1. theadrock13's Avatar
    Perhaps I'm repeating sentiments that have already been expressed elsewhere, but I haven't seen it. I'm thinking that the business model being used for "smartphones" is flawed and doesn't work in the favor of consumers or to benefit technological advances. I'm sure we can agree that the modern smartphone is a Personal Computers at this point. My BB does more than my PC did a few years ago.

    Recall the model being used by Apple Computers when they began making PCs: they controlled the hardware and the OS and priced it where they wanted it. This is how the "smartphone" business is operating, and with them offering phone exclusivity to certain providers it limits the customers' options. If I want to stay updated with the newest phone/OS from RIM then I need to be rotating carriers every few months which it totally impractical.

    It took Compaq and Microsoft to come shake up / open up the PC business and really accellerate advances in tech. This is what free markets do; they are flexible and move fast, which benefits the consumer. I'm suggesting that our phones need to migrate towards that model, in terms of phone's hardware, OS, and provider.

    Imagine if our phones were as flexible as PCs are. If I don't like one ISP I can drop them and get another (no contracts). The provider is forced to compete with a good network and good service. AT&T's "product" should not be the fact that they have some new exclusive phone. Imagine if Motorola built a really great Blackberry "clone" that ran RIM's OS but with a faster processor and more system memory, and could jump around to any provider's network (maybe you take off the back and snap on a CDMA plug-in, or a GSM, etc). One provider isn't making you happy, you buy a $30 plugin and move to the next provider. Google releases a better OS that runs on a Blackberry (or a "clone") then you can try it out for $100. Flexibility for customers. That would drive innovation and advancement.

    The phone hardware, the OS, and the providers should all be independent and competetive in their own fields. The Apple business model is not the most efficient. Apple was/is obsessed with holding onto the control of their hardware & software. RIM is the same way. I don't see that working out in the long run.

    I'm not an expert in this field, just an observer, and perhaps others (Google?) are trying to bust open the market as I'm suggesting.
    Your thoughts?
    02-04-09 09:04 AM
  2. cavingjan's Avatar
    If you want OS that is separate from hardware, you need to look at the WinMob arena as that is exactly what they have. For separating phone from network, take a look at the European phone market and see how that operates compared to the America model. The American model has contracts, phones tied to a network, and subsidized phones. The reduced prices on the phones are made back through the monthly fees that are higher than plans in Europe (although data is cheaper in the US).

    The biggest problem is the BIS servers for Balckberries and they will be tied to someone unless you want to sever the connection to the phone providers and pay someone else to host them.
    02-04-09 12:31 PM