Database Users

The guy who wrote this article is an ididot

I saw this on Digg, read it and left a very angry comment. This is a horrible article.
http://www.informationweek.com/blog...l;jsessionid=GPDCAHFFTFPQTQE1GHRSKH4ATMY32JVN
Yea I spelled idiot wrong, Its for dramatic effect.

kylepotts said:
I saw this on Digg, read it and left a very angry comment. This is a horrible article.
http://www.informationweek.com/blog...l;jsessionid=GPDCAHFFTFPQTQE1GHRSKH4ATMY32JVN
Yea I spelled idiot wrong, Its for dramatic effect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
kyle I think you misunderstood.
of course google is not producing the handsets, but rumors have it that they will realease an android phone manufactured/designed by them.
The guy that wrote the article didnt mean that google shouldnt develop android, only that it is a risky business for google to enter in, while they can just sit back and reap the benefits of the wide diffusion android is having.
and to be honest, in more than a way, i kind of agree with him.

Despite interpretations, that article is STILL retarded.
For example; how about the fact that Google *already did it* -- a year ago.
In fact, I have one.
It came in a box labelled "Android Dev Phone 1".
Second, this is *exactly* what the mobile phone business *needs*. It should be CRIMINAL for a carrier to peddle hardware.
The effect of separating the carrier from the hardware is this;
1) It destroys the links between plans and devices, i.e., they won't be saying that if you want X phone, you need to buy an X plan at $827.50/month.
2) It eliminated the subsidization component of phone plans, which given fair competition means that plans should drop in price.
3) It means that YOU as the customer get to choose the hardware that YOU want. Do you let your LANDLINE provider tell you what telephone to use? Or do you go to radio shack and buy whichever one you want? Do you let your internet provider tell you what computer to buy?
4) It means elimination of network locks, and freedom to change providers AT WHIM.
5) It means elimination of long term CONTRACTS, and freedom to change providers at WHIM.
6) It means that when a provider gets a customer, they need to continue to compete with other providers, otherwise the customer will switch.
7) Did I mention that competition leads to LOWER PRICES?

man, relax...
first of all I never said it wouldnt be a great thing for consumers if they do. I know it would, and agree with you that carriers have been playing consumers for years. the guy that wrote the article simply stated the reasons why google shouldnt do that, from a business point of view. it is a huge risk and i doubt the results would be the same as we are used to (Hero etc), at least initially.
(ADP1 was/is in limited availability.. IMHO they made that to 'test' the market reception towards a new mobile OS).

kylepotts said:
I saw this on Digg, read it and left a very angry comment. This is a horrible article.
http://www.informationweek.com/blog...l;jsessionid=GPDCAHFFTFPQTQE1GHRSKH4ATMY32JVN
Yea I spelled idiot wrong, Its for dramatic effect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This has to be one of the stupidest articles I have ever read. First Google doesn't even make the phones manufactures lie HTC do. Google creates the OS on the device. You says "Additionally, there's absolutely no indication that Google knows how to develop a high-end smartphone that will draw in the crowds." How is that even possible when Google doesn't create smart phones?
You say that Google will create a netbook with android on it, and then start talking about android on smartphones. Android on smartphones and android on netbooks are very different beasts.
Horrible article. Do you research next time
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
maybe YOU need to learn how to read and interpret information.
google is PLANNING on MAKING their OWN DEVICES and start a phone manufacturing business.
android is not made by google anyways.. INITIALLY it was developed by google,but NOW the Open Handset Alliance has taken over. this allows other companies like google,motorola,archos,asus,htc,etc to develop their own flare based on android.
"You says 'Additionally, there's absolutely no indication that Google knows how to develop a high-end smartphone that will draw in the crowds.' How is that even possible when Google doesn't create smart phones?
"
your question is just straight up dumb.. no **** google has never made an smartphone or netbook so therefore! no indication that Google knows how to develop a high-end smartphone
i mean really.. youre reading a business article but youre WAY to dumb to understand it.

brian_v3ntura said:
maybe YOU need to learn how to read and interpret information.
google is PLANNING on MAKING their OWN DEVICES and start a phone manufacturing business.
android is not made by google anyways.. INITIALLY it was developed by google,but NOW the Open Handset Alliance has taken over. this allows other companies like google,motorola,archos,asus,htc,etc to develop their own flare based on android.
"You says 'Additionally, there's absolutely no indication that Google knows how to develop a high-end smartphone that will draw in the crowds.' How is that even possible when Google doesn't create smart phones?
"
your question is just straight up dumb.. no **** google has never made an smartphone or netbook so therefore! no indication that Google knows how to develop a high-end smartphone
i mean really.. youre reading a business article but youre WAY to dumb to understand it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey come on? Do we really need to mud sling? I was just bringing this up. No need to call me dumb as it is my opinion.

kylepotts said:
Hey come on? Do we really need to mud sling? I was just bringing this up. No need to call me dumb as it is my opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you the one who made the most stupid comment on the article. even tho you was completely WRONG and irrelevant

Ok
It's not that big of a deal it's just his opinion!

rfj1979 said:
It's not that big of a deal it's just his opinion!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you rfj

nmesisca said:
kyle I think you misunderstood.
of course google is not producing the handsets, but rumors have it that they will realease an android phone manufactured/designed by them.
The guy that wrote the article didnt mean that google shouldnt develop android, only that it is a risky business for google to enter in, while they can just sit back and reap the benefits of the wide diffusion android is having.
and to be honest, in more than a way, i kind of agree with him.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that phone was the Motorola droid

lbcoder said:
Despite interpretations, that article is STILL retarded.
For example; how about the fact that Google *already did it* -- a year ago.
In fact, I have one.
It came in a box labelled "Android Dev Phone 1".
Second, this is *exactly* what the mobile phone business *needs*. It should be CRIMINAL for a carrier to peddle hardware.
The effect of separating the carrier from the hardware is this;
1) It destroys the links between plans and devices, i.e., they won't be saying that if you want X phone, you need to buy an X plan at $827.50/month.
2) It eliminated the subsidization component of phone plans, which given fair competition means that plans should drop in price.
3) It means that YOU as the customer get to choose the hardware that YOU want. Do you let your LANDLINE provider tell you what telephone to use? Or do you go to radio shack and buy whichever one you want? Do you let your internet provider tell you what computer to buy?
4) It means elimination of network locks, and freedom to change providers AT WHIM.
5) It means elimination of long term CONTRACTS, and freedom to change providers at WHIM.
6) It means that when a provider gets a customer, they need to continue to compete with other providers, otherwise the customer. will switch.
7) Did I mention that competition leads to LOWER PRICES?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sorry i had to
play captain obvious here:
1 plenty unauthorized dealers (mall kiosks, corner stores in the hood) will sell a smart phone and new contract without a data plan or other required add-ons. show em the money.
2 usually one company starts a trend and others will follow. I.e. myfavs, I forgot who started it but all the big dogs have it now
3 never ever had a phone company tell me what phone I had to use, only suggestive selling to suit my needs, and I can always buy one off the street an use. i took in my old dash to a t-mo corporate store and got my daughter on a one year contact, 300 min a month plan and didnt have to buy a phone or add ons.
4 unlocked phones are already on the market, online and certain retail stores, also applys to #3
5 plenty of no commitment options in almost every big and small carrier.
6 they do with quality customer service and incentives for long term customers. when a company lacks those 2 basic things people will take their mony elsewhere.
7 yea basic economics they don't teach anymore in public schools

Are you just plain thick? Or are you being intentionally obtuse?
We're talking about regular consumers here, not people who can figure out things on their own.
Point is this; how many phone manufacturer's advertise phones that AREN'T linked to some carrier?
How many RETAILERS *ADVERTISE* phones that aren't linked to some carrier?
How many CARRIERS *ADVERTISE* phones that aren't locked to their network?
Your regular stupid consumer who wants to buy a phone will see the sparkly ad on TV, will go to their nearest big-box store, and will get suckered into a lifetime commitment with some carrier just for the sake of having that sparkly phone that they saw on TV.
The OBJECTIVE is for phones to ALL be sold entirely in the free, so that joe consumer can go into the big box store, grab a phone off the shelf, pay in cash (no ID), sign NOTHING, walk out with it, and shove in whatever sim card they like with whatever plan they like.
The average consumer does NOT go down to a greasy store with no air conditioning that smells like barf to buy a phone that's been HACKED, and it is quite impossible to get a no-commitment phone from a big box store or off some carrier's website. Yes, if you *already* have a phone, the carrier should let you plug your card into it, but NO, most retarded consumers *DON'T KNOW THIS*.
The fact that it is damned difficult to get a no-strings-attached phone, and that the average idiot watching ads on TV doesn't even know that you can means that there IS a link between hardware and carrier. Which means that EVERY ONE of your arguments is entirely INVALID.
phatmanxxl said:
sorry i had to
play captain obvious here:
1 plenty unauthorized dealers (mall kiosks, corner stores in the hood) will sell a smart phone and new contract without a data plan or other required add-ons. show em the money.
2 usually one company starts a trend and others will follow. I.e. myfavs, I forgot who started it but all the big dogs have it now
3 never ever had a phone company tell me what phone I had to use, only suggestive selling to suit my needs, and I can always buy one off the street an use. i took in my old dash to a t-mo corporate store and got my daughter on a one year contact, 300 min a month plan and didnt have to buy a phone or add ons.
4 unlocked phones are already on the market, online and certain retail stores, also applys to #3
5 plenty of no commitment options in almost every big and small carrier.
6 they do with quality customer service and incentives for long term customers. when a company lacks those 2 basic things people will take their mony elsewhere.
7 yea basic economics they don't teach anymore in public schools
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

rfj1979 said:
It's not that big of a deal it's just his opinion!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
opinion of what? what his comment said on the article pretty much had nothing to do with what google is planning.

