or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Verizon iPhone talks seen as Apple counterattack on Android
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Verizon iPhone talks seen as Apple counterattack on Android

post #1 of 82
Thread Starter 
With speculation of a CDMA iPhone compatible with Verizon's network renewed this week, one prominent analyst said he believes Apple's alleged negotiations could be more about competing with Android than anything else.

Shaw Wu with Kaufman Bros. issued a note to investors Wednesday morning in which he reiterated his belief that a deal between Apple and Verizon is more complicated and costly than most people assume. While he believes such a deal is inevitable, given the carrier's 90 million wireless customers, both Verizon and Apple are very interested in economic and customer control, and are likely to butt heads.

But because Android is positioning itself as an alternative to the iPhone, and is gaining share in the overall smartphone market, Apple may be looking to take on Google's mobile operating system directly by a jump to Verizon. Wu said a Verizon iPhone would most greatly impact Google and the Android platform.

"We would not be surprised if volumes drop dramatically as customers flock to a real iPhone as opposed to a mediocre imitation," Wu wrote. "In our view, web surfing, multimedia, apps and multi-touch remain very strong AAPL hallmarks."

The analyst also said that Verizon would need to give up a lot in order to reach a deal with Apple. For example, the wireless provider would pay Apple double or triple the subsidies it currently pays other smartphone makers. Given that, Wu said it may make more sense for Apple to reach a deal with Sprint or T-Mobile, both of which are far more likely to agree to Apple's terms.

Wu's note came in response to a report from The Wall Street Journal on Monday, which said Apple is working on two new iPhones, including one for the Verizon network. Sources told the paper that CDMA iPhones are not scheduled to go into mass production until September.

In December, Wu stated he believes a "complicated" Verizon iPhone deal is unlikely to happen in 2010. Though Verizon is the top prize in terms of the four major U.S. carriers, Wu said both Verizon and Apple have found success by focusing on "customer control." In that sense, he believes their similarities are what will keep them apart.

As for the other two major wireless carriers in the U.S., a potential jump to T-Mobile could be the simplest choice for Apple. Though the carrier's high-speed 3G connectivity operates on a unique 1700MHz spectrum that is incompatible with the current iPhone, the addition of that frequency to a future hardware model would be much simpler than adding compatibility with Verizon or Sprint's CDMA networks.

Recent rumors have suggested Apple is working on an agreement with chip maker Qualcomm to add CDMA connectivity to a new iPhone in 2010. But both Verizon and Sprint use a technology that, unlike the GSM network of AT&T and T-Mobile, is not widely used abroad.

But Apple executives, in January, made a clear effort to demonstrate they are happy with their partnership with AT&T. The company also attempted to downplay speculation that the iPhone would become available on multiple carriers in the U.S., with Apple's chief operating officer, Tim Cook, stating multi-carrier strategies are not necessarily the best option for every country.

"I don't want to imply that would happen in every market or that we are headed that way in every market," Cook said in the company's quarterly earnings call. He also specifically defended AT&T and said the nation's second-largest wireless carrier is working to alleviate coverage concerns across the country.
post #2 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Apple may be looking to take on Google's mobile operating system directly by a jump to Verizon.

If this happens it would not be a "jump to Verizon." A jump is when you leave one place and land on another instead. Apple isn't going to discontinue offering iPhones through AT&T.

I've long been skeptical about Apple offering a Verizon CDMA phone in the twilight of that technology. As time continues to run out on it, the option becomes less and less attractive as a business case. However mounting a counter-attack against Android may affect that calculation.

BTW, simply as one data point, put me down as someone who has experienced both very good coverage and excellent customer service from AT&T. But then I don't live in NYC or SFO.
post #3 of 82
". . . a real iPhone as opposed to a mediocre imitation." Ouch!
post #4 of 82
Why Verizon? There's T-Mobile and Sprint. Apple could go for them instead.

iPod nano 5th Gen 8GB Orange, iPad 3rd Gen WiFi 32GB White
MacBook Pro 15" Core i7 2.66GHz 8GB RAM 120GB Intel 320M
Mac mini Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz 8GB RAM, iPhone 5 32GB Black

Reply

iPod nano 5th Gen 8GB Orange, iPad 3rd Gen WiFi 32GB White
MacBook Pro 15" Core i7 2.66GHz 8GB RAM 120GB Intel 320M
Mac mini Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz 8GB RAM, iPhone 5 32GB Black

Reply
post #5 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aizmov View Post

Why Verizon? There's T-Mobile and Sprint. Apple could go for them instead.

