Elsewhere, like Australia.. Apple is on all carriers.
I don't see much use in the mobile phone market of providing space for competitors to gain traction. America is a bit whack, crappy CDMA / EVDO is the biggest provider but Apple could not have gone global within one year had they gone that way.
I hope it goes all carriers in USA quick cause you mob have been suffering, even in phone pricing. $199 for an iPhone 4, woah. Try $0 on for size, that's what we pay in oz if we want.
I hope it goes all carriers in USA quick cause you mob have been suffering, even in phone pricing. $199 for an iPhone 4, woah. Try $0 on for size, that's what we pay in oz if we want.
Wow! That's cheaper than anything offered on Android phones around here! About the cheapest you can get a high end Android is half-price: Pay for one, and then buy another data plan and we'll "give" you a second phone for "free".
I sure hope that ATT will offer me a free iPhone next spring, when my contract expires! Or even better, a selection of free iPhones and hot Android phones. So far, ATT doesn't carry any good Android phones, and the one-size-fits-all iPhone is very limited in capabilities.
Elsewhere, like Australia.. Apple is on all carriers.
I don't see much use in the mobile phone market of providing space for competitors to gain traction. America is a bit whack, crappy CDMA / EVDO is the biggest provider but Apple could not have gone global within one year had they gone that way.
I hope it goes all carriers in USA quick cause you mob have been suffering, even in phone pricing. $199 for an iPhone 4, woah. Try $0 on for size, that's what we pay in oz if we want.
I know, what is this grip of retrograde exploitation that obtains here in the citadel of capitalism? Or does that answer the question? Maybe it is narcissistic advertising for the last 50 years what done it.
I dunno. Would adding Sprint and T-Mobile really add that much?What % do Verizon and ATT command?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
About 186 million in the US.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ
I meant from Apple's p.o.v. Seems to me that if they are on the two largest carriers who control ~2/3 of the market, it's probably not a huge advantage to them. That is, unless I totally misunderstand Apple's business model; which I will admit could easily be the case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacVicta
Yes it would add much in terms of competition over iPhone pricing plans. Sprint and T-Mobile are the only major US carriers who offer anything interesting in that aspect.
1. Apple is likely to make nice with Verizon for awhile despite the disclosure of no exclusivity. (And to keep ATT mollified, as with this we're all equal and can get along "in perfect harmony" ad.) Verizon seems to have the biggest head start on the most scalable 4G system being deployed and the resources to roll it out at a decent speed. So a good working relationship is at least somewhat strategic for Apple - and they'll be prodding Verizon to make sure the network and phones work well together even if it requires tweaks by Verizon.
That won't be hard for awhile either, as it's going to take time to ramp up the production of enough phones to add to this new channel, so again no rush to add the "small two."
2. Apple's long-term business model is to sell as many damn gadgets and geegaws and computers as it can as long as it can maintain its margins and premium quality/hi buzz rep. Adding the other third of the cell market certainly seems to fit within that mission statement going forward.
3. Another part of its business plan is to feed a growing ecosystem by being able to attract and keep the best mobile developers committed to its platform as their primary bread and butter. Marketshare is certainly a relevant metric in this pursuit. (As is revenue, and most app vendors are already finding that iPhone users are much more active apps buyers than Android users, and having to incorporate ads to get a revenue stream is less appealing to both users and forces compromises by developers. I'm hearing stories of adds in ongoing games and other such weirdness or having to endure ads to get to your apps.
4. Whatever Apple's POV, my business plan is to get the best value equation for my bit delivery and sending that I can, and having four companies competing for my iPhone business should help me achieve my plan via competition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbryanh
Advertisement is excrement. All of it.
There's been some interesting back and forth on this - not the quality of your post which is unidimensional and half-thot through at best - but some thotful reactions.
Here in the same general format is a statement that is much less arguable, though:
Advertisement is meant to and designed to and produced to manipulate your perceptions and/or behavior. All of it. Whether you were looking to have such done to you or not.
I notice they avoided using data and voice simultaneously...
Oh I'm such a b**ch
I kid VeriZon, I kid cos I...Well cos it's what I do. I honestly don't care about your inferior Network features, I'm in the UK rocking the Hutchison 3G network.
I'm sure Verizon would reply "Well, there's always Wifi".
Elsewhere, like Australia.. Apple is on all carriers.
