It's no secret that mobile phone service in the US isn't as ubiquitous, US phones aren't as stylish, and the whole mobile system just doesn't work as well as in Europe, Asia, and most of the rest of the world (with the possible exception of Africa). Even our proudest mobile phone technologies often don't live up to the most basic standards of service expected in the ROW.
Case in point: The Droid. Now here's a beautiful phone just launched by one of the country's most accomplished technology companies, Motorola, using Google's innovative software, and sold for use on the largest US mobile network, Verizon Wireless. But guess what? The Droid won't work on non-US networks! Or, in the sophisticated technical jargon of Verizon Wireless, the Droid is not a "world phone." Which begs a point: What planet does Verizon Wireless inhabit, anyway?
More than five years ago, when I lived in the UK, if I had gone shopping for a new mobile phone at any store, for use on any network, I would have had a hard time finding a phone that did NOT have "triband" capability, meaning that it would work on virtually any phone system in the world, including the antiquated US CDMA One and CDMA2000 systems.
But here in the US, half a decade later, we still tout our proudest mobile phone accomplishments to ourselves alone. How utterly parochial and narrow-minded. Hey, we're Americans. We don't need no stinkin' world.
I am sorry, Mark and Gavin, but I probably didn't make myself clear enough in my original post. I agree with everyone that whether or not the Droid has been released in Europe or not is a decision for Motorola, Google, and (maybe) Verizon Wireless. Frankly, I don't think they need smart phones in Europe as much as we need them in the United States. In Europe they already have a whole raft of mobile phones with way more capabilities than ours have in the US, for the most part.
What I am lamenting in my original article is the fact that Verizon Wireless would choose to release a high-end, king-of-the-hill, killer-app phone like the Droid, without even accommodating the large number of high-value phone users who live in the US but frequently travel overseas and need a phone that works in EVERY country, not just in the US or other CDMA countries (of which there may be five or ten total, I don't know).
I live in the US, but I travel outside the US a great deal. The problem with the Droid is that (in its current Verizon configuration) it simply cannot be used outside the US, Canada, and Mexico. I don't think this is Google's fault, and probably not Motorola's fault. This is probably Verizon Wireless's fault, because it's simply the way they chose to have the phone configured. Apparently such a tiny fraction of US mobile phone subscribers travel abroad and need a phone that works in foreign countries that Verizon Wireless can simply ignore the whole lot of us.
Contrast this with ANY business-purpose mobile phone sold in Europe today, and you will discover that almost all of them have multiple capabilities, and can therefore be used in virtually any country in the world. Clearly, the Europeans must think of themselves as world citizens, while Americans apparently do not.
I do think you can chalk this up to the peculiar structure of mobile phones in the US, with the telco operators being way too powerful. The consequences are that they just don't need to meet customer needs, and US mobile phone customers are under-served, relative to customers outside the US..
Don:
This is the PC story all over again. In the past, operating systems were inseparable from compture hardware just as the iphone OS is today. Android is an open source operating system that any handset maker can configure to run on their own hardware.
The iphone has been very popular with developers as it is easy to develop (only one hardware spec) and distribute via itunes.
The Droid is being made available in other markets under a different name. In Germany its called the "Milestone" marketed by O2.
Whats wrong with the US market is that the telcos control the distribution of the handsets and insist on locking them to contracts. Because the lack of transparancy, consumers thing the bundled phones are free when in fact they are paying by the month in subsidies buried in network contract.
( Correction to my previous post: second paragraph, last sentence: "But that’s going *beyond* the first quarter of next year." ]
I think we need to step back here a pace or two: The Droid is the first phone based on the Android 2.0 operating system. Although one can debate the particular merits of the (wonderful) iPhone vs. the Droid – it seems to be a product that is worthy of being in the same sentence as the iPhone – which is the breakthrough. So you can’t get one in Europe just yet – but with a different chipset down the pike – which happens often enough in this industry – you’ll see the Droid or some equally capable Android 2.0-based phone down the pike. It seems that Motorola’s strategy – either by choice or by not having much of one, is for Verizon in the US to be the venue. The Droid need sales traction and Verizon is a logical fix for both the size of its market and having no worthy contender to the iPhone. If Motorola/Verizon can build a reasonable sized following here – you’ll can have host of Android 2.0 based phones around the globe soon enough.
Having said that - I already see one potential monkey wrench - or as others say - a spanner, which may be headed into the whole industry: Google itself is due out in the first quarter with their Google branded phone. Who knows what they have up their sleeve? Will it turn the whole US (or maybe even Global) mobile business on its head? And even if it doesn’t – they can now take the Microsoft strategy, having enough of a war chest, to try and try again. But that’s going being the first quarter of next year.
So it’s a shame that that Motorola has ignored the non-US market for the Droid on the first pass – but I think they’ll be there soon enough.
Well, thanks for your comment, Gavin, but I guess you don't get out of the country much, huh?
And I don't think iPhone is dropping calls because it's GSM - it's the lack of SUFFICIENT coverage on GSM that means their calls are dropping. They don't drop calls in Europe, even on i-Phone.
Do you by any chance work for Qualcomm?
Wow, what an incredibly naive article on the state of wireless today. It is a question of technology. GSM vs. CDMA.
Qualcomm, the company behind CDMA, is used by Verizon Wireless. Just because many countries picked GSM does not mean the technology is better. Ask iPhone users if they love dropping calls!
It is about carriers and cell coverage. If the Droid was built for GSM, one could argue that the phone does not work on the best US network!
Just surprised at the point that unless you build for GSM, you are not ready to make world phones... ask Asia if this applies!
Thanks for the insight on the Droid. As a loyal Verizon customer, I've been suffering through contract on my first data phone: the Motorola Q9C. Now there's a phone that migrated from the Stone Age. I've been reluctant to jump on the Droid bandwagon until I get more feedback on it. Your insight gave me some pause to think about whether it's time to upgrade or not. I guess it all depends on how much traveling I intend to do abroad.