If you were on the board of Verizon, you'd probably wait more than a couple weeks after a products release before jumping to any conclusions.
No I won't. There are certain product intros that take a long time to evaluate. There are others that you realize will be a raging success or dismal failure pretty much right off the bat or shortly after. If you're still doubting that the iPhone has changed the cell phone business permanently, and that Verizon got caught on the wrong side of this wave, then I don't know what other evidence you're waiting for.
How did the iPhone change the celluar business? Things are still the same as it where before the iPhone came out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraboy
No I won't. There are certain product intros that take a long time to evaluate. There are others that you realize will be a raging success or dismal failure pretty much right off the bat or shortly after. If you're still doubting that the iPhone has changed the cell phone business permanently, and that Verizon got caught on the wrong side of this wave, then I don't know what other evidence you're waiting for.
No I won't. There are certain product intros that take a long time to evaluate. There are others that you realize will be a raging success or dismal failure pretty much right off the bat or shortly after. If you're still doubting that the iPhone has changed the cell phone business permanently, and that Verizon got caught on the wrong side of this wave, then I don't know what other evidence you're waiting for.
I think BSN has a valid question. We don't know if the cellular industry is going to change their practices just for Apple or because of Apple. Only one company changed anything, and that was only for one product and in my opinion, the changes are relatively minor. Right now, iPhone is still technically an outlier, and for all we know, a flash in the pan. I hope it does more than that, but it's far from conclusive.
How did the iPhone change the celluar business? Things are still the same as it where before the iPhone came out.
I would think that a cell phone with a UI that obsoletes everything else that came before it is a serious game changer. I think a cell phone that integrates iTunes, the most pervasive media and device management software on the planet is a serious game changer. I think a cell phone that is seen by its owner/user not just as a mere communications tool but as a source of pleasure and entertainment is a serious game changer. I think a change in mindset on the part of the carriers from 'these are the features we will let you have, deal with it', to one that's more open to customer needs is a serious game changer.
Oh ok, your personal opinion. I thought AT&T did something different with their network or something.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraboy
I would think that a cell phone with a UI that obsoletes everything else that came before it is a serious game changer. I think a cell phone that integrates iTunes, the most pervasive media and device management software on the planet is a serious game changer. I think a cell phone that is seen by its owner/user not just as a mere communications tool but as a source of pleasure and entertainment is a serious game changer. I think a change in mindset on the part of the carriers from 'these are the features we will let you have, deal with it', to one that's more open to customer needs is a serious game changer.
I would cheer for a change in the way the celluar companies operate, but I don't see a change coming anytime soon.
I thought you might have came across some site saying that AT&T was doing something different to their network due to the iPhone popularity. It was just wishful thinking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraboy
Well, it is our [differing] personal opinions that makes these discussions interesting after all, isn't it?
The carriers dictate to the phone makers what phones to make, what features to enable or disable, etc. etc., and of course the decisions are all based on what makes money for the carrier... even if that involves making the phone less good from a consumer point of view. \
The phone makers have never been super-happy with that, because they could probably make better phones without the carriers 'backseat designing' and insisting that certain features be removed or watered-down. .
I've read that it is the opposite in Europe. The manufacturers make phones with really cool features and the carriers are selling them with features intact. Innovations rules supreme over there and it's time the US carriers follows suit. STOP making the rules and dumbing down the phones feature (Verizon)! Maybe Apple will be the first to change things over here.
How did the iPhone change the celluar business? Things are still the same as it where before the iPhone came out.
That is yet too be seen. The iPod didn't change the music industry over night. It took a couple years.
As for the topic. I think more than 25% of people switched to AT&T. In the line at the Apple store I was at, only about 1 in 12 were AT&T customers. If that. 1 in 12 is being generous to AT&T.
I guess I'm just use to using a Cingular smartphone with no restrictions. I didn't see any type of restrictions on Cingular's phones, until the iPhone was introduced. Hell, my phone is even unlocked.
What phone do you have and if it was unlocked and its feature set was left fully intact from the get-go I'm going to imagine you didn't get it with any form of sign-up rebate direct from Cingular but instead paid full freight for it...
