This is something Apple should have done LONG AGO! Why not have multiple carriers each getting paid partially to deliver me the fastest data with the best signal possible at each location I traverse?
This can't go too far unless Google adds other phones including iPhone to work on their Project experiment wireless service. Otherwise it is bound to fail like Project Glass.
Actually adding iPhone would be the only way to get this off the ground. Other wise is a fail
This is something Apple should have done LONG AGO! Why not have multiple carriers each getting paid partially to deliver me the fastest data with the best signal possible at each location I traverse?
The days of a single carrier are over!
I don't thing the carriers would like that. Everybody would go for Apple
I find it funny how many people are talking about the high costs for a family and having to buy X number of Nexus 6 devices at full price. If anyone actually bothered looking into this at all, say through Google's own FAQ, they would know that: 1) this is currently for single lines only, 2) you can get a Nexus 6 through monthly payments like To offers, buy one at full price, or bring one if you already own an N6
If you want to buy a $650 iPhone and only pay $200 up front, and finance the rest of it over 2 yrs so that your total payments for that $650 phone end up being $800, that's your crazy decision to make.
Groan. There's nothing 'crazy'. Let me do the math for you.
$25 extra each month over 18 months -- which is, if your payments and credit are in good standing, when ATT will let you upgrade, even though they say "24 months" -- is $450. $200 + $450 = $650. An unlocked version of the same will set you back $750.
Even if you last through 24 months, the total is $800, i.e., $50 more than $750.
?For that extra $50, add the additional capacity usage from a new, larger form-factor phone since it could substitute for a tablet; add the carrying (financing) cost for ATT....
Sheesh, why do I even bother.
(Add: I see from the thumbs-up that Macky the Macky had trouble with the math too).
Keep in mind that T-Mobile or Sprint needs to work well in whatever area you generally habituate.
Of course they do. If you read all my posts, that's exactly what I was saying. Which is why it is better than just having only one or the other. But that's not to say it is still as good as ATT or Verizon. If it's not as good (as it may not be in my case or yours), it's obviously not a great option.
In any event, I could care less about Google and its plan. I was speculating on what Apple's opportunities with something like this might be. That's all. Not very complicated.
I don't know if somebody ask already, but, how much personal data is Google going to be able to grab from the user with this? And is Google going to bombard you with adds?
I don't know if somebody ask already, but, how much personal data is Google going to be able to grab from the user with this? And is Google going to bombard you with adds?
It's not an app so I'm not sure how they'd "bombard you with ads". In addition Google doesn't typically push ads with their paid services. They'r even experimenting with paid ad-free web (Look up Google Contributor)
As for info on user location and such I'd guess they'd have the same available to them as TMo and Sprint do but would that be any different than what they already have? Dunno.
It's not an app so I'm not sure how they'd "bombard you with ads". In addition Google doesn't typically push ads with their paid services. They'r even experimenting with paid ad-free web (Look up Google Contributor)
As for info on user location and such I'd guess they'd have the same available to them as TMo and Sprint do but would that be any different than what they already have? Dunno.
I recently travel to Colombia South America and got a local SIM card, it was a Movistar and I got adds all day long from them. Some how they just popped up on my screen like a notification and I had to dismiss it before I could get into my iPhone . It is very clever actually and invasive. I should have taken a screen shot of it. That's why I ask about the adds.
I meant carriers in their pipe business not the handset business.
I thought that was implied/obvious. Sorry.
Yes, I understood. The pipes got faster because there is now demand for mobile data, and because eventually all carriers offered the iPhone (and later, other smartphones that followed in the model forced on them by Apple), they are now forced to compete with each other data plans. Don't believe me? Look at what we have now:
"Unlimited" everything for $50
Rollover data
"Get a new subsidized phone every year" plans
Families share data plans
BYOD value plans
Fierce competition over LTE rollouts
VoLTE
WiFi calling
I remember what it was like in 2006. EDGE was the fastest network available, carriers were dragging their feet on 3G rollouts, 4G LTE was a pipe dream (pun semi-intended), and data plans were expensive. Now every carrier is competing to be the pipe you use for your iPhone.
Again, my point is that Apple has changed the carriers for the better.
