Rumored no 950XL on AT&T!

nukez

New member
Jun 3, 2014
10
0
0
Visit site
Hey there,
funny to see that many other talk about the carrier availability versus the unlocked version that msft might sell by thier own.
i've created a thread in Windows Phone Uservoices that suggest to have financing option to gain market share by doing something that no other constructor do.

if you want to check out ( sorry i can't post link.... ) : it's name is "Gaining market traction by offering financing option" on windowsphone dot uservoice dot com
 

Reflexx

New member
Dec 30, 2010
4,484
4
0
Visit site
If you get a subsidized phone on AT&T you pay $25 a month more for your plan...for 2 years...that is $600. So basically whatever down payment the phone requires plus $600 is what you pay.

Unfortunately, I have an old grandfathered Unlimited data plan.

I may finally have to give that up I guess.
 

Tyler Swindell

New member
Feb 17, 2014
36
0
0
Visit site
Has anybody considered the reason they are not carrying the 950 XL is because it has Qi charging integrated while the regular 950 needs a case for this functionality?
 

Big Papa Smurf

New member
Apr 26, 2014
240
0
0
Visit site
Has anybody considered the reason they are not carrying the 950 XL is because it has Qi charging integrated while the regular 950 needs a case for this functionality?

Thinking outside the box. Gold star for you!

They might. Or they may just wanna see how the 950 sells instead of stocking multiple phones that wont sell.
 

Tyler Swindell

New member
Feb 17, 2014
36
0
0
Visit site
Yea but don't they sell both the 640 and 640 XL? The only reason I could think of is perhaps Microsoft didn't want to build a special edition of the 950 XL just for at&t, and basically came to an agreement they would not include this functionality in the regular 950 and just give them that.

Maybe they didn't like the idea of certain models of phones having functionality that others didn't. The 1520 had Qi but that didn't mean mine did. Maybe this caused a lot of headaches Microsoft didn't want to have to put up with again so this time around they designed one around what carriers would take and one that they could add more to that the carriers couldn't restrict.
 

mary beth hale

New member
Mar 13, 2013
1,436
0
0
Visit site
Hey there,
funny to see that many other talk about the carrier availability versus the unlocked version that msft might sell by thier own.
i've created a thread in Windows Phone Uservoices that suggest to have financing option to gain market share by doing something that no other constructor do.

if you want to check out ( sorry i can't post link.... ) : it's name is "Gaining market traction by offering financing option" on windowsphone dot uservoice dot com
Voted and thank you
 

Laura Knotek

Retired Moderator
Mar 31, 2012
29,394
20
38
Visit site
Hey there,
funny to see that many other talk about the carrier availability versus the unlocked version that msft might sell by thier own.
i've created a thread in Windows Phone Uservoices that suggest to have financing option to gain market share by doing something that no other constructor do.

if you want to check out ( sorry i can't post link.... ) : it's name is "Gaining market traction by offering financing option" on windowsphone dot uservoice dot com
I also voted.

Sent from my rooted Nexus 7 (2013) using Tapatalk
 

Gorsky

New member
Jul 23, 2015
2
0
0
Visit site
I'm cautiously optimistic, and I believe Microsoft is taking the long view with their own phones.

I'm optimistic because I believe Microsoft will be adopting the Surface (or Apple) style of strategy from now on. Different market I know, but let's look at the Surface. It took a while for it to get popular, and since the Surface Pro 3 came out, the Surface line has had a small, but strong and very loyal group of fans. Does that remind you of anything else in the tech world? I'll answer that for you; Apple computers. Apple for decades has had a low marketshare in the computer market, yet they have always had a very loyal fan following. The Surface is almost in a similar situation with tablets at this early stage. Small marketshare yes, but highly praised devices and a very loyal following of fans. This group of loyal fans has become influential enough, that AT&T and T-Mobile are about to start selling the Surface 3 LTE (in addition to all the regular places you can get Surface devices from). So that is an example of organic growth. That means Microsoft was in no rush and had zero desperation to sell Surface devices. Purely through the merits and strengths of the Surface devices themselves, and marketing, Microsoft was able to reach this point. A strong enough point, that in this case it's highly likely carriers approached Microsoft to work out a deal to sell the Surface. Also as far as we know, other than being locked to AT&T or whatever, the surface devices that some of the carriers will soon be selling are otherwise identical to the fully unlocked Surface devices you can buy direct from Microsoft. Does that remind you of anything else? It should, as that's exactly the same strategy and approach Apple has used with the iPad.