It was my first phone with Cingular. It's the Motorola MPx220 (which was sweeeet back in 2005). I got a $100 mail-in rebate. I think I paid $330 for the phone. My brother who is a T-mobile user, was able to put his sim card into my phone and it worked just fine. I'm not sure if all the T-mobile services would have worked, we didn't try.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveGee
What phone do you have and if it was unlocked and its feature set was left fully intact from the get-go I'm going to imagine you didn't get it with any form of sign-up rebate direct from Cingular but instead paid full freight for it...
There are some numbers we can speculate on ourselves. Let's take the 10M iPhones Apple plans to sell in/through 2008.
25% switchers at the $60/month plan is $3.6B over a two year contract. Obviously we double that for 50% switchers. From the one survey it will be Verizon losing the most here.
If we assume that Apple is getting 10% ($6) in monthly returns for each iPhone customer from AT&T, and use the lowest figure of $60/month we see Apple generating an extra $1.4B in that same two year period on top of the revenue from the sale of the iPhone and accessories.
In a way, it's pretty scary. Look at what the stock closed at today. This is well ahead of my expectations.
My wife today told me that on a crowded elevator in her place of business, one guy took out his iPhone, and everyone tried to crowd around to see it. This isn't a bunch of grocery clerks (nothing disrespectful meant there), but highly paid lawyers and business people.
So you're ok with APple having all the power, but not a celluar carrier.....care to explain why. I'm sure it was Apple who crippled the bluetooth!
I'm not so sure the Bluetooth is crippled after all. In a NYTimes article yesterday, a couple of headphone manufactures were quoted as saying that their stereo wireless headphones would be coming to the iPhone.
Now, it's possible that these phones don't use Bluetooth, but some other radio technology, as mice and phones for desktops have also used. But, maybe they do use Bluetooth.
Perhaps it's just that Apple doesn't have stereo BT phones, and so, in the normal manner of Apple, when they don't have their own product to support something, they say it isn't supported. They've done that numerous times in the past.
I don't know who crippled the bluetooth... could've been Apple, ATT, or both. \
Saying bluetooth has been crippled is inaccurate. Not having official support for or not yet having adequate software for is not the same. To say it's cripples implies that Apple has created the software and then purposefully and willfully disabled it. Something that Verizon is certainly famous for. There are reports of handsfree working with some autos to a certain degree so expect a software update soon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackSummerNight
Oh ok, your personal opinion. I thought AT&T did something different with their network or something.
I would cheer for a change in the way the celluar companies operate, but I don't see a change coming anytime soon.
? A manufacturer having control over a carrier.
? A manufacturer getting a portion of the monthly dues from the carrier.
? A carrier to alter how it's voicemail system works to accommodate the manufacturer's wishes.
? Competing carrier finally willing to work with manufacturers to create integrated devices months in advance of the iPhone's actual release.
What the f@#k do you need before you see the shift in paradigms?
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
In a way, it's pretty scary. Look at what the stock closed at today. This is well ahead of my expectations.
I'm happy about the stock prices today. I'm wondering if it will hold throughout Monday or should I dump it and buy in again after the dip. I expect $145-155 the AAPL releases its quarterly earning in 11 days.
RIMM is still surprising me with it's consistently higher jumps. CLWR has been okay but it's still to early to tell, I just I had bought in before the 30% bump.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
My wife today told me that on a crowded elevator in her place of business, one guy took out his iPhone, and everyone tried to crowd around to see it. This isn't a bunch of grocery clerks (nothing disrespectful meant there), but highly paid lawyers and business people.
Apple's marketing has something to do with the interest but the device is so cool. It seems everyone is interested in the damn thing. They should stop calling it the Jesus phone and start calling it the Devil phone. Even my parents know about the thing in detail... that is scary.
• A manufacturer getting a portion of the monthly dues from the carrier.
This has not been confirmed. Even if this is part of Apple's arrangement, it's not new, RIM gets a small sum per handset per month, though they can actually justify it.
Quote:
• Competing carrier finally willing to work with manufacturers to create integrated devices months in advance of the iPhone's actual release.
