or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple predicted to sacrifice 'sweetheart' AT&T deal for Verizon
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple predicted to sacrifice 'sweetheart' AT&T deal for Verizon - Page 3

post #81 of 193
What would stop them from creating a GSM/CDMA phone like Blackberry? My old Storm was capable of picking up both networks.
post #82 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleStud View Post

Wrong. My AT&T 3G coverage is excellent, almost everywhere I go. As much recognition as Apple gets for their marketing, Verizon deserves a lot of credit for convincing people their network is, as a matter of indisputable fact, superior to AT&T.

Justify it any way you want to... AT&T's network blows.

For the last 18 months, it's be "ok" in Oregon. Now it's to the point where I'm dropping almost every call, and so are other people I know that have AT&T. I'm getting very frustrated with it to the point where I'm going to move when my contract is up no matter what. If the iPhone is there, great. If not, guess I'm going to android. For the last few weeks my phone has been jumping back and forth between Edge and 3g. 4 months ago this never would have happened.

AT&T even admits their network sucks.

In 2010 Verizon is migrating their network to a GSM based 4g. Once this happens, I'm sure the iPhone will migrate over to Verizon. Verizon has too many customers that want the iPhone. Apple is in the selling phone business. Not making carrier's happy business. It's inevitable that there will be an iPhone on Verizon.

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #83 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveGee View Post

Come on folks... we need to all realize that making comments about one carriers quality/coverage is subjective to the point that even in the same TOWN two people could have two ENTIRELY different feelings when it comes to 'carrier A' vs. 'carrier B' if the town is sprawling enough and one person lives on one side of a mountain and the other person lives on the other side.

Exactly. Just because it doesn't happen to you, doesn't mean it doesn't happen to everyone

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #84 of 193
There is another GSM carrier in the U.S.: T-Mobile. Although it's not the largest, are 30+ million subscribers to be sneezed at?
post #85 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by irnchriz View Post

All the naysayers stated that Apple wouldn't make an iPhone for the Chinese market and their variant of CDMA but they did. Whats to stop them from adding Verizon as an iPhone carrier? Especially if Apples accountants reckon that they can make more money by being with AT&T and Verizon.

The CDMA standard in China is not really CDMA

It's W-CDMA which is actually very similar to GSM and completely different than CDMA2000 which Verizon uses.

Verizon standard is IS-41, also known as ANSI-41.

ATT, other GSM and China Unicom standards are GSM-MAP

The two system will converge in 4G LTE as discussed in previous posts.
post #86 of 193
Wow, this analyst is being more an idiot than they usually are. There are so many things wrong with his conclusions that it hardly seems fair to start listing them out. Readers can safely overlook this idiot and move on to the next topic.

And don't expect the iPhone to become more expensive if the exclusive contract ends.
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.
  Samuel Johnson
Reply
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.
  Samuel Johnson
Reply
post #87 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turley Muller View Post

Apple already has stated several times it doesn't see any sense in investing in making a CDMA network handset because nearly the whole world is on GSM and CDMA is nearing end of life. Verizon is moving to LTE, a next generation GSM standard. That won't probably happen until 2011.

I see the iPhone going to T-Mobile for Verizon or Sprint. Apple & AT&T never expected exclusivity to last forever. Apple wanted an exclusive partner so both would work to together in innovating ne services such as visual voicemail and App store etc. Since AT&T was GSM, it made sense to build a GSM iphone because it works on 95% of the worlds networks

I can't see any reason why Apple would go to another CDMA player. What good would that do for Apple? If they move to CDMA, then it will be Verizon. T-Mobile is the smallest by far, with less than 35 million customers, and is not growing. It also uses the 1700 freq band, an odd choice.

In June, when Apple comes out with a new phone upgrade, we'll see if it includes an LTE radio. If it does, then we'll have a good idea of what's to come, early. If not, then everything will remain the same until, at least, June 2010.
post #88 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Apple is a control freak and Verizon is a control freak. It ain't gonna happen.

