if Verizon refuses to cooperate, Apple should just cut a deal with TMobile and leave Verizon odd man out. that will hurt Verizon with its dead-end CDMA more than Apple. Apple marketing can point out that CDMA is 'soon to be obsolete.'
Oh, and let me guess - GSM is NOT going to obsolete? In 2020, AT&T will still be using GSM???? Yeah right! Especially now that GSM encryption got cracked - what do you say about that??? Some kind of standard.
if Verizon refuses to cooperate, Apple should just cut a deal with TMobile and leave Verizon odd man out. that will hurt Verizon with its dead-end CDMA more than Apple. Apple marketing can point out that CDMA is 'soon to be obsolete.'
Even better, get the GSM iPhone on Tmobile. Then make a CDMA iPhone for Sprint (Sprint would likely jump at the opportunity). That would really leave Verizon out in the cold and force them to accept pretty much whatever terms Apple put in front of them.
As for CDMA being obsolete... CDMA is no more obsolete than 3G GSM. ATT is moving to LTE, just like Verizon. So why aren't people clamoring for Apple to stop making GSM phones because it's an obsolete technology? The point being, CDMA is going to be around for a long time, just like 3G (and probably 2.5G) GSM are going to be around long after ATT moves the bulk of it's network to LTE, to maintain compatibility with older device and coverage in areas that haven't been upgraded to LTE yet.
CDMA will be around far longer than any iPhone you buy this year.
As Apple and Verizon are rumored to be in negotiations for a summer 2010 CDMA iPhone launch, the nation's largest wireless carrier and the handset maker are believed to be at odds over pricing.
This isn't for a CDMA iPhone. It's another botch job from Verizon to carry the 3G for the tablet. They don't need to carry voice on it, so Apple was going to try and use VZW for the networking on the tablet.
It wouldn't put undue stress on an already burdened AT&T network, and would be a good test on how Verizon could handle heavy traffic from a decent internet device on their 3G network.
However, Verizon sucks and is going to f*ck it up.....again.
Apple is usually quite clever. Chances are, CDMA support might actually be there, but has to be unlocked.
Nope. it's not a simple software thing.
CDMA and GSM are like comparing PPC and Intel. two totally different beasts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by libertyforall
Why is Apple so stubborn to at least provide the OPTION of Blu-Ray movie playback on Macs?
that's easy. Money. they would rather support you downloading so they get a cut, rather that popping in a disk
and if they could have support for 1080 downloads (with Extras etc) they might pull it off. but the two problems there are file sizes, which would be huge, and the studios who don't want Apple doing 1080 files cause that cuts into potential Blu-ray sales which they probably make more money from
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin
Please explain why it makes 0 sense? There are no significant technical or economical reasons to not make a CDMA phone.
sorry but wrong.
right now there is no dual CDMA/GSM chip on the market. so to have CDMA Apple would have to have a separate phone. which means doubling up their factories to handle the demand, plus extra shipping costs to get both sets to the stores, more training to make sure their Geniuses can handle supporting the phones and so on.
and every time there is a bug they have to do double the testing etc to fix it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin
[My emphasis added.]
First, I believe the extra engineering, inventory, etc is trivial. Many phone makers are able to manage versions of their phones for different carriers.
yes but that is all the phone makers do so it makes sense. Apple is about more than the iphone, they aren't going to spend all their time and money supporting it.
Quote:
Apple has multiple versions of nearly all of their products. They offer 3 different stock configurations of 15" MBP, and the option to custom configure any of them.
those different computers are essentially the same parts, just some are slightly faster, bigger etc.
making two different phones (since the hybrids won't be avail for a while longer) would be like making both Intel and PPC. which is hardly 'child's play'
plus Apple has always been about looking ahead, not behind CDMA is a dying tech, why would future focused Apple suddenly jump in on something that is going out. When they could look to the future, which is LTE
Quote:
Of course, Verizon could simply implement the newly approved CDMA standard that allows for simultaneous voice/data.
Few do watch movies on their computer...but for the new iMac that thing would be an even sweeter deal to watch Blu-Ray on (idk if it supports 1080p res). Mac Mini or AppleTV would be quite nice for Blu-Ray. Ill hold steady with my PS3 though
Oh, I agree. But BR hasn't reached the point where Apple will add it. While they are not as bad as they were in adding CDR's to the original iMac's, Apple still is not a fan of removable media and they won't add it until it's well justifiable. And that's not any time in the next six months, at a minimum.
Quote:
Who cares if Verizon gets the iPhone or not? You fanboys want to dig at Verizon every chance you get, but simply put Verizon has still done remarkably well WITHOUT the iPhone.
Have they? They are only #1 right now because of the AllTell acquisition. The horse is out of the barn on strict control over the phone and experience as dictated by the carrier, the iPhone shot that concept down.
AT&T is at least a year behind Verizon in terms of LTE, probably longer. AT&T first has to fix their mess with regular 3G before they move on to LTE. Apple knows all this and they WILL make a deal with Verizon. Just wait and see...I told you so
AT&T's 3G they are deploying now and in the near future will be faster then Verizon's "LTE"
AT&T's real problem right now is they have allowed meaningless labels like 3G to be tossed around instead of labels that truly describe the technology behind them in a meaningful manner. Much like AMD and Apple found themselves against meaningless MHz numbers with Intel in the 90's and early 2000's...
Quote:
And by the way, Verizon's EVDO might be a bit slower than HSPA, but wouldn't you rather have a fast network than a slightly faster network that is spotty at best???
My AT&T works just fine at home and at work. In fact, Verizon doesn't work at my house at all, but Sprint, AT&T and TMobile does. And AT&T is the only carrier that penetrates my building at work - probably because a tower is less then two blocks away, but it doesn't matter - AT&T works where I need them. I've been throughout the mid-atlantic region, Florida, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, southern California and not had issues. Like politics, all cell coverage is local. If it's good for you, great. But there is no perfect carrier with 100% coverage and much of the rhetoric about AT&T is severely overblown.
Personally I would love for the iPhone to come to Verizon. It would submarine their network, free up traffic on AT&T's and I'm sure they would institute data caps or some other draconian policy - they won't be able to help themselves. Everyone's happy The key will be, can Verizon be reasonable? I'm not holding out hope Luckily for me it doesn't matter since AT&T works just fine for me (and roll over minutes kick butt!)
Sure, and when the time is right Apple may do it. They obviously don't think it's worth it right now. So far they seem pretty savvy at balancing features vs. profitability despite all the back seat driving from internet forum jockey's
Quote:
Every Mac sold can do 720p, which looks fine for HD, it looks a heck of a lot better than DVD on the same screen.
In a true double blind test I would wager you couldn't tell the difference between a BR and upscaled DVD at 720p - esp. on a screen smaller than the 27".
Besides, I thought the whole hype of BR is 1080p?
Quote:
Blu-ray is a minority marketshare? Yet it is still far ahead of digital downloads, and Apple supports that.
1) For optical media, yes (although I own BR's - I just play them through my PS3 on a 52" HDTV)
2) No BR licensing issues with ridiculous "secure path" DRM requirements
In a true double blind test I would wager you couldn't tell the difference between a BR and upscaled DVD at 720p - esp. on a screen smaller than the 27".
Actually I can, one of my TVs is an older Samsung 26" 720p LCD, and I can tell the difference between DVD's and Blu-Rays
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42
Besides, I thought the whole hype of BR is 1080p?
Yes 1080p is more desirable, but with the higher bitrates in Blu-Rays they look great in 720p as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42
1) For optical media, yes (although I own BR's - I just play them through my PS3 on a 52" HDTV)
Blu-Ray accounted for 12.6% of revenue for disc sales in the US last year, that is a little higher than minority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42
2) No BR licensing issues with ridiculous "secure path" DRM requirements
You are aware that Apple has implemented HDCP aren't you?