What again?
So far, it only shifts for one manufacturer. So AT&T was willing to make concessions in exchange of locking in more people to their service. Carrier lock-in is the paradigm I would much rather see change. Stuff like visual voicemail is nice but also serves as a distraction.
So far, it only shifts for one manufacturer. So AT&T was willing to make concessions in exchange of locking in more people to their service. Carrier lock-in is the paradigm I would much rather see change. Stuff like visual voicemail is nice but also serves as a distraction.
The paradigm shift is the manufacturer no longer being a slave to the carrier. Are you trying to say this is not a different way of operating for AT&T or are you suggesting that it means nothing unless ALL carrier have their gonads squeezed by ALL manufacturers? It's a shift on the model, whether it's effecting one or all companies is irrelevant, the fact is that Apple has turned things on its head, has shown that it is possible. It's up to them to figure out how to make it work for them.
How is Visual Voicemail a distraction? Distraction from what? From having to call your cell provider to listen to your phone messages in order? I don't get it.
As for carrier/manufacturer lock-in and integration, they are the same in concept but how they are executed is everything. Visual Voicemail, as an example, shows that real integration can lead to things that should have been implemented a decade ago. Having a 'one size fits all' philosophy forces manufacturers to create devices that either cater to the lowest common denominator or are stuffed to the brim with overpriced and heavy hardware that probably won't be used. But is sure impresses the kids on IRC when they list their tech specs!
What we need is a worldwide standard but I'm not going to hold my breath.
The paradigm shift is the manufacturer no longer being a slave to the carrier. Are you trying to say this is not a different way of operating for AT&T or are you suggesting that it means nothing unless ALL carrier have their gonads squeezed by ALL manufacturers? It's a shift on the model, whether it's effecting one or all companies is irrelevant, the fact is that Apple has turned things on its head, has shown that it is possible. It's up to them to figure out how to make it work for them.
There is nothing to suggest that this is anything but an anomaly, which Apple managed to do by exploiting what looks like only they can do. I don't see now Nokia, Ericson or any other brand can possibly do the same thing. It took Apple a decade to get where they are now in terms of brand identity, design reputation and most importantly, extraordinary to possibly unprecedented levels of consumer demand, something that only seems to happen once every few decades. The path may be possible, but I think a second manufacturer pulling that off may be an even harder thing to do than the first.
Quote:
How is Visual Voicemail a distraction? Distraction from what? From having to call your cell provider to listen to your phone messages in order? I don't get it.
It is a distraction from the fact that you are now stuck with that carrier in order to be able to use the device at all, you are still just as stuck ball-and-chain with one carrier. That paradigm is still bolted down to the deck, though possibly even harder then before.
I'm not so sure the Bluetooth is crippled after all. In a NYTimes article yesterday, a couple of headphone manufactures were quoted as saying that their stereo wireless headphones would be coming to the iPhone.
Now, it's possible that these phones don't use Bluetooth, but some other radio technology, as mice and phones for desktops have also used. But, maybe they do use Bluetooth.
Perhaps it's just that Apple doesn't have stereo BT phones, and so, in the normal manner of Apple, when they don't have their own product to support something, they say it isn't supported. They've done that numerous times in the past.
Bluetooth headphones could work just fine with the iPhone, and the bluetooth would still be crippled. \
Bluetooth consists of a number of profiles. When folks refer to it being 'crippled', usually that means that the headset profile and other more-or-less mundane profiles are enabled, but profiles that allow file transfers are intentionally disabled.
No, its accurate, as of this writing. From Gizmodo:
... most Bluetooth phones sold by carriers in the US have been "crippled" in that sense, including the iPhone:
• It can't transfer files to a PC, or appear on a desktop for drag-and-drop file juggling.
• It can't send a photo to a Bluetooth printer.
• It can't stream audio via Bluetooth to a compatible speaker system or headset. (Video is out of the question.)
However, it can link with any Bluetooth headset on the market, including the Apple iPhone Bluetooth Headset that will soon be at an Apple Store near you.
