Now, if only Apple could get US cell carriers into an iPhone-subsidy-war.
Just think. We could save maybe $100 over our two year contracts.
That's roughly 4 percent of our iPhone TCO! Such a deal.
Subsidy smubsidy. The cost of the iPhone is tiny fraction of your 2 year costs. Your monthly bill and how much data.voice minutes/texts you get for that are the only real things that matter. I pay $50 a month ($57 including all taxes) on Sprint and get unlimited everything including LTE data which I think is probably among the best deals in the country . That would run me well over $100 a month on Verizon or AT&T for a decent amount of data but even then not unlimited like I have. I am just hoping I can keep my plan a very long time and they don't try and push me to the new ones that are $80 for the same deal I have.
I am curious to know whether Apple let Docomo to preunstall apps or to rebrand it somehow.
I wouldn't want that as that would be a sign of Apple's weakness.
Any news on this topic?
Never going to happen. Apple would not let its User Experience to be gummed up by telco's sludge. It has never happened in any country to date and it never will. What apple would do is allow the telco to build there own apps for install through the iTunes store, which all of the U.S. ones do right now.
That's not gonna happen. Operating, building, and maintaining a cellular network takes a huge capital expenditure, and the carriers are also in the business of making a profit. Anyone in the market for a smartphone has already decided on taking on the ongoing costs, then all they need is to choose a phone. If the monthly bill is going to be the same with a free phone or a $199 one then many will choose the free one.
Thanks a million. People keep forgetting this, and it needs to be shouted from the rooftops. This "requires a data plan" BS needs to be taken care of.
I refuse to get an iPhone due to the carrier fees, myself. I've no problem buying an iPhone outright, but I can't afford the plan. Can't be justified by my potential use case.
How does that make it a phone? Doesn't really help him. You want him to basically do what I've done for the past 6 years. It has worked for me, and I enjoy it, but only because it's all I've ever known a smartphone to be.
Of course it will. Don't kid yourself. It will only not happen if people let it not happen. Are you claiming that technology doesn't get cheaper? Is that what you're saying? In that case, my magical ten megabit Internet connection should be costing me thousands of dollars a month since it's so fast compared to the 2400 baud my neighbors have. Ah, wait, it's not 1993 anymore. Dial up doesn't cost $39 a month.
The fact that we not only pay these prices but LET THE CARRIERS COLLUDE TO RAISE PRICES SIMULTANEOUSLY is a failing on our part.
It doesn't get cheaper just like the iPhone released each year doesn’t get cheaper. The network is constantly evolving and being constantly upgraded to handle demand and obsolescence. I work for a telecom and I am witnessing first hand equipment that was installed 5-10 years ago and cost 10s of millions of dollars being replaced by even more expensive equipment.
No, that's not a comparison in any respect, thanks. In fact, you continue to prove me right. The iPhone DOES get cheaper every year. You can get an iPhone 4S for $100 less than a year ago. It's the same product… cheaper.
Just like cellular telephony is the same product… not cheaper.
Thanks for giving us a glimpse into the corruption at hand. Everything you say continues to prove me right.
What part of 'released every year' was too hard for you to understand?
Obsolescence is not corruption. I so enjoy how you keep proving how clueless you are. You sound exactly like those that ask why can't Apple make a cheap phone is Samsung can do it.
So all these landline ISPs who update their hardware in the same timeframe as you guys; they're backed by magical leprechauns who give them all the gold they could ever want, letting them continuously lower prices while providing faster services. But you, no, you in the telecoms, you don't have those leprechauns; you have to keep raising them and cutting off services to people while doing the same thing. First texting was five cents, then ten, now twenty per text. It costs you absolutely nothing to send them beyond the electricity powering the stations at rest, since they go on the always-on wavelength. Then Internet was unlimited, now 2GB, now throttled, and costing more. Don't give me that BS.
And how did you expect the telecoms to recover the lost revenue when subscribers no longer purchased apps from them? They also have a profit margin to maintain and if they lose revenue on one service they'll get it from another. I mean really is Apple the only company allowed to make money?
Just as texts aren't a primary source of income. Here's a novel idea, you want a cheap plan? Then get a feature phone. Don't buy a sports car and then complain about the price of premium gasoline.
Buy a iPhone first then we can discuss buying a car.
It is fact that carriers can't offer it for everything unlimited for $10 but it is possible for probably $20 (per device or $40 plus $10-15 a device) so the carriers offering a similar for $120-200 for 1 device is bull, they could replace cable Internet (IPad plus tethering) for if they offered it, I would switch. This $70 a month for 3 gb, and unlimited MSG, but 200 calls is $40-60 more expensive than should.
The iPhone 5S for free must hurt iPhone 5C sales because of they get better phones for it, pretty much only color freaks wouldn't.
Yes yes, it appears that our Canadian carriers -- Rogers, Telus and Bell are getting ready to battle too .... but not on pricing though ... just how to rip off Canadians even more! ROFLAMO
I refuse to get an iPhone due to the carrier fees, myself. I've no problem buying an iPhone outright, but I can't afford the plan. Can't be justified by my potential use case.
What do you feel is an affordable enough a plan for you? Virgin Mobile offers a beyond talk plan with unlimited data (throttled to 3G after around 2.5GB) for only $30 a month. There are also plenty of other options to choose from that even someone who only works part-time at a minimum wage job could afford. It is very ironic that the poster here who has commented more on the iPhone than the rest of us combined doesn't even own or use one but is so quick to tell us how stupid or wrong we are for making actual observations from using our iPhones. I am really curious to hear what you would consider the perfect plan for your needs at your price point. If you are waiting for unlimited data at $15 a month then you will be waiting a long time.
Virgin Mobile isn't the only option out there. Pageplus is very cheap and works on Verizon. There are also many more like Straight Talk and others. There are plenty of options that you could use that would work where you live and are very affordable.
It is fact that carriers can't offer it for everything unlimited for $10 but it is possible for probably $20...
"A FACT"??? Who dictates what a carrier can or cannot do for $10 a month? And why does it magically BECOME possible when one doubles that figure evenly to a cool $20? Preposterous and senseless defending of carriers and the status quo!
As to our other misguided friend in this thread who actually WORKS FOR A CARRIER, we should not be surprised he is fighting reason in hopes of giving himself job security. But the genuine "fact" is that "when you lower it, they will come." I've already said what monthly fee would lure me into becoming hooked on smartphones. And the market is already showing us that such "low price" reasoning is valid and legitimate, as per the fact that iPads and tablets have been eating away at traditional computer sales because of their significantly lower price. (I own a wifi iPad and am typing this post on it too.)
Those who ask us to look back at the 1990s and compare with today so that we can simply be grateful for the status quo today are asking us to do something foolish and wrong. Technology advances while prices go down, thereby eliminating any reasonable comparisons with the distant past. (And spare me the comparisons with Apple by trying to say that Apple advances the technology used in its smart phones while NOT lowering the price. I said "distant past," meaning that the prices of smart phone and tablet hardware today are cheaper than say a Mac 128k back in 1984. The very reason why Apple can add more new and fancy features to their EXISTING product lines, is because of the fact that technology does decrease in price over time.)
Yes there was a time when wireless carriers did spend a lot of money to build up the base infrastructure and expand their networks countrywide. But those who work for the carriers are not going to convince me that they've still not yet gotten a return on those investments! And if you want to argue that all your new investments in LTE are what keeps the prices high, then you are willingly turning a blind eye to a huge business opportunity. Why not offer a $15/mo smartphone contract that restricts use to your older (but paid for) wireless tech, such that millions of dumb phone users will finally make the switch and become your sinking customers?!? But oh no... You big carriers continue to ignore the untapped masses while telling yourselves that "sticking it to the millions of smartphone customers we already have is the way to go!" How shortsighted!
How many people in developed nations have not yet contracted to get a smart phone, but instead simply have dumb phones? And how many of those millions remain to have dumb phones, not because they don't like or want smartphones, but because like me and Tallest Skil, their wallets don't allow it at current monthly fees? (And no, not even the relatively cheaper fee mentioned of $50/mo is going to lure us dumb phone users.) And don't try to tell me that carriers are somehow going to suffer and lose money and be unable to advance wireless technology to LTE and beyond when and if they ever lower prices substantially so as to capture business from those MILLIONS of people waiting to switch to a smart phone! For truly, has Apple suffered by coming out with its iPad tablet product that is at a substantially lower price point than pretty much anything else Apple has traditionally sold? Have the millions and millions of people who bought an iPad at that relatively low price point caused Apple to "suffer"? No! Apple lowered prices to what the common man (in industrialized nations) can afford and millions of people bought it and Apple became even richer by it!
And so, what will lure nearly everyone into getting a smartphone worldwide is a monthly carrier fee that is the same or only slightly higher than a dumb phone. And for me here in Japan, my eyes are locked on that base ¥980 per month dumb phone price from Softbank. (And by the way, for that low price, I get unlimited talk time to other Softbank phones from morning hours until 9PM.) For me, it makes no what economic sense whatsoever to ditch my dumb phone at ¥980 per month for a smartphone that will cost me ¥7000 per month! (I can justify that mentality because I have an iMac at home with $60/mo 100Mbps fiber connection to the net, and I have an iMac at the office with the same speed connection, and I have my Wi-Fi iPad that I can take the relatively few places here in Japan which have free Wi-Fi.) So features and apps and convenience of smartphones be darned! HOWEVER, if I am presented with a plan for an iPhone 5S that would allow me to pay say ¥1500 per month, even if I have to pay for the phone hardware all by myself with no phone subsidy from the carrier, so long the phone it is carrier-unlocked so I can use cheap SIM cards on my occasional business trips to Taiwan, I am going to seriously consider ditching my dumb phone for that iPhone! In my mindset, a smart phone is worth ¥500 more per month than a dumb phone. But a smart phone is not worth ¥6000/mo more! You see?
You status quo defenders and employees of carriers can continue to argue with all your breath, but your breath is wasted and in vain on those of us who think in the frugal manner I just described! And no manner of defending wireless carriers or defending the status quo of pricing is ever going to change our minds! The only thing that will convince us is raw pricing. The only bait that will temp me to get hooked is bait that is priced only slightly higher than what I'm paying now. THAT'S ALL THAT MATTERS.
With all that said, I've not lost hope. I remember a time back in the 1990's when I once had to pay NTT exorbitant fees to make an international phone call home to California to speak with my parents. These days I can use my Hikari Denwa IP phone for a very very low price to reach my parent's land line, or we can just use Skype or FaceTime for free. In like manner I hope that cellular wireless fees will also come down to a price that the common man can afford. I'm just a tad impatient because it's taking so long! :-)
"A FACT"??? Who dictates what a carrier can or cannot do for $10 a month? And why does it magically BECOME possible when one doubles that figure evenly to a cool $20? Preposterous and senseless defending of carriers and the status quo!
As to our other misguided friend in this thread who actually WORKS FOR A CARRIER, we should not be surprised he is fighting reason in hopes of giving himself job security. But the genuine "fact" is that "when you lower it, they will come." I've already said what monthly fee would lure me into becoming hooked on smartphones. And the market is already showing us that such "low price" reasoning is valid and legitimate, as per the fact that iPads and tablets have been eating away at traditional computer sales because of their significantly lower price. (I own a wifi iPad and am typing this post on it too.)
Those who ask us to look back at the 1990s and compare with today so that we can simply be grateful for the status quo today are asking us to do something foolish and wrong. Technology advances while prices go down, thereby eliminating any reasonable comparisons with the distant past. (And spare me the comparisons with Apple by trying to say that Apple advances the technology used in its smart phones while NOT lowering the price. I said "distant past," meaning that the prices of smart phone and tablet hardware today are cheaper than say a Mac 128k back in 1984. The very reason why Apple can add more new and fancy features to their EXISTING product lines, is because of the fact that technology does decrease in price over time.)
Yes there was a time when wireless carriers did spend a lot of money to build up the base infrastructure and expand their networks countrywide. But those who work for the carriers are not going to convince me that they've still not yet gotten a return on those investments! And if you want to argue that all your new investments in LTE are what keeps the prices high, then you are willingly turning a blind eye to a huge business opportunity. Why not offer a $15/mo smartphone contract that restricts use to your older (but paid for) wireless tech, such that millions of dumb phone users will finally make the switch and become your sinking customers?!? But oh no... You big carriers continue to ignore the untapped masses while telling yourselves that "sticking it to the millions of smartphone customers we already have is the way to go!" How shortsighted!
How many people in developed nations have not yet contracted to get a smart phone, but instead simply have dumb phones? And how many of those millions remain to have dumb phones, not because they don't like or want smartphones, but because like me and Tallest Skil, their wallets don't allow it at current monthly fees? (And no, not even the relatively cheaper fee mentioned of $50/mo is going to lure us dumb phone users.) And don't try to tell me that carriers are somehow going to suffer and lose money and be unable to advance wireless technology to LTE and beyond when and if they ever lower prices substantially so as to capture business from those MILLIONS of people waiting to switch to a smart phone! For truly, has Apple suffered by coming out with its iPad tablet product that is at a substantially lower price point than pretty much anything else Apple has traditionally sold? Have the millions and millions of people who bought an iPad at that relatively low price point caused Apple to "suffer"? No! Apple lowered prices to what the common man (in industrialized nations) can afford and millions of people bought it and Apple became even richer by it!
And so, what will lure nearly everyone into getting a smartphone worldwide is a monthly carrier fee that is the same or only slightly higher than a dumb phone. And for me here in Japan, my eyes are locked on that base ¥980 per month dumb phone price from Softbank. (And by the way, for that low price, I get unlimited talk time to other Softbank phones from morning hours until 9PM.) For me, it makes no what economic sense whatsoever to ditch my dumb phone at ¥980 per month for a smartphone that will cost me ¥7000 per month! (I can justify that mentality because I have an iMac at home with $60/mo 100Mbps fiber connection to the net, and I have an iMac at the office with the same speed connection, and I have my Wi-Fi iPad that I can take the relatively few places here in Japan which have free Wi-Fi.) So features and apps and convenience of smartphones be darned! HOWEVER, if I am presented with a plan for an iPhone 5S that would allow me to pay say ¥1500 per month, even if I have to pay for the phone hardware all by myself with no phone subsidy from the carrier, so long the phone it is carrier-unlocked so I can use cheap SIM cards on my occasional business trips to Taiwan, I am going to seriously consider ditching my dumb phone for that iPhone! In my mindset, a smart phone is worth ¥500 more per month than a dumb phone. But a smart phone is not worth ¥6000/mo more! You see?
You status quo defenders and employees of carriers can continue to argue with all your breath, but your breath is wasted and in vain on those of us who think in the frugal manner I just described! And no manner of defending wireless carriers or defending the status quo of pricing is ever going to change our minds! The only thing that will convince us is raw pricing. The only bait that will temp me to get hooked is bait that is priced only slightly higher than what I'm paying now. THAT'S ALL THAT MATTERS.
With all that said, I've not lost hope. I remember a time back in the 1990's when I once had to pay NTT exorbitant fees to make an international phone call home to California to speak with my parents. These days I can use my Hikari Denwa IP phone for a very very low price to reach my parent's land line, or we can just use Skype or FaceTime for free. In like manner I hope that cellular wireless fees will also come down to a price that the common man can afford. I'm just a tad impatient because it's taking so long! :-)
Laughable post, VZW has over 100 million subscribers so how is that ignoring the masses?,and with their high prices they still add subscribers every quarter. Why is that? Because people want quality service which cost more to get and people are willing to pay for it in droves. It's easy to offer a $40 unlimited everything plan when you're piggy backing on some else's network. Imagine the government mandating that Apple sell it's iPhones way below cost to another company and that company be allowed to sell the iPhone at whatever price they see fit. That's exactly how these other companies are able to offer much cheaper service on a major carriers network. They don't build the network nor maintain it, and outsource customer service overseas.
Our country might be slowly falling apart but we have pretty decent phone tarrifs. I always buy my phones sim free and am currently paying £9.99/month (about $15) for a sim-only deal with Three for 200 mins talktime, 3000 texts and unlimited data.
Here in Canada, plans are terrible. If you buy the iPhone from the carrier, you are usually (not always) forced to get a data plan. These plans often start at $50 and you only get 100-200 MB. It costs usually $70-80 a month to get 1-2 GB of data. I haven't even seen unlimited data anywhere (except on the HSPA+ networks).
Oftentimes you have to buy the phone outright to take advantage of lower plans (20-30$ a month) but then you have to add data to those as they are just a talk and text plan
So basically you pay 50$ a month if you want a decent amount of data. I don't call much. Just text and use data, but plans don't accommodate much
Here in Canada, plans are terrible. If you buy the iPhone from the carrier, you are usually (not always) forced to get a data plan. These plans often start at $50 and you only get 100-200 MB. It costs usually $70-80 a month to get 1-2 GB of data. I haven't even seen unlimited data anywhere (except on the HSPA+ networks).
Oftentimes you have to buy the phone outright to take advantage of lower plans (20-30$ a month) but then you have to add data to those as they are just a talk and text plan
So basically you pay 50$ a month if you want a decent amount of data. I don't call much. Just text and use data, but plans don't accommodate much
Laughable post, VZW has over 100 million subscribers so how is that ignoring the masses?,and with their high prices they still add subscribers every quarter.
Your numerous posts in this thread (so numerous in fact that this thread almost should bear your name) are not laughable at all. You work for a carrier and will be darned if you let anyone say your beloved employer and the status quo should ever consider the masses — oh yes, THE MASSES — of people who have not yet put your hook in their wallets to become yet another high paying zombie follower who never calls for lower carrier fees. You laugh while you encourage people to condemn Apple for having phones that are "much too expensive," all the while dodging left and right when people begin to examine where their real pocket drain comes from — carriers, like the one YOU work for! And your justification for your condemnation of the unrepentant masses (which include myself and Talkest Skil) is, "we have MILLIONS of zombies now, and we take out a bite of millions more each quarter."
If there is any reason to revolt and demand (as a united group if consumers, NOT with governmental intervention) that carriers lower fees, YOU are that reason, sir. If anyone is an ENEMY of the consumer's wallet it is the wireless carriers (and armed drones like Dasanman69), NOT mobile phone makers like Apple.
But despite all the negatives we see now, as I wrote in the closing of my previous post (which some mock), I remain an optimist that eventually we consumers can, along with technological advancements, drive down the monthly cost of smartphone ownership just as the cost of international phone calls dropped exponentially when IP phones came on the scene.
Your numerous posts in this thread (so numerous in fact that this thread almost should bear your name) are not laughable at all. You work for a carrier and will be darned if you let anyone say your beloved employer and the status quo should ever consider the masses — oh yes, THE MASSES — of people who have not yet put your hook in their wallets to become yet another high paying zombie follower who never calls for lower carrier fees. You laugh while you encourage people to condemn Apple for having phones that are "much too expensive," all the while dodging left and right when people begin to examine where their real pocket drain comes from — carriers, like the one YOU work for! And your justification for your condemnation of the unrepentant masses (which include myself and Talkest Skil) is, "we have MILLIONS of zombies now, and we take out a bite of millions more each quarter."
If there is any reason to revolt and demand (as a united group if consumers, NOT with governmental intervention) that carriers lower fees, YOU are that reason, sir. If anyone is an ENEMY of the consumer's wallet it is the wireless carriers (and armed drones like Dasanman69), NOT mobile phone makers like Apple.
But despite all the negatives we see now, as I wrote in the closing of my previous post (which some mock), I remain an optimist that eventually we consumers can, along with technological advancements, drive down the monthly cost of smartphone ownership just as the cost of international phone calls dropped exponentially when IP phones came on the scene.
Subscriber gains by VZW and AT&T contradict your theory of there ever being a revolution. Go get your low cost contract from a low rate company and when you smash your iPhone against the wall because of the crappy service someone at VZW or AT&T will gladly help you get a new one with excellent service.
They JUST (in the last 2 months) switched over to 2 year contracts. Everyone is being forced to switch by December. I'm super excited for it! My iPhone 4 needs an upgrade
Subscriber gains by VZW and AT&T contradict your theory of there ever being a revolution.
My HOPE of positive change in terms of lower carrier pricing will never be crushed by naysayers like you who lurk in forums like this for no other purpose but to seek to crush the hopes of others.
Go get your low cost contract from a low rate company and when you smash your iPhone against the wall because of the crappy service someone at VZW or AT&T will gladly help you get a new one with excellent service.
As if the sheer number of your posts in this thread wasn't evidence of it already, your above statement is proof that you prefer the sound of your own voice, skimming the words of others so rapidly you are utterly ignorant of what they have said.
I need not smash against the wall that which I do not own. How can I own an iPhone when I refuse to pay carriers the outrageous monthly fees that the iPhone currently demands? I have never owned an iPhone for reasons that I have already stated; namely, that the recurring monthly fees from carriers are too high. The day those fees come down to what I deem to be "reasonable," I shall go out and buy an iPhone, carrier unlocked.
You may continue to spout off all you like, and again, because of the dominance of your posts in this thread it looks like you most likely will do just that, but the fact remains there are millions of people out there in the world, myself and Tallest Skil included, who do not yet have an iPhone because the carrier fees are too high. The continuous stream of hot air that flows forth so freely from your mouth is not about to change that. The only thing that will change that is lower monthly pricing from carriers. Making the phone quote for "free" to customers is really nothing in the greater scheme of things because the long-term costs that hit our bottom line are that monthly fees we pay to those carriers. That is the REAL cost of owning an iPhone. Therefore, the iPhone is never "free."
So why do people such as myself or Tallest Skil even waste our time to comment in the thread like this if we don't own an iPhone? Because we don't view our time is being wasted to point out an important fact that is denied by people such as yourself and also by many of the millions of those who do pay through the nose to maintain a cellular connection for their iPhones. It's clear that we ourselves would love to have an iPhone right now if we could afford the monthly fees from carriers. But because those fees are just too high, we speak out about it! And we speak out boldly, despite the harsh words that people such as you continue to give us throughout this thread. There are still countless millions of people who have not signed up for a smart phone but who have a dumb phone. These people can be convinced to switch if fees become more in line with what they pay now for dumb phones. And despite the number of new iPhone customers that carriers get all the time, those new customers are not the masses I'm talking about here.
Your contention that the whole world is going to switch from dumb phones to smart phones while carrier monthly fees remain as high as they are now is wrong. What is going to get the majority of the world a smart phone, developing countries included, is lower monthly fees.
So once again I will repeat the primary point I've been trying to make, which the naysayers continue to ignore. The cost of an iPhone is not the raw cost of the hardware alone. It is the total cost of ownership including the carrier fees. As such the iPhone can never be considered "free." Nor should Apple be condemned or bashed for not coming out with a significantly cheaper phone in light of the fact that carriers are the ones who ultimately clean out your wallet over time. Any chastisement of Apple about why the iPhone 5C wasn't "cheaper" is therefore misguided, foolish, and wrong.
My HOPE of positive change in terms of lower carrier pricing will never be crushed by naysayers like you who lurk in forums like this for no other purpose but to seek to crush the hopes of others.
As if the sheer number of your posts in this thread wasn't evidence of it already, your above statement is proof that you prefer the sound of your own voice, skimming the words of others so rapidly you are utterly ignorant of what they have said.
I need not smash against the wall that which I do not own. How can I own an iPhone when I refuse to pay carriers the outrageous monthly fees that the iPhone currently demands? I have never owned an iPhone for reasons that I have already stated; namely, that the recurring monthly fees from carriers are too high. The day those fees come down to what I deem to be "reasonable," I shall go out and buy an iPhone, carrier unlocked.
You may continue to spout off all you like, and again, because of the dominance of your posts in this thread it looks like you most likely will do just that, but the fact remains there are millions of people out there in the world, myself and Tallest Skil included, who do not yet have an iPhone because the carrier fees are too high. The continuous stream of hot air that flows forth so freely from your mouth is not about to change that. The only thing that will change that is lower monthly pricing from carriers. Making the phone quote for "free" to customers is really nothing in the greater scheme of things because the long-term costs that hit our bottom line are that monthly fees we pay to those carriers. That is the REAL cost of owning an iPhone. Therefore, the iPhone is never "free."