By way, this weak rumor as such, combined with 3 years of negotiations with the Chinese over iPhone, may serve as yet another argument for the CDMA iPhone probability being quite vague one.
right now there is no dual CDMA/GSM chip on the market. so to have CDMA Apple would have to have a separate phone. which means doubling up their factories to handle the demand, plus extra shipping costs to get both sets to the stores, more training to make sure their Geniuses can handle supporting the phones and so on.
and every time there is a bug they have to do double the testing etc to fix it.
Sorry, but you're wrong. Not only is there a chip on the market, but its been in production. Qualcomm has a dual CDMA/GSM chip that is currently in use in dual mode (Global) BlackBerrys running on Verizon and Sprint. And you can pop in a ATT SIM and run the phone on both Verizon and ATT. There is an option of which network to use. Also several WinMo phones on Verizon/Sprint have a CDMA/GSM chip but I dont know if thats the Qualcomm chip or not.
Also they would not have to "double up their factories" to handle demand. They already have backup deals with manufacturers in China to handle extra production capacity should they ever need it. And how do you figure they couldnt handle the "extra shipping costs"? The profit from selling the CDMA iPhones to Verizon would more than cover any additional costs. Plus that additional cost is spread out amongst ALL iPhones produced period. Thats Managerial Accounting 101. Also their Geniuses wouldnt have to learn anything CDMA specific other than the fact to explain to customers that CDMA iPhone doesnt handle voice/data simultaneously.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
yes but that is all the phone makers do so it makes sense. Apple is about more than the iphone, they aren't going to spend all their time and money supporting it.
Ummm....Apple has an entire department/budget dedicated to the iPhone. And really is that even a logical statement? Of course they are going to spend time and money to support growing the iPhone. I cant believe you would make that statement. The iPhone is a cash cow for them and one of their flagship products.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
those different computers are essentially the same parts, just some are slightly faster, bigger etc.
making two different phones (since the hybrids won't be avail for a while longer) would be like making both Intel and PPC. which is hardly 'child's play'
plus Apple has always been about looking ahead, not behind CDMA is a dying tech, why would future focused Apple suddenly jump in on something that is going out. When they could look to the future, which is LTE
assuming such a thing is possible.
No each computer is not the same parts. To manufacture a 13", 15" and 17" MacBook Pro requires different engineering for each one. Each case is different and has to be cut from different dies, so there are increased manufacturing costs for each model, the screens are different, plus they offer more powerful processors and higher memory capacity on the higher end macbooks, plus they offer more powerful graphics cards. All of that requires engineering and ordering different motherboards to support the higher end processor and graphics. So each size model is not just the same parts with different size and power.
right now there is no dual CDMA/GSM chip on the market. so to have CDMA Apple would have to have a separate phone. which means doubling up their factories to handle the demand, plus extra shipping costs to get both sets to the stores, more training to make sure their Geniuses can handle supporting the phones and so on.
You must really think Apple employs a bunch of idiots. Apple makes dozens of products and product variations. One more isn't going to matter. By your logic, Apple should only sell one type of iPod because their Geniuses are too stupid to be able to help people with more than one type of music player.
Oh, and Apple already makes three different versions of the iPhone. The still manufactures the previous generation 3G, along with the 3GS introduced last year and a special version for the Chinese market. And it costs the same to ship a GSM phone as it would a CDMA phone, so I don't get the "extra shipping costs" thing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
yes but that is all the phone makers do so it makes sense. Apple is about more than the iphone, they aren't going to spend all their time and money supporting it.
Really!?! Motorola only makes phones? Sony only makes phones? Samsung only makes phones? Wrong on all counts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
those different computers are essentially the same parts, just some are slightly faster, bigger etc.
making two different phones (since the hybrids won't be avail for a while longer) would be like making both Intel and PPC. which is hardly 'child's play'
No, it's more like having the same computer with different video card options, which by the way, Apple offers in the 15" MBP example I provided. There is a slight hardware difference along with different software drivers. It's not nearly as complex as PPC vs Intel. The cellular radio is a relatively small part of the iPhone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
plus Apple has always been about looking ahead, not behind CDMA is a dying tech, why would future focused Apple suddenly jump in on something that is going out. When they could look to the future, which is LTE
Um, because they can't sell an LTE phone yet? Also, think about the smart phone ecosystems being developed. It's no longer just about the phone. The applications are becoming a bigger part of it. The longer Apple delays getting an iPhone on Verizon, the more people will get Android phones. And those people will buy applications. And just like FairPlay locked people into the iPod ecosystem and "encouraged" them to buy another iPod when they upgrade (or else have to buy their content all over again), applications are going to have the same effect on smart phones. If a strong Andoid base is developed before the iPhone is available on those other networks, the harder it will be for Apple to achieve penetration because those users will be locked into Android and all the apps they bought.
Besides, CDMA will be around long after a phone bought today has reached end of life. Make a CDMA phone now, 2-3 years from now sell a hybrid CDMA/LTE phone to those same people, and 2-3 years later sell them an LTE phone. It fits perfectly with the typical upgrade cycle for most phone users.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
assuming such a thing is possible.
It is. I would not have suggested it if it weren't possible. The updated CDMA standard was approved last summer, and the hardware supporting it is expected to be available in 2010.
"A complementary device enhancement known as simultaneous 1X Voice and EV-DO Data (SVDO) will also become available during the same timeframe and will enable CDMA2000 devices to access EV-DO packet data services while in an active 1X circuit-switch voice call. For example, users will be able to send emails or access the Web while on voice calls; phones with GPS can update maps or download real-time traffic information while on voice calls, etc. This device enhancement, which enables these concurrent voice and data services, is independent of the air link standard and infrastructure."
Oh, and let me guess - GSM is NOT going to obsolete? In 2020, AT&T will still be using GSM???? Yeah right! Especially now that GSM encryption got cracked - what do you say about that??? Some kind of standard.
With AT&T they might with little pockets of whatever replaces it.
Note: CDMA and GSM are the voice technologies. EVDO and UTMS are the data technologies. Verizon has not stated whether it plans to go with a GSM voice system or not after going with LTE for 4G data.
With AT&T they might with little pockets of whatever replaces it.
Note: CDMA and GSM are the voice technologies. EVDO and UTMS are the data technologies. Verizon has not stated whether it plans to go with a GSM voice system or not after going with LTE for 4G data.
Actually, I recall seeing a statement by Verizon that they intend on continuing to use CDMA (sorry, can't provide a link at this time.)
Oh, and let me guess - GSM is NOT going to obsolete? In 2020, AT&T will still be using GSM???? Yeah right! Especially now that GSM encryption got cracked - what do you say about that??? Some kind of standard.
a 10 to 20 year old version of GSM encryption was hacked. the current one is a lot stronger and is still secure
Blu-Ray accounted for 12.6% of revenue for disc sales in the US last year, that is a little higher than minority.
That's less then 1/3 - OK, you can argue about what "minority" means but it fits for me.
Quote:
You are aware that Apple has implemented HDCP aren't you?
In the OS or as passthrough? If in the OS, no and I would love to see someone credible talking about it since that would be a pretty substantial change to the kernel.
Most hybird phone don't work well. i have tried Blackberry 9530 (Storm) using on GSM network. the data service/signal always dropped out. Seriously. I don't think VZ will get iphone even LTE version is out. let say some life in the city don't have LTE coverage. How did you get the coverage. switch back to CDMA ? Apple have to built specific version for Verizon. LTE+CDMA. I would say LTE+GSM still make more sense (it can sell worldwide). especially Verizon pushing Droid so hard. if iphone aviliable for verizon. They will push Droid or iPhone ?
Most hybird phone don't work well. i have tried Blackberry 9530 (Storm) using on GSM network. the data service/signal always dropped out. Seriously. I don't think VZ will get iphone even LTE version is out. let say some life in the city don't have LTE coverage. How did you get the coverage. switch back to CDMA ? Apple have to built specific version for Verizon. LTE+CDMA. I would say LTE+GSM still make more sense (it can sell worldwide). especially Verizon pushing Droid so hard. if iphone aviliable for verizon. They will push Droid or iPhone ?
Switching between LTE and CDMA for data is no different than switching between 3G and edge. It just programming which Apple is very good at.
