MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

May 28, 09 - 12:15 pm Comment from: Glossy is good

Too bad for Sprint. Beleaguered?

May 28, 09 - 12:17 pm Comment from: silverwarloc

I thought Palm had an exclusive deal with Sprint...like Apple had with ATT. Did I mis-read that?

May 28, 09 - 12:20 pm Comment from: ericdano

Wait.......so........the exclusive thing isn't exclusive........or it is just for 6 months? That is a LONG time for a tech device. Half way through the life cycle.

May 28, 09 - 12:21 pm Comment from: Islandgirl

Is there no hope that Apple might announce a deal at WWDC for Verizon to carry some version of the iPhone later this year?
Sigh. :(

May 28, 09 - 12:26 pm Comment from: Roger Knights

Palm's stock hasn't jumped as much as I thought it would on this news. Maybe it's "old news" to the pros on Wall Street--and the rumor was what drove the stock so high in the first place. "Sell on the news"?

@Islandgirl

old meme. The contract with ATT was and continues to be exclusive. That doesn't even include the time and human resourced required to support a network that is end of life in a year and a half. I hope Apple continues to use that engineering talent to make more wonderful things.

What I'm wondering is if Verizon paid Sprint some money, or if the original deal was so short.

It's a good deal for both, considering Verizon now has to do something because they DROPPED THE BALL when offered the game-changing infant iPhone.

You fools! I told you the exclusivity would only be for 6 months and you ignored my sound advice. How many times must R2 be proven correct before you recognize that his words are golden?

A six month exclusivity is normal for hot, new phones. The long relationship between ATT and Apple is what's extraordinary here. Palm sees exclusivity agreements as a weakness, having learned from how it crippled the iPhone's growth in the US, and there was no way they'd be anchored to Sprint for any long period like the lot of you hoped for.

Palm, led by Jon Rubinstein, is going to hit Apple where it hurts. By making the Pre into a lineup of devices spread across all carriers at various prices like I've been begging Apple to do with the iPhone. The GSM Pre for ATT/T-Mobile and a global launch is also close.

And this is no mere wannabe like the Samsung Instinct and other weak Flash-based touchscreen dumbphones, it's a very capable and attractive smartphone platform created by Jon Rubinstein and a team of other pros peeled from Cupertino.

It's "exclusive LAUNCH provider"

So Pre will not sell that many devices because everyone will hold off until Verizon starts selling it.
Why switch if you can wait.
Way to kill your sales Palm

The 6 month time frame may explain why Sprint is refusing to subsidize the Pre to get the price down under $299.

If the timeframe is correct, it's actually a perfect fit for Verizon. Sprint gets to be the guinea pig for the Pre, and Verizon gets to sell it once the initial software bugs are fixed. Or Verizon can cut its marketing plan if the Pre ends up being a flop.

Why on earth Apple would choose to severely limit the iPhone's customer base by going exclusive with AT&T;is beyond me. How many people simply don't get good AT&T;in there area? LOTS. It doesn't matter how good a phone is if the connection sucks. Apple has only served to give the competition WAY more time to play catch up than it deserves. Of course, they are still way ahead, but I see no good reason to self inflict damage.

May 28, 09 - 12:56 pm Comment from: blah blah blah...

Verizon is doing everything it can to compete with one phone, it's kind of funny if you think about it. Meanwhile AT&T;isn't wasting anymore time on the handset department as much and finally concentrating on their network which has been on the incline as of late. AT&T;struck gold with the iPhone in so many ways. They get more premium paying customers, they don't have to spend money advertising it, apple takes care of that, and they get the best mobile product out there.
Anyone can make their argument on how any Mobile provider sucks, but no matter how you feel, at the end of the day, the iPhone is on at&t;, and Verizon is not getting it.

@ G Spank - You're ignoring the leverage Apple is able to wield by partnering exclusively with AT&T. Everyone who bemoans the exclusivity loves to ignore the benefits that exclusivity has brought, which includes loosening the carrier's stranglehold on the mobile experience.

I'm definitely not saying that exclusivity with AT&T has been an all-around positive thing (as it hasn't), but it's important to look at both the positives and negatives from it when rendering judgment.

@G Spank

As Gabriel said, that was the only way that Apple could get what they wanted which allowed them to create the game changing device that they did. Otherwise, the iPhone would more closely resemble the Motorola iTunes phone than the current iPhone.

May 28, 09 - 01:05 pm Comment from: Ottawa Mark

MDN's take is bizarre to say the least. Considering how many Americans apparently loathe AT & T, and how so many feel Verizon is the best service in the US (iPhone notwithstanding), how could this not be a concern?

May 28, 09 - 01:06 pm Comment from: Sir Gill Bates

@Islandgirl,

On the latest podcast of MacBreak Weekly (available via iTunes Store) Scott Bourne said that he had inside sources at Verizon who said that it would be announced in June that the iPhone was going to be available from Verizon.

