5 ms·

This is very close to a previous article blaming Google for turning us back into the days of strong carrier control. (can't remember the link, but it was here o

by nanairo 16y ago

This is very close to a previous article blaming Google for turning us back into the days of strong carrier control. (can't remember the link, but it was here on HN). And I agree, though I don't think Google did it on purpose. Their main aim---I think---was just to avoid Apple (or Blackberry) becoming too powerful. They wanted to commoditise the smartphone market. And they have succeeded. And to me it doesn't look like the hardware manufacturers got a great deal either. It's turning into a cut-throat market, where all phones are pretty much identical (and interchangeable), and your revenues come from economy of scale. Basically like the PC market. Normally (e.g PC market) this would mean that the customer can shop for the best deal, which is great. However the "customer" here are the carriers: they buy from the manufacturers and resell to the real customer. And indeed they got all the power: they can ask this or that company to lock or modify the phone under threat of taking their business elsewhere. The real customer, however, is only dealing with the carriers, and Google hasn't commoditise these. If anything we are getting even more market concentration. So yeah, it seems to me to be pretty much what economics theory would suggest. The only alternative would to get an unlocked phone but then the manufacturer would lose the massive subsidise and most users seem to prefer those to the hassle of getting a closed system from their carriers.

ssp 16y ago
The real customer, however, is only dealing with the carriers, and Google hasn't commoditise these. If anything we are getting even more market concentration. Not yet, anyway. But the carriers have to be the next target. The huge capital requirements to build a network is their main barrier to entry, but that's unlikely to stop Google. I wonder if they realize this (they probably do), and if so, what they are going to about it.
- nanairo 16y ago
  I thought so too... but now I am not too convinced. Two reasons mostly: 1- Google abandoning the Nexus One 2- Google getting too friendly with Verizon I fear they've moved to plan B. :(
- oiuygtfrtghyju 16y ago
  Google don't want to be in the phone market - they want to be in the selling ads on search market. Their worry was a closed iPhone with an Apple only browser might go to an Apple/ATT only search page with Apple/ATT ads - or they might simply replace all the Google ads with their own before sending pages to the phone And once people accepted this on iPhone they might also accept it on all the other phones then on all the home cable connections - like BT/Phorn.
- jfno67 16y ago
  I don't think Google is ever going to be willing to enter the carrier business. Although they hinted 1 or 2 years ago to a system where the global carrier would lose most of there power. It was phones that would operate on unlicensed frequencies or locally licensed frequencies. The phone could register with what is locally available by having a GPS and a database of operators by locations. It was a neat idea and I could see Google pushing this as a standard to be implemented by different operators. Sadly, I can't find a reference to the post I saw back then. Google certainly doesn't seem to be pushing this solution currently.
ZeroGravitas 16y ago
Saying back into the days of strong carrier control assumes that you ever left those days behind in the U.S. Since the great white hope for this happening was the iPhone, which is still only available on one single carrier, this seems somewhat naive. Either Apple couldn't get any concessions from the other carriers or they accepted a big bag of cash to give one carrier an advantage over the others. Either way carriers are in control. All you get is a slightly different set of consumer hostile activities that affect different demographics. At best you could argue that Apple is demonstrating a better way to do things on the AT&T network and customer pressure will force other carriers to emulate (if/when allowed by whatever contract binds Apple and AT&T), but exactly the same could be said about Android. And similar could be argued across mobile OSes too e.g. with Android pressuring Apple into relaxing its arbitrary developer tool restrictions and iPhones showing a market for unbranded (by carriers at least) phones.
- nanairo 16y ago
  I am not sure I follow you. Apple's iPhone is still unique in its niche. Of course Android is commoditising the smartphone market, so if you are in the market for a smartphone then iPhone/Android/WebOS/etc... are all comparable. But if someone actually wants an iPhone or an Android in particular then the view is different. In that case the carrier can get any manufacturer to build what they want or they'll choose a different manufacturer for their Android phone. But you can't get the iPhone anywhere else than Apple. Apple does not need to bow to carrier pressure because they are the only game in town (if you want an iPhone, if you don't care about the OS then I agree with you).
  - ZeroGravitas 16y ago
    It sounds like you think there was (is?) a time when carriers in the U.S. had no power and the customer reigned supreme, but this only applied to people on AT&T who wanted an iPhone (and didn't want tethering or Skype over 3G for the first few years etc.) If Google have betrayed us all by destroying this tiny, short-lived, half-hearted, single-network, sub-national niche of telecoms utopia then I'm not sure I can bring myself to care, particularly if they've opened up various other niches in exchange.

by nanairo 16y ago

ssp 16y ago

The real customer, however, is only dealing with the carriers, and Google hasn't commoditise these. If anything we are getting even more market concentration. Not yet, anyway. But the carriers have to be the next target. The huge capital requirements to build a network is their main barrier to entry, but that's unlikely to stop Google. I wonder if they realize this (they probably do), and if so, what they are going to about it.

nanairo 16y ago
I thought so too... but now I am not too convinced. Two reasons mostly: 1- Google abandoning the Nexus One 2- Google getting too friendly with Verizon I fear they've moved to plan B. :(
oiuygtfrtghyju 16y ago
Google don't want to be in the phone market - they want to be in the selling ads on search market. Their worry was a closed iPhone with an Apple only browser might go to an Apple/ATT only search page with Apple/ATT ads - or they might simply replace all the Google ads with their own before sending pages to the phone And once people accepted this on iPhone they might also accept it on all the other phones then on all the home cable connections - like BT/Phorn.
jfno67 16y ago
I don't think Google is ever going to be willing to enter the carrier business. Although they hinted 1 or 2 years ago to a system where the global carrier would lose most of there power. It was phones that would operate on unlicensed frequencies or locally licensed frequencies. The phone could register with what is locally available by having a GPS and a database of operators by locations. It was a neat idea and I could see Google pushing this as a standard to be implemented by different operators. Sadly, I can't find a reference to the post I saw back then. Google certainly doesn't seem to be pushing this solution currently.

ZeroGravitas 16y ago

Saying back into the days of strong carrier control assumes that you ever left those days behind in the U.S. Since the great white hope for this happening was the iPhone, which is still only available on one single carrier, this seems somewhat naive. Either Apple couldn't get any concessions from the other carriers or they accepted a big bag of cash to give one carrier an advantage over the others. Either way carriers are in control. All you get is a slightly different set of consumer hostile activities that affect different demographics. At best you could argue that Apple is demonstrating a better way to do things on the AT&T network and customer pressure will force other carriers to emulate (if/when allowed by whatever contract binds Apple and AT&T), but exactly the same could be said about Android. And similar could be argued across mobile OSes too e.g. with Android pressuring Apple into relaxing its arbitrary developer tool restrictions and iPhones showing a market for unbranded (by carriers at least) phones.

nanairo 16y ago
I am not sure I follow you. Apple's iPhone is still unique in its niche. Of course Android is commoditising the smartphone market, so if you are in the market for a smartphone then iPhone/Android/WebOS/etc... are all comparable. But if someone actually wants an iPhone or an Android in particular then the view is different. In that case the carrier can get any manufacturer to build what they want or they'll choose a different manufacturer for their Android phone. But you can't get the iPhone anywhere else than Apple. Apple does not need to bow to carrier pressure because they are the only game in town (if you want an iPhone, if you don't care about the OS then I agree with you).
- ZeroGravitas 16y ago
  It sounds like you think there was (is?) a time when carriers in the U.S. had no power and the customer reigned supreme, but this only applied to people on AT&T who wanted an iPhone (and didn't want tethering or Skype over 3G for the first few years etc.) If Google have betrayed us all by destroying this tiny, short-lived, half-hearted, single-network, sub-national niche of telecoms utopia then I'm not sure I can bring myself to care, particularly if they've opened up various other niches in exchange.