Fact is, the 2012 date changed. The fact USA Today reported the date change should tell you someone was crowing about a date change. Now, the question to ask would be if the iPad extended exclusivity in some way.
A Verizon iPhone will happen at some point given their LTE ambitions and spectrum holdings in the 700 mhz band as a result of Auction 73. The other question Steve Jobs has to ask is this:
Does he want people continue to be stuck on the world's WORST GSM carrier, or does he want to give the option of the world's best CDMA carrier? I am a GSM fanboy but it's an insult to GSM to compare AT&T's network with Euro-style GSM, the call quality and coverage over there is so much better than what AT&T does. Ironically the only network that comes close over here is Verizon.
I'd settle for T-Mobile though over AT&T, they're the only GSM carrier in this country that has any sort of quality control.
Please stop. I can't take this mountain of evidence for AT&T being the world's worst GSM carrier. Your proof is overwhelming.
When Apple developed the iPhone, the carriers were in control of everything. They controlled which functions on the phone would work. To buy music (or anything), you had to buy it from the carrier.
Nobody wanted the iPhone. Verizon turned it down because Apple wouldn't let Verizon cripple it. Verizon said publicly they didn't think it would sell anyway.
So Apple finally convinces AT&T to sell the phone - in exchange, AT&T will pay Apple a subsidy, but it wants an exclusive period of time (5 years). Apple had no choice - nobody else wanted the iPhone.
If it weren't for the exclusive deal with AT&T, there would be no iPhone available, and no Palm Pre, no Android, no real smartphones - only Blackberries.
George W. Bush had 2 terms. Short-term memories are what most of us Americans seem to be suffering from of late.
The only sense in which Apple can be accused of "screwing around" here is by allowing their phones to be locked to a particular carrier, but all phone manufacturers do that. Verizon built a network that is not compatible with standard phones. It is inconceivable that Apple would build a non-standard phone just to accommodate Verizon -- especially with Verizon in the process of building a standards-compliant 4G/LTE network.
RIGHT? Like that "non-standard" Cdma which is used in 50 countries. CDMA which was built by Qualcomm? That Radio Signal that goes back to world war 2? Have you also considered that GSM is going to be replaced by LTE/4g also? Data then Voip? That would make it also Deadend!
Please stop. I can't take this mountain of evidence for AT&T being the world's worst GSM carrier. Your proof is overwhelming.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ogmudbone
I though the iPad deal with AT&T binded them another 2 years? IMO AT&T pretty much has nothing with out the iPhone, I'm sure they are desperate to keep it exclusive.
Desperate is an understatement! At&t has one Phone.
Inconveivable? You do understand that over half of China uses the same standard as Verizon. So does Brazil. In other words, billions of people.
The reality is if Apple is locked in for five years, it made a bad deal. Of course, that is easy to say in hindsight. At the time, it might have been Apple's only option. Further, at the time, it wasn't aware of Google's plans.
Apple currently is locked out of over half the US cell phone market. A market that is free for Android to dominate. I hate AT&T. Further, I hate Verizon. Both companies really gouge their customers. Yet, plenty of people use those networks, and Apple is allowing the enemy to become entrenched.
Apple has already stolen all the customers that it is going to steal from Verizon. Many such people have employer discounts and so they are not going to switch over to AT&T. I for one prefer T-Mobile, it has better family plans, the call quality is good in my area, and customer service has been better then my dealings with AT&T and Verizon.
I am running a hacked iPhone on T-Mobile, but I am sure most regular people aren't going to take that chance and go throught the trouble of figuring out how to do that.
The problem Apple is going to have is one somebody else alluded to: once people beomce familar with a platform (e.g. Android), they tend to stick with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcarling
The only sense in which Apple can be accused of "screwing around" here is by allowing their phones to be locked to a particular carrier, but all phone manufacturers do that. Verizon built a network that is not compatible with standard phones. It is inconceivable that Apple would build a non-standard phone just to accommodate Verizon -- especially with Verizon in the process of building a standards-compliant 4G/LTE network.
Patel noted that the plaintiffs argued Apple exerts illegal monopoly power over applications on the iPhone, by requiring company approval of all App Store software, and the court deemed the argument valid to go forward.
