Showing posts with label T-mobile. Show all posts
Showing posts with label T-mobile. Show all posts

Monday, March 21, 2011

The freedom of choice. ATT or Verizon.

One of the reasons why I came the USA was that this is country of opportunities and variety. But after six years I had to learn that this is not always true.

There is still a lot of opportunities, but you need either to know the right people or you need to have a lot of money to come your dream alive.
But this alone is another topic I could write a lot. This post is about the competition.

America was a dream for Germans. I am coming from a country where the state did own or control a lot of business. We had in time back not many private banks, and long ago telecommunications were owned by the German Telekom, owned by the government. I remember in 1994 to make a call overseas or even from door to door was expensive. 23 cent per 8 minutes for a local call and over $2 per minute for a call to the US. At this time (I lived in San Diego) a local call in the US was and a call to Germany less than 99 cent a minute.

But all changed in the last few years. Since then the German Telekom is no monopoly anymore, we can make call to the US for less than a cent a minute and sometimes free.

Calling from the US today to Germany is only free if you have Vonage or other VoIP. A normal landline costs still 9 cent and with a cellphone it costs 99 cent depending on the provider. American companies even charge you money for receiving calls or SMS. In Germany only the sender has to pay, if it is not a roaming call to a German number into another country.

Back to competition. In last few months Facebook did buy some smaller competitors, Google did buy in the last 8 years over 20 companies and Zynga (famous game platform) did buy 10 smaller game competitions.

There is not much competition going on in America. There is no real competition to google and bing, and any competition to FB gets more or less bought from FB. Or Facebook does offer same service like a competition with more financial strength.

Zynga is buying almost all possible competition to keep sole player. Word with friends creators could have been a good competition to Zynga but is now a part of the Zynga empire.

When you look at all potential interesting start ups then the main investors are mostly the paypal or AOL Netscape mafia and then some former google and Facebook billionaires.

At the end a few handful of people own the the American Internet.




Not to mention CPG or CE companies and American Car industry. All comes down to a few main players.

Now the same happens in the telecom business. ATT announced that they are going to buy the American part of T-Mobile for $39 Billion (Sprint thought they had already the deal with T-Mobile but their $25 Billion offer was not enough).

What does this mean for us consumers and Sprint?

ATT will be the biggest mobile carrier in the States, followed by Verizon and then long nothing till Sprint shows up. Sprint stock went already down with this announcement and Sprint might even vanish totally. A few years ago there was at least Nextel, ATT, Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile and a few other small providers. Soon there are only two left. This means as a consumer we don't have a choice and no choice means higher prices.

America is a great country but if the acquisition and merger goes on, then we are in country with no real competition which will result in more unemployed people and higher prices.

ATT will close approx. 400 stores where ATT and T-Mobile have been too close together like in malls, which will leave at least 3000 people without work.

For existing ATT customers the merger might be better. The price stays stable and the coverage might be better because ATT can benefit from the newer T-Mobile technology. T-Mobile customers will get the iPhone but with a premium. T-Mobile offers much cheaper family packages and cheaper data plans. All this will go away.

And with this acquisition we will miss the cute T-mobile girl in the ads against ATT. Pretty sure somebody will make soon a parody on this.



T-Mobile Germany will use the money to invest in faster Internet and better technology, therefore it is at least a win for the German consumer.

I am a big supporter of open business and that everybody can buy everybody if they have the money, but only to a point when it is for a benefit for the consumer as well. If at the end the consumer is the biggest loser then the government should take action. And this deal will be not good for the consumer neither for thousands of employees. The US has already too many unemployed people, and these people can't afford to help the economy to grow. Our economy needs us consumers to buy the products to invest into the country. If we don't work and the prices are going up then we can't buy anything and the companies have to let go more people and less people can buy good and so on.

Please let me know if I see something wrong? As not a born American I might not understand the system.


- Posted using BlogPress, please follow me on twitter @schlotz69

Monday, December 6, 2010

iPhone at Verizon but why not Sprint or T-Mobile?

Since a while are speculations that the iPhone will come to Verizon and ATT loses exclusivity here in the US.
Assuming this is correct (at this point fair to do so, everybody has no doubt), then i am wondering what is the whole deal behind. We know ATT paid a lot to be the only iPhone partner for the first 3 years.
But to get iPhone running on Verizon, Apple has to build a new iPhone which supports CDMA. T- mobile as an example has GSM like ATT, would it not easier to sell the iPhone at T-Mobile without the need to produce a new iPhone?
ATT and t-mobile are both on GSM and both using 3GPP (3rd Generation Partnership Project) for their 3G.
Verizon and Sprint are both CDMA for calls and 3GPP2 for data. This means Apple could already sell to t-mobile and when the Verizon iPhone is released they could sell it through Sprint.
I am, by no mean, a techie, and maybe to get 3G running on t-mobile, Apple would need to produce a new iPhone, and maybe the same if it should work on Sprint.
But if not, why only Verizon?
It looks very likely that Verizon did pay a big $$$ amount to block Sprint and T-Mobile. Or in nicer words: Verizon paid a premium which limits the rights to Verizon and ATT, for now.
Or maybe Apple is speculating to offer on Verizon only the 4G iPhone (which does not yet exist, the iPhone 4 is still only 3G). The good part is that Verizon will switch sometimes to 4G LTE like all other big providers, which means very good times for us consumers.

We will see soon. Maybe only ATT and Verizon will offer The iPhone in the coming year, maybe it is still only ATT or maybe all four providers will carry the iPhone.

What I don't understand is, that it is only 4 weeks left till Christmas and still no iPhone at Verizon. All and everybody it reporting that the number one and two Christmas gift will be the iPad and smartphone, and that 35% of Android users would switch to the iPhone if it would be not only at ATT.
Is Apple not losing a lot of money by waiting too long, should they not try to get the Christmas rush? Or can't Apple produce fast enough? We are still waiting on the white iPhone 4. Which is now over six months delayed.



- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad.
Please visit my blog http://www.new-kid-on-the-blog.com

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Is the new yahoo app a facetime killer?

Facetime today does only work from iPhone/iPod touch over wifi. Steve Jobs said that facetime will be open standard but till now there are no other devices using facetime.
Instead more and more smartphones begin to sport front facing video cameras, the market for apps that handle video messaging efficiently has becoming increasingly attractive.
Many options such as Fring, Tango, and Qik are available, but the only big player right now is Apple with Facetime.
Qik is an android application but not as good integrated into OS like facetime and is not preinstalled as standards on android phones.

In a press release announcing T-Mobile’s new myTouch smartphone, there was a mention of users’ ability to video chat through Yahoo! Messenger.
Recently, David Katz, Yahoo’s VP of Mobile for the Americas region, gave the low down to Reuters in terms of what smartphone owners can expect from the revamped Yahoo! Messenger app. The app is expected to be released for Android users in the near future with the ability to work across 3G and Wi-Fi. Interestingly, the video part of the app will work with PC and Mac users running Yahoo! Messenger—finally making video chat from smartphone to desktop/laptop a reality.
Rumors are out there that the new yahoo app is coming to the Apple app store.

But Apple is very adamant about video apps running only over Wi-Fi, as its native FaceTime only operates on Wi-Fi.
Apple will earlier or later extend facetime to 3G but it is doubtful that Apple will approve the new yahoo messenger.
In case yahoo messenger will only work on Wifi, it will still be a big competition to Facetime because of the ability to make video calls cross phones and PCs which Facetime does not offer yet.

The question is why does Apple not already open facetime to other platforms and why does it not support 3G.
It is a tough call, and I find no sense why my MacOs X iChat does not work with facetime or why other messengers are not allowed to work facetime.

I could find two reason why not supporting 3G. Apple wants to have always best user experience, 3G is often too slow and most of the iPhone users are living in big cities where the 3G network is already pretty busy, video chat would not help the 3G network.
Then there are the costs for the consumer. If a consumer does not have the old unlimited ATT contract then the 2GB are pretty fast used for video chatting. After this it gets expensive for the user or 3G is unavailable till next payment circle.

The other reason could be that Apple wants to show strengths to the carriers to show that an user does not need a calling or data plan to make calls. The future is not to need a carrier and Apple does know it. It is since a while an issue for Apple that the phone bills are so high. Apple does not like that others are charging high for their service and Apple does not make money out of it.
Their dream is that all services are going through Apple and that they dominate the price.
If they can't deliver all services then at least the 3rd party has to go by Apple's rule.

We will see if Apple is approving the new yahoo messenger and if people will use it. I personally like that facetime is so perfect integrated into the OS, and if iChat on Mac would work with facetime, this would be great, but if i could use facetime to call my sisters in Germany to their Skype or AOL messenger my life would be almost perfect.

But I guess instead, I have to buy them new iPod touchs. I have 4 sisters each of them gets an $229 iPod touch which is in total $916 which would be equivalent to
45,800 minutes or 32 days straight call to landline (based on 2 cent a minute).

I think i skip the iPod touch. Better choice might me Apple TV and a camera. And using facetime to call their living room or i just use the Skype app on my iPhone, without video chat.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad.
Please visit my blog http://www.new-kid-on-the-blog.com

Location:Spinning Wheel Ln,Spring Hill,United States