Single Carrier Phones?

[Cootie]

Why do they keep doing this?

Release the phone on more than one carrier for one. There is no reason to have four different "versions" of the Galaxy S when you can just release the normal Galaxy S on all of the carriers. The Droid 2 is a huge hit, the release the damn thing on more than one carrier. They are just making 4x the amount of phones and confusion than necessary or so it seems.

 

[jdbower]

In the US the carriers subsidize the phones, as such they partially own them for most people and have more control. Hopefully this will go away eventually, it will open up phones significantly but it will also mean we'll be paying $600 a pop.

We've also got multiple systems. Verizon uses CDMA, AT&T uses GSM. As everyone migrates to LTE this offers more hope for a single phone across all carriers, but as of now we need dual-mode phones so we're a few years off from pure LTE plays. The Droid 2 was developed for Verizon so there are technical reasons why it won't work on GSM carriers.

That said, the Droid 2 name was licensed by Verizon because they needed to pay off Lucas. Search for the Milestone 2 on other carriers which is an identical phone.

 

[Cootie]

Why can't they all subsidize the same phone and just make minor changes to accommodation networks like the iPhone 4 (as much as saying that pains me). Having so many devices out there just creates confusion with knowing what you are actually getting.

 

[jdbower]

Because then AT&T could spend $10M advertising a phone and people would just buy it from T-Mobile. Or, more appropriately, because the carriers see more value in renaming and rebranding than they see in keeping the name the same. The educated consumer knows what's what and that research needs to be done on smartphones these days. The uneducated consumer probably doesn't care that the AT&T WidgetMaster 4000 is the same exact phone as the T-Mobile DataMuncher. And really, what is the problem with that? The only difference is you're buying a Verizon phone first that happens to be an LG instead of buying an LG phone that happens to be on Verizon.

The iPhone name has had a lot of money poured into it from Apple, If Samsung was responsible for marketing the Galaxy S series (and able to do so effectively) the carriers wouldn't rebrand it. However, the GSM iPhone is an AT&T exclusive, it's not sold anyplace other than AT&T. The CDMA iPhone is a Verizon exclusive and not sold anyplace other than Verizon. The hardware in these phones is completely different, they're not interchangeable at all. Thinking these two phones ARE the same creates a lot of confusion.

Luckily you may get your wish with tablets, with WiFi-only tablets able to be sold at any electronics outlet without contract it's much more likely that the name will stick cross carrier.

 

[srkmagnus]

Very well put, jdbower. Remember, carriers are in competition and are trying to attract consumers and lock them to the longest possible contract offered. This is also why you see "exclusive" devices because the carrier is in hopes to take customers away from competition with a guarantee of a device that is at the forefront of technology. There are many good examples, but I think the Evo comes to most minds being that it was the "first 4G" phone and many people went to Sprint to get in on the action.