I can't picture Verizon allowing the app store to download new apps unless Verizon gets to veto any app they don't like. This would be hideous for developers; you'd not only have to convince Apple, but you'd have to convince Verizon as well. Can't see it happening.
post #89 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Apple is not going to Verizon in 2010. Next.

I would have to agree with you. Due to one major point that none of these folks ever address. The technology. Verizon is CDMA. No where has anyone pointed this out, discussed the cost of adding that tech to the phones. Dealt with the issue of LTE and when Apple might add it, if they are going to, the cost, how far Verizon might be on having a working network of a decent size etc.

that said, I highly doubt that Apple is going to drop ATT, with all the customer service hassles that caused, and go to another company exclusively. It just makes more sense for them to drop the need to illegally unlock by doing it themselves and making it a free for all with the right tech. and it would benefit the customers because the carriers would have to compete to have the best rates and coverage to lure in and keep subscribers.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #90 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleStud View Post

What misinformation? I have no problem with my iPhone 3G. AT&T has 80million subscribers - are they all masochists who choose to suffer with crappy service for the heck of it? Sorry if New York and San Fran suck, that's inexcusable on AT&Ts part. However, the vast majority of people are satisfied with their AT&T service.

For my part, I agree with this. I live in Austin, TX and used to be a Verizon customer; had a Motorola made phone. I'd be 2 miles from down town, a stone throw from one of two N <--> S freeways and I'd be analog and roaming. I paid to get out of my contract.

I was in NY for some Yanks vs BSox games a few weeks back and, holy hell, the service wasn't near what I was used to.
post #91 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

So theoretically speaking if all your consumers are well-off retirees , it doesn't matter?

That's Cadillac, and it's why their sales have been shrinking over the years.

Apple sells across the entire spectrum. College students are willing to spend more to get a Macbook, or Macbook Pro. So are parents buying computers for their their kids in middle school and high school. Older, well off people are buying them as well.

iPhones are selling to every age group, and even income group.

That's why sales have been on such a sharply higher trajectory.
post #92 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

My question is: Will people leave AT&T to go to t-Mobile if the iPhone gets there first?

Doubtful that more than a few would do that. T-Mobile has, by far, the worst 3G coverage of all the carriers. If people are complaining about 3G coverage at AT&T, then they will have a heart attack over T-Mobile's coverage.
post #93 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by djbeta View Post

Forgive my ignorance, but why would the recent VZW / Moto/Droid deal would suggest that VZW would be unable to carry the iPhone?

that deal isn't over if they would be unable, that is tech as I mentioned before. The deal and the recent ads suggests that there's no deal in the words, regardless of tech. Because logically you don't bash, or allow a partner to bash, a company you are negotiating with. it's tacky and can blow up in your face. so those ads seem like a strong sign that no deal is in the worlds, no matter what the analysts want to say

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #94 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by emig647 View Post

Exactly. Just because it doesn't happen to you, doesn't mean it doesn't happen to everyone

Look, I know people with Verizon who have problems, and several who hate their customer service. While the network is better, the question is whether that's enough to matter.

As AT&T is now adding more new customers per quarter than Verizon, and churn is down a lot, possibly the network quality differences don't matter.

We've go to be realistic here.

When I first bought a smartphone, I went to Sprint, despite their having the worst network at the time. At was sometime close to 9.11, when we decided we should get cells. I went to them because they were the only carrier to have the Samsung i300, the first color Palmphone.

People often go to a carrier for a phone, and ignore the network problems.

Sprint, which now has a fairly good network, one that had improved noticeably by the time I left it and my Treo 700p, has so many customer service problems that they're drowning in them. That's something I don't understand, but seems to be far more important to most people than the network quality.

The fact that AT&T is doing so well, esp as far as iPhone sales go, shows that despite the network complaints by some, the iPhone is much more important than those complaints. Churn for iPhone users is far less than the industry average. I think the lowest of all major phones.

So I don't think that the network matters as much when a desirable phone is in question.
post #95 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

The argument that Apple would greatly profit from a CDMA-based iPhone is solid. There are 150M+ CDMA-based users in the US and there are some countries that cant get the iPhone until a CDMA version is made. It may only account for 10% of the worlds cellphone users but its still a very large number.

Still, there are already reports of production issues from this years 3GS launch and there are logistical issues for the controlling Apple to have 2 phones for each capacity stocked in their stores. Id think theyd go with T-Mobile USA, by adding the additional radio, where controlled iPhone growth to here 40M customers would be an smoother transition. On top of that, they already have a rapport with the parent company in Europe and they are certainly a favoured underdog in the US that would likely be more willing to bend to Apples needs over Verizon.


PS: This thread has now been jacked up. It looks like more than half the posts are from Teckstud followed by others correcting him. When you feed him it just gets out of hand. Please, be kind to other forum members

You do have a point about the 150m users of the world that use CDMA but it will eventually be out the window. That would be like people going back and making HD DVD because a very small percentage of people use that format. It doesn't make sense to cater to the minority just so they can have fun too. They don't hold a majority of the wealth which is what drives production and coverage support. I could see this phone going to all other companies that use CDMA way before it goes to Verizon. Apple wouldn't have to redesign the phone to cater to CDMA users...they would only have to make more of what they already have to support the GSM users. Just my opinion.
post #96 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

That's Cadillac,

Unless we're talking . . .






post #97 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Unless we're talking . . .







I don't know how to comment on that without getting in some sort of trouble.
post #98 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't know how to comment on that without getting in some sort of trouble.

LOL, why? It's popular with younger people, often celebrities, with above-average disposable income.
post #99 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

All the articles I have read about LTE seem to suggest that it is primarily for data. Most estimates seem to suggest that Verizon and Sprint will still need the CDMA towers for voice calls for a good 10 to 15 more years. So even with LTE, Apple would still need to include the CDMA radio in any Verizon iPhone for many, many, more years to come. Personally I think WiMax is the far more open and better technology than LTE but that is an entirely different debate.

With about 150 million plus CDMA customers in the U.S. that is a pretty big market not to tap. The cost for making a CDMA version would be tiny compared to the potential profit to Apple. That number is larger than the cellphone subscribers of the U.K. , France, and Italy combined for example. Apple is Apple and therefore unpredictable so who knows what they are thinking or what they will do.

Sprint actually has a very impressive 3G map coverage that rivals Verizon. It is also far more widespread than AT&T's. I would love to see Apple slap Verizon in the face an offer a CDMA version for Sprint. Sprint's impressive 3G coverage plus unbeatable plans that would be about $30 cheaper per month would definitely make AT&T and Verizon very nervous.

What people who dream of Verizon arn't thinking about, when they mention that possible 150 million number, is first, that many people from those networks are already leaving them to buy iPhones from AT&T, so that the addtional numbers may very well be much smaller than is thought. Ion't agree with the numbers in the article, for example, because they seem to be adding them to the AT&T numbers, rather that trying to figure out how many would stay with AT&T (most) and how many are left elsewhere.

Second is the overall percentage of adds for Apple. We had only to consider AT&Ts numbers over the first year, but now we have to consider the numbers from all the other countries, a number that is quickly growing.

What percentage would Verizon be? It might be too small for Apple to want a special model phone. Even if the troubled Sprint is added in, where Apple may see only small numbers.

While many manufacturers are willing to make a myriad number of phones for every small marker niche, Apple has shown that they aren't willing to do that. None of those other phones sell in large numbers, and is one reason why those other manufacturers have so much less profit than Apple does. R&D costs, as well as manufacturing start-up costs become too big a percentage of sales. I can't see Apple going there now.
post #100 of 193
Apple must sure have reduced to cost of iPhone well below the $500 number mentioned in the original article, so $300 subsidy going forward starting some time next year (similar to the subsidy offered for most other high end phones) sounds quite reasonable. I am sure Apple is already setup to make this type of business case work with more carriers selling iPhones.

The more important issue is the $30 monthly service fee which is holding back a good number of people from getting iPhones. Apple should negotiate a way for carriers to offer lower monthly rates based on some kind of a tiered plan. Instead of charging a fortune for "overage" as is done with voice plans, carriers can offer a simple plan where you pay $10/month up to 200MB, $20/month up to 500MB, $30/month up to $2GB and $40/month beyond 2GB based on your metered usage. Instead of signing up for a fixed rate, your monthly rate would be determined at the end of the month based on your actual usage. Since the unlimited service costs $40, you are not going to get a "bill shock". Such a plan would provide incentive for "casual" users to get a iPhone while charging the "bandwidth hogs" a bit more to distribute the cost of service more fairly.

And please, make 50 or 100 text messages part of base service please...
post #101 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

LOL, why? It's popular with younger people, often celebrities, with above-average disposable income.

It's hard to explain, but Cadillac is popular with a very few small groups other than older people. A couple of years ago, GM had said that their biggest problem with Cadillac was that the average customers age was 68, and rising, and that they were having a lot of problems convincing younger buyers to move over.

Yeah, some basketball and football stars have one, so what? Pimps do to.
post #102 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Pimps do to.

Well there you go!

Although I'm not sure what demographic they fall into.
post #103 of 193
and as for subsidizing the iPhone WHEN they do switch to Verizon, or put the phone on the open market for all to sell(?), they can subsidize it by themselves with all of the money they will have made by then!

Skip
post #104 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't know how to comment on that without getting in some sort of trouble.

Can a mod give himself a 3 day ban just for thinking bad thought?

Even wonder what the letters PONTIAC stand for? Yes I know this is wrong but I can't help but to still think its funny... I blame it on society and the age I grew up in...
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
post #105 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Wrong - the market is for young people between 17 and 24. Your talking from a stockholder perpective only interested in momentary profits.

Hmm... I bought my first Mac about 18 months ago, and I'm about to turn 39.

I converted my mother-in-law to an iMac about 6 months ago and she is in her 60s.

I converted my parents to a Mac Mini about 2 months ago, and my father is 74 and my mother 69.

My brother-in-law has already told me that as soon as AutoDesk ports AutoCad (supposedly in the works) to Mac OS he is going to be getting a new Mac. Oh, he is my age, maybe a year or two younger.

One of my co-workers recently purchased a MacBook, I think, and he is definitely a thirty-something. Another co-worker has a daughter who is in her mid 20s and she just recently bought a new MacBook.

Out of all the people I know personally having bought an Apple computer in the past 2 years only one has been in this target market that you suggest. I do not argue that Apple has a tremendous appeal for young people, but Macs are premium machines and as such I think Apple understands that most of their customers are going to be more established and adults who can afford to pay for the premium product they are buying. Similarly, I think Lexus, Acura, and Infinity are targeting a more mature shopper who can afford the premium price of their vehicles.
post #106 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveGee View Post

Can a mod give himself a 3 day ban just for thinking bad thought?

Even wonder what the letters PONTIAC stand for? Yes I know this is wrong but I can't help but to still think its funny... I blame it on society and the age I grew up in...

Political correctness sometimes goes too far.
post #107 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Apple is a control freak and Verizon is a control freak. It ain't gonna happen.

verizon will pre buy 8 million phones from apple for 2010
for 2011 verizon will pre buy 22 million iphones for there 7g network

repeat after me
data data data
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #108 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

verizon will pre buy 8 million phones from apple for 2010
for 20111 verizon will pre buy 22 million iphones for there 7g network

repeat after me
data data data

yada yada yada
post #109 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by accumulator View Post

CDMA doesn't allow voice and data over the same call; so, you'd have an iPhone that doesn't work like other iPhones do. That's a cardinal sin. Can anyone really see Apple saying: "Sorry, this app won't work for you because you have a Verizon iPhone"?? Not likely. It would cripple the seamless user experience.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OhReallyNow View Post

I don't know if anyone has mentioned this yet.. BUt one big thing that I'm sure apple would want is for all of their customers to have an equal/the best experience.

Now sure VZW network might be able to handle the load better (or maybe it'l buckle under pressure from having a phone on it that people actually use which sends bandwidth thru the roof). But from all that I have heard, VZW's cellular technology doesn't allow for simultaneous voice and data transmission. SO if youre on an iPhone on verizon, then you'd not be able to talk and surf the net or check email... or you'd be plagued with those crazy problems we all had on the Edge only iPhone with ATT where if youre surfing the net or pulling heavy data somehow.. you just wouldn't get calls. They'd all of a sudden show up as voicemails of phone calls that never rang. And who wants that?

I PERSONALLY went to ATT Store, and then to VZ Store to verify this:

VZ's CDMA CAN NOT DO VOICE + INTERNET/DATA AT THE SAME TIME. So, you won't get your email till you are off the phone, and you'll get knocked off line, browsing, when a phone call comes in. That is like OLD DIAL UP DAYS!

I won't be able to tolerate such Either Or!

iPhone is a CLEAR WINNER compared to other Smart Phones!

4G LTE is coming, thus GSM and CDMA will go away, but the TRANSITION will take another 2-3 years at least. Will Apple open iPhone to VZ before LTE, remains to be seen. They won't announce that till they are ready! Till then we can only guess!!!

If iPhone is on VZ before LTE, will it then do VOICE + INTERNET/DATA AT THE SAME TIME - hopefully, but I am yet to hear a good explanation there. They VZ Manager and Tech Support either don't know, or are told to say that they don't know! If they already know that the answer is NO, then it makes it obvious that waiting for iPhone on VZ is a WASTE of time, and thus they'd lose customers to ATT sooner!

At VZ Store, the manager couldn't tell me if the LIMITATION of VOICE + INTERNET/DATA AT THE SAME TIME was due to the Hardware or CDMA Network! In front of me, he tried to Browser while on the phone call on: Blackberry and HTC/Windows Mobile. Each time we got the Error = it can't be done!

It's Easy to dump on ATT, but VZ's CDMA CAN NOT DO VOICE + INTERNET/DATA AT THE SAME TIME -- so pick your poison!

ATT was more PROGRESSIVE cause they saw the future with iPhone! Apple -- that is who the leader is. And I am glad that they did EXCLUSIVE with ATT, because that allowed them to spread it via GSM worldwide, and not dance around VZ who proved to be PATHETIC, given my old Palm Treo 700p Wars!!!

SUPPORT is IMPORTANT! iPhone ECHOSYSTEM is the best, as I see it!!!!! Apple Care + Apple Store (IN PERSON) + Apple Discussions Board = are so much better than anything ANY CARRIER can provide! Calling some 3rd World Country Tech Support, and being stuck in a BLAME GAME - FINGER POINTING between the maker of the phone and carrier, like Verizon -- I already had that with Palm, and it was UGLY!

Never again will I buy ANYTHING from PALM!!!!

So, if anyone is waiting for VZ iPhone, ask yourself:

Will it do VOICE + INTERNET/DATA AT THE SAME TIME?

If that's important to you, then you might be waiting for nothing!

I refuse to get off the phone to look at the webpage, or have miss a call and have to use my minutes to check my Voicemail, and then have to call back, thus starting a phone tag cycle! If that's what Verizon expects me to do, they must be kidding!

It could be easier to borrow someone else's phone and or WiFi, then ask someone else to teach you how to use their Smart Phone, so you could go online!

Plus, ATT is not gonna just sit there and allow VZ beat them up on Network PR... I wonder why ATT didn't "milk" this advantage in their PR Wars:

VOICE + INTERNET/DATA AT THE SAME TIME

Go  Apple!!!

