Analyst says iPhone is lifeblood of AT&T success

[AppleInsider]

If the iPhone's exclusivity with AT&T were to expire, one market research firm predicts that the cell phone carrier would suffer due to the superior network offered by competitor Verizon Wireless.

This week, Pali Research released a prediction that AT&T will net less than 1 million new subscribers in 2010, compared with the 4 million it gained in 2008. The report operates under the assumption that the iPhone will leap to Verizon's network once the contract has expired.

The statement comes as AT&T is pushing to keep Apple's phone exclusively on their network through 2011. The Wall Street Journal has reported, through anonymous sources, that CEO Randall Stephenson is currently negotiating with Apple. iPhone-AT&T exclusivity in the U.S. expires next year.

If Pali Research is to be believed, AT&T's future could depend on retention of the iPhone, making Stephenson's alleged negotiations all the more crucial.

"As the iPhone exclusivity period rolls off between AT&T Wireless and Apple, a material number of AT&T customers will flock to Verizon’s superior network," the firm states. "We estimate that nearly a third of AT&T’s post-paid customers are being retained by AT&T primarily because of the iPhone exclusivity."

The market research firm based its conclusion on two recent studies that show AT&T has 3G speeds that lag behind Verizon, T-Mobile and Sprint. The study from Wired, with a sampling of 12,000 mobile phone customers, demonstrated that AT&T has an average download speed of 901 Kbps. Another survey from PC World corroborated those results.

This, despite numerous attempts by the company to boost bandwidth capacity for the iPhone and the network's influx of users.

This year, it was estimated that a third of AT&T's new customers are switching solely because of the iPhone. The same study from ChangeWave suggests that AT&T customers are also less likely to switch carriers.

Pali Research recently gave investors a buy rating for Verizon and sell for AT&T, based on the latter's dependence on the iPhone.

"Our Buy rating on Verizon is based on our view that its market share gains will lead to profit growth that tops other telecom companies and Wall Street consensus estimates," the firm said in June. "Our Sell rating on AT&T is based primarily on our belief that its wireless business will enter a prolonged period of erosion after being propped up by the iPhone for the past two years."

[bitzandbitez]

BRING IT ON VERIZON.. i would switch to them in a heartbeat . ATT has THE WORST coverage in my city New York City and I am sick of the bad reception and dropped calls , plus all my friends and family members have verizon and i could take advantage of my current verizon DSL plan by bundling it with my iphone ... bye bye ATT, HELLO VERIZON ... can you hear me now???

[cmf2]

It isn't that simple. The iPhone increases the strain on anyones 3G network, since it ups usage. Thus speeds are lower. I'm in Canada, so really don't know how the two stack up, but Verizons average 3G speeds will drop if they get the iPhone. On the flip side, AT&T's speeds will increase as iPhone users vacate the carrier, so there should be a floor where AT&T would stop losing users due to 3G speeds.

[lkrupp]

BRING IT ON VERIZON.. i would switch to them in a heartbeat . ATT has THE WORST coverage in my city New York City and I am sick of the bad reception and dropped calls , plus all my friends and family members have verizon and i could take advantage of my current verizon DSL plan by bundling it with my iphone ... bye bye ATT, HELLO VERIZON ... can you hear me now???

Get out of your fantasy world. Verizon sucks the big one. At&t rules the roost in terms of reliability and service. For every one of you there two at&t customers who are perfectly satisfied. The "grass is always greener" syndrome is alive and well. :lol:

[Dogcow]

This article completely ignores that fact that the current hardware will not work on Verizon. Sure people might switch as contracts expire with AT&T if there is new, subsidized hardware on verizon. I would not expect the stampede they seem to be implying. At least not in switchers from AT&T, maybe Verizon will see a stampede in upgrades.

[mstone]

I'm okay with AT&T for the most part. They have been a pretty good provider for our businss phone needs over the years. I am not entirely satisfied with the voice quality of their cell network but the coverage is improving. If iPhone had all the same features on Verizon and the call quality was better, then I would probably switch back to them on my next iPhone. I don't do much international travel and I am not in rural areas very often either, so for me it is all about the voice quality.

[davebarnes]

Why would Apple manufacture a CDMA iPhone?
R&D expense for a phone that would only work on one carrier in the entire world.
More complicated supply chain issues.

[polvadis]

Get out of your fantasy world. Verizon sucks the big one. At&t rules the roost in terms of reliability and service. For every one of you there two at&t customers who are perfectly satisfied. The "grass is always greener" syndrome is alive and well. :lol:

While I agree that the grass is always greener on the other side, you're way off the mark on saying "Verizon sucks the big one". Something about being the biggest, having the least complaints, and most reliable service states otherwise. I like Verizon for their coverage, hate them for trying to monopolize everything like the app store I read about yesterday. I can't image ATT without the iPhone. Someone's gonna pocket a ton load of money to get that exclusive deal extended as much as possible.

[crees!]

"As the iPhone exclusivity period rolls off between AT&T Wireless and Apple, a material number of AT&T customers will flock to Verizon’s superior network."

Consider me one of those material customers. Reason being all my family is on VZW and I was too prior to buying an iPhone.

[ZenTigerpaw]

I may not have an iPhone. Only experienced the iPod Touch, and, I can clearly say that I don't doubt it. :lol:

[walshbj]

The "which network is better" discussion is kind of pointless as everyone's experience varies by geography.

In my brief experience with my iPhone 3GS and new AT&T service I've experienced extremes. Full bars EVERYWHERE I went in Miami. Dropped calls and No-Service messages all over Charlotte. Granted, Charlotte is no Miami, but it's a decent sized city - and I live right on the edge of downtown and the inner loop.
One of Charlotte's most populous areas - Southpark - has horrible coverage. AT&T would have a hard time explaining to me why it's so bad.

I never had dropped calls with Verizon, but I didn't have data service either so I can't compare.

And like I said, Miami had phenomenal coverage.

So - who's to say which is better??

[floccus]

Two important flaws I can see:

1. Assuming that 1/3 of all post-paid subscribers are only using ATT because of the iPhone and would leave if they had the option seems egregiously inflated. This obviously can't tally just actual iPhone users, and has to be extended to include people who simply want an iPhone but don't have the option/ability to upgrade to one yet.

2. Since Apple won't make a CDMA iPhone (face it people, they won't, end of discussion, unless its for China...), even if they did switch over to making a LTE version next year only for Verizon, it would technically be usable with ATT when they build out their LTE network. While Verizon may have the blanket coverage title, each particular region is either better with Verizon or ATT depending on a number of factors.

I also doubt Verizon would give up as much control as ATT has over what goes on the phone. We're still reading stories about how they are trying to set up their own app store that developers for any model phone they offer would have to go through as opposed to a manufacturer specific store.

[adam937]

Another issue I've recently faced with AT&T was the execution of their heavily-discussed 35% discount on iPhones through Bing Cashback. For many customers these cashback transactions are being denied after the fact without valid cause. It is not clear who is ultimately responsible for this, since at this time neither company is talking. There is a Get Satisfaction post where affected customers are gathering and we would appreciate hearing from anyone who has successfully or unsuccessfully responded to this promotion:

http://getsatisfaction.com/bingcashback/topics/will_bing_cashback_honor_their_advertisement_for_3 5_cash_back_on_at_t_phones

[segastyle]

From what I understand, CDMA signals are stronger and better at going through obstacles (this is simplifying) so they don't need as many towers to penetrate an area. But since Apple is likely not to make a CMDA iPhone, but instead wait for LTE, since that will be for both Verizon and at&t, we have no way of knowing who's network will be stronger. LTE is a completely different signal than CDMA. It could very well be, that when everyone switches over, at&t's towers will have better LTE penetration than Verizon's.

[MacKrazyinKC]

This article completely ignores that fact that the current hardware will not work on Verizon. Sure people might switch as contracts expire with AT&T if there is new, subsidized hardware on verizon. I would not expect the stampede they seem to be implying. At least not in switchers from AT&T, maybe Verizon will see a stampede in upgrades.

Completely agree. Analyst here is missing the boat - the only easy shift here is to T-Mobile, which has problems of its own in the USA. That is the choice today - at&t on regular service - or T-Mobile for no contract / jailbroke iPhones. Sprint or Verizon are fairy tales with the iPhone. Not that Apple is not above dropping its customers cold - but the backlash on cell phones would not be worth the risk to change to a non-compatible space with the majority of the rest of the world.

[Jerseymac]

We just want choice. Give us a phone for each carrier. Give us non glossy options on the Mac. You know we'll pay extra for it.

I see some of the AT@T defenders have returned. Not mad about MMS and tethering anymore?

[johnmcboston]

with 4G on the horizon, how much is anyone going to spend getting a better 3G experience for users??? (as an interesting side note - with VoIP, why are we still building cell networks anyway - just wifi and wiMax everywhere...)

I've loved Verizon's coverage while I was with them, but they are notorious for hobbling their phones and trying to nickel and dime you to death. If (when?) iphone goes over there, I'm curious what they'd try to disable...

[GSMozart]

I WOULD NOT hesitate to move to Verizon. I am SO SICK of dropped calls & lousy coverage. Whenever I walk in a building...I get the "No Service" line at the top of my iPhone, and dropped calls are an EVERYDAY occurrence. I already had 2 dropped calls today, where the person starts breaking up, and the GONE...........I think AT&T's sales moniker should be "AT&T, CALL FAILED". The iPhone is a masterpiece, and that's why people deal with the LOUSY LOUSY phone service. If AT&T loses it's exclusivity deal, then customers will leave in droves NO DOUBT. I will admit the AT&T's customer service is good, this is no reflection on their employees. but the service is down right frustrating to the core. Especially when I'm doing business on my phone and I have to be causious to make those calls where I feel confident I won't lose them to the proverbial "Call Failed" crap.

[DimMok]

Dont care, either one....but they should lower the prices....I pay too much, just to have the iPhone.

[walshbj]

I agree with the premise that AT&T needs the iPhone. Look at how many new subscribers to AT&T came for iPhones and that's clear. My knee-jerk reaction to the poor service I get in Charlotte: AT&T is sitting back on their existing network and counting the iPhone money. They don't HAVE to deliver top-level service because they have a phone people crave with a high-profit plan.

Hard to tell how serious AT&T is about their femtocell project but it seems like they've had years to beef up the network and aren't committed to doing that. Maybe femtocell is their preferred bridge to 4G.

I admit I was hesitant to give up Verizon, and I hoped all the complainers were just complainers being louder than satisfied customers. But at least in Charlotte they have a point about AT&T coverage.

What I really want to know: How much will Apple be able to collect per phone from the carriers once the exclusive is over...

[leftcoast131]

Like all of you, I follow Apple/iPhone info on Gizmodo, Engadget, 9to5Mac, and here at AppleInsider, of course! I've been reading posts for quite some time and have a few thoughts to share:

1) If you haven't read the article about the iPhone in Wired, read it. Its a good read and give you insight to the Verizon/AT+T dilemma.
http://www.wired.com/gadgets/wireless/magazine/16-02/ff_iphone

2) Verizon, to this day, is still telling manufacturers how to build their phones. Apple will never submit to being told what to do. Until they change their fundamentals, Apple will not switch.

3) A more likely option if they break the exclusivity contract, and the SEC inquiries might, might play a role in this (but I believe highly unlikely), they'll expand to Sprint/T-Mobile.