Because Apple might not want to continue giving Google uncontested access to all of Verizon's customers. Apple needs to contain the cylon menace.
post #6 of 82
Verizon's Customer Control has been to offer me phones that don't meet my needs; so I have to take a basic phone and do with out the extras I really want. Then I have to go into the system setup of the phone and change the settings so I don't accidently activate some function on the phone I don't want to use and then pay excessively for it . I hope they have an iPhone announced before September for Verizon otherwise I'm leaving; as my contract is up then.
post #7 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aizmov View Post

Why Verizon? There's T-Mobile and Sprint. Apple could go for them instead.

Why add a smaller, probably less capable network to the mix. Although unpopular, I hate the idea of Apple developing and building more than one iPhone for the same version product - it ultimately takes away effort from making the product better when the effort is split.

Before anyone hollers it is nontrivial to do a phone - just cause Apple has one does not mean that you can 'just change the radio'. That is why it takes Engineers and a long approval process.

BTW: I have never had any problems with signal, dropped calls etc. and happen to think AT&T's coverage here and in the other portions of the country I have lived in has been good.
post #8 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilM View Post

If this happens it would not be a "jump to Verizon." A jump is when you leave one place and land on another instead. Apple isn't going to discontinue offering iPhones through AT&T.

I've long been skeptical about Apple offering a Verizon CDMA phone in the twilight of that technology. As time continues to run out on it, the option becomes less and less attractive as a business case. However mounting a counter-attack against Android may affect that calculation.

BTW, simply as one data point, put me down as someone who has experienced both very good coverage and excellent customer service from AT&T. But then I don't live in NYC or SFO.

I'm on my 3rd iPhone. The first two I had the coverage was extremely bad in San Francisco. And even worse in my specific area of San Francisco. And so I had switched back to the Blackberry. But about 4 months ago a friend swore up and own that the situation is largely resolved in San Fran. I bought another iPhone and I can easily tell you it's been totally fine here. Dropped calls almost don't exist in my area. Once a month or longer between a single dropped call where as I used to get 3 or 4 in a single conversation. I also own a VZ MiFi, which only did about 800k up and down. My Blackberry on VZ, same location did 1.7mb down and 80k up. Strange huh? Well, the iPhone blows those numbers away on AT&T in the same area now.

I'm sure not every place is as resolved as my area, but from my own point of view, AT&T has not only fixed any issues I had, they are doing better than VZ by far. I have no intension of switching to VZ as I honestly feel that would be a step backwards.

MacBook Pro | iPad (3rd gen)
Samsung Galaxy Note

Reply

MacBook Pro | iPad (3rd gen)
Samsung Galaxy Note

Reply
post #9 of 82
I believe that Apple will make two separate versions of the iPhone...

1. Verizon USA (and any other compatible CDMA network)
The Verizon iPhone will be a limited run (15-20 million units over two years) due to the fact that in a few years, LTE 4G will be available on both Verizon and AT&T networks. The only caveat here is that Verizon will need to concede its infamous desire to control the handset, otherwise, I don't see Apple giving in to them.

2. China Mobile
Just too damned big to ignore. (500 million customers!!!)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Aizmov View Post

Why Verizon? There's T-Mobile and Sprint. Apple could go for them instead.

Apple will not want to get into the business of making too many versions of its phones. So far it has been one version that works world wide.
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
post #10 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aizmov View Post

Why Verizon? There's T-Mobile and Sprint. Apple could go for them instead.

Because verizon has the largest customer base with the most mature network. In other words, the highest possibility for sales and profit. Sprint's is network smaller than verizon and uses wimax, not LTE while having half as many customers. And T-Mobile USA has by far the least mature network and the least amount of customers.
post #11 of 82
Stock manipulators...

bump Verizon.
post #12 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damn_Its_Hot View Post

Why add a smaller, probably less capable network to the mix. Although unpopular, I hate the idea of Apple developing and building more than one iPhone for the same version product - it ultimately takes away effort from making the product better when the effort is split.

Before anyone hollers it is nontrivial to do a phone - just cause Apple has one does not mean that you can 'just change the radio'. That is why it takes Engineers and a long approval process.

BTW: I have never had any problems with signal, dropped calls etc. and happen to think AT&T's coverage here and in the other portions of the country I have lived in has been good.


