Does anybody else wish that Nokia would stop making carrier exclusive phones?

[ajst222]

I think that Nokia has a great lineup of phones, but I am also bummed out that I can't purchase most of them. I am on Verizon and my only 2 options are the 928 and 822. The 1020 is an amazing phone but is carrier exclusive to AT&T. The 925 is carrier exclusive to T-Mobile. Wouldn't it be a little bit easier for both Nokia and its customers if they created one device that could serve the same purpose across the board?

I know some people will argue that there won't be as much choice, but carrier exclusive devices mean less choice. I'm not going to realistically void my contract and hop on over to AT&T just so I can get the 1020. I would love to, but there are plenty of reason why I won't. When I read the WPCentral article about the "bandit" and how it was being tested by AT&T, all I could think about was how Nokia is creating another great phone that I (and millions of others) probably won't be able to have.

Right now for high end phones, Nokia has the 920 (I will call that AT&T's high end as the 1020 is more of a niche high end), the 925, and the 928. Isn't that a little bit redundant? I personally think if they decided to release the 920 when they did with a CDMA variant along with the GSM variant (for both T-Mobile and AT&T), it would have resulted in higher sales.

Flooding the market with a large number phones is alright if all of the phones serve a different purpose. They don't. Nokia also has a large number of mid and lower end phones which seems a little redundant as well. Phones in large numbers can confuse the customer as well. I'm sure that if the average consumer looks at the Lumia lineup and sees all the different models and numbers, they won't have a clue on which phone to get and what all of the differences are.

Not sure that I would count this as a rant, but I just had to get it out there. My main point is that I wish Nokia wouldn't be so carrier exclusive and specific when releasing their phones. Myself and I'm sure others feel a bit left out.

 

[P O]

Unfortunately for Nokia with windows at 3% of the marketplace carriers will continue pushing hard IOS and android platforms . Ironic Nokia makes great hardware, it invented the smartphone, owns more patents than anyone at one point Nokia was 70% of the global mobile market but missed out following some bad choices. AT&T was built on marketing, I phone exclusive, HTC One exclusive , Lumia 1020 one. After much fanfare VZ finally introduced the 928 in mid May at its windows flagship phone. Less than 3 months later VZ is selling flagship for free; all marketing. I found a NOTICEABLE difference between VZ's very comprehensive IOS/Android tech support and its almost non existent one for windows. Don't even bother walking into a VZ store with a windows issue. You may as well be trying to speak Mandarin with them

 

[spyderzWPC]

this is why I left Verizon I kept calling them about getting them to even enable visual voicemail the absolute zero knowledge base while on wp7 just finally pushed me to a carrier (at&t) that actually supported their product.

but on to exclusives...the reason nokia makes them is because they are given a huge amount of cash to make it only theirs in an attempt to drawn new customers, that's why at&t held on to the exclusivity of iphone for so long.

 

[ajst222]

I agree guys that carriers will pay to keep a phone exclusive just to that carrier, but if Nokia were to expand their market to other carriers, it could mean more customers for Nokia. Even if carriers might tend to push other phones, it will still at least result in more sales for Nokia because the customer has the opportunity that they did not if the phone was carrier specific.

 

[Zokudu]

They cannot release the exact same phone on VZW that they do on AT&T and worldwide because of its CDMA requirement for voice. If they did release a CDMA 920 on VZW it wouldn't work on any other carriers anyway. Samsung does this. There's actually several s4s and not every s4 works on every carrier. Nokia just made it easier tbh.

 

[ajst222]

They cannot release the exact same phone on VZW that they do on AT&T and worldwide because of its CDMA requirement for voice. If they did release a CDMA 920 on VZW it wouldn't work on any other carriers anyway. Samsung does this. There's actually several s4s and not every s4 works on every carrier. Nokia just made it easier tbh.

Obviously I know that there is a difference between GSM and CDMA. If you read, then you will see that I mentioned how they should create different variants like most manufacturers do. Nokia did not make it easier. Instead of putting a different radio into the same phone, they had to create whole new pieces of hardware.

 

[theefman]

Switch to a GSM carrier, import unlocked device, problem solved.

 

[ajst222]

Switch to a GSM carrier, import unlocked device, problem solved.

If only it was that easy haha

 

[MSFTisMIA]

Nokia has now done what others, such as Samsung, has done before them. It took 2 years of solid sales from the SGS and S2 before Sammy was in a position to keep the look and basic guts of the S3 universal. And yes, as someone said above, the radios are different so that's why in the purest sense, the phones are different. Exclusivity allows for OEMs to have known money coming in n. If the phone bombs, they drop it and move on. If it sells well, they milk it. The average self life for a flagship is 12 months, with a best selling flagship being 18 months. Most folks on contracts hold phones for the 2 years. Apple makes a killing due to owning both hardware and software.Nokia just did a massive reorganization, dropping Symbian - a home made OS - for WP. Betcha once market share picks up and the exclusivity ends, you will see a Sammy S3 like approach from Nokia. Until then, we've got to deal with the exclusive crap...