I don't see much use in the mobile phone market of providing space for competitors to gain traction. America is a bit whack, crappy CDMA / EVDO is the biggest provider but Apple could not have gone global within one year had they gone that way.
I hope it goes all carriers in USA quick cause you mob have been suffering, even in phone pricing. $199 for an iPhone 4, woah. Try $0 on for size, that's what we pay in oz if we want.
Good for you.
So for those that only use about half a GB you can get a 1GB plan in Australia for $1656 ($69/month) over 2 years.
Or you can get a 4 GB plan for $2400/2years.
In effect, you are paying ($2400 less $199 less $1656) over $500 for the iPhone if you are the average data user.
And note, in America, for $199 iPhone you can virtually call over 300 million more people for free and get unlimited data. Plus a lot of other things you may want or not.
I notice they avoided using data and voice simultaneously...
Oh I'm such a b**ch
I kid VeriZon, I kid cos I...Well cos it's what I do. I honestly don't care about your inferior Network features, I'm in the UK rocking the Hutchison 3G network.
I can't believe that this is a bigger deal to people, then not having 3G in half of the country. They should have displayed the 2 3G and EDGE maps. Verizon will be 4G before at&t is 3G here I think. I have to drive 2 hours before I'm out of the EDGE network. Plus you can do both Data and talk on Verizon if there is wifi available... if your on at&t Data in northern Mn. may I say ufff wifi is a MUST.
Sprint will come eventually since it requires no further hardware development for Apple.
I expect Apple's next moves to occur in Asia: China, India and NTT Docomo in Japan.
I wonder what the deal is with NTT docomo. The FCC fling for the iPhone 4 showed their specrtrum as the 5th UMTS element. They should have a multipass by now.
So for those that only use about half a GB you can get a 1GB plan in Australia for $1656 ($69/month) over 2 years.
Or you can get a 4 GB plan for $2400/2years.
In effect, you are paying ($2400 less $199 less $1656) over $500 for the iPhone if you are the average data user.
Good point. I don’t know why people compare a single aspect of a different country’s cellular service and assume all other parts are equal. Even geography and politics play a major role in how much the consumer is charged.
Quote:
And note, in America, for $199 iPhone you can virtually call over 300 more people for free and get unlimited data. Plus a lot of other things you may want or not.
300 more people? I see about 15x as many people or about 285M more people across the US, including Hawaii. Not to mention the better data plans they tend to offer.
Does Australia offer service everywhere people live? IOW, can you drive from one part of the country to the other and have data pretty much all of the way?
Yes it would add much in terms of competition over iPhone pricing plans. Sprint and T-Mobile are the only major US carriers who offer anything interesting in that aspect.
What is this comment based on? Sprint and Tmobile prices?
Ever consider putting two and two together and realizing this why they are not even in the running?
I can't believe that this is a bigger deal to people, then not having 3G in half of the country. They should have displayed the 2 3G and EDGE maps. Verizon will be 4G before at&t is 3G here I think. I have to drive 2 hours before I'm out of the EDGE network. Plus you can do both Data and talk on Verizon if there is wifi available... if your on at&t Data in northern Mn. may I say ufff wifi is a MUST.
It all depends on what part of the country you live in.. At&T's 3g service covers 75% of the US population.. when you add in their EDGE network 93% of the US population is covered.. And remember Verizons 3g is much slower than At&T in the majority of areas, in some areas it's even slower than AT&T's EDGE.
So for me, who happens to live in an area with excellent At&T 3G coverage, Yes, Voice/Data is extremely important.
I can't believe that this is a bigger deal to people, then not having 3G in half of the country. They should have displayed the 2 3G and EDGE maps. Verizon will be 4G before at&t is 3G here I think. I have to drive 2 hours before I'm out of the EDGE network. Plus you can do both Data and talk on Verizon if there is wifi available... if your on at&t Data in northern Mn. may I say ufff wifi is a MUST.
I can’t believe people think it should be important for me to want less functionality so long as I can get a ‘3G’ marketing term in an area I’ll never travel to. I travel quite a bit (I live out of hotels) and I am never without AT&T’s 3G service in the areas I reside, so why would ‘3G’ on, say, some potato farm in Idaho matter to me so long as I have service in the areas that suit my needs.