Now for those of you familiar with the smartphone market, you'll remember that many years ago when the iPhone first came out, it was only initially available on one carrier in the US (AT&T), and that was the case for a couple of years, until more carriers agreed to carry it. So during the first couple of years on the market, why did other US carriers refuse to carry the iPhone? Simple, because Steve Jobs and Apple had high demands for any carrier wanting the iPhone. They could not muck up the phone with any bloatware, or otherwise make any modifications to the phone. They also had to sell the phone at pre-determined prices from Apple, and were not allowed to modify prices outside of Apple's permission. Finally, they had to buy a guaranteed number of iPhones from Apple, before Apple would even allow that carrier to carry the iPhone. So initially most carriers balked at these demands. Soon though, it became obvious that iPhone's small, yet strongly loyal following was becoming too influential for other carriers to ignore. So other US carriers ended up with no choice but to accept Apple's demands.

Now let me come back to Microsoft's situation. The word is that Verizon will be dropped as a partner carrier by Microsoft. Now imagine if ONLY AT&T carries the new Microsoft flagships in the US, or only one of the two flagships. Yes, it will be bad in the short term, BUT it's a good thing LONG TERM. If Microsoft with their future phones is able to establish a strong, loyal following like the Surface line, and right now completely void any existing US carrier relationships that are not beneficial, then they would be in a good long-term position. Then that would mean eventually the strong following of Lumia or "Surface phones" would become too influential to ignore. Then instead of Microsoft caving in to carrier's demands, the carriers would have no choice but to accept Microsoft's demands, were they to want to carry the devices.

As some of you mentioned, Microsoft has other options, like offering 3rd-party financing at their stores. Or they could bundle their phones with the Surface tablets, as sort of special packages at certain points of the year, to help sales.

My main point is, iPhone sales originally started small, and grew organically, without any forced pressure, until it became impossible for other US carriers to ignore the iPhone.

My main hope/belief is that Microsoft will follow this strategy.
 

Gorsky

New member
Jul 23, 2015
2
0
0
Visit site
Why on earth would you need to imagine that? That's exactly how it has been with Lumias in USA and you only need to remember how well that has worked.

Not exactly true. Verizon, however poorly, did carry some Lumias, as did T-Mobile.

Sprint had a historical issue with Nokia, one major reason they never carried any Lumias.

You're disregarding everything else in my post. That's not what I meant.

In this case, Microsoft is going with a different strategy than in the past, and what Nokia tried in the past. Instead of catering to carriers, Microsoft is simply going with a more "take it or leave it" approach with US carriers. In the past neither Microsoft nor Nokia did that. That's why the Verizon relationship is being cut, and I wouldn't be surprised if the AT&T relationship changes, or AT&T further reduces their Lumia lineup or support.

Microsoft themselves however will sell the phones fully unlocked with fully functioning worldwide radios, without any limited functionality. Just like the 640 and 640XL that you can buy right now, they have worldwide radio and bands support, allowing use on a wide variety of carriers, including various US carriers. On that note, despite limited carrier support for the 640 and 640XL in the US so far, these devices have proven to be popular. More popular than expected in fact. This too is part of the new approach. No more having a dozen variants of the same Lumia model, just to appease the "exclusivity" of specific US carriers. I fully predict that from now on, all future Microsoft smartphones will have one variant, one model, with worldwide radios and modems supporting a huge range of bands and frequencies. They will keep it simple and easy to understand like Apple.

Getting back to my main point, here's the simplest way to look at it. Microsoft now controls the software and hardware of their phones, top to bottom. They are changing or cutting carrier relationships, so that they will have almost 100% control of updates and bloat/modifications on their phones. In other words, they will no longer cater to, or allow silly carrier modifications on their phones. Nor will US carriers be able to control so much of the phone update process any longer. This therefore leads to almost 100% control of the user experience on the phones, as well as the marketing. This will lead to more satisfied owners, and a stronger loyal following. It will even influence the anti-Microsoft tech media bias in a positive way.

With Nadella, Microsoft understands the need for short-term pain, in order to achieve in the longer-term, a healthy and stable Windows Phone ecosystem, even if it means a small one.
 

Jazmac

New member
Jun 20, 2011
4,995
4
0
Visit site
I'm cautiously optimistic, and I believe Microsoft is taking the long view with their own phones.

I'm optimistic because I believe Microsoft will be adopting the Surface (or Apple) style of strategy from now on. Different market I know, but let's look at the Surface. It took a while for it to get popular, and since the Surface Pro 3 came out, the Surface line has had a small, but strong and very loyal group of fans. Does that remind you of anything else in the tech world? I'll answer that for you; Apple computers. Apple for decades has had a low marketshare in the computer market, yet they have always had a very loyal fan following. The Surface is almost in a similar situation with tablets at this early stage. Small marketshare yes, but highly praised devices and a very loyal following of fans. This group of loyal fans has become influential enough, that AT&T and T-Mobile are about to start selling the Surface 3 LTE (in addition to all the regular places you can get Surface devices from). So that is an example of organic growth. That means Microsoft was in no rush and had zero desperation to sell Surface devices. Purely through the merits and strengths of the Surface devices themselves, and marketing, Microsoft was able to reach this point. A strong enough point, that in this case it's highly likely carriers approached Microsoft to work out a deal to sell the Surface. Also as far as we know, other than being locked to AT&T or whatever, the surface devices that some of the carriers will soon be selling are otherwise identical to the fully unlocked Surface devices you can buy direct from Microsoft. Does that remind you of anything else? It should, as that's exactly the same strategy and approach Apple has used with the iPad.

Now for those of you familiar with the smartphone market, you'll remember that many years ago when the iPhone first came out, it was only initially available on one carrier in the US (AT&T), and that was the case for a couple of years, until more carriers agreed to carry it. So during the first couple of years on the market, why did other US carriers refuse to carry the iPhone? Simple, because Steve Jobs and Apple had high demands for any carrier wanting the iPhone. They could not muck up the phone with any bloatware, or otherwise make any modifications to the phone. They also had to sell the phone at pre-determined prices from Apple, and were not allowed to modify prices outside of Apple's permission. Finally, they had to buy a guaranteed number of iPhones from Apple, before Apple would even allow that carrier to carry the iPhone. So initially most carriers balked at these demands. Soon though, it became obvious that iPhone's small, yet strongly loyal following was becoming too influential for other carriers to ignore. So other US carriers ended up with no choice but to accept Apple's demands.

Now let me come back to Microsoft's situation. The word is that Verizon will be dropped as a partner carrier by Microsoft. Now imagine if ONLY AT&T carries the new Microsoft flagships in the US, or only one of the two flagships. Yes, it will be bad in the short term, BUT it's a good thing LONG TERM. If Microsoft with their future phones is able to establish a strong, loyal following like the Surface line, and right now completely void any existing US carrier relationships that are not beneficial, then they would be in a good long-term position. Then that would mean eventually the strong following of Lumia or "Surface phones" would become too influential to ignore. Then instead of Microsoft caving in to carrier's demands, the carriers would have no choice but to accept Microsoft's demands, were they to want to carry the devices.

As some of you mentioned, Microsoft has other options, like offering 3rd-party financing at their stores. Or they could bundle their phones with the Surface tablets, as sort of special packages at certain points of the year, to help sales.

My main point is, iPhone sales originally started small, and grew organically, without any forced pressure, until it became impossible for other US carriers to ignore the iPhone.

My main hope/belief is that Microsoft will follow this strategy.
 

