The rumors don't "piss people off" (I see nobody's posts sounding "pissed off.")
It's the repeating of the rumors as fact that causes a bit of irritation.
this guy sounds pissed off:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menno
One year of rumors. It's been FOUR years of rumors for a Verizon iPhone. Always citing "sources close to the matter." always popping up JUST when the last round of rumors faded.
Whatever. The point about the Boy Who Cried Wolf story is to always believe the boy who cries wolf, just in case.
The stakes are not so big here, but just because the rumours were wrong before does not mean they are wrong now. The Old Grey Lady is a serious outfit, and is citing sources - it's own sources - not quoting the WSJ. With contacts in Apple.
This is generally code for "A senior Apple Employee".
The rest of the web thinks that APple is planting this story to curtail potential defectors to Android over Holidays.
Not that I am anti AT&T or pro Verizon. It is just that where I live and work - I can't get an AT&T signal! T-Mobile is even worse.
I live in one of the top 75 cities in the US and AT&T has virtually no coverage. It is unheard of a phone is tied to only one carrier for this long. I am thrilled at the news but would be thrilled if it was with any carrier I could get coverage with. It just happens that I am currently with Verizon which is King here due to acquisitions and Verizon putting $$$$ into my area the past 4-5 years or so. Before that, we didn't even have a Verizon office in our city.
I understand your reservations after 3 years of this rumour essential "crying wolf? but I think there is enough circumstantial evidence, at least for me, to finally think that this is finally going to happen.
What's your take on the kind of iPhone assuming this may actually be a 'wolf'? Is there evidence of this being the same phone i.e. internet and calls simultaneously, or a modified phone to deal with Verizon's current limitations?
Agreed. I find the rumors hard to believe due to the lack of details about what hardware is being used or even how they are addressing the whole 5 year contract that was revealed during one of the early lawsuits.
The probability that that contract is still in effect, especially given the slanderous changes made to the iPad deal right after their announcement, is insanely low.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
I understand your reservations after 3 years of this rumour essential "crying wolf? but I think there is enough circumstantial evidence, at least for me, to finally think that this is finally going to happen.
That's hilarious. Could you link to some of the stories about it you cite as evidence this time?
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadash
I don't remember people getting irritated about the slew of iPad rumors last year.
The slew of iPad rumors never included this level of nonsense. Also, it's a new product. Not a reawakening of one that was killed in 2006.
Quote:
Originally Posted by whitentosh
I don't understand it myself. If Verizon wants to be on the iPhone, isn't that a good thing?
Only for Apple. Verizon said, "No," four years ago. If they "want" to get the iPhone now, they're bound and gagged naked with Apple holding a chain around their neck.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
What's your take on the kind of iPhone assuming this may actually be a 'wolf'? Is there evidence of this being the same phone i.e. internet and calls simultaneously, or a modified phone to deal with Verizon's current limitations?
CDMA doesn't need modification to do that. A carrier's choice in CDMA just might SUCK, though.
The probability that that contract is still in effect, especially given the slanderous changes made to the iPad deal right after their announcement, is insanely low.
That's hilarious. Could you link to some of the stories about it you cite as evidence this time?
The slew of iPad rumors never included this level of nonsense. Also, it's a new product. Not a reawakening of one that was killed in 2006.
Only for Apple. Verizon said, "No," four years ago. If they "want" to get the iPhone now, they're bound and gagged naked with Apple holding a chain around their neck.
CDMA doesn't need modification to do that. A carrier's choice in CDMA just might SUCK, though.
Several people who were never convinced of all the stories in the past merely said the level of journalistic notice being taken this time is of a higher caliber, that's all.
The probability that that contract is still in effect, especially given the slanderous changes made to the iPad deal right after their announcement, is insanely low.
That's hilarious. Could you link to some of the stories about it you cite as evidence this time?
The slew of iPad rumors never included this level of nonsense. Also, it's a new product. Not a reawakening of one that was killed in 2006.