Also note that when Verizon started advertising ‘3G’ coverage in relation to AT&T’s ‘3G’ coverage they were using EV-DO 1xRTT which is on par with AT&T’s EDGE speeds though technically EDGE is faster. Even now Verizon’s ‘3G’ speeds are many times slower than AT&T’s ‘3G’ speeds which haven’t even come close to reaching their maximum theoretical speeds of 84.4 down and 42.2Mbps up. Those are so far away on mobile devices that the HW hasn’t even been developed yet.
Furthermore, Verizon’s best ‘4G’ speeds (since you’re hell bent on using these marketing terms as if they have some real world meaning) will likely be much slower than AT&T’s best ‘3G’ speeds, and will be very power inefficient and require larger than normal cellular chips and will be more expensive. All this will limit the desirability, usability and, most importantly, the user experience. It’ll probably take a few years before LTE will be refined to the point that it can compete with HSPA+ mobile chips and by then AT&T, T-Mobile, and probably even Sprint will all be well into their network LTE setup.
P.s. Solipism - the coverage on the potato farm matters to the guy on the potato farm. He probably has Android now, if interested in smart phones at all.
So for those that only use about half a GB you can get a 1GB plan in Australia for $1656 ($69/month) over 2 years.
Or you can get a 4 GB plan for $2400/2years.
In effect, you are paying ($2400 less $199 less $1656) over $500 for the iPhone if you are the average data user.
And note, in America, for $199 iPhone you can virtually call over 300 more people for free and get unlimited data. Plus a lot of other things you may want or not.
P.s. Solipism - the coverage on the potato farm matters to the guy on the potato farm. He probably has Android now, if interested in smart phones at all.
Of course it does, but why should the average person who resides in areas with decent coverage care about the service in areas that will never affect them. If a carrier marketed coverage at the South Pole you?d 1) think they are lying, 2) wonder if how they can offer service in those areas and why, and 3) think that it?s a pointless reason for you to join there service based on that criteria unless you are someone who will be living at the South Pole for a part of the year.
Comments
I don't see much use in the mobile phone market of providing space for competitors to gain traction. America is a bit whack, crappy CDMA / EVDO is the biggest provider but Apple could not have gone global within one year had they gone that way.
I hope it goes all carriers in USA quick cause you mob have been suffering, even in phone pricing. $199 for an iPhone 4, woah. Try $0 on for size, that's what we pay in oz if we want.
I hope it goes all carriers in USA quick cause you mob have been suffering, even in phone pricing. $199 for an iPhone 4, woah. Try $0 on for size, that's what we pay in oz if we want.
Wow! That's cheaper than anything offered on Android phones around here! About the cheapest you can get a high end Android is half-price: Pay for one, and then buy another data plan and we'll "give" you a second phone for "free".
I sure hope that ATT will offer me a free iPhone next spring, when my contract expires! Or even better, a selection of free iPhones and hot Android phones. So far, ATT doesn't carry any good Android phones, and the one-size-fits-all iPhone is very limited in capabilities.
Elsewhere, like Australia.. Apple is on all carriers.
I don't see much use in the mobile phone market of providing space for competitors to gain traction. America is a bit whack, crappy CDMA / EVDO is the biggest provider but Apple could not have gone global within one year had they gone that way.
I hope it goes all carriers in USA quick cause you mob have been suffering, even in phone pricing. $199 for an iPhone 4, woah. Try $0 on for size, that's what we pay in oz if we want.
I know, what is this grip of retrograde exploitation that obtains here in the citadel of capitalism? Or does that answer the question? Maybe it is narcissistic advertising for the last 50 years what done it.
I dunno. Would adding Sprint and T-Mobile really add that much?What % do Verizon and ATT command?
About 186 million in the US.
I meant from Apple's p.o.v. Seems to me that if they are on the two largest carriers who control ~2/3 of the market, it's probably not a huge advantage to them. That is, unless I totally misunderstand Apple's business model; which I will admit could easily be the case.
Yes it would add much in terms of competition over iPhone pricing plans. Sprint and T-Mobile are the only major US carriers who offer anything interesting in that aspect.
1. Apple is likely to make nice with Verizon for awhile despite the disclosure of no exclusivity. (And to keep ATT mollified, as with this we're all equal and can get along "in perfect harmony" ad.) Verizon seems to have the biggest head start on the most scalable 4G system being deployed and the resources to roll it out at a decent speed. So a good working relationship is at least somewhat strategic for Apple - and they'll be prodding Verizon to make sure the network and phones work well together even if it requires tweaks by Verizon.
