Skype for iPhone Sparks Battle Between Consumers and Carriers

[str1f3]

Can someone explain to me something

Why didn't Fring kick up the same amount of fuss as Skype?

Is Skype a better program? Aren't they basically identical?

because an app native app will almost always perform better than a third party app. the call quality and connectivity on skype is already better than fring. fring may do a lot but i never needed it to. i have other apps for im.

 

[Saladinos]

there're several smartphones selling as well as iphone, some even better. eg, research in motion sold twice as many smartphones during holiday season as apple. outside the us (and to certain extend the uk), iphone hasn't really been all that successful. lots of talk yes, but mediocre or slow sales. apple really needs to deliver something special with the next model, otherwise they are going to loose momentum. tweaking looks a bit, adding 3.2mpix cam and increasing memory won't be sufficient.

I would certainly call the iPhone successful. You have to consider a number of factors when analysing if it's successful from a business point of view:
- Apple has only been in the market for two years. Many volume customers have significant inertia and don't switch unless the platform has been established for some time.
- Apple has one model at one price point. Other manufacturers have several. This is related to the point above. As Apple spends more time in the market, they'll release more product lines to appeal to more people at more price points.
- Regardless of the amount of sales, Apple's sales have been increasing dramatically. They have upwards momentum, which from a business perspective, is crucially important.
- Apple have removed many of the competitive advantages of their rivals. WinMo's software superiority, built up over about a decade, has vanished in one year, and the iPhone is now the mobile platform to develop for. Developers are making lots of money from the AppStore, which is going to attract more people to the platform. Again, upwards momentum.

I would love to agree with you by the truth is, I work fir a high end tech firm, mostly mac and while some of us have iPhone's, we all have sprint htc or touch. What hasn't happened and is about to happen is smart phones with features that apple doesn't have and if they do with 3.0, it's due to all the newer smart phones coming out. Heck even apple stores use windows mobile for ez pay but the point is, mobile 6.5 looks a lot like iPhone and this is from msft. There are many news smart phones coming, everyone will have an app store with many developers that were shut out fromApple going to android.

WinMo 6.5 may look like the iPhone's OS, but it isn't nearly as good as the iPhone's OS. It doesn't work as well, not all the software uses the touch interface, it only supports resistive touch and 65K colours...etc. It may have a new look, but to paraphrase Bertrand Serlet, it's still WinMo. Oh, and as I mentioned above, 3rd party software, which used to be the big advantage of WinMo, has now disappeared. The iPhone has more apps, more developer support, and a better store. Also, all apps on the iPhone were built to take maximum advantage of the large touch screen. The iPod touch has the same OS, meaning that apps developed for the iPhone are accessible from 30 million devices. That's impressive even if you compare it to WinMo's established market share.

Oh, and everyone's running away from WinMo. Palm, Sony Ericsson, LG, Samsung, HTC...etc are all moving away from the WinMo-exclusive business models they used to have. Instead, they're adopting OSes such as Symbian or Android (or for Palm, WebOS). WinMo is haemorrhaging manufacturing partners.

Sure the iPhone is king but the smart phone, android, palm, msft os are in it's infancy and we know from apples business model, they fear flash, Voip, video conferencing and mlions hate AT&T. It will take I or two good smart phones and open source app development too damage apple and that's bad for apple, not to mention DRM and iTunes, plus songs going to $1.29, as apples bread and butter is consumer phones and iPods. Even I think msft new mobile os looks good and can only imagine what palm will be like. You have millions of iPhone users with 2 year contracts about to expire.

Search the net, everyone is developing app stores, phones are geting better, the browsing, more refined, you can't use old last years models and apple will only open up so much wheras other providers will go for video conference, streaming TV ( apple won't do , apple tv), flash=hulu, voip, non AT&T, this ISA really big year for non iPhone developers

Actually, you got that the wrong way around. Apple is the new kid.

