I'm gonna have to agree with Citi on this one and the poster above.
The plan is what is killing it, especially the new 3G plan. You get more 3G coverage with Verizon or Sprint and T-Mobile is cheaper than AT&T even with their new 3G coverage. Thats why I think Apple could help lower prices by allowing true competition on the carriers. I don't think the telcos are hurting and their $.20 text message shows how good they are at over charging at any given time.
I also like what some carries are doing overseas with data such as peak/off peak and day passes. NetCom in Norway which carries the iPhone 3G has plans for its smartphone where you pay a certain fee for unlimited data for one day. And it doesn't cost more if you subscribe to a month of service or if you just did it day to day (and used it everyday). I think people want flexibility and not everyone is prepared for $30 dollars more each month for some light email (and nobody wants to check email on a cheap Nokia).
I think for me the screen size and layout is the best, something obviously I was against before mostly because a larger Windows Mobile phone was more bulky than a smaller one and didn't have more resolution for the increased size. But other phones are catching up or exceeding in certain areas like the Palm Pre, HTC Touch HD etc...
I'm on T-Mobile and I used 60MB last month. All I do is email, maybe a website or two, and weather. Charging me $30 is not something I can justify. I do want a nice screen phone that is better than my current Tilt which I find the screen is two small compared to iPod Touch. Another thing that drives me mad, and i'm sure has upset other people (as I've heard complaints) is the lack of true IM like AIM or Yahoo. WHERE IS THE PUSH?
I can't decided between real keaboard and a software one. But it should be a choice and can be done much the same way HTC is doing.
I think the problem is Apple went into the iPhone not truly knowing what they wanted to achieve or what customers wanted. They wanted to try iPod + Phone again but do the mass storage that really pushed the iPod out the door. But they never thought about 3G, Apps, or IM services. Its obvious that some areas are lacking and showed when the 3G was launched to many service issues. Also working with all networks was a second thought as well.
Apple would do go to step back and do a total redesign that incorporates more of what people are wishing, because then truly what would people say to an iPhone with a better camera, video recording, copy & paste, a good solution to IM Services, a clean up to the APP Store (my hope was that Apple wouldn't turn into what Handango is for WM where you wade thru crap).
--The data plan for the iPhone is comparable with anything Verizon has to offer, or other smart phones on AT&T. The smaller carriers may have some better deals, but they have to. Sprint may not even survive, so of course they have to do anything they can to woo subscribers.
-- You arguably get more with your data plan and an iPhone because of the ease of use and superior browser. There's a reason mobile internet use on the iPhone/Touch platform has exploded.
-- An iPhone without a data plan isn't an iPhone. People seem to want Apple to make "just a phone with an iPod" but I don't think that's what Apple is interested in. Sure, it sucks if Apple isn't interested in the very thing you want, but that's how it goes. I wish Apple made the UI for half the CE devices in my house.
--Some of this, I think, is because Apple has abruptly moved the smart phone out of the "hard to use for geeks" realm and into the mass market. So people who would have never considered a data plan consider the iPhone, then complain that it costs more to operate. I hate the cell operators to a man, think they charge way too much, but for the time being they get to set the rates. The iPhone as Apple intended it requires a data plan, it costs what it costs, which is perfectly in line with industry norms. People who feel they don't really need a smart phone are probably just going to have to make do with dumb phones with bad UIs. I'm not saying that's good or bad (I actually wish they would make such a phone), I just looks to me like how Apple does things.
-- None of the shortcomings you list would require a "total redesign." Video recording, copy and paste and unified IM are just software updates, easily fit into the existing frameworks. Better camera is inevitable, as are other hardware enhancements.
The phone industry has been dominated by phones du jour distinguished by little more than case design; phone consumers got used to restlessly moving from cheap phone to cheap phone for little more than fashion reasons. My guess is that some adopters of the iPhone expect Apple to change it up every 6 months or so, or they get bored.
Maybe that's an insurmountable obstacle of the demographic, but I think people are going to start thinking differently about handsets and come to realize it's mostly about software, just like their computers at home.
Which means Apple's in a pretty good position to give people what the want, albeit probably not as fast as the want it.
Not good enough to be a true business class phone but too advanced and too pricey to be a consumer grade handset.
It has sold well due to hype, marketing and the millions of Jobs' worshippers out there.
the data plans are crazily priced and the build quality is suspect.
once you get past the fanboys (as with lots of 'cool' products) the demand is limited.
