Some folks want a certain phone, then choose their service. Others look for the best service, then pick the phone. Pick a city or location in the US at random, and odds are Verizon will have the best service. Yes, maybe AT&T is equal or better than Verizon where you live, but if you travel frequently, odds are Verizon is the way to go. AT&T will improve, but so will Verizon. AT&T should really be looking at buying T-Mobile or some other GSM provider in the US.
The Palm Pre, so far, isn't looking much like a real threat. The Android platform was supposed to unseat iPhone. Now everyone is saying Droid and Android 2.0 is going to do it, because it has more gizmos.
I'm not so willing to write them off. If anyone can present a serious threat to the iPhone it's going to be Android. The Pre is just not happening, while WinMo and Symbian are clearly too far behind to catch up, and RIM, well as a Canuck I'd love to see better of them, but I just don't see the growth vectors in the consumer market once the iPhone goes multi-carrier.
Google, on the other hand, has a pretty good platform technically, serious development cash, and the desire to get this to work. On the downside, like MS, Google doesn't really need Android. If it fails, they don't care.
The same is not true for Apple, where the iPod was clearly starting to plateau and they needed to have its successor ready. The iPhone had to succeed, and for that reason, as much as any other, it did.
Whatever happens, it looks increasingly like it's iPhone vs. Android. We'll know further after the Christmas season numbers come in.
I'm not so willing to write them off. If anyone can present a serious threat to the iPhone it's going to be Android. The Pre is just not happening, while WinMo and Symbian are clearly too far behind to catch up, and RIM, well as a Canuck I'd love to see better of them, but I just don't see the growth vectors in the consumer market once the iPhone goes multi-carrier.
Google, on the other hand, has a pretty good platform technically, serious development cash, and the desire to get this to work. On the downside, like MS, Google doesn't really need Android. If it fails, they don't care.
The same is not true for Apple, where the iPod was clearly starting to plateau and they needed to have its successor ready. The iPhone had to succeed, and for that reason, as much as any other, it did.
Whatever happens, it looks increasingly like it's iPhone vs. Android. We'll know further after the Christmas season numbers come in.
Maury
There is an issue with Android that is going to sabotage it: Google doesn't control the hardware platform and thus the overall reliability and experience. You can get away with that in the PC world, but cell phones? I think it's a fatal flaw. I'd love to be wrong, but cell phones are among those classes of devices where fault tolerance from users is extremely thin.
Some folks want a certain phone, then choose their service. Others look for the best service, then pick the phone. Pick a city or location in the US at random, and odds are Verizon will have the best service. Yes, maybe AT&T is equal or better than Verizon where you live, but if you travel frequently, odds are Verizon is the way to go. AT&T will improve, but so will Verizon. AT&T should really be looking at buying T-Mobile or some other GSM provider in the US.
Unless you want to travel outside the US....then your Verizon Phone is just a brick.
If AT&T only sold 3.2 million iPhones out of 7.4 million total, this means that International sales are now higher than US sales.
Another first and a sign that going with Verizon would have been a mistake.
Apple increased channel inventory by 500K iphones for the quarter and we don't know how many iphones were stuffed to the Chinese carrier for late October launch.
It does NOT cost a lot of money to make a CDMA iphone. The chipset manufacturers will provide Apple with all the necessary drivers. That's how the whole world works.
Nobody prevents you from buying a Verizon blackberry --- which are true world phones with both CDMA and GSM chipsets.
Actually yes, there is something that would prevent me from buying a Verizon *ANYTHING*. Crippled firmware.
Most if not all Verizon phones are crippled so that to do anything with them you have to go through Verizon's servers at nickel and dime fees. Take photos on your phone? Sorry, can't get them off your phone unless you e-mail them to yourself at x cents a pop.
No, as long as Verizon insists on crippling their devices relative to their competitors, I will never be a customer of theirs, even if they had the best coverage on the planet.
Why can't we just do like RIM and have the iPhone open to all carriers? Exclusivity causes work-arounds. Besides, t-mobile, for example, is how the iPhone works in Europe. There is no reason why anyone can't have an iPhone, regardless of their carrier. (Unless they're on Medicare).
Actually yes, there is something that would prevent me from buying a Verizon *ANYTHING*. Crippled firmware.
