Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
UK iPhone - disappointing launch?
- Thread starter benfilan
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
bartelby
macrumors Core
They are in this case with Apple being greedy and insisting on kick backs from every monthly fee.
If Apple just took money from the phone and left O2 to dictate the tariffs then it'd be the same as the Sony P1i and the N95 (both of which are expensive phones)
garybUK
Guest
Email will never replace SMS or MMS on phones unless everyone adopts the blackberry approach, and if they do how will people remember your e-mail address.
So your asking people to know your e-mail AND mobile phone number? it will never work.
MMS is DESIGNED for mobile platforms, e-mail isn't.
FACT iPhone WILL flop without MMS and video recording.
Me and my friends send MMS picture/audio/video messages all the time. The people who generally send them are the target audience or Apple.
Get a Nokia and get a better phone 🙂
I don't know most people's email OR their phone number. I just remember their name. I expect the phone to remember the rest. 😀
SMS and MMS are not designed to compete with email. Half the people I SMS don't even *have* an email address and nor do they want one. Also 90% of the phones in use are not email capable.. smartphones are the minority.
Lack of MMS is an issue for me because I get them free (comes out of the data plan) whereas SMS is 10p a message... so the iPhone is currently costing me ~£14 a week I wasn't paying previously.. if they don't fix it soon I'll have to start farting around with new contracts to get a better deal, which I'd rather avoid.
Lack of MMS is an issue for me because I get them free (comes out of the data plan) whereas SMS is 10p a message... so the iPhone is currently costing me ~£14 a week I wasn't paying previously.. if they don't fix it soon I'll have to start farting around with new contracts to get a better deal, which I'd rather avoid.
Any evidence or data to verify this claim?
I would have thought the target audience for the iPhone are those who will take a picture and send it to Flickr or Facebook by email. You know, comfortable with the latest and greatest....early adopters....living the whole digital lifestyle thing.
The way it stands, I take a picture on my iPhone and send it to Facebook - ALL of my friends get to see it...for free!
I'm not saying that MMS isn't without its uses. But for people to claim that the iPhone will flop because it doesn't have it is an incredibly bold claim to make.
Well speaking as someone who writes software for mobile phones and has worked on an MMS client, I think MMS is a complete waste of time and effort. Nobody uses it's full capabilities, in fact it is way to complicated for how people do use it. Most people just want to take a picture and send it not compose multiple pages containing pictures, sounds and text.
It should still be possible to view MMS on the iPhone as they are just sent as an SMS containing a URL. If the phone supports MMS the URL is automatically recognised and downloaded via WAP, if not, it should just show up as a SMS with a URL in that you can open in Safari. That is the way the it is supposed to work anyway. Can somebody with an iPhone give it a go?
However, the iPhone really should have an MMS client for compatibility.
PS: It's also possible to send MMS to an email address from any phone.
It should still be possible to view MMS on the iPhone as they are just sent as an SMS containing a URL. If the phone supports MMS the URL is automatically recognised and downloaded via WAP, if not, it should just show up as a SMS with a URL in that you can open in Safari. That is the way the it is supposed to work anyway. Can somebody with an iPhone give it a go?
However, the iPhone really should have an MMS client for compatibility.
PS: It's also possible to send MMS to an email address from any phone.
Cloudane
macrumors 68000
I thought the same, but on re-thinking, I can imagine a time when people were saying:
"FACT iMac WILL flop without a floppy drive" (pun wasn't intended but haha)
Nowadays we're thanking them for (perhaps even at their expense) giving progress a kick up the backside.
Apple like to drag technology forward, kicking and screaming if necessary. I'd rather they stick to their ethos than change it (same goes for the quality thing)
Other phones you can take a picture and send it direct to facebook... there's even plugins that make this a one step operation.
With the iphone it's *much* harder.. facebook mobile doesn't really work with the iphone:
"Upload photos and videos straight to Facebook from your phone. Send an MMS to..."
