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.
Exactly. When you have the leverage you must use it or lose it.
No idea if the US is the same as the UK, but anyone considered the fact of AT&T and Verizon sharing networks specifically for the iPhone? In times of need (now) businesses will do crazy things to get the edge or just stay afloat. If figures are correct and the reason AT&T are doing so well is due to the iPhone verizon might take the hit, and buy a large proportion of line time on AT&T's network to get the slice of the Apple "cake" so to speak. Even if it costs them now once you have people switched with the backup of AT&T's network connection all is well. Gives them enough time to fully role out 4G with the HSM network as a back bone.
Sorta happened in the UK, O2 (Apples Carrier here) is now sharing masts etc with Vodaphone, another large player in the industry.
I think AT&T and verizon is an option as from what Im hearing over here, AT&T coverage is poor whereas Verizon is good, however AT&T have the iPhone. Merge the two, both businesses can make more money - sell more iPhones, have a higher volume of network traffic etc but increase coverage and reduce outgoings while rolling out the 4G service my sharing masts. Once 4G is properly rolled out and the majority of the recession is over then they will start worrying about beating each other once again
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.
I am with you. If you look and the worldwide picture, it gets worse. In many countries Apple is with the underdog for absolutely no technical reasons. For various reasons switching carrier just for a phone is not an option for the majority of the people there, more than in the US I guess.
No idea if the US is the same as the UK, but anyone considered the fact of AT&T and Verizon sharing networks specifically for the iPhone?
They use completely different network types, GSM and CDMA-based, unlike most of Europe, which is GSM-based. Apple would have to use CDMA and GSM-based dual-standards radios to make this work. The only piggyback possibility wouldn't for several years once LTE is a go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow
In many countries Apple is with the underdog for absolutely no technical reasons. For various reasons switching carrier just for a phone is not an option for the majority of the people there, more than in the US I guess.
That is a solid argument as to why Apple will not engineer a CDMA-based iPhone just to service the US. Winterspan needs to ask himself, if almost all the countries that they do service are GSM-based why did they go with exclusive contracts in every country they could and make the legally required unlocked iPhones price prohibitive? Why did they team with the lesser, more desperate carrier by consumer base over the larger carriers in many countries? These are all long term business decisions. If they aren't going to open their device up to the rest of the GSM world in these countries they service why should we expect Apple to do that with a separate device altogether just for the US. It doesn't make sense.
Sorry, what I meant was Verizon use the 4G service they have rolled out but where there is not support they drop back onto AT&T's GSM network. Which the iPhone does currently support and assuming the new iPhone will support 4G then to keep its backwards compatibility it would be 4G verizon and GSM AT&T where there is no signal for 4G
want now the piece of action so badly! They just didn't think this new business model, having been reared by Apple, would be so successful. You don't want complainers to pay for their own mistake, do you?
Remember back in 2005 when Steve Jobs announced that OS X has been living a secret double life for the last 5 years? Remember that "Just in Case" building in Cupertino?
I am absolutely certain that Apple has a working CDMA iPhone ready for the "just in case" scenario in which AT&T does not play nice. They are using the hardware as leverage to push AT&T to make their service better knowing that is they don't, Apple will just not extend that exclusivity contract for another year.
I also bet that Apple is using the demo iPhone in talks with Verizon to make them put a better offer than AT&T on the table.
However, I would agree with Tim Cook that CDMA has no future and that it would be wrong for Apple to release a CDMA iPhone now. For start, that would solidify the usefulness of the CDMA network and prolong the transition to LTE in both Verizon and AT&T.
So releasing a CDMA phone would just extend the Status quo and prolong the adoption of a unified mobile communication standard worldwide. As Apple is selling one type of products worldwide, this will not be in their best interest.
What Apple can and is probably doing is leveraging the success of the iPhone to make Verison adapt the LTE faster.
Its interesting. AT&T can go 4G via minor software and hardware upgrade in the existing towers. That would however compromise the coverage of existing 3G and 2G iPhones. Verizon on the other hand would be forced to instal a whole new types of antennas to go 4G but it has no installed base to worry about.
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.
Image at stake? I think it is more like they can't wait for 4G. Right now, AT&T's 3G network is making Apple look like bums when it comes to the actual cell phone part of the iphone. The reality is the iphone's utility as an actual phone is pretty limited....to put it as polite as possible.
I think Apple is using its negotiations with Verizon to force AT&T to accelerate their 4G network rollout plans.
