Spot on! Verizon is going down the same road as the Music Industry, the television industry and the Movie Industry....when will they learn, get on board with Apple, get more happy customers and make money!
At the same time, Apple went 180 degree with their $600 iphone with a 2 year contract with simlocking with revenue sharing.
If Apple didn't insist on these idiotic demands in the first place, you would have seen the iphone on Verizon already.
Both Verizon and Sprint do not support simultaneous web access and voice calls. If you are doing anything on the network and a phone call comes in, you lose the connections.
Seriously?? Good to know, thanks for the tip. I was surprised how much I liked the simultaneous phone call & internet access feature when I upgraded from my iphone 2G to 3GS. Now that they have Webex on iphone, it is VERY nice to have the simultaneous feature so I can dial in and listen to the audio portion of a teleconference while watching the visual part on Webex all on my phone. That comes in so handy at work there's no way I'd ever switch to a network that can't support it. I've seen a Palm Pre pop up at work among the sea of iphones & Blackberries - I'll have to warn my friends to stay away from Verizon & Sprint if they want to have mobile access to telecons.
And for the record, I get very good coverage from AT&T where I live and work and all the places I've traveled to since having my iphone, even in surprisingly remote areas. I have not experienced the network problems that I see in a lot of the other comments. I switched from Verizon when the iphone came out and I'm still very happy about it.
I want the iPhone very much, but I am stuck in a contract with Verizon thru 3/10. If Verizon does not come through with the iPhone by then, I will be long gone ...
they won't. Verizon uses CDMA while the iphone is GSM. so Verizon can't support the iphone
as for this notion of the contract ending, of course. the real issue is if Apple will jump to all new signups being forced to go with T-Mobile or unlock the phone and let folks have a choice.
Objectively, right now you can get a Verizon Blackberry with a true world phone, with wifi, with uncrippled bluetooth and you can install Google Voice on it.
I will wait to see how your objectivity pans out. I have a hunch, though...
But if T-Mobile an dSprint got the iPhone that would seriously change things.
Sprint's 4G is incompatible with everyone else's 4G. The Steve is not going to build one iPhone for Sprint in the US and a separate model for the rest of the world.
Besides, Sprint isn't in the strongest financial shape. They recently outsourced their wireless and wireline network management to Ericsson including transferring 6000 technical employees. Not the kind of company Apple would want to partner with for the iPhone, esp. given their AT&T woes.
At the same time, Apple went 180 degree with their $600 iphone with a 2 year contract with simlocking with revenue sharing.
If Apple didn't insist on these idiotic demands in the first place, you would have seen the iphone on Verizon already.
List of idiotic demands…
— Profit sharing (It was bizarre, but this is great for the consumer as it forces the vendor to update the HW frequently with rich updates instead of trying to convince you to buy a new device as soon as possible to increase revenue)
— Letting Apple repair their own device (How sucky is it to be able to go into an Apple Store to get a repair done or to be able to call 1-800-MY-APPLE to get assistance by Apple. Crazy!)
— Apple wanted to control their technical call center (Parish the thought! Having to call Verizon so some overworked, untrained CSR with minimal training on dozens of phones can assist me. It’s always fun to meet new people over the phone.)
— Having control over the OS and it’s updates (Remember back then Verizon crippled their vendor’s OSes so that their customers were forced to buy Verizon’s additional services)
Did I miss any?
Do you really think YouTube and GoogleMaps would have been allowed? I’m all for Verizon (or anyone else) getting the iPhone, I just don’t think it coincides with Apple’s plans, but anything to increase the stock value is fine by me. Plus, I’d be happy to have a bunch of iPhone users jump to Verizon’s network to alleviate some of the obvious congestion. I wouldn’t go because I think having using the phone AND having internet access at the same time is vital, but to each his own.
It blows me away that there are "numerous reports" suggesting iPhone might move to Verizon. It's simply preposterous to think Apple would create an entirely separate piece of hardware to run on Verzion's network, which is fundamentally incompatible hardware as compared to every other carrier that currently carries the iPhone.
When Verizon launches LTE in 2011, along with T-Mobile and AT&T, sure, iPhone will jump to them. But certainly not before then, and it's a mark of incredible ignorance on the part of these analysts to think otherwise.
It's really icky to see this argument -- Yes CDMA, cause it's not that expensive..., vs. any other arguments... We just won't know for a while...
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoboNerd
There is an issue with Android that is going to sabotage it: Google doesn't control the hardware platform and thus the overall reliability and experience. You can get away with that in the PC world, but cell phones? I think it's a fatal flaw. I'd love to be wrong, but cell phones are among those classes of devices where fault tolerance from users is extremely thin.
I always say: It's not just Network, which is hard to prove, cause it varies based on location, and the bias of those who do the reporting! So it's hard to take those reports at face value...
SUPPORT -- is another huge factor!
Android won't be even close to iPhone because:
Between Apple Stores, where any employee knows iPhone and most are users, AppleCare, and so many iPhones out there, vs. Verizon Stores, where it's usually not the most educated people; nowhere near Apple Store's Level, and T-Mobile and Sprint are steps down below Verizon. So then the customer will become a Monkey In The Middle, caught in the Finger Pointing Game between Phone Maker, Google, and the Cell Carrier!
I remember how VZWLS used to point a finger at Palm Treo, and Pam pointed it at Verizon, and I was caught in between! That's between 2 Sides
If it's Android, it's Google, Phone Maker, and Carrier!
And Android will have to be flawless on all those devices? Good luck!!!
Microsoft finally realized that they need their own stores, and they started copying Apple... Eventually, Google would have to do that for Android and Chrome OS, but they probably will resist that for a long time, as iPhone runs away and ahead even further...
So, No Thanks on that Threesome! I'll take iPhone's Walled Garden Approach over that "Zoo" any time!
Quote:
Originally Posted by erac3rx
Any chance that Verizon had to land the iPhone next year when AT&T's exclusivity runs out evaporated the moment they launched their current anti-iPhone smear campaign. It's pretty clear that Steve holds grudges, and though Apple trashes Microsoft in essentially all their ads they have nonetheless proven quite sensitive to criticism.
Take 2 - Did Steve tell you PERSONALLY? Can you prove it? Or are we just supposed to take your word for it!?
Like it's been already pointed out -- unless Steve Jobs said it on the record or to someone personally, it's a guess at best...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dueces
1. I agree with you on the "numerous reports" thing. In the end these "reports" are nothing but 1 persons opinion.
2. I think you are completely overestimating the difficulty of a) installing a cdma chip versus a gsm chip or b) adding a cdma chip in addition to the gsm chip to made the cdma version a world phone.
Apple the company who gives there customers hardly any options at all on every single product they sell, even has 2 or more versions of most things (imac, mac mini, etc). There will be a CDMA iphone in less than a year you can bet your life on that.
3. If I were a betting man, and I am. I would bet 5 to 1 that we we will see the iphone on Sprint before Verizon.
4. The iphone was offered to Sprint and Verizon BEFORE ATT, they both passed, they didn't want to give up any of their "power" to a phone manufacturer, it would set a terrible precedent as it has with ATT. In the long run they made the correct decision, and neither of them is going to bow down to Apple, then or now. They have moved on and are in a much better position because of it, on the other hand Apple knows that the US GSM network is shit and even the sheep are starting to realize it.
We'll know when it's announced or not OFFICIALLY!
Also, thank to the Post where it was pointed out that it's not VZ, but Motorolla whose Droid ads are anti-iPhone! Of course, VZ is looking the other way, cause they are technically off the hook (pun intended)...
Again, it's SUPPORT as far as software, and NETWORK as far as Connection, drop calls etc.
