Verizon, Apple quarreled over iPhone retail options, digital content
Major sticking points in negotiations between Verizon and Apple have reportedly been the wireless carrier's interest in allowing retail partners to sell the iPhone, and Verizon's promotion of its V Cast digital video-on-demand store.
Overnight, The Wall Street Journal filled in some of the holes in its story filed Wednesday afternoon, adding new details of a purported Verizon-compatible CDMA iPhone. Among other changes, the story added specifically that the phone would be coming to Verizon, the largest wireless carrier in the U.S.
The previous report said only that Apple would make a phone that was compatible with Verizon's network. It did not go as far as to say Apple had struck a deal with Verizon -- but that detail was, in fact, later added.
The report also shed some light on previous negotiations between the two companies, alleging that Apple and Verizon butted heads over a number of issues, including the wireless carrier's V Cast digital video store.
"Verizon, in those earlier discussions, balked at Apple's requirement that Verizon not allow its retail partners to sell the phone, people familiar with the discussion said at the time," the report said. "Verizon also declined to give up its ability to sell content like music and videos through its proprietary service, these people said."
The expanded report from Yukari Iwatani Kane and Ting-I Tsai also added that Apple will not create a dual-mode GSM and CDMA phone for Verizon's network. Instead, the new Verizon-compatible phone will operate only on CDMA networks, based on a chip provided by Qualcomm.
The report also alleged that Verizon has been preparing its network for the arrival of the iPhone, expected to happen in early 2011.
"Verizon Wireless has been meeting with Apple, adding capacity and testing its networks to prepare for the heavy data load by iPhone users, according to one person familiar with the matter," the report said. "The carrier is seeking to avoid the kind of public-relations hit that AT&T took when the boom in data-hungry iPhones overtaxed its network, especially in New York and San Francisco."
Responding to the Journal's reports on Wednesday, Verizon President and COO Lowell McAdam said that any indication of a Verizon iPhone would need to come from Apple. Lowell told the press he could not provide them "any insights."
Overnight, The Wall Street Journal filled in some of the holes in its story filed Wednesday afternoon, adding new details of a purported Verizon-compatible CDMA iPhone. Among other changes, the story added specifically that the phone would be coming to Verizon, the largest wireless carrier in the U.S.
The previous report said only that Apple would make a phone that was compatible with Verizon's network. It did not go as far as to say Apple had struck a deal with Verizon -- but that detail was, in fact, later added.
The report also shed some light on previous negotiations between the two companies, alleging that Apple and Verizon butted heads over a number of issues, including the wireless carrier's V Cast digital video store.
"Verizon, in those earlier discussions, balked at Apple's requirement that Verizon not allow its retail partners to sell the phone, people familiar with the discussion said at the time," the report said. "Verizon also declined to give up its ability to sell content like music and videos through its proprietary service, these people said."
The expanded report from Yukari Iwatani Kane and Ting-I Tsai also added that Apple will not create a dual-mode GSM and CDMA phone for Verizon's network. Instead, the new Verizon-compatible phone will operate only on CDMA networks, based on a chip provided by Qualcomm.
The report also alleged that Verizon has been preparing its network for the arrival of the iPhone, expected to happen in early 2011.
"Verizon Wireless has been meeting with Apple, adding capacity and testing its networks to prepare for the heavy data load by iPhone users, according to one person familiar with the matter," the report said. "The carrier is seeking to avoid the kind of public-relations hit that AT&T took when the boom in data-hungry iPhones overtaxed its network, especially in New York and San Francisco."
Responding to the Journal's reports on Wednesday, Verizon President and COO Lowell McAdam said that any indication of a Verizon iPhone would need to come from Apple. Lowell told the press he could not provide them "any insights."
Comments
You know what Apple's problem is? They can't partner with anyone because their CEO has delusions of Godhood.
"Verizon also declined to give up its ability to sell content like music and videos through its proprietary service, these people said."
I'm sorry, but I don't see Apple caving on that one.
So let Verizon sell their V Cast stuff on the iPhone. What's the big deal? Apple bent and put Netflix on the Apple TV.
You know what Apple's problem is? They can't partner with anyone because their CEO has delusions of Godhood.
Apple TV is a "hobby", and it's not exactly a headliner product for Apple or even a very popular one at that.
The iPhone, however, is one of their flagship brands and I just can't see them allowing VCast crap on the iPhone.
That, to me, seems like a fair compromise.
Apple TV is a "hobby", and it's not exactly a headliner product for Apple or even a very popular one at that.
The iPhone, however, is one of their flagship brands and I just can't see them allowing VCast crap on the iPhone.
I see. So it's okay for Lord Jobs to partner with someone on their hobby but not on a "headliner product?" Wouldn't a headliner product make more money for the company than a "hobby?"
Why did Apple extend the AT&T contract that pushed them into a corner, is beyond me.
I never will understand Apple's partnership with AT&T. There such a crap company. As Jason Snell of MacWorld put it, they are a cancer on Apple's good name.
I recently updated my "Mark the Spot" app that ATT wrote to let them know where their dead zones are, since they apparently have no clue without my input. The reason for the update: bug fixes to stop crashes.
I thought part of the approval process for Apps was that they couldn't crash. I distinctly remember Jobs making a big point of this at the D8 conference.
So how come ATT was allowed to have an App in the store that was crashing all this time? Why does ATT get "a pass" for substandard service in the eyes of a company that demands excellence?
I see. So it's okay for Lord Jobs to partner with someone on their hobby but not on a "headliner product?" Wouldn't a headliner product make more money for the company than a "hobby?"