Also, whilst your argument might make sense to somebody focussed on technical details, it doesn't happen like that in reality. iTunes was outselling Amazon even though Amazon was DRM free. Phones have had features like copy and paste for ages, but that didn't stop the iPhone's explosive growth.

Lots of those competitors I mentioned were technically 'better' than the iPhone when they were released. The people who buy the devices obviously don't care. They feel that the iPhone offers them more.

 

[Goona]

Last time I checked Apple has sold 17 million iphones in less than 2 years, if you add in ipod touches the number of iphone OS devices goes to 30 million in less than 2 years, I'll say they aren't doing too badly. Apple also seems to be making more money off their phones than RIM. When the 3g launched, they sold about the same amount of phones as RIM but significantly more money. They are selling a lot of apps, web sites are getting the most hits from iphones, and iphone and ipods have the highest consumer satisfaction rates.

 

[jzuena]

Skype need to make their own handset with a data network and all but kill the cellular monopoly for good. Would have been incredible if Apple went for this from the start - making the iPhone a Skype phone used over a data network. That would have been revolutionary in it's effect..

You mean like the original Cisco iPhone?

 

[ipoppy]

I dont know what to think about iPhone now really. I am owner of one of them as well and I am Apple fan/freak person but I need more from next iphone to be as supportive as I am now. The other smart phones got that core apps which I need soooooo much on next iphone which are:
1. I need Video conference as a ichat
2. I need video recording and pictures with better camera
3. I need turn-by -turn such TomTom
4. Skype over 3G since other smart phones got it so why not iPhone (please explain that to me?)
5. Slingbox some sort of app over 3G too (which is on the way apparently) which will eliminate need for built in TV tuner.
The last two depend on carriers really but still...its Apple marketing. The other wishes are for apps so developers will deal with it.
If Apple will make that happened I am with them, otherwise I may step away and focus BB for a change.

So far

 

[sjo]

I would certainly call the iPhone successful. You have to consider a number of factors when analysing if it's successful from a business point of view:

you're getting pretty defensive i pointed out that there are smartphones selling as well or even better than iphone. if you read that calling iphone unsuccessful i think you should lower your defenses a little and observe the world outside steve jobs' reality distortion field. ...

- Apple has only been in the market for two years. Many volume customers have significant inertia and don't switch unless the platform has been established for some time.
- Apple has one model at one price point. Other manufacturers have several. This is related to the point above. As Apple spends more time in the market, they'll release more product lines to appeal to more people at more price points.

yes indeed, there are several areas apple needs to address in the future.

- Regardless of the amount of sales, Apple's sales have been increasing dramatically. They have upwards momentum, which from a business perspective, is crucially important.

actually, no. iphone has sold really well only during one quarter, when iphone 3g was made available. after that the sales have been declining at alarming rate. apple has a change to gain more momentum when the next iteration is announced next summer, but if the rumors are correct (slight modification in case, 3.2mpix cam, more memory), the price needs to come down...

- Apple have removed many of the competitive advantages of their rivals. WinMo's software superiority, built up over about a decade, has vanished in one year, and the iPhone is now the mobile platform to develop for. Developers are making lots of money from the AppStore, which is going to attract more people to the platform. Again, upwards momentum.

i don't know in what world you're living in, but in this one winmo has never had software superiority. the top dog in smartphones is symbian. by far.

 

[iPhoneNYC]

In their ads, ATT sells 3G as "internet," easily letting the consumer think that 3G is wifi. Then Skype comes along and says you can use me on 3G and wifi and ATT flips out.

ATT has been a huge disservice to Apple and the iPhone in the past and and it just continues again with this Skype thing.

 

[donlphi]

All this deliniation of data, voice, text... it's all complete and utter bullsh*t.

You pay for 1's and 0's. You should be able to use them however you like.

An example of this rampant exploitation of the system? A recent NY Times article pointed out that it costs cell carriers next to nothing for text messages:

http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2008/12/28/the-new-york-times-t.html

Likewise, your cable co tells you that you can get a "discount" on VOIP phone if you sign up with them for a year. It costs them pennies a month for VOIP phone.