In the end Apple's interest in expanding the platform will over come its interest in maintaining radio compatibility. I don't believe Apple is at all interested in selling a smart phone, what they want to build and sell are devices that run the iPhone OS platform.

They're working on their 4th generation phone and have gained a lot of experience over the passed three years. It is time to expand, even if it's a limited expansion.
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
post #13 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

With speculation of a CDMA iPhone compatible with Verizon's network renewed this week, one prominent analyst said he believes Apple's alleged negotiations could be more about competing with Android than anything else.

Shaw Wu with Kaufman Bros. issued a note to investors Wednesday morning in which he reiterated his belief that a deal between Apple and Verizon is more complicated and costly than most people assume. While he believes such a deal is inevitable, given the carrier's 90 million wireless customers, both Verizon and Apple are very interested in economic and customer control, and are likely to butt heads.

But because Android is positioning itself as an alternative to the iPhone, and is gaining share in the overall smartphone market, Apple may be looking to take on Google's mobile operating system directly by a jump to Verizon. Wu said a Verizon iPhone would most greatly impact Google and the Android platform.

"We would not be surprised if volumes drop dramatically as customers flock to a real iPhone as opposed to a mediocre imitation," Wu wrote. "In our view, web surfing, multimedia, apps and multi-touch remain very strong AAPL hallmarks."

The analyst also said that Verizon would need to give up a lot in order to reach a deal with Apple. For example, the wireless provider would pay Apple double or triple the subsidies it currently pays other smartphone makers. Given that, Wu said it may make more sense for Apple to reach a deal with Sprint or T-Mobile, both of which are far more likely to agree to Apple's terms.

Wu's note came in response to a report from The Wall Street Journal on Monday, which said Apple is working on two new iPhones, including one for the Verizon network. Sources told the paper that CDMA iPhones are not scheduled to go into mass production until September.

In December, Wu stated he believes a "complicated" Verizon iPhone deal is unlikely to happen in 2010. Though Verizon is the top prize in terms of the four major U.S. carriers, Wu said both Verizon and Apple have found success by focusing on "customer control." In that sense, he believes their similarities are what will keep them apart.

As for the other two major wireless carriers in the U.S., a potential jump to T-Mobile could be the simplest choice for Apple. Though the carrier's high-speed 3G connectivity operates on a unique 1700MHz spectrum that is incompatible with the current iPhone, the addition of that frequency to a future hardware model would be much simpler than adding compatibility with Verizon or Sprint's CDMA networks.

Recent rumors have suggested Apple is working on an agreement with chip maker Qualcomm to add CDMA connectivity to a new iPhone in 2010. But both Verizon and Sprint use a technology that, unlike the GSM network of AT&T and T-Mobile, is not widely used abroad.

But Apple executives, in January, made a clear effort to demonstrate they are happy with their partnership with AT&T. The company also attempted to downplay speculation that the iPhone would become available on multiple carriers in the U.S., with Apple's chief operating officer, Tim Cook, stating multi-carrier strategies are not necessarily the best option for every country.

"I don't want to imply that would happen in every market or that we are headed that way in every market," Cook said in the company's quarterly earnings call. He also specifically defended AT&T and said the nation's second-largest wireless carrier is working to alleviate coverage concerns across the country.

Even if this is true...I really wonder if Verizon's network could handle the bandwidth needed for the iPhone. While they do have a large range of 3G coverage, the speed is really lacking. It would take a big investment on Verizon's part to get a handle all the data that regular iPhone users expect. Then, of course, their is the issue with the other phone manufacturers that Verizon has in their arsenal. Wonder how that would feel about that. This will be interesting to watch.
post #14 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

Because Apple might not want to continue giving Google uncontested access to all of Verizon's customers. Apple needs to contain the cylon menace.

I have doubts that they'll do it but you can't argue with the obvious business strategy of going to the network people don't want to leave and offer them the device they wish they could have.

I'm expecting a major jump in the stock from an official announcement. $10, $15, $20/share in a day?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #15 of 82
So sick of Verizon iPhone "news".

CDMA is dead. The sooner those networks realise it, deal with the cost and reconfigure their network the better.

