Login:
Password:
Lost Password?
Print this article  |  E-mail this article  |  Comment on this article

Is the US fast becoming a 'third world' for smartphones?

By Tim Conneally, BetaNews

October 7, 2008, 4:52 PM

What do the Blackberry Bold, Nokia 5800, and the HTC Touch HD have in common? They're all 3G smartphones that have no US release date.

Research in Motion's latest BlackBerry, the 3G Bold, was released in Canada in August, but continues to be delayed in the US due to extensive testing of AT&T's HSPA network.

Many have echoed the Associated Press' inference that RIM wants to avoid a situation similar to the one Apple faced with the launch of its 3G iPhone, because of RIM co-CEO Mike Lazardis' statement that "a certain device" has brought a great deal of critical inspection to "that network."

While the US has missed out on no small number of excellent feature phones in the past from such companies as Sony Ericsson, Nokia, LG, and Samsung, we may have to admit we've been a little spoiled by the Apple iPhone.

Prior to being the launch pad for the iconic device, the US was frequently a second-tier release market, usually following a device maker's homeland. But Apple inaugurated a trend in phone design, and did so through the United States. Now the HTC G1 Android Phone is keeping up that pace. And its hype.

However, when Nokia's first "TouchPhone," the Xpressmusic 5800, was debuted last week, it carried no mention of a release date for the Western market. This action, coupled with the Bold delay, could temper the excitement of the exclusive Google phone.

The vexation surrounding the Nokia 5800's release isn't localized in the United States, either. Dutch publication TelecomPaper, for example, released a report today bluntly entitled "Analysts disappointed about Nokia 5800 availability."

Furthermore, the debut of the G1 may leave Americans feeling a little bittersweet about getting the device first when they see what HTC will not be selling in the US because of it.

Add a Comment (20 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By psycros

posted Oct 8, 2008 - 3:33 PM

Cell plans and most of the phones are cheaper outside the US (the iPhone being a rare exception). I think the reason America is dead last on the technology totem pole is greed. In the 90's our wireless carriers got used to getting the lion's share of any deal. But the rest of the world caught up and even outpaced our infrastructure and economic development. The Nokias and Samsungs of the world no longer need the US market to do well. They can afford to pass us by, with our archaic telecom laws and dishonest carriers who run roughshod over the consumer with impunity.

Score: 0

By gregmlr

posted Oct 8, 2008 - 6:45 AM

Smart phones are just too much for the casual US consumer.

A friend of mine purchased a Palm Treo a few months back and I can safely say that it is the most difficult wireless phone I have ever tried to use in my life (and I'm her "techie" friend). The buttons were way too small to be practical and the menu was horrendous (I mean c'mon, was was so you could subscribe to XM).

Their large learning curve and the high price of the plans are what's keeping America from buying smart phones.

And another thing, they all keep being released on the GSM network. Maybe not even half of all wireless users in the United States use the GSM network, most use CDMA. They are directly going head to head with the iPhone by choosing the same network which is doing nothing but setting them up to fail.

Finally, before you just to any conclusions I'm by no means am an iPhone fanboy (I have a Slvr that I purchased for $.99) because switching to AT&T? No thank you.

Score: 0

By methuselah

posted Oct 8, 2008 - 9:09 AM

A treo is too difficult for a "techie" friend to figure out how to use? chuckling Maybe that is the Microsoft version, as the Palm version is really easy to use, and has a full qwerty keyboard.

Of course most cellphones in the US don't use GSM, all other countries except US and one other country use GSM as their primary infrastructure. Building up GSM here is difficult, as we're already using most of our frequencies, especially around major metropolitan areas. And we are auctioning off much of the rest, including ones meant to be used for first responders.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Oct 8, 2008 - 9:36 AM

including ones meant to be used for first responders.

Give 'em all iPhones. :p

Score: 0

By internetworld7

edited Oct 7, 2008 - 6:40 PM

"we may have to admit we've been a little spoiled by the Apple iPhone. Prior to being the launch pad for the iconic device, the US was frequently a second-tier release market, usually following a device maker's homeland."

That quote says it all. With the iPhone, America will always be at the forefront of smartphone innovation. Thank you Apple, we all love you for this.