Now, you can speculate that it's Apple's intention to UNcripple it in the future, via a software update or something, and I might even agree with you. But right now... yeah, it's definitely crippled. \
Comments
If you were on the board of Verizon, you'd probably wait more than a couple weeks after a products release before jumping to any conclusions.
No I won't. There are certain product intros that take a long time to evaluate. There are others that you realize will be a raging success or dismal failure pretty much right off the bat or shortly after. If you're still doubting that the iPhone has changed the cell phone business permanently, and that Verizon got caught on the wrong side of this wave, then I don't know what other evidence you're waiting for.
No I won't. There are certain product intros that take a long time to evaluate. There are others that you realize will be a raging success or dismal failure pretty much right off the bat or shortly after. If you're still doubting that the iPhone has changed the cell phone business permanently, and that Verizon got caught on the wrong side of this wave, then I don't know what other evidence you're waiting for.
No I won't. There are certain product intros that take a long time to evaluate. There are others that you realize will be a raging success or dismal failure pretty much right off the bat or shortly after. If you're still doubting that the iPhone has changed the cell phone business permanently, and that Verizon got caught on the wrong side of this wave, then I don't know what other evidence you're waiting for.
I think BSN has a valid question. We don't know if the cellular industry is going to change their practices just for Apple or because of Apple. Only one company changed anything, and that was only for one product and in my opinion, the changes are relatively minor. Right now, iPhone is still technically an outlier, and for all we know, a flash in the pan. I hope it does more than that, but it's far from conclusive.
How did the iPhone change the celluar business? Things are still the same as it where before the iPhone came out.
I would think that a cell phone with a UI that obsoletes everything else that came before it is a serious game changer. I think a cell phone that integrates iTunes, the most pervasive media and device management software on the planet is a serious game changer. I think a cell phone that is seen by its owner/user not just as a mere communications tool but as a source of pleasure and entertainment is a serious game changer. I think a change in mindset on the part of the carriers from 'these are the features we will let you have, deal with it', to one that's more open to customer needs is a serious game changer.
I would think that a cell phone with a UI that obsoletes everything else that came before it is a serious game changer. I think a cell phone that integrates iTunes, the most pervasive media and device management software on the planet is a serious game changer. I think a cell phone that is seen by its owner/user not just as a mere communications tool but as a source of pleasure and entertainment is a serious game changer. I think a change in mindset on the part of the carriers from 'these are the features we will let you have, deal with it', to one that's more open to customer needs is a serious game changer.
I would cheer for a change in the way the celluar companies operate, but I don't see a change coming anytime soon.
Oh ok, your personal opinion.
Well, it is our [differing] personal opinions that makes these discussions interesting after all, isn't it?
Well, it is our [differing] personal opinions that makes these discussions interesting after all, isn't it?
The carriers dictate to the phone makers what phones to make, what features to enable or disable, etc. etc., and of course the decisions are all based on what makes money for the carrier... even if that involves making the phone less good from a consumer point of view.
The phone makers have never been super-happy with that, because they could probably make better phones without the carriers 'backseat designing' and insisting that certain features be removed or watered-down.
I've read that it is the opposite in Europe. The manufacturers make phones with really cool features and the carriers are selling them with features intact. Innovations rules supreme over there and it's time the US carriers follows suit. STOP making the rules and dumbing down the phones feature (Verizon)! Maybe Apple will be the first to change things over here.
How did the iPhone change the celluar business? Things are still the same as it where before the iPhone came out.
That is yet too be seen. The iPod didn't change the music industry over night. It took a couple years.
As for the topic. I think more than 25% of people switched to AT&T. In the line at the Apple store I was at, only about 1 in 12 were AT&T customers. If that. 1 in 12 is being generous to AT&T.
I guess I'm just use to using a Cingular smartphone with no restrictions. I didn't see any type of restrictions on Cingular's phones, until the iPhone was introduced. Hell, my phone is even unlocked.
What phone do you have and if it was unlocked and its feature set was left fully intact from the get-go I'm going to imagine you didn't get it with any form of sign-up rebate direct from Cingular but instead paid full freight for it...