Most if not all Verizon phones are crippled so that to do anything with them you have to go through Verizon's servers at nickel and dime fees. Take photos on your phone? Sorry, can't get them off your phone unless you e-mail them to yourself at x cents a pop.
No, as long as Verizon insists on crippling their devices relative to their competitors, I will never be a customer of theirs, even if they had the best coverage on the planet.
Verizon doesn't cripple their smartphones.
And in many objective areas, Apple cripples the iphone a lot more than Verizon. You can get Google Voice on Verizon blackberries, you can't with the iphone.
My last two toasters have had LCD screens, an array of buttons, and serious feature lists. I bought the first one. My wife surprised me with the second one. I wish she hadn't. They've both been less useful than one with a simple knob to turn. You, sir, win the "Excellence in Metaphory" award of the day.
As I (not so gracefully) age... I too find the simple pleasers in life are far too elusive.... I haven't had a UNIFORM golden brown not-too-crunchy not-too-mushy slice of toast since 1979.
I wonder if many of the newbees jumped from Verizon like myself? Hence their newly developed Apple/At&T commercials.
Probably far less than those (like me) who have recently 'jumped' from AT&T to Verizon.
I certainly had my issues with my iPhone, but it was really AT&T's abysmal reception/service (in my area) that proved to be the final straw.
I still have one iPhone 3GS account active, but I don't even bother using my iPhone now that I've experienced what reliable (crystal clear) phone service really is with Verizon/HTC Imagio.
Any chance that Verizon had to land the iPhone next year when AT&T's exclusivity runs out evaporated the moment they launched their current anti-iPhone smear campaign. It's pretty clear that Steve holds grudges, and though Apple trashes Microsoft in essentially all their ads they have nonetheless proven quite sensitive to criticism.
At this point I think it's fair to say Verizon will be the last provider to get the iPhone in the US, partly for technology reasons (why make a CDMA iPhone) and partly due to the fact that Steve now hates their guts.
Actually yes, there is something that would prevent me from buying a Verizon *ANYTHING*. Crippled firmware.
Most if not all Verizon phones are crippled so that to do anything with them you have to go through Verizon's servers at nickel and dime fees. Take photos on your phone? Sorry, can't get them off your phone unless you e-mail them to yourself at x cents a pop.
No, as long as Verizon insists on crippling their devices relative to their competitors, I will never be a customer of theirs, even if they had the best coverage on the planet.
That is not true. i have a Verizon BlackBerry Tour 9630 and I can send emails w/pics without being charged. it is if you send any MMS messages you will be charged for, but that is standard for ALL US carriers.
Yea but lets not paint Verizon to be this hip technology savvy corporation with its arms stretched open welcoming all the new and exciting cellular phone technologies and only asking 'hey bring more if you got it we can't get enough of this great stuff'.
Remind me again HOW many years did it take until Verizon FINALLY (perhaps somewhat begrudgingly) offered its peasants I mean subscribers a phone with BlueTooth functionality? Was it after the turn of the Millennium? I somehow think it was but I'm willing to concede if it was in the 90s it doesn't matter all that much since even when they were forced kicking AND screaming to the BT party weren't they SUED by their peasants sorry I did it again, subscribers for tearing down nearly ALL of the bluetooth functionality?
I'm not confused right? It was in fact Verizon pulling these lame stunts..
Isn't it TRUE that Verizon only started wearing this 'WE LOVE ALL PHONE TECHNOLOGIES' halloween mask AFTER the iPhone was rolled out and they started to feel the pains of not making the deal with Apple in the first place?
The Palm Pre, so far, isn't looking much like a real threat. The Android platform was supposed to unseat iPhone. Now everyone is saying Droid and Android 2.0 is going to do it, because it has more gizmos.
The people making these predictions don't get it. More gizmos != more productivity.
I'm sure a toaster with an LCD screen progress meter and 30 customization buttons would look like a killer product, but in the end, people just want to make toast. If you want to sell a premium toaster, sell one that makes the best toast for the least hassle.
It seems this message is lost on device manufacturers, who just want to make their checkboxed feature list longer than Apple's.
Actually, many of us simply want a full-featured smartphone and dependable phone service on a reliable network.
No dropped calls, no static, no missing handset features that other manufacturers have had for years, and no lack of insurance options for our expensive handsets et al.
For me, I've found that with Verizon's network/HTC Imagio combination, as it provides everything I desire in advanced smartphone support e.g. choice of internet browsers (Opera, Skyfire w/ FLASH support), complete MS Word/Excel/Outlook integration, user changeable battery, advanced media player features w/incredible codec support (Kinoma Play), LIVE Playback (V Cast TV) No Tyrannical Ecosytem... just drag n' drop = done!, and a very reasonable insurance fee in case the worst does happen.
In my experience, the iPhone is a fairly solid 'media hub' with lots of Apps (can't forget those Apps ), but it seriously disappoints at its core task... that of being a reliable phone.
I wonder if many of the newbees jumped from Verizon like myself? Hence their newly developed Apple/At&T commercials.
We'll know Monday when Verizon reports; I expect to see their churn go up a bit more (possibly equaling AT&T's) and their new subscribers to be less than AT&T's 2m. During this past year, their churn has already been around 30% higher than it was in 2Q07 (pre-iPhone).
My theory right now is that Verizon is now taking the AT&T/iPhone threat more seriously than ever, as the 3GS (and $99 3G) has increased defections. The passive 2-for-1 BB worked for awhile but grew stale (no more takers). And the Storm and Storm 2 was and are useless in the battle. So Verizon is going even more strongly on the offensive.
Apple increased channel inventory by 500K iphones for the quarter and we don't know how many iphones were stuffed to the Chinese carrier for late October launch.
Like the way you use the word "stuffed" as you continue to show up here to poo-poo iPhone and AT&T. Cook clearly stated that channel inventory was much lower than Apple wanted so there was no stuffing going on to supply over 80 countries with 3G and 64 countries with 3GS, many of which are still undersupplied.
AT&T's network is crap and they lie every time they open their mouths. They have utterly failed to provide the robust network they undoubtedly promised Apple in order to get their exclusive contract. It's definitely time to open the iPhone to the rest of the market.
Comments
The Palm Pre, so far, isn't looking much like a real threat. The Android platform was supposed to unseat iPhone. Now everyone is saying Droid and Android 2.0 is going to do it, because it has more gizmos.
I'm not so willing to write them off. If anyone can present a serious threat to the iPhone it's going to be Android. The Pre is just not happening, while WinMo and Symbian are clearly too far behind to catch up, and RIM, well as a Canuck I'd love to see better of them, but I just don't see the growth vectors in the consumer market once the iPhone goes multi-carrier.
Google, on the other hand, has a pretty good platform technically, serious development cash, and the desire to get this to work. On the downside, like MS, Google doesn't really need Android. If it fails, they don't care.
The same is not true for Apple, where the iPod was clearly starting to plateau and they needed to have its successor ready. The iPhone had to succeed, and for that reason, as much as any other, it did.
Whatever happens, it looks increasingly like it's iPhone vs. Android. We'll know further after the Christmas season numbers come in.
Maury
AT&T should really be looking at buying T-Mobile or some other GSM provider in the US.
That's not a bad idea. They could sell off some of the redundant bandwidth.
Merging the two networks though? Yikes!
Maury
I'm not so willing to write them off. If anyone can present a serious threat to the iPhone it's going to be Android. The Pre is just not happening, while WinMo and Symbian are clearly too far behind to catch up, and RIM, well as a Canuck I'd love to see better of them, but I just don't see the growth vectors in the consumer market once the iPhone goes multi-carrier.
Google, on the other hand, has a pretty good platform technically, serious development cash, and the desire to get this to work. On the downside, like MS, Google doesn't really need Android. If it fails, they don't care.
The same is not true for Apple, where the iPod was clearly starting to plateau and they needed to have its successor ready. The iPhone had to succeed, and for that reason, as much as any other, it did.
Whatever happens, it looks increasingly like it's iPhone vs. Android. We'll know further after the Christmas season numbers come in.
Maury
There is an issue with Android that is going to sabotage it: Google doesn't control the hardware platform and thus the overall reliability and experience. You can get away with that in the PC world, but cell phones? I think it's a fatal flaw. I'd love to be wrong, but cell phones are among those classes of devices where fault tolerance from users is extremely thin.
