Page 17 of 20 FirstFirst ... 7121314151617181920 LastLast
Results 321 to 340 of 390
  1. #321  
    Quote Originally Posted by barkerja View Post
    Given the ability, they should shoot for multiple carriers however they should focus on Verizon being that they're the largest U.S. carrier. More people equates to more possible customers. However, all carriers are entrenched with flagship devices that are selling VERY well:

    AT&T - iPhone
    Verizon - Droid
    T-Mobile - HTC G2/Galaxy S
    Sprint - Evo / Epic

    I don't think HP Palm would be able to capture the flagship position on Verizon considering how well Android devices are currently selling. AT&T has the iPhone. Sprint is a possibility but rumors (and they're just that, rumors) that the iPhone could see Sprint before Verizon in the very near future; T-Mobile is such a small carrier that it doesn't much matter.

    So really, who knows.. it's kind of a crapshoot, no one really know's where the market is going and who the big players will be tomorrow.
    And the world circles around the US doesn't it...

    That's another reason the Pre failed, with its slow global push. Global reach is very important these days. Officially, the Pre has ZERO presence in Asia PacRim, probably due to budget. But reality is there were so many O2 units being unlocked and sent to Hong Kong and China, so lots of missed opportunities there for Palm.

    I think another very important thing for the next device is to launch them in more countries, hence the GSM/HSPA version should be a priority over CDMA. Outside of US only very few markets use CDMA. Even Canada is slowly phasing out CDMA and replacing it with HSPA.

    I can understand Palm back then couldn't do large global launches, but HP can and should.
    Palm IIIc -> Sony CLIÉ T650C -> Sony TJ-37 -> Palm TX -> Palm Centro -> Palm Pre Bell -> Palm Pre Plus Bell/Verizon Hybrid -> HP Veer -> HP Pre 3 NA -> BlackBerry Classic -> BlackBerry Priv

    It's a Late Goodbye, such a Late Goodbye.

    Need OEM Palm Pre parts? See here
  2. #322  
    With HP's financial muscle backing them, a multiple carrier, multiple country release is the ONLY way to go. Spread the phone's availability everywhere possible. I, personally, assume that HP will go this route as they have mentioned, on many occasions, their ability to distribute stuff on a global scale. This is what Palm lacked when they launched the Pre.

    Had Palm been able to launch the Pre globally, hardware issues not-withstanding, they would have probably sold 5 million+ devices within a couple of months. Instead, they lacked the ability to produce enough to keep Sprint filled during the device's first week of launch, and the Pre Plus was unable to really launch well after that.

    With the right launch, they could easily double the ~2.6 million users in just one week. With the right device and availability, they could triple the user base in a month.
  3. #323  
    Originally Posted by rwhitby View Post
    The next webOS device needs to be released on whatever global carrier/s HP believes will be best for the long term future of webOS.

    Insular US-focused carrier parochialism by current Pre/Pixi customers will hopefully be of no consequence compared to the order of magnitude more customers that a HP-backed marketing and distribution push for a new smartphone must achieve to succeed.

    Face it - if the opinions of the current webOS users matter, then the game is lost.

    It is the 10x to 100x more new users that matter, not the current ones.

    -- Rod
    One correction; if the opinion of PRECENTRAL webOS users mattered, then the game is lost and has been lost.

    The US launch is the most critical and HP needs to launch on one of the two largest US carriers first. HP will spread the love further across diff countries but it starts here in the US.

    As far as marketing, $150 million in the US and $100 million abroad is the only way to compete. Will HP provide that large of a marketing budget? I have my doubts but we'll see.
    Why release it first in the US and then in Europe or somewhere else? Why?
    That doesn't make sense to me..

    To release it in as many countries and with as many carriers as possible and all at the same time would be much more efficient in bringing webOS back in the game.
  4. #324  
    Quote Originally Posted by virox View Post
    Why release it first in the US and then in Europe or somewhere else? Why?
    That doesn't make sense to me..

    To release it in as many countries and with as many carriers as possible and all at the same time would be much more efficient in bringing webOS back in the game.
    Because Palm didn't have the money to back then.
    Palm IIIc -> Sony CLIÉ T650C -> Sony TJ-37 -> Palm TX -> Palm Centro -> Palm Pre Bell -> Palm Pre Plus Bell/Verizon Hybrid -> HP Veer -> HP Pre 3 NA -> BlackBerry Classic -> BlackBerry Priv

    It's a Late Goodbye, such a Late Goodbye.

    Need OEM Palm Pre parts? See here
  5. #325  
    But they have HP behind them
  6. #326  
    Too bad it's still either just GSM or CDMA. It would be nice to have a world phone like various Blackberries and Samsungs. 4G is cool and everything, but if you travel, today it's useless.
  7. #327  
    well people understand that the sales for the original pre on sprint were good up to a point I believe to the begining of the 4th quarter. Of course we can blame it alot of Palm releasing the Pre not complete (lets face it alot of basic things were missing, and the OS was not optimized at all with a very bad battery). Sprint did support Palm it was there flagship device regardless of the bad marketing Palm chose. Also if im wrong, I still believe that sprint sold more devices then Verizon, even though Verizon has more then double the subscribers. So to me even if your HP now working with Palm internally Im sure they know which company would support fully the new device, and which company would just add it to their device list. To me ( and I even contacted sprint back in july and posted it on here stating that Palm and sprints relationship is still fully intact and they plan on carring Palm phones in the future) it would be sprint who has the most Webos users, has been a partner with Palm for years, and supported the Pre out the gate and still does. The other carrier would be AT&T who Im even surprised with how they supported the pre and pixi, but they did and even better then Verizon did, with a flagship phone in the Iphone who I dont care what people say about Android they dont sell as many Iphones in one year as Apple does. To not only have a flagship device but support the pre, market the pre (with its own commercial), and train their sales reps to push and sell the pre. As stated though this is all speculation, so why not wait and see which carriers are announced for a launch of what we hope are smartphones, for all we know HP may just launch the device on 2 to 3 carriers at once, so lets wait please.
  8. #328  
    Quote Originally Posted by virox View Post
    Why release it first in the US and then in Europe or somewhere else? Why?
    That doesn't make sense to me..

    To release it in as many countries and with as many carriers as possible and all at the same time would be much more efficient in bringing webOS back in the game.
    seems like that would be the best plan if they can do it. break out something amazing hardware-wise at CES --or perhaps their own press conference-- and then say "oh hey, you can go get this tomorrow, at whatever carrier on the planet [i know this is a stretch, but i think you get the point] floats your boat."
  9. #329  
    Quote Originally Posted by Major Payne View Post
    somewhere on the forum (nope don't want to find it) someone said that sprint turned down the next Palm phone so if sprint doesn't get it don't be blaming Palm blame sprint.
    Sprint turned down the Pre Plus, that's it. Big deal. It's the same phone minus a button.
  10. #330  
    Quote Originally Posted by wellwellwell11 View Post
    correct he only meant to say EWW meant CDMA which we all know in the states as sprint and verizon. My question is lets say the rumor about Verizon launching in October will it be a 4G device even though Verzion not launching 4G devices until Novemeber? Hence for me thinking that Sprints version the original C40 that was rumored to be Sprints first 4G phone, that was supposed to be released last july would be first to be released in october with Verizon behind them in november when they launch the LTE network for phones. To me why launch a phone on a network thats only 3G a month before they will be launching a 4G campagin. Also is Verizon old roadmap showing the palm pre 2, was that put there way back before Palm was bought out, way back when they were testing the Palm C40 for sprint and advising Verizon they will release a 3G version of it for that carrier in october. It would give 4 months between the releases on par with Palm releases for the Sprint and Verizon carrier after the exclusive deal with sprint. To me I see this as the highly anticipated HD Webos device, and with the rumors ill stick with a sprint release, followed by a Verizon release both 4G in 2010, then a AT&T release first Q 2011.
    FYI, Verizon has stated they will not be launching any 4G handsets this year. I'm guessing it will be late Q1 '11 before they do, AT THE EARLIEST.
  11. #331  
    Quote Originally Posted by Splitbiker View Post
    Yes, but if it were a 4G phone on Verizon it would most likely be a GSM phone, and therefor not have the EWW suffix.
    OK, now you're doing it on purpose. I already told you that Verizon is CDMA and not GSM.
  12. #332  
    Yep, Verizon will move to LTE over time... but they are CDMA today.
  13. #333  
    Quote Originally Posted by WrlsFanatic View Post
    FYI, Verizon has stated they will not be launching any 4G handsets this year. I'm guessing it will be late Q1 '11 before they do, AT THE EARLIEST.
    oh ok right i do see that, they say by may 2 or 3 smartphones. So hopefully we hear something about who gets what soon enough.
  14. #334  
    Even if they made an LTE device, it must be LTE/CDMA.

    I hear all of that talk of the global market priority, and it's definitely important, but CDMA customers in America number around 130-140 million, and they are some of the hungriest to buy smartphones, not to mention they have carriers willing to promote your device if you make them a priority.

    I'm pretty sure the Droid line is more of a priority and moneymaker than the Milestone line.
  15. #335  
    Quote Originally Posted by wellwellwell11 View Post
    The other carrier would be AT&T who Im even surprised with how they supported the pre and pixi, but they did and even better then Verizon did, with a flagship phone in the Iphone who I dont care what people say about Android they dont sell as many Iphones in one year as Apple does.
    I'm confused by this statement. Who is "they" (which I've bolded above)? Is it AT&T? Perhaps they don't sell as many iPhones as Apple does, but since almost anyone who buys an iPhone in the US has to subscribe to AT&T anyway (a few jailbroken iPhones on TMo notwithstanding), that would not seem to matter.