4) If a Verizon stopped being stubborn and were to agree to an Apple/Verizon agreement, it would be late 2010/2011, when Verizon can universally support CDMA/TDMA/SIM-Based phones on their new network http://smart-data-centers.tmcnet.com/topics/trends/articles/34144-4g-network-launch-planned-2010-verizon-wireless.htm. I would like to think they would make the change so their core customers could make the switch when their contracts expire (and not have to pay a pentalty).

5) While AT+T's speeds are not good at all, we're hoping to see an increase in the network by the end of this year. I, for one, would be thrilled to see download test results around 3-4Mbps.

6) To those who complaints about US carriers not being able to provide speeds of Hong Kong, Taiwan, and some European countries, let me remind you, the United States is the size of Europe. Europe has multiple providers. US carriers had cable they had to upkeep, Fiber Optics they're installing AND expanding to build out/upgrade their digital services every 2-3 years. I'd be really interested to see what the bill per customer of Europeans would be if there were 1-2 providers. We have a huge country and our size, when it comes to digital networks, hurts us because providers not only have to build new, but have to maintain existing platforms.

7) Customer Service. Verizon's wireless customer service (polite, helped you out), until about 2005, was phenomenal. At that point, the book was thrown out and they turned into "another corporate entity". Surprisingly, AT+T's customer service is quite good. Their agents are polite and the company is pretty flexible about altering your plan on a regular basis. I would only consider switching back to Verizon if they got an attitude adjustment, but I don't see that happening. Until then, I will stick with AT+T, MiPhone, or until

Just my thoughts. I encourage people to reply to this post with additional information/insights/corrections to share with the rest of us to points I've made here.
Thanks guys -
Left Coast

[jedialan]

Besides the reliability of the network, Verizon has vastly superior customer service over AT & T. My year with AT & T was the absolute worst customer service experience I have ever had with any company with any product/service. I've been with both and Verizon is by far the best.

[min_t]

Have we forgotten Verizons own app program announcement? The iPhone is not going to VZ.:no:

[mrtotes]

with 4G on the horizon, how much is anyone going to spend getting a better 3G experience for users??? (as an interesting side note - with VoIP, why are we still building cell networks anyway - just wifi and wiMax everywhere...)

I'm still on GPRS (2.5G) 80% of my day with about 10% EDGE (2.75G) and 10% 3G here in the UK on O2. The iPhone 3GS was my first 3G phone.. 6 years after 3G phones started going. If 4G standards are yet ratified globally then investing in 3G makes sense. And there will be millions of 3G phones out there for years to come.



I wonder how other networks performance would compare if they actually had a usable mobile internet devices for sale on their networks.

I've loved Verizon's coverage while I was with them, but they are notorious for hobbling their phones and trying to nickel and dime you to death. If (when?) iphone goes over there, I'm curious what they'd try to disable...

I can't see Apple putting up with that. Although some of the old limitations we used to see like bluetooth file transfer haven't made it to iPhone yet anyhow...

[leftcoast131]

can't see Apple putting up with that. Although some of the old limitations we used to see like bluetooth file transfer haven't made it to iPhone yet anyhow...

agreed. they would try to charge for every service - google maps, weather, data transfers from iTunes/App Store.

[libertyforall]

I have had a consistent problem with dropped calls on AT&T on my 3GS, and even on original iPhone. AT&T pricing is far higher than its level of service deserves. The data rate in my area is only 540K avg. bleh!

[Ronbo]

It isn't that simple. The iPhone increases the strain on anyones 3G network, since it ups usage. Thus speeds are lower. I'm in Canada, so really don't know how the two stack up, but Verizons average 3G speeds will drop if they get the iPhone. On the flip side, AT&T's speeds will increase as iPhone users vacate the carrier, so there should be a floor where AT&T would stop losing users due to 3G speeds.

That's what I was thinking. I wonder if anyone knows what that actual capacity of the two carriers is?

[arougthopher]

BRING IT ON VERIZON.. i would switch to them in a heartbeat . ATT has THE WORST coverage in my city New York City and I am sick of the bad reception and dropped calls , plus all my friends and family members have verizon and i could take advantage of my current verizon DSL plan by bundling it with my iphone ... bye bye ATT, HELLO VERIZON ... can you hear me now???

See, I'm the exact opposite. I had Verizon, and could not use my phone in my house. Step outside, and I had 3 bars, step inside, no signal. AT&T, however, I have 3 bars in and out of the house (I'm in rural PA, so I rarely get really great coverage, and don't have 3G in my town, but the next town over does)

It would be better if Apple just openned up to all carriers, then you could choose Verizon since it is better for you, and I could choose ATT, since that is better for me.

[MacTel]

I hope AT&T doesn't get the extension. If they did then that would mean they'd have no motivation to expidite fixing their network problems. I say part ways on exclusitivity and let AT&T scramble to make good on their coverage and bandwidth. Who cares if they have the faster network if you cannot even get any signal.

[MacTripper]

Analyst says iPhone is lifeblood of AT&T success


TARP for AT&T more like it.

I would like to see the iPhone opened up to more carriers and let them fight it out for our dollars in better quality and service.

[Judgegavel]

Besides the reliability of the network, Verizon has vastly superior customer service over AT & T. My year with AT & T was the absolute worst customer service experience I have ever had with any company with any product/service. I've been with both and Verizon is by far the best.

I find just the opposite, if I go to the VZ store I sometimes had to wait 1 hr to talk to someone. I've never had any problems with/at AT&T. I also get horrible reception on VZ phones in my house (and I'm in the middle of NYC) while AT&T comes in crystal clear.

TDMA is a dying technology, until VZ switches their service is dated.

[Jsyedinak]

They won't - It will need to be an LTE (4G) version that ATT and Verizon will be going to starting Next Year - at least as far as Verizon is concerned.

Why would Apple manufacture a CDMA iPhone?
R&D expense for a phone that would only work on one carrier in the entire world.
More complicated supply chain issues.

[Jsyedinak]

I find just the opposite, if I go to the VZ store I sometimes had to wait 1 hr to talk to someone. I've never had any problems with/at AT&T. I also get horrible reception on VZ phones in my house (and I'm in the middle of NYC) while AT&T comes in crystal clear.

TDMA is a dying technology, until VZ switches their service is dated.

It's CDMA, not TDMA! On Verizon Customer Service there is a BIG Difference between the Personal Side and the Coporate Side. In my opinion being a telecom manager for a large manufacturer Verizon's Corporate Systems and Service are very good / easy to work with, but agree that on the Personal Side a big majority of Verizon Store employees are clueless and what's worse pretend like they know what they are talking about.

[telemaque]

Here, here, Jerseymac: a little choice would be nice.

Hopefully the FCC will step in, because rumor has it that AT&T got another 2 years of exclusivity with the iPhone 3GS.

[Ronbo]

We just want choice. Give us a phone for each carrier. Give us non glossy options on the Mac. You know we'll pay extra for it.

I see some of the AT@T defenders have returned. Not mad about MMS and tethering anymore?

I'd like a choice. I think that would erase the biggest complaint about the iPhone in the US.

I've always been a little surprised at both the people who hated AT&T and the people who loved them. Maybe it's a blind spot of mine, but prior to the iPhone, I used Sprint, AT&T, T-mobile. I didn't especially like any of them, but I didn't much see them being different from one another either.

The following comments are from someone who could switch carriers and forget it the next day...

At least AT&T was flexible enough to sign with Apple. Verizon, if I recall, was so stuck in the old mindset of uber-control that they refused. AT&T has gotten a few black eyes during their iPhone years, and I think they pretty much earned some of them (MMS and tethering). But on the other hand, sometimes when I hear them being criticized, I find myself thinking "Don't the other guys pretty much play the same game?"

I don't tether, but I'd imagine that tethering would suck lots more of AT&T's bandwidth. And they'll no doubt get criticized for that too. I have an unlimited data plan. But it's not unreasonable to admit that the cost for this data plan were based on a very calculated prediction of how much bandwidth the average user would consume. I suspect that (1) they were surprised at how much bandwidth we really DO use, and that (2) the extra bandwidth entailed with tethering is quite terrifying to them. They know it'll be a huge hit on their network, and they know people are gonna throw the "unlimited" word in their face. I imagine the real stalling point is just trying to find a way to limit it and monetize it.

The MMS problem seems to be a different matter, and I think that counts as a genuine black eye for them, but I don't understand the roadblock from there standpoint. But the tethering thing... that just doesn't sound all that evil, to me. It just sounds like pragmatism. And personally, I don't look forward to tethering becoming widespread, because it seems like my iPhone speeds will go down.

Maybe I'm wrong. Like I say, I'm not too much into the partisan stuff between carriers. I'm far too distracted by my own partisan issues between the OS vendors :)

[dasein]

Two important flaws I can see:

2. Since Apple won't make a CDMA iPhone (face it people, they won't, end of discussion, unless its for China...), even if they did switch over to making a LTE version next year only for Verizon,

They most probably already have CDMA prototypes up and working, just as they did for ATT before they sold them on it years ago. Things get complicated with LTE, because all carriers will be moving to that well before whatever 4G turns out to become...that includes BOTH ATT and Verizon. You want to get your best deal when ATT comes asking for an extension? Show up with a fully functioning CDMA iPhone.

[solipsism]

Here, here, Jerseymac: a little choice would be nice.

Hopefully the FCC will step in, because rumor has it that AT&T got another 2 years of exclusivity with the iPhone 3GS.
Choice is great, but exactly what would this do for consumers if Apple was not allowed to offer an exclusivity for the iPhone to a carrier? Would this prevent other vendors and carriers from also having exclusivity, or just Apple? Would this prevent AT&T from selling the iPhone and/or marketing the iPhone in their stores? Would this prevent AT&T from subsidizing the iPhone? Would this prevent Apple working with AT&T to bring new services to the device that otherwise would not get developed? Would this require Apple to make another device that works on T-Mobile’s 3G, Sprint and Verizon?

I don’t see any viable change coming about from such a motion with the disconnected US mobile setup. The government should have stepped in a long time ago to get the US on mobile technology path. Now we have to wait until LTE is in place and GSM, WCDMA, CDMA, and CDMA2000 are near obsolesced before it’s resolved. I say ’near’ because I figure by then there will be small, power-freindly chips that have all those radios in one. It seems like such a decision would merely make the iPhone sold in Apple Stores unlocked at an inflated full retail price. Since there is no discount for the iPhone being in or out of contract there is no benefit for the average US consumer, regardless of the carrier they use.


They most probably already have CDMA prototypes up and working, just as they did for ATT before they sold them on it years ago. Things get complicated with LTE, because all carriers will be moving to that well before whatever 4G turns out to become...that includes BOTH ATT and Verizon.
I think Sprint is still banking on WiMAX for their 4G tech at this point. Though they’ll probably be absorbed before LTE is prominent enough to make an impact on mobile phones.

You want to get your best deal when ATT comes asking for an extension? Show up with a fully functioning CDMA iPhone.
That is what I’d do. There is no SIM card required with CDMA, the voice algorithm is better than GSM, and use CDMA for voice with CDMA2000 for data does assist in battery usage when measuring talk time with 3G turned on.

[telemaque]

There is no SIM card required with CDMA

That's an advantage? Then how do you use a phone with more than one provider? GSM allows me to use my phone with different providers all over the world just by changing the SIM.

[iVlad]

I think if Apple wants to extend its market share switching to all carriers will solve the problem. To avoid collapse of ATT, Apple needs to give iPhone to Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile. This way every one can compete with their pricing and speeds. I think that's the smartest way to compete.

[solipsism]

That's an advantage? Then how do you use a phone with more than one provider? GSM allows me to use my phone with different providers all over the world just by changing the SIM.

Because the SIM card is not required thre is more free space internally, without engineering around a very large piece of plastic for the data it actually holds that requires placement on the edge. Also, Apple can make their device with less pieces and without the visual obstruction of the SIM card slot. Apple could then spin this as a cost savings in engineering and construction that could lead to other chips that a GSM-based iPhone couldn’t have.

We’re talking about negotiations here. AT&T can’t counter Apple’s argument about how an AT&T iPhone can be used on any GSM-based network, because they don’t offer that option.

[chipr]

There is no SIM card required with CDMA

Uhh definitely agree with previous post, no SIM is what makes me NOT want ANY CDMA phone!! What happens when my phone dies and I need to switch into another phone immediately?? Uhh yea I'd be calling my CDMA provider.

[solipsism]

Hey solipism, did you hear- AT&T really does suck! I keep getting validated daily lately- huh? Matte scrrens, AT&T , etc
Though I guess I have to put up with AT&T now, now that I'm in it.

The rational, intelligent individual would return the device within the 30-day period if the network didn’t suit their needs… which is why I’m sure you’ll keep it and use it as an excuse to complain about AT&T excessively.

[veloboldie]

ATT Wireless has a horrible coverage in the Washington DC area and no coverage in Metro. My calls get dropped all the time. Would definitely switch to Verizon, once Apple allows V to carry their phones. :devil:

[libertyforall]

If the shoe fits:http://www.insightts.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/5f8e3_att-planning-new-wave-of-refurbished-iphone-3g-salesjpg.jpeg

[solipsism]

If the shoe fits:

image: http://www.insightts.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/5f8e3_att-planning-new-wave-of-refurbished-iphone-3g-salesjpg.jpeg

HAHA Nice!

[mjtomlin]

I don't think people quite understand how the iPhone factors into AT&T's "slow" network.

If all the current iPhones in the US were on Verizon's network, their freaken download speed would be just as slow as AT&T's is now. That's a fact of physics. There is only so much bandwidth on any network. The more devices on that network and the more those devices access the network, the more the probability of that network becoming bogged down. This is especially true for the iPhone; on average iPhones are responsible for the same amount of traffic as ALL other smart phones combined in the US (and sits at 33% for all smartphone traffic in the world), even though the iPhone only sits at 15%-20% market share in the US. That's some serious network traffic.


Second, is Verizon's network even compatible with the iPhone? Don't people realize Apple isn't interested in making different models for different cell networks? This is why they went with AT&T in the US, because they were deploying the world-standard 3G.

[Trajectory]

It isn't that simple. The iPhone increases the strain on anyones 3G network, since it ups usage. Thus speeds are lower. I'm in Canada, so really don't know how the two stack up, but Verizons average 3G speeds will drop if they get the iPhone. On the flip side, AT&T's speeds will increase as iPhone users vacate the carrier, so there should be a floor where AT&T would stop losing users due to 3G speeds.

I really hate that Rogers demands a 3-year contract, however, I have to say their service and reliability has been pretty good. As soon as 3.0 was released, I had immediate access to MMS and tethering. AT&T customers are still waiting for that.

Last time I was in NYC using AT&T's network, the service was spotty and I had a bunch of dropped calls and couldn't always use the 3G cellular network when no WiFi was available. If I still lived in NYC, I would not be too happy with that level of service.

[Trajectory]

Hey solipism, did you hear- AT&T really does suck! I keep getting validated daily lately- huh? Matte scrrens, AT&T , etc
Though I guess I have to put up with AT&T now, now that I'm in it. :lol:

I guess you'll also be anxiously awaiting for every new iPhone thread now, right?

[nightlover]

I do not experience any drop calls with the iPhone but I do with my Blackberry. I was very disappointed with Verizon and Sprint so I will stick with At&t. Unfortunately, any US carriers is not that great we should push all US carriers to match Europe communication networks ...no matter what carriers they have outstanding service and fast speed.

[Wiggin]

Why would Apple manufacture a CDMA iPhone?
R&D expense for a phone that would only work on one carrier in the entire world.
More complicated supply chain issues.

They won't - It will need to be an LTE (4G) version that ATT and Verizon will be going to starting Next Year - at least as far as Verizon is concerned.

The R&D expense would be minimal, you are only changing a very small part of the phone. Phone manufactures do it all the time on much less expensive handsets.

And the "only one carrier" ignores the fact that that one carrier is huge and would increase their potential market by 50%. Ok, I don't really know all the market share numbers, so I'm making them up... I assume US iPhone sales are 50% of world-wide iPhone sales, so ATT is 50% of iPhones sold. Verizon and ATT are about the same size, so assuming the same % penetration into the Verizon customer base, that's a 50% increase is global iPhone sales if they made a Verizon phone. (And even if my guestimates are off by half, a 25% increase in sales is nothing to sneeze at.)

That said, I don't see Apple ever making a dedicated CDMA phone, and agree that they would wait for Verizon's LTE network. But how long do they wait? Verizon isn't going to magically flip a switch and have LTE coverage across their entire network. It will take time to build out, starting with the big cities. If Apple makes an LTE-only phone, you will have NO service outside of those cities because you won't be able to switch over to their older CDMA network.

So Apple will either need to make a combined LTE/CDMA capable phone, or we'll be waiting much longer for a Verizon iPhone while they build out their nationwide network.

[Wiggin]

That's an advantage? Then how do you use a phone with more than one provider? GSM allows me to use my phone with different providers all over the world just by changing the SIM.

Um, have you tried putting another carrier's SIM card in your iPhone? Didn't think so. In fact, this is one of the reasons I paid to get out of my contract with ATT. Prior to a trip to Europe, they swore to me that my phone (not an iPhone) was unlocked and that I'd be able to purchase a local SIM card and put it in (I told them this was exactly what I planned on doing). A flat out lie. It took three weeks and many expensive overseas calls to customer service and finger-pointing at Motorola (blaming them for locking the phone) before I finally got an ATT customer service rep who admitted that all the other reps had lied to me and he was able to provide me the unlock code.

This combined with extremely poor service in the US was justification to pay the $150 contract termination fee. Now I have my very reliable Verizon phone for when I'm in the US and my now unlocked ATT phone, which will never again see an ATT SIM card, for overseas travel (it's essentially now a pre-paid UK Virgin Mobile phone).

[bigmc6000]

Why do I always seem to be validated lately? :D
When I was last in NYC with my 2G I didn't have even the slightest problem at all...

[Trajectory]

You got it- I love this 3Gs iPhone! The love grows daily as my wallet shrinks monthly with AT&T.
I learn something new everyday with it. So many things I have yet to figure out- I'm lucky an Apple store is not far from my job and we have the AppleInsider.

I've had my 3G for about a year now, and I can't imagine now how I lived without it. Although I am envious of your ability to make videos and use voice commands. I'll have to wait another year before I can get a phone that will do that.

[Trajectory]

When I was last in NYC with my 2G I didn't have even the slightest problem at all...

That's because it's not using the 3G network, which is the biggest problem with AT&T.

[Slang4Art]

Make an exorbitant amount of shares a part of the next contract renewal. Take a piece of ATT and gain full access to accounts so that activation is more seamless and less problematic. That's what I'd like to see happen. Might be bad for their business though, so perhaps not.

[Mazda 3s]

I'm happy with AT&T, granted I've only been with them for a month now. I bought an iPhone 3G S on launch day (stood in line for three hours). I haven't had a problem with the phone or AT&T's service.

Now granted, I live in Garner, NC (just south of Raleigh) and 3G data and voice coverage is wonderful. I get full 3G in Garner, Raleigh, Cary or just about any area I travel during the day. Most of the places I travel to see family (Greensboro/Burlington, NC and Charlotte, NC) have good 3G coverage as well.

The only time I wasn't able to get 3G is when I was in Holden Beach, NC and I had to fallback to EDGE.

My only "minor" gripe with AT&T is that their customer service lags behind Alltel (who I switched from). I could call Alltel about an account issue and have someone on the phone immediately. I have to wait 4-5 minutes with AT&T.

Also, it took me two calls to get them to bock text messaging completely on my iPhone -- I'm paying for unlimited data (and thus full email capabilities), there's no way in hell that I'm going to give them EXTRA money for stupid texting (let the kiddies play with that *&^%).

For those of you planning to jump ship, good luck to you. I'm happy where I'm at... for now :)

[bigmc6000]

That's because it's not using the 3G network, which is the biggest problem with AT&T.
After upgrading to the 3GS I'd have to say I've actually had FEWER problems in terms of connections than I had with my 2G...

[solipsism]

Why do I always seem to be validated lately?
Validated in what way? Complaining the iPhone is too slow and getting a faster one two years later, complaining that AT&T sucks and having others with occasional issues or constant issues in certain areas is not the result of your clairvoyance. It’s only you complaining about wanting something that will occur eventually.

You are probably even claiming that Apple has “listened to you” about glossy screen sucking because there is a rumour that they me including matte as an option. The rational people here that do prefer glossy have stated that the option for users would be nice, but your absolute statements about glossy screens suck for all users, that they don’t look better than matte in any regard, agreeing that those who prefer glossy are ignorant.

For you to validated you’ll have to actually make logical, rational, balanced claims; not hyperbolic whinefests about Apple being doomed. You can’t see the difference in the same way Michael Bay doesn’t realize that good CGI doesn’t equal a plot or storyline.


Make an exorbitant amount of shares a part of the next contract renewal. Take a piece of ATT and gain full access to accounts so that activation is more seamless and less problematic. That's what I'd like to see happen. Might be bad for their business though, so perhaps not.
My “in the box” reaction is now way, since there has never been a mobile vendor do such a thing. But do I think it’s likely that Apple has at least entertained the idea since they do like to control the whole experience. That is not to say that Apple would partner with AT&T and make the iPhone the only device on the network, but getting more control over part of the ecosystem is obviously something Apple would like, assuming it was a viable business move which I’m not sure it is.

Care to build on your idea more?

[tmp]

Uhh definitely agree with previous post, no SIM is what makes me NOT want ANY CDMA phone!! What happens when my phone dies and I need to switch into another phone immediately?? Uhh yea I'd be calling my CDMA provider.

I've had to do that and it took about 15 minutes on the phone to Verizon. And they keep your contacts online for you so as soon as the new phone arrives it synchs up just like MobileMe,

ATT coverage is atrocious in my neighborhood, but since it's been pointed out that a Verizon iPhone would be on a new and unproven network I won't be the first one to jump from the fat to the fire.

[dyler]

Yes I was going to say the same thing, the Iphone will only come to version if a few things happen.

