Apple Using T-Mobile USA As Example To Carriers That Won’t Deal?

T-Mobile still doesn’t have the iPhone even as Apple adds 5 regional carriers that will start providing Apple’s iconic mobile device to their subscribers.  I know that the reason has more to do with the technical GSM deployment rather than Apple simply unwilling to make this happen.  Or maybe T-Mobile simply did not give Apple enough financial incentive to make iPhones that will take advantage of T-Mobile’s 3G network.  For speculation sake, let’s suppose there is another reason why Apple has yet to make the iPhone available on T-Mobile’s network.

Apple wants to show carriers what happens when they don’t deal with Apple on its terms when it comes to the iPhone.  With And T-Mobile, already kinda dying when AT&T tried to merge with it, Apple decided it would not harm its bottom line if it used T-Mobile as an example to any carrier that decides to cross it.  How else can you explain why regional guys with as little as 400K subscribers getting the iPhone ahead of some that still has thirty million subscribers?

Obviously, the operative word is “still” as T-Mobile continues to bleed users not only to carriers like iPhone-newcomer Sprint but also others with a better selection of smartphones.

Crazy speculation here?  Definitely not.  Consider this.  Apple may or may not have already struck a deal with China Mobile, the world’s largest carrier at 600 million subscribers.  You didn’t misread that or did I accidentally added an extra zero.  Six hundred million subscribers or about twice the US population.

There had been words in the media in the past couple of years that Apple and China Mobile were having difficulties coming to terms agreeable to both sides for China Mobile to start carrying the iPhone.  So, Apple offered them to its smaller rivals, China Telecom and China Unicom combined with more than 300 million subscribers.  Already, both of China Mobile’s smaller rivals are seeing benefits.

Any other carriers still without the iPhone can be pointed to T-Mobile as an example of what happens if they don’t carry Apple’s iOS devices.

I am sure Apple will eventually offer the iPhone to T-Mobile USA subscribers and those who remain will happily snatch up them up.  However, T-Mobile could pay a very heavy price to make that happen.  Just ask Sprint about the $20 billion deal it currently has with Apple.

Android Verus iOS: Even Regular Mobile Warriors Fight The War

I'm from UCLA and I hate USC.  With a passion.  I dislike everything about them.  Particularly how they cheat in sports.  And we are a better school.  Obviously, this is the duty of every Bruin just as it is the duty of every Trojan to show disdain for all that is Westwood.  At the end of the day, we're all Americans and it's mostly in good fun.

I have seen this behavior with fanboys from Apple, Google, Microsoft, and RIM.  This is particularly true when it comes to the blogging community.  Some of it are in good fun but mostly, it's not.  It reminds me very much of the GOP versus Democrats.  However, I did not expect this bantering to extend to regular mobile warriors.

And this is especially evident in the harsh treatment of iOS users against Android users over the Instagram app. Seriously, some of the comments are just down right nasty (and funny).

I'll leave to them to you over at Cult of Mac and Phandroid.

It's just so interesting that regular users who I never suspected would care about the mobile war seems to regularly fight it out on social media and just about everywhere else as well.

How Many High School Students Have iPhones?

Source:  iMore.

Apparently, a hair-cut more than a third of US high school students have the iPhones.  That's an astonishing high number.  Apple only recently reached 30% of installed base in the US after the release of the iPhone 4S.
There are a couple of comments worth mention.

Could something be wrong with this?  Here's why I believe so.  iPhones are pretty expensive and so are the plans.  I can't do the 200 MB of data per month.  I don't know how these kids are doing it.  If this is true, they've learned a great deal about self-control.

Now, if the information is correct, I reckon it's the apps that are attractive to the students.  After all, app discovery is a pretty important part and so far, Apple does have an advantage here over competing platforms.  Google Play just came out but when it comes to discovering social apps or ones they can use for schools, the students could have a better time finding what they need.

Then there's the issue of peer pressure.  My high school wasn't big on $200 Nike shoes but there were kids that wore them.  But as I understand it, having an iOS device is a status thing in China.  Maybe it's a bit of a stretch but the clique-ish teenage environment like a high school do mean that this sort of conformity.  After all, if high school when we explore who we are and experiment with life, frankly, Android devices are much more friendly for customization than any other platforms.

Last, maybe there is also the element of students using their iPhones to aid in their studies.  I know I use it for studying even now and had I had an iPhone in high school, I'd use it to do everything I can (short of cheating) to put myself ahead in the competitive world of applying for college.

Still, the fact that 34% of high school students is a surprising high number.  I'm sure the free 3GS model and the $99 iPhone 4 helps a lot.

Wall Street: LTE on iPHone Enough To Propel Apple to Trillion Dollars

We previously discussed how Sprint would take us to an LTE world, virtually assuring that the next iPhone would have to have LTE and then we discussed how Apple would get there given that LTE chips are so power hungry.  What I did not anticipate was just how important LTE is until a bunch of Wall Street guys started pricing Apple at $1000 or so a share and calling it a trillion-dollar company.

Why?  LTE.

Crazy?  I guess.  As of this moment, Apple is priced at around $630 with a market value of $580 billion.  And I suppose given how strongly the iPhone is perform against WiMax and LTE devices, with a major of smartphone sales at AT&T and Sprint being iPhones and about 50% of all Verizon Wireless sales, it definitely would be scary when Apple puts LTE on the iconic device.

Scary for competitors that is.  And who knows just what other new features Apple will offer.

In the past, I've blasted Wall Street guys for being clueless and spreading rumors based on Apple rumor sites.  But when it comes to valuation, some have been more right than others.  Some of the forward numbers they've placed on Apple are achievable.  $700 or $800 a share.  Probably.

I just don't want us to get ahead of ourselves on the $1000 a share value or Apple becoming the first trillion-dollar company.  Trust me when I say that a trillion today is not like a trillion a decade back.

Let's get serious.  $1.5 To $2 trillion.  Now we're talking.  And there's a path for Apple to get there.

How To Solve TV Now: Easy UI and Make It Accessible And Mobile

I set up a Slingbox for my uncle last night.  He’s an avid NBA and golfing fan.  We got an Apple TV hooked up to it and he’s able to use the SB to watch his videos and cable TV from anywhere.  Just about anywhere I hope because he travels a lot on business, especially, overseas.  He’s pretty happy about this.  He can keep with his golf games as well.  I know he’s big on cable news too.  All in all, the Slingbox is an incredible device.  I’ve wanted something like this since, well, forever.

But the Slingbox can only do so much.  It doesn't do more than offering an extension and convenience to whatever HDTV or other box setups you've got in your home.  And as great as it is, the Slingbox is last decade's innovation.  It's time for something new.

Now, I don’t know what people are talking about when they said that Steve Jobs cracked television when it came to digital and cloud deployment.  Most think it has something to do with Siri.  Maybe but it has to be more than that.  Siri would only be a part of the solution.

But I wonder if what Steve Jobs meant by figuring how television for Apple means nothing more than making what currently exists now easier to use and access for the user.  No more cables.  Anyone who can reduce the number of cables and plugs can really lay claim to figuring television. So, what else could there be that makes it easier for the user when it come to live or stored video?

Here are a few identified requirements for Apple, Google, or anyone else to lay claim that they’ve figured out television:

• One remote or mobile device.  You can control 
• “What would you like to do?” - this goes along with ease of use.  Being able to "tell" your TV what you want to do rather than having to go through a series of menus to do that would be key to all this.  
• Access Anywhere - this is about mobile. Being able to access content at home, Starbucks, or even work. 
• Easy and Clean UI - it shouldn't take three remotes, and going through a series of menus to get to what you want to do.  It should take more than a couple of seconds, not minutes.  And it should be so easy my mom could use it.  Let me back up a bit here:  it should be so easy even I can use it.  
• Mobile - 
• Live or later
• Social Network And Privacy
• Scalable

Does this have to be affordable?  It would be nice but I reckon it could be expensive. New hardware and all.  Probably even have to pay for a new HDTV.  However, having this service and carrying a premium could be worth all the trouble for folks who don’t want to have to deal with multiple cords, plugs, and cables.

One other thing that I like to see happen.  You know and I know that Apple would never allow any breaches in its ecosystem.  It’s iOS, iTunes, Apple TV, and Macs only.  But I like to see Google step up and release a Google TV app for competing mobile platforms and PCs.  Heck, if Amazon, Boxee, or Roku figures out TV, I like to see them do the same thing - allow access on not just the box but also on mobile and PC.  Charge for the app if need be. Slingbox charges $30 for an app.  We simply want something that works well to be everywhere.  For the companies involved, it not only allows a greater reach but shows your partners you’re doing everything you can to  help them expand their markets.

One other issue that I have, which I doubt Steve Jobs was thinking about is when I meant access anywhere, I really mean anywhere.  For instance, I’m in the US.  Which means I have access to Netflix.  Awesome right?  Except the problem with this is that when I travel, I no longer have access to that.  Nor does my NBA TV subscription work anymore.  I know the reasons behind it.  Distribution rights, piracy, etc.  Still, it’s insane, don’t you think?

