Verizon got their iPhone. VZW customers will finally have piece-of-mind. Right up until it comes to selling their old iPhone and realizing that phone can only be sold to other Verizon folks and not the world GSM market. That will take a hit on resale value methinks.
Maybe that's true, maybe it isn't. But if the GSM phone won't work for people b/c AT&T sucks for them, then future resale value doesn't really matter for them.
What does this chip mean for the prospect of simultaneous voice and data on Verizon in the future with just a software update? That's what I want to know...
Well there's also the matter of Vz rolling out EVDO rev B across its entire network! Why would it do this for a feature that isn't that important?
If you wife calls you at work to say you've missed your anniversary, presumably you have WiFi data and can make reservations via that data service while you stall with her on your Verizon iPhone.
"According to one report, unlocking Verizon's iPhone 4 will be virtually impossible to do because it would require using 'an ESN/MEID from a donor phone with service. This technique is a US federal crime.'"
I don't understand this rule. If you've payed full price for the verizon phone and own the other phone with the service.....why is it illegal? Both devices are your property.
The intent of the law is to prevent (and prosecute) criminals who clone phones to create disposable, difficult to track mobiles for use in everything from drug running to terrorist attacks. Like another person stated, its similar to having a license plate on your car. If a criminal swaps a valid plate on a stolen car, or operates multiple cars on the same plate, it makes it harder to track what they're up to.
Android has given people this false impression that the world has no regulations and that mobile phones can run free software. That's not true at all. The only portion of the phone that is "open" is the computer end. The modem end that communicates with the network is just as closed and regulated as radio/tv stations and other forms of wireless communications.
Society wouldn't exist if we "opened" everything up so that people with a criminal intent could upend markets without any barriers. We have locks on doors and RFID shoplifting tags on merchandise for the same reason we have DRM. Because complete openness = exploitability.
Look at what "openness" did to the music/video industry. Virtually destroyed.
Apple would have locked down all of the components of the iPhone at least by early 2010. This Qualcomm chip may not have been available at that point.
If Apple had included it, would have been more than enough proof that a Verizon phone was coming long before Apple was prepared to release that information.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell
I think the question is still open as to why they didn't make the same phone available on AT&T and Verizon, and whether whatever the reason was will still be an issue when the iPhone 5 arrives.
Maybe that's true, maybe it isn't. But if the GSM phone won't work for people b/c AT&T sucks for them, then future resale value doesn't really matter for them.
Nah...there's 20 million iPhone users on AT&T right now...yeah sure, there are many unhappy in NY and SF. The NY upgrades (new cell towers) are announced almost on a daily basis. SF is a different story....local politicians don't want any cell towers (I guess they don't want any high paying jobs either!).
There is a HUGE global market for used GSM iPhones. I sold the original iPhone for $240, bought the iPhone 3G 8GB. I sold the 3G for 180, and then bought the iPhone 4 16GB. So, my last two iPhones were just about free.
The used market for Verizon iPhones is much smaller.
Verizon's network cannot make any use of a GSM radio. So it does not fix that issue at all. Verizon would need to upgrade its network.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadash
What does this chip mean for the prospect of simultaneous voice and data on Verizon in the future with just a software update? That's what I want to know...
I do hope that this points to "world mode" versions for both the iPhone and iPad. But, to make financial sense, Apple will have had to struck quite a advantageous deal for the CDMA licensing. Perhaps the prospect of all those sold chips made Qualcomm more accommodating than what they are usually reported to be.
Blackberry doesn't sell nearly as many world phones as Apple sells iPhone/iPad. Its difficult to see the licensing working out better for RIM than for Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by penchanted
I do hope that this points to "world mode" versions for both the iPhone and iPad. But, to make financial sense, Apple will have had to struck quite a advantageous deal for the CDMA licensing. Perhaps the prospect of all those sold chips made Qualcomm more accommodating than what they are usually reported to be.
Apple would have locked down all of the components of the iPhone at least by early 2010. This Qualcomm chip may not have been available at that point.
If Apple had included it, would have been more than enough proof that a Verizon phone was coming long before Apple was prepared to release that information.
Can you explain what you mean by this? Are you talking about the summer 2010 iPhone 4? I'm talking about the just-released Verizon iPhone. It could have potentially been a universal AT&T-Verizon phone, but for some reason they decided against it. Everyone is saying this means that the iPhone 5 will be a universal phone, but I think that depends on the reason they chose not to make the Verizon iPhone a universal phone. It's possible that whatever issues they had with keeping it Verizon-only may not change. Could it be that they require different antenna designs? Could there be security issues, having to do with unlocking? Could there be marketing reasons? Unless we know the reason, we can't know if Apple will address them by the time the iPhone 5 comes out.
As was stated it was likely much easier to just do a CDMA only phone. With the iPhone 4 coming to the end of its cycle, a world phone at this point would not have appreciably increased sales, so why bother.
If the iPhone 5 is going to contain both, Apple would want to launch that capability on the newer phone with all of the media buzz they are known for. That is the opportunity to maximize sales.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell
Can you explain what you mean by this? Are you talking about the summer 2010 iPhone 4? I'm talking about the just-released Verizon iPhone. It could have potentially been a universal AT&T-Verizon phone, but for some reason they decided against it. Everyone is saying this means that the iPhone 5 will be a universal phone, but I think that depends on the reason they chose not to make the Verizon iPhone a universal phone. It's possible that whatever issues they had with keeping it Verizon-only may not change. Could it be that they require different antenna designs? Could there be security issues, having to do with unlocking? Could there be marketing reasons? Unless we know the reason, we can't know if Apple will address them by the time the iPhone 5 comes out.
Verizon's network cannot make any use of a GSM radio. So it does not fix that issue at all. Verizon would need to upgrade its network.
Of course it can't use the GSM radio. But there was talk that even if Verizon upgraded their version of CDMA to allow for simultaneous voice and data, the CDMA iPhone 4 wouldn't be able to take advantage of that. Does this chip shed any light on that?
Blackberry doesn't sell nearly as many world phones as Apple sells iPhone/iPad. Its difficult to see the licensing working out better for RIM than for Apple.
I never suggested that it would. My point is that Qualcomm are known to be difficult to deal with.
Adding GSM to the Verizon iPhone will not be nearly as costly as adding CDMA for GSM carriers/customers worldwide. There, Apple will be paying for technology that will never be used and Qualcomm is reported to ask a fair amount for their IP.
The flip side is that Apple will be moving a lot of product between the iPhone and ipad and Qualcomm is very anxious to wrap up that business.
Of course it can't use the GSM radio. But there was talk that even if Verizon upgraded their version of CDMA to allow for simultaneous voice and data, the CDMA iPhone 4 wouldn't be able to take advantage of that. Does this chip shed any light on that?
What does this chip mean for the prospect of simultaneous voice and data on Verizon in the future with just a software update? That's what I want to know...
The MDM6600™: supports HSPA+ data rates of up to 14.4 Mbps and CDMA2000® 1xEV-DO Rev. A/Rev. B so if Verizon does upgrade the towers you can get simultaneous voice and data.
From my reading of information I found on the Qualcomm site it looks like the cell towers can be easily upgraded. It's likely that Verizon is already doing this so I'm not going to be surprised if we see simultaneous voice and data soon.
The chip that does it all is the MDM9600 which supports LTE data rates of up to 100 Mbps with full backward compatibility to dual carrier HSPA+ and EV-DO Rev. A/Rev. B.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archos
Well there's also the matter of Vz rolling out EVDO rev B across its entire network! Why would it do this for a feature that isn't that important?
Because thats the main point that AT&T brings up about Verzion's network. Deploy EDVO RevB and it go away.
China is heavily vested in CDMA. There is another place that Apple is missing out on many potential customers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by penchanted
Adding GSM to the Verizon iPhone will not be nearly as costly as adding CDMA for GSM carriers/customers worldwide. There, Apple will be paying for technology that will never be used and Qualcomm is reported to ask a fair amount for their IP.
Nah...there's 20 million iPhone users on AT&T right now...yeah sure, there are many unhappy in NY and SF. The NY upgrades (new cell towers) are announced almost on a daily basis. SF is a different story....local politicians don't want any cell towers (I guess they don't want any high paying jobs either!).
There is a HUGE global market for used GSM iPhones. I sold the original iPhone for $240, bought the iPhone 3G 8GB. I sold the 3G for 180, and then bought the iPhone 4 16GB. So, my last two iPhones were just about free.
The used market for Verizon iPhones is much smaller.
I know what you're saying. I sold my original iPhone for the 3G and got more than what the phone cost. We kept the 3G and my son uses it now (on T-Mobile). But resale value for me didn't enter into the equation at all in moving to the Verizon iPhone 4. AT&T is almost unusable where I am, so if I wanted to use an iPhone, it had to be on another network.
Comments
Verizon got their iPhone. VZW customers will finally have piece-of-mind. Right up until it comes to selling their old iPhone and realizing that phone can only be sold to other Verizon folks and not the world GSM market. That will take a hit on resale value methinks.
Maybe that's true, maybe it isn't. But if the GSM phone won't work for people b/c AT&T sucks for them, then future resale value doesn't really matter for them.
What does this chip mean for the prospect of simultaneous voice and data on Verizon in the future with just a software update? That's what I want to know...
Well there's also the matter of Vz rolling out EVDO rev B across its entire network! Why would it do this for a feature that isn't that important?
If you wife calls you at work to say you've missed your anniversary, presumably you have WiFi data and can make reservations via that data service while you stall with her on your Verizon iPhone.
"According to one report, unlocking Verizon's iPhone 4 will be virtually impossible to do because it would require using 'an ESN/MEID from a donor phone with service. This technique is a US federal crime.'"
I don't understand this rule. If you've payed full price for the verizon phone and own the other phone with the service.....why is it illegal? Both devices are your property.
The intent of the law is to prevent (and prosecute) criminals who clone phones to create disposable, difficult to track mobiles for use in everything from drug running to terrorist attacks. Like another person stated, its similar to having a license plate on your car. If a criminal swaps a valid plate on a stolen car, or operates multiple cars on the same plate, it makes it harder to track what they're up to.
Android has given people this false impression that the world has no regulations and that mobile phones can run free software. That's not true at all. The only portion of the phone that is "open" is the computer end. The modem end that communicates with the network is just as closed and regulated as radio/tv stations and other forms of wireless communications.
Society wouldn't exist if we "opened" everything up so that people with a criminal intent could upend markets without any barriers. We have locks on doors and RFID shoplifting tags on merchandise for the same reason we have DRM. Because complete openness = exploitability.
Look at what "openness" did to the music/video industry. Virtually destroyed.
If Apple had included it, would have been more than enough proof that a Verizon phone was coming long before Apple was prepared to release that information.
I think the question is still open as to why they didn't make the same phone available on AT&T and Verizon, and whether whatever the reason was will still be an issue when the iPhone 5 arrives.
Maybe that's true, maybe it isn't. But if the GSM phone won't work for people b/c AT&T sucks for them, then future resale value doesn't really matter for them.
Nah...there's 20 million iPhone users on AT&T right now...yeah sure, there are many unhappy in NY and SF. The NY upgrades (new cell towers) are announced almost on a daily basis. SF is a different story....local politicians don't want any cell towers (I guess they don't want any high paying jobs either!).
There is a HUGE global market for used GSM iPhones. I sold the original iPhone for $240, bought the iPhone 3G 8GB. I sold the 3G for 180, and then bought the iPhone 4 16GB. So, my last two iPhones were just about free.
The used market for Verizon iPhones is much smaller.
What does this chip mean for the prospect of simultaneous voice and data on Verizon in the future with just a software update? That's what I want to know...
I do hope that this points to "world mode" versions for both the iPhone and iPad. But, to make financial sense, Apple will have had to struck quite a advantageous deal for the CDMA licensing. Perhaps the prospect of all those sold chips made Qualcomm more accommodating than what they are usually reported to be.
Apple would have locked down all of the components of the iPhone at least by early 2010. This Qualcomm chip may not have been available at that point.
If Apple had included it, would have been more than enough proof that a Verizon phone was coming long before Apple was prepared to release that information.
Can you explain what you mean by this? Are you talking about the summer 2010 iPhone 4? I'm talking about the just-released Verizon iPhone. It could have potentially been a universal AT&T-Verizon phone, but for some reason they decided against it. Everyone is saying this means that the iPhone 5 will be a universal phone, but I think that depends on the reason they chose not to make the Verizon iPhone a universal phone. It's possible that whatever issues they had with keeping it Verizon-only may not change. Could it be that they require different antenna designs? Could there be security issues, having to do with unlocking? Could there be marketing reasons? Unless we know the reason, we can't know if Apple will address them by the time the iPhone 5 comes out.
If the iPhone 5 is going to contain both, Apple would want to launch that capability on the newer phone with all of the media buzz they are known for. That is the opportunity to maximize sales.
Can you explain what you mean by this? Are you talking about the summer 2010 iPhone 4? I'm talking about the just-released Verizon iPhone. It could have potentially been a universal AT&T-Verizon phone, but for some reason they decided against it. Everyone is saying this means that the iPhone 5 will be a universal phone, but I think that depends on the reason they chose not to make the Verizon iPhone a universal phone. It's possible that whatever issues they had with keeping it Verizon-only may not change. Could it be that they require different antenna designs? Could there be security issues, having to do with unlocking? Could there be marketing reasons? Unless we know the reason, we can't know if Apple will address them by the time the iPhone 5 comes out.
Verizon's network cannot make any use of a GSM radio. So it does not fix that issue at all. Verizon would need to upgrade its network.
Of course it can't use the GSM radio. But there was talk that even if Verizon upgraded their version of CDMA to allow for simultaneous voice and data, the CDMA iPhone 4 wouldn't be able to take advantage of that. Does this chip shed any light on that?
Blackberry doesn't sell nearly as many world phones as Apple sells iPhone/iPad. Its difficult to see the licensing working out better for RIM than for Apple.
I never suggested that it would. My point is that Qualcomm are known to be difficult to deal with.
Adding GSM to the Verizon iPhone will not be nearly as costly as adding CDMA for GSM carriers/customers worldwide. There, Apple will be paying for technology that will never be used and Qualcomm is reported to ask a fair amount for their IP.
The flip side is that Apple will be moving a lot of product between the iPhone and ipad and Qualcomm is very anxious to wrap up that business.
Of course it can't use the GSM radio. But there was talk that even if Verizon upgraded their version of CDMA to allow for simultaneous voice and data, the CDMA iPhone 4 wouldn't be able to take advantage of that. Does this chip shed any light on that?
What does this chip mean for the prospect of simultaneous voice and data on Verizon in the future with just a software update? That's what I want to know...
The MDM6600™: supports HSPA+ data rates of up to 14.4 Mbps and CDMA2000® 1xEV-DO Rev. A/Rev. B so if Verizon does upgrade the towers you can get simultaneous voice and data.
From my reading of information I found on the Qualcomm site it looks like the cell towers can be easily upgraded. It's likely that Verizon is already doing this so I'm not going to be surprised if we see simultaneous voice and data soon.
The chip that does it all is the MDM9600 which supports LTE data rates of up to 100 Mbps with full backward compatibility to dual carrier HSPA+ and EV-DO Rev. A/Rev. B.
Well there's also the matter of Vz rolling out EVDO rev B across its entire network! Why would it do this for a feature that isn't that important?
Because thats the main point that AT&T brings up about Verzion's network. Deploy EDVO RevB and it go away.
Adding GSM to the Verizon iPhone will not be nearly as costly as adding CDMA for GSM carriers/customers worldwide. There, Apple will be paying for technology that will never be used and Qualcomm is reported to ask a fair amount for their IP.
Nah...there's 20 million iPhone users on AT&T right now...yeah sure, there are many unhappy in NY and SF. The NY upgrades (new cell towers) are announced almost on a daily basis. SF is a different story....local politicians don't want any cell towers (I guess they don't want any high paying jobs either!).
There is a HUGE global market for used GSM iPhones. I sold the original iPhone for $240, bought the iPhone 3G 8GB. I sold the 3G for 180, and then bought the iPhone 4 16GB. So, my last two iPhones were just about free.
The used market for Verizon iPhones is much smaller.
I know what you're saying. I sold my original iPhone for the 3G and got more than what the phone cost. We kept the 3G and my son uses it now (on T-Mobile). But resale value for me didn't enter into the equation at all in moving to the Verizon iPhone 4. AT&T is almost unusable where I am, so if I wanted to use an iPhone, it had to be on another network.