1. Verizon does not tell their manufacturers how to build handsets.

2. Verizon lets go of their own new app store for Apple's on the Iphone.

3. Verizon changes their network to support the iphone.

These are the demands that Apple had when the Iphone first came out and offered it to Verizon but they said now, I cannot see them relaxing these to get the Iphone now so therefore the Iphone will never be a Verizon phone. Also for the NYC guy who claims he does not get a good signal in the city, I am there all the time with my 2g, 3g, and now my 3gs and never have any issues. You may be in a building that is blocking cell phone signals because of the construction, but I have full bars pretty much everywhere I go including, upstate NY, Maine, Boston, Rural Mass, and in Cali where I live way North. So it's not ATT there is something else going on with you that you are not taking into consideration!!!

[pats]

Funny I have both data and texting and prefer the texting. I must just be used to it and I really like the iChat look of it. So if someone texts you to your phone number do you get any notification of it? How did people get texts last year ? Did they go to the email adress?

(ad hom removed)
I know you pass the day being a idiot, but text works just fine on the Iphone. If you ever had one you would know. How do people get texts you ask. You buy them of course:lol: With ATT they charge you extra for text up to unlimited family plan for $20. If you think ATT will match Sprints price you obviously are clueless about market share. ATT better then any other network finally has a phone which uses their network so they can determine rational pricing for the consumer. I would love to see it come down, but I doubt it. By the way what does Verizon charge?

[bizlaw]

One important difference all of these articles seems to ignore is that on AT&T, you can use 3G services (like Maps, Safari) while talking on the phone. You can't do that on Verizon and Sprint.

Add a few million iPhones to Verizon's network and it will slow down too.

You won't see an iPhone for Verizon until they fully build out a nationwide 4G network. Apple isn't going to build a CDMA phone, and if Verizon does a slow 4G rollout, Apple can't let Verizon sell an iPhone that loses coverage outside major metro areas (if the phone were to have to drop down to CDMA b/c no 4G coverage).

Plus, Steve Jobs is probably still pissed at Verizon, which should add a couple of years to Verizon getting the iPhone.http://forums.appleinsider.com/images/smilies/lol.gif

[solipsism]

Yes I was going to say the same thing, the Iphone will only come to version if a few things happen.

1. Verizon does not tell their manufacturers how to build handsets.

2. Verizon lets go of their own new app store for Apple's on the Iphone.

3. Verizon changes their network to support the iphone.

These are the demands that Apple had when the Iphone first came out and offered it to Verizon but they said now, I cannot see them relaxing these to get the Iphone now so therefore the Iphone will never be a Verizon phone. Also for the NYC guy who claims he does not get a good signal in the city, I am there all the time with my 2g, 3g, and now my 3gs and never have any issues. You may be in a building that is blocking cell phone signals because of the construction, but I have full bars pretty much everywhere I go including, upstate NY, Maine, Boston, Rural Mass, and in Cali where I live way North. So it's not ATT there is something else going on with you that you are not taking into consideration!!!
With the popularity of the iPhone and Verizon’s inability to get a real iPhone competitor up yet I can see them giving into to Apple while allowing their other vendor’s phones to be on the same platform. That won’t make the others happy, but with millions of sales with guaranteed data plans from a proven device that isn’t the major issue it once was for Verizon.

[solipsism]

One important difference all of these articles seems to ignore is that on AT&T, you can use 3G services (like Maps, Safari) while talking on the phone. You can't do that on Verizon and Sprint.

That often gets overlooked and it’s one of those features that you take for granted until you don’t have it, like if you have dropped to EDGE and are trying to do both. I don’t use voice much, but when I do I am usually having to access Safari, Mail or some other app that uses the web to get information.

[pats]

Yes I was going to say the same thing, the Iphone will only come to version if a few things happen.

1. Verizon does not tell their manufacturers how to build handsets.

2. Verizon lets go of their own new app store for Apple's on the Iphone.

3. Verizon changes their network to support the iphone.

These are the demands that Apple had when the Iphone first came out and offered it to Verizon but they said now, I cannot see them relaxing these to get the Iphone now so therefore the Iphone will never be a Verizon phone. Also for the NYC guy who claims he does not get a good signal in the city, I am there all the time with my 2g, 3g, and now my 3gs and never have any issues. You may be in a building that is blocking cell phone signals because of the construction, but I have full bars pretty much everywhere I go including, upstate NY, Maine, Boston, Rural Mass, and in Cali where I live way North. So it's not ATT there is something else going on with you that you are not taking into consideration!!!

It would be much easier for Apple to add a CDMA chip from Qualcomm then for Verizon to change their network, but I seriously doubt Apple will waste their time chasing after CDMA when the technology is rapidly approaching EOL. That would be like spending your R&D on Windows XP. As far as the App store and Apple I think it's a non-starter but would watch what happens in China to see if Apple is willing to negotiate on the App store revenue share with carriers.
I think in the short term it's a pipe dream to think you will see the 3GS Iphone on the Verizon network. Apple is moving customers from other networks to ATT and ATT is paying a premium to Apple for these customers. If the Iphone is available on all the US networks the premium per iphone will go down, so I'm sure the financial analyst at Apple continually look at the sales numbers and future handset subsidies and play the carriers off each other in all the negotiations. Once LTE is the dominate technology the game will change but that is really in the 2011/12 timeframe since you'll need a fall back network like Edge/HSPA or CDMA/

[AjitMD]

If the iPhone's exclusivity with AT&T were to expire, one market research firm predicts that the cell phone carrier would suffer due to the superior network offered by competitor Verizon Wireless.

This week, Pali Research released a prediction that AT&T will net less than 1 million new subscribers in 2010, compared with the 4 million it gained in 2008. The report operates under the assumption that the iPhone will leap to Verizon's network once the contract has expired.

The statement comes as AT&T is pushing to keep Apple's phone exclusively on their network through 2011. The Wall Street Journal has reported, through anonymous sources, that CEO Randall Stephenson is currently negotiating with Apple. iPhone-AT&T exclusivity in the U.S. expires next year.

If Pali Research is to be believed, AT&T's future could depend on retention of the iPhone, making Stephenson's alleged negotiations all the more crucial.

"As the iPhone exclusivity period rolls off between AT&T Wireless and Apple, a material number of AT&T customers will flock to Verizon’s superior network," the firm states. "We estimate that nearly a third of AT&T’s post-paid customers are being retained by AT&T primarily because of the iPhone exclusivity."

The market research firm based its conclusion on two recent studies that show AT&T has 3G speeds that lag behind Verizon, T-Mobile and Sprint. The study from Wired, with a sampling of 12,000 mobile phone customers, demonstrated that AT&T has an average download speed of 901 Kbps. Another survey from PC World corroborated those results.

This, despite numerous attempts by the company to boost bandwidth capacity for the iPhone and the network's influx of users.

This year, it was estimated that a third of AT&T's new customers are switching solely because of the iPhone. The same study from ChangeWave suggests that AT&T customers are also less likely to switch carriers.

Pali Research recently gave investors a buy rating for Verizon and sell for AT&T, based on the latter's dependence on the iPhone.

"Our Buy rating on Verizon is based on our view that its market share gains will lead to profit growth that tops other telecom companies and Wall Street consensus estimates," the firm said in June. "Our Sell rating on AT&T is based primarily on our belief that its wireless business will enter a prolonged period of erosion after being propped up by the iPhone for the past two years."
This analyst must be some bean counter that is clueless about carrier technology, wireless voice and data. ATT is using UMT/3G which is an asynchronous wide band (5 MHz) version of the synchronous 1.25 MHz CDMA that VZ uses. The really big difference is that VZ uses - mostly - a separate channel for data called EVDO... this way, hi data rates do not degrade voice. To sum it up, the VZ tech is much more efficient than what ATT uses. This mess was created because the European carriers, particularly Nokia and Ericsson tried to bypass QCOM's CDMA with their own version called WCDMA... but basically lost. Still they diluted QCOM IPRs and royalties.

However, CDMA/EVDO is used only by 20% of the subscribers in the world at best. It is dominant in the US, parts of the Americas, S. Korea, Any phone designed for VZ will have to have GSM/EDGE or even WCDMA to roam worldwide... I suspect it will add another $25-50/phone to the cost.

I think that Apple is playing hardball with ATT and using the threat of the VZ deal to squeeze ATT. It would make sense to add T-Mobile here in the US and worldwide as well, particularly in EU. Like many have said, VZ is not desperate enough to give up their control over the phones. The other phone makes will ask for the same control as well. VZ store stinks anyway.

[Mazda 3s]

Funny I have both data and texting and prefer the texting. I must just be used to it and I really like the iChat look of it. So if someone texts you to your phone number do you get any notification of it? How did people get texts last year ? Did they go to the email adress?

Here's the deal. I never had texting with my old flip phone on Alltel. I've never seen the point of it and have always refused to pay for it. I specifically had it blocked, so all of my friends know not to text me.

Now when I got my iPhone, I told them I didn't want texting. However, within an hour of activating my phone (with a new phone number mind you), I got two texts about some stupid Jonas Brothers concert from some number that I didn't even recognize. After I found out that I was being charged per text for these unwanted messages, I called AT&T and told them to disable that *&^#. They also said that I could call back after receiving my first bill to have those texting charges removed.

Now, I don't get text messages at all. No notifications, no nothing.

If I need to talk to someone, I give them a call, leave them a voicemail, or send them an email. If you can't answer your phone/respond to a voicemail, or respond to an email, you're worthless to me anyway :lol:

[anmarkle]

Besides the reliability of the network, Verizon has vastly superior customer service over AT & T. My year with AT & T was the absolute worst customer service experience I have ever had with any company with any product/service. I've been with both and Verizon is by far the best.

I have had a totally different experience with Verizon Customer Service. I had a billing problem that went on for months and every CS rep I spoke to at Verizon was rude and ultra arrogant. They had no problem ridiculing me and blaming me for their obvious errors. One day, after spending over an hour trying to get the issue resolved the rep told me that if I was so unhappy i could just cancel my service but be prepared to pay a termination fee. At this point I was so enraged I jumped up from my desk and left work in the middle of the day and headed straight to my local Verizon office and cancelled all my phones (I had 4). There was also someone else waiting there to do the same thing for the very same reasons. I then went to AT&T and signed up for my first iPhone and I haven't looked back.

You talk as if it is a fact that Verizon has "vastly superior customer service" but it s only your opinion. My opinion is that Verizon has the worst customer service of all the carriers. It is all a matter of perception.

[frapple]

Well... duh. I switched form Verizon for an iPhone, and the femto-second I can switch back I will. I never really believed just how different the quality of connection and data rates could be between major carriers until I switched. As much as I love my iPhone, if AT&T somehow managed to stay exclusive until 2011, I think I will end up punting on the iPhone. Ultimately, I value the phone service over everything else.

[Biomusicologist]

Just last night I was discussing AT&T's incredibly poor service here in the Silicon Valley area with a colleague of mine. We both work in tech and recently switched from other (way better) service providers. Why? Because we wanted the features the iPhone has to offer.

We exchanged notes on the terrible service here. It's almost impossible to converse for an extended period of time without dropping a call. We both talked about the experience of sitting in a chair in your house with what seems like a good connection, and then you move an inch to right and BAM!.....the call instantly dissappears. Also we both talked about locations on Highways 101, 280 or 17 where every single time you drive by a certain spot, you'll loose your call.