Reply

Go  Apple!!!

Reply
post #110 of 193
A thought.

If Apple does give up exclusivity to AT&T, then we could see unlocked phones here as normal.

So if Apple decides to add LTE then people could simply buy the phone and use it on Verizon for LTE, and AT&T, if they want, for everything else. It could possibly even be done as a pay as you go thing.
post #111 of 193
Every time I see an ATT/Verizon thread (that is always full of frustration), I try very hard to relate. We simply have it too easy up here in Canada with Rogers.

Their service isn't cheap, but most of us up here have no problems regarding quality of service, coverage, etc. I can get a 3G signal in the middle of the deep woods in Northern Ontario. And on occasion, Rogers will pick up part of my bill or throw me a bone of some kind. All services are included in my 6gb data plan - tethering, MMS, you name it.

Again, the only issue might be price. The iPhone being my only phone, I have Rogers' full package - inlcuding SMS (unlimited received, 2500 sent), 6gb data plan, long-distance saver, MY5, VisualVoicemail, free evenings/weekends, 200 weekday minutes, and a few other things, which comes out to around $100/month, taxes in. Could be worse.
post #112 of 193
LTE is at least a few years away. They're only just now starting to do initial rollouts. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple has a CDMA iPhone ready to go. It's a similar situation to how Apple knew the Power PC was its weak link, but was unable to switch to Intel after Jobs took over. So they developed an Intel OS X all along, biding their time.

Forum posters here love to portray adding CMDA support as some sort of epic engineering and programming feat, but the reality is many smartphones support both platforms with no problem. As for manufacturing, it's not really much different than having different hardware in the 3G and 3GS.
post #113 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by macologist View Post

blah BLAH bLAH blaHH BLAHHH.........

You DO KNOW that

IT"S NOTTTTT neccessARRYYYY to

CONstantly switch BETWEEN all CAPPS

and NORMAL WRITing!!!!!????!!!

ALSO no NEED to constantly USE A

LINE break AFTER

EVERY sentenCE!!!!!!!
post #114 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by I. Pod MacNut View Post

How about this scenario. Apple builds a phone that works with one type of cellular technology. They go with the one most popular across the world (not that it is the best) because that gives them the greatest pool from which to sell their phone. Verizon does not use that technology. Why would Apple manufacture another type of phone just to pick up one or two other carriers. Especially when Verizon has already said they are migrating to the system that Apple is already on (albeit the next generation of that system). Don't forget, Apple sells a lot of phones in their stores. Can you imagine the nightmare of trying to keep inventory straight for 5 models for multiple carriers? Verizon will have the opportunity to sell the iPhone when their network matches up with the network that Apple feels gives them the best opportunity to sell phones not until.

While I agree there are arguments to wait until Verizon is on the next generation service, it's not for the reasons which I bolded above.

First, we are talking only 2 models, not five. Best Buy, Amazon, etc all sell phones/plans for multiple carriers. It's not rocket science.

As for manufacturing a different type of phone to "just pick up one or two carriers"... First, if you are making 20 millions phones, there would be absolutely no financial impact (cost of manufacturing) to making 7 million of them different than the other 13 million. You are well beyond the increased economy of scale at the point. Also, Apple has already shown a willingness to make a special version for the Chinese market.

Second, setting aside the unknown Chinese market since we don't know what that will be yet, adding Verizon would represent an estimated 50% increase in iPhone sales. Right now ATT is approx 50% of worldwide iPhone sales. And Verizon is about the same size as ATT (a little bigger, actually). So adding "just" one more carrier may only represent a 2% increase in the number of carriers, but a 50% increase in sales.
post #115 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by stonefree View Post

LTE is at least a few years away. They're only just now starting to do initial rollouts. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple has a CDMA iPhone ready to go. It's a similar situation to how Apple knew the Power PC was its weak link, but was unable to switch to Intel after Jobs took over. So they developed an Intel OS X all along, biding their time.