Think about it, Skype is free, or $3 per month to call land lines and cell phones in America. Why is that? It's because it costs so little to make those calls.

AT&T charging for separate text/data/phone? It's all complete nonsense based on the consumer not knowing that everything is running through the exact same pipe.

Again, voice calls, texts, IM's, SMS, MMS, 3g data to watch Youtube videos: all identical. All 1's and 0's.

Skype is EXACTLY what the consumer needs to make the most out of the "unlimited" data that we pay so much for.

AMEN!!!

 

[Saladinos]

you're getting pretty defensive i pointed out that there are smartphones selling as well or even better than iphone. if you read that calling iphone unsuccessful i think you should lower your defenses a little and observe the world outside steve jobs' reality distortion field. ...

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to appear so defensive. You said that "iphone hasn't really been all that successful". My point was that, whilst Apple's sales volumes haven't matched RIM's, if you consider Apple's position, the iPhone has done very well indeed.

actually, no. iphone has sold really well only during one quarter, when iphone 3g was made available. after that the sales have been declining at alarming rate. apple has a change to gain more momentum when the next iteration is announced next summer, but if the rumors are correct (slight modification in case, 3.2mpix cam, more memory), the price needs to come down...

Momentum is definitely something that needs to be maintained, but I disagree about iPhone sales falling. As the iPhone 3G has been available in more markets, global sales have been accelerating.

i don't know in what world you're living in, but in this one winmo has never had software superiority. the top dog in smartphones is symbian. by far.

I meant to say WinMo's superiority over the iPhone in software. With the original iPhone, people used to compare it to WinMo, saying they preferred the latter because of its larger 3rd party software selection. My point was that, despite WinMo being available for ages, the iPhone has been so successful that this factor has been simply erased.

I don't know what Symbian's software selection is like. It is certainly possible that it is better yet than the iPhone. However, with the iPhone picking up so much attention at games conferences and from venture capitalists, I'm sure Apple are looking at that as a target rather than a threat.

 

[hiimamac]

Great points. Sorry. Out the last post. Types on an iPhone. You can always spot iPhone replies. Fir instead or for, u instead of I. LOL.

Anyway, great points. When you think about CONTROL. Apple wins. They cripple anything and force you to spend $2000 just to get good GPU. the same canbe said for the iPhone. Search "real reason no flash on iPhone" and you will see adobe wants it but apple fears the flash app.

I would relax though. Right now, the US, went from 3rd speed wise to 17th. Meanwhile other countries stream video/tv on their phones. Am happy GM Ford and others who sold crappy cars that fell apart are going down. Sure I feel bad for the workers but not the cororate types. Greed has ruins this country. Am glad Obama has an 80 billion dollar broadband initiative that wants to turn broadband into a utility. Plus an FCC head that will go after these greedy bastards.

Hope they all face stiff, great iPhone smart phone compitition and Apple loses millions of customers. This would force apple to open up to other carriers and I promise there will be a better phone out there with a better data plan in the next six months.

People are hurting now. Cell phones becoming a utility not a luxary. Corprate greed will not be tolerated any more. Hope AT&T fails misrably as I believe data hikes will NOT be tolerated and the FCC will step in. Just watch.

Peace.

Typing on iPhone agiain. Oopps. LOL

there're several smartphones selling as well as iphone, some even better. eg, research in motion sold twice as many smartphones during holiday season as apple. outside the us (and to certain extend the uk), iphone hasn't really been all that successful. lots of talk yes, but mediocre or slow sales. apple really needs to deliver something special with the next model, otherwise they are going to loose momentum. tweaking looks a bit, adding 3.2mpix cam and increasing memory won't be sufficient.




this is proving to be a myth. apple didn't have to fight hard because the phone didn't really have anything that would upset the carriers too much. now that iphone is starting to get where the other smartphones have been for years, they're are facing the carrier resistance.



the us carriers have thus far chosen to not to offer those phones that have been capable for skype and have other advance features. so the us public have largely been unaware of the existence of these services, and are only now starting to catch up with the rest of the world. the us carriers haven't really offered decent deals on advanced nokia phones until very recently (e71x from att).

the most advanced nokia phones such as n97 are probably not going to be available from the us carriers.

