Apple, AT&T originally agreed to iPhone exclusivity until 2012

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 91
    mudpudmudpud Posts: 38member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    30 countries is not worldwide. Worldwide is over 200 countries.





    No, all they did for China was remove one feature. They didn't make it incompatible with the rest of the world.





    You started the presumptions about others, specifically that I use AT&T -- despite every post I make indicating that I'm in Europe.



    Hmmmmmmm you're not in Europe. That's what I love about all former Iron Curtain people - they think they're in Europe?!?!?
  • Reply 42 of 91
    iguesssoiguessso Posts: 132member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Twiztd View Post


    As far as the CDMA issue.....most everyone is not getting it: Qualcomm has millions of these they would love to sale to Apple. Its not that hard to recode for new hardware. This is a moot point.



    Correct. It's not trivial but it's done all the time, in lots and lots of phones. Pop in a different chip and away you go.



    It's definitely not CDMA that's holding it back. The other flaw in all the noise about why there is no Verizon phone: if it's about CDMA then why are there no T-Mobile rumors?



    The iPhone is exclusive to AT&T because that's the deal Apple made. And more than likely kept it as the result of the iPad negotiations.
  • Reply 43 of 91
    How is this just coming out now? It's not like this court case hasn't been posted on the Internet before. Yet I suppose because Engadget has just come across this old case it spreads across the tech world like wildfire.



    These sites apparently need to pay more attention. User V.B. from the AT&T Forums found this case and information in 2008:

    http://forums.wireless.att.com/t5/Ap...1668318#M59865



    The speculation though is that the 5 year agreement was nullified when Apple agreed to stop taking a part of the iPhone's subscription costs:

    http://www.pcworld.com/article/14689...lan_costs.html
  • Reply 44 of 91
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    No, all they did for China was remove one feature. They didn't make it incompatible with the rest of the world.



    Not incompatible, but an iPhone that no one in their right mind will buy because of what Apple did to change it, why is that so different from launching a CDMA phone?
  • Reply 45 of 91
    eriamjheriamjh Posts: 1,366member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacHarborGuy View Post


    Why is this news? This had already been talked about back when the iPhone first launched. Leo Laporte was going on about how the iPhone was locked to AT&T until 2012, because the contract was for 5 years.



    I remember this news, but for the life of me forgot about it because of all the analysts conveniently ignoring it every June when a new iPhone came out.



    It explains why Apple and AT&T don't unlock the phones when the 2-year contract ends. Where the country allows, they don't have to.
  • Reply 46 of 91
    eacummeacumm Posts: 93member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mudpud View Post


    Whereas I don't like the fact that CDMA and GSM are incompatible,

    Whereas this is frustrating since I now have to reactivate my BlackBerry each time I travel back to Europe since my HTC DROID Incredible is CDMA only

    Whereas I am in general not a fan of region-branded DVDs, different electrical plugs and voltages,

    None of this changes the fact that I, a former AT&T customer, hate the aforementioned company, their crappy implementation of GSM, a European standard and while I do love Apple, I hate what the iPhone has become.



    Did you know that if you try and use a calling card to make an international call on AT&T, they charge you as if you never used a calling card but dialed directly from their phone?!?!?!?!?!?



    One of the many reasons why I hate AT&T. Verizon rocks for me ... since 2005



    PS before you make assumptions about people, look at yourself first. The comment section here could do with fewer of your crappy comments.



    I have made over a thousand International call using a calling card on AT&T and they have never charged me as a direct call, it just eat's up my minutes, so don't lie just because you hate AT&T.
  • Reply 47 of 91
    hellacoolhellacool Posts: 759member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Soskok;


    Are those dropped calls really so bad? Statistics shows that at&t has 4.5% dropped calls against 2.5% on Verizon. It is 5 out 100 calls dropped on at&t. So worst scenario is 2 calls dropped a day. Is it really that hard to redial? Or all of you are involved in business there every lost minute costs thousands of $ ?



    Yes at&t costs more but you get that iPhone for a $100 when it costs unlocked no less than $600 in other countries.



    So is it really all that bad. Or you just reluctant to change your carrier?



    Yes it is. I live in the DC area and drop 3/4 of my calls over 5 minutes. I eagerly await a Verizon iPhone. Then AT$T can kiss off.
  • Reply 48 of 91
    masternavmasternav Posts: 442member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TheRobin View Post


    Why is all this so secret? These kind of things most definitely effect the companies earnings etc. Both of these companies are publicly traded. Shouldn't they be letting their shareholders know details like this?



    To the keynote that introduced the iPhone - SJ said, very straight forward, we have a five year deal with AT&T - it's out there. No need to pore over legal documents. It was stated as baldly as that right in the first iPhone keynote. So ain't no secret, people have lost all short-term memory capacity, or perhaps just want the iPhone on Verizon so bad they are willing to make fantasy a reality. Now, whether the legal teams left any escape clauses in place is another matter - and rife for speculation. But really folks, are attention spans so short that you can't even remember back a scant three years?





    Point of clarification: as Soli mentions downthread the 5 year reference was out of a reference made by a Verizon exec - the keynote (upon my own review) does not contain the 5 year reference I alleged by Steve Jobs, the only reference to the contract of any specificity was by then Cingular CEO Stan Sigman to a 'multi-year contract".



    Now someone pass me the grits to dish up with my crow, because if I make a mistake or misattribute - I like to own to it - for integrity's sake if nothing else.
  • Reply 49 of 91
    masternavmasternav Posts: 442member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    If you believe this, you don't know Steve Jobs and you don't understand Apple's corporate culture. It is nearly inconceivable that Apple would sell different iPhones for different networks. Apple will produce one iPhone for the most standard network protocols. If Verizon want to play with Apple, then Verizon need to play by the standards Apple have chosen. Apple will not change for Verizon.



    Remember Apple brought the iPhone concept to Verizon first, and once they refused brought it to Cingular, which became ATT Mobility after they bought ATT Wireless. The only thing standing in the way for Apple is making sure that a suitable "world chip set" (CDMA/GSM) is available and meets spec. Rumors are that the Qualcomm Snapdragon series is made to order, as it is many times more power efficient than any out at he time when the iPhone was first developed. And think about it - at the time Apple brought it to Verizon, they had to know that the majority of the world was on GSM to begin with and probably were sorting out hardware designs to reflect that. Remember, just because they announce something this year doesn't mean it just magically popped out of Jony Ive's mind yesterday.
  • Reply 50 of 91
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by masternav View Post


    To the keynote that introduced the iPhone - SJ said, very straight forward, we have a five year deal with AT&T - it's out there. No need to pore over legal documents. It was stated as baldly as that right in the first iPhone keynote. So ain't no secret, people have lost all short-term memory capacity, or perhaps just want the iPhone on Verizon so bad they are willing to make fantasy a reality. Now, whether the legal teams left any escape clauses in place is another matter - and rife for speculation. But really folks, are attention spans so short that you can't even remember back a scant three years?





    Please point out the hour and minute it's stated. The only evidence I know of comes from Verizon, after the event stating that the Apple came to them first but they wouldn't agree to their 5 year deal, profit sharing, etc.
  • Reply 51 of 91
    masternavmasternav Posts: 442member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mudpud View Post


    Whereas I don't like the fact that CDMA and GSM are incompatible,

    Whereas this is frustrating since I now have to reactivate my BlackBerry each time I travel back to Europe since my HTC DROID Incredible is CDMA only

    Whereas I am in general not a fan of region-branded DVDs, different electrical plugs and voltages,

    None of this changes the fact that I, a former AT&T customer, hate the aforementioned company, their crappy implementation of GSM, a European standard and while I do love Apple, I hate what the iPhone has become.



    Did you know that if you try and use a calling card to make an international call on AT&T, they charge you as if you never used a calling card but dialed directly from their phone?!?!?!?!?!?



    One of the many reasons why I hate AT&T. Verizon rocks for me ... since 2005



    PS before you make assumptions about people, look at yourself first. The comment section here could do with fewer of your crappy comments.



    Whereass I HAVE used an international calling card on ATT and they did not do that to me, hmmm could it be I am a more enlightened consumer than thou?



    So yeah. I'm OK with your love/hate thing, it always amuses me when consumers invest so much emotion into something as silly as a cell carrier, or phone manufacturer. And before YOU make ass-sumptions about someone - take a look in the mirror. Then lift your fingers from the keyboard and take a chill pill Sunny Jim. You're all surly and churlish calling other's comments crappy with you leaving your own inconsiderate foetid remains herein. Chip off the shoulder, nose down, unclench those fists and relax.

  • Reply 52 of 91
    masternavmasternav Posts: 442member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Please point out the hour and minute it's stated. The only evidence I know of comes from Verizon, after the event stating that the Apple came to them first but they wouldn't agree to their 5 year deal, profit sharing, etc.



    Oh lordy Soli, I guess I'll have to hunt it out of Youtube - I only keep 2 year's worth of keynotes and seminars stored. I just remember that comment distinctly, because I commented to another engineer that 5 years was a LONG time to be in a marriage of convenience. I have referred back to it ever since without even thinking to clip that statement. Gimmee a bit - I'll sort it and post back with the time marks.

  • Reply 53 of 91
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by masternav View Post


    Oh lordy Soli, I guess I'll have to hunt it out of Youtube - I only keep 2 year's worth of keynotes and seminars stored. I just remember that comment distinctly, because I commented to another engineer that 5 years was a LONG time to be in a marriage of convenience. I have referred back to it ever since without even thinking to clip that statement. Gimmee a bit - I'll sort it and post back with the time marks.





    Please do, I can't find it anywhere but from Verizon.
  • Reply 54 of 91
    ipaladinipaladin Posts: 20member
    http://bit.ly/cmg69a



    There it is, ladies and gentlemen... the contract doesn't end in 2012, it ends in 2010! This year!!!
  • Reply 55 of 91
    I though the iPad deal with AT&T binded them another 2 years? IMO AT&T pretty much has nothing with out the iPhone, I'm sure they are desperate to keep it exclusive.
  • Reply 56 of 91
    elrothelroth Posts: 1,201member
    It's amazing how much people forget.



    When Apple developed the iPhone, the carriers were in control of everything. They controlled which functions on the phone would work. To buy music (or anything), you had to buy it from the carrier.



    Nobody wanted the iPhone. Verizon turned it down because Apple wouldn't let Verizon cripple it. Verizon said publicly they didn't think it would sell anyway.



    So Apple finally convinces AT&T to sell the phone - in exchange, AT&T will pay Apple a subsidy, but it wants an exclusive period of time (5 years). Apple had no choice - nobody else wanted the iPhone.



    If it weren't for the exclusive deal with AT&T, there would be no iPhone available, and no Palm Pre, no Android, no real smartphones - only Blackberries.
  • Reply 57 of 91
    realisticrealistic Posts: 1,154member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iPaladin View Post


    http://bit.ly/cmg69a



    There it is, ladies and gentlemen... the contract doesn't end in 2012, it ends in 2010! This year!!!



    What does your link prove? It is one source reporting what another source reported, neither of which happen to be Apple or AT&T.
  • Reply 58 of 91
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member
    So you were in range of a wifi network I take it.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post


    Just this past weekend I was on a phone call with someone who needed an address, brought up the web browser on the phone and was able to help them out, all without dropping the call, ending the call, or using a separate device.



    Palm Pre Plus on Verizon.



  • Reply 59 of 91
    masternavmasternav Posts: 442member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Please do, I can't find it anywhere but from Verizon.



    Soli - I have to claim a mea culpa on this one - at right around the 1 hour mark Stan Sigman refers to a "multi-year agreement" in the 2007 MacWorld intro of the iPhone - but not the specifics. I can only think that I conflated the later Verizon reference with his comment in the keynote, as I do not have any of the notes I made previously for talks where I properly attributed that. *sigh*
  • Reply 60 of 91
    ipaladinipaladin Posts: 20member
    http://tcrn.ch/920qBS



    Fact is, the 2012 date changed. The fact USA Today reported the date change should tell you someone was crowing about a date change. Now, the question to ask would be if the iPad extended exclusivity in some way.



    A Verizon iPhone will happen at some point given their LTE ambitions and spectrum holdings in the 700 mhz band as a result of Auction 73. The other question Steve Jobs has to ask is this:



    Does he want people continue to be stuck on the world's WORST GSM carrier, or does he want to give the option of the world's best CDMA carrier? I am a GSM fanboy but it's an insult to GSM to compare AT&T's network with Euro-style GSM, the call quality and coverage over there is so much better than what AT&T does. Ironically the only network that comes close over here is Verizon.



    I'd settle for T-Mobile though over AT&T, they're the only GSM carrier in this country that has any sort of quality control.
Sign In or Register to comment.