Check yourself before you wreck yourself. Let me help you.
Quote:
I know you want to ignore this fact, but it still has to be acknowledged. Even with many more models and carriers, RIM's sales are not much better than Apple's with one phone and one carrier.
What is the point of raising this information about Apple's self-imposed limitation?
Quote:
We are specifically talking about BlackBerry which is not on as many carriers world wide.
So you've provided data that shows that number of carriers above or below certain points would change Blackberry sales?
This is a strange tactic here. You toss out the information with a clear inference in mind, but then slap people around for drawing the obvious conclusion from it. This is why I'm now asking for your conclusions. Why would you expect Apple to be acknowledged for being on one U.S. carrier but not do the same for RIM with regard to worldwide carriers? Where is the information about number of worldwide carriers being negatively associated with growth?
Quote:
The iPhone isn't the only phone AT&T offers, it is helping to drive people to its service, most people are purchasing other phones. But my point was specifically about AT&T versus Verizon.
Verizon has done a pretty good job of answering and hasn't been harmed at all by the iPhone. Both networks have expanded through obtaining exclusive phones at certain times and also by acquisitions. Verizon is the largest cell provider out there. Again you offer a claim but not a conclusion. Does Verizon not offer phones that would drive people to continue to join their network? Have they ignored Apple or AT&T? Have you seen something of note with regard to churn rate? Please state the claim.
Quote:
The BlackBerry Storm does not have WiFi.
How does this support Verizon not allowing apps to be loaded?
Quote:
Verizon only allows its own GPS service.
They also allow you to separate it from the data plan so your choice isn't pay more for data whether you would use it for that purpose or not.
Quote:
Other examples of Verizon locking down it phones and charging extra for services.
This has nothing to do with apps on smart phones. Was I a bit pissed when I couldn't load ringtones on my Razr back in 2006 unless they were purchased through Verizon? Yes however again, with the half conclusions, how is Apple operating a closed wall store where you are not only limited to apps by them (legally) and Apple must bless and can unbless them at anytime any different now in 2009? Most providers have learned and now have open networks. Meanwhile Apple is stuck in 2006 with their model repeating the mistakes of the past. Imagine the uproar if Apple limited any other item them they sold to data and apps only from them. People would go nuts.
Not as long as you're stuck with one carrier. You will eventually stagnate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
As usual you fail to look at the big picture. You are looking at one device on one carrier and suggesting that it will always be that way. You also aren't considering that the Storm/Thunder, RiM's direct competitor to the iPhone, and other higher-end devices also have exclusive deals with carriers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud
That's now and I actually agree with you , but how can you not think that being locked into AT&T is not a disadvantage going into the future?
Nobody says that's forever - even tho' consolidation/recession may only leave 2 or at most 3 relevant companies standing in a year or three - how many besides Verizon and AT&T have the resources to build out a full 4G infrastructure? Most don't even have adquate 3G yet.
People are also not mentioning one unique thing about the history of the iPhone - the first phone where the phone maker got a cellco to modify ITS own systems to accomodate phone features rather than vice-versa, e.g., the reason my LG phone has 15 features Verizon won't let me use. By definition, since AT&T agreed to let Apple determine how the iP would function, every function is always supported (if ATT's up to snuff at least, e.g., it still can't provide even good phone service in Manhattan).
Mods had to be made to accommodate Apple's plans, e.g., visual voicemail, which is why that feature doesn't function on jail-broke iPhones. Once the model was established companies around the world began to fall into place. (Btw, nobody's mentioned how many countries the Blackberry's in. Does anyone know?)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud
Now I know for a fact that you are certifiably crazy- How many Blackberries are there that are on how many different US carriers alone vs. the iPhone exclusivity in the US with only AT&T? We're talking RIM -not STorm/Thunder.
Blackberry had (pre-iPhone at least) no such leverage, and having "exclusive phones" on different networks in no way implies meaningful input by the device manufacturer, rather "we'll buy that design from you if you agree not to sell it to some other carrier." Maybe Apple's given them (and Nokia and Google) more power in the process, or not. I have no idea, but the old model has been dented, if not broken by Apple.
HP has configs you can only buy at Best Buy. Which means nothing technologically important about an HP computer bought at BestBuy. I.e., all marketing, no tech. And in the case of RIM, being able to market to their corporate base by saying, you're on "X" cellco? No prob. We got a phone for that." Whereas Apple went for the consumer market first, and is happy to sell to business - on their (existing, but maybe expanding) terms. (Which may yet turn out to be an Achilles heel for Apple which still seems ambivalent about how it will or won't market to businesses.)
