All these exclusives are getting REALLY annoying!

[Agent-P]

First there's the fact that the Lumia 920 is exclusive to one carrier per region (Rogers, EE, AT&T, etc.). That alone is bad enough because it prevents plenty of people from getting access to such a great device. A device that in our poll here on WPCentral the majority of users would like to get.

Then we found out at the WP8 event that the Ativ S (Odyssey) will be a Verizon exclusive (in the US). I know plenty of people on AT&T and T-Mobile who would've loved the Ativ because it still has a great screen, processor, bigger screen, and access for MicroSD.

And now it appears that for the 8X the black and red colours will be Verizon exclusives (check the last part with the bullet points). By that wording it seems like T-Mobile/AT&T may only get the blue and yellow variants. And as an extension of this, only the Verizon model 8X will have wireless charging?

All this exclusive nonsense is just ridiculous. The way to get a platform to grow is to make it easily available for more people. Not everyone can switch carriers just to get a particular device.

/rant

 

[rockstarzzz]

I think since carriers don't have much to play with on the OS, they are pressing on the software giant this way. I can't see through their business plans but I am hoping they have something in mind.

One of the valid points I read was : Have on carrier whole heartedly support your device and focus on selling only that with each sales speech i.e. AT&T's hero device. But we've seen in past, that hasn't worked. Not for Lumias. Not for WP.

On the other hand, UK example - Nokia Lumia 920 in 4 colours exclusive on EE. I've seen some of my iPhone work mates, switch to EE for that phone! I on the other hand, don't see the point. BTW, EE price plans are THE most expensive thing you've seen after diamond on queen's finger.

 

[a5cent]

Do we really need another one of these threads?

It's not bad business decisions on behalf of device manufacturers or carriers that limit North Americans freedom of choice! Most of the rest of the world has that freedom of choice! Do you really think U.S. companies are so much more incompetent when it comes to making good business decisions? No. It's part of how U.S. carriers have decided to compete with each other and how they minimize customer attrition.

I'm generally against most market regulation, but some markets require regulation to actually be free. Infrastructure markets like telecommunications are one of them. Carriers should be forced to compete solely on the quality of their communication services and price, because both of those are relevant to the entire economy as a whole, whereas device manufacturers should be left to compete on their own merits without carrier interference. Other countries realized this long ago.

Until U.S. consumers realize that their freedom of choice isn't limited due to "bad business decisions", nothing will change.

 

[SnailUK]

The way to get a platform to grow is to make it easily available for more people.

Availability is great when you have an iPhone, or Galaxy S3, that people know and want.

WP7 devices were available everywhere, and we all know how that worked out.

At this point in the game, availability only helps the people like us, who know the product and want it, thats likely to be us. People who already know WP, and we are a rare bunch.

What WP needs, is advertising, promotion, and most importantly, sales staff at shops, who have an incentive to sell a WP device, over a iPhone or Android device.

It is unfortunate, but at this moment, WP8 is such an unknown quantity, that Exclusivity should give carriers a reason to promote and sell the devices.

From what i saw today, Phones4u in the UK (exclusive shop for the 920) have dedicated about 25% of their shop to WP8, and of that 50% is the 920. Its everywhere, and more prominent than the iPhone or S3. For 2 years, WP7 devices have been barely showing in shops, this is the first time i've seen a WP device soo obvious. I saw 2 iPhone owners asking questions about it. That amazed me.

 

[Reflexx]

But people were saying that only Nokia was doing exclusives.

Or was it that Nokia is the only one that's "stupid" for doing exclusives, while it's fine for everyone else?

 

[gsquared]

I'll tell ya WG. The "cry meter" has been working some extra shifts on this board lately. It amazes me that some will take the most trivial thing and make a total spectacle out of it.

 

[rockstarzzz]

Availability is great when you have an iPhone, or Galaxy S3, that people know and want.

WP7 devices were available everywhere, and we all know how that worked out.

At this point in the game, availability only helps the people like us, who know the product and want it, thats likely to be us. People who already know WP, and we are a rare bunch.

What WP needs, is advertising, promotion, and most importantly, sales staff at shops, who have an incentive to sell a WP device, over a iPhone or Android device.

It is unfortunate, but at this moment, WP8 is such an unknown quantity, that Exclusivity should give carriers a reason to promote and sell the devices.

From what i saw today, Phones4u in the UK (exclusive shop for the 920) have dedicated about 25% of their shop to WP8, and of that 50% is the 920. Its everywhere, and more prominent than the iPhone or S3. For 2 years, WP7 devices have been barely showing in shops, this is the first time i've seen a WP device soo obvious. I saw 2 iPhone owners asking questions about it. That amazed me.

