Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Der Tschonnie
    Guest
    Why no Android phone from Sprint? They're waiting until NY and LA and
    Chi are covered with enough 4G/WiMAX signal to make a rollout of a new
    phone exciting. They can already fit the electronics into a card and
    a USB stick, so there's not much more they have to do to get
    everything into the form factor of a G1-type phone.

    With the superb 3G service I get (I listen to streaming audio and have
    never been throttled back) in the West and in parts of the East not
    that near "civilization", I think they're doing a good job. My
    friends are a little disturbed with calls dropping when I pass through
    two locations in the area, but all-in-all my Centro works in elevator
    shafts, moving vehicles, and in some tunnels. I've got no complaints.

    Note that I am a stockholder. It's not a big chunk - 100 shares - and
    I've seen the share value drop considerably. However, I think that
    with a sharp product that does everything a 3G phone plus adds Android
    and 4G will excite Americans enough to get customers to switch back.
    It also may make the South Koreans look a little more closely at the
    company. I don't want to see a duopoly in the US, although if AT&T
    were to buy Sprint and Verizon were to buy T-Mobile, they could both
    make dual-mode (CDMA/GSM) handsets and maintain some degree of
    competition.



    See More: My guess as to why no Sprint Android phone




  2. #2
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: My guess as to why no Sprint Android phone

    At 13 Dec 2008 17:48:36 -0800 Der Tschonnie wrote:

    > Note that I am a stockholder. It's not a big chunk - 100 shares - and
    > I've seen the share value drop considerably.



    Tell me about it! ;-)


    > However, I think that
    > with a sharp product that does everything a 3G phone plus adds Android
    > and 4G will excite Americans enough to get customers to switch back.



    I'm curious- what do you find so compelling about Andriod that you think
    it'll "excite Americans." I don't see it personally. It certainly has a
    little "geek appeal" but I don't see the mass appeal.


    > It also may make the South Koreans look a little more closely at the
    > company. I don't want to see a duopoly in the US, although if AT&T
    > were to buy Sprint and Verizon were to buy T-Mobile, they could both
    > make dual-mode (CDMA/GSM) handsets and maintain some degree of
    > competition.



    Except that Verizon doesn't need T-Mo's network, assets, or customers, nor
    do they need the headache of adding GSM to their plate.





  3. #3
    Der Tschonnie
    Guest

    Re: My guess as to why no Sprint Android phone

    On Dec 13, 10:31*pm, Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:
    > At 13 Dec 2008 17:48:36 -0800 Der Tschonnie wrote:
    >

    <snip>

    >> will excite Americans enough to get customers to switch back.

    >
    > I'm curious- what do you find so compelling about Andriod that you think
    > it'll "excite Americans." *I don't see it personally. *It certainly has a
    > little "geek appeal" but I don't see the mass appeal.


    I think the mapping, GPS, "street view", transit, etc., on top of
    calendar and mail, most of which I admit can work on other phones, are
    the features that will push people to buy Android phones. I wish I
    had an iPhone, because that would solve all of my problems, but I
    can't pop a CDMA card into the GSM slot so I could keep my great plan
    and have a great phone. It doesn't work that way.

    Every player in the mobile biz is going to have a hand in the Handset
    Alliance. An OS is an OS once it's burned into ROM, so the technology
    involved in talking to cell towers (GSM, CDMA, iDEN) doesn't make much
    difference.

    Here's a question I can't answer for myself - what OS predominates in
    phones sold by SK Telecom or the big Japanese players? Are they all
    proprietary by manufacturer or Symbian or something else? I'm sure
    they're not PalmOS or Mac OSX. Google is good at regionalizing its
    offerings, so I hope they'll do the same for Android.

    >
    > > It also may make the South Koreans look a little more closely at the
    > > company. *I don't want to see a duopoly in the US, although if AT&T
    > > were to buy Sprint and Verizon were to buy T-Mobile, they could both
    > > make dual-mode (CDMA/GSM) handsets and maintain some degree of
    > > competition.

    >
    > Except that Verizon doesn't need T-Mo's network, assets, or customers, nor
    > do they need the headache of adding GSM to their plate.


    You're right about VZW and AT&T not needing the headaches brought on
    by acquiring smaller players, but it makes roaming much more
    attractive, especially if a) you have a customer base which travels
    internationally or b) you have some weak spots which don't pay to
    cover with your own tower. So single-number, dual-mode phones alone
    would be a tidier solution.




  4. #4
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: My guess as to why no Sprint Android phone

    At 14 Dec 2008 16:29:42 -0800 Der Tschonnie wrote:

    > > I'm curious- what do you find so compelling about Andriod that youthink
    > > it'll "excite Americans." *I don't see it personally. *It certainly has

    a
    > > little "geek appeal" but I don't see the mass appeal.

    >
    > I think the mapping, GPS, "street view", transit, etc., on top of
    > calendar and mail, most of which I admit can work on other phones, are
    > the features that will push people to buy Android phones.


    But you just said yourself- all that stuff (and more) is available on other
    phones.

