Hasn't resulted in price going down for data...in fact, AT&T raised the price last year.
Hasn't resulted in price going down for text messages.
Hasn't resulted in price going down for voice.
People who purchased their iPhone 2 years ago, who have fulfilled their contract with AT&T, still have to pay the same charges, even though they have completed subsidizing the cost of their iPhone. And neither Apple nor AT&T will unlock the iPhone.
Hasn't resulted in arbitrary limitations on what you can do with your iPhone to maximize revenue for AT&T (no VOIP, no SlingBox video, but NFL and MLB is OK).
The only things that have been disrupted:
-ringtones are down to $1 (or is it $2, that you have to first buy the song, then the ringtone?) down from the even more outrageous amount AT&T is charging for them on other phones
AT&T made huge profits on the first iPhone, but didn't invest new hardware and still havn't upgradded.
Can you provide proof of this? Note: there is plenty of proof to counter your claims that AT&T “didn't invest new hardware and still havn't upgradded."
The line in the article about the government dictating subsidy rates and networks is crap. I don't want them to do either one of those, and they aren't planning to so far as i can tell.
I want them to stop telling me which carrier i must use regardless of technical capability, and i want them to stop locking the phones in an attempt to enforce that restriction. If i must sign a contract to get the subsidy rate, fine. You want 24 months of service payments from me, fine, but you don't need to lock the phone to do that.
That is probably a complex answer. When the original iPhone arrived the unlimited data plan was only $20 with the profit sharing setup, well below the norm which was $40-50 across the major carriers. This might have been Apple’s idea, but regardless, it’s something that has taken hold in the US for the more expensive, higher-end devices like the Storm and Pre. I’m certain this trend will continue.
If you remember back in January 2007 SJ said that the iPhone will automatically connect to your Wifi to help you save on your data plan. My guess is that when Apple and Cingular (AT&T now) original iPhone agreement did not include a data plan. It is most likely that Cingular was going to offer iPhone buyers the standard $15 data plan as an option but Apple or AT&T changed their minds and decided on the mandatory data plan, which worked well for them.
As for Verizon, they are still not very ?Apple friendly?, which means, they are not very willing to let any vendor control their own HW, control their own repairs (Apple Stores not through Verizon Stores), control their own call center for technical support or control their own App Store. Perhaps they would make concessions for Apple, but historically it doesn?t look good.
Plus, consider that Apple is locking horns in China for certain control for over 2 years now when they could have had the iPhone selling to the 58 Trillion (slight exaggeration) Chinese mobile phone users so I don?t think that the 50M potential Verizon users are going to make them relinquish their control of the iPhone. I think will Apple stick with carriers it can control and dominate.
I agree with you that Apple has to have 100% control over the iPhone, otherwise the bulk of the profits flow to the carriers. In turn the carriers would use too many restrictions and sell the features piece meal. Even then, I find the data plan at $30/mo onerous, plus charging extra for SMS. The voice plan is expensive, especially if the customer uses excess minutes. Overseas roaming is too hi.
AT&T has the best phone service in my area, its actually the only carrier that gets full reception at my house. Bare in mind I'm in a densely populated borough of NYC. Sprint and Verizon are both awful here (T-mobile is not bad).
Still I cant see what Apple has done as wrecking the cell industry.
AT&T and all of the other cellular providers imagine an Internet with a toll booth at every entry point, on every device, and at every node or junction. Consumers want an internet with unlimited everything, one monthly charge per customer (not per device), no mention of terms like: Contracts, Kilobytes, Roaming Charges, Cancellation Charges, etc.
What's really happening here is that Apple is giving the customers what they want but AT&T (and the other networks) are giving the customers the shaft (or to be nice, exactly what the customers don't want). The Cable companies like Comcast are certainly no better.
that is the truth of it. in pc's, mobile music and mobile phones (cell is technologically obsolete, someone please tell the media) apple has delivered a better user experience consumers choose instead of foisting a pile of 'features' on customers and then trying to convince them it's better ... and i'm going back to tail fins on grampa's caddy people.
"My last good idea was advertising," Lucifer as told to Stanley Moon.
Even then, I find the data plan at $30/mo onerous, plus charging extra for SMS. The voice plan is expensive, especially if the customer uses excess minutes. Overseas roaming is too hi.
I find the data plan fees fine, especially when you consider what they were 2 years ago for unlimited (sans the iPhone). SMS and MMS are a rip off so I don?t pay for them. The government should be looking into all the carriers raising the SMS prices over time. It seems fishy to me.
