Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 41
Like Tree27Likes
  1.    #1  
    I can almost be certain that HP wants a Pre3 on Sprint, especially since they are making a CDMA unit for verizon anyways. The largest contingent of webos users still remains on sprint, and there are many android users on sprint who will switch back to webos given that sprint makes available any new webos hardware. If HP wants to grow webos, there is nothing better than the die hard existing user base that will basically act as "ambassadors" of webos, marketing the platform to friends, family and others for FREE.

    So i have came up with a proposed solution that i think would satisfy everyone (sprint, hp, webos users), and hope for some feedback as to whether this is possible.

    HP should make available a CDMA Pre3 that is "unlocked" or whatever the equivalent may be on the CDMA side since "unlocked" phones apply only to GSM. Maybe a Pre3 that is not flashed with Verizon specific software. Or maybe that allows customers to "webos quickinstall" or "webos doctor" a sprint specific OS, to their device. Or heck just sell one with sprint specific software. You get the point just a pre 3 that can function normally on sprint.

    Next part, is to use HP's leverage to strike some kind of deal where sprint will allow activation of a phone ESN that is not in their system. Im not talking about any phone out there, obviously sprint will not do that. make it an unadvertised exception to just the PRE3. And the phone must be purchased form HP or any avenue outside of sprint.

    This way sprint does not have to sell the phone, and does not even have to support the phone through their tech support, or even sell insurance on it. It will be like a "use at your own risk" and since we are not buying the phone subsidized from sprint, no one is under contract which otherwise will require sprint to provide some level of support.

    This will not be any big advertised thing, all it takes is a memo on sprints part to employees, to allow the pre3 to be activated on the network. Since sprint is not selling or supporting the phone or even insuring the phone, it does not have to worry about any costs or problems that it faced with the original pre (even though those issues have been resolved).

    Everybody is happy. Sprint, HP, and WebOS users. sounds good right?
  2. #2  
    Sounds Great! Now if only Sprint will play ball, who knows.
  3. #3  
    That's based on a whole lot of assumptions, but that's not how things work. Either HP makes a Pre 3 specifically for Sprint or there will be no Pre 3 on Sprint. End of story. No one is going to go through the effort of putting together some sort of under-the-table workaround just for you guys.

    And we don't even know who is responsible for the lack of the Pre 3. It may be that HP doesn't want to make a Pre 3 for Sprint, or it could be that Sprint hasn't asked HP to make a Pre 3 for them because they don't want it. Trying to fix problems that you don't even know the cause of is futile.
    Touchscreens are a fad.
  4. #4  
    What about a prepaid, "Pay as you Go" Palm Pre3?

    Customers can purchase pre-paid plans and experience webOS features as determined by their plan. No carrier issues, no tech support, no hidden charges/expenses, no insurance, no contracts, nothing. The customer can even exchange their Pre3 for a newer webOs device, run OTA updates, all based on their pre-paid plan. Everything and anything is flexible to satisy the customer. Call this, "webOS-2-Go"
    Last edited by fred1955; 07/21/2011 at 12:59 PM.
  5.    #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by Syndil View Post
    That's based on a whole lot of assumptions, but that's not how things work. Either HP makes a Pre 3 specifically for Sprint or there will be no Pre 3 on Sprint. End of story. No one is going to go through the effort of putting together some sort of under-the-table workaround just for you guys.

    And we don't even know who is responsible for the lack of the Pre 3. It may be that HP doesn't want to make a Pre 3 for Sprint, or it could be that Sprint hasn't asked HP to make a Pre 3 for them because they don't want it. Trying to fix problems that you don't even know the cause of is futile.
    Im pretty sure HP does not wait around for sprint to ask them to make a Pre3, they go out and try to get them to carry it, and there is no reason HP would not want to make a sprint pre3, unless sprint is requiring it to have wimax chip, because they are already making a CDMA verizon pre3.

    All that i was suggesting that if the issue at hand is sprint not wanting to support another webos device on their network, due to the huge costs incurred of supporting/carrying the last webos device on their network; than HP can sell a Sprint network capable pre3 directly, as long as sprint agrees to activate the ESN's. This way sprint will not be responsible for supporting the device or insuring it, since there is no contract. (this is kind of how prepaid works...no contract = no insurance and minimal support). And they don't have to waste any money advertising it.

