Pundits are about as accurate as rumors. I can believe the contract had performance metrics for both parties that could lead to early termination or renegotiation, but we've no evidence that this has occurred.
You make my point while missing it at the same time.
Your pundits/rumors that have been claiming a 5-year contract are no more reliable than more recent pundits/rumors that are claiming a 3-year contract. In fact, we know nothing about any such contract, or even if one exists, let alone performance metrics for early termination.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sincere
what they said people keep crying CDMA .....why? its not WORLD....if you want to be big you have to be World....not just U.S.
CDMA isn't US-only. If you want to be big in Japan, China and Korea, you need CDMA capability.
If you want to be world and not just Europe then you need to support both.
CDMA isn't US-only. If you want to be big in Japan, China and Korea, you need CDMA capability.
If you want to be world and not just Europe then you need to support both.
That isn't true. The biggest players in Japan are S. Korea are 3GSM. The biggest player in China is GSM-based with their 3G being a nascent TD-SCDMA network.
If this Wikipage is even close to correct then China has 50M CDMA-based customers with 650M GSM-based customers; Japan has 80M that is GSM-based while only 32M on CDMA; and S. Korea has 37M on 3GSM and only 8M on EV-DO for 3G data.
Those CMDA numbers aren't insubstantial but they surely aren't close to disqualifying you from being a "big" in any of those countries.
China's growing economic middle class and China Mobile's potential of more than 522M subscribers as of the end of 2009 would be a bigger grab than any other market once they get their 3G in full swing.
That isn't true. The biggest players in Japan are S. Korea are 3GSM. The biggest player in China is GSM-based with their 3G being a nascent TD-SCDMA network.
If this Wikipage is even close to correct then China has 50M CDMA-based customers with 650M GSM-based customers; Japan has 80M that is GSM-based while only 32M on CDMA; and S. Korea has 37M on 3GSM and only 8M on EV-DO for 3G data.
Those CMDA numbers aren't insubstantial but they surely aren't close to disqualifying you from being a "big" in any of those countries.
China's growing economic middle class and China Mobile's potential of more than 522M subscribers as of the end of 2009 would be a bigger grab than any other market once they get their 3G in full swing.
I agree, CDMA is looking like a bit of a dead end at this point, GSM-2G has evolved into UMTS/HSPDA-3G and from there looks likely to evolve into LTE (Long Term Evolution)-4G. UMTS/HSPDA-3G descended from GSM but confusingly is also known as WCDMA.
Apple want to keep it simple and offer a limited amount of SKU's to the broadest possible market, they are doing this by offering a device that offers GSM and UMTS/HSPDA now LTE in the future.
I have no doubt that Verizon may have been offered a device at some point BUT I think this would have beed tied to their timeline for rolling out UMTS/HSPDA across their network and not whether Apple would offer a device with CDMA. People also seem to think that Apple could use a chip that had CDMA as well as what is currently offered, they probably could but seeing as this would have further complicated things in terms of the way service is provided by the networks. CDMA has no SIM, GSM has SIM etc.. Confusing for the customer and expensive for Apple, even if the chip only cost $5 more, multiply that by 30 million and that is a sizable loss in revenue to serve a much smaller market than GSM/UMTS/HSPDA-3G.
People also seem to think that Apple could use a chip that had CDMA as well as what is currently offered, they probably could but seeing as this would have further complicated things in terms of the way service is provided by the networks. [...] Confusing for the customer and expensive for Apple, even if the chip only cost $5 more, multiply that by 30 million and that is a sizable loss in revenue to serve a much smaller market than GSM/UMTS/HSPDA-3G.
Even if it was the same cost there is an issue of the additional size of the chip, not including all the additional radio modules needed to make it a true "world" phone. Then there is power efficiency of having a mutli-mode chip verse a dedicated one.
But even if the chip cost, size and power usage was the same the same or better there is still the reason that 3GSM and LTE were created from as few Qualcomm patents as possible. Qualcomm wants an ungodly amount of money per device, regardless of whether the device was running on a CDMA network or not. Perhaps they've gained some humility as they've lost both EV-DO and UMB to 3GPP with only the barest of patents still holding, but I doubt it.
A couple other things to consider: 1) Apple didn't even put the 1700MHz spectrum in the iPad for T-Mobile despite it being 3GSM and unlocked, and 2) if these world-mode chips were so great then why aren't they being used by all manufacturers in they entire product line? It's obvious the one-size-fits-all concept has some drawbacks.
AT&T coverage is pretty good here in Indianapolis. Agreed regarding iPhone that if you don't get good 3G coverage from AT&T where you live, then you're kind of 'left out'.
I live in Lincoln, NE. While the map says there is coverage, it isn't consistent coverage as I can't get coverage at work or home.
In the mean time, I haven't upgraded my crappy 4 year old phone as I don't want to get into another contract if Apple allows another company in the next few months (I have been thinking this for years!) Let the phone make it to the ipad announcement, now it is let the phone make it to the next iphone announcement.......
Comments
Pundits are about as accurate as rumors. I can believe the contract had performance metrics for both parties that could lead to early termination or renegotiation, but we've no evidence that this has occurred.
You make my point while missing it at the same time.
Your pundits/rumors that have been claiming a 5-year contract are no more reliable than more recent pundits/rumors that are claiming a 3-year contract. In fact, we know nothing about any such contract, or even if one exists, let alone performance metrics for early termination.
what they said
CDMA isn't US-only. If you want to be big in Japan, China and Korea, you need CDMA capability.
If you want to be world and not just Europe then you need to support both.
CDMA isn't US-only. If you want to be big in Japan, China and Korea, you need CDMA capability.
If you want to be world and not just Europe then you need to support both.
That isn't true. The biggest players in Japan are S. Korea are 3GSM. The biggest player in China is GSM-based with their 3G being a nascent TD-SCDMA network.
If this Wikipage is even close to correct then China has 50M CDMA-based customers with 650M GSM-based customers; Japan has 80M that is GSM-based while only 32M on CDMA; and S. Korea has 37M on 3GSM and only 8M on EV-DO for 3G data.Those CMDA numbers aren't insubstantial but they surely aren't close to disqualifying you from being a "big" in any of those countries.
China's growing economic middle class and China Mobile's potential of more than 522M subscribers as of the end of 2009 would be a bigger grab than any other market once they get their 3G in full swing.
That isn't true. The biggest players in Japan are S. Korea are 3GSM. The biggest player in China is GSM-based with their 3G being a nascent TD-SCDMA network.
If this Wikipage is even close to correct then China has 50M CDMA-based customers with 650M GSM-based customers; Japan has 80M that is GSM-based while only 32M on CDMA; and S. Korea has 37M on 3GSM and only 8M on EV-DO for 3G data.Those CMDA numbers aren't insubstantial but they surely aren't close to disqualifying you from being a "big" in any of those countries.
China's growing economic middle class and China Mobile's potential of more than 522M subscribers as of the end of 2009 would be a bigger grab than any other market once they get their 3G in full swing.
I agree, CDMA is looking like a bit of a dead end at this point, GSM-2G has evolved into UMTS/HSPDA-3G and from there looks likely to evolve into LTE (Long Term Evolution)-4G. UMTS/HSPDA-3G descended from GSM but confusingly is also known as WCDMA.
Apple want to keep it simple and offer a limited amount of SKU's to the broadest possible market, they are doing this by offering a device that offers GSM and UMTS/HSPDA now LTE in the future.
I have no doubt that Verizon may have been offered a device at some point BUT I think this would have beed tied to their timeline for rolling out UMTS/HSPDA across their network and not whether Apple would offer a device with CDMA. People also seem to think that Apple could use a chip that had CDMA as well as what is currently offered, they probably could but seeing as this would have further complicated things in terms of the way service is provided by the networks. CDMA has no SIM, GSM has SIM etc.. Confusing for the customer and expensive for Apple, even if the chip only cost $5 more, multiply that by 30 million and that is a sizable loss in revenue to serve a much smaller market than GSM/UMTS/HSPDA-3G.
People also seem to think that Apple could use a chip that had CDMA as well as what is currently offered, they probably could but seeing as this would have further complicated things in terms of the way service is provided by the networks. [...] Confusing for the customer and expensive for Apple, even if the chip only cost $5 more, multiply that by 30 million and that is a sizable loss in revenue to serve a much smaller market than GSM/UMTS/HSPDA-3G.
Even if it was the same cost there is an issue of the additional size of the chip, not including all the additional radio modules needed to make it a true "world" phone. Then there is power efficiency of having a mutli-mode chip verse a dedicated one.
But even if the chip cost, size and power usage was the same the same or better there is still the reason that 3GSM and LTE were created from as few Qualcomm patents as possible. Qualcomm wants an ungodly amount of money per device, regardless of whether the device was running on a CDMA network or not. Perhaps they've gained some humility as they've lost both EV-DO and UMB to 3GPP with only the barest of patents still holding, but I doubt it.
A couple other things to consider: 1) Apple didn't even put the 1700MHz spectrum in the iPad for T-Mobile despite it being 3GSM and unlocked, and 2) if these world-mode chips were so great then why aren't they being used by all manufacturers in they entire product line? It's obvious the one-size-fits-all concept has some drawbacks.
AT&T coverage is pretty good here in Indianapolis. Agreed regarding iPhone that if you don't get good 3G coverage from AT&T where you live, then you're kind of 'left out'.
I live in Lincoln, NE. While the map says there is coverage, it isn't consistent coverage as I can't get coverage at work or home.
In the mean time, I haven't upgraded my crappy 4 year old phone as I don't want to get into another contract if Apple allows another company in the next few months (I have been thinking this for years!) Let the phone make it to the ipad announcement, now it is let the phone make it to the next iphone announcement.......