I think a good marketing move would be an automatic plan bump if you go over. So if you get 450 minutes and you use 600 you get the plan bump to 700 minutes instead of being charged for an additional 150 minutes at the per minute charge. Even if the plan was a little more for the potential accounting variances it would go a long way for giving the consumer peace of mind. You read those stories of people being charged outrageous fees for SMS because their kid didn?t have a plan or the they exceeded their plan. I?d pay a premium for that.
1st Apple will never make a CDMA phone. Most of the world is on GSM so if Sprint and Verizon is wanting the iPhone the onus is on them to change their back end structure to GSM. It's simple as that.
Also AT&T definitely is the bad guy here. I live in New Zealand and I did nothing once the iPhone 3.0 software came to get tethering and MMS (which I never cared about anyway) bar reboot my phone. If an entire country with a population of just over half of the population of Los Angeles can have all of this then why can't a network with 15 times more customers than the entire country's population not provide the same service?
The only thing AT&T has that I want is Visual Voicemail.
as soon as apple moves to another carrier, i'll drop at&t like a hot potato. I don't care if i'm in the middle of a contract with them or not, i'll gladly pay the $175 to get our of this lousy service. "fewest dropped calls"... "raising the bar".... What bullshit that is. If i could get an iphone on sprint or verizon, i would be unbelievably happy.
Part of the reason the original iPhone did not have 3G was because AT&T had not yet widely deployed its 3G network across the US. To spread 3G costs AT&T billions in new software and hardware. 2008 AT&T upgraded its 3G network by deploying 3.6Mbps HDSPA. 2009 AT&T is upgrading its network to 7.2 Mbps HDSPA, next year they plan to upgrade to 14 Mbps.
AT&T is also switching its 850MHz band to HDSPA that will allow better 3G reception. All of this while enduring one of the largest expansions in data usage of any carrier in the world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobborries
AT&T made huge profits on the first iPhone, but didn't invest new hardware and still havn't upgradded. They don't push the iPhone in their stores, with crappy service, and low bandwidth it seems they're trying to kill it. Why does Apple put up with this BS?
It is important to keep in mind that the initial 3G tech that ATT uses called WCDMA/UMTS has been designed for widespread use of data on a sustained basis. It is essentially Wide Band CDMA that uses asynch tech. Voice and data packets travel over the same 5 MHZ channel. Voice has time sensitive QoS, while data can lag but maintain integrity. The problem is where there are too many data users, there is not enough room for voice transmission and voice calls drop. Furthermore, the size of the WCDMA coverage per tower shrinks as usage increases... so users at the edge can experienced dropped calls often. Power consumption control is also difficult.
The Verizon networks uses a more "primitive" tech called CDMA 2000 or 1X and EVDO. Basically the narrow band tech uses 1.25 MHz channel primarily for voice and is called 1X... it can also transmit data. However, the bulk of the data is transmitted over a separate data only EVDO 1.25 MHz channel. So voice and data do not interfere. Then there are frequency used issues as well.
The CDMA2000 tech is essentially controlled by an American company called QCOM. The WCDMA was pushed by the EU in an effort to take control of the tech from QCOM and dilute their influence and royalties. Again, it was not data friendly in practice.. new variations called HSPDA, will improve data performance. It will take a lot of money. Not sure of ATT will kick in the money.
However, ATT was the best way for Apple to max out its investment in the iPhone, since VZ did not want to play ball by Apple's rules.
If an entire country with a population of just over half of the population of Los Angeles can have all of this then why can't a network with 15 times more customers than the entire country's population not provide the same service?.
That is your answer! Your network covers a much smaller area while servicing a lot less people. More people and more area is not friendly to carriers. I?m not saying that AT&T has not made mistakes but this type of growth would be an issue for any US carrier.
i wouldn't be so quick to say that. it is possible that the next iphone will be one that has the tech to open up to more networks, and LTE might be the new standard at that point. who knows.
we've all heard that ATT loses their exclusive contract in 2010 and nothing yet about getting an extension. so it is possible that Apple turned down that request and is planning to go open market. no more SIM locks, if the carrier can and wants to service the iphone, have at all. if they want to subsidize, great. but complain to them if you don't like their rules. you wanna buy it at the apple store, no activation, full price. no other game from Apple. thank you come again.
