Slashdot Log In
AT&T Sidestepping Google, Eyes Symbian
Posted by
Soulskill
on Fri Dec 05, 2008 08:15 PM
from the hat-in-the-ring dept.
from the hat-in-the-ring dept.
molotovjester writes "In what is surely going to be a slap in the face of Apple, AT&T is eyeballing the Symbian platform as a smart-phone OS for an army of new handsets it expects will make up the majority of the market by 2014. Is this move too little, too late compared to Google's Android? Will Apple open up its iPhone platform, or will dreams of electric sheep be dreamed up by the majority of cell phone users? I wrote an analysis of the industry players as of mid-November, but it will be interesting to see what AT&T does and how it changes the mobile ecosystem."
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Slap in the face? (Score:5, Insightful)
A slap in the face? Come on. Apple's not going to care. There will always be other smartphones out there. Apple wouldn't have any desire for their OS to run on other phones. Their plan is to try to get THEIR product to dominate the market.
Ding, ding, ding (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Indeed (Score:3, Insightful)
I doubt Apple cares. Last time I checked the iPhone is doing pretty damn well and Apple isn't the kind of company that wants every person on the planet to buy it's stuff.
Because if everyone's special, then no one is.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
AT&T is eyeballing the Symbian platform
The ladies will get a kick out of this one. ;)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Apple isn't the kind of company that wants every person on the planet to buy it's stuff
I take it you missed the whole iPod thing? It's got no WiFi, less space than a Nomad, and is lame, but apparently it's selling quite well...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Judging from past behavior, Apple doesn't care: they seem to be content being a niche player selling cool but overpriced stuff to people who want cool but overpriced stuff. AT&T may or may not be happy with Apple but in the end it's irrelevant since there are other carriers for Apple. It doesn't seem like this is aimed at Apple at all. Google and perhaps Microsoft are more likely targets - especially Google because of Android & the open source thing.
The REAL question is "will the market care?".
Re:Slap in the face? (Score:4, Insightful)
THEIR product to dominate the market.
No, their plan is profit.
This is the same discussion about Apple that comes up when people talk about Macs; someone always says "ZOMG they have to do x to dominate the market like Microsoft!"
While I'm sure they'd be happy if they did dominate the market, Apple is in the business of making money, not market domination.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I think that's more due to Apple dealing realistically with their role as a minority platform than actually wanting to be one. That is, while they'd undoubtedly be happy to be the dominant computing platform, they fact is that they aren't, so they're using the "elite minority" thing to make the best of their market position.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Please... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Please... (Score:4, Insightful)
Apple will "open up" its products, in the sense it will make them "more open" it will however, not "make them open". Both sides are right, just for some values of "open". As for AT&T, my gut feeling is that Android's too open for them.
Parent
Re:Please... (Score:4, Informative)
And Symbian is not?
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081203-nokias-oss-strategy-gets-boost-as-symbian-deal-completed.html [arstechnica.com]
Parent
Re:Please... (Score:5, Insightful)
Like all other cell phones, any phone AT&T "makes" is as open as they (and the manufacturer) decide to make it. Even if part of the source for the phones operating system is available, it is unlikely that AT&T will make it any easier for end-users to install custom firmware than the G1 does or the iPhone does.
Same with Applications. It will be completely up to AT&T to control what API's will be available on the phone (just like it is now, arguably, the sole exception being the iPhone), and what applications will be permitted on the phone and where you will be able to acquire them from.
People seem to be assuming that because the Symbian OS is open source, that the phone itself is going to be wide open for whatever you want to do. This is highly unlikely.
Even the magical GoogleOSPhone has arbitrary limitations, such as you can't download music to the phone over the 3G network, not because of bandwidth concerns, but solely to protect the carriers revenue stream for their existing overpriced music store that they force their customers with other handsets to use.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Please... (Score:4, Interesting)
For Limit read block - for all intents and purposes, its not possible to get useful apps on Symbian any more - you can pay for cr*p, but that is not the same thing.
People are saying "if its going to be locked, then I might as well buy Apple". If Symbian is going to sell phones it will only be because they dump this stupidity.
Disclaimer: my last 4 phones have been Symbian, and I wont buy another till "Symbian SIgned" is history. If they have not killed it when my contract runs out, I will get an iPhone too. (like all my freinds, family and colleagues)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
So why did you buy your phones from a corporation that does that? You can very easily buy Symbian phones that aren't crippled. Your lousy consumer research has nothing to do with the security features of the OS.
There are plenty of really useful applications for Symbian. For example, people have been walking around with Vorbis-capable music players in their pockets for several years while Slashdotters kept making bad jokes about how they just want to make calls.
http://symbianoggplay.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's only a matter of time before Apple is forced to start monetizing their software directly.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Why? What business model would you suggest they follow?
It's not like they can pull a Microsoft and require a license fee for every single phone shipped by AT&T and all their other iPhone vendors (that is what got Microsoft their millions from the PC manufacturers).
Can you name another vendor that sells hardware that monetizes their software, and manages to grow handsomely?
Sun isn't it, they give away their OS that isn't tied to their hardware AND they happen to be going down.
IBM isn't it, they sold thei
Re:Please... (Score:5, Funny)
I think it's only a matter of time before Apple is forced to start monetizing their software directly.
because if the last 5 years have been any indication, Apple is clearly using a failing business model...
Parent
Will Apple open up its iPhone platform? (Score:4, Insightful)
No.
Though you almost made me lol.
Apple vs AT&T (Score:4, Insightful)
Who stands more to lose: Apple because AT&T is running another phone in addition to the iPhone, or AT&T because Apple decides to let other carriers have the iPhone.
Which gives Apple the bigger market share?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
AT&T confused by the mobile ecosystem? (Score:3, Insightful)
Wrong summary (Score:5, Insightful)
I RTFA, and it seems to me AT&T is looking for a common operating system for their "base" or cheaper phones. This would serve as a replacement for all of the Java crap that's out there now. They also further state that they see Apple as a third party provider using their network services. This has the potential to be the best situation of all. If AT&T opens their network to third party devices, not just Apple/RIM/Windows Mobile, we could see all manner of innovation in the near future.
This is in no way a slap in the face of Apple. If anything it's a validation of Apple's current iPhone model. (That is, if you ignore subsidies and rebates)
Re: (Score:2)
As it is, Apple has provided the Smartphone For The Rest of US, and expanded the market beyond what anyone would have predicted a year ago. Now everyone else is trying to catch up and make a smartphone to complete. ATT,
Re: (Score:2)
What is not open about ATT's network?
From the openmoko wiki...
I had a non-compatible SIM card, but it took only a few minutes in an AT&T Store to have them bring up my account, give me a new card, and double check that it works. They generally seem friendly, and it's pretty easy. Just say "Hi, I have an unlocked phone, and my current SIM card doesn't work. Is there any way that I can get another one?"
I've used a couple of phones (non-ATT purchased) using my ATT sim card and haven't had any problems.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Ducks in one basket (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think this is a slap in the face of Apple. AT&T needs to hedge its bets - the iPhone exclusivity deal isn't forever, it's until 2010. And when the contract expires, if Apple goes multi carrier or drops AT&T entirely, then AT&T better have the backup plan well in the works. And given that it's almost 2009, it's probably a good idea to get the backup plan done now.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
LOL You're thinking of the Sybian.
http://www.sybian.com/index.html?set=yes [sybian.com]
A win for open-source? Only if AT&T opens it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, as often the /. tagline is rather full of hyperpole. FTA:
'Seth Bloom, an AT&T spokesperson, confirmed to Ars Technica that the company "has no plans to standardize on one platform for our smart devices. But we have said that we see potential benefit in standardizing our low-end devices on a single mobile OS, though we have not finalized our plans to do so." '
So, you'll get probably get a crippled/slow device with the ability to expensively download crap 'approved' by AT&T. I'll pass.
Re:A win for open-source? Only if AT&T opens i (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
I still want to get Haiku to my smartphone (Score:2)
Awful summary, as usual (Score:5, Interesting)
"In what is surely going to be a slap in the face of Apple"? Are you serious?
You can't seriously believe that Apple expected AT&T to stop selling every other variety of phone in existence once they picked up the iPhone. Controlling though he may be, I seriously doubt Steve Jobs is lying awake at night saying, "Those bastards! How dare they sell other phones!" Obviously AT&T was going to keep selling other kinds of phones, including Symbian phones, that's just common sense. But then, when there's a chance to bash Apple on Slashdot, common sense does seem to go out the window, doesn't it?
And as for any moves on Apple's part being "too little, too late", the sales numbers hardly bear that out at this point. Last I checked, the iPhone was outsold all of RIM's devices put together last fiscal quarter. Obviously this is going to fluctuate as time goes on, I hardly think that demonstrates widespread pent-up demand for a FOSS mobile operating system. When you spend all your days on Slashdot, it's hard to notice, but believe it or not, not everyone gives a damn.
Good Luck with that (Score:3, Interesting)
As the telecoms are dragged kicking and screaming to the party, they will find out why Android and Mobile OSX will dominate the next-gen hardware.
More like a shining gift to Apple (Score:2)
Having all other AT&T iPhones running Symbian is like a giant gift to Apple. Android is platform more suited to delivering phones atop of, so making them all Symbian will have the iPhone shine all the brighter as a result.
It seems a silly move on the part of AT&T though, the Android platform is going to grow and be supported by applications far better than Symbian.
Re:More like a shining gift to Apple (Score:5, Interesting)
Android is going nowhere, at least in the short term. That's my educated opinion, as I was involved with it (hence the anonymous post). It's a side project for Google, and Google has been tightening up over the last few months. Most of the people working on android were contract workers (and have seen their contracts cancelled) or have been reassigned to other projects. Sure, it's open source and the community can support it, but it relies on binary blobs from handset providers and testing on green hardware. I hope it doesn't stagnate and die, but at this point, it looks like it might.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
"Nowhere" seems like an odd statement for a phone OS that has ramped up to 1.5M units sold much faster than iPhone, and that in terms of architecture, license, security, and usability runs rings around iPhone and Symbian.
I think Android is going to be the darling of Chinese hardware manufacturers. It's a great OS to power all those hardware look-alike phones that come out of China, and people are going to discover quickly that an iPhone hardware clone running Android is the best phone you can buy--at half
It's because it's just a Fanboi Toy. (Score:3, Funny)
This is because ATT realizes just what the iPhone is ... An apple fanboi toy. It never caught on with the general public. Parts are very difficult up to impossible to get replaced without loosing your data. NO SPARE BATTERY possible. Come on every other Cell Phone on the planet has easily user replaceable or spare battery capability. A less than stellar relationship with application developers. Last but not least piss poor service from Apple. Now why do you wonder that ATT is looking for a replacement?
Oh yeah and I never owned one. I just listened to the bitching of the few I knew who did.
Took them long enough... (Score:2)
ITS ABOUT F'N TIME!
Seriously though...How long has Nokia had incredible Symbian-based phone around the globe? The US gets the version the red-headed step child slobbered on, shook vigorously, then beat with a bat. Then our beloved GSM carriers get ahold of it and lock it down to do as little as possible. So up to now, one needs to buy an expensive (compared to subsidized models) unlocked phone off ebay o
$15 a month (Score:2)
AT&T, from all accounts, pays Apple $15 a month for each iPhone. I'm sure all that all Samsung/Motorola/etc get is a per-item fee. AT&T would prefer to charge you $90 a month and keep the extra $15 a month. That's why you never see AT&T advertising the iPhone - while it gets them more customers, they're making less of the iPhone customers than other customers. They want you as a customer, but if they can get you AND keep the extra money, that's what they're going to do.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Look, I really respect your belief that the BSD license represents a better idea of freedom than the GPL. But it's unnecessarily insulting to compare the GPL to representing a "kill your wife/control freak philosophy." Really? Kill your wife?! Yeah, like you've got a monopoly on intelligence or deliberate thought, and people who disagree with you...what? Whether you agree with it or not, believing that it's worthwhile to take steps to *ensure* that what you love *stays* free is a legitimate position th
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Security/Analysts-iPhone-Has-Neither-Security-nor-Relevance/ [eweek.com]
http://gizmodo.com/5042332/huge-iphone-security-flaw-puts-all-private-information-at-risk [gizmodo.com]
http://forums.techarena.in/web-news-trends/1050689.htm [techarena.in]