[psmith2.0]

Seems like they're definitely going to be sold there, that's pretty solid. What's interesting is the rumor of a $99 4GB model, which, let's face it, would sell like crazy.

I've got the original 4GB and still have 2.2GB of free space (and that's with 175 songs, 468 photos and 14 third-party apps). So I would imagine most people could make do with "only" 4GB (what do most other "smart phones" or modern camera/3G/flip-keyboard phones come with?).

Anyway, thought it was an interesting story. Would be awesome if it's true because I know three people (Dad, Mom, stepmom and sister) who'd all get one. They're all on AT&T anyway, and they're constantly cooing over my phone and talking about having one "but they're just so expensive".

[Maciej]

I don't care how cheap the phones get, their plans are too expensive. It's ridiculous, I rather pay a high price for my hardware than be ripped off on a monthly basis.

[psmith2.0]

What should the monthly charge be? I'm not paying much more ($20) for my iPhone than I was for my little Samsung flip-phone from 2004-2007...and believe me, the iPhone does about 50x more than that little silver plastic turd ever dreamed about!



I guess the 3G plans are higher, huh? I've forgotten all the numbers by now...I think they're $10 higher than the original iPhone, plus another $5 for the same amount of text messages that used to be included for $59?

[artesc]

eh? The phones now aren't that much more expensive. What's $200 vs. $99? One extra month of phone service, that's all. But I do see where you are coming from. There is a psychological barrier that many people have when dealing with the iPhone; they see it, they like it, then say "wtf, $200 for a phone?! (and that is subsidized) I can just go get a $50 phone from (insert phone company name.)" $99 puts it almost in the realm of impulse buying...if it weren't for that damn-expensive plan. That's why I don't have one, I'm not going to pay $100 a month to use the internet on the go (ok, ok, a lot more than that, but it is really the iPhone and Appole that are the capable parties here. There you have the hardware, the OS and the app store, what is ATT? Basically a connection to the internet.)

I really think that the monthly charge for Internet only should be $40. Voice plans start at $50. I know, unrealistic, but the phone companies are a rape.

[Maciej]

I don't think they offer that 20$ deal on 3G. If they did, or a 30$ deal I'd be all over it.

[PB PM]

Spending more than $100 a year for a phone service is too much, that is why I'll never use an iPhone. Considering rates here for iPhone use is $60 a month plus service fees and taxes, no way.

[psmith2.0]

"$100 a year" is too much?

People have to figure out what works for them, I guess. I know people with regular, button-laden phones that are a pain to use and they're paying over $60 for an Internet/e-mail experience that isn't 1/3 as nice, easy and efficient as it could be on an iPhone, so, for them, it might be worth a $10 bump or whatever.

The big, easy-to-use/see screen alone might be worth it to some.

[Maciej]

I wish it was easier to find information on AT&T's website. They make it so hard to find anything.

[PB PM]

Yes, $100 is too much for the service that is provided, IMO. All phone, cell or otherwise, services over charge for what you get from my point of view.

I have better things to spend my money on than some cell phone with internet service. I'm not an addict, I don't need access 24hours a day.

[kieran]

Originally Posted by Maciej I don't think they offer that 20$ deal on 3G. If they did, or a 30$ deal I'd be all over it.

The data plan on the 3G iPhone is $30. 200 texts are an extra $5.

The cheapest voice plan is $49.99 and then you tack on the data charges.

My last phone bill was $83.

I don't think that's that bad when it is my only phone and all of the extras that come with the iPhone.

Yes, it's expensive if you add it all up over the course of a year, but I really don't mind paying what I do for something that keeps me in contact with everyone all the time.

To each his own though...

[canyon_Carver]

I just got the 8GB on Black Friday...I was waiting to see if the $99 would hit for the xmas rush.

Anyway...if they need to do anything its to open the iphone up for COMPETITION. If more carriers offered it, it would dramatically be reduced.

[kieran]

Originally Posted by canyon_Carver I just got the 8GB on Black Friday...I was waiting to see if the $99 would hit for the xmas rush. Anyway...if they need to do anything its to open the iphone up for COMPETITION. If more carriers offered it, it would dramatically be reduced.

The only other carrier in the US that could offer ti would be T-Mobile. They are the only other GSM carrier in the US.

it's not that big of a deal to only have it on AT&T here. If someone wants it on T-Mobile so bad, pick up a 1st gen one and unlock it.