You'd think that with Apple's HQ being located here and with so many tech companies AT&T's service would be spectacular. It's shit. With all the money they must be raking in in from people who want the iPhone, you'd think they'd be investing rapidly in upgrading their service. Yet in my home in here in the South Bay, I can rarely make a call, sometimes even when I step outside the house. And I live in a suburb of Silicon Valley. I get much more reliable service in Kansas City (Sprint's HQ - where I travel to frequently), and some other cities, but even then it's not as good my old Treo with Sprint service.

So I have to agree based on conversations I have had with quite a few people. The day the iPhone goes to another carrier, whether it's Verizon or someone else, people will leave AT&T in droves.

[quinney]

I think if Apple wants to extend its market share switching to all carriers will solve the problem. To avoid collapse of ATT, Apple needs to give iPhone to Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile. This way every one can compete with their pricing and speeds. I think that's the smartest way to compete.

I am starting to come around to this type of thinking. If Verizon insists on
crippling the iPhone, or adding nickel and dime charges for iPhone
features, or interfering with seamless access to iPhone apps on iTunes, these
will be negative comparison points relative to their competitors. If people
want to stick with Verizon, in spite of these types of shortcomings, and if
Verizon pays Apple the same subsidy as AT&T, maybe it would all be good.

The biggest stumbling block is probably Apple's requirement for a superior
overall user experience. They have already been blamed for some of AT&T's
shortcomings, so they may not want to be blamed for those of other phone
companies, in addition.

[quinney]

You'd think that with Apple's HQ being located here and with so many tech companies AT&T's service would be spectacular. It's shit. With all the money they must be raking in in from people who want the iPhone, you'd think they'd be investing rapidly in upgrading their service. Yet in my home in here in the South Bay, I can rarely make a call, sometimes even when I step outside the house. And I live in a suburb of Silicon Valley. I get much more reliable service in Kansas City (Sprint's HQ - where I travel to frequently), and some other cities, but even then it's not as good my old Treo with Sprint service.

You might think that or you might think, with so many tech-type people
living in a small area, that the demands on AT&T's bandwidth are exceptionally
large, and this causes the lack of reliability you cite.

[echosonic]

Get out of your fantasy world. Verizon sucks the big one. At&t rules the roost in terms of reliability and service. For every one of you there two at&t customers who are perfectly satisfied. The "grass is always greener" syndrome is alive and well. :lol:






I can't speak to Verizon because I left them 5 years ago. I can, however, speak to AT&T, because I have had AT&T for five years now, and AT&T sucks the rigid wank of Satan.

Their cavalier use of the word "service" to describe what they provide is the most lying, out and out fraudulent deception in the history of mankind. "Service to His Darkest Lord" would be a better description.

AT&T is every bit the agent of the Devil himself that spiders and poodles are, and anybody who does not recognize that either lives within 20 miles of their corporate HQ, is a waterhead, or never personally used a phone on the Devil's Network.

You get out of YOUR fantasy world, Zohan, and smell what the Jobs is cookin':


AT&T goes away as soon as that contract ends. The secrecy is simply there to keep Wall Street from knowing too much too early.

[jfanning]

However, CDMA/EVDO is used only by 20% of the subscribers in the world at best. It is dominant in the US, parts of the Americas, S. Korea, Any phone designed for VZ will have to have GSM/EDGE or even WCDMA to roam worldwide... I suspect it will add another $25-50/phone to the cost.

No it is not, CDMA/EVDO only has a 10% market share

[Trajectory]

What's clear is that AT&T's quality of service is subjective and based on where you live. So, some people get crappy service (as I did in NYC), and some people are getting great service.

@Tech Idiot: I know you pass the day being a idiot, but text works just fine on the Iphone.

C'mon, that's rude, not to mention against forum rules.

[anantksundaram]

Well... duh. I switched form Verizon for an iPhone, and the femto-second I can switch back I will. I never really believed just how different the quality of connection and data rates could be between major carriers until I switched. As much as I love my iPhone, if AT&T somehow managed to stay exclusive until 2011, I think I will end up punting on the iPhone. Ultimately, I value the phone service over everything else.

That means ATT has you for two more years. Lots can happen during that time to keep you going as an ATT customer!

[anantksundaram]

If the shoe fits:http://www.insightts.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/5f8e3_att-planning-new-wave-of-refurbished-iphone-3g-salesjpg.jpeg

How does one get that fish image as wallpaper -- it has been around in ads and media from Day 1, but Apple has never offered it!

[Trajectory]

How does one get that fish image as wallpaper -- it has been around in ads and media from Day 1, but Apple has never offered it!

Try here (http://www.iphonestuff.org/2007/03/07/iphone-wallpapers-dimensions-examples-and-the-famous-clown-fish-wallpaper/).

[solipsism]

How does one get that fish image as wallpaper -- it has been around in ads and media from Day 1, but Apple has never offered it!

You’re going to kick yourself for asking that question. Just save the image and to your photos and then make it your wallpaper.• http://images.google.com/images?client=safari&rls=en&q=clown%20fish%20os%20x&oe=UTF-8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi

[anantksundaram]

Try here (http://www.iphonestuff.org/2007/03/07/iphone-wallpapers-dimensions-examples-and-the-famous-clown-fish-wallpaper/).

You’re going to kick yourself for asking that question. Just save the image and to your photos and then make it your wallpaper.• http://images.google.com/images?client=safari&rls=en&q=clown%20fish%20os%20x&oe=UTF-8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi

Heh heh. Thanks.
:embarrass

[Biomusicologist]

You might think that or you might think, with so many tech-type people
living in a small area, that the demands on AT&T's bandwidth are exceptionally
large, and this causes the lack of reliability you cite.

I don't think so. Unless everyone living in Silicon Valley is up at 3:00 a.m. downloading porn to their iPhones.

I have been on AT&T for about a year now, and no matter what time of night or day, I get lousy service. Besides, your theory doesn't account for losing connections every time you pass a specific location, or their lack of coverage in certain areas -- like where my house is located. Even AT&T admits their coverage isn't so stellar. If you go to their coverage map and enter any Silicon Valley address or zip and look around, you'll find plenty areas where coverage is "moderate" -- their term for "shit" (their scale being Best - Good - Moderate - No Service).

http://www.wireless.att.com/coverageviewer/

[quinney]

I can't speak to Verizon because I left them 5 years ago. I can, however, speak to AT&T, because I have had AT&T for five years now, and AT&T sucks the rigid wank of Satan.

Their cavalier use of the word "service" to describe what they provide is the most lying, out and out fraudulent deception in the history of mankind. "Service to His Darkest Lord" would be a better description.

AT&T is every bit the agent of the Devil himself that spiders and poodles are, and anybody who does not recognize that either lives within 20 miles of their corporate HQ, is a waterhead, or never personally used a phone on the Devil's Network.

You get out of YOUR fantasy world, Zohan, and smell what the Jobs is cookin':


AT&T goes away as soon as that contract ends. The secrecy is simply there to keep Wall Street from knowing too much too early.

Although I appreciate your dramatic hyperbole, I think the best you can hope for is for
the iPhone to be offered on more cell networks in addition to AT&T.:)
I don't think they will go away.

[quinney]

I don't think so. Unless everyone living in Silicon Valley is up at 3:00 a.m. downloading porn to their iPhones.

I have been on AT&T for about a year now, and no matter what time of night or day, I get lousy service. Besides, your theory doesn't account for losing connections every time you pass a specific location, or their lack of coverage in certain areas -- like where my house is located. Even AT&T admits their coverage isn't so stellar. If you go to their coverage map and enter any Silicon Valley address or zip and look around, you'll find plenty areas where coverage is "moderate" -- their term for "shit" (their scale being Best - Good - Moderate - No Service).

http://www.wireless.att.com/coverageviewer/

Too bad they didn't have that map before you signed up and so sad you didn't discover
the problem during the period when you could have returned the phone for a refund.
Please keep us all posted regularly on how you are feeling about it.

[Twiztd]

Why is it everone thinks going to CDMA is such a hard thing? The way people make it sound, you would think a CDMA chip has never been invented. There is no inventing, buy it from Qualcomm. You can buy them yourself if you want.

The other issue is people say it is only good for the US if you make it CDMA. Not really, there are many other countries that CDMA or GSM/CDMA mix ( you know...China for example...the country that has more population than the rest of the world ).

And do you really think its impossible to build a phone with both CDMA and GSM radios? It is and has been done for a while.

The people that say it can't and won't be done are the GSM/ATT fanboys that this is their last gleaming hope of being someone very special.

Going to just Verizon would open the potential to 80 million plus customers....let alone the other CDMA carriers in the world.

If you think Apple is going to keep its exclusivity with ATT just to be nice and turn its back on hundreds of millions to possibly billions more dollars, you are nutz. They love making money just like any other company.

I look for VZW to announce the iPhone or something similar from Apple when the LTE networks are promoted.

LTE will use a SIM style card, but, it will not allow just taking the device from one carrier to another like with GSM. I believe their plans are to use CDMA as the backbone for the voice and low speed data and the LTE for higher speed.

As for which is better, VZW touts the Most Reliable network. I believe this is true, but, it mostly depends on your location. Some providers have better service than others in certain locations. To be fair, I have seen areas where a small local regional carrier had better coverage than any of the Big 4.

[Abster2core]

Just last night I was discussing AT&T's incredibly poor service here in the Silicon Valley area with a colleague of mine. We both work in tech and recently switched from other (way better) service providers. Why? Because we wanted the features the iPhone has to offer.

We exchanged notes on the terrible service here. It's almost impossible to converse for an extended period of time without dropping a call. We both talked about the experience of sitting in a chair in your house with what seems like a good connection, and then you move an inch to right and BAM!.....the call instantly dissappears. Also we both talked about locations on Highways 101, 280 or 17 where every single time you drive by a certain spot, you'll loose your call.

You'd think that with Apple's HQ being located here and with so many tech companies AT&T's service would be spectacular. It's shit. With all the money they must be raking in in from people who want the iPhone, you'd think they'd be investing rapidly in upgrading their service. Yet in my home in here in the South Bay, I can rarely make a call, sometimes even when I step outside the house. And I live in a suburb of Silicon Valley. I get much more reliable service in Kansas City (Sprint's HQ - where I travel to frequently), and some other cities, but even then it's not as good my old Treo with Sprint service.

So I have to agree based on conversations I have had with quite a few people. The day the iPhone goes to another carrier, whether it's Verizon or someone else, people will leave AT&T in droves.

Check it out yourself. http://www.cellreception.com/

[GregAlexander]

But since Apple is likely not to make a CMDA iPhone, but instead wait for LTE, since that will be for both Verizon and at&t, we have no way of knowing who's network will be stronger. LTE is a completely different signal than CDMA. It could very well be, that when everyone switches over, at&t's towers will have better LTE penetration than Verizon's.

Though it's possible for Apple to make a CDMA iPhone, I agree it's unlikely. As such we would need to compare the overall quality of Verizon's LTE, against AT&T's LTE+3G+GSM networks. AT&T would likely win that in the short term!

That said, it is _possible_ that Apple will make an LTE+CDMA phone. I think that's more likely a backup plan and bargaining chip with AT&T.

We just want choice. Give us a phone for each carrier. Give us non glossy options on the Mac. You know we'll pay extra for it.

I see some of the AT@T defenders have returned. Not mad about MMS and tethering anymore?
Competition is great. In Australia Telstra has the best coverage and costs a bit more than AT&T for the iPhone. Three other networks also offer the iPhone, and at much cheaper rates. The low end sweet spot is the 16GB iPhone 3GS for free on a <US$60 plan (2 year contract). Lots of voice minutes provided but only 1GB of data.

All carriers offer MMS, but only Vodafone offers Visual Voicemail & free tethering.

ps.
In general, it's a pity that we're seeing too many big companies buy each other up rather than give us lots of competition.

[nightlover]

Just last night I was discussing AT&T's incredibly poor service here in the Silicon Valley area with a colleague of mine. We both work in tech and recently switched from other (way better) service providers. Why? Because we wanted the features the iPhone has to offer.

We exchanged notes on the terrible service here. It's almost impossible to converse for an extended period of time without dropping a call. We both talked about the experience of sitting in a chair in your house with what seems like a good connection, and then you move an inch to right and BAM!.....the call instantly dissappears. Also we both talked about locations on Highways 101, 280 or 17 where every single time you drive by a certain spot, you'll loose your call.

You'd think that with Apple's HQ being located here and with so many tech companies AT&T's service would be spectacular. It's shit. With all the money they must be raking in in from people who want the iPhone, you'd think they'd be investing rapidly in upgrading their service. Yet in my home in here in the South Bay, I can rarely make a call, sometimes even when I step outside the house. And I live in a suburb of Silicon Valley. I get much more reliable service in Kansas City (Sprint's HQ - where I travel to frequently), and some other cities, but even then it's not as good my old Treo with Sprint service.

So I have to agree based on conversations I have had with quite a few people. The day the iPhone goes to another carrier, whether it's Verizon or someone else, people will leave AT&T in droves.

Since when Sprint has good service?? it is the only phone carrier that constantly lose subscribers..do they leave because they have good service. I was with Sprint 3 years and had to constantly battling with problems.

[zigzaglens]

I don't see iPhone for Verizon anytime soon, but I can't miss a chance to rant about AT&T. The 3G service in coastal LA is a real joke.

I get 3G about 15-20% of the time. I'm on GPRS (2.5G) another 10-15% of the time; the rest is EDGE (2.75G) of course. And even when I supposedly do have a 3G signal, stable connections are truly a rarity.

Here's hoping for more choices next year.

[ajmas]

with 4G on the horizon, how much is anyone going to spend getting a better 3G experience for users??? (as an interesting side note - with VoIP, why are we still building cell networks anyway - just wifi and wiMax everywhere...)

If Verizon et al are busy adding support for 4G GSM, I hope that support includes support for older GSM technologies, since otherwise it will limit the number of roaming customers and handsets they have access to in the beginning. Access to roaming customers is one big reason to support GSM: the provide additional income from customers traveling abroad and international phone users using the network while present.

As to quality of service, they all rock and they all suck. Many cell phone companies seem fine, until you deal with customer service and then it depends on the person you are dealing with. On the other hand preventing access to features of your cell phone is one way to displease customers. As to network speeds, the number of customers making heavy data use is going to have an impact on the speed and in many ways I don't think many cell phone companies to expect such a high data usage, though they should now.

[brucep]

T

I also doubt Verizon would give up as much control as ATT has over what goes on the phone. We're still reading stories about how they are trying to set up their own app store that developers for any model phone they offer would have to go through as opposed to a manufacturer specific store.

The biggest mistake verizon ever
made was not getting the iphone.

This will be a decade long highlight on how not to run a high tech phone company.


9

[TenoBell]

I rarely have a problem with dropped calls. The problem normally would be in connecting the call in the first place. But you are right in the middle of the day in Manhattan, the 3G data is either slow or nonexistent.

New York is a particular situation that doesn't exist in most places. The New York metro area has 20 million people and one of the highest concentrations of iPhones in the world. It's unknown how any network would deal with the load.


Last time I was in NYC using AT&T's network, the service was spotty and I had a bunch of dropped calls and couldn't always use the 3G cellular network when no WiFi was available. If I still lived in NYC, I would not be too happy with that level of service.

[TenoBell]

As though no one thought AT&T had network problems before you?

Why do I always seem to be validated lately? :D

[DocNo42]

Hopefully the FCC will step in, because rumor has it that AT&T got another 2 years of exclusivity with the iPhone 3GS.

Wow, I wasn't aware that all other cell phone manufacturers ceased production and Apple is now the sole provider of mobile phones.

Fascinating...

[DocNo42]

ATT Wireless has a horrible coverage in the Washington DC area and no coverage in Metro. My calls get dropped all the time

Huh? Yeah, they don't have coverage in Metro (if you want to whine about FCC intervention for unfair competitive practices, how about exclusive deals for tower placement?) but AT&T is the only carrier that penetrates the building I work in. Since I switched last August I've had two dropped calls. I get decent speed on data not only in DC but in Northern VA, even in the extreme western edge where I live.

There is no perfect carrier - I've had no significant issues with AT&T vs. Sprint (my previous provider) or vs. Verizion (previous work phone).

[arTem1s]

There's the problem -- attitude.

I'm astonished the if the people in ATandT are aware of how much their business depends on iPhone's!

The attitude of the two companies couldn't be more different.

Apple is innovative and gives stellar service with iPhone (if a little restrictive with developers) whereas ATandT gives appalling 3G service (especially in the LA area) and gouges its customers with restrictions on access designed to chisel as much money as possible -- consider travel abroad, or using the iPhone as a modem to a lap-top.

The argument might run -- greed is good and ATandT is beholden to its shareholders, but I am not pleased with my treatment, not only with the iPhone agreement but other nickle and dimeing to death that ATandT marketing dreams up to bundle and foist upon their clientele.

I am divesting myself of as much ATandT stuff as I can -- a combination of Magic Jack and PinCity does well to reduce the hemorraging. I'd also like to chuck my need for a DSL modem as well. ATandT is making a ton already from my families use of two cell-phone accounts already.

Why do they want more -- and for such lousy service?

Wake up and smell the coffee ATandT! There are lots of little people, like me, who are making their own decisions...and the trend seems obvious.

[samab]

The biggest mistake verizon ever
made was not getting the iphone.

This will be a decade long highlight on how not to run a high tech phone company.


9

Without the inclusion of massive net subscriber additions of prepaid Tracfone customers (who has a monthly average revenue per user of $13 a month) into AT&T Wireless' customer base --- AT&T has NEVER beaten Verizon since the iphone was launched.

Verizon Wireless has higher total ARPU than AT&T Wireless, has higher data ARPU than AT&T Wireless, has much higher profit margin than AT&T Wireless...

This is how you run a telephone company --- you concentrate your effort on middle class Americans.

[brucep]

Without the inclusion of massive net subscriber additions of prepaid Tracfone customers (who has a monthly average revenue per user of $13 a month) into AT&T Wireless' customer base --- AT&T has NEVER beaten Verizon since the iphone was launched.

Verizon Wireless has higher total ARPU than AT&T Wireless, has higher data ARPU than AT&T Wireless, has much higher profit margin than AT&T Wireless...

This is how you run a telephone company --- you concentrate your effort on middle class Americans.

Sorry but you quote empty no profit facts / Vernon is a fantastic company with withaa great vision for a digital future.

They still made a no signing babe ruth error .

FOR your info AT&T HAD a net gain of 2 million data subscribers. After all the churn and switching that goes on Verizon stood still. ATT gained two million high profit clients.

I like verizon allot there fios is great .i hope they get the iphone soon

peace
9.

[jsmythe00]

In short, I'd like to have the iPhone on Verizon's network, using Sprint's Everything Plan, with ATT's customer service. That's your cake and eating it too

I've had the iPhone for 3 months and it's the best phone I've ever purchased. And this is coming from a former Apple hater.

[Lancelot9201]

I'm a Apple Tech & even I'm amazed at the type of client the iPhone has drawn. Some of Apple's product line is a hard sell due to The heavy Apple Tax but the iPhone is in a league of its own. Not only are people paying more that than I thought they ever would for just the phone but AT&T's charges are ridiculous & still millions of people are more than willing to pay. Yes, I have had an iPhone (bought used for $150) but it's not on the AT&T network & never will be. Yes, I'd like to have "3G" speeds but I've found that in more areas than you would believe the "Edge" network is almost as fast. The biggest thing is I pay less than $60 per month for unlimited minutes, web access & 200 messages. Now with the 3.0 firmware I even have SMS & tethering which most AT&T customers don't & will probably be forced to pay for. I've been waiting to see a class action filed against AT&T for not having these functions available & even more amazed that all those AT&T customers are so willing to pay for something they're not getting.

I had a supervisor put it this way. The iPhone customer is a great example of why the Economy is in the state it is. iPhone People are to willing to waste money, to willing to pay for something they're not getting (like USA Wide 3G, SMS picture Messaging, Tethering or useful apps like Google Voice) & What's worst is they never seem to evaluate the alternatives so that they can save for the future.

[samab]

Sorry but you quote empty no profit facts / Vernon is a fantastic company with withaa great vision for a digital future.

They still made a no signing babe ruth error .

FOR your info AT&T HAD a net gain of 2 million data subscribers. After all the churn and switching that goes on Verizon stood still. ATT gained two million high profit clients.

I like verizon allot there fios is great .i hope they get the iphone soon

peace
9.

Verizon still has more data subscribers than AT&T, has higher data ARPU than AT&T, has more 3G subscribers than AT&T...

Verizon has beaten AT&T in every single quarter in terms of net subscriber additions for the last 2 years (when cheap Tracfone subscribers who pay $13 a month are taken out of AT&T's numbers) --- since the iphone was launched.

You think that the iphone subscribers are high profit clients? Not until the final numbers are compiled, then we will know for sure. 2 years into the iphone --- and we still hear wall street analysts talking about the profit margin hit. How many years does AT&T has to keep the iphone subscribers until they can raise the profit margin.

[solipsism]

Verizon still […] has more 3G subscribers than AT&T…
Is that devices on their network that are 3G capable, or devices on their network that pay for data plans?

You think that the iphone subscribers are high profit clients?
High profit for Apple. At this point AT&T can’t afford to lose the iPhone exclusivity, even if it means little to no profit from the device after all the associated costs are determined.

[Trajectory]

Come on people, we all know why AT&T's network is bogged down. In addition to directing digital and voice traffic to the intended recipients, they also have to siphon all that data directly into the NSA's computers (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/homefront/interviews/klein.html). So, their network is doing double-duty 24/7.

Perhaps Apple should have partnered with a phone company that isn't helping the government and large corporations spy on Americans. Their networks won't be as bogged down.

[GregAlexander]

But don't you think it could also be a mistake for AT&T? Thank god AT&T helped start the iPhone but once APple pulls the plug or goes multi-carrier in the US , AT&T will be in much worse shape than Verizon. Don't you think? I mean Verizon will suffer in the short term but AT&T will in the long term.

Yes, it could be a mistake for AT&T.
The iPhone brought them customers, but has earned a bad reputation with many of those customers.

Or at least that's how it seems. Is it a really common anti-AT&T feeling amongst customers, or just in the customers interested enough in Apple to post online?


The attitude of the two companies couldn't be more different.

Apple is innovative and gives stellar service with iPhone (if a little restrictive with developers) whereas ATandT gives appalling 3G service (especially in the LA area) and gouges its customers with restrictions on access designed to chisel as much money as possible -- consider travel abroad, or using the iPhone as a modem to a lap-top.

Their MMS blocks make no sense to me. And their coverage is something they're entirely responsible for.

I wouldn't criticise them for expensive roaming charges (the ALL do this, as much as I hate it). I think it's fair to minimise tethering too - AT&T provided unlimited data for iPhones which is incredibly enabling to iPhone users (we outside the US have to think about using apps which will download too much data... avoid any music over 3G unless you know what you're doing!). We get free tethering, but only 500MB of data.

I'm very surprised that AT&T got a bad rep for those, and a bad rep for subsidising the phone but not letting people drop their contract a year early (at a $200 cost to AT&T).

One thing is sure, AT&T has managed their customer perceptions badly.
And I'm not sure whether the monthly fees (for a subsidised phone) are similar, more, or less than Verizon.

The argument might run -- greed is good and ATandT is beholden to its shareholders, but I am not pleased with my treatment, not only with the iPhone agreement but other nickle and dimeing to death that ATandT marketing dreams up to bundle and foist upon their clientele.

So many people say that companies have a duty to their shareholders to make more money. It seems they miss 2 key issues
1) charging more doesn't mean you get more customers... it can be bad for making money!
2) if an individual/person tries to cheat us of our money, we don't say "that's okay, he has a duty to himself to make more money"... we say "I get it, I don't like him, I think what he's doing is wrong, and I will avoid dealing with him". Why is it okay or encouraged if it's a company but wrong for individuals?

[samab]

Their MMS blocks make no sense to me.

If the rumor about AT&T having to manually remove the MMS blocks one subscriber at a time is true, then it makes perfect sense.

After 10 million different mergers, AT&T's backend is basically held up by scotch tape.

[brucep]

Verizon still has more data subscribers than AT&T, has higher data ARPU than AT&T, has more 3G subscribers than AT&T...

Verizon has beaten AT&T in every single quarter in terms of net subscriber additions for the last 2 years (when cheap Tracfone subscribers who pay $13 a month are taken out of AT&T's numbers) --- since the iphone was launched.

You think that the iphone subscribers are high profit clients? Not until the final numbers are compiled, then we will know for sure. 2 years into the iphone --- and we still hear wall street analysts talking about the profit margin hit. How many years does AT&T has to keep the iphone subscribers until they can raise the profit margin.

That is not the point my friend AFTER ALL THE CHURNING verizon overall had no net gain in subscribers.

AT&T RETAINED since they got the iphone >> 2 million high data clients . Not all of these clients bought an iphone .

Both telco's are spending billions built out to the so called 3g 4g LTE networks. And the only high profit item on the tele phone table is data charges >>> all the rest of the services have razor thin profit margins. That is why you phone bill is always confused and over billed. And they need trainloads of cash to pay for all that wire.

SO verizon can have a billion clients and still lose money ./
Verizon down the road will crush time warner ATT and all the rest with there WIRELESS DSL FIOS internet programs /

FROM verizon you will drop all landlines . YOU will bundle on the fastest network speed ever built network FIOS 50G DL. You will bundle your cell phone > your super fast DSL > and movie TV content/
And that is now. $99 a month
Coming soon with such mega mega power is that verizon has you as a client they can then sell you everything fast and cheap from their network .
VERIZON will control your phone your internet your TV and will sell to you from that perch. Verizon will spend over 22 billion when there done lighting dark fiber and stuff.

So can you now see why it was so important for VERIZON TO STRETCH ITS DIGITAL LEGS WITH THE IPHONE .
BUT watch amazon they soon will be a major player.
Amazon and verizon will soon be at war or they will merge. AT&T WILL soon merge with sprint .

peace

[samab]

That is not the point my friend AFTER ALL THE CHURNING verizon overall had no net gain in subscribers.

AT&T RETAINED since they got the iphone >> 2 million high data clients . Not all of these clients bought an iphone .

Both telco's are spending billions built out to the so called 3g 4g LTE networks. And the only high profit item on the tele phone table is data charges >>> all the rest of the services have razor thin profit margins. That is why you phone bill is always confused and over billed. And they need trainloads of cash to pay for all that wire.

SO verizon can have a billion clients and still lose money ./
Verizon down the road will crush time warner ATT and all the rest with there WIRELESS DSL FIOS internet programs /

FROM verizon you will drop all landlines . YOU will bundle on the fastest network speed ever built network FIOS 50G DL. You will bundle your cell phone > your super fast DSL > and movie TV content/
And that is now. $99 a month
Coming soon with such mega mega power is that verizon has you as a client they can then sell you everything fast and cheap from their network .
VERIZON will control your phone your internet your TV and will sell to you from that perch. Verizon will spend over 22 billion when there done lighting dark fiber and stuff.

So can you now see why it was so important for VERIZON TO STRETCH ITS DIGITAL LEGS WITH THE IPHONE .
BUT watch amazon they soon will be a major player.
Amazon and verizon will soon be at war or they will merge. AT&T WILL soon merge with sprint .

peace

Verizon Wireless has a lower churn than AT&T Wireless. And Verizon Wireless has beaten AT&T Wireless in NET subscriber additions every single quarter since the iphone was launched --- when you take out the $13 a month ARPU Tracfone customers.

Verizon outspends AT&T on network infrastructure spending --- because Verizon spends less money on handset subsidies. Verizon Wireless has HIGHER data ARPU than AT&T Wireless --- AT&T relies on cheap $13 Tracfone customers for most of their net adds for the past few years.

Verizon Wireless has HIGHER profit margin than AT&T Wireless.

You WON'T drop Verizon landline --- because it's QUAD bundling. Vonage died because of bundling --- even though Vonage is cheaper than VOIP from cable companies.

[TenoBell]

You have no point here, all of the carriers are the results of mergers. Didn't Verizon just complete a major merger.

If the rumor about AT&T having to manually remove the MMS blocks one subscriber at a time is true, then it makes perfect sense.

After 10 million different mergers, AT&T's backend is basically held up by scotch tape.

[TenoBell]

The majority of the posts you make are to continually pull out these same statistics. Yes Verizon is a successful company, we all agree. To keep bringing this up adds nothing new to the conversation.


Verizon Wireless has a lower churn than AT&T Wireless. And Verizon Wireless has beaten AT&T Wireless in NET subscriber additions every single quarter since the iphone was launched --- when you take out the $13 a month ARPU Tracfone customers.

Verizon outspends AT&T on network infrastructure spending --- because Verizon spends less money on handset subsidies. Verizon Wireless has HIGHER data ARPU than AT&T Wireless --- AT&T relies on cheap $13 Tracfone customers for most of their net adds for the past few years.

Verizon Wireless has HIGHER profit margin than AT&T Wireless.

You WON'T drop Verizon landline --- because it's QUAD bundling. Vonage died because of bundling --- even though Vonage is cheaper than VOIP from cable companies.

[samab]

The majority of the posts you make are to continually pull out these same statistics. Yes Verizon is a successful company, we all agree. To keep bringing this up adds nothing new to the conversation.

The majority of my posts are responding to people who pull out the same incorrect statistics --- which in turn forces me to correct them.

If you don't want me to correct them, then you can correct them.

[samab]

You have no point here, all of the carriers are the results of mergers. Didn't Verizon just complete a major merger.

AT&T went through a lot more mergers than its competitors --- the current AT&T is the combination of AT&T Wireless/Cingular Wireless/SBC/BellSouth.

For many years after AT&T Wireless merged with Cingular Wireless --- their backend systems still segregated their customers into individual "markets". They also have to deal with 3 different wireless network technologies --- TDMA/GSM/Analog --- for their integration efforts.

Verizon has been pretty much the same since its formation --- in 2000. I won't call their Alltel purchase as major.

[solipsism]

I won't call [Verizon’s] Alltel purchase as major.

Of course not, because then you’d have to acknowledge the 14.7 million subs they bought in 34 states for over $28 Billion, as well as acknowledging that Altell still has analog, just like AT&T.

[TenoBell]

Anytime anyone criticizes Verizon about anything you start pulling out the numbers. Whether they actuay adress the complaint or not.

The original post you addressed the person said that Verizon made a mistake allowing AT&T to get the iPhone. It's true it was a mistake. AT&T would be in serious trouble right now if they did not have the iPhone. Verizon would be far ahead of all US carriers.

The majority of my posts are responding to people who pull out the same incorrect statistics --- which in turn forces me to correct them.

If you don't want me to correct them, then you can correct them.

[TenoBell]

AT&T went through a lot more mergers than its competitors --- the current AT&T is the combination of AT&T Wireless/Cingular Wireless/SBC/BellSouth.

For many years after AT&T Wireless merged with Cingular Wireless --- their backend systems still segregated their customers into individual "markets". They also have to deal with 3 different wireless network technologies --- TDMA/GSM/Analog --- for their integration efforts.

Verizon is a combination of Bell Atlantic Mobile, NYNEX Mobile Communications, AirTouch Communications, PrimeCo Communications, GTE Mobilnet. Now Alltel.

AT&T has shut down TDMA.

Verizon has been pretty much the same since its formation --- in 2000. I won't call their Alltel purchase as major.

Of course you don't.

[brucep]

verizon wireless has a lower churn than at&t wireless. And verizon wireless has beaten at&t wireless in net subscriber additions every single quarter since the iphone was launched --- when you take out the $13 a month arpu tracfone customers.

Verizon outspends at&t on network infrastructure spending --- because verizon spends less money on handset subsidies. Verizon wireless has higher data arpu than at&t wireless --- at&t relies on cheap $13 tracfone customers for most of their net adds for the past few years.

Verizon wireless has higher profit margin than at&t wireless.

You won't drop verizon landline --- because it's quad bundling. Vonage died because of bundling --- even though vonage is cheaper than voip from cable companies.fair enough

[xplics]

Okay I have been with At&T now for a little over a month but let me tell the service is so excellent. I love their customer support, and how I can change my plans anytime I want without having to renew my contract each time. I also live in New York City and must say the service with a dropped call every now and then is still excellent. I had T-Mobile before this for about 3 years and the phone service always sucked. The customer card was the worst ever. AT&T is just so much better then T-Mobile that it is shocking.

[samab]

Verizon is a combination of Bell Atlantic Mobile, NYNEX Mobile Communications, AirTouch Communications, PrimeCo Communications, GTE Mobilnet. Now Alltel.

That's what I said --- Verizon hasn't made a really big merger since its formation in 2000. If there were any big integration problems, Verizon would have solved them ages ago.

AT&T Wireless/Cingular Wireless/SBC/BellSouth mergers all occurs much more recently.

AT&T Wireless and Cingular Wireless merged in Oct 2004, only 2.5 years before the original iphone was launched. It is not within the realm of reasoning to speculate that while they were busy with the integration of AT&T Wireless and Cingular Wireless --- they jerry-rigged their backend to accomodate the iphone's lack of MMS by manually blocking MMS on each iphone account.

Putting a jerry-rig solution is easy, removing the jerry-rig is always much harder.

[samab]

Anytime anyone criticizes Verizon about anything you start pulling out the numbers. Whether they actuay adress the complaint or not.

The original post you addressed the person said that Verizon made a mistake allowing AT&T to get the iPhone. It's true it was a mistake. AT&T would be in serious trouble right now if they did not have the iPhone. Verizon would be far ahead of all US carriers.

