The clock is ticking to the release of the Droid, and its smaller brother the Droid Eris, this Friday from Verizon. The media is filled with rhetoric drawing comparisons between the Droid and the iPhone. Those stories miss the point that the real battle isn't between the Droid and the iPhone, but between Verizon and AT&T. AT&T has faced a fairly steady stream of complaints from customers--the majority of those complaints coming from the dedicated legions of iPhone users. There have been complaints that the battery can't be replaced, complaints that the data service is slow, complaints that 3G access is dysfunctional, complaints that the device couldn't do MMS messaging, and more. AT&T and Apple have also been the focus of controversy related to rejecting the Google Voice app, and trying to block third-party VoIP solutions. iPhone users love their iPhones, but they aren't quite as dedicated to the wireless provider the iPhone is tied to. Verizon seems to be the number one wireless carrier in the country for a reason. It has a better quality network and higher customer satisfaction, and it is capitalizing on those attributes in its marketing. In preparation for the Droid launch, Verizon has two clever campaigns. The iDon't ad campaign is aimed at spotlighting the deficiencies in the iPhone and highlighting the fact that Droid has those capabilities. The other campaign plays off of Apple's "There's an app for that" iPhone campaign to compare maps of the 3G coverage of Verizon vs. AT&T. Do you want to know why you can't find a 3G connection with AT&T? There's a map for that.
The iPhone has a great framework that has been crippled by the same "control"
mindset that kept iPhone from the Verizon network in the first place. If
you remember the history of the iPhone - Apple first approached Verizon to be
the first carrier for this new product and were flat rejected. Verizon was
not about to open their network to third party applications that could
potentially suck revenue that the carrier wanted control over.
Now Google's new operating system does Apple one better and Verizon has
figured out that the loss of customers to the features and applications of the
iPhone is far more costly that opening up their network.
Regardless of which carrier you use i.e. AT&T or Verizon (assuming most
anyone has now dropped T-Mobile for the
extended outage and Sprint's coverage and service are so bad they don't even
warrant a Verizon Map campaign). We need a
National Broadband Strategy - just take a look at the success of DoCoMo in Japan where the carrier is a
wireless carrier - third party applications and the associated revenues belong
the the Application sector not the carrier.
Could you imagine if all of the power utilities charged a different price for
power depending on what amount of revenue you could generate for your business?
Our Broadband must be an "Essential Utility" where we must separate the carriers "Regulated Duties" from what should be a open and
competitive application arena - where innovation can not be restricted. Mark Hewitt Broadband 2.0
The iPhone has a great framework that has been crippled by the same "control"
mindset that kept iPhone from the Verizon network in the first place. If
you remember the history of the iPhone - Apple first approached Verizon to be
the first carrier for this new product and were flat rejected. Verizon was
not about to open their network to third party applications that could
potentially suck revenue that the carrier wanted control over.
Now Google's new operating system does Apple one better and Verizon has
figured out that the loss of customers to the features and applications of the
iPhone is far more costly that opening up their network.
Regardless of which carrier you use i.e. AT&T or Verizon (assuming most
anyone has now dropped T-Mobile for the
extended outage and Sprint's coverage and service are so bad they don't even
warrant a Verizon Map campaign). We need a
National Broadband Strategy - just take a look at the success of
DoCoMo in Japan where the carrier is a
wireless carrier - third party applications and the associated revenues belong
the the Application sector not the carrier.
Could you imagine if all of the power utilities charged a different price for
power depending on what amount of revenue you could generate for your business?
Our Broadband must be an "Essential Utility" where we must separate the carriers "Regulated Duties" from what should be a open and
competitive application arena - where innovation can not be restricted.
Mark Hewitt
Broadband 2.0