or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Tense Apple-AT&T iPhone partnership nearly ended multiple times
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Tense Apple-AT&T iPhone partnership nearly ended multiple times - Page 4

post #121 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by NormM View Post

I suppose this is an illusion: Steve Jobs at Oscars.

Looks like a homeless guy in a tuxedo.
post #122 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by freddych View Post

AT&T wants nothing for their customers. Seems like Apple's the only one on our side.

What are you smoking?
post #123 of 154
It boggles my mind how gullible people can be. There was no substantive information in that article.

A "wink, wink" was even tossed in. There is no way, no how that anyone within ATT, excepting possibly the janitor, would presume to tell anyone remotely close to Steve Jobs what he should wear when he meets with ATT execs. Incredibly, most people posting here were taken in by this. It boggles my mind how people are so willing to accept something as fact just because it was in print somewhere. Why does the mere fact that it was in print give it any greater credibility than something that some stranger that you ran into the street told you?

As for the exclusivity of the agreement, and the gist of the article, the article entirely misses what is likely the true story. The true is most likely that ATT is paying Apple for exclusivity, and that Apple is entirely happy with the arrangement because their margins on the phone are so high. Unless and until someone comes up with some good reason to believe that this is not the case, then it should be taken for granted that this the full explanation and the end of the story. Why aren't the people who write these pointless, non-imformative articles providing meaningful, hard facts? The place to start here would be with finding out how much VZ pays for their phones, and then comparing that with the amount that ATT pays Apple. An article of this sort should always start with that, i.e., should start by making it clear that VZ pays just as much for comparable phones that ATT pays for iPhone. "Comparable phone" means of course a phone that is leased to customers for a similar amount and under similar contractual terms.
post #124 of 154
[QUOTE=AppleInsider;1679148]A new report detailing the relationship between Apple and AT&T, the exclusive carrier of the iPhone in the U.S., reveals that Apple CEO Steve Jobs allegedly considered dropping AT&T numerous times, and considered leaving for Verizon as far back as 2007.

Uhm.....wow...where do I begin?? How bout this.....How the hell can Jobs consider dumping AT&T for Verizon "as far back as 2007", when the iPhone came OUT in 2007. They tried to go with Verizon in the first place, but that deal fell through, hence they went to AT&T, but they didn't think about dumping AT&T for Verizon. Jesus...get your facts straight noob!
post #125 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolcat View Post


Uhm.....wow...where do I begin?? How bout this.....How the hell can Jobs consider dumping AT&T for Verizon "as far back as 2007", when the iPhone came OUT in 2007. They tried to go with Verizon in the first place, but that deal fell through, hence they went to AT&T, but they didn't think about dumping AT&T for Verizon. Jesus...get your facts straight noob!

Well you have to remember that Apple originally signed a contract with Cingular. Once SBC/AT&T acquired Cingular, the contracts would have to be renegotiated. I addition I'm sure that both organizations have plenty of opt out clauses based on performance and quotas.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #126 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by stonefree View Post

If true, this would further confirm Apple's disinterest in reception. Maybe I could make calls in 3G mode if San Francisco if Apple had used a better radio.

perhaps the rest of the world>>>AT&T?
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #127 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristophB View Post

You lost me when you got the the fiber; fiber; optic; verizon can run much of it thru it's fios network, stuffs. Immediately beneath every cell tower is a cable. Backbone capacity isn't the issue with AT&T - it's quite beefy.

-Chris

i stand corrected
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #128 of 154
(edit: retracted)
post #129 of 154
For some reason I relish this tension between the two companies.
http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/quotes.asp

Never argue with idiots, they'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. - a bumper sticker

Never quote idiots, they just clog up...
Reply
http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/quotes.asp

Never argue with idiots, they'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. - a bumper sticker

Never quote idiots, they just clog up...
Reply
post #130 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

They do rent on occasions though:





That might be resolved with Verizon switching to GSM:

http://www.gsmworld.com/newsroom/pre.../2010/5105.htm

GSM is a far more prevalent network format so it makes more sense for Verizon to go GSM so that the same iPhone can work on both networks.

For the last time Verizon is not switching to GSM, but is adding/moving to LTE. LTE is based on OFDMA and not GSM.
post #131 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

You guys in the US really are in a mess with this while AT&T aren't you. Here in the UK the iPhone is on 5 carriers now, with the previous exclusive carrier (O2) having lost their exclusivity some time ago now. I gather many other countries also have a choice of carriers with the iPhone, so what's gone wrong in the US? Why are you stuck with only one choice? Is this an uncommon situation or are most phones locked down like this in the US?