 

[WanderingTraveler]

Switch to a GSM carrier, import unlocked device, problem solved.

If you're on anyone other than T-Mobile, or a prepaid MVNO, you're actually going to pay more.

 

[MSFTisMIA]

If you're on anyone other than T-Mobile, or a prepaid MVNO, you're actually going to pay more.

That's so true. And it is off those expensive rates AT&T is able to carry seemingly nearly every phone announced. And you wonder why it takes them so long to send out updates its because they're constantly testing for pockets of niche phones that sold ok amidst the gut of the popular models...

 

[theefman]

If you're on anyone other than T-Mobile, or a prepaid MVNO, you're actually going to pay more.

Verizon isn't exactly cheap either. So that's really not a barrier to switching.

 

[ajst222]

Verizon isn't exactly cheap either. So that's really not a barrier to switching.

Well for me, there are a few factors of why I won't switch.

1. I would need to pay I think $350 to cancel my Verizon contract
2. I would need to buy a new phone with AT&T and start a new contract
3. The AT&T service in my area is virtually nonexistent

 

[gsquared]

Oh, another arm-chair CEO.

My answer to the question is No. I trust Nokia's management enough to believe they know what they are doing. Enough so that I have put my money where my mouth is.

 

[poddie]

Oh, another arm-chair CEO.

My answer to the question is No. I trust Nokia's management enough to believe they know what they are doing. Enough so that I have put my money where my mouth is.

Agreed. There's something about the internet that makes people think they're an expert on everything, even though they have absolutely NO sales data, projections, studies, or even knowledge of the contracts and tradeoffs involved. How can you possibly even attempt to make a judgment on what's best for Nokia without any of that information?? Pro tip: you can't. Give up.

 

[scottcraft]

I understand why Nokia has carrier exclusives, but I will be glad when Nokia is in a position where they can release the same phone on all carriers.

 

[ajst222]

Oh, another arm-chair CEO.

My answer to the question is No. I trust Nokia's management enough to believe they know what they are doing. Enough so that I have put my money where my mouth is.

Agreed. There's something about the internet that makes people think they're an expert on everything, even though they have absolutely NO sales data, projections, studies, or even knowledge of the contracts and tradeoffs involved. How can you possibly even attempt to make a judgment on what's best for Nokia without any of that information?? Pro tip: you can't. Give up.

Um...no. I'm not an arm chair CEO. If you want arm chair CEO's, head on over to CrackBerry. But a lot of them make sense. If a company isn't doing well, customers have a right to air their concerns and point it out.

All I am doing is just wishful thinking. It has nothing to do with the internet. It also has nothing to do with sales data (which anyone can look up), projections, studies, or contracts. I'm not making judgments. Again, it's wishful thinking.

 

[jmshub]

I see a lot of griping on the carrier exclusivity here, and I understand it a little, but I think that Nokia mostly achieves parity. While there was a longish period between the 920 and the 928, they eventually got there. It can't cost Nokia a ton to re-engineer the 920 with a new case and a CDMA radio. If it makes each carrier feel special to have their own exclusive model of Nokia phone, than I'd say just roll with it.

 

[fatclue_98]

If Nokia, or any other OEM, made the same device for all carriers, what incentive would customers have for staying on-contract. The carrier with the cheapest plan would avail itself. Carriers will always insist on some differentiation regardless of what the consumer wants. Case in point: back in the WinMo days HTC had the Touch Pro 2 on every carrier, yet each was unique whether it was keyboard lay-out, connectivity options, etc. Same HTC Rhodium though. The Moto Q was in the same boat along with countless other phones. I feel your pain but you will always have the Cadillac Cimarron to choose from instead of the Chevy Cavalier or Pontiac Sunbird. Same crappy GM J-body, different dealer to buy it from. Best analogy I can come up with even though it's 31 years late.

 

[ajst222]

If Nokia, or any other OEM, made the same device for all carriers, what incentive would customers have for staying on-contract. The carrier with the cheapest plan would avail itself. Carriers will always insist on some differentiation regardless of what the consumer wants. Case in point: back in the WinMo days HTC had the Touch Pro 2 on every carrier, yet each was unique whether it was keyboard lay-out, connectivity options, etc. Same HTC Rhodium though. The Moto Q was in the same boat along with countless other phones. I feel your pain but you will always have the Cadillac Cimarron to choose from instead of the Chevy Cavalier or Pontiac Sunbird. Same crappy GM J-body, different dealer to buy it from. Best analogy I can come up with even though it's 31 years late.

Most OEM's do. BlackBerry does with the Z10 and Q10 (and the Q5 now too). Apple does with the iPhone 4, 4s, and 5. Samsung does with the GS III and GS IV along with the Note models. HTC does with the 8X and the One.

I get what you're saying about how it would benefit carriers, but realistically, not everyone would just jump ship like that. It depends on coverage. And you bring up about whichever one has the cheapest plan. If users were to jump ship to different carriers because of cheaper plans, then wouldn't the carrier have to change it's plan pricing in order to compete?

As I stated, most other manufacturers already have created the same device across carriers and there doesn't seem to be that problem.