... none of what Citi is saying can be a shock to anyone surely.
In short it is a product that is not nearly worth the money (overall) you have to shell out.
The old canard of "they just sell to the Jobs worshippers" sure is getting threadbare, now that Apple is selling so many of it's handhelds. I guess eventually "Jobs worshippers" will come to mean "most people" and you can be extra smug to be among the (dwindling) elite that see through his wiles.
Find me a Verizon data plan that beats what AT&T offers for the iPhone, and I will revise my opinion that you have no idea what you're talking about.
Paying that much more for a data plan feels just like long distance plans used to. Think different!
you are putting that blame on the wrong people. the data plan and requirement to have one is ATT.
Folks, learn your iphone history. Apple went to every company out there that was supporting GSM and offered them this deal. Which was, at that time, two. Verizon and ATT. One non-negotiable part was that Apple had all control over design. Verizon said no. If they were going to pony up development money they wanted control over the design. ATT said sure, Apple could make what they wanted and ATT would help pay.
which is why ATT has this exclusive contract. They haven't made back their upfront money. The only diff between this and the contract you sign that gets you a phone 'for free' is that there's not ETF built in. Apple can't pay their way out of the contract. It has to run its course.
All of this is known fact that has been mentioned in countless articles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jb510
Citi is wrong on this... as usual frankly.
Introducing a new product is not likely to be successful in the face of weakening consumer demand in a receding market. Apple figured this out when they KEPT the original White MacBook around. The most profitable way forwra
Add to this that a fair chunk of the first gen phone users probably didn't see a need to update and it's not a shock that the 3g sales haven't been as huge
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adjei
You don't know the iphone is the only phone tied to one carrier?
no it is not. Every carrier out there has at least one phone, most of them smart phones, that is tied to that carrier.
--The data plan for the iPhone is comparable with anything Verizon has to offer, or other smart phones on AT&T. The smaller carriers may have some better deals, but they have to. Sprint may not even survive, so of course they have to do anything they can to woo subscribers.
-- You arguably get more with your data plan and an iPhone because of the ease of use and superior browser. There's a reason mobile internet use on the iPhone/Touch platform has exploded.
-- An iPhone without a data plan isn't an iPhone. People seem to want Apple to make "just a phone with an iPod" but I don't think that's what Apple is interested in. Sure, it sucks if Apple isn't interested in the very thing you want, but that's how it goes. I wish Apple made the UI for half the CE devices in my house.
--Some of this, I think, is because Apple has abruptly moved the smart phone out of the "hard to use for geeks" realm and into the mass market. So people who would have never considered a data plan consider the iPhone, then complain that it costs more to operate. I hate the cell operators to a man, think they charge way too much, but for the time being they get to set the rates. The iPhone as Apple intended it requires a data plan, it costs what it costs, which is perfectly in line with industry norms. People who feel they don't really need a smart phone are probably just going to have to make do with dumb phones with bad UIs. I'm not saying that's good or bad (I actually wish they would make such a phone), I just looks to me like how Apple does things.
-- None of the shortcomings you list would require a "total redesign." Video recording, copy and paste and unified IM are just software updates, easily fit into the existing frameworks. Better camera is inevitable, as are other hardware enhancements.
The phone industry has been dominated by phones du jour distinguished by little more than case design; phone consumers got used to restlessly moving from cheap phone to cheap phone for little more than fashion reasons. My guess is that some adopters of the iPhone expect Apple to change it up every 6 months or so, or the get bored.
Maybe that's an insurmountable obstacle of the demographic, but I think people are going to start thinking differently about handsets and come to realize it's mostly about software, just like their computers at home.
Which means Apple's in a pretty good position to give people what the want, albeit probably not as fast as the want it.
I never said I wanted a data plan less iPhone. I said I don't want to pay $30. I don't see why plans suited for light emailing can't be included and it would increase sales.
Also I didn't say people wanted just a Phone + iPod. I'm saying thats how Apple approached it. And then kept adding features mainly a good browser in the first version.
IT WILL TAKE a redesign because Copy & Paste inherently is more difficult and may take a new approach. If it really was as easy as people say it would have been done by now. Also I have a feeling that the Push AIM isn't work out so great in their internal trials (it was promised by September of last year) and true Multitasking to a degree (maybe only to apps that have permission) will have to be granted. Which could also require more memory and thus changes to the hardware. The iPod has pushed the old out with new hardware, I wouldn't be surprised to see an iPhone do the same.
no it is not. Every carrier out there has at least one phone, most of them smart phones, that is tied to that carrier.
Well beyond Windows Mobile (which really everyone for the most part has a similar competing phone). The T-Mobile G1 is available unlocked if you wish, and T-Mobile will also happily unlock it for you. Blackberry is everywhere, and most phones are timed max 6 months exclusives. The Palm Pre will be the same way, as Android will no go to Sprint soon.
I can understand the need to launch on one carrier, but almost 2 years on is crazy. The only reason this doesn't exist outside the US is because #1 carriers had the balls to refuse to pay the crazy deal Apple wanted with the first iPhone (which is now gone shockingly with the 3G) and #2 because of stricter laws especially in the EU (which can be thanked for GSM).
I don't see the harm in selling an unlocked iPhone from Apple.com for $600-800. People would buy it and they could be flexible in the carriers they wanted worldwide including not doing data if they didn't want it. You know if you think about it, people were willing to pay $600 for a locked with 2 year contract phone.
you are putting that blame on the wrong people. the data plan and requirement to have one is ATT.
Folks, learn your iphone history. Apple went to every company out there that was supporting GSM and offered them this deal. Which was, at that time, two. Verizon and ATT. One non-negotiable part was that Apple had all control over design. Verizon said no. If they were going to pony up development money they wanted control over the design. ATT said sure, Apple could make what they wanted and ATT would help pay.
which is why ATT has this exclusive contract. They haven't made back their upfront money. The only diff between this and the contract you sign that gets you a phone 'for free' is that there's not ETF built in. Apple can't pay their way out of the contract. It has to run its course.
.
Actually Verizon is not on GSM and it was Cingular who accepted Apple offer, which shortly after became AT&T.
I never said I wanted a data plan less iPhone. I said I don't want to pay $30. I don't see why plans suited for light emailing can't be included and it would increase sales.
Also I didn't say people wanted just a Phone + iPod. I'm saying thats how Apple approached it. And then kept adding features mainly a good browser in the first version.
IT WILL TAKE a redesign because Copy & Paste inherently is more difficult and may take a new approach. If it really was as easy as people say it would have been done by now. Also I have a feeling that the Push AIM isn't work out so great in their internal trials (it was promised by September of last year) and true Multitasking to a degree (maybe only to apps that have permission) will have to be granted. Which could also require more memory and thus changes to the hardware. The iPod has pushed the old out with new hardware, I wouldn't be surprised to see an iPhone do the same.
No, I get that lots of people would like a cheaper "lite" data plan. Trouble is, that's not how the cell industry operates. You'll notice that Verizon doesn't do that with their full featured smart phones, AT&T doesn't do it with their phones other than the iPhone. It sucks, they're greedy, you bet. But it really doesn't seem to be under Apple's control.
I would guess that copy and paste has been slow to come, not because of technical challenges, but because Apple just hasn't put many resources on it. That's because I would guess that the vast majority of iPhone users never even realize it's missing.
My bet is that Apple is looking to implement more of what they already have: a kind of OS X "services" menu approach, in which you do an end run around copy and paste per se by putting app specific hard links where most people need them: mail this, make a sticky of this, add this to my picture library.
That would be a typical Apple "works for 95% of their users but infuriates the other 5% by being insanely restrictive" move. Or insert your preferred ratio here.
At any rate, even if they are working on traditional cut and paste, and even though push is delayed, I still don't see how that entails any major revisions to any software or UI underpinnings, unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean by "redesign."
The old canard of "they just sell to the Jobs worshippers" sure is getting threadbare, now that Apple is selling so many of it's handhelds. I guess eventually "Jobs worshippers" will come to mean "most people" and you can be extra smug to be among the (dwindling) elite that see through his wiles.
Find me a Verizon data plan that beats what AT&T offers for the iPhone, and I will revise my opinion that you have no idea what you're talking about.
You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you'll never fool all of the people all of the time...
find you a better Verizon plan?
nope?
to do that I'd have to live in the states, which fortunately I don't.
you are putting that blame on the wrong people. the data plan and requirement to have one is ATT.
Folks, learn your iphone history. Apple went to every company out there that was supporting GSM and offered them this deal. Which was, at that time, two. Verizon and ATT. One non-negotiable part was that Apple had all control over design. Verizon said no. If they were going to pony up development money they wanted control over the design. ATT said sure, Apple could make what they wanted and ATT would help pay.
which is why ATT has this exclusive contract. They haven't made back their upfront money. The only diff between this and the contract you sign that gets you a phone 'for free' is that there's not ETF built in. Apple can't pay their way out of the contract. It has to run its course.
