go bankrupt and believe the US will pay up the interest ad infinitum. see http://www.usdebtclock.org/
But yes, benanderson89, you are missing something: the big elephant [AKA the Red Chinese when the US didn't need their money back then], right in front of your nose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by benanderson89
Question for 500 points.
It seems that every quarter, a gigantic amount of each carriers sales go to the iPhone. How is Android the number 1 again?
I may be missing something but at a quick glance, it just doesn't make sense.
When AT&T's effectively giving away the iPhone 3GS for a penny, and deliberately cripples phones for other carriers... No Wonder they can post such numbers.
Android was designed to be open... to the carriers, not the customers... just like Google planned it.
The money that Apple makes goes towards making more stuff for us, the customer. That makes me happy. I've no problem with Apple making a bundle at the same time that they give me technology that makes my life simpler. The money that AT&T makes does nothing for me. They too slowly ramp their infrastructure, they charge way too much for the services they provide and all they do is look for more ways to squeeze money out of us customers while they complain about how much we load their network. Look at SMS charges. Charge both ends of the communication for bandwidth that is already being consumed by the cell-tower service stream.
America is a backwater in consumer comms (compare to Europe, Singapore, South Korea). Largely because the service providers are leeches.
You can't compare the infrastructure of the US to that of those countries. The land mass is 3-4 times as big. Some of those countries will leap frog from 2G to LTE while we take baby steps.
Not sure Apples to Apples comparison, but AT&T seems to be on a net higher growth path and had a greater sales and per cent share of iPhones. Of course, AT&T is beneficiary of $0 iPhone 3GS as well as 4 and 4S. This advantage should evaporate in Sept.
My guess this won't hold with anticipate summer slump of iPhones but an explosion in fall 2012.
Once Verizon and Sprint are aggressively advertising "New iPhones for $0!" I'm sure some of that discrepancy between Verizon and AT&T's numbers will vanish. Personally I think Sprint will benefit the most from a $0 iPhone considering they are already a less premium carrier catering to entry level buyers.
The big opportunity Apple has in the US market is having a strong contender on Boost/Cricket/Virgin Mobile. That's where Android is really winning. 3GS with CDMA radio? That could fit the bill priced at $149, and we'll see Apple selling 40+million iPhones on non-holiday quarters.
It seems that every quarter, a gigantic amount of each carriers sales go to the iPhone. How is Android the number 1 again?
I may be missing something but at a quick glance, it just doesn't make sense.
China, and India to some extent (and yes, South America and Africa too). Remember the biggest carrier in China doesn't even carry iPhone at the moment. Fandroids will love to have you believe small carriers in the US make up for it but the actual number doesn't add up.
Andy Rubin never talked about Android activation in the US.
It surprises me because all I kept hearing for 4 years is that the only reason AT&T can sell a single iPhone is because it's not on any of the other carriers. I was informed many, many times on this forum that soon as Verizon got the iPhone that no one would ever sign up with AT&T for the iPhone again but that everyone would cancel their contracts, pay the fee, and move to Verizon.
Right now AT&T does have a leg up on Verizon because their 3G (aka 4G) network is significantly faster than Verizon's, but with the next phone Verizon will have the edge because they have a larger LTE network with far more availability than AT&T. Will most people switch to Verizon when they get a LTE iPhone? Probably not, but there will definitely be more incentive for the power user to make the switch.
Right now AT&T does have a leg up on Verizon because their 3G (aka 4G) network is significantly faster than Verizon's, but with the next phone Verizon will have the edge because they have a larger LTE network with far more availability than AT&T. Will most people switch to Verizon when they get a LTE iPhone? Probably not, but there will definitely be more incentive for the power user to make the switch.
That, plus other reasons, has been my stance on why AT&T will be fine for awhile.
If the iPhone gets LTE that not only means a good speed on Verizon but also simultaneous voice and data. Their 3G just sucks! Because of those two reasons I am likely to switch to Verizon in a couple months.
Right now AT&T does have a leg up on Verizon because their 3G (aka 4G) network is significantly faster than Verizon's, but with the next phone Verizon will have the edge because they have a larger LTE network with far more availability than AT&T. Will most people switch to Verizon when they get a LTE iPhone? Probably not, but there will definitely be more incentive for the power user to make the switch.
That's news to me, in NYC on VZWs LTE I get 15-30 Mbps.
