All you're doing is quoting what they reserve the right to do. They also reserve the right to shut off abusers of the 3G data. They don't do it. You're wrong, sorry.
Do I need to file down my finger by a third to use this phone? \
I doubt this will be a down-sized iPhone. It will be a different device with different capabilities. Yes, it will fragment the market but, if sold in conjunction with an Apple MVNO service plan, it could make solid continuing contributions to the bottom line that would make the extra effort to support it worthwhile.
Does the price of the handset really matter anymore? I see the cost of the data plans being the thing that is holding the mainstream buyer back. Apple needs an iPhone you can purchase without a data plan, for the huge number of people who won't pay for data and would be happy to use the phone in WiFi.
I know alot of people will say this is crazy and "who would buy an iPhone without data?", but I think we are in the minority. Compare the number of people who have text plans and the number who have data - huge difference.
I know there is a $15 option at AT&T for a small amount of data, but they need a $0 option - just like the quick messaging phones.
Don't get me wrong, we need our regular iPhone plans too (I have had one since they came out), but I know ALOT of people who just wont pay for the plans.
I agree
AND
Apple needs an iPhone you can purchase without a VOICE plan, for the number of people who don't need voice and want to access the internet anywhere. (Like a small iPad)
I use my iPad like the above, but I don't take the iPad everywhere. Right now I'm paying for voice minutes that I barely use (5 minutes last month) and that don't rollover.
Apple needs an iPhone you can purchase without a VOICE plan, for the number of people who don't need voice and want to access the internet anywhere. (Like a small iPad)
I use my iPad like the above, but I don't take the iPad everywhere. Right now I'm paying for voice minutes that I barely use (5 minutes last month) and that don't rollover.
So you want a ipod touch 3g?? I guess I can see some people wanting that.
The problem is the amount of people is probably too small for apple to want to cut into there cash cow, the iphone
So Apple wants to be a volume manufacturer now like Nokia, Samsung, Motorola, etc. for the sake of marketshare? Jeez Apple you rake in 51% of all mobile phone profits despite a 4% marketshare. I thought you'd rather take that stats over marketshare.
Apple cannot ignore marketshare while secretly chuckling 'but we make the profits'
Marketshare is key for developers. They may prefer iOS, even with a slightly smaller marketshare because of less piracy, single App store, well off user-base prepared to pay for Apps, etc. But there comes a point where shear numbers of Android users will make it a better platform to develop for.
Once they have lost pre-eminence amongst developers, they have lost it altogether. It will be WIndows v Mac all over again.
The smartphone market is expanding - and it is expanding downwards. Typical feature-phone users are aspiring to a phone which offers more, but are going for the cheaper end. Android is best placed to take the market from the bottom - of course they are, Apple is not currently competing there!
I don't know whether these rumo(u)rs have substance, or if a 'Nano' would be a good move. But some way Apple needs to find a way to compete in the at lower price points in the smartphone market.
$45/mo for a Straight Talk phone at wally world. Unlimited voice, txt and data (with the usual caveats about what unlimited means now). And that phone is running on the same network that wants to charge you $90/mo for limited voice, unlimited txt and data. VZW likes their profit margins.
If the phone described here actually exists, I would expect it may be destined for the MVNO market (not necessarily Apple being a MVNO). 75% of the people I know are on either Straight Talk or Boost. Sooner or later Apple must penetrate the cost conscious end of the phone market.
Straight talk means crippled phones, unusable data and browser (probably on purpose) and more voice and texts than 99% of users need or want, creating a perceived value until you start using the phone and realize that it's a marketing gimmick. And tech support...nobody speaks English.
I just don't think apple is interested in that model and besides, it's on the verizon network. Do you think verizon would unleash millions and millions of new iphone users on their network at a reduced price and no contract when they have new users lining up to pay full price for a contract plan? No chance.
I just don't think apple is interested in that model and besides, it's on the verizon network. Do you think verizon would unleash millions and millions of new iphone users on their network at a reduced price and no contract when they have new users lining up to pay full price for a contract plan? No chance.
You don't think Apple is interested in becoming an MVNO? I think it may make more sense that they use their money to build their own wireless service than any large acquisition they could make. They can't just keep accumulating cash.
As far as what Verizon thinks, it's the same dilemma they (or any carrier) has now. Someone approaches you about buying a few million minutes in bulk at a discounted price that is prepaid. You don't want the business, someone else will. And I think this may explain why Apple is optiong to use the MDM6600 which supports both CDMA and GSM/UMTS - they have even more potential carriers to shop.
Just sell the previous version for that price. It's already at $99, why not make it $199 off contract. Here is a customer profile for such a phone: College student / Early professional who wants to use iPhone and has access to WiFi at home, work and school. This person does not want to / can't afford to pay for data or unlimited talk, but is OK with just voice and WiFi.
End result - more iphones out there, less strain on data networks and no need to mess with exclusivity since this is an older version and thereby should not disrupt any agreements. Plus you get to get rid of unsold inventory at fairly reasonable price.
