or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Suppliers say Apple will build first 3M CDMA iPhones in December
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Suppliers say Apple will build first 3M CDMA iPhones in December - Page 2

post #41 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by amador_o View Post

Sorry that I don't know this, but does anyone think it will possible to use CDMA iPhones on Virgin Mobile's network with a jailbreak or hack?

It's called flashing. Metro PCS does it to VZW phones in certain states.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #42 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

Agreed, but I think Verizon has learned its lesson in the last 3-4 years....Verizon is another example of short-sighted CEO missing the boat!

WHAT???????

Verizon most certainly hasn't learned their lesson. Look at the Android phones they sell. ALL of them are branded and use custom interface screens. ALL of them have certain features disabled/crippled in favor of Verizon's own overpriced crap. Much of it stuff available for free elsewhere with the same phone and unadulterated firmware.

I sincerely hope Apple tells Verizon to pound sand if they start making the same demands of Apple.

I will not ever use an iPhone that has been crippled in any way by a cell phone carrier.
post #43 of 87
A new iPhone with CDMA/GSM/Wi-Max/LTE all built into it (if possible) would mean it could be opened up to every US carrier, be future ready and let me stay on Sprint and not have to suck AT&T's cock ALso, as stated above previously, CDMA has had an updated tech available since last fall that will allow simultaneous voice and data. If VZW and Sprint want to be able to have the iPhone (or even just offer this as a new feature to their network) they would need to upgrade, which they likely have done
post #44 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

It's called flashing. Metro PCS does it to VZW phones in certain states.

Thanks... I'm reading up on it now!
post #45 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

And what lesson is that? They're still the #1 carrier although not by much and doing quite well selling the line of Droid phones. And for the record VZW did not turn down the iPhone, the two sides just didn't give into the other's demands. Apple and VZW turned each other down.

As much as I can agree with that, in reality it was most likely SJ willingness to walk away form the table that screw VZ. But your right this allowed VZ to continually over charge their customers for less features and service (leaving out the whole network debate)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jax44 View Post

While a Verizon iPhone would help sales, I don't know if Apple and Verizon can come to an agreement. Verizon loves to load up their garbage on phones. CDMA versions could be for China/Sprint.

It will be interesting to see what if any a deal would look like. If VZ caves and allow the Iphone to exist as it does on ever other network, this could cause problem for other VZ phone suppliers since they may attempt to get similar deals. The fact the iphone does not exist on VZ allowed the provider to dictate terms. This could change things and VZ could become a fat dumb cheap pipe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrFreeman View Post

It says a lot about this guys grasp of technology!

I wonder how these guys stay in a job, they make prediction and convince people to invest on bad information. The problem is any one can make money on Apple, imagine if this guy try and predict this for RIM or someone other company.
post #46 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by PersonMan View Post

WHAT???????

Verizon most certainly hasn't learned their lesson. Look at the Android phones they sell. ALL of them are branded and use custom interface screens. ALL of them have certain features disabled/crippled in favor of Verizon's own overpriced crap. Much of it stuff available for free elsewhere with the same phone and unadulterated firmware.

I sincerely hope Apple tells Verizon to pound sand if they start making the same demands of Apple.

I will not ever use an iPhone that has been crippled in any way by a cell phone carrier.

That's not entirely true. The Droid 1 and the HTC Incredible are pretty much untouched and uncrippled by VZW except for the branding and their lil tab in the market which only has about 6-7 apps that are solely VZWs. If they were able to agree with Moto and HTC on certain conditions I don't see why they wouldn't with Apple. I think the price is the biggest hurdle right now. Apple will want to keep their high margin while VZW will want it for less.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #47 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Anyone can get out of a contract, the point of it is to make it more viable to remain in it. If Apple is still selling all the iPhones it can make then what is the point of breaking the contract with AT&T early to add another US carrier? That would likely be a financially stupid move. I trust both Apple and AT&T to work in ways to benefit their bottom line, not reduce it.