All of this is known fact that has been mentioned in countless articles.
Add to this that a fair chunk of the first gen phone users probably didn't see a need to update and it's not a shock that the 3g sales haven't been as huge
no it is not. Every carrier out there has at least one phone, most of them smart phones, that is tied to that carrier.
what utter rubbish...
One thing straight....Apple sets the prices...end of story.
AT&T voice and data plans are governed ONLY by what Apple charges AT&T per handset.
As you correctly state, AT&T need to get their money back, but they would have much more flexibility in the price if Apple were more flexible on sell in price.
I'm sure AT&T would love to lower the prices but they can't.
I never said I wanted a data plan less iPhone. I said I don't want to pay $30. I don't see why plans suited for light emailing can't be included and it would increase sales.
Also I didn't say people wanted just a Phone + iPod. I'm saying thats how Apple approached it. And then kept adding features mainly a good browser in the first version.
IT WILL TAKE a redesign because Copy & Paste inherently is more difficult and may take a new approach. If it really was as easy as people say it would have been done by now. Also I have a feeling that the Push AIM isn't work out so great in their internal trials (it was promised by September of last year) and true Multitasking to a degree (maybe only to apps that have permission) will have to be granted. Which could also require more memory and thus changes to the hardware. The iPod has pushed the old out with new hardware, I wouldn't be surprised to see an iPhone do the same.
One thing straight....Apple sets the prices...end of story.
AT&T voice and data plans are governed ONLY by what Apple charges AT&T per handset.
As you correctly state, AT&T need to get their money back, but they would have much more flexibility in the price if Apple were more flexible on sell in price.
I'm sure AT&T would love to lower the prices but they can't.
Then every other handset manufacturer is gouging in precisely the same way, so unless your alleging some kind of price fixing scheme, you have no point.
OK. Does the carrier with the iPhone where you are have better data plans on their other smart phones than what they charge for the iPhone?
absolutely...
in the UK on O2 unlimited web browsing is called a bolt on which can be had for £7.50 a month, so you can pick any tariff you like and add unlimited data for that price.
Then every other handset manufacturer is gouging in precisely the same way, so unless your alleging some kind of price fixing scheme, you have no point.
I'm betting this analyst's estimates are way, way off. Looks to me like he's attempting to manipulate the stock downward so he can either short AAPL or pick up a bunch at a reduced price.
I'm betting this analyst's estimates are way, way off. Looks to me like he's attempting to manipulate the stock downward so he can either short AAPL or pick up a bunch at a reduced price.
I tend to agree, overall analysts never understand Apple. They usually base their estimates on what other computer companies, or software companies, or consumer electronics companies do, but fail to take into account that Apple is all three.
I don't care about a keyboard, I don't care about the camera; the only thing that keeps an iPhone out of my pocket is the monthly fee. Don't tell me how 'competitive' it is... in this uncertain economy, I'm not about to obligate myself to a plan that's double what I pay now, no matter how much more I get. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone here. Apple's just hit the saturation point on folks willing to dole out $70/month for this.
Paying that much more for a data plan feels just like long distance plans used to. Think different!
Bingo!
Except here in Canada it's $104/month. Minimum 3 year contract.
For that price, not in this lifetime. Rogers is smoking crack.
This always bothers me - why are people astonished that there is a data rate and prone to call the cell phone companies greedy?
Data requires infrastructure. It requires either seperate transmitters or more capacity in existing transmitters. It requires infrastructure to get data to and from the cell towers and then to the Internet.
Infrastructure costs, and companies are in business to make money - not provide a bunch of expensive services for free.
If it's too expensive for you, fine. But to whine because you can't get everything you want in life handed on a silver platter for free is just silly.
Comments
I'm gonna have to agree with Citi on this one and the poster above.
The plan is what is killing it, especially the new 3G plan. You get more 3G coverage with Verizon or Sprint and T-Mobile is cheaper than AT&T even with their new 3G coverage. Thats why I think Apple could help lower prices by allowing true competition on the carriers. I don't think the telcos are hurting and their $.20 text message shows how good they are at over charging at any given time.