I've seen it done in 12-18 months alongside a high quality CDMA network and the changeover was seamless. Now thankfully no more awful CDMA products come and split the market even further, infuriating customers and killing everyone on differences and higher prices as a result.
post #16 of 82
Piss on AT&T. Tethering is something that should have been on the phone from day 1 and it's now going into year 4. I'm jumping ship on the iphone and AT&T for sprint and the supersonic as soon as it hits since neither AT&T nor apple can provide the functionality I've been looking for over the last 3 years. Mediocre my ass.
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
post #17 of 82
Apple would be wise to make a CDMA phone since Android is growing ever more popular. Yes CDMA is a dead end technology, but in those few years it might take to completely do away with CDMA in America, that's more market for Android to fill. A lot of people are waiting on their networks to get the iPhone and the vast majority are looking at Android to fill the void. Verizon has around 90 million suscribers, Sprint around 45 million and T-Mobile less than that. That's a lot of LOST sales if you ask me. Personally, I would ignore Sprint, but not the other two.
post #18 of 82
Verizon's network is already prepared to handle the iPhone. Last year they welcomed jail-broken iPhones on their network. T-Mobile and Sprint would have to upgrade their networks and trust me, Sprint would need to big time and eliminate all of their dead zones.
post #19 of 82
Four words for ya:

Island of Misfit Toys.

IOW, it'll be a cold day in H#&&...

(Even if the ad was much more of a stab at AT&T than Apple.)

Seeing the iPhone sold by Verizon is about as likely to happen as a Beatles reunion (and just about as possible, IMHumO ).

I think Apple would rather personally lay siege to Google headquarters than climb into bed with Verizon (which is about what Verizon would require/demand).

As iLogic said, "Stock manipulators..."

(Of course, one could draw vague similarities between this scenario and Apple switching to Intel -- one step backward and then three forward. )
post #20 of 82
If Verizon balks at Apple's demands, Apple should give the iPhone to Sprint and T-Mobile this fall. Then Verizon's house would be on fire. They would probably lose more customers than they are adding for several quarters. By June 2011 they would be ready to sign any contract Apple hands down to them.
post #21 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy1 View Post

Verizon's network is already prepared to handle the iPhone. Last year they welcomed jail-broken iPhones on their network. T-Mobile and Sprint would have to upgrade their networks and trust me, Sprint would need to big time and eliminate all of their dead zones.

jail-broken iPhones on Verizon? HOW? they use different comm techniques. the iPhone doesn't work on CDMA which is what verizon uses.
post #22 of 82
Here we go again--same lame excuses: dead technology, too complicated, Apple doesn't care about market share, verizon's control...blah blah.

Money talks people. And market share definitely matters, if you don't believe it matters to Apple, there's a bridge up for sale in you know where.

CDMA is a dying technology, but one that is dying very slowly. By the time it is completely dead we're probably talking towards the end of this decade--no VZ iPhone till then? Ha. As for it's just too damn hard to make a CDMA iPhone...yeah I suppose every single other manufacturer manages it, but I guess Apple is the lazy kid in the class then? Right. As for control? Verizon just allowed the most open platform in the business on their network with no problems--they do not cripple their android headsets nor their blackberries or other smartphones. Why would they cripple an iPhone?

This has never been about CDMA and has been about the exclusivity contract--you see it hasn't gone to the other GSM carrier in the US for 3 years either. They will tap the CDMA market because they want to make a lot of money, and as long as CDMA is around, and it will be years and years in some form or another, they cannot ignore it. They can't ignore Android either--Google isn't sitting with one provider in the US, they are expanding and if you think Apple doesn't care about the growth of Android, again there's that bridge up for sale you can look into.

It's all about business.
post #23 of 82
good to see Apple going after Android and getting more market share. As more people use Apple products, it will move them to buy Mac computers as well. all about getting more people into the Apple ecosystem.
post #24 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy1 View Post

Verizon's network is already prepared to handle the iPhone. Last year they welcomed jail-broken iPhones on their network.

Nonsense. Verizon uses CDMA and at present there is no CDMA iPhone version.
post #25 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostface147 View Post

Apple would be wise to make a CDMA phone since Android is growing ever more popular. Yes CDMA is a dead end technology, but in those few years it might take to completely do away with CDMA in America, that's more market for Android to fill. A lot of people are waiting on their networks to get the iPhone and the vast majority are looking at Android to fill the void. Verizon has around 90 million suscribers, Sprint around 45 million and T-Mobile less than that. That's a lot of LOST sales if you ask me. Personally, I would ignore Sprint, but not the other two.

