Scott, thank you for your comments. This post was really illuminating
to me, as I am not in the smartphone market and thus do not pay much
attention to it. Your analysis is much appreciated!
Apple controling the end user's experience is nothing new; wasn't that
primarily the point of products like the iMac and iBook where you
could make some broad choices (how much memory, color, etc.) but
otherwise you got your product as-is? At the time I never really
thought of it like that but over the years that has really made itself
clear for me.
~Luke
On Jan 20, 9:44 am, Scott D Hamilton <
zetasc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, January 19, 2012 8:16:46 AM UTC-5, Serv wrote:
>
> > nothing in that article suprises me. The mistake Apple made was being
> > EXCLUSIVE to AT&T for too long. Put the iPhone on Verizon or T-Mobile (a
> > near miss AT&T aquisition) and they sell the crap out of the phone.
>
> Apple's exclusive time at AT&T was hardly a mistake. It was the key to
> Apple's strategy, and why Apple still has the three best selling phone
> models on the market and is taking the majority of profits available<
http://www.asymco.com/2011/07/29/apple-captured-two-thirds-of-availab...> even
> if they aren't selling the majority of phones.
>
> Apple came into the market with the intention of offering an Apple
> experience to consumers directly. That's completely contrary to the way the
> phone business had been done. Traditionally the phone manufactuers would
> allow the carriers to dictate what went on the phone, both in terms of
> software and ugly physical logos. Apple wanted complete control, and back
> in 2007 Verizon wasn't willing to give it them. So Apple made the exclusive
> deal with AT&T, and AT&T had no say in what went on the iPhone. And as a
> result AT&T's growth and profits surged<
http://seekingalpha.com/article/199920-at-t-s-growth-spurred-by-iphon...>.
> visualized.<
http://theunderstatement.com/post/11982112928/android-orphans-visuali...>