lbcoder said:
We're talking about regular consumers here, not people who can figure out things on their own.
Point is this; how many phone manufacturer's advertise phones that AREN'T linked to some carrier?
How many RETAILERS *ADVERTISE* phones that aren't linked to some carrier?
How many CARRIERS *ADVERTISE* phones that aren't locked to their network?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apples and Oranges.
Carriers and retailers don't advertise (or even carry) non sim-locked high end phones because most phones are subsidized with the contract. This doesn't mean that a a carrier doesn't welcome unlocked phones though. Selling service to a consumer that already has the equipment means that the service contract doesn't have to pay for the equipment and the carrier profits from the consumer much faster.
This also means that it is possible (how likely is up for debate though) for a carrier to enter a contract with Google and subsidize a part of the equipment cost and offer a locked version of the Google phone for much a cheaper cost to the consumer.
Just because Google may offer an unlocked version of a phone doesn't exclude the possibility of a locked/subsidized version from a carrier.
I think it is a great idea. The worst that could happen is that it doesn't sell and fades into obscurity. Worth the risk if you ask me.

Noooo....Apple's iPhone does better because it appeals to more people, because there all stupid. Android users phiddling with an iPhone is like giving Einstein some paper and a box of crayons

How Each Carrier Controls Their Android Phones - I'm glad I have the EVO & Sprint. :)

How Each Carrier Controls Their Android Phones - I'm glad I have the EVO & Sprint.
Just saw this article over on tested; it compares how each carrier controls their android phones. While I knew parts of what they hit on (e.g. Verizon bing search), I didn't know all of each carriers quirks/lock-downs/dumb rules.
Tested Article
After reading that, I'm glad to be with Sprint and have the EVO - Seems like one of the best carrier/phone combos out there right now.

+1 hooray for sprint & Evo4g
from mercury6200

Well, at least as of right now Sprint isnt locking down their android phones like the other carriers, but we dont know how it will be for newer android phones in the future.

Well, in all fairness to Sprint and the other carriers, it's the manufacturers that create and implement the security features. I'm sure the carrier has some say, but it's in there best interests to secure their phones to some extent. Let's face it, anyone who browses these forums can see the multitude of problems that arise from rooting and modding by the average user. It would be extremely costly for them just to troubleshoot, not to mention actually support, all the 3rd party mods. And if they did then the added cost would be passed on to the customers. Thankfully, sprint has taken a relatively relaxed approach, they don't support or warranty customization, but they don't (afaik) penalize you either. As for Sprint's hotspot cost, well it'd be hard to justify giving away that much free bandwidth, especially for customers who might use it a lot during business travel with 4g speeds. I love sprint's customer service and service plans, but my only gripe would be the extra $10 data fee.
Also worth noting, the manufacturer is probably more responsible then the carrier when it comes to locking down or crippling a phone and producing updates. In that case the carrier just outlines goals, requirements, expectations, and deadlines. Oh, and of course, budget limitations. (ie: make us the best phone in the world, but we're only going to pay you X and the unit can't cost more then Y.)
Ok, I think I've rambled on long enough...
-SLS-

SouL Shadow said:
Well, in all fairness to Sprint and the other carriers, it's the manufacturers that create and implement the security features. I'm sure the carrier has some say, but it's in there best interests to secure their phones to some extent. Let's face it, anyone who browses these forums can see the multitude of problems that arise from rooting and modding by the average user. It would be extremely costly for them just to troubleshoot, not to mention actually support, all the 3rd party mods. And if they did then the added cost would be passed on to the customers. Thankfully, sprint has taken a relatively relaxed approach, they don't support or warranty customization, but they don't (afaik) penalize you either. As for Sprint's hotspot cost, well it'd be hard to justify giving away that much free bandwidth, especially for customers who might use it a lot during business travel with 4g speeds. I love sprint's customer service and service plans, but my only gripe would be the extra $10 data fee.
Also worth noting, the manufacturer is probably more responsible then the carrier when it comes to locking down or crippling a phone and producing updates. In that case the carrier just outlines goals, requirements, expectations, and deadlines. Oh, and of course, budget limitations. (ie: make us the best phone in the world, but we're only going to pay you X and the unit can't cost more then Y.)
Ok, I think I've rambled on long enough...
-SLS-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good, logical points. I pretty much agree, other than I do think the carriers have more say in certain matters; manufacturers have more say in other matters.

+1
Sprint is the ****!!!
Sent from my phone.. I think Tapatalk??

It would be nice if the carriers catered to the hacking users just a little. For example, each carrier could have one phone in its line up with top notch specs and that you buy unsubsidized. Since the phone would be known as a hacking phone, I'm sure some sort of warranty and insurance thing could be offered.
That's why it's sad the google's experiment with the nexus one failed. To be able purchase a developer friendly phone and choose a carrier would be ideal for us.
There's has to be way of implementing this without it being a money loser.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

parousia15 said:
It would be nice if the carriers catered to the hacking users just a little. For example, each carrier could have one phone in its line up with top notch specs and that you buy unsubsidized. Since the phone would be known as a hacking phone, I'm sure some sort of warranty and insurance thing could be offered.
That's why it's sad the google's experiment with the nexus one failed. To be able purchase a developer friendly phone and choose a carrier would be ideal for us.
There's has to be way of implementing this without it being a money loser.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you'll be able to do that with some of the nokia meego phones that will be coming out next year.
I gotta tell you...I love my evo, but that meego OS is really intriguing to me.

Don't forget to hooray for HTC as well.

SouL Shadow said:
Well, in all fairness to Sprint and the other carriers, it's the manufacturers that create and implement the security features. I'm sure the carrier has some say, but it's in there best interests to secure their phones to some extent. Let's face it, anyone who browses these forums can see the multitude of problems that arise from rooting and modding by the average user. It would be extremely costly for them just to troubleshoot, not to mention actually support, all the 3rd party mods. And if they did then the added cost would be passed on to the customers. Thankfully, sprint has taken a relatively relaxed approach, they don't support or warranty customization, but they don't (afaik) penalize you either. As for Sprint's hotspot cost, well it'd be hard to justify giving away that much free bandwidth, especially for customers who might use it a lot during business travel with 4g speeds. I love sprint's customer service and service plans, but my only gripe would be the extra $10 data fee.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Phone makers allowing customers to load third party apps and ROMs onto their phones would be like PC makers allowing customers to load third party apps and OSes. Oh wait. They do, and they make money.
Phone makers can easily handle modders. Just ask if the customer is using a custom or made any modifications to the phone. If the customer answers yes, offer paid support or say we don't support that mod or ROM.
When I called RoadRunner asking for support, they said they didn't support Linux and I had to seek alternatives. Of course, I switched to a Windows machines and proved the problem was their end.

I'd say both TMo and Sprint are the best. I think this G2 business is way way overblown.

Interesting speculation. Apple buy Sprint?

http://goo.gl/M16Ct
Sent from my PC36100 using xda premium

iphone5 only at sprint?
http://apple.slashdot.org/story/11/10/03/2114206/sprint-bets-big-on-the-iphone

I hate to say this I really do.
But they have the cash... The cash can easily be spent on making the network the fastest there is. I wish a company with the $$$ would do this.

This is the first thing that I have ever read that involves Apple that sounds like a good idea to me. If Apple does buy the network they WILL put the money into the network to make it much better. Most likely the fastest of ALL networks not just the major 4. I hate Apple, I mean I really hate Apple,but if this does happen we could have a major overhaul of our network and we would actually get great speeds as opposed to the decent speeds in some areas and terrible speeds in other areas. I say for the first time ever to Apple, GO FOR IT!

Antitrust.
KJ

Noncon said:
Antitrust.
KJ
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, there's just no way this would be allowed.
And to the person that thought this was a good idea... yeeaaaahhhhh not sure what you're smoking.
We think At&t and Verizon [and really the whole industry anymore] are bad with the lock downs and penny pinching?
Let Apple own a carrier.

Evo4eva said:
This is the first thing that I have ever read that involves Apple that sounds like a good idea to me. If Apple does buy the network they WILL put the money into the network to make it much better. Most likely the fastest of ALL networks not just the major 4. I hate Apple, I mean I really hate Apple,but if this does happen we could have a major overhaul of our network and we would actually get great speeds as opposed to the decent speeds in some areas and terrible speeds in other areas. I say for the first time ever to Apple, GO FOR IT!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree but I also have some reservations on this, mainly pricing. Everything apple makes tends to be on the expensive side. I'm on Sprint not because it carries the phone I want or because it's got the best coverage, but because it's the cheapest carrier for high end smart phones that include everything you need. No extra charges for GPS access or unlimited texting or anything goofy like that. Point I guess is that if Apple does buy Sprint I hope the pricing stays the same. Otherwise I'll probably have to move back over to Verizon or T-Mobile.

Evo4eva said:
This is the first thing that I have ever read that involves Apple that sounds like a good idea to me. If Apple does buy the network they WILL put the money into the network to make it much better. Most likely the fastest of ALL networks not just the major 4. I hate Apple, I mean I really hate Apple,but if this does happen we could have a major overhaul of our network and we would actually get great speeds as opposed to the decent speeds in some areas and terrible speeds in other areas. I say for the first time ever to Apple, GO FOR IT!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes...and a 50% hike in your bill. And data throttling. And great data plans like "2GB for 25 bucks a month," And all the crap that goes along with Apple.....
Horrible idea.