 

[lftrghtparadigm]

For of those that still don't understand, skype is only working over 3G on 3.0 due to the OS falsely reporting that the phone is constantly on WiFi. Anyone can test this with speedtest.net app.

As soon as this is corrected, 3.0 skype will be restricted as well.

 

[tenguy]

WiFi better than nothing

Once again, people want it all. They get a FREE app that has restrictions then want those restrictions removed. That's just like when iPhone came out. People bought the phone, on their own free will, knowing that they were stuck with AT&T then complained that they couldn't use another carrier. It's what's called an "entitlement mentality".

 

[Saladinos]

Great points. Sorry. Out the last post. Types on an iPhone. You can always spot iPhone replies. Fir instead or for, u instead of I. LOL.

Anyway, great points. When you think about CONTROL. Apple wins. They cripple anything and force you to spend $2000 just to get good GPU. the same canbe said for the iPhone. Search "real reason no flash on iPhone" and you will see adobe wants it but apple fears the flash app.

I disagree with the point about Apple not allowing flash because of control.
- Flash opens the door for many more browser vulnerabilities. For example, in the Pwn2Own competitions, browser exploits usually happen through flash.
- Flash is a proprietary format. Apple let you do pretty much the same thing with the iPhone's HTML5, CSS Animations, and H.264 support. By not allowing flash on the iPhone, Apple are promoting open standards. This is better for the web as a whole.
- Flash is heavily x86 based. It took Adobe ages to create an x64 native version that ran with acceptable performance because of this (by Adobe's own admission). Making it run on ARM is crazy. Even if it works, it'll be slow and drain the battery in seconds flat.
- Flash wasn't designed for touch input. Many sites use events like mouse-overs. These sites may not work properly on the iPhone and would need to be redesigned. If they're going to be redesigned, why use Flash anyway? Do it in standards-based HTML and Javascript and it'll work on all platforms.

I don't think Apple cares about controlling you. People could create premium web applications if they wanted to, and Apple couldn't/wouldn't stop them. For things like Hulu streaming, I don't think it's the iPhone that needs to change - I think Hulu has to change. The BBC in the UK have shown with their iPlayer service that streaming to all kinds of devices can work well. Services need to move away from Flash, and the sooner they do the better.

 

[michael.lauden]

AMEN!!!

you're agreeing with someone who agreed to Apple's UELA. and the iPhone being subsidized to AT&T would mean you agreed to their EULA too

 

[wizbang-fl]

AT&T should worry more about making there own service work better if they want people to stay away from this.

Won't the inevitable iChat app have the same functionality? (minus the connection to actual land lines) Does that mean T-Mobile will be looking to ban an Apple app?

I would think so or lock the phone in such a way that you have to pay a fee to use it in this manner. I remember a couple of years ago that if you were in a wi-fi area with certain T-Mobile phones and you paid (I think it was $10 / mo.) the phone would allow you to make calls through the wi-fi and not apply to minutes.

 

[sjo]

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to appear so defensive. You said that "iphone hasn't really been all that successful". My point was that, whilst Apple's sales volumes haven't matched RIM's, if you consider Apple's position, the iPhone has done very well indeed.

i said: outside the us (and the uk), iphone hasn't really been all that successful, which happens to be true. in the us it has been successful, iphone 3g has been somewhat successful in uk, but outside those markets, the impact has been some hype, not so much sales.

Momentum is definitely something that needs to be maintained, but I disagree about iPhone sales falling. As the iPhone 3G has been available in more markets, global sales have been accelerating.

considering starting point of zero, more iphones have been sold than last year. accelerating, probably not so. the sales pattern globally appears to be similar to that of the us: decelerating after the initial volumes at becoming available.

