Apple as a Wireless Provider?

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif

While this falls more in line with speculation than actual rumor, Forbes mentions the possibility of Apple launching its own wireless network to promote the upcoming Motorola iTunes-enabled cellular phone.

Forbes comments how other companies have recently been able to enter the mobile market without a significant outlay of money by becoming a "mobile virtual network operator" or MVNO. The advantage is that it allows companies to deploy a mobile network but utilize existing infrastructure. Disney, ESPN and Earthlink are among companies who have launched their own mobile networks.

This would also circumvent roadblocks in having to work with individual wireless carriers.

The solution could be for Apple to launch its own cellular network, doing an end run around carriers and providing the company with revenue from both selling phone handsets and from the resale of cellular service.

The most recent rumors have pinpointed Cingular as the likely provider for Motorola's iTunes enabled cell phone.

[realityisterror]

It shall never happen... maybe someday it'll be like a nationwide WiFi/cell network... but Apple isn't really the one to do that...

I'm thinking the iTunes phone, if and when it is released, will come through Cingular or Verizon... quite possibly Cingular, since that's where analysts and insiders are pointing...

reality

[mlrproducts]

This won't happen even though it would be AWESOME!

[Surreal]

is there really that much money to be made in this arena? i know that it would push hardware..but not apple's hardware..so it would hardly be a "break even to get ahead" situation ala itunes music store.

[Le Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Surreal

is there really that much money to be made in this arena? i know that it would push hardware..but not apple's hardware..so it would hardly be a "break even to get ahead" situation ala itunes music store.

There's plenty of money to be lost creating the infrastructure. If they wanted to do anything, it would be like Virgin does--resell capacity on another network, say Cingular, and brand it "Apple". I doubt it would make sense profit-wise, but at least it has a chance, unlike creating their own network.

[Porchland]

Originally Posted by Le Big Mac

There's plenty of money to be lost creating the infrastructure. If they wanted to do anything, it would be like Virgin does--resell capacity on another network, say Cingular, and brand it "Apple".

You just restated what was in the lead post.

The whole news item was that Apple would resell on an existing network.

[pontecorvo]

Originally Posted by mlrproducts

Darnit, second post, but still this won't happen even though it would be AWESOME!

First of all, why won't it happen? Second of all, why would it be "AWESOME!"?

[technocoy]

you can bet the motorola would just be a hold-over for a wholly apple designed iPhone.

here's to wishing....

[snkTab]

I figure it'll be more expensive and have less customer service.

[evilernie]

If it does happen I hope they don't hook up with the SUCKIEST provider there is, which of course is Cingular.

[jinzo012]

Maybe they'll send a couple relay systems up into orbit with STS-114 (One-Fourteen)- Return to flight.
maybe
probably not though

[Flying Llama]

Wow, wonder what their plans would be like!
But apple style as a wireless provider? Integration with current apple products? That would be quite nice.
I doubt this will happen, though why would it be on page 1...

llama

[joeconvert]

Originally Posted by Flying Llama

I doubt this will happen, though why would it be on page 1...

B/c it came from a credible source (Forbes) known for its insight in the business world.

I agree, however, that it is not likely to happen. The author in question was clearly under pressure ot meet a deadline with an insightful column.

[Thanatoast]

Hey, if Apple provided a capable pda-phone, and if it happened to be integrated with their ipod products, I wouldn't complain. Imagine having an apple pda (ha!!) / cellphone (i like the samsung i500, i550) with a 20 gig harddrive full of music, games, videos, productivity software, camera, universal remote, etc, etc.

Bow down before the uber-convergence device!

[Stella]

What you describe is a smartphone.

Apple should go with Symbian OS, if any. Palm and microsoft are nowhere in this arena. ( Symbian has over 50% marketshare, twice that of microsoft and palm).

Originally Posted by Thanatoast

Hey, if Apple provided a capable pda-phone, and if it happened to be integrated with their ipod products, I wouldn't complain. Imagine having an apple pda (ha!!) / cellphone (i like the samsung i500, i550) with a 20 gig harddrive full of music, games, videos, productivity software, camera, universal remote, etc, etc.

Bow down before the uber-convergence device!

[macnews]

I don't think this will happen and doubt it would be awesome. The equivilant would be Apple ONLY selling iPods through HP, Dell, etc. It would still be an iPod and would be branded much like the HP iPod but why? Unlike other branded iPods, cell phones are being practically given away.

There is more money to be made by having more phones with iTunes service and finding a way to split revenue with the major exisiting cell phone providers. Of course the major problem here is the providers tend to be very greedy and like the idea of charging an arm and a leg for ring tones.

[abrooks]

We have to remember that Forbes was one of the first to report and confirm the Intel switch, none of us believed it or wanted to believe it but they news sources were right, I think we should think some more before we cast this away.

[GregA]

Nice ideas in your posts cryptochrome and dstorey

I have only one thing to add - and that's a simple "starting point" Apple could have.
edit: Hmmm.. on hindsight.. it's not really just "one thing" eh?

Starting VERY simply - lets imagine an Airport-phone for the home. It's just a cordless home phone like many people have, with a few exceptions
a) it's made by Apple
b) it connects to your Airport network
c) it makes and receives phone calls via the net (but looks and feels like a regular phone)

I'm talking about a very simple phone, to start with - really an iChat phone that also connects to the regular phone networks.

