Apple details GSM, CDMA iPhone differences, AT&T CEO disparages App Store

Posted:
in iPhone edited January 2014
Apple has posted a support document detailing the differences between GSM and CDMA iPhones, and the AT&T CEO criticized Apple's App Store business model, touting instead an interoperable carrier-driven HTML 5 application store.



GSM vs. CDMA



After years of selling only GSM iPhone models, Apple, along with Verizon, released a CDMA iPhone 4 last week. In order to head off possible user confusion, Apple has published a support document explaining the differences between the GSM and CDMA versions of the iPhone.



"iPhone supports many phone features, including call waiting, call forwarding, and conference calls. Depending on your wireless carrier's network technology (GSM or CDMA), there are different methods for enabling and using these features," the support article read.



According to the accompanying chart, call forwarding, call waiting and caller ID settings can be adjusted in the settings pane of GSM iPhones, but on the CDMA iPhone, users need to dial numbers to enable or disable the features.



In addition, GSM supports conference calls of up to five people simultaneously, while CDMA supports up to two calls simultaneously. "CDMA networks may not be able to add, swap, or merge calls in certain situations," the article noted.



The one feature on the chart that the GSM iPhone lacks when compared to the CDMA iPhone is the ability to dial a hard pause. The CDMA version of the iPhone, however, is unable to place a call on hold.



The document also noted that phone numbers that contain alphabetic characters beyond seven digits "may not dial as expected." Finally, due to the CDMA iPhone's lack of a SIM card, several SIM card-related features are unavailable on the CDMA iPhone.







AT&T app envy



One week after losing US exclusivity of the iPhone, AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson expressed frustration with app stores that work on just one mobile operating system, the Associated Press reports.



Speaking at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Spain on Tuesday, Stephenson criticized companies like Apple and Google as restricting consumers.



"You purchase an app for one operating system, and if you want it on another device or platform, you have to buy it again," Stephenson said. "That's not how our customers expect to experience this environment."



Stephenson's comments are confusing, however, as AT&T's customers have indeed come to expect exactly "this environment" while enjoying exclusive access to the iPhone App Store in the US for two and a half years. Apple launched the App Store in 2008 and has since seen the number of apps available on the digital storefront swell to 350,000.



As an alternative to the one platform model, the CEO touted the recently launched Wholesale Applications Community, or WAC. The WAC, which utilizes HTML 5, would allow carriers to sell applications directly to customers across a variety of devices.



Mobile phone manufacturers LG Electronics, Samsung, Sony Ericsson, Huawei and ZTE have all committed to making WAC-compatible phones. The four largest carriers in the US -- AT&T, Verizon Wireless, Sprint Nextel and T-Mobile USA -- are all members of the WAC, according to the report.



Despite declining to attend the Mobile World Congress, Apple's presence has still been felt at the event in remarks from Stephenson and other presenters. On a more positive note, the Cupertino, Calif., company took the trade show's top award for a mobile device. The iPhone 4 was awarded the title of "Best Mobile Device" for its "great screen, sharp design, fantastic materials, and phenomenal ecosystem for app developers."
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 67
    AT&T is a network provider. It would serve them positively if they remembered that and didn't try their "big me-little you" game on the consuming public. Since the user pooling data says, BY FAR, AT&T has the absolutely the WORST CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE OF ANY NETWORK PROVIDER - ON EARTH !!!



    So AT&T (Also known by the old timers as SBC), SIT DOWN - SHUT UP - DELIVER WORTHWHILE BANDWIDTH. Otherwise, we don't need you.
  • Reply 2 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Bwinski View Post


    AT&T is a network provider. It would serve them positively if they remembered that and didn't try their "big me-little you" game on the consuming public. Since the user pooling data says, BY FAR, AT&T has the absolutely the WORST CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE OF ANY NETWORK PROVIDER - ON EARTH !!!



    So AT&T (Also known by the old timers as SBC), SIT DOWN - SHUT UP - DELIVER WORTHWHILE BANDWIDTH. Otherwise, we don't need you.



    Actually Verizon's customer service is far worse. If we didn't have GSM networks we would be stuck with CDMA.
  • Reply 3 of 67
    [QUOTE=You purchase an app for one operating system, and if you want it on another device or platform, you have to buy it again," Stephenson said. "That's not how our customers expect to experience this environment.

    [/QUOTE]



    That's a load of Crap, HTML5 has nothing to do with it being open, they want you to have to purchase apps through their store so they get a cut, but hello, all the Carriers attempted this and had miserable content at ridiculously high prices...



    Carriers will never have an application store that will support all devices and operating systems, and using HTML5 in that context is a joke to get attention out of the media...



    I would much rather the app be tied to the OS than to the carrier, imagine if I have to rebuy my android applications when i shove a different carrier SIM into my phone... what a crock...
  • Reply 4 of 67
    Doesn't make a lot of sense for the AT&T CEO to criticize something that has only made his company more healthy financially. Not a smart move Mr. CE-Oh no he didn't!
  • Reply 5 of 67
    I like the idea of apps working across different platforms. This allows the consumer to change without having to pay for the same thing twice (Or more). Probably unrealistic to expect the various OS developers to be excited about such a concept. But, I could see app developers making such a promise - call it "insurance".
  • Reply 6 of 67
    Gosh, what an idiot. An app store that doesn't "restrict consumers" would literally ruin iOS.
  • Reply 7 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jman_in_NYC View Post


    Actually Verizon's customer service is far worse. If we didn't have GSM networks we would be stuck with CDMA.



    That doesn't make AT&T any better, and it definitely doesn't make this guy not a moron.
  • Reply 8 of 67
    cmvsmcmvsm Posts: 204member
    Stephenson didn't seem to care when luring new iPad buyers into an AT&T unlimited plan, and then once purchased, pulling the old bait and switch. I think I also remember him legally threatening any one that sent him a derogatory email because of the bait and switch. Now he wants to do what's 'right for the consumer'. Yeah...what a jack off.
  • Reply 9 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tbsteph View Post


    I like the idea of apps working across different platforms. This allows the consumer to change without having to pay for the same thing twice (Or more). Probably unrealistic to expect the various OS developers to be excited about such a concept. But, I could see app developers making such a promise - call it "insurance".



    I think it's kind of like expecting your PS3 software to work on an Xbox. Or your windows software to work on your Mac.



    I prefer my applications be tuned to the hardware and OS of the device for which they are intended to run. Anything less is lowest common denominator and most likely a flawed user experience.



    What the AT&T CEO really meant to say is, "Now that we no longer have an exclusive deal on the iPhone, it's become readily apparent how crappy the other smartphone platforms' ecosystems really are."
  • Reply 10 of 67
    This guy is pretty much saying to eliminate native client apps and bring on HTML5 apps a la Google Chrome. Doing so would pretty much eliminate all the advantages of client apps compared to "web apps". Sounds like what only a network CEO would say because of his lack of technical knowledge.
  • Reply 11 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TheGreatBug View Post


    Gosh, what an idiot. An app store that doesn't "restrict consumers" would literally ruin iOS.



    LOL



    Nice try .





    What this guy is actually trying to fish here is to go back to those glory days where our apps were bought inside the carriers and not independently.



    For kashiiing purposes, of course, while vulgarizing once more (how much more could it be vulgarized), the word "Freedom!". These crooks only remind me of Mel Gibson. And he's not such a good figure to be reminded of.
  • Reply 12 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by omacko View Post


    This guy is pretty much saying to eliminate native client apps and bring on HTML5 apps a la Google Chrome. Doing so would pretty much eliminate all the advantages of client apps compared to "web apps". Sounds like what only a network CEO would say because of his lack of technical knowledge.



    More or less. Web OS, for instance, works pretty much on HTML "technologies". Perhaps he's ignorant, but I get his point. What he is trying to shout here is the notion of app standards for all..... inside each carrier.... so that the carriers themselves can gobble up and take over all of the other app stores.



    Anyways, such a store is fantasy. No way any HTML app can possibly behave as good as a native code app. And just for that performance hit, it's a no.
  • Reply 13 of 67
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,989member
    The iPhone was the first phone I ever owned where I could re-install all my Apps to a new iPhone.



    Prior to that I'd been buying Apps since around 2002 from my phone network's store and always had to repurchase them (if they were still available or compatible) after updating my phone or even after sending a phone in for repair and having the data wiped.



    Phone network store's can go get f&^ked, install your stinking stores on Android phone's, that's what it's for.
  • Reply 14 of 67
    AT&T, like all carriers, is a dumb pipe. They are only enablers of services, and utter gougers.



    They're forgetting that Apple made their brand. AT&T became front-page news when Apple allowed them the privilege of carrying the iPhone.



    Now it's sour grapes and spite because they lost exclusivity and have to spend time and money on damage-control and image-management, thanks to Verizon's renewed attacks, now that they too carry the planet's best smartphone.



    We keep hearing about these open, uncontrolled ecosystems and how wonderful they are, but the irony is that the best, most comprehensive and seamless user-centric ecosystem is Apple's closed model. And it remains Apple's closed model.
  • Reply 15 of 67
    boogabooga Posts: 1,075member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    "You purchase an app for one operating system, and if you want it on another device or platform, you have to buy it again," Stephenson said. "That's not how our customers expect to experience this environment."



    But if I buy an app for an iPhone for AT&T, it will still work on Verizon. That is how I expect to 'experience this environment' (whatever that means).



    Besides, I'm fine with AT&T promoting an HTML5 "app" store. Apple does a good job of letting HTML pages appear as apps. You can add them to the home screen and they get the favicon and everything. And the iPhone has one of the most compatible browsers out there. So go ahead, give it a try. Apple did, and users (remember them?) clambered for "real" apps.
  • Reply 16 of 67
    Here's what I keep thinking about AT&T:



    As soon as they have iPhone competition they've managed to



    1. Increase the tethering bandwidth by 2GB for the same price

    2. Give away Microcells

    3. Provide unlimited mobile to mobile plans

    4. Bring the unlimited data plan back for select customers



    What else am I missing?



    AT&T should think more about how to help their customers BEFORE they're backed into a corner. They can stuff the critique of the App Store. AT&T's lack of innovation is a complete embarrassment. The fact that it took Apple's help to implement visual voicemail paints a picture of how clueless the carriers are.
  • Reply 17 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    "You purchase an app for one operating system, and if you want it on another device or platform, you have to buy it again," Stephenson said. "That's not how our customers expect to experience this environment."



    Riiight!... What an idiot!



    I guess the same could be said about the dumb pipes that are ATT, Verizon, Sprint, etc. Why can't the one iPhone one purchases work on all carriers? Hmmm, Mr. Stephenson? Why does one have to have a contract of a given length of time. Apps don't do that. Why Mr. Stephenson? Why am I penalized if I leave ATT earlier then that stated time, huh Mr. Stephenson? I can delete and re-add apps at any time with no penalty. Why am I limited in options of only two data plans, outrageous text message plans, increased fee to tether but pulling from the data I have already purchased AND have to PAY to ENHANCE your SIGNAL with a MICROCELL! What gives?!



    I'm still waiting for this environment customers expect to experience to show it's ugly head over there at ATT, Mr. Stephenson! When can we expect to see it? Hmm??



    The VP of USA slot is already taken, but if they ever need another moronic foot in mouth Biden replacement, I know where they can find one!

    /

    /

    /
  • Reply 18 of 67
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member
    deleted
  • Reply 19 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    AT&T, like all carriers, is a dumb pipe. They are only enablers of services, and utter gougers.



    Hmmm...if I recall from my history books, AT&T invented:



    -The first Digital Computer

    -Transistor

    -UNIX, which is the foundation of MAC OS

    -Cellular Networks





    Seems Apple has also relied upon AT&T's accomplishments
  • Reply 20 of 67
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member
    deleted
Sign In or Register to comment.