Page 17 of 20 « First 71516 17 1819 Last »
Reply
Thread Tools
YoDude's Avatar
YoDude is offline YoDude
2009-09-11 , 11:40
Posts: 2,869 | Thanked: 1,784 times | Joined on Feb 2007 @ Po' Bo'. PA
#161
Originally Posted by ysss View Post
UPDATE: Operators to stop supporting Maemo phones on their network...
Where is this UPDATE you speak of?

How will an operator restrict access to their network... by individual IMEI?

BTW, if this is a figment of your imagination or you have no support for your allegation, please say so in your reply.

If on the other hand you do have support for your position, please provide a link.
 
dantonic's Avatar
dantonic is offline dantonic
2009-09-11 , 11:42
Posts: 361 | Thanked: 108 times | Joined on Sep 2008
#162
@Crashdamage

Maybe they should use the N900 to get the attention of the customer base.

Apple was already popular because of its Ipods... one could argue that it was easier for them to dictate the way the Iphone was launched, as opposed to letting the providers make the rules.

Nokia could build interest with this "4th Step" and then gradually move towards the "unaltered" option with their subsequent maemo devices.

I guarantee you the N900 will sell much much less in the US if it is unsubsidized than it would otherwise, altered or not.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to dantonic For This Useful Post:
MildTonic is offline MildTonic
2009-09-11 , 12:02
Posts: 6 | Thanked: 0 times | Joined on Aug 2009 @ Turku@Finland
#163
Problem is with subsidized prices. When operators/carriers sell "cheap" phones, they want some return to investment. Which means blocking VoIP, Skype and IM services. Currently they make bucks with calls and SMSes. This the reason why they donīt like the loop holes in THEIR phones (as they present it). This is the reason why carriers donīt want to subsidize N900.
Another is that people donīt want to spend $500 to mobile, even it means that they have to bind themselves to fixed terms for long periods, if they want "cheaper" phones.
Last edited by MildTonic; 2009-09-11 at 12:05.
 
ossipena's Avatar
ossipena is offline ossipena
2009-09-11 , 12:07
Posts: 3,159 | Thanked: 2,023 times | Joined on Feb 2008 @ Finland
#164
Originally Posted by Architengi View Post
why not getting the N900 at an attractive price?
excuse me but are the subsidied phones a form of charity from operators? who will pay the tab finally?

tip: look at the mirror.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to ossipena For This Useful Post:
Crashdamage is offline Crashdamage
2009-09-11 , 12:12
Posts: 670 | Thanked: 747 times | Joined on Aug 2009 @ Kansas City, Missouri, USA
#165
Originally Posted by dantonic View Post
@Crashdamage
Maybe they should use the N900 to get the attention of the customer base.
I think that's their plan, yeah. Use it to create a loud buzz.

Apple was already popular because of its Ipods... one could argue that it was easier for them to dictate the way the Iphone was launched, as opposed to letting the providers make the rules.
For sure, Apple already had clout. Same goes for Nokia outside the US. They're trying to use that popularity to do something with the N900 similar to Apple did with the iPhone - take it as is or leave it. It might work...

Nokia could build interest with this "4th Step" and then gradually move towards the "unaltered" option with their subsequent maemo devices.
If they let the carriers modify Maemo now, they'll never be able to put that back in the bottle. Set the rules and stick by them.

I guarantee you the N900 will sell much much less in the US if it is unsubsidized than it would otherwise, altered or not.
Absolutely. And if successful, the N900 or it's children will be offered subsidized, no doubt. But the iPhone started out unsudsidized at $500-600, built demand, got subsidized later - and gadget history was made, despite flawed hardware/software, a single lousy carrier and high price. Appears to me Nokia wants to try and follow that model.
 
deeteroderdas's Avatar
deeteroderdas is offline deeteroderdas
2009-09-11 , 12:17
Posts: 274 | Thanked: 62 times | Joined on Jul 2007 @ Helotes, TX
#166
Originally Posted by Crashdamage View Post
Absolutely. And if successful, the N900 or it's children will be offered subsidized, no doubt. But the iPhone started out unsudsidized at $500-600, built demand, got subsidized later - and gadget history was made, despite flawed hardware/software, a single lousy carrier and high price. Appears to me Nokia wants to try and follow that model.
Heh, over 17 million iPhones sold worldwide since release, not bad for flawed...