From there, the idea can expand (or higher end phones can add features), especially a nice colour screen:
1) it could send/receive iChat messages and SMS messages
2) it could do video calls (ala iChat)
3) you could have a few iPhones in your house (some higher end, some simpler phones?)
4) it could run widgets (including Phonebook, and iTunes remote?)
5) a bigger screen could work for eBooks, & to check email/web.

It wouldn't take much to do the above. Besides building an Airport-phone, they'd have to expand .Mac to provide a phone number and billing, connect iChat to regular phone networks, and add QoS to Airport devices. No big deals with mobile carriers.

The above phone stays at home, it doesn't go with you. And that may be "old school" at this point.

So from here, the ideas get bigger. Such as
6) configure the phone for your home AND work AND friend's houses
7) add iPod functionality for 'disconnected' use
8) provide wireless access points at Apple stores AND
9) automatically log on to wireless access points wherever they may be

That give you quite a useable phone, but it's not 'always connected' until you:
10) add cell phone technology

#10 is where this article started off, with an ongoing range of possibilities.

[iMeowbot]

w00t, e•World Phone Edition! Gah, let's hope not. .Mac seems to be about as complicated as Apple can get with an online service without losing it completely.

[sacear]

Originally Posted by iMeowbot

w00t, e•World Phone Edition! Gah, let's hope not. .Mac seems to be about as complicated as Apple can get with an online service without losing it completely.

e•World was excellent. The best online service and community at that time.

e•World was another Michael Spindler train wreck. Apple already had Applelink in service for several years; the idea for e•World actually pre-dated AOL and was supposed to be an extension of the Macintosh Operating System included free with System 7 back in the early nineties. Spindler couldn't understand what e•World was or how it worked, and didn't see its benefits. Then AOL took off and he finally got the picture. However, for some reason, he tho't e•World would be a huge success and a huge income revenue resource, so instead of including it free with the System Software, he made the decision to charge for it and to charge expensive rates for the online time. In typical Spindler fashion, months later Apple was back-pedaling by giving e•World away for free and trying to adjust the online rates. Yet, that was too little, too late. There were too many other online services and communities at that time (Prodigy, CompuServe, GEnie, Delphi, AOL, etc.), and Apple could not keep up or find its niche marketing to and depending on only Macintosh users.

[iMeowbot]

Originally Posted by sacear

e•World was excellent. The best online service and community at that time.

Meh. They did a nice job of reskinning the AOL software, but the community part is where they really fell down: there really wasn't much of one. That's why we called it empty•World! Apple completely dropped the ball when it came to getting enough subscribers to make the service sustainable. At peak they managed to attract 150K subscribers. Given the small proportion of any online community that ever speaks up and the large number of discussion areas Apple created up front, I guess that the reputation was inevitable, but most boards really were peppered mostly with unreplied, apparently unread, messages.[/quote]

e•World was another Michael Spindler train wreck. Apple already had Applelink in service for several years; the idea for e•World actually pre-dated AOL and was supposed to be an extension of the Macintosh Operating System included free with System 7 back in the early nineties.

There were two Applelink services. One was an internal Apple system, and a second one, run by Quantum (now AOL) and called Applelink Personal Edition, was for the general public. Personal Edition was what became AOL after Apple abandoned it. e•World was a second joint venture with AOL.

Spindler couldn't understand what e•World was or how it worked, and didn't see its benefits. Then AOL took off and he finally got the picture.

AOL were already taking off by the time eWorld was introduced. Early that year (1992), AOL floated their IPO with 180K subscribers. They were already up to 300K by the time Apple signed the eWorld deal in the fall, and AOL reached half a million by the end of 1993. Having just become a public company and always being more than happy to trumped their ever-increasing subscribe numbers, there is no way that the rapid growth at AOL couldn't have been known to Apple. The infamous flood of AOL disks (floppies at the time, with a PC-GEOS based version of the AOL client) had already begun.

However, for some reason, he tho't e•World would be a huge success and a huge income revenue resource, so instead of including it free with the System Software, he made the decision to charge for it and to charge expensive rates for the online time.

The eWorld software was tossed in with Performa models, which was the Apple consumer product line at the time.

e•World began at $5/hour, later dropped to $3/hour.

In 1992, AOL charged a monthly fee of $5.95 which included one non-peak hour. Additional time was billed at $5/hour (non-peak) or $10/hour (peak). In 1993 they dropped to an initial $9.95 a month (5 hours included) and $3.50 for additional time. For most users, the prices worked out to about the same.

Clearly the Apple service was initially cheaper, and later comparable.

[pontecorvo]

Originally Posted by realityisterror

but Apple isn't really the one to do that...

Like Disney and ESPN are?

[nagromme]

If it's becoming common for "any old company" to piggyback off of existing systems, then I guess anything's possible. But doubtful.

Still, not nearly AS doubtful as MacOSRumors' tidbit a while back about Apple becoming a wireless carrier by putting up cell towers at all their retail stores

[amac4me]

if this were to happen, all i would have to say is WHOA

[ham_man]

If Apple wants to sell a large number of phones, they will do it through one of the existing providers (Cingular, Verizon, etc.). People will be more likely to buy an iTunes phone if there is no hassle of switching providers...