Five Reasons Apple Should Buy Sprint

Each month we take a look at Apple fantasy mergers: Mergers intended to be funny, or sometimes serious, but almost always unlikely to happen. Today though, it's a merger/acquisition that would actually make a lot of sense: Sprint. Sprint? Here's Five reasons why this makes sense:

1. Apple would control the whole "widget." What does Apple like above all else? Control over how their products are marketed and viewed. What better way to do that with the iPhone and future devices than to own the network too. The cell phone service provider space could use the same kind of shakeup the iPhone brought to the hardware manufacturers.

2. It's a bargain. Relative to the other networks, Sprint would represent a decent buy. And while their coverage might be lacking in current generations, the 4G space looks like it could be a different story.

3. Revenue, revenue, revenue. Sure, the $300 subsidy from AT&T on each phone is nice, but how about the net revenue from every U.S. customer over the course of their contract? It remains to be seen how becoming a U.S. provider could affect relationships with carriers in other parts of the world.

4. A rising tide lifts all ships. Imagine the new opportunities across Apple's products, from MobileMe to MacBooks if Apple could integrate wireless service into more devices, and use a networked streamlined for data rather than voice.

5. Make AT&T call your bluff. Admittedly, this one doesn't require buying Sprint, but merely talking about it. If Apple let it be known that they weren't afraid to go into the cell provider business themselves, maybe AT&T would make more attractive concessions not just for Apple, but also iPhone customers. Things like last week's contract wording "mistake" could be a thing of the past.

Disappointing News From AT&T

Electronista is reporting that some new language in AT&T's contract might bring streaming video to the iPhone to a grind, including SlingPLayer's new app. The language says in part, "customer initiated redirection of television or other video or audio signals via any technology from a fixed location to a mobile device," will be blocked.

Guess what AT&T? the iPhone is a portable computer on your network. Deal with it. You could've seen this demand coming, and should've made plans to accomodate it. It almost makes me wonder how restrictive AT&T could become before Apple could break out of their exclusivity agreement. You're making extra money on iPhone subscriber every single month. If you don't have a problem with that, you shouldn't have a problem with the capabilities that sell those devices, AT&T.

UPDATE: Now AT&T says the wording was a mistake.Thanks to Grant in the comments for the heads up.

Why Computer Companies Shouldn't Be Part of News: MSNBC Online

There's  a strange dual personality for MSNBC. On one hand, you have the cable network, and as far as technology goes, they tend to take a hands-off approach, with little news beyond big product launches. On the other hand, you have msnbc.com, which every once in awhile, will stick a stinker of a bias tech story in there, that just makes you scratch your head. And so it goes with today's article, "Has The Mac Lost Its Cachet?" Author Dan Richman, hiding behind that headline with a question mark on the end, (fine for bloggers I say, but not "real" news) goes on to explain just why it could be lights out for Apple. Oh sure there are other computer companies doing worse, and yes he's pulling a stat that he admits only shows the one month in which Apple saw a decline. But surely that's enough evidence that Apple's about to coming crashing down, right? And it's just a coincidence that this comes on the heels of Microsoft's new ad campaign (Microsoft being the "MS" in MSNBC) touting how expensive a Mac is compared to a PC. Dan spends the first half of the article repeating the same mantra found in the commercial. (It's even more strange since we uncovered that Steve Jobs works at MSNBC. :) )

There may very well be valid points in the article, but I know if I was the news editor of a company that's a joint venture with MSFT, and I wanted to ensure objectivity, I wouldn't go anywhere near this story. I think there would be anger in the general public, if say there was a network called CNNGM, a partnership with General Motors,  that then ran a story questioning whether Fords were really worth it.

Apple's Nuclear Option Against Microsoft

On Friday, we covered Microsoft's new commercial strategy, and corresponding banner ads. A quick recap is that the spots aim to show the Mac as more expensive than comparable PCs. Of course there's no cost of ownership or duration of the machine considered. These are simple ads aimed at placing doubt in the minds of those about to buy Macs, and frankly, for a lot of people they may prove convincing.

So what is Apple to do? Well, it would be wise to wait a bit, and see if these ads have any appreciable effects. Of course waiting too long, if they are effective could spell doom. What would be the strongest course of action if the ads work? There's a difference between Microsoft and Apple, and it's significant: Microsoft doesn't make computers. Why does that matter? Imagine if you woke up tomorrow to $799 MacBooks, or MacBook Pros starting at $1299. All Apple has to do in a worst-case scenario is lower prices and weather the storm. They have plenty of money in the bank to do so. The same can't be said of all the PC manufacturers. And those manufacturers would probably not be thrilled with Microsoft if they needed to lower prices to compete. I don't think the Lenovos and Compaqs of the world have the same kind of cash sitting around as Apple, and in a slow growth period in the industry, a price war could be devastating to some PC manufacturers.

So while it's unlikely to happen, and unlikely to need to happen, Apple has the ability to wipe out any gains from these ads in short order.

Microsoft Ad Offensive Hits Banner Ads Too

It's a little hard to see, but following up on our earlier post, this is a screen grab of a banner from CNN.com minutes ago. In short, the left side shows how "little" you get with a Mac, while the right side shows all the extra things you can buy by saving money with a PC.

The ad works like a slot machine, with different Windows PCs on the right, and of course, they're always the better value, er, the cheapest. But it's the same thing, right? Right.