Verizon Wireless to Release Specs for 'Any Device' Initiative
I just don't see it
Why would a manufacturer go through all the trouble to engineer a device that works on a specific network if that network operator won't support it or, more importantly, help distribute/sell said device.
It's not like a HTC Hermes that could be used on multiple networks around the world (and i suspect even that sold better through carrier partners than it sold directly through HTC)
Still, it's a step in the right direction.
It's not like a HTC Hermes that could be used on multiple networks around the world (and i suspect even that sold better through carrier partners than it sold directly through HTC)
Still, it's a step in the right direction.
The two main reasons for the move are:
1. - to thwart the idea in consumers minds that verizon is just a big company with its rules and greed. It was this idea that has been trancended to the wireless device knowledge of the consumers. The know t...
(continues)
1. - to thwart the idea in consumers minds that verizon is just a big company with its rules and greed. It was this idea that has been trancended to the wireless device knowledge of the consumers. The know t...
(continues)
...
There are two upsides to this situation: consumer power and advanced devices. PDA devices should work pretty much the same no matter what network they're on, so if someone wants the Palm Centro on Verizon, they can use it, and VZW gets to pocket the...
(continues)
(continues)
...
Brilliant! Verizon dictates rules for "open network"
A great marketing move... but in reality this is like Microsoft determining the rules for open source software (OSS).
All Verizon has to do is:
Rule #1: Thus shalt not set the MSL to anything other than 000000, and all Sprint phones are now declared "Not suitable for Open Networks(tm)".
If the CDMA carriers were *really* serious, they would all sit at the same table (at least Verizon, Sprint and Alltel), with the same voting rights and hammer out a true inter-carrier agreement for interoperability for BOTH voice and DATA.
As it is, its all marketing/public perception (deception) manipulation...
All Verizon has to do is:
Rule #1: Thus shalt not set the MSL to anything other than 000000, and all Sprint phones are now declared "Not suitable for Open Networks(tm)".
If the CDMA carriers were *really* serious, they would all sit at the same table (at least Verizon, Sprint and Alltel), with the same voting rights and hammer out a true inter-carrier agreement for interoperability for BOTH voice and DATA.
As it is, its all marketing/public perception (deception) manipulation...
I don't think it's quite that 1984- and anouncing an open network is not the same as announcing a network without rules and guidelines. You can plug any manufacturer's phone into a landline jack, but without meeting the minimum specs to operate on th...
(continues)
(continues)
...
Its simple, really... (just a public positioning move)
Ok, so Verizon publishes this set of rules and protocols for its CDMA network... now ?
- Does anyone really think that Sprint will start spec'ing its devices to conform to Verizon's rules ? (no)
- Does Verizon think that Sprint will start to follow these rules that Verizon unilaterally dictated ? (no)
- When Sprint contracts manufacturer X to build a new device, is it going to ignore Sprint (its customer) and build according to these rules instead ? (no)
- (re: its not the handset argument) For any company that wants to build a device to work on Verizon's network (e.g. like Amazon's Kindle that works off of Sprint's network), is this set of rules really going to tell them something that they wouldn't have already normally had access to...
(continues)
- Does anyone really think that Sprint will start spec'ing its devices to conform to Verizon's rules ? (no)
- Does Verizon think that Sprint will start to follow these rules that Verizon unilaterally dictated ? (no)
- When Sprint contracts manufacturer X to build a new device, is it going to ignore Sprint (its customer) and build according to these rules instead ? (no)
- (re: its not the handset argument) For any company that wants to build a device to work on Verizon's network (e.g. like Amazon's Kindle that works off of Sprint's network), is this set of rules really going to tell them something that they wouldn't have already normally had access to...
(continues)
its not about handsets!
This isn't about handsets.
This isn't about handsets.
It's not about handsets.
Think about the all of the portable devices that would benefit if they were running on-line all the time.
I'll get you started on the right track-
portable gaming devices- next gen "PSP type device" with revA (and LTE coming soon) connectivity.
here's a better one- onstar on performance enhancing drugs....internet on your dash.
it's not about the phone.
This isn't about handsets.
It's not about handsets.
Think about the all of the portable devices that would benefit if they were running on-line all the time.
I'll get you started on the right track-
portable gaming devices- next gen "PSP type device" with revA (and LTE coming soon) connectivity.
here's a better one- onstar on performance enhancing drugs....internet on your dash.
it's not about the phone.