Does the price of the handset really matter anymore? I see the cost of the data plans being the thing that is holding the mainstream buyer back. Apple needs an iPhone you can purchase without a data plan, for the huge number of people who won't pay for data and would be happy to use the phone in WiFi.
I know alot of people will say this is crazy and "who would buy an iPhone without data?", but I think we are in the minority. Compare the number of people who have text plans and the number who have data - huge difference.
I know there is a $15 option at AT&T for a small amount of data, but they need a $0 option - just like the quick messaging phones.
Don't get me wrong, we need our regular iPhone plans too (I have had one since they came out), but I know ALOT of people who just wont pay for the plans.
Walmart has straight talk $45 / AND NO FEES
Unlimited data text voice and u buy the phone
Month to month keep your old number and
NO FEES many do these contract phones to keep a budge
They have for 30$ 1000 texts 1000 min a bit of data
You don't think Apple is interested in becoming an MVNO? I think it may make more sense that they use their money to build their own wireless service than any large acquisition they could make. They can't just keep accumulating cash.
It's called a dividend. A company doesn't have to just throw their money down a hole if they can't manage to lose it through normal operations. It's the shareholders' money.
Just sell the previous version for that price. It's already at $99, why not make it $199 off contract. Here is a customer profile for such a phone: College student / Early professional who wants to use iPhone and has access to WiFi at home, work and school. This person does not want to / can't afford to pay for data or unlimited talk, but is OK with just voice and WiFi.
The previous version is not $99, it's $499. The carrier buys it for $499, then sells it to you for $99 plus your signature on a contract. Selling it for $199 without a contract leaves Apple $300 poorer for each phone sold. Who is going to make that up? You?
Quote:
End result - more iphones out there, less strain on data networks and no need to mess with exclusivity since this is an older version and thereby should not disrupt any agreements. Plus you get to get rid of unsold inventory at fairly reasonable price.
Great, except none of those things benefit Apple to the tune of the $300 that was lost. The first benefits Apple mildly, since they may sell more Apps. But it will clearly push their manufacturing partners very hard to sell a ZERO PROFIT phone, meanwhile eliminating Apple's stream of upgraders. The second only benefits the carriers. The third, again, benefits Apple not at all.
Comments
Fixed that for you. Check out my previous post.
All you're doing is quoting what they reserve the right to do. They also reserve the right to shut off abusers of the 3G data. They don't do it. You're wrong, sorry.
And what if you get a pre-paid SIM card? How can they add to that?
The point is, do they in the pre-paid SIM card contracts have a clause that it prevents you from using the SIM card in an iPhone?
And if they are as anal about this, just go to a different carrier. Even in the US, you must have virtual network providers.
They can't. The OP doesn't know what he's talking about.
Do I need to file down my finger by a third to use this phone?
I doubt this will be a down-sized iPhone. It will be a different device with different capabilities. Yes, it will fragment the market but, if sold in conjunction with an Apple MVNO service plan, it could make solid continuing contributions to the bottom line that would make the extra effort to support it worthwhile.
Does the price of the handset really matter anymore? I see the cost of the data plans being the thing that is holding the mainstream buyer back. Apple needs an iPhone you can purchase without a data plan, for the huge number of people who won't pay for data and would be happy to use the phone in WiFi.
I know alot of people will say this is crazy and "who would buy an iPhone without data?", but I think we are in the minority. Compare the number of people who have text plans and the number who have data - huge difference.
I know there is a $15 option at AT&T for a small amount of data, but they need a $0 option - just like the quick messaging phones.
Don't get me wrong, we need our regular iPhone plans too (I have had one since they came out), but I know ALOT of people who just wont pay for the plans.
I agree
AND
Apple needs an iPhone you can purchase without a VOICE plan, for the number of people who don't need voice and want to access the internet anywhere. (Like a small iPad)
I use my iPad like the above, but I don't take the iPad everywhere. Right now I'm paying for voice minutes that I barely use (5 minutes last month) and that don't rollover.
I agree
AND
Apple needs an iPhone you can purchase without a VOICE plan, for the number of people who don't need voice and want to access the internet anywhere. (Like a small iPad)
I use my iPad like the above, but I don't take the iPad everywhere. Right now I'm paying for voice minutes that I barely use (5 minutes last month) and that don't rollover.
So you want a ipod touch 3g?? I guess I can see some people wanting that.
The problem is the amount of people is probably too small for apple to want to cut into there cash cow, the iphone
This is the price that Chinese iPhone rip offs are selling.
It's more effective if you post the exact same thing to Macrumors forum at the exact same time. Oh wait, you already did that.
Steve just wants to punish Google. That's all! And google is going to get it good!
I think he does want to outsell Android, or at least be the platform of first choice for devs.
So Apple wants to be a volume manufacturer now like Nokia, Samsung, Motorola, etc. for the sake of marketshare? Jeez Apple you rake in 51% of all mobile phone profits despite a 4% marketshare. I thought you'd rather take that stats over marketshare.
Apple cannot ignore marketshare while secretly chuckling 'but we make the profits'
Marketshare is key for developers. They may prefer iOS, even with a slightly smaller marketshare because of less piracy, single App store, well off user-base prepared to pay for Apps, etc. But there comes a point where shear numbers of Android users will make it a better platform to develop for.