For the moment, I think Apple is finalizing plans for its TV and has been very meticulous about it. Google’s approach has been to throw everything at the wall and see what sticks.  Maybe they'll figure it out or maybe it'll be someone else with a better approach with the right balance to content access.

2012 iPhone Will Have LTE But No One Knows How It'll Happen

We learn that Sprint will stop work on WiMax devices and focus only on LTE going foward.

What about Apple?  We know what the first LTE device from Apple is.  It’s the just released 2012 iPad with the “resolutionary” Retina Display.  So, we have an idea what Apple’s thinking is.

First, the Retina Display along with the LTE chip is very power hungry.  It just so happens that Apple managed to fit a vastly bigger battery into the 2012 iPad and that only managed to keep the battery life on par with the previous generation iPads.  I’ve used mine for a couple of weeks now and I find it on par.  

Second, the new iPad is a tiny bit thicker and heaver, which goes contrary to what Apple has been doing over the last few years by trying to shrink the weight and thickness of its iOS devices and Macbooks.  While it isn’t noticeable, it shows that Apple under Tim Cook is more pragmatic about design until technology allows for Apple to continue its strides to make its devices lighter and thinner.

Third, by incorporating LTE now, Apple has demonstrated market awareness and sought to continue its dominance in the tablet market.  It could have easily forgone LTE connectivity for the sake of design but it knows that it has to get with the time as it were.  Apple engineers may have performed a small miracle when they managed to cramp all that tech and battery into 2012 iPad.  Innovation has not died under Tim or will it.  

So, where does that leave the 2012 iPhone?  Assuming Apple applies the same parameters in developing the new iPad, we could well be looking at an iPhone with LTE later this year.  By then, the efficiency of LTE chips from Qualcomm could have improved and give Apple a bit more breathing room on battery life.  Furthermore, Apple may continue to shrink “the brain” of the iPhone to fit in more battery life.

What we don’t know is if Apple will add a larger body to the iPhone.  I know readers will immediately jump to the conclusion that Apple will then ship a larger display for the new iPhone.  Right so but that much isn’t guaranteed at this time.  No one knows if that will happen.  I repeat:  no one, particular click-baiting DigiTimes, knows what kind of display the next iPhone will have.

For speculation sake, let’s suppose that happens and the iPhone gets a bigger display ranging from 3.6” to 4”.  It like means a larger volume to put extra battery in for the designers and engineers.  Also, it means more room for a better camera.  Perhaps, I am asking for too much.  This will be the third year of Retina Display being used on the iPhone.  It is possible that Apple could use a more efficient display for the iPhone to help offset any power drain by its wireless chip.  

And from a marketing perspective, Apple has to get an LTE iPhone out on the market in 2012.  It would be a huge draw in the America market and it means one less weapon competitors can hammer the iPhone over.  

When the original iPhone was released in June of 2007, it was a revolutionary device like no others.  Still critics found something to complain about which was that it only allowed for 2G access.  But a year later, Apple released the iPhone 3G without sacrificing the battery life. With LTE phones on the market for about a year now, and about 18 months by the time Apple is due to release the next iPhone, Apple should have ample time to figure out how to make LTE work on the iPhone without us working about find a power plug.

Sprint: It's LTE World After All

Source:  Android Guys.

Sprint says no to WiMax and will focus on LTE.  It’s not a surprising thing considering where its competitors are headed and what is going on in the wireless market as more consumer focus on faster LTE deployment.  What this does mean is that WiMax users should be able to keep their devices a while longer before having to chuck them for LTE.

So, in the short term, I reckon Sprint WiMax device sales could suffer until they bring their own LTE devices to the market.  According to Android Guys, Sprint could move more than a dozen LTE devices but little is known about when that’ll happen or when and where its LTE network will go live.

It’s likely we’ll see Sprint advertise the heck out of it but still rely mostly on the older CDMA network to provide wireless Internet for those with LTE devices.  So yeah, you’ll be paying for a LTE device running on 3G.  This isn’t that much different for the early adopters of WiMax or even LTE now on AT&T and Verizon Wireless.

My hope is that this second batch of LTE devices will sip power more conservative than the current crop of LTE phones.  This is largely one of the main complaints of LTE users and why Apple passed on LTE in its iPhone.

It’ll be interesting to see where this takes Sprint’s unlimited wireless plans, the only true wireless data provider that still exist since AT&T throttles users while T-Mobile continues to falsely advertise their “unlimited” plans.

We need a strong Sprint to compete in the marketplace.  T-Mobile is self-destructing that really started when it tried to sell itself to AT&T.  Hope Sprint’s LTE roll-out will go without a hitch.