So why do people such as myself or Tallest Skil even waste our time to comment in the thread like this if we don't own an iPhone? Because we don't view our time is being wasted to point out an important fact that is denied by people such as yourself and also by many of the millions of those who do pay through the nose to maintain a cellular connection for their iPhones. It's clear that we ourselves would love to have an iPhone right now if we could afford the monthly fees from carriers. But because those fees are just too high, we speak out about it! And we speak out boldly, despite the harsh words that people such as you continue to give us throughout this thread. There are still countless millions of people who have not signed up for a smart phone but who have a dumb phone. These people can be convinced to switch if fees become more in line with what they pay now for dumb phones. And despite the number of new iPhone customers that carriers get all the time, those new customers are not the masses I'm talking about here.
Your contention that the whole world is going to switch from dumb phones to smart phones while carrier monthly fees remain as high as they are now is wrong. What is going to get the majority of the world a smart phone, developing countries included, is lower monthly fees.
So once again I will repeat the primary point I've been trying to make, which the naysayers continue to ignore. The cost of an iPhone is not the raw cost of the hardware alone. It is the total cost of ownership including the carrier fees. As such the iPhone can never be considered "free." Nor should Apple be condemned or bashed for not coming out with a significantly cheaper phone in light of the fact that carriers are the ones who ultimately clean out your wallet over time. Any chastisement of Apple about why the iPhone 5C wasn't "cheaper" is therefore misguided, foolish, and wrong.
You don't have a iPhone either? You should've stopped there. If your precious Apple wasn't able to negotiate a better rate for its users what makes you think you'll be able to? I'd like the rents in Manhattan to go down but that's not happening either.
Comments
iPhone. Big in Japan.
Now, if only Apple could get US cell carriers into an iPhone-subsidy-war.
Just think. We could save maybe $100 over our two year contracts.
That's roughly 4 percent of our iPhone TCO! Such a deal.
Subsidy smubsidy. The cost of the iPhone is tiny fraction of your 2 year costs. Your monthly bill and how much data.voice minutes/texts you get for that are the only real things that matter. I pay $50 a month ($57 including all taxes) on Sprint and get unlimited everything including LTE data which I think is probably among the best deals in the country . That would run me well over $100 a month on Verizon or AT&T for a decent amount of data but even then not unlimited like I have. I am just hoping I can keep my plan a very long time and they don't try and push me to the new ones that are $80 for the same deal I have.
I am curious to know whether Apple let Docomo to preunstall apps or to rebrand it somehow.
I wouldn't want that as that would be a sign of Apple's weakness.
Any news on this topic?
Never going to happen. Apple would not let its User Experience to be gummed up by telco's sludge. It has never happened in any country to date and it never will. What apple would do is allow the telco to build there own apps for install through the iTunes store, which all of the U.S. ones do right now.
I also hope we will se Apple officialy in my country as well some day...
It is fact that carriers can't offer it for everything unlimited for $10 but it is possible for probably $20 (per device or $40 plus $10-15 a device) so the carriers offering a similar for $120-200 for 1 device is bull, they could replace cable Internet (IPad plus tethering) for if they offered it, I would switch. This $70 a month for 3 gb, and unlimited MSG, but 200 calls is $40-60 more expensive than should.
The iPhone 5S for free must hurt iPhone 5C sales because of they get better phones for it, pretty much only color freaks wouldn't.
If the 5s is free, then do they PAY THE CUSTOMER to take a 5c?
¡
If the 5s is free, then do they PAY THE CUSTOMER to take a 5c?
¡
No, they make it free on a lower plan.
Just like a Galaxy 4S and a Galaxy 4S Mini.
Yes yes, it appears that our Canadian carriers -- Rogers, Telus and Bell are getting ready to battle too .... but not on pricing though ... just how to rip off Canadians even more! ROFLAMO
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I refuse to get an iPhone due to the carrier fees, myself. I've no problem buying an iPhone outright, but I can't afford the plan. Can't be justified by my potential use case.
What do you feel is an affordable enough a plan for you? Virgin Mobile offers a beyond talk plan with unlimited data (throttled to 3G after around 2.5GB) for only $30 a month. There are also plenty of other options to choose from that even someone who only works part-time at a minimum wage job could afford. It is very ironic that the poster here who has commented more on the iPhone than the rest of us combined doesn't even own or use one but is so quick to tell us how stupid or wrong we are for making actual observations from using our iPhones. I am really curious to hear what you would consider the perfect plan for your needs at your price point. If you are waiting for unlimited data at $15 a month then you will be waiting a long time.
Virgin Mobile offers a beyond talk plan with unlimited data (throttled to 3G after around 2.5GB) for only $30 a month.
Their network doesn't work where I live
Their network doesn't work where I live
Virgin Mobile isn't the only option out there. Pageplus is very cheap and works on Verizon. There are also many more like Straight Talk and others. There are plenty of options that you could use that would work where you live and are very affordable.
"A FACT"??? Who dictates what a carrier can or cannot do for $10 a month? And why does it magically BECOME possible when one doubles that figure evenly to a cool $20? Preposterous and senseless defending of carriers and the status quo!
