AT&T Losing iPhone Exclusivity on Wednesday?

[LagunaSol]

Now lets compare that to apple who releases a new OS every 1-1.5 on average with a cost of $129. So when you comare that to 3-4 Apple seems to pop off the the time of one over MS OS windows looks a hell of a lot cheaper.

Yes, the fact that Microsoft only releases a decent OS every 10 years makes it a real bargain. Hey, you found the silver lining! *handclap*

As a niche (5%) OS, Apple's stuff should be more expensive. Do you think it takes less effort to create an OS just because you hold a very small piece of the market? Of course it doesn't.

Microsoft's 95% stranglehold on the OS market, on the other hand, should net me a copy of Windows 7 Ultimate for around $49 retail - if you want to talk about "reasonable" margins that is (but of course you don't).

Where's the outrage?

 

[~NeonFire372~]

Competition is always a good thing, although Bell and Telus gaining the iPhone in Canada didn't do much.. then again it's a smaller market.

 

[VenusianSky]

What relevance does that have to the argument at hand?

I thought the argument is whether the price of the software is reflected in the price of the hardware that the software is written specifically for. I'm not sure how MS Windows became part of the debate considering it is not written for a specific piece of hardware made by the same company.

 

[maschinetheist]

Anybody remember the iPhone nano?

 

[Rodimus Prime]

The AT&T iPhone would have to be unlocked for a similar radio band network (GSM) for its communications. So, for the US it would have to be a carrier like T-Mobile.

If the iPhone does get released on Verizon, which I wholeheartedly do believe will happen because of the exclusivity deal ending with AT&T & an emerging market opportunity - Apple may just start building all the new iPhones using one of the dual GSM/CDMA chips and utilize it for all carriers.

I am know expert in whether or not the dual-chips have worked as stated, but I do know Blackberry and some Droid phones already utilizing these.

I am wondering what are the cons about the dual-chip? ...If there are major flaws in the dual chips then I don't see Apple building a "one-for-all."

That is what I expect apple would start doing. RIM already does that with there CDMA phones. If you pull up the charts on RIMs phone you will see if they have CDMA support on said phone it supports everything else. The Bold 9700 supports everything but CDMA but I expect the tour2 will be supporting everything include CDMA.
All blackberry CDMA phones (Storm and Tour) contain a sim card slot for if and when the phone is unlock so they can be used with a GSM carrier.

The only thing I could for see apple having to do is build in 2 Sim card slots. One for a R-UIM and one for a SIM card. CDMA cariars have been thinking about starting to use an R-UIM card which is basicly a SIM card for CDMA. Reason I would expect it to require 2 slots is it would not suprise me if the specs on R-UIM and SIM are slight different so it has to be handled differently.


Oh and just to point out the

 

[Eidorian]

I thought the argument is whether the price of the software is reflected in the price of the hardware that the software is written specifically for. I'm not sure how MS Windows became part of the debate considering it is not written for a specific piece of hardware made by the same company.

All of this has happened before and it will happen again.

I think that your comeback was already answered in my post:

"No software company could price their products based on the incremental cost per unit produced.
I doubt that any company could price any mass-produced product on the incremental cost per unit."​

Why did you have to spoil it? Anyone that read your post would have seen it.

 

[AidenShaw]

Yet on the other hand, iPhone, iPhone OS, and Mac OS X design and develop themselves.

I think that your comeback was already answered in my post:

"No software company could price their products based on the incremental cost per unit produced.
I doubt that any company could price any mass-produced product on the incremental cost per unit."​

Not sure if you read the whole thread, but this is the exact argument that we are all making. Earlier, Ryeno was complaining that the iPhone parts only cost $180 and that Apple is ripping everyone off.

Not *everyone* is making that argument, LagunaSol seems to argue that $0.50 is the right price for Windows 7.

 

[OllyW]

I thought the argument is whether the price of the software is reflected in the price of the hardware that the software is written specifically for. I'm not sure how MS Windows became part of the debate considering it is not written for a specific piece of hardware made by the same company.

I don't know how any of this became part of the debate about AT&T losing iPhone exclusivity on Wednesday.

 

[rhett7660]

Are you kidding? AT&T is far from the worst network.
Keep buying those Verizon commercials.....



"Keep buying"??? You have to be ****ing joking me right now? I didn't even get service in my own house with AT&T. Verizon is without a doubt THE MOST REALIABLE and BEST wireless carrier for me. It would explain why they are Number 1 and have the most people on their network and will only gain many more when they finally get the iPhone.

There fixed that for you...

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Yes, the fact that Microsoft only releases a decent OS every 10 years makes it a real bargain. Hey, you found the silver lining! *handclap*

As a niche (5%) OS, Apple's stuff should be more expensive. Do you think it takes less effort to create an OS just because you hold a very small piece of the market? Of course it doesn't.

Microsoft's 95% stranglehold on the OS market, on the other hand, should net me a copy of Windows 7 Ultimate for around $49 retail - if you want to talk about "reasonable" margins that is (but of course you don't).

Where's the outrage?

My problem with your argument is exactly what I point out. You have no problem pointing that out about MS but come up with a BS excuse when it is pointed out about apple.

I personally think Apple and Microsoft over charge. Apple charges a crap load of money for a service pack and a few new features. Microsoft just does huge OS updates but both over charge for it.

Now neither are as bad as some other software I can think of that is there. For example AutoCAD. A new copy every year that you have to pay thousands for. The changes are minor at best but they change the way the files are saved to screw over older copies of it.

Either way I think you like to make that argument about MS OS but glass over the fact that Apple is many ways is by far worse.

