Of course you know, even though CDMA is a dead end technology, Apple could surprise (me included) and release a CDMA phone. If you think about it, there are die-hard Verizon customers (not sure why) who would snap these things up in a heartbeat if available on their network of choice.
The upside here is that if it's a CDMA only phone, it will have to be replaced in about 3 years anyway with the change over to LTE... So Apple could conceivably sell twice as many phones to that group.
It really doesn't matter to Apple whether CDMA is a dead end technology or not --- they are not spending billions of dollars building the network.
Apple is spending $20-30 on a HSDPA or a EV-DO chipset --- it really doesn't matter whether the technology is a dead end or not.
There are millions of LG Voyager's and RIM Storm's on the Verizon network --- and you don't hear much complaining about how they can't talk and do data at the same time. It's an academic problem that only surfaces up in fanbois arguments.
Except that it's a real, known problem that is only now being addressed for CDMA, but has not yet been implemented.
You don't know that, do you?
The fact is that We do have simultaneous voice and data, and you don't.
Actually, all that I was pointing out was the mess our "analyst" friend Kumar made on Baron's blog.
I have sources inside Qualcomm that say Kumar's sources aren't as good as mine, and I live in San Diego. They also say that they're will be chicken served in the cafeteria tomorrow, but they're not sure if it will be in curry or soup, it would be a "stretch," but don't rule out chicken salad. Get my point?
The China sales numbers are irrelevant. Anyone who can afford an iPhone in China and wanted one already has it. They either bought it full feature in HK or on the black market and are now paying $15/month to China Mobile.
He didn't make a mess. What he said was correct. The phone was being pre-sold. He commented that sales weren't as high as expected.
It was the fault of Barron's reporter. He didn't seem to know the phone was being pre-sold, and so screwed up. When Kumar was asked, he explained it to him.
It's nice that you say you have good sources. So what do you know from these great sources? Tell us.
Except that it's a real, known problem that is only now being addressed for CDMA, but has not yet been implemented.
You don't know that, do you?
The fact is that We do have simultaneous voice and data, and you don't.
You can say whatever you want, it doesn't matter.
Aside from fanbois discussions, you don't see much complaining about this technical weakness. You don't even hear complaints about how you supposedly would lose your verizon turn-by-turn navigation because you picked up a phone call while driving causing the nav app to lose the data connection --- becuase there is nothing to complain, the nav app cached the maps ahead of time.
Aside from fanbois discussions, you don't see much complaining about this technical weakness. You don't even hear complaints about how you supposedly would lose your verizon turn-by-turn navigation because you picked up a phone call while driving causing the nav app to lose the data connection --- becuase there is nothing to complain, the nav app cached the maps ahead of time.
Caching maps is done in a couple of the programs available for the iPhone as well.
The China iPhone disaster was so obviously predictable. Doesn't say much about this guy's credibility or analytical prowess one way or another.
The iPhone is doing very well in China.
On the grey market. That should be OK with Apple. After all, iPhone owners are probably the children of rich industrialists and Communist party elites. Apple is hitting the right market.
I don't get the whole "CDMA-only" comments. Just about all new Blackberries for VerizonWireless's network are worldphone capable. Maybe someone can explain why Apple wouldn't produce a VZW phone that's worldphone capable???
Separately, CDMA may be a dead-end technology but so is GSM, an even older technology. They are both going to go away at some point.
Ha correct but you must remember GSM is world wide where the other is US....any network thats worldwide is better and people in the know have been saying this for years now and the people here in the states never listened we could have already been up to standard by now if there werent always people here in country trying to go a different direction ....As we are finding out more and more everyday the world is bigger than just the US....everyone dont live here and people do travel to and from......
Why are we asking philosophical questions about CDMA vs GSM...
The point is, Verizon is huge and Apple needs to use Verizon's tech in order to tap a massive market and sell lots of iPhones. That is the only thing we need to say here.
Why are we asking philosophical questions about CDMA vs GSM...
The point is, Verizon is huge and Apple needs to use Verizon's tech in order to tap a massive market and sell lots of iPhones. That is the only thing we need to say here.
Needs to? Looks to me Apple is doing pretty good so far without a CDMA iPhone. Good enough that they have had supply shortages several times since the first iPhone. If Apple needs to do anything, it?s include another carrier in the US because AT&T?s data network is overly saturated having increased usage by 5000% in 3 years. But that doesn?t mean that need to move to Verizon who are in a position to not play ball with Apple while the other two have likely begs Apple with giant wads of cash in hand.
The guy wasn't predicting anything. He was stating that from his research, the number of iPhones pre sold wasn't meeting expectations.
And it wasn't predictable.
Easy for an armchair analyst like yourself to say so afterwards.
I said so before. Here. I won't even bother to give you a link. You know nothing about me to make stupid statements like 'armchair analysts.' What is this analyst? Certified? Non-armchair?
The China sales numbers are irrelevant. Anyone who can afford an iPhone in China and wanted one already has it. They either bought it full feature in HK or on the black market and are now paying $15/month to China Mobile.
Exactly. Apple will be disappointed in China for that very reason. Prices need to be cut dramatically for it to have a legitimate chance there.
Google is expected to launch a self branded smartphone by year end followed by a netbook early next year.
That actually sounds like a very plausible prediction.
Incidentally, you should ignore obvious baits. You need to prove nothing to anybody. You are welcome to make your claim without providing some 'proof of claim.'
On the grey market. That should be OK with Apple. After all, iPhone owners are probably the children of rich industrialists and Communist party elites. Apple is hitting the right market.
There are growth assumptions relying on iPhone China sales that have nothing to do with the grey market - i.e., the grey market phones are already presumably reflected in Apple's financials.
If China doesn't pan out from incremental sales, it will have a major impact on Apple stock.
Apart from hitting people with bogus data charges that their phones are designed to produce more of, the real kicker is that with the $350 "early termination" fee, which decreases at $10 per month, you still have a $110 "early termination" fee at the end of your contract, if you leave or get a new phone.
The only Verizon phone that could make economic sense for Apple would be a CDMA/EVDO phone. The QCOM chip set would not be too hi... cheaper than the current UMTS+GSM phone. Royalties would be around 5.5%. With ASP at $600-700, that would amount to less than $40.
Adding GSM would incur additional chip cost, plus royalties to the GSM consortium. Very few people use the iPhone overseas. The few who travel would find the roaming charges for voice and data too expensive. Cheaper to buy a local used GSM phone for $50 and buy a SIM card... calls are cheap then.
However, any Verizon contract would cause ATT to cut subsidies significantly. Meanwhile a lot Verizon customers who wanted an iPhone have migrated - or found alternatives. It is hard to say if the CDMA phone would be a big winner in the big picture.
As I said earlier, you don't ever hear much complaining on this supposed technical weakness on the Verizon network.
That's probably because most people on the Verizon network don't realize that it's even possible, on any network.
This capability adds tremendously to the value of the iPhone on GSM, and though I never had the capability before, I use it all the time (on the web while on a phone call), and I would not be happy at all to discover I had lost it. I also wouldn't be very happy if someone else with the "same" phone had it and I didn't. Brings new meaning to the phrase "paperweight mode" if your phone turns into one for data service just because you are on a call.
Comments
Of course you know, even though CDMA is a dead end technology, Apple could surprise (me included) and release a CDMA phone. If you think about it, there are die-hard Verizon customers (not sure why) who would snap these things up in a heartbeat if available on their network of choice.
The upside here is that if it's a CDMA only phone, it will have to be replaced in about 3 years anyway with the change over to LTE... So Apple could conceivably sell twice as many phones to that group.
