I'm afraid I'll create Skynet…
Posts tagged AT&T
Nonsense
May 10th
Some silly analyst claims that Apple may have extended their exclusivity with AT&T 6 months in order to get great deals on iPad data rates. Specifically the idea seems to be that Apple would have delayed a Verizon iPhone from this summer to get AT&T to make that deal.
Really? Apple had an iPhone ready to launch for Verizon’s stellar network and tens of millions of subscribers who want an iPhone, but decided to hold off 6 months or more just so their customers could save some money on those 3G iPad plans? The huge margins they’d make on each phone, as well as the tremendously increased market share and improved network service they would get with Verizon, were worth sacrificing to make a few extra bucks selling 3G iPad’s instead those without?
Yeah. Nonsense.
At best, the closest this claim is to accurate is Apple said, “Hey we’ll give you exclusive rights to the iPad for a while, if you’ll give us a great deal on service.” And AT&T jumped at the chance because they’re desperate to please the company who makes them a lot of money.
But Apple sitting on a product that would bring them so much profit (and so many App store eyeballs), just for a good deal on 3G data service. Why do we listen to “analysts”??
So what happened?
Sep 9th
I told you earlier that I believe there are two possible reasons we didn’t get a camera on the iPod Touch. The first reason, that they didn’t have them ready and weren’t willing to announce them way in advance of releasing them, just doesn’t seem likely. If Apple was going to make these, they would have them ready for the holiday season and would have plenty of hype beforehand.
The deeper and darker reason is to differentiate the iPod from the iPhone. More >
According to AT&T iPhone is computer, other smartphones aren't
Aug 3rd
John Gruber just cited an old article from Wired about AT&T restricting the SlingPlayer app to only working over WiFi. It seems that streaming TV to a personal computer is a violation of AT&T’s service agreement.
Applications like this, which redirects a TV signal to a personal computer, are specifically prohibited under our terms of service. We consider smartphones like the iPhone to be personal computers in that they have the same hardware and software attributes as PCs
What’s stupid about this is there’s a SlingPlayer app that can be run on an AT&T Blackberry Bold. So you can basically interpret this as AT&T has decided that, to them, the iPhone is a personal computer while the Blackberry Bold is not.
Bullshit.
They can handle the load of the few Bold users, but the iPhone users would bring AT&T to their knees. It has nothing to do with terms of service, just numbers.
What sucks about this whole deal is, because Apple has the ability to reject apps, they are almost forced to do so to some because of contractual obligations to AT&T (note: that’s speculation as I don’t know exactly what their contracts with AT&T state exactly). No one can block you from installing SlingPlayer or Google Voice or your Blackberry, so AT&T is shit out of luck there. But with the iPhone, there’s an approval process. And AT&T is making full use of their agreements with Apple (while they still can).
Apple is not avoiding CDMA
Jul 7th
I’m just going to repeat that: Apple will NOT avoid Verizon, Sprint, etc. because of CDMA. It just doesn’t make financial sense. Yes there is engineering cost associated with building a CDMA phone. And yes it is not nearly as common around the world as GSM.
First off, anyone who alludes to GSM v. CDMA being like VHS v. Betamax is stupid. VHS and Betamax was all about customer choice. For whatever debatable reasons, the customers chose VHS. In the case of cellular networks, 95% of customers could not tell you what the hell GSM or CDMA is. As far as the customer is concerned, there is absolutely no difference. Carriers have chosen which network they will use, and that will not change. So CDMA is not dead.
3G has just recently become fairly prevalent, and companies will not have dominantly 4G networks for a few years. So the idea that putting out a CDMA handset isn’t worth it just doesn’t make sense (particularly for a company that releases a new version every year). A majority of users will be on 3G networks for years to come so CDMA still has plenty of time left.
Just look at what the iPhone 3GS release did for AT&T. The device was said by many to be a minor upgrade and that most wouldn’t want to upgrade to it, but in many states the thing is not easy to find. The device resulted in the biggest sales day in AT&T history.
At some point in the near future the iPhone will have saturated the number of iPhone purchasers they can get on AT&T (as well as many foreign carriers I’m sure). There are just too many people who can’t or won’t switch. Apple can’t wait until 4G is dominant to try to gain more customers, and even then, no one really knows whether LTE will dominate or whether WiMAX will make a push.
It only makes sense for Apple to spend the extra money engineering, manufacturing, and supporting a CDMA phone so that they can move their product to what most believe is the most reliable network in the US, Verizon.
The mobile phone market is a complicated one. Operators use a variety of networks that make hardware development confusing. CDMA, CDMA2000, EDGE, GSM, LTE, and WiMAX are all being used today or will be used soon. Apple will surely find a way to engineer a phone that can be used on more of the current and future networks. The only thing stopping them from such plans right now is the exclusivity contract with AT&T.
I guarantee that by this time next year, Apple will have a phone that operates on GSM, CDMA, and possibly even LTE networks.
Demand for ubiquitous data growing
Jun 27th
The smartphone revolution is upon us. Devices are being offered for great deals, like the Blackberry Curve in a buy one get one free offer or the iPhone 3G, which is now available for only $99. Consumers want to be connected to the internet no matter where they are, largely because the incredible capability of the iPhone has made users expect more out of their phones. They want to watch YouTube videos, read their favorite blogs, check their email, and play games all on the go (and I hear that Twitter thing is pretty big these days as well).
The cell phone market isn’t the only place where data and the internet is changing what we do. Web video is replacing the television because consumers want to watch their shows when they chose, not when the schedule demands it (not to mention avoid the price of cable). Social media is giving us real time information about big stories, like the Iranian election, while CNN is busy showing reruns of Larry King Live.
This has me thinking about where we are headed. I think one thing that’s going to change is the differentiation between types of data, who we pay, and how we pay for them. Currently, we have many different means of receiving data of all kinds: a cable/satellite provider, an internet service provider, a telephone landline (well for some), a cell phone w/ data plan, maybe a GPS device for the car, a satellite radio, etc. and a bill for each one.
Customers are finding ways to blend some of these types, like tethering their computers to their phones to use their cellular data connection. Or getting their video from sites like Hulu or from iTunes, instead of from a cable company. Consumers’ demand is pushing these markets and distinguishing them from each other is becoming more difficult.
Companies like AT&T and Verizon offering cable, internet, phone, and mobile data is just beginning the change in the market. These two are in good position to be the dominant players in content and data distribution, though two other companies whose futures are interesting are Comcast and Time Warner. Moving forward we will see acquisitions and mergers, so these larger companies can strengthen their infrastructure and subscriber bases.
So what does this mean for consumers; how will the plans we purchase change? The first thing that will happen is some sort of ubiquitous data plan. This means that your home internet and your mobile phone (as well as your laptop’s data card) will all be on one plan. This sort of plan has only become possible since 3G has become more prevalent and mobile data speeds are actually approaching those of broadband internet.
Within 5 years, laptops will come with both WiFi and 4G data connections built into them. WiFi, nor physical connections, will die for consumers, because mobile networks would never be able to shoulder the load of all our data. These big companies that form will have public WiFi connections in all sorts of public places, and our devices will transfer back and forth so that the transition will go almost unnoticed.
This all inclusive mobile data plan will also move into our vehicles. Cars will come with full computers built in that are fully data connected. You will be able to stream internet radio, podcasts, and or even music from your home web server directly to your car. How media is distributed to consumers is a whole other tremendous topic (that I will discuss soon in another post).
There are a few problems that have to be addressed. Will the backbone of the internet be able to handle the increase in traffic the more connectivity will definitely create. The internet is a complex thing, and someone will have to make the investment to lay down more fiber optic cables to increase the throughput of the internet.
The second concern is the merging of businesses with different business models. In the cell phone industry you agree to a two year contract and get a subsidy on whatever phone you purchase, with the provider expecting to make that subsidy back over the course of the contract. The cable providers do things a little differently. They tend to give you a low introductory rate (but charge a nice fee for installation) to get you committed, but you still by the month and usually rent your cable box and modem. Most of the time you can cancel this service at any time without some large fee. How will these two business models meet to provide all inclusive service?