I think it also hasn't been mentioned that, relevant to the future, RIM has achieved one kind of leverage, in the opposite direction from Apple. In this quarter they ALSO reported that over 50% of their sales, for the first time, were to consumers rather than business. Not too many business-oriented companies whose products and sales model are based on corps break out into the mainstream that way. There have to be some savvy and adapable folks over there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud
BUt the more carriers the greater the pentetration. People simply will not switch regardless if their carrier is inferior or whatever. The iPhone would have already had MMS texts and MMS pics plus video if it had been on Verizon on the other hand not to mention a better connection.
Partiencel, grasshopper, patience. All is still up for grabs in the 4G future, including the possibility that Apple may decide to purchase (seamlessly swistching) cell bandwidth from multiple carriers and "create" its own "best of breed" cell service. May or not be a good business idea, but if any company has the heft and buzz to do something like this, it's Apple.
All good and well, but I still can't help but wonder how this would play out if Apple had let their AT&T contract expire and started selling iPhone on Verizon's network instead of waiting till 2010.
The Storm's fun (ESPECIALLY once it's running on an upgraded software version than what mine came with) and I'm glad they finally launched their app store.
All good and well, but I still can't help but wonder how this would play out if Apple had let their AT&T contract expire and started selling iPhone on Verizon's network instead of waiting till 2010.
You're making an assumption that you don't know is true.
How can you talk about Apple letting its contract expire, when you have no idea what that contract is? You might as well talk about AT&T allowing the contract to expire, and why would they?
We have all read about the contract being for five years. Is that true? We don't know. Does it cover every phone Apple comes out with? We don't know?
Verizon has been making noise about writing widgets that will run on every phone they will sell in the future. Would Apple allow Verizon dictate what runs on their phone? Unlikely. But you never know how Verizon is using that for leverage over Apple in public statements now, for when the phone COULD run on their LTE network in sometime 2010 when it arrives.
That's assuming that Apple's contract with AT&T would allow it.
Quote:
The Storm's fun (ESPECIALLY once it's running on an upgraded software version than what mine came with) and I'm glad they finally launched their app store.
It sure ain't fun typing on it! I tried for a while, but it isn't worth it. Like all the reviews have said about it. It's great at receiving e-mails, but sucks at sending them.
Comments
I did not raise that issue, you did.
Check yourself before you wreck yourself. Let me help you.
I know you want to ignore this fact, but it still has to be acknowledged. Even with many more models and carriers, RIM's sales are not much better than Apple's with one phone and one carrier.
What is the point of raising this information about Apple's self-imposed limitation?
We are specifically talking about BlackBerry which is not on as many carriers world wide.
So you've provided data that shows that number of carriers above or below certain points would change Blackberry sales?
This is a strange tactic here. You toss out the information with a clear inference in mind, but then slap people around for drawing the obvious conclusion from it. This is why I'm now asking for your conclusions. Why would you expect Apple to be acknowledged for being on one U.S. carrier but not do the same for RIM with regard to worldwide carriers? Where is the information about number of worldwide carriers being negatively associated with growth?
The iPhone isn't the only phone AT&T offers, it is helping to drive people to its service, most people are purchasing other phones. But my point was specifically about AT&T versus Verizon.
Verizon has done a pretty good job of answering and hasn't been harmed at all by the iPhone. Both networks have expanded through obtaining exclusive phones at certain times and also by acquisitions. Verizon is the largest cell provider out there. Again you offer a claim but not a conclusion. Does Verizon not offer phones that would drive people to continue to join their network? Have they ignored Apple or AT&T? Have you seen something of note with regard to churn rate? Please state the claim.
The BlackBerry Storm does not have WiFi.
How does this support Verizon not allowing apps to be loaded?
Verizon only allows its own GPS service.
They also allow you to separate it from the data plan so your choice isn't pay more for data whether you would use it for that purpose or not.
Other examples of Verizon locking down it phones and charging extra for services.
This has nothing to do with apps on smart phones. Was I a bit pissed when I couldn't load ringtones on my Razr back in 2006 unless they were purchased through Verizon? Yes however again, with the half conclusions, how is Apple operating a closed wall store where you are not only limited to apps by them (legally) and Apple must bless and can unbless them at anytime any different now in 2009? Most providers have learned and now have open networks. Meanwhile Apple is stuck in 2006 with their model repeating the mistakes of the past. Imagine the uproar if Apple limited any other item them they sold to data and apps only from them. People would go nuts.
Not as long as you're stuck with one carrier. You will eventually stagnate.
As usual you fail to look at the big picture. You are looking at one device on one carrier and suggesting that it will always be that way. You also aren't considering that the Storm/Thunder, RiM's direct competitor to the iPhone, and other higher-end devices also have exclusive deals with carriers.
That's now and I actually agree with you , but how can you not think that being locked into AT&T is not a disadvantage going into the future?
Nobody says that's forever - even tho' consolidation/recession may only leave 2 or at most 3 relevant companies standing in a year or three - how many besides Verizon and AT&T have the resources to build out a full 4G infrastructure? Most don't even have adquate 3G yet.
People are also not mentioning one unique thing about the history of the iPhone - the first phone where the phone maker got a cellco to modify ITS own systems to accomodate phone features rather than vice-versa, e.g., the reason my LG phone has 15 features Verizon won't let me use. By definition, since AT&T agreed to let Apple determine how the iP would function, every function is always supported (if ATT's up to snuff at least, e.g., it still can't provide even good phone service in Manhattan).
Mods had to be made to accommodate Apple's plans, e.g., visual voicemail, which is why that feature doesn't function on jail-broke iPhones. Once the model was established companies around the world began to fall into place. (Btw, nobody's mentioned how many countries the Blackberry's in. Does anyone know?)
Now I know for a fact that you are certifiably crazy- How many Blackberries are there that are on how many different US carriers alone vs. the iPhone exclusivity in the US with only AT&T? We're talking RIM -not STorm/Thunder.
Blackberry had (pre-iPhone at least) no such leverage, and having "exclusive phones" on different networks in no way implies meaningful input by the device manufacturer, rather "we'll buy that design from you if you agree not to sell it to some other carrier." Maybe Apple's given them (and Nokia and Google) more power in the process, or not. I have no idea, but the old model has been dented, if not broken by Apple.
HP has configs you can only buy at Best Buy. Which means nothing technologically important about an HP computer bought at BestBuy. I.e., all marketing, no tech. And in the case of RIM, being able to market to their corporate base by saying, you're on "X" cellco? No prob. We got a phone for that." Whereas Apple went for the consumer market first, and is happy to sell to business - on their (existing, but maybe expanding) terms. (Which may yet turn out to be an Achilles heel for Apple which still seems ambivalent about how it will or won't market to businesses.)
I think it also hasn't been mentioned that, relevant to the future, RIM has achieved one kind of leverage, in the opposite direction from Apple. In this quarter they ALSO reported that over 50% of their sales, for the first time, were to consumers rather than business. Not too many business-oriented companies whose products and sales model are based on corps break out into the mainstream that way. There have to be some savvy and adapable folks over there.
BUt the more carriers the greater the pentetration. People simply will not switch regardless if their carrier is inferior or whatever. The iPhone would have already had MMS texts and MMS pics plus video if it had been on Verizon on the other hand not to mention a better connection.
Partiencel, grasshopper, patience. All is still up for grabs in the 4G future, including the possibility that Apple may decide to purchase (seamlessly swistching) cell bandwidth from multiple carriers and "create" its own "best of breed" cell service. May or not be a good business idea, but if any company has the heft and buzz to do something like this, it's Apple.
The Storm's fun (ESPECIALLY once it's running on an upgraded software version than what mine came with) and I'm glad they finally launched their app store.
All good and well, but I still can't help but wonder how this would play out if Apple had let their AT&T contract expire and started selling iPhone on Verizon's network instead of waiting till 2010.
You're making an assumption that you don't know is true.
How can you talk about Apple letting its contract expire, when you have no idea what that contract is? You might as well talk about AT&T allowing the contract to expire, and why would they?
We have all read about the contract being for five years. Is that true? We don't know. Does it cover every phone Apple comes out with? We don't know?
Verizon has been making noise about writing widgets that will run on every phone they will sell in the future. Would Apple allow Verizon dictate what runs on their phone? Unlikely. But you never know how Verizon is using that for leverage over Apple in public statements now, for when the phone COULD run on their LTE network in sometime 2010 when it arrives.
That's assuming that Apple's contract with AT&T would allow it.
The Storm's fun (ESPECIALLY once it's running on an upgraded software version than what mine came with) and I'm glad they finally launched their app store.
It sure ain't fun typing on it! I tried for a while, but it isn't worth it. Like all the reviews have said about it. It's great at receiving e-mails, but sucks at sending them.