So does that mean that the RIAA and MPAA are exerting illegal monopoly power over the music and movie industries when the assign ratings to music and movies?
And the federal government is exerting illegal monopoly power over my income by collecting income taxes - no wait, the feds aren't the only ones who do that so its not a monopoly.
Just this past weekend I was on a phone call with someone who needed an address, brought up the web browser on the phone and was able to help them out, all without dropping the call, ending the call, or using a separate device.
I presume they will just give up some $concessions$ and breach the contract. Another two years of AT&T exclusivity will simply ensure the rapid loss of market share for the iPhone.
Agreed. My guess is that Apple thought market penetration would be much slower when they signed the deal.
They need to kill the deal. I wonder what ATT would want for that to happen.
The hardware was superb. The network was horrible. Coverage and voice quality were no where near VZW's. After 2 weeks, I was back to my VZW phone. Got the Moto Droid. While it is not as attractive as the iPhone, it is a nice phone that has some/better features than the iPhone. I do prefer the iPhones GUI as it is more attractive.
This is my unbiased view and comparing apples to apples ( pun intended ).
In some places, Verizon is much better than ATT. In some places, the opposite. And in rural places, the local company is often best.
The coolest newest phones on most networks run Android. It is no surprise that the iPhone is faltering.
Now someone pass me the grits to dish up with my crow, because if I make a mistake or misattribute - I like to own to it - for integrity's sake if nothing else.[/B]
Good for you. Sometimes, being incorrect is a direct path towards knowledge, but only when you realize your error.
So does that mean that the RIAA and MPAA are exerting illegal monopoly power over the music and movie industries when the assign ratings to music and movies?
Neither the RIAA nor the MPAA are the exclusive vendor. Indeed, they are not vendors at all. That is the most obvious difference.
Why do people say market share doesn't matter? You can have the best product out there. It's useless if nobody is buying it. Just ask Palm about that. Of course, Apple is not Palm, but undoubtedly the iPhone's market share is very relevant to its success. Those quarter million apps are there because the iPhone is popular. If something else becomes more popular, you can be sure that the flow of thousands of apps which are submitted each month to Apple will slow to a trickle.
As for Apple not wanting to deal with Verizon...never say never. Clearly Apple would have loved to have started with Verizon in the beginning. Verizon passed, so we are where we are. But that does not mean Apple and Verizon can't or won't cooperate in the future.
Neither the RIAA nor the MPAA are the exclusive vendor. Indeed, they are not vendors at all. That is the most obvious difference.
I admit it was a pretty weak analogy - I was trying to come up with something where a single organization exercises a significant impact on an industry but where that impact is completely irrelevant to anything that could be called a monopoly.
You could argue that anything Apple does with any of their products is monopolistic since Apple is the only company producing Apple products - but that completely misses the point of a monopoly.
How anyone can use the word monopoly to describe 100,000 apps by 10,000 developers on three versions of one platform in a market space where there are numerous competing platforms is beyond me. Maybe if Apple devices made up 90% or more of all the phones then maybe you might have some ground to stand on.
Maybe a better example would be the government "monopoly" on auto motive safety equipment and fuel economy that is contrary to free market forces and increases the cost of my next vehicle.
There were reports of a 5 year exclusivity originally, there were also many reports in 2008 about negotiations to extend the deal until 2010 followed by many reports that the deal was extended until 2010. Then in 2009, there were again many reports that there were negotiations to extend the deal until 2011, unlike the prior year, those reports were never followed up with reports that the deal had been extended.
Is the original 5 year deal from the date that the iPhone was first shipped, or from the date that the contracts were signed? When I first read of extensions to the deal well before 2012, I assumed it was the latter.
Use European GSM networks that are far more robust and properly administered, and then get back to me. Look at the Consumer Reports and JD Power rankings... Apple sits at the top but AT&T at the bottom.
PS - If I really wanted to be a troll here, I'd say AT&T had a robust network and that Apple's design of the iPhone was causing the network problems, pinning the problems back on Jonathon Ive's and Steve Jobs's work. I'm not doing that because in Europe, the iPhone's RF works great.
Are those dropped calls really so bad? Statistics shows that at&t has 4.5% dropped calls against 2.5% on Verizon. It is 5 out 100 calls dropped on at&t. So worst scenario is 2 calls dropped a day. Is it really that hard to redial? Or all of you are involved in business there every lost minute costs thousands of $ ?