Forum posters here love to portray adding CMDA support as some sort of epic engineering and programming feat, but the reality is many smartphones support both platforms with no problem. As for manufacturing, it's not really much different than having different hardware in the 3G and 3GS.

No one is saying that it's epic. What we're saying is that it would cost Apple more, as it would need not just a couple more chips, but also another antenna, and a redesign of the interior to squeeze more inside what has been described as a device that is the most packed of any phone.

Would Apple sell such a model only to CDMA users? Then it would cost Apple even more. If they sell it to everyone, then it would cost everyone more.

It's a dilemma for Apple. would the extra R&D costs be worth it? I don't know.
post #116 of 193
Nothing technical to say... I'm a stoopid fanboy of the high-priced, Apple and Verizon. It'd be interesting (or would it? oh, poor gullible me) to see the high-priced united. (Kick my poor sorry butt up and down the hall...OOOF OOOf OOof Ooof ooof!
post #117 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

While I agree there are arguments to wait until Verizon is on the next generation service, it's not for the reasons which I bolded above.

First, we are talking only 2 models, not five. Best Buy, Amazon, etc all sell phones/plans for multiple carriers. It's not rocket science.

As for manufacturing a different type of phone to "just pick up one or two carriers"... First, if you are making 20 millions phones, there would be absolutely no financial impact (cost of manufacturing) to making 7 million of them different than the other 13 million. You are well beyond the increased economy of scale at the point. Also, Apple has already shown a willingness to make a special version for the Chinese market.

Second, setting aside the unknown Chinese market since we don't know what that will be yet, adding Verizon would represent an estimated 50% increase in iPhone sales. Right now ATT is approx 50% of worldwide iPhone sales. And Verizon is about the same size as ATT (a little bigger, actually). So adding "just" one more carrier may only represent a 2% increase in the number of carriers, but a 50% increase in sales.

Your numbers are off.

At most, Verizon would add 30% to Apple's US sales numbers. Those numbers are shrinking as a part of the total. So Verizon may represent 15% of the total if Apple went to them today, and possibly 7% in a year.

Would that pay? I don't think so, if a special model would be required. And then, in 2011, LTE might be spread around enough so that in June of that year, the ver 5 of the phone should definitely have it, and that would be the end of a pure CDMA phone. so what would Apple have gained? One year, or a bit more, of CDMA sales?
post #118 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

I can get a 3G signal in the middle of the deep woods in Northern Ontario.

You get extreme comfort memory to spare
post #119 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

No one is saying that it's epic. What we're saying is that it would cost Apple more, as it would need not just a couple more chips, but also another antenna, and a redesign of the interior to squeeze more inside what has been described as a device that is the most packed of any phone.

Would Apple sell such a model only to CDMA users? Then it would cost Apple even more. If they sell it to everyone, then it would cost everyone more.

It's a dilemma for Apple. would the extra R&D costs be worth it? I don't know.

$5 million to design a CDMA iphone, a former Virgin Mobile executive said.

http://www.businessinsider.com/why-a...xt-year-2009-9

Apple doesn't even have to do the redesign if it is just a motherboard reshuffling space --- the taiwanese firms that do the manufacturing can redesign the iphone motherboard for Apple.
post #120 of 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Your numbers are off.

At most, Verizon would add 30% to Apple's US sales numbers. Those numbers are shrinking as a part of the total. So Verizon may represent 15% of the total if Apple went to them today, and possibly 7% in a year.

Would that pay? I don't think so, if a special model would be required. And then, in 2011, LTE might be spread around enough so that in June of that year, the ver 5 of the phone should definitely have it, and that would be the end of a pure CDMA phone. so what would Apple have gained? One year, or a bit more, of CDMA sales?

One year of CDMA iphone sale is still a lot of money. We are talking about billions of dollars of revenue and billion of dollars of profits.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple predicted to sacrifice 'sweetheart' AT&T deal for Verizon