NEWS: Apple sued over hot iPad shutdowns
in [Wireless Internet]
|
Prev: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security of wireless networks
Next: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security ofwireless networks
From: John Navas on 9 Aug 2010 13:53 On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 10:47:50 -0700, in <f5f066h0hi0a2jtp5gkt6crh525ifjjvh8(a)4ax.com>, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: >On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 09:55:18 -0700, John Navas ><spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >>>While a Verizon iPhone can't be _sold_ prior to the expiration of the >>>end of exclusivity (which is widely believed to be in 2011), it could >>>certainly be advertised (which is pointed out in that article). >> >>Probably not without agreement by AT&T, which would seem unlikely. > >The FCC does not allow RF devices to "be offered for sale" prior to >type certification. However, it does allow the usual press releases, >product announcements, data sheets, and trade show exhibits. It's >just that the phone can't sold via any of these. > >No clue on the AT&T agreement. > >I'm not so sure that AT&T really wants to keep the current contract. >That's because they're apparently paying Apple full retail $600 price >for the phones, while selling them to customers for about $200. The >current guess by iSuppli is $178 to produce a 3GS. A two year >contract term, with mandatory options (i.e. data plan), will make up >the difference, but I'm sure they're not thrilled. If I were Apple, I >would offer AT&T a continued exclusive at an even higher price for the >iPhone 4, or a major price break if Apple were allowed to sell it to >the other vendors. Either way, Apple wins, and AT&T just sits there. I think you may be underestimating AT&T. -- John "Assumption is the mother of all screw ups." [Wethern�s Law of Suspended Judgement]
From: John Navas on 9 Aug 2010 13:58 On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 10:28:48 -0700, in <qma06656iuft7k9lprl3vnk4pcheki2lbo(a)4ax.com>, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: >Incidentally, it seems that Steve Jobs may have been responsible for >the decision to ship the iPhone 4 with a known antenna problem: ><http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704268004575417572159585144.html> > It was Mr. Jobs, rather than Mr. Papermaster, who decided to > move forward with the development of the phone even though > the company was aware of the risks of the antenna design as > much as a year ago, according to people familiar with the matter. FYI, I posted this info back near the beginning of the flap. I think it's part of why Papermaster got canned -- Steve's never been terribly good at taking reasonability for his own screw-ups, preferring to find a scapegoat instead. "You shouldn't have let me do that!" ;) -- John The Six Phases of Any Project: 1. Optimism and enthusiasm. 2. Disillusionment. 3. Panic. 4. Search for the guilty. 5. Punishment of the innocent. 6. Reward and honor for the undeserving.
From: Ted Nelson on 9 Aug 2010 14:49 In article <2j3066l5obs7amhlm7t39lhs1flbp5g4id(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> But only for those happy with a bumper, so not 100% overall. > >> I personally don't like the idea of a bumper or skin -- > >> my phone (T-Mobile myTouch 3G, aka HTC Magic) doesn't need one, > >> and I prefer to keep it naked in a holster. In other words, > >> count me in the percentage for whom the bumper solves the problem by 0%. > > > >but those already have a built in bumper > > What "built in bumper"? It has an internal antenna if that's what you > mean, but there's no bumper on the outside of the handset. it means they put a plastic case around the device "before" it was shipped, apple didn't so it requires a case, learn the difference. > >so what is the difference? > > Bulk, fit, finish, ease of carrying it in a holster. yes, the apple case is brilliant, a true engineering accomplishment, so you are right. it adds no bulk compared to the "built in" case based smartphones, the fit, finish of apple's case is way beyond anything else, and yes, it makes it even easier to carry.
From: John Navas on 9 Aug 2010 15:05 On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 12:49:00 -0600, in <4c604d9c$0$87069$815e3792(a)news.qwest.net>, Ted Nelson <ted(a)rnelson.org> wrote: >In article <2j3066l5obs7amhlm7t39lhs1flbp5g4id(a)4ax.com>, > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> >> But only for those happy with a bumper, so not 100% overall. >> >> I personally don't like the idea of a bumper or skin -- >> >> my phone (T-Mobile myTouch 3G, aka HTC Magic) doesn't need one, >> >> and I prefer to keep it naked in a holster. In other words, >> >> count me in the percentage for whom the bumper solves the problem by 0%. >> > >> >but those already have a built in bumper >> >> What "built in bumper"? It has an internal antenna if that's what you >> mean, but there's no bumper on the outside of the handset. > >it means they put a plastic case around the device "before" it was >shipped, apple didn't so it requires a case, learn the difference. The case on the device is similar to the one on the iPhone 4. The only relevant difference is in the antenna placement. Learn the differences and the similarities. >> >so what is the difference? >> >> Bulk, fit, finish, ease of carrying it in a holster. > >yes, the apple case is brilliant, a true engineering accomplishment, so >you are right. it adds no bulk compared to the "built in" case based >smartphones, the fit, finish of apple's case is way beyond anything >else, and yes, it makes it even easier to carry. Nonsense. -- John "Assumption is the mother of all screw ups." [Wethern�s Law of Suspended Judgement]
From: SMS on 9 Aug 2010 15:33
On 09/08/10 9:43 AM, nospam wrote: > In article<4c602cf3$0$22173$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>, SMS > <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote: > >>> bullshit. the earliest date is *not* known. nobody outside of apple and >>> at&t knows when the exclusive ends or when a verizon/sprint/t-mobile >>> iphone will appear. >> >> While a Verizon iPhone can't be _sold_ prior to the expiration of the >> end of exclusivity (which is widely believed to be in 2011), it could >> certainly be advertised (which is pointed out in that article). > > what is widely believed is not necessarily what it is. as i said, > nobody outside of apple and at&t know exactly what the deal is and > depending on what you read, the exclusive is anywhere from 2-5 years. > it could also have been renegotiated during that time (there's at least > one rumour of that). > > at some point it will end (at&t has said as much) but nobody knows when > that will be. however, the rumours are definitely heating up, so > something's afoot. > >> The meteoric rise in sales of Android phones on other carriers is no >> doubt of great concern to Apple, and they will not wait any longer than >> absolutely necessary to launch iPhones on other carriers (especially >> Verizon since and AT&T/Verizon Duopoly is emerging in wireless as most >> growth in sales is on AT&T and Verizon). > > i'm sure apple will be happy to include sprint and t-mobile users too, > as well as sprint and t-mobile will be happy to carry it. there's > little point in doing verizon and not doing sprint (same radio). And Korea. >> Will Verizon's data network crumble under the crush of iPhone data like >> AT&T's did? > > it's handling android just fine, and by some reports, android users use > *more* data than iphone users. There are far less Android users than iPhone users. Android sales are increasing at a faster rate, but the iPhone has a huge installed base already. > what will be very interesting is how many at&t customers switch away > from at&t once the iphone goes multi-carrier. Certainly AT&T's churn will go up, but it will take a while for contracts to expire. There's still the issue of international roaming as well. While most Asian countries have both CDMA and GSM networks, Europe is another story. |