I think we see Apple's goals (or what we believe Apple's goals should be) differently. I think they should do everything they can (with reason of course) to blunt Android and even MS. If that means taking lower margins on sales of phones, so be it. With 2-3% of total phone sales, they still account for almost 40% of the profit. From what I have seen, you believe Apple should follow their Mac strategy - take the cream of the crop and let HTC and Samsung fight over the scraps. Both strategies have some merit, I'll give you that. But if 11 million phones a quarter is all Apple can profitably make, then as the smart phone market balloons they will find themselves with a smaller and smaller piece of the pie. It will probably continue to be very profitable, but small. In my opinion, this would not be the best allocation of Apple's resources given the alternatives.
post #48 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by henderson101 View Post

No one what-so-ever outside of the US. GSM is the world standard. Even in places that use CDMA, the iPhone tends to be available on UTMS/HSDPA (the GSM 3G standard.) Really, Apple will pick up some users in the US, but outside of the US the validity of a CDMA device is pretty shakey. We don't even *have* CDMA networks in Europe. Your CDMA phones are therefore "pretty" bricks.

It's rather clear that if most of the world uses GSM then it's rather obvious Apple is not going after that market with a CDMA device. But thanks for pointing out the obvious.

I think with Verizons near 100 million subscribers, there is plenty of business logic in offering a CDMA phone. Whether a network is technically obsolete is a non-issue when you can't get an ATT signal.
post #49 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I have no idea what point you are getting at. Its possible they have plenty of CDMA-only phones on their network or that they havent decommissioned their CDMA network yet or some other reason. Regardless, its moot to the point I made. I guess we could also ask why any network offers 2G in areas they have 3G.

Fact: The iPhone only has GSM and UMTS cellular radios.
Fact: The S. Korean iPhone does not have CDMA for 2G and UMTS for 3G.
Fact: The iPhone does not have CDMA or CDMA2000 cellular radios.
Fact: The iPhone is highly successful in S. Korea.

Based on the comments you are making it sounds like you dont think the iPhone could function or flourish there, yet it has. Hence my point that using only the CDMA subscribers as a metric for determining the value of a CDMA-based iPhone is erroneous when there are plenty of networks that ONLY use CDMA for 2G and UMTS for 3G.



PS: Are you expecting a CDMA/UMTS iPhone to arrive alongside a CDMA/CDM2000? I dont see that as needed and wouldnt bet on that happening when a GSM/UMTS iPhone has proven to more than sufficient on networks with CDMA/UMTS.

The point of the AI article is that your first "fact" may not be a fact much longer. Isn't that what generated the discussion?
post #50 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by LewysBlackmore View Post

I think that we need to drop the whole "troll" moniker and assign commenters who are continuously fixated like this to a merrier role - like "court jester" - perhaps. That way they can continue to be rude and vulgar and contrary - and the rest of us can enjoy it as humorous nonsense instead a badly delivered attempt at derision. We could even have a little jester hat to flag with - instead of, or in addition to the ignore list!

Sir your a genius

A reputation is not built upon the restful domain of one's comfort zone; it is made out of stalwart exposition of your core beliefs, for all challenges to disprove them as irrelevant hubris.- Berp...
Reply
A reputation is not built upon the restful domain of one's comfort zone; it is made out of stalwart exposition of your core beliefs, for all challenges to disprove them as irrelevant hubris.- Berp...
Reply
post #51 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by PersonMan View Post

WHAT???????

Verizon most certainly hasn't learned their lesson. Look at the Android phones they sell. ALL of them are branded and use custom interface screens. ALL of them have certain features disabled/crippled in favor of Verizon's own overpriced crap. Much of it stuff available for free elsewhere with the same phone and unadulterated firmware.

I sincerely hope Apple tells Verizon to pound sand if they start making the same demands of Apple.

I will not ever use an iPhone that has been crippled in any way by a cell phone carrier.

Umm... Where are you getting this idea that all Android phones on Verizon are crippled?

The only phone so far on Verizon that is "crippled" in any way is the Galaxy S (Fascinate) that uses Bing services by default. That will quickly go away once the 2.2 update is rolled out. And the ones who don't want to wait until then can easily find solutions to get around it online.

