or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple's next-gen world mode GSM-CDMA iPad to arrive in early 2011 - rumor
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's next-gen world mode GSM-CDMA iPad to arrive in early 2011 - rumor

post #1 of 44
Thread Starter 
The 3G model of Apple's next-generation iPad will be a "world mode" device with both GSM and CDMA radios, allowing Apple to sell one model for integrated wireless access, according to a new rumor.

Analyst Brian Blair from Wedge Partners said in a note to investors that Apple is developing a new iPad with a Qualcomm multimode CDMA-GSM chips built in. In the U.S., such a chip would allow the iPad to run on both AT&T and Verizon networks, which use different wireless technology.

The addition of a CDMA iPad to Apple's product line would not come as a major surprise, as Apple has already begun selling the iPad through Verizon. However, because the 3G model is not compatible with Verizon's CDMA network, the carrier offers the Wi-Fi-only model bundled with a MiFi 2200 Intelligent Mobile Hotspot for connectivity on the go.

Blair also indicated that the new iPad will be thinner and will have a forward-facing camera. In September, AppleInsider reported that Apple plans to move aggressively in pushing FaceTime, with future plans including a camera-equipped iPad.

"The new iPad is thinner than the existing model and is essentially made from one piece of metal with no pins needed," Blair wrote. "We understand it requires a new type of manufacturing process as a result, similar to the company's unibody approach seen in MacBooks."
post #2 of 44
This makes sense since there is more real estate inside an iPad. They can use slightly bigger chips for their radio.
post #3 of 44
It would be pretty funny if all verizon got was the iPad. I'm telling you, if they get the iPhone....they are going to rape people on charges. They will get an even bigger case of The Big Head.
post #4 of 44
You beat me to the exact same response.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #5 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The 3G model of Apple's next-generation iPad will be a "world mode" device with both GSM and CDMA radios, allowing Apple to sell one model for integrated wireless access, according to a new rumor.

I think this points toward Apple's 'cloud' music service that we've been hearing rumors of. Basically, like Pandora on your iPad, only you can get a version that will be 3G for music only. This'd be awesome -- an iPad as your music server. I've always thought Apple needed something better audio-wise to compete against Logitech's Squeezebox and the Sonos system. It could make a great stand-alone music jukebox.

I haven't bought an iPad because I have a netbook running a Logitech Squeezebox of my music collection that consists of 90GB of .flac files. If and iPad would do something similar, I'd be all over that. I've already coverted my .flac's to .m4a's for the day when the iPad gets 128GB of memory.
post #6 of 44
Yawn. The original iPad was "rumored" to be a Verizon exclusive device up until it's announcement. Actually if you remember, the Wall Street Journal "confirmed" it was a CDMA device according to their sources in the know.

Still...regardless of how unreliable any rumors involving CDMA and Verizon are...the iPad makes way more sense for them to make CDMA, since it would not suffer from having some functionality toned down.
post #7 of 44
"The new iPad is thinner than the existing model and is essentially made from one piece of metal with no pins needed," Blair wrote. "We understand it requires a new type of manufacturing process as a result, similar to the company's unibody approach seen in MacBooks."

Does this guy even know how the current iPad is constructed?
It is already a unibody construction, one piece of metal with no pins!!!
What the hell is he talking about?
post #8 of 44
i think apple should ditch the wifi-only version all together. sell one version starting at $499 with various storage sizes...

A 3G radio can't be that expensive. Certainly not $130. It's probably more like $2.

It will save people grief when trying to choose which they want, plus it will cut production costs and increase supply.

I guess they will lose a bit by axing the premium people pay for the 3G model now though...
post #9 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by iancass79 View Post

It would be pretty funny if all verizon got was the iPad. I'm telling you, if they get the iPhone....they are going to rape people on charges. They will get an even bigger case of The Big Head.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Verizon may be full of idiots, but so is every other telecom. The important thing is the idiots don't manage plan prices, they manage the company.

Verizon's iPhone plans will be identical to AT&Ts if they want ANYONE to use an iPhone on their network.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #10 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by OllieWallieWhiskers View Post

i think apple should ditch the wifi-only version all together. sell one version starting at $499 with various storage sizes...

A 3G radio can't be that expensive. Certainly not $130. It's probably more like $2.

It will save people grief when trying to choose which they want, plus it will cut production costs and increase supply.

I guess they will lose a bit by axing the premium people pay for the 3G model now though...

I absolutely agree. I still can't get over how ridiculous the extra $130 charge is. Plus, wouldn't they want millions of iPad owners to have the option of turning on "aka" paying for 3G data?

That's where the real money is. Overcharging for wireless data. Just ask AT&T. Data plans = all of their profit from iPhone sales. They lose hundreds on the hardware. Break even with voice/text, and then finally profit from those mandatory data plans.

Problem is, Apple sees no additional profit from selling a 3G model than wifi, unless they artificially charge more. (like now) unless they have the vision to see that always-on data results in more iTunes/App store sales.
post #11 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by iancass79 View Post

It would be pretty funny if all verizon got was the iPad. I'm telling you, if they get the iPhone....they are going to rape people on charges. They will get an even bigger case of The Big Head.

What charges? I'm a VZW customer and have yet to be raped by the "charges" you speak of.
"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 #12 of 44
my sore neck from extended ipad usage?

If it gets a camera now I'm wondering how is it going to work if I don't hold it up like a steering wheel walking downtown like I'm reading the (paper) newspaper bumping into things causing a scene and not to mention car / pedestrian accidents.
post #13 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

I absolutely agree. I still can't get over how ridiculous the extra $130 charge is.

And, yet, most reports say that about 1/2 of users are buying the 3G version.

You should really learn some basic economics. Selling price is not determined by cost. Rather, it is determined by what the market will pay. And since 1/2 of users are buying the 3G, clearly, the market is willing to pay $130.
"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 #14 of 44
Radio, huh. I'd like to see Radio get the full Apple treatment. This new iPad sounds like it's worth waiting for.
post #15 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonder View Post

"The new iPad is thinner than the existing model and is essentially made from one piece of metal with no pins needed," Blair wrote. "We understand it requires a new type of manufacturing process as a result, similar to the company's unibody approach seen in MacBooks."

Does this guy even know how the current iPad is constructed?
It is already a unibody construction, one piece of metal with no pins!!!
What the hell is he talking about?

Off with his head!

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #16 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by OllieWallieWhiskers View Post

i think apple should ditch the wifi-only version all together. sell one version starting at $499 with various storage sizes...

A 3G radio can't be that expensive. Certainly not $130. It's probably more like $2.

It will save people grief when trying to choose which they want, plus it will cut production costs and increase supply.

I guess they will lose a bit by axing the premium people pay for the 3G model now though...

Interesting that most of the iPad killers are priced higher.

Yet, you in your profound wisdom, would be able to research, design, create, license, manufacture, market, sell, distribute, service and support your dual radio multi-language, FCC-approved iPaddie for less.

Perhaps you could let us in on your magic formula.

We're waiting, waiting, waiting…

P.S. So is Balmer. Problem is, his photocopiers are probably on standby.
post #17 of 44
This report is highly suspect.

A CDMA-GSM chip would be useless for the iPad. GSM is a 2G technology. What Apple would need would be a CDMA-HSPA (or HSPA+) multimode chip.

Either this rumor is B.S. or AppleInsider doesn't know squat about mobile telephony technology.
post #18 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonder View Post

"The new iPad is thinner than the existing model and is essentially made from one piece of metal with no pins needed," Blair wrote. "We understand it requires a new type of manufacturing process as a result, similar to the company's unibody approach seen in MacBooks."

Does this guy even know how the current iPad is constructed?
It is already a unibody construction, one piece of metal with no pins!!!
What the hell is he talking about?

I noticed this too. I don't see how anyone can take the report seriously when this complete fantasy statement is tacked on the end of it.

He might just as well as finished by saying "And I know this to be true because the gremlins that live in my ear told me so." It would make as much sense.
post #19 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonder View Post

"The new iPad is thinner than the existing model and is essentially made from one piece of metal with no pins needed," Blair wrote. "We understand it requires a new type of manufacturing process as a result, similar to the company's unibody approach seen in MacBooks."

Does this guy even know how the current iPad is constructed?
It is already a unibody construction, one piece of metal with no pins!!!
What the hell is he talking about?

Exactly what I was thinking. Man, I really hate these "Analyst" they do not know crap.

I would like to see a lighter iPad. But they would probably have to shrink the battery and maybe remove glass for plastic. The case is already very strong and light
post #20 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by elmsley View Post

my sore neck from extended ipad usage?

If it gets a camera now I'm wondering how is it going to work if I don't hold it up like a steering wheel walking downtown like I'm reading the (paper) newspaper bumping into things causing a scene and not to mention car / pedestrian accidents.

The front camera would presumably be useful for video conferencing, which you would typically be seated for. And if you have one of those awesome Apple iPad cases, you could stand it up on a desk in front of you and not have to hold it.

Thompson
post #21 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

This report is highly suspect.

A CDMA-GSM chip would be useless for the iPad. GSM is a 2G technology. What Apple would need would be a CDMA-HSPA (or HSPA+) multimode chip.

Either this rumor is B.S. or AppleInsider doesn't know squat about mobile telephony technology.

AppleInsider was just reporting the contents of a research note by an analyst. If this is evidence of someone not knowing squat, then you can blame the analyst.

Thompson
post #22 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by OllieWallieWhiskers View Post

A 3G radio can't be that expensive. Certainly not $130. It's probably more like $2.

The chip might only be an extra $2 (more like $5), but the IP licenses are more like $50-60. At retail, that gives you a $130 premium.

The iPad seems like a much better use of the integrated SIM than the iPhone. (Just add the phone features back in... or sell the phones unlocked for those that want them!) Hope it works with T-Mobile and Sprint as well though.

Should Apple buy Sprint..?
post #23 of 44
"In the U.S., such a chip would allow the iPad to run on both AT&T and Verizon networks"

And Sprint and T-Mobile. The world is not just AT&T and Verizon you know.
post #24 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by iancass79 View Post

It would be pretty funny if all verizon got was the iPad. I'm telling you, if they get the iPhone....they are going to rape people on charges. They will get an even bigger case of The Big Head.

ATT is finally getting the MiFi device on their network, and have you seen their fees?

$35 for 200MB
$60 for 5GB

http://www.macworld.com/article/1557.../att_mifi.html

And Verizon's prices for the same thing:

$20 for 1 GB
$35 for 3 GB
$50 for 5 GB

So exactly who's customers are getting raped by prices??
post #25 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post

The chip might only be an extra $2 (more like $5), but the IP licenses are more like $50-60. At retail, that gives you a $130 premium.

Don't forget the SIM tray costs. Additionally, these things have to be assembled, connected to other things, etc., increasing labor costs.

As someone above said, the person doesn't know the basics of pricing. Ultimately, it's a question of what the market will pay.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post

Should Apple buy Sprint..?

Heaven forbid. What a horrendous business to get into. The stock will sink like a stone.

Moreover, what would be the point of buying just a US carrier!?
post #26 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

AppleInsider was just reporting the contents of a research note by an analyst. If this is evidence of someone not knowing squat, then you can blame the analyst.

Thompson

A real journalist would point out the discrepancy. It would be like saying the new MacBook Air ships with 2 megabytes of RAM because they read it somewhere else.

I know, I know.

Journalism is dead.
post #27 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

A real journalist would point out the discrepancy. It would be like saying the new MacBook Air ships with 2 megabytes of RAM because they read it somewhere else.

I know, I know.

Journalism is dead.

AppleInsider is reporting on a rumor, not a verifiable fact (such as what new MacBook Airs may be shipping with). As such, I find it appropriate that they simply passed along the information that they found elsewhere without taking it to task.

I think you're being too persnickety here.

Thompson
post #28 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

I absolutely agree. I still can't get over how ridiculous the extra $130 charge is.

How is it ridiculous? How much do the GSM, UMTS, and GPS cost in components cost? How much is the licensing? How much is the engineering and production? How much do others charge for adding cellular radios and GPS. I paid $350 not too many years ago for a 3G USB stick for my Mac from a carrier.

You say that $130 more is too much, but that would assume that the base price for the WiFi iPad is the ideal price, when its possible (based on other tablet makers inability to compete with Apple) that the price is lower than Apple desired profit margin to attract more buyers, with the flagship option picking up some of the slack to even out their margins. This isnt some shady business practice, but how all smart companies operate. The entry level product is often designed to attract less affluent buyers and sell more by volume.

The only way it would be atypical is to expect a higher end feature that is only produced for a fraction of their product to scale in price in accordance with common features they produce for the entire product line.
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 #29 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by elmsley View Post

If it gets a camera now I'm wondering how is it going to work if I don't hold it up like a steering wheel walking downtown like I'm reading the (paper) newspaper bumping into things causing a scene and not to mention car / pedestrian accidents.

the same way idiots are bumping into things now while trying to use an iPad [or reading a newspaper] while walking in downtown manhattan. they deserve to get run over. [i have to admit, i've been guilty of throwing a shoulder check at the guy walking down the street while reading his iPad, assuming it's everyone else's responsibility to get out of his way].
post #30 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

This report is highly suspect.

A CDMA-GSM chip would be useless for the iPad. GSM is a 2G technology. What Apple would need would be a CDMA-HSPA (or HSPA+) multimode chip.

Either this rumor is B.S. or AppleInsider doesn't know squat about mobile telephony technology.

GSM/CDMA is an acceptable way of describing it. By your logic people should be clamoring for an EVDO iPhone (what is all this talk of 2G CDMA???). EVDO would be associated with CDMA, and HSPA+ with GSM.
post #31 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

ATT is finally getting the MiFi device on their network, and have you seen their fees?

$35 for 200MB
$60 for 5GB

http://www.macworld.com/article/1557.../att_mifi.html

And Verizon's prices for the same thing:

$20 for 1 GB
$35 for 3 GB
$50 for 5 GB

So exactly who's customers are getting raped by prices??

These charges are for the iPad only, get your facts straight. If you just buy a standard MiFi you are looking at nearly identical pricing.
post #32 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckdutter View Post

These charges are for the iPad only, get your facts straight. If you just buy a standard MiFi you are looking at nearly identical pricing.

Nope, you are wrong. But thanks for playing. Instead of telling me to get my facts straight, perhaps you should head over to Verizon's web site and double-check for yourself. And perhaps you'll be a bit less cocky the next time.

Here, let me help you out: http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/m...nd/?page=plans

The $20 plan isn't availble for the MiFi, but it is available of non-iPad tablets. And for the MiFi, $35 gets you 3 GB w/Verizon and only 200 MB with ATT. That is boardline criminal.
post #33 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

This report is highly suspect.

A CDMA-GSM chip would be useless for the iPad. GSM is a 2G technology. What Apple would need would be a CDMA-HSPA (or HSPA+) multimode chip.

Either this rumor is B.S. or AppleInsider doesn't know squat about mobile telephony technology.

What about China? Don't they have a few large providers using CDMA? My guess would be that Apple is looking in this direction more than just for the US. Several hundred million customers is a hellavu lot more friendly than just 10's of millions.
post #34 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by spudit View Post

What about China? Don't they have a few large providers using CDMA? My guess would be that Apple is looking in this direction more than just for the US. Several hundred million customers is a hellavu lot more friendly than just 10's of millions.

China Telecoms CDMA 2G user base is relatively tiny. Its less than AT&T or Verizon at about 85 million subscribers. Then figure out how many of those subscribers could or would be able to afford an iPhone and a data plan for it.

Its Chinas GSM 2G user base is huge with about about ¾ of a billion subscribers across their two largest carriers.

China Mobile, their largest carrier with about 575 million subscribers uses GSM for 2G and TD-SCDMA for 3G. This is the same GSM in the iPhone and their homegrown TD-SCDMA is not CDMA, but closer to the W-CDMA(UMTS) found in the iPhone. This makes working with China Mobile more important than working with China Telecom for many different reasons.
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 #35 of 44
What would be cool is iPad getting a slot for the blade SSD modules.
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

I think this points toward Apple's 'cloud' music service that we've been hearing rumors of. Basically, like Pandora on your iPad, only you can get a version that will be 3G for music only. This'd be awesome -- an iPad as your music server. I've always thought Apple needed something better audio-wise to compete against Logitech's Squeezebox and the Sonos system. It could make a great stand-alone music jukebox.

However I still see cloud based storage of music or video files as pretty stupid. Think about it, if everybody with an MP3 player running at this moment, at Apples standard bit rates, switched to the cloud we would have a network melt down. The bandwidth simply isn't there.

This is probably why you are looking for more Flash in the iPads and is frankly one of the reasons I'm waiting. Frankly though I see RAM as more important but I'm expecting a major update so that is not a problem.
Quote:
I haven't bought an iPad because I have a netbook running a Logitech Squeezebox of my music collection that consists of 90GB of .flac files. If and iPad would do something similar, I'd be all over that. I've already coverted my .flac's to .m4a's for the day when the iPad gets 128GB of memory.

In your case you need to save your money for 256GB of storage. Really 90 GB is awfully close to 128GB, since everyone loads an app or two on their machines you would be out of storage pretty quickly.
post #36 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Don't forget the SIM tray costs. Additionally, these things have to be assembled, connected to other things, etc., increasing labor costs.

As someone above said, the person doesn't know the basics of pricing. Ultimately, it's a question of what the market will pay.

To some extent yes. However people mis a few things that adds a little bit to iPad 3Gs cost. You have a housing that requires signifactantly more machining to handle yhe antenna molding plus the cost of that molding and antenna array. It isn't just the 3G chip and it isn't just the hardware as IP has a price too.

Given all of this the 3G modem is still an expensive addition to the device. Yes it is due to what the market can bear but sadly this is a regulated market with minimal consummer influence. People feel like they are getting ripped of because in simple terms they are.
Quote:
Heaven forbid. What a horrendous business to get into. The stock will sink like a stone.

All the more reason for Apple to get in there and clean things up. If they can offer reasonable data rates it would promote even more device sales and provide for a steady stream of income. The big problem is finding a reasonably priced carrier with enough bandwidth. Lets face it niether Verizon nor AT&T really compete against each other unless you consider seeing who can gouge the consummer the most competition. The only reason iPhone and iPad have slightly better rates is that Apple is very aggressive in its contract negotiations.
Quote:
Moreover, what would be the point of buying just a US carrier!?

Frankly because it is the largest market out there without active competition. Apple couldn't reasonably improve the situation in many countries but in the US they could reasonably shake things up. It would take wads of cash though.

In some respects though to really fix the cellular industry in the US you would need to go after congress and change many of the laws governing the industry. Especially the ones at the local level that tend to regulate the industry based on ignorance or preferrential treatment of one company over another. AT&Ts problems if the SF bay region are not technical but rather a corrupt government. In this case a government corrupted by ignorance more than anything else.
post #37 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonder View Post

"The new iPad is thinner than the existing model and is essentially made from one piece of metal with no pins needed," Blair wrote. "We understand it requires a new type of manufacturing process as a result, similar to the company's unibody approach seen in MacBooks."

Does this guy even know how the current iPad is constructed?

Obviously not.
Quote:
It is already a unibody construction, one piece of metal with no pins!!!
What the hell is he talking about?

That is a good question. Apple has a few patents from a couple of years ago that might shed some light on just what might be coming. The patent describes a process where parts of an electronic assembly are laminated together almost like plywood. Apples track pad may be the first example of such an assembly. This patent showed up on several of the Mac rumor sights some time ago.

As to this idiot, you ever get the feeling that Apple goes out and searches for the most clueless analyst they can possibly find to leak some of this info to? It is pretty much a given that these clueless "analyst" will butcher whatever info they are given. This keeps Apple in the spotlight without an obvious champaign to do so. Since the published comments are gibberish it gives the rumor community something to discuss.

Just a thought, this guy might simply be a pawn unkowningly playing his part.

Dave
post #38 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

What would be cool is iPad getting a slot for the blade SSD modules.

There's a reason this will never happen.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #39 of 44
Nevermind, someone already stated the obvious.
post #40 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by iancass79 View Post

It would be pretty funny if all verizon got was the iPad. I'm telling you, if they get the iPhone....they are going to rape people on charges. They will get an even bigger case of The Big Head.


Aren't they infamous too for crippling HW features in devices to force us to buy their crappy SW-based replacements ? They did with my first Razor handset.

And they had lousy if any concern for me at tech support.

---h
---gooddog

/
: * ] AAAAaaaRRRrrrFFFFff !!!
\
Reply
---gooddog

/
: * ] AAAAaaaRRRrrrFFFFff !!!
\
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Apple's next-gen world mode GSM-CDMA iPad to arrive in early 2011 - rumor
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple's next-gen world mode GSM-CDMA iPad to arrive in early 2011 - rumor