04-12-2016 09:16 AM
247 ... 45678 ...
tools
  1. gernerttl's Avatar
    All the corporate stores here have working models. I've only seen the 735, M8, and the Lancet though.
    07-27-2015 10:58 PM
  2. Mr. MacPhisto's Avatar
    Mr Macphisto you're going to either be a hero or reviled in a few months depending on how your news pans out. I'm hoping you're right and Verizon sticks with it.
    There's always a risk in sharing because plans do change. Verizon changes its mind. OEMs change their minds. The LG G3 was supposed to come in Windows form to Verizon late last year following the M8. It turned up on testing via AdDuplex long before the LG Lancet ever came about. But LG pulled it, deciding to wait for Windows 10 for a marquee handset instead.

    Part of the problem is that Verizon doesn't rush to launch usually. Unless it's something they HAVE to carry, they don't do it.
    07-28-2015 09:31 AM
  3. Mr. MacPhisto's Avatar
    Wait - What??? Verizon will allow unlocked phones on their network???? Seriously??? Isn't Verizon the only network in the world that doesn't give unlocked phones a chance to connect to their network (Sprint isn't really a network, is it?)? I must be dreaming. This can't be real. But man, if this happens, WOOHOO! I could get the phone I want, and keep the good reception!

    Microsoft will produce and sell in their stores, a Lumia flagship that will run on Verizon. I claim that by faith in Jesus' name!
    The reasoning behind it is due to interest in the corporate sales ranks. The buzz for Windows 10 handsets is strongest there and Microsoft has gone behind the scenes pitching Continuum, better security, and better device management on phones. Verizon has a lot of big corporate customers that are not on the BYOD bandwagon. My friend directly deals with these contracts, but these contracts don't function like consumer contracts. The phones are bought in bulk and distributed while the contract is tied to service payments. So the devices are bought outright. Verizon would still like to sell the high end Lumia devices to these clients, but they don't expect they could move them in their stores based on their experience with the 928 and Icon.
    aximtreo, Laura Knotek and a5cent like this.
    07-28-2015 09:36 AM
  4. Mr. MacPhisto's Avatar
    Yes I did read what you wrote, and you're not listening. I'm telling you, you're full of it to say consumers don't know the Lumia line. The Lumia line is what has kept WP floating EVERYWHERE. You can't keep referring to just Verizon, because all the carriers consumers helped.

    I agree that Verizon shouldn't be trying to make consumers feel confident in the Lumia handset. And I guarantee the Lumia owners feel like their handset is a quality phone. I know I do. But if Verizon won't promote the WP line, the consumers won't have a chance to see the quality.

    I don't blame MS for not wanting Verizon to carry the Lumia line. Verizon's past with the WP line is an example. If MS sells and unlocked Lumia that works on Verizon, great. I'm not sure I will be on Verizon much longer. And you know why those other OEM's are big name? Because Verizon promoted them.

    Again, I don't believe Verizon disliked Nokia because their presence as the marquee handset maker hindered the ecosystem.

    I own the 822, 928 and the Icon. I have enjoyed each upgraded in hardware. Eh, so the 822 sold well. It still doesn't excuse Verizon's treatment of the WP ecosystem.
    The Lumia line has kept WP floating everywhere except Verizon. The One M8 came from a direct intervention BY Verizon to Microsoft and HTC to get something their customers would buy with Windows. They got the Icon because AT&T had gotten the hot Lumia phones previously and the 928 came too late. The Icon bombed. Verizon DID promote it. So did Microsoft. It still bombed. Verizon put it next to the Galaxy and the One in their corporate stores. It still bombed.

    Notice that the One M8 is still there a year later. That's because it still sells decently. Sure, it's not a Lumia and one carrier will not cause a phone to make a blip on the charts, but the One M8 is likely a large part of that 3% non-Lumia number and most of those are on Verizon.

    Lumia is not a name that works on Verizon. The last time it did was at the end of 2013. The 822 did well. It made appearances as one of the top sellers in the US for Windows Phone. I believe at one point it even did better than the 920 on AT&T.

    Verizon wanted the 928 earlier than they got it. They wanted it to have microSD because Verizon customers prefer that. Nokia did not deliver the phone they wanted. Same for the Icon. They wanted it earlier but AT&T got a window due to the 1520 launch. They wanted microSD like the 1520 had. They didn't get it.

