Lord loves a workin' man; don't trust Whitey; see a doctor and get rid of it.

Bullshiat.

FTFA: ""What has been holding Apple back from becoming a wireless provider already, according to Bluestein, are the enormous handset subsidies paid by mobile operators (AT&T, VZW and Sprint in the US), which amount to about $381 for each iPhone sold today,"

Yeah, that and a COMPLETE LACK OF WIRELESS INFRASTRUCTURE.

Moran.

I'll believe it when the stylish towers are in place. A national mobile network is no joke. It's an extremely ambitious project and you can't really charge a premium for design.

I'd imagine they'd have to gobble up the likes of T-Mobiles or Sprint in order to get the necessary spectrum, towers, etc. Getting into the national carrier buisness isn't exactly thing you do over a weekend.

I'd love to see this, in order to knock the carriers in-line (looking at you AT&T) but I see it as little more than hit whoring from the author.

A complete lack of wireless infrastructure is not a major problem when you have everything else you need and enough cash to fill a small planet.

Someone is smoking something... I don't see it happening.

B-b-b-but they dont have a network!!!!

Not many carriers do. Most towers are owned and operated by behind the scenes companies, they merely lease access to people like Verizon.

This could potentially work out well for apple, and fits right in with their aggressive approach to proprietary everything.

Oh, that'd be funny. Apple buys T-Mobile and then... off they go!

But, it would mean that all the other carriers would drop Apple. Is that really a good idea, Apple?

Can I please have an unlimited data plan that doesn't cost an arm and a leg now?

Stabone33: Yeah, that and a COMPLETE LACK OF WIRELESS INFRASTRUCTURE.

Well, it'll be slightly easier since they don't need 4G.

Begun, the clone wars have ...

/Sorry

The only thing Apple is going to crush is Steve Jobs' dream for the second and final time.

Oh, and Apple has over a hundred ten BILLION dollars in CASH just sitting around.

They could literally buy Verizon Wireless in cash if they wanted to.

They'll charge 50% more than other providers, but they'll have the prettiest towers ever!

A complete lack of wireless infrastructure is not a major problem when you have everything else you need and enough cash to fill a small planet.

Well, then they'll need all that cash to invent a farking time machine or buy all of China's slaves to install the infrastructure. You don't just throw those things up across the continent overnight.

Vertical

Integration

I found the other article, about no contract iphones interesting as well. Things could get fun to watch, if apple can pull this off. Gonna need a lot of popcorn.

I think this piece only came out because there was mention earlier in the week about Google wanting to access bandwidth and someone suggested they wanted to become their own carrier. I think they need to interview better industry strategists.

Sign me up. Both AT&T and Verizon are crap. One sucks for billing, the other sucks for coverage. At least when I call Apple for a problem, a human answers the phone, and they speak my language.

Stabone33: A complete lack of wireless infrastructure is not a major problem when you have everything else you need and enough cash to fill a small planet.

Well, then they'll need all that cash to invent a farking time machine or buy all of China's slaves to install the infrastructure. You don't just throw those things up across the continent overnight.

You don't need to build new towers.

Oh, and Apple has over a hundred ten BILLION dollars in CASH just sitting around.

They could literally buy Verizon Wireless in cash if they wanted to.

And then they would have no cash. And it would take years of hostile takeover lawsuits and antitrust litigation before it could happen, so....

It ain't gonna happen.

Good...maybe now with the bandwidth hogs gone carriers will stop throttling our bandwidth.

Wishful thinking.

lanciepants: I'd imagine they'd have to gobble up the likes of T-Mobiles or Sprint in order to get the necessary spectrum, towers, etc. Getting into the national carrier buisness isn't exactly thing you do over a weekend.

I'd love to see this, in order to knock the carriers in-line (looking at you AT&T) but I see it as little more than hit whoring from the author.

This only works IF Apple doesn't overcharge like they are want to do with their hardware. I'm also curious how this might play into anti-trust laws. Also will the carrier be able to carry non Apple devices?

Mind you, Epstein has been an iShill for years, but claiming "Core Competency" as a reason why this can work for Apple and not Google is a sign of using buzzwords to make yourself seem knowledgeable.

The reason why this will work, however, is the Cult of Apple that would call AT&T;'s network "Fast and subtly elegant" if it were Apple-branded.

Only way this would happen is if AAPL bought T-Mo.

But then again, the same source "reported" that there would be two iPhones coming out last October and that Sprint would have an exclusive on the newer model.

BGR is not a trustworthy source of info.

The analyst's name is "Whitey Bluestein"?

Really?

This article is a pathetic May Fool's joke.

Remember, this guy was talking at an MVNO conference. You don't need your own network anymore. You can rent network wholesale.

There was a rumor that Apple was considering this before the iPhone launch. Remember, only Cingular was willing to take a chance on the iPhone...nobody else wanted to touch it.

Realistically speaking, Apple uses the carriers as MVNOs anyway, so it would be pointless for Apple to run its own network. It's a lot more work, for not a lot more return. In a world without carrier subsidies it may make sense. Imagine: unlimited music and movie streaming via iTunes match from wherever you are. You'd only pay for data outside of Apple's network. Since you're already in the ecosystem, why not go deeper?

hbomb1129: This only works IF Apple doesn't overcharge like they are want to do with their hardware

That's adorable.

Unlike Samsung, Microsoft, Google, etc, Apple has a research and development budget.

Zion21: Can I please have an unlimited data plan that doesn't cost an arm and a leg now?

Probably. Apple is well-known for reasonable prices. Especially for deliberately undercutting competitor's prices.

Stabone33: A complete lack of wireless infrastructure is not a major problem when you have everything else you need and enough cash to fill a small planet.

