Comments on: Apple, AT&T: Bosom buddies or odd couple?

The corporate pair that launched the iPhone shares much in common. They also have plenty of conflicts as they push competing digital music businesses.

[calpundit]

Last line of piece

"I haven't seen a deal yet where Apple hasn't come out of it
smelling like roses and its partners have had to bear the brunt."

Umm ... I'd say Apple wound up on the short end of the stick
when it partnered with Microsoft on software development lo
those many years ago. Microsoft wound up stealing its OS and
taking over the world. Apple came within a hair's breath of going
under.

A little sense of history might have tempered that particular
comment.

[iJak]

We have to look at the bottom line.

Not just monetarily, but intrinsic worth. And we have to talk
about that. ... Not just the surface of squabbles, nor the leagal
bull lort that people throw around, but what the two companies
do for us.

Whose future is more important to us?

NBC, and their ilk, that make entertaining wastes of time. Not
only do they want to charge you to see it, they want to rent it to
you for the rest of your life, where you pay by month, forever?

Or. ...

Apple, and their ilk, that create real products, real tools. Things
we can use to make money, create things of our own?

I think people should know what the stakes in setting up a battle
are. ...

And, I think c/net, and their ilk, need to come down on the side
of people. Come down on our side, and really show what the
differing sides mean to our future.

[nicmart]

The feel-good company

AT&T is just too touchy-feely for this relationship to last. When you
think AT&T, you think happy face.

[thomasdosborneii]

Are You Kidding?

Whenever I think of AT&T, I think of Evil Empire. Don't forget,
AT&T is really Cingular (pure evil). It is because of iPhone being
chained to Cingular (now AT&T), I would never touch it no matter
how wonderful it might be.

[escaport]

Here's one

"The bottom line is that Apple is not a good partner," said
Yankee Group's Goodman. "They have tremendous products and
marketing. But if you're a partner, you'd better put your hand on
your wallet. I haven't seen a deal yet where Apple hasn't come
out of it smelling like roses and its partners have had to bear the
brunt."

How about the Microsoft-Apple partnership in '98 through '03?
Microsoft invested $150M in Apple and guaranteed Microsoft
Office development on Mac for 5 years. Apple in turn dropped a
lawsuit against MS for copy-write infringement for Windows and
some of the code in Win Media Player. Apple was helped out at a
time they needed it, and Microsoft made a huge profit from their
$150M stock and every copy of MS Office they sold. From what I
hear Microsoft came out on the better end on $1B in that deal.
Sounds like a good partnership deal to me.

[cincytee]

The real winner

Microsoft was inarguably the short-term winner, but the bottom
line is that, with the gurantee of Office availability and a cash
infusion, it allowed Apple the breathing room to enact a long-
term plan whose fruits it is harvesting today. A strategic
retrenchment. In the longer term, which company would you
rather be: Microsoft, whose Windows/Office cash cows are
looking more every day like the golden cage -- like the original
AT&T's long-distance business -- or Apple, which has
succeeded at diversifying into new businesses it has helped
create?

[Nodack]

Partner

To be short. Gates worked at Apple early on and stole everything
he could get his hand on and started Windows. Not a very nice
thing to do, but business is business right? Gates was so
successful that Windows became so dominant that when Apple
was almost out of business Gates bailed them out with the 150
million to assure Apple stayed in business so that Microsoft
wouldn't be considered a monopoly. Gates didn't give money to
Apple because he was a nice guy and wanted to help out his
competition. He just needed to competition to stay in business.

[mvpcarl]

Envy of the Wireless Industry?

"AT&T's exclusive deal to sell Apple's iPhone for use on its network in the United States has been the envy of the wireless industry for more than nine months."

Didn't the author read all the reports of EVERY OTHER cell phone company turning down Apple because they wanted too much control over their product. After AT&T accepting the deal with Apple, the other major carriers in the US are more likely to feel pity for ATT, not envy. AT&T has to pay Apple a piece of every iPhone's monthly service. You don't see Motorola, Palm, HTC, Samsung, or any other phone maker demanding a kick back from the monthly service do you? That, along with other reasons, is why all other carriers denied to host the Apple iPhone.

[oxtail01]

so what's your point?

Are you saying AT&T made a mistake? I don't think so!

[thomasdosborneii]

You are right

Yeah, I laughed at the "envy" line!

[georgiarat]

AT&T/BellSouth

I heard that the deal was cut between BellSouth (Cingular Wireless)
and Apple and that AT&T had to go along with the deal in the
acquisition of BellSouth. I bet if Apple had to deal with AT&T back
then we would not have the freedom on the iPhone that exists
now for bluetooth, file transfer, etc.

[cincytee]

AT&T/BellSouth

Don't be confused by the AT&T name. Bell South bought what
was left of AT&T and took its name because of its worldwide
recognition. AT&T had to go along with the deal because it *is*
Bell South,

[K.P.C.]

AT&T the Big winner and also the BIGGER loser here

a MILLION phones (some currenent but many if not mostly new customers) in only 74 days!

WOW!

What cellular provider (CEO) wouldn't voluntarily have it's eye teeth pulled for such a massive influx of
users?
No single phone has ever reached such a large market in so short a time.

Here's the kicker though . . .
Even though the majority of reviews on the iPhone have been favorable (gleeming) with only a few "poo
poo's" from people who rely on uncompatable MS products (whose fault is that?) on their "smart" phones
. . .

The VAST majority of bad press on the iPhone has focused on AT&T . . .
Unable to activate when they purchased the phone . . .
Screwed up billing practices . . .
Did I see story about a $3000 phone bill for someone who took their phone to Europe with them . . .
roaming charges for auto email checks?

Look at the story line:
Apple, AT&T: Bosom buddies or odd couple?

When the iPhone was released everytime I saw an iPhone related story on c/net I also saw . . .
right over there > > >

And ad for the new "AT&T Blackberry"
How f**king stupid is that?
Try to piggyback on iTunes success?
Nope . . . try to launch a competing music store that can't be played on the iPhone that they EXCLUSIVELY
sell!
(Can't be played because MS stopped supporting Mac OS "WMP/WMA" about 3 or 4 years ago)

I think AT&T is gonna take the bullet on this one . . .
Not because Apple screwed them but because they screwed themselves

[oxtail01]

bullshit article

AT&T knows better than wasting their time and effort chasing a business segment that's NOT in their main focus. AT&T is doing fine in spite of all your idiotic ranting and cussing and will continue to do so.

[MRMOAV]

If the phone companies where doing it right...

They would be in the number 3 spot like Apple is with their itunes
store. I've had 4 different music phones and the experience is
terrible. Even today nothing comes close to the Iphone experience,
nothing. Try putting an MP3 onto a N75 or SYNC and then scrolling
through songs and shuffling songs and changing equalizers and
looking at album art. For 2X the price Verizon nor ATTs product is
even close when it comes to music.

[jhawk95]

Stop Lying! Nokia 300 Not first music phone

I owned the first MP3 music phone back in 2000. It came from Sprint and Samsung and was called the Uproar.

http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-SPHM100-Uproar-Phone-Sprint/dp/B00004YKVU

It held about 20 songs and was awesome for its time. You could be listening to music and when a call came in itlet you answer it.

I am sick of people forgetting that this phone ever existed.

[nmcphers]

Cingular's First!

It doesn't say THE first music phone.

[cyberspittle]

No odder than ...

I don't think they more odd than Microsoft & IBM or Bosom Buddies like IBM & Microsoft. ;)

[herkamur]

iPod touch not competition

Personally I would never buy an iPhone. I'm not interested in the convergence of a music player and phone and I'd rather use WiFi for internet. So, when the iPod touch was announced I found a device I was interested in and ordered one. So, in my case, there was no competition. I would suspect the same reaction from many other people.

[jhawk95]

iPhone is WiFi too... duh!

So you didn't like the iPhone because you like WiFi.... but the iPhone was the first Apple device to let you browse the internet using WiFi..... so I don't get your point.

Why carry an extra phone when the iPhone can do it all... it does EVERYTHING the iPod Touch does and more.....

[Nodack]

Waa?

I agree, why would anybody be interested in one small device that
does everything when you can buy several different devices and
carry them all around with you.

If you prefer WiFi you could always turn on that feature in the
iPhone since it does come with it built in. It even looks for WiFi
when you come in range of one and asks you if you want to join.

Silly hekamur

[PostNoComments]

Apple/AT&T deal was shortsided

Apple made a huge mistake making the deal with AT&T. Remember
when the iPod was Mac only? How many did they sell? By limiting
consumers to which platform their toy played, Apple almost missed
the iPod taking off at all. In just months there was a Windows
compatible iPod and the rest is history. Consumers are stating very
clearly they want the iPhone in the network of their choice. Apple
obviously didn't learned a thing from the iPod launch.

[AlienEric]

iPhone is cool

I bought mine from http://www.iphone-singapore.com/ and so far, it's attracting so much attention from people. People so far away are looking at what I'm carrying, absolutely awesome.