I live on the edge of the Kansas City metro area that ATT just doesn't cover. Therefore, I can't get an iPhone. If I lived 20 miles north, no problem -- but where I've chosen to raise my family, no dice. I can get Verizon there, and I can get T-Mobile. I would gladly switch to ATT if it was an option, but it's not. Opening up the iPhone to T-mobile would be an option that I would gladly welcome.
Specifically Verizon is planning to launch LTE in 2010, but it will be limited to its first markets. It will expand over time. How long is over time we don't really know.
AT&T will gradually speed its HSPA network and can naturally evolve up to LTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dagamer34
Second, Verizon has already stated their LTE rollout will be publically available mid-2010, whereas AT&T will have theirs ready mid-2011. I'll leave defending AT&T for delaying their network by a year to someone else.
GSM is pretty much gone from the developed world: what ignoramuses call 3G GSM is in fact a variant of CDMA (W-CDMA) . The 3G iPhone already works with W-CDMA, and the W-CDMA world is converging with the CDMA2000 world via LTE.
So consider the facts:
1. We know that Apple will release an LTE phone, perhaps as early as June.
2. Sprint and Verizon will almost certainly be faster to the draw with implementing LTE across their network than ATT will. AI's assumption that an incremental upgrade is easier is full of shit! ATT is still struggling with getting up to 3G standards due to their legacy GSM base. CDMA in any flavor is an easier upgrade to LTE than GSM is.
Although many in developed countries have migrated to UMTS and beyond, GSM is still widely in use there for legacy customers. And that is not the point. 3G is very confusing and poorly defined in general. In fact, you have some of the facts wrong.
GSM (2G) has evolved to GRPS (2.5G), EDGE (2.75G) and to UMTS (3G) which is sometimes referred to as WCDMA. UMTS is broken down into HSPA (HSDPA and HDUPA) and will evolve to HSPA+. Instead of calling it UMTS or WCDMA, however, many call it 3G GSM to indicate its origin (particularly to distinguish the use of SIM card)
cdmaOne (2G), which is often incorrectly but more commonly referred to as CDMA, has evolved to cdma2000 (1xRTT =2.5G, EV-DO = 3G -> EV-DV). cdma2000 is often incorrectly referred to as WCDMA.
Many players (e.g., AT&T, Verizon) are looking at/rolling out LTE for 4G. But some (e.g., Sprint) are looking at/rolling out WiMax and other technologies. But as to when LTE will be deployed well enough for mass consumption is a big question. AT&T still has marginal coverage of 3G in many areas, for instance.
That said, I think Apple should make EV-DO/EV-DV phone. I don't think it will cost a whole lot in terms of development and market share gain (see Blackberry) will be big enough to offset any cost. AT&T is giving Apple what it wants to delay/prevent the release of EV-DO/EV-DV iPhone and Verizon isn't.
Specifically Verizon is planning to launch LTE in 2010, but it will be limited to its first markets. It will expand over time. How long is over time we don't really know.
AT&T will gradually speed its HSDPA network and can naturally evolve up to LTE.
Funny how "launch" has become "full nationwide coverage" and how there is not one LTE EC34 or USB card for notebooks at this time, but people will be upset when the next iPhone doesn't have it.
Even when Verizon's LTE is setup like their CDMA2000 is today Apple will still have to make a second model for CDMA-based markets for when LTE is not available. GSM/UMTS/LTE and CDMA/CDMA2k/LTE would be two different models, but somehow we are to expect CDMA2k and UMTS to simply pop out of existence. Although, by the time LTE is well optimized for mobile phones we might see some very sleek UMTS/CDMA2k combo chips that may work, but I think that will all depend on the size and how well the developing countries with CDMA-based networks are coming along with 3G and how they would receive the iPhone.
I partially agree with this statement, however, if people are SO upset with the phone service, why is iPhone so successful? Why are Apple making billions including apps, etc? I see it as the best phone/portable device ever created and most people are willing to look beyond its obvious flaws.
Why is it a windoze world? Why did people vote for W Bush twice?
However, AT&T has already stated that it plans to upgrade its existing network incrementally, which is a much easier path toward LTE than Verizon's plans to completely replace its CDMA/EVDO network with LTE. During that time, AT&T will also be able to continue to advertise a faster mobile network, and Apple will be able to leverage global support for 3GPP mobile networks to release increasingly faster versions of the iPhone.
As if Apple was ever going to diss AT&T today. It's all financial politics.
New is always better than upgrade and that is why AT&T, the patch & paste carrier, will always be inferior in reception. Unless as melgross says its in the very GSM vs CDMA technology itself.
I myself can't wait for a brand new, sparkling Verizon LTE network.
This doesn't make sense from any sort of logical business perspective.
As I posted before,
1) CDMA 3G is going to maintain widespread use on many CDMA carriers for sometime. Widespread use of LTE and in particular full, widespread service coverage is not going to be available for at least 18-24 months, and that's an incredibly ambitious timeline. Depending on many factors, including the DTV transition and economy, it could be even longer.
2) Even when widely deployed, many providers are expected to use dual-use devices that use LTE AND CDMA. Thus they are going to have to become familiar with the technology on a deep level anyways.
3) MOST PERSUASIVE is the fact that the United States is easily the largest market for the iPhone based on total cellphone subscribers and the very favorable reception and general opinion of the iPhone. With Tmobile being a minor carrier and not even having a nationwide 3G network, Verizon and Sprint combined represent the vast majority of the ~100 million cellphone customers left in the nation after accounting for AT&T users, and they are all running on CDMA.
AT&T is going to run out of steam and the only for large growth is by opening up to CDMA carriers. Based on surveys, there are still some customers who would consider switching to AT&T for a new iPhone, but there are MILLIONS more that are NOT going to leave their preferred carrier that are very interested in purchasing an iPhone on their existing network.
Economically, there is no way you could convince me that the potential market of the 100 Million CDMA subscribers in the iPhone-receptive United States (and the ~400 million worldwide) is not enough to recoup the resources spent on creating an CDMA EV-DO iPhone.
A few years ago before ATT and Cingular merged, I had ATT cell phone service. I live on a very high hill 2 miles from our state capitol. ATT service was terrible. It sometimes took 3 attempts to finish one conversation given the persistent dropped calls. I dropped them and switched to a Verizon family plan which, for our area, is superior.
I recently acquired an enterprise iPhone 3G from work and the ATT connections have been very good. Calls still get dropped occasionally, but their service is much improved from a few years ago. Not sure if it?s the iPhone hardware or an improved network. I'd like to think both.
We've kept our Verizon family plan, and we'd certainly buy at least 2 iPhones for personal use if Verizon offered them.
This doesn't make sense from any sort of logical business perspective.
As I posted before,
1) CDMA 3G is going to maintain widespread use on many CDMA carriers for sometime. Widespread use of LTE and in particular full, widespread service coverage is not going to be available for at least 18-24 months, and that's an incredibly ambitious timeline. Depending on many factors, including the DTV transition and economy, it could be even longer.
2) Even when widely deployed, many providers are expected to use dual-use devices that use LTE AND CDMA. Thus they are going to have to become familiar with the technology on a deep level anyways.
3) MOST PERSUASIVE is the fact that the United States is easily the largest market for the iPhone based on the total subscribers and the very favorable reception and general opinion of the iPhone. With Tmobile being a minor carrier and not even having a nationwide 3G network, Verizon and Sprint combined represent the vast majority of the ~100 million cellphone customers left in the nation after accounting for AT&T users, and they are all running on CDMA.
AT&T is going to run out of steam and the only for large growth is by opening up to CDMA carriers. Based on surveys, there are still some customers who would consider switching to AT&T for a new iPhone, but there are MILLIONS more that are NOT going to leave their preferred carrier that are very interested in purchasing an iPhone on their existing network.
Economically, there is no way you could convince me that the potential market of the 100 Million CDMA subscribers in the iPhone-receptive United States (and the ~400 million worldwide) is not enough to recoup the resources spent on creating an CDMA EV-DO iPhone.
You seem to be thinking that all of Apple's potential customers live in the US. They do not. In fact, the biggest market Apple can tap into is China, and they don't use CDMA.
It's never been about maximizing profits or there are a plethora of markets that Apple could get into an conceivably do well (netbooks, sub-$1000 laptops, non-Mac Pro tower PCs, etc..). But it goes against the companies core philosophy of keeping things simple. Once you start down that slippery road, it becomes all to easy to ship out crud to the market simply because it will make money.
I partially agree with this statement, however, if people are SO upset with the phone service, why is iPhone so successful? Why are Apple making billions including apps, etc? I see it as the best phone/portable device ever created and most people are willing to look beyond its obvious flaws.
The obvious flaws are inherent to at&t. The iPhone remains a best in class device.
Economically, there is no way you could convince me that the potential market of the 100 Million CDMA subscribers in the iPhone-receptive United States (and the ~400 million worldwide) is not enough to recoup the resources spent on creating an CDMA EV-DO iPhone.
