Apple, Ink
Rumors and Headlines
Advertisement
Apple News
Mac Manager NewsMac Administrator Jobs
Advertisement |
Apple Minion's Reviews of iPhone are Out (of touch)Wed, 06/27/2007 - 07:10 — Quincy Pince-Nez
Not surprisingly, the big four non-Apple civilians who had been given iPhones to play with (and had signed their life away in NDAs) finally showed their cards ahead of the rest of the media yesterday. Also, not a surprise to anyone, they loved it almost unconditionally. How does the public let Apple get away with this round robin "give us good reviews and you get our newest product early, bad reviews and we give our new products to your competitors" game? "Freedom of the press and Democracy Inaction" as the Daily Show would say...so here they are, your unbiased reviews:
They really all just wrote the same review - what is on Apple's PR website plus:
What is most frustrating about these reviews is the lack of any coverage of the most "Game-Changing" part of the phone. The "Lock-in".Why would Apple want to lock you into one particular phone company? What's the advantage? Besides the need to create a CDMA version of the iPhone, not much. Visual voicemail on T-Mobile? I am sure it's not that hard, especially the second time around. The iTunes registration? Not much there either. Why not sell it direct like Nokia is doing with their very capable N95 phone in the US? More customer base, more options, equals more sales - right? Why would Apple choose to follow the super lock-in model that T-Mobile has built around the Sidekick - (which relies on 3rd party Danger server but despite the lock-in has had considerable success?) Maybe, like me, Steve Jobs is super-pissed that he can't take his Sidekick 3 overseas and use another carrier - even if just for phone and SMSing. Probably not...in fact, if the Apple people knew this frustration and hate, they would not voluntarily, and without any benefit, lock in their customers to one carrier. Apple isn't such a control freak that it would give up customer experience, sales and exposure - all for control.. ...well maybe it is. Because Apple has to be taking some of the monthly customer payment cut. There is no other logical explanation for why Apple would choose to lock itself in with AT&T. Now how much? Probably not a lot. Maybe $5-10/month. Maybe a bit more on the SMS plans - otherwise why only 200 SMS messages and no iChat? But multiply that little amount times 10 million customers and 24 months and you've got a pretty healthy chunk of change - not many companies would scoff at a quarter of a billion dollars or more. Apple has had a taste of the economics of scale from the iTunes store, which besides Apple's stated best intentions to only make money on iPods, is turning a healthy profit. Go MBA's! For instance if Apple makes 1 cent on each of the 10 billion itunes songs sold through iTunes, that is $100 million. If they make 10 cents, that is a billion dollars. Economics of scale are nice when you have a large marketshare, aren't they Apple? It is also the reason Apple is having a very difficult time finding a partner in Europe. They say "Arrogance" is the reason why no one wants to deal with Apple. This is business...5-10€/month+NDA="Arrogance". Most likely the European companies are waiting to see how the iPhone does in the US to bid on their price. All signs point to the iPhone having an incredible release Stateside so most likely one of the European carriers will cave in and allow Apple to take a cut of its revenue for allowing the iPhone on its network. The current frontrunners are Vodafone and Orange. Whoever wins, the lock-in is already a huge loss for consumers. Will the media, who should represent the people, pick up on this? Doubtful, there are enough iPhones to go around. EDIT: It Looks like Vodafone is the front runner for carrying the iPhone in europe. No deals have been announced yet however
Latest News from 9 to 5 Mac
|
PollRecent comments
Who is talking about us?
User loginWho's online
There are currently 0 users and 554 guests online.
9to5Mac ToysTeen Blog |
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
Comments
Follows the Apple Model
Apple throughout history has wanted to keep control of the user experience. They use a vertical framework to do this. Look at the iPod. iTunes was released to leverage the iPod. In addition, in the beginning, Jobs only wanted the iPod to be Mac only.
Lastly, with the iPhone, there were reports that Apple actually places a server on top of Cingular's network. If the iPhone was open, there wouldn't be any guarantees that the iPhone would work.
In addition, before the iPhone was announced, there were talks that Apple would be running its own virtual cellphone network.
http://www.forbes.com/technology/2005/07/08/apple-cellphone-service-cx_d...
Apple doesn't control universe ...