Oh. No luck there then.
So you have to wait until you get home and do it manually... this isn't progress.
Yeah, that's clearly already the case. After all, it's only the biggest selling smartphone in the USA. 🙄
Huh? You take the photo. Tap Email Photo. Put photos@facebook.com for the address. Boom. How is this *much* harder?
Its great because I can send the photo to Flickr, my blog and Facebook in one move. Just add each to the To field.
Stella
macrumors G3
I'd be more impressed if it was world wide, but that won't happen soon, if ever.
Whilst the sales have been good in the states, you have to wonder if the iPhone can sustain its momentum.
It might happen, once the price drops.
The iPod went through the same thing.. by all accounts it was ubiquitous in the US but over here it was virtually unheard of.. but at that time a 60GB ipod photo cost £499 ($1000). Then the price started dropping with the release of the ipod mini, and the next christmas it went nuts and loads of people got one.
Now an 80GB 'classic' costs £150 ($315), does more than the photo ever did, and it's only 2 years later.
I can see the iphone going through the same process. Maybe more so - most phones are free on contract around 6 months after their release, and it's a cutthroat market.. O2 may be forced to do the same kind of deal.
The iPod went through the same thing.. by all accounts it was ubiquitous in the US but over here it was virtually unheard of.. but at that time a 60GB ipod photo cost £499 ($1000). Then the price started dropping with the release of the ipod mini, and the next christmas it went nuts and loads of people got one.
Now an 80GB 'classic' costs £150 ($315), does more than the photo ever did, and it's only 2 years later.
I can see the iphone going through the same process. Maybe more so - most phones are free on contract around 6 months after their release, and it's a cutthroat market.. O2 may be forced to do the same kind of deal.
Stella
macrumors G3
There's a different between iPod and iPhone: exclusive carriers and therefore there are consequences that may form a barrier from people buying the iPhone, e.g., maybe that carrier hasn't got very good reception in their area, or a potential customer wouldn't touch that carrier with a barge pole.
Each cell phone market differs from location to location. In EU markets people don't expect to pay a boat load of money for a phone and then on top of that high contract rates.
Its not up to O2 to give iPhone deals - remember Apple said the carriers will not be subsidizing. Perhaps Apple will need to backtrack if sales in Europe don't go too well.
Until the iPhone gets cheaper there are many many people who could not justify spending hundreds on a cell phone.
Oh, there's another reason too - the iPhone isn't sold worldwide. As long as Apple keeps its exclusivity policy, it may never be a ( an official ) worldwide product.
Each cell phone market differs from location to location. In EU markets people don't expect to pay a boat load of money for a phone and then on top of that high contract rates.
Its not up to O2 to give iPhone deals - remember Apple said the carriers will not be subsidizing. Perhaps Apple will need to backtrack if sales in Europe don't go too well.
Until the iPhone gets cheaper there are many many people who could not justify spending hundreds on a cell phone.
Oh, there's another reason too - the iPhone isn't sold worldwide. As long as Apple keeps its exclusivity policy, it may never be a ( an official ) worldwide product.
Well, £399 is closer to $839 (at current exchange rates anyway). I was trying to explain partly why the ipod took so long to take off in the UK.
I paid a lot more than that.. it's difficult to find reviews from that long ago but here's some from a bit later:
http://www.avreview.co.uk/review/re...0GB/RCN/38/rgn/4/v/1/sp/332564698578332451368
http://www.ithings.co.uk/item--iPod-Photo-60-GB--ipodphoto60.html
In response to the original article:
The media decides what some people think, at least those that let them.
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?feed=ACBJ&date=20071113&id=7805773
So I guess it was a good first night...
The media decides what some people think, at least those that let them.