Other than that, Verizon has done zero to stand in the way of Android phones having features that rival their own paid services. Take Google Nav for instance. ALL of the Android phones on Verizon have access to Nav, even when VZ Nav is still available as an option. And the Market. Verizon has their own app market, but all Android phones still have access to the official Android Market. Then there's Google Voice, which is a free replacement to Verizon's Visual Voicemail, that all Android phones are allowed to install and use.
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
post #52 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackintosh;

Hard to say. According to the media, millions are waiting. According to the Apple Insider forum, few will switch because AT&T's service is terrific, just like the outside antenna that picks it up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackintosh;

Did I say something rude and vulgar and contrary? If I did then I missed it. If you have an issue with something specific I said, then let's discuss it. That's the point of this forum. Otherwise you are the one who is rude with your intolerance of other opinions.

Oh, and if you want to call me a court jester, thats fine. So long as you don't call me a fanboi.

As in your post above in bold. There is no attempt to discuss the issue, contribute anything, and the post is clearly insubstantial and intended purely to provoke. The post IMO can be considered vulgar and contrary.
post #53 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackintosh View Post

With very few exceptions, everyone here hits a nerve with me.

I think you've just incriminated yourself.
post #54 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadash View Post

You mention the fact that you can't use your CDMA phone in Europe, and that's true. But unless you want to pay massive roaming charges to AT&T or jailbreak your iPhone, you might as well have a CDMA iPhone right now, because the solution is the same: get a disposable prepaid phone in Europe once you get there.
.

That's not quite accurate. AT&T has international data plans that aren't too bad for short stays and they prorate the usage. (The call plans weren't that great - I think it was only a 30% discount as compared with normal roaming charges.) I went to London some months back and when I got back, I cancelled the extra coverage. They charged me only for the days I used. I thought that was very fair. And for the record, my iPhone 3G worked spectacularly in London - the 3G service was very fast and the phone even worked on most of the underground trains.

I've sworn all along that I would switch back to Verizon once a CDMA iPhone was available, but the fact is that AT&T service has gotten much better (in NYC) over the last six months and now I'm not sure I would switch, especially if you can't talk and search the web at the same time. While Verizon would probably be able to provide better service initially, if a great many users migrated to their services, they'd probably have the same problems AT&T had in high usage areas. Over the summer, I was on Cape Cod for a week and I had pretty good (although not perfect) coverage there as well. And on most of the I95 corridor, I was able to sue the Maps application without any coverage issues.
post #55 of 87
Let's back off on the sniping.

If you don't like the comment, don't use it as a justification to attack the poster. If it's truly offensive (profanity, insulting another user, etc.) report it. If you use a comment you dislike as a spring board for vigilante reciprocity, you are guilty too.

And please try to stick to the topic of the article.
post #56 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

And what lesson is that? They're still the #1 carrier although not by much and doing quite well selling the line of Droid phones. And for the record VZW did not turn down the iPhone, the two sides just didn't give into the other's demands. Apple and VZW turned each other down.

You're kidding, right? The lesson is they missed out on the most dramatic product of the decade!
post #57 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

You're kidding, right? The lesson is they missed out on the most dramatic product of the decade!

That's the best you can come up with? Has it hurt their customer base considerably? No. Has it hurt their bottom line? No. I am a VZW customer and by far not a fanboy but I am a realist, and realistically speaking they've done quite well without the iPhone and not only that also by offering absolutely crappy phones until the Droid.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #58 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

And what lesson is that? They're still the #1 carrier although not by much and doing quite well selling the line of Droid phones. And for the record VZW did not turn down the iPhone, the two sides just didn't give into the other's demands. Apple and VZW turned each other down.

You're saying that VZW didn't turn down the iPhone, then saying VZW turned down the iPhone? Don't use exclusive-or logic if you're really saying the truth is inclusive-or.
post #59 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

That's not entirely true. The Droid 1 and the HTC Incredible are pretty much untouched and uncrippled by VZW....