    The last time Nokia delivered Verizon what they asked for was the 822. They asked for more on phone storage. Done. MicroSD? Done. After that they got very little willingness from Nokia to work with them. That's why they dumped Nokia YEARS before. Nokia was better when WP8 was launching, but unwilling to placate Verizon afterwards. Microsoft has had to clean up the pieces of a relationship that was largely damaged by Nokia.

    But, as I said, Verizon was the one largely responsible for getting the M8. They have a great relationship with HTC, though HTC fumbled with the 8X. Again, Verizon wanted microSD. But HTC was too far along in the design process.

    And if you want Windows on Motorola, Verizon is your best hope to get it done. They have the best relationship of any carrier with Motorola and they have been lobbying to get the new Moto X with Windows. They're trying to do the same with the new Moto G.

    Verizon's concept for trying to boost Windows mobile sales is to sell familiar handsets and names to customers. They also plan on showing them next to Android phones of the same build and next to the Surface 3.

    Lumia may do okay elsewhere, but let's not get too crazy on the "everybody knows Lumia" bit. At 2.7% marketshare, few people really know Lumia. Most current active Windows users on Verizon don't use Lumias. Like I said, the 735 is off to a nice start. The LG Lancet also has sold better than anticipated. But Verizon prefers having their own strategy.

    And does it matter? If Verizon launches 2-3 premium handsets that are not Lumia and they sell well, isn't that what Microsoft wants? Microsoft WANTS to show OEMs that their mobile platform is viable. That's not going to happen if Lumias remain 97% of a small market. They need Lumia to be less than 50% of a growing market.

    If you want Windows mobile to succeed, it needs to succeed with more than just Lumia. Microsoft will not be able to get the platform to even 5% on their own.
    aximtreo and Laura Knotek like this.
    07-28-2015 09:55 AM
  5. Mr. MacPhisto's Avatar
    Had some spare time this afternoon, so stopped by my local (franchisee partner) Verizon store. Partly to check out the form of the LG G4. The good news was they had a side of a display table dedicated to Windows Phones.

    The Bad News, you ask? The static models displayed were: 822, Icon, HTC 8x, and Sammy Ativ Odyssey.
    Partner stores are notoriously out of date. I stopped by one to check out the G4 a month ago. Didn't have it. Didn't have the Galaxy S6 either. Didn't have the iPhone 6 either. Didn't even have the One M8 for Windows or Android. They had the original HTC One. And all the phones were way overpriced. They were charging $100 more for the LG G3 than Verizon corporate was charging for the LG G4.

    My local corporate store is always stocked with the latest on all platforms. They also have always had a knowledgeable staff concerning Windows Phone.
    aximtreo likes this.
    07-28-2015 09:59 AM
  6. Mr. MacPhisto's Avatar
    Also for those wondering about unlocked phones on Verizon. The newly announced Moto X Pure Edition is available unlocked for $399 and supports all the bands Verizon needs. It will work on Verizon unlocked. Will no be surprised to see Microsoft pull the same thing with at least one of the 950s if not both. Global unlocked that can work on any carrier at a low price. It's Snapdragon 808 with 3GB RAM as well. So we could conceivable see Microsoft launch the Lumia 950 unlocked for around that price. Though the Pure Edition is a 5.7" screen, so that may be more in line with 950XL, though that will have an 810.

    I could see Microsoft getting aggressive with pricing on unlocked phones. The Moto announcement coupled with the source at VZW makes me suspect an unlocked Lumia 950 working on VZW is a very real possibility. In fact, I'd say it's likely.
    Laura Knotek, aximtreo and a5cent like this.
    07-28-2015 12:37 PM
  7. hopmedic's Avatar
    The reasoning behind it is due to interest in the corporate sales ranks. The buzz for Windows 10 handsets is strongest there and Microsoft has gone behind the scenes pitching Continuum, better security, and better device management on phones. Verizon has a lot of big corporate customers that are not on the BYOD bandwagon. My friend directly deals with these contracts, but these contracts don't function like consumer contracts. The phones are bought in bulk and distributed while the contract is tied to service payments. So the devices are bought outright. Verizon would still like to sell the high end Lumia devices to these clients, but they don't expect they could move them in their stores based on their experience with the 928 and Icon.
    This makes good sense. And it treats customers (business ones, anyway) like, ummm... CUSTOMERS. Which is surprising from Verizon.