Well said, but other than the marketing materials this time I really want the guy to sell me Ativ S over Galaxy S3 at least in Phones4U. With WP7, USA folks had threads with their dreadful experiences in AT&T stores where sales rep persuaded them to buy Android even when they specifically asked "What WP can I buy?"

 

[Agent-P]

I'm generally against most market regulation, but some markets require regulation to actually be free. Infrastructure markets like telecommunications are one of them. Carriers should be forced to compete solely on the quality of their communication services and price, because both of those are relevant to the entire economy as a whole, whereas device manufacturers should be left to compete on their own merits without carrier interference. Other countries realized this long ago.

While I understand that's the way the business works (with carrier hardware exclusives), this paragraph right here is why I think carrier decisions for consumers should be based on service, not hardware. They are independent and all the carriers ever do is mess with the devices. Android wouldn't have nearly as much of the update issues if the carriers didn't interfere with updates (at that point the only hurdle would've been device manufacturers).

Availability is great when you have an iPhone, or Galaxy S3, that people know and want.

WP7 devices were available everywhere, and we all know how that worked out.

At this point in the game, availability only helps the people like us, who know the product and want it, thats likely to be us. People who already know WP, and we are a rare bunch.

What WP needs, is advertising, promotion, and most importantly, sales staff at shops, who have an incentive to sell a WP device, over a iPhone or Android device.

It is unfortunate, but at this moment, WP8 is such an unknown quantity, that Exclusivity should give carriers a reason to promote and sell the devices.

From what i saw today, Phones4u in the UK (exclusive shop for the 920) have dedicated about 25% of their shop to WP8, and of that 50% is the 920. Its everywhere, and more prominent than the iPhone or S3. For 2 years, WP7 devices have been barely showing in shops, this is the first time i've seen a WP device soo obvious. I saw 2 iPhone owners asking questions about it. That amazed me.

But what about when those people see the advertising and become aware of the product, but don't want to switch carriers to get it? If the device was spread to their carrier, then the advertising would be effective. I'm not saying everyone falls into this boat (some people do switch carriers for a particular device), but I'm sure there's a significant portion that does.

But people were saying that only Nokia was doing exclusives.

Or was it that Nokia is the only one that's "stupid" for doing exclusives, while it's fine for everyone else?

It's not only stupid when Nokia does it. It's stupid when any company does it (HTC, Samsung, Verizon, etc.)

 

[brmiller1976]

Exclusives are ridiculous. Microsoft needs to get the Surface Phone at eye popping prices on every carrier ASAP, or stupid OEMs will make a smoking crater out of the ecosystem.

 

[dalydose]

Switch

The religious devotion to a carrier is what is getting annoying to me. Contrary to their commercials, I get coverage pretty much everywhere with any of the major players. Consistent with all reports, the customer service level of all of the carriers pretty much sucks. The moral is I'll go where the stuff I want is. I'm already with AT&T and I want the Lumia 920, so I'm staying with AT&T. If what I wanted was at Verizon, I have no loyalty to a signal provider who takes my money every month, so I'd switch. Simple.

 

[dalydose]

Exclusives are ridiculous. Microsoft needs to get the Surface Phone at eye popping prices on every carrier ASAP, or stupid OEMs will make a smoking crater out of the ecosystem.

I have a feeling that IF the Surface phone ever...uh...surfaces, that it will be sold directly to us by Microsoft. No subsidies and you can get service wherever you wish.

 

[Laura Knotek]

Exclusives are not limited to WP.

Per Android Central article about S3 colors: "Samsung stresses, however, that the availability of colors will depend on your country, retailer and carrier."

 

[aubreyq]

Exclusives are ridiculous. Microsoft needs to get the Surface Phone at eye popping prices on every carrier ASAP, or stupid OEMs will make a smoking crater out of the ecosystem.

Don't want to derail the thread but when the Surface Phone (or whatever is called) comes out, it will probably change the WP game. I have a feeling it will come out in late 2013. At that point I would already be on a contract with a 920 or 8X so it will be the second iteration of Surface Phone for me. That might be even better

 

[Old_Cus]

I have a feeling that IF the Surface phone ever...uh...surfaces, that it will be sold directly to us by Microsoft. No subsidies and you can get service wherever you wish.

I'm really interested to see if Microsoft really will produce a Suface phone. If they do that would be the way to sell it....unlocked and direct. I'd buy one in a second.