As to our other misguided friend in this thread who actually WORKS FOR A CARRIER, we should not be surprised he is fighting reason in hopes of giving himself job security. But the genuine "fact" is that "when you lower it, they will come." I've already said what monthly fee would lure me into becoming hooked on smartphones. And the market is already showing us that such "low price" reasoning is valid and legitimate, as per the fact that iPads and tablets have been eating away at traditional computer sales because of their significantly lower price. (I own a wifi iPad and am typing this post on it too.)
Those who ask us to look back at the 1990s and compare with today so that we can simply be grateful for the status quo today are asking us to do something foolish and wrong. Technology advances while prices go down, thereby eliminating any reasonable comparisons with the distant past. (And spare me the comparisons with Apple by trying to say that Apple advances the technology used in its smart phones while NOT lowering the price. I said "distant past," meaning that the prices of smart phone and tablet hardware today are cheaper than say a Mac 128k back in 1984. The very reason why Apple can add more new and fancy features to their EXISTING product lines, is because of the fact that technology does decrease in price over time.)
Yes there was a time when wireless carriers did spend a lot of money to build up the base infrastructure and expand their networks countrywide. But those who work for the carriers are not going to convince me that they've still not yet gotten a return on those investments! And if you want to argue that all your new investments in LTE are what keeps the prices high, then you are willingly turning a blind eye to a huge business opportunity. Why not offer a $15/mo smartphone contract that restricts use to your older (but paid for) wireless tech, such that millions of dumb phone users will finally make the switch and become your sinking customers?!? But oh no... You big carriers continue to ignore the untapped masses while telling yourselves that "sticking it to the millions of smartphone customers we already have is the way to go!" How shortsighted!
How many people in developed nations have not yet contracted to get a smart phone, but instead simply have dumb phones? And how many of those millions remain to have dumb phones, not because they don't like or want smartphones, but because like me and Tallest Skil, their wallets don't allow it at current monthly fees? (And no, not even the relatively cheaper fee mentioned of $50/mo is going to lure us dumb phone users.) And don't try to tell me that carriers are somehow going to suffer and lose money and be unable to advance wireless technology to LTE and beyond when and if they ever lower prices substantially so as to capture business from those MILLIONS of people waiting to switch to a smart phone! For truly, has Apple suffered by coming out with its iPad tablet product that is at a substantially lower price point than pretty much anything else Apple has traditionally sold? Have the millions and millions of people who bought an iPad at that relatively low price point caused Apple to "suffer"? No! Apple lowered prices to what the common man (in industrialized nations) can afford and millions of people bought it and Apple became even richer by it!
And so, what will lure nearly everyone into getting a smartphone worldwide is a monthly carrier fee that is the same or only slightly higher than a dumb phone. And for me here in Japan, my eyes are locked on that base ¥980 per month dumb phone price from Softbank. (And by the way, for that low price, I get unlimited talk time to other Softbank phones from morning hours until 9PM.) For me, it makes no what economic sense whatsoever to ditch my dumb phone at ¥980 per month for a smartphone that will cost me ¥7000 per month! (I can justify that mentality because I have an iMac at home with $60/mo 100Mbps fiber connection to the net, and I have an iMac at the office with the same speed connection, and I have my Wi-Fi iPad that I can take the relatively few places here in Japan which have free Wi-Fi.) So features and apps and convenience of smartphones be darned! HOWEVER, if I am presented with a plan for an iPhone 5S that would allow me to pay say ¥1500 per month, even if I have to pay for the phone hardware all by myself with no phone subsidy from the carrier, so long the phone it is carrier-unlocked so I can use cheap SIM cards on my occasional business trips to Taiwan, I am going to seriously consider ditching my dumb phone for that iPhone! In my mindset, a smart phone is worth ¥500 more per month than a dumb phone. But a smart phone is not worth ¥6000/mo more! You see?
You status quo defenders and employees of carriers can continue to argue with all your breath, but your breath is wasted and in vain on those of us who think in the frugal manner I just described! And no manner of defending wireless carriers or defending the status quo of pricing is ever going to change our minds! The only thing that will convince us is raw pricing. The only bait that will temp me to get hooked is bait that is priced only slightly higher than what I'm paying now. THAT'S ALL THAT MATTERS.
With all that said, I've not lost hope. I remember a time back in the 1990's when I once had to pay NTT exorbitant fees to make an international phone call home to California to speak with my parents. These days I can use my Hikari Denwa IP phone for a very very low price to reach my parent's land line, or we can just use Skype or FaceTime for free. In like manner I hope that cellular wireless fees will also come down to a price that the common man can afford. I'm just a tad impatient because it's taking so long! :-)
Laughable post, VZW has over 100 million subscribers so how is that ignoring the masses?,and with their high prices they still add subscribers every quarter. Why is that? Because people want quality service which cost more to get and people are willing to pay for it in droves. It's easy to offer a $40 unlimited everything plan when you're piggy backing on some else's network. Imagine the government mandating that Apple sell it's iPhones way below cost to another company and that company be allowed to sell the iPhone at whatever price they see fit. That's exactly how these other companies are able to offer much cheaper service on a major carriers network. They don't build the network nor maintain it, and outsource customer service overseas.