It really doesn't matter to Apple whether CDMA is a dead end technology or not --- they are not spending billions of dollars building the network.
Apple is spending $20-30 on a HSDPA or a EV-DO chipset --- it really doesn't matter whether the technology is a dead end or not.
And the same thing happens to CDMA network.
There are millions of LG Voyager's and RIM Storm's on the Verizon network --- and you don't hear much complaining about how they can't talk and do data at the same time. It's an academic problem that only surfaces up in fanbois arguments.
Except that it's a real, known problem that is only now being addressed for CDMA, but has not yet been implemented.
You don't know that, do you?
The fact is that We do have simultaneous voice and data, and you don't.
You can say whatever you want, it doesn't matter.
Actually, all that I was pointing out was the mess our "analyst" friend Kumar made on Baron's blog.
I have sources inside Qualcomm that say Kumar's sources aren't as good as mine, and I live in San Diego. They also say that they're will be chicken served in the cafeteria tomorrow, but they're not sure if it will be in curry or soup, it would be a "stretch," but don't rule out chicken salad. Get my point?
The China sales numbers are irrelevant. Anyone who can afford an iPhone in China and wanted one already has it. They either bought it full feature in HK or on the black market and are now paying $15/month to China Mobile.
He didn't make a mess. What he said was correct. The phone was being pre-sold. He commented that sales weren't as high as expected.
It was the fault of Barron's reporter. He didn't seem to know the phone was being pre-sold, and so screwed up. When Kumar was asked, he explained it to him.
It's nice that you say you have good sources. So what do you know from these great sources? Tell us.
Except that it's a real, known problem that is only now being addressed for CDMA, but has not yet been implemented.
You don't know that, do you?
The fact is that We do have simultaneous voice and data, and you don't.
You can say whatever you want, it doesn't matter.
Aside from fanbois discussions, you don't see much complaining about this technical weakness. You don't even hear complaints about how you supposedly would lose your verizon turn-by-turn navigation because you picked up a phone call while driving causing the nav app to lose the data connection --- becuase there is nothing to complain, the nav app cached the maps ahead of time.
Heh!
Actually, Kunar was right after all. Remember that China Unicom only sold 5,000 phones the first day? Not close to what was expected.
So he gets the last laugh.
The China iPhone disaster was so obviously predictable. Doesn't say much about this guy's credibility or analytical prowess one way or another.
Aside from fanbois discussions, you don't see much complaining about this technical weakness. You don't even hear complaints about how you supposedly would lose your verizon turn-by-turn navigation because you picked up a phone call while driving causing the nav app to lose the data connection --- becuase there is nothing to complain, the nav app cached the maps ahead of time.
Caching maps is done in a couple of the programs available for the iPhone as well.
The China iPhone disaster was so obviously predictable. Doesn't say much about this guy's credibility or analytical prowess one way or another.
The guy wasn't predicting anything. He was stating that from his research, the number of iPhones pre sold wasn't meeting expectations.
And it wasn't predictable.
Easy for an armchair analyst like yourself to say so afterwards.
Caching maps is done in a couple of the programs available for the iPhone as well.
As I said earlier, you don't ever hear much complaining on this supposed technical weakness on the Verizon network.
It's nice that you say you have good sources. So what do you know from these great sources? Tell us.
Google is expected to launch a self branded smartphone by year end followed by a netbook early next year.
The China iPhone disaster was so obviously predictable. Doesn't say much about this guy's credibility or analytical prowess one way or another.
The iPhone is doing very well in China.
On the grey market. That should be OK with Apple. After all, iPhone owners are probably the children of rich industrialists and Communist party elites. Apple is hitting the right market.
I don't get the whole "CDMA-only" comments. Just about all new Blackberries for VerizonWireless's network are worldphone capable. Maybe someone can explain why Apple wouldn't produce a VZW phone that's worldphone capable???
Separately, CDMA may be a dead-end technology but so is GSM, an even older technology. They are both going to go away at some point.
Ha correct but you must remember GSM is world wide where the other is US....any network thats worldwide is better and people in the know have been saying this for years now and the people here in the states never listened we could have already been up to standard by now if there werent always people here in country trying to go a different direction ....As we are finding out more and more everyday the world is bigger than just the US....everyone dont live here and people do travel to and from......
The point is, Verizon is huge and Apple needs to use Verizon's tech in order to tap a massive market and sell lots of iPhones. That is the only thing we need to say here.
Why are we asking philosophical questions about CDMA vs GSM...
The point is, Verizon is huge and Apple needs to use Verizon's tech in order to tap a massive market and sell lots of iPhones. That is the only thing we need to say here.
Needs to? Looks to me Apple is doing pretty good so far without a CDMA iPhone. Good enough that they have had supply shortages several times since the first iPhone. If Apple needs to do anything, it?s include another carrier in the US because AT&T?s data network is overly saturated having increased usage by 5000% in 3 years. But that doesn?t mean that need to move to Verizon who are in a position to not play ball with Apple while the other two have likely begs Apple with giant wads of cash in hand.
The guy wasn't predicting anything. He was stating that from his research, the number of iPhones pre sold wasn't meeting expectations.
And it wasn't predictable.
Easy for an armchair analyst like yourself to say so afterwards.
I said so before. Here. I won't even bother to give you a link. You know nothing about me to make stupid statements like 'armchair analysts.' What is this analyst? Certified? Non-armchair?
Get off your high-horse.
The China sales numbers are irrelevant. Anyone who can afford an iPhone in China and wanted one already has it. They either bought it full feature in HK or on the black market and are now paying $15/month to China Mobile.
Exactly. Apple will be disappointed in China for that very reason. Prices need to be cut dramatically for it to have a legitimate chance there.
Said as an "armchair analyst", of course.
Google is expected to launch a self branded smartphone by year end followed by a netbook early next year.
That actually sounds like a very plausible prediction.
Incidentally, you should ignore obvious baits. You need to prove nothing to anybody. You are welcome to make your claim without providing some 'proof of claim.'
The iPhone is doing very well in China.
On the grey market. That should be OK with Apple. After all, iPhone owners are probably the children of rich industrialists and Communist party elites. Apple is hitting the right market.
There are growth assumptions relying on iPhone China sales that have nothing to do with the grey market - i.e., the grey market phones are already presumably reflected in Apple's financials.
If China doesn't pan out from incremental sales, it will have a major impact on Apple stock.
So, it's true....Verizon Nickels and Dimes.
Yeah, check out this article by David Pogue:
http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/...ou-charge-now/
Apart from hitting people with bogus data charges that their phones are designed to produce more of, the real kicker is that with the $350 "early termination" fee, which decreases at $10 per month, you still have a $110 "early termination" fee at the end of your contract, if you leave or get a new phone.
Adding GSM would incur additional chip cost, plus royalties to the GSM consortium. Very few people use the iPhone overseas. The few who travel would find the roaming charges for voice and data too expensive. Cheaper to buy a local used GSM phone for $50 and buy a SIM card... calls are cheap then.
However, any Verizon contract would cause ATT to cut subsidies significantly. Meanwhile a lot Verizon customers who wanted an iPhone have migrated - or found alternatives. It is hard to say if the CDMA phone would be a big winner in the big picture.
As I said earlier, you don't ever hear much complaining on this supposed technical weakness on the Verizon network.
That's probably because most people on the Verizon network don't realize that it's even possible, on any network.
This capability adds tremendously to the value of the iPhone on GSM, and though I never had the capability before, I use it all the time (on the web while on a phone call), and I would not be happy at all to discover I had lost it. I also wouldn't be very happy if someone else with the "same" phone had it and I didn't. Brings new meaning to the phrase "paperweight mode" if your phone turns into one for data service just because you are on a call.