I agree. Though it's unpopular to say, I think the same can be said about Flash (I can already hear the Droid 2.0 ads, about all the "Do's" that Apple doesn't allow). For the iPad AND the iPhone I'd really like to see a ClickToFlash option. Anyone notice the timing of all this? In Boston I'm getting flooded with ads for the AT&T Backflip... I wonder if AT&T broke some agreement they had between Apple...Never seemed like there were any real Android phones on AT&T until this one... and sudenly there's all this talk of opening the iPhone to Verizon. Android is playing for keeps... Apple needs to take the fight to Verizon.

EDIT: To all those Verizon haters out there, you need to get over it... Google is the REAL threat... Everytime Apple has gotten hung up on old fueds it's hurt them....Look at their history with Microsoft... In interviews, Steve talked about his return to the company...That one of his biggest challenges was changing the attitude within the company that Microsoft had to die for Apple to win... Instead they opened up new partnerships, Steve completely changed the course of the company and the rest is history
post #26 of 82
Apple should assist ATT in imporving their network and help them takeover the top spot. The sooner ATT can boast a faster, farther reaching network the sooner more will make the move as I did a year ago. Got tired of waiting on VZ to get the iPhone technology and haven't regreted it at all. Admittidly early on I didn't get the same reception as I did with VZ in some places, but it has gotten better and should going forward. I rarely have dropped calls or complaints about service, currently awaiting the WWDC before getting my upgrade......
post #27 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisTheXIV View Post

Here we go again--same lame excuses: dead technology, too complicated, Apple doesn't care about market share, verizon's control...blah blah.

Money talks people. And market share definitely matters, if you don't believe it matters to Apple, there's a bridge up for sale in you know where.

CDMA is a dying technology, but one that is dying very slowly. By the time it is completely dead we're probably talking towards the end of this decade--no VZ iPhone till then? Ha. As for it's just too damn hard to make a CDMA iPhone...yeah I suppose every single other manufacturer manages it, but I guess Apple is the lazy kid in the class then? Right. As for control? Verizon just allowed the most open platform in the business on their network with no problems--they do not cripple their android headsets nor their blackberries or other smartphones. Why would they cripple an iPhone?

This has never been about CDMA and has been about the exclusivity contract--you see it hasn't gone to the other GSM carrier in the US for 3 years either. They will tap the CDMA market because they want to make a lot of money, and as long as CDMA is around, and it will be years and years in some form or another, they cannot ignore it. They can't ignore Android either--Google isn't sitting with one provider in the US, they are expanding and if you think Apple doesn't care about the growth of Android, again there's that bridge up for sale you can look into.

It's all about business.

Very good comment and sums up the reality of this topic.

It seems like almost everyone here is such a downer when it comes to any news that reaches outside of the status quo. Nobody has any valid reasons NOT to bring the iphone to Verizon, but I see a heck of a lot of valid reasons TO bring it.

Let's face it: Android devices are getting to the point that they are going to be a major competitor to the iphone. The HTC Evo coming to Sprint is a great example of a CDMA phone that should definitely turn some heads.
post #28 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post

I don't believe Apple is at all interested in selling a smart phone, what they want to build and sell are devices that run the iPhone OS platform.

What would you take away from the iPhone that would keep it from being a smart phone but still use the iPhone OS platform? I am not sure I understand this. Not a smart phone BUT use the iPhone OS platform - can you expand on what this might include? That is, what might a 'dumb-phone' using iPhone OS be like, what would the iPhone OS do?

BTW: You have made my original point - that Apple's efforts will be divided and that will ultimately take away from what the iPhone could be.
post #29 of 82
All this business about CDMA being obsolete and GSM taking over the world. Everyone here pretty much admits that this 4G technology wont be available for years. Fine. Make the CDMA phone now and I'll buy two of them and when 4G is available, I'll buy two of the new ones. Apple is a hardware company so this should be good business.

I get it that Apple is forward thinking and all that, but I don't understand this concept of abandoning a technology before another one is in place. There is no flash on the iPhone or iPad because it's so terrible, but how about making it available to those who choose to use it until the new HTML 5 is widely available.

Apple is cutting me off from websites I might wish to visit the same way they are cutting me off from using a cell provider that gives better service where I live and work. I'm trying to be a good customer here!