[psmith2.0]

Originally Posted by PB PM Yes, $100 is too much for the service that is provided, IMO. All phone, cell or otherwise, services over charge for what you get from my point of view. I have better things to spend my money on than some cell phone with internet service. I'm not an addict, I don't need access 24hours a day.

Well I don't either. And I rarely just sit and "surf" on my phone.

It's the e-mail access that I use, and appreciate, most.

[Yontsey]

I don't mind spending $90-100/month for my phone.

For my sidekick3, I was spending $80-90/month and this phone and 3G speed blows the SK3 away.

I mean, I guess I could get a plan for a normal phone for $50-60/month but will hardly do anything that the iPhone does.

[torifile]

My iPhone is worth every penny I spend on the monthly service. It's when I go back to using EDGE that I think that extra $10 is money well-spent. I don't understand people who uniformly proclaim "AT&T is charging too much for their plans". No, they're not. They are charging what people are willing to pay. My cell is my only phone. It's nice to be able to enjoy using it and part of that is, gasp!!, ATT's network.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by PB PM Spending more than $100 a year for a phone service is too much, that is why I'll never use an iPhone. Considering rates here for iPhone use is $60 a month plus service fees and taxes, no way.

Please tell me how you're spending $100 a year for a cell phone service that you actually use. Tracfone, the self-proclaimed "least expensive way to own a cell phone in America," is $80 a year even if you use no minutes at all. For $100 a year, you would get just 300 minutes to use for the entire year (with additional restrictions on how many you'd have to use each quarter).

So, pray tell, how on earth are you getting cell phone service for $100/year, assuming you talk more than a minute a day, on average? If you're talking about a landline or VoIP solution, well, that's apples and oranges, isn't it?

I'm not normally the person who jumps on people for having different values - I know not everyone has to buy a new phone twice a year - but I honestly don't know how you can even get cell phone service that's the slightest bit usable (i.e., not for just emergencies) for $100/year. And there's still no way that would be comparable to the iPhone's service. If you do have phone service "just for emergencies," or if you don't think cell phone service is worth it period, then say so, and don't act like it's the iPhone plan in particular that you object to.

That's like saying "Paying more than sixty-three cents for a transatlantic flight is too much. That's why I'll never fly BA." WTF? It's not like anyone would give you a transatlantic flight for sixty-three cents, so don't use that as a strike against BA.

EDIT:

Originally Posted by PB PM Yes, $100 is too much for the service that is provided, IMO. All phone, cell or otherwise, services over charge for what you get from my point of view. I have better things to spend my money on than some cell phone with internet service. I'm not an addict, I don't need access 24hours a day.

OK, so you think every phone service is overpriced. My bad - I missed this post. That clears things up, I guess...but if your complaint doesn't have anything to do with the iPhone in particular, and you just think that communications services in general aren't worth it for you personally, then why bring it up in this thread?

I'm honestly not trying to jump all over you so please don't take offense. I guess I just honestly don't understand what your post has to do with this thread...?

Now its like you're saying "sixty-three cents for a transatlantic flight is ridiculous because I personally have no desire to fly overseas." While that might be true for you, that doesn't make your point any more reasonable.

BTW, your classification of anyone who does pay for a cell phone as an "addict" is kind of...weird. Like, whoa.

[Capella]

The problem is that all cell plans are expensive. $40-50 for around 450 minutes is fairly ridiculous, and that's the average for a lot of carriers. It is nice to have a cell phone, especially without a landline, but the prices just to make calls are obscene. I would get an iPhone if I had a salaried job, because if I'm going to get gouged anyway I might as well get extra service, but atm even an extra $20 a month would wind up breaking my bank. The real problem is not 'the iPhone prices', it's 'the cell carriers being bloody ridiculous'.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by kieran The data plan on the 3G iPhone is $30. 200 texts are an extra $5. The cheapest voice plan is $49.99 and then you tack on the data charges. My last phone bill was $83. I don't think that's that bad when it is my only phone and all of the extras that come with the iPhone. Yes, it's expensive if you add it all up over the course of a year, but I really don't mind paying what I do for something that keeps me in contact with everyone all the time. To each his own though...

Just a minor correction - AT&T's cheapest data plan is $39.99 (450 minutes). The cheapest iPhone plan is, then, $69.99, or $74.99 if you want their cheapest messaging bucket (200 messages). This is before the various regulatory fees and taxes.

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by Yontsey I don't mind spending $90-100/month for my phone. For my sidekick3, I was spending $80-90/month and this phone and 3G speed blows the SK3 away. I mean, I guess I could get a plan for a normal phone for $50-60/month but will hardly do anything that the iPhone does.

That is fine on an income of $30k + a year, not so much on 15k a year, when you are paying rent, making car payments and trying to start your own business, such as myself.

Robo: I don't use a phone enough to justify spending more than $100 a year. I have talked just over 15h on the phone in the last year, most of it during 1 cent a minute even and weekends. I spend on average 10-15 minutes a week on the phone, at the most, so it doesn't make sense to have an expensive plan. Based on that usage, an iPhone would be total overkill, and add unneeded expenses to my budget. This has something to do with the iPhone, if I could get the iPhone on my pre-paid plan I would! The features of it are enough for me to want to have it, but I don't want to be stuck with a 3 year contract either. I would better use my pre-paid plan if I had the iPhone, I would use its other services, not just the phone part.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Capella The problem is that all cell plans are expensive. $40-50 for around 450 minutes is fairly ridiculous, and that's the average for a lot of carriers. It is nice to have a cell phone, especially without a landline, but the prices just to make calls are obscene. I would get an iPhone if I had a salaried job, because if I'm going to get gouged anyway I might as well get extra service, but atm even an extra $20 a month would wind up breaking my bank. The real problem is not 'the iPhone prices', it's 'the cell carriers being bloody ridiculous'.

They charge what people are willing to pay, same as any other industry in a free market.

I currently pay $30 for 500 minutes and unlimited everything else I can do on my phone. I think that's more than fair, and if my carrier said "halp we're going bankrupt please send us $39 this month" I probably would do so. And it's not like I'm using an ancient plan (although it is no longer available) or some obscure network - I'm using Sprint, and I signed up at the beginning of this year. So deals can be had, if you look for them.

I, personally, feel that the price "premium" of the iPhone is justified, even compared to my Sprint deal, because of the richness of the iPhone's web experience - there's still no other phone like it. Compared to other, non-promotional plans, it's certainly worth the small-ish premium, if there even is one, because you simply get so much more. I'm a web junkie, and I'm not saying that my values are everyone's values. But again, I don't see the point in claiming that every phone company ever is overpriced, because there's no "non-overpriced" point of comparison. If you don't feel that the service is worth it to you, personally, then don't use it. It's that simple. I don't watch enough television to make cable "worth it" to me, but I don't go around saying that the entire cable and satellite industry is overpriced. I simply don't pay for it.

I do take issue with the ridiculous price of text messages in the US, especially since all the carriers tend to raise their rates within weeks of each other. I think some FCC dude sent the carriers letters asking why that was so (since the point of competition is to drive prices down). My imagined carriers reply: "Oh, shit."

[psmith2.0]

The funny thing lately is seeing this flood of commercials with the various "iPhone killers". All of them are sporting one: a touch-screen machine (some even look like the iPhone!) with the big, friendly icons, etc. And the commercials carry on like they're the first ones to do it, or have stumbled across something clever and unique.



I always get a chuckle out of that stuff.

There's one now (Sprint?) and it's about the screen-based keyboard that clicks.

Yeah, I had one of those 18 months ago!

[Robo]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 The funny thing lately is seeing this flood of commercials with the various "iPhone killers". All of them are sporting one: a touch-screen machine (some even look like the iPhone!) with the big, friendly icons, etc. And the commercials carry on like they're the first ones to do it, or have stumbled across something clever and unique. I always get a chuckle out of that stuff. There's one now (Sprint?) and it's about the screen-based keyboard that clicks. Yeah, I had one of those 18 months ago!

That's Verizon's BlackBerry Storm, the highest-profile iPhone killer yet. I like "normal" BlackBerries, but they should leave the touchscreen phones to Apple (just as Apple should leave the QWERTY phones to them). The screen-based keyboard on the Storm is unique in that it actually "clicks in" (think new MacBook trackpad), which is something the iPhone's screen doesn't do (yet). This much-ballyhooed "tactile response" actually has the effect of slowing thumb-typing, since you have to wait for the screen to pop back before you can press the next letter.

But yeah, everyone has a full-touchscreen phone these days (Samsung alone makes, like, nine of them). My brother bought LG's "Dare," and then tried to convince me it was "just as good as the iPhone" (sorry, bro - but at least when you tire of using your non-existant gigabytes of internal storage to listen to your music, you can use your non-existant app store to expand the abilities of your phone!). Unsurprisingly, the only one that actually comes close is the G1, simply because that focuses on launching a new platform (like the iPhone/iPod touch did) rather than just slapping a big touchscreen on a regular dumbphone. (It's also the least imitative of the iClones, as it features a full keyboard and trackball too.)

[Maciej]

Originally Posted by Roboman This much-ballyhooed "tactile response" actually has the effect of slowing thumb-typing, since you have to wait for the screen to pop back before you can press the next letter.

I've tried it, and it doesn't slow things down significantly, at least for how fast I type. I suppose if you've got super human thumbs this might be a bigger factor.

[Luca]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 There's one now (Sprint?) and it's about the screen-based keyboard that clicks. Yeah, I had one of those 18 months ago!

Actually, it's Verizon, and it's the Blackberry Storm. And you did not have one with a screen that clicks 18 months ago. The screen physically clicks in when you press on it, giving you tactile feedback while also allowing you to run your fingers along the phone's screen without accidentally triggering a click input.

The iPhone, on the other hand, just uses a standard touchscreen. It's not the same thing.

EDIT: Roboman beat me to it.

Also, personally, I would like a phone that is a little nicer than the RAZR I'm currently using, one that is much easier to work with (moving pictures, sounds, videos, etc. onto and off of) without having to get a hyper-overpriced data plan. Texting is good enough for me. I hardly ever even use that, but if I had a phone with a keyboard I probably would.

Essentially, I want an iPhone without the data plan. But an iPhone seems like overkill when there are a lot of smaller, cheaper phones out there that do just what I want. I'll just have to look into some stuff.

[psmith2.0]

Ah, I see. Well then, apologies all around! It's Verizon, and it's a Blackberry.

I still don't give a rip because the iPhone is the easiest, fastest handheld device I've ever used (in 18 months or beyond), so, to me, it's a lot of "blah-blah" about nothing.

YMMV (I realize that...no, really, I do!)



Maybe if I was 17 and sending 785 text messages a day, I'd be a little more demanding/discerning in my virtual keyboard wants and needs?

ducks

As it is, I fly like a rabbit on my iPhone. I'm not writing a Civil War novel or recipe book with it, after all. Tactile, schmactile...I type goooooood with what I have.



How do they make the screen do that on that Blackberry? Is it segmented? Or does the whole thing pooch in? Is that truly a help in 1-2 sentences texts or e-mails? Or even a paragraph? Or is it just a heavy-handed (no pun) sales/marketing point, something they can lay claim to first and make a commercial about?

[Robo]

The entire screen pops in. And yeah, it's mainly a marketing point. It's a good idea in theory, but in practice it's meh. RIM should stick to their excellent keyboarded phones. That's their niche, and they do it well. I think once this all shakes out Apple and RIM will own the smartphone market, at least in North America - Apple will make the mass-market touchscreen smartphones and RIM will keep making phones for enterprise types as well as consumers who want a physical keyboard. They don't even have to compete with each other. I'm guessing Verizon commissioned the Storm, though - they wanted a high-profile "iPhone killer" (after the Voyager, Glyde, and Dare didn't "work out") and BB is arguably the next hottest phone manufacturer in line, so...

[Maciej]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 Maybe if I was 17 and sending 785 text messages a day, I'd be a little more demanding/discerning in my virtual keyboard wants and needs?

I routinely send more than 1500 text messages per month, and I'm not struggling at all with the keyboard. I think blackberry keyboards really appeal to the emailing business folk. So as you attested before pscates (about your emailing obsession), maybe you have more insight into this then you let on.

Originally Posted by Roboman The entire screen pops in. And yeah, it's mainly a marketing point. It's a good idea in theory, but in practice it's meh. RIM should stick to their excellent keyboarded phones.

In that respect I think you're right on. And when I think about how fast people type on those little keyboards, the form of the moving screen would get in the way a little. I think it was a neat idea, but pretty poorly implemented in my opinion. I it really reminds (in feel) of the trackpads on the new laptops.

[psmith2.0]

Originally Posted by Roboman I'm guessing Verizon commissioned the Storm, though - they wanted a high-profile "iPhone killer" (after the Voyager, Glyde, and Dare didn't "work out")...

Ha...that's just it. There have been multiple "iPhone killers" and "iDethroners" - from all companies - in the space that Apple has just had two models (18 months: iPhone and iPhone 3G, with only three variations in capacity, and one barely counted, the 4GB, because it was yanked almost as fast as it hit the street).



I'd like to know the money, time and energy put into these three models you mention (plus the countless others) that no longer even exist, or came and went like a poot in the night.

It's just funny to me, for some reason. These companies will fall all over themselves and go to outrageous lengths (often putting the marketing/hype cart before the "is is even worth a damn?" horse), and still can't seem to make something 1/3 as slick, intuitive and fun as the iPhone.

What evidence is there that this new "tactileberry" won't go the same route as the others? It just seems like every 3-4 months there's "something big" coming, and "Apple better look over its shoulder...they've got some competition!" and blah, blah, blah...and six months later the thing isn't even being sold anymore (and nobody you know actually has one).



Seriously...someone find out - and post - how many "iPhone killers" have been released (and faded away) in the past 12-16 months.

[Robo]

Well, BlackBerry is, unlike LG and Samsung, an established smartphone manufacturer with an actual platform. So even though the idea of a keyboard-less BlackBerry is kind of backwards to me, I think it will do better than most of the "iPhone killers," just as I think the Nokia 5800 and N97 will do better than most of the others. What Moto and LG and Samsung don't get is that the iPhone isn't successful just because it has a big touchscreen - it's successful because it's a platform that can be easily developed for and expanded. RIM and Nokia understand that, so they'll be more successful than most, even if their marketshare is technically in decline.

The Storm will be successful because Verizon will force it to be successful. The Storm is their New BlackBerry for 2009. AT&T has the Bold, T-Mobile has the Pearl Flip, and Verizon has the Storm and they'll make it successful by brute marketing force if they need to. And BlackBerries are hot. I think they're hot largely because QWERTY phones are hot, and taking the QWERTY away might not make sense...but Verizon has to have a hot touch phone. Everyone else does (except possibly Sprint).

I'm really interested in what the 2009 iPhone will bring to the table (and yes, I think we'll see a new iPhone next summer). I don't think they have to worry about the Samsung Beholds or the LG Dares of the world, but they do need to stay competitive with the G1s (G2s?) and N97s. I think that means, for starters, a better camera. Even the LG Dare has a 3.2 MP shooter, as does the G1. The N97 and Behold have 5MP cameras, and there's an 8MP version of the Behold on the way (and unlike other 8MP phones, it'll actually leave Asia). Apple needs, at the very least, a 3.2 MP camera just to stay competitive with other phones in its class. Even now a 2MP camera is decidedly mid-list in the US and by mid-2009 they'll be downright low-end (just as 1.3MP cameras are now). The rest of the world has even higher standards - so a better camera is a must. Purists out there might wonder why phones even need cameras but the point is that they're here to stay. Even the Nokia 1000-series has a cameraphone now.

More storage, is of course, inevitable - 16GB on the low-end and 32GB on the high-end - and after this fall's iPod nano experiment I think we could see the iPhone in a myriad of colors, too (offering a phone in multiple colors is an even more established tradition than offering an MP3 player in one). But I think that Apple will need one big feature to set the 2009 iPhone apart from its rivals - and its biggest rivals are going to be the original iPhone and iPhone 3G. (Remember - everyone who signed a two year contract for the 2007 iPhone will be up for renewal in 2009.)

My bet? Video calling. It'll be the iPhone video, you heard it hear first (or not).

[Kraetos]

4 GB iPhone 3G? Unlikely. A $99 iPhone? Today, very unlikely. Three years from now? Absolutely.

At Wal-Mart? No way in hell. Apple isn't going to change the Apple Store/AT&T Store exclusivity of iPhone any time soon. They don't have to.

The larger problem is the plans. The cost of the top of the line iPhone - for $299 - is dwarfed but the yearly cost of the plan. The cheapest voice plan + the cheapest text plan + the mandatory data plan = $85/month, but kieran just mentioned that he pays $83/month, so I am going to operate on that assumption. $83x12 = $996.

Someone who draws the line at $100 for a phone is not going to spend $1000 a year for the plan, unless said customer is terrible at math... and even if they buy a phone with a plan they can't afford, they'll end up selling the phone and getting one with a cheaper plan when they eventually realize they can't afford it. There is almost no market for a $99 iPhone as long as the base plan is $1000 a year. Not when customers can get a free phone with a $40/month with no data plan, which is $480 a year. The second we start talking about data, frugal customers are eliminated from the equation.