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscente...7_million.html
__________________
Mitch Thompson, Helotes, TX USA
N800|2x 16GB SDHC|PDAir case|i737 BT GPS

"There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and BSD. We don't believe this to be a coincidence. " - Jeremy S. Anderson
 
sachin007's Avatar
sachin007 is offline sachin007
2009-09-11 , 12:41
Posts: 2,041 | Thanked: 1,066 times | Joined on Mar 2006 @ Houston
#167
Originally Posted by dantonic View Post
I think... Let them do their changes if they want... let the device become popular accross the spectrum! As long as I can get the $300-$400 dollar discount for the phone, then as soon as I get it I can flash it with the regular Freemantle Install offered by nokia, and make it like the regular device :P

For those that can't bother doing such a thing or wouldn't bother flashing their device... WHO CARES!! they probably are too tech illiterate or too lazy to use the device to its fullest, and will probably just use it as a media player/phone etc. All those capabilities will still be enabled for them.

I mean how difficult would it be to flash a device?
I understand what you are saying but sometimes the operator subsidized phones end up costing more than the unlocked phones on the longer run. For example the iphone data plan is 15$ more expensive than the regular unlocked data plan on at&t. So that increases the price by 15* 24 = 360$ on top of the 200$ you are already paying for the phone. So that makes the total price 560$ and of course remember that you have to stay in contract for 2 years which in these days of technology is a lot. In most cases you will get a better model of the same phone or another brand phone which you will want to buy. And then there is the issue of lack of official firmware updates. And most important of all reasons is that it prevents competition among the cellular providers. If Americans keep allowing their carriers(and apple) to do what they want to do they will never get a free market. Not that it cannot be done.... the markets in Asia are very good and you get very cheap prices for prepaid services. So there are many advantages to get an unlocked phone. I think buying the phone on a credit card and paying off a little every month is better than getting a locked phone.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to sachin007 For This Useful Post:
gerbick
2009-09-11 , 13:34
Guest | Posts: n/a | Thanked: 0 times | Joined on
#168
I've been following this thread rather closely - btw, Transformers rule - but as far as it stands... can I just simply ask for somebody to break this down to me a bit better than it has been so far to me?

Reason I'm asking... mind you... I've had prior phones that were subsidized that were not crippled or even branded over than a startup screen from all I could tell.

So why is this a problem with the Maemo branded phone? Am I missing a shift in how phones are marketed now?

Feel free to treat me like some 3 year old dummy (which isn't too far from the truth). I just don't... quite get the concern from the standpoint from the carrier.
 
ragnar is offline ragnar
2009-09-11 , 13:54
Posts: 631 | Thanked: 1,123 times | Joined on Sep 2005 @ Helsinki
#169
In general, operators either want to either SIM lock the device after subsiziding, but equally well you can just have a fixed 24 month contract for your SIM card and not worry about locking the device: the consumer pays the same whether or not he uses the SIM (and/or the device). That works well if it's a relatively fixed flat monthy fee. For deals where the price depends on the usage, SIM locking is preferrable to operators, since you don't want the customer to use the device with a cheaper deal.
 
ragnar is offline ragnar
2009-09-11 , 14:03
Posts: 631 | Thanked: 1,123 times | Joined on Sep 2005 @ Helsinki
#170
Then again, in general: an expensive device = users are able to do a lot with it it = a lot of data transfer as well as other services potentially used = a lot of potential extra revenue = more need to lock down and make sure that the customer doesn't go for cheaper options.
 
Reply
Page 17 of 20 « First 71516 17 1819 Last »

Tags
carrier, n900, networks, nokia v. cell carrier war, operator, telco

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 00:20.

Contact Us - Home - Archive - Top