What's wrong? Right Hand vote = AT&T (GSM); Left Hand vote = Verison (CDMA). So, that much hands used no more left to vote others!
iMac i7
Reply
iMac i7
Reply
post #132 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

How about this?


You know what happened to the person who took that photo? They disappeared. Rumor has it they are now chained up in a Foxconn factory making iPhone in China. Every morning, some guy in a mask wakes them up by saying, "I want to play a game" over an intercom.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #133 of 154
Not hard to believe story about ATT & APPLE albeit short on the inner details.

ATT has made many mistakes over the years and should have seized the opportunity with APPLE as an exclusive partner to improve upon their service and follow the lead from APPLE.

ATT feels that once it looses their exclusivity contract on the IPHONE they will still be a dominant force. Truth is customers will run to other carries even if the rate is higher.
post #134 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

If you were on trial in front of a jury, would you wear a suit? Would you prefer that your lawyer wore a suit to court as well or would having him show up in t-shirt and sandals be just fine?

As long as they clear the molestation charges, they can be buck nekkid for all I care.

Obviously I would feel compelled to wear a suit in that situation as I would in many situations. What I'm saying is that it's not of my free will nor do I see the importance of it. Is a murderer in a suit any less of a murderer? No, so what difference does it make?

It's just a charade to make people look better than they are. I can sit in a court room surrounded by criminals and lawyers who bleed the taxpayer dry with their corruption and they're all wearing suits or I can sit in a bar with the working class in casual clothes who have been out doing an honest day's work. There will be criminals there too but the point is that the uniform is meaningless, it's the actions of the person wearing it that matters.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadash

Jobs is an exception to many rules. One of them is dress. Otherwise you get Phil Schiller up there on stage with Jobs, dressed in his hip, casual clothes, looking about as comfortable as I imagine Randall Stephenson would next to Jobs, dressed similarly.

I think they all look pretty comfortable in their chosen outfits.

Bertrand Serlet wears what resembles a suit and if anything he looks like he should be wearing something else entirely. Something that a Bond villain would wear:



Quote:
Originally Posted by LonerATO

For the last time Verizon is not switching to GSM, but is adding/moving to LTE. LTE is based on OFDMA and not GSM.

'For the last time'? How many times have you mentioned it? Even if it's not for calls, they can use the data service to make calls. Their coverage should be enough to allow that. It's about time the networks started doing this and stopped charging per call.

If Verizon offered a plan with just a data cap but no calling limits or charges, AT&T would be history. A 2GB data cap would allow over 1000 minutes of call time. If they set it at 5GB to cover actual data usage then it's fine and they can have data overage charges. They could allow about 250 minutes of FaceTime calling with that plan too.

I just don't see much point in them making a CDMA iPhone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton

You know what happened to the person who took that photo? They disappeared. Rumor has it they are now chained up in a Foxconn factory making iPhone in China. Every morning, some guy in a mask wakes them up by saying, "I want to play a game" over an intercom.

I think it was Microsoft trying to Photoshop out a black guy again.
post #135 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Interesting. For those who believe that Apple should merge with this or that company, stories like should give pause. Corporate culture is important and the differences can be difficult to overcome.

Sooo true...
post #136 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

A new report detailing the relationship between Apple and AT&T, the exclusive carrier of the iPhone in the U.S., reveals that Apple CEO Steve Jobs allegedly considered dropping AT&T numerous times, and considered leaving for Verizon as far back as 2007.

The tense relationship between Apple and AT&T is detailed in this month's issue of Wired magazine. Though the article is not yet available online, it was summarized Monday by Jason D. O'Grady of ZDNet.

The article compares the relationship between AT&T and Apple as a loveless celebrity marriage -- one that went wrong quickly after the honeymoon ended. Apple was unwilling to restrict the Internet capabilities of the iPhone, while AT&T struggled to meet the overwhelming pressure the smartphone placed on its network.

An anonymous source told the magazine that Jobs discussed severing ties with AT&T at least a half-dozen times. At one point in 2007, Apple engineers allegedly visited the headquarters of Qualcomm to consider the prospect of creating a CDMA iPhone for the rival network. EVentually, the company concluded it would have to rebuild the phone from scratch to fit the new chips inside, making the prospect too costly and complicated.