Yes at&t costs more but you get that iPhone for a $100 when it costs unlocked no less than $600 in other countries.
So is it really all that bad. Or you just reluctant to change your carrier?
That's a nationwide average. When I moved from Austin, Texas, to Irving, Texas, for a job, my connectivity on AT&T went very sour. For the six months I was using my iPhone 3GS in Irving, I dropped at least 90% of my calls. It's like deadzones are just floating randomly through my neighborhood. My iPhone 3GS became, in effect, unusable.
As my work pays for my phone, I had to have a workable solution, so I was forced to switch to Verizon. I bought the best Android handset available at the time -- the Droid.
I hate the Droid hardware. Sliders suck. It feels less than solid to my hand. I am neutral on the Android OS... version 2.1 is a nice upgrade over version 2.0, but the waiting period for my phone to be "blessed" with the update was completely unacceptable. The apps available for Android are inferior to the apps available to the iPhone, though they are rapidly improving.
But the network? I love the Verizon network. In five months, I haven't dropped a single call. It's the best cell phone network experience of my life.
I'd kill for an iPhone on Verizon. But I firmly intend to stick with Verizon and it's awesome network from now on, even if that means being stuck on Android phones.
How anyone can use the word monopoly to describe 100,000 apps by 10,000 developers on three versions of one platform in a market space where there are numerous competing platforms is beyond me. Maybe if Apple devices made up 90% or more of all the phones then maybe you might have some ground to stand on.
You are struggling to identify a relevant market. It is not an easy task.
The only market I see where Apple has significant power is the market for mobile phone apps. They are clearly the biggest seller of apps for mobile phones via the App Store. They can clearly push around the small devs.
Apple is saying that if devs want to sell apps in the App store, the apps need to be manufactured in a manner which will preclude sales elsewhere.
Whether this is OK under an antitrust analysis, I have no strong opinions.
Really, I mean really. I believe iPhone sales for the last quarter were up >130% over the same quarter the previous year. If I'm wrong feel free to correct my ignorance of your definition of faltering.
Comments
http://tcrn.ch/920qBS
Fact is, the 2012 date changed. The fact USA Today reported the date change should tell you someone was crowing about a date change. Now, the question to ask would be if the iPad extended exclusivity in some way.
A Verizon iPhone will happen at some point given their LTE ambitions and spectrum holdings in the 700 mhz band as a result of Auction 73. The other question Steve Jobs has to ask is this:
Does he want people continue to be stuck on the world's WORST GSM carrier, or does he want to give the option of the world's best CDMA carrier? I am a GSM fanboy but it's an insult to GSM to compare AT&T's network with Euro-style GSM, the call quality and coverage over there is so much better than what AT&T does. Ironically the only network that comes close over here is Verizon.
I'd settle for T-Mobile though over AT&T, they're the only GSM carrier in this country that has any sort of quality control.
Please stop. I can't take this mountain of evidence for AT&T being the world's worst GSM carrier. Your proof is overwhelming.
30 countries is not worldwide. Worldwide is over 200 countries.
No, all they did for China was remove one feature. They didn't make it incompatible with the rest of the world.
You started the presumptions about others, specifically that I use AT&T -- despite every post I make indicating that I'm in Europe.
Sorry, how about in 30+ countries that make up 95%+ of the world's population?
Better?
It's amazing how much people forget.
When Apple developed the iPhone, the carriers were in control of everything. They controlled which functions on the phone would work. To buy music (or anything), you had to buy it from the carrier.
Nobody wanted the iPhone. Verizon turned it down because Apple wouldn't let Verizon cripple it. Verizon said publicly they didn't think it would sell anyway.
So Apple finally convinces AT&T to sell the phone - in exchange, AT&T will pay Apple a subsidy, but it wants an exclusive period of time (5 years). Apple had no choice - nobody else wanted the iPhone.
If it weren't for the exclusive deal with AT&T, there would be no iPhone available, and no Palm Pre, no Android, no real smartphones - only Blackberries.
George W. Bush had 2 terms. Short-term memories are what most of us Americans seem to be suffering from of late.
