sleepy

AT&T OKs VoIP For the iPhone, Too Bad Google Voice Isn't VoIP

On yer bike and go home, TechCrunch. Spoiled brat whingeing instead of any kind of insight about what's really happening here.

What’s Really Going on with Apple, Google, AT&T and the FCC

Apple is tied by exclusive carrier agreements. These exclusive carrier agreements are the means whereby Apple did the FCC's job for it, and bust wide open the mobile internet (making a financial killing at the same time). Apple achieved this by demanding affordable unmetered mobile internet access, while protecting the carrier partner's high margin voice revenues; in exchange the carrier partners got growth in a saturated market.

I am sure Apple is ready and waiting for regulators to take over this unacknowledged public service, so Apple can move forward itself with internet based voice services. Equally I am sure Apple does not want to be holding the door open for Google and others while still pinned down by these exclusive carrier contracts. Regulation on this would mandate that third party internet based voice services must be permitted on any mobile data contract, and that's a tough rule for the lazy carriers to swallow. All the players (Apple, Google, FCC, AT&T) must know this is what underlies the public role-playing.

I find Mr Arrington's take on it superficial and unnecessarily offensive to Apple.

It's Time to Build a Real Mobile Web

I think Apple wants openness too, but it's a long term goal. Meantime, for at least five years, they have to work with carrier cartels. Exclusive carrier deals, including the Apple imposed condition that the standard contract for iPhone must have unlimited data, and insisting that that data transport is neutral and not linked to carrier walled gardens for content delivery, navigation etc. are far bigger issues that Apple has achieved for us. The penalty (for now) is that they protect the carriers voice revenues.

Why the FCC Wants to Smash Open the iPhone

Apple wants to control the core functionality of the iPhone, and it's not finished developing it yet. Don't underestimate the scope and timescale of Apple's strategic thinking. This is an issue that needs to be resolved, so Apple needs to be somewhat abrasive; that doesn't mean that their stated current position is the desired end state; they just aren't ready to have part of the voice telephony application veer off at a tangent.

Looking at it another way, the voice network will inevitably be subsumed into the internet, but that would cripple carrier revenues today. Apple and others have to continue working with the carriers for a few years more, because of the way politicians have set up mobile communications licensing.

Apple Sours: Analysts Doubtful of iPhone's Prospects

Analysts never imagine more than 6 months ahead. Steve Jobs is executing (spectacularly well) a whole lifetime business plan to create the world's standard personal information appliance, which started with the Macintosh in 1984 and developed further with Next. Next management and OS then took control of Apple, and that OS is the foundation of the iPhone.

Handset features had been hijacked by the government-mandated carrier cartels, and Apple is in the process of breaking that down. Expect major fluctuations in iPhone shipments as Apple moves from phase to phase of its plan. The fluctuations aren't relevant and are expected, so Apple has deliberately invoked subscription accounting over 2 years so these fluctuations aren't reflected in quarterly earnings.

Will Apple Increase iPhone Value with Rumored Verizon Deal?

I am sure they are negotiating, and Apple is developing a Verizon compatible iPhone. But it may only be to add pressure on AT&T in negotiating the next annual renewal of their iPhone exclusive. (Assuming the rumored 2 year exclusive with annual renewals to five years).

Remember that an exclusive delivers higher carrier subsidy, which is probably Apple's largest source of income at present.

Apple's 3G iPhone: Q4 Sales Estimates Are Encouraging

The market share figures are just that: share of total browsing, not absolute iPhone browsing level. The spike/volatility in share during August is likely due to a fall in general browsing from PC's during Olympics, vacation time & labor day in favour of watching TV or having fun. Level iPhone browsing and falling general browsing creates a peak in share.

It's almost as though Apple has deliberately issued BBY with demo units from early production runs to conceal the run rate data that IMEI numbers initially revealed. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if Apple obfuscated this IMEI covert information channel in future.

iPhone: Apple Making All the Wrong Moves

AT&T exclusive for 5 years is the price Apple is paying so that iPhone isn't locked to AT&T. That would have made it AT&T's product in the USA, not Apple's. Apple will require iPhone to sell for its full value; a "free with contract" destiny for iPhone would never be acceptable to Apple. Apple equally obviously will require that if you have an iPhone, it's your iPhone, and in your mind it comes from Apple, not AT&T, and it's worth the price which is appropriately higher than an equivalent WiFI iPod with no phone.

It may be that, initially, it's only available with contract, but I'm sure that can change if Apple wants it to. Compared to other phones, iPhone will subsidize the contract instead of the other way around, and AT&T will still get that subsidy even if the customer doesn't sign with them. That subsidy, together with the fact that using another service will require 2 purchases and DIY support, and will cost Apple on the revenue sharing means that Apple/AT&T continue to work together because it benefits both, not because t hey've tied t hemselves in knots with contractual prohibitions. They will get and keep customers out of the customers' free choice, not because of locked phones and long contracts.

That's how I think it's going to work. Apple & AT&T can change the cellphone market because no-one else can make an iPhone. They will be ready ahead of time for the threats of VOIP, and WImax, when protectionist, lock-in tactics will drive customers away.