You seem to think that Google and Apple were responsible for the Nexus and the iPhone to be available on multiple carriers. It's not a one-sided deal. The carrier has to agree to offer a phone on their network. Verizon and Sprint both WANTED the iPhone on their networks because they saw the major cash revenue AT&T was making off of it. All of the carriers wanted the Nexus because they saw how much consumers wanted the device (AT&T asked on their Google Plus page whether people would be interested in the device. They don't just ask those things for nothing. It is to help them see whether a device would be good or not to offer.) The point is, carriers aren't seeing the major gain offering Windows Phones. They don't bring in the volume of consumers that other OS' do. This will, of course, change. Apple's iPhone and Google's Nexus weren't always hugely desired by the carriers. The Nexus was only offered on T-Mobile and then Sprint (and AT&T only through Best Buy and after months of it already being offered) got the Nexus S. It wasn't until this recent Galaxy Nexus that the carriers really wanted to offer it on their network. The same is going to go for Windows Phone. The Nokia 900 may be offered on other carriers or it may not. People who really want the device will switch carriers to get it, just like they did the iPhone when it was on AT&T for years. We can't really know how much a carrier would want these new devices until they actually hit the market and the other carriers look to AT&T to see how well they sell. So, my point is, the future of Windows Phone relies more on AT&T and how well they market the device as well as how many AT&T customers want the device.
in order for the 900 to be huge it has to be on all carriers!
- Thread starter DontHate707
- Start date
You seem to think that Google and Apple were responsible for the Nexus and the iPhone to be available on multiple carriers. It's not a one-sided deal. The carrier has to agree to offer a phone on their network. Verizon and Sprint both WANTED the iPhone on their networks because they saw the major cash revenue AT&T was making off of it. All of the carriers wanted the Nexus because they saw how much consumers wanted the device (AT&T asked on their Google Plus page whether people would be interested in the device. They don't just ask those things for nothing. It is to help them see whether a device would be good or not to offer.) The point is, carriers aren't seeing the major gain offering Windows Phones. They don't bring in the volume of consumers that other OS' do. This will, of course, change. Apple's iPhone and Google's Nexus weren't always hugely desired by the carriers. The Nexus was only offered on T-Mobile and then Sprint (and AT&T only through Best Buy and after months of it already being offered) got the Nexus S. It wasn't until this recent Galaxy Nexus that the carriers really wanted to offer it on their network. The same is going to go for Windows Phone. The Nokia 900 may be offered on other carriers or it may not. People who really want the device will switch carriers to get it, just like they did the iPhone when it was on AT&T for years. We can't really know how much a carrier would want these new devices until they actually hit the market and the other carriers look to AT&T to see how well they sell. So, my point is, the future of Windows Phone relies more on AT&T and how well they market the device as well as how many AT&T customers want the device.
Reflexx
New member
Can we agree that Hero status (which includes sales incentives that make reps actually want to recommend the phone) is better than not having Hero status?
I have to disagree about nobody knowing about the phone no matter how many commercials air. If there's enough advertising, people will hear about it. People will know.
And if it helps for AT&T, then that means it helps for MS and Nokia. If AT&T has any exclusivity with the phone, they will take any success and try to push that into bigger success.
Then maybe with WP8 we'll see high end phones on all carriers. Or maybe not. If exclusivity yields enough success for AT&T, they might pay for more exclusivity.
But the cool thing if you're another carrier is that WP isn't exclusive to Nokia. So if AT&T gets success with its hero phone, then Verizon, Sprint, and T-Mo could push for companies like HTC and Samsung to step it up.
In the end, it might mean better devices all around.
jdevenberg
New member
The way the iPhone became so famous was that AT&T gave it hero status. No matter how you want to slice it, a high end phone with $100,000,000 marketing budget, given hero status is good news for windows phone. AT&T has to think that windows phone has a chance to agree to this. Even though they aren't putting in much of the marketing budget, they don't want to tie their name in such a huge way to a crappy phone running an OS they think is crappy.
Nokia is in no position to make demands, they have no leverage right now. They have even less leverage over AT&T than Pantech (what does that tell you?). They want to re-establish a marketshare in the U.S. market. In order to do so, they have to make concessions to the carriers.
Here's a basic run-down:
NOK: Hey, AT&T, we have these phones that we are thinking about producing, do any of them interest you?
ATT: Hmmm, yes, there is one phone on your product planning roadmap that may interest us, tell us more about it.
NOK: Well, it has blah blah blah, blah blah blah, and blah blah blah.
ATT: Well, we like the phone, but we want it to look like blah blah blah, we want you to disable blah blah blah, we want you to add blah blah blah, and most of all, we want exclusitivity on this phone.
Then they hash it out for the next year or so as the phone gets developed. Do not underestimate the demands that carriers will make, something as simple as "we want it in AT&T blue" is a make it or break it proposition, especially if the phone manufacturer has no leverage. If any of you are familiar w/ the Nokia X7, then that's a good example of something that went horribly bad in the final hour before it was to launch w/ AT&T. And that phone was in the works for at least a year and a half.
The iphone was different. All the carriers thought it was a bad idea and slammed the door on el jefe, but the then CEO of Cingular Wireless took a giant risk and signed up for it. Neither party, Cingular nor Apple, had leverage over the other. It wasn't until the iphone shot off like a rocket into space that Apple had AT&T by where the sun don't shine. That relationship was love & hate. AT&T loved the iphone cash cow, but hated the leverage Apple had over them.
Similar deal w/ Android. AT&T loves the Android cash cow, but hates the problems that the OS introduced to the company.
That's why I sez, AT&T is secretly rooting for Nokia and WP7 (and I didn't come up w/ conclusion, either...). But they expect something in return that starts with $. So if they think an exclusivity to Ace is going to give them that initial ROI bump, then they will demand it and it will be non-negotiable.
Let's get another thing straight. Carriers don't make money off of subsidized phone sales. They make money off of new contracts and renewals. A customer that leaves VZW for AT&T because of a phone means exactly that -- +1 for AT&T and -1 for VZW in the accounting books. Kick your competitor in the nads while going up one stair at the same time.
Here's a basic run-down:
NOK: Hey, AT&T, we have these phones that we are thinking about producing, do any of them interest you?
ATT: Hmmm, yes, there is one phone on your product planning roadmap that may interest us, tell us more about it.
NOK: Well, it has blah blah blah, blah blah blah, and blah blah blah.
ATT: Well, we like the phone, but we want it to look like blah blah blah, we want you to disable blah blah blah, we want you to add blah blah blah, and most of all, we want exclusitivity on this phone.
Then they hash it out for the next year or so as the phone gets developed. Do not underestimate the demands that carriers will make, something as simple as "we want it in AT&T blue" is a make it or break it proposition, especially if the phone manufacturer has no leverage. If any of you are familiar w/ the Nokia X7, then that's a good example of something that went horribly bad in the final hour before it was to launch w/ AT&T. And that phone was in the works for at least a year and a half.
The iphone was different. All the carriers thought it was a bad idea and slammed the door on el jefe, but the then CEO of Cingular Wireless took a giant risk and signed up for it. Neither party, Cingular nor Apple, had leverage over the other. It wasn't until the iphone shot off like a rocket into space that Apple had AT&T by where the sun don't shine. That relationship was love & hate. AT&T loved the iphone cash cow, but hated the leverage Apple had over them.
Similar deal w/ Android. AT&T loves the Android cash cow, but hates the problems that the OS introduced to the company.
That's why I sez, AT&T is secretly rooting for Nokia and WP7 (and I didn't come up w/ conclusion, either...). But they expect something in return that starts with $. So if they think an exclusivity to Ace is going to give them that initial ROI bump, then they will demand it and it will be non-negotiable.
Let's get another thing straight. Carriers don't make money off of subsidized phone sales. They make money off of new contracts and renewals. A customer that leaves VZW for AT&T because of a phone means exactly that -- +1 for AT&T and -1 for VZW in the accounting books. Kick your competitor in the nads while going up one stair at the same time.
I'd rather have Nokia strike an exclusive with AT&T which means its reps will portray the device in a positive light and try to sell it as opposed to having all four major carriers carrying it and telling everyone not to buy it.
1jaxstate1
New member
The iPhone wasn't that way for a LONG time. The Nexus is only on Verizon right now, then heading to Sprint. No tmobile and AT&T for the time being. I think the exclusive deal is bull****, but carriers do it to get customers to switch.
I don't thing you guys understand.
Nokia DID made the Lumia 900 prototype for Verizon.
Verizon said **** no, it's not going to carry the Lumia 900.
At this point there's nothing Nokia can do.
Nokia DID made the Lumia 900 prototype for Verizon.
Verizon said **** no, it's not going to carry the Lumia 900.
At this point there's nothing Nokia can do.
Premium1
New member
the at&t nexus already passed through the fcc so it will most likely come to at&t in the coming months, most likely around the same time at&t gets the 900.
Premium1
New member
Proof or it didn't happen. Going by what some "analyst" said you can not put to much faith in. Until verizon comes out and says it it is all rumor.
I quote CNET and that's as official as it gets.
I have some real doubt that Verizon will come and officially declare that it rejected the Lumia 900.
Last edited:
1jaxstate1
New member
Really! My friend has one and he loves it. ****, I'm going to need a loan from Bill Gates to keep up with all these new toys! 
Premium1
New member
Really! My friend has one and he loves it. ****, I'm going to need a loan from Bill Gates to keep up with all these new toys!
Yeah the nexus is really nice. The first android phone that doesn't seem to have the stutter and lag and bogged down by a skin other android phones have.
The latest from BGR is that the 900 is released on 3/18/ 2012 and the price w 2 yr contract is going to be $99.00. Dont know who their source but I hopoe its all true If so ATT will have hopefully ordered a few train loads at it should sell like hotcakes!! or better! I hope they have a pre order site up and running soon Demand I think will be very very very heavy!
I dont know why PPL have this same conversation over and OVER !
ITS NOT UP TO MS OR NOKIA TO GET IT ON ALL CARRIERS ! Its UP TO THE CARRIERS ! Of course MS and Nokia want it on all carriers ! They sell phones to carriers ! Thus!
By all rumor Nokia pitched the 900 to VZW and VZW said no. So dont blame MS or Nokia and no they cant force them either...
Go complain to VZW or Sprint.. You can bet it was intentional that VZW selected mid tier hardware for the one WP7 device they offer.. They dont like MS. So.. if your on VZW get a jesusphone a droid or 18 month old trophy just sayn.
ITS NOT UP TO MS OR NOKIA TO GET IT ON ALL CARRIERS ! Its UP TO THE CARRIERS ! Of course MS and Nokia want it on all carriers ! They sell phones to carriers ! Thus!
By all rumor Nokia pitched the 900 to VZW and VZW said no. So dont blame MS or Nokia and no they cant force them either...
Go complain to VZW or Sprint.. You can bet it was intentional that VZW selected mid tier hardware for the one WP7 device they offer.. They dont like MS. So.. if your on VZW get a jesusphone a droid or 18 month old trophy just sayn.
Well yeah. 4g is becoming the standard now.
Verizon and Sprint only have 1 Windows phone each and both are 3g phones. So they're easily overshadowed by the 4g Android phones.
T-Mobile is only selling the Radar (in white...yuck) and 710 (fugly design) now. Both are 4g but they're no HTC Titan, Lumia 900 or Focus S. ATT is the only carrier getting the top of the line Windows phones so its no wonder Windows phones aren't selling much in the U.S.
Verizon and Sprint only have 1 Windows phone each and both are 3g phones. So they're easily overshadowed by the 4g Android phones.
T-Mobile is only selling the Radar (in white...yuck) and 710 (fugly design) now. Both are 4g but they're no HTC Titan, Lumia 900 or Focus S. ATT is the only carrier getting the top of the line Windows phones so its no wonder Windows phones aren't selling much in the U.S.
Te number of people rating them is minuscule compared to the iPhone and top android phones, which outsell windows phone device models. The carriers know that. They aren't stupid.
They care about volume of sales, not ratings with a comparatively minuscule sample pool.
Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
11B1P
Active member
The OS didn't fail, the hardware failed. Palm failed to provide hardware specs that meet the desire of the community, i.e. a large screen. If Palm/HP had stayed with a "Treo-like" design, we wouldn't have seen the untimely death of webOS.
whatever yous guys act like MS one of the most profitable companies in the world ever couldn't persuade these other carriers? bull. im 19 and there one thing ive caught on to in this planet and its "money talks"
theres no reason why tmobile or even sprint couldnt carry this device
theres no reason why tmobile or even sprint couldnt carry this device
Looking at the announcements from VZW and Sprint they just don't care. They're content with Android and iOS and don't want to bother with yet another phone that might not sell in mass quantities. Maybe they're waiting for the 900 to sell like crazy so they can then carry something similar at the end of the year for those willing to wait... but I'll tell you this much, with even the Arrive being $199 with contract at Sprint you won't find a 900 anywhere near the introductory $99 price at ATT.
I've had Sprint for about 9 years now and come March, I'm gone. Yeah, they have unlimited data but it's so slow you can't even stream music from Zune over EVDO without it cutting out every 5-10 seconds and roaming on the Verizon network is even worse than that. Unlimited data means nothing when you can only manage 250MB/month.
Also, Sprint just dumped A LOT of money into the iPhone so I've doubted since then that they would have a big push for anything else in the near future.
Similar threads
Trending Posts
-
The Fallout Season 1 viewing figures are absolutely INSANE, no wonder Season 2 was confirmed so quickly
- Started by Windows Central
- Replies: 0
-
Fallout show creators pretty much confirm what we expected for season two
- Started by Windows Central
- Replies: 0
-
PSA: It doesn't matter if your computer runs on ARM, all of your apps will work on Windows 11
- Started by Windows Central
- Replies: 3
-
Microsoft's Xbox has taken over the Sony's PlayStation Store 🤯
- Started by Windows Central
- Replies: 18
Members online
No members online now.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram