Hello! And welcome to our Friday column, Worst of the Week. There’s a lot of nutty stuff that goes on in this industry, so this column is a chance for us at RCRWireless.com to rant and rave about whatever rubs us the wrong way. We hope you enjoy it!
And without further ado:
Many have taken the past week to ruminate on the impact Apple’s iPhone has had on the wireless space since it was launched five years ago. These ruminations have often entailed nostalgic looks back at how the device changed the mobile space and the influence it has had on all devices since its launch during the summer of 2007. There are also a few instances of how this device literally changed how people lived.
It’s indeed hard to underestimate the impact the iPhone did have and continues to have on the mobile space. Sure, there were “smartphones” and “touchscreens” before the iPhone was unveiled, but most would admit that those offerings, especially in terms of the touchscreen, were awkward to use … at best. Plus, none of those devices were branded with the Apple “Apple,” thus drawing the eyes and pocketbooks of all humans in some unexplainable manner.
(Personal note: I believe I have a pretty strong constitution when it comes to resisting the urge of shiny, new technology. However, even my credit cards get all warm and agitated whenever I take a step into an Apple store. It does not seem to matter that I don’t need anything that Apple is selling, once inside I unconsciously begin remodeling my technology wardrobe.)
One look back, by Nilay Patel over at The Verge, took a slightly different tack on the “celebration” by noting that since the high water mark that was the iPhone launch, wireless carriers have slowly strangled the innovation out of the mobile space and have set it on a course “towards total failure.” Consider yourselves warned?
Now, just about everything Patel noted in this opinion/news piece concerning wireless carriers was more or less correct, but to make the jump that these actions are sending the wireless space on a collision course with “total failure” might (maybe?) be a bit extreme. Sure, the mission of such columns is to take an argument to the extreme in order to garner some strong reaction from readers, but I think there is significant number of consumers that really do feel that wireless carriers are evil.
Again, if you were to read the Patel column in a vacuum you would likely come to that conclusion as well. You would also probably be covered in dirt. But, by taking even a baby-step back, you would realize that this line of reasoning is borderline loony.
Now, I will admit that I have my issues with wireless carriers; issues that I have shared extensively through previous columns as well as with my personal journal (don’t call it a diary!). But, to blame them for stifling innovation and trying to make a few bucks for offering a service that I would argue is one of the greatest technological inventions of the last 30 years is … did I already say “loony?”
Wireless carriers have spent hundreds of billions of dollars acquiring spectrum, building out networks and providing support services that have made cellular services into the model of consistency they are today. To fault them for trying to have a say in how those networks are used and by what devices seems a bit one-sided, no? (And dare we mention cases where some of these same companies that have benefited from wireless services have used their clout to force carriers to spend billions on needed spectrum assets?)
Sure, wireless carriers could do everyone – except their shareholders – a favor and just step aside and become a subsidiary of Apple/Facebook/Google/insert mobile application-flavor-of-the-day-here maker, but haven’t we seen that most of these guys are really just winging it? If it weren’t for the wireless industry that wireless carriers – as well as the thousands of other companies – have established where would the Apple/Facebook/Google/insert mobile application-flavor-of-the-day-here maker be today?
The article notes that the iPhone has transformed the industry in a way that carriers could never have done on their own. This is perhaps true, but are we not overlooking the impact carriers have had on the success of the iPhone though the subsidy they provide on every device? When it first launched, the iPhone sold for $400, a price that was reduced just months later to what has become that magically $200 price point after AT&T and Apple reportedly came to a new agreement that called for AT&T to offer up a greater upfront subsidy on the device.
Had that price adjustment not happened, who is to say how successful the iPhone, or all smartphones for that matter, would have become.
The article also slams carriers for making it difficult for device makers to produce products to work on their networks. But, when a device does not work, where do most people vent their outrage? Do they call Samsung? LG? Motorola? Nokia? Apple? No. They pick up a (working) phone and call their carrier.
There is no doubt that the mobile space is in the midst of a transformation from a voice-centric model to one where data and devices are king, and this transformation is being taken harder by some. And, wireless carriers have stumbled at times in trying to get their hands around those transformation plans. Sure, just about everything in The Verge article is a legitimate critique from one point of view, and heck they even left out a few juicy blunders.
However, that critique only seems to hold water if viewed from one side of the camera.
That view of the dirty side of the business is never pretty.
OK, enough of that.
Thanks for checking out this week’s Worst of the Week column. And now for some extras:
–Verizon Wireless has garnered its fair share of grief from the vocal minority in regards to its recently installed shared data plans. However, before taking that last step from the ledge, might be worth giving this column from Marguerite Reardon at CNet a read.
–Big week for Apple rumors. I guess that is to be expected when the “Big A” has not launched a new device in a few weeks. As we all know, all rumors are in fact, facts even if they contradict each other or are physically impossible. They are even more factual facts when they make it out of the regular rumor channels and into the “main stream” press.
A number of outlets jumped on the smaller iPad bandwagon this week, which follows recent bandwagon-ing on what the next iPhone will entail. While one part of me likes to see these rumors gain legitimacy by being picked up by broader news outlets, the other side must now brace for all the questions from family members regarding the “news” they heard about the definite plans for the next iPad and iPhone.
I welcome your comments. Please send me an email at [email protected].
Bored? Why not follow me on Twitter?
