Before the iPhone was announced, I thought the next iPod would include bluetooth and would be a phone buddy. So when your phone rings (whatever carrier), you answer on your iPod like you do now with an iPhone - except you are carrying two devices still.
I wonder if Apple would consider this for theiPod Touch.
The second step would be for Verizon to produce a very slim and cheap buddy-phone which you mainly never touch. I'd like this as I could sometimes leave the Touch at home when I go to the beach etc.
Before the iPhone was announced, I thought the next iPod would include bluetooth and would be a phone buddy. So when your phone rings (whatever carrier), you answer on your iPod like you do now with an iPhone - except you are carrying two devices still.
I wonder if Apple would consider this for theiPod Touch.
The second step would be for Verizon to produce a very slim and cheap buddy-phone which you mainly never touch. I'd like this as I could sometimes leave the Touch at home when I go to the beach etc.
Sounds like a terrible system.... the iPhone is great, but for people on Verizon. get a droid rather than the system above. Carrying around an iPod touch all the time? Thats the kind of system only a true gearhead would bother with. Not a market Apple is interested in.
so if your on verizon and you want the idont phone they have spent millions on ridiculing. you can now buy it on their network??? worst marketing plan ever if this is true
Verizon hasn't spent one red cent bashing the iPhone, much like AT&T commercials don't show any favoritism amongst the various phones they carry. This is the way it is in the wireless industry: the carriers don't spend a significant amount of $$$ bashing pr praising particular phone models. That is for the phone makers to do.
The advertisements that bash the iPhone were done by Motorola, not Verizon, in order to differentiate their new Droid phone vs the iPhone. The Verizon ads have concentrated on bashing the AT&T network. (In their "Island of Misfit Toys" commercial, they even go so far as to say "millions of people would love to have you" before pointing out that its the network that caused the iPhone to show up there.) I love my iPhone, and I actually like AT&T where I live. But I got to say, that was a BRILLIANT commercial.
Apple has 89 million reasons to consider Verizon in the US, and nearly 500 million reasons worldwide to consider a 3G CDMA iPhone. As I've said before, I've got to believe that Apple would love to sell me a CDMA iPhone next year and then another LTE iPhone two years down the road.
I have only heard one valid reason not to -- if the two cannot agree on revenue sharing. To say the technology is not there, or would be too expensive, or too complicated to support, is all FUD. Period.
If Verizon can sell enough Android or RIM smartphones, at some point they may not care to give up data revenues to Apple just to have the iPhone.
In the past, Apple has had the mindset of "we build what we think is best, and let people come to us, and to heck with the rest". But recent developments (Intel chips, app store, DRM-free music, etc) seem to indicate that Apple is willing to reconsider some of its perfect ideals if it can drive sales without compromising the overall experience. Let's be honest, Steve isn't going to live forever, so I think he's finally realized that he need to get busy on that world domination thingy.
For many of us, AT&T's weaknesses far outweigh its strengths to the point where changing carriers just to get a phone is not an option. Network issues aside, Verizon's free "in network calling" far outweighs rollover minutes for me.
I've had no issues with Verizon's network (despite having a smartphone and two data cards), and most of my family and friends are on Verizon, so I rarely use peak minutes. I have two friends on AT&T, both switched from Verizon to get the iPhone, and would switch back in a heartbeat because their friends and family are mostly on Verizon.
Let's face it -- two year contracts have long expired, and those who are willing to switch carriers to get the iPhone have long since done so. Many of the rest of us are willing to wait for a Verizon iPhone, and will make do with a iPod Touch if that never happens. Plus there are millions of people who would never consider the iPhone, but would probably buy it if they walked into a Verizon to get their new phone every two years and saw it in action (yes, I'm saying it is that good).
Apple may not be crazy about building a CDMA iPhone, but they would certainly be fools not to consider it.
Final decision on Verizon or not depends upon how much control Verizon wants.
If they want their own App Store and crippled phones, like they do with others, then No Deal.
If they want the current Apple model extended to Verizon, then Deal.
