Drew Gibson wrote: > Although Apple may wish it was otherwise, they have to conform to the > business model and methods of the mobile phone business. To get in the > door they have had to sell their soul to the telco/devil (eg AT&T in US, > O2 in UK).
Not really. They could have just sold the iPhone unlocked, as is done in Asia and elsewhere, and let people make their best deal on a service plan. However, they chose to go in the other direction. Usually in North America you have a choice of paying full price for the phone unlocked, or of getting a steep discount in return for a phone lock and a contract. With the iPhone you have the worst of all worlds -- paying full price AND still getting a locked phone and a contract. Considering the design of the Mac and OS X, Apple has demonstrated that it is quite comfortable with business models involving customer lock-in. They *did* have other options. They could have appealed to the large market of people whose phones need to be replaced (average life of a cell is 18 months) but did not want to re-enter a long-term contract. > If they wish to continue doing business, they have to be seen > to respect and enforce the "exculsivity" of the agreements. Motorola, Nokia and others have been quite capable of living up to their exclusivity deals without bricking phones that have been unlocked. > Remember > that telcos regard their customers with all the respect that a child > regards his collection of marbles. They don't care if some get sat on, > stepped on or dropped in dog sh*t, as long as they have more than the > other guy. Your wishes as a customer are something to be worked around, > not accommodated. Apple was not obligated to play that game; but, on the contrary, they were more than happy to participate. - Evan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