    The Lumia line has kept WP floating everywhere except Verizon. The One M8 came from a direct intervention BY Verizon to Microsoft and HTC to get something their customers would buy with Windows. They got the Icon because AT&T had gotten the hot Lumia phones previously and the 928 came too late. The Icon bombed. Verizon DID promote it. So did Microsoft. It still bombed. Verizon put it next to the Galaxy and the One in their corporate stores. It still bombed.

    Notice that the One M8 is still there a year later. That's because it still sells decently. Sure, it's not a Lumia and one carrier will not cause a phone to make a blip on the charts, but the One M8 is likely a large part of that 3% non-Lumia number and most of those are on Verizon.

    Lumia is not a name that works on Verizon. The last time it did was at the end of 2013. The 822 did well. It made appearances as one of the top sellers in the US for Windows Phone. I believe at one point it even did better than the 920 on AT&T.

    Verizon wanted the 928 earlier than they got it. They wanted it to have microSD because Verizon customers prefer that. Nokia did not deliver the phone they wanted. Same for the Icon. They wanted it earlier but AT&T got a window due to the 1520 launch. They wanted microSD like the 1520 had. They didn't get it.

    The last time Nokia delivered Verizon what they asked for was the 822. They asked for more on phone storage. Done. MicroSD? Done. After that they got very little willingness from Nokia to work with them. That's why they dumped Nokia YEARS before. Nokia was better when WP8 was launching, but unwilling to placate Verizon afterwards. Microsoft has had to clean up the pieces of a relationship that was largely damaged by Nokia.

    But, as I said, Verizon was the one largely responsible for getting the M8. They have a great relationship with HTC, though HTC fumbled with the 8X. Again, Verizon wanted microSD. But HTC was too far along in the design process.

    And if you want Windows on Motorola, Verizon is your best hope to get it done. They have the best relationship of any carrier with Motorola and they have been lobbying to get the new Moto X with Windows. They're trying to do the same with the new Moto G.

    Verizon's concept for trying to boost Windows mobile sales is to sell familiar handsets and names to customers. They also plan on showing them next to Android phones of the same build and next to the Surface 3.

    Lumia may do okay elsewhere, but let's not get too crazy on the "everybody knows Lumia" bit. At 2.7% marketshare, few people really know Lumia. Most current active Windows users on Verizon don't use Lumias. Like I said, the 735 is off to a nice start. The LG Lancet also has sold better than anticipated. But Verizon prefers having their own strategy.

    And does it matter? If Verizon launches 2-3 premium handsets that are not Lumia and they sell well, isn't that what Microsoft wants? Microsoft WANTS to show OEMs that their mobile platform is viable. That's not going to happen if Lumias remain 97% of a small market. They need Lumia to be less than 50% of a growing market.

    If you want Windows mobile to succeed, it needs to succeed with more than just Lumia. Microsoft will not be able to get the platform to even 5% on their own.
    Thanks for the history lesson. It is good to see what was going on in the minds at the time, and good to see that Verizon actually did want what I want - more storage, SD, blah blah blah.

    Also for those wondering about unlocked phones on Verizon. The newly announced Moto X Pure Edition is available unlocked for $399 and supports all the bands Verizon needs. It will work on Verizon unlocked. Will no be surprised to see Microsoft pull the same thing with at least one of the 950s if not both. Global unlocked that can work on any carrier at a low price. It's Snapdragon 808 with 3GB RAM as well. So we could conceivable see Microsoft launch the Lumia 950 unlocked for around that price. Though the Pure Edition is a 5.7" screen, so that may be more in line with 950XL, though that will have an 810.

    I could see Microsoft getting aggressive with pricing on unlocked phones. The Moto announcement coupled with the source at VZW makes me suspect an unlocked Lumia 950 working on VZW is a very real possibility. In fact, I'd say it's likely.
    This would indeed be a wonderful thing. I am not opposed to Verizon having other phones. I just know that all of the Lumias that I have had, I have loved. It would have to be a very compelling Motorolla, HTC, Samsung, or whatever, to get me to give up my Icon for something that isn't a Lumia. Not saying it won't happen, but I am saying that the Lumia line has proven itself to me. The HTC Trophy that I was stuck with because Verizon didn't offer another Windows Phone until after WP8 did nothing to earn my loyalty. The HTC Touch Pro 2, Touch Pro, and other HTC Windows Mobile phones that I had before those were good phones for their day, though there were quality issues (looking at you, Touch Pro), and they did not inspire me to seek out other HTC phones, either. What I sought out in those days was Windows Mobile, without loyalty to a handset brand. Today, Lumia has earned loyalty in my mind, so it would take something indeed very compelling to pull me away.

    Mr. MacPhisto, I greatly appreciate your information here. You had my trust more than two years ago (http://forums.windowscentral.com/win...ml#post1840793), and I hope you come through this time. And yes, I do realize that sometimes plans change.
    aximtreo, Laura Knotek and a5cent like this.
    07-28-2015 01:16 PM
  8. enthuz's Avatar
    The reasoning behind it is due to interest in the corporate sales ranks. The buzz for Windows 10 handsets is strongest there and Microsoft has gone behind the scenes pitching Continuum, better security, and better device management on phones. Verizon has a lot of big corporate customers that are not on the BYOD bandwagon. My friend directly deals with these contracts, but these contracts don't function like consumer contracts. The phones are bought in bulk and distributed while the contract is tied to service payments. So the devices are bought outright. Verizon would still like to sell the high end Lumia devices to these clients, but they don't expect they could move them in their stores based on their experience with the 928 and Icon.
    This is why I was hoping they would have a change of mind and carry the 950XL. I have a corporate 928 I'm waiting to upgrade.
    aximtreo likes this.
    07-28-2015 01:38 PM
  9. dkediger's Avatar
    Mr. MacPhisto, I greatly appreciate your information here. You had my trust more than two years ago (http://forums.windowscentral.com/win...ml#post1840793), and I hope you come through this time. And yes, I do realize that sometimes plans change.
    So much this! Those of us limited to Verizon coverage do greatly appreciate you and your friend being willing to talk us off the ledge.
    hopmedic, aximtreo and a5cent like this.
    07-28-2015 01:39 PM
  10. badshar's Avatar
    And you know why those other OEM's are big name? Because Verizon promoted them.
    Lol no. Those OEM's are big names because their marketing department actually did some work. Samsung spent billions on their "The Next Big Thing" marketing campaign for the Galaxy Line. It was everywhere. It was in the commercials, banners on streets etc. Literally everyone knew about Galaxy after that campaign. They knew how to market effectively and they did. Guess what? It worked, big time. They competed with Apple's marketing head-on and arguably "won". Verizon may have done some marketing here and there, but Samsung made their phones popular through their own marketing genius.
    07-28-2015 03:28 PM
  11. Mr. MacPhisto's Avatar
    For Verizon, there's no agenda against Windows. They just want it to fit into what their business model is. The friend has said that the Nokia partnership was both a blessing and curse for Windows Phone. It gave them a huge global name but it also drove away other OEMs because Nokia received a special relationship. It made it much harder to get those OEMs to make handsets, especially of the CDMA variety for Verizon when it came to Windows. There's a lot of backstory on all this stuff. Nokia actually did a lot of damage behind the scenes before MS bought them and MS has to try to rebuild things.

    It's my own perception based in information give, but I think Verizon is the carrier of choice to attempt to build a bridge to the OEMs. MS probably does not to abandon those who want Lumias, hence asking if Verizon would allow unlocked phones. But giving other OEMs the chance to be the only ones subsidized by Verizon can help. Regardless, it's still a fairly small segment of the market. And if selling Windows versions of existing handsets makes Verizon happy, why not make them happy? They are going to carry the Surface 3. If that Intel phone gets a Surface branding, I'd expect them to carry that too.

    To me, the best of all worlds is the ability to buy the 950 off contract and use it while Verizon gets to directly sell the stuff it likes. That does not preclude Lumias on their networ. And if they saw a ton of people using them unlocked, they might decide to stock them themselves.
    07-28-2015 03:32 PM
  12. Indistinguishable's Avatar
    To me, the best of all worlds is the ability to buy the 950 off contract and use it while Verizon gets to directly sell the stuff it likes. That does not preclude Lumias on their networ. And if they saw a ton of people using them unlocked, they might decide to stock them themselves.
    So you're saying that you think that the 950 will be GSM & CDMA and able to operate on both AT&T and Verizon? That's rather unprecedented. And given the lack of support for Windows Phone by Verizon, Microsoft's history of being unable to push updates to their phones on Verizon's network, and the bitter rivalry between Verizon & AT&T, it's pretty hard to believe.

    I'm totally willing to hear you out because I think you're a great source on things. But pardon me if this all seems super farfetched. What's the saying? If it seems like it's too good to be true, it probably is too good to be true.
    07-28-2015 03:51 PM
  13. Tim Stone's Avatar
    I've had discussions with execs at both Microsoft and Verizon. This is a personal decision by the leadership of Verizon, and essentially they refuse to even allow their staff free training on the Windows Phones. Even if a WinPhone is the best solution for a customer, Verizon staff will attempt to steer the clients to Android phones for the higher commissions. I've gotten this from staff at all levels. Fortunately phone staff doesn't do this, and some have actually seen the benefits of Win Phones. Change the CEO at Verizon and you'll likely see a new attitude.

    Now, for the bottom line. Microsoft will make the phones that work on Verizon, but the stores will make little, if any, effort to sell them. NEWS FLASH ! You do NOT need to buy your phone from Verizon directly. I'd never buy another phone of any type from their corporate stores. I might order one online, or by phone call, and have it here in a day, but more likely I would go to the Microsoft Store to buy one. The deals are the same, the staff is supportive, and the phones will be great.

    In the end, none of the carriers care about quality. In fact, they would be happy to sell you a phone you don't like just to get you back in to buy another one. In the end, get the carrier with the best coverage in your area, then check the variety of resources for the best phone you want. Look at the stores, both online and brick/mortar, and you will be able to find a solution you like.
    07-28-2015 04:13 PM
  14. etphoto's Avatar
    I have never been on any carrier except big red since the 90s. I am glad to read (if its true) that Vz will continue to support Windows Phone even if its not the Luminas since the best phone I have ever owned is the M8 and don't plan on replacing it any time soon.
    07-28-2015 05:08 PM
  15. sunrat39's Avatar
    If moto X can be sold unlocked and be able to work on gsm/cdma as one device, why can't windows phone?

    The new moto x won't even be stocked in carrier stores, but it will be sold at major retailers.

    Can windows phone follow the same scenario? What's holding Microsoft back from doing this? Verizon? Is there some sort of agreement that has to be met?
    07-28-2015 05:18 PM
  16. Mr. MacPhisto's Avatar
    So you're saying that you think that the 950 will be GSM & CDMA and able to operate on both AT&T and Verizon? That's rather unprecedented. And given the lack of support for Windows Phone by Verizon, Microsoft's history of being unable to push updates to their phones on Verizon's network, and the bitter rivalry between Verizon & AT&T, it's pretty hard to believe.

    I'm totally willing to hear you out because I think you're a great source on things. But pardon me if this all seems super farfetched. What's the saying? If it seems like it's too good to be true, it probably is too good to be true.
    Look at the Moto X Pure Edition just announced today that will go onsale in Fall 2015. Supports all those bands, GSM, CDMA, and all LTE bands. Motorola stated that the one phone would work on any carrier on the planet. $399 unlocked. Snapdragon 808 with 3GB of memory, much like the Lumia 950.

    If Moto can do it, why can't Microsoft?

    Secondly, unlocked phones do not need carrier approval for updates. Microsoft can push updates directly to the phones when they are unlocked, regardless of the network they're on. The carrier holds no rights to the phone or its content then.

    Even if you wanted to go Android, you could buy the Moto X Pure Edition unlocked and get updates direct from Moto. Motorola could even decide to sell a Windows version of the Moto X just like that - unlocked. Frankly I would love to see Motorola and Microsoft set major trends with universal phones that can go on anything - truly global. And I think BOTH will get a lot of attention for doing it. And if both hit these price points ($399 for a 5.7" QHD Snapdragon 808 phone - Microsoft could do that; the 950 is smaller, but selling the 950 for $349 and the 950XL for $449 unlocked would make major waves along with Moto).