Verizon will get the iPhone and most likely late this year. Apple is not going to ignore half of the potential market in the US.
Verizon will still push the Droid and other phones just the same as AT&T pushes other phones. Why? The answer is "Never". Jeopardy music please. What is "When did you ever see AT&T run an ad for the iPhone?"
Comments
you sure about that they dont have a 5gb limit?
...
Not with the iPhone. An iPhone account includes unlimited data.
if Verizon refuses to cooperate, Apple should just cut a deal with TMobile and leave Verizon odd man out. that will hurt Verizon with its dead-end CDMA more than Apple. Apple marketing can point out that CDMA is 'soon to be obsolete.'
Oh, and let me guess - GSM is NOT going to obsolete? In 2020, AT&T will still be using GSM???? Yeah right! Especially now that GSM encryption got cracked - what do you say about that??? Some kind of standard.
if Verizon refuses to cooperate, Apple should just cut a deal with TMobile and leave Verizon odd man out. that will hurt Verizon with its dead-end CDMA more than Apple. Apple marketing can point out that CDMA is 'soon to be obsolete.'
Even better, get the GSM iPhone on Tmobile. Then make a CDMA iPhone for Sprint (Sprint would likely jump at the opportunity). That would really leave Verizon out in the cold and force them to accept pretty much whatever terms Apple put in front of them.
As for CDMA being obsolete... CDMA is no more obsolete than 3G GSM. ATT is moving to LTE, just like Verizon. So why aren't people clamoring for Apple to stop making GSM phones because it's an obsolete technology? The point being, CDMA is going to be around for a long time, just like 3G (and probably 2.5G) GSM are going to be around long after ATT moves the bulk of it's network to LTE, to maintain compatibility with older device and coverage in areas that haven't been upgraded to LTE yet.
CDMA will be around far longer than any iPhone you buy this year.
As Apple and Verizon are rumored to be in negotiations for a summer 2010 CDMA iPhone launch, the nation's largest wireless carrier and the handset maker are believed to be at odds over pricing.
This isn't for a CDMA iPhone. It's another botch job from Verizon to carry the 3G for the tablet. They don't need to carry voice on it, so Apple was going to try and use VZW for the networking on the tablet.
It wouldn't put undue stress on an already burdened AT&T network, and would be a good test on how Verizon could handle heavy traffic from a decent internet device on their 3G network.
However, Verizon sucks and is going to f*ck it up.....again.
/speculation
Apple is usually quite clever. Chances are, CDMA support might actually be there, but has to be unlocked.
Nope. it's not a simple software thing.
CDMA and GSM are like comparing PPC and Intel. two totally different beasts.
Why is Apple so stubborn to at least provide the OPTION of Blu-Ray movie playback on Macs?
that's easy. Money. they would rather support you downloading so they get a cut, rather that popping in a disk
and if they could have support for 1080 downloads (with Extras etc) they might pull it off. but the two problems there are file sizes, which would be huge, and the studios who don't want Apple doing 1080 files cause that cuts into potential Blu-ray sales which they probably make more money from
Please explain why it makes 0 sense? There are no significant technical or economical reasons to not make a CDMA phone.
sorry but wrong.
right now there is no dual CDMA/GSM chip on the market. so to have CDMA Apple would have to have a separate phone. which means doubling up their factories to handle the demand, plus extra shipping costs to get both sets to the stores, more training to make sure their Geniuses can handle supporting the phones and so on.
and every time there is a bug they have to do double the testing etc to fix it.
[My emphasis added.]
First, I believe the extra engineering, inventory, etc is trivial. Many phone makers are able to manage versions of their phones for different carriers.
yes but that is all the phone makers do so it makes sense. Apple is about more than the iphone, they aren't going to spend all their time and money supporting it.
Apple has multiple versions of nearly all of their products. They offer 3 different stock configurations of 15" MBP, and the option to custom configure any of them.
those different computers are essentially the same parts, just some are slightly faster, bigger etc.
making two different phones (since the hybrids won't be avail for a while longer) would be like making both Intel and PPC. which is hardly 'child's play'
plus Apple has always been about looking ahead, not behind CDMA is a dying tech, why would future focused Apple suddenly jump in on something that is going out. When they could look to the future, which is LTE
Of course, Verizon could simply implement the newly approved CDMA standard that allows for simultaneous voice/data.
assuming such a thing is possible.
Few do watch movies on their computer...but for the new iMac that thing would be an even sweeter deal to watch Blu-Ray on (idk if it supports 1080p res). Mac Mini or AppleTV would be quite nice for Blu-Ray. Ill hold steady with my PS3 though
Oh, I agree. But BR hasn't reached the point where Apple will add it. While they are not as bad as they were in adding CDR's to the original iMac's, Apple still is not a fan of removable media and they won't add it until it's well justifiable. And that's not any time in the next six months, at a minimum.
Who cares if Verizon gets the iPhone or not? You fanboys want to dig at Verizon every chance you get, but simply put Verizon has still done remarkably well WITHOUT the iPhone.
Have they? They are only #1 right now because of the AllTell acquisition. The horse is out of the barn on strict control over the phone and experience as dictated by the carrier, the iPhone shot that concept down.
AT&T is at least a year behind Verizon in terms of LTE, probably longer. AT&T first has to fix their mess with regular 3G before they move on to LTE. Apple knows all this and they WILL make a deal with Verizon. Just wait and see...I told you so
AT&T's 3G they are deploying now and in the near future will be faster then Verizon's "LTE"
AT&T's real problem right now is they have allowed meaningless labels like 3G to be tossed around instead of labels that truly describe the technology behind them in a meaningful manner. Much like AMD and Apple found themselves against meaningless MHz numbers with Intel in the 90's and early 2000's...
And by the way, Verizon's EVDO might be a bit slower than HSPA, but wouldn't you rather have a fast network than a slightly faster network that is spotty at best???
My AT&T works just fine at home and at work. In fact, Verizon doesn't work at my house at all, but Sprint, AT&T and TMobile does. And AT&T is the only carrier that penetrates my building at work - probably because a tower is less then two blocks away, but it doesn't matter - AT&T works where I need them. I've been throughout the mid-atlantic region, Florida, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, southern California and not had issues. Like politics, all cell coverage is local. If it's good for you, great. But there is no perfect carrier with 100% coverage and much of the rhetoric about AT&T is severely overblown.
Personally I would love for the iPhone to come to Verizon. It would submarine their network, free up traffic on AT&T's and I'm sure they would institute data caps or some other draconian policy - they won't be able to help themselves. Everyone's happy
Yet a number of companies still manage to do it
Sure, and when the time is right Apple may do it. They obviously don't think it's worth it right now. So far they seem pretty savvy at balancing features vs. profitability despite all the back seat driving from internet forum jockey's
Every Mac sold can do 720p, which looks fine for HD, it looks a heck of a lot better than DVD on the same screen.
In a true double blind test I would wager you couldn't tell the difference between a BR and upscaled DVD at 720p - esp. on a screen smaller than the 27".
Besides, I thought the whole hype of BR is 1080p?
Blu-ray is a minority marketshare? Yet it is still far ahead of digital downloads, and Apple supports that.
1) For optical media, yes (although I own BR's - I just play them through my PS3 on a 52" HDTV)
2) No BR licensing issues with ridiculous "secure path" DRM requirements
In a true double blind test I would wager you couldn't tell the difference between a BR and upscaled DVD at 720p - esp. on a screen smaller than the 27".
Actually I can, one of my TVs is an older Samsung 26" 720p LCD, and I can tell the difference between DVD's and Blu-Rays
Besides, I thought the whole hype of BR is 1080p?
Yes 1080p is more desirable, but with the higher bitrates in Blu-Rays they look great in 720p as well.
1) For optical media, yes (although I own BR's - I just play them through my PS3 on a 52" HDTV)
Blu-Ray accounted for 12.6% of revenue for disc sales in the US last year, that is a little higher than minority.
2) No BR licensing issues with ridiculous "secure path" DRM requirements
You are aware that Apple has implemented HDCP aren't you?
Let's see.... two companies whose business model and general attitude towards customers are diametrically opposed? Go figure!
sorry but wrong.
right now there is no dual CDMA/GSM chip on the market. so to have CDMA Apple would have to have a separate phone. which means doubling up their factories to handle the demand, plus extra shipping costs to get both sets to the stores, more training to make sure their Geniuses can handle supporting the phones and so on.
and every time there is a bug they have to do double the testing etc to fix it.
Sorry, but you're wrong. Not only is there a chip on the market, but its been in production. Qualcomm has a dual CDMA/GSM chip that is currently in use in dual mode (Global) BlackBerrys running on Verizon and Sprint. And you can pop in a ATT SIM and run the phone on both Verizon and ATT. There is an option of which network to use. Also several WinMo phones on Verizon/Sprint have a CDMA/GSM chip but I dont know if thats the Qualcomm chip or not.
Also they would not have to "double up their factories" to handle demand. They already have backup deals with manufacturers in China to handle extra production capacity should they ever need it. And how do you figure they couldnt handle the "extra shipping costs"? The profit from selling the CDMA iPhones to Verizon would more than cover any additional costs. Plus that additional cost is spread out amongst ALL iPhones produced period. Thats Managerial Accounting 101. Also their Geniuses wouldnt have to learn anything CDMA specific other than the fact to explain to customers that CDMA iPhone doesnt handle voice/data simultaneously.
yes but that is all the phone makers do so it makes sense. Apple is about more than the iphone, they aren't going to spend all their time and money supporting it.
Ummm....Apple has an entire department/budget dedicated to the iPhone. And really is that even a logical statement? Of course they are going to spend time and money to support growing the iPhone. I cant believe you would make that statement. The iPhone is a cash cow for them and one of their flagship products.
those different computers are essentially the same parts, just some are slightly faster, bigger etc.
making two different phones (since the hybrids won't be avail for a while longer) would be like making both Intel and PPC. which is hardly 'child's play'
plus Apple has always been about looking ahead, not behind CDMA is a dying tech, why would future focused Apple suddenly jump in on something that is going out. When they could look to the future, which is LTE
assuming such a thing is possible.
No each computer is not the same parts. To manufacture a 13", 15" and 17" MacBook Pro requires different engineering for each one. Each case is different and has to be cut from different dies, so there are increased manufacturing costs for each model, the screens are different, plus they offer more powerful processors and higher memory capacity on the higher end macbooks, plus they offer more powerful graphics cards. All of that requires engineering and ordering different motherboards to support the higher end processor and graphics. So each size model is not just the same parts with different size and power.
right now there is no dual CDMA/GSM chip on the market. so to have CDMA Apple would have to have a separate phone. which means doubling up their factories to handle the demand, plus extra shipping costs to get both sets to the stores, more training to make sure their Geniuses can handle supporting the phones and so on.
You must really think Apple employs a bunch of idiots. Apple makes dozens of products and product variations. One more isn't going to matter. By your logic, Apple should only sell one type of iPod because their Geniuses are too stupid to be able to help people with more than one type of music player.
Oh, and Apple already makes three different versions of the iPhone. The still manufactures the previous generation 3G, along with the 3GS introduced last year and a special version for the Chinese market. And it costs the same to ship a GSM phone as it would a CDMA phone, so I don't get the "extra shipping costs" thing?
yes but that is all the phone makers do so it makes sense. Apple is about more than the iphone, they aren't going to spend all their time and money supporting it.
Really!?! Motorola only makes phones? Sony only makes phones? Samsung only makes phones? Wrong on all counts.
those different computers are essentially the same parts, just some are slightly faster, bigger etc.
making two different phones (since the hybrids won't be avail for a while longer) would be like making both Intel and PPC. which is hardly 'child's play'
No, it's more like having the same computer with different video card options, which by the way, Apple offers in the 15" MBP example I provided. There is a slight hardware difference along with different software drivers. It's not nearly as complex as PPC vs Intel. The cellular radio is a relatively small part of the iPhone.
plus Apple has always been about looking ahead, not behind CDMA is a dying tech, why would future focused Apple suddenly jump in on something that is going out. When they could look to the future, which is LTE
Um, because they can't sell an LTE phone yet? Also, think about the smart phone ecosystems being developed. It's no longer just about the phone. The applications are becoming a bigger part of it. The longer Apple delays getting an iPhone on Verizon, the more people will get Android phones. And those people will buy applications. And just like FairPlay locked people into the iPod ecosystem and "encouraged" them to buy another iPod when they upgrade (or else have to buy their content all over again), applications are going to have the same effect on smart phones. If a strong Andoid base is developed before the iPhone is available on those other networks, the harder it will be for Apple to achieve penetration because those users will be locked into Android and all the apps they bought.
Besides, CDMA will be around long after a phone bought today has reached end of life. Make a CDMA phone now, 2-3 years from now sell a hybrid CDMA/LTE phone to those same people, and 2-3 years later sell them an LTE phone. It fits perfectly with the typical upgrade cycle for most phone users.
assuming such a thing is possible.
It is. I would not have suggested it if it weren't possible. The updated CDMA standard was approved last summer, and the hardware supporting it is expected to be available in 2010.
"A complementary device enhancement known as simultaneous 1X Voice and EV-DO Data (SVDO) will also become available during the same timeframe and will enable CDMA2000 devices to access EV-DO packet data services while in an active 1X circuit-switch voice call. For example, users will be able to send emails or access the Web while on voice calls; phones with GPS can update maps or download real-time traffic information while on voice calls, etc. This device enhancement, which enables these concurrent voice and data services, is independent of the air link standard and infrastructure."
http://www.cdg.org/news/press/2009/aug17_09.asp
Oh, and let me guess - GSM is NOT going to obsolete? In 2020, AT&T will still be using GSM???? Yeah right! Especially now that GSM encryption got cracked - what do you say about that??? Some kind of standard.
With AT&T they might with little pockets of whatever replaces it.
Note: CDMA and GSM are the voice technologies. EVDO and UTMS are the data technologies. Verizon has not stated whether it plans to go with a GSM voice system or not after going with LTE for 4G data.
With AT&T they might with little pockets of whatever replaces it.
Note: CDMA and GSM are the voice technologies. EVDO and UTMS are the data technologies. Verizon has not stated whether it plans to go with a GSM voice system or not after going with LTE for 4G data.
Actually, I recall seeing a statement by Verizon that they intend on continuing to use CDMA (sorry, can't provide a link at this time.)
Oh, and let me guess - GSM is NOT going to obsolete? In 2020, AT&T will still be using GSM???? Yeah right! Especially now that GSM encryption got cracked - what do you say about that??? Some kind of standard.
a 10 to 20 year old version of GSM encryption was hacked. the current one is a lot stronger and is still secure
Blu-Ray accounted for 12.6% of revenue for disc sales in the US last year, that is a little higher than minority.
That's less then 1/3 - OK, you can argue about what "minority" means but it fits for me.
You are aware that Apple has implemented HDCP aren't you?
In the OS or as passthrough? If in the OS, no and I would love to see someone credible talking about it since that would be a pretty substantial change to the kernel.
Most hybird phone don't work well. i have tried Blackberry 9530 (Storm) using on GSM network. the data service/signal always dropped out. Seriously. I don't think VZ will get iphone even LTE version is out. let say some life in the city don't have LTE coverage. How did you get the coverage. switch back to CDMA ? Apple have to built specific version for Verizon. LTE+CDMA. I would say LTE+GSM still make more sense (it can sell worldwide). especially Verizon pushing Droid so hard. if iphone aviliable for verizon. They will push Droid or iPhone ?
Switching between LTE and CDMA for data is no different than switching between 3G and edge. It just programming which Apple is very good at.
Verizon will get the iPhone and most likely late this year. Apple is not going to ignore half of the potential market in the US.
Verizon will still push the Droid and other phones just the same as AT&T pushes other phones. Why? The answer is "Never". Jeopardy music please. What is "When did you ever see AT&T run an ad for the iPhone?"