Whatever happens in the negotiations its a win win win all the way around for Apple.
given all the issues with unlocking and such I am not buying that Apple would dump ATT and simply pick up someone else. a move to a carrier independent system where any company that supports the hardware could provide service seems more likely. and that hardware will, i suspect, stay GSM or more to whatever comes next, not add on a second CDMA setup.
Actually, a dual-mode GSM/CDMA phone similar to the Blackberry Bold would make a lot of sense for the people like myself that are mainly pissed off about the iPhone being a SIM-Locked phone because of world travel. Going dual-mode, they can force you to use Verizon where available, and allow GSM anywhere it isn't.
Since almost half of the revenue from the iPhone seems to be from the US, that kind of strategy isn't completely half-baked. It adds cost (about $10/phone from what iSupply says), but it could just be for all the US (or North America) units and let international units be plain GSM.
The roaming fees for the iPhone mean that I will ditch it when my AT&T contract is up in June and switch to something else. Traveling now, and I have to say... my old Motorola V360 doesn't make that bad of a phone! The battery lasts a week still (after 4 years!). I love having a smart phone, but I'm not willing to pay $1k per year in roaming fees!
Dudes, an LTE version of the iPhone won't happen until 2011.
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...
Thanks for this information.
It makes sense.
Do you have a link to the Infineon?s roadmap?
The upcoming iPhone should integrate the latest UMTS HSPA quad band capable Infineon baseband.
And hopefully the upcoming iPhone will include the winning band UMTS900 for the rest of the world, besides the current triple band of the iPhone 3G, (the winning) UMTS850 for America, UMTS1900 for America & UMTS2100 for the rest of the world.
Only the 850 MHz and 900 MHz bands enable real mobile broadband services by leveraging the advantages of lower frequencies.
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.
Exactly. More smoke and mirrors from Apple so they can get a sweeter deal from AT&T and allow them to rape us with data and soon to be teether and worse, abomination of data plan for netbook.
The reality is the iphone's utility as an actual phone is pretty limited....to put it as polite as possible.
I'm wondering why you think the iPhone is pretty limited as a phone? What are you talking about? I'm interested in getting one but the primary use is as a phone.
So, what are the problems? I'd really love to know.
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.
What was that old adage? Keep your friends close but your enemies closer.
There is another adage that comes to mind as well: business is business, business isn't personal. Fact is, it would not be a good strategic move for Apple to shut Verizon out of a potential deal, despite Verizon reportedly having snubbed Apple the first time around. Verizon is a large company just like AT&T, and just like AT&T, Verizon offers a huge customer pool. I can't tell you how many of my friends think my iPhone is awesome but won't switch to AT&T/buy one because of the network (sidenote: effective marketing on Verizon's part over the years; I really can't tell any difference in network quality where I live).
Of course, this is a ripe opportunity for Apple to extract concessions and deal sweeteners from AT&T (or Verizon) for the impending LTE launches. More power to them. IMO, a worthy competitor to the iPhone has yet to surface, so as long as this remains, Apple will use the time it has as #1 to its clear advantage.
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.
The US is the largest market for the iPhone at present but it's certainly not the largest potential market. India and China are both far, far bigger cell phone markets even if Apple doesn't currently enjoy the same rock star status in Asia as it does in the English-speaking world.
Quote:
Although we don't know the details, this enormous potential market obviously overshadows any benefits from maintaining exclusivity with AT&T.
Judging by the number of people willing to swap networks to AT&T, there's very minimal benefits in dropping the exclusivity.
The problem with creating a model for Verizon is that it would need a different modem as not even the best dual GSM/CDMA modems support all of the frequency bands required. The change it modem would mean a partial re-write of the iPhone software too as GSM and CDMA continue to work differently at the higher levels. R&D is expensive.
Add this to the "bag of hurt" CDMA licensing and it all becomes a very expensive venture to capture a relatively small*, dying market.
(* i.e. those customers who would want an iPhone but won't switch to AT&T)
If CDMA was so important then why do two out of the top three smartphone platforms not support?
It offers a 30% longer standby time, 7.2Mbit Downlink and 5.8Mbit uplink (perfect for sending videos).
UMTS900 is used by two of the networks selling the iPhone in Australia, in addition to UMTS2100. They have both rolled out large UMTS900 networks which I am sure they will have been requesting support from Apple. However I'm not sure the X-GOLD 616 supports UMTS900.
All I know is if Apple begins offering its iPhone through Verizon I won't be able to get to the Verizon store fast enough.
Here in the Heartland of the USA AT&T's signal is a total ZERO unless you are within 2 miles of I-80. If you turn off the interstate and get a flat tire - you'd better have a Verizon cell phone to call AAA.