RoC1909 said:
Yes...and a 50% hike in your bill. And data throttling. And great data plans like "2GB for 25 bucks a month," And all the crap that goes along with Apple.....
Horrible idea.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're a moron. Apple is not the cause of the throttling.

Apple makes hardware, and they've chosen a business model to make hardware for certain carriers, either because it made sense, or because that particular carrier bought exclusive rights. Don't quote me, but I think they sell the iPhone in a lot of countries. I don't think it would make much sense for Sprint, but then again they've been doing a lot of little stuff as side-business/sub-business because there is a market for it.

^^ ^^ Apple makes software. Not hardware. They buy hardware from multitude of companies
Sent from my PC36100 using xda premium

I don't really think that would be a good thing. If Apple buy's sprint then I think Apple will start trying to close the market off for google's Android.

Man Steve must be rolling over in his......Oh wait too soon
Sent from my NOCTURNAL SUPERSONIC EVO using Tapatalk

I don't buy it.
As mentioned above, Apple is a software/niche hardware company. They sell an image as much as anything. They would not want to get slogged down with wires and towers and coast-to-coast utility servicing....it just isn't what they do (or would be good at).

Noncon said:
Antitrust.
KJ
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1st off I'll let everyone know that I'm not a complete moron. I admit I can't build my own ROM but I can't see why this would violate any antitrust laws. How would this be any different than when the iPhone was only on AT&T? If you wanted an iPhone then you basically were stuck with AT&T. Plus when you have as much cash as Apple has you can "buy" a waiver from the government. Unless I'm missing something I can't see any way Apple buying Sprint would/could harm other mobile carriers other than those carriers couldn't sell the iPhone.

Antitrust, anticompetition, and a step toward monopolizing the industry. FCC cockblocked the at&t/t-moble merge, making the mere notion of Apple owning it's own carrier ludicrous at best.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

shochu808 said:
Antitrust, anticompetition, and a step toward monopolizing the industry. FCC cockblocked the at&t/t-moble merge, making the mere notion of Apple owning it's own carrier ludicrous at best.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

shochu808 said:
Antitrust, anticompetition, and a step toward monopolizing the industry. FCC cockblocked the at&t/t-moble merge, making the mere notion of Apple owning it's own carrier ludicrous at best.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A carrier owning their own Network is completely fine under the law. If they wanna pay for it, it's theirs to have. As long as they aren't limiting peoples choice of networks, it's all fine. Clearly Apple would not be doing this. There are other carriers, and nothing Apple can ever do will make you unable to simply switch to one of them. Even if they made future iPhones Sprint exclusives, in the eyes of the law that is their god-given right and there's nothing shady or illegal about it. You *still* have a choice of networks, no one said you have a right to buy an iPhone.
And anyway, Apple will NEVER(mark my words) make an iPhone Sprint exclusive(except maybe for a few weeks at launch). This would be a slap in the face to all the people who support them(literally EVERYONE OF THEM at this point) by buying iPhones while on other networks. Not to mention Sprint is a very small Network and will always be compared to the big two, and nothing Apple can do is gonna change that. So why would they limit themselves in that way?
But despite everything you might read, Apple likely has NO interest in buying Sprint. Why the hell would they? Give me one logical reason? It just makes no sense what-so-ever. But those of you are are using Anti-Trust Law as a reason why it wouldn't be possible really need to look up Anti-Trust in a dictionary because Apple having a foothold in 2 entirely separate but logically linked fields isn't even remotely close to a monopoly. A monopoly of what? Them owning Sprint can't effect your choice of carrier OR handsets. Them owning Apple can't either.

@ landora, in your honest opinion, do you think this would pass through the FCC?
However, I totally agree with your business angle. It would shock me if Apple ever made an attempt to either merge or takeover one of the existing carriers. Cost would make it a huge risk, and too much capital and attention would be devoted toward raising customer satisfaction levels that meet their high standards.
I never said it was against the law, I listed reasons the FCC might consider if this ever got thrown their way. If this crazy notion ever made it through...and not that it would make business sense, what's stopping them from mailing free iPhones to their competitor's customers offering them better carrier service and pricing. Owning both entities could eventually pay off. Initially take a loss on the phone, a later profit from carrier fees. Existing carriers begin to fold not able to compete as Apple gains market share.
All this said without factoring in the broadband packages they could offer if customers purchasrd their macbooks or macpros.
This analogy is extreme, but how different would this be if say British Petroleum decided to by Toyota or Ford?
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

To keep it simple
Hell freaking no.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

Is this a first for Android?

One device all over the world. Available on pretty much every carrier in every country. The internals may be different, but same design.
This is such a huge deal. This means accessories are going to be universal, and allow manufactures to make 1 accessory model, thus increasing the economies of scale and variety.
People can also finally recognize the Galaxy name in the US, no more stupid carrier names nonsense.

ECrispy said:
One device all over the world. Available on pretty much every carrier in every country. The internals may be different, but same design.
This is such a huge deal. This means accessories are going to be universal, and allow manufactures to make 1 accessory model, thus increasing the economies of scale and variety.
People can also finally recognize the Galaxy name in the US, no more stupid carrier names nonsense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
May be apart from the nexus devices.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

ECrispy said:
One device all over the world. Available on pretty much every carrier in every country. The internals may be different, but same design.
This is such a huge deal. This means accessories are going to be universal, and allow manufactures to make 1 accessory model, thus increasing the economies of scale and variety.
People can also finally recognize the Galaxy name in the US, no more stupid carrier names nonsense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think this is what happens when you have a strong product that is gonna sell no matter what, you get to dictate things like telling the carriers not to mess with the design and all that stuff. Like apple.

I can imagine how the conversation went with VZW execs :-
VZW: So we need space for a big Droid name on the front, and a different case
Samsung: No way
VZW: And of course the button has to go
Samsung: Don't think so
VZW: And we'll be sending you a list of features we want deleted
Samsung: Are you crazy?
VZW: We were thinking Oct 21 is when we announce it, our marketing dept needs to create some new ads
Samsung: Look, STFU! You want this phone, you're gonna do exactly what we tell you, and tell you what, you can;t charge $299 for it either. Got it?

ECrispy said:
I can imagine how the conversation went with VZW execs :-
VZW: So we need space for a big Droid name on the front, and a different case
Samsung: No way
VZW: And of course the button has to go
Samsung: Don't think so
VZW: And we'll be sending you a list of features we want deleted
Samsung: Are you crazy?
VZW: We were thinking Oct 21 is when we announce it, our marketing dept needs to create some new ads
Samsung: Look, STFU! You want this phone, you're gonna do exactly what we tell you, and tell you what, you can;t charge $299 for it either. Got it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol ... I'm really wondering how Samsung managed to pull this off . I mean what's in it for carriers to release as is, I think may be they want a serious apple competitor to just keep apple at check and they believe sgs3 is the one
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

ECrispy said:
One device all over the world. Available on pretty much every carrier in every country. The internals may be different, but same design.
This is such a huge deal. This means accessories are going to be universal, and allow manufactures to make 1 accessory model, thus increasing the economies of scale and variety.
People can also finally recognize the Galaxy name in the US, no more stupid carrier names nonsense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was thinking just the same. This is a paradigm shift. Android has, by far, the greatest market share among smartphone OSes, but Apple still dominates in hardware. I think this phone could change all of that - especially at $199. Add to that unprecedented custom SW development and accessories.
The bigger question looming is what this means for the rest of the Android OEMs. Aside from offering a better display and aesthetics, how do you compete with something like this? Let's face it, a strong ecosystem is more valuable than any feature these days.

More than anything, this signals a shift in power away from the US carriers who are used to getting their own way. Till now, the only company they listened to was Apple.
Hopefully this will encourage HTC etc to let them deliver the phone they designed, and not the carriers. Though some, like Sprint, always managed to make the phone better

I don't live in the US, can someone explain why the carriers do this? What do they gain from releasing a custom device? A competitive edge? The most that happens where I live is the big carriers will sell a device with their logo as the boot animation and a custom app or two. At the extreme their logo is branded on the device.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using XDA

US carriers (and ISP's) are basically a monopoly permitted by our govt (via the FCC) so there is very little competition and no choice for consumers. In the rest of the world you have unlocked phones which share the same GSM network, prepaid plans and its easy to switch. Its the exact opposite here, you pick your carrier, pick the phone they offer and sign a contract.

kirdroid said:
May be apart from the nexus devices.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even the Samsung Nexus phones have been modified by carriers (don't know about the N1).

kirdroid said:
Lol ... I'm really wondering how Samsung managed to pull this off . I mean what's in it for carriers to release as is, I think may be they want a serious apple competitor to just keep apple at check and they believe sgs3 is the one
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Whats there to wonder? samsung said, "you take it as it is, or leave it." Thats all there is to it. That's all samsung had to say.

ECrispy said:
One device all over the world. Available on pretty much every carrier in every country. The internals may be different, but same design.
This is such a huge deal. This means accessories are going to be universal, and allow manufactures to make 1 accessory model, thus increasing the economies of scale and variety.
People can also finally recognize the Galaxy name in the US, no more stupid carrier names nonsense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds like you read the article about this exact topic on Android Police and pretty much just highlighted the key points they made. But yeah, big move here. All involved stand to gain nicely from the collaboration so it's a win/win/win/win/win/win/win/win.....you get the point

ECrispy said:
US carriers (and ISP's) are basically a monopoly permitted by our govt (via the FCC) so there is very little competition and no choice for consumers. In the rest of the world you have unlocked phones which share the same GSM network, prepaid plans and its easy to switch. Its the exact opposite here, you pick your carrier, pick the phone they offer and sign a contract.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Funny, here we have the exact same situation but with our fixed line telephones. Only one partially state owned company who abuses their monopoly so badly the effect is measurable in our inflation rate.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using XDA

T-Mobile's nice FU to Nexus Owners...

