Don't you remember how sales suffered in the beginning?
I remember lines of people and sold out stores when it went on sale in the US, but that doesn't answer the question as to why Apple should make an extra thick iPhone that supports T-Mobile's WCDMA radios and CDMA/EV-DO chips or create another iPhone or two for these other US carriers when they don't they don't want to sell their phone unfettered to countries that are completely GSM/WCDMA with the exact radios that that are already present? To not acknowledge this is to not look at the Apple's goals here.
I remember lines of people and sold out stores when it went on sale in the US, but that doesn't answer the question as to why Apple should make an extra thick iPhone that supports T-Mobile's WCDMA radios and CDMA/EV-DO chips or create another iPhone or two for these other US carriers when they don't they don't want to sell their phone unfettered to countries that are completely GSM/WCDMA with the exact radios that that are already present? To not acknowledge this is to not look at the Apple's goals here.
Why? It hits the nail on the head. Apple weren't phone maker until recently. And gradual prudent changes are their nature. Why to throw 150 different phones on the market and have headaches of the launch (this is the first Apple's phone, remember it) with all of those phones on different networks. It's Microsoft's approach.
And there were no lines abroad. And it was Orange and neither SFR nor Bouygues, who performed that break-dance of business schemes to make iPhone attractive for customers.
And there were no lines abroad. And it was Orange and neither SFR nor Bouygues, who performed that break-dance of business schemes to make iPhone attractive for customers.
If there were no lines and the device was released to most countries over a year after the original iPhone was launched and well proven to be a consumer media phone contender worth copying, then why did not sell to all those GSM/WCDMA based carriers in all those carriers to get more sales.
If there were no lines and the device was released to most countries over a year after the original iPhone was launched and well proven to be a consumer media phone contender worth copying, then why did not sell to all those GSM/WCDMA based carriers in all those carriers to get more sales.
Because, as it appeared to be, this does not blow the doors of sales off that much and may even hurt the reputation.
Because, as it appeared to be, this does not blow the doors of sales off that much and may even hurt the reputation.
Half the sales come from outside the US and from carriers that don't have a dominate subscriber base. If they went for an open free for all in those countries the sales would be significantly higher.
You are saying that Apple SHOULD spend the money on R&D to make a CDMA iPhone for Sprint and Verizon in the US and a GSM/WCDMA iPhone for T-Mobile because the carrier lock in means absolutely nothing to Apple in the US , but selling their already made iPhone without any changes whatsoever to the HW doesn't make sense for all those GSM/WCDMA countries that don't have disparate networks with uncommon 3G radios. With all due respect, that doesn't make any sense. On top of that, the new network variances in each device increase how many they have to keep on hand while increasing customer confusion and , most of all, losing the one thing that will push the iPhone further than other media phones in the future, the carrier lock in.
This whole Apple should make a phone for Verizon doesn't make any sense. It's mostly an emotional response from people who prefer the cell quality of CDMA and the coverage of Verizon but don't want to look at the big picture.
PS: It's now available in 88 countries, they advertise the GSM/UMTS/HSDPA as being a "worldphone" standard and the 3 new countries coming soon each have a single carrier, exclusivity attached to them. Guinea-Bissau and Equatorial Guinea with Orange, and Qatar with Vodafone.
That will be 91 countries and after two years of use they are still pushing the single carrier model in every country where the laws allow it. If it's not apparent that Apple's business model relies on having access to the carrier with the lock-in then I I don't have the skills to make it anymore clearer that I already have. I can't even get an answer to my oft asked question about the continued lock-ins so I'll have to leave it at that as I really don't have anything else to say on this matter.
Until I can buy a new iphone from Apple that's unlocked so I can pick my own provider you won't see me buying a new phone. At&T's price gouging is unacceptable to me & should be to anyone who values getting a good cellular plan that's in line with other companies. T-Mobile offers a $135 rebate for those that need to port over another number, a college student discount plus unlimited minutes, 200 text & unlimited internet (edge only) for less than $50.00 -- Yes this figure is correct because that's what I pay & my iPhone preforms great.
Until I can buy a new iphone from Apple that's unlocked so I can pick my own provider you won't see me buying a new phone. At&T's price gouging is unacceptable to me & should be to anyone who values getting a good cellular plan that's in line with other companies. T-Mobile offers a $135 rebate for those that need to port over another number, a college student discount plus unlimited minutes, 200 text & unlimited internet (edge only) for less than $50.00 -- Yes this figure is correct because that's what I pay & my iPhone preforms great.