Dave
What phone do you have and if it was unlocked and its feature set was left fully intact from the get-go I'm going to imagine you didn't get it with any form of sign-up rebate direct from Cingular but instead paid full freight for it...
Dave
There are some numbers we can speculate on ourselves. Let's take the 10M iPhones Apple plans to sell in/through 2008.
25% switchers at the $60/month plan is $3.6B over a two year contract. Obviously we double that for 50% switchers. From the one survey it will be Verizon losing the most here.
If we assume that Apple is getting 10% ($6) in monthly returns for each iPhone customer from AT&T, and use the lowest figure of $60/month we see Apple generating an extra $1.4B in that same two year period on top of the revenue from the sale of the iPhone and accessories.
In a way, it's pretty scary. Look at what the stock closed at today. This is well ahead of my expectations.
My wife today told me that on a crowded elevator in her place of business, one guy took out his iPhone, and everyone tried to crowd around to see it. This isn't a bunch of grocery clerks (nothing disrespectful meant there), but highly paid lawyers and business people.
So you're ok with APple having all the power, but not a celluar carrier.....care to explain why. I'm sure it was Apple who crippled the bluetooth!
I'm not so sure the Bluetooth is crippled after all. In a NYTimes article yesterday, a couple of headphone manufactures were quoted as saying that their stereo wireless headphones would be coming to the iPhone.
Now, it's possible that these phones don't use Bluetooth, but some other radio technology, as mice and phones for desktops have also used. But, maybe they do use Bluetooth.
Perhaps it's just that Apple doesn't have stereo BT phones, and so, in the normal manner of Apple, when they don't have their own product to support something, they say it isn't supported. They've done that numerous times in the past.
I'm hoping this is correct.
I don't know who crippled the bluetooth... could've been Apple, ATT, or both.
Saying bluetooth has been crippled is inaccurate. Not having official support for or not yet having adequate software for is not the same. To say it's cripples implies that Apple has created the software and then purposefully and willfully disabled it. Something that Verizon is certainly famous for. There are reports of handsfree working with some autos to a certain degree so expect a software update soon.
Oh ok, your personal opinion. I thought AT&T did something different with their network or something.
I would cheer for a change in the way the celluar companies operate, but I don't see a change coming anytime soon.
? A manufacturer having control over a carrier.
? A manufacturer getting a portion of the monthly dues from the carrier.
? A carrier to alter how it's voicemail system works to accommodate the manufacturer's wishes.
? Competing carrier finally willing to work with manufacturers to create integrated devices months in advance of the iPhone's actual release.
What the f@#k do you need before you see the shift in paradigms?
In a way, it's pretty scary. Look at what the stock closed at today. This is well ahead of my expectations.
I'm happy about the stock prices today. I'm wondering if it will hold throughout Monday or should I dump it and buy in again after the dip. I expect $145-155 the AAPL releases its quarterly earning in 11 days.
RIMM is still surprising me with it's consistently higher jumps. CLWR has been okay but it's still to early to tell, I just I had bought in before the 30% bump.
My wife today told me that on a crowded elevator in her place of business, one guy took out his iPhone, and everyone tried to crowd around to see it. This isn't a bunch of grocery clerks (nothing disrespectful meant there), but highly paid lawyers and business people.
Apple's marketing has something to do with the interest but the device is so cool. It seems everyone is interested in the damn thing. They should stop calling it the Jesus phone and start calling it the Devil phone. Even my parents know about the thing in detail... that is scary.
• A manufacturer getting a portion of the monthly dues from the carrier.
This has not been confirmed. Even if this is part of Apple's arrangement, it's not new, RIM gets a small sum per handset per month, though they can actually justify it.
• Competing carrier finally willing to work with manufacturers to create integrated devices months in advance of the iPhone's actual release.
What again?
So far, it only shifts for one manufacturer. So AT&T was willing to make concessions in exchange of locking in more people to their service. Carrier lock-in is the paradigm I would much rather see change. Stuff like visual voicemail is nice but also serves as a distraction.
So far, it only shifts for one manufacturer. So AT&T was willing to make concessions in exchange of locking in more people to their service. Carrier lock-in is the paradigm I would much rather see change. Stuff like visual voicemail is nice but also serves as a distraction.