The only sense in which Apple can be accused of "screwing around" here is by allowing their phones to be locked to a particular carrier, but all phone manufacturers do that. Verizon built a network that is not compatible with standard phones. It is inconceivable that Apple would build a non-standard phone just to accommodate Verizon -- especially with Verizon in the process of building a standards-compliant 4G/LTE network.
RIGHT? Like that "non-standard" Cdma which is used in 50 countries. CDMA which was built by Qualcomm? That Radio Signal that goes back to world war 2? Have you also considered that GSM is going to be replaced by LTE/4g also? Data then Voip? That would make it also Deadend!
Please stop. I can't take this mountain of evidence for AT&T being the world's worst GSM carrier. Your proof is overwhelming.
I though the iPad deal with AT&T binded them another 2 years? IMO AT&T pretty much has nothing with out the iPhone, I'm sure they are desperate to keep it exclusive.
Desperate is an understatement! At&t has one Phone.
The reality is if Apple is locked in for five years, it made a bad deal. Of course, that is easy to say in hindsight. At the time, it might have been Apple's only option. Further, at the time, it wasn't aware of Google's plans.
Apple currently is locked out of over half the US cell phone market. A market that is free for Android to dominate. I hate AT&T. Further, I hate Verizon. Both companies really gouge their customers. Yet, plenty of people use those networks, and Apple is allowing the enemy to become entrenched.
Apple has already stolen all the customers that it is going to steal from Verizon. Many such people have employer discounts and so they are not going to switch over to AT&T. I for one prefer T-Mobile, it has better family plans, the call quality is good in my area, and customer service has been better then my dealings with AT&T and Verizon.
I am running a hacked iPhone on T-Mobile, but I am sure most regular people aren't going to take that chance and go throught the trouble of figuring out how to do that.
The problem Apple is going to have is one somebody else alluded to: once people beomce familar with a platform (e.g. Android), they tend to stick with it.
The only sense in which Apple can be accused of "screwing around" here is by allowing their phones to be locked to a particular carrier, but all phone manufacturers do that. Verizon built a network that is not compatible with standard phones. It is inconceivable that Apple would build a non-standard phone just to accommodate Verizon -- especially with Verizon in the process of building a standards-compliant 4G/LTE network.
Patel noted that the plaintiffs argued Apple exerts illegal monopoly power over applications on the iPhone, by requiring company approval of all App Store software, and the court deemed the argument valid to go forward.
So does that mean that the RIAA and MPAA are exerting illegal monopoly power over the music and movie industries when the assign ratings to music and movies?
And the federal government is exerting illegal monopoly power over my income by collecting income taxes - no wait, the feds aren't the only ones who do that so its not a monopoly.
Just this past weekend I was on a phone call with someone who needed an address, brought up the web browser on the phone and was able to help them out, all without dropping the call, ending the call, or using a separate device.
Palm Pre Plus on Verizon.
That's impossible. I saw it on TV.
5 yr deal = tactical error by Apple.
I presume they will just give up some $concessions$ and breach the contract. Another two years of AT&T exclusivity will simply ensure the rapid loss of market share for the iPhone.
Agreed. My guess is that Apple thought market penetration would be much slower when they signed the deal.
They need to kill the deal. I wonder what ATT would want for that to happen.
The hardware was superb. The network was horrible. Coverage and voice quality were no where near VZW's. After 2 weeks, I was back to my VZW phone. Got the Moto Droid. While it is not as attractive as the iPhone, it is a nice phone that has some/better features than the iPhone. I do prefer the iPhones GUI as it is more attractive.
This is my unbiased view and comparing apples to apples ( pun intended ).
In some places, Verizon is much better than ATT. In some places, the opposite. And in rural places, the local company is often best.
The coolest newest phones on most networks run Android. It is no surprise that the iPhone is faltering.
Now someone pass me the grits to dish up with my crow, because if I make a mistake or misattribute - I like to own to it - for integrity's sake if nothing else.[/B]
Good for you. Sometimes, being incorrect is a direct path towards knowledge, but only when you realize your error.
Desperate is an understatement! At&t has one Phone.
ATT carries the Balckberry which outsells the iPhone by a wide margin.
And they are introducing several Android phones this summer.