I also like what some carries are doing overseas with data such as peak/off peak and day passes. NetCom in Norway which carries the iPhone 3G has plans for its smartphone where you pay a certain fee for unlimited data for one day. And it doesn't cost more if you subscribe to a month of service or if you just did it day to day (and used it everyday). I think people want flexibility and not everyone is prepared for $30 dollars more each month for some light email (and nobody wants to check email on a cheap Nokia).
I think for me the screen size and layout is the best, something obviously I was against before mostly because a larger Windows Mobile phone was more bulky than a smaller one and didn't have more resolution for the increased size. But other phones are catching up or exceeding in certain areas like the Palm Pre, HTC Touch HD etc...
I'm on T-Mobile and I used 60MB last month. All I do is email, maybe a website or two, and weather. Charging me $30 is not something I can justify. I do want a nice screen phone that is better than my current Tilt which I find the screen is two small compared to iPod Touch. Another thing that drives me mad, and i'm sure has upset other people (as I've heard complaints) is the lack of true IM like AIM or Yahoo. WHERE IS THE PUSH?
I can't decided between real keaboard and a software one. But it should be a choice and can be done much the same way HTC is doing.
I think the problem is Apple went into the iPhone not truly knowing what they wanted to achieve or what customers wanted. They wanted to try iPod + Phone again but do the mass storage that really pushed the iPod out the door. But they never thought about 3G, Apps, or IM services. Its obvious that some areas are lacking and showed when the 3G was launched to many service issues. Also working with all networks was a second thought as well.
Apple would do go to step back and do a total redesign that incorporates more of what people are wishing, because then truly what would people say to an iPhone with a better camera, video recording, copy & paste, a good solution to IM Services, a clean up to the APP Store (my hope was that Apple wouldn't turn into what Handango is for WM where you wade thru crap).
--The data plan for the iPhone is comparable with anything Verizon has to offer, or other smart phones on AT&T. The smaller carriers may have some better deals, but they have to. Sprint may not even survive, so of course they have to do anything they can to woo subscribers.
-- You arguably get more with your data plan and an iPhone because of the ease of use and superior browser. There's a reason mobile internet use on the iPhone/Touch platform has exploded.
-- An iPhone without a data plan isn't an iPhone. People seem to want Apple to make "just a phone with an iPod" but I don't think that's what Apple is interested in. Sure, it sucks if Apple isn't interested in the very thing you want, but that's how it goes. I wish Apple made the UI for half the CE devices in my house.
--Some of this, I think, is because Apple has abruptly moved the smart phone out of the "hard to use for geeks" realm and into the mass market. So people who would have never considered a data plan consider the iPhone, then complain that it costs more to operate. I hate the cell operators to a man, think they charge way too much, but for the time being they get to set the rates. The iPhone as Apple intended it requires a data plan, it costs what it costs, which is perfectly in line with industry norms. People who feel they don't really need a smart phone are probably just going to have to make do with dumb phones with bad UIs. I'm not saying that's good or bad (I actually wish they would make such a phone), I just looks to me like how Apple does things.
-- None of the shortcomings you list would require a "total redesign." Video recording, copy and paste and unified IM are just software updates, easily fit into the existing frameworks. Better camera is inevitable, as are other hardware enhancements.
The phone industry has been dominated by phones du jour distinguished by little more than case design; phone consumers got used to restlessly moving from cheap phone to cheap phone for little more than fashion reasons. My guess is that some adopters of the iPhone expect Apple to change it up every 6 months or so, or they get bored.
Maybe that's an insurmountable obstacle of the demographic, but I think people are going to start thinking differently about handsets and come to realize it's mostly about software, just like their computers at home.
Which means Apple's in a pretty good position to give people what the want, albeit probably not as fast as the want it.
its a luxury product.
Not good enough to be a true business class phone but too advanced and too pricey to be a consumer grade handset.
It has sold well due to hype, marketing and the millions of Jobs' worshippers out there.
the data plans are crazily priced and the build quality is suspect.
once you get past the fanboys (as with lots of 'cool' products) the demand is limited.
... none of what Citi is saying can be a shock to anyone surely.
In short it is a product that is not nearly worth the money (overall) you have to shell out.
its a luxury product.
Not good enough to be a true business class phone but too advanced and too pricey to be a consumer grade handset.
It has sold well due to hype, marketing and the millions of Jobs' worshippers out there.
the data plans are crazily priced and the build quality is suspect.
once you get past the fanboys (as with lots of 'cool' products) the demand is limited.
