Apple and Verizon said in talks for 2010 iPhone
Once believed to have blown its first chance at the iPhone, Verizon is now claimed to be in discussions with Apple for its own version of the iPhone in 2010.
Pointing only to anonymous people familiar with the negotiations as its sources, USA Today explains that Verizon reportedly entered serious talks before Steve Jobs' hiatus and has been continuing those talks even with Jobs temporarily sidelined for medical reasons.
Other than a 2010 target release window, little else is divulged by the apparent insiders.
Although not explicitly stated, the newspaper infers that the phone would be a CDMA device compatible with Verizon's existing network and therefore using EVDO for its 3G Internet access. Such a move would give the phone broad coverage but directly contradicts Apple COO Tim Cook's own dismissal of CDMA last week: when discussing iPhone expansion plans, the executive justified the absence of a CDMA model by arguing that a single, GSM phone model is easier to produce than building a separate version for a relatively small batch of customers. Cook also sharply criticized CDMA by asserting that it has no future, as most CDMA carriers plan to phase out the calling technology in favor of the same 4G standard that will be used on GSM networks.
More likely is a direct leap to a 4G. Verizon chief executive Ivan Seidenberg recently explained that a deal is more likely for a phone with the advanced networking technology as it would let Apple continue making one phone but still service North American carriers that are for now off limits. Verizon plans to officially launch its commercial 4G network in early 2010 and would therefore have at least some of its network ready for an iPhone by the time AT&T's exclusivity term ends, which is likely for the same year.
However determined Verizon may be to land an iPhone of its own, AT&T may topple those ambitions through its own discussions. Separate rumors have the incumbent iPhone carrier pushing Apple to extend its US exclusivity until 2011 -- enough to stall any Verizon deal until AT&T's own 4G network is ready.
Any successful deal, no matter the network type, would likely be a serious blow to AT&T, which credited much of its ability to weather the ongoing economic crisis to iPhone sales and the resulting spike in data revenue. Aside from reducing incentives to launch massive, special upgrades to the network, a Verizon model would let those dissatisfied with AT&T' s 3G coverage or its customer service defect to Verizon without giving up Apple's handset.
Pointing only to anonymous people familiar with the negotiations as its sources, USA Today explains that Verizon reportedly entered serious talks before Steve Jobs' hiatus and has been continuing those talks even with Jobs temporarily sidelined for medical reasons.
Other than a 2010 target release window, little else is divulged by the apparent insiders.
Although not explicitly stated, the newspaper infers that the phone would be a CDMA device compatible with Verizon's existing network and therefore using EVDO for its 3G Internet access. Such a move would give the phone broad coverage but directly contradicts Apple COO Tim Cook's own dismissal of CDMA last week: when discussing iPhone expansion plans, the executive justified the absence of a CDMA model by arguing that a single, GSM phone model is easier to produce than building a separate version for a relatively small batch of customers. Cook also sharply criticized CDMA by asserting that it has no future, as most CDMA carriers plan to phase out the calling technology in favor of the same 4G standard that will be used on GSM networks.
More likely is a direct leap to a 4G. Verizon chief executive Ivan Seidenberg recently explained that a deal is more likely for a phone with the advanced networking technology as it would let Apple continue making one phone but still service North American carriers that are for now off limits. Verizon plans to officially launch its commercial 4G network in early 2010 and would therefore have at least some of its network ready for an iPhone by the time AT&T's exclusivity term ends, which is likely for the same year.
However determined Verizon may be to land an iPhone of its own, AT&T may topple those ambitions through its own discussions. Separate rumors have the incumbent iPhone carrier pushing Apple to extend its US exclusivity until 2011 -- enough to stall any Verizon deal until AT&T's own 4G network is ready.
Any successful deal, no matter the network type, would likely be a serious blow to AT&T, which credited much of its ability to weather the ongoing economic crisis to iPhone sales and the resulting spike in data revenue. Aside from reducing incentives to launch massive, special upgrades to the network, a Verizon model would let those dissatisfied with AT&T' s 3G coverage or its customer service defect to Verizon without giving up Apple's handset.
Comments
AT&T forever!
After the 1st Verizon rejection, I wouldn't be surprised to see Jobs personally snub them this second time, all the while, negotiating an even better deal with AT&T, and make 4G available to Verizon once AT&T's 4G network debuts.
I love how Apple is working over the carriers to help profits, innovate, and protect the iPhone platform. If the App Store keeps growing, their leverage does too.
Plus, there's no reason for Apple to jump on the LTE bandwagon on an unproven network infrastructure. Not when you have your image at stake.
I love how Apple is working over the carriers to help profits, innovate, and protect the iPhone platform.
I agree, Apple is playing one carrier off against another. Considering how pathetic all the carriers are in the states, can you blame them? Can you give them credit?
I do.
Give them credit, that is..
Unlikely to be in 2010, more like 2011. Apple will cite chipset immaturity and wait for lower-power chipsets. Look at the reasoning behind the original iPhone not having 3G and the *apparent* decrease in battery life in the iPhone 3G.
Plus, there's no reason for Apple to jump on the LTE bandwagon on an unproven network infrastructure. Not when you have your image at stake.
Do you have any particular data about Apple's 4G development that might support your 2011 late date (other than before the 3g)?
I agree that the power is a major issue for Apple to decide, but aren't launch date and the unproven network issues really dependent upon testing on a 4G network pilot? I think AI had an article about AT&T getting Apple on theirs soon.
If there is any way it will work, good power/chipset, 4G infrastructure rollout, and iPhone 4G development timeframe, Apple would take the early window to leverage competitive advantage. But, big if!
Looks like more FUD and ball-breaking negotiation tactics coming from Apple.
After the 1st Verizon rejection, I wouldn't be surprised to see Jobs personally snub them this second time, all the while, negotiating an even better deal with AT&T, and make 4G available to Verizon once AT&T's 4G network debuts.
I love how Apple is working over the carriers to help profits, innovate, and protect the iPhone platform. If the App Store keeps growing, their leverage does too.
The best tactic is for Apple to keep all negotiations open. One, they need to have a fall back plan. Two, regardless of your partnership if you are for-profit company you need to try to get the best deal possible. Letting AT&T think they are the only real choice in the US isn't good for Apple's business, regardless of the fact that they the best choice in the US for a single phone.
Unlikely to be in 2010, more like 2011. Apple will cite chipset immaturity and wait for lower-power chipsets. Look at the reasoning behind the original iPhone not having 3G and the *apparent* decrease in battery life in the iPhone 3G.
Plus, there's no reason for Apple to jump on the LTE bandwagon on an unproven network infrastructure. Not when you have your image at stake.
2011 is still way too soon. Verizon will start to roll out LTE in 2010. First we'll have 4G USB and EC/34 cards for notebooks where size and battery usage isn't as big of a concern. Then we'll get smaller and smaller components, but it's not Apple modus operandi to be the first on the block with new, unproven HW. Especially when their phones are considerably smaller than the competition in most cases. I don't expect a decent LTE network until a 2013, but unless Verizon is going to LTE in every single area that CDMA is present any phone on their network using LTE will also need CDMA and CDMA2000 radios.
However, by the GSM/CDMA/UMTS/CDMA2000 combo chipsets may be small and power efficient enough to work. But even then I don't see that as an option unless Apple will also sees signs that the countries that are mainly CDMA-based would also see good iPhone sales. Though those countries tend to be poorer and less developed.
Following Infineon's roadmap if Apple adopts it aggressively. There will be an HSPA (7.2Mbit Downlink /5.8Mbit Uplink) version this year and an HSPA+ (21Mbit) version in 2010.
Infineon's LTE (150Mbit downlink / 50Mbit uplink) baseband will be ready for devices shipping in 2011.
If the agreement is reached in 2010, then that makes sense...
All Verizon can really do at this point is pull out the check book and ask how many zeros do they need to write.
The other thing they can do is get over their obsession with locking out handset features. (maybe they already have).
I don't expect a decent LTE network until a 2013, but unless Verizon is going to LTE in every single area that CDMA is present any phone on their network using LTE will also need CDMA and CDMA2000 radios.
That's the crux that most people ignore. The current GSM-based iPhone has a number of legacy networks to fall back on, whereas a Verizon/LTE iPhone will only work where there is LTE coverage. That is, unless Apple incorporates full CDMA capability as a stop-gap, and no engineer likes stop-gaps.
If Verizon's LTE network were a good three years away Apple might consider an interim GSM/CDMA chipset (assuming there is one that meets their design requirements), but right now they can play a stalling game and prod Verizon to accelerate their LTE rollout. It's quite a game of poker that we get to witness...
That's the crux that most people ignore. The current GSM-based iPhone has a number of legacy networks to fall back on, whereas a Verizon/LTE iPhone will only work where there is LTE coverage. That is, unless Apple incorporates full CDMA capability as a stop-gap, and no engineer likes stop-gaps.
If Verizon's LTE network were a good three years away Apple might consider an interim GSM/CDMA chipset (assuming there is one that meets their design requirements), but right now they can play a stalling game and prod Verizon to accelerate their LTE rollout. It's quite a game of poker that we get to witness...
hmmm...
Plus having us talking about this means Verizon is stuck trying to negotiate something not likely to happen to save face with stock holders, and refusal to negotiate means a hit to the stock. Real attempted negotiations also hurts AT&T for their renegotiation. Wow, I never thought the Bells would be over a barrel like this. Is this really just poker? More like a cage match?
Does anyone know if 4G will sound better than AT&T and Verizon's current voice quality? I've always found the CDMA standard chosen for Sprint and Verizon slightly better than GSM 3G.
Sound better? Maybe less background hiss, but more difficulty distinguishing F from S and distinguishing a drop-out from no input. IMHO that's worse.
AT&T and Verizon have a pretty clear idea when their 4G services will roll out, how quickly and how fast, and at what cost. So does Apple.
These are massively expensive, long term plans that have everything to do with the fortunes of these companies over the next ten years. A Verizon branded iPhone would be nice for Verizon, but not upend your business and technological plan nice.
I'm sure negotiations are ongoing, but they're within the context of the realities of what Verizon and AT&T are already doing, not creating a whole new Apple-centric world.
It would be an understatement to say that I am disappointed that Apple doesn't *already* have a CDMA iPhone. There is NO legitimate argument for not creating one (or using a dual-CDMA/HSPA chipset in the single model iPhone) as there are ~100 million CDMA customers in the United States --- easily the largest potential market for the iPhone so far based upon total cellphone users and the iPhone's extensive popularity among the public.
Although we don't know the details, this enormous potential market obviously overshadows any benefits from maintaining exclusivity with AT&T. It may have been necessary initially to enter the market, but now it is just a big ball and chain. Even if opening the iPhone to the Verizon and Sprint led to a reduced average subsidy, the potential doubling or more of unit sales would easily more than make up for the lower revenue per phone.
As an Apple enthusiast, device owner, stockholder, and especially as a fledgling software developer, I will be very upset if Apple continues this nonsense exclusivity.
I'm already written about this too many times, so i'll keep it short.
It would be an understatement to say that I am disappointed that Apple doesn't *already* have a CDMA iPhone. There is NO legitimate argument for not creating one (or using a dual-CDMA/HSPA chipset in the single model iPhone) as there are ~100 million CDMA customers in the United States --- easily the largest potential market for the iPhone so far based upon total cellphone users and the iPhone's extensive popularity among the public.
Although we don't know the details, this enormous potential market obviously overshadows any benefits from maintaining exclusivity with AT&T. It may have been necessary initially to enter the market, but now it is just a big ball and chain. Even if opening the iPhone to the Verizon and Sprint led to a reduced average subsidy, the potential doubling or more of unit sales would easily more than make up for the lower revenue per phone.
As an Apple enthusiast, device owner, stockholder, and especially as a fledgling software developer, I will be very upset if Apple continues this nonsense exclusivity.
So, and this is kind of my standard rejoinder to this kind of post, why do you think Apple hasn't made a CDMA phone? By your lights it's obvious, necessary and nothing but upside, yet, here we are.
So do you figure Apple is stupid, incompetent, corrupt, or all three?
It would be an understatement to say that I am disappointed that Apple doesn't *already* have a CDMA iPhone. There is NO legitimate argument for not creating one (or using a dual-CDMA/HSPA chipset in the single model iPhone) as there are ~100 million CDMA customers in the United States --- easily the largest potential market for the iPhone so far based upon total cellphone users and the iPhone's extensive popularity among the public.
I just don't think that selling as many units as possible right out of the gate without getting control over the ecosystem is the best tactic for long term growth.
1) They are under contract so it's a no go until that is over. Sure, we don't know the exact details, but I think we can assume at least 2 years and probably the 1 year add on for going hte subsidization route on Apple's request.
2) How small and power efficient are these dual network standards chips? Remember, Apple has one of the smallest smartphones by volume.
3) Why do all other handset makers do exclusive deals with carriers if it limits their unit sales?
Even if Apple were to make a CDMA iPhone they would get more money and more control if they were to partner with Sprint. So the best way to get a better deal with a US CDMA-based carrier is to court Verizon to get Sprint to agree with pretty much anything anything that Apple wanted. How much did SPrint pay for the failed Samsung Instinct? How much are they paying for the Palm Pre? This strategy also works for getting more from AT&T.
If memory serves me, Apple's current agreement with ATT doesn't expire until 2012.
That might be a memory, but it's a memory of an unsubstantiated rumour. After Apple announced the exclusivity with AT&T, Verizon's CEO came out and said that Apple came to them first with profit sharing, a 5 year deal and whole bunch of things they wouldn't agree too. Apple nor AT&T has ever spoken of the deal's duration.