But I interpreted your post to mean that you didn't care about better pipes, but cheaper pipes. Did I get your meaning correct?
You seem to take it for granted that LTE and all this competition on price and plans is the norm, but it wasn't in 2006. Back then, carriers were trying to offer services; they were trying to turn into more than just "dumb pipes." But Apple (and later Google too) wrestled control of the phone and services ecosystems away from the carriers, forcing them to become faster, cheaper dumb pipes for our data-hungry smartphones.
Yes, I understood. The pipes got faster because there is now demand for mobile data, and because eventually all carriers offered the iPhone (and later, other smartphones that followed in the model forced on them by Apple), they are now forced to compete with each other data plans. Don't believe me? Look at what we have now:
"Unlimited" everything for $50
Rollover data
"Get a new subsidized phone every year" plans
Families share data plans
BYOD value plans
Fierce competition over LTE rollouts
VoLTE
WiFi calling
I remember what it was like in 2006. EDGE was the fastest network available, carriers were dragging their feet on 3G rollouts, 4G LTE was a pipe dream (pun semi-intended), and data plans were expensive. Now every carrier is competing to be the pipe you use for your iPhone.
Again, my point is that Apple has changed the carriers for the better.
But I interpreted your post to mean that you didn't care about better pipes, but cheaper pipes. Did I get your meaning correct?
You seem to take it for granted that LTE and all this competition on price and plans is the norm, but it wasn't in 2006. Back then, carriers were trying to offer services; they were trying to turn into more than just "dumb pipes." But Apple (and later Google too) wrestled control of the phone and services ecosystems away from the carriers, forcing them to become faster, cheaper dumb pipes for our data-hungry smartphones.
I don't disagree with anything you say. Apple changed the game in so many ways with the original iPhone!
I did indeed mean that now Apple has the opportunity to disrupt the industry to get cheaper pipes. We most certainly get more functionality than we did (e.g., faster access, great capabilities), but so do we with our computers, phones, tablets, cars, and TVs. There's nothing particularly unusual in that regard with carrier plans.
Except, frustratingly, I am (and I think a lot of people are) paying much more than I did for my monthly plans compared to when the original iPhone came out. With still a lot of strings attached (e.g., throttling, nickel-and-diming of lots of little additional features). I think it's time for a bit of disruption in the way data is delivered to us, and the prices we pay for it. I don't know what Apple can do about it. But even though it may rudimentary and in fits and starts, I am very glad to see a company like Google try to take a swing at it. I don't see that innovation coming from the entrenched, incumbent carriers
I guess I am a little less cynical about Google vis-a-vis this issue than a lot of people here seem to be.
Comments
This is something Apple should have done LONG AGO! Why not have multiple carriers each getting paid partially to deliver me the fastest data with the best signal possible at each location I traverse?
The days of a single carrier are over!
Holly crap you made me laugh
Actually adding iPhone would be the only way to get this off the ground. Other wise is a fail
BAAA HAHAHA
I don't thing the carriers would like that. Everybody would go for Apple
Use a VPN, and encrypt your data over a public WiFi.
And that is apparently how google plans to let project Fi users use public wifi securely. According to the FAQ, Google appears to be providing a vpn service (https://fi.google.com/about/faq/#wifi-connection-and-calls-2).
Again, ummm no.
If you want to buy a $650 iPhone and only pay $200 up front, and finance the rest of it over 2 yrs so that your total payments for that $650 phone end up being $800, that's your crazy decision to make.
Groan. There's nothing 'crazy'. Let me do the math for you.
$25 extra each month over 18 months -- which is, if your payments and credit are in good standing, when ATT will let you upgrade, even though they say "24 months" -- is $450. $200 + $450 = $650. An unlocked version of the same will set you back $750.
Even if you last through 24 months, the total is $800, i.e., $50 more than $750.
?For that extra $50, add the additional capacity usage from a new, larger form-factor phone since it could substitute for a tablet; add the carrying (financing) cost for ATT....
Sheesh, why do I even bother.
(Add: I see from the thumbs-up that Macky the Macky had trouble with the math too).
Keep in mind that T-Mobile or Sprint needs to work well in whatever area you generally habituate.
