Apple rumored in talks for Verizon budget phone, media tablet

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 94
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,595member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    That may not be your gut, it may just be gas.



    I guess they could make a purchase of an app for one iPhone be available for you if you get the other iPhone if you switch carriers, and I guess they could make the SDK compile for both types at once, but there is still so much for the developer to do to ft for different displays and other HW. But more importantly, I can't see Apple with their mindset to make a new device that requires a completely different App Store and apps.



    I am not so sure. An iPhone light COULD make a lot of sense. Certainly more than a a MB mini or tablet. To create another category within the appStore does not seem like such a huge deal. A whole new market would be created in record time on the back of the existing appStore. Developers will have a whole new platform, yet there will be so much overlap the investment in time will be minimal. A very attractive idea. With the marketing momentum of the iPhone and appStore such a device would hit the market with a real advantage. Within no time there would be thousands of apps and Apple would be a game changer in the cell market in the same way they were in the smart phone market.

    The 'thing' would have limited functionality compared to the iPhone but it would sell by the millions and so spread the Apple brand ever wider. Will such a device become a reality? I think it is a matter of number crunching and the not so small task of designing a satisfactory product that will not cannibalize iPhone sales, yet have the requisite WOW factor.
  • Reply 42 of 94
    tundraboytundraboy Posts: 1,613member
    Just because they're talkin' doesn't mean it's happ'nin'. This could all be posturing to get an even better deal from AT&T who, based on how iPhone rescued their quarter, must be getting more and more desperate to retain exclusivity.
  • Reply 43 of 94
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by paxman View Post


    The 'thing' would have limited functionality compared to the iPhone but it would sell by the millions and so spread the Apple brand ever wider. Will such a device become a reality? I think it is a matter of number crunching and the not so small task of designing a satisfactory product that will not cannibalize iPhone sales, yet have the requisite WOW factor.





    It couldn't be much more limited than the current iPhone is. So other than answering, and calling, with an occasional SMS or two, it is basically the same as a regular iPhone.
  • Reply 44 of 94
    I don't see the upside to Apple selling something that doesn't further the App platform.



    They could make a flip phone that plays music well and syncs with iTunes.

    But why bother?



    They could just as easily make something not much larger than the current iPhone screen and thin as an iPod touch to do the same -and- get all the benefits of the app store.

    And that's pretty damn small.
  • Reply 45 of 94
    wilcowilco Posts: 985member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ThatSoCALguy View Post


    This may be just speculation, only time will tell.



    Welcome to AI!



    Your kind of insight is always welcome.
  • Reply 46 of 94
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Roc Ingersol View Post


    I don't see the upside to Apple selling something that doesn't further the App platform.



    They could make a flip phone that plays music well and syncs with iTunes.

    But why bother?



    They could just as easily make something not much larger than the current iPhone screen and thin as an iPod touch to do the same -and- get all the benefits of the app store.

    And that's pretty damn small.



    I can see some ways to reduce costs and still keep the current iPhone platform intact:



    - Keep a lower MP camera while maintaing a high MP version on the regular iPhone.



    - Smaller, but same resolution, screen (3.1 vs 3.5).



    - Remove Wi-Fi & GPS.



    - 4GB or 8GB capacities.
  • Reply 47 of 94
    As others have said, I can't see Apple getting away with any sort of product that uses Verizon's wireless assets.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    An iPhone Lite that is considerably lesser than the iPhone that AT&T sells in all major areas is the only way I can see Verizon getting it. Mainly because it would mean that Apple found a loophole in the contract or it's a device that AT&T wouldn't feel threatened by.



    You know, it could be a voip based home phone to use on Verizon home wifi networks. It would only work at home, it wouldn't need GPS or cell phone chips, and would work with less than 1GB of onboard memory. It probably wouldn't need as much battery either - in short it could be quite "lite" in many ways but still act like an iPhone and run apps.



    Quote:

    I can't imagine any such device that doesn't have a connection to a carrier. Since it will be larger than a phone, I think going the route of Apple's original Airport card with a proprietary slot might work. You can buy the GSM/WCDMA or the CDMA/CDMA2000 card for it. Perhaps even a subsidy from the carrier if you go through them with contract.



    Before this rumour, I was already thinking that a tablet as a phone doesn't make sense - it's too big to put up to your ear. But 3G data connections DO make sense.



    To avoid paying for 2 separate mobile bills, it is plausible to have a handset that connects through the tablet's cell connection to make calls. Or a tablet which uses the handset's 3G to make calls (if the iPod touch could have used my Nokia's bluetooth 3G connection I would have bought one last year).



    Give the tablet the ability to use local wifi OR a bluetooth through your nearby phone, and it'll work quite nicely.



    Quote:

    Though, I don't expect either of these to appear. I think the MacBook Mini, Apple's expensive "netbook" that they'll never refer to as a netbook, is more likely.



    Yeah... they have to be considering it. I'm thinking MacBook Air but 2/3 the size in every way (except stretching the keyboard right to the edges of the device). Using iPhone v3 hardware and touch screen (much cheaper!), a keyboard, and adding Pages to the iPhone.



    But they'll have at least 5 different prototyped products in these areas that they're playing with to decide what will be the next must-have device.
  • Reply 48 of 94
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 4,564member
    You still have the fundamental issue here of what features will Verizon allow any product from Apple to perform without Verizon making all the money.



    Look at every product that Verizon has on the market, they have cripple features and if you want something like songs, ring tones, file (pictures and the such) transfer, or GPS navigation you have to pay Verizon for the privilege of getting those things on the phone. If Verizon maintains their current business model with an Apple product, you can expect a lot of dissatisfied customers when they find out going to another provide you get it all free or less from Apple directly.



    Now if Verizon changes their current business model to match that of the Apple & AT&T relationship, it will open the flood gates with all the cell phone manufactures to say they want the same deal as Apple is getting and have more control over product features.



    I personally see Verizon loosing either way. They have been strong arming both the cell phone suppliers as well as their end customers for too long for this not to back fire somehow.



    Also people you have to think about this, if apple does do a CDMA version for Verizon it would have to include GSM as well since people who travel will not want two phones. This has also been one of the fundamental issue with Verizon, you can not use their standard phone everywhere in the world. So if they make a truly CDMA/GSM phone it will suck on power that is for sure.
  • Reply 49 of 94
    flowneyflowney Posts: 53member
    Conspicuous by its absence in these descriptions of a media tablet is mobileSafari. Also not mentioned is a camera and iChat support. These are both crucial IMHO.
  • Reply 50 of 94
    I don't think it's surprising that Apple is negotiating with Verizon. It just makes sense to keep there options open whether they have any intention of following through or not.



    In terms of the iPhone Lite, I think it's very believable and I've always thought that would be the only way Verizon is let in on the party. It really doesn't make sense this late in the game to switch to another exclusive carrier and if Apple were to open it up to a duopoly, then they might as well just completely open it up. There were many previous rumours that Apple would start making different iPhone models with different features. A budget iPhone Lite could certainly be the one available to any carrier with a compatible network, since the whole point of a budget model would be to expand user-base, while the iPhone Pro will stay AT&T exclusive to maintain consistency and leverage on everyone.



    I have to agree that it doesn't make sense for Apple to make a CDMA iPhone this late in the game. As such a Verizon 2010 deal seems a bit premature since there is no guarantee that the 4G network will be broad and stable enough yet. This works in Apple's advantage of course. The unknown of 4G in 2010 means that AT&T will most likely get their exclusivity extension to 2011, but Apple will use the future Verizon deal as bargaining chip. Just as AT&T's extension to 2011 will be used to scare Verizon that they may never get the iPhone.



    And the thing about the Media Pad. Will it have a cellular connection, because the article only mentions placing calls and connectivity over WiFI? If it doesn't have a cellular connection and don't see how they need Verizon for it.
  • Reply 51 of 94
    Please explain to me how a 10" (diagonal) screen could produce a device that is smaller than the Kindle which is 8"x5.5"? At best it it could only be the same size as the Kindle. Perhaps the 10" screens could be also serve as new input device? Interestingly enough Apple's bluetooth keyboard is close to 10".



    Anyone find it weird that Apple doesn't list the dimensions for their keyboards anywhere on their website?
  • Reply 52 of 94
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    Bleh. Give me the Pad without the phone company... just like the iPod touch. $%&@!!!



    Agreed...

    If the pad is tied to any sort of contract of phone connection, I'm going to be deeply disappointed.

    I have no interest in mobile connectivity with the pad, only wi-fi.

    I hope the Verizon talks are about the iPhone lite (ahem, iPhone nano) alluded to in the article.
  • Reply 53 of 94
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by carloblackmore View Post


    Please explain to me how a 10" (diagonal) screen could produce a device that is smaller than the Kindle which is