His point is that the iPhone is already wildly successful and should not have to cave in to meet idiotic demands. In the case of the apple tv, apple needed to make traction and make it a staple within their ecosystem, therefore making the small cave of bringing in netflix should help boost sales and make it less of a hobby.
I see. So it's okay for Lord Jobs to partner with someone on their hobby but not on a "headliner product?" Wouldn't a headliner product make more money for the company than a "hobby?"
So it's okay for Lord Verizon to force their rubbish onto your phone?
My previous phones before iPhone was loaded with all sorts of nonsense and the telcos had their sway in their software and offerings I wasn't remotely interested in.
I like my phones un-raped nowadays.
If Verizon was allowed to make one Vcast app that would be preinstalled on the iphone but have the ability to be deleted I would not mind it.
That, to me, seems like a fair compromise.
Remember that Apple has a a strict policy of not putting such apps, removable or otherwise, on their products. Their isn’t a single piece of crapware on any Mac. Not one trial version. They used to come with an iWork Trial, but that stopped as soon as Apple didn’t have to include the MS Office for Mac Test Drive anymore. Note: I just said that Apple doesn’t even promote its own iWork suite with a trial version on Macs.
My problem with letting carriers put apps on these devices, even if they are removal is that it could open the floodgates to even more such apps. I don’t want to have clean up a phone the way i cleaned up a new Windows PC from a major OEM. All that stuff was removable, too, but it still got to be a PiTA. I bet that started as a single little app, too.
They should also skip this whole CDMA crap and go right to LTE. By the time this phone comes out Verizon will have 1/2 the country lit up with LTE.
Little Rant:
I never will understand Apple's partnership with AT&T. There such a crap company. As Jason Snell of MacWorld put it, they are a cancer on Apple's good name.
I recently updated my "Mark the Spot" app that ATT wrote to let them know where their dead zones are, since they apparently have no clue without my input. The reason for the update: bug fixes to stop crashes.
I thought part of the approval process for Apps was that they couldn't crash. I distinctly remember Jobs making a big point of this at the D8 conference.
So how come ATT was allowed to have an App in the store that was crashing all this time? Why does ATT get "a pass" for substandard service in the eyes of a company that demands excellence?
Mr. Jobs, I hope the kickback your getting from your buddies at ATT is worth it.
Right... All apps on the App Store never crash at all...
If Verizon was allowed to make one Vcast app that would be preinstalled on the iphone but have the ability to be deleted I would not mind it.
That, to me, seems like a fair compromise.
I am not familiar with what V Cast does, but if it offers similar features that the iTunes app does like sell music, video and the like, it goes against the App Store guidelines.
His point is that the iPhone is already wildly successful and should not have to cave in to meet idiotic demands. In the case of the apple tv, apple needed to make traction and make it a staple within their ecosystem, therefore making the small cave of bringing in netflix should help boost sales and make it less of a hobby.
So the iPhone was wildly successful before it was released? Isn't that the time frame when the original negotiations took place?
There's that word again. Idiotic. We were using that word a lot yesterday. Why is letting Verizon make some money on the iPhone idiotic? Apple let ATT make a bag of cash by making them exclusive partners. Was that fair business??
Has it occurred to you that no carrier is everywhere? Has it occurred to you that there must be somebody on the planet that would like an iPhone with it's beautiful scratch prone glass body and innovative exterior antenna that drops calls when held naturally in your left hand. Hypothetically this person would not buy an iPhone until it is available on other carriers.
So Apple would sell more phones and make more profit for itself and it's shareholders and everybody would be happy. Everyone except the members of this forum.
Idiotic. Yeah, your right. It would be idiotic to allow V Cast on an iPhone. It would really ruin everything. Idiotic. Yes indeed.
Remember that Apple has a a strict policy of not putting such apps, removal or otherwise, on their products. Their isn?t a single piece of crapware on any Mac. Not one trial version. They used to come with an iWork Trial, but that stopped as soon as Apple didn?t have to include the MS Office for Mac Test Drive anymore.
My problem with letting carriers put apps on these devices, even if they are removal is that it could open the floodgates to even more such apps. I don?t want to have clean up a phone the way i cleaned up a new Windows PC from a major OEM. All that stuff was removable, too, but it still got to be a PiTA. I bet that started as a single little app, too.
Bingo.
Right... All apps on the App Store never crash at all...
Mark the Spot works just fine on my phone, no crashes here. Maybe it's your phone, have you tried restoring it and starting with a clean slate and reinstalling all your apps?
And as far as AT&T being a crap company, I think you should keep that in persepective. In some areas other carriers are better than AT&T, however where I live (WA and then UT) AT&T has worked very well. I have no complaints
So let Verizon sell their V Cast stuff on the iPhone. What's the big deal? Apple bent and put Netflix on the Apple TV.
You know what Apple's problem is? They can't partner with anyone because their CEO has delusions of Godhood.
You know what Apple's strength is? They have a strong business plan, a controlled user experience which ensures user safety, operating stability and optimal handling for the hardware.
The CEO of any company gets the final say about how and where the company's products are sold. It has nothing to do with "Godhood", and I'd ask that you maybe didn't blaspheme.
I am not familiar with what V Cast does, but if it offers similar features that the iTunes app does like sell music, video and the like, it goes against the App Store guidelines.
I just want a physical button on my phone that is designed to be accidentally hit so I can be charged more.
Right... All apps on the App Store never crash at all...
You included several rolling eyes in your post like I said something foolish. I'm supposed to know the percentage of Apps that crash before I'm allowed to post here?
Okay. Give me an hour or so. I'm going to download every app in the store and test them one at a time and figure out the percentage of Apps that crash.
Lord knows I wouldn't want my posts to appear emotional and uninformed. I want to sound intelligent. Like all of my forum friends here.