Score: 0

By preinterpost

posted Oct 8, 2008 - 8:32 AM

iPhones are for losers.

Score: 0

By foxfyre

posted Oct 7, 2008 - 9:04 PM

Yup, what would we do without it?

And the econ major below is complaining about the cost of landlines!

As if $99/month (minimum) fees, in addition to $300 phones are practical and affordable.

Want to do something truly amazing? Develop a functional phone that will extend the function to the majority of people at a price commenserate to their land lines.

And to think that the operational costs of wireless are less than that of landlines, yet they are obscenely mined for the cash cow they are.

Real functionality is a bit more than a multi-touch screne or simple wireless connectivity.

Its always nice to watch as the symbolism over substance cell-phone crowd justifies the flash and the absolutely exorbitant consumer cost, while eschewing the substance.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Oct 8, 2008 - 9:35 AM

Why does the Cell phone need to be more functional than the land line phone?

You're comparing a PMP-phone, and it's provided services, with a basic land-line phone with *zero* services...

Yeah, the costs aren't comparable...go figure...

Try comparing that with a basic (non-billed) Cell plan, using a basic Cell. Amazingly, the costs become much more comparable.

Score: 0

By foxfyre

edited Oct 8, 2008 - 5:26 PM

Nowhere did anyone say a cell phone needed to be MORE functional than a landline.

Services? Oh, you must be thinking of that horse thing in the other thread.

Cell phone services, huh. LOL!

And basic functionality...try 24/7 broadband data services connectivity? And what BASIC cell phone plan are you on? And what are your desktop computers connected to - aside from you cell phone? LOL

Oh, but you mentioned services - there are a few more pertinent and fundamental functional services than ring tones and horse porn chat lines. ;-)

Yeah, compare my landline and ADSL, with unlimited usage to your cell plan. ~$40 to ~$100+
...Much more comparable, but not equivalent!

You see, 30 years ago a phone line was for most folks, strictly voice. Its ironic that on this forum we have to suggest that this is no longer the case.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Oct 9, 2008 - 9:26 AM

Quoth the Fox:

Nowhere did anyone say a cell phone needed to be MORE functional than a landline.

Real functionality is a bit more than a multi-touch screne or simple wireless connectivity.

Suuuuure.....

And basic functionality...try 24/7 broadband data services connectivity?

Yeah, compare my landline and ADSL, with unlimited usage to your cell plan.

OK....you *refuse* my comparison and substitute yours... Are you mentally incapable of sticking to the point?

Idiot,Learn to read: I am *not* talking about a DSL line. I am talking about your basic, voice-only, land line. No touch screens, no internet access.

Come back to me when you can discuss this rationally. Better yet, don't come back at all. I swear you're incapable of being rational.

Score: 0

By alphatrigon

posted Oct 7, 2008 - 6:01 PM

this is only weird because of the US consumer, and I'm in the US and a citizen...I must say I hate cellphones anyways...that said...

The problem with the US consumer is that it's all about making the consumer feel special, and though this is not unique to the US, it is overwhelming. Unless a product sells itself as making the owner something more than they are, it just won't make it, regardless of it's usability or it's feature set. The US market is pretty shallow and material...focus on that and you'll sell millions.

Score: 0

By foxfyre

edited Oct 7, 2008 - 9:20 PM

No real surprises here.

For the rest of the world, wireless has become their only nearly ubiquitous network.

Whereas the US is essentially 100% wired.

Were it not for wireless, much ofthe world would still be in the dark.

In the US, wireless is a convenience, not a necessity (although some here will inevitably make the claim hat they are SO important that being reached at 3am in the bathroom is essential.)

Convergence is moving ahead, but there is no compelling need to rush forward, as cheaper more reliable alternatives are already in place. For most of the rest of the world, they lack the luxury of such choice.

Score: 0

By vikampion

posted Oct 7, 2008 - 5:41 PM

Just to let you know, landlines in the US are becoming obsolete. Wireless phones have been on the rise. Mostly, every college kid has a cell phone, no need for a landline.

Not to mention landlines can cost $70/month. Who would want a landline that costs that much, when you can get a cell phone that can go anywhere with you for cheaper.

Pretty much, the only good solution for landline is Vonage, which is only $24/month. The only bad thing about it, is you can't dial 911.

Score: 0

By foxfyre

edited Oct 7, 2008 - 7:18 PM

"Just to let you know, landlines in the US are becoming obsolete."

Yeah, and land lines routinely cost $70. LOL!

Nonsense.

Vonage? Are you an economic moron? (a rhetorical question!) Let's see, for Vonage you have to already have and pay for a land line, in addition to already having ADSL - which unless you are stupid enough to live off cable - you ALREADY HAVE A PHONE LINE!!!! - and now you get to duplicate the cost of $25/month essentially just for VOIP long distance! What a deal! NOT!

Hey economics boy, why not just get SkypeOut for ~$30 a YEAR and have the vast majority of the features you actually use????

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited Oct 8, 2008 - 9:32 AM

Most folks in metro areas already have a cell phone. Why the duplication? Why do they need a land line if they have a Cell? So they can pay $30+ a month to let the political activist groups call them at all hours of the day? So can be barraged by telemarketers?

*laughs*

Land lines are going away in well-covered areas.

Example: (in my area)

Frontier, the only land line phone provider, charges $30 a month for *basic* service.

Boost Unlimited Cell costs $30 a month, included Voice Mail, Unlimited Long Distance, No Billing, and the ability to take it with you.

Tell us...which is the better deal?

The wife has been trying to get me to get a Cell for *years*, I've always hated the things. After a major billing snafu which resulted in frontier cutting off our service, I decided we were done with them. We pay no more than we did before, but we have more services, better reliability, fewer telemarketing/political calls, and can be reached anywhere....all with a far lower chance some idiot is going to type a few numbers out of order and cancel our account....at the same price.

Score: 0

By foxfyre

edited Oct 8, 2008 - 5:24 PM

Telemarketing calls? Have you not heard of the Federal do not call list.

It actually works.
And if it doesn't, Sue. Its easy and you actually collect! Its actually fun to receive the ~2 a year...and an easy ~$800...And unsolicited faxes are even easier!

And so your no frills basic cell service and a basic land line is equivalent, are they?

Really, and you have 24/7 broadband access on your cell? And I suppose your home computer runs over your cell service too? Right.

Suddenly your cell service isn't quite so all encompassing nor cost competitive, is it?
If you have ADSL, you get the phone line - whether you want it or not. And suddenly we're back to ~$40 versus ~$100+.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Oct 9, 2008 - 9:21 AM

Telemarketing calls? Have you not heard of the Federal do not call list.

It actually works.

Well, except for the *large* number of exceptions...including Political Action groups.

and you have 24/7 broadband access on your cell?

Did I have that on my landline? Nope.

Did it run over my landline? Nope.

Suddenly your cell service isn't quite so all encompassing nor cost competitive, is it?

With what? My land line? Yes, it is. Whatever the hell it is you're talking about? Who knows...and who cares.

If you have ADSL, you get the phone line - whether you want it or not.

Some of us have cable, genius.

Score: 0

By preinterpost

edited Oct 8, 2008 - 10:26 AM

I'm telling ya, get a smartphone. You could do BN nonstop! ;-)

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Oct 8, 2008 - 11:31 AM

Yeah...

Because...

What could be better...

;)

Score: 0

By imafurby

posted Oct 7, 2008 - 5:16 PM

Leave out the "for smartphones?" bit and you've got it about right.

Score: 0

Dec 1 - 11:19 AM ET DTV broadcasters could make another transition to mobile next year

Nov 29 - 1:41 PM ET Teacher must still surrender license in bizarre 'exposure to porn' suit

Nov 26 - 9:19 PM ET Spambots edge back online post-McColo

Nov 26 - 9:17 PM ET Connecting the Black Friday dots: What to expect from CE retail

Nov 26 - 9:09 PM ET Google admits that its iPhone voice search breaks Apple's rules

Nov 26 - 5:15 PM ET Apple uses DMCA as a weapon against an open source iTunes hack

Nov 26 - 5:13 PM ET US DHS eases off its '10+2' import rules

Nov 26 - 5:08 PM ET IBM unveils 'cloud validation' to harden security and lower TCO

Nov 26 - 2:15 PM ET Thanks, EchoStar: TiVo nears its first profitable year

Nov 26 - 1:49 PM ET Google integrates Earth-like controls in new Maps interface