Apple is a game-changer. They'd like Verizon, but they don't *need* Verizon. Current scenario has made that very clear. Verizon is a carrier. A big one to be sure, but a carrier. Not a game-changer.
Some will say that it will happen anyway when LTE arrives. Probably true. So does Verizon find it in its interest to play sooner? For that, we need the crystal ball ...
I think you're right. It has little to do with compatibility of networks. There is enough profit to be made on Verizon, and Apple holds the winning hand in any (presumed) negotiations. It's all about control.
The recent campaign by Verizon could be the last effort at holding out. If it proves to be successful, in terms of subscriptions and not merely perception, or if the Droid takes off; Verizon can hold out. If not, we could see a Verizon iPhone sooner, rather than later.
Final decision on Verizon or not depends upon how much control Verizon wants.
If they want their own App Store and crippled phones, like they do with others, then No Deal.
If they want the current Apple model extended to Verizon, then Deal.
Verizon has already answered this with the Droid:
1) No VCAST or VZAPPS crap.
2) Almost no Verizon branding or customization within the phone OS.
3) Full Android Market, with Verizon apps (visual VM, account info) published through the Market.
4) Amazon MP3 for music purchases (which is standard for Android).
5) Free nav through the included Google Nav, instead of $10/monthly for VZNAV.
Also, updates are being pushed OTA within days of release by Google, as opposed to nearly NEVER with previous Verizon smartphones. So it seems that Verizon is doing some basic quality control checking before rolling them out, but is NOT doing its own heavy customizations in-house.
so if your on verizon and you want the idont phone they have spent millions on ridiculing. you can now buy it on their network??? worst marketing plan ever if this is true
While I just do not see a Verizon iPhone for the CDMA reason as well as Verizon being a royal pain wanting to control and make money on everything its own way. Maybe why Apple did not go with them in the first place.?????
But it would serve Verizon customers right if Apple did sell a CDMA phone. It would be slower than the ATT version, could only do data OR voice at once, and in 2 1/2 years, it would be obsolete as Verizon is moving to 4G / LTE (what ever))
Just a thought.
en
Wow, pretty much everything you just said is wrong. 1.Verizon by far has the largest 3g network. 2.The iphone allows voice and data at the same time not the service provider. As long as apple designs it that way it will do voice and data at the same time on Verizon's network. 3.LTE will be here sooner than 2 1/2 years and AT@T will be swithing to LTE as well. Might be a good idea to get your facts straight before you spread your foolishness.
Wow, pretty much everything you just said is wrong. 1.Verizon by far has the largest 3g network. 2.The iphone allows voice and data at the same time not the service provider. As long as apple designs it that way it will do voice and data at the same time on Verizon's network. 3.LTE will be here sooner than 2 1/2 years and AT@T will be swithing to LTE as well. Might be a good idea to get your facts straight before you spread your foolishness.
1 more thing. The original iphone was offered to Verizon before ATT and they turned it down.
Wow, pretty much everything you just said is wrong. 1.Verizon by far has the largest 3g network. 2.The iphone allows voice and data at the same time not the service provider. As long as apple designs it that way it will do voice and data at the same time on Verizon's network. 3.LTE will be here sooner than 2 1/2 years and AT@T will be swithing to LTE as well. Might be a good idea to get your facts straight before you spread your foolishness.
The inability for Verizon to do simultaneous Voice and Data is a limitation with their EVDO Rev. A network. If they upgraded to Rev. B then it would be possible, instead they are moving past their obsolecing CDMA2000 data network to LTE, which will be used for Data while CDMA will still be used for Voice. They will be able to support simultaneous Voice and Data when then happens.
AT&T (and T-Mobile) will eventually move to LTE but they don?t have the same urgency as Verizon has since their 3GSM network is still in its relative infancy with much higher capacities to be had on the same network architecture.
