Credit Suisse: 75% chance AT&T keeps iPhone exclusivity in 2010 - Page 2

Ignore this guy Aquatic, what i heard from him is gas coming out of his ass. A worker from verizon would know a switch of networks isn't a flip of the switch. If your going to pretend to be something buddy, at least know your damn facts, don't come in here with bull

i think the iPhone will be available on Verizon sometime this year.

iPad is going to be exclusive to AT&T.


i guess we'll soon find out.

Apple never was going with Verizon. It used Verizon to secure a better deal from AT&T. If it would have went with Verizon, it would have had to make different model iPhones for different parts of the world. That would have messed up the simplicity of it's distribution model.

If Apple doesn't go with Verizon, it will be because Verizon has shown it is not a great company to work with if you sell phones.

exactly what are you multi-tasking ??
and ATT only sucks in 2 cities
San Fran and NYC
ATT is great every where else , verizon is much better overall country wide
Verizon hates apple and does not support apple anything on any verizon projects
for example
Verizon has free wifi for their broadband clients . they caledl me on the phone and spent 45 minutes setting me up . it crashed many times . FInally some one told me i need XP to get free wifi in NYC
f... XP
f,,, verizon
so why do so many ever think that either party wants to dance
the mutual hate is real
go apple

First off, EV/DO can currently provide up to 3.1 Mbps in the downlink... this is going to be increased to approx. 9-10 Mbps shortly... ad in Verizon's outstanding 3G coverage, and AT&T can't beat it...

My friend & I haven't experienced any change in speeds. We have an iPhone 3GS and an HTC Droid Eris. We are both running the speedtest.net app set to the same servers. Both have excellent signal strength.

We have run this from multiple locations in Manhattan & NJ metro area.

Verizon is ALWAYS faster on the uplink by 2-3 TIMES! 200-300 kbps on AT&T vs. 800-900 kbps on Verizon...

On the downlink, Verizon has either been about the same and up to 50% FASTER than AT&T.... In the downlink, we top out at 1.2 Mbps on the iPhone, while we get 1.8-2.0 Mbps on the HTC Droid.

If we run tests at rush hour... AT&T slows to a crawl & pokes along... Verizon remains quite fast.... (this is the benefit of EV/DO vs UMTS... if UMTS is carrying circuit-switched voice, then it slows WAY down...)

I called Apple to ask if either Apple was limiting the data speeds in the device or if AT&T was limiting them in the network... No one knows anything..... Nice.... make a bold claim as both companies do, and then have NOTHING to back it up!

Um, AT&T came in DEAD LAST on SECOND TO DEAD LAST in EVERY region of the country in the category of network quality in the latest Consumer Reports survey.... this is where they have been for the past few years in both the annual Consumer Reports as well as JD Powers surveys...

So they suck in a lot more places than NYC & San Fran my friend...

Um... different model phones? - NOT TRUE!!!!!!

The Blackberry Storm uses the multimode Qualcomm chipset that supports ALL 2G & 3G standards EXCEPT the Chinese-only TD-SCDMA...

I am so tired of hearing this bogus argument! There are a number of multimode 3G devices on the market today...

Yes, AT&T can beat it because they choose 3GSM, which has a long way to go before it starts to obsolesce.

EV-DO development has stopped at the weak EV-DO Rev. B and Qualcomm has dropped UMB '4G' development because LTE was kicking it's ass in every way. Note: Qualcomm still has patents in LTE and 3GSM so they aren't completely losing here, but it isn't be nearly as profitable as CDMA2000 and UMB.

Neither Sprint nor Verizon have shown interest in updating their '3G' past EV-DO Rev. A. They're moving to WiMAX and LTE so it looks like getting more than 3.1Mbps theoretical is out of the question.

I'm in one of the many markets with HSDPA 7.2Mbps, the iPhone has a radio to support those theoretical speeds and my downlink is usually just over 3Mbps (actual) for all the areas I travel to.


PS: It's CDMA-based networks that have the inherent problem with fixed bandwidth sizes that limit total bandwidth to handsets, not 3GSM.

Look at the thickness and weight of the BB Storm to the iPhone. No one has said Apple could not use dual radio chips, the point is that Apple will not use such radio chips.

Anecdotally I'm not finding this true. The couple of people I know with Android phones. They would drop Android in a heart beat if they could have an iPhone on VZW. The only reason they have an Android phone is because it is the phone most like the iPhone on VZW.


I do see your point. But I cannot see it as a primary reason alone to bring the iPhone to VZW. I've seen many people who have a smartphone and still have an iPod Touch.

When someone goes crazy with the exclamations and bolding I expect them to have a better grasp of the facts, yet that never seems to be the case.

The BB Storm might be "worldmode" by definition but they only support 2100Mhz spectrum on 3GSM. That means that it's uni-band for UMTS, which means that they can be used with AT&T, T-Mobile (or Canadian 3GSM). You can use it for '2G' GSM networks but that isn't exactly the all-in-one phone you made it out to be in your bogus argument, is it?

Then there are the issues you completely ignored. For instance, why does RiM sell the Storm everywhere in the world, expect for Verizon, without CDMA if there it's simply easier to make a single phone. Your initial argument that the Storm is a single model phone is a lie. There is the 9530 for North America and the 9500 for everywhere else.

Let's assume for a moment that you weren't mistaken about there being a single model phone and that it would work on every carrier's 3GSM in North America. If a "worldmode" phone was such an ideal method to R&D and manufacturer a single handset then why aren't these phones more common? Hell, why aren't all phones "worldmode"?

The simple fact is that there are plenty of trade offs with this design. Some might include, but not be limited to: increased chip cost, increased radio chip costs, increased R&D costs, hugely increased Qualcomm licensing costs, increased size of phones do to more HW, and increased power usage.

This whole using dual radios for CDMA and GSM, it sure seems the cost-benefit for Apple waaay outweighs any minor engineering. TenoBell I take your point about possible vs. Apple wanting to do it in their slim form, but I still think it would probably be in the realm of possible. Ives & Co. at Infinite Loop have magical powers. I think AT&T just made Apple an offer to good to refuse, a huge wad of cash. But...I think the reason Apple took this was because they themselves didn't know how big a success iPhone would be! Seriously. I think the current situation with no VZ iPhone is more politics and less engineering. That's just my gut feeling...I'm sure we will see CDMA iPhone, it's just when that is the question. CDMA isn't going anywhere for a half a decade or more. And Mr. Verizon would you care to comment on