I meant to say WinMo's superiority over the iPhone in software. With the original iPhone, people used to compare it to WinMo, saying they preferred the latter because of its larger 3rd party software selection. My point was that, despite WinMo being available for ages, the iPhone has been so successful that this factor has been simply erased.

I don't know what Symbian's software selection is like. It is certainly possible that it is better yet than the iPhone. However, with the iPhone picking up so much attention at games conferences and from venture capitalists, I'm sure Apple are looking at that as a target rather than a threat.

what apple (and any smartphone manufacturer) needs to do on software side is to increase quality, not quantity. and this is the point of this thread: allowing carriers to sabotage the applications is counterproductive from the point of view of utility of the software. developers and vc's have plenty of great ideas, but some of those are bound to clash with the interests of the carriers (some of whom still prefer thinking cell phone service as their sandbox).

 

[GenNovE]

Just recently I decided to do a test.

I took my Laptops 3g sim card and I inserted it on my iphone 3g running beta 2. The iphone recognised the data connection and the entire day I used skype.
I use my google voice number which is then forwarded to my skype number.
Not only do i get visual voicemail but it is also transcribed and then text/emailed to me.

No voice data from ATT at all.

I paid 29.95 for unlimited calling for a whole year from skype. And I pay about 40 bucks for 3g data a month for my laptop.

40x12=480 + 29.95 unlimited calling= $509.95 a year total
Unlimited calling. Plenty of apps to use for texting, unlimited internet included.

I am currently paying 165.69 a month for my iphone plan.
Unlimited calling, unlimited internet, unlimited text messaging.

165.69x12=1988.28. a year total.

The iphone's potential is greater then anything we have seen. But it needs to be crippled. because if allowed to do anything then companies like ATT will loose profit.

 

[jbernie]

If I am not mistaken, the moment AT&T officially allows you to tether your iPhone 3g with your laptop you can use Skype (or any other app like it) over the tethered connection which defeats the purpose of blocking it on the phone itself.

I guess they are just hoping that this setup is viewed as inconvenient or a hassle and people will not bother.

 

[rnizlek]

Am I the only one here happy with my AT&T plan?

I agree that calling "unlimited" data "unlimited" is a blatant lie by AT&T. It should be advertised as a 5 GB plan.

But I'm overall very happy with my plan. I'm paying $10 less a month than Verizon ever charged me for my Blackberry, I use about 3/4 of my minutes every month and I feel I get my money's worth out of it.

I think a lot of valid points have been made on this thread about data-only plans, unlimited data and Skype over 3G. However, I worry that changes made by AT&T (such as allowing Skype over 3G) will raise the price that I pay for data. I think they definitely need to come out with tiers on the data side, much like the phone side of things. As long as I can get my 450 min/5 GB data plan for $69.95 a month I'll be happy. Offering lower tier price plans will also increase the price for those with higher tier plans, as AT&T has to make it's profit somewhere.

AT&T does need to make money. They don't need to gouge consumers, but they do have to pay for thousands of cell sites across the US (which aren't cheap - you can get quite a bit of money for having a cell tower installed on your land) and costs such as upgrading new areas to 3G and eventually 4G and so forth. They are rolling out 3G to my area this spring - I'm sure that's not going to be cheap for them, but I appreciate the fact that they're going to do it (Verizon put in 3G a few years ago).

Also, is handling a phone call fundamentally different than handling data on a cellular network? For instance, can a cell tower only handle x phone calls and y data packets or are phone calls basically encoded the same way as data? In other words, if everyone in the vicinity of a 3G tower started making VOIP calls tomorrow rather than phone calls would the tower be overwhelmed? Or does making a VOIP call utilize the same pool of resources that a phone call would use?

 

[rnizlek]

I should also note that for all those complaining about AT&T's profit, that is the very nature of capitalism. These companies are not out there to provide you the best service at the best value possible they are out there to make as much possible money for their investors. If they make more money, they have been successful. Providing you a service at a better value is a failure to them if they don't increase their profits by doing it. That's how capitalism works.