Pretty clearly that was before they realized the possibilities.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

That's the best you can come up with? Has it hurt their customer base considerably? No. Has it hurt their bottom line? No. I am a VZW customer and by far not a fanboy but I am a realist, and realistically speaking they've done quite well without the iPhone and not only that also by offering absolutely crappy phones until the Droid.

Yes not having the iPhone has effected Verizon. During the launch of the 3G and 3GS Verizon's churn rate rose considerably. Primarily the reason Verizon has been able to maintain such a large customer base is because they absorbed Alltel last year.
post #60 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

That's the best you can come up with? Has it hurt their customer base considerably? No. Has it hurt their bottom line? No. I am a VZW customer and by far not a fanboy but I am a realist, and realistically speaking they've done quite well without the iPhone and not only that also by offering absolutely crappy phones until the Droid.

So, if VZW hasn't lost customers, where did ATT get all those new iPhone customers? ATT has increased their customer base dramatically since they "gave in" to Apple and took on the iPhone.

Maybe VZW didn't lose any customers to ATT with the advent of the iPhone, but they sure didn't gain any iPhone customers like ATT did. Oh, except one that I know of for sure. Me. I left VZW for ATT just for the iPhone. If you looked, I'll bet you could find others like me. I don't know if VZW's customer base or bottom line has been hurt by the iPhone or not. If you do please cite a source. But logic says that ATT's new iPhone customers came from somewhere (possibly Sprint or T-Mobile). But even if they come from providers other than VZW, those are ptontial customers that VZW lost, or at least failed to gain because they didn't do a deal with Apple.

And if you don't agree with that logic, you can't argue that the Droid has brought any customers to VZW either.

All that being said I will be very happy when a VZW iPhone comes out. Competition is a good thing for us customers. Look at how VZW has had to relax their restrictions to keep customers because of the iPhone. Or how ATT has had to improve their network because of VZWs reputation/marketing/performance. However I won't be switching unless VZW offers something more or a better price than ATT, since I have no issues with ATT right now.
post #61 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by russgriz View Post

So, if VZW hasn't lost customers, where did ATT get all those new iPhone customers? ATT has increased their customer base dramatically since they "gave in" to Apple and took on the iPhone.

Maybe VZW didn't lose any customers to ATT with the advent of the iPhone, but they sure didn't gain any iPhone customers like ATT did. Oh, except one that I know of for sure. Me. I left VZW for ATT just for the iPhone. If you looked, I'll bet you could find others like me. I don't know if VZW's customer base or bottom line has been hurt by the iPhone or not. If you do please cite a source. But logic says that ATT's new iPhone customers came from somewhere (possibly Sprint or T-Mobile). But even if they come from providers other than VZW, those are ptontial customers that VZW lost, or at least failed to gain because they didn't do a deal with Apple.

And if you don't agree with that logic, you can't argue that the Droid has brought any customers to VZW either.

All that being said I will be very happy when a VZW iPhone comes out. Competition is a good thing for us customers. Look at how VZW has had to relax their restrictions to keep customers because of the iPhone. Or how ATT has had to improve their network because of VZWs reputation/marketing/performance. However I won't be switching unless VZW offers something more or a better price than ATT, since I have no issues with ATT right now.

The keyword was "considerably". Of course VZW lost customers and I was almost one of them until I personally was on the other end of a multitude of dropped calls from iPhone owning friends. That was a deal breaker for me. What I can state as fact is that the Droid is the first smartphone for a multitude of VZW subscribers. Keeping one's customer base and getting more money from them at the same is usually a good strategy. BTW with the exception of the iPhone, ATT does its fair share of disabling features and branding of phones. In that sense they're not much different from VZW.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #62 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

You're saying that VZW didn't turn down the iPhone, then saying VZW turned down the iPhone? Don't use exclusive-or logic if you're really saying the truth is inclusive-or.

Hey cut me some slack. I'm a guy ,and contradicting ourselves is in ours genes lol.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #63 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

When people post worldwide CDMA numbers they really should exclude networks, like South Korea, that have CDMA for 2G and UMTS for 3G. The real question is how many subscribers worldwide only have CDMA2000 for 3G.