I understand not wanting to go to a particular carrier, but AT&T is right in line with the other major carrier in the US. Sprint and T-Mobile are having to lower prices and increase services to get consumers to stay. Sprint has lost millions of subs to AT&T and Verizon and T-Mobile only added 384k in the three month period between December 2008 and March 2009. Despite that gain in subs and their 4% increase in gross revenue, they lost over 4% in profits, but that isn't a big deal for T-Mobile USA as their backer will surely have longterm plans that supersede any short-term loses. They need to get their 3G network up and once 4G is up in 5 years they will be a good option for many
If T-Mobile suits your needs then use them, you can certainly get good rates with them right now, but AT&T is not making the iPhone rates unreasonably high.
I understand not wanting to go to a particular carrier, but AT&T is right in line with the other major carrier in the US. Sprint and T-Mobile are having to lower prices and increase services to get consumers to stay. Sprint has lost millions of subs to AT&T and Verizon and T-Mobile only added 384k in the three month period between December 2008 and March 2009. Despite that gain in subs and their 4% increase in gross revenue, they lost over 4% in profits, but that isn't a big deal for T-Mobile USA as their backer will surely have longterm plans that supersede any short-term loses. They need to get their 3G network up and once 4G is up in 5 years they will be a good option for many
If T-Mobile suits your needs then use them, you can certainly get good rates with them right now, but AT&T is not making the iPhone rates unreasonably high.
Half the sales come from outside the US and from carriers that don't have a dominate subscriber base. If they went for an open free for all in those countries the sales would be significantly higher.
This is where the theory doesn't get well along with practice. The sales don't appear to be significantly higher. Not higher enough to justify headaches.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
You are saying that Apple SHOULD spend the money on R&D to make a CDMA iPhone for Sprint and Verizon in the US and a GSM/WCDMA iPhone for T-Mobile because the carrier lock in means absolutely nothing to Apple in the US , but selling their already made iPhone without any changes whatsoever to the HW doesn't make sense for all those GSM/WCDMA countries that don't have disparate networks with uncommon 3G radios. With all due respect, that doesn't make any sense. On top of that, the new network variances in each device increase how many they have to keep on hand while increasing customer confusion and , most of all, losing the one thing that will push the iPhone further than other media phones in the future, the carrier lock in.
No. Upon 2 years of iPhone's triumph, I'd say it's up to carriers to make an effort and to launch small parcels of network, that iPhone is made for.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
This whole Apple should make a phone for Verizon doesn't make any sense. It's mostly an emotional response from people who prefer the cell quality of CDMA and the coverage of Verizon but don't want to look at the big picture.
Its just not worth the huge hit to get out of a contract and then have to pony up tons of money to get an iphone.
Apple is missing out on sales b/c of their exclusive arrangement. Maybe it's worth it.
The contract cancelation is only $175. You can buy an iPhone at $199 under contract, then say you lost/stole/broke it or whatever the next day and pay the cancellation fee. You will prorated for the amount used, not the full month. That is cheaper than buying it the in-contract price for current AT&T customers and surely cheaper than what it would cost you unsubsidized.
But that isn't your real issue. Regardless of how much you pay for it it still won't do 3G on T-Mobile or work on Sprint or Verizon, even if you got it unlocked.
Logically speaking, the exclusivity agreements have to profitable otherwise Apple wouldn't continue doing them and other, more established phone vendors wouldn't continue to do them for their new, higher-end devices. BB Storm is with Verizon, Palm Pre is with Sprint, HTC Android is with T-Mo and those are only a few of the recent model releases.
[QUOTE=AppleInsider;1417327]Apple executives said this week they believe the iPhone remains in its infancy and went on to -- somewhat uncharacteristically -- reveal a series of strategic measures they may employ in the near term to help grow the handset's share of the booming smartphone market.
I have had an AT&T account and used it Nationwide. Customer service was horrible. I paid the cancellation fee. Used Sprint and customer service was good. Coverage could have been better.
Went with Verizon had poor customer service and billing issues. But the coverage awesome.
Then I went with Cingular....I was in cell phone heaven. Finally trouble free billing and great customer service and coverage until AT&T bought Cingular. Gradually Cingular service and customer service became worse. A friend with Verizon offered for me to Hitch a ride on her account. Now I have someone who knows how to talk to these folks and watch the billing. I have great coverage and a so so phone.
