Apple's iPhone "wrecking" the cell industry

1567810

Comments

  • Reply 181 of 210
    humannhumann Posts: 22member
    This is the explanation I was googling for last night and didn't find. Thank you.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AjitMD View Post


    It is important to keep in mind that the initial 3G tech that ATT uses called WCDMA/UMTS has been designed for widespread use of data on a sustained basis. It is essentially Wide Band CDMA that uses asynch tech. Voice and data packets travel over the same 5 MHZ channel. Voice has time sensitive QoS, while data can lag but maintain integrity. The problem is where there are too many data users, there is not enough room for voice transmission and voice calls drop. Furthermore, the size of the WCDMA coverage per tower shrinks as usage increases... so users at the edge can experienced dropped calls often. Power consumption control is also difficult.



    The Verizon networks uses a more "primitive" tech called CDMA 2000 or 1X and EVDO. Basically the narrow band tech uses 1.25 MHz channel primarily for voice and is called 1X... it can also transmit data. However, the bulk of the data is transmitted over a separate data only EVDO 1.25 MHz channel. So voice and data do not interfere. Then there are frequency used issues as well.



    The CDMA2000 tech is essentially controlled by an American company called QCOM. The WCDMA was pushed by the EU in an effort to take control of the tech from QCOM and dilute their influence and royalties. Again, it was not data friendly in practice.. new variations called HSPDA, will improve data performance. It will take a lot of money. Not sure of ATT will kick in the money.



    However, ATT was the best way for Apple to max out its investment in the iPhone, since VZ did not want to play ball by Apple's rules.



     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 182 of 210
    SpamSandwichspamsandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    Two things here.



    (snip)



    Phone manufacturers have never before had the freedom to come out with so many features without first having to go through carrier vetting and approvals.



    Fascinating insights as always, Mel.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 183 of 210
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by .:R2theT View Post


    Just because you type the word doesn't make it so.



    Apple is making more than the $199/$299 on the upfront iPhone sales.



    How it gets the rest and how much seems to be between AT&T and Apple. Unless you care to share some inside information you have.



    You dummy. It's not inside information. If you post crap and get called on it, changing what you said before doesn't make the original crap correct. Yes Apple makes $300-400 more than the retail price on each iPhone. But contrary to your very clear and very wrong post, they do not make any money off the monthly contract.



    You spewed: "Apple continues to make money on you, per the monthly contract that it gets a piece of, for at least 2 years."
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 184 of 210
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by .:R2theT View Post


    Actually my original post on this sub-topic was replying to somebody who said iPhone buyers were not paying an Apple tax for the phone. And I called BS on that. And said something to the effect of "I imagine" Apple is making money on the contract. I am happy to be wrong on the details as I do not follow these things that closely. But the original item being replied to was in reference to the denied Apple tax. So in that regard I I think "False (all of it)." does not quite hit the nail on the head. Apparently I didn't either, but a person can't deny we pay more because of the little apple on the back of these things.



    If only you weren't posting on a message board where what you said wasn't recorded. I did you the favor of posting what you said that was 100% wrong in my original reply. Here, I'll do it again for you. If you really think the below text can be translated to "Apple makes more than $199 off an iPhone sale" then you're delusional.



    "While I understand that you are referring to the quote you cited above, I would have to say that you are quite delusional to think that there isn't an "Apple Tax" on the iPhone.



    Apple continues to make money on you, per the monthly contract that it gets a piece of, for at least 2 years. Maybe longer and we have no idea exactly how much. I would imagine they make more off the lifetime of the contract than they do off the $199/$299 for the device at the store."



    Do you understand now?



    Here, I'll say it for you in a language you can understand.



    ALL OF THE MONEY THAT APPLE MAKES OFF THE IPHONE, IT MAKES AT THE TIME OF SALE. IT MAKES NO MONEY AFTER THE $600 OR SO THAT GETS PAID BY THE PHONE COMPANY WHEN THAT PHONE COMPANY BUYS THE PHONE FROM APPLE SO IT CAN RESELL IT TO YOU.



    Understand now?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 185 of 210
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,720member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    I agree that AT&T must be receiving the greatest demand due to iPhones success and the plethora of low end3G phones AT&t adds monthly. What you are stating as far as the upgrade- has it been finished? If not now, when so? And more importantly where is it being done? A tower added out in Boise Idaho isn't gonna help me here. I would doubt it's been completed if this is the best they were able to accomplish- at least here in NY.



    AT&T's said that they have a long way to go. I don't doubt it.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 186 of 210
    hillstoneshillstones Posts: 1,490member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Prepare for disappointment.



    Loser. You probably don't even own an iPhone.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 187 of 210
    hillstoneshillstones Posts: 1,490member
    I have no problems with the iPhone or AT&T, so the analyst can go suck it!
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 188 of 210
    "wrecking" the wireless industry? He means "wrecking" the ridiculous, innovation-stifling, anti-competitive status quo where carriers have complete control over which devices can be used on their network and what software can be used on those devices.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 189 of 210
    nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    Previous poster: [ATT could have had tethering and MMS easily]



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post


    Really? And you know this because???



    Because 3rd world countries have it right now as we speak. With the iPhone 3G and over the next few months iPhone 3GS



    Ah, everyday I sit back an enjoy my MMS and tethering. Actually, MMS is nonsense for me but tethering is a real bl**dy lifesaver. Evil locked or expensive pay-by-hour Wi-Fi networks! You shall not pass!
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 190 of 210
    nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    +1 rep point for you for attempting to use the word highlighted in red below.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Your logic that a continuing upgrade path could ever be completed on a thriving carrier speaks volume for your lack of understanding on this matter.



    Your definition that more towers, more 3G in ruraler areas, higher classes (read bandwidth via more antenees) of HSDPA and HSUPA, and a wider spectrum equates to a simple patch, not major upgrades, is also quite telling.



    Tell us, what would be an upgrade if all those billions are just simple patches?



     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 191 of 210
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post


    +1 rep point for you for attempting to use the word highlighted in red below.



    There was nothing grammatically wrong with the spelling, except for that minor issue of it not actually existing as a word, yet.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 192 of 210
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Plus, consider that Apple is locking horns in China for certain control for over 2 years now when they could have had the iPhone selling to the 58 Trillion (slight exaggeration) Chinese mobile phone users so I don?t think that the 50M potential Verizon users are going to make them relinquish their control of the iPhone. I think will Apple stick with carriers it can control and dominate.



    Solipsism, you are behind the times on your comment. China Mobile never had any intention to sign up with Apple, they just held the 'carrot' for long enough that they can release their own handset - they announced the Ophone and Mmarket about a month ago.



    http://deancollinsblog.blogspot.com/...marketcom.html



    Cheers,

    Dean Collins

    www.Cognation.net
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 193 of 210
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Why would China Mobile need to have false negotiations with Apple to then release their own handset and never sign a deal for the iPhone?



    Sounds like a convoluted Bond villan plot.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dean.collins View Post


    Solipsism, you are behind the times on your comment. China Mobile never had any intention to sign up with Apple, they just held the 'carrot' for long enough that they can release their own handset - they announced the Ophone and Mmarket about a month ago.



     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 194 of 210
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,764member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post


    Previous poster: [ATT could have had tethering and MMS easily]



    Because 3rd world countries have it right now as we speak. With the iPhone 3G and over the next few months iPhone 3GS



    OK, but let's look at usage. Half of all iPhones sold are in the US - the rest are distributed throughout the entire world.



    That's a huge load on AT&T.



    So yes, I'm sure they could flip a switch and turn on MMS and Tethering. And then watch their network totally collapse.



    That would make everyone happy though, right? Because at least they would have MMS and Tethering? No way to use it mind you, but the geek checklist box would be checked and all would be right with the world.







    Seriously, is anyone really paying attention other then obsessively repeating "I want I want I WANT"?!?!?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 195 of 210
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,764member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


    Sounds like a convoluted Bond villan plot.



    Or a ploy to pimp your blog \
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 196 of 210
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dean.collins View Post


    Solipsism, you are behind the times on your comment. China Mobile never had any intention to sign up with Apple, they just held the 'carrot' for long enough that they can release their own handset - they announced the Ophone and Mmarket about a month ago.



    http://deancollinsblog.blogspot.com/...marketcom.html



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


    Why would China Mobile need to have false negotiations with Apple to then release their own handset and never sign a deal for the iPhone?



    Sounds like a convoluted Bond villan plot.



    The only way that such talks would help China Mobile is to keep China Unicom from getting the iPhone before the Ophone arrives, but as TenoBell stated it’s very convoluted way of doing things.



    The most pressing issues I see here are that…


    • Such a victory would be very short lived

    • Unicom would be more likely to give Apple what it wants if the Ophone is imminent

    • There is no reason that China Mobile could not have both the Ophone and iPhone in their arsenal of handsets

    • Ophone is not an iPhone, which has been shown to be important as a status symbol with the number of expensive imports despite the knock offs available.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 197 of 210
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    The only way that such talks would help China Mobile is to keep China Unicom from getting the iPhone before the Ophone arrives, but as TenoBell stated it?s very convoluted way of doing things.



    Not to mention that it presumes that Apple doesn't have the ability to negotiate with more than one partner at a time. Makes you wonder how they managed to launch the phone in 30+ countries (or whatever the number is now).
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 198 of 210
    brucepbrucep Posts: 2,823member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


    Why would China Mobile need to have false negotiations with Apple to then release their own handset and never sign a deal for the iPhone?



    Sounds like a convoluted Bond villan plot.



    They kept all options open . They may still sell the iphone and there own Branded phone .
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 199 of 210
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dean.collins View Post


    Solipsism, you are behind the times on your comment. China Mobile never had any intention to sign up with Apple, they just held the 'carrot' for long enough that they can release their own handset - they announced the Ophone and Mmarket about a month ago.



    http://deancollinsblog.blogspot.com/...marketcom.html



    Cheers,

    Dean Collins

    www.Cognation.net



    Have a lot of shorts on Apple stock, perhaps?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 200 of 210
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Yes it appears so.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post


    Or a ploy to pimp your blog \



     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.