 

[rdowns]

I hope there is something to this. The only thing keeping me with ATT this past year has been my iPhone. Not that I think Verizon is much better, but generally, competition is a good thing. It's been several years since I switched from Verizon to Cingular, but I remember Verizon having good customer service. My personal experience with ATT has not been good.

I don't mean to single you out but your post was there.

I always see all these posts about customer service. May I ask why you all have so much interaction with your wireless provider? Other than one billing error, I have never had to contact Cingular/ATT in 6-7 years.

 

[VenusianSky]

I don't know how any of this became part of the debate about AT&T losing iPhone exclusivity on Wednesday.

True dat. And I took the bait

 

[rwilliams]

If Apple is going to bring the iPhone to a CDMA carrier, it doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense to offer it to just one (Verizon). If the GSM/CDMA combo chips are ready for major usage, they should just build all future iPhones with this combo chip and offer up the phone to every US carrier.

 

[nickdelvecchio]

If Apple is going to bring the iPhone to a CDMA carrier, it doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense to offer it to just one (Verizon). If the GSM/CDMA combo chips are ready for major usage, they should just build all future iPhones with this combo chip and offer up the phone to every US carrier.

I agree, but it depends on how much moolah verizon (or any other carrier) would pay for more exclusivity.. at least it would be unlock-able to most carriers.

 

[robfromabove]

If Apple is going to bring the iPhone to a CDMA carrier, it doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense to offer it to just one (Verizon). If the GSM/CDMA combo chips are ready for major usage, they should just build all future iPhones with this combo chip and offer up the phone to every US carrier.

Not necessarily. As tech-savvy as current iPhone users may be, bringing it to a crippled network like MetroPCS could be bad business for Apple - the majority of phone users don't realize the intricacies of networks, and when their iPhone has worse web speeds than offered by AT&T, they'll automatically assume it's the phone not the network.

Plus I think Apple likes the exclusivity of their phone.

 

[balamw]

May I ask why you all have so much interaction with your wireless provider?

+1, I too have been with AWS->Cingular->AT&T for a LONG time and have maybe called them twice in all that time. Once to activate a new phone and once to get help in setting up my voicemail 'case the shortcut key wasn't working.

Maybe it's just where I live and work, but AT&T works fine for me.

B

 

[Peace]

+1, I too have been with AWS->Cingular->AT&T for a LONG time and have maybe called them twice in all that time. Once to activate a new phone and once to get help in setting up my voicemail 'case the shortcut key wasn't working.

Maybe it's just where I live and work, but AT&T works fine for me.

B

Works fine for me too. Unless there is something very important that I can't do on AT&T I don't see myself moving to Verizon.

 

[rdowns]

Isn't most contact with customer service departments over non payment of bills?

 

[goobot]

macromors you need to give it up. version is not getting the iphone.

 

[cumanzor]

Of course not. Does anyone get all up in arms that a copy of Windows 7 Ultimate Edition costs $320 when the DVD itself costs only $0.25 to press? Of course not. People only get all up in arms that Apple sells an iPhone for $600 when it only costs $200 to build.

Microsoft's margins make Apple's look like child's play. Where's the outrage? Nowhere.

It's called selective indignation, and it's apparently triggered by a glowing fruit logo and nothing else.

Hey look who's talking about selective indignation.

You probably agree with me, this whole argument is complete ******** for virtually every case you can think of:

• CoD:MW2: Costs of development? Fees paid to MS and Sony for the SDK? Advertisement, artwork, etc, etc, etc.
• Windows 7*: The same, who pays developers, advertisers, etc, etc?
• iPhone: Costs of R&D and advertisement?

And they also want profit out of it. None of these things happen magically. There are far more costs involved than just $0.25 to press a DVD.

*please refrain from your known irrelevant anti-MS biased comments/jokes.

 

[aristotle]

Verizon is not getting the iPhone and it most certainly is not getting iPhone exclusively The majority of iPhone sales now are outside of the US and all of those countries use GSM. It would be suicide to release the next iPhone on a carrier and standard that only worked in the US.

 

[butterfly0fdoom]

+1, I too have been with AWS->Cingular->AT&T for a LONG time and have maybe called them twice in all that time. Once to activate a new phone and once to get help in setting up my voicemail 'case the shortcut key wasn't working.

Maybe it's just where I live and work, but AT&T works fine for me.

B

I've only ever called them to get SIM unlock codes.

 

[LagunaSol]

Maybe it's just where I live and work, but AT&T works fine for me.

Agreed. I've never understood the Verizon religion. I'm not saying I like AT&T (I don't), but I have no reason to dislike them based on their service, which also works fine for me where I live and work.

AT&T's texting plan prices are criminal though.

I view all carriers as equally evil. That said, the more carriers Apple can sell its phones through, the better for me (and the worse for Apple's competitors).

 

[ThunderSkunk]

That has never been stated either.

What? Ach. I thought that was in print upon the booking of the venue. Now my "I'll believe it when I see it" approach has even less to go on.

 

[Ammo]

Verizon is not getting the iPhone and it most certainly is not getting iPhone exclusively The majority of iPhone sales now are outside of the US and all of those countries use GSM. It would be suicide to release the next iPhone on a carrier and standard that only worked in the US.

It's not getting the iPhone exclusively...

But how...HOW is it suicide to release the iPhone for Verizon if it's also on other carriers?

How could selling 20 million more iPhones be a bad thing?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Who cares if it doesn't work outside the U.S. if there are other versions of it that do!

Please explain this to me. Logic seems to fall on deaf ears.