Here in Canada, plans are terrible. If you buy the iPhone from the carrier, you are usually (not always) forced to get a data plan. These plans often start at $50 and you only get 100-200 MB. It costs usually $70-80 a month to get 1-2 GB of data. I haven't even seen unlimited data anywhere (except on the HSPA+ networks).
Oftentimes you have to buy the phone outright to take advantage of lower plans (20-30$ a month) but then you have to add data to those as they are just a talk and text plan
So basically you pay 50$ a month if you want a decent amount of data. I don't call much. Just text and use data, but plans don't accommodate much
Here in Canada, plans are terrible. If you buy the iPhone from the carrier, you are usually (not always) forced to get a data plan. These plans often start at $50 and you only get 100-200 MB. It costs usually $70-80 a month to get 1-2 GB of data. I haven't even seen unlimited data anywhere (except on the HSPA+ networks).
Oftentimes you have to buy the phone outright to take advantage of lower plans (20-30$ a month) but then you have to add data to those as they are just a talk and text plan
So basically you pay 50$ a month if you want a decent amount of data. I don't call much. Just text and use data, but plans don't accommodate much
Do they still have 36 month contracts?
On what carrier and what country? The carriers in the US require a data plan for smartphones.
Nope. USA t-Mobile. My daughter has a BYOD smartphone on our family talk + text plan and has no data, she uses wifi only.
If there is any reason to revolt and demand (as a united group if consumers, NOT with governmental intervention) that carriers lower fees, YOU are that reason, sir. If anyone is an ENEMY of the consumer's wallet it is the wireless carriers (and armed drones like Dasanman69), NOT mobile phone makers like Apple.
But despite all the negatives we see now, as I wrote in the closing of my previous post (which some mock), I remain an optimist that eventually we consumers can, along with technological advancements, drive down the monthly cost of smartphone ownership just as the cost of international phone calls dropped exponentially when IP phones came on the scene.
Subscriber gains by VZW and AT&T contradict your theory of there ever being a revolution. Go get your low cost contract from a low rate company and when you smash your iPhone against the wall because of the crappy service someone at VZW or AT&T will gladly help you get a new one with excellent service.
They JUST (in the last 2 months) switched over to 2 year contracts. Everyone is being forced to switch by December. I'm super excited for it! My iPhone 4 needs an upgrade
As if the sheer number of your posts in this thread wasn't evidence of it already, your above statement is proof that you prefer the sound of your own voice, skimming the words of others so rapidly you are utterly ignorant of what they have said.
I need not smash against the wall that which I do not own. How can I own an iPhone when I refuse to pay carriers the outrageous monthly fees that the iPhone currently demands? I have never owned an iPhone for reasons that I have already stated; namely, that the recurring monthly fees from carriers are too high. The day those fees come down to what I deem to be "reasonable," I shall go out and buy an iPhone, carrier unlocked.
You may continue to spout off all you like, and again, because of the dominance of your posts in this thread it looks like you most likely will do just that, but the fact remains there are millions of people out there in the world, myself and Tallest Skil included, who do not yet have an iPhone because the carrier fees are too high. The continuous stream of hot air that flows forth so freely from your mouth is not about to change that. The only thing that will change that is lower monthly pricing from carriers. Making the phone quote for "free" to customers is really nothing in the greater scheme of things because the long-term costs that hit our bottom line are that monthly fees we pay to those carriers. That is the REAL cost of owning an iPhone. Therefore, the iPhone is never "free."
So why do people such as myself or Tallest Skil even waste our time to comment in the thread like this if we don't own an iPhone? Because we don't view our time is being wasted to point out an important fact that is denied by people such as yourself and also by many of the millions of those who do pay through the nose to maintain a cellular connection for their iPhones. It's clear that we ourselves would love to have an iPhone right now if we could afford the monthly fees from carriers. But because those fees are just too high, we speak out about it! And we speak out boldly, despite the harsh words that people such as you continue to give us throughout this thread. There are still countless millions of people who have not signed up for a smart phone but who have a dumb phone. These people can be convinced to switch if fees become more in line with what they pay now for dumb phones. And despite the number of new iPhone customers that carriers get all the time, those new customers are not the masses I'm talking about here.
Your contention that the whole world is going to switch from dumb phones to smart phones while carrier monthly fees remain as high as they are now is wrong. What is going to get the majority of the world a smart phone, developing countries included, is lower monthly fees.
So once again I will repeat the primary point I've been trying to make, which the naysayers continue to ignore. The cost of an iPhone is not the raw cost of the hardware alone. It is the total cost of ownership including the carrier fees. As such the iPhone can never be considered "free." Nor should Apple be condemned or bashed for not coming out with a significantly cheaper phone in light of the fact that carriers are the ones who ultimately clean out your wallet over time. Any chastisement of Apple about why the iPhone 5C wasn't "cheaper" is therefore misguided, foolish, and wrong.
You don't have a iPhone either? You should've stopped there. If your precious Apple wasn't able to negotiate a better rate for its users what makes you think you'll be able to? I'd like the rents in Manhattan to go down but that's not happening either.