I wish that Apple would do a deal with Verizon - and I could merge my cell phone and my iPod touch -- Or maybe AT&T could use some of the million$$$ they are making to put up some TOWERS out here.
Comments
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.
Exactly. When you have the leverage you must use it or lose it.
Sorta happened in the UK, O2 (Apples Carrier here) is now sharing masts etc with Vodaphone, another large player in the industry.
I think AT&T and verizon is an option as from what Im hearing over here, AT&T coverage is poor whereas Verizon is good, however AT&T have the iPhone. Merge the two, both businesses can make more money - sell more iPhones, have a higher volume of network traffic etc but increase coverage and reduce outgoings while rolling out the 4G service my sharing masts. Once 4G is properly rolled out and the majority of the recession is over then they will start worrying about beating each other once again
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.
I am with you. If you look and the worldwide picture, it gets worse. In many countries Apple is with the underdog for absolutely no technical reasons. For various reasons switching carrier just for a phone is not an option for the majority of the people there, more than in the US I guess.
No idea if the US is the same as the UK, but anyone considered the fact of AT&T and Verizon sharing networks specifically for the iPhone?
They use completely different network types, GSM and CDMA-based, unlike most of Europe, which is GSM-based. Apple would have to use CDMA and GSM-based dual-standards radios to make this work. The only piggyback possibility wouldn't for several years once LTE is a go.
In many countries Apple is with the underdog for absolutely no technical reasons. For various reasons switching carrier just for a phone is not an option for the majority of the people there, more than in the US I guess.
That is a solid argument as to why Apple will not engineer a CDMA-based iPhone just to service the US. Winterspan needs to ask himself, if almost all the countries that they do service are GSM-based why did they go with exclusive contracts in every country they could and make the legally required unlocked iPhones price prohibitive? Why did they team with the lesser, more desperate carrier by consumer base over the larger carriers in many countries? These are all long term business decisions. If they aren't going to open their device up to the rest of the GSM world in these countries they service why should we expect Apple to do that with a separate device altogether just for the US. It doesn't make sense.
Sorry I should have made that clearer
I am absolutely certain that Apple has a working CDMA iPhone ready for the "just in case" scenario in which AT&T does not play nice. They are using the hardware as leverage to push AT&T to make their service better knowing that is they don't, Apple will just not extend that exclusivity contract for another year.
I also bet that Apple is using the demo iPhone in talks with Verizon to make them put a better offer than AT&T on the table.
However, I would agree with Tim Cook that CDMA has no future and that it would be wrong for Apple to release a CDMA iPhone now. For start, that would solidify the usefulness of the CDMA network and prolong the transition to LTE in both Verizon and AT&T.
So releasing a CDMA phone would just extend the Status quo and prolong the adoption of a unified mobile communication standard worldwide. As Apple is selling one type of products worldwide, this will not be in their best interest.
What Apple can and is probably doing is leveraging the success of the iPhone to make Verison adapt the LTE faster.
Its interesting. AT&T can go 4G via minor software and hardware upgrade in the existing towers. That would however compromise the coverage of existing 3G and 2G iPhones. Verizon on the other hand would be forced to instal a whole new types of antennas to go 4G but it has no installed base to worry about.
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.
Image at stake? I think it is more like they can't wait for 4G. Right now, AT&T's 3G network is making Apple look like bums when it comes to the actual cell phone part of the iphone. The reality is the iphone's utility as an actual phone is pretty limited....to put it as polite as possible.
I think Apple is using its negotiations with Verizon to force AT&T to accelerate their 4G network rollout plans.
Whatever happens in the negotiations its a win win win all the way around for Apple.
given all the issues with unlocking and such I am not buying that Apple would dump ATT and simply pick up someone else. a move to a carrier independent system where any company that supports the hardware could provide service seems more likely. and that hardware will, i suspect, stay GSM or more to whatever comes next, not add on a second CDMA setup.
Actually, a dual-mode GSM/CDMA phone similar to the Blackberry Bold would make a lot of sense for the people like myself that are mainly pissed off about the iPhone being a SIM-Locked phone because of world travel. Going dual-mode, they can force you to use Verizon where available, and allow GSM anywhere it isn't.
Since almost half of the revenue from the iPhone seems to be from the US, that kind of strategy isn't completely half-baked. It adds cost (about $10/phone from what iSupply says), but it could just be for all the US (or North America) units and let international units be plain GSM.
The roaming fees for the iPhone mean that I will ditch it when my AT&T contract is up in June and switch to something else. Traveling now, and I have to say... my old Motorola V360 doesn't make that bad of a phone! The battery lasts a week still (after 4 years!). I love having a smart phone, but I'm not willing to pay $1k per year in roaming fees!