You are, of course, correct. But that's because you leave one factor out of the equation - payments or other non-monetary remuneration made to Apple in exchange for keeping the iPhone off Verizon and other CDMA networks.
Apple would surely profit (if all such exclusive contracts were removed from the equation) by making an iPhone they could sell to Verizon. The engineering costs would be minimal compared to the huge market opportunity. But ATT is making up for that with its payments to Apple. Those payments are not reflected in profit and loss statements, but go straight to Apple's balance sheet as one time items.
I partially agree with this statement, however, if people are SO upset with the phone service, why is iPhone so successful? Why are Apple making billions including apps, etc? I see it as the best phone/portable device ever created and most people are willing to look beyond its obvious flaws.
In my opinion, I think a lot of it has to do with people simply complaining. I have the iPhone 3G on AT&T and a verizon phone that I carry for my job. I get great reception with them both, very few dropped calls. True, you are going to have some areas where reception will be spotty, but that's with any carrier. I've been with AT&T for 5 years and they aren't as bad as people make them out to be from my experience.
You seem to be thinking that all of Apple's potential customers live in the US. They do not. In fact, the biggest market Apple can tap into is China, and they don't use CDMA.
It's never been about maximizing profits or there are a plethora of markets that Apple could get into an conceivably do well (netbooks, sub-$1000 laptops, non-Mac Pro tower PCs, etc..). But it goes against the companies core philosophy of keeping things simple. Once you start down that slippery road, it becomes all to easy to ship out crud to the market simply because it will make money.
Nah, that's crap.
Making a CDMA iPhone would not add any user complexity (which is all Apple cares about - I don't understand why you think it cares about manufacturing or design complexity). It's ALL about maximizing profits. And given the world the way it IS, not the way we wish it would be, being with one carrier in the USA maximizes profits better than being with both bigs because of the large subsidies and because of ATT's willingness to give Apple tons of control and cash in return for not making a Verizon iPhone.
the biggest market Apple can tap into is China, and they don't use CDMA.
That doesn't jive with what I've been reading on the telecom news sites. What I've been seeing is CDMA is widely used in China, and is actually increasing. Carriers there are seeing that they get better bang for their buck in terms of signal strength, audio quality, and transition to LTE from CDMA, and are moving away from GSM.
Comments
I live on the edge of the Kansas City metro area that ATT just doesn't cover. Therefore, I can't get an iPhone. If I lived 20 miles north, no problem -- but where I've chosen to raise my family, no dice. I can get Verizon there, and I can get T-Mobile. I would gladly switch to ATT if it was an option, but it's not. Opening up the iPhone to T-mobile would be an option that I would gladly welcome.
Just whereabout is it not covered? http://www.wireless.att.com/coverage...585&sci=6&3g=t
dunno... Apple might be happy with AT&T but many users aren't.
Yep. And they are all right here.
Yep. And they are all right here.
AT&T will gradually speed its HSPA network and can naturally evolve up to LTE.
Second, Verizon has already stated their LTE rollout will be publically available mid-2010, whereas AT&T will have theirs ready mid-2011. I'll leave defending AT&T for delaying their network by a year to someone else.
GSM is pretty much gone from the developed world: what ignoramuses call 3G GSM is in fact a variant of CDMA (W-CDMA) . The 3G iPhone already works with W-CDMA, and the W-CDMA world is converging with the CDMA2000 world via LTE.
So consider the facts:
1. We know that Apple will release an LTE phone, perhaps as early as June.
2. Sprint and Verizon will almost certainly be faster to the draw with implementing LTE across their network than ATT will. AI's assumption that an incremental upgrade is easier is full of shit! ATT is still struggling with getting up to 3G standards due to their legacy GSM base. CDMA in any flavor is an easier upgrade to LTE than GSM is.
Although many in developed countries have migrated to UMTS and beyond, GSM is still widely in use there for legacy customers. And that is not the point. 3G is very confusing and poorly defined in general. In fact, you have some of the facts wrong.
GSM (2G) has evolved to GRPS (2.5G), EDGE (2.75G) and to UMTS (3G) which is sometimes referred to as WCDMA. UMTS is broken down into HSPA (HSDPA and HDUPA) and will evolve to HSPA+. Instead of calling it UMTS or WCDMA, however, many call it 3G GSM to indicate its origin (particularly to distinguish the use of SIM card)
cdmaOne (2G), which is often incorrectly but more commonly referred to as CDMA, has evolved to cdma2000 (1xRTT =2.5G, EV-DO = 3G -> EV-DV). cdma2000 is often incorrectly referred to as WCDMA.
Many players (e.g., AT&T, Verizon) are looking at/rolling out LTE for 4G. But some (e.g., Sprint) are looking at/rolling out WiMax and other technologies. But as to when LTE will be deployed well enough for mass consumption is a big question. AT&T still has marginal coverage of 3G in many areas, for instance.
That said, I think Apple should make EV-DO/EV-DV phone. I don't think it will cost a whole lot in terms of development and market share gain (see Blackberry) will be big enough to offset any cost. AT&T is giving Apple what it wants to delay/prevent the release of EV-DO/EV-DV iPhone and Verizon isn't.
Specifically Verizon is planning to launch LTE in 2010, but it will be limited to its first markets. It will expand over time. How long is over time we don't really know.
AT&T will gradually speed its HSDPA network and can naturally evolve up to LTE.
Funny how "launch" has become "full nationwide coverage" and how there is not one LTE EC34 or USB card for notebooks at this time, but people will be upset when the next iPhone doesn't have it.
Even when Verizon's LTE is setup like their CDMA2000 is today Apple will still have to make a second model for CDMA-based markets for when LTE is not available. GSM/UMTS/LTE and CDMA/CDMA2k/LTE would be two different models, but somehow we are to expect CDMA2k and UMTS to simply pop out of existence. Although, by the time LTE is well optimized for mobile phones we might see some very sleek UMTS/CDMA2k combo chips that may work, but I think that will all depend on the size and how well the developing countries with CDMA-based networks are coming along with 3G and how they would receive the iPhone.
I partially agree with this statement, however, if people are SO upset with the phone service, why is iPhone so successful? Why are Apple making billions including apps, etc? I see it as the best phone/portable device ever created and most people are willing to look beyond its obvious flaws.
Why is it a windoze world? Why did people vote for W Bush twice?
However, AT&T has already stated that it plans to upgrade its existing network incrementally, which is a much easier path toward LTE than Verizon's plans to completely replace its CDMA/EVDO network with LTE. During that time, AT&T will also be able to continue to advertise a faster mobile network, and Apple will be able to leverage global support for 3GPP mobile networks to release increasingly faster versions of the iPhone.
As if Apple was ever going to diss AT&T today. It's all financial politics.
New is always better than upgrade and that is why AT&T, the patch & paste carrier, will always be inferior in reception. Unless as melgross says its in the very GSM vs CDMA technology itself.
I myself can't wait for a brand new, sparkling Verizon LTE network.
Blu-ray is having a banner year? Does that mean it finally cracked 10% of DVD sales?
Yeah- kinda like the way usage of Mac OS web browsing finally cracked 10% in 2008.
As I posted before,
1) CDMA 3G is going to maintain widespread use on many CDMA carriers for sometime. Widespread use of LTE and in particular full, widespread service coverage is not going to be available for at least 18-24 months, and that's an incredibly ambitious timeline. Depending on many factors, including the DTV transition and economy, it could be even longer.
2) Even when widely deployed, many providers are expected to use dual-use devices that use LTE AND CDMA. Thus they are going to have to become familiar with the technology on a deep level anyways.
3) MOST PERSUASIVE is the fact that the United States is easily the largest market for the iPhone based on total cellphone subscribers and the very favorable reception and general opinion of the iPhone. With Tmobile being a minor carrier and not even having a nationwide 3G network, Verizon and Sprint combined represent the vast majority of the ~100 million cellphone customers left in the nation after accounting for AT&T users, and they are all running on CDMA.
AT&T is going to run out of steam and the only for large growth is by opening up to CDMA carriers. Based on surveys, there are still some customers who would consider switching to AT&T for a new iPhone, but there are MILLIONS more that are NOT going to leave their preferred carrier that are very interested in purchasing an iPhone on their existing network.
Economically, there is no way you could convince me that the potential market of the 100 Million CDMA subscribers in the iPhone-receptive United States (and the ~400 million worldwide) is not enough to recoup the resources spent on creating an CDMA EV-DO iPhone.
I recently acquired an enterprise iPhone 3G from work and the ATT connections have been very good. Calls still get dropped occasionally, but their service is much improved from a few years ago. Not sure if it?s the iPhone hardware or an improved network. I'd like to think both.
We've kept our Verizon family plan, and we'd certainly buy at least 2 iPhones for personal use if Verizon offered them.
This doesn't make sense from any sort of logical business perspective.
As I posted before,
1) CDMA 3G is going to maintain widespread use on many CDMA carriers for sometime. Widespread use of LTE and in particular full, widespread service coverage is not going to be available for at least 18-24 months, and that's an incredibly ambitious timeline. Depending on many factors, including the DTV transition and economy, it could be even longer.
2) Even when widely deployed, many providers are expected to use dual-use devices that use LTE AND CDMA. Thus they are going to have to become familiar with the technology on a deep level anyways.
3) MOST PERSUASIVE is the fact that the United States is easily the largest market for the iPhone based on the total subscribers and the very favorable reception and general opinion of the iPhone. With Tmobile being a minor carrier and not even having a nationwide 3G network, Verizon and Sprint combined represent the vast majority of the ~100 million cellphone customers left in the nation after accounting for AT&T users, and they are all running on CDMA.
AT&T is going to run out of steam and the only for large growth is by opening up to CDMA carriers. Based on surveys, there are still some customers who would consider switching to AT&T for a new iPhone, but there are MILLIONS more that are NOT going to leave their preferred carrier that are very interested in purchasing an iPhone on their existing network.
Economically, there is no way you could convince me that the potential market of the 100 Million CDMA subscribers in the iPhone-receptive United States (and the ~400 million worldwide) is not enough to recoup the resources spent on creating an CDMA EV-DO iPhone.
You seem to be thinking that all of Apple's potential customers live in the US. They do not. In fact, the biggest market Apple can tap into is China, and they don't use CDMA.
It's never been about maximizing profits or there are a plethora of markets that Apple could get into an conceivably do well (netbooks, sub-$1000 laptops, non-Mac Pro tower PCs, etc..). But it goes against the companies core philosophy of keeping things simple. Once you start down that slippery road, it becomes all to easy to ship out crud to the market simply because it will make money.
Yeah- kinda like the way usage of Mac OS web browsing finally cracked 10% in 2008.
I partially agree with this statement, however, if people are SO upset with the phone service, why is iPhone so successful? Why are Apple making billions including apps, etc? I see it as the best phone/portable device ever created and most people are willing to look beyond its obvious flaws.
The obvious flaws are inherent to at&t. The iPhone remains a best in class device.
OS X doesn't need the marketshare as badly as Blu-ray does.
Right- and the iPhone doesn't need a good signal either.
Economically, there is no way you could convince me that the potential market of the 100 Million CDMA subscribers in the iPhone-receptive United States (and the ~400 million worldwide) is not enough to recoup the resources spent on creating an CDMA EV-DO iPhone.
You are, of course, correct. But that's because you leave one factor out of the equation - payments or other non-monetary remuneration made to Apple in exchange for keeping the iPhone off Verizon and other CDMA networks.
Apple would surely profit (if all such exclusive contracts were removed from the equation) by making an iPhone they could sell to Verizon. The engineering costs would be minimal compared to the huge market opportunity. But ATT is making up for that with its payments to Apple. Those payments are not reflected in profit and loss statements, but go straight to Apple's balance sheet as one time items.
I partially agree with this statement, however, if people are SO upset with the phone service, why is iPhone so successful? Why are Apple making billions including apps, etc? I see it as the best phone/portable device ever created and most people are willing to look beyond its obvious flaws.
In my opinion, I think a lot of it has to do with people simply complaining. I have the iPhone 3G on AT&T and a verizon phone that I carry for my job. I get great reception with them both, very few dropped calls. True, you are going to have some areas where reception will be spotty, but that's with any carrier. I've been with AT&T for 5 years and they aren't as bad as people make them out to be from my experience.
You seem to be thinking that all of Apple's potential customers live in the US. They do not. In fact, the biggest market Apple can tap into is China, and they don't use CDMA.
It's never been about maximizing profits or there are a plethora of markets that Apple could get into an conceivably do well (netbooks, sub-$1000 laptops, non-Mac Pro tower PCs, etc..). But it goes against the companies core philosophy of keeping things simple. Once you start down that slippery road, it becomes all to easy to ship out crud to the market simply because it will make money.
Nah, that's crap.
Making a CDMA iPhone would not add any user complexity (which is all Apple cares about - I don't understand why you think it cares about manufacturing or design complexity). It's ALL about maximizing profits. And given the world the way it IS, not the way we wish it would be, being with one carrier in the USA maximizes profits better than being with both bigs because of the large subsidies and because of ATT's willingness to give Apple tons of control and cash in return for not making a Verizon iPhone.
the biggest market Apple can tap into is China, and they don't use CDMA.
That doesn't jive with what I've been reading on the telecom news sites. What I've been seeing is CDMA is widely used in China, and is actually increasing. Carriers there are seeing that they get better bang for their buck in terms of signal strength, audio quality, and transition to LTE from CDMA, and are moving away from GSM.