I want an IPHONE but what good is it without good customer service... I would prefer dealing with APPLE, Not AT&T. APPLE has the best customer service ever. I suspect AT&T has improved coverage. I hope so. But they have the rudest customer service. AT7T needs to take lessons from APPLE on how to work with customers.
If Verizon hooks up with APPLE...BRAVO! I will not use another phone with WINDOWS on it. To buggy!
Comments
Don't you remember how sales suffered in the beginning?
I remember lines of people and sold out stores when it went on sale in the US, but that doesn't answer the question as to why Apple should make an extra thick iPhone that supports T-Mobile's WCDMA radios and CDMA/EV-DO chips or create another iPhone or two for these other US carriers when they don't they don't want to sell their phone unfettered to countries that are completely GSM/WCDMA with the exact radios that that are already present? To not acknowledge this is to not look at the Apple's goals here.
I remember lines of people and sold out stores when it went on sale in the US, but that doesn't answer the question as to why Apple should make an extra thick iPhone that supports T-Mobile's WCDMA radios and CDMA/EV-DO chips or create another iPhone or two for these other US carriers when they don't they don't want to sell their phone unfettered to countries that are completely GSM/WCDMA with the exact radios that that are already present? To not acknowledge this is to not look at the Apple's goals here.
Why? It hits the nail on the head. Apple weren't phone maker until recently. And gradual prudent changes are their nature. Why to throw 150 different phones on the market and have headaches of the launch (this is the first Apple's phone, remember it) with all of those phones on different networks. It's Microsoft's approach.
And there were no lines abroad. And it was Orange and neither SFR nor Bouygues, who performed that break-dance of business schemes to make iPhone attractive for customers.
And there were no lines abroad. And it was Orange and neither SFR nor Bouygues, who performed that break-dance of business schemes to make iPhone attractive for customers.
If there were no lines and the device was released to most countries over a year after the original iPhone was launched and well proven to be a consumer media phone contender worth copying, then why did not sell to all those GSM/WCDMA based carriers in all those carriers to get more sales.
If there were no lines and the device was released to most countries over a year after the original iPhone was launched and well proven to be a consumer media phone contender worth copying, then why did not sell to all those GSM/WCDMA based carriers in all those carriers to get more sales.
Because, as it appeared to be, this does not blow the doors of sales off that much and may even hurt the reputation.
Because, as it appeared to be, this does not blow the doors of sales off that much and may even hurt the reputation.
Half the sales come from outside the US and from carriers that don't have a dominate subscriber base. If they went for an open free for all in those countries the sales would be significantly higher.
You are saying that Apple SHOULD spend the money on R&D to make a CDMA iPhone for Sprint and Verizon in the US and a GSM/WCDMA iPhone for T-Mobile because the carrier lock in means absolutely nothing to Apple in the US , but selling their already made iPhone without any changes whatsoever to the HW doesn't make sense for all those GSM/WCDMA countries that don't have disparate networks with uncommon 3G radios. With all due respect, that doesn't make any sense. On top of that, the new network variances in each device increase how many they have to keep on hand while increasing customer confusion and , most of all, losing the one thing that will push the iPhone further than other media phones in the future, the carrier lock in.
This whole Apple should make a phone for Verizon doesn't make any sense. It's mostly an emotional response from people who prefer the cell quality of CDMA and the coverage of Verizon but don't want to look at the big picture.
That will be 91 countries and after two years of use they are still pushing the single carrier model in every country where the laws allow it. If it's not apparent that Apple's business model relies on having access to the carrier with the lock-in then I I don't have the skills to make it anymore clearer that I already have. I can't even get an answer to my oft asked question about the continued lock-ins so I'll have to leave it at that as I really don't have anything else to say on this matter.
Until I can buy a new iphone from Apple that's unlocked so I can pick my own provider you won't see me buying a new phone. At&T's price gouging is unacceptable to me & should be to anyone who values getting a good cellular plan that's in line with other companies.