    Seriously, Take a look. Lifted right off of Motorola's website right now:

    Networks

    LTE cat. 6 (up to 300 Mbps)
    WCDMA
    CDMA
    EV-DO
    TD-SCDMA
    GSM/EDGE

    Bands

    GSM/GPRS/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz)
    UMTS/HSPA+ (850, 900, 1900, 2100 MHz)
    CDMA (800, 850, 1900 MHz)
    4G LTE (B1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 25, 26, 38, 41)

    One phone. Pretty much everyone is covered. After what I've heard, I can almost guarantee Microsoft will do this. They may do it for ALL their phones going forward. Would make it really easy to cut down to 6 total handsets a year.
    07-28-2015 07:16 PM
  17. tgp's Avatar
    Look at the Moto X Pure Edition just announced today that will go onsale in Fall 2015. Supports all those bands, GSM, CDMA, and all LTE bands. Motorola stated that the one phone would work on any carrier on the planet.
    The Nexus 6 also works on all carriers, as well as the factory unlocked iPhone 6 and 6+.
    07-28-2015 07:51 PM
  18. hopmedic's Avatar
    Look at the Moto X Pure Edition just announced today that will go onsale in Fall 2015. Supports all those bands, GSM, CDMA, and all LTE bands. Motorola stated that the one phone would work on any carrier on the planet. $399 unlocked. Snapdragon 808 with 3GB of memory, much like the Lumia 950.

    If Moto can do it, why can't Microsoft?

    Secondly, unlocked phones do not need carrier approval for updates. Microsoft can push updates directly to the phones when they are unlocked, regardless of the network they're on. The carrier holds no rights to the phone or its content then.

    Even if you wanted to go Android, you could buy the Moto X Pure Edition unlocked and get updates direct from Moto. Motorola could even decide to sell a Windows version of the Moto X just like that - unlocked. Frankly I would love to see Motorola and Microsoft set major trends with universal phones that can go on anything - truly global. And I think BOTH will get a lot of attention for doing it. And if both hit these price points ($399 for a 5.7" QHD Snapdragon 808 phone - Microsoft could do that; the 950 is smaller, but selling the 950 for $349 and the 950XL for $449 unlocked would make major waves along with Moto).

    Seriously, Take a look. Lifted right off of Motorola's website right now:

    Networks

    LTE cat. 6 (up to 300 Mbps)
    WCDMA
    CDMA
    EV-DO
    TD-SCDMA
    GSM/EDGE

    Bands

    GSM/GPRS/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz)
    UMTS/HSPA+ (850, 900, 1900, 2100 MHz)
    CDMA (800, 850, 1900 MHz)
    4G LTE (B1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 25, 26, 38, 41)

    One phone. Pretty much everyone is covered. After what I've heard, I can almost guarantee Microsoft will do this. They may do it for ALL their phones going forward. Would make it really easy to cut down to 6 total handsets a year.
    Oh. My. Goodness, you have me excited! Thanks!
    07-28-2015 11:32 PM
  19. gernerttl's Avatar
    Lumia may do okay elsewhere, but let's not get too crazy on the "everybody knows Lumia" bit. At 2.7% marketshare, few people really know Lumia. Most current active Windows users on Verizon don't use Lumias. Like I said, the 735 is off to a nice start. The LG Lancet also has sold better than anticipated. But Verizon prefers having their own strategy.
    Few people here in the US know Lumia; which is true. Outside the US is a different matter. Nokia's Lumia and Asha lines of phones were pretty popular in Europe, Asia, and South America.
    07-29-2015 01:42 AM
  20. Laura Knotek's Avatar
    These are some old articles I found, but they provide more history lessons regarding Nokia and its issues in the US market, particularly with CDMA carriers.

    From this article:
    What's more, Colin Giles, senior vice president and head of global sales for Nokia, said during a conference call with reporters Tuesday that the company has no plans to introduce CDMA versions of its phones, leaving out more than half of all U.S. wireless subscribers from its potential customer base. CDMA is a network technology that is used by Verizon Wireless, the largest U.S. wireless operator, and Sprint Nextel, the third largest wireless carrier in the U.S.
    From this article:
    2. It continued to ignore the U.S. market: Nokia's inability to make custom phones for the U.S. market didn't win itself many allies among the local carriers, further accelerating its market share declines here. Nokia's "my way or the highway" approach with its handsets didn't sit well with the carriers, who were entertaining more nimble players like Motorola.

    In addition, Samsung Electronics and LG Electronics were more than happy to bend over backwards to accommodate the carriers, and it's no surprise their influence in the industry grew over the last decade.


    Nokia instead receded into a niche brand with a few loyal fans. The company set up its own shops in major cities such as New York, selling its phones directly to consumers without a contract, which meant a high non-subsidized price that only a small set of hardcore devotees were willing to pay.