Some folks want a certain phone, then choose their service. Others look for the best service, then pick the phone. Pick a city or location in the US at random, and odds are Verizon will have the best service. Yes, maybe AT&T is equal or better than Verizon where you live, but if you travel frequently, odds are Verizon is the way to go. AT&T will improve, but so will Verizon. AT&T should really be looking at buying T-Mobile or some other GSM provider in the US.
Unless you want to travel outside the US....then your Verizon Phone is just a brick.
If AT&T only sold 3.2 million iPhones out of 7.4 million total, this means that International sales are now higher than US sales.
Another first and a sign that going with Verizon would have been a mistake.
Apple increased channel inventory by 500K iphones for the quarter and we don't know how many iphones were stuffed to the Chinese carrier for late October launch.
It does NOT cost a lot of money to make a CDMA iphone. The chipset manufacturers will provide Apple with all the necessary drivers. That's how the whole world works.
Unless you want to travel outside the US....then your Verizon Phone is just a brick.
Nobody prevents you from buying a Verizon blackberry --- which are true world phones with both CDMA and GSM chipsets.
Nobody prevents you from buying a Verizon blackberry --- which are true world phones with both CDMA and GSM chipsets.
Actually yes, there is something that would prevent me from buying a Verizon *ANYTHING*. Crippled firmware.
Most if not all Verizon phones are crippled so that to do anything with them you have to go through Verizon's servers at nickel and dime fees. Take photos on your phone? Sorry, can't get them off your phone unless you e-mail them to yourself at x cents a pop.
No, as long as Verizon insists on crippling their devices relative to their competitors, I will never be a customer of theirs, even if they had the best coverage on the planet.
Nobody prevents you from buying a Verizon blackberry --- which are true world phones with both CDMA and GSM chipsets.
http://forums.appleinsider.com/image...ies/1devil.gif
Why can't we just do like RIM and have the iPhone open to all carriers? Exclusivity causes work-arounds. Besides, t-mobile, for example, is how the iPhone works in Europe. There is no reason why anyone can't have an iPhone, regardless of their carrier. (Unless they're on Medicare).
http://forums.appleinsider.com/image.../1rolleyes.gif
These animations are completely stupid!http://forums.appleinsider.com/image...lies/irked.gif
Actually yes, there is something that would prevent me from buying a Verizon *ANYTHING*. Crippled firmware.
Most if not all Verizon phones are crippled so that to do anything with them you have to go through Verizon's servers at nickel and dime fees. Take photos on your phone? Sorry, can't get them off your phone unless you e-mail them to yourself at x cents a pop.
No, as long as Verizon insists on crippling their devices relative to their competitors, I will never be a customer of theirs, even if they had the best coverage on the planet.
Verizon doesn't cripple their smartphones.
And in many objective areas, Apple cripples the iphone a lot more than Verizon. You can get Google Voice on Verizon blackberries, you can't with the iphone.
My last two toasters have had LCD screens, an array of buttons, and serious feature lists. I bought the first one. My wife surprised me with the second one. I wish she hadn't. They've both been less useful than one with a simple knob to turn. You, sir, win the "Excellence in Metaphory" award of the day.
As I (not so gracefully) age... I too find the simple pleasers in life are far too elusive.... I haven't had a UNIFORM golden brown not-too-crunchy not-too-mushy slice of toast since 1979.
I wonder if many of the newbees jumped from Verizon like myself? Hence their newly developed Apple/At&T commercials.
Probably far less than those (like me) who have recently 'jumped' from AT&T to Verizon.
I certainly had my issues with my iPhone, but it was really AT&T's abysmal reception/service (in my area) that proved to be the final straw.
I still have one iPhone 3GS account active, but I don't even bother using my iPhone now that I've experienced what reliable (crystal clear) phone service really is with Verizon/HTC Imagio.
At this point I think it's fair to say Verizon will be the last provider to get the iPhone in the US, partly for technology reasons (why make a CDMA iPhone) and partly due to the fact that Steve now hates their guts.
Actually yes, there is something that would prevent me from buying a Verizon *ANYTHING*. Crippled firmware.