Attachments

  • Colin-Powell-Not-reading-1.jpg
    Colin-Powell-Not-reading-1.jpg
    34.9 KB · Views: 4

RumoredNow

New member
Nov 12, 2012
18,134
0
0
Visit site
Microsoft themselves however will sell the phones fully unlocked with fully functioning worldwide radios, without any limited functionality. Just like the 640 and 640XL that you can buy right now, they have worldwide radio and bands support, allowing use on a wide variety of carriers, including various US carriers. On that note, despite limited carrier support for the 640 and 640XL in the US so far, these devices have proven to be popular. More popular than expected in fact. This too is part of the new approach. No more having a dozen variants of the same Lumia model, just to appease the "exclusivity" of specific US carriers. I fully predict that from now on, all future Microsoft smartphones will have one variant, one model, with worldwide radios and modems supporting a huge range of bands and frequencies. They will keep it simple and easy to understand like Apple.

Getting back to my main point, here's the simplest way to look at it. Microsoft now controls the software and hardware of their phones, top to bottom. They are changing or cutting carrier relationships, so that they will have almost 100% control of updates and bloat/modifications on their phones. In other words, they will no longer cater to, or allow silly carrier modifications on their phones. Nor will US carriers be able to control so much of the phone update process any longer. This therefore leads to almost 100% control of the user experience on the phones, as well as the marketing. This will lead to more satisfied owners, and a stronger loyal following. It will even influence the anti-Microsoft tech media bias in a positive way.

This. ^^^

For all those that think Microsoft Mobile will curl up and die without kissing the ring of US carriers, think again. It's Microsoft, not your Uncle Ed and Aunt Wendy's mom and pop soda store. As much as Nokia was a name in phones, that quickly faded after the Apple/Android duopoly got established. Nokia had to play carrier games with Windows Phone which Microsoft does not have to tolerate.

For those of you who are thinking about your Next, your Edge, your Jump... It's not Microsoft's responsibility. Their responsibility is to building a place for themselves in mobile. It has got to happen and they have to make bold choices to get there. Look beyond yourself and your next phone, please. Look toward what makes the platform viable. Carrier games do not do that. Anyone who believes the old carrier way is in the best interest of the platform or YOU the consumer is not, IMHO, being realistic and rational.

Change is scary, but change can usher in progress if handled correctly.

No one (at least that I've seen) is saying, "Unh Unh, no way should a Windows Phone ever appear inside a carrier shop." Quite the opposite. Microsoft needs to forge a new way forward. The carriers are free to join in or sit it out. I believe they will, in large part, sit it out at first. But this could have more momentum than you are giving the change credit for.

Let go of the stale past and look toward a fresh future.
 
Mar 16, 2013
14
0
0
Visit site
This is probably true, the only problem is that most people buy their phones from the carrier. I have never met anyone who has gone out of their way to buy an unlocked phone. Especially with the phone subsidies from carriers. I would love to have the 950XL, but unless MSFT has some sort of payment plan similar to Next, I will probably be stuck with the 950.
This is not applicable to third world countries such as Sri Lanka where I live in. We, almost ALWAYS buy our phones retail and unlocked...
 

JPDVM2014

New member
Sep 11, 2011
382
0
0
Visit site
This is not applicable to third world countries such as Sri Lanka where I live in. We, almost ALWAYS buy our phones retail and unlocked...

It is like that in most other places in the world, just not here in the US for the most part. I originally was just going to get whichever phone AT&T gets, but I'm thinking now I'll buy it outright. There are a lot of good points being made in this thread that are making me rethink my plan. I might just have to wait a couple months before getting it so I can save up the cash. Unless MSFT offers some 0% financing, which I am not counting on.
 

ODwyerPW

New member
Jun 12, 2014
57
0
0
Visit site
Hi, my name is ODwyerPW. I have not purchased a phone on contract since 2003. I always go out of my way to purchase my own phones and add them to my selected carrier.

I do this on AT&T and TelCel.
 

Stormdrunk

New member
Feb 22, 2013
45
0
0
Visit site
In Canada you can truly own your phone by paying off what you owe for the subsidy and pay a fee to the carrier to have it unlocked. Then you can move your number and service to a new carrier.
 

Chris Stevens1

New member
Aug 6, 2014
18
0
0
Visit site
On T-Mobile you pay sales tax, then for the[horn itself interest free over time. Interest free is much lower than credit card interest rate. Note: Some credit cards provide 2 or 3 year warranty.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
322,914
Messages
2,242,888
Members
428,004
Latest member
hetb