On Thursday, January 19, 2012 8:16:46 AM UTC-5, Serv wrote: > > nothing in that article suprises me. The mistake Apple made was being > EXCLUSIVE to AT&T for too long. Put the iPhone on Verizon or T-Mobile (a > near miss AT&T aquisition) and they sell the crap out of the phone. >
Apple's exclusive time at AT&T was hardly a mistake. It was the key to Apple's strategy, and why Apple still has the three best selling phone models on the market and is taking the majority of profits available<http://www.asymco.com/2011/07/29/apple-captured-two-thirds-of-available-mobile-phone-profits-in-q2/> even if they aren't selling the majority of phones. Apple came into the market with the intention of offering an Apple experience to consumers directly. That's completely contrary to the way the phone business had been done. Traditionally the phone manufactuers would allow the carriers to dictate what went on the phone, both in terms of software and ugly physical logos. Apple wanted complete control, and back in 2007 Verizon wasn't willing to give it them. So Apple made the exclusive deal with AT&T, and AT&T had no say in what went on the iPhone. And as a result AT&T's growth and profits surged<http://seekingalpha.com/article/199920-at-t-s-growth-spurred-by-iphone-and-other-e-devices>. That allowed Apple to take their "hands-off, the end user is our customer, not the carrier" deal to Verizon and Sprint later on. The other carriers had to take Apple's terms, or AT&T was going to eat their lunch. The post-2007 churn rate was scaring the hell out of Verizon in particular. As a result, Apple has prospered beyond anyone's predictions. Android takes the opposite tack. Android is "open" -- to the carriers. So my T-Mobile Android phone had a (crappy, buggy, crashy) phone app written by T-Mobile, a UI T-Mobile customized (to suck and crash), a bunch of T-Mobile crapware I couldn't delete, etc. My understanding is Verizon is the same way. I like some things about Android I like and I'm glad there's competition, but so long as the carriers are in control of Android phones the consumer's experience will suffer. > In our circle of friends in St Pete Dr Jen and I are the only Android > users...but we refuse to become Apple-ites like most of the St Pete geeks. > Nothing at all wrong with Apple products (if you can swallow the purchase > price), but our carrier (Verizon) didn't sell the iPhone when we needed new > phones so we bought the competition and have been pleased...at least i have! > I'm glad you're pleased, but Android's carrier-first attitude is going to screw you, if not now, then later. The big issue is updates. Apple pushes updates out to consumers as quickly as possible, because Apple want to keep its customers up-to-date and happy. Android puts the carriers in charge of updates, and the carriers have you in a contract and therefore have little incentive to update your phone's software. So even though your phone is capable of running Android 4.0 (Ice Cream Sandwich), Verizon will probably not push it out to you. They want you to get a new Android phone with the associated contract extension. Here's the state of Android updates visualized.<http://theunderstatement.com/post/11982112928/android-orphans-visualizing-a-sad-history-of-support?f816e460> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Unique Geek" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/theuniquegeek/-/xsPS7njruegJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en.
