[Splines]

> The more the iPhone succeeds, the less leverage the carriers have, Mr. Kuittinen explained. All they have is bandwidth.

So what's the concern here? Carriers aren't idiots - is carrier commoditization necessarily a bad thing?

[masklinn]

> is carrier commoditization necessarily a bad thing?

Depends on the POV you're considering.

From the POV of the carriers it's a very, very bad thing as it's going to eat into their money and their control. For some manufacturers it's not a good thing as they build handsets for carriers who may not want handsets built specifically for them once they're "nothing but dumb pipes".

For pretty much everybody else, it'll be a great day.

[recoiledsnake]

>For some manufacturers it's not a good thing as they build handsets for carriers who may not want handsets built specifically for them once they're "nothing but dumb pipes".

I think manufacturers are very pissed at having to make a different model for each carrier or make slight changes in the design and naming for each carrier.

This is the reason that Nokia stopped dealing with carriers and went the unlocked route a few years before having to eat crow and get back into bed with the carriers this year.

The manufacturers would be very happy to make one model and be able to sell it on multiple carriers with consistent naming.

[masklinn]

> I think manufacturers are very pissed at having to make a different model for each carrier or make slight changes in the design and naming for each carrier.

I'm guessing that depends on the carrier, Nokia had power and brand name but HTC was founded as a strict ODM.

The advantage is that you get money to build the phone (to specs, and usually shitty, but still build it) and are cushioned from device failure: currently, carriers want many devices in their portfolio (even if most barely sell).