China Mobile Still Pushing Apple to Adopt TD-SCDMA for iPhone

[jayducharme]

The game-changer here, IMO, would be if Apple caved in to China's demands. That would signal that we're back to the old way of doing things, where the cell providers dictated what phones could do. The revolution of the iPhone was that for the first time a manufacturer dictated what the cell provider could do. I'd hate to see things revert back to the way they were, even if it were confined to a single country. I hope Apple sticks to its guns.

 

[M2M]

I think the decision of Apple to not include Flash in all iPhonews and also not not include Wifi in the Chinese Version of the iPhone (due to a China Only Standard) gives a pretty clear answer on how much Apple cares about island solutions..... I would agree on that Strategy

 

[kdarling]

The revolution of the iPhone was that for the first time a manufacturer dictated what the cell provider could do.

Yes, Apple moved the carrier walled garden into Cupertino and made the garden prettier but the walls higher.

Apple took control of deciding which apps everyone can use, unlike being able to download any app from anywhere with other smartphones at the time.

At the same time, ATT still dictated not being able to sell apps that used a lot of 3G bandwidth, like Skype or Slingbox.

A big question is, was it Apple or the carriers that prevent unlocking the phone so that local SIMs can be used, like other GSM phones? (It's one important reason why you would choose GSM to start with.)

 

[3282868]

Yes, Apple moved the carrier walled garden into Cupertino and made the garden prettier but the walls higher.

Apple took control of deciding which apps everyone can use, unlike being able to download any app from anywhere with other smartphones at the time.

At the same time, ATT still dictated not being able to sell apps that used a lot of 3G bandwidth, like Skype or Slingbox.

A big question is, was it Apple or the carriers that prevent unlocking the phone so that local SIMs can be used, like other GSM phones? (It's one important reason why you would choose GSM to start with.)

Apple has not taken control of all the applications in a dictatorship style "reign". Apple simply isn't allowing adult oriented applications, or has become more strict in approving them, which doesn't equate to a "walled garden".

Apple has always had a controlled environment with regard to software and hardware as doing so equates to a superior end user environment. Selling the software with the hardware creates a better system. Spreading FUD about Apple's "control" as communistic isn't a fair point.

Now ATT on the other hand, I agree with your points.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

It must be a really, REALLY slow day for this to get front page press. Of course Apple won't roll out a TD-SCDMA enabled iPhone... that standard is only used in China so they can avoid paying royalties to Western nations. I doubt Apple wants to pay China royalties for using it...

In looking at this: http://www.att.com/gen/press-room?pid=4800&cdvn=news&newsarticleid=26961

Looks like Apple might be able to make a bundle in making a TD-SCDMA phone just for China... according the press release in the 2Q of 2009 (2.4m activations vs 79.6 subscribers - This does not count those iPhone users already on board. ). In Q2 that amounted to 3% of the total users!

Heck, 3% of 500M users for a TD-SCDMA phone would mean 15m new iPhones sold.

And looking at this: ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IPhone_sales_per_quarter_simple.svg ). Apple has sold 42.2m iPhones so far. I would guess that give the 500M base number for China - that Apple would easily gather 10% of their market.

The question is.... would Apple be able to gain manufacturing capabilities to keep up with China's TD-SCDMA needs - and to be able to keep up with the demand for the markets they are already in...

It's clearly about the margins for Apple. Unless they can guarantee enough sales, there is no benefit to them making a different hardware iteration of their device specifically for one carrier - they clearly want software and packaging to be the only thing they need to change when manufacturing devices.

See the above... On the hardware side it seems to make sense. On the App side of things it might not....

If they won't do CDMA for a customer base of 500 million, there is no way they'll do it for 90 million (Verizon).

That was one of my first thoughts in jumping in to this thread. LOL

But there the contract with AT&T may prevent Apple going towards Verizon. The sweet deal for users of the iPad seems to me be an indication that Apple wants to stay on the good side of AT&T. Along with that Verizon wants to control the look and feel of the cell phones they sell from what I have read.