Only for Apple. Verizon said, "No," four years ago. If they "want" to get the iPhone now, they're bound and gagged naked with Apple holding a chain around their neck.
CDMA doesn't need modification to do that. A carrier's choice in CDMA just might SUCK, though.
There's nothing "wrong" with CDMA. In fact, many so called experts believe it's a superior technology to GSM but networks didn't want to pay Qualcomm to use it.
Two other points: GSM can't handle voice and data simultaneously which is why AT&T only offers that capability in 3G territory. Secondly CDMA does have simultaneous voice and data but Verizonwireless has not adopted or implemented it (yet). Whether they will go forward with simultaneous voice and data over CDMA or just wait for LTE is an unanswerable question by the masses.
There's nothing "wrong" with CDMA. In fact, many so called experts believe it's a superior technology to GSM but networks didn't want to pay Qualcomm to use it.
There are "so called experts ? that also claim the Earth was created 6000 years ago. If we?re talking only ?2G? technology then CDMA has many advantages over GSM that I would call superior, but if we?re talking ?3G? then 3GPP has many things over 3GPP2 which makes it superior.
Quote:
Two other points: GSM can't handle voice and data simultaneously which is why AT&T only offers that capability in 3G territory. Secondly CDMA does have simultaneous voice and data but Verizonwireless has not adopted or implemented it (yet). Whether they will go forward with simultaneous voice and data over CDMA or just wait for LTE is an unanswerable question by the masses.
I find it odd that you distinctly separate GSM from UMTS noting simultaneous (GPRS and EDGE) data and voice is not possible, yet with CDMA you are bundling it with ?3G? EV-DO Rev.B and/or whatever rigged configuration Verizon has come up with to allow simultaneous voice and data over EV-DO Rev. A.
I've seen it on the CNN crawl, MSNBC and a host of other usually credible sources that lead me to the same conclusion. Things are going to get interesting with this and windows phone 7 entering the fray.
Whatever. The point about the Boy Who Cried Wolf story is to always believe the boy who cries wolf, just in case.
The stakes are not so big here, but just because the rumours were wrong before does not mean they are wrong now. The Old Grey Lady is a serious outfit, and is citing sources - it's own sources - not quoting the WSJ. With contacts in Apple.
This is generally code for "A senior Apple Employee".
The rest of the web thinks that APple is planting this story to curtail potential defectors to Android over Holidays.
Not pissed off, frustrated. because people continue to believe tripe.
It's citing sources who claim to HAVE sources in apple. Aka "heard it from a friend."
And Apple releasing the rumor now is stupid because it harms their own sales (look at the surveys taken about people who would jump carriers if it came to Verizon) for the holiday rush, not to mention the months leading up to it. The rest of the web doesn't believe that apple planted this story. In fact, the rest of the web is pretty sure that even IF this leak was real Apple wouldn't want it released. The rest of the web is more than apple rumor sites. Or are you one of those people who thought that they intentionally "Lost" the prototype of the iphone4?
Countless "reputable" newspapers have reported that Verizon's getting the iphone, and they have for years. In fact, most people would consider the WSJ a "serious outfit." Because the last time they came out with a prediction every news channel and most papers blindly quoted them without fact checking it.
There is NOTHING about this story that makes it any more believable than the others. In fact, there's actually less. Because at least most other rumors claimed to be speaking with someone directly in the chain of command, the NYT is getting the information second hand.
I still have my 1st gen iphone on at&t - waiting for Verizon iphone before I upgrade. Hopefully this rumor is true, but even if it isn't it is stopping me from spending money on a new phone which is good.
AT&T should create a new commercial for this Holiday Season.
Scene: Island of Misfit Toys
A bunch of misfit toys circle around a Verizon vPhone and the spotted elephant says to the vPhone, "Why are you here and so unhappy?"
The vPhone says, "They put me on Verizon. Now I can't surf the internet or run any internet application while I talk on the Phone. Also, my top speed went down from 7.2mbs to 3mbs. My CDMA signal drains my battery faster and I can no longer use any of the free 20,000 wifi hotspots. On top of that, any calling minute that I don't use each month, I lose. And just look at me!.....there are Verizon "V"s all over my skin".
AT&T should create a new commercial for this Holiday Season.
Scene: Island of Misfit Toys
A bunch of misfit toys circle around a Verizon vPhone and the spotted elephant says to the vPhone, "Why are you here and so unhappy?"
The vPhone says, "They put me on Verizon. Now I can't surf the internet or run any internet application while I talk on the Phone. Also, my top speed went down from 7.2mbs to 3mbs. My CDMA signal drains my battery faster and I can no longer use any of the free 20,000 wifi hotspots. On top of that, any calling minute that I don't use each month, I lose. And just look at me!.....there are Verizon "V"s all over my skin".
“My download speeds on Verizon are slower than my upload speeds on AT&T”
Not exactly easy to relay in an ad without a visual aid, but it’s certainly true in the tests I’m preformed with my iPhone 4.
But that is neither here nor there. There are people that won’t or can’t leave Verizon so they’ll get the iPhone 4, AT&T customers will have less congestion as less need to come to AT&T and hopefully some leave to go to Verizon. On top of that, this may spawn some better rate plans to keep customers. AT&T is really the only the ones who lose here, and even they may have a slight victory if Verizon’s network crumbles under the pressure of the data heavy iPhone user.
Getting better all the time....used to have 2 bars, now 4-5. Depends on where you live. Verizon not very strong here in Chicago. Might be the buildings.....I suppose that represents a challenge for any carrier.
Comments
The rumors don't "piss people off" (I see nobody's posts sounding "pissed off.")
It's the repeating of the rumors as fact that causes a bit of irritation.
this guy sounds pissed off:
One year of rumors. It's been FOUR years of rumors for a Verizon iPhone. Always citing "sources close to the matter." always popping up JUST when the last round of rumors faded.
Whatever. The point about the Boy Who Cried Wolf story is to always believe the boy who cries wolf, just in case.
The stakes are not so big here, but just because the rumours were wrong before does not mean they are wrong now. The Old Grey Lady is a serious outfit, and is citing sources - it's own sources - not quoting the WSJ. With contacts in Apple.
This is generally code for "A senior Apple Employee".
The rest of the web thinks that APple is planting this story to curtail potential defectors to Android over Holidays.
Wake me when you can buy one.....
Not that I am anti AT&T or pro Verizon. It is just that where I live and work - I can't get an AT&T signal! T-Mobile is even worse.
I live in one of the top 75 cities in the US and AT&T has virtually no coverage. It is unheard of a phone is tied to only one carrier for this long. I am thrilled at the news but would be thrilled if it was with any carrier I could get coverage with. It just happens that I am currently with Verizon which is King here due to acquisitions and Verizon putting $$$$ into my area the past 4-5 years or so. Before that, we didn't even have a Verizon office in our city.
I understand your reservations after 3 years of this rumour essential "crying wolf? but I think there is enough circumstantial evidence, at least for me, to finally think that this is finally going to happen.
What's your take on the kind of iPhone assuming this may actually be a 'wolf'? Is there evidence of this being the same phone i.e. internet and calls simultaneously, or a modified phone to deal with Verizon's current limitations?
Agreed. I find the rumors hard to believe due to the lack of details about what hardware is being used or even how they are addressing the whole 5 year contract that was revealed during one of the early lawsuits.
The probability that that contract is still in effect, especially given the slanderous changes made to the iPad deal right after their announcement, is insanely low.
I understand your reservations after 3 years of this rumour essential "crying wolf? but I think there is enough circumstantial evidence, at least for me, to finally think that this is finally going to happen.
That's hilarious. Could you link to some of the stories about it you cite as evidence this time?
I don't remember people getting irritated about the slew of iPad rumors last year.
The slew of iPad rumors never included this level of nonsense. Also, it's a new product. Not a reawakening of one that was killed in 2006.
I don't understand it myself. If Verizon wants to be on the iPhone, isn't that a good thing?
Only for Apple. Verizon said, "No," four years ago. If they "want" to get the iPhone now, they're bound and gagged naked with Apple holding a chain around their neck.
What's your take on the kind of iPhone assuming this may actually be a 'wolf'? Is there evidence of this being the same phone i.e. internet and calls simultaneously, or a modified phone to deal with Verizon's current limitations?
CDMA doesn't need modification to do that. A carrier's choice in CDMA just might SUCK, though.
*cough cough well what do we have here cough cough*
The probability that that contract is still in effect, especially given the slanderous changes made to the iPad deal right after their announcement, is insanely low.
That's hilarious. Could you link to some of the stories about it you cite as evidence this time?
The slew of iPad rumors never included this level of nonsense. Also, it's a new product. Not a reawakening of one that was killed in 2006.
Only for Apple. Verizon said, "No," four years ago. If they "want" to get the iPhone now, they're bound and gagged naked with Apple holding a chain around their neck.
CDMA doesn't need modification to do that. A carrier's choice in CDMA just might SUCK, though.
*cough cough well what do we have here cough cough*
Several people who were never convinced of all the stories in the past merely said the level of journalistic notice being taken this time is of a higher caliber, that's all.
The probability that that contract is still in effect, especially given the slanderous changes made to the iPad deal right after their announcement, is insanely low.
That's hilarious. Could you link to some of the stories about it you cite as evidence this time?
The slew of iPad rumors never included this level of nonsense. Also, it's a new product. Not a reawakening of one that was killed in 2006.
Only for Apple. Verizon said, "No," four years ago. If they "want" to get the iPhone now, they're bound and gagged naked with Apple holding a chain around their neck.
CDMA doesn't need modification to do that. A carrier's choice in CDMA just might SUCK, though.
*cough cough well what do we have here cough cough*
There's nothing "wrong" with CDMA. In fact, many so called experts believe it's a superior technology to GSM but networks didn't want to pay Qualcomm to use it.
Two other points: GSM can't handle voice and data simultaneously which is why AT&T only offers that capability in 3G territory. Secondly CDMA does have simultaneous voice and data but Verizonwireless has not adopted or implemented it (yet). Whether they will go forward with simultaneous voice and data over CDMA or just wait for LTE is an unanswerable question by the masses.
There's nothing "wrong" with CDMA. In fact, many so called experts believe it's a superior technology to GSM but networks didn't want to pay Qualcomm to use it.
There are "so called experts ? that also claim the Earth was created 6000 years ago. If we?re talking only ?2G? technology then CDMA has many advantages over GSM that I would call superior, but if we?re talking ?3G? then 3GPP has many things over 3GPP2 which makes it superior.
Two other points: GSM can't handle voice and data simultaneously which is why AT&T only offers that capability in 3G territory. Secondly CDMA does have simultaneous voice and data but Verizonwireless has not adopted or implemented it (yet). Whether they will go forward with simultaneous voice and data over CDMA or just wait for LTE is an unanswerable question by the masses.
I find it odd that you distinctly separate GSM from UMTS noting simultaneous (GPRS and EDGE) data and voice is not possible, yet with CDMA you are bundling it with ?3G? EV-DO Rev.B and/or whatever rigged configuration Verizon has come up with to allow simultaneous voice and data over EV-DO Rev. A.
I've seen it on the CNN crawl, MSNBC and a host of other usually credible sources that lead me to the same conclusion. Things are going to get interesting with this and windows phone 7 entering the fray.
Good. God. If someone people only knew
this guy sounds pissed off:
Whatever. The point about the Boy Who Cried Wolf story is to always believe the boy who cries wolf, just in case.
The stakes are not so big here, but just because the rumours were wrong before does not mean they are wrong now. The Old Grey Lady is a serious outfit, and is citing sources - it's own sources - not quoting the WSJ. With contacts in Apple.
This is generally code for "A senior Apple Employee".
The rest of the web thinks that APple is planting this story to curtail potential defectors to Android over Holidays.
Not pissed off, frustrated. because people continue to believe tripe.
It's citing sources who claim to HAVE sources in apple. Aka "heard it from a friend."
And Apple releasing the rumor now is stupid because it harms their own sales (look at the surveys taken about people who would jump carriers if it came to Verizon) for the holiday rush, not to mention the months leading up to it. The rest of the web doesn't believe that apple planted this story. In fact, the rest of the web is pretty sure that even IF this leak was real Apple wouldn't want it released. The rest of the web is more than apple rumor sites. Or are you one of those people who thought that they intentionally "Lost" the prototype of the iphone4?
Countless "reputable" newspapers have reported that Verizon's getting the iphone, and they have for years. In fact, most people would consider the WSJ a "serious outfit." Because the last time they came out with a prediction every news channel and most papers blindly quoted them without fact checking it.
There is NOTHING about this story that makes it any more believable than the others. In fact, there's actually less. Because at least most other rumors claimed to be speaking with someone directly in the chain of command, the NYT is getting the information second hand.
Good. God. If someone people only knew
delete
You are wrong about the NYT source. It is a direct source. Someone they talked to, and someone they obviously believe.
Since the NYT prides itself on the veracity of it's stories and the reliability of it's sources, we can take the story as true.
The counter argument , which is apparantly proclaiming angrily that "we have heard it all before" doesn't hold much weight.
The anger about something which can only benefit Apple and consumers is strange, nevertheless
I love the "are you one of those people" putdowns. Are you one if those people who thought the Earth was flat? It's a form of well poisoning.
You are wrong about the NYT source. It is a direct source. Someone they talked to, and someone they obviously believe.
Since the NYT prides itself on the veracity of it's stories and the reliability of it's sources, we can take the story as true.
The Times has Fabricated (unknowingly) in the past: Jayson Blair?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jayson_...cation_scandal
The Times has Fabricated (unknowingly) in the past: Jayson Blair?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jayson_...cation_scandal
Blair was fired. The NYT protects it's brand image. Which is one of reliability.
Scene: Island of Misfit Toys
A bunch of misfit toys circle around a Verizon vPhone and the spotted elephant says to the vPhone, "Why are you here and so unhappy?"
The vPhone says, "They put me on Verizon. Now I can't surf the internet or run any internet application while I talk on the Phone. Also, my top speed went down from 7.2mbs to 3mbs. My CDMA signal drains my battery faster and I can no longer use any of the free 20,000 wifi hotspots. On top of that, any calling minute that I don't use each month, I lose. And just look at me!.....there are Verizon "V"s all over my skin".
AT&T should create a new commercial for this Holiday Season.
Scene: Island of Misfit Toys
A bunch of misfit toys circle around a Verizon vPhone and the spotted elephant says to the vPhone, "Why are you here and so unhappy?"
The vPhone says, "They put me on Verizon. Now I can't surf the internet or run any internet application while I talk on the Phone. Also, my top speed went down from 7.2mbs to 3mbs. My CDMA signal drains my battery faster and I can no longer use any of the free 20,000 wifi hotspots. On top of that, any calling minute that I don't use each month, I lose. And just look at me!.....there are Verizon "V"s all over my skin".
But darn it, I get a signal wherever I go!
But darn it, I get a signal wherever I go!
“My download speeds on Verizon are slower than my upload speeds on AT&T”
Not exactly easy to relay in an ad without a visual aid, but it’s certainly true in the tests I’m preformed with my iPhone 4.
But that is neither here nor there. There are people that won’t or can’t leave Verizon so they’ll get the iPhone 4, AT&T customers will have less congestion as less need to come to AT&T and hopefully some leave to go to Verizon. On top of that, this may spawn some better rate plans to keep customers. AT&T is really the only the ones who lose here, and even they may have a slight victory if Verizon’s network crumbles under the pressure of the data heavy iPhone user.
But darn it, I get a signal wherever I go!
Getting better all the time....used to have 2 bars, now 4-5. Depends on where you live. Verizon not very strong here in Chicago. Might be the buildings.....I suppose that represents a challenge for any carrier.