Why there's no iPhone and why Nokia hasn't succeeded in US

David Pogue writes in his New York Times blog about why he thinks there will never be an iPhone.
His point is that the carriers (aka. operators) have so much power and want to influence every step in the product development of mobile phones. And that Apple doesn't want to give "veto power to ANYONE over its software design". He tells about his friends' - who've worked in the Treo development - experiences: "the carriers (Verizon, Cingular, etc.) have veto power over EVERY move you make. You have to fight, -- refine, -- repeat…all in hopes that -- (they will) -- stock your phone."

I think David has a very good point. It seems to me that Apple and Nokia have had the same approach to making their devices in at least one way. They've both wanted to keep control in their product development. This might be partially the reason that Nokia has such a lousy market share in the US compared to other market areas.

This might even partially explain the 'design problem' that Nokia has had especially in the US. The carriers' influence is quite monopolistic in practice and they can influence the trends and what people 'want' very strongly.

I'm pretty sure that if the carries didn't have such a strong influence, ie. if there weren't subsidies for buying phones, Nokia - whose phones are just so much better than Motorola's - would have a larger market share - and, who knows, maybe there'd be an iPhone on the market, too.