... none of what Citi is saying can be a shock to anyone surely.
In short it is a product that is not nearly worth the money (overall) you have to shell out.
The old canard of "they just sell to the Jobs worshippers" sure is getting threadbare, now that Apple is selling so many of it's handhelds. I guess eventually "Jobs worshippers" will come to mean "most people" and you can be extra smug to be among the (dwindling) elite that see through his wiles.
Find me a Verizon data plan that beats what AT&T offers for the iPhone, and I will revise my opinion that you have no idea what you're talking about.
Paying that much more for a data plan feels just like long distance plans used to. Think different!
you are putting that blame on the wrong people. the data plan and requirement to have one is ATT.
Folks, learn your iphone history. Apple went to every company out there that was supporting GSM and offered them this deal. Which was, at that time, two. Verizon and ATT. One non-negotiable part was that Apple had all control over design. Verizon said no. If they were going to pony up development money they wanted control over the design. ATT said sure, Apple could make what they wanted and ATT would help pay.
which is why ATT has this exclusive contract. They haven't made back their upfront money. The only diff between this and the contract you sign that gets you a phone 'for free' is that there's not ETF built in. Apple can't pay their way out of the contract. It has to run its course.
All of this is known fact that has been mentioned in countless articles.
Citi is wrong on this... as usual frankly.
Introducing a new product is not likely to be successful in the face of weakening consumer demand in a receding market. Apple figured this out when they KEPT the original White MacBook around. The most profitable way forwra
Add to this that a fair chunk of the first gen phone users probably didn't see a need to update and it's not a shock that the 3g sales haven't been as huge
You don't know the iphone is the only phone tied to one carrier?
no it is not. Every carrier out there has at least one phone, most of them smart phones, that is tied to that carrier.
--The data plan for the iPhone is comparable with anything Verizon has to offer, or other smart phones on AT&T. The smaller carriers may have some better deals, but they have to. Sprint may not even survive, so of course they have to do anything they can to woo subscribers.
-- You arguably get more with your data plan and an iPhone because of the ease of use and superior browser. There's a reason mobile internet use on the iPhone/Touch platform has exploded.
-- An iPhone without a data plan isn't an iPhone. People seem to want Apple to make "just a phone with an iPod" but I don't think that's what Apple is interested in. Sure, it sucks if Apple isn't interested in the very thing you want, but that's how it goes. I wish Apple made the UI for half the CE devices in my house.
--Some of this, I think, is because Apple has abruptly moved the smart phone out of the "hard to use for geeks" realm and into the mass market. So people who would have never considered a data plan consider the iPhone, then complain that it costs more to operate. I hate the cell operators to a man, think they charge way too much, but for the time being they get to set the rates. The iPhone as Apple intended it requires a data plan, it costs what it costs, which is perfectly in line with industry norms. People who feel they don't really need a smart phone are probably just going to have to make do with dumb phones with bad UIs. I'm not saying that's good or bad (I actually wish they would make such a phone), I just looks to me like how Apple does things.
-- None of the shortcomings you list would require a "total redesign." Video recording, copy and paste and unified IM are just software updates, easily fit into the existing frameworks. Better camera is inevitable, as are other hardware enhancements.
The phone industry has been dominated by phones du jour distinguished by little more than case design; phone consumers got used to restlessly moving from cheap phone to cheap phone for little more than fashion reasons. My guess is that some adopters of the iPhone expect Apple to change it up every 6 months or so, or the get bored.
Maybe that's an insurmountable obstacle of the demographic, but I think people are going to start thinking differently about handsets and come to realize it's mostly about software, just like their computers at home.
Which means Apple's in a pretty good position to give people what the want, albeit probably not as fast as the want it.
I never said I wanted a data plan less iPhone. I said I don't want to pay $30. I don't see why plans suited for light emailing can't be included and it would increase sales.
Also I didn't say people wanted just a Phone + iPod. I'm saying thats how Apple approached it. And then kept adding features mainly a good browser in the first version.
IT WILL TAKE a redesign because Copy & Paste inherently is more difficult and may take a new approach. If it really was as easy as people say it would have been done by now. Also I have a feeling that the Push AIM isn't work out so great in their internal trials (it was promised by September of last year) and true Multitasking to a degree (maybe only to apps that have permission) will have to be granted. Which could also require more memory and thus changes to the hardware. The iPod has pushed the old out with new hardware, I wouldn't be surprised to see an iPhone do the same.
no it is not. Every carrier out there has at least one phone, most of them smart phones, that is tied to that carrier.