The article also alleges that Qualcomm also began working on a chip that will allow the iPhone to work on both the AT&T and Verizon networks. Recent reports have alleged that Apple will offer a CDMA iPhone for the Verizon network in January 2011.

One of many spats between the companies was said to be regarding tethering: Apple wanted it to be included in the standard data plan charges, while AT&T wanted to charge extra. AT&T eventually won that alleged battle, as it now offers tethering via USB or Bluetooth for an extra $20 per month.

The report also said that AT&T took issue with the fact that the iPhone uses a radio from Infineon, a company that previously had been most widely used in Europe, where cell towers are more common. AT&T allegedly felt that Apple's use of an Infineon chip led to inferior reception. When the wireless carrier asked Apple to resolve the issues "together," it was said that Apple's response was, "No, you resolve them. They're not our problem. They're your problem."

The companies apparently squabbled over small things as well, as the two corporate cultures did not mesh well. At one point, an AT&T representative reportedly told one of Jobs' deputies that the company co-founder should wear a suit to meet with the AT&T Board of Directors. That AT&T employee was allegedly told, "We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."

i love the part about the suits!
post #137 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

I agree with AT&T on this one. Jobs looks stupid in that same outfit day after day and the other guys just look really uncomfortable dressed like that. It doesn't fit their personalities. Appropriate attire is showing respect for your partners and vendors. Jobs would probably show up to a funeral dressed like that. He doesn't appear to give a rat's ass about anyone but himself. Oh I forgot, he 'loves' his users.

well, from the article, it seems that apple doesn't actually have any respect for at&t.

besides that, if it weren't for the iphone, somebody like t-mobile would have surpassed at&t due to their vastly superior phones, customer service, and price. and at&t wants to complain about wearing suits?
post #138 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

I agree with AT&T on this one. Jobs looks stupid in that same outfit day after day and the other guys just look really uncomfortable dressed like that. It doesn't fit their personalities. Appropriate attire is showing respect for your partners and vendors. Jobs would probably show up to a funeral dressed like that. He doesn't appear to give a rat's ass about anyone but himself. Oh I forgot, he 'loves' his users.

Outfit like suit is only respect in certian circles. If you followed world better (I am European) then you would know that in many businesses outside of this country (and also in designers buisnesses in the USA) the proper attire is turtleneck and sports jacket. If you do not like it then it is your problem. If world did not change then you would be wearing tailcoat and tallhat to the office.

Respect style of others. That does not mean they show up dirty and unprepared. Respect is in how you get along with partner and how you refer to them and not via attire. Tide attire is everything what's needed.

Having said that I go to interviews sharp in suit and tie, but as soon as I notice that company standard for business is different I adopt to common attire regardless if I like it or not. This is to say I am part of it and I do not make revolutions by being different in this context for the firm that pays me. That's a minimum that we have to comply.


Also be careful who you are talking about. Jobs is THE enterpreneur of technology wheather you like it or not. As such a person he can afford being extravagant and also decide what's appropriate in his company what's not. I may disagree on some points with Mr. Jobs', but I will defend his postion on this. That's respect to real leaders.
post #139 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by glui2001 View Post

I bet they will! Verizon's probably kicking themselves for all the lost billions they could've made if they jumped on board the first time Apple courted them.

Verizon is probably thanking their lucky starts that they didn't get that contract as THEY would have been the ones taking the hits for a network that was being choked by a 5000% data bandwidth increase. Give me a break. Verizon was no more ready than AT&T for the iPhone explosion.
post #140 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Well you have to remember that Apple originally signed a contract with Cingular. Once SBC/AT&T acquired Cingular, the contracts would have to be renegotiated. I addition I'm sure that both organizations have plenty of opt out clauses based on performance and quotas.

Your information is incorrect. SBC owned the majority share of Cingular when the original contract was signed. They received the balance of Cingluar when SBS purchased BellSouth.
post #141 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by BUSHMAN4 View Post

Not hard to believe story about ATT & APPLE albeit short on the inner details.

ATT has made many mistakes over the years and should have seized the opportunity with APPLE as an exclusive partner to improve upon their service and follow the lead from APPLE.

ATT feels that once it looses their exclusivity contract on the IPHONE they will still be a dominant force. Truth is customers will run to other carries even if the rate is higher.