Well, then they'll need all that cash to invent a farking time machine or buy all of China's slaves to install the infrastructure. You don't just throw those things up across the continent overnight.

You have no idea how any of this works, do you?

Am I the only one happy with my provider? (sprint)

I know the iPhone sells well, but does it sell well enough justifying their own network?

/What you think they'd service competing handsets?
//Maybe if mandated

Alonjar: B-b-b-but they dont have a network!!!!

Not many carriers do. Most towers are owned and operated by behind the scenes companies, they merely lease access to people like Verizon.

This could potentially work out well for apple, and fits right in with their aggressive approach to proprietary everything.

And those providers are going to be mighty pissed off if Apple pulls the iPhone from their ranks of offerings and will likely tell those providers that you can either retain our business, which has has been sustainable and successful for over a decade, or you can go with their startup.

Alonjar: B-b-b-but they dont have a network!!!!

Not many carriers do. Most towers are owned and operated by behind the scenes companies, they merely lease access to people like Verizon.

This could potentially work out well for apple, and fits right in with their aggressive approach to proprietary everything.

Verizon and other carriers owns their towers.
http://www.cellreception.com/towers/t owers.php?city=dallas&state_abr= t x&filter_verizon=1

ElPollotonto: Am I the only one happy with my provider? (sprint)

No. I'm pretty happy with your provider as well. :)

They have enough cash and equity that they could buy a controlling share in an existing carrier. Operating a wireless phone network requires a huge capital investment and expertise in an industry where they have no direct experience.

I could see Apple hooking it's Cult Members fan-base to pay a premium for bragging rights along the lines of "Well, MY signal goes through THAT!... So there!"

Current mobile carriers will not wholesale enough bandwidth to make the economics work in the US. This is the barrier to the MVNO model, particularly where 3G data capacity utilization is high. Why sell wholesale when you can sell retail?

Lightsquared was going to wholesale data capacity to MVNO's, but they are shut down. Sprint network? Maybe... T-MO? Why would Deutsche Telecom let Apple get more in the game.

steelkidney: ElPollotonto: Am I the only one happy with my provider? (sprint)

No. I'm pretty happy with your provider as well. :)

Third.

So how the hell is it that I keep on hearing about them tanking?

Stabone33: A complete lack of wireless infrastructure is not a major problem when you have everything else you need and enough cash to fill a small planet.

Well, then they'll need all that cash to invent a farking time machine or buy all of China's slaves to install the infrastructure. You don't just throw those things up across the continent overnight.

You don't need to build new towers.

And leasing capacity on existing networks would make for better service how? The high data use that iPhones drive would still be going through the same access points, but via one carrier instead of two or three, depending on the standard they choose. Either way, the cell networks today are at capacity, so consumers won't notice a difference.

In fact, it might make it worse, because then all iPhone and iPad users get crammed onto one network, constantly streaming from their iTunes Cloud and asking Siri stupid questions and FaceTiming and all that crap.

No, Apple doesn't have the juice for that. And they couldn't keep that kind of development project under wraps if they did.

Skarekrough: steelkidney: ElPollotonto: Am I the only one happy with my provider? (sprint)

No. I'm pretty happy with your provider as well. :)

Third.

So how the hell is it that I keep on hearing about them tanking?

Because we're the only three people that like them.

They will have to rent tower bandwidth from carriers, it would be funny to see AT&T and VZW rape them like Apple has been doing with the iPhone to the carriers.

I call cell phone towers: progress trees.

/what are we talking about?

lanciepants: I'd imagine they'd have to gobble up the likes of T-Mobiles or Sprint in order to get the necessary spectrum, towers, etc. Getting into the national carrier buisness isn't exactly thing you do over a weekend.

I'd love to see this, in order to knock the carriers in-line (looking at you AT&T) but I see it as little more than hit whoring from the author.

I'd like to see a new competitor take on the other carriers, but not Apple. They're draconian enough in their EULAs and making hardware obsolete in a short time frame that I have no desire for them to get MORE power over consumers. Tentatively I'd support Google, although I'd rather they get their dang fiber optic internet thing in place first. Verizon might be evil but in six years they've only kinda screwed me once, and I'm still not 100% sure what happened in that incident.

Giggle. Just figuring this out now, eh lads?

The pervasive industry-wide feeling that Apple is always either several steps ahead or perennially planning some deep dark world takeover is mitigated by... paying attention.

Huck Chaser: Stabone33: Yeah, that and a COMPLETE LACK OF WIRELESS INFRASTRUCTURE.

Well, it'll be slightly easier since they don't need 4G.

Alonjar: Oh, and Apple has over a hundred ten BILLION dollars in CASH just sitting around.

Enron had that much about a month before they went bankrupt. They were hemorrhaging 600 million in cash per day at the end.

Good luck with that, guys

Nightsweat: I'll believe it when the stylish towers are in place. A national mobile network is no joke. It's an extremely ambitious project and you can't really charge a premium for design.

Alternately, since Apple's never given a shiat about your privacy and been doing the iPhone thing for several years, they've probably got a very good idea of where to drop their data towers to save them the most money with the least investment. Usage statistics are the least of the data they have on their customers' patterns, they could fairly easily start small (well, relatively) and save money covering certain neighborhoods without even charging for it.

"making hardware obsolete in a short time frame"

Not sure where that's coming from. I just sold my macbook that was introduced in 11/06 - still works great. I've got two mini's that are the same generation (core duo) chugging away as media servers. Even my original iPhone and 3G are working great.

I fact, I can take that original iPhone and sell it on eBay for $60, which is a great price for a 5 year old cellphone.

In fact, most of Apple's hardware lasts for a ridiculously long time, and has great resale value. The same can't be said for most computers/devices.