Show me a $60/month ($720/year) plan with 350 minutes + 4000 night and weekends, 100 texts, and unlimited data, and we'll talk. Until then? If Apple decided to release a $99 iPhone, it would not increase overall sales. Until there is a plan to match, a $99 4GB iPhone would merely eat into the sales of the 8GB iPhone. Gruber's first rule of Apple speculation states: "For any idea, ask yourself this: Would it help Apple sell more Macs or more iPods? If the answer is 'no', Apple isn’t going to do it, or, if they do, it’d be a genuinely shocking development." Replace iPods with iPhones and you have your answer. A 4GB iPhone would not move the sales needle. It would, however, shrink the overall profit margin.

Apple is obviously making a grab for market share with iPhone, which is the opposite of their strategy with the Mac. Apple is in a position to utterly dominate the smartphone market with the OS X platform. What do I mean by dominate?

iPhone : Smartphones :: Windows : Personal Computers.

Think it can't happen because it sounds too good to be true? Look at the facts: iPhone is universally adored. We're not talking about Macs here, where many have misguided preconceptions which prevents them from even considering a Mac. This is almost a non-issue for iPhone. (More on that "almost" in a moment.) Everyone wants an iPhone. The vast majority of those poking around the smartphone market want an iPhone, and the only thing holding them back is the price of the plans or AT&T.

Lack of a physical keyboard is (for most people) not a valid reason to avoid iPhone. Most people who bitch about iPhone's keyboard and lavish praise on the Blackberry have not given the virtual keyboard a sincere chance. Most people who bitch about iPhone's keyboard are apparently blind to the fact that no keyboard means iPhone has a screen that is twice as large as any other keyboard-encumbered smartphone. Those who cite slider phones as the perfect compromise are apparently oblivious to the fact that slider phones are either significantly larger/heavier than iPhone, and if they are not, they lack vital features such as Wi-Fi. As iPhone market share increases, this misconception will fade. Virtual keyboards are the future. There will always be a market for a physical keyboard, for those who send a million emails a day. Sure, this is a large portion of the current smartphone market, but it's a small fraction of the general cell phone carrying population. Presented with the decision between slightly better email with a shitty screen, or slightly worse email and an incredible screen, the average consumer will obviously go with the latter.

AT&T's network will soon be superior to Verizon's in every US market. AT&T is hindered by the fact that the radius of a GSM cell has a 35km hard limit, but CDMA is theoretically only limited by available power. In practice, however, CDMA cell radius is roughly 70km. That means that for every tower Verizon builds, AT&T needs to build four towers to cover the same area. (A lot of other factors can affect cell radius. While the GSM cell radius is a hard limit, the CDMA cell size is a rough estimate.)

But GSM is superior technology. SIM cards make cell phone upgrades easier on customers. (Yeah, yeah, RUIM. Have you ever seen a phone with a RUIM card? Have you ever even heard of RUIM before now?) In addition to being slower to begin with, EV-DO slows down as more users are connected - HSDPA does not. In a best case scenario - i.e. there is a negligible amount of users in a given EV-DO cell - HSDPA is twice as fast. The next revisions of both technologies increases HSDPAs lead to eight times as fast - in theory. In practice, EV-DO is even slower. GSM roams better. GSM is worldwide. CDMA world phones are simply CDMA phones supplemented with a GSM chipset.

CDMAs days are obviously numbered. Verizon will either switch to GSM or die. The smart money is on death.

Apple is determined to make this happen. I am certain that Apple is willing to go to great lengths to make OS X Mobile the single dominant mobile computing platform, and they are willing to do so at the expense of profit. Apple has $25,000,000,000 in the bank. Shrinking margins to increase market share is a completely viable option when you have enough money to light cigars with million-dollar bills. This is exactly what Apple is going to do. Short term profit is nothing compared to the chance to dominate one of the fastest growing markets in the world.

What is standing in the way of Apple getting to this point? AT&T. AT&T needs the fat profit margins from their plans. Despite more than four times the revenue, AT&T has a smaller profit margin and a tiny fraction of Apple's cash reserves - a mere $1.6 billion. If it was up to Apple, they would only break even on both hardware sales and plan sales, and every person in the world would have an iPhone in their pocket.

As iPhone sales increase, Apple will have an easier time convincing AT&T to shrink the margins in favor of sales.

This will snowball until Apple is the smartphone market. That is the endgame. The question is no longer if iPhone will dominate the market. The question now is, by how much will iPhone dominate?

Answer: enormously.