Whether true or not, who knows.

May 28, 09 - 01:16 pm Comment from: blah blah blah...

Apple has the advantage of keeping the iPhone with one carrier. They can easily pin point problems along the network and see if the same problems are occurring elsewhere throughout the world. They have customer care that actually can help because they not dealing with a plethora of different phones.
They get to keep a small efficient environment and just make it work as flawless as possible. This what they have done for years with their products since steve got back, they use the K.I.S.S.(keep it simple stupid) method, and it's worked for them and thats why they are able to build on top of sturdy base.
Give time people for them to spread the wealth, They haven't even started their third year of selling the damn thing, but overall yeah at&t;deserves alot of credit for taking a chance on a product that wasn't even made at the time. Verizon blew it, and they know it.

May 28, 09 - 01:20 pm Comment from: Noodles Noodlemann

I've had Verizon and AT&T;. No problems with either one. I think it depends on where you reside. The exclusive deal with AT&T;was smart on Apple's part. They got much more control with AT&T;. It will be interesting to see what happens next month. I will be very surprised if Verizon snags an iPhone. And I think the Pre will do fine. It won't be an iPhone killer but it seems capable and if Verizon doesn't get an iPhone, then it will be a good alternative for Verizon customers or those who don't get decent AT&T;coverage. Not an iPhone, but closer than the others.

May 28, 09 - 01:26 pm Comment from: Predrag

It is still fascinating how many people genuinely believe that if they can't get good AT&T coverage, then the carrier is somehow worse than others.

There would have been NO noticeable difference in growth of the iPhone, had it been available on all carriers in the US. Practically NONE. AT&T's coverage is virtually identical to Verizon's, and much better than T-Mobile's or Sprints. The number of people who would have bought iPhone if it had been offered on Verizon (or anyone else) is NEGLIGIBLE. Study after study have confirmed that.

Verizon's only choice is to try with Pre. Judging by all the press we've seen about it since January unveiling, it will have a hard time to succeed. Remember, two years ago, everyone was raving about the iPhone (timeline was more-or-less the same). When such large numbers of people tend to have similar opinions about something, they usually tend to be correct.

And it is refreshing to see someone else figuring out how to insert proper HTML when writing about AT&T. (da li je moguće da smo mi pametniji od ostalih?)

May 28, 09 - 01:40 pm Comment from: Sir Gill Bates

I don't understand why some people discount the idea that Apple will ever allow Verizon to carry the iPhone.

Of course they will, when it suits them. Apple doesn't hold grudges if it's not in their best interest. They are all about making money, and selling more iPhones means more money.

May 28, 09 - 01:46 pm Comment from: Predrag

Sir Gill Bates,

That's precisely the point -- when it suits them, if at all. The main argument here is, Apple has a lot to lose and nothing to gain by opening up to Verizon. The number of people who don't have an iPhone but would have bought one had it been offered on Verizon is pretty much negligible. The average difference in network reliability is rather intangible and most likely not nearly enough of a reason. On the other hand, the leverage it has over AT&T is significant. Let's not forget; iPhone is the ONLY mobile phone in the US market WITHOUT a carrier logo. It is the only phone were AT&T sells NO wallpaper, ringtons, games, anything. For iPhone, AT&T provides ONLY connectivity and nothing else.

Verizon is the complete opposite of that. It controls EVERY aspect of EVERY handset on their network; from feature set, to menu design, to button functions, to services. You can't even copy a picture you take with your phone onto your computer without paying Verizon for that privilege. I cannot imagine Verizon would change the core of their corporate philosophy for the iPhone. Not even now, after seeing what the iPhone has done to the industry.

May 28, 09 - 01:46 pm Comment from: Sir Gill Bates

"There would have been NO noticeable difference in growth of the iPhone, had it been available on all carriers in the US."

I'm sorry, but time and again I read of people who want an iPhone but can't or wont use AT&T. What "study after study" are you referring to? Do you have any links?

@ Ottawa Mark
Trust me US citizens loathe Verizon far more than they do AT&T;(at least in my experience)
However I too believed the Verizon "has a better network" shtick, and was worried about my service when I switched. Imagine my suprise whn I found my service was mostly improved (live in the NY-Phil corridor and constantly travel to LA and Orlando, and less frequently to SF, Vancover/Seattle, Atlanta & Boston)
In most cases my service with ATT is noticeably better than it was on Verizon's network.

May 28, 09 - 01:53 pm Comment from: Sir Gill Bates

Predrag,

The idea that no one who uses Verizon would want an iPhone is nonsensical. Please show proof.

And yes, Verizon always has implemented tyrannical control over their phones. I'm sure that was part of the original problem when Apple approached them.

But that was then, and this is now. I would imagine Verizon just might be a little more flexible at this stage of the game.

Buying the "right" phone can be complicated.

For example, my contract with Alltel is up right now, so I can get a new phone. However, Verizon has just bought Alltel, so the lineup of available phones will be different.