It surprises me because all I kept hearing for 4 years is that the only reason AT&T can sell a single iPhone is because it's not on any of the other carriers. I was informed many, many times on this forum that soon as Verizon got the iPhone that no one would ever sign up with AT&T for the iPhone again but that everyone would cancel their contracts, pay the fee, and move to Verizon.
iPhone 6 with Voice over LTE could be the game changer for Verizon. Here's hoping it's included. I think Verizon is already in trial in a few areas. Until then, I think ATT will have the technical advantage with their HSPA+ fallback. It'll be a hard break from my current unlimited plans. Would also have to swap out my iPads if I want to use the group data plans.
iPhone 6 with Voice over LTE could be the game changer for Verizon. Here's hoping it's included. I think Verizon is already in trial in a few areas. Until then, I think ATT will have the technical advantage with their HSPA+ fallback. It'll be a hard break from my current unlimited plans. Would also have to swap out my iPads if I want to use the group data plans.
That's news to me, in NYC on VZWs LTE I get 15-30 Mbps.
His comment supports yours. Verizon's LTE is faster but LTE is not in the iPhone. Perhaps his "aka 4G" through you but that is a reference to AT&T following T-Mobile USA's lead in called HSPA+ '4G'.
Verizon sold 2.7M iPhones and 2.9M Android phones. Yet this article says Verizon is "mostly dependent" on Android? Slightly > 50% = mostly? Hmmm ...
Even if it's 50.00000000000000001% that is technically the "most" out of two halves so mostly is technically accurate. This obviously isn't as close but it's still pretty close enough that I, personally, wouldn't have used that term as it's not the most accurate.
iPhone 6 with Voice over LTE could be the game changer for Verizon. Here's hoping it's included. I think Verizon is already in trial in a few areas. Until then, I think ATT will have the technical advantage with their HSPA+ fallback. It'll be a hard break from my current unlimited plans. Would also have to swap out my iPads if I want to use the group data plans.
I think that's many years away from being standard. Right now, even if it was possible an even with these 3rd gen LTE chips you don't want that. CDMA does voice very efficiently. If it was over LTE I'm thinking we would only get about 20% more than from using it for data. The increase coming from the display being off.
In fact, AnandTech has made mention before of the challenge doing specific tests for the battery on modern smartphones because they have such huge batteries that doing a voice call test takes far too long. At some point I assume reviewers will just have to drop this test if they want to get their review out in a timely manner.
And how do you think they got that higher profit margin? Android phones cost less to subsidize. What other shopping are iPhone users doing with ATT other than their phone plans?
Are you sure that android phones cost less to subsidize? I haven't seen that mentioned anywhere. If you have a link, it would be greatly appreciated.
What I have read is that one of the big costs to the phone companies is turnover. That is one place where the iPhone is better than Android
Again, this survey is a year old but it is an interesting read.
When I looked up data usage, I was surprised and wrong with my original statement. It appears that the article that I found talked about Android users using more data but it was close. The shopping issue and spending I am now recalling that this was not related to phones but was probably iPad and tablet related but gave an advantage to iOS.
You can't compare the infrastructure of the US to that of those countries. The land mass is 3-4 times as big. Some of those countries will leap frog from 2G to LTE while we take baby steps.
When various large US city municipalities discovered WiFi and started planning and rolling out free WiFi city infrastructure it was the cellular service providers and cable lobbyists who complained that this would hurt their revenue streams. One by one, those WiFi initiatives were shut down. When AT&T discovered it could not keep its voice customers happy in the Times Square area because so much smartphone data bandwidth was being used that voice customers could not sustain connections, they instituted free WiFi in the area. Problem solved. If WiFi had been rolled out in the other city areas as planned, a whole class of problems based on AT&T's inability to enhance its infrastructure would have been avoided.
It's not about land mass, it's about being smart and providing a service. Something our protectionist phone service providers have singularly failed to do. Next, companies like AT&T will want to claim special-infrastructure hardship status and want to sidestep such weakened net-neutrality rules as we already have. Oh wait... too late!
Are you sure that android phones cost less to subsidize? I haven't seen that mentioned anywhere. If you have a link, it would be greatly appreciated.
I don't recall any specific sources but I've read that the Apple can demand around $100 more per unit than other vendors for a device sold subsidized at the same retail price point. This does make sense because the iPhone is so popular. If you aren't a carrier with the iPhone then you are carrier that few people care about.
It also makes sense for carriers to allow that kind o investment because what you state about retention. But it's not just retention of a single user with the iPhone but a device that gets used for many years compared to other vendors. Whether it's sold or gifted to others the iPhone tends to get used for a lot longer thus making any additional upfront costs from carriers a moot point if that device is used on their network by others without any subsidy.