Once they have lost pre-eminence amongst developers, they have lost it altogether. It will be WIndows v Mac all over again.
The smartphone market is expanding - and it is expanding downwards. Typical feature-phone users are aspiring to a phone which offers more, but are going for the cheaper end. Android is best placed to take the market from the bottom - of course they are, Apple is not currently competing there!
I don't know whether these rumo(u)rs have substance, or if a 'Nano' would be a good move. But some way Apple needs to find a way to compete in the at lower price points in the smartphone market.
$45/mo for a Straight Talk phone at wally world. Unlimited voice, txt and data (with the usual caveats about what unlimited means now). And that phone is running on the same network that wants to charge you $90/mo for limited voice, unlimited txt and data. VZW likes their profit margins.
If the phone described here actually exists, I would expect it may be destined for the MVNO market (not necessarily Apple being a MVNO). 75% of the people I know are on either Straight Talk or Boost. Sooner or later Apple must penetrate the cost conscious end of the phone market.
Straight talk means crippled phones, unusable data and browser (probably on purpose) and more voice and texts than 99% of users need or want, creating a perceived value until you start using the phone and realize that it's a marketing gimmick. And tech support...nobody speaks English.
I just don't think apple is interested in that model and besides, it's on the verizon network. Do you think verizon would unleash millions and millions of new iphone users on their network at a reduced price and no contract when they have new users lining up to pay full price for a contract plan? No chance.
I just don't think apple is interested in that model and besides, it's on the verizon network. Do you think verizon would unleash millions and millions of new iphone users on their network at a reduced price and no contract when they have new users lining up to pay full price for a contract plan? No chance.
You don't think Apple is interested in becoming an MVNO? I think it may make more sense that they use their money to build their own wireless service than any large acquisition they could make. They can't just keep accumulating cash.
As far as what Verizon thinks, it's the same dilemma they (or any carrier) has now. Someone approaches you about buying a few million minutes in bulk at a discounted price that is prepaid. You don't want the business, someone else will. And I think this may explain why Apple is optiong to use the MDM6600 which supports both CDMA and GSM/UMTS - they have even more potential carriers to shop.
End result - more iphones out there, less strain on data networks and no need to mess with exclusivity since this is an older version and thereby should not disrupt any agreements. Plus you get to get rid of unsold inventory at fairly reasonable price.
Does the price of the handset really matter anymore? I see the cost of the data plans being the thing that is holding the mainstream buyer back. Apple needs an iPhone you can purchase without a data plan, for the huge number of people who won't pay for data and would be happy to use the phone in WiFi.
I know alot of people will say this is crazy and "who would buy an iPhone without data?", but I think we are in the minority. Compare the number of people who have text plans and the number who have data - huge difference.
I know there is a $15 option at AT&T for a small amount of data, but they need a $0 option - just like the quick messaging phones.
Don't get me wrong, we need our regular iPhone plans too (I have had one since they came out), but I know ALOT of people who just wont pay for the plans.
Walmart has straight talk $45 / AND NO FEES
Unlimited data text voice and u buy the phone
Month to month keep your old number and
NO FEES many do these contract phones to keep a budge
They have for 30$ 1000 texts 1000 min a bit of data
On VZ network that's the best deal going unless
Net10 for infrequent users
You don't think Apple is interested in becoming an MVNO? I think it may make more sense that they use their money to build their own wireless service than any large acquisition they could make. They can't just keep accumulating cash.
It's called a dividend. A company doesn't have to just throw their money down a hole if they can't manage to lose it through normal operations. It's the shareholders' money.
So you want a ipod touch 3g?? I guess I can see some people wanting that.
The problem is the amount of people is probably too small for apple to want to cut into there cash cow, the iphone
Yes, if the iPod Touch 3G had the same cameras as the iPhone 4.
This would be perfect for my children and myself due the small number of voice minutes I use monthly.
When my plan comes up for renewal, I'll be asking the Retentions department to offer me a data only plan on the iPhone 4. So far, they've been
very accommodating.
Just sell the previous version for that price. It's already at $99, why not make it $199 off contract. Here is a customer profile for such a phone: College student / Early professional who wants to use iPhone and has access to WiFi at home, work and school. This person does not want to / can't afford to pay for data or unlimited talk, but is OK with just voice and WiFi.
The previous version is not $99, it's $499. The carrier buys it for $499, then sells it to you for $99 plus your signature on a contract. Selling it for $199 without a contract leaves Apple $300 poorer for each phone sold. Who is going to make that up? You?
End result - more iphones out there, less strain on data networks and no need to mess with exclusivity since this is an older version and thereby should not disrupt any agreements. Plus you get to get rid of unsold inventory at fairly reasonable price.
Great, except none of those things benefit Apple to the tune of the $300 that was lost. The first benefits Apple mildly, since they may sell more Apps. But it will clearly push their manufacturing partners very hard to sell a ZERO PROFIT phone, meanwhile eliminating Apple's stream of upgraders. The second only benefits the carriers. The third, again, benefits Apple not at all.
Thank god actual businesspeople run Apple.