    This is really no under-table deal...im sure sprint and verizon activate plenty of devices for corporate customers that they do not support or sell directly.
  6.    #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by fred1955 View Post
    What about a prepaid, "Pay as you Go" Palm Pre3?

    Customers can purchase pre-paid plans and experience webOS features as determined by their plan. No carrier issues, no tech support, no hidden charges/expenses, no insurance, no contracts, nothing. The customer can even exchange their Pre3 for a newer webOs device, run OTA updates, all based on their pre-paid plan. Everything and anything is flexible to satisy the customer. Call this, "webOS-2-Go"
    yes exactly, My idea was partially derived from the pre-paid model. with buying phones outright-no contracts- and having no insurance or phone specific tech support. The only problem is that most prepaid services now maybe too much pain for a webos user to endure. for example both sprints prepaid offerings, boost and virgin mobile, i believe use sprints slower data speeds. 1x or evdo rev 0. If i am not mistaken.
    fmarcanojr likes this.
  7. dec
    dec is offline
    dec's Avatar
    Posts
    247 Posts
    Global Posts
    255 Global Posts
    #7  
    or wait for the
    next product cycle . . . It'll happen not soon enuf, but we'll have webOS on the now network - just not now ~
    brum likes this.
  8. gbp
    gbp is offline
    gbp's Avatar
    Posts
    2,506 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,543 Global Posts
    #8  
    I doubt Sprint will agree. To begin with Sprint Pre users stay with Sprint not with Pre. Secondly the number of Pre- users is low. Very low.
  9. #9  
    Never gonna happen.
  10. #10  
    There is no "unlocked" version of CDMA. Period. It's not that it isn't called "unlocked;" it's that there is nothing close to it. In order for a phone to work on either Sprint or Verizon, Sprint or Verizon have to manually go into their systems and say "this phone is allowed on our network." It's that whole Clean ESN thing you might have seen. Each phone has an ESN that identifies it. Sprint has to say what ESNs are allowed on the network.

    Your method is asking Sprint to go through and do a lot of work to input these ESNs into their system, but get no cut of the profits of selling the phone.
  11. #11  
    Not only that, the way CDMA works, there is no way of providing an "unflashed" device and having it work on a carrier. With GSM, the SIM card contains all the necessary carrier information. That is how it is possible to have unlocked GSM phones. The phone itself knows nothing about any carriers until a SIM is inserted. Since there are no interchangeable SIMs for CDMA phones, they must be programmed from the get-go on what settings are to be used with whatever carrier they are designed to be used for. A carrier-free CDMA phone just is not possible. And if HP and Sprint are not working together to make a Sprint Pre 3--for whatever the reason or whoever's fault--there will not be a Sprint Pre 3, period.
    Touchscreens are a fad.
  12. bignoze's Avatar
    Posts
    330 Posts
    Global Posts
    373 Global Posts
    #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by boarder1999 View Post
    There is no "unlocked" version of CDMA. Period. It's not that it isn't called "unlocked;" it's that there is nothing close to it. In order for a phone to work on either Sprint or Verizon, Sprint or Verizon have to manually go into their systems and say "this phone is allowed on our network." It's that whole Clean ESN thing you might have seen. Each phone has an ESN that identifies it. Sprint has to say what ESNs are allowed on the network.

    Your method is asking Sprint to go through and do a lot of work to input these ESNs into their system, but get no cut of the profits of selling the phone.
    they dont make money selling phones anyway and its the monthly service they are after.....imputing an esn into their database is all they would have to do.


    the used to do it all the time. but they stopped.
  13. #13  
    I came up with this idea almost a month ago. lol. Everyone seemed to think that Sprint would not allow this because they wouldn't want to "support" the device as in tech support, in which i said that giving that responsibility to HP would work but i got shot down. lol.

    http://forums.precentral.net/hp-pre-...e3-sprint.html
    fmarcanojr likes this.
  14. #14  
    What leverage does hp have over sprint again?