The problem with your argument is that South Korean government classifies ev-do (even ev-do rev A) as 2G. The South Korean government took back LG Telecom's 3G license because the government only recognized ev-dv as 3G.

http://www.telecomskorea.com/beyond-3g-152.html
post #64 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadash View Post

I think we see Apple's goals (or what we believe Apple's goals should be) differently. I think they should do everything they can (with reason of course) to blunt Android and even MS. If that means taking lower margins on sales of phones, so be it. With 2-3% of total phone sales, they still account for almost 40% of the profit. From what I have seen, you believe Apple should follow their Mac strategy - take the cream of the crop and let HTC and Samsung fight over the scraps. Both strategies have some merit, I'll give you that. But if 11 million phones a quarter is all Apple can profitably make, then as the smart phone market balloons they will find themselves with a smaller and smaller piece of the pie. It will probably continue to be very profitable, but small. In my opinion, this would not be the best allocation of Apple's resources given the alternatives.

I think the 40%(39%) represents their total profits of the handset market, but that 23% of total phone sales represents smartphones. Maybe not, but either way its a moot point. It makes no sense for Apple to follow the path of others into large unit sales with shrinking profits, or worse a net lose quarter of quarter. This is a for profit company and it makes no matter how many handsets are sold to them so long as they are making as much profit as possible.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson1 View Post

The point of the AI article is that your first "fact" may not be a fact much longer. Isn't that what generated the discussion?

If a CDMA/CDMA2000 iPhone comes to Verizon or Sprint, that doesnt mean there will be a CDMA/UMTS iPhone for KT or that the CDMA/CDM2000 iPhone will be used in S. Korea over the GSM/UMTS iPhone. Why would a network that uses UMTS for 3G forego that for a voice only service for CDMA? That makes no sense. The only carriers that will be getting the CDMA/CDMA2000 iPhones will be ones with a CDMA/CDMA2000 network, hence my original statement that you shouldnt count networks that use CDMA for 2G and UMTS for 3G.


Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

That's the best you can come up with? Has it hurt their customer base considerably? No. Has it hurt their bottom line? No. I am a VZW customer and by far not a fanboy but I am a realist, and realistically speaking they've done quite well without the iPhone and not only that also by offering absolutely crappy phones until the Droid.

When you look at the number of subs leaving AT&T vs. Verizon, revenue, profit, etc. before and after each new iPhones arrival I think its safe to say that Verizon lost a lot of money by not taking Apples deal. AT&T is pretty close to Verizons total subscriber numbers now and has recorded lower turn over than Verizon, something that I dont recall happening before the iPhone. I think its easy to form an argument of direct causal linkage.
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 #65 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

If a CDMA/CDMA2000 iPhone comes to Verizon or Sprint, that doesnt mean there will be a CDMA/UMTS iPhone for KT or that the CDMA/CDM2000 iPhone will be used in S. Korea over the GSM/UMTS iPhone. Why would a network that uses UMTS for 3G forego that for a voice only service for CDMA? That makes no sense. The only carriers that will be getting the CDMA/CDMA2000 iPhones will be ones with a CDMA/CDMA2000 network, hence my original statement that you shouldnt count networks that use CDMA for 2G and UMTS for 3G.

As I stated earlier, the South Korean government classifies ev-do (even ev-do rev A) as 2G.
post #66 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by fjpoblam View Post

Did AAPL ever settle with VZN the argument over AAPL's not allowing a VZN logo on an iPhone?

Actually Verizon would allow a phone with no logo and less control of it too. It was said by one of the execs a few months ago.
Android makes the world go round.
Reply
Android makes the world go round.
Reply
post #67 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

As I stated earlier, the South Korean government classifies ev-do (even ev-do rev A) as 2G.

How they define it as has zero barring on my statements.
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 #68 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix2004 View Post

Actually Verizon would allow a phone with no logo and less control of it too. It was said by one of the execs a few months ago.

Yes, but they have said that lack of VZW branding was one of the reasons they said no to the iPhone. Of course NOW they are willing to do that
post #69 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

How they define it as has zero barring on my statements.

How is it that it has zero barrings?

All 3 Korean carriers still have significant CDMA networks --- with 1x voice AND ev-do data.
post #70 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post

Yes, but they have said that lack of VZW branding was one of the reasons they said no to the iPhone. Of course NOW they are willing to do that

Verizon never said that --- in fact, Verizon never really alter smartphones in their history.

Verizon rejected the iphone because of distribution and tech support.

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/20...n-iphone_x.htm
post #71 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I think the 40%(39%) represents their total profits of the handset market, but that 23% of total phone sales represents smartphones. Maybe not, but either way its a moot point. It makes no sense for Apple to follow the path of others into large unit sales with shrinking profits, or worse a net lose quarter of quarter. This is a for profit company and it makes no matter how many handsets are sold to them so long as they are making as much profit as possible.

I don't want to get in a huge argument with you over this. Obviously we see things differently. Two points:

1. The 2.8% share and 39% profits apply both to all phones, not just smart phones.
http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/artic...mpaign=feature

2. You're setting up a false dichotomy by arguing that either Apple goes for profits and a small market share or for unit volume and very low margins. With the huge amounts of money Apple is raking in on the iPhone, they can afford to take slightly lower margins to get more customers. I am not saying they should follow the Nokia playbook.
post #72 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

How is it that it has zero barrings?

All 3 Korean carriers still have significant CDMA networks --- with 1x voice AND ev-do data.

You honestly think a GSM/UMTS iPhone with a maximum of 7.2Mbps down and 5.76Mbps up will be be replaced with a CDMA/CDMA2000 iPhone on a network that only has EV-DO Rev.0? Come on, Samab, you can be as pro-CDMA and anti-GSM/3GSM as you want but I’m shocked that even you would argue that KT will drop a GSM/UMTS iPhone for a CDMA/CDM2000 iPhone.

Again, all these carriers around the world that have dropped pushing CDMA-based networks in favour of 3GSM-based networks will not be increasing their CDMA2000 support for the iPhone when they already have a perfectly viable network for the current device. Hence, including all CDMA subscribers in a list of potential customers is specious.

BTW, I’m arguing that Apple and all other companies are going for profits. The number of units to attain that profit is incidental and just different ways to go about achieving the same goal of maximizing profits. Can you guess which one is working best and being copied by Moto and other handset vendors?
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 #73 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadash View Post

2. You're setting up a false dichotomy by arguing that either Apple goes for profits and a small market share or for unit volume and very low margins. With the huge amounts of money Apple is raking in on the iPhone, they can afford to take slightly lower margins to get more customers. I am not saying they should follow the Nokia playbook.

Lets say Apple is selling 3 million iPhone 4s per month this quarter. Lets also say they go crazy and lower the price by $50 across the line.

The result is Apple making $50 less pre device, times 3 million, times 3 months for the quarter. There are no increased sales, there are no increased profits, just loses.

In your model, you have to allow supply and demand to be unlimited. But these are limited and Foxxcon is building a new factory capable of 3M units per month to deal with this issue. And that doesnt address the supply issue (like with iPad displays from LG) or any production issues (like with the white glass for the iPhone 4).

Your model is a simplistic, if you lower the price you can sell more, thus making more profit with high volume sales. That isnt even necessarily true and there is a lot of complex math involved in finding the right price point to maximize your profits.

You can say that Apple is doing all wrong but everything shows that Apple is doing it right. Now that there was no iPhone on the market barely 3 years ago and they are making well over ⅓ of the handset profits for the entire 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 #74 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Lets say Apple is selling 3 million iPhone 4s per month this quarter. Lets also say they go crazy and lower the price by $50 across the line.

The result is Apple making $50 less pre device, times 3 million, times 3 months for the quarter. There are no increased sales, there are no increased profits, just loses.

In your model, you have to allow supply and demand to be unlimited. But these are limited and Foxxcon is building a new factory capable of 3M units per month to deal with this issue. And that doesnt address the supply issue (like with iPad displays from LG) or any production issues (like with the white glass for the iPhone 4).

Your model is a simplistic, if you lower the price you can sell more, thus making more profit with high volume sales. That isnt even necessarily true and there is a lot of complex math involved in finding the right price point to maximize your profits.

You can say that Apple is doing all wrong but everything shows that Apple is doing it right. Now that there was no iPhone on the market barely 3 years ago and they are making well over ⅓ of the handset profits for the entire world.

I don't think they should lower their price - and I never said that. I think they should take lower margins (if they have to) to increase production in order to sell more units (even if the cost of producing those units is slightly higher than it would be manufacturing what they are now) and expand to CDMA carriers.
post #75 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by LewysBlackmore View Post

I think that we need to drop the whole "troll" moniker and assign commenters who are continuously fixated like this to a merrier role - like "court jester" - perhaps. ...

Apply judiciously:
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
post #76 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadash View Post

I don't think they should lower their price - and I never said that. I think they should take lower margins (if they have to) to increase production in order to sell more units (even if the cost of producing those units is slightly higher than it would be manufacturing what they are now) and expand to CDMA carriers.

There's only two ways to lower the margin, either your production costs rise but you keep the product at the same price or you lower the cost of your product. Even if they did lower the cost that does not mean ATT will whom ultimately is the true seller. No other company sells their phones at such a high margin in that respect most economist will tell you that ATT is on the losing end of the exclusivity agreement. VZW does not pay as much per unit to Moto, HTC, RIM, etc… thus making more money per two year contract than ATT does. Now all you will argue how ATT got millions of subscribers due to the iPhone, yea they did but at a low margin. So it's ok for them to accept a lower margin but not Apple? ATT could sell it for more but the market has spoken and $199 is the going price for a smartphone and even a small increase would keep consumers away and on to another device.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #77 of 87
What are you talking about. Verizon always has altered phones from everyone else.

Last year Verizon just began allowing smart phones to have WiFi.

Why do we need a Verizon App Store. Carriers are terrible at software.

Quote:
Originally Posted by samab View Post

Verizon never said that --- in fact, Verizon never really alter smartphones in their history.

Verizon rejected the iphone because of distribution and tech support.
post #78 of 87
Instead of Apple making a CDMA iPhone why doesn't Verizon instead upgrade their 3G network to support GSM HSPA capable hardware (cellphones and USB modems)? Here in Canada both Telus and Bell two of the biggest telecom carriers competing with Rogers opted to upgrade their CDMA network from EVDO+ 2.75G to GSM HSPA+ 3.5G. This made it easier on the company financially due to the scalability of HSPA, increased profits by making it easier for customers to move from one carrier to another with existing hardware and helped them provide a capable network for popular GSM handsets such as the iPhone. As it is now Verizon advertises averaging 600 Kbps to 1.4 Mbps on their CDMA 3G network. At least here in Canada the carriers didn't call it 3G until they could provide at least 3.2 Mbps. Even Rogers EDGE+ 2.75G is still faster than what Verizon tries to sell customers as 3G. HSPA 3G here was between 3.2 Mbps which then went to 7.2 Mbps before now offering HSPA+ 21 Mbps. Carriers here are already on an upgrade path for 100 Mbps in 2011.
Unity3D, Maya, Final Cut, iPhone 5S, Apple TV, Mac Pro, MBP, iPad Mini
Reply
Unity3D, Maya, Final Cut, iPhone 5S, Apple TV, Mac Pro, MBP, iPad Mini
Reply
post #79 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imagine Engine View Post

Instead of Apple making a CDMA iPhone why doesn't Verizon instead upgrade their 3G network to support GSM HSPA...?
[...]

They were going to do that but the guy with the network patch on a flash drive lost it.

Seriously though, that is what they are doing, it's just that they are doing it with LTE. They will still use CDMA '2G' for voice for the time being, but that is a good thing as LTE will be power hungry tech for sometime and CDMA offers a great voice algorithm, it's in place, it's efficient and is tried-and-true.
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 #80 of 87
Here we go again. I've heard this rumor so many times from so mant different sources. I believe it when I see it.
My question is will this be the IPHONE4 or IPHONE 5, if the rumor is true???
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Suppliers say Apple will build first 3M CDMA iPhones in December