Analyst Craig Moffett of Bernstein Research is living in a time long since past when monopolies like the "Death Star" were allowed to do anything they pleased with virtually no regulation and get away with it. He fails to realize that "the customer is always right" and therefore he and his pals at AT&T just do not get it. Why shouldn't AT&T be hailed as a bad guy when they have offered MMS service for several years with virtually any phone capable but Apple makes a user friendly device and its patrons want to use the functionality of the device and AT&T can not get their act together until later this summer. Shame on them. AT&T's network is marginal at best, I live in a college town with decent coverage for EDGE but it is EDGE, in the more rural areas that surround were I live i see NO SERVICE quite often. I knew this going into buy the iPhone 3G and love the phone so I put up with the poor network, and also upgraded to the 3G S the day it became available. AT&T was suppose to roll out 3G by this fall when I got my first 3G but now they are blaming the poor economy and are now saying they do not know when they will be rolling out 3G in my area. The only thing "Craig Moffett" got correct in his analysis is that if AT&T does not get their S*^T together I will gladly pay a contract cancellation fee and leave for another carrier with a more robust network
Comments
Hasn't resulted in price going down for text messages.
Hasn't resulted in price going down for voice.
People who purchased their iPhone 2 years ago, who have fulfilled their contract with AT&T, still have to pay the same charges, even though they have completed subsidizing the cost of their iPhone. And neither Apple nor AT&T will unlock the iPhone.
Hasn't resulted in arbitrary limitations on what you can do with your iPhone to maximize revenue for AT&T (no VOIP, no SlingBox video, but NFL and MLB is OK).
The only things that have been disrupted:
-ringtones are down to $1 (or is it $2, that you have to first buy the song, then the ringtone?) down from the even more outrageous amount AT&T is charging for them on other phones
-same for music
-same for phone apps
AT&T made huge profits on the first iPhone, but didn't invest new hardware and still havn't upgradded.
Can you provide proof of this? Note: there is plenty of proof to counter your claims that AT&T “didn't invest new hardware and still havn't upgradded."
I want them to stop telling me which carrier i must use regardless of technical capability, and i want them to stop locking the phones in an attempt to enforce that restriction. If i must sign a contract to get the subsidy rate, fine. You want 24 months of service payments from me, fine, but you don't need to lock the phone to do that.
That is probably a complex answer. When the original iPhone arrived the unlimited data plan was only $20 with the profit sharing setup, well below the norm which was $40-50 across the major carriers. This might have been Apple’s idea, but regardless, it’s something that has taken hold in the US for the more expensive, higher-end devices like the Storm and Pre. I’m certain this trend will continue.
If you remember back in January 2007 SJ said that the iPhone will automatically connect to your Wifi to help you save on your data plan. My guess is that when Apple and Cingular (AT&T now) original iPhone agreement did not include a data plan. It is most likely that Cingular was going to offer iPhone buyers the standard $15 data plan as an option but Apple or AT&T changed their minds and decided on the mandatory data plan, which worked well for them.
If you remember back in January 2007 SJ said that the iPhone will automatically connect to your Wifi to help you save on your data plan.
Do you know at what minute he stated that? I Googled for it and came up short and I also don?t recall that statement, though it was 2.5 years ago.
You?ll also have to buy another iPhone.
As for Verizon, they are still not very ?Apple friendly?, which means, they are not very willing to let any vendor control their own HW, control their own repairs (Apple Stores not through Verizon Stores), control their own call center for technical support or control their own App Store. Perhaps they would make concessions for Apple, but historically it doesn?t look good.
Plus, consider that Apple is locking horns in China for certain control for over 2 years now when they could have had the iPhone selling to the 58 Trillion (slight exaggeration) Chinese mobile phone users so I don?t think that the 50M potential Verizon users are going to make them relinquish their control of the iPhone. I think will Apple stick with carriers it can control and dominate.
I agree with you that Apple has to have 100% control over the iPhone, otherwise the bulk of the profits flow to the carriers. In turn the carriers would use too many restrictions and sell the features piece meal. Even then, I find the data plan at $30/mo onerous, plus charging extra for SMS. The voice plan is expensive, especially if the customer uses excess minutes. Overseas roaming is too hi.
Apparently he was absent on "competition" day as well as being sick for "disruptive technology" day.
Still I cant see what Apple has done as wrecking the cell industry.
This author is so far off the deep end. Whoa!
AT&T and all of the other cellular providers imagine an Internet with a toll booth at every entry point, on every device, and at every node or junction. Consumers want an internet with unlimited everything, one monthly charge per customer (not per device), no mention of terms like: Contracts, Kilobytes, Roaming Charges, Cancellation Charges, etc.
