Digg founder spills beans on Apple iPhone? - Page 4

No and I know. Code Division Multiple Access is used by 3G networks.

2G phones are GSM and an improvement to these some years ago was to add GPRS capabilities which is nominally known as 2.5G. Now in parallel we have 3G phones that use CDMA technology.

If you are on the 3 (Three) network in the UK, as a relatively new player to the mobile market, they had the problem that on day one as the first 3G provider they couldn't roll out the coverage that the big 4 had on their 2G networks. Obviously if they sold a 3G only phone then consumers would be aghast at the poor coverage. To counter this phone had to be able to revert to GSM use when a CDMA network was not available. In this case 3(Three) worked out a deal with O2 to use O2's GSM/GPRS network. Back in May 06 3(Three) made another deal with Orange to do the same.

So the vast majority of UK 3G phones can also use 2G networks so it's pap to say "I don't think Apple could make a GSM and CDMA phone in one".

well, that phone will not be offered for Verizon, simply because Verizon does not like to activate phones that they don't support. (ie with their horrible red interface )

I think I see the problem here. CDMA is both the basis for 3G advanced network efforts and a competing voice only (albeit with soft handoff/greater battery use) technology with GSM which is inferior, but uses less power and is not inferior by enough for CDMA to really matter outside of the States and a few other places.

A 3G CDMA phone is not using the same bands as a 2G CDMA phone like the ones used in the States where 2G CDMA is a competitor to regular ol' GSM technology.

Therefore adding a GSM module to 3G CDMA phones is fairly easy because the 3G phone already has to be fairly large/battery intensive and a GSM module is not. However using both 2G GSM and CDMA in the same phone imposes penalties in size and battery life that are not worthwhile compared to having two models of the same phone.

3G is worth the size/weight to get the transmission speeds needed for data and video calls which neither GSM or 2G CDMA can provide. However having GSM and 2G CDMA is not worth it because no networks use both and therefore having two models of phones makes more sense.

Damn Straight Verizon won't be supported unless they release it under that carrier. Verizon is kind of deep in Microsoft Deals (MSN, Windows Live Search, WL Messenger support, etc. etc.)

i don't understand why a verizon/ or any other carrier wants to allow apple to take the profits from it's own download service. the price for itunes is 99 much higher up to 3-4$ for the other carriers. that's why i think they will go mvno. ok, then who do you buy the warranty from, applecare or cingular. where is the revenue stream for apple, from purchasing hardware??? i think apple being the force they are want's to control the whole enchelada as an mvno, like disney. i would buy this no matter what apple does, but i prefer the apple controls the ballgame approach. is an mvno that much risky in this business or will apple test the waters and then go mvno as they get into it. the apple store could offer bto, cdma, gsm and a discount or free .mac.

perhaps the idea is the price of iphone will keep people out, or those that go to a carrier for a "free" phone, or those oppresive 2 year contract holders, won't buy iphone. but the market is huge....what % of ipod owners (ha ha returned zoon) would buy an iphone???i would guess at least 50% penetration. the other thing is brand loyalty. most buy phones based on price, package and i think last features, switch phones and manufacturers with each contract. the potential for keeping iphones when you upgrade is MASSIVE no where is this discussed. it would signal an ever growing market just like the ipod 4 years ago. ipod family and iphone stays in the family.....how powerful a $$$$$ is that think major. also it pushes other manufactures to try the same model and sell unlocked phones. i was hoping for mvno so apple would shake up this cellphone oligarchy...maybe network providers know this and gives apple a huge deal to stay OUT of mvno.

another point----few carriers want wifi for the phone because calls go off network, verizon is famous for crippling the phones, e.g. bluetooth till the customer base screamed and left them because of the retriction. the carriers want this control.....apple is proconsumer so how do they co-exist. i want a smartphone with wifi/ maybe even wimax capability with a browser so it can become a true internet connection device. imagine the possibilites an iphone with wifi AND your laptop synced and streaming. whoa way cool way helpful, adds value to the consumer.

Most people don't care about phones with wifi or tethering to connect laptops to the internet. yes it is cool, but the majority of people just use the phone for voice. 3G for data is overrated and still too expensive. I expect the iphone to be just basically a high end ipod with a phone program and limited pda capacity, but nothing else in the first iterations of the device.

Am I the only one who thinks Apple getting into the cell phones market is silly?

Why exactly do you think it's silly?

I think if Apple were to offer a complete end-to-end experience for consumers, they could generally change personal tech again. Cell phone, computer, audi/visual entertainment, all integrated and easy to use. This would force the type of competition that will only make our lives more interesting and user friendly.

Any rumor you throw you're weight behind should immediately be classified under the extreme bullshit category... right next to the Apple TV.

rageous: how did you insert the arrow after Rolo that links to his original post?

it's just a new feature of the recently updated forums. you'll notice when you hit the reply button on someone's post that it'll now show something to the effect of:

Got it, thanks. Something made me change my mind to do an unposted quoted reply test before asking or I'd have noticed, like I see the ";1012000" appended after your username right now. Cool feature.

There's no point in getting into an argument over this, 10 years ago nobody would have seen Apple where they are today. I think it's just a time issue, and you don't think it will happen, so that's just how it is.

p.s. I love the fact that the users posts are now a tad bit wider than everyone elses, great UI change, very Apple.

I think that it's going to happen eventually, but the obviously impairment of the drunken guy doesn't bode well for his judgement of the credibility of his source as to the specifics of the device. At any rate, if it's coming out any time soon, it may be announced in a couple weeks.