Will Evans: > the lock-in with one of the worst networks known to man. Coverage is spotty - > even in metropolitan areas like Boston and now DC, and internet access is so > painfully slow
You have two main objections to the AT&T network: coverage and speed. On a national (U.S.) basis, it's debatable if AT&T's coverage is measurably and substantially worse than its chief competitor Verizon. There's a body of *anecdotal* evidence that in many spots around the country its coverage is better than Verizon's. Unfortunately, we don't have an objective way of testing such coverage on a national scale. If the spot(s) you need coverage are badly served by AT&T (or anybody else for that matter) than naturally it's not the appropriate network for you. As for speed, yes, 3G is faster than 2G. And yet people have conducted tests of a 3G BlackBerry loading web pages more slowly than a 2G iPhone, with WebKit being faster to load and render. People have been more than willing to take 2G iPhone over 3G phones as evidenced by the iPhone's whopping 71% dominance over mobile web usage. There were lots of legitimate reasons for Apple to start its mobile adventure with AT&T (GSM, network size, revenue sharing arrangement, etc). As you may know, Apple said in no uncertain terms that they are not married to a single-carrier/locked strategy and that they'll evaluate it on a regional basis. But this is pretty much history at this point. What I think you are ignoring is the title of my post: "Who can beat iPhone 2.0?" It's specifically about iPhone 2.0, not the v1.0 you're carrying, but the one *with 3G* that you'll be buying in just a few weeks. > Someone comes out with a decent, well designed phone (Google?), that actually > is not locked into a terrible network - with high speed 3G network - and it's > game over for the iPhone. Certainly. But as I pointed out in my article, this is easier said than done. Years after the introduction of the iMac, iPod or iPhone, for example, the collective PC/CE industry has not actually been able to equal or surpass the Apple solutions. Notice I said "solutions." What Apple competitors often sell are "products" and "gadgets." What Apple sells are well integrated hardware+software+service solutions/systems. (That's why I listed the 10 factors in iPhone's favor). It's extremely difficult to compete against that for companies that don't have their own OS, industry-leading industrial design labs, three-decade long design culture, willingness to take risks, etc. There's no guarantee that Apple will win this game, but it's certainly theirs to lose, as I argue in the article. -- Kontra http://counternotions.com ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