Now where I live (Burlington, VT), I get my electricity, water, cable and internet (and landline if I want it, but I don't) through municipal providers. My electric company offers me a better rate than the commercial utility that services the surrounding communities and my communications provider offers me packages unbeatable by commercial competitors. And I think that's a very beneficial way to do business - mission driven organizations that are out to provide a service rather than to generate a profit (I should note that all the municipal providers are not subsidized and must at minimum cover their operating costs themselves). The main reason is that these organizations are concerned with providing a quality product, not skimming as much off the top as possible.

But if you talk to people most places, they will tell you these municipally backed companies smack of socialism and are inefficient and un-American. Try convincing people in this country to support of state or federally backed organization to roll out cellular broadband and provide it to citizens at cost. Politicians would be voted out office if they suggested that.

 

[jbernie]

Last time I checked Apple has sold 17 million iphones in less than 2 years, if you add in ipod touches the number of iphone OS devices goes to 30 million in less than 2 years, I'll say they aren't doing too badly. Apple also seems to be making more money off their phones than RIM. When the 3g launched, they sold about the same amount of phones as RIM but significantly more money. They are selling a lot of apps, web sites are getting the most hits from iphones, and iphone and ipods have the highest consumer satisfaction rates.

Apple is doing quite well but their sales are more consumer/small business where people don't have the investment in servers or rely on cheap mail services for their business email etc, the small business people just have a fancy phone.

Blackberry has been around for alot longer so they can offset their costs easier on new devices. Even though they are very much more into the consumer market, their biggest market is corporations & large government. Also, Blackberrys are not that great for web surfing especially the models with the scroll wheel on the side and not the track ball in the middle, but they do corporate applications etc really well.

Once you are the Blackberry market, most of the iPhone users are flying solo and wont have the integration that the Blackberry offers. The blackberry servers offer a lot of control over the devices by way of security settings, group policies, wiping lost/stolen devices etc.

 

[ian.maffett]

I for one (and apparently also many of you) feel that skype is a great app to have on the iPhone because one of the many downfalls of the iPhone in general is AT&T's sketchy service, to say the least. Moreover, (also as many of you) I rely solely on my iPhone and have no land line. This way, I can use skype on my wifi and thus far have not been concerned with dropping calls, etc. I think due diligence is paid since it won't allow you to make calls via the cellular network and in a way helps to keep it honest.
Additionally, I agree that in most cases the more competition exists, the more consumers benefit.

 

[michelepri]

In Italy Skype comes factory installed on handsets distributed by the carrier "3". Not only do they allow it, they encourage it. And it works perfectly in their 3G networks. Are ATT and T-Mobile still so primitive?

 

[lftrghtparadigm]

I dont know what to think about iPhone now really. I am owner of one of them as well and I am Apple fan/freak person but I need more from next iphone to be as supportive as I am now. The other smart phones got that core apps which I need soooooo much on next iphone which are:
1. I need Video conference as a ichat laughable at best
2. I need video recording and pictures with better camera I'm sure its coming, but what you need is an actual camera
3. I need turn-by -turn such TomTom Again, its coming
4. Skype over 3G since other smart phones got it so why not iPhone (please explain that to me?) Call up AT&T. Apple has nothing to do with Skype, or 3G restrictions
5. Slingbox some sort of app over 3G too (which is on the way apparently) which will eliminate need for built in TV tuner. Also laughable in terms of the word "need"
The last two depend on carriers really but still...its Apple marketing. The other wishes are for apps so developers will deal with it.
If Apple will make that happened I am with them, otherwise I may step away and focus BB for a change.

Go for the blackberry then, if you prefer a few hardly useful, yet "advanced" features over stability, performance, and versatility.

 

[tyr2]

A number of the phones on the '3' network in the UK come with an inbuilt Skype client. It's free to use even if you don't have a data plan.

So with regard to mobile data '3' 'gets it', in that it's all just data, and if you can attract people over to your network paying a monthly subscription then it's a good deal for both parties. Unfortunately their network coverage is terrible.