What's really happening here is that Apple is giving the customers what they want but AT&T (and the other networks) are giving the customers the shaft (or to be nice, exactly what the customers don't want). The Cable companies like Comcast are certainly no better.
that is the truth of it. in pc's, mobile music and mobile phones (cell is technologically obsolete, someone please tell the media) apple has delivered a better user experience consumers choose instead of foisting a pile of 'features' on customers and then trying to convince them it's better ... and i'm going back to tail fins on grampa's caddy people.
"My last good idea was advertising," Lucifer as told to Stanley Moon.
Even then, I find the data plan at $30/mo onerous, plus charging extra for SMS. The voice plan is expensive, especially if the customer uses excess minutes. Overseas roaming is too hi.
I find the data plan fees fine, especially when you consider what they were 2 years ago for unlimited (sans the iPhone). SMS and MMS are a rip off so I don?t pay for them. The government should be looking into all the carriers raising the SMS prices over time. It seems fishy to me.
I think a good marketing move would be an automatic plan bump if you go over. So if you get 450 minutes and you use 600 you get the plan bump to 700 minutes instead of being charged for an additional 150 minutes at the per minute charge. Even if the plan was a little more for the potential accounting variances it would go a long way for giving the consumer peace of mind. You read those stories of people being charged outrageous fees for SMS because their kid didn?t have a plan or the they exceeded their plan. I?d pay a premium for that.
Also AT&T definitely is the bad guy here. I live in New Zealand and I did nothing once the iPhone 3.0 software came to get tethering and MMS (which I never cared about anyway) bar reboot my phone. If an entire country with a population of just over half of the population of Los Angeles can have all of this then why can't a network with 15 times more customers than the entire country's population not provide the same service?
The only thing AT&T has that I want is Visual Voicemail.
as soon as apple moves to another carrier, i'll drop at&t like a hot potato. I don't care if i'm in the middle of a contract with them or not, i'll gladly pay the $175 to get our of this lousy service. "fewest dropped calls"... "raising the bar".... What bullshit that is. If i could get an iphone on sprint or verizon, i would be unbelievably happy.
ditto.
AT&T is also switching its 850MHz band to HDSPA that will allow better 3G reception. All of this while enduring one of the largest expansions in data usage of any carrier in the world.
AT&T made huge profits on the first iPhone, but didn't invest new hardware and still havn't upgradded. They don't push the iPhone in their stores, with crappy service, and low bandwidth it seems they're trying to kill it. Why does Apple put up with this BS?
The Verizon networks uses a more "primitive" tech called CDMA 2000 or 1X and EVDO. Basically the narrow band tech uses 1.25 MHz channel primarily for voice and is called 1X... it can also transmit data. However, the bulk of the data is transmitted over a separate data only EVDO 1.25 MHz channel. So voice and data do not interfere. Then there are frequency used issues as well.
The CDMA2000 tech is essentially controlled by an American company called QCOM. The WCDMA was pushed by the EU in an effort to take control of the tech from QCOM and dilute their influence and royalties. Again, it was not data friendly in practice.. new variations called HSPDA, will improve data performance. It will take a lot of money. Not sure of ATT will kick in the money.
However, ATT was the best way for Apple to max out its investment in the iPhone, since VZ did not want to play ball by Apple's rules.
If Apple "wrecks" the cell phone industry like they "wrecked" the music industry it will only be because it too HAD IT COMING!
Count on Apple to disrupt the status quo!
If an entire country with a population of just over half of the population of Los Angeles can have all of this then why can't a network with 15 times more customers than the entire country's population not provide the same service?.
That is your answer! Your network covers a much smaller area while servicing a lot less people. More people and more area is not friendly to carriers. I?m not saying that AT&T has not made mistakes but this type of growth would be an issue for any US carrier.
Prepare for disappointment.
i wouldn't be so quick to say that. it is possible that the next iphone will be one that has the tech to open up to more networks, and LTE might be the new standard at that point. who knows.
we've all heard that ATT loses their exclusive contract in 2010 and nothing yet about getting an extension. so it is possible that Apple turned down that request and is planning to go open market. no more SIM locks, if the carrier can and wants to service the iphone, have at all. if they want to subsidize, great. but complain to them if you don't like their rules. you wanna buy it at the apple store, no activation, full price. no other game from Apple. thank you come again.