For one, Apple had to "sell" the idea and make it attractive. Verizon threw them to the curb awhile ago. Hell, the iTunes Store has a similar history: Apple toured the idea around for a long time before the labels started to come around. AT&T was willing to break the mold. They deserve some payback for taking the risk (ie, no competition for phone sales).
Also, Apple's approach has always to only do what you know you can, don't overreach. Too many people misinterpret the strategy as arrogance or rigidity. In fact, it is the best way to run a business, if the point is to grow as quickly as you can with a minimum of risk. Do what you know how to do. This constant drubbing of Apple as "arrogant" gets out of hand sometimes.
Game Changer?!?
Why does everyone keep saying the iPhone is going to revolutionize the cell phone market? To me it does the exact opposite. The ultra-high price and stringent provider lock-down reinforces the status quo big time. Heck, by activating the phone online, you can't even negotiate things like the activation fee. Pay it or go somewhere else. Good for consumers?!? How is doing away with discounts and rebates good for consumers?!?
Revolutionizing the cell phone market would be to sell their phones unlocked to anybody with both a GSM and CDMA versions (or better yet, both in the same phone - seriously, how hard could it be? ever see a portable radio that does AM, FM, TV, and short wave? yep.). It's going to take more than a kick-ass user interface to revolutionize the cell phone market, you're going to have to free us from the oppression of the service providers to do that.
See a shrink
Let me state my intentions:
I'm not buying an iPhone -- at least for a long, long time.
Here's my take:
I think it's amazing. There's nothing close to it. I wonder whether it works over the long-haul, but we'll know about that over the next year.
Here's my reason for not buying:
I don't need it. Five mouths to feed, two of those mouths in college and I don't need to explain the rest. I'll wait for the fifth generation when 40k won't be leaving my pocket every year to enter college coffers.
Here's my advice to you:
Lighten up. If you can't, see a shrink. But he may call you back from his iPhone.
iPhone is not the first to have a lock-in...
People have such short memories. The RAZR had a lock-in just like the iPhone. The amount of disinformation and FUD being generated because the iPhone doesn't give you exactly what you want (too expensive, not fastest IP cell network, etc.) is just classic whining without worth.
As a previous poster said, go see a shrink and take a chill pill.
- James
Why would Apple lock you into one phone company? They dont!
Call me a fanboy, but as I see it Apple had no choice as to go with the first company that would have them. Unlike with the launch of the iPod, the market of phones is already very mature. To play a (any) part in this business would mean you'd have a very mature party to back you up. If AT&T is that party that agrees in backing up, then so be it.
My guess? After the first two years... iPhone unlocked for the masses!
Precedent
Unfortunately there is a precedent you may be forgetting: Motorola's iTunes compatible phones. The ROKR was the first (and by all accounts the worst), but several other Moto phones have iTunes software too. And since day one, they have all been Cingular/AT&T/GSM exclusives; and remain so today.
Since the iPhone is a GSM only phone, they could only open it up to T-mobile anyway, as Verizon, Sprint, U.S. Cellular, and the rest would all require a CDMA version. And rumor has it that AT&T's FIVE YEAR exclusive contract forbids them from even developing a CDMA version.
Apple Did it Right this time!
If Apple is forced to earn razor thin profit margins, it would have to worry about survival and not be able to fund research and development to focus on new and better ideas. That is probably how Motorola came up with the name for their best product, RAZR! Motorola didn't know how to keep its profit margins high enough to pay its bills, so they knew at some point the profits would be as thin as a RAZOR!
Apple provides the best hardware with the best software. If you want something cheaper, go buy all the WinTel devices you want. The "Lock-in" was necessary to get AT&T to spend big bucks to develop Visual Voice Mail and other network capabilities, so that the iPhone would have a network that supported ALL of its features.
Verizon came out and said that it did NOT want Apple to come between Verizon and the cell phone user. However, that is exactly the point at which Apple excels: the user experience and follow-on support.
A SIM card hack will probably be done soon to get the iPhone to work on another U.S. network, however, Visual Voice Mail, and other features, will NOT work on that network. I am a Verizon user for over 6 years. I accept that I have to move to AT&T. That is the price to be paid. If you want to drive a Yugo, go ahead. It wlll get you to work. Others may prefer to spend more for a Mercedes, BMW, or a Lexus (all of which I personally do not own). But, that is their decision.
Post new comment