Well beyond Windows Mobile (which really everyone for the most part has a similar competing phone). The T-Mobile G1 is available unlocked if you wish, and T-Mobile will also happily unlock it for you. Blackberry is everywhere, and most phones are timed max 6 months exclusives. The Palm Pre will be the same way, as Android will no go to Sprint soon.
I can understand the need to launch on one carrier, but almost 2 years on is crazy. The only reason this doesn't exist outside the US is because #1 carriers had the balls to refuse to pay the crazy deal Apple wanted with the first iPhone (which is now gone shockingly with the 3G) and #2 because of stricter laws especially in the EU (which can be thanked for GSM).
I don't see the harm in selling an unlocked iPhone from Apple.com for $600-800. People would buy it and they could be flexible in the carriers they wanted worldwide including not doing data if they didn't want it. You know if you think about it, people were willing to pay $600 for a locked with 2 year contract phone.
you are putting that blame on the wrong people. the data plan and requirement to have one is ATT.
Folks, learn your iphone history. Apple went to every company out there that was supporting GSM and offered them this deal. Which was, at that time, two. Verizon and ATT. One non-negotiable part was that Apple had all control over design. Verizon said no. If they were going to pony up development money they wanted control over the design. ATT said sure, Apple could make what they wanted and ATT would help pay.
which is why ATT has this exclusive contract. They haven't made back their upfront money. The only diff between this and the contract you sign that gets you a phone 'for free' is that there's not ETF built in. Apple can't pay their way out of the contract. It has to run its course.
.
Actually Verizon is not on GSM and it was Cingular who accepted Apple offer, which shortly after became AT&T.
I never said I wanted a data plan less iPhone. I said I don't want to pay $30. I don't see why plans suited for light emailing can't be included and it would increase sales.
Also I didn't say people wanted just a Phone + iPod. I'm saying thats how Apple approached it. And then kept adding features mainly a good browser in the first version.
IT WILL TAKE a redesign because Copy & Paste inherently is more difficult and may take a new approach. If it really was as easy as people say it would have been done by now. Also I have a feeling that the Push AIM isn't work out so great in their internal trials (it was promised by September of last year) and true Multitasking to a degree (maybe only to apps that have permission) will have to be granted. Which could also require more memory and thus changes to the hardware. The iPod has pushed the old out with new hardware, I wouldn't be surprised to see an iPhone do the same.
No, I get that lots of people would like a cheaper "lite" data plan. Trouble is, that's not how the cell industry operates. You'll notice that Verizon doesn't do that with their full featured smart phones, AT&T doesn't do it with their phones other than the iPhone. It sucks, they're greedy, you bet. But it really doesn't seem to be under Apple's control.
I would guess that copy and paste has been slow to come, not because of technical challenges, but because Apple just hasn't put many resources on it. That's because I would guess that the vast majority of iPhone users never even realize it's missing.
My bet is that Apple is looking to implement more of what they already have: a kind of OS X "services" menu approach, in which you do an end run around copy and paste per se by putting app specific hard links where most people need them: mail this, make a sticky of this, add this to my picture library.
That would be a typical Apple "works for 95% of their users but infuriates the other 5% by being insanely restrictive" move. Or insert your preferred ratio here.
At any rate, even if they are working on traditional cut and paste, and even though push is delayed, I still don't see how that entails any major revisions to any software or UI underpinnings, unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean by "redesign."
The old canard of "they just sell to the Jobs worshippers" sure is getting threadbare, now that Apple is selling so many of it's handhelds. I guess eventually "Jobs worshippers" will come to mean "most people" and you can be extra smug to be among the (dwindling) elite that see through his wiles.
Find me a Verizon data plan that beats what AT&T offers for the iPhone, and I will revise my opinion that you have no idea what you're talking about.
You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you'll never fool all of the people all of the time...
find you a better Verizon plan?
nope?
to do that I'd have to live in the states, which fortunately I don't.
You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you'll never fool all of the people all of the time...
find you a better Verizon plan?
nope?
to do that I'd have to live in the states, which fortunately I don't.
OK. Does the carrier with the iPhone where you are have better data plans on their other smart phones than what they charge for the iPhone?
you are putting that blame on the wrong people. the data plan and requirement to have one is ATT.
