You are here: Home / Articles / Invasion of the Feature Phone!

Invasion of the Feature Phone!

April 18, 2009 9:58 pm By 8 Comments

samsung-impression Have you noticed the number of feature phones increasing lately? More importantly, have you noticed now capable some of these phones are? Its got me wondering about where smartphones and feature phones are going to intersect.

Feature phones include the Sidekick, Samsung Instinct and Impression, LG Xenon and Motorola Hint and they are really quite capable; there is really very little that separates these from smartphone.  What keeps feature phones from being considered "smart" would be third-party developers, customization, tethering and a few other things.  The newest Sidekick does stretch this definition though, as it already has dozens of apps in its app store.

This is exactly my point though.  If you look at using phones more or less out of the box there is very little difference between these two classes.  You can browse, email, listen to music, watch videos, etc.  Believe it or not, there are a LOT of users of iPhone, Windows Mobile and Blackberry that are actually out-of-the-box types that do little or no customization.

One of the biggest differences we see is in the cost of data.  In Canada you can get $10 unlimited mobile browsing (which really doesn’t differentiate between browsing and downloading data) but data costs (for smartphones) are astronomical.  From Bell you can get $10 unlimited internet on a feature phone but on Windows Mobile you pay $35 for 500mb.  Pretty darn nuts!

So, what is going to happen?  Will we see high priced data packages start being used on feature phones or much better flat rates for all phones?  Obviously I would hope that carriers just bite the bullet and make mobile data flat rate and cheap.  Maybe figure out some way to detect tethering or something, but devices should be FULLY usable.

Lets hope that competition makes cheap mobile data a reality.

About Darren Humphries

Darren Humphries has written 78 posts on Mobile Jaw..

Editor, MobileJaw.com Microsoft MVP (Windows Mobile)

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: , ,
  • http://twitter.com/MobileJaw/statuses/tag:search.twitter.com,2005:1555242366 MobileJaw

    Invasion of the Feature Phone!: Have you noticed the number of feature phones increasing lately? More importantl.. http://bit.ly/ZPbTQ

  • BRYAN B

    I think you have forgotten who we are dealing with, ALL companies are driven be several motivating factors, PROFIT…. PROFIT…. PROFIT. Case in point, I will refer you to the following article concerning text messaging fees and this only a small part of the overall picture.

    http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/114665

  • http://www.MobileJaw.com Mike Temporale

    @Bryan, To be fair, profit is what all companies are after. Companies aren’t in business to lose money. ;)

    In general, we’ve seen a steady drop in rates over the last couple years. As consumer adoption grows, the price falls (maybe not at the exact same rate).

  • BRYAN B

    I have no problem with anyone making a profit, my contention was with the comment,” Obviously I would hope that carriers just bite the bullet and make mobile data flat rate and cheap.”
    To stress my point of where dose profit end and greed start, Engadget just posted this story

    http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/22/time-warner-and-embarq-cant-compete-with-city-owned-isp-trying/

  • http://www.twitter.com/DarrenHumphries Darren Humphries

    Bryan, its a little frightening that you would assume I am naive enough to think that companies would just magically become bleeding hearts.

    Of course companies are motivated by money; it is the point of their existence. But while some companies decide to raise prices others lower in order to gain more customer and potentially even more money.

    Case in point: the iPhone App Store. Before the iPhone decent applications for mobile devices cost $20, $30 or more. The App Store has shown that developers can sell a LOT more application and make far more money by selling their apps at $1.99, $4.99 or whatever.

    My point (that I didn’t think I was going to need to expound) was that by offering lower data rates carriers will eventually realize that they can still make money and perhaps make more by sheer volume. I would hope for consumers that would be the case in Canada as it already is in many other countries. Unfortunately, the Canadian carriers have not made this leap in logic yet.

    The really ugly truth in Canadian cellular rates right now is that new options are on their way and existing carriers want to lock as many people in to long term contracts at these high rates. As we get closer to the arrival of this much needed competition you will see the big three start to lower their prices more aggressively to, again, grab hold of customers.

    In the end, competition will force data rates down to where they should be. Many more people will end up buying this cheaper data and carriers will satisfy their bloodlust. What a wonderful world. :)

  • BRYAN B

    For the most part Darren I can relate to your comments, it was simply the parting phrase which caused me to comment. If the implication is that you naive, that may be an over stated, but that depends on weather you believe that they are looking out for your best interests or their profit margin. The Tech industry can’t be run with the same business model as, say Home Depot. When Home Depot first moves into an area, their prices can’t be beat, most if not all the local lumber supply houses most drop their prices or close their doors. After they have consolidated the area, prices start to increase. Once their prices reach a certain level, that leaves room for Lowes to undercut them and move in. This is the basic principle of capitalism.
    The Tech industry on the other hand, has no time frame in which to make their profits to be able to build on, for future technology, so most if not all their profit must come up front. Case in point, I read somewhere AT&T is skipping a generation in the development of their services that they provide. The money to upgrade must come from us, but when a device is considered obsolete before it even hits the market, it doesn’t leave a lot of room for recouping the expense of have the latest and greatest.
    I think the best representation of the technology industry would be that of a chubby little man (or woman) hauling butt down a mountain side while being chased by an avalanche.
    If you have taken exception to being naive???? Then I’m a little confused, because I was under the impression, that; that is what should drive you in your commentary. If simply spout things I want to hear, then your reader base is going to be very boring. I would rather you strike up a discourse, while not agonistic, but stimulating.

    BRYAN B

  • http://www.twitter.com/DarrenHumphries Darren Humphries

    I’m pretty sure my last comment cleared up any doubts on whether I think companies are thinking of profit or people. Maybe re-read it?

    Its actually baffling that you are confused at me taking exception to being called naive. But, w/e.

    Anyway, I am all for discussions and friendly arguments, just don’t expect me to withhold the whit whip if you don’t. :)

  • http://www.MobileJaw.com Mike Temporale

    I know I’m late to respond, but I’ve been sick. (That’s my story and I’m sticking with it) ;)

    In regards to companies selling more applications for less and making more money – that’s no really correct. The reason for the price drop is that by making it to the front page of the app store, your sales will skyrocket. Sure, these companies made more money, but not every application makes it to the top. For those that don’t, $1.99 is hard to live off. You’ll be hard pressed to pay for your development time, food, office space, phones, etc…

    In the end, the $1.99 move will hurt the developers eco-system. I fully expect that things won’t stay that way forever.