Total population is 1.3 B. The number sounds right. BUT,

The real question is how many people amoung the 1/2 B can afford an iPhone. The answer is not so many.

Well so far it seems that 500M can afford cell phones. No small feat from my limited knowledge on disposable income in China. Yet here in the US I know folks that cut back on other things to make the iPhone work for their budget.

The thing we are missing is how much those 500M are paying.. and how much more the iPhone would add to that....

The game-changer here, IMO, would be if Apple caved in to China's demands. That would signal that we're back to the old way of doing things, where the cell providers dictated what phones could do. The revolution of the iPhone was that for the first time a manufacturer dictated what the cell provider could do. I'd hate to see things revert back to the way they were, even if it were confined to a single country. I hope Apple sticks to its guns.

Respectfully disagree... we are talking about a country of 1.3B people. You are talking about 1/5 to 1/7 of the population of the world! As I said - if only 10% of the the current 500M subsribers went to the iPhone that is 50M units!

 

[kdarling]

Apple has not taken control of all the applications in a dictatorship style "reign". Apple simply isn't allowing adult oriented applications, or has become more strict in approving them, which doesn't equate to a "walled garden".

It absolutely is a walled garden. Perhaps you don't know the term. Any control at all equates to one, much less an absolute control over all app choices, whether for a good purpose or not:

walled garden: "carrier or service provider control over applications and content/media on platforms (such as mobile devices) and restricting convenient access to non-approved applications or content."

walled garden "also commonly refers to the content that wireless devices such as mobile phones have access to if the content provided by the wireless carrier is limited."

Apple has always had a controlled environment with regard to software and hardware as doing so equates to a superior end user environment. Selling the software with the hardware creates a better system.

I use third party software on my MacBook without asking Apple. I don't think that I have an inferior environment because of that freedom. Quite the opposite, actually.

Spreading FUD about Apple's "control" as communistic isn't a fair point.

I didn't say it was either good or bad, nor did I call it "communistic". Those are your words, not mine. Please don't read in more than I said.

I stated a fact, which is that the control got tighter from both manufacturer and carrier, who have also admitted to working together to keep 3G apps off AT&T's network.

This is far more control than any AT&T smartphone had over it before the iPhone. You can claim that it's for the good if you wish, but you can't dispute that the ultimate app control passed from the carrier and users to Apple.

 

[iphones4evry1]

Apple has offered the iPhone in China since last October through China Unicom, which uses the same 3GSM/UMTS standard available on the rest of the iPhone's carrier partners around the world.

If people in China want an iPhone, they know where to go ... China Unicom.
Apple knows the people can get an iPhone if they want one.

 

[marksman]

[QUOTE］Originally Posted by erasetheclouds
If they won't do CDMA for a customer base of 500 million, there is no way they'll do it for 90 million (Verizon).

You don't get it:

As much as 1/2 B, few can afford an iPhone. The "potential" of a market advertised by China never existed.[/QUOTE]

What is a few when it comes to 500 million?

1% is 5 million people.

 

[valanchan]

You don't get it:

As much as 1/2 B, few can afford an iPhone. The "potential" of a market advertised by China never existed.

What is a few when it comes to 500 million?

1% is 5 million people.[/QUOTE]

The number of potential buyers in China is too staggering to comprehend for most.

The Chinese have a borderless mentality. They will purchase an iPhone from whichever country they want. This makes statistics meaningless and the Chinese purchasing behaviour an art rather than a science.

Most said Apple was slow to get into China but, as usual, they are watching and learning.

 

[vladi]

The game-changer here, IMO, would be if Apple caved in to China's demands. That would signal that we're back to the old way of doing things, where the cell providers dictated what phones could do. The revolution of the iPhone was that for the first time a manufacturer dictated what the cell provider could do. I'd hate to see things revert back to the way they were, even if it were confined to a single country. I hope Apple sticks to its guns.

Not really. Maybe in US but in Europe all the phones were always available without a network carrier so networks had to ajdust to whats available on the market. Come to think about it only iPhone and some HTC models are carrier exclusives today.

 

[aristotle]

Exactly. Not a GSM network, so the existing GSM/CDMA chips wouldn't work (well, they'd work on the CDMA side but I'm talking about the new side). You'd need one of the (prototype?) GSM/WCDMA/CDMA2000 chips to use Telus/Bell's new network.

For the last time. HSPA/UMTS == 3G GSM(US) FOMA(Japan). WCDMA has nothing to do with the CDMA2000 standard. WCDMA borrows some technique from CDMA2000 for the air interface but it is part of the HSPA/UMTS standard. It is part of the GSM groups 3G standard. Is that clear enough for you?

Telus and Bell decided to not implement EDGE (2G GSM) but the fall back is implemented equipment shared with 3G service in a lot of countries. The CDMA network is "not" compatible in any way with the new HSPA+ network which means that they are separate networks with separate towers or at least separate transmission infrastructure.

The iPhone 3GS sold on Telus and Bell is the same model that is sold at Fido/Rogers, same model sold in Japan by Softbank and AT&T in the US. Is that clear enough for you?

 

[Nermal]

WCDMA has nothing to do with the CDMA2000 standard.

I never said that it did. Someone else mentioned hybrid GSM/CDMA2000 "world" chips and I was replying to that post. I'm well aware that the CDMA side of those chips isn't compatible with WCDMA/HSPA. The 2G GSM side won't work with a pure 3G network either.

they are separate networks with separate towers or at least separate transmission infrastructure.

Same here in NZ.

The iPhone 3GS sold on Telus and Bell is the same model that is sold at Fido/Rogers, same model sold in Japan by Softbank and AT&T in the US. Is that clear enough for you?

Again, I'm not sure why you're arguing with me when I agree with you.

I was under the impression that the new system in Canada was the same as XT in NZ: There's a WCDMA/UMTS network, which of course requires a compatible phone (such as an iPhone). An old 2G GSM phone does not work as the network has no GSM component. There's also an old CDMA2000/EVDO network but it's completely separate, just run by the same company.

It's possible that we're having a naming "clash". Over here we typically think of GSM as the old 2G system, and the operators here refer to 3G as WCDMA, not 3GSM, 3G GSM etc. So when I say "not GSM", I mean "not 2G GSM".

 

[bniu]

If people in China want an iPhone, they know where to go ... China Unicom.
Apple knows the people can get an iPhone if they want one.

not China Unicom, Hong Kong or any electronics mall with hong kong iPhones. My dad picked up a Hong Kong version of the 3GS in beijing for far cheaper than the china unicom prices and best of all, it's unlocked and he can use it both here and in china and he can even update the software without going through jailbreak measures. I'm pretty sure Steve Jobs is well aware of the black market HK iphones being sold in China and i'm sure that he doesn't mind it one bit and i'm sure he's quite happy that the HK iphones are undercutting the crappy wifi crippled china unicom iphones and with the black market going on, users aren't paying the exorbiant taxes on iphones the commie govt is collecting (hence the ridiculously high prices for the mainland version)...

 

[bump.ac]

The New Generation Of Mobile Phone Apps

Try the new MOBILE phone APPLICATION for FREE on www.bump.ac !BackUp your information now!

 

[Jenkins12]

Not true. 15% of Chinese consumers are middle-class or wealthier. When I worked in marketing in Shanghai we all used China Mobile; the percentage may be higher for them.

That makes the Chinese opportunity with CM roughly the same size or larger as the opportunity for Verizon, assuming that Verizon has many existing customers who also can't afford an iphone.

Well said. This subject isnt exactly black and white, I'm sure Apple considered the option.