I understand not wanting to go to a particular carrier, but AT&T is right in line with the other major carrier in the US. Sprint and T-Mobile are having to lower prices and increase services to get consumers to stay. Sprint has lost millions of subs to AT&T and Verizon and T-Mobile only added 384k in the three month period between December 2008 and March 2009. Despite that gain in subs and their 4% increase in gross revenue, they lost over 4% in profits, but that isn't a big deal for T-Mobile USA as their backer will surely have longterm plans that supersede any short-term loses. They need to get their 3G network up and once 4G is up in 5 years they will be a good option for many
If T-Mobile suits your needs then use them, you can certainly get good rates with them right now, but AT&T is not making the iPhone rates unreasonably high.
I understand not wanting to go to a particular carrier, but AT&T is right in line with the other major carrier in the US. Sprint and T-Mobile are having to lower prices and increase services to get consumers to stay. Sprint has lost millions of subs to AT&T and Verizon and T-Mobile only added 384k in the three month period between December 2008 and March 2009. Despite that gain in subs and their 4% increase in gross revenue, they lost over 4% in profits, but that isn't a big deal for T-Mobile USA as their backer will surely have longterm plans that supersede any short-term loses. They need to get their 3G network up and once 4G is up in 5 years they will be a good option for many
If T-Mobile suits your needs then use them, you can certainly get good rates with them right now, but AT&T is not making the iPhone rates unreasonably high.
Now that's longterm thinking aka Apples way!
Half the sales come from outside the US and from carriers that don't have a dominate subscriber base. If they went for an open free for all in those countries the sales would be significantly higher.
This is where the theory doesn't get well along with practice. The sales don't appear to be significantly higher. Not higher enough to justify headaches.
You are saying that Apple SHOULD spend the money on R&D to make a CDMA iPhone for Sprint and Verizon in the US and a GSM/WCDMA iPhone for T-Mobile because the carrier lock in means absolutely nothing to Apple in the US , but selling their already made iPhone without any changes whatsoever to the HW doesn't make sense for all those GSM/WCDMA countries that don't have disparate networks with uncommon 3G radios. With all due respect, that doesn't make any sense. On top of that, the new network variances in each device increase how many they have to keep on hand while increasing customer confusion and , most of all, losing the one thing that will push the iPhone further than other media phones in the future, the carrier lock in.
No. Upon 2 years of iPhone's triumph, I'd say it's up to carriers to make an effort and to launch small parcels of network, that iPhone is made for.
This whole Apple should make a phone for Verizon doesn't make any sense. It's mostly an emotional response from people who prefer the cell quality of CDMA and the coverage of Verizon but don't want to look at the big picture.
+1
Apple is missing out on sales b/c of their exclusive arrangement. Maybe it's worth it.
Its just not worth the huge hit to get out of a contract and then have to pony up tons of money to get an iphone.
Apple is missing out on sales b/c of their exclusive arrangement. Maybe it's worth it.
The contract cancelation is only $175. You can buy an iPhone at $199 under contract, then say you lost/stole/broke it or whatever the next day and pay the cancellation fee. You will prorated for the amount used, not the full month. That is cheaper than buying it the in-contract price for current AT&T customers and surely cheaper than what it would cost you unsubsidized.
But that isn't your real issue. Regardless of how much you pay for it it still won't do 3G on T-Mobile or work on Sprint or Verizon, even if you got it unlocked.
Logically speaking, the exclusivity agreements have to profitable otherwise Apple wouldn't continue doing them and other, more established phone vendors wouldn't continue to do them for their new, higher-end devices. BB Storm is with Verizon, Palm Pre is with Sprint, HTC Android is with T-Mo and those are only a few of the recent model releases.
I have had an AT&T account and used it Nationwide. Customer service was horrible. I paid the cancellation fee. Used Sprint and customer service was good. Coverage could have been better.
Went with Verizon had poor customer service and billing issues. But the coverage awesome.
Then I went with Cingular....I was in cell phone heaven. Finally trouble free billing and great customer service and coverage until AT&T bought Cingular. Gradually Cingular service and customer service became worse. A friend with Verizon offered for me to Hitch a ride on her account. Now I have someone who knows how to talk to these folks and watch the billing. I have great coverage and a so so phone.
I want an IPHONE but what good is it without good customer service... I would prefer dealing with APPLE, Not AT&T. APPLE has the best customer service ever. I suspect AT&T has improved coverage. I hope so. But they have the rudest customer service. AT7T needs to take lessons from APPLE on how to work with customers.
If Verizon hooks up with APPLE...BRAVO! I will not use another phone with WINDOWS on it. To buggy!