When AT&T's effectively giving away the iPhone 3GS for a penny, and deliberately cripples phones for other carriers... No Wonder they can post such numbers.
How is AT&T crippling phones for other carriers? And last time I checked there are plenty of cheap Android phones. The last time I was on T-Mobile's website most if not all of their Android phones were free with contract.
Comments
It surprises me because all I kept hearing for 4 years is that the only reason AT&T can sell a single iPhone is because it's not on any of the other carriers. I was informed many, many times on this forum that soon as Verizon got the iPhone that no one would ever sign up with AT&T for the iPhone again but that everyone would cancel their contracts, pay the fee, and move to Verizon.
That's because the US is not the world, and as Apple's CEO had mentioned the growth lies elsewhere for Apple [notably China]. Number-wise, perhaps, there are as many affluent Chinese as the total of US population of 310 million people. Sadly, the majority of US adults are deeply in debt. And, yes, these Chinese bought Apple's stuff using cold hard cash. It's staggering to think how the Chinese indirectly support the US bankrupt economy in which its public debt has ballooned to almost 16 trillion dollars [that is 16 with twelve zeroes] by buying the US bonds and other instruments. They probably think the US will never go bankrupt and believe the US will pay up the interest ad infinitum. see http://www.usdebtclock.org/
But yes, benanderson89, you are missing something: the big elephant [AKA the Red Chinese when the US didn't need their money back then], right in front of your nose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by benanderson89
Question for 500 points.
It seems that every quarter, a gigantic amount of each carriers sales go to the iPhone. How is Android the number 1 again?
I may be missing something but at a quick glance, it just doesn't make sense.
Android was designed to be open... to the carriers, not the customers... just like Google planned it.
You can't compare the infrastructure of the US to that of those countries. The land mass is 3-4 times as big. Some of those countries will leap frog from 2G to LTE while we take baby steps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gprovida
Not sure Apples to Apples comparison, but AT&T seems to be on a net higher growth path and had a greater sales and per cent share of iPhones. Of course, AT&T is beneficiary of $0 iPhone 3GS as well as 4 and 4S. This advantage should evaporate in Sept.
My guess this won't hold with anticipate summer slump of iPhones but an explosion in fall 2012.
Once Verizon and Sprint are aggressively advertising "New iPhones for $0!" I'm sure some of that discrepancy between Verizon and AT&T's numbers will vanish. Personally I think Sprint will benefit the most from a $0 iPhone considering they are already a less premium carrier catering to entry level buyers.
The big opportunity Apple has in the US market is having a strong contender on Boost/Cricket/Virgin Mobile. That's where Android is really winning. 3GS with CDMA radio? That could fit the bill priced at $149, and we'll see Apple selling 40+million iPhones on non-holiday quarters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by benanderson89
Question for 500 points.
It seems that every quarter, a gigantic amount of each carriers sales go to the iPhone. How is Android the number 1 again?
I may be missing something but at a quick glance, it just doesn't make sense.
China, and India to some extent (and yes, South America and Africa too). Remember the biggest carrier in China doesn't even carry iPhone at the moment. Fandroids will love to have you believe small carriers in the US make up for it but the actual number doesn't add up.
Andy Rubin never talked about Android activation in the US.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
It surprises me because all I kept hearing for 4 years is that the only reason AT&T can sell a single iPhone is because it's not on any of the other carriers. I was informed many, many times on this forum that soon as Verizon got the iPhone that no one would ever sign up with AT&T for the iPhone again but that everyone would cancel their contracts, pay the fee, and move to Verizon.
Right now AT&T does have a leg up on Verizon because their 3G (aka 4G) network is significantly faster than Verizon's, but with the next phone Verizon will have the edge because they have a larger LTE network with far more availability than AT&T. Will most people switch to Verizon when they get a LTE iPhone? Probably not, but there will definitely be more incentive for the power user to make the switch.
That becomes truer everyday. Carriers can block apps, decide how hackable a phone can be, the list grows and grows.
That, plus other reasons, has been my stance on why AT&T will be fine for awhile.
If the iPhone gets LTE that not only means a good speed on Verizon but also simultaneous voice and data. Their 3G just sucks! Because of those two reasons I am likely to switch to Verizon in a couple months.
That's news to me, in NYC on VZWs LTE I get 15-30 Mbps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Android was designed to be open... to the carriers, not the customers... just like Google planned it.