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?feed=ACBJ&date=20071113&id=7805773
So I guess it was a good first night...
iphone is clealy subsidised otherwise they can't justify locking it.. locked/subsidised is OK (you're entitled to unlock after the contract ends/you buy yourself out of it), locked/unsubsidised is not OK (you're entitled to unlock immediately). Apple take a third of the contract price apparently.. that's money for each iphone and amounts to subsidy. But that's a whole other thread and has been done to death already.
Also O2 (or CPW, or anyone else that can get hold of stock) can sell iphones at whatever price they like - nothing at all to stop them discounting it. Apple or anyone else can't force a minimum price on something - eg. if a car dealership wants to start selling mercedes for 50p then there's nothing stopping them (except it's insane and they'd go bankcrupt).
It remains to be seen what happens to sales once the initial run of first adopters is done with. The first week is always a peak and headline grabbing (looking at that MSN headline it neglects to mention that the share price *dropped* 10% the previous day due to bad news and most of the rise is just recovery. Price was 174 on Friday.. it's still not recovered completely).
Unfortunately if you wish to undercut a manufacturers RRP then you'd better be damn sure the manufacturer needs you more than you need them or you won't be getting hold of any stock.
And that's ignoring completely the contractual agreement between Apple, O2 and CPW which almost certainly specifies that they are not allowed to discount the price.
Regent Street
I was there on Friday night - it had great atmosphere. I think they were well organized there.
I think the media were expecting a meltdown - but people got the iPhone and went straight home to register / have a play!
As for early sales figures...I think as people show the iPhone off, it'll increase in popularity. It does cost a fortune, and has a big question mark over what happens once the 18months initial contract completes.
Christmas will be big for aapl.
FireArse
I was there on Friday night - it had great atmosphere. I think they were well organized there.
I think the media were expecting a meltdown - but people got the iPhone and went straight home to register / have a play!
As for early sales figures...I think as people show the iPhone off, it'll increase in popularity. It does cost a fortune, and has a big question mark over what happens once the 18months initial contract completes.
Christmas will be big for aapl.
FireArse
Stella
macrumors G3
All I can state is what Apple have previously stated publicly - which is they - Apple - won't allow carriers to subsidize the iPhone. Apple on the other hand may or may not be using the revenue sharing scheme to subsidize the phone, but since there's little evidence either way we should keep an open mind.
A while back someone claimed on their (AT&T)iPhone box that read something like - "Continued AT&T contract required to operate this phone". Can any one confirm this?
Regarding AT&T iPhones, you cannot buy yourself out of the contract and have the phone unlocked. I don't know how this will work in Europe - perhaps someone soon will try it!
A while back someone claimed on their (AT&T)iPhone box that read something like - "Continued AT&T contract required to operate this phone". Can any one confirm this?
Regarding AT&T iPhones, you cannot buy yourself out of the contract and have the phone unlocked. I don't know how this will work in Europe - perhaps someone soon will try it!
That's illegal in the UK. I'd imagine in the EU. Not that some companies don't try to collude on pricing, look at British Airways and Virgin. BA were were just handed a very hefty fine for attempting to 'agree' on some part of their pricing with Virgin.
Carphone Warehouse stated they expect minimal to no profit already from the iPhone. They just want to generate 'footfall'. I guess they can then sell accessories, insurance and simply prevent themselves being sidelined.
I imagine Apple ensures retailers maintain any RRP simply by offering very small margins so they have no room for manoeuvre.
Price collusion only applies to various COMPETITORS trying not to compete on price.
O2/Apple/CPW are not competitors --- they are business partners and they can set 1 standard price for the whole country.
This is like buying a big mac in the UK --- same price for a corporately owned macdonalds and for a franchisee-owned macdonalds.
No such unlocking laws exist in the UK.
UK carriers don't even have to give you an unlocking code even after your contract is up. And there is no such legal distinction as a cell phone purchased "outright".
http://www.esato.com/board/viewtopic.php?topic=158413&start=150
http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php?t=1243570&page=2&pp=15
http://www.howardforums.com/showpost.php?p=10074542&postcount=59