Wrong.
The iPhone's success has to do with a robust operating system and a unified code base. In time, we will see all sorts of applications on it - and that is what makes it so attractive.
I 100% agree that the iPhone's (and will add Apple's) success is based on a "robust operating system and a unified code base." We can all agree that this level of control is Apple's bread and butter.
I just neglected to cover this obvious fact in my initial post.
The other phone manufacturer's like SE & Nokia are using the Symbian OS and they aren't as good in application software like Apple. Although they have hardly failed.
Sure. Manufacturers like SE & Nokia have had great success... but not against anything as remotely robust and integrated as what Apple brought to the party on June 29th.
Recap.
June 28th, the mobile phone market was the same old game: fat cats getting fatter. And while things seemed to 'work,' tho not particularly well, there was no threat/incentive for anyone/anything to evolve.
June 29th, everything changed.
With the proverbial flip of the switch, the fat cats (seemingly all of the sudden - tho there was that MWSF '07 'warning') found themselves playing catchup. And it's easy to gloss over just how remarkable that light-switch, redefinition phenomenon is (something Apple has now pulled off twice). But if you
must know what that's like, just ask Creative or iRiver.
What the current phone market is experiencing is not much different than what the mp3 player market went through in 2001. Before Apple, several manufacturers were doing just fine. Everyone had comfortably settled into place. Apple shows up, amidst a LOT of skepticism, and well... we all know how that's been unfolding ever since.
The future of mobile communications is Asia. India adds 7+ million new users a month and China adds 5+ million a month. For these people, primarily under age 30, their mobile is the only phone they have and will not hesitate buying a more expensive unit and will not hesitate going from one provider to another because there is no contract and when they move around, these people like to use whichever carrier suits them. There are people in Asia who are ready to jump at the iPhone given the chance, but if its locked down, its unlikely to happen. An unlocked iPhone, if it were released world wide, would see several million sold right off the bat. I would say the factory that makes the iPhone in China wouldn't be able to keep up with demand.
Heck yeah the future of many things, least of which is mobile communications, is Asia! And while an unlocked iPhone would sell millions right out of the gate (and manufacturing plants would instantly be 2 years behind in production) again, it would hurt the brand in the long run. I just can't see Apple putting out something they could not guarantee the user experience. That so M$. And for better or worse (I can argue 'better'), that user experience guarantee is well worth not selling crap-loads (which = a lot) of kludge devices.
Kind of like that 'less is more' mentality.
ATT only brings visual voice mail. Their network, like everyone else, doesn't work well in all places within the US. I don't think Apple is going to become a mobile service provider anytime soon because that involves a large infrastructure and is a very different business than what they are presently doing. It would be analogous to Apple becoming an internet service provider.
Agreed. Visual Voice Mail, while nifty, does not justify partnering with AT&T. But I covered (and stand by) my reasons for a partnership.
And yes, providing Mobile Services requires a massive infrastructure.
Especially with today's inefficient practices/strategies/concepts/implementations. This alone, to me, suggests an opportunity that I think Apple is (and has been) strategically placing themselves in a position to address. For a long time. And no matter how you slice it: Apple is most certainly in the mobile communications business - if only from a different angle.
Now there is no way they could have jumped into the game, alone, played by today's rules AND been successful. Which is exactly why they didn't. Again, they partnered with a 'established' service provider (in the US) more as a buffer. Lessons learned form this experience, combined that with their decades of successful user experience design and implementation, and (all of the sudden) service providing makes maybe a lot more sense than it once did. Only, it won't look the same as today's 'service provider.' I don't think it out of line to suggest that the revolution is here.
I'll bet that Nokia, Samsung and SE will in the near future dump the Symbian OS and go to Linux.
To me, dumping Symbian in favor of Linux is the Nokia's and Samsung's (etc.) only option. The sooner, the better.
But again, Apple's tight integration will be hard to compete with, for a long time. And if you think these suggestions/ideas are original or somehow new, you have another thing coming. The iPhone (and devices like it) have been in the works for years. Everything Apple has done from the get-go has been leading to this. And today, they are far more poised to handle current and future challenges than most of their competition.
I know it has been popular/tempting to bash Apple at every turn. And many have taken their best shot(s).
OS X?
iPod??
Intel???
iPhone?!?!?
From my perspective, I think they're onto something.
