Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 61 to 65 of 65
  1. #61  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    http://www.microsoft.com/billgates/s...26Mobility.asp

    If it wasnt for Verizon, there would be NO WM Treo. I think they are very much in charge of the product mix.

    Surur
    You're not exactly contradicting me... Verizon wanted it because their customers wanted it.
  2. #62  
    Let me first say that I'd love it if the carriers would continue to offer multiple OS's on Treo phones. I just don't believe it will happen, based on my personal work experience and listening to marketing execs both in a software development environment...here are a few thoughts in response...

    But it just makes no sense to say that a 650 wouldn't conflict with the 700w, but a 700p would. What product mix problem would suddenly appear when Verizon replaces the Treo 650 with the Treo 700p?
    The 650 would be a legacy product being carried only until whatever inventory of the devices were left in stock (T-Mobile admitted as much to me when I was purchasing the T600). The carriers may also have remaining contracts to purchase X amount of T650's to honor -- depending on their inventory/pricing strategy (as a combo with whatever contract packages they offer). I believe the next generation Treo will be offered as both a P and a W, but that this will not last more than another couple of generations.

    A Treo with a camera and a Treo without a camera are different versions of the same product. A PalmOS Treo and a Windows Treo are two different products, whether you're talking about the 650/700w or the 700p/700w.
    Actually, I believe that to a carrier, multiple products would be considered say, 3 PDA phones. One Treo, one RIM, and then an HP or another entry from an established electronics manufacturer. Not products as they relate to Palm. I believe that consolidated major carriers will see three, maybe four PDA phones as an acceptable mix when compared against forecasted support and contractual costs. Further, they'll want to ensure that the phones cannot be used by retail consumers to circumvent their bandwidth or usage pricing strategies. That is why they'll elect WM over Palm in the long run -- barring a successful closed source alternative.

    "If Verizon's large corporate customers want PalmOS Treos, Verizon will support PalmOS Treos."
    Perhaps, but when choosing telephone's or mobile e-mail devices for their employees, if there is going to be a preference, I see it more likely to be WM than Palm. My current organization (2000+ employees) chooses RIM/Blackberry on Verizon -- largely to strictly control usage of the devices. My previous organization chose Nextel for voice and considered the issuance of laptops and reimbursement for a data plan sufficient without a PDA at all. Many of my current organization's employees are denied voice plans and given only the ability to access email and SMS/paging functions. I can't envision my current company ever deciding to allow their employees to connect with or use devices they could load shareware into. Even so, the systems my company uses for email are not PDA friendly using web browsers nor have I seen any email clients that are compatible.

    Hence my personal enthusiasm for Palm Treo.

    As far as non-mobile phone/messaging applications, I was trying to get across that I don't believe WM will be as large a player in the short term -- wireless inventory management is a highly competitive industry at present, licensing and development fees are avoided. Long term, with Microsoft moving it's business software to the web, who knows what will happen.
    Give a man fire, he's warm for a day.
    Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
  3. #63  
    Quote Originally Posted by Senya
    I believe that consolidated major carriers will see three, maybe four PDA phones as an acceptable mix when compared against forecasted support and contractual costs.
    I think this is the core assumption behind the view that PalmOS Treos will eventually be sidelined, but this is based on a dated view of the handset market.

    The demand for smartphones continues to grow, and Average Revenue Per User is much higher for smartphone customers than for customers with regular handsets. So there isn't as strong a need to pare down the products. Carriers like selling Treos. Months after PalmOS has been declared dead, Palm continues to sign up new carrier after new carrier to sell PalmOS 650s. India, Ecuador, Chile, New Zealand, and now China. This is in an environment where there's no shortage of competing smartphone devices. You know Nokia has existing relationships with all of Palm's new carrier customers, and so they must be pushing their new smartphone device. You know HTC is all over them as well with their Windows smartphones. Samsung's got a global salesforce with a marketing budget that dwarfs Palm's. Yet the carriers are still lining up to buy PalmOS Treos.

    The Treo product is very profitable to carriers. Verizon somehow gets away with charging over $500 per year on the data plan alone. Treo owners aren't legacy customers that Verizon is "stuck" with servicing. Treo owners are premium customers - among the most profitable ones they have.

    The point of the same-product/different-product exercise is to think about the consequences of adding and removing products. If Verizon discontinues the PalmOS Treos somewhere down the line, what will happen to all that easy money? Will the million Treo owners (a guess; don't know the actual figure off-hand) be loyal to Verizon or to PalmOS? Sure, many will stick with Verizon, and a few years from now the outlook for PalmOS could be different, but a large number of very profitable customers will walk away rather than switch platforms when it comes time to upgrade. There's no good reason to send profitable customers to your competitors.

    Verizon is no more likely to shut down the PalmOS Treo line anytime soon than Palm is of shutting down its PalmOS business. Both see a very profitable and growing business. Many market observers seem to ignore profitability when predicting future business decisions. That's the first thing, and sometimes the only thing, the decision makers look at.

    Could that change? Absolutely. Data plan rates are sure to come down eventually (or at least I personally hope so). Average network usage will probably rise as more applications appear and user savvy grows. But I think the key driver will be market demand. If customers stop buying PalmOS (hasn't happened yet), the carriers will no longer feel compelled to carry it.
  4. #64  
    With all this talk about the GSM for Cingular, assuming we EVER see a new Treo for Palm,
    would you also speculate that this could be used on the T-Mobile system by popping in a SIM and unlocking it?

    Re: the comments on the Verizon data plan, rip-offs like this are why I keep T-Mobile. You don't need a data plan. You can access email, surf, etc just with a dialup connection out of your normal minutes.
    If it doesn't have a slot for SDHC--I don't want it. Period.
  5. #65  
    Verizon and Cingular may not get away with their expensive data plans for long, as soon as all the new wi-fi devices hit the market(some are already out)! Even though I dislike Sprint for other reasons, gotta commend them for not overcharging customers on data! What's so good about the other 2 that their data plans are so high? Speed? I hear Sprint is plenty fast!
    HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

    And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Posting Permissions