Comments on: How the iPhone Should Have Made the Blackberry Storm Launch Easier

By: lord_kahos

lord_kahos — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 20:08:22 +0000

Monetize Your Mobile Traffic
Mojiva’s publisher solutions make it easy to control and monetize content in the mobile space. The platform provides everything needed to accurately track performance, and manage yield…simply. http://bit.ly/c7tikY

By: James Petrich

James Petrich — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 01:26:20 +0000

Well, I will take one more word. I can sync my Storm with iTunes, so your premise about iTunes robbing VZW of revenue doesn’t really jive. As a matter of fact the Storm can be synced with several music services. So maybe it’s Apple that is keeping a tight hold of the revenue stream at the expense of user friendliness. Maybe that’s why you have to buy a new device if your battery is at end of life and the device is not… Revenue… The agreement that Verizon has with Rhapsody allows me to have unlimited downloads for $15 per month. Maybe with the money I save on music I can afford the $3 visual voice mail. There are tons of apps for RIM devices that can be downloaded that don’t generate any revenue for the carriers. And with the launch of the Storm I’m sure there will be a lot more. And your right, you don’t have to send the iPhone in to get the battery replaced. You just have to find one of the 15 Apple stores in the Great State of Texas. No problem if you live in Houston, Austin, or San Antonio. What about the rest of the population? The rest of the population has to send the device in and pay $80 plus, and if you need a loaner you pay even more. That’s ok if your talking about an iPod. Not so great if the device is a business tool that you rely on to make a living. That’s where Apple falls short and RIM shines… Business customers… The reason Verizon turned down Apple was that Verizon did not want to defer to Apple when a Verizon customer had an issue. Verizon customers expect Verizon to stand behind the products and services they sell. Not throw up their hands and tell them to call Apple. How customer friendly is that? And I’m sure Verizn wanted no part of the huge subsidies ATT is eating. Take a look at them. And finally, as for Wifi if Verizon had as small a 3G network as ATT I would be crying about no WiFi as well. I agree with you E. Verizon does have the better network and a device is only as good as the network it’s on.

By: E

Tue, 25 Nov 2008 23:55:16 +0000

What Tom says. I too almost laughed out loud when I read the comments about the reasons Verizon turned down Apple. Verizon turned down Apple SPECIFICALLY because Apple wanted to put the features they wanted to in the phone, and Verizon wanted to keep tight reign over their revenue stream, even at the expense of user friendliness. We can see where that is getting them with no WiFi (that was NOT RIMs choice).
Verizon may have the better network, but they lose me with their continuing crippling of phones. This has always been the case with Verizon, and has not changed even with the introduction of the iPhone and the G1.

By: Tom Reestman

Tom Reestman — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 23:41:17 +0000

James,

Whoa! What I countered was your statement that you had to “send the phone in” to get the battery replaced. Clearly, you don’t.

The visual voice-mail feature from Verizon is $3 a month. Of course, I guess you could argue that you SAVE $3 a month if you don’t want it…

As for pictures, music, ringtones, etc., the iTunes ecosystem would all but eliminate Verizon getting anyone to bite on their Vcast service, and they know it.

Knock yourself out with the last word, if you want. I think RIM is a fine company, but that Verizon is being dragged into the modern age of carriers wailing every step the way.

By: James Petrich

James Petrich — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 22:28:44 +0000

Tom- Are you kidding me? Your not going to say that the fact that you have to schedule an appointment (at a store if one is close to you) to get your device replaced when you need a new battery is not valid(they don’t replace the battery they exhange the device, call the store, I did). I guess next your going to say that complaining about the fact that if your iPhone is 1 year and 1 day old and no longer under warranty that you have to buy a new device at $200 + is forward thinking and just what the enterprise customer is looking for when all they need is a battery. As I said before Apple raised the bar with this “consumer” device. But they shouldn’t break their arm patting themselves on the back. There are a lot of things other manufactures have been doing well for years RIM being one of them. Apple could take some notes from what other manufacturers are doing well and make the iPhone even better. After all they have had plenty of time to get it right. I’ll stick with a device manufacturer that understands the “enterprise” customer. When I need a new battery for my device I’ll call my wireless administrator and he will give me one, even if my device is two years old. No appointment, no paying $200+ for a new device. $3 dollars a month for voice mail? What are you talking about? Hard to load pictures? Hard to load music? Stick with Apple that’s what you know.

By: Tom Reestman

Tom Reestman — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:39:17 +0000

Lots of interesting comments here. Just to reply to a few…

“I have seen MUCH criticism over the exclusion of WiFi”

True, and I should have been clearer. What I meant is that RIM and Verizon aren’t really called on it. I see a sentence or two saying that it’s bad, and then they move on.

I feel so strongly about WiFi on these high-end devices that it’s the subject of another article coming soon.

KenC,

“Honestly, is James getting paid by BB”

James is a big boy and doesn’t need anybody defending him, but I’ve been reading jkOnTheRun for about 8 months and, to me, the thought of them being on the BB payroll is silly.

Rutger,

“Tell me. If Apple didn’t have an iPhone, would you write the article the same way?”

Um, the entire premise of the article is that Apple’s iPhone PAVED THE WAY for the Storm. Obviously, if there was no iPhone, there would be no article. Of course, as I’ve already argued, there would be no Storm, either.

James,

Opinions vary, and yours are as good as mine, but I couldn’t disagree more with your comments.

“But enterprise customer’s want a device that gives them the security of a Blackberry.”

All RIM can possibly use to defend their complicated method for getting Exchange email is the “security” buzzword. The idea that putting everything below between the user and his email somehow makes it MORE secure is absurd:

- Dedicated hardware and a proprietary OS
- Legions of administrators and support people
- An entire Network Operations Center!
- The attendant processes, components, and employees of said data center.

Any rational person would see the above as further potential points of failure in the chain, and the latter item especially is an INCREASED opportunity for security breaching.

Bottom line is a few years you needed RIM’s complicated setup just to get the job done. They walked in and took business that could have been Microsoft’s and I admire them for it. But, MS has responded and ActiveSync gets better all the time. The idea that all the above makes it more secure is laughable in my opinion.

“One huge flaw is that you have to send the phone in if you have a battery issue.”

That’s news to me. Go to an Apple store, they put in a new one. These battery arguments are as valid as those for the iPod.

“Those kinds of issues along with many other issues in which Apple gets between the customer and the carrier (ATT)is the reason Verizon turned Apple down when they came calling with the iPhone.”

This almost made me spew coffee on my iPhone.

Verizon turned down the iPhone because it had WiFi (notice the Storm does not), and also made it too easy for a user to load their own pictures, music, ringtones, etc. Verizon did not and still does not like that sort of thing, and are moving as slowly as possible in changing that backward attitude. You will stay on their network, thank you very much, and pay them $3 a month for voice mail, etc.

By: James Petrich

James Petrich — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:11:53 +0000

E- Unlimited Global email on the BlackBerry with Verizon is $64.99. And works in over 175 global destinations. We all know WiFi is not free everywhere you go. Enterprise customer’s are concerned about security. That’s one of the major reasons the iPhone is not being adopted in the enterprise space the way it is in the consumer space. It’s a consumer product, and a great one. But enterprise customer’s want a device that gives them the security of a Blackberry. If they can get that security with a device that gives them a robust touch screen platform then they will. Give me a break. Apple has raised the bar no doubt. But there are basic flaws in the device. One huge flaw is that you have to send the phone in if you have a battery issue. And you have to pay for a loaner while it’s being fixed. That’s not going to fly in the entrprise space. Those kinds of issues along with many other issues in which Apple gets between the customer and the carrier (ATT)is the reason Verizon turned Apple down when they came calling with the iPhone.

By: Trevor Caswell

Trevor Caswell — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 13:56:21 +0000

“Tell me. If Apple didn’t have an iPhone, would you write the article the same way? Would you write an article about Blackberry Storm at all”

No, he wouldn’t, because it wouldn’t exist.

And James Kendrick’s assertion that the Storm isn’t going head to head with the iPhone is one of the most fatuous and/or disingenuous I’ve read in a long time.

By: Rutger Blom

Rutger Blom — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 13:09:49 +0000

It is hardly surprising that somebody writing for The Apple Blog is not too enthusiastic about Blackberry’s products. Tell me. If Apple didn’t have an iPhone, would you write the article the same way? Would you write an article about Blackberry Storm at all?

By: mike

mike — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:00:29 +0000

Can we all agree to disagree?

By: How the iPhone Should Have Made the Blackberry Storm Launch Easier … | IPHONE NEWS

Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:35:38 +0000

[...] is the example post: How the iPhone Should Have Made the Blackberry Storm Launch Easier … Leave a comment Comment RSS Previous: First Look: Guitar Rock Tour for iPhone Next: [...]

By: KenC

KenC — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 05:38:43 +0000

I’m glad Tom got in the final word, cause I couldn’t believe that James threw out that strawman, where he said, “to call it a failure is premature”!!!

Honestly, is James getting paid by BB, because he sure seems to have drunk the koolaid, if Tom’s well-reasoned argument why the Storm is a direct response to Apple’s iPhone doesn’t sway him. Tom’s exactly right, the Bold is a fine BB, the Storm’s only reason for being is to satisfy some marketing wonk at BB and Verizon.

By: Newt

Newt — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 03:58:42 +0000

I wish we had the Verizon network for the iPhone.

That would be the best of all worlds. AT&T is awful.

By: Tom Reestman

Tom Reestman — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 22:18:55 +0000

James,

Fair enough. However, I’d like to point out that I did not call it a failure. :-)

By: E

Mon, 24 Nov 2008 22:17:24 +0000

Tom, I agree with you – however, I have seen MUCH criticism over the exclusion of WiFi. It is actually the most criticized aspect.
I do agree with you that the Storm was brought out by BB AND VZ specifically to stem the exodus to the iPhone.
So James K, I disagree with you on that point. James P, I disagree on international travel, unless it is all business. Roaming charges are insane for data, and having no WiFi, while you can still use the phone internationally, most people will turn off that functionality for fear of insane charges and not be able to resort to WiFi when available. If your work is willing to pay those exorbitant fees, then your work is not thinking about the current economic crisis.

By: James Kendrick

James Kendrick — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:35:08 +0000

Tom, we’ll have to agree to disagree. I firmly believe that all RIM and Verizon wanted with the Storm was to provide a Blackberry with a large screen for multimedia and web browsing and that’s what they’ve done. It already looks like a huge seller for Verizon and RIM so to call it a failure is premature I believe. Sure every competitor would like to “dethrone” the competition but the market is big enough for all of them.