My opinion on why apple would make the iphone nano and not for AT&T...

SatanLover said:
apple is a "cell phone company" they sell cell phones
Click to expand...

So because Apple released one phone and an upgrade for that phone, they're a cell phone company?

Ok. I guess it's really a matter of opinion. I wouldn't consider them one of the major manufacturers, even though their one phone is vastly popular. Not Samsung, on the other hand, sells several different phones and a ton of different electronics. I'd consider them a cell phone company. Apple? No.
 
lostprophet894 said:
So because Apple released one phone and an upgrade for that phone, they're a cell phone company?

Ok. I guess it's really a matter of opinion. I wouldn't consider them one of the major manufacturers, even though their one phone is vastly popular. Not Samsung, on the other hand, sells several different phones and a ton of different electronics. I'd consider them a cell phone company. Apple? No.
Click to expand...

They aren't a major manufacturer even though they have sold 10+ million phones? Defining any of these companies that have a variety of electronic product lines by a single product is a misnomer. How can you consider Samsung a "cell phone company" and apple not? What are your criteria?
 
I don't really care about the iPhone's size. I just want a iPhone that is basically a iPod Touch but with phone and text functions. It needs to be on PAYG as well. BTW, I know the current iPhone can be bought on PAYG, but that's way too expensive for a phone...
 
SatanLover said:
They aren't a major manufacturer even though they have sold 10+ million phones? Defining any of these companies that have a variety of electronic product lines by a single product is a misnomer. How can you consider Samsung a "cell phone company" and apple not? What are your criteria?
Click to expand...

As I said before, it comes down to a matter of opinion. To answer your question, my opinion is as stated because Samsung has more than one phone and has been selling them for many years while Apple has one phone and has shown no sign of releasing any others.
 
lostprophet894 said:
As I said before, it comes down to a matter of opinion. To answer your question, my opinion is as stated because Samsung has more than one phone and has been selling them for many years while Apple has one phone and has shown no sign of releasing any others.
Click to expand...

It's not a matter of opinion. Apple is a company that sells cell phones. Labeling Apple a "cell phone company", the way you are using it, is so ambiguous it doesn't mean a thing.

By that same logic Budweiser is a "t-shirt company". They have been selling a variety of different t-shirts for decades and they sure do sell a lot of them.
 
SatanLover said:
It's not a matter of opinion. Apple is a company that sells cell phones. Labeling Apple a "cell phone company", the way you are using it, is so ambiguous it doesn't mean a thing.

By that same logic Budweiser is a "t-shirt company". They have been selling a variety of different t-shirts for decades and they sure do sell a lot of them.
Click to expand...

Your logic is absolutely ridiculous. ESPECIALLY after introducing the Budweiser argument. I'd like to see a poll regarding just that. But it's all good. Agree to disagree.
 
TSX said:
We know that AT&T has the rights to the iphone for a certain number of years, but they dont own the rights to the iphone nano. So if apple made the nano they could sell it to another carrier (sprint , t-mobile, ect.) and get a whole new group of buyers who didnt want to switch carriers to get the iphone. If it was released on AT&T who would buy the nano over the iphone 3g, i mean it would be sort of a down grade some what, as far a screen size and stuff.
Click to expand...

I would be willing to bet that AT&T has a non-compete clause in the contract. I don't see the above even plausible any lawyer worth his/her salt would have thought of this in advance.
 
lostprophet894 said:
Your logic is absolutely ridiculous. ESPECIALLY after introducing the Budweiser argument. I'd like to see a poll regarding just that. But it's all good. Agree to disagree.
Click to expand...

I could go through and painstakingly show you why it is the same logic but I think its pretty obvious to other readers who don't have their heels dug in on one side of an argument. And I don't want to waste the time.
 
lostprophet894 said:
Because people want a smartphone without having to pay for it. I sincerely hope Apple doesn't go down to that level.

And to all who say "why shouldn't they?"; Apple is NOT a cell phone company, as much as you'd like them to be. If people want a cheaper phone without a data plan, get a Nokia or a Motorola. They're nice phones. The iPhone is a smart phone. Take a look at the Blackberry forums. Are people over there saying "Where's my Bold nano!!!?!?!?!?!?"? I haven't been there but I wouldn't assume they would be because Blackberries are smart phones and everybody knows it.

Get over it already.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about ? I am not defending the nano I think it's a stupid idea. A new iPhone would be nice. Like hard and software upgrades. Your post still confuses me. Explain
 
TJisYeah said:
What are you talking about ? I am not defending the nano I think it's a stupid idea. A new iPhone would be nice. Like hard and software upgrades. Your post still confuses me. Explain
Click to expand...

Sorry for the confusion. I'm on your side. I was addressing the "why shouldn't they make a nano" people.

Clear?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top