That won't be hard for awhile either, as it's going to take time to ramp up the production of enough phones to add to this new channel, so again no rush to add the "small two."
2. Apple's long-term business model is to sell as many damn gadgets and geegaws and computers as it can as long as it can maintain its margins and premium quality/hi buzz rep. Adding the other third of the cell market certainly seems to fit within that mission statement going forward.
3. Another part of its business plan is to feed a growing ecosystem by being able to attract and keep the best mobile developers committed to its platform as their primary bread and butter. Marketshare is certainly a relevant metric in this pursuit. (As is revenue, and most app vendors are already finding that iPhone users are much more active apps buyers than Android users, and having to incorporate ads to get a revenue stream is less appealing to both users and forces compromises by developers. I'm hearing stories of adds in ongoing games and other such weirdness or having to endure ads to get to your apps.
4. Whatever Apple's POV, my business plan is to get the best value equation for my bit delivery and sending that I can, and having four companies competing for my iPhone business should help me achieve my plan via competition.
Advertisement is excrement. All of it.
There's been some interesting back and forth on this - not the quality of your post which is unidimensional and half-thot through at best - but some thotful reactions.
Here in the same general format is a statement that is much less arguable, though:
Advertisement is meant to and designed to and produced to manipulate your perceptions and/or behavior. All of it. Whether you were looking to have such done to you or not.
I notice they avoided using data and voice simultaneously...
Oh I'm such a b**ch
I kid VeriZon, I kid cos I...Well cos it's what I do. I honestly don't care about your inferior Network features, I'm in the UK rocking the Hutchison 3G network.
I'm sure Verizon would reply "Well, there's always Wifi".
Love, love, love that they showed Hitch-22 in iBooks
Why? What is Hitch-22?
Anyone notice that they didn't do a Safari page load time comparison but just a double-tap to zoom?
Anyone notice this is an Apple ad, not a carrier ad?
The phone is being highlighted, not the crap service [from both providers] on which it runs.
Elsewhere, like Australia.. Apple is on all carriers.
I don't see much use in the mobile phone market of providing space for competitors to gain traction. America is a bit whack, crappy CDMA / EVDO is the biggest provider but Apple could not have gone global within one year had they gone that way.
I hope it goes all carriers in USA quick cause you mob have been suffering, even in phone pricing. $199 for an iPhone 4, woah. Try $0 on for size, that's what we pay in oz if we want.
Good for you.
So for those that only use about half a GB you can get a 1GB plan in Australia for $1656 ($69/month) over 2 years.
Or you can get a 4 GB plan for $2400/2years.
In effect, you are paying ($2400 less $199 less $1656) over $500 for the iPhone if you are the average data user.
And note, in America, for $199 iPhone you can virtually call over 300 million more people for free and get unlimited data. Plus a lot of other things you may want or not.
I notice they avoided using data and voice simultaneously...
Oh I'm such a b**ch
I kid VeriZon, I kid cos I...Well cos it's what I do. I honestly don't care about your inferior Network features, I'm in the UK rocking the Hutchison 3G network.
I can't believe that this is a bigger deal to people, then not having 3G in half of the country. They should have displayed the 2 3G and EDGE maps. Verizon will be 4G before at&t is 3G here I think. I have to drive 2 hours before I'm out of the EDGE network. Plus you can do both Data and talk on Verizon if there is wifi available... if your on at&t Data in northern Mn. may I say ufff wifi is a MUST.
Sprint will come eventually since it requires no further hardware development for Apple.
I expect Apple's next moves to occur in Asia: China, India and NTT Docomo in Japan.
I wonder what the deal is with NTT docomo. The FCC fling for the iPhone 4 showed their specrtrum as the 5th UMTS element. They should have a multipass by now.
Why? What is Hitch-22?
He didn’t mean Catch-22.
So for those that only use about half a GB you can get a 1GB plan in Australia for $1656 ($69/month) over 2 years.
Or you can get a 4 GB plan for $2400/2years.
In effect, you are paying ($2400 less $199 less $1656) over $500 for the iPhone if you are the average data user.
Good point. I don’t know why people compare a single aspect of a different country’s cellular service and assume all other parts are equal. Even geography and politics play a major role in how much the consumer is charged.
And note, in America, for $199 iPhone you can virtually call over 300 more people for free and get unlimited data. Plus a lot of other things you may want or not.