Most if not all Verizon phones are crippled so that to do anything with them you have to go through Verizon's servers at nickel and dime fees. Take photos on your phone? Sorry, can't get them off your phone unless you e-mail them to yourself at x cents a pop.
No, as long as Verizon insists on crippling their devices relative to their competitors, I will never be a customer of theirs, even if they had the best coverage on the planet.
That is not true. i have a Verizon BlackBerry Tour 9630 and I can send emails w/pics without being charged. it is if you send any MMS messages you will be charged for, but that is standard for ALL US carriers.
Verizon doesn't cripple their smartphones.
Yea but lets not paint Verizon to be this hip technology savvy corporation with its arms stretched open welcoming all the new and exciting cellular phone technologies and only asking 'hey bring more if you got it we can't get enough of this great stuff'.
Remind me again HOW many years did it take until Verizon FINALLY (perhaps somewhat begrudgingly) offered its peasants I mean subscribers a phone with BlueTooth functionality? Was it after the turn of the Millennium? I somehow think it was but I'm willing to concede if it was in the 90s it doesn't matter all that much since even when they were forced kicking AND screaming to the BT party weren't they SUED by their peasants sorry I did it again, subscribers for tearing down nearly ALL of the bluetooth functionality?
I'm not confused right? It was in fact Verizon pulling these lame stunts..
Isn't it TRUE that Verizon only started wearing this 'WE LOVE ALL PHONE TECHNOLOGIES' halloween mask AFTER the iPhone was rolled out and they started to feel the pains of not making the deal with Apple in the first place?
The Palm Pre, so far, isn't looking much like a real threat. The Android platform was supposed to unseat iPhone. Now everyone is saying Droid and Android 2.0 is going to do it, because it has more gizmos.
The people making these predictions don't get it. More gizmos != more productivity.
I'm sure a toaster with an LCD screen progress meter and 30 customization buttons would look like a killer product, but in the end, people just want to make toast. If you want to sell a premium toaster, sell one that makes the best toast for the least hassle.
It seems this message is lost on device manufacturers, who just want to make their checkboxed feature list longer than Apple's.
Actually, many of us simply want a full-featured smartphone and dependable phone service on a reliable network.
No dropped calls, no static, no missing handset features that other manufacturers have had for years, and no lack of insurance options for our expensive handsets et al.
For me, I've found that with Verizon's network/HTC Imagio combination, as it provides everything I desire in advanced smartphone support e.g. choice of internet browsers (Opera, Skyfire w/ FLASH support), complete MS Word/Excel/Outlook integration, user changeable battery, advanced media player features w/incredible codec support (Kinoma Play), LIVE Playback (V Cast TV) No Tyrannical Ecosytem... just drag n' drop = done!, and a very reasonable insurance fee in case the worst does happen.
In my experience, the iPhone is a fairly solid 'media hub' with lots of Apps (can't forget those Apps
AT&T activates record 3.2M iPhones, says exclusivity could end
The sooner the better.
Although Verison doesn't seem to want the iPhone with their attack ads coming out.
That leaves..nobody really. Not any other carrier that has a fighting chance in hell competing with AT&T
So we are screwed. So no cheaper iPhone for the masses.
It's a VOIP iPod Touch then.
I wonder if many of the newbees jumped from Verizon like myself? Hence their newly developed Apple/At&T commercials.
We'll know Monday when Verizon reports; I expect to see their churn go up a bit more (possibly equaling AT&T's) and their new subscribers to be less than AT&T's 2m. During this past year, their churn has already been around 30% higher than it was in 2Q07 (pre-iPhone).
My theory right now is that Verizon is now taking the AT&T/iPhone threat more seriously than ever, as the 3GS (and $99 3G) has increased defections. The passive 2-for-1 BB worked for awhile but grew stale (no more takers). And the Storm and Storm 2 was and are useless in the battle. So Verizon is going even more strongly on the offensive.
Apple increased channel inventory by 500K iphones for the quarter and we don't know how many iphones were stuffed to the Chinese carrier for late October launch.
Like the way you use the word "stuffed" as you continue to show up here to poo-poo iPhone and AT&T. Cook clearly stated that channel inventory was much lower than Apple wanted so there was no stuffing going on to supply over 80 countries with 3G and 64 countries with 3GS, many of which are still undersupplied.