Another HUGE thing that I've learned from this thread:
on 3GS one can be on a call and online AT THE SAME TIME, ala home WiFi vs. Dial Up in old days! But on CDMA by VZ, it's not possible - either or!
If that is actually so, that's a huge strike against VZ...
Yes I wish ATT improved their Network sooner! I am sure they are trying hard!
But, soon it'll be 4G LTE, and GSM + CDMA will be UNIFIED, except Sprint's 4G is WiMax, and thus won't do iPhone... Or am I wrong?
As to ONE PHONE FOR THE WORLD -- there will be plenty of those who will try to stop that, so that they can make $$ carving up the world, ala 110V vs. 120V, DVDs, except most hardware is 110+220 already!!!
This is a GREAT THREAD, GREAT FORUM! THANKS TO ALL! Really!
As I said earlier, it would only cost $5 million to design a CDMA iphone.
It's not the cost to design, it's the support. Apple has a very limited number of SKUs in the market, even in the Mac business. You have your choice of 4 or 5 Macs. All iMacs use the same parts, except for maybe a higher clocked (but still totally compatible CPU). This reduces the cost of channel operations, as you don't have a lot of different SKUs to distribute across the nation. It also reduces supplier problems, as you only have 1 supplier.
Think about it?Apple could have at least a dozen iMac revisions right now, if they wanted to offer different video cards, CPU models (from one of Intel's 20 or so x86 chips), etc. But Apple chooses what they want to offer, and if that doesn't fit some people's needs, tough luck.
Worse, CDMA is a dead end technology. Verizon has already announced LTE will be deployed in late 2010, early 2011. But you need CDMA as a fallback since LTE will not be widespread until 2012 or later. I don't see Steve Jobs announcing a CDMA phone to a lot of hoopla; most people will be announcing their LTE phones late next year. But Apple also can't announce an LTE phone that has no CDMA or GSM fallback.
Most likely, I see Apple using GSM as a fallback, and sticking with AT&T but getting better concessions out of them, and maybe nabbing T-Mobile as a fallback carrier.
Again, we are not talking about the iPhone. However, If you want an officially unlocked iPhone with AT&T you can get one from eBay but you can't get your Verizon phone to work worldwide unless it is dual system, where the selection is very limited. Can you tell me which phones Verizon sell right now that is not crippled?! Oh wait.. they said November and it is only one phone. I don't have anything against Verizon but I prefer phone makers to dictate features not carriers and I prefer my phone to be software locked not hardware locked (even though I prefer it to be completely unlocked).
Unless you want to travel outside the US....then your Verizon Phone is just a brick.
But, with AT&T and T-Mobile's less than stellar networks you're pretty much bricked if you want to travel inside the U.S.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
they won't. Verizon uses CDMA while the iphone is GSM. so Verizon can't support the iphone
Replace GSM radios with CDMA radios. It has been done with many other phones.
Quote:
as for this notion of the contract ending, of course. the real issue is if Apple will jump to all new signups being forced to go with T-Mobile or unlock the phone and let folks have a choice.
i vote unlock
You understand that unlock = $700 or so iPhone right?
There is an issue with Android that is going to sabotage it: Google doesn't control the hardware platform and thus the overall reliability and experience.
I generally agree, although I think the operative word is "could", not "going to".
Replace GSM radios with CDMA radios. It has been done with many other phones.
At high cost. Given that there's a GSM carrier everywhere (even places with CDMA or PCS) developing a CDMA version only makes sense if you've got a carrier that really wants it and is willing to pay.
Additionally, it's very clear that every CDMA and PCS carrier is switching to GSM over the next couple of years. Bell and Telus are bringing up their networks this month. Similar plans have been announced by every major carrier that isn't already using GSM.
I applaud this move. Apple is dragging the carriers into the GSM world and eliminating carrier-lock-in. Any carrier that wants the iPhone, and they all do, has to go GSM. The situation is not unlike USB support on the original iMacs, with the exception that no one really cared about the iMac back then, but vendors are literally spending billions and billions on infrastructure to get the iPhone.
So yeah, for the next year or two you're stuck on AT&T. But as a side effect, when all of this is over, everyone will be GSM and that whole world of hurt goes away. You can survive this pain for the end result that the iPhone is creating.
It's not the cost to design, it's the support. Apple has a very limited number of SKUs in the market, even in the Mac business. You have your choice of 4 or 5 Macs. All iMacs use the same parts, except for maybe a higher clocked (but still totally compatible CPU). This reduces the cost of channel operations, as you don't have a lot of different SKUs to distribute across the nation. It also reduces supplier problems, as you only have 1 supplier.
Except that Apple already gets 50% gross profit margin on the iphone, so supporting a different iphone (like they do in china without the wifi) or a CDMA iphone is going to drop that profit margin down to something like 45%, which is going to be still the envy of the industry (and 4x as much profit margin as Nokia).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maury Markowitz
I applaud this move. Apple is dragging the carriers into the GSM world and eliminating carrier-lock-in. Any carrier that wants the iPhone, and they all do, has to go GSM. The situation is not unlike USB support on the original iMacs, with the exception that no one really cared about the iMac back then, but vendors are literally spending billions and billions on infrastructure to get the iPhone.
So yeah, for the next year or two you're stuck on AT&T. But as a side effect, when all of this is over, everyone will be GSM and that whole world of hurt goes away. You can survive this pain for the end result that the iPhone is creating.
Except that you are still getting a simlocked iphone in Canada with a 3 year contract (I am a Canadian who knows the pain of a 3 year contract). It doesn't change a thing.
? Profit sharing (It was bizarre, but this is great for the consumer as it forces the vendor to update the HW frequently with rich updates instead of trying to convince you to buy a new device as soon as possible to increase revenue)
? Letting Apple repair their own device (How sucky is it to be able to go into an Apple Store to get a repair done or to be able to call 1-800-MY-APPLE to get assistance by Apple. Crazy!)
? Apple wanted to control their technical call center (Parish the thought! Having to call Verizon so some overworked, untrained CSR with minimal training on dozens of phones can assist me. It?s always fun to meet new people over the phone.)
? Having control over the OS and it?s updates (Remember back then Verizon crippled their vendor?s OSes so that their customers were forced to buy Verizon?s additional services)
Did I miss any?
Do you really think YouTube and GoogleMaps would have been allowed? I?m all for Verizon (or anyone else) getting the iPhone, I just don?t think it coincides with Apple?s plans, but anything to increase the stock value is fine by me. Plus, I?d be happy to have a bunch of iPhone users jump to Verizon?s network to alleviate some of the obvious congestion. I wouldn?t go because I think having using the phone AND having internet access at the same time is vital, but to each his own.
Except that revenue sharing didn't improve much of the original iphone's functionality --- uncrippled bluetooth and turn-by-turn navigation came out 2 years later (after your 2 year contract with AT&T is over).
Many overseas iphone carriers handle iphone tech support and warranty issues --- crazy, isn't it?
Verizon crippling vs. Apple crippling --- there is no difference.
Why would I care about youtube and googlemaps if I can get the real thing --- actual FLO mobile tv channels and actual turn-by-turn navigation softwares?
Seriously, I have a Windows Mobile phone for work, and nobody wants one of those. They get saddled with it because their IT departments are backwards and only support Exchange connectivity from that one interface, but they don't want one. Or they don't know any better.
At least the Blackberrys have an actual fanbase (though their reasons are lost on me).
Comments
Spot on! Verizon is going down the same road as the Music Industry, the television industry and the Movie Industry....when will they learn, get on board with Apple, get more happy customers and make money!
At the same time, Apple went 180 degree with their $600 iphone with a 2 year contract with simlocking with revenue sharing.
If Apple didn't insist on these idiotic demands in the first place, you would have seen the iphone on Verizon already.
Both Verizon and Sprint do not support simultaneous web access and voice calls. If you are doing anything on the network and a phone call comes in, you lose the connections.
Seriously?? Good to know, thanks for the tip. I was surprised how much I liked the simultaneous phone call & internet access feature when I upgraded from my iphone 2G to 3GS. Now that they have Webex on iphone, it is VERY nice to have the simultaneous feature so I can dial in and listen to the audio portion of a teleconference while watching the visual part on Webex all on my phone. That comes in so handy at work there's no way I'd ever switch to a network that can't support it. I've seen a Palm Pre pop up at work among the sea of iphones & Blackberries - I'll have to warn my friends to stay away from Verizon & Sprint if they want to have mobile access to telecons.
And for the record, I get very good coverage from AT&T where I live and work and all the places I've traveled to since having my iphone, even in surprisingly remote areas. I have not experienced the network problems that I see in a lot of the other comments. I switched from Verizon when the iphone came out and I'm still very happy about it.
I want the iPhone very much, but I am stuck in a contract with Verizon thru 3/10. If Verizon does not come through with the iPhone by then, I will be long gone ...
they won't. Verizon uses CDMA while the iphone is GSM. so Verizon can't support the iphone
as for this notion of the contract ending, of course. the real issue is if Apple will jump to all new signups being forced to go with T-Mobile or unlock the phone and let folks have a choice.
i vote unlock
If Apple didn't insist on these idiotic demands in the first place....
Idiotic for whom? You? Verizon?
News flash: There are tens of millions of us happy iPhone users (and Apple shareholders) who don't give a rat's backside.
Objectively, right now you can get a Verizon Blackberry with a true world phone, with wifi, with uncrippled bluetooth and you can install Google Voice on it.
I will wait to see how your objectivity pans out. I have a hunch, though...
But if T-Mobile an dSprint got the iPhone that would seriously change things.
Sprint's 4G is incompatible with everyone else's 4G. The Steve is not going to build one iPhone for Sprint in the US and a separate model for the rest of the world.
Besides, Sprint isn't in the strongest financial shape. They recently outsourced their wireless and wireline network management to Ericsson including transferring 6000 technical employees. Not the kind of company Apple would want to partner with for the iPhone, esp. given their AT&T woes.
At the same time, Apple went 180 degree with their $600 iphone with a 2 year contract with simlocking with revenue sharing.
If Apple didn't insist on these idiotic demands in the first place, you would have seen the iphone on Verizon already.
List of idiotic demands…
— Profit sharing (It was bizarre, but this is great for the consumer as it forces the vendor to update the HW frequently with rich updates instead of trying to convince you to buy a new device as soon as possible to increase revenue)
— Letting Apple repair their own device (How sucky is it to be able to go into an Apple Store to get a repair done or to be able to call 1-800-MY-APPLE to get assistance by Apple.
— Apple wanted to control their technical call center (Parish the thought! Having to call Verizon so some overworked, untrained CSR with minimal training on dozens of phones can assist me. It’s always fun to meet new people over the phone.)
— Having control over the OS and it’s updates (Remember back then Verizon crippled their vendor’s OSes so that their customers were forced to buy Verizon’s additional services)
Did I miss any?
Do you really think YouTube and GoogleMaps would have been allowed? I’m all for Verizon (or anyone else) getting the iPhone, I just don’t think it coincides with Apple’s plans, but anything to increase the stock value is fine by me. Plus, I’d be happy to have a bunch of iPhone users jump to Verizon’s network to alleviate some of the obvious congestion. I wouldn’t go because I think having using the phone AND having internet access at the same time is vital, but to each his own.
It blows me away that there are "numerous reports" suggesting iPhone might move to Verizon. It's simply preposterous to think Apple would create an entirely separate piece of hardware to run on Verzion's network, which is fundamentally incompatible hardware as compared to every other carrier that currently carries the iPhone.
When Verizon launches LTE in 2011, along with T-Mobile and AT&T, sure, iPhone will jump to them. But certainly not before then, and it's a mark of incredible ignorance on the part of these analysts to think otherwise.
It's really icky to see this argument -- Yes CDMA, cause it's not that expensive..., vs. any other arguments... We just won't know for a while...
There is an issue with Android that is going to sabotage it: Google doesn't control the hardware platform and thus the overall reliability and experience. You can get away with that in the PC world, but cell phones? I think it's a fatal flaw. I'd love to be wrong, but cell phones are among those classes of devices where fault tolerance from users is extremely thin.
I always say: It's not just Network, which is hard to prove, cause it varies based on location, and the bias of those who do the reporting! So it's hard to take those reports at face value...
SUPPORT -- is another huge factor!
Android won't be even close to iPhone because:
Between Apple Stores, where any employee knows iPhone and most are users, AppleCare, and so many iPhones out there, vs. Verizon Stores, where it's usually not the most educated people; nowhere near Apple Store's Level, and T-Mobile and Sprint are steps down below Verizon. So then the customer will become a Monkey In The Middle, caught in the Finger Pointing Game between Phone Maker, Google, and the Cell Carrier!
I remember how VZWLS used to point a finger at Palm Treo, and Pam pointed it at Verizon, and I was caught in between! That's between 2 Sides
If it's Android, it's Google, Phone Maker, and Carrier!
And Android will have to be flawless on all those devices? Good luck!!!
Microsoft finally realized that they need their own stores, and they started copying Apple... Eventually, Google would have to do that for Android and Chrome OS, but they probably will resist that for a long time, as iPhone runs away and ahead even further...
So, No Thanks on that Threesome
Any chance that Verizon had to land the iPhone next year when AT&T's exclusivity runs out evaporated the moment they launched their current anti-iPhone smear campaign. It's pretty clear that Steve holds grudges, and though Apple trashes Microsoft in essentially all their ads they have nonetheless proven quite sensitive to criticism.
Take 2 - Did Steve tell you PERSONALLY? Can you prove it? Or are we just supposed to take your word for it
Like it's been already pointed out -- unless Steve Jobs said it on the record or to someone personally, it's a guess at best...
1. I agree with you on the "numerous reports" thing. In the end these "reports" are nothing but 1 persons opinion.
2. I think you are completely overestimating the difficulty of a) installing a cdma chip versus a gsm chip or b) adding a cdma chip in addition to the gsm chip to made the cdma version a world phone.
Apple the company who gives there customers hardly any options at all on every single product they sell, even has 2 or more versions of most things (imac, mac mini, etc). There will be a CDMA iphone in less than a year you can bet your life on that.
3. If I were a betting man, and I am. I would bet 5 to 1 that we we will see the iphone on Sprint before Verizon.
4. The iphone was offered to Sprint and Verizon BEFORE ATT, they both passed, they didn't want to give up any of their "power" to a phone manufacturer, it would set a terrible precedent as it has with ATT. In the long run they made the correct decision, and neither of them is going to bow down to Apple, then or now. They have moved on and are in a much better position because of it, on the other hand Apple knows that the US GSM network is shit and even the sheep are starting to realize it.
We'll know when it's announced or not OFFICIALLY!
Also, thank to the Post where it was pointed out that it's not VZ, but Motorolla whose Droid ads are anti-iPhone! Of course, VZ is looking the other way, cause they are technically off the hook (pun intended)...
Again, it's SUPPORT as far as software, and NETWORK as far as Connection, drop calls etc.
Another HUGE thing that I've learned from this thread:
on 3GS one can be on a call and online AT THE SAME TIME, ala home WiFi vs. Dial Up in old days! But on CDMA by VZ, it's not possible - either or!
If that is actually so, that's a huge strike against VZ...
Yes I wish ATT improved their Network sooner! I am sure they are trying hard!
But, soon it'll be 4G LTE, and GSM + CDMA will be UNIFIED, except Sprint's 4G is WiMax, and thus won't do iPhone... Or am I wrong?
As to ONE PHONE FOR THE WORLD -- there will be plenty of those who will try to stop that, so that they can make $$ carving up the world, ala 110V vs. 120V, DVDs, except most hardware is 110+220 already!!!
This is a GREAT THREAD, GREAT FORUM! THANKS TO ALL! Really!
As I said earlier, it would only cost $5 million to design a CDMA iphone.
It's not the cost to design, it's the support. Apple has a very limited number of SKUs in the market, even in the Mac business. You have your choice of 4 or 5 Macs. All iMacs use the same parts, except for maybe a higher clocked (but still totally compatible CPU). This reduces the cost of channel operations, as you don't have a lot of different SKUs to distribute across the nation. It also reduces supplier problems, as you only have 1 supplier.
Think about it?Apple could have at least a dozen iMac revisions right now, if they wanted to offer different video cards, CPU models (from one of Intel's 20 or so x86 chips), etc. But Apple chooses what they want to offer, and if that doesn't fit some people's needs, tough luck.
Worse, CDMA is a dead end technology. Verizon has already announced LTE will be deployed in late 2010, early 2011. But you need CDMA as a fallback since LTE will not be widespread until 2012 or later. I don't see Steve Jobs announcing a CDMA phone to a lot of hoopla; most people will be announcing their LTE phones late next year. But Apple also can't announce an LTE phone that has no CDMA or GSM fallback.
Most likely, I see Apple using GSM as a fallback, and sticking with AT&T but getting better concessions out of them, and maybe nabbing T-Mobile as a fallback carrier.
Again, we are not talking about the iPhone. However, If you want an officially unlocked iPhone with AT&T you can get one from eBay but you can't get your Verizon phone to work worldwide unless it is dual system, where the selection is very limited. Can you tell me which phones Verizon sell right now that is not crippled?! Oh wait.. they said November and it is only one phone. I don't have anything against Verizon but I prefer phone makers to dictate features not carriers and I prefer my phone to be software locked not hardware locked (even though I prefer it to be completely unlocked).
List of Verizon Phones that are not crippled
BlackBerry Tour 9630
BlackBerry Curve 8530
BlackBerry "Essex" (Tour w/WIFI)
BlackBerry Storm2 9550
ALL current Windows Mobile Phones
My bet is T-mobile is next (in addition to keeping iPhone on AT&T).
They may indeed partner with Sprint to get it done.
I wonder if many of the newbees jumped from Verizon like myself? Hence their newly developed Apple/At&T commercials.
At least one.
Unless you want to travel outside the US....then your Verizon Phone is just a brick.
But, with AT&T and T-Mobile's less than stellar networks you're pretty much bricked if you want to travel inside the U.S.
they won't. Verizon uses CDMA while the iphone is GSM. so Verizon can't support the iphone
Replace GSM radios with CDMA radios. It has been done with many other phones.
as for this notion of the contract ending, of course. the real issue is if Apple will jump to all new signups being forced to go with T-Mobile or unlock the phone and let folks have a choice.
i vote unlock
You understand that unlock = $700 or so iPhone right?
There is an issue with Android that is going to sabotage it: Google doesn't control the hardware platform and thus the overall reliability and experience.
I generally agree, although I think the operative word is "could", not "going to".
Maury
Replace GSM radios with CDMA radios. It has been done with many other phones.
At high cost. Given that there's a GSM carrier everywhere (even places with CDMA or PCS) developing a CDMA version only makes sense if you've got a carrier that really wants it and is willing to pay.
Additionally, it's very clear that every CDMA and PCS carrier is switching to GSM over the next couple of years. Bell and Telus are bringing up their networks this month. Similar plans have been announced by every major carrier that isn't already using GSM.
I applaud this move. Apple is dragging the carriers into the GSM world and eliminating carrier-lock-in. Any carrier that wants the iPhone, and they all do, has to go GSM. The situation is not unlike USB support on the original iMacs, with the exception that no one really cared about the iMac back then, but vendors are literally spending billions and billions on infrastructure to get the iPhone.
So yeah, for the next year or two you're stuck on AT&T. But as a side effect, when all of this is over, everyone will be GSM and that whole world of hurt goes away. You can survive this pain for the end result that the iPhone is creating.
Maury
It's not the cost to design, it's the support. Apple has a very limited number of SKUs in the market, even in the Mac business. You have your choice of 4 or 5 Macs. All iMacs use the same parts, except for maybe a higher clocked (but still totally compatible CPU). This reduces the cost of channel operations, as you don't have a lot of different SKUs to distribute across the nation. It also reduces supplier problems, as you only have 1 supplier.
Except that Apple already gets 50% gross profit margin on the iphone, so supporting a different iphone (like they do in china without the wifi) or a CDMA iphone is going to drop that profit margin down to something like 45%, which is going to be still the envy of the industry (and 4x as much profit margin as Nokia).
I applaud this move. Apple is dragging the carriers into the GSM world and eliminating carrier-lock-in. Any carrier that wants the iPhone, and they all do, has to go GSM. The situation is not unlike USB support on the original iMacs, with the exception that no one really cared about the iMac back then, but vendors are literally spending billions and billions on infrastructure to get the iPhone.
So yeah, for the next year or two you're stuck on AT&T. But as a side effect, when all of this is over, everyone will be GSM and that whole world of hurt goes away. You can survive this pain for the end result that the iPhone is creating.
Except that you are still getting a simlocked iphone in Canada with a 3 year contract (I am a Canadian who knows the pain of a 3 year contract). It doesn't change a thing.
List of idiotic demands?
? Profit sharing (It was bizarre, but this is great for the consumer as it forces the vendor to update the HW frequently with rich updates instead of trying to convince you to buy a new device as soon as possible to increase revenue)
? Letting Apple repair their own device (How sucky is it to be able to go into an Apple Store to get a repair done or to be able to call 1-800-MY-APPLE to get assistance by Apple.
? Apple wanted to control their technical call center (Parish the thought! Having to call Verizon so some overworked, untrained CSR with minimal training on dozens of phones can assist me. It?s always fun to meet new people over the phone.)
? Having control over the OS and it?s updates (Remember back then Verizon crippled their vendor?s OSes so that their customers were forced to buy Verizon?s additional services)
Did I miss any?
Do you really think YouTube and GoogleMaps would have been allowed? I?m all for Verizon (or anyone else) getting the iPhone, I just don?t think it coincides with Apple?s plans, but anything to increase the stock value is fine by me. Plus, I?d be happy to have a bunch of iPhone users jump to Verizon?s network to alleviate some of the obvious congestion. I wouldn?t go because I think having using the phone AND having internet access at the same time is vital, but to each his own.
Except that revenue sharing didn't improve much of the original iphone's functionality --- uncrippled bluetooth and turn-by-turn navigation came out 2 years later (after your 2 year contract with AT&T is over).
Many overseas iphone carriers handle iphone tech support and warranty issues --- crazy, isn't it?
Verizon crippling vs. Apple crippling --- there is no difference.
Why would I care about youtube and googlemaps if I can get the real thing --- actual FLO mobile tv channels and actual turn-by-turn navigation softwares?
List of Verizon Phones that are not crippled
BlackBerry Tour 9630
BlackBerry Curve 8530
BlackBerry "Essex" (Tour w/WIFI)
BlackBerry Storm2 9550
ALL current Windows Mobile Phones
Seriously, I have a Windows Mobile phone for work, and nobody wants one of those. They get saddled with it because their IT departments are backwards and only support Exchange connectivity from that one interface, but they don't want one. Or they don't know any better.
At least the Blackberrys have an actual fanbase (though their reasons are lost on me).
They may indeed partner with Sprint to get it done.
But that would make two phone companies with horrible customer service... they couldn't be that thick!