I think the first blogger who pointed this out is MG Siegler, and he's right on the money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
It surprises me because all I kept hearing for 4 years is that the only reason AT&T can sell a single iPhone is because it's not on any of the other carriers. I was informed many, many times on this forum that soon as Verizon got the iPhone that no one would ever sign up with AT&T for the iPhone again but that everyone would cancel their contracts, pay the fee, and move to Verizon.
iPhone 6 with Voice over LTE could be the game changer for Verizon. Here's hoping it's included. I think Verizon is already in trial in a few areas. Until then, I think ATT will have the technical advantage with their HSPA+ fallback. It'll be a hard break from my current unlimited plans. Would also have to swap out my iPads if I want to use the group data plans.
Verizon sold 2.7M iPhones and 2.9M Android phones. Yet this article says Verizon is "mostly dependent" on Android? Slightly > 50% = mostly? Hmmm ...
I think LTE Advanced is still a few years away.
His comment supports yours. Verizon's LTE is faster but LTE is not in the iPhone. Perhaps his "aka 4G" through you but that is a reference to AT&T following T-Mobile USA's lead in called HSPA+ '4G'.
Even if it's 50.00000000000000001% that is technically the "most" out of two halves so mostly is technically accurate. This obviously isn't as close but it's still pretty close enough that I, personally, wouldn't have used that term as it's not the most accurate.
[VIDEO]
[VIDEO]
I think that's many years away from being standard. Right now, even if it was possible an even with these 3rd gen LTE chips you don't want that. CDMA does voice very efficiently. If it was over LTE I'm thinking we would only get about 20% more than from using it for data. The increase coming from the display being off.
In fact, AnandTech has made mention before of the challenge doing specific tests for the battery on modern smartphones because they have such huge batteries that doing a voice call test takes far too long. At some point I assume reviewers will just have to drop this test if they want to get their review out in a timely manner.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
And how do you think they got that higher profit margin? Android phones cost less to subsidize. What other shopping are iPhone users doing with ATT other than their phone plans?
Are you sure that android phones cost less to subsidize? I haven't seen that mentioned anywhere. If you have a link, it would be greatly appreciated.
What I have read is that one of the big costs to the phone companies is turnover. That is one place where the iPhone is better than Android
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/08/01/survey-iphone-retention-94-vs-android-47/
It is last year and the timing favors Apple and the numbers are small but it was what I found on short notice.
There are also differences between iPhone and Android users which may make iPhone users more profitable to have
http://osxdaily.com/2011/08/22/ios-vs-android-user-profile-infographic/
Again, this survey is a year old but it is an interesting read.
When I looked up data usage, I was surprised and wrong with my original statement. It appears that the article that I found talked about Android users using more data but it was close. The shopping issue and spending I am now recalling that this was not related to phones but was probably iPad and tablet related but gave an advantage to iOS.
Neal
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
You can't compare the infrastructure of the US to that of those countries. The land mass is 3-4 times as big. Some of those countries will leap frog from 2G to LTE while we take baby steps.
When various large US city municipalities discovered WiFi and started planning and rolling out free WiFi city infrastructure it was the cellular service providers and cable lobbyists who complained that this would hurt their revenue streams. One by one, those WiFi initiatives were shut down. When AT&T discovered it could not keep its voice customers happy in the Times Square area because so much smartphone data bandwidth was being used that voice customers could not sustain connections, they instituted free WiFi in the area. Problem solved. If WiFi had been rolled out in the other city areas as planned, a whole class of problems based on AT&T's inability to enhance its infrastructure would have been avoided.
It's not about land mass, it's about being smart and providing a service. Something our protectionist phone service providers have singularly failed to do. Next, companies like AT&T will want to claim special-infrastructure hardship status and want to sidestep such weakened net-neutrality rules as we already have. Oh wait... too late!
Damn - I was reading 2013.
I don't recall any specific sources but I've read that the Apple can demand around $100 more per unit than other vendors for a device sold subsidized at the same retail price point. This does make sense because the iPhone is so popular. If you aren't a carrier with the iPhone then you are carrier that few people care about.
It also makes sense for carriers to allow that kind o investment because what you state about retention. But it's not just retention of a single user with the iPhone but a device that gets used for many years compared to other vendors. Whether it's sold or gifted to others the iPhone tends to get used for a lot longer thus making any additional upfront costs from carriers a moot point if that device is used on their network by others without any subsidy.