I think a better question to ask is: Why aren't telecoms taking more risks with the user experience on their handsets? There has been plenty of innovative talk about where mobile and smart phones can go in the near future. I think there is too much fear in extending some of those features into the market and being seen (initially) as novel. Novelty doesn't always equal sales.

The board of any public telco is hamstrung. They are sandwiched between the best interests of their shareholders and the government or market expectations as to market growth.

In the shareholders interest, to who they are contracted, they must hold cust.vol./ revenue advantage, even if that means not collaborating with emergent technologies.

What we are all experiencing now is the swirl of the transition economy as we move from ‘steam – to electricity’ (physical assets earning income to virtual assets earning income.)

However, clearly there are alignments that can live alongside each other. One example would be, a ‘licence fee’ to the customer database – a ‘click the ticket’ approach.

...well of course they are. Anytime you force innovation to go through the corporate gatekeepers you will limit it because it has to go through more than just a technical approval process. It has to be proven not to threaten other internal offerings. If Ford Motor Company didn't have this same protectionist bent then they would have owned the mini-van market in the mid-70s just in time to for the American oil crunch. As it was, Iaccoca couldn't get it past committee because it would have been in competition with the station wagon; Fords bread and butter. This same way of thinking in the short term stifles innovation and in the long term will prevent the mobile carriers from becoming something much greater.

Jay -- Both Mobile TV and Mobile Wallet have become a way of life in Japan. If profits were not a factor, why do you (or anyone else here) think these and other innovative uses of cellphones are not happening in North America?

Potentially, but not exactly. AT&T, formerly Cingular Wireless was convinced in 2006 that VoIP over mobile was not necessarily a threat to their profit. They figured they could charge for traffic instead of minutes. Before that there were WiFi mobiles. VoIP in mobile is innovative. The profit motive does not in this case stifle innovation. Innovations such as the electronic wallet in a phone can deliver revenue by way of a small transaction fee. TV over mobile is innovative and generates enough profit to be worthwhile. The list goes on.
Jay Thomas-Burrows

not always, Jan Chipchase from Nokia has some interesting thoughts!

i believe they certainly did and are as far as network/service - just sitting back taking in the money, little-to-no R&D. luckily apple broke into the telecom market to help push product innovation. now, if only one of the big telecoms would actually break through and develop a product / network / service.

Please view Parent apl US11/581,155 on www.uspto.gov web & decide about trade off of copyrighted pers info/exchanged/money via short published ad copyrighted phrases. Process is being used now via small cos:Expanded process added/Govt/needs amendments via pros:

No.