Then, word that ATnT has bought our region from Verizon has me pumped that I can finally get an iPhone. Problem is, it could be as long as 18 months before our towers are converted to GSM.

So, do I hold onto my aging Razr that has a shitty battery life (washed it by accident) or do I sign up for a 1-year contract and take it in the shorts on the cost of my next phone?

One thing I won't do is sign a two-year deal with Verizon and have to wait that long for my iPhone. I'd rather pay more now and have it right when it's available than go 6 months knowing I can have one but be stuck with some other cruddy phone.

It's tough be a consumer sometimes

As a former Palm PDA fan, I am saddened. Nothing has convinced me more that Palm is doomed than to read about this. Their management is clueless. No matter how good the Pre might be, the company will find a way to sink it.

(Happy iPhone user)

May 28, 09 - 02:22 pm Comment from: Predrag

Sir Gill Bates:

I don't have links now, and at the moment don't have the time to dig around, so I guess it will have to be just my word (whatever it is worth to you); I do remember reading an article by one of the survey companies (Changewave, NPDOR, Gartner, one of those).

..."The idea that no one who uses Verizon would want an iPhone is nonsensical."

Indeed it is. I never said anything like that though; you misunderstood. I'm sure there is a substantial number of Verizon users who would LOVE an iPhone. However among those who are no longer bound by 2-year contract, there is only a negligible percentage who would NOT want to switch to AT&T; i.e. those who would buy the iPhone right away, if only it were available on Verizon.

The point is, there are very few new customers that Apple could possibly gain (and that they can't get right now) if they opened up to Verizon.

May 28, 09 - 02:28 pm Comment from: Predrag

And to get back on the subject; if Sprint's exclusive PRE deal was the usual 6 months, then Verizon just knocked off a significant percentage of the initial sales and switch-overs to Sprint. There may have been some Verizon (as well as other non-Sprint) customers interested in switching to Sprint for the Pre. Now that they know it's coming to Verizon in six months, they'll just wait it out. This may not necessarily be bad for Palm, if they manage to survive until Verizon gets them, but it just completely blunts the possible spike it could get from the Pre.

May 28, 09 - 02:31 pm Comment from: The Dude

The former Apple execs are actually trojan horses.

The Dude abides.

May 28, 09 - 02:47 pm Comment from: Sir Gill Bates

@Predrag,

OK.


@MidWest Mac,

I absolutely did not laugh about your Razr phone. Honest.

May 28, 09 - 03:53 pm Comment from: ken1w

So dumb. Who is in charge of marketing at Palm? MDN's take is exactly right. Palm has a small dedicated group of loyal customers. But they stopped buying any Palm device over the last few quarters because Palm over-hyped the unreleased Pre. Now, just as they are about to launch it with an exclusive Sprint partnership, we find out that Verizon will have it in six months. OK, lets wait another six months, because I want or already have Verizon and don't want Sprint. Brilliant. At this rate, Palm will not be in business in six months.

May 28, 09 - 03:54 pm Comment from: zmarc

This will kill Palm. While I'm not surprised the Sprint exclusivity is just six months, releasing the news now is going to kill a lot of the Pre's momentum. After the Pre flops at Sprint is Verizon going to want to subsidize it or advertise it much? I doubt it.

Basically Palm is now in a desperate battle to outlive the six month Sprint exclusivity. That's a big "if," considering how they're hemorrhaging money. They really needed the Pre to be big right off the bat to bring in some revenue and this just kills that (no one on ATT or Verizon is switching to Sprint for Pre so they can only draw from existing Sprint customers, of which few will want to be tied to Sprint for two more years). I don't see how Palm can make it without some kind of cash infusion and if the Pre's a flop, who's going to pony up?

May 28, 09 - 04:30 pm Comment from: studentrights

They just doomed themselves...

Sprint's network coverage nationwide is pretty limited compared to Verzion or AT&T;. Who is going to sign up with Sprint's limited network coverage knowing that 6 months down the line they can go with Verzion?

More nails in the coffin.

Here we go: Verizon spreading more FUD, I read the article, nothing in it says the Pre is going to Verizon, the CEO says "a Pre LIKE device." It's speculation, Verizon (LIke ATT) are doing everything they can to keep current customers from switching to Sprint. It's odd that days before the June 6th launch you have two CEO's from rival carriers making the same comments. Where is the statement from Palm? If anyone has the particulars on the alleged 6 exclusive period, please post it... NOT!!! The Pre is NOT going to ATT, it is NOT going to Verizon.

@studentrights

Sprint and Verizon have identical networks, in some areas Sprint and Verizon are tide, in others Sprint is doing better than Verizon. Also, Sprint customers roam for free on Verizon. Get your facts straight.

May 28, 09 - 05:18 pm Comment from: Sir Gill Bates

"... in some areas Sprint and Verizon are tide ..."

And in other areas they are cheer?

@Sir Gill Bates

Oooops! Tied.