Though it’s unclear how these business will work, its definite that change is brewing in the world of data transfer. These markets are maturing and companies will begin consolidating to save money and increase subscriber bases. In my next article all discuss what this means for the future of content distribution, and possibly how these data distributers will look to the consumer.
AT&T caves on iPhone 3G S upgrade price
Jun 18th
AT&T has announced that they will allow customers who are eligible for an upgrade in July, August, and September 2009 to get the lowest upgrade price on the new iPhone 3G S. This is just another piece of evidence that AT&T is really the one in need to this relationship.
The reason AT&T had to do this is twofold. A lot of customers were saying that this upgrade wasn’t enough to make them pay $400+ for a new phone, especially given the possibility of the iPhone on another network next year. AT&T needed to do it to get users to upgrade and get them on the hook for another 2 years of service. Their image has already suffered with the lack of immediate support for MMS and tethering (not to mention the constant complaints about their network).
This is just speculation, but I’d say the other reason they had to do it is because Apple wanted them too. The 3G S may not be a huge upgrade, but it comes with some crucial hardware bumps. One of the most notable is support for OpenGL ES 2.0 (the 3G only supports version 1.1).
There are a good number of iPhone lovers who will bit the bullet and pay the premium (not to mention original iPhone owners who were due for an upgrade) so there will be strong 3G S sales. But there will also be some big iPhone 3G sales with its price now set at a low $99. This will create a real split when it comes to the app store. Apple surely wanted to get as many 3G S phones (I refuse to make 3G S plural) sold so that developers would be motivated to create apps that take advantage of this hardware bump.
The end user really couldn’t care less about whether the phone supports OpenGL ES 1.1 or 2.0, but when they realize that some apps might not work on a 3G, it could motivate them to bump up to the 3G S; which means more money for AT&T and Apple. So the lower price means more early iPhone 3G S customers which means more developers making compatible apps which could mean more iPhone 3G S buyers in the future.
Jobs-Less Keynote was a Little Sloppy
Jun 9th
Just a few observations from the WWDC keynote which was without Apple CEO Steve Jobs
The different company presentations seemed very sloppy. Lots of mistakes and things that didn’t seemed to work. I can’t really recall so much going wrong in a while. Presenters handled the problems well, but it still was very…un-Apple (and something Jobs would hate)
The lack of support for MMS or tethering from AT&T in the keynote was a major downer. Seems to be the talk of attendees and its really bad timing for AT&T with the Palm Pre just being released on Sprint and all the talk in the past couple of months about the iPhone being headed to Verizon.
You could tell AT&T’s lack of support was a bit of a thorn in Apple’s side by the way Phil Schiller addressed it (or didn’t in the case of tethering). I have to wonder if this sort of thing would have happened if Steve Jobs had been working the past 6 months. Would he have found a way to get this stuff figured out with AT&T.
Either way it seems to be a recurring theme that Apple is carrying AT&T while the mobile carrier is dragging the iPhone maker down. It’s almost guaranteed that once their exclusivity deal runs out Apple will move the iPhone onto other networks. I can’t see any way any network could offer a deal that would make exclusivity worth it.
The one place where the keynote seemed strong was the introduction of the new MacBook Pro lineup and the introduction to Snow Leopard. I imagine just about every Leopard user will be running Snow Leopard once it’s released.
The addition of the SD card slots (and removal of ExpressCard slots) on the two smaller MacBook Pros is very interesting and could prove to be a strong move on Apple’s part. I will be interested to see how well those function and what users think of them.
In all it was a fairly boring presentation that lacked the smoothness and the pop that a Jobsian keynote usually has. There were some good aspects (Snow Leopard, MacBook price drops) and some bad ones (Scott Forstall’s rehash of what iPhone 3.0 is, the failed software presentations) but I think Apple showed where they’re headed for at least the next 6 months.
They want to aggressively attack the notebook market (and it seems those Windows ads have hit home a little bit) and use Snow Leopard to try to gain market share in the consumer and business markets. My guess is that they’re biding their time until this AT&T deal runs out to make some BIG announcements in the mobile department.



