That "truth" is not supported by anything outside of forums like this. Teleco analysts and the like do not come to the same conclusion.
post #142 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaps View Post

The Wired article should make for some interesting questions during AT&T's earnings call on Thursday morning. What the article alluded to but didn't really explain was that a lot of the problems have to do with antiquated backhaul infrastructure (backhaul refers to the bandwidth supplied to a cell tower site) and a lack of available licensed wireless spectrum for transmitting from towers to handsets.

AT&T can spend to improve backhaul -- it spent nearly $2 billion last year adding fiber and more T-1 lines to sites in San Francisco and New York alone -- but it is going to have to wait to get more spectrum, and in the meantime it will continue to deny there's a problem and sell you another iPhone.

Do users care? Are they figuring this out? How fast would they leave if Verizon got the iPhone? All questions to be answered...

AT&T is deplying fiber for the backhaul infrastructure and has been at the forefront of the spectrum crunch issue and spoken publicly on it for quite some time. What excatly are you looking for. Both issues are acknowledged as critical by AT&T and being worked.
post #143 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icesnake View Post

Didn't someone whine about "form over function?" Yet we know that the antenna engineer who designed the iPhone 4's antenna told Management that it was going to be a problem long before the design went gold. And now we know that Apple chose a radio chip that is known to work poorly in non-optimal signal areas, and knew it, and went ahead with it anyway.

Bottom line: Knowing all this, if you buy an iPhone, you deserve crappy service.

Again, it's very interesting that this info is being completely ignored here. If the article had said Apple wanted to use a super duper chip and AT&T balked, well, there would be plenty of negative comments about AT&T's reaction. All these iPhone design clues and they are being ignored. Easier to say AT&T's network is crap and Apple is god I suppose.
post #144 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icesnake View Post

If AT&T goes down, someone will buy their assets and it's almost certain the AT&T network will not be shut off. Someone will have to maintain all that stuff - and it's pretty unlikely you'll see the new owners getting 400,000 H-1B visas to import a bunch of low-wage workers to replace the people in place now.

Excuse me?

The vast majority of AT&T employees are born and bred in the US. Those with visas are paid at the same scale as others doing the same job. Low-wage workers? Your xenophobia is repugnant.
post #145 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by StLBluesFan View Post

Your information is incorrect. SBC owned the majority share of Cingular when the original contract was signed. They received the balance of Cingluar when SBS purchased BellSouth.

Let's split some hairs why don't we. SBC had recently changed its name to AT&T before the acquisition of BellSouth which is why I referred to them as SBC/AT&T. AT&T had attempted to change the name of Cingular to AT&T even before the merger with BellSouth was completed in Dec 2006. Cingular was operating as a independent company at the time of the original contract with Apple. Although independent also wholly owned 60% AT&T, 40% BellSouth.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #146 of 154
I'm only on page 2. You guys got it completely backwards with the Infineon thing.

Apple works with a number of carriers around the globe. Let's say 100 carriers, as an example. Of those 100 carriers, 99 of them play well with the Infineon chip. AT&T does not. How the HELL is that not AT&T's problem?
post #147 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

I'm only on page 2. You guys got it completely backwards with the Infineon thing.

Apple works with a number of carriers around the globe. Let's say 100 carriers, as an example. Of those 100 carriers, 99 of them play well with the Infineon chip. AT&T does not. How the HELL is that not AT&T's problem?

Not to mention that none of the other carriers are complaining about the Infineon chip.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #148 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Let's split some hairs why don't we. SBC had recently changed its name to AT&T before the acquisition of BellSouth which is why I referred to them as SBC/AT&T. AT&T had attempted to change the name of Cingular to AT&T even before the merger with BellSouth was completed in Dec 2006. Cingular was operating as a independent company at the time of the original contract with Apple. Although independent also wholly owned 60% AT&T, 40% BellSouth.

I didn't take issue with referring to them as SBC/AT&T. I do that as well.

Cingular was not acting "independently." Yes, Cingular had it's own management structure but they were responsible to and reported to SBC and BLS. Decisions like "Apple" were not made independently by Cingular brass. Lastly, there's never been any indication that if Cingular's ownership mix changed that Apple had an "out" in the contract.
post #149 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

I'm only on page 2. You guys got it completely backwards with the Infineon thing.

Apple works with a number of carriers around the globe. Let's say 100 carriers, as an example. Of those 100 carriers, 99 of them play well with the Infineon chip. AT&T does not. How the HELL is that not AT&T's problem?

