Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: slacker711 who wrote (10585)	5/10/2001 2:05:35 PM
From: golfinvestor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197192

<....but I would think they would still want to offer as many applications as possible.> Slacker711, I'm sure if there is a demand for an application, the carrier will offer it. I see BREW as a win-win-win-win. The CARRIER gets more customer billable minutes from many the many application downloads and a cut of the application revenue. The DEVELOPER gets roughly 80% of the the application revenue. Also, the developers get a easy platform to write applications to. Q gets paid by the carrier for the BREW platform download and a cut of the application revenue. The USER gets useful applications downloaded quickly and easily using less air time minutes resulting is less frustration. IMHO, the potential revenue generated by BREW for Q is much more than most can imagine.

To: slacker711 who wrote (10585)	5/10/2001 2:37:45 PM
From: brian h	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197192

I thought I-Mode's model is similar. NTT DoCoMo has a full control over developers' software distribution.

To: slacker711 who wrote (10585)	5/10/2001 3:43:08 PM
From: Kayaker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197192

it seems to me that it would be in the carrier's best interest to offer all of the BREW developed applications. I agree with you. I've been a software developer since the mid 80s. I have developed and sell a couple of programs that are very much niche products. It takes thousands of hours to write the software. I wouldn't write a program if it were up to a "phone company" to decide whether or not I could sell it. It's not worth the risk. Or maybe they let me sell it, but then drop it later because they like a competitor's product better, or they get a better split with the competitor. I think the Yahoo poster's concerns are legit. The risk, uncertainty, and lack of control over the distribution have to be considered. It's a huge risk for a little guy(s) to commit the time and effort to write a new piece of software. I suspect there will be many creative and innovative software programs that will never be programmed. It discourages individual developers and small companies and favors big, well financed companies with mainstream apps. Just my 2¢.

To: slacker711 who wrote (10585)	5/10/2001 3:47:46 PM
From: pyslent	Respond to of 197192

<< it would be in the carrier's best interest to offer all of the BREW developed applications. >> I bet carriers would offer as many applications as they could, as there really isn't any drawback to it (except public backlash against porn <g>). I wonder if the motivation for BREW downloads to have to go through carriers is because this provides a mechanism by which carriers can negotiate (and pay for) exclusive rights to certain software. I remember IJ once saying that the carriers saw BREW as a way to differentiate themselves from the competition, and of course, one couldn't do that if there was open source access to all programs.