Good luck to Verizon!
Dudes, an LTE version of the iPhone won't happen until 2011.
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...
Thanks for this information.
It makes sense.
Do you have a link to the Infineon?s roadmap?
The upcoming iPhone should integrate the latest UMTS HSPA quad band capable Infineon baseband.
http://www.infineon.com/cms/en/produ...12d7390ad9000a
And hopefully the upcoming iPhone will include the winning band UMTS900 for the rest of the world, besides the current triple band of the iPhone 3G, (the winning) UMTS850 for America, UMTS1900 for America & UMTS2100 for the rest of the world.
Only the 850 MHz and 900 MHz bands enable real mobile broadband services by leveraging the advantages of lower frequencies.
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.
Exactly. More smoke and mirrors from Apple so they can get a sweeter deal from AT&T and allow them to rape us with data and soon to be teether and worse, abomination of data plan for netbook.
All Verizon can really do at this point is pull out the check book and ask how many zeros do they need to write.
It's not just a factor of how many zeroes. It's also a factor of the number in front of the zeroes. No number in front, no sale. he he
In fact, it may not matter what number is at the front right now anyway, as is being discussed.
The reality is the iphone's utility as an actual phone is pretty limited....to put it as polite as possible.
I'm wondering why you think the iPhone is pretty limited as a phone? What are you talking about? I'm interested in getting one but the primary use is as a phone.
So, what are the problems? I'd really love to know.
Greg
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.
What was that old adage? Keep your friends close but your enemies closer.
There is another adage that comes to mind as well: business is business, business isn't personal. Fact is, it would not be a good strategic move for Apple to shut Verizon out of a potential deal, despite Verizon reportedly having snubbed Apple the first time around. Verizon is a large company just like AT&T, and just like AT&T, Verizon offers a huge customer pool. I can't tell you how many of my friends think my iPhone is awesome but won't switch to AT&T/buy one because of the network (sidenote: effective marketing on Verizon's part over the years; I really can't tell any difference in network quality where I live).
Of course, this is a ripe opportunity for Apple to extract concessions and deal sweeteners from AT&T (or Verizon) for the impending LTE launches. More power to them. IMO, a worthy competitor to the iPhone has yet to surface, so as long as this remains, Apple will use the time it has as #1 to its clear advantage.
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.
The US is the largest market for the iPhone at present but it's certainly not the largest potential market. India and China are both far, far bigger cell phone markets even if Apple doesn't currently enjoy the same rock star status in Asia as it does in the English-speaking world.
Although we don't know the details, this enormous potential market obviously overshadows any benefits from maintaining exclusivity with AT&T.
Judging by the number of people willing to swap networks to AT&T, there's very minimal benefits in dropping the exclusivity.
The problem with creating a model for Verizon is that it would need a different modem as not even the best dual GSM/CDMA modems support all of the frequency bands required. The change it modem would mean a partial re-write of the iPhone software too as GSM and CDMA continue to work differently at the higher levels. R&D is expensive.
Add this to the "bag of hurt" CDMA licensing and it all becomes a very expensive venture to capture a relatively small*, dying market.
(* i.e. those customers who would want an iPhone but won't switch to AT&T)
If CDMA was so important then why do two out of the top three smartphone platforms not support?
The upcoming iPhone should integrate the latest UMTS HSPA quad band capable Infineon baseband.
http://www.infineon.com/cms/en/produ...12d7390ad9000a
And hopefully the upcoming iPhone will include the winning band UMTS900 for the rest of the world
The 2009 iPhone is likely to have the X-GOLD 616:
http://www.infineon.com/cms/en/produ...1a39470bb00555
It offers a 30% longer standby time, 7.2Mbit Downlink and 5.8Mbit uplink (perfect for sending videos).
UMTS900 is used by two of the networks selling the iPhone in Australia, in addition to UMTS2100. They have both rolled out large UMTS900 networks which I am sure they will have been requesting support from Apple. However I'm not sure the X-GOLD 616 supports UMTS900.
All I know is if Apple begins offering its iPhone through Verizon I won't be able to get to the Verizon store fast enough.
Here in the Heartland of the USA AT&T's signal is a total ZERO unless you are within 2 miles of I-80. If you turn off the interstate and get a flat tire - you'd better have a Verizon cell phone to call AAA.
I wish that Apple would do a deal with Verizon - and I could merge my cell phone and my iPod touch -- Or maybe AT&T could use some of the million$$$ they are making to put up some TOWERS out here.