“AT&T’s Roger Smith, Director of next generation devices, yesterday spoke at the Symbian Partner Event in San Francisco. According to Macworld, he told that AT&T has basically given up on Java for cell phones and is now looking for a standardized smartphone platform to increase the carrier’s mobile content revenue,” infoSync World reports.
“If AT&T finds a platform which manufacturers can use without getting stuck in trouble, there’s no reason why this shouldn’t turn AT&T into a crucial mobile content player. Of course, that implies that a company such as Apple will no longer work directly with the carrier. After all, they are all about mobile content themselves.,” infoSync World reports.
“iPhone users shouldn’t worry though, as Apple may perhaps be the first company with the potential of becoming a significant MVNO. So don’t be surprised if you’ll soon receive your phone bills from Apple,” infoSync World reports.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Note: A MVNO (mobile virtual network operator) is a company that provides mobile phone service, but does not have its own licensed spectrum or all of the infrastructure (towers, etc.) required to provide mobile telephone service.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Fred Mertz” for the heads up.]
AT&T;branded devices will all run one OS.
Apple will still run their OS and still be on AT&T;.
Not exactly a business Apple needs to be in. There’s little innovation there, and not much else to recommend it. Why bother?
Well, those of us in South Dakota would like to see an end to the iPhone drought up here sooner than later!
“”iPhone users shouldn’t worry though, as Apple may perhaps be the first company with the potential of becoming a significant MVNO. So don’t be surprised if you’ll soon receive your phone bills from Apple,” infoSync World reports.”
Won’t happen, if it does, until Apple’s contract with ATT expires in 2012.
No reason for Apple to become an MVNO. And just because AT&T;has given up on Java and wants to have one OS on its phones doesn’t mean that AT&T;wouldn’t be Apple’s partner.
What’s happened here is that AT&T;has seen how valuable a true OS is to a mobile phone, and AT&T;realizes that current OSes won’t cut it. AT&T;wants to differentiate itself from other mobile service providers, and having a solid, feature-rich OS for its other mobile phones would be a motivating factor for customers to choose AT&T;over Verizon, etc.
That by no means says that AT&T;is going to drop Apple. If anything, all other indications are that AT&T;is doing all it can to please Apple and strengthen the relationship.
No one said that Apple wouldn’t license their phone OS.
They could still make the iPhone, but imagine the success of the App store if was available to other phones.
I know, farfetched, but there was a time I didn’t expect to see an Intel Mac or Windows on a Mac either.
Never say never to a corporate.
AT&T;wants to control everything and that is not going to happen with Apple supplying an AT&T;locked iPhone. My fear is that Microsoft will come in and say run everything with Windows Mobile. Greed and the quick dollar is what has ruined this country. AT&T;would better serve it’s customers by offering a host of different options for phones and operating systems. Let the customer select what they want to use. Either way AT&T;wins.
This is a terrible idea. Why take on all the infrastructure costs and complexity of managing a mobile network. Just keep building the best mobile phones out there and everything will take care of itself as it is now.
@WTFrank
I don’t understand this repeated obsession with Apple licensing their OS technology to others. Apple makes their money on their hardware sales, which (last I checked) were doing phenomenally well, all things considered, for both computers and smartphones. Why on earth would they consider licensing their technology – which is a strong differentiating factor helping to sell their hardware – to their competitors? That’s not just “farfetched”, that’s ludicrous.
MVNO’s have a tough time, generally. Virgin Mobile USA is absorbing Helio, and others have simply went out of business, like mobile ESPN and Disney (hello Steve), Sonopia, and Amp’d.
Some people here don’t quite understand what is a MVNO. A good example is Virgin Mobile. They sell mobile telephony services, just like other carriers. In the UK, they use T-Mobile’s networks; in the US, it is Sprint’s network, but your bill comes from Virgin, and it is Virgin that offers various plans and phones.
AT&T has an extremely strong relationship with Apple. They have no reason to terminate it. They obviously are painfully aware how much confusion all the various mobile OSes bring to the market. It is clear that Windows Mobile has no future. RIM OS (blackberry) also seems limited and without direction. So, they decided, in order to streamline the quality of their support services, to limit their phone offerings to devices offering only Symbian. I’m sure this will work out very well for AT&T. Obviously, they don’t have to worry about the iPhone, since Apple provides all support for it.
As for Apple licensing the iPhone OS, that would probably be the silliest move for them. If for no other reason, then because Steve Balmer keeps repeating that Apple’s iPhone model is wrong, that they should be licensing their OS, so that other manufacturers can build phones. No hardware maker out there has ever been making as much money on hardware as Apple has. At any given time, Apple’s margins were by far fattest in the respective categories. Could anyone explain why would Apple want to surrender those fat, fat, fat (100s of dollars per device sold) margins, so that they could collect $30 license fee per device from third parties? The other hardware manufacturers would need to sell 13 phones for every iPhone Apple sells in order to make Apple the same profit.
Therefore, neither Apple MVNO, nor iPhone OS licensing is ever going to happen.
Just buy Sprint instead.
done, solved.
next problem please
They wont license OSX.
They wont license the phone software (OSX mobile, if you will).
Hmm, its lunchtime.
as long as its still unlimited everything to all AT&T;people then i dont care.
@ deepdish
> Just buy Sprint instead.
Sprint uses CDMA (as does Verizon), so current iPhones will not work on that network.
T-Mobile would work…
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
But I’d say go MVNO. Running the physical infrastructure would not be something I’d want Apple to worry about. They have enough trouble running MobileMe…
I understand ur points, but look, no innovations with any phone carriers…
Apple has to hold back all the time… When iChat videoconferencing?
Imagine how many more iPhones they’d sell if they were the only ones to do that…
There’s probably lots more lifechanging features they have to hold back because operators just won’t allow it, they’re just too busy charging us like crazy for 2-bit SMS texts that transit through their network
Now, all that white space Google fought for will benefit Apple too. ATT got lucky that Verizon idiot CEO turned down Jobs’ offer, and all of a sudden they think they are geniuses. I predict whatever they do will only help Apple’s bottom line. I would be surprised if Jobs is already 3 moves ahead of any change in the mobile landscape. If he wasn’t prepared, he wouldn’t be moving into this market.
NeVer, NO.