Verizon?s been pumping their impending LTE network well but it?s all vapourware. It will happen but not in the time frame some people are expecting. Japan is much smaller than the US and has a more developed network and yet they won?t have any LTE-based phones until 2011, yet somehow some silly Verizon users think that Verizon is going to have a complete LTE network with all their major devices using LTE hardware in 2010. Yeah right!
According to http://www.cdg.org/ there are 308 commerical operators in 116 countries using CDMA, so who is wrong, you or them?
In relation to EVDO Rev. B, the only way a CDMA-based network can do simultaneous voice and data, there aren?t very many countries supporting that tech.
If we look at the number of subs with CDMA2000 for data there are certainly more, but it?s still pretty low compared to 3GSM. Even in S. Korea?s all their carriers all us eCDMA for ?2G? while their two largest are using 3GSM for ?3G?. They were smart enough to not even go with CDMA2000 at all.
Measuring the number of countries is strawman as most of the countries supporting CDMA are quite small in size and subscribers. Most countries with carriers supporting both GSM/3GPP and CDMA/CDMA2000 are predominately GSM or 3GSM. Since most of the countries supporting only CDMA are quite poor I?d wager that most of them won?t be adopting EVDO Rev. B for simultaneous Voice and Data, making the point moot on a couple different levels.
S. Korea has CDMA for 2G, but mostly uses 3GSM for 3G. Only LG Telecom has EVDO Rev. A for 3G and they only account for about 8M subs.
How many times do I have to correct you that the majority of Koreans are actually on EV-DO networks?
When you are a AT&T Wireless customer and you have a GSM phone --- then you are NOT a WCDMA/HSDPA subscriber. The majority of the subscribers on the 2 Korean carriers with HSDPA networks --- are actually on their EV-DO networks --- because the South Korean government has an idiotic policy requiring people to get a brand new telephone number if they switch to HSDPA technology.
In relation to EVDO Rev. B, the only way a CDMA-based network can do simultaneous voice and data, there aren?t very many countries supporting that tech.
EV-DO Rev A can do simultaneous voice and data if the carrier implements VoIP-over-EVDO Rev A.
EV-DO Rev B is basically bundling 3 EV-DO Rev A channels together --- it doesn't give it any more features.
Comments
I wonder if Apple would consider this for theiPod Touch.
The second step would be for Verizon to produce a very slim and cheap buddy-phone which you mainly never touch. I'd like this as I could sometimes leave the Touch at home when I go to the beach etc.
Before the iPhone was announced, I thought the next iPod would include bluetooth and would be a phone buddy. So when your phone rings (whatever carrier), you answer on your iPod like you do now with an iPhone - except you are carrying two devices still.
I wonder if Apple would consider this for theiPod Touch.
The second step would be for Verizon to produce a very slim and cheap buddy-phone which you mainly never touch. I'd like this as I could sometimes leave the Touch at home when I go to the beach etc.
Sounds like a terrible system.... the iPhone is great, but for people on Verizon. get a droid rather than the system above. Carrying around an iPod touch all the time? Thats the kind of system only a true gearhead would bother with. Not a market Apple is interested in.
so if your on verizon and you want the idont phone they have spent millions on ridiculing. you can now buy it on their network??? worst marketing plan ever if this is true
Verizon hasn't spent one red cent bashing the iPhone, much like AT&T commercials don't show any favoritism amongst the various phones they carry. This is the way it is in the wireless industry: the carriers don't spend a significant amount of $$$ bashing pr praising particular phone models. That is for the phone makers to do.
The advertisements that bash the iPhone were done by Motorola, not Verizon, in order to differentiate their new Droid phone vs the iPhone. The Verizon ads have concentrated on bashing the AT&T network. (In their "Island of Misfit Toys" commercial, they even go so far as to say "millions of people would love to have you" before pointing out that its the network that caused the iPhone to show up there.) I love my iPhone, and I actually like AT&T where I live. But I got to say, that was a BRILLIANT commercial.
Thompson
I have only heard one valid reason not to -- if the two cannot agree on revenue sharing. To say the technology is not there, or would be too expensive, or too complicated to support, is all FUD. Period.
If Verizon can sell enough Android or RIM smartphones, at some point they may not care to give up data revenues to Apple just to have the iPhone.
In the past, Apple has had the mindset of "we build what we think is best, and let people come to us, and to heck with the rest". But recent developments (Intel chips, app store, DRM-free music, etc) seem to indicate that Apple is willing to reconsider some of its perfect ideals if it can drive sales without compromising the overall experience. Let's be honest, Steve isn't going to live forever, so I think he's finally realized that he need to get busy on that world domination thingy.
For many of us, AT&T's weaknesses far outweigh its strengths to the point where changing carriers just to get a phone is not an option. Network issues aside, Verizon's free "in network calling" far outweighs rollover minutes for me.
I've had no issues with Verizon's network (despite having a smartphone and two data cards), and most of my family and friends are on Verizon, so I rarely use peak minutes. I have two friends on AT&T, both switched from Verizon to get the iPhone, and would switch back in a heartbeat because their friends and family are mostly on Verizon.
Let's face it -- two year contracts have long expired, and those who are willing to switch carriers to get the iPhone have long since done so. Many of the rest of us are willing to wait for a Verizon iPhone, and will make do with a iPod Touch if that never happens. Plus there are millions of people who would never consider the iPhone, but would probably buy it if they walked into a Verizon to get their new phone every two years and saw it in action (yes, I'm saying it is that good).
Apple may not be crazy about building a CDMA iPhone, but they would certainly be fools not to consider it.
Final decision on Verizon or not depends upon how much control Verizon wants.
If they want their own App Store and crippled phones, like they do with others, then No Deal.
If they want the current Apple model extended to Verizon, then Deal.
Apple is a game-changer. They'd like Verizon, but they don't *need* Verizon. Current scenario has made that very clear. Verizon is a carrier. A big one to be sure, but a carrier. Not a game-changer.
Some will say that it will happen anyway when LTE arrives. Probably true. So does Verizon find it in its interest to play sooner? For that, we need the crystal ball ...
I think you're right. It has little to do with compatibility of networks. There is enough profit to be made on Verizon, and Apple holds the winning hand in any (presumed) negotiations. It's all about control.
The recent campaign by Verizon could be the last effort at holding out. If it proves to be successful, in terms of subscriptions and not merely perception, or if the Droid takes off; Verizon can hold out. If not, we could see a Verizon iPhone sooner, rather than later.
Final decision on Verizon or not depends upon how much control Verizon wants.
If they want their own App Store and crippled phones, like they do with others, then No Deal.
If they want the current Apple model extended to Verizon, then Deal.
Verizon has already answered this with the Droid:
1) No VCAST or VZAPPS crap.
2) Almost no Verizon branding or customization within the phone OS.
3) Full Android Market, with Verizon apps (visual VM, account info) published through the Market.
4) Amazon MP3 for music purchases (which is standard for Android).
5) Free nav through the included Google Nav, instead of $10/monthly for VZNAV.
Also, updates are being pushed OTA within days of release by Google, as opposed to nearly NEVER with previous Verizon smartphones. So it seems that Verizon is doing some basic quality control checking before rolling them out, but is NOT doing its own heavy customizations in-house.
so if your on verizon and you want the idont phone they have spent millions on ridiculing. you can now buy it on their network??? worst marketing plan ever if this is true
The idont ad is a motorola droid ad, not verizon.
While I just do not see a Verizon iPhone for the CDMA reason as well as Verizon being a royal pain wanting to control and make money on everything its own way. Maybe why Apple did not go with them in the first place.?????
But it would serve Verizon customers right if Apple did sell a CDMA phone. It would be slower than the ATT version, could only do data OR voice at once, and in 2 1/2 years, it would be obsolete as Verizon is moving to 4G / LTE (what ever))
Just a thought.
en
Wow, pretty much everything you just said is wrong. 1.Verizon by far has the largest 3g network. 2.The iphone allows voice and data at the same time not the service provider. As long as apple designs it that way it will do voice and data at the same time on Verizon's network. 3.LTE will be here sooner than 2 1/2 years and AT@T will be swithing to LTE as well. Might be a good idea to get your facts straight before you spread your foolishness.
Wow, pretty much everything you just said is wrong. 1.Verizon by far has the largest 3g network. 2.The iphone allows voice and data at the same time not the service provider. As long as apple designs it that way it will do voice and data at the same time on Verizon's network. 3.LTE will be here sooner than 2 1/2 years and AT@T will be swithing to LTE as well. Might be a good idea to get your facts straight before you spread your foolishness.
1 more thing. The original iphone was offered to Verizon before ATT and they turned it down.
Wow, pretty much everything you just said is wrong. 1.Verizon by far has the largest 3g network. 2.The iphone allows voice and data at the same time not the service provider. As long as apple designs it that way it will do voice and data at the same time on Verizon's network. 3.LTE will be here sooner than 2 1/2 years and AT@T will be swithing to LTE as well. Might be a good idea to get your facts straight before you spread your foolishness.
The inability for Verizon to do simultaneous Voice and Data is a limitation with their EVDO Rev. A network. If they upgraded to Rev. B then it would be possible, instead they are moving past their obsolecing CDMA2000 data network to LTE, which will be used for Data while CDMA will still be used for Voice. They will be able to support simultaneous Voice and Data when then happens.
AT&T (and T-Mobile) will eventually move to LTE but they don?t have the same urgency as Verizon has since their 3GSM network is still in its relative infancy with much higher capacities to be had on the same network architecture.
Verizon?s been pumping their impending LTE network well but it?s all vapourware. It will happen but not in the time frame some people are expecting. Japan is much smaller than the US and has a more developed network and yet they won?t have any LTE-based phones until 2011, yet somehow some silly Verizon users think that Verizon is going to have a complete LTE network with all their major devices using LTE hardware in 2010. Yeah right!
The CDMA technology is unable to do data and voice at the same time. Verizon uses CDMA. Korea uses CDMA. Almost nobody else uses it.
According to http://www.cdg.org/ there are 308 commerical operators in 116 countries using CDMA, so who is wrong, you or them?
According to http://www.cdg.org/ there are 308 commerical operators in 116 countries using CDMA, so who is wrong, you or them?
In relation to EVDO Rev. B, the only way a CDMA-based network can do simultaneous voice and data, there aren?t very many countries supporting that tech.
If we look at the number of subs with CDMA2000 for data there are certainly more, but it?s still pretty low compared to 3GSM. Even in S. Korea?s all their carriers all us eCDMA for ?2G? while their two largest are using 3GSM for ?3G?. They were smart enough to not even go with CDMA2000 at all.
Measuring the number of countries is strawman as most of the countries supporting CDMA are quite small in size and subscribers. Most countries with carriers supporting both GSM/3GPP and CDMA/CDMA2000 are predominately GSM or 3GSM. Since most of the countries supporting only CDMA are quite poor I?d wager that most of them won?t be adopting EVDO Rev. B for simultaneous Voice and Data, making the point moot on a couple different levels.
S. Korea has CDMA for 2G, but mostly uses 3GSM for 3G. Only LG Telecom has EVDO Rev. A for 3G and they only account for about 8M subs.
How many times do I have to correct you that the majority of Koreans are actually on EV-DO networks?
When you are a AT&T Wireless customer and you have a GSM phone --- then you are NOT a WCDMA/HSDPA subscriber. The majority of the subscribers on the 2 Korean carriers with HSDPA networks --- are actually on their EV-DO networks --- because the South Korean government has an idiotic policy requiring people to get a brand new telephone number if they switch to HSDPA technology.
In relation to EVDO Rev. B, the only way a CDMA-based network can do simultaneous voice and data, there aren?t very many countries supporting that tech.
EV-DO Rev A can do simultaneous voice and data if the carrier implements VoIP-over-EVDO Rev A.
EV-DO Rev B is basically bundling 3 EV-DO Rev A channels together --- it doesn't give it any more features.