300 more people? I see about 15x as many people or about 285M more people across the US, including Hawaii. Not to mention the better data plans they tend to offer.
Does Australia offer service everywhere people live? IOW, can you drive from one part of the country to the other and have data pretty much all of the way?
Yes it would add much in terms of competition over iPhone pricing plans. Sprint and T-Mobile are the only major US carriers who offer anything interesting in that aspect.
What is this comment based on? Sprint and Tmobile prices?
Ever consider putting two and two together and realizing this why they are not even in the running?
I can't believe that this is a bigger deal to people, then not having 3G in half of the country. They should have displayed the 2 3G and EDGE maps. Verizon will be 4G before at&t is 3G here I think. I have to drive 2 hours before I'm out of the EDGE network. Plus you can do both Data and talk on Verizon if there is wifi available... if your on at&t Data in northern Mn. may I say ufff wifi is a MUST.
It all depends on what part of the country you live in.. At&T's 3g service covers 75% of the US population.. when you add in their EDGE network 93% of the US population is covered.. And remember Verizons 3g is much slower than At&T in the majority of areas, in some areas it's even slower than AT&T's EDGE.
So for me, who happens to live in an area with excellent At&T 3G coverage, Yes, Voice/Data is extremely important.
I can't believe that this is a bigger deal to people, then not having 3G in half of the country. They should have displayed the 2 3G and EDGE maps. Verizon will be 4G before at&t is 3G here I think. I have to drive 2 hours before I'm out of the EDGE network. Plus you can do both Data and talk on Verizon if there is wifi available... if your on at&t Data in northern Mn. may I say ufff wifi is a MUST.
I can’t believe people think it should be important for me to want less functionality so long as I can get a ‘3G’ marketing term in an area I’ll never travel to. I travel quite a bit (I live out of hotels) and I am never without AT&T’s 3G service in the areas I reside, so why would ‘3G’ on, say, some potato farm in Idaho matter to me so long as I have service in the areas that suit my needs.
Also note that when Verizon started advertising ‘3G’ coverage in relation to AT&T’s ‘3G’ coverage they were using EV-DO 1xRTT which is on par with AT&T’s EDGE speeds though technically EDGE is faster. Even now Verizon’s ‘3G’ speeds are many times slower than AT&T’s ‘3G’ speeds which haven’t even come close to reaching their maximum theoretical speeds of 84.4 down and 42.2Mbps up. Those are so far away on mobile devices that the HW hasn’t even been developed yet.
Furthermore, Verizon’s best ‘4G’ speeds (since you’re hell bent on using these marketing terms as if they have some real world meaning) will likely be much slower than AT&T’s best ‘3G’ speeds, and will be very power inefficient and require larger than normal cellular chips and will be more expensive. All this will limit the desirability, usability and, most importantly, the user experience. It’ll probably take a few years before LTE will be refined to the point that it can compete with HSPA+ mobile chips and by then AT&T, T-Mobile, and probably even Sprint will all be well into their network LTE setup.
Together, I think they represent about 65-70% of the US market.
56%. AT&T = 25%. Verizon = 31%
1) it's a real minority sport
2) Apple have not dropped the feature. If you want to keep it you can stay on AT&T.
Good for you.
So for those that only use about half a GB you can get a 1GB plan in Australia for $1656 ($69/month) over 2 years.
Or you can get a 4 GB plan for $2400/2years.
In effect, you are paying ($2400 less $199 less $1656) over $500 for the iPhone if you are the average data user.
And note, in America, for $199 iPhone you can virtually call over 300 more people for free and get unlimited data. Plus a lot of other things you may want or not.
Well put. FACE!
P.s. Solipism - the coverage on the potato farm matters to the guy on the potato farm. He probably has Android now, if interested in smart phones at all.
Of course it does, but why should the average person who resides in areas with decent coverage care about the service in areas that will never affect them. If a carrier marketed coverage at the South Pole you?d 1) think they are lying, 2) wonder if how they can offer service in those areas and why, and 3) think that it?s a pointless reason for you to join there service based on that criteria unless you are someone who will be living at the South Pole for a part of the year.
This whole debate about voice and data continues to be surreal.
1) it's a real minority sport
2) Apple have not dropped the feature. If you want to keep it you can stay on AT&T.
I bet more iPhone users care about simultaneous voice and data than getting service in areas they will never travel to.