Two points. First, Apple's refusal to work with their partner on the issue was plain stoopid. Setting up the iPhone for potential poor performance in its initial rollout market ain't too bright. Second,which of those "99" carrier markets covers a territory the size of AT&T's. Aren't we regularly smacked about the body and head by overseas posters explaining how their cell infrasturcture is more dense and superior? The chip in question is supposedly a poor performer when signal strength is poor.

Now, Apple could have either helped work the issue, waited for an infrastructure that would better support that lessser chip, or done what they apparently did. Ignore it and say "not my problem." Swell partner there, eh?
post #150 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by StLBluesFan View Post

Two points. First, Apple's refusal to work with their partner on the issue was plain stoopid. Setting up the iPhone for potential poor performance in its initial rollout market ain't too bright. Second,which of those "99" carrier markets covers a territory the size of AT&T's. Aren't we regularly smacked about the body and head by overseas posters explaining how their cell infrasturcture is more dense and superior? The chip in question is supposedly a poor performer when signal strength is poor.

Now, Apple could have either helped work the issue, waited for an infrastructure that would better support that lessser chip, or done what they apparently did. Ignore it and say "not my problem." Swell partner there, eh?

Wrong. I don't see Australians complaining. I don't see Russians complaining. I don't see Chinese complaining. Just like the economy, size of territory is not a viable excuse.

Why is Apple's "rollout market" more important than their global market, anyway? Should Apple sacrifice their global customers to appease Americans? Talk about entitlement!
post #151 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Wrong. I don't see Australians complaining. I don't see Russians complaining. I don't see Chinese complaining. Just like the economy, size of territory is not a viable excuse.

Why is Apple's "rollout market" more important than their global market, anyway? Should Apple sacrifice their global customers to appease Americans? Talk about entitlement!

I agree with your points. Apple needs to work with an eye towards their global markets. But, it isn't like the international market hasn't been affected by Apple making concessions to AT&T in the past. Our carriers allow tether and MMS, but the features were delayed because of AT&T. Similarly, VOIP over 3G apps, internationally, had to wait for AT&T to approve it.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #152 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by StLBluesFan View Post

Two points. First, Apple's refusal to work with their partner on the issue was plain stoopid.

No, 'stoopid' is relying on silly rumors as the basis of your world view.

There is plenty of data out there if you open your eyes and look for facts. Apple and AT&T have both stated publicly that they are happy with the relationship. They have both stated publicly that they worked together on the iPhone launch. The iPhone went from nowhere to the #1 single phone model in the world (all RIM phones together outsell the iPhone, but no single model does), at least partly due to the cooperation with AT&T (such as the creation of visual voicemail).

Now, you can run your life on the basis of jumping onto every single rumor that supports your jaded worldview or you can look at facts. Your choice.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #153 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Wrong. I don't see Australians complaining. I don't see Russians complaining. I don't see Chinese complaining. Just like the economy, size of territory is not a viable excuse.

Why is Apple's "rollout market" more important than their global market, anyway? Should Apple sacrifice their global customers to appease Americans? Talk about entitlement!

Where are you monitoring for these complaints? AppleInsider? Are you seriously suggesting there is no one outside of the US complaining about their cell phone service? Really?

Size of territory has very much to do with it. Good grief. Only so much money, time and resources...you think it's easier to get a higher percentage of coverage in a smaller geographical area or a larger one? To use your examples, you think Russia and China have fewer dead zone cell coverage than AT&T in the US? Really?

Look, in the US nearly "everyone" (yes a slight exageration) has a cell and expects perfect coverage. In those larger countries comparatively few have cell phones and most of those phones are not within the vast rural areas. In the smaller countries of Europe, for example, I would expect relatively few dead zones, again a function of size of territory.

The reason I mentioned Apple's "rollout" market is simple. You want that initial rollout to go smoothly, no issues that might be attributed to the phone and cast a negative picture for expansion. That wasn't obvious?

Entitlement? <sigh> Why does it seem that so many people want to argue just for the sake of arguing? And a to you too.
post #154 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

verizon pre cripples its own networks making sure every one get a tad above shit service
but no one gets dropped calls

Sorry, not even close to true. The worst service I ever had was Verizon, and they didn't care at all why. A five-year-long endless bloody stream of expensive insults, that.
If yer gonna bother with thinking different, swing for the fences.
Reply
If yer gonna bother with thinking different, swing for the fences.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Tense Apple-AT&T iPhone partnership nearly ended multiple times