When the first iMac came out, it abandoned the floppy drive which I'm sure freaked a lot of people out. But it did come with a CD drive so you could copy files and back up your work.
post #30 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I have doubts that they'll do it but you can't argue with the obvious business strategy of going to the network people don't want to leave and offer them the device they wish they could have.

I'm expecting a major jump in the stock from an official announcement. $10, $15, $20/share in a day?

Buy the rumor, sell the news.
post #31 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameronj View Post

Buy the rumor, sell the news.

As a rule of thumb, sure, but I'd bet that news would be pretty beneficial to the stock value.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #32 of 82
Apple would nearly overnight double its U.S. iPhone users if it offered the iPhone on Verizon. What looked to be a good idea at the time (exclusive contract and monthly revenue sharing) failed miserably. Apple couldn't change the entrenched dynamics of a mobile phone industry by itself worldwide.

So now Apple is in an exclusive agreement with AT&T that is actually hurting sales in the U.S. I know many, many people who would jump to an iPhone, but they need Verizon because AT&T doesn't have good coverage where they live.

If Apple offers the iPhone on Verizon, Android sales will plummet. Blackberry will drop as well.
post #33 of 82
Sigh, I dislike when people don't use facts to make an argument

1) There is no Voice over LTE standard.
2) Verizon has already publicly stated that LTE will be for data initially and CDMA will be used for voice for much of the current decade (2015-2016 if I remember correctly).
3) Verizon will not finish it's nationwide built out of LTE until 2013.
4) Until both points 1 & 2 are met, there must be a fallback signal when not in LTE tower range.
5) The only logical fallback is CDMA, as it is extremely unlikely that Verizon will willingly choose to fallback on T-Mobile's or even worse, AT&T's network (in fact, you might as well just say it won't happen).
6) Because of all the previously stated points, regardless of what Steve Jobs says, Apple will have to make an iPhone with CDMA in it at some point. It is not wise to take what a CEO says at face value without looking at the facts. *See the time he stated video on an iPod doesn't make sense only months before the reveal of the iPod 5G with video*
7) Apple is not "just now finding out about the slow deployment of LTE". Again, because of points 1 & 2, LTE could be here today, but since it's there isn't a standard (and won't be one for a while), I don't see how Apple could even think of prepping a 4G phone for release of either this year or next. Chipsets have to be ready months in advance and they simply aren't right now.

Next few points are inferences based on current facts
8) No LTE phones have been announced. Apple shied away from 3G chips because they said they were "immature". Most likely they'll say the same about 4G chipsets.
9) It is cheaper to make a phone that supports both Verizon & *the rest of the world* than to separate them. It's likely Apple was waiting for such a chip to exist, but progress on that front might have been delayed.

I think that's all I have for now. Please let me know where my logic is flawed. People keep spouting sensationalist lies without walking through what they're saying in a stepwise fashion. This is a company with tons of engineers, analysts, and business-minded people. Random reasoning doesn't fit into their ethos.
post #34 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseymac View Post

All this business about CDMA being obsolete and GSM taking over the world. Everyone here pretty much admits that this 4G technology wont be available for years. Fine. Make the CDMA phone now and I'll buy two of them and when 4G is available, I'll buy two of the new ones. Apple is a hardware company so this should be good business.

I get it that Apple is forward thinking and all that, but I don't understand this concept of abandoning a technology before another one is in place. There is no flash on the iPhone or iPad because it's so terrible, but how about making it available to those who choose to use it until the new HTML 5 is widely available.

Apple is cutting me off from websites I might wish to visit the same way they are cutting me off from using a cell provider that gives better service where I live and work. I'm trying to be a good customer here!

When the first iMac came out, it abandoned the floppy drive which I'm sure freaked a lot of people out. But it did come with a CD drive so you could copy files and back up your work.

I agree 100% See my post #25

I get so frustrated with all the Flash haters. Stand alone video is one thing, but until ALL the interactive graphics and animations out there built in Flash and Silverlight, are rebuilt in HTML5, create some kind of solution. Don't simply take away functionality. No one has been able to explain to me what the drawbacks of a ClickToFlash-type app would be....Even if mobile phones aren't able to support Flash 10....if it's some older version like Flash 1, 2 or 3... the iPhone must at least be able to match the capabilities of the Android phones.
post #35 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Halfen View Post


(Of course, one could draw vague similarities between this scenario and Apple switching to Intel -- one step backward and then three forward. )


and then back again.... A4
post #36 of 82
It has nothing to do with Android, its about sales figures and market penetration. If Apple iPhone sales figures are declining due to saturation then it would be worthwhile for Apple to pursue a CDMA iPhone for verizon.