    If "they" = Verizon, then I agree -- Verizon doesn't sell any iPhones at all!

    If "they" = Android, I'm even more confused, as Android is an OS, not a phone. Its maker, Google, did make a brief foray into selling phones (Nexus One), but aborted that effort in fairly short order. Needless to say, Google doesn't sell iPhones.

    If you're trying to say that Apple sells more iPhones than {HTC,Moto,etc.} sell Android phones, then you are correct for the moment. But that situation is unlikely to last, as Android is rapidly taking market share from Apple (and others) and is expected to surpass both Apple and RIM fairly soon...
  16. #336  
    Quote Originally Posted by drew145022 View Post
    ...when android has made numorous devices and the iphone is constantly getting updates. I'm getting tired of waiting for nothing.
    To be accurate, Android hasn't made any devices.
  17. #337  
    I hope everyone realizes that most of the people adopting Android phones, especially those on Verizon, are probably not defecting from any other platform (especially not from the iPhone). Droids, as in the stable of phones being released on the Big Red, are the new "cool phone" for high-schoolers and are being treated similarly that the big feature phones were a few years ago. The Motorola Droid was the new, more badass EnV to make an example.

    I am friends with plenty of people that are still in high school that fortify this belief. My area is very heavy in Verizon and very low in AT&T subscribers so the iPhone couldn't really take off in this area (no 3G here from Ma Bell. It's pathetic.) While this may not be the same way throughout the US, I feel like it's a better explanation than assuming everyone is just drawn to Android phones because of what they can do...
  18. #338  
    Quote Originally Posted by EvilMonkey View Post
    I'm confused by this statement. Who is "they" (which I've bolded above)? Is it AT&T? Perhaps they don't sell as many iPhones as Apple does, but since almost anyone who buys an iPhone in the US has to subscribe to AT&T anyway (a few jailbroken iPhones on TMo notwithstanding), that would not seem to matter.

    If "they" = Verizon, then I agree -- Verizon doesn't sell any iPhones at all!

    If "they" = Android, I'm even more confused, as Android is an OS, not a phone. Its maker, Google, did make a brief foray into selling phones (Nexus One), but aborted that effort in fairly short order. Needless to say, Google doesn't sell iPhones.

    If you're trying to say that Apple sells more iPhones than {HTC,Moto,etc.} sell Android phones, then you are correct for the moment. But that situation is unlikely to last, as Android is rapidly taking market share from Apple (and others) and is expected to surpass both Apple and RIM fairly soon...
    they clearly means Google, hence stating Android...they(google). With markets share of Android's total market share of 13% still lags well behind both Apple (28%), the Iphone still has only one carrier, and though for the first half of 2010 google had 27% of people opting for the device on 4 carriers and Apple (with a outdated iphone 3gs) still had 23%. If rumors are true and Iphone goes to Verizon, just imagine what their market share would look like. Though Android is hot right now, its a fad to me (again my opinion only) the OS is not innovated, and to me more is not always better. Providing too many devices every year will most likely hurt Google in the long run, as apposed to releasing say 2 different devices a year. In my eyes Webos can capitalize on this with 2 strong devices on all 4 carriers, as well as windows phone 7.
    Last edited by wellwellwell11; 09/29/2010 at 02:28 PM.
  19. mike5's Avatar
    Posts
    762 Posts
    Global Posts
    782 Global Posts
    #339  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToniCipriani View Post
    And the world circles around the US doesn't it...

    That's another reason the Pre failed, with its slow global push. Global reach is very important these days. Officially, the Pre has ZERO presence in Asia PacRim
    I agree & think we will see that changed w/the distribution outlets of HP. Does anyone know, are the margins or prices higher in the US then in other places? Seems to me it was comparable in Canada--maybe a little more, but started as a 3 year contract, didn't it?

    If it sells in China or Brazil, etc., are the prices about the same?
  20. mike5's Avatar
    Posts
    762 Posts
    Global Posts
    782 Global Posts
    #340  
    Quote Originally Posted by virox View Post
    Why release it first in the US and then in Europe or somewhere else? Why?
    That doesn't make sense to me..

    To release it in as many countries and with as many carriers as possible and all at the same time would be much more efficient in bringing webOS back in the game.
    Aren't there many different regulatory hurdles to complete based on the country? Do you really want to delay release in one country while another holds the phone up by 6 months or more due to administrative red tape?

    I do think it is a good strategy to release as close to simultaneous worldwide as possible, but I just don't know if it is always practical.

Posting Permissions