 

[Laura Knotek]

Don't want to derail the thread but when the Surface Phone (or whatever is called) comes out, it will probably change the WP game. I have a feeling it will come out in late 2013. At that point I would already be on a contract with a 920 or 8X so it will be the second iteration of Surface Phone for me. That might be even better

That would be good timing for me, since I would be eligible to upgrade in late 2013.

 

[chriscookz]

The religious devotion to a carrier is what is getting annoying to me. Contrary to their commercials, I get coverage pretty much everywhere with any of the major players. Consistent with all reports, the customer service level of all of the carriers pretty much sucks. The moral is I'll go where the stuff I want is. I'm already with AT&T and I want the Lumia 920, so I'm staying with AT&T. If what I wanted was at Verizon, I have no loyalty to a signal provider who takes my money every month, so I'd switch. Simple.

That's part of the reason I'm switching from VZW to AT&T for the L920. Their plans cost essentially the same for essentially the same service and data limits in my area. I'll go where my phone is.

 

[Arsynic]

Do we really need another one of these threads?

It's not bad business decisions on behalf of device manufacturers or carriers that limit North Americans freedom of choice! Most of the rest of the world has that freedom of choice! Do you really think U.S. companies are so much more incompetent when it comes to making good business decisions? No. It's part of how U.S. carriers have decided to compete with each other and how they minimize customer attrition.

I'm generally against most market regulation, but some markets require regulation to actually be free. Infrastructure markets like telecommunications are one of them. Carriers should be forced to compete solely on the quality of their communication services and price, because both of those are relevant to the entire economy as a whole, whereas device manufacturers should be left to compete on their own merits without carrier interference. Other countries realized this long ago.

Until U.S. consumers realize that their freedom of choice isn't limited due to "bad business decisions", nothing will change.

Even without the carrier business model, different carriers use different cellular technology.

 

[a5cent]

this paragraph right here is why I think carrier decisions for consumers should be based on service, not hardware. They are independent and all the carriers ever do is mess with the devices.

Carrier's don't make decisions FOR (i.e. in the interest of) consumers. They make decisions in the interest of profits and reducing operational costs to the lowest possible level, while continually striving to increase their sphere of influence through any legal means possible. As long as you are paying for their services, whatever else you might think really doesn't matter to them.

As long as it is legal, U.S. carriers will continue these practices and they should. It's what they are meant to do. Expecting carriers to behave nicely just out of the goodness of their hearts is naive. The only way to change that is by getting those that represent the people to stand up for the peoples interests. The 1000 rants on wpcentral won't change anything.

Exclusives are ridiculous. Microsoft needs to get the Surface Phone at eye popping prices on every carrier ASAP, or stupid OEMs will make a smoking crater out of the ecosystem.

The idea that Microsoft can develop a surface phone that will have all U.S. carriers falling over themselves to offer it subsidized on contract is simply naive. Theoretically, it is possible if Microsoft were to deliver a surface phone with the potential to do serious damage to carriers bottom lines if they decide not to play along. Unfortunately, the carriers just went though a similar experience with Apple and there is no way in h3ll any of them will allow that to repeat. Carriers will declare Microsoft a competitor and boycott them (some already perceive Microsoft as a competitor) before they let such a Microsoft surface phone fantasy become reality.

Edit: Microsoft may choose to avoid carrier intervention by selling it unlocked and at full price, which would instantly reduce the set of potential customers to a miniscule group of WP smartphone enthusiasts (a.k.a. us) and destroy any chances of it becoming a "game changing" device.

 

[cgk]

Exclusives are not limited to WP.

Per Android Central article about S3 colors: "Samsung stresses, however, that the availability of colors will depend on your country, retailer and carrier."

Colours are a trivial issues compared to a situation (such as we have in the UK) where even if you buy the 920 sim only, it's locked to one network which only offers premium priced contracts - it's a bit baffling and means the 920 is effectively dead on arrival in the UK.

 

[Laura Knotek]

Colours are a trivial issues compared to a situation (such as we have in the UK) where even if you buy the 920 sim only, it's locked to one network which only offers premium priced contracts - it's a bit baffling and means the 920 is effectively dead on arrival in the UK.

That is correct. However, there are other vendors who provide more devices in UK than in US. For example, I just checked Motorola's US and UK sites. Motorola does not sell any T-Mobile US devices at all, and its AT&T selection is mediocre. UK customers are able to get quite a few Motorola devices such as the Razr Maxx, which are only available to VZW customers in US.