Of course they do. If you read all my posts, that's exactly what I was saying. Which is why it is better than just having only one or the other. But that's not to say it is still as good as ATT or Verizon. If it's not as good (as it may not be in my case or yours), it's obviously not a great option.
In any event, I could care less about Google and its plan. I was speculating on what Apple's opportunities with something like this might be. That's all. Not very complicated.
Lol I didn't think so
I don't care if it means following Google's lead in this instance, but Apple should really do something similar and disrupt carriers.
They did disrupt the carriers. (Etc)
I meant carriers in their pipe business not the handset business.
I thought that was implied/obvious. Sorry.
I think this move is to garner Google some hardware sales. Allowing the iPhone on it would effectively kill that.
As for info on user location and such I'd guess they'd have the same available to them as TMo and Sprint do but would that be any different than what they already have? Dunno.
I recently travel to Colombia South America and got a local SIM card, it was a Movistar and I got adds all day long from them. Some how they just popped up on my screen like a notification and I had to dismiss it before I could get into my iPhone . It is very clever actually and invasive. I should have taken a screen shot of it. That's why I ask about the adds.
I meant carriers in their pipe business not the handset business.
I thought that was implied/obvious. Sorry.
Yes, I understood. The pipes got faster because there is now demand for mobile data, and because eventually all carriers offered the iPhone (and later, other smartphones that followed in the model forced on them by Apple), they are now forced to compete with each other data plans. Don't believe me? Look at what we have now:
I remember what it was like in 2006. EDGE was the fastest network available, carriers were dragging their feet on 3G rollouts, 4G LTE was a pipe dream (pun semi-intended), and data plans were expensive. Now every carrier is competing to be the pipe you use for your iPhone.
Again, my point is that Apple has changed the carriers for the better.
But I interpreted your post to mean that you didn't care about better pipes, but cheaper pipes. Did I get your meaning correct?
You seem to take it for granted that LTE and all this competition on price and plans is the norm, but it wasn't in 2006. Back then, carriers were trying to offer services; they were trying to turn into more than just "dumb pipes." But Apple (and later Google too) wrestled control of the phone and services ecosystems away from the carriers, forcing them to become faster, cheaper dumb pipes for our data-hungry smartphones.
Yes, I understood. The pipes got faster because there is now demand for mobile data, and because eventually all carriers offered the iPhone (and later, other smartphones that followed in the model forced on them by Apple), they are now forced to compete with each other data plans. Don't believe me? Look at what we have now:
I remember what it was like in 2006. EDGE was the fastest network available, carriers were dragging their feet on 3G rollouts, 4G LTE was a pipe dream (pun semi-intended), and data plans were expensive. Now every carrier is competing to be the pipe you use for your iPhone.
Again, my point is that Apple has changed the carriers for the better.
But I interpreted your post to mean that you didn't care about better pipes, but cheaper pipes. Did I get your meaning correct?
You seem to take it for granted that LTE and all this competition on price and plans is the norm, but it wasn't in 2006. Back then, carriers were trying to offer services; they were trying to turn into more than just "dumb pipes." But Apple (and later Google too) wrestled control of the phone and services ecosystems away from the carriers, forcing them to become faster, cheaper dumb pipes for our data-hungry smartphones.
I don't disagree with anything you say. Apple changed the game in so many ways with the original iPhone!
I did indeed mean that now Apple has the opportunity to disrupt the industry to get cheaper pipes. We most certainly get more functionality than we did (e.g., faster access, great capabilities), but so do we with our computers, phones, tablets, cars, and TVs. There's nothing particularly unusual in that regard with carrier plans.
Except, frustratingly, I am (and I think a lot of people are) paying much more than I did for my monthly plans compared to when the original iPhone came out. With still a lot of strings attached (e.g., throttling, nickel-and-diming of lots of little additional features). I think it's time for a bit of disruption in the way data is delivered to us, and the prices we pay for it. I don't know what Apple can do about it. But even though it may rudimentary and in fits and starts, I am very glad to see a company like Google try to take a swing at it. I don't see that innovation coming from the entrenched, incumbent carriers
I guess I am a little less cynical about Google vis-a-vis this issue than a lot of people here seem to be.