03-28-2002, 04:16 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
What Price Wireless Apps?
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,91604,tk,dn032702X,00.asp
Just when you think wireless data charges are too high to swallow, the carriers are talking about how to charge you for using applications on your phone while disconnected! This is a very bold move by the carriers, one that will be met with almost universal loathing. Who wants to pay 25 cents every time they play a simple game or read news offline? If you buy an application, you should be able to use that application whenever you want - not keep paying for it. What if it cost us 25 cents every time we opened Microsoft Word? Microsoft might like it, but most people would stop using Word - the TCO would skyrocket. This attempt by the carriers to extort more money from their victims will flop in a huge way. People are willing to pay a small amount to communicate with others (SMS), but not to play a game on their phone. Comparing a tiny, low-res B&W screen on a phone with awkward controls to an arcade game is silly - the two simply don't compare.
"The prime example of value-based pricing is in Europe, where carriers charge 10 cents per SMS message. With the rise of J2ME applications that are small enough to reside on the cell phone, however, the problem has become how to charge users who are not connected to the network and who access an application only locally on the handset.
Sprint and others seem to have overcome the problem of charging for offline use. Sprint calls its solution BOBO (billing on behalf of others) and is currently testing this and various other pricing schemes, said Nancy Sherrer, a Sprint spokesperson based in Overland Park, Kansas. Sprint will offer value-based pricing schemes with its applications in the second half of this year when it launches its third-generation network, Sherrer said. By placing a counter in each application--even if a user is playing a game on the handset while flying coast to coast, or if a salesperson is checking an SFA application for an address offline--Sprint can charge for usage.
"Think of it as gong to an arcade and paying 25 cents for a game. It's the same experience," Sherrer said."
|
| |
|
|
|
03-28-2002, 04:24 PM
|
|
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 516
|
|
BOBO seems like an apt name for this.
Scott
|
| |
|
|
|
03-28-2002, 04:53 PM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 217
|
|
Pure extortion. The quarter/video game comment is absurd. Look at the current full-size arcade games and the graphics/user experience (Daytona USA and that skiing game comes to mind) and compare these to a game on a mobile phone.
I was really looking forward to Smartphone 2002, but not if this is what they have in mind for the "experience". I want to be able to buy my apps and use them whenever I like. Small monthly fee for SMS, I can handle, but this?
The ridiculous part is that they would be so hot to charge for apps in this way that they will scare off potential customers by the thousands, before these things ever get off the ground. I mean, any business since at all says that you should get everyone hooked on the service and then try to gouge them later on. :wink:
|
| |
|
|
|
03-28-2002, 04:56 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 62
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Scott R
BOBO seems like an apt name for this.
Scott
|
For there to be true justification for billing, there must be some interactivity with the network and an enhanced level of game play (eg. multiplayer) besides what is resident on one handset (even when your not in a service area).
Either billing for the app upfront or on a per use basis, but not both, but there must be a greater user experience.
|
| |
|
|
|
03-28-2002, 04:57 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mar2k
I was really looking forward to Smartphone 2002, but not if this is what they have in mind for the "experience". I want to be able to buy my apps and use them whenever I like. Small monthly fee for SMS, I can handle, but this?
|
There's no mention of Smartphone 2002 in the article - if anything, it seems to be a J2ME initiative. Bad Java, bad! ;-)
|
| |
|
|
|
03-28-2002, 05:07 PM
|
|
Thinker
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 360
|
|
More Charges
I tell you what, I am getting so damn sick and tired of this carp. Sprint was supposed to be one of the first in the states to get their 3G network up and running, but turns out they will be last. They do not even have it running and allready want to find ways to screw their customers out of money. I have had Sprint for over two years.. My wife and I keep talking ourselves out of leaving them because of the costs involved in switching carriers. But this is really starting to tweak me off. What is really funny is that I have to go pay my bill today.
I think I am going to talk to their store manager.
I am starting to wonder if 3G is really worth all of the carp envolved.
|
| |
|
|
|
03-28-2002, 05:08 PM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 217
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jason Dunn
There's no mention of Smartphone 2002 in the article - if anything, it seems to be a J2ME initiative. Bad Java, bad! ;-)
|
Oops, I can see how you would interpret my comment in that way. I wasn't picking on Smartphone 2002, it just hit me that if this is what ultimately the CARRIERS have in mind I wouldn't be so interested anymore. Hopefully, Smartphone 2002 will be a lot more like Pocket PC and a lot less like J2ME...
|
| |
|
|
|
03-28-2002, 05:09 PM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 137
|
|
This is one more reason (along with the perpetual 3G tease) to ditch the carriers altogether and adopt new devices combining 802.11 and Voice Over IP. You can walk from one end of downtown Seattle to the other without losing 802.11 coverage (thanks to Starbucks) and here in Denver, it's getting close to that already. Why carry a cellphone and a Pocket PC if the Pocket PC can do the job by itself?
I know this is tantamount to treason here in the USA, but this is why greed sucks. Didn't anyone read "The Goose That Laid the Golden Eggs" when they were kids? If the carriers persist in trying to suck every dime possible out of their customers, they'll drive their customers elsewhere. Not unlike the RIAA charging $20 for a CD with maybe two good songs on it drove people to Napster.
|
| |
|
|
|
03-28-2002, 07:16 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 69
|
|
Another of my 17 reasons
That just adds more fuel to my argument against cell phones. I've never owned one, and at this rate never will. It's absolutely stupid to pay the money they ask for a service that is inconsistent in it's coverage (my friends are "out of range" more often than in), that you have to count this kind of minute and that kind of minute, and now this stupidity of charging for messages AND for using the piece of junk when not in an actual call!? I guess this also shows how lame the combined units will be--what's to stop the carriers from charging you for games you play on your PocketPC Phone Edition, huh?
The VOIP is the most promising way at this point for battling these moronic carriers, as far as I can see. Somebody needs to spank those carriers....
|
| |
|
|
|
03-28-2002, 09:02 PM
|
|
Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,060
|
|
So, it sounds like we're undecided about the value of BOBO, huh? :wink:
The good news is that this type of pricing plan will never fly and it will rapidly yield to those based on reality.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