If I take your theory a little bit further --- then Verizon is not the company that made the really big mistake. If AT&T didn't have the iphone, maybe they would have concentrated on the really important, but mundane stuff --- like network improvements. AT&T wouldn't have been in serious trouble if they didn't have the iphone --- because they would be forced to spend on iphone subsidy on network improvements.

Apple made a much bigger mistake by not launching the original iphone with Verizon 2 years ago --- when Palm was much weaker financially. Would Apple make much less money with a original Verizon iphone launch? Of course, they would make much less money. But killing Palm --- like the Visa card commercial said --- is priceless.

[solipsism]

That's what I said --- Verizon hasn't made a really big merger since its formation in 2000. If there were any big integration problems, Verizon would have solved them ages ago.

AT&T Wireless/Cingular Wireless/SBC/BellSouth mergers all occurs much more recently.

AT&T Wireless and Cingular Wireless merged in Oct 2004, only 2.5 years before the original iphone was launched. It is not within the realm of reasoning to speculate that while they were busy with the integration of AT&T Wireless and Cingular Wireless --- they jerry-rigged their backend to accomodate the iphone's lack of MMS by manually blocking MMS on each iphone account.

Putting a jerry-rig solution is easy, removing the jerry-rig is always much harder.

1) Your continuation to ignore the the 14.7 million subscribers Verizon bought in 34 states for over $28 Billion, as well as acknowledging that Altell still has analog, just like AT&T, is not getting you any objectivity points. That is a huge purchase that includes all the issues that you have pooh-poohed AT&T for.

2) Having a hypothesis on how much time between mobile carrier mergers and acquisitions is required to do more than “jerry rig” a network together is not the same as proof. You have offered no evidence as to how compatible these networks were previously, how much money AT&T has put into merging the networks, or anything at all that resembles an iota of proof.

[solipsism]

If I take your theory a little bit further --- then Verizon is not the company that made the really big mistake. If AT&T didn't have the iphone, maybe they would have concentrated on the really important, but mundane stuff --- like network improvements. AT&T wouldn't have been in serious trouble if they didn't have the iphone --- because they would be forced to spend on iphone subsidy on network improvements.
If AT&T didn’t get the iPhone they wouldn’t have the original iPhone profits to which the next year’s subsidies cold be pulled from. They also wouldn’t have all those >$69/month iPhone contracts for 24 months to be able to make sound business decisions to upgrade their network at many billion dollars a year. They also wouldn’t have had needed to spend that money on network upgrades —much less forced— if iPhone with it’s excessive data usage was not on their network.

Apple made a much bigger mistake by not launching the original iphone with Verizon 2 years ago --- when Palm was much weaker financially. Would Apple make much less money with a original Verizon iphone launch? Of course, they would make much less money. But killing Palm --- like the Visa card commercial said --- is priceless.
It’s safe to say that the only way Verizon would have excepted the iPhone is if Apple had no control of the anything, including what apps were put on the device. I surely wouldn’t have gone to Verizon if Visual Voicemail was an additional $5/month, YouTube streaming wasn’t available, apps were done through Verizon, Google Maps required an additional monthly fee to use the GPS or removed entirely in favour of Verizon’s own app, and no iTunes Store, just Verizon’s expense option to get ringtones. Verizon might play ball, not there is no way the iPhone would have been the device everyone tries to beat if Verizon got its hands on it before 2007.

[samab]

1) Your continuation to ignore the the 14.7 million subscribers Verizon bought in 34 states for over $28 Billion, as well as acknowledging that Altell still has analog, just like AT&T, is not getting you any objectivity points. That is a huge purchase that includes all the issues that you have pooh-poohed AT&T for.

2) Having a hypothesis on how much time between mobile carrier mergers and acquisitions is required to do more than “jerry rig” a network together is not the same as proof. You have offered no evidence as to how compatible these networks were previously, how much money AT&T has put into merging the networks, or anything at all that resembles an iota of proof.

Everything is relative, isn't it?

Compare the amount of integration that Verizon has to go through in recent years with AT&T --- there is a great deal of difference between the two. Compare the Analog/TDMA/GSM/WCDMA transition to the relatively simple Analog/CDMA transition --- another big difference.

I said that all the major mergers that created Verizon occurred when Verizon was formed in 2000 (all but the Alltel merger --- which Verizon has just started their integration recently). I said that all the major mergers that created the current AT&T are much more recent.

I never said I have any "proof" on this matter --- I said it from the beginning that it was a "rumor" (from boygeniusreport) about the jerry-rigging. I said that if the rumors were true, I can understand it.

[samab]

If AT&T didn’t get the iPhone they wouldn’t have the original iPhone profits to which the next year’s subsidies cold be pulled from. They also wouldn’t have all those >$69/month iPhone contracts for 24 months to be able to make sound business decisions to upgrade their network at many billion dollars a year. They also wouldn’t have had needed to spend that money on network upgrades —much less forced— if iPhone with it’s excessive data usage was not on their network.

It’s safe to say that the only way Verizon would have excepted the iPhone is if Apple had no control of the anything, including what apps were put on the device. I surely wouldn’t have gone to Verizon if Visual Voicemail was an additional $5/month, YouTube streaming wasn’t available, apps were done through Verizon, Google Maps required an additional monthly fee to use the GPS or removed entirely in favour of Verizon’s own app, and no iTunes Store, just Verizon’s expense option to get ringtones. Verizon might play ball, not there is no way the iPhone would have been the device everyone tries to beat if Verizon got its hands on it before 2007.

AT&T would have spent the money on network improvements anyway because Verizon is winning customers on the network improvement issue. Verizon spends more on capex than AT&T even though Verizon doesn't have the iphone, doesn't face excessive data usage from the iphone....

You would have gotten apps much sooner if Verizon got the iphones --- and you would have paid the same $10 a month getting either VZ Navigator or AT&T Navigator. You might get Google Maps for free right now --- but the GPS pinpointing is close to useless with the current iphone. VZ never had that much complaints on their GPS pinpointing.

[TenoBell]

Compare the amount of integration that Verizon has to go through in recent years with AT&T --- there is a great deal of difference between the two. Compare the Analog/TDMA/GSM/WCDMA transition to the relatively simple Analog/CDMA transition --- another big difference.

The primary reason AT&T still had an analog and TDMA network is because there were paying customers who used those networks. As I told you before AT&T has shut analog/TDMA networks down.

As of February 18th, 2008, AT&T has discontinued service of its TDMA/Analog network (http://www.wireless.att.com/learn/articles-resources/tdma-notification.jsp)

I said that all the major mergers that created Verizon occurred when Verizon was formed in 2000 (all but the Alltel merger --- which Verizon has just started their integration recently). I said that all the major mergers that created the current AT&T are much more recent.


What does it matter if the mergers happened in 2000 or 2004? Both companies were still formed from other companies.

[TenoBell]

AT&T would have spent the money on network improvements anyway because Verizon is winning customers on the network improvement issue. Verizon spends more on capex than AT&T even though Verizon doesn't have the iphone, doesn't face excessive data usage from the iphone....

Yes we all agree, Verizon has done a better job of maintaining and updating its network. Most of us have acknowledged this, its nothing new.

You would have gotten apps much sooner if Verizon got the iphones --- and you would have paid the same $10 a month getting either VZ Navigator or AT&T Navigator. You might get Google Maps for free right now --- but the GPS pinpointing is close to useless with the current iphone. VZ never had that much complaints on their GPS pinpointing.

Since it seems you don't use an iPhone, on what basis are you asserting that the iPhone GPS pinpointing is useless?

[samab]

The primary reason AT&T still had an analog and TDMA network is because there were paying customers who used those networks. As I told you before AT&T has shut analog/TDMA networks down.

As of February 18th, 2008, AT&T has discontinued service of its TDMA/Analog network (http://www.wireless.att.com/learn/articles-resources/tdma-notification.jsp)

What does it matter if the mergers happened in 2000 or 2004? Both companies were still formed from other companies.

I know that they shut down their analog/TDMA network. But you can't just shut them down first without correspondingly overlay it with a brand new GSM network. There is a lot more work involved in AT&T's Analog/TDMA/GSM/WCDMA migrations than Verizon's relatively simple Analog/CDMA migrations.

Of course, it matters --- because AT&T's network integration was still continuing in 2006-2007 while the alleged rumored jerry-rigged was taking place. If AT&T had fully finished their merger related integration in 2006-7, then there would have been no need to jerry-rig the iphone launch.

Since it seems you don't use an iPhone, on what basis are you asserting that the iPhone GPS pinpointing is useless?

On the basis that TomTom sells their nav apps to dozens and dozens of other smartphones, the iphone is the only one that they need to include a separate GPS receiver.

[TenoBell]

I know that they shut down their analog/TDMA network. But you can't just shut them down first without correspondingly overlay it with a brand new GSM network. There is a lot more work involved in AT&T's Analog/TDMA/GSM/WCDMA migrations than Verizon's relatively simple Analog/CDMA migrations.

Its not that simple for Verizon, they are dealing with analog/CDMA/EV-DO/LTE. Verizon may do a better job than AT&T at managing all of these standards but Verizon certainly is not dealing with only two.

Of course, it matters --- because AT&T's network integration was still continuing in 2006-2007 while the alleged rumored jerry-rigged was taking place. If AT&T had fully finished their merger related integration in 2006-7, then there would have been no need to jerry-rig the iphone launch.

Exactly what were they jerry-rigging? Do you actually have any details on what they were jerry-rigging?


On the basis that TomTom sells their nav apps to dozens and dozens of other smartphones, the iphone is the only one that they need to include a separate GPS receiver.

Complete biased speculation, in other words BS.


http://www.instablogsimages.com/images/2009/06/09/tom-tom-iphone-car-kit_69zdY_59.jpg


TomTom has not made an integrated dashboard cradle for dozens and dozens of other phones. As far as I can see the iPhone is the only phone they've made one for.

I would imagine TomTom's GPS receiver works better than the GPS receiver in any phone.

[samab]

Its not that simple for Verizon, they are dealing with analog/CDMA/EV-DO/LTE. Verizon may do a better job than AT&T at managing all of these standards but Verizon certainly is not dealing with only two.

Exactly what were they jerry-rigging? Do you actually have any details on what they were jerry-rigging?

Everything is RELATIVE, isn't it? Qualcomm made the transitions of cdmaOne to 1x to ev-do rev 0 to ev-do rev A relatively easy.

To all you people that think I am some sort of Verizon fanboi --- here is my take: AT&T ain't doing that bad of a job.

AT&T has to deal with a lot more RECENT mergers, has to deal with RELATIVELY complex network migration issues (comparing with Europe, they didn't even have TDMA) --- somehow AT&T still has the largest iphone data allowance in the whole world (not counting Canadian carrier Rogers' time limited special 6 GB iphone plan) and the third fastest iphone speed in the whole world (wired.com survey).

Somehow while they were delivering all these technical achievements --- AT&T jerry-rigged their database with MMS opt-out codes on individual accounts --- and suddenly AT&T becomes some sort of villain.

http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2009/06/08/the-reason-why-att-wont-support-mms-with-the-iphone-until-late-summer/

[SGSStateStudent]

Ok people let's get back to the topic and not get carried away with squabbling and arguing. It does us all no good, right? ;)

Carry on..