Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 46 of 46
Like Tree9Likes
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by Targon View Post
    What if the difficulty between HP and Sprint at this point is that Sprint demanded exclusivity for the Pre 3 due to previous agreements between Palm and Sprint, and HP did not go for it. Sprint had been the exclusive for many Palm devices, so expected to be given favored status, and HP denied it. Sprint people may have gotten on their high horses and just shut down negotiations, and here we are.

    This is a rational notion.

    With the kind of junk phones that Sprint has been known to throw out there (Kyocera Echo anyone?!?), there's no reason for Sprint to not throw webOS out there to see what sticks. It's not like NOBODY wants/uses webOS. Yes, the numbers are quite small, but, it's not like "we" don't let them know how we feel about it...

    That's my personal take on this. I find it VERY hard to believe that Sprint directly gave HP the finger, when you factor in all the crap Sprint puts out.


    M.
    Last edited by Xanadu73; 08/06/2011 at 10:29 AM.
  2. #42  
    We have entered into the world of "conflicts of interest" gone amuck: the carriers should NOT be selling phones to their customers, providing support, and then turning around and telling the customer that carrier guidelines being disregarded will void the device warranty.

    The consumer owns the phone. Period. If they do something to the device that stops it from working, or working well on the carrier's network, then the carrier needs to help them until they discover that, and then tell them they can't help them with that issue - NOT voild the device's warranty.

    The way things are now, the carriers have ultimate control over the type, quantity, quality and use of the mobile devices that the consumer in the US gets an opportunity to buy and use, yet, they have no risk involved at all - no cash outlay for the devices, long contracts that have penalties to make up for lost revenue in case of early failure, excessive monthly fees for device warranty extensions, and total control of many devices via "exlusives" with the manufacturers, making the availability on a carrier a monopolistic practice for a specifically determined time. (iPhone, Droid, Evo, Sidekick.. etc..)

    In the end, the user cannot buy a smartphone and shop for a carrier that he/she feels is best suited for his needs - the carriers can choose to not support the device, and lock it out if they want - a device that uses public airways and that the consumer pays taxes for the FCC to govern and make sure is used in the best interest of the American citizen -
    "their networks" rely on OUR airwaves - its supposed to be a partnershp between the american people and the businesses to provide a fair relationship, NOT a one-sided one.

    For Sprint to void a warranty because a user put a custom theme on it, or patched it to show the battery % in the top bar, or overclocked it, is ridiculous, but, this can happen, and we accept it, like it is right.

    As I said above, it we do something to OUR phone that causes a problem, they don't have to help us resolve that issue, but a broad warranty violation is, well, just a convenient way of finding any excuse to reduce their responsibilities for support, and that's a travesty.

    II think all mobile devices should be sold/leased, distrubuted and then supported by the manufacturers with ALL radio bands and frequencies, so that any device can run on any network. This would enable competition for our business by the carriers to be forced to be ALL about the quality of their service versus the price they charge for it, and nothing else, as it should be.

    This voided warranty thing is definitely just the tip of the iceberg of the overall conflict of interest position that Sprint, Verizon and AT&T find themselves in (and to a much less, but stil significant degree, T-Mobile usa).

    The ONLY way I could see them adapting this voided warranty policy is if THEY owned the devices and then leased them to the consumers for a discounted price and specified time period - then, and only then, would they have a right to set guidelines for how THEIR devices are used and modified.

    IMHO, of course.
    Last edited by LCGuy; 08/06/2011 at 10:31 AM.
    "The more I learn, the more I realize just how little I really do know!" -Albert Einstein

  3. #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by gdgates View Post
    "You seem to have that relationship backwards"
    Nope, as a former Sprint employee, I can assure you that he did not have the relationship backwards. Palm, then HP decided to bypass Sprint. Sprint would love to have current and future WebOS devices, I promise you.
    Tell me where you worked at Sprint and where you got that info, and I'll tell everyone whether or not you are making it up or not.
  4. #44  
    grabber, that's creepy :O

    anyway, for a webos phone I'm gonna leave sprint? No way! I like their service and the prices. Android is already years ahead of webos. Everywhere you go, ANDROID this Android that. Iphone got eclipsed already. I still love my pre but I feel too behind when my friends take out their latest androids :/ I think the pre 3 will be the only reason I will still stay with webos. I just want a bigger screen. The screen on the pre and pre 2 is so not attractive anymore
  5. #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by gdgates View Post
    ... Sprint would love to have current and future WebOS devices, I promise you.
    Quote Originally Posted by C-Note View Post
    ... I can pretty much guarantee you that Palm/HP did not pass over Sprint. ...
    Everybody is right. Sprint would be happy to offer webOS phones, and anybody who thinks otherwise is nuts. HP would be happy to have their phones in Sprint stores, and anybody who thinks otherwise is nuts. The leaders of both companies are smart, savvy, profit driven. They would not turn away from a profit opportunity just because something did not work out as expected in the past. People who hold grudges or operate on emotion simply don't get to the top of companies like HP and Sprint.

    On the other hand, making a deal to put a new phone in a carrier store can be tough. Virtually every phone in every carrier store is covered by an exclusive deal. The EVO is only in Sprint. The Droid is only at Verizon. And so on. There are sometimes nearly identical phones on other networks, but they almost always have different names. Exceptions to the "different name" rule have included the iPhone and the Pre2.

    All phones are subsidized by the carriers. By this I mean that they are sold to the subscriber/customer for less than the carrier pays for the phone. The amount of the subsidy/discount depends on what the manufacturer charges, and of course on how well the phone is marketed and how much customers are willing to pay.

    When a phone (like the Pre3) is going to be in multiple carriers, then naturally a carrier will not receive as much demand for that phone as it would if it had a complete exclusive on the phone. This is true regardless of the total demand for the phone. Whether the phone is just mildly popular or wildly popular, a carrier will sell a lower number if multiple carriers have the phone. And therefore, it either needs to buy the phone at a lower price, or else offer a smaller discount/subsidy to its customers. Which, in turn, reduces the quantity that it will order, or commit to, with the manufacturer.

    Sometimes these issues prevent a manufacturer and carrier from working out a deal. The manufacturer wants the phone on the carrier's network, and the carrier wants the phone. But they just don't see eye-to-eye on anticipated sales volume, wholesale price, and customer discount/price. Thus, no deal. Neither wants to pass on the other. It's just a failure to agree on the numbers. Nothing more, nothing less. Nothing sinister to read into the situation.
    - Bubba
  6. #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by pelikan3 View Post
    I took my phone in for responsiveness issues with my keyboard and touch screen today.
    If your screen/keyboard have mechanical problems, then Sprint is wrong. The warranty still applies (assuming you are within the warranty period), regardless of what you have done internally with your phone. Even if you have overclocked your phone, and even if you admit it, that would free them from responsibility for all internal components affected by overclocking but would not relieve them from responsibility for mechanical defects in the hardware -- keyboard, sliding mechanism, display, touch screen, etc.


    The exclusions in the warranty say, in essence, that if the damage is CAUSED by doing unauthorized things, then the damage is not covered. The warranty does NOT say that it is completely void, cancelled, etc. if you do one bad thing with your phone, regardless of whether that bad thing is the cause of the damage.

    Any chance you are in Florida? If so, PM me and I'll offer you some free assistance.
    - Bubba
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions