Recently in cellular Category

If you're like me and find most Bluetooth headsets uncomfortable and/or inconvenient to use, the AXVisor (model TRIBC200) from Tritton Technologies might be just what you're looking for. This is a Bluetooth speakerphone unit that, as its name suggests, clips to the sun visor in your car for hands-free conversations.

 

 

AXVisor_02_BoxContents.jpg 


I tested out the Tritton AXVisor with my AT&T phone, a Nokia 2085 clamshell. I quickly discovered that, as with any Bluetooth device, the functionality of the Visor is limited mostly by the hands-free function on the phone you have. Mine allows voice dialing (no programming necessary) for any person in the contacts list, after a long press of the phone's + or - volume button. I discovered that voice dialing on the 2085 is a bit fiddly -- I tried to specify a particular person I wanted to call several times before it recognized what I was saying. This was not the fault of the AXVisor, of course.

 

To see my full review of the AXVisor -- specifics about how it performed when I put it through the paces -- click here.

 

Overall, I found the Tritton Visor to be quite simple to use, and appreciate the ability to make (mostly) hands-free calls while in the car without using a Bluetooth headset. If you do a lot of traveling alone in a vehicle, I would say it's well worth the roughly $90-$100 the device is currently selling for. (Tritton's Web site lists 8 U.S. distributors, and 22 U.S. resellers for the AXVisor, but upon doing a spot-check wasn't able to find it online from Micro Center, CompUSA, Newegg.com, or Costco. I did find it from Buy.com, MacMall and tigerdirect.com.)

One of the challenges for manufacturers of consumer electronics products is how to minimize the cost of building a particular gadget, while maximizing profits. Cut too many corners, and there's the risk of losing potential customers. Spend too much on features people don't really care about, and it's likely the result will be unnecessary costs.

 

It appears that Apple has struck a pretty good balance between these two extremes in the new iPhone 3G. That's the conclusion reached by applied market intelligence firm iSuppli, which makes a habit of taking apart products to find out what's inside and how much the components cost.

 

While iSuppli hasn't actually been able to dissect the actual iPhone 3G yet (it won't be available until July 11), the firm did manage to conduct a "virtual teardown," and estimated that it will cost Apple about $173 to manufacture each phone. That can be compared with a $226 "bill of materials" (BOM) for the original 8GB iPhone.

 

"The new iPhone is significantly less expensive to produce than the first-generation product, despite major improvements in the product's functionality and unique usability, due to the addition of 3G communications," said Jagdish Rebello, director and principal analyst for iSuppli, in a statement.

 

Apple typically prices its iPod and iPhone products at about 50 percent more than their BOM and manufacturing costs, iSuppli said. iPhone 3G is no exception, and in fact Apple will actually make more profit per unit with this product than the previous generation; the new phone sells for $199, and Apple gets an estimated subsidy per unit of $300, from wireless carriers, resulting in a boosted BOM/manufacturing margin.

 

The way iPhone 3G will be sold represents a significant strategic change on the part of Apple.

 

"The original 2G phone was sold at an unsubsidized price of $499," Rebello explained. "However, at a retail price of $199 for the low-end 8Gbyte version of the new 3G model, wireless communications service carriers will be selling the product at a subsidized rate, using a common business model for the mobile-handset market. ... With subsidies from
carriers, Apple will be selling the 8Mbyte version of the second-generation iPhone to carriers at an effective price of about $499 per unit, the same as the original product."

 

In changing its business model for iPhone, Apple is also giving up service revenue associated with its phone (previously carriers paid the company a portion of revenue from service subscriptions. This means Apple is relying heavily on profiting from carrier subsidies on the hardware.

 

"Hardware is vital to Apple profits, valuation and revenue in the consumer-electronics and wireless communications realms," Rebello said. "In fact, two-thirds of Apple's revenue from the iPod still is derived from hardware, while only one third is from the iTunes service and accessories. The second-generation iPhone is no exception."

CTIA Wireless 2008 News Roundup

This week (April 1-3) was the CTIA Wireless 2008 show in Las Vegas. All week TMCnet has been reporting on news from the show, which is put on (as the name suggests) by CTIA, an organization whose acronym formerly stood for “Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Assocation,” but now simply goes by CTIA  —  The Wireless Association.
 
The show’s Web site has a full roster of news highlights from this week, but here are a few that caught my eye from TMCnet’s coverage.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
For even more coverage of the show, check out the blogs for Rich Tehrani and Greg Galitzine.
I’ve long held the belief that driving while talking on a cell phone is dangerous, even if one is using a headset or switching on the speakerphone function. (Although I’m as guilty as the next person of talking while driving anyway.) Now some recent research adds more backing to that argument.
 
Marcel Just, director at Carnegie Mellon University’s Center for Cognitive Brain Imaging, decided to find out the extend to which non-driving activities distract drivers from their primary task of steering a vehicle down the road.
 
In a March 9 report that’s been making the rounds online, USA Today explained what happened when 29 volunteer subjects were hooked up to an MRI brain scanner while engaging in a simulated driving exercise. Some of the volunteers were left alone to engage only in the driving exercise. Some were asked to decide, at the same time, whether a sentence they heard was true or false.
 
Results? The MRI scan recorded a 37 percent decrease in parietal lobe activity in the volunteers who were multi-tasking, USA Today said. (This part of the brain is associated with special processing.) There was also less activity in the occipital lobe, associated with processing visual information. Not surprisingly given the MRI results, the “drivers” who were multitasking veered off the virtual road more often than their single-minded counterparts.
 
“Certain activities in life are inherently multitasking, but driving and cellphone use isn't something Mother Nature thought about when she was designing our brains,” Just was quoted as saying in the USA Today report.
 
Just admitted that, while the results clearly indicate that driving and talking on the phone don’t mix, banning all use of cell phones in vehicles is too draconian a measure. It might work better, USA Today said, to instead cut down on accidents by forbidding cell phone use in certain situations—like rush hour or inclement weather—that require a fairly high level of concentration for safe driving.
 
The report noted that seven parts of the U.S. forbid the use of handheld phones when driving: Connecticut, New York, California, New Jersey, the District of Columbia and the Virgin Islands. No jurisdiction, however, forbids using hands-free devices.
 
Jonathan Adkins, spokesperson for the Governors Highway Safety Association, thinks hands-free devices lure people into a false sense of security. In the USA Today report, he said there is no evidence that bans on handheld phones have helped prevent accidents.
 
Where do you stand on this issue?
The power of Google’s ability to perform fast and accurate Web searches comes in large part from the its distributed nature—using a geographically dispersed network of computing power to deliver results to users quickly. Distributed systems like Google’s have another advantage, too: they inherently protect against any single point of failure since if equipment in one location goes down the slack can be picked up somewhere else.
 
In a Thursday post, ZDNet MobileTech blogger Eric Everson suggested that, in light of two major outages within a year, RIM might want to consider a more distributed type of architecture to provide service for its BlackBerry devices, rather than feeding everything through a centralized system.
 
Everson quoted a Canadian Press report as pointing out that, “The concentration of RIM's BlackBerry service at a single network operation centre in the Ontario city of Waterloo, through which traffic such as e-mails are routed, exacerbates such problems and leaves it open to more crashes.”
 
Everson added in his post, “If at a network level everything is routed through a bottleneck configuration it likely doesn’t take the Founder of MyMobiSafe.com to point out that there may be some mobile security issues users should consider.”
 
In other words, there is power in numbers and RIM might do well to consider adopting a distributed network architecture to avoid such a major outage again in the future.
The rumor mill is in full gear this week suggesting that AT&T will be introducing its own “branded” model of Palm’s Centro smartphone, till now available exclusively through Sprint.
 
The PalmAddicts blog said Sprint’s exclusive hold on the Centro, which began shipping in early October, was rumored to be a three-month deal, so now’s about the time you’d expect to see it start being offered by other carriers.
 
Engadget seemed very confident in a Thursday post that AT&T’s Centro is set being shipping on February 19. The price likely will be $99, and the color probably white.

How Many iPhones Has Apple Really Sold?

It just doesn’t add up. During Steve Jobs’ Macworld keynote, he reported that Apple shipped four million iPhones so far. But AT&T says it had only about two million iPhone customers at the end of 2007. Even taking into account the fact that Apple now has service agreements with carriers in countries other than the U.S., it appears there is a discrepancy. 
 
InformationWeek offers information from analysts at Sanford Bernstein that attempts to explain the mismatch between Apple’s and AT&T’s numbers. The analyst firm estimated that Apple’s total iPhone shipments are actually 3.75 million, not 4 million. The firm also estimated that carriers have activated 2.35 million iPhones.
 
“Assuming that 20% of the unactivated phones may have been unlocked to work on other networks, that still leaves 670,000 iPhones unaccounted for,” InformationWeek noted in its report.
 
That means that there is a pile of not-yet-activated iPhones in the hands of carriers. The question remains: can Apple still hit its target of selling 10 million iPhones by the end of 2008? What do you think?
 
On a somewhat related note, Rich Tehrani blogged yesterday that Motorola may be considering spinning off its handset business. He asked whether this is really a smart move, given how big mobility is these days. The company has operations in 44 countries/regions and describes itself as “a global communications leader” that’s all about seamless mobility, broadband embedded systems and wireless networks.
As of Tuesday, the FCC had conducted 12 rounds of bidding for sections of the 700MHz spectrum, over a span of four days. But one of the blocks up for bid isn’t garnering much interest among potential buyers, Reuters reported.
 
That is “Block D,” also known as the “public safety block” because it’s designated for use by police, firefighters and other public saftery officials, Reuters reported. So far there has only been one bid for this block—for $472 million, far below the FCC’s reserve price of $1.3 million.
 
If things don’t pick up soon for the D block, the FCC may be forced to modify its requirements for the spectrum and/or lower the price. Reuters speculated that the dearth of bidders may be due to the credit crunch companies in the U.S. are experiencing; possibly they simply can’t raise the capital.
 
Current requirements for the D block also likely make it less appealing in terms of return on investment: “Under rules adopted by the FCC, the winner of the D block airwaves will be required to negotiate an agreement with public safety agencies, build out a nationwide network and then give those agencies priority use during emergencies,” Reuters explained.
 
What do you think—will someone step in yet to rescue the D block? Or will the FCC have to change its expectations for this section of the spectrum?
So, with the FCC’s 700MHz spectrum auction underway, the $4.6 billion question is: will Google come to the rescue of open access or not? If the company bids more than the $4.6 billion reserve (minimum) price specified for the C Block of spectrum to be licensed as “open,” then the consumer advocacy groups and some analysts will be pretty happy.
 
Of course if Google does bid that much, it’s possible the company may actually go all the way and win the spectrum itself. Or not. The outcome will either paint Google as the knight in shining armor or as a company determined to really shake up the wireless market.
 
Which do you think it will be?
Wireless service providers may need to engage in some reality-checking during 2008 when it comes to projected versus actual revenue growth associated with mobile business applications. That’s what In-Stat predicted this week in a new report, Wireless Data in the US Enterprise 2007: Avoiding a CDPD Reprise.
 
The research firm expects revenue growth for this particular wireless sector will end up being about 44 percent from 2007 to 2008, down slightly from 50 percent for 2006 and 2007. Why the slight downturn? In-Stat chalked it up to the services companies actually implement, which tend to be somewhat reduced from plans made by decision-makers.
 
“As business users approach saturation for horizontal mobile data applications, most of the growth potential remains for vertical market applications,” In-Stat analyst Bill Hughes said in the report. “These require more planning and time to implement. The result is that many within the wireless industry may have overoptimistic forecasts.”  
 
In terms of horizontal applications, In-Stat said the following four have the highest penetration because they’re relatively easy to implement: wireless Internet, wireless IM, wireless e-mail and personal information management (PIM).
 
What do you think—are service providers expecting too much from an increasingly saturated market?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next

Subscribe to Blog

August 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            

About this Archive

This page is a archive of recent entries in the cellular category.

Bluetooth is the previous category.

fixed-mobile convergence is the next category.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Around TMCnet Blogs

Latest Whitepapers