    More importantly, Nokia's minimal presence in the U.S. meant it wasn't tapped into the market when it shifted to the modern smartphone.
    07-29-2015 02:00 AM
  21. gernerttl's Avatar
    Nokia shot themselves in the foot much like Blackberry and Palm did. Not being flexible enough to realize a shift in direction of the market.
    Laura Knotek and aximtreo like this.
    07-29-2015 02:34 AM
  22. Laura Knotek's Avatar
    Nokia shot themselves in the foot much like Blackberry and Palm did. Not being flexible enough to realize a shift in direction of the market.
    The difference is that both BlackBerry and Palm had huge market share in the US at the time Nokia chose to ignore the US market. Both BlackBerry and Palm also made specific devices for each US carrier. For example, BlackBerry made the 83xx Curve line in multiple configurations for US carriers: AT&T got the 8310, T-Mobile got the 8320, Verizon/Sprint got the 8330.
    gernerttl likes this.
    07-29-2015 02:44 AM
  23. Mr. MacPhisto's Avatar
    The difference is that both BlackBerry and Palm had huge market share in the US at the time Nokia chose to ignore the US market. Both BlackBerry and Palm also made specific devices for each US carrier. For example, BlackBerry made the 83xx Curve line in multiple configurations for US carriers: AT&T got the 8310, T-Mobile got the 8320, Verizon/Sprint got the 8330.
    Nokia's frayed US relationship hurt them badly with Verizon and Sprint. It should be noted that even Blackberry got fast launched on Verizon. The HTC One M8 had fairly quick turnaround. The Lumia line up, outside of the 822, did not. But the 822 was customized to Verizon's specs. After that, Nokia was not so willing to assent to Verizon's requests. It's also worthwhile noting that at least Verizon considering Microsoft making Nokia their premiere partner to be a bit of a slap in the face. So much of what we see on that end stems from the decade long issues with Nokia and MS' decision to be involved with them. I understand why MS did get involved with them, but it will take time to repair relationships.

    Verizon knew Windows 10 was coming and could've just cancelled the 735. They didn't. My local store has several 735s on prominent display with a LCD playing a video about it while promoting it as "Windows 10 ready". We'll see what the future looks like.

    Personally, I'd prefer to just make all phones universal and unlocked. Ditch the contracts, Verizon EDGE, etc. The big loser if this happens in the US will be Apple. They won't keel over or anything, but they have a lot of customers that would not get an iPhone if they had to pay $600+ out of pocket. If a phone like the Moto X is only $400 for 5.7" then the value proposition on an iPhone 6Plus is terrible. Fans would still buy them and Apple would still make plenty of money, but I'd guess their marketshare in the US would gradually contract down to 20% or so.
    07-29-2015 08:11 AM
  24. gernerttl's Avatar
    You are absolutely correct, we need to transition to a totally unlocked system and let us consumers figure what is best for us. Much like what most of the world does.

    Unfortunately, the contract based system isn't going away for a while. We are moving away from it slowly though. The system is based on the old way of doing cable and satellite TV subscriptions and even old landline subscriptions. Its a system that US telecom companies are familiar and comfortable with. The problem is that the leaders of the US telecom companies need to change they way they look at wireless communications for that to happen. In other words we need more Nadellas and Legeres to start getting into upper ranks of Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint. That's going to take a while.
    07-29-2015 04:52 PM
  25. GreenScrew's Avatar
    I don't imagine anyone in this thread will disagree with a preference for not having subsidized hardware. I'm not really sure who wins in this scenario, but I know that having 2 lines available for renewal and being stuck with my carrier for coverage reasons, I'm losing out. I should really get a new iPhone and resell it in order to maximize the value of the system. A more ideal scenario would be to lower rates commensurate with the subsidy value. Or, just as well, what harm is there in providing a "customer loyalty" account credit equivalent to the subsidy value for someone extending their contract 2 years?
    07-29-2015 06:53 PM
247 ... 45678 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Changing the world
    By rhapdog in forum The "Off Topic" Lounge
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-24-2015, 11:29 AM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-23-2015, 05:32 PM
  3. Rise of the Tomb Raider will raid its way to Windows 10 and Steam in early 2016
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-23-2015, 11:50 AM
  4. Dishonored digital Xbox 360 owners can get the Xbox One Definitive Edition for just $20
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-23-2015, 11:11 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-23-2015, 10:42 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD