Apple more likely to produce Verizon iPhone with 4G

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 78
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    it always amazes me how many iPhone owner feel the need to defend AT&T just because it offers the iPhone.

    Well they did offer the ROCKR way back when.
  • Reply 42 of 78
    tomkarltomkarl Posts: 237member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    it always amazes me how many iPhone owner feel the need to defend AT&T just because it offers the iPhone.

    Well they did offer the ROCKR way back when.



    I am quite satisfied with AT&T's service. 1st gen phone works great for me in the Phoenix area. A friend has a 3G and is quite satisfied with their 3G service here also.
  • Reply 43 of 78
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    Apple needs to wake up and get its own lawyers to break this choke holding exclusive contract with AT&T - coming up to over 2 years already. iPhone should be available not only with Verizon but the other carriers as well- just like any Blackbery etc.

    It behooves Apple to act promptly to break the AT&T chains. AT&T keeps promoting and offering all kinds of 3g phones constantly thus clogging all the iPhone customers Apple has provided to them.



    Apple entered into the exclusivity contract willingly, so I don't understand your statement. I just switched to AT&T in February, and so far I have been quite satisfied. Where I am, the coverage and network strength are pretty much on par with one another. I haven't had to deal with customer service for any carrier, so that's a non-issue for me. At least it's good to see AT&T actively upgrading their network and not just milling around while Apple does the "grunt" work for them (providing AT&T millions of new customers). Making the iPhone available to all LTE networks would be a welcome choice, however. In the event Verizon does acquire the iPhone, it will be interesting to see the competition between Verizon/AT&T in terms of plans/rates per month.
  • Reply 44 of 78
    trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,455member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hillstones View Post


    Typical Verizon. More specifically, Verizon wants to control what features to charge their customers, like Bluetooth. Verizon would love to charge extra for all the standard iPhone features.



    You're right to a degree. However if you get a better network for that cost, then it is worth it.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post


    I don't think the hardware would be much different. The only things that would change are the signal reception/transmission chips, the actual iphone hardware would stay the same.



    It should be relatively easy for Apple to produce both models of the same phone.



    It should be and every other cell maker in the world makes multiple models for multiple standards just fine.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Steven R Wilson View Post


    Ok, I'll bite. Lets see some of this evidence you're slinging around?



    I was a nearly 10 year customer of Verizon before switching to ATT, along with my mom, my dad, and my brother.



    Customer service from Verizon was horrid, I mean literally some of the worst customer experiences I have ever seen by any company. Not just 1 incident, multiple from multiple members of my family. Bad in store, bad on the phone, bad experiences with managers.



    My mom normally does not have trouble dealing with people, she's lobbied in both Sacramento the state capitol and in US congress for educational issues, dealt with thousands of people, and she was steaming mad after one of these incidents and there's no way she'd go back with Verizon.



    So from our personal (anecdotal) experiences, Verizon was bad. Really, offensively bad.



    What about ATT? Fantastic. Want examples? They had the store open during the iPhone launch day 2 years back, they handled people that weren't there for the iPhone separately, took them in the store took care of them and sent them on their way, no problem.



    Prior to the iPhone coming out we switched and they gave us free phones that we didn't even have to pay extra for that we were only going to use for a few months.



    In the 2+ years since we've been customers, we've had numerous examples of good in-store and phone service from ATT, not one example of bad service, rudeness or difficulty. Examples include traveling with roaming charges, and having the issues cleared up efficiently and courteously, and in our favor. In our numerous examples of service from both companies there was a huge gap.



    So I'd have an extremely difficult time believing Verizon has better customer service scores than ATT.



    So network? That's regional but ATT works good where we are, no worse than Verizon. You get dropped calls from any carrier depending on where you go, that's an unfortunate issue with cell phones in general. Perhaps that's what you are claiming Verizon has over ATT, but that's a marginal argument, and very situational.



    Lastly, technology, Verizon really stunk. I mean they had bad phones, that were way behind what I could get from other carriers, and what they did have they crippled by turning off standard Bluetooth so you could *only* use the Bluetooth adapters from Verizon, and on and on. Making you pay *per picture* to send pictures off your phones camera and not having any way to get them directly off with a cable. And forget about any Mac support for anything they sold.



    So technology, Verizon is very easily the worst carrier in the nation by far.



    Score:



    Service: Verizon bad, ATT good.

    Network: Mixed bag, about an even tie, depends where you live.

    Technology: Verizon awful, ATT ok.



    Unless you have other criteria you'd like to discuss, this is pretty much a slam dunk for ATT over Verizon. This of course assuming ATT has good coverage where you live. If not, well then that pretty much ends the discussion, but the same would be true in reverse.



    I'm pretty sure he is talking about the Consumer Reports ratings which I have looked at as well. They take your very nicely written conclusions about your personal anecdotes, and multiply it by 51,700 to reach some conclusions about cell networks in terms of the points you mentioned in just about every major metro market. The results were so bad that they couldn't recommend AT&T at all unless you needed an iPhone. No coverage is perfect and no provider is perfect so everyone should get what is best for them. However 51,700 responses say that overall Verizon has the best network in more places. Verizon has improved their phone selection but no one would be stupid enough to thumb their nose at the iPhone in the future.



    BTW, to anyone who excuses the network suckiness by claiming it is more utilized, again, please prove it and no cell phone browser marketshare doesn't prove network use or performance.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    Apple needs to wake up and get its own lawyers to break this choke holding exclusive conrtrract with AT&T - coming up to over 2 years already. iPhone should be available not only with Verizon but the other carriers as well- just like any Blackbery etc.

    It behooves Apple to act promptly to break the AT&T chains. AT&T keeps promoting and offering all kinds of 3g phones constantly thus clogging all the iPhone customers Apple has provided to them.



    Apple made their bed and should lie in it. They want GSM for now. Most GSM phones have better battery life than EVDO phones. I can't imagine how bad the iPhone battery life would be using EVDO. AT&T has given Apple a lot of leeway. Neither side is perfect but for now they both help each other. I think Apple should stick with it for now. People who can't tolerate AT&T (like me) can always buy an iPod Touch.
  • Reply 45 of 78
    Reading all of your posts it is clear that [email protected] works well in some places and doesn't in others. I'm sure all phone providers have dead zones someplace or another.



    As such, doesn't it make sense to open up the iPhone to multiple providers so everyone can choose what is best for them? Then everyone can make money and be happy.



    My beef with [email protected] is simple. With five bars and 3G I still drop several calls a day. Either there is something wrong with the network, or there is something wrong with the signal strength indication.
  • Reply 46 of 78
    olternautolternaut Posts: 1,376member
    Face it people. Apple won't make the iphone available for other carriers in the U.S. (especially Verizon) until the 4G networks are finally up. Apple has no interest in making a separate CDMA 3G phone just for verizon. I also don't think it is practical for Apple to come up with an iphone that can do both CDMA and GSM.



    Once verizon decided not to go with Apple back in 2007 they missed the boat.
  • Reply 47 of 78
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by trumptman View Post


    Most GSM phones have better battery life than EVDO phones. I can't imagine.



    GSM over EV-DO, yes, but for calls with 3G radios on, EV-DO wins over UMTS. The reason is that GSM doesn't have the ability carry the call while the 3G is connected. It's either one, but not both. With EV-DO, CDMA is more advanced in this way and will used for the call while the 3G radio is on. There are tests that show that the only phones that beat the iPhone in longesvity were Blackberries on EV-DO making calls, in every other category to won. Something about a soft handshake on CMDA, but I don't recall the technical aspects.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jerseymac View Post


    Reading all of your posts it is clear that [email protected] works well in some places and doesn't in others...



    FYI: It's AT and T, not AT at T.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Olternaut View Post


    Face it people. Apple won't make the iphone available for other carriers in the U.S. (especially Verizon) until the 4G networks are finally up. Apple has no interest in making a separate CDMA 3G phone just for verizon. I also don't think it is practical for Apple to come up with an iphone that can do both CDMA and GSM.



    Once verizon decided not to go with Apple back in 2007 they missed the boat.



    Even when LTE is rampant, like 3G is now, which won't be for many years as 3G has a lot of growing room, they will still need, at least EV-DO chips for areas where LTE isn't available. It will be a very long time before CDMA or GSM radios will be dropped to have just UMTS or EV-DO as the lowest available.



    I think that Apple would not have a problem with supporting a CDMA-based phone that is in every other way indentical to the GMS-based version, but only after the GSM-based based iPhone gets saturated. This would be a way to jump start their sales when they plateau, but that appears to be a long way off and well after the contract with AT&T is over.
  • Reply 48 of 78
    guckygucky Posts: 7member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by merdhead View Post


    I think it will be a long wait for LTE. Not only do people have to roll out a decent network, LTE chip implementations have to be small and efficient enough to fit into an increasingly small package.



    Why would I want a smaller package? I already want a *larger* screen and not a smaller one!
  • Reply 49 of 78
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 4,599member
    Plain and simple, you will never see the iphone with Verizon until they change their business model.



    The precedent has been set with the iphone, the cell company makes money on calls and data plans and Apple and it is partners make money on everything else and Apple controls all design elements of the product.



    This is a fundamental different from how Verizon does business. Forget about who has a better network or better service. Version today dictates to all manufactures of phone how the phone will work on their network and what features will be included and that Verizon make money on extending the functionality of the phone and additional services you get. They also tell supplier how to test and manage their phone and how much they will pay.



    BTW it is no issue to put a CDMA chip in an iphone, there are a number of phones out there today that support both GSM and CDMA in the same design and it would not have been a big deal for Apple to have two model ship one to verizon and ship one to the rest of the world.



    The issue is not a technical one but business philosophy.



    If Verizon adopts the iphone business model they loose control with all their other suppliers who bend over backwards to get their phones on Verizon's network and they will not give the up since it is way too profitable for them since companies like LG and Samsung do not care how they make money.
  • Reply 50 of 78
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    So pompous of you to think you end the discussion.

    That's you own personal opinion and can't negate the fact of what's been documented over and over. And the networks are not even- Verizon wins hands down. It doesn't depend upon where you live- it's fully covered. AT&T in NYC sucks - and if it sucks here than - well you fill in the dots.



    So because ATT sucks in NYC it sucks all over? Here is the coverage map from ATT and Verizon at my house. Now why on earth would I choose Verizon. Now, just like you think ATT sucks in NYC, I have proof that Verizon sucks in parts of San Diego. Contrary to your previous statement, it does depend on where you live. Saying that ATT sucks everywhere is just a lie.



    ATT





    Verizon

  • Reply 51 of 78
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    So pompous of you to think you end the discussion.

    That's you own personal opinion and can't negate the fact of what's been documented over and over. And the networks are not even- Verizon wins hands down. It doesn't depend upon where you live- it's fully covered. AT&T in NYC sucks - and if it sucks here than - well you fill in the dots.



    Did you actually read my post? Where in there did I say I end the discussion? Certainly your post comes across as pompous.



    Specifically: "Get over it- You are literally the only one who defends AT&T."



    ...and also: "So pompous of you to think you end the discussion."



    I merely ask for some qualification in your general statements, and some evidence, and all you have to sling back is that it's my opinion and you then retroactively switch the discussion from ATT sucks, to "ATT in NYC sucks" as if it's the same discussion as "AT&T is alway at the bottom or next to bottom."



    I made points about Verizon crippling technology and having horrifically, and astonishingly bad customer service. You refuted neither point. And you still have not backed up your claim with a single link.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    it always amazes me how many iPhone owner feel the need to defend AT&T just because it offers the iPhone.

    Well they did offer the ROCKR way back when.



    If my experience with ATT was as bad as Verizon I'd say so, I have no reason to lie. My whole family had multiple examples of consistently bad or mediocre service with one provider vs multiple examples of invariably good service with another. I was a customer with Verizon for almost 10 years. I said it was anecdotal, but it was from dozens of incidents from multiple people.



    I only defend ATT because they seem to be markedly better in terms of customer service, and also technology.



    The network issue is a separate matter, and I already said if ATT has a bad network in your area then the whole discussion is moot.



    I don't think we're disagreeing as much as you make it sound, other than you're making rather sloppy general arguments when you really should be making specific ones. You could also work on the tone of your posts as you come across as needlessly hostile.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by trumptman View Post


    I'm pretty sure he is talking about the Consumer Reports ratings which I have looked at as well. They take your very nicely written conclusions about your personal anecdotes, and multiply it by 51,700 to reach some conclusions about cell networks in terms of the points you mentioned in just about every major metro market. The results were so bad that they couldn't recommend AT&T at all unless you needed an iPhone. No coverage is perfect and no provider is perfect so everyone should get what is best for them. However 51,700 responses say that overall Verizon has the best network in more places. Verizon has improved their phone selection but no one would be stupid enough to thumb their nose at the iPhone in the future.



    Fair enough, but he didn't specify what his criteria was for saying ATT was bad.



    In every major market? This I find hard to believe, I would love to see those reports. I do know that Consumer Reports has had some shady practices in the past with some of their "objective" surveys, so I'd prefer more than just them for evidence. I don't consider them an unbiassed source.



    There's also a tendency in the main stream media to have "NYCitis" since a lot of the MSM is headquartered in NYC, they think that NYC = the rest of the country. This is not the case. The fact that Verizon happens to have a better network in NYC means that people that live there think this means that Verizon has a better nationwide network.



    I will say this. I hope that the nation can move away from proprietary networks altogether and have a national standard that everyone uses, so we don't have to have this discussion at all. If you're in range of any cell tower anywhere in the country it should not matter which network you are on.
  • Reply 52 of 78
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Verizon is believed to have snubbed Apple early on... [ View this article at AppleInsider.com ][/c]



    Verizon will get the "Adobe treatment" from Apple for this.



    On a separate note, I hate AT&T's reception on my iPhone in Manhattan and Queens, NY. It sucks!!
  • Reply 53 of 78
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 4,599member
    To add to the network sucks discussion...



    It has nothing to do with AT&T or Verizon, it is the technology they are using. Generally speaking GSM does not do well in building especially one constructed of steel thus the reason people said AT&T does not work well in NYC, CDMA however seems to penetrate building better. I see this all the time, outside my GSM cells work great with 5 bars walking in a building it drops to 1 or 2 bars. My company had to install repeaters inside the building so our cells work, they are all GSM.



    I see the same thing at my parents house in the country which was built in the 50's and has plaster with metal lath in the walls, it a Faraday cage for all intended purposes. They have a cell town in sight of their house my GSM phones go almost dead when you walk in their house, However people who have CDMA phone work well.



    I can tell you the opposite was true when AT&T was still on TDMA it work everywhere even in tunnels and in basement of building where CDMA was not as good.



    The question will be is how well 4G networks will fair, I suspect they will have even more issue inside building and the such, and required local antenna's in buildings. Time will only tell.
  • Reply 54 of 78
    ibillibill Posts: 392member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Steven R Wilson View Post


    Customer service from Verizon was horrid, I mean literally some of the worst customer experiences I have ever seen by any company. Not just 1 incident, multiple from multiple members of my family. Bad in store, bad on the phone, bad experiences with managers.



    I have to second this. My experience with Verizon customer service was easily the worst of my life. I cancelled my service with them and will never be a customer of Verizon again.



    I think they study with the neanderthal school of customer relations.
  • Reply 55 of 78
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,660member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iBill View Post


    I have to second this. My experience with Verizon customer service was easily the worst of my life. I cancelled my service with them and will never be a customer of Verizon again.



    I think they study with the neanderthal school of customer relations.



    And really not surprising, in that in his public utterances Ivan the CEO appears to be an enormous asshole, with a kind of "we're the best, you can suck it" mentality that seems to extend to his user base.



    You get the feeling that if Ivan was a customer service rep at a Verizon store, and you came in with a complaint, he'd just start screaming at you to get the fuck out, if you didn't like it.
  • Reply 56 of 78
    randythotrandythot Posts: 109member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hillstones View Post


    Jailbreaking has nothing to do with different carriers. You are referring to unlocking a phone. Jailbreaking allows you to install unauthorized applications on a phone.



    Verizon told Apple to stick it because they didn't think Apple could build a phone.



    Yes, thanks for clarifying the difference between jailbreaking and unlocking. I did confuse them. However, I believe Apple sees both in ill light, as both fragment the user base.



    Regarding Verizon's rejection, that seems likely, but my point was that Apple was shopping carriers and keeping their options open.
  • Reply 57 of 78
    randythotrandythot Posts: 109member
    Only familiar with game theory in name, not so much the nuts and bolts. Personally, I think ever since Jobs and Gates started dusting up, it seems Jobs and Apple has learned to enter negotiations in ball-breaker mode. They do seem to pump and dump suppliers, and punish "bad" partners. While I don't condone unethical behavior (not saying either way, here), Apple seems to find and create strong opportunities for itself. Adept and shrewd.
  • Reply 58 of 78
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by merdhead View Post


    I think it will be a long wait for LTE. Not only do people have to roll out a decent network, LTE chip implementations have to be small and efficient enough to fit into an increasingly small package.





    Though I understand the statement this is incorrect. Lte is being tested in seattle as we speak and you should be excepting it public in 2010 for Verizon Wireless. The network for 4g is what was formally used for television, 700 megahetrz. Now two other carriers are excepting to switch to this a few years later, but with different networks yes as well that don't have the same coverage. Why would at&t be trying to get a year extention to 2011 to be the sole provider for the iphone when the other provider has already stepped above the game?



    Say you had a 4g lg prada phone (no disrespect but this is what the iphone is based on)



    an iphone 3g with whatever design they bring next



    Network Coverage, Speed (this is gonna be a big difference), whatever specs are available



    Makes perfect sense.
  • Reply 59 of 78
    ibillibill Posts: 392member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by theobold View Post


    Say you had a 4g lg prada phone (no disrespect but this is what the iphone is based on)



    Sorry, but I don't buy in to this statement.
  • Reply 60 of 78
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,660member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iBill View Post


    Sorry, but I don't buy in to this statement.



    Really. That's sufficiently goofy as to throw into question anything else the poster has to say.
Sign In or Register to comment.