The paradigm shift is the manufacturer no longer being a slave to the carrier. Are you trying to say this is not a different way of operating for AT&T or are you suggesting that it means nothing unless ALL carrier have their gonads squeezed by ALL manufacturers? It's a shift on the model, whether it's effecting one or all companies is irrelevant, the fact is that Apple has turned things on its head, has shown that it is possible. It's up to them to figure out how to make it work for them.
How is Visual Voicemail a distraction? Distraction from what? From having to call your cell provider to listen to your phone messages in order? I don't get it.
As for carrier/manufacturer lock-in and integration, they are the same in concept but how they are executed is everything. Visual Voicemail, as an example, shows that real integration can lead to things that should have been implemented a decade ago. Having a 'one size fits all' philosophy forces manufacturers to create devices that either cater to the lowest common denominator or are stuffed to the brim with overpriced and heavy hardware that probably won't be used. But is sure impresses the kids on IRC when they list their tech specs!
What we need is a worldwide standard but I'm not going to hold my breath.
The paradigm shift is the manufacturer no longer being a slave to the carrier. Are you trying to say this is not a different way of operating for AT&T or are you suggesting that it means nothing unless ALL carrier have their gonads squeezed by ALL manufacturers? It's a shift on the model, whether it's effecting one or all companies is irrelevant, the fact is that Apple has turned things on its head, has shown that it is possible. It's up to them to figure out how to make it work for them.
There is nothing to suggest that this is anything but an anomaly, which Apple managed to do by exploiting what looks like only they can do. I don't see now Nokia, Ericson or any other brand can possibly do the same thing. It took Apple a decade to get where they are now in terms of brand identity, design reputation and most importantly, extraordinary to possibly unprecedented levels of consumer demand, something that only seems to happen once every few decades. The path may be possible, but I think a second manufacturer pulling that off may be an even harder thing to do than the first.
How is Visual Voicemail a distraction? Distraction from what? From having to call your cell provider to listen to your phone messages in order? I don't get it.
It is a distraction from the fact that you are now stuck with that carrier in order to be able to use the device at all, you are still just as stuck ball-and-chain with one carrier. That paradigm is still bolted down to the deck, though possibly even harder then before.
I'm not so sure the Bluetooth is crippled after all. In a NYTimes article yesterday, a couple of headphone manufactures were quoted as saying that their stereo wireless headphones would be coming to the iPhone.
Now, it's possible that these phones don't use Bluetooth, but some other radio technology, as mice and phones for desktops have also used. But, maybe they do use Bluetooth.
Perhaps it's just that Apple doesn't have stereo BT phones, and so, in the normal manner of Apple, when they don't have their own product to support something, they say it isn't supported. They've done that numerous times in the past.
Bluetooth headphones could work just fine with the iPhone, and the bluetooth would still be crippled.
Bluetooth consists of a number of profiles. When folks refer to it being 'crippled', usually that means that the headset profile and other more-or-less mundane profiles are enabled, but profiles that allow file transfers are intentionally disabled.
.
Oh ok, your personal opinion. I thought AT&T did something different with their network or something.
I would cheer for a change in the way the celluar companies operate, but I don't see a change coming anytime soon.
Actually they already did. They fixed/upgraded their edge network the day before the iphone launch!!!
Saying bluetooth has been crippled is inaccurate.
No, its accurate, as of this writing. From Gizmodo:
... most Bluetooth phones sold by carriers in the US have been "crippled" in that sense, including the iPhone:
• It can't transfer files to a PC, or appear on a desktop for drag-and-drop file juggling.
• It can't send a photo to a Bluetooth printer.
• It can't stream audio via Bluetooth to a compatible speaker system or headset. (Video is out of the question.)
However, it can link with any Bluetooth headset on the market, including the Apple iPhone Bluetooth Headset that will soon be at an Apple Store near you.
Now, you can speculate that it's Apple's intention to UNcripple it in the future, via a software update or something, and I might even agree with you. But right now... yeah, it's definitely crippled.
.