And what about the rest of the world. Is there enough LTE built out in other countries that having an LTE phone would matter?
Not even close. What?s odd (and a credit to Verizon?s marketing) is that people expect/ed Verizon to have the LTE iPhone before anyone else does even though Verizon will be well behind many countries in the world with LTE rollouts as a percentage of their population and geographical areas. It?s just too costly and too complex to expect Verizon to cover every area they have ?3G? before these already advanced networks in comparatively tiny countries with dense populations. So, if Verizon won?t have a widespread LTE network for awhile and there are now viable LTE phones on the market today then it seems to me that we?ll know when Apple can feasibly do it by looking at the competition. I think 2012 is the earliest to expect an LTE model of the iPhone. Maybe I?ll be proven wrong, but the odds are not in Verizon?s favour.
Quote:
2011 will be one GSM iPhone and one CDMA iPhone. Even in 2012, will enough of the world's GSM networks be upgraded to LTE to justify an LTE iPhone that could only be used on GSM networks in most places? Would Apple build three models (LTE, GSM, CDMA)? Unlikely. The million dollar question...would Apple ever build at CDMA/LTE phone at all, or will Verizon be stuck on CDMA-only until it's LTE network is built out enough for an LTE-only phone (probably 2013).
Like GSM (which has 4 standard radios), WiFi and Bluetooth (usually now on the same chip) and other technologies, they get small and power efficient enough to be included and/or combined with other technologies. I don?t think we have to worry about any future LTE phones also not supporting GSM/UMTS or CDMA/EVDO.
Besides, until there is a viable (or carriers) method for VoIP over LTE we?ll still be using GSM/UMTS or CDMA for the voice and control channel to the carrier.
PS: Qualcomm now has a modern mobile handset design about the size of the iPhone that has GSM/UMTS|CDMA/EVDO. It?s just s reference mode, I?m not sure how many UMTS bands it contains, it?s using the Snapdragon SoC/PoP, which is distinct from their Samsung-based A4 design efforts and their Imagination Tech owned GPUs, but it?s bringing a single model iPhone into the realm of possibility. I think it?s possible Qualcomm would license the cellular tech component that Apple could include in it?s A4* chips.
Other questions still remain. For instance, what HSDPA and HSUPA categories does it support? Can LTE be added? What is the power usage in comparison to non-?world mode? chips?
* Using A4 because there is now known umbrella term for Apple?s versioning of Hummingbird.
It's unfortunate you've had a bad experience, but it's not limited to Verizon. I left ATT because of bad billing and outright lies by their CRSs (even had one CSR admit that the last CSR had lied to me) ...on top of the poor reception.
At&t has never been fined for bad billing Verizon has been multiple times.
I wonder how much the iPhone is responsible for AT&T's lousy network performance. Seriously, I bet it is a factor. There's a distinct chance that Verizon's network performance will suffer due to the iPhone. I'm on AT&T now, in San Francisco, and the service blows. Basically everyone here has a smartphone -- mostly iPhones. If you are in the financial district during working hours, there's really not much point to having web features at all, because the band is so clogged that the service is slower than dial up.
1.) How many would actually break their contract and incur that AT&T succubus fee?
2.) Do these people actually realize that their AT&T iPhones won't work on Verizon's network and will need to buy a new one?
I doubt it, and seeing that this was released a week prior to the announcement, I'd bet most surveyed weren't even aware of it.
Well if they have been with AT&T for over two years on their current contract and are still using a 3GS they would be fine to switch. I am in that exact category but on seeing the specs and also knowing that the hotspot is coming to AT&T I think I'll stay put and upgrade to a 4 after all. I have no connection issues these days and AT&T have been ok to be honest.
It is not just the tall buildings of NYC and San Francisco. I live in Pensacola, Florida – a flat, low-lying state. My home is two blocks off the coast in a residential area with plenty of other people nearby, including the Pensacola Naval Air Station, and yet I am lucky to get one or two bars with my iPhone. Before getting a Microcell, the phone often failed to complete calls, dropped nearly half of all calls and had troubles even keeping a signal at all on many days. This despite that fact that I could drive down the road onto the isolated barrier island in the middle of nowhere and get four and five bars and crystal clear service. Plus, the cable company learned that the signal from the iPhones when trying to communicate with the local tower was disrupting their cable modems and forcing them to reset many times a day. Even better shielded coaxial cable was not enough. The cable company had to switch to a different frequency to avoid this issue.
Could it possibly have something to do with radio interference coming from an air station, all that RADAR stuff, etc?
I wonder how much the iPhone is responsible for AT&T's lousy network performance. Seriously, I bet it is a factor. There's a distinct chance that Verizon's network performance will suffer due to the iPhone. I'm on AT&T now, in San Francisco, and the service blows. Basically everyone here has a smartphone -- mostly iPhones. If you are in the financial district during working hours, there's really not much point to having web features at all, because the band is so clogged that the service is slower than dial up.
I?m sure it?s a mix from both, but where you draw the fault line may be tricky. The 1900MHz spectrum that made it hard for signals to penetrate buildings isn?t the iPhone?s fault. The GSM algorithm quality isn?t the iPhone?s fault. Not being able to predict what a huge success and how much data the iPhone would use in 2007 isn?t AT&T?s fault. The difficulty in adding new towers and bidding on spectrums isn?t AT&T?s fault. The excessive keepalives saturating the network the iPhone was sending up until late last year isn?t AT&T?s fault.
Strange how the dropped call rate for AT&T shot up when the iPhone 4 came out....and then when the bumpers became easily available, the dropped call rate came back down.
Oh, it's not Apple's fault.
Strange how the dropped call rate dropped after Apple ended the free case program, don't you mean?
Could it possibly have something to do with radio interference coming from an air station, all that RADAR stuff, etc?
Most likely yes, but AT&T has never officially stated that. There is an two-mile area around the end of the runway where service is horrible to non-existent. To be fair, from talking to others in the neighborhood, everyone has diminished cell reception no matter the carrier, but AT&T is the only carrier that becomes totally worthless in the area (at least without a Microcell that is).
Plus the fact that AT&T told various lies about the poor quality over the past four years and then finally stated they do not service this area and my only options were to a) keep paying for their service (that I wasn't being able to use) or b) cancel my contract. Either way $300 is quite expensive for a 'paperweight' for the six months a year I've been living here.
Well, if you read the article, the numbers you are asking for where in there: "Of those polled, 4.7 percent said they had experienced a dropped call in the last three months, less than the 6 percent who said they had dropped calls in September."
The last three month of September was the quarter after the iPhone 4 was released. The quarter after that when Apple gave away cases and told everybody to get a case or hold their phone differently, the dropped calls dropped by about 20%. Not conclusive, obviously, but supports the theory.
The free case program ended on the 30th of September, there goes that theory.
Strange how the dropped call rate dropped after Apple ended the free case program, don't you mean?
Well, keep in mind that cases were finally in stock too. Even Jobs commented that the dropped call rate was higher due to a lack of cases.
Since AT&T was the only carrier with iPhones, they should show a chart showing similar phones for each carrier (IE...take away the iPhone data for AT&T). That comparison would be more meaningful.
I'm on AT&T with no significant complaints. I also have a year and a half on the current contract anyway. The iPad with no contract is a different story. I have an AT&T iPad now.
I AM considering a verizon iPad 2 though. Will see what the data plans look like. With no contract I don't use cell service every month but as I always have my AT&T iPhone, the thought of having a second device on Verizon when I am traveling is kind of appeAling. Flying to NYC? Activate the iPad and I,m good. Traveling where verizon sux, I got AT&T in my back pocket.
now if a single carrier offered a single data plan to share with both my devices, I might change my mind. If I am capped at 2 GB per month on my data plan (especially when I only use a 1/3 of that each month now), then I would jump at the chance to do that.
Well, keep in mind that cases were finally in stock too. Even Jobs commented that the dropped call rate was higher due to a lack of cases.
Since AT&T was the only carrier with iPhones, they should show a chart showing similar phones for each carrier (IE...take away the iPhone data for AT&T). That comparison would be more meaningful.
You do know there are phone carriers with iPhones outside the USA, right?
It might be fun if a slough of people pay a penalty to switch to Verizon only to discover that the Verizon network's not robust enough for the pounding iPhone users will undoubtedly deliver to it. It'll be a replay of the whining that occurred with the first iPhone update.
Comments
And what about the rest of the world. Is there enough LTE built out in other countries that having an LTE phone would matter?
Not even close. What?s odd (and a credit to Verizon?s marketing) is that people expect/ed Verizon to have the LTE iPhone before anyone else does even though Verizon will be well behind many countries in the world with LTE rollouts as a percentage of their population and geographical areas. It?s just too costly and too complex to expect Verizon to cover every area they have ?3G? before these already advanced networks in comparatively tiny countries with dense populations. So, if Verizon won?t have a widespread LTE network for awhile and there are now viable LTE phones on the market today then it seems to me that we?ll know when Apple can feasibly do it by looking at the competition. I think 2012 is the earliest to expect an LTE model of the iPhone. Maybe I?ll be proven wrong, but the odds are not in Verizon?s favour.
2011 will be one GSM iPhone and one CDMA iPhone. Even in 2012, will enough of the world's GSM networks be upgraded to LTE to justify an LTE iPhone that could only be used on GSM networks in most places? Would Apple build three models (LTE, GSM, CDMA)? Unlikely. The million dollar question...would Apple ever build at CDMA/LTE phone at all, or will Verizon be stuck on CDMA-only until it's LTE network is built out enough for an LTE-only phone (probably 2013).
Like GSM (which has 4 standard radios), WiFi and Bluetooth (usually now on the same chip) and other technologies, they get small and power efficient enough to be included and/or combined with other technologies. I don?t think we have to worry about any future LTE phones also not supporting GSM/UMTS or CDMA/EVDO.
Besides, until there is a viable (or carriers) method for VoIP over LTE we?ll still be using GSM/UMTS or CDMA for the voice and control channel to the carrier.
PS: Qualcomm now has a modern mobile handset design about the size of the iPhone that has GSM/UMTS|CDMA/EVDO. It?s just s reference mode, I?m not sure how many UMTS bands it contains, it?s using the Snapdragon SoC/PoP, which is distinct from their Samsung-based A4 design efforts and their Imagination Tech owned GPUs, but it?s bringing a single model iPhone into the realm of possibility. I think it?s possible Qualcomm would license the cellular tech component that Apple could include in it?s A4* chips.
Other questions still remain. For instance, what HSDPA and HSUPA categories does it support? Can LTE be added? What is the power usage in comparison to non-?world mode? chips?
* Using A4 because there is now known umbrella term for Apple?s versioning of Hummingbird.
So true.
It's unfortunate you've had a bad experience, but it's not limited to Verizon. I left ATT because of bad billing and outright lies by their CRSs (even had one CSR admit that the last CSR had lied to me) ...on top of the poor reception.
At&t has never been fined for bad billing Verizon has been multiple times.
http://www.walletpop.com/2010/10/28/...fine-over-mys/
http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com...n-2-12080.html
Isn't parts of New Zealand covered by a CDMA network? I'm unsure which network. I assume it has the same limitation as Verizon's.
The network is Telecrum and is actually getting less and less as they roll out their XT network.
Vodafone has always been GSM digital as they bought out Bell South (ironically an AT&T subsidiary) around 1998/1999.
Once XT is rolled out (which incidentally piggy backs off the Vodafone cell towers) New Zealand will be full GSM digital.
2 Questions:
1.) How many would actually break their contract and incur that AT&T succubus fee?
2.) Do these people actually realize that their AT&T iPhones won't work on Verizon's network and will need to buy a new one?
I doubt it, and seeing that this was released a week prior to the announcement, I'd bet most surveyed weren't even aware of it.
Well if they have been with AT&T for over two years on their current contract and are still using a 3GS they would be fine to switch. I am in that exact category but on seeing the specs and also knowing that the hotspot is coming to AT&T I think I'll stay put and upgrade to a 4 after all. I have no connection issues these days and AT&T have been ok to be honest.
It is not just the tall buildings of NYC and San Francisco. I live in Pensacola, Florida – a flat, low-lying state. My home is two blocks off the coast in a residential area with plenty of other people nearby, including the Pensacola Naval Air Station, and yet I am lucky to get one or two bars with my iPhone. Before getting a Microcell, the phone often failed to complete calls, dropped nearly half of all calls and had troubles even keeping a signal at all on many days. This despite that fact that I could drive down the road onto the isolated barrier island in the middle of nowhere and get four and five bars and crystal clear service. Plus, the cable company learned that the signal from the iPhones when trying to communicate with the local tower was disrupting their cable modems and forcing them to reset many times a day. Even better shielded coaxial cable was not enough. The cable company had to switch to a different frequency to avoid this issue.
Could it possibly have something to do with radio interference coming from an air station, all that RADAR stuff, etc?
Should be a bumper quarter for Apple as millions of folks that already have an iPhone go buy another one to switch networks...
My bet is the vast majority of new buyers are not already iPhone customers and want one but wanted to be with Verizon.
I wonder how much the iPhone is responsible for AT&T's lousy network performance. Seriously, I bet it is a factor. There's a distinct chance that Verizon's network performance will suffer due to the iPhone. I'm on AT&T now, in San Francisco, and the service blows. Basically everyone here has a smartphone -- mostly iPhones. If you are in the financial district during working hours, there's really not much point to having web features at all, because the band is so clogged that the service is slower than dial up.
I?m sure it?s a mix from both, but where you draw the fault line may be tricky. The 1900MHz spectrum that made it hard for signals to penetrate buildings isn?t the iPhone?s fault. The GSM algorithm quality isn?t the iPhone?s fault. Not being able to predict what a huge success and how much data the iPhone would use in 2007 isn?t AT&T?s fault. The difficulty in adding new towers and bidding on spectrums isn?t AT&T?s fault. The excessive keepalives saturating the network the iPhone was sending up until late last year isn?t AT&T?s fault.
Strange how the dropped call rate for AT&T shot up when the iPhone 4 came out....and then when the bumpers became easily available, the dropped call rate came back down.
Oh, it's not Apple's fault.
Strange how the dropped call rate dropped after Apple ended the free case program, don't you mean?
I am a multi-tasker on Verizon you cannot do two things at once like on At&t...I simply cannot go back to one thing at a time.
That's a Huge drawback to me too. Also, I live in a good AT&T market where I do not drop calls and have excellent Internet service with them.
I can wait a good long while and see how 'competition' develops.
Could it possibly have something to do with radio interference coming from an air station, all that RADAR stuff, etc?
Most likely yes, but AT&T has never officially stated that. There is an two-mile area around the end of the runway where service is horrible to non-existent. To be fair, from talking to others in the neighborhood, everyone has diminished cell reception no matter the carrier, but AT&T is the only carrier that becomes totally worthless in the area (at least without a Microcell that is).
Plus the fact that AT&T told various lies about the poor quality over the past four years and then finally stated they do not service this area and my only options were to a) keep paying for their service (that I wasn't being able to use) or b) cancel my contract. Either way $300 is quite expensive for a 'paperweight' for the six months a year I've been living here.
Well, if you read the article, the numbers you are asking for where in there: "Of those polled, 4.7 percent said they had experienced a dropped call in the last three months, less than the 6 percent who said they had dropped calls in September."
The last three month of September was the quarter after the iPhone 4 was released. The quarter after that when Apple gave away cases and told everybody to get a case or hold their phone differently, the dropped calls dropped by about 20%. Not conclusive, obviously, but supports the theory.
The free case program ended on the 30th of September, there goes that theory.
Strange how the dropped call rate dropped after Apple ended the free case program, don't you mean?
Well, keep in mind that cases were finally in stock too. Even Jobs commented that the dropped call rate was higher due to a lack of cases.
Since AT&T was the only carrier with iPhones, they should show a chart showing similar phones for each carrier (IE...take away the iPhone data for AT&T). That comparison would be more meaningful.
I AM considering a verizon iPad 2 though. Will see what the data plans look like. With no contract I don't use cell service every month but as I always have my AT&T iPhone, the thought of having a second device on Verizon when I am traveling is kind of appeAling. Flying to NYC? Activate the iPad and I,m good. Traveling where verizon sux, I got AT&T in my back pocket.
now if a single carrier offered a single data plan to share with both my devices, I might change my mind. If I am capped at 2 GB per month on my data plan (especially when I only use a 1/3 of that each month now), then I would jump at the chance to do that.
Never believe what consumers say about their future purchase behaviour.
And never ask them what they'd like to see or have in a product... they just don't know until they see it!
Well, keep in mind that cases were finally in stock too. Even Jobs commented that the dropped call rate was higher due to a lack of cases.
Since AT&T was the only carrier with iPhones, they should show a chart showing similar phones for each carrier (IE...take away the iPhone data for AT&T). That comparison would be more meaningful.
You do know there are phone carriers with iPhones outside the USA, right?
we need to have a best deal thread once this becomes available to all
as i have said before.....
if walmart straight talk using vz network can give you unlimited talk text data for $45 and no fees
we should be able to do the same for less than $60
thats my goal as close to or LESS than $60/month
am i off base with that, another member said att on the spot took $15 off/ a month