Folks, learn your iphone history. Apple went to every company out there that was supporting GSM and offered them this deal. Which was, at that time, two. Verizon and ATT. One non-negotiable part was that Apple had all control over design. Verizon said no. If they were going to pony up development money they wanted control over the design. ATT said sure, Apple could make what they wanted and ATT would help pay.
which is why ATT has this exclusive contract. They haven't made back their upfront money. The only diff between this and the contract you sign that gets you a phone 'for free' is that there's not ETF built in. Apple can't pay their way out of the contract. It has to run its course.
All of this is known fact that has been mentioned in countless articles.
Add to this that a fair chunk of the first gen phone users probably didn't see a need to update and it's not a shock that the 3g sales haven't been as huge
no it is not. Every carrier out there has at least one phone, most of them smart phones, that is tied to that carrier.
what utter rubbish...
One thing straight....Apple sets the prices...end of story.
AT&T voice and data plans are governed ONLY by what Apple charges AT&T per handset.
As you correctly state, AT&T need to get their money back, but they would have much more flexibility in the price if Apple were more flexible on sell in price.
I'm sure AT&T would love to lower the prices but they can't.
I never said I wanted a data plan less iPhone. I said I don't want to pay $30. I don't see why plans suited for light emailing can't be included and it would increase sales.
Also I didn't say people wanted just a Phone + iPod. I'm saying thats how Apple approached it. And then kept adding features mainly a good browser in the first version.
IT WILL TAKE a redesign because Copy & Paste inherently is more difficult and may take a new approach. If it really was as easy as people say it would have been done by now. Also I have a feeling that the Push AIM isn't work out so great in their internal trials (it was promised by September of last year) and true Multitasking to a degree (maybe only to apps that have permission) will have to be granted. Which could also require more memory and thus changes to the hardware. The iPod has pushed the old out with new hardware, I wouldn't be surprised to see an iPhone do the same.
case in point...
what utter rubbish...
One thing straight....Apple sets the prices...end of story.
AT&T voice and data plans are governed ONLY by what Apple charges AT&T per handset.
As you correctly state, AT&T need to get their money back, but they would have much more flexibility in the price if Apple were more flexible on sell in price.
I'm sure AT&T would love to lower the prices but they can't.
Then every other handset manufacturer is gouging in precisely the same way, so unless your alleging some kind of price fixing scheme, you have no point.
OK. Does the carrier with the iPhone where you are have better data plans on their other smart phones than what they charge for the iPhone?
absolutely...
in the UK on O2 unlimited web browsing is called a bolt on which can be had for £7.50 a month, so you can pick any tariff you like and add unlimited data for that price.
Then every other handset manufacturer is gouging in precisely the same way, so unless your alleging some kind of price fixing scheme, you have no point.
nope the others have more realistic pricing.
price fixing..??? absolutely!
there is too much money to be made!!!
I'm sure AT&T would love to lower the prices but they can't.
I don't think AT&T would love to lower prices. Why lower prices for something that is selling so well?
The iPhone is the most popular phone in the US. Not just most popular smartphone / dataphone. It outsells even the ubiquitus moto razor.
I'm betting this analyst's estimates are way, way off. Looks to me like he's attempting to manipulate the stock downward so he can either short AAPL or pick up a bunch at a reduced price.
I tend to agree, overall analysts never understand Apple. They usually base their estimates on what other computer companies, or software companies, or consumer electronics companies do, but fail to take into account that Apple is all three.
I don't care about a keyboard, I don't care about the camera; the only thing that keeps an iPhone out of my pocket is the monthly fee. Don't tell me how 'competitive' it is... in this uncertain economy, I'm not about to obligate myself to a plan that's double what I pay now, no matter how much more I get. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone here. Apple's just hit the saturation point on folks willing to dole out $70/month for this.
Paying that much more for a data plan feels just like long distance plans used to. Think different!
Bingo!
Except here in Canada it's $104/month. Minimum 3 year contract.
For that price, not in this lifetime. Rogers is smoking crack.
they're greedy, you bet.
This always bothers me - why are people astonished that there is a data rate and prone to call the cell phone companies greedy?
Data requires infrastructure. It requires either seperate transmitters or more capacity in existing transmitters. It requires infrastructure to get data to and from the cell towers and then to the Internet.
Infrastructure costs, and companies are in business to make money - not provide a bunch of expensive services for free.
If it's too expensive for you, fine. But to whine because you can't get everything you want in life handed on a silver platter for free is just silly.