Is it possible Windows Phone might finally have a chance?

[gMaesterUK]

Today I read an article about Google wanting to create a truly international phone service without the roaming charges by effectively setting up as a virtual operator. Here in the UK, Google is talking to Three (which is currently purchasing O2). The only way Google can really do this is by using their own SIM cards.

Next, Apple are rumoured to be enforcing on carriers the Apple SIM, which has the potential for Apple to try following Google. The customer is then Apple's, using (for example) Vodafone purely for connectivity.

The big question is whether the major carriers will stop this, or are they just going to roll over and allow it?

The reason I mentioned Microsoft, is could the carriers try to block it, or at least take some impact away by diverting customers to other platforms, such as Windows Phone, Blackberry, etc?

What's your thoughts on the Google/Apple SIM plan, and the "Carriers Fight Back" opinion?

Oh, and please don't make this a MS is doomed topic, cause TBH, it's getting tiresome!

G.

 

[theefman]

Obviously the carriers will roll over for apple and google, why would it be otherwise? If any carrier truly wanted WP to be a viable alternative they would work better to sell them in stores but they don't so I wouldn't expect anything to change.

 

[doob9911]

It will be very harmful to local business. Government will block this for carriers.

 

[hotphil]

The softSIM is large in Apple's plans. And let's not forget in the development of the iPhone, Apple even contemplated (whether seriously or just as a threat to carriers) to build their own cell network (they had the cash and the determination to do it too).
​Carriers are heading the way of broadcasters and record labels. Their place in the market is increasingly irrelevant. If they don't see it coming, they're in for a shock. Too slow to adapt.
We're seeing it already with the merging/selling of various carriers in multiple markets. The sooner they realise their role is going to change solely to that of IP connection provider between tower and device, the better.
If they'd spent less resource on loading up devices with unwanted bloatware in the attempt to boost ARPU and more in partnering with someone like Microsoft to actually deliver value-adding services, they'd be onto a winner.
MS has the technology to be a big player in the post carrier-dependent market (with Skype for voice and all their various data services). But seemingly no desire/vision to do the obvious thing and take ownership of the part of the chain that they're currently beholden to carriers for.
For all the talk of "mobile first, cloud first" they'll be caught napping.
Google's vision, whilst a long way from reality (certainly outside the US) at least seems to be more complete than MS's.
I can't see regulators blocking such moves. If anything it would increase local cell competition markets, with carriers being invisible to users - they'd just sell infrastructure access to the service provider, similar to MVNO now. And for the regulators to be effective, they'd have to understand the technology and have the relevant powers to intervene. And we all know that when it comes to being up to date and effective, watchdogs are seldom at the forefront.​