    ---
    galaxy tab tapatalk
  15. #15  
    Just convince virgin mobile to carry webos phones. Its the same as sprint. I know cause i have it. you can argue its better than sprint cause its cheaper. Anyways i get sprint 3g.
    fmarcanojr likes this.
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by gbp View Post
    I doubt Sprint will agree. To begin with Sprint Pre users stay with Sprint not with Pre. Secondly the number of Pre- users is low. Very low.
    Better look at the poll. It's probably about 50/50. In other words, about half will leave, or already have.

    Let's say Sprint loses 10-20k customers (a small fragment of the Sprint webOS base - at least at its height), that would cost (assuming a ~$70/user) $700k to $1.4M. Is Sprint really stupid enough, bleeding already as it is, to not find a way to keep its hard earned customers? They sure aren't getting me to switch from Verizon. They act small time, and I need coverage no matter where I go, using the phone I want.

    Sprint needs to start thinking about trying to keep their webOS user base, and offering what is likely to be a very solidly built phone hardly seems THAT big of a money risk, especially if they get HP to provide them the phone on a limited basis (i.e. they don't have to stock 100's of thousands of phones to have it on their network).

    My personal opinion is that they want the phone but they want Wimax. I believe the rumor about them trying to hook-up, but with HP refusing to go back and add a Wimax radio, is the more likely issue here. We'll see.
  17. gbp
    gbp is offline
    gbp's Avatar
    Posts
    2,506 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,543 Global Posts
    #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by falconrap View Post
    Better look at the poll. It's probably about 50/50. In other words, about half will leave, or already have.

    Let's say Sprint loses 10-20k customers (a small fragment of the Sprint webOS base - at least at its height), that would cost (assuming a ~$70/user) $700k to $1.4M. Is Sprint really stupid enough, bleeding already as it is, to not find a way to keep its hard earned customers? They sure aren't getting me to switch from Verizon. They act small time, and I need coverage no matter where I go, using the phone I want.

    Sprint needs to start thinking about trying to keep their webOS user base, and offering what is likely to be a very solidly built phone hardly seems THAT big of a money risk, especially if they get HP to provide them the phone on a limited basis (i.e. they don't have to stock 100's of thousands of phones to have it on their network).

    My personal opinion is that they want the phone but they want Wimax. I believe the rumor about them trying to hook-up, but with HP refusing to go back and add a Wimax radio, is the more likely issue here. We'll see.
    I doubt. The polls doesn't reflect the right numbers.
    Here is what my gut feeling if Sprint were to say yes to Pre3

    • About 100K plus users on Pre - demand Pre3.
    • Verizon/ATT offering a welcome package to Sprint customers giving a free Pre3 + unlimited data at current Verizon/ATT rate.
    • HP shows some of the cool products in the works that Sprint wants in the future.
    • HP cuts a deal with SPRINT to own the cost of replacing/supporting Pre3.


    Everything in the list happened except for Verizon and ATT offering deals to Sprint customers.

    If we ask Verizon as a group for a "Deal". And if Verizon agrees , that would shake Sprint like anything.
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by Maestro1 View Post
    Next part, is to use HP's leverage to strike some kind of deal where sprint will allow activation of a phone ESN that is not in their system.
    Not gonna happen.
  19. #19  
    one issue i have with sprint losing money is the simple fact that sprint has a ton of government backing and contracts.... i dont think they are worried about losing anyone, hell they are prolly making money from the gov on losses. figuring 70 a line and family plans are like 50 a line... just a thought.
    Palm prē-ist.
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by boarder1999 View Post
    There is no "unlocked" version of CDMA. Period. It's not that it isn't called "unlocked;" it's that there is nothing close to it. In order for a phone to work on either Sprint or Verizon, Sprint or Verizon have to manually go into their systems and say "this phone is allowed on our network." It's that whole Clean ESN thing you might have seen. Each phone has an ESN that identifies it. Sprint has to say what ESNs are allowed on the network.

    Your method is asking Sprint to go through and do a lot of work to input these ESNs into their system, but get no cut of the profits of selling the phone.
    The profit for Sprint would be in keeping customers that might otherwise change carriers. No need to subsidize a phone, just put it in their system
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions