We know what the phone has. We know what's in the new software code, because it's been seen, and announced and demoed by Apple, as well as inferences of 3G and other features in the ver 2.0 software..
We know that 3G is coming because Jobs said it was. They're marketing the phone later this year to segments of the world where 3G is important, perhaps overriding.
So, from that, we can deduce what may arrive in the next edition.
Most other wilder guesses are just that, guesses. But a guess is similar to a prediction depending on how strongly it's stated.
Rumors are where someone says thay they have gotten word from someone in Apple, or a close supplier, that something will appear.
Apple went with AT&T because they had the most extensive GSM network the same type of network that is in Europe and Asia as well as rest of world. Sent from my iPhone. The point is that ATT did not have go pay up, it was easier for Apple to support one type of network than many different types or other non-GSM networks.
Apple went with AT&T because they had the most extensive GSM network the same type of network that is in Europe and Asia as well as rest of world. Sent from my iPhone. The point is that ATT did not have go pay up, it was easier for Apple to support one type of network than many different types or other non-GSM networks.
As you say.
This is so obvious, that I don't understand why more people don't realize it.
Apple went with AT&T because they had the most extensive GSM network the same type of network that is in Europe and Asia as well as rest of world. Sent from my iPhone. The point is that ATT did not have go pay up, it was easier for Apple to support one type of network than many different types or other non-GSM networks.
Jim Gerace, Verizon VP, stated that they passed on the iPhone. I believe that is true. The time frame also suggests that Apple went to Verizon first. I also believe this is true. I also believe that Apple went to AT&Ts biggest competitor(s) to gain a better bargaining foothold. If AT&T knew they were the only really choice for Apple since they were the only GSM network in the US that had 3G frequencies that corresponded with emerging tri-and quad-band chips thinks may have gone differently. (speculation)
Correct but it was obvious that Apple really wanted AT&T, I mean I was scratching my head when I heard that Apple was talking with Verizon, and I was on Verizon at the time. I don't think it was one company over the other or better technology that made the final decision. I think like you say, Apple knew going in AT&T would be easier to deal with if they knew they were not the only game in town, that way AT&T could make the GSM connection and sell that idea like it was their own. A classic Steve tactic.
AT&T "Plus we use GSM like they do in Europe and Asia, if you want to roll this puppy out around the world it is much easier to support one communication chip-set."
Steve "Good point, anything else?"
AT&T "Plus we can set-up a special iPhone plan with unlimited data, your customers like it easy correct. Plus we are getting access to hotspots all around the US, more on that later"
Steve "I guess I'll have to switch carriers."
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Jim Gerace, Verizon VP, stated that they passed on the iPhone. I believe that is true. The time frame also suggests that Apple went to Verizon first. I also believe this is true. I also believe that Apple went to AT&Ts biggest competitor(s) to gain a better bargaining foothold. If AT&T knew they were the only really choice for Apple since they were the only GSM network in the US that had 3G frequencies that corresponded with emerging tri-and quad-band chips thinks may have gone differently. (speculation)
Correct but it was obvious that Apple really wanted AT&T, I mean I was scratching my head when I heard that Apple was talking with Verizon, and I was on Verizon at the time. I don't think it was one company over the other or better technology that made the final decision. I think like you say, Apple knew going in AT&T would be easier to deal with if they knew they were not the only game in town, that way AT&T could make the GSM connection and sell that idea like it was their own. A classic Steve tactic.
AT&T "Plus we use GSM like they do in Europe and Asia, if you want to roll this puppy out around the world it is much easier to support one communication chip-set."
Steve "Good point, anything else?"
AT&T "Plus we can set-up a special iPhone plan with unlimited data, your customers like it easy correct. Plus we are getting access to hotspots all around the US, more on that later"
Steve "I guess I'll have to switch carriers."
It's my opinion that it was probably Apple that presented the idea of unlimited data plans at half the regular price to AT&T. AS it was recently pointed out to me recently on these forums, data plans are optional for smartphones, so by making them a requirement on the iPhone drastically helps to balance the cost to AT&T for heavy users.
Using your example above, AT&T may have also presented to Apple that T-Mobile, the otehr GSM in the US, is just getting their 3G bands and have no networks setup, while AT&T uses more common frequencies used throughout the world.
Not that I totally disagree, but there had to be something else for the data plan idea to work, unlimited data at half the price, AT&T had to want this too. The reason for the want eludes me, but I don't think it fits that it was only at Apples' request. AT&T had to fell like they were breaking the mold with Apple, it may have been like "we talked to the others and we can use them but we want AT&T because of your GSM network and who you are in the world of cummunication, but here is what we want to do to turn the smartphone business upside down. We can get our customers to pay for the phone, or most of the phone so AT&T won't have to pay for that, but we need to shakeup the smartphone market, do you want to just sell walkie-talkies', or do you want to change the way the world communicates?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
It's my opinion that it was probably Apple that presented the idea of unlimited data plans at half the regular price to AT&T. AS it was recently pointed out to me recently on these forums, data plans are optional for smartphones, so by making them a requirement on the iPhone drastically helps to balance the cost to AT&T for heavy users.
Using your example above, AT&T may have also presented to Apple that T-Mobile, the otehr GSM in the US, is just getting their 3G bands and have no networks setup, while AT&T uses more common frequencies used throughout the world.
If Apple sold over 5 mil iPhones and 2.5 mil are with AT&T that means that at least 2.2 mil have been unlocked and are in other networks here and abroad.
Not that I totally disagree, but there had to be something else for the data plan idea to work, unlimited data at half the price, AT&T had to want this too. The reason for the want eludes me, but I don't think it fits that it was only at Apples' request. AT&T had to fell like they were breaking the mold with Apple, it may have been like "we talked to the others and we can use them but we want AT&T because of your GSM network and who you are in the world of cummunication, but here is what we want to do to turn the smartphone business upside down. We can get our customers to pay for the phone, or most of the phone so AT&T won't have to pay for that, but we need to shakeup the smartphone market, do you want to just sell walkie-talkies', or do you want to change the way the world communicates?"
Perhaps it was projections of how many new customers AT&T will obtain and how many people on low rate plans moving into smartphone plans that was the reason for the lower than average unlimited/unlimited data plan.
PS: Since AT&T has worked hard this past year to get their less than stellar 3G network upgraded are we to expect new iPhone data plans to be more inline with their other unlimited/unlimted data plans? If it remains at $20 then it would help indicate the number of new AT&T customer and upgrading customers balances the lower cost data plan, if it goes up to $35 then that helps to indicate that the iPhone subscribers aren't as powerful to the AT&T bottom line.
Of course, this is just speculation on how one might argue a case for or against AT&T's benefit of the iPhone. Unless we can look at the contract between Apple and AT&T there are no facts that can be obtained about the motivation of price of the data plan.
Phones are the bottom line number or at least an important one, however with that said I think as an Apple user that it is the OS that is the difference and the one top line item that will drive the bottom line. Since I got my iPhone I have looked at it more and more like a computer in my pocket, and now with programs coming that will only heighten the experience. Apple has a different approach to smartphones. It is not the AT&T internet it is Safari just like on the Mac, it is Google maps, and easily using them to find your way around. It is using, what appears to be iChat to SMS, gee iChat can do much more... These are baby steps, but it is easy to see the tools that Apple is bringing to the party are much more robust and fully featured. I hope the data plans are the same cost wise. I also take solace in the fact that Apple is not going to have iPhones sold into plans that do not include data, also if AT&T did even ok on the first iPhone experience then they should be able to see the difference and they will really want iPhone 2. And apparently they did ok because they are hiring temps again and they would not do that if they were not at least doing ok, however my guess is that they are doing great with the iPhone. Remember that the iPhone is way ahead of the iPod in many ways, and the iPod revolutionized MP3 players and that market. If AT&T only looked at the success of the iPod and the iPhone and the fact that they are making money, maybe even more money than with other phones, then they should be very happy with the iPhone. In short I do not expect Apples' market penetration to remain at 3%, it takes time (11 to 12 months maybe) for the market to decide what kind of egg it is being sold, apparently the market is deciding that the iPhone is a good egg and at $200 very much worth exploring.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Perhaps it was projections of how many new customers AT&T will obtain and how many people on low rate plans moving into smartphone plans that was the reason for the lower than average unlimited/unlimited data plan.
PS: Since AT&T has worked hard this past year to get their less than stellar 3G network upgraded are we to expect new iPhone data plans to be more inline with their other unlimited/unlimted data plans? If it remains at $20 then it would help indicate the number of new AT&T customer and upgrading customers balances the lower cost data plan, if it goes up to $35 then that helps to indicate that the iPhone subscribers aren't as powerful to the AT&T bottom line.
Of course, this is just speculation on how one might argue a case for or against AT&T's benefit of the iPhone. Unless we can look at the contract between Apple and AT&T there are no facts that can be obtained about the motivation of price of the data plan.
This week, Apple stock has been doing pretty darn well all things considered, the stock market has been sliding down all week. There were a couple times where everything my stock widget is tracking was colored red.
Phones are the bottom line number or at least an important one, however with that said I think as an Apple user that it is the OS that is the difference and the one top line item that will drive the bottom line.
The OS is certainly the big difference. Nokia bought a software development company at the beginning to 2008, presumably to better compete with mobile OS X. In April, if I recall correctly, they did admit they need to beef up their OS platform. This is good news; while there is no one phone that fits everybody I don't want Apple to think that it's too far ahead in it's consumer/PMP/smartphone field to slow down the platform's evolution.
Quote:
Since I got my iPhone I have looked at it more and more like a computer in my pocket, and now with programs coming that will only heighten the experience.
As an example of computer in your pocket, I went into Indiana Jones 4 an hour early to get a good seat Wednesday night. There were only 20 people in the theater and 6 of them were actively engaged in their iPhones. Most telling is that the other 14 had no cell phone out. Of course, i popped mine out and entertained myself until the the previews began, even posting that story on AI forums. 3G and App Store will make this even more usual to an even larger group.
Quote:
Remember that the iPhone is way ahead of the iPod in many ways, and the iPod revolutionized MP3 players and that market. If AT&T only looked at the success of the iPod and the iPhone and the fact that they are making money, maybe even more money than with other phones, then they should be very happy with the iPhone.
Can we expect later version of the ipod line to come with mobile OS X? Seems feasible to me as Apple refines the OS and ARM performance increases. Are we expect Apple to eventually kill off the iPod Classic line or is the market for HDD based iPod still popular enough to warrant the product line?
This week, Apple stock has been doing pretty darn well all things considered, the stock market has been sliding down all week. There were a couple times where everything my stock widget is tracking was colored red.
If there wasn't that short lived fear of a delay in the new phone, the stock could still have been sitting at $190. It's amazing that one word can disrupt a trend.
Correct but it was obvious that Apple really wanted AT&T, I mean I was scratching my head when I heard that Apple was talking with Verizon, and I was on Verizon at the time. I don't think it was one company over the other or better technology that made the final decision. I think like you say, Apple knew going in AT&T would be easier to deal with if they knew they were not the only game in town, that way AT&T could make the GSM connection and sell that idea like it was their own. A classic Steve tactic.
AT&T "Plus we use GSM like they do in Europe and Asia, if you want to roll this puppy out around the world it is much easier to support one communication chip-set."
Steve "Good point, anything else?"
AT&T "Plus we can set-up a special iPhone plan with unlimited data, your customers like it easy correct. Plus we are getting access to hotspots all around the US, more on that later"
Steve "I guess I'll have to switch carriers."
I don't agree with that assessment at all.
Apple wanted the best partner for their initial launch in the US --- and Verizon is the best carrier in the US.
It is a bigger problem for Apple right now --- because the world didn't end for Verizon with AT&T's iphone launch. If they launched the iphone with Verizon --- then we don't have an worldwide iphone exporting problem.
Apple wanted the best partner for their initial launch in the US --- and Verizon is the best carrier in the US.
It is a bigger problem for Apple right now --- because the world didn't end for Verizon with AT&T's iphone launch. If they launched the iphone with Verizon --- then we don't have an worldwide iphone exporting problem.
So you're saying that Apple wanted Verizon but couldn't get them? That it had nothing to do with the fact with what the Verizon VP stated about Apple's demands being too much for them?
Note that "best" is a realtive term which means nothing without severe quantifiaction and that Apple also went with 02 which isn't considered "best" in the UK in terms of network speeds or service.
Could it be that Apple went with the carrier that would make them the most money knowing that what ever carrier they went with would bring a great many new subscribers to that carrier? Could Apple have possibly figured that going with Verizon would have more costly simply for the fact that it would require a company that prides itself on not trying to produce different products for different markets to have a separate device for the US market and one for the EU market?
Comments
? Apple takes delivery of 188 shipping containers marked only as "electric computers"
I couldn't remember where I read that.
Update the Mac Mini. Update the Mac Mini. Update the Mac Mini.
I have nothing else to say.
I know how you feel man
By the way, most of this isn't rumors.
A rumor is when someone says that they have some direct knowledge that something is going to happen, or is happening..
Most of what we read is a logical extrapolation of what is known into a prediction of what will happen. It's very different.
Prithy, what was known and where was the logic?
Prithy, what was known and where was the logic?
Deduction, my dear Watson.
Prithy, what was known and where was the logic?
As Solipsism said, it's deduction.
We know what the phone has. We know what's in the new software code, because it's been seen, and announced and demoed by Apple, as well as inferences of 3G and other features in the ver 2.0 software..
We know that 3G is coming because Jobs said it was. They're marketing the phone later this year to segments of the world where 3G is important, perhaps overriding.
So, from that, we can deduce what may arrive in the next edition.
Most other wilder guesses are just that, guesses. But a guess is similar to a prediction depending on how strongly it's stated.
Rumors are where someone says thay they have gotten word from someone in Apple, or a close supplier, that something will appear.
Again, that's different.
Apple went with AT&T because they had the most extensive GSM network the same type of network that is in Europe and Asia as well as rest of world. Sent from my iPhone. The point is that ATT did not have go pay up, it was easier for Apple to support one type of network than many different types or other non-GSM networks.
As you say.
This is so obvious, that I don't understand why more people don't realize it.
Apple went with AT&T because they had the most extensive GSM network the same type of network that is in Europe and Asia as well as rest of world. Sent from my iPhone. The point is that ATT did not have go pay up, it was easier for Apple to support one type of network than many different types or other non-GSM networks.
Jim Gerace, Verizon VP, stated that they passed on the iPhone. I believe that is true. The time frame also suggests that Apple went to Verizon first. I also believe this is true. I also believe that Apple went to AT&Ts biggest competitor(s) to gain a better bargaining foothold. If AT&T knew they were the only really choice for Apple since they were the only GSM network in the US that had 3G frequencies that corresponded with emerging tri-and quad-band chips thinks may have gone differently. (speculation)
AT&T "Plus we use GSM like they do in Europe and Asia, if you want to roll this puppy out around the world it is much easier to support one communication chip-set."
Steve "Good point, anything else?"
AT&T "Plus we can set-up a special iPhone plan with unlimited data, your customers like it easy correct. Plus we are getting access to hotspots all around the US, more on that later"
Steve "I guess I'll have to switch carriers."
Jim Gerace, Verizon VP, stated that they passed on the iPhone. I believe that is true. The time frame also suggests that Apple went to Verizon first. I also believe this is true. I also believe that Apple went to AT&Ts biggest competitor(s) to gain a better bargaining foothold. If AT&T knew they were the only really choice for Apple since they were the only GSM network in the US that had 3G frequencies that corresponded with emerging tri-and quad-band chips thinks may have gone differently. (speculation)
Correct but it was obvious that Apple really wanted AT&T, I mean I was scratching my head when I heard that Apple was talking with Verizon, and I was on Verizon at the time. I don't think it was one company over the other or better technology that made the final decision. I think like you say, Apple knew going in AT&T would be easier to deal with if they knew they were not the only game in town, that way AT&T could make the GSM connection and sell that idea like it was their own. A classic Steve tactic.
AT&T "Plus we use GSM like they do in Europe and Asia, if you want to roll this puppy out around the world it is much easier to support one communication chip-set."
Steve "Good point, anything else?"
AT&T "Plus we can set-up a special iPhone plan with unlimited data, your customers like it easy correct. Plus we are getting access to hotspots all around the US, more on that later"
Steve "I guess I'll have to switch carriers."
It's my opinion that it was probably Apple that presented the idea of unlimited data plans at half the regular price to AT&T. AS it was recently pointed out to me recently on these forums, data plans are optional for smartphones, so by making them a requirement on the iPhone drastically helps to balance the cost to AT&T for heavy users.
Using your example above, AT&T may have also presented to Apple that T-Mobile, the otehr GSM in the US, is just getting their 3G bands and have no networks setup, while AT&T uses more common frequencies used throughout the world.
It's my opinion that it was probably Apple that presented the idea of unlimited data plans at half the regular price to AT&T. AS it was recently pointed out to me recently on these forums, data plans are optional for smartphones, so by making them a requirement on the iPhone drastically helps to balance the cost to AT&T for heavy users.
Using your example above, AT&T may have also presented to Apple that T-Mobile, the otehr GSM in the US, is just getting their 3G bands and have no networks setup, while AT&T uses more common frequencies used throughout the world.
Not that I totally disagree, but there had to be something else for the data plan idea to work, unlimited data at half the price, AT&T had to want this too. The reason for the want eludes me, but I don't think it fits that it was only at Apples' request. AT&T had to fell like they were breaking the mold with Apple, it may have been like "we talked to the others and we can use them but we want AT&T because of your GSM network and who you are in the world of cummunication, but here is what we want to do to turn the smartphone business upside down. We can get our customers to pay for the phone, or most of the phone so AT&T won't have to pay for that, but we need to shakeup the smartphone market, do you want to just sell walkie-talkies', or do you want to change the way the world communicates?"
Perhaps it was projections of how many new customers AT&T will obtain and how many people on low rate plans moving into smartphone plans that was the reason for the lower than average unlimited/unlimited data plan.
PS: Since AT&T has worked hard this past year to get their less than stellar 3G network upgraded are we to expect new iPhone data plans to be more inline with their other unlimited/unlimted data plans? If it remains at $20 then it would help indicate the number of new AT&T customer and upgrading customers balances the lower cost data plan, if it goes up to $35 then that helps to indicate that the iPhone subscribers aren't as powerful to the AT&T bottom line.
Of course, this is just speculation on how one might argue a case for or against AT&T's benefit of the iPhone. Unless we can look at the contract between Apple and AT&T there are no facts that can be obtained about the motivation of price of the data plan.
Perhaps it was projections of how many new customers AT&T will obtain and how many people on low rate plans moving into smartphone plans that was the reason for the lower than average unlimited/unlimited data plan.
PS: Since AT&T has worked hard this past year to get their less than stellar 3G network upgraded are we to expect new iPhone data plans to be more inline with their other unlimited/unlimted data plans? If it remains at $20 then it would help indicate the number of new AT&T customer and upgrading customers balances the lower cost data plan, if it goes up to $35 then that helps to indicate that the iPhone subscribers aren't as powerful to the AT&T bottom line.
Of course, this is just speculation on how one might argue a case for or against AT&T's benefit of the iPhone. Unless we can look at the contract between Apple and AT&T there are no facts that can be obtained about the motivation of price of the data plan.
Phones are the bottom line number or at least an important one, however with that said I think as an Apple user that it is the OS that is the difference and the one top line item that will drive the bottom line.
The OS is certainly the big difference. Nokia bought a software development company at the beginning to 2008, presumably to better compete with mobile OS X. In April, if I recall correctly, they did admit they need to beef up their OS platform. This is good news; while there is no one phone that fits everybody I don't want Apple to think that it's too far ahead in it's consumer/PMP/smartphone field to slow down the platform's evolution.
Since I got my iPhone I have looked at it more and more like a computer in my pocket, and now with programs coming that will only heighten the experience.
As an example of computer in your pocket, I went into Indiana Jones 4 an hour early to get a good seat Wednesday night. There were only 20 people in the theater and 6 of them were actively engaged in their iPhones. Most telling is that the other 14 had no cell phone out. Of course, i popped mine out and entertained myself until the the previews began, even posting that story on AI forums. 3G and App Store will make this even more usual to an even larger group.
Remember that the iPhone is way ahead of the iPod in many ways, and the iPod revolutionized MP3 players and that market. If AT&T only looked at the success of the iPod and the iPhone and the fact that they are making money, maybe even more money than with other phones, then they should be very happy with the iPhone.
Can we expect later version of the ipod line to come with mobile OS X? Seems feasible to me as Apple refines the OS and ARM performance increases. Are we expect Apple to eventually kill off the iPod Classic line or is the market for HDD based iPod still popular enough to warrant the product line?
This week, Apple stock has been doing pretty darn well all things considered, the stock market has been sliding down all week. There were a couple times where everything my stock widget is tracking was colored red.
If there wasn't that short lived fear of a delay in the new phone, the stock could still have been sitting at $190. It's amazing that one word can disrupt a trend.
Correct but it was obvious that Apple really wanted AT&T, I mean I was scratching my head when I heard that Apple was talking with Verizon, and I was on Verizon at the time. I don't think it was one company over the other or better technology that made the final decision. I think like you say, Apple knew going in AT&T would be easier to deal with if they knew they were not the only game in town, that way AT&T could make the GSM connection and sell that idea like it was their own. A classic Steve tactic.
AT&T "Plus we use GSM like they do in Europe and Asia, if you want to roll this puppy out around the world it is much easier to support one communication chip-set."
Steve "Good point, anything else?"
AT&T "Plus we can set-up a special iPhone plan with unlimited data, your customers like it easy correct. Plus we are getting access to hotspots all around the US, more on that later"
Steve "I guess I'll have to switch carriers."
I don't agree with that assessment at all.
Apple wanted the best partner for their initial launch in the US --- and Verizon is the best carrier in the US.
It is a bigger problem for Apple right now --- because the world didn't end for Verizon with AT&T's iphone launch. If they launched the iphone with Verizon --- then we don't have an worldwide iphone exporting problem.
I don't agree with that assessment at all.
Apple wanted the best partner for their initial launch in the US --- and Verizon is the best carrier in the US.
It is a bigger problem for Apple right now --- because the world didn't end for Verizon with AT&T's iphone launch. If they launched the iphone with Verizon --- then we don't have an worldwide iphone exporting problem.
So you're saying that Apple wanted Verizon but couldn't get them? That it had nothing to do with the fact with what the Verizon VP stated about Apple's demands being too much for them?
Note that "best" is a realtive term which means nothing without severe quantifiaction and that Apple also went with 02 which isn't considered "best" in the UK in terms of network speeds or service.
Could it be that Apple went with the carrier that would make them the most money knowing that what ever carrier they went with would bring a great many new subscribers to that carrier? Could Apple have possibly figured that going with Verizon would have more costly simply for the fact that it would require a company that prides itself on not trying to produce different products for different markets to have a separate device for the US market and one for the EU market?