The article says:
So does that mean that the RIAA and MPAA are exerting illegal monopoly power over the music and movie industries when the assign ratings to music and movies?
Neither the RIAA nor the MPAA are the exclusive vendor. Indeed, they are not vendors at all. That is the most obvious difference.
As for Apple not wanting to deal with Verizon...never say never. Clearly Apple would have loved to have started with Verizon in the beginning. Verizon passed, so we are where we are. But that does not mean Apple and Verizon can't or won't cooperate in the future.
Neither the RIAA nor the MPAA are the exclusive vendor. Indeed, they are not vendors at all. That is the most obvious difference.
I admit it was a pretty weak analogy - I was trying to come up with something where a single organization exercises a significant impact on an industry but where that impact is completely irrelevant to anything that could be called a monopoly.
You could argue that anything Apple does with any of their products is monopolistic since Apple is the only company producing Apple products - but that completely misses the point of a monopoly.
How anyone can use the word monopoly to describe 100,000 apps by 10,000 developers on three versions of one platform in a market space where there are numerous competing platforms is beyond me. Maybe if Apple devices made up 90% or more of all the phones then maybe you might have some ground to stand on.
Maybe a better example would be the government "monopoly" on auto motive safety equipment and fuel economy that is contrary to free market forces and increases the cost of my next vehicle.
Is the original 5 year deal from the date that the iPhone was first shipped, or from the date that the contracts were signed? When I first read of extensions to the deal well before 2012, I assumed it was the latter.
Use European GSM networks that are far more robust and properly administered, and then get back to me. Look at the Consumer Reports and JD Power rankings... Apple sits at the top but AT&T at the bottom.
PS - If I really wanted to be a troll here, I'd say AT&T had a robust network and that Apple's design of the iPhone was causing the network problems, pinning the problems back on Jonathon Ive's and Steve Jobs's work. I'm not doing that because in Europe, the iPhone's RF works great.
Are those dropped calls really so bad? Statistics shows that at&t has 4.5% dropped calls against 2.5% on Verizon. It is 5 out 100 calls dropped on at&t. So worst scenario is 2 calls dropped a day. Is it really that hard to redial? Or all of you are involved in business there every lost minute costs thousands of $ ?
Yes at&t costs more but you get that iPhone for a $100 when it costs unlocked no less than $600 in other countries.
So is it really all that bad. Or you just reluctant to change your carrier?
That's a nationwide average. When I moved from Austin, Texas, to Irving, Texas, for a job, my connectivity on AT&T went very sour. For the six months I was using my iPhone 3GS in Irving, I dropped at least 90% of my calls. It's like deadzones are just floating randomly through my neighborhood. My iPhone 3GS became, in effect, unusable.
As my work pays for my phone, I had to have a workable solution, so I was forced to switch to Verizon. I bought the best Android handset available at the time -- the Droid.
I hate the Droid hardware. Sliders suck. It feels less than solid to my hand. I am neutral on the Android OS... version 2.1 is a nice upgrade over version 2.0, but the waiting period for my phone to be "blessed" with the update was completely unacceptable. The apps available for Android are inferior to the apps available to the iPhone, though they are rapidly improving.
But the network? I love the Verizon network. In five months, I haven't dropped a single call. It's the best cell phone network experience of my life.
I'd kill for an iPhone on Verizon. But I firmly intend to stick with Verizon and it's awesome network from now on, even if that means being stuck on Android phones.
How anyone can use the word monopoly to describe 100,000 apps by 10,000 developers on three versions of one platform in a market space where there are numerous competing platforms is beyond me. Maybe if Apple devices made up 90% or more of all the phones then maybe you might have some ground to stand on.
You are struggling to identify a relevant market. It is not an easy task.
The only market I see where Apple has significant power is the market for mobile phone apps. They are clearly the biggest seller of apps for mobile phones via the App Store. They can clearly push around the small devs.
Apple is saying that if devs want to sell apps in the App store, the apps need to be manufactured in a manner which will preclude sales elsewhere.
Whether this is OK under an antitrust analysis, I have no strong opinions.
......
It is no surprise that the iPhone is faltering.
Really, I mean really. I believe iPhone sales for the last quarter were up >130% over the same quarter the previous year. If I'm wrong feel free to correct my ignorance of your definition of faltering.