Verizon Mandates Their Own App Stores on Future Devices
In the finest playground tradition, a constant in any mobile-oriented forum is chatter about the best and worst wireless providers. The latest bit of news out of the Verizon camp will certainly fan the flames of debate and add to the already heated Sprint vs. Verizon rivalry.
GigaOm are reporting that Verizon Wireless is going to soon mandate handset manufacturers to install the new Verizon multi-platform application store on every device. In fact, such a portal will override the various app stores existing and forthcoming from most of Verizon's handset partners; chiefly, Microsoft, RIM, and Palm. Additional details and speculation is available from Engadget.
This news is certain to be another blow to Pre-watchers (including yours truly) who are eagerly awaiting the confirmation of that device's rumored arrival on Verizon in early 2010. Verizon has traditionally lagged far behind other carriers in regards to carrying Palm's latest and greatest handsets, as the year-old Palm OS-based Centro is their only remaining Palm device since the Treo 755p and 700wx reached EOL status last year. Verizon also elected to pass on the Treo 800w and this year's CDMA Treo Pro. The Pro is, however, officially available through Verizon's newly-acquired Alltel subsidiary.
Presumably, it will be a matter of a quick download to install the Palm App Store portal on a device but the events are aligning for a fierce battle with carriers on one side, handset manufacturers and developers on the other, and the consumer caught in between in the crossfire.
With the release of the Mojo SDK, the barren Palm App Store should start showing some signs of life in the coming months. As a result, this move may become a greater point of contention further down the road when a Verizon-branded Pre actually appears and a robust application and a robust application ecosystem starts to form around the Pre as well as future WebOS devices such as the rumored Palm Eos/Pixie.
Permalink
PrintArticle Comments
(11 comments)
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. PalmInfocenter is not responsible for them in any way.
Please Login or register here to add your comments.
RE: let the wars begin. I'm writing my Congressmen
At the same time, this seems like a really stupid move for Verizon. First, as you said, it pits the carrier AGAINST the phone maker. Did Verizon say they wanted to carry the iPhone? This ensures that they never will. Second, it mixes apps from various platforms together into what will likely be a big, unwieldy mess. That doesn't bode well for increased visibility or distribution (pov of developer) or ease of us (pov of consumer).
RE: let the wars begin. I'm writing my Congressmen
No relief seems to be in sight, so the sooner they begin to die the better imo. Is there not some enterprising group with funding that could actually look at this carrier tyranny and give customers what they want. Is this to novel an idea?
RE: let the wars begin. I'm writing my Congressmen
rmhurdman wrote:
I disagree that developers lose out. I don't care who sells my (hypothetical) apps, as long as they are paid for. If I can get greater visibility and distribution through a single provider, that's great.
That may be fine (to some) when they want a 10% cut. Wait until your single provider says, now they want to raise their cut to 20%, 25%, 50% of the selling price. This is a particularly bad investment in the case of the iPhone or Pre where you're signing onto essentially a one-off development environment.
I do not want to waste my time/energy learning platform-specific development skills where the return on value is totally at the whim of the phone manufacturer. It should be my choice where my apps are sold.
RE: let the wars begin. I'm writing my Congressmen
Example. Some bright person posted an article on an Android site I visit complaining that the latest Android device costs more than the latest iPhone because the sticker price was $199 for the Android phone and "only" $99 for the iPhone. Absolutely no consideration of the clearly more expensive two year contract you were required to accept to "buy" that iPhone entered into the comparison. The average consumer really is ignorant.
Still, seems like a silly time for VZW to make this move when "someone" is already looking their way. Confidence or arrogance?
Hey Palm! Where's my PDA with Wifi and phone capabilities?
RE: let the wars begin. I'm writing my Congressmen
Example. Some bright person posted an article on an Android site I visit complaining that the latest Android device costs more than the latest iPhone because the sticker price was $199 for the Android phone and "only" $99 for the iPhone. Absolutely no consideration of the clearly more expensive two year contract you were required to accept to "buy" that iPhone entered into the comparison. The average consumer really is ignorant**
You are exactly correct here. This is what I wonder. The "fields are white to harvest" for anyone willing to break this ridiculous carrier scam of locking people into contracts by subsidizing phones. Yet, the gigantic hurdle to instant success is the ignorance that you speak of among the sheep who think that "free phones" really are free.
I would venture to say that the average consumer does not even understand what a subsidized phone is. Therefore to say "buy your own $399 iPhone and get cheap network pricing and carrier freedom would sound like a ripoff to most Americans. Who would want that when I can get my iPhone for only $99. Ugggh.
Pat Horne
RE: let the wars begin. I'm writing my Congressmen
Which is, at least I think so, why commercials here (Sweden) now have to state the total minimum cost that you need to pay during your contract including the price of the phone. This leads to easier comparisons even though additional cost for phone calls and so on are not included.
RE: let the wars begin. I'm writing my Congressmen
No relief seems to be in sight, so the sooner they begin to die the better imo. Is there not some enterprising group with funding that could actually look at this carrier tyranny and give customers what they want. Is this to novel an idea?
Stupid stupid stupid stupid
I'm hoping this is just a 'trial balloon' to see how much outrage they draw. They're not code jockeys. Everything they put out is crap.
They should stick to the network and selling other people's hardware.
RE: Stupid stupid stupid stupid
Pilot 1000->Pilot 5000->PalmPilot Pro->IIIe->Vx->m505->T|T->T|T2->T|C->T|T3->T|T5->Zodiac 2->TX->Verizon Treo 700P->Verizon Treo 755p->?
RE: Stupid stupid stupid stupid
Pat Horne
Latest Comments
- My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST((SELECT/**/CASE/**/IS_SRVROLEMEM
- My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST((SELECT/**/CASE/**/IS_SRVROLEMEM
- My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST((SELECT/**/CASE/**/IS_SRVROLEMEM
- My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST(db_name()/**/AS/**/NVARCHAR(4000
- My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST(db_name()/**/AS/**/NVARCHAR(4000
- My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST(db_name()/**/AS/**/NVARCHAR(4000
- My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST(db_name()/**/AS/**/NVARCHAR(4000
- My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST(db_name()/**/AS/**/NVARCHAR(4000
let the wars begin. I'm writing my Congressmen
Given that Congress is already examining their anti-competitive behavior, I'm going to write some letters to put fuel on the fire.
I am technically a registered iPhone developer and was considering signing up for the Pre. At this point, I'm just going to switch to standard web technology and JavaScript, and hope that more open approaches like Android pick up steam.
Developers need to step up to the plate and say NO to single distribution sources of their apps. Unfortunately, these days $$$$ beats out principle and someone will always step up to make a fast buck.