You know what sucks about the new iPads?
The cell versions all ship with a T-Mobile SIM that includes 200MB a free data a month ongoing (at least no one's indicated how long this freebie will last)...
The Nexus 7 also ships with a T-Mobile SIM that gives you 200MB free...
For one month.
Thank you T-Mobile and **** you too.
I suggest everyone who got a Nexus 7 avoid or dump T-Mobile and let them know why.
Personally, I'm sick of 'iPhone/iPad plans' that either are exclusive to those devices - or are actually exactly the same plans as all their other data plans, just given a special name to cater to the self-indulgent Apple owners. I'm also tired of stores (I'm looking at YOU Best Buy) who have sections titled 'iPhones and Smartphones' and 'iPads and Tablets' as if iPhones and iPads were a special class unto themselves. They're not even the majority phones or tablets anymore. Get over it and stop treating your majority customers are second class citizens.
[And if you're wondering why I'm ticked about this since I'm not in the US? I travel to the US regularly - this would have given me a way to stay connected for free...]

It's not T-Mobile's fault you don't understand how business deals work here in the US, also your ignorance shows because T-Mobile is pretty much the best provider we have
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

z0phi3l said:
It's not T-Mobile's fault you don't understand how business deals work here in the US, also your ignorance shows because T-Mobile is pretty much the best provider we have
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow - and you have no clue what being a consumer means. Really - if that's your defense of T-Mobile (and yes, there's something just wrong about a consumer who defends a company's business practices when they affect that consumer negatively) then that explains a lot about why corporations run pretty much everything down thre. But yeah, roll over and let the businesses do whatever they want *is* a pretty common mindset down there.
That being said, you know - if you protest to a business and make it clear that their decision will have negative impacts on their bottom line - they actually listen. Pity most people just assume they have to take what they're given...
Which is actually pretty ignorant.

No need to attack me, I get it you wanted a freebie and you can't get it, the only one I see is you having a problem, just stop trying to be cheap
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

I don't know what you are thinking. The iPhone is the most common phone in the world and the iPad is the most common tablet. Android > iOS in market share but those two devices are at the top
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app

Apple simply does better business. They have products that they know consumers will buy. Their choices are "simple." Their OS is "simple". There are (now) four choices for an Apple tablet. But, even with the lowest choices people know exactly the experience that they are going to get. For Best Buy and T-Mobile or even any other wireless carrier, they know it is an easy sale. It's also easy for businesses to give incentives to buy said products. Businesses and consumers, in general, like simplicity. It's easy to back a simple product. It's easy to sell a simple product.
Businesses have a peace of mind knowing that regardless of what generation of Apple product they sell, Apple still fully supports it. When a product is phased out, also, businesses don't have to worry about what to do with all the excess; they simple just stop selling it (and probably send all extras back to Apple to deal with). That's simply not the case for any other product/manufacturer/business really.
As android users, more specifically XDA-members, we like the open OS, it offers a lot more customization and choice. To the rest of the consumers, the choices between Android devices is honestly overwhelming. That's not to mention the fact that most people don't know which version of the Android OS you are going to get on the various tablets. On top of that, which "Skin" or experience they get when they purchase an Android tablet (or in our case, as N7 owners, no "Skin" at all).
If you have any questions on your specific android device where can you physically go to get the dedicated support that you get from an Apple store? People pay a premium for that and the comfort that knowing regardless of where they bought the product they can take it into the Apple store to get assistance. If we have issue with our devices, we are left to fend for ourselves, trying to find resolutions for our issues completely on our own.

TheWerewolf said:
You know what sucks about the new iPads?
The cell versions all ship with a T-Mobile SIM that includes 200MB a free data a month ongoing (at least no one's indicated how long this freebie will last)...
The Nexus 7 also ships with a T-Mobile SIM that gives you 200MB free...
For one month.
Thank you T-Mobile and **** you too.
I suggest everyone who got a Nexus 7 avoid or dump T-Mobile and let them know why.
Personally, I'm sick of 'iPhone/iPad plans' that either are exclusive to those devices - or are actually exactly the same plans as all their other data plans, just given a special name to cater to the self-indulgent Apple owners. I'm also tired of stores (I'm looking at YOU Best Buy) who have sections titled 'iPhones and Smartphones' and 'iPads and Tablets' as if iPhones and iPads were a special class unto themselves. They're not even the majority phones or tablets anymore. Get over it and stop treating your majority customers are second class citizens.
[And if you're wondering why I'm ticked about this since I'm not in the US? I travel to the US regularly - this would have given me a way to stay connected for free...]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
..what in the hell are you complaining about. t-mobile is giving out 200mb for free for EVERYBODY, whether you're signed up with them or not. it just happens to be bundled with the new ipads, but you can walk into a tmobile store and get 200mb for free regardless of your device. for life.
source: http://www.theverge.com/2013/10/23/4947704/t-mobile-makes-free-ipad-data-offer-official
#readbeforeyoufreak

Chillllllll......
This offer is good for ALL tablets. Someone asked that on their Twitter feed.

And the problem goes away..
http://www.engadget.com/2013/10/23/t-mobile-200mb-free-data-for-tablets/
All tablets are now eligible for it.. and T-Mobile will be selling Nexus 7 LTEs in their stores as of November.
So much for 'business plans' and living with what you get.
Thank you T-Mobile.
As for some of the comments... now I see why Apple is so popular... the sheep aren't all iSheep...
Cheers.

s1lenz said:
..what in the hell are you complaining about. t-mobile is giving out 200mb for free for EVERYBODY, whether you're signed up with them or not. it just happens to be bundled with the new ipads, but you can walk into a tmobile store and get 200mb for free regardless of your device. for life.
source: http://www.theverge.com/2013/10/23/4947704/t-mobile-makes-free-ipad-data-offer-official
#readbeforeyoufreak
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, I've been going back and forth as to whether to get the LTE Nexus 7 or not. This pretty much clears that issue up.

TheWerewolf said:
And the problem goes away..
http://www.engadget.com/2013/10/23/t-mobile-200mb-free-data-for-tablets/
All tablets are now eligible for it.. and T-Mobile will be selling Nexus 7 LTEs in their stores as of November.
So much for 'business plans' and living with what you get.
Thank you T-Mobile.
As for some of the comments... now I see why Apple is so popular... the sheep aren't all iSheep...
Cheers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem didn't "go away", it wasn't a problem in the first place. All tablets were eligible for it from the start. They just chose to announce it with the iPad since a)the new iPads were just announced and they piggybacked on that hype, and b)iPad is by far the best selling tablet, and c)the iPad will be the first available with this feature. Once additional details came out, it became apparent that other tablets would be included, including Nexus 7, but they won't be available for a month from now.

TheWerewolf said:
And the problem goes away..
http://www.engadget.com/2013/10/23/t-mobile-200mb-free-data-for-tablets/
All tablets are now eligible for it.. and T-Mobile will be selling Nexus 7 LTEs in their stores as of November.
So much for 'business plans' and living with what you get.
Thank you T-Mobile.
As for some of the comments... now I see why Apple is so popular... the sheep aren't all iSheep...
Cheers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There was never a problem in the first place. You got excited because Apple announced something before T-Mobile formally announced it, and proceeded to attack anyone in this thread who didn't agree with your perception.
I think this is an interesting deal, and can definitely be an important feature for those debating whether to purchase an LTE or wi-fi tablet. Assuming you used the tablet for only 1 year, the price difference of $100 between the 32GB wifi and LTE versions amounts to paying $8.33 a month for a 200mb plan.

TheWerewolf said:
As for some of the comments... now I see why Apple is so popular... the sheep aren't all iSheep...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know why you think you are entitled to be so rude. We are sheep because we understand businesses and business decisions?
You really need to chill before you jump to any further conclusions. You already made yourself look ridiculous three times in this thread...

TheWerewolf said:
You know what sucks about the new iPads?
The cell versions all ship with a T-Mobile SIM that includes 200MB a free data a month ongoing (at least no one's indicated how long this freebie will last)...
The Nexus 7 also ships with a T-Mobile SIM that gives you 200MB free...
For one month.
Thank you T-Mobile and **** you too.
I suggest everyone who got a Nexus 7 avoid or dump T-Mobile and let them know why.
Personally, I'm sick of 'iPhone/iPad plans' that either are exclusive to those devices - or are actually exactly the same plans as all their other data plans, just given a special name to cater to the self-indulgent Apple owners. I'm also tired of stores (I'm looking at YOU Best Buy) who have sections titled 'iPhones and Smartphones' and 'iPads and Tablets' as if iPhones and iPads were a special class unto themselves. They're not even the majority phones or tablets anymore. Get over it and stop treating your majority customers are second class citizens.
[And if you're wondering why I'm ticked about this since I'm not in the US? I travel to the US regularly - this would have given me a way to stay connected for free...]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
WRONG, T-Mobile is offering this to the Nexus 7, I-Pads and the Samsung pad. Sometimes people should read before they make dumb statements. IMO T-Mobile is the best Carrier on the planet. For a very small Carrier they have exploded in their expansion of towers both in the 1900 and LTE radios. This time next year T-Mobile will have taken over 3rd place. Thank You T-Mobile.

TheWerewolf said:
So much for 'business plans' and living with what you get.
Thank you T-Mobile.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please clarify. Because the way it's written (admittedly fairly vague), it can be construed that you think your OP (8 hrs before this post) somehow caused a ripple that changed the entire way TMobile does business, and now you are thanking them for responding. And somehow in addition to congratulating yourself for changing the world, you've also turned the entire imagined event into fuel for a silly brandwar.