    Personally, I doubt most people acftually care what OS is on their phone if
    it's got the features they want and it easy enough to use.

    The success of the iPhone has nothing to do with the fact that it has a
    mobile version of "OS X" under the hood. If T-Mo's G1 was running Symbian
    or Windows Mobile instead of Android, but had the same apps and features
    "on top", would it be any less of a desirable phone?

    > I wish I
    > had an iPhone, because that would solve all of my problems, but I
    > can't pop a CDMA card into the GSM slot so I could keep my great plan
    > and have a great phone. It doesn't work that way.



    Ah, so you're really looking for a iPhoney, rather than an Android phone.


    > Every player in the mobile biz is going to have a hand in the Handset
    > Alliance. An OS is an OS once it's burned into ROM, so the technology
    > involved in talking to cell towers (GSM, CDMA, iDEN) doesn't make much
    > difference.



    True- there's nothing stopping Sprint from offering an Android phone,
    except they don't think they need one- between their Blackberries and WinMo
    phones, they have the enterprise covered, and for consumers they have the
    Instinct. (I'm not making a value judgement about the Instinct's
    capabilities, just suggesting Sprint feels they've covered the iPhone's
    niche, just as they felt the Katana filled the RAZR's niche years ago back
    when the RAZR was exclusive.


    > Here's a question I can't answer for myself - what OS predominates in
    > phones sold by SK Telecom or the big Japanese players? Are they all
    > proprietary by manufacturer or Symbian or something else? I'm sure
    > they're not PalmOS or Mac OSX. Google is good at regionalizing its
    > offerings, so I hope they'll do the same for Android.



    From what I've read, mostly a mix of Symbian, Linux and proprietary OSes in
    Japan, and South Korea has a government-mandated smartphone platform called
    WIPI, ostensibly to assure interoperability, but may have been
    protectionism to make foreign penetration difficult. Either way, it's
    being phased out to allow competing platforms like RIM, WinMo and, of course,
    the iPhone.



    > You're right about VZW and AT&T not needing the headaches brought on
    > by acquiring smaller players,


    I never said acquiring smaller carriers was the headache- I suggested
    acquiring one that used a different technology was.


    > but it makes roaming much more
    > attractive, especially if a) you have a customer base which travels
    > internationally or b) you have some weak spots which don't pay to
    > cover with your own tower. So single-number, dual-mode phones alone
    > would be a tidier solution.


    But Verizon and Sprint already offer CDMA/GSM phones, without the headache
    of operating their own secondary (or in Sprint's case tertiary) non-CDMA
    network for international travelers, and with up to seven carriers per
    market, roaming partners using either technology are generally available.






  5. #5
    Roger 2008
    Guest

    Re: My guess as to why no Sprint Android phone


    "Todd Allcock" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > Except that Verizon doesn't need T-Mo's network, assets, or customers, nor
    > do they need the headache of adding GSM to their plate.


    I've been under the impression that Verizon has already added "GSM to their
    plate."

    Take a look at the specs on their BlackBerry Storm 9530 at:
    http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/phone.php?p=1864

    You will see the phone supports both GSM and CDMA.

    I know someone with the BlackBerry Storm and with all the trouble he has had
    with the screen I'm surprised he hasn't returned it yet.





  6. #6
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: My guess as to why no Sprint Android phone

    At 21 Dec 2008 08:20:37 -0600 Roger 2008 wrote:

    > > Except that Verizon doesn't need T-Mo's network, assets, or customers,

    nor
    > > do they need the headache of adding GSM to their plate.

    >
    > I've been under the impression that Verizon has already added "GSM to

    their
    > plate."



    The GSM radio on the Blackberry supports roaming on international GSM
    networks.

    I was referring to the headache of operating a secondary GSM network here
    in the States. You can ask Sprint-Nextel how much fun running two
    incompatible networks is! ;-)

    > Take a look at the specs on their BlackBerry Storm 9530 at:
    > http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/phone.php?p=1864
    >
    > You will see the phone supports both GSM and CDMA.
    >


    Ther are plenty of dual CDMA/GSM phones used by Sprint and Verizon for
    internationally-traveling customers.





  7. #7
    JC
    Guest

    Re: My guess as to why no Sprint Android phone

    "Todd Allcock" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> I've been under the impression that Verizon has already added "GSM to
    >> their plate."


    > I was referring to the headache of operating a secondary GSM network
    > here
    > in the States. You can ask Sprint-Nextel how much fun running two
    > incompatible networks is! ;-)


    Well remember that Verizon is moving from CDMA/EVDO to LTE. That's a
    total technology shift, since LTE is the upgrade path for GSM. AT&T is
    moving to LTE, T-mobile is moving to LTE, so it's not *inconceivable*
    that Verizon could buy T-mobile. Does it make business sense for
    Verizon to buy T-mobile? I haven't the foggiest.

    It's beginning to look like everybody is moving to LTE except Sprint,
    which is on EVDO/iDEN/WiMax and seems somewhat unsure of its future
    direction.


    --
    JC














  • Similar Threads