Now whether Apple wishes to produce an iPhone which will be incompatible with verizons 4g network is another matter. Yes, Apple like to get users to upgrade but they always support the old hardware for a good few years, much longer than many electronics manufacturers.

At the end of the day Apple will sell the iPhone on Verizon as well as AT&T but I would not expect this until the sales figures drop.
post #37 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by swinge View Post

Don't simply take away functionality. No one has been able to explain to me what the drawbacks of a ClickToFlash-type app would be....Even if mobile phones aren't able to support Flash 10....if it's some older version like Flash 1, 2 or 3... the iPhone must at least be able to match the capabilities of the Android phones.

1) No one has taken away functionality. iPhone OS has never had Flash. Android still doesn't have Flash (Flash Lite doesn't count).

2) The drawback of ClickToFlash on a desktop? There are none. On iPhone OS, it means there are now 2 plug-ins in iPhone OS, and that isn't going to happen.

3) The drawback of Flash Lite (the ONLY Flash available for mobiles when this silly argument for Flash on the iPhone cropped up in 2007) is it can't render most sites, can't play video, can't play all those Flash games. Even with a desktop version of Flash those games were designed for keyboards and a mouse pointer, not a finger-based touch screen so Adobe had to rewrite Flash to be smarter (which they are still doing with Flash 10.1 for mobiles) and the Flash apps have to be rewritten for the new input method, with the HW limitations in mind (eg: CPU, GPU, RAM, Display Size).

4) What would Flash 1, 2 or 3 do for any mobile? What benefit would it have except make pages load slower, the processor work harder while wearing down the battery faster, and make the scrolling more problematic by using a plug-in. Modern Flash already messed up 2-finger scrolling in browsers at time.

5) Why must the iPhone match every single capability of Android. Since when has entered a market specifically to bloat features in oder to sell a solution to its customers? Apple has always worked a certain way with competitors trying to scrape out a living by added features that only look good on a spec sheet, but rarely work well in the real world.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #38 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

1) No one has taken away functionality. iPhone OS has never had Flash. Android still doesn't have Flash (Flash Lite doesn't count).

2) The drawback of ClickToFlash on a desktop? There are none. On iPhone OS, it means there are now 2 plug-ins in iPhone OS, and that isn't going to happen.

3) The drawback of Flash Lite (the ONLY Flash available for mobiles when this silly argument for Flash on the iPhone cropped up in 2007) is it can't render most sites, can't play video, can't play all those Flash games. Even with a desktop version of Flash those games were designed for keyboards and a mouse pointer, not a finger-based touch screen so Adobe had to rewrite Flash to be smarter (which they are still doing with Flash 10.1 for mobiles) and the Flash apps have to be rewritten for the new input method, with the HW limitations in mind (eg: CPU, GPU, RAM, Display Size).

4) What would Flash 1, 2 or 3 do for any mobile? What benefit would it have except make pages load slower, the processor work harder while wearing down the battery faster, and make the scrolling more problematic by using a plug-in. Modern Flash already messed up 2-finger scrolling in browsers at time.

5) Why must the iPhone match every single capability of Android. Since when has entered a market specifically to bloat features in oder to sell a solution to its customers? Apple has always worked a certain way with competitors trying to scrape out a living by added features that only look good on a spec sheet, but rarely work well in the real world.

So is this simply untrue?
http://gizmodo.com/5374115/flash-101...ayable-hd-vids

I'm a huge Apple fanboy...it really bothers me when people talk about Apple as a closed, evil system... I think of everything Apple has pioneered in desktop publishing and print and how it continues to dominate in sound and video production....This move against Flash to me is just silly though... Let the user decide!!
post #39 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

1) No one has taken away functionality. iPhone OS has never had Flash.

Functionality has been taken away if you look at it from a certain point of view. Safari on the Mac has it and Safari on the iPhone and iPad does not.
post #40 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseymac View Post

Functionality has been taken away if you look at it from a certain point of view. Safari on the Mac has it and Safari on the iPhone and iPad does not.

And the argument made more sense on the first 2 iPhones...The 3GS though doubled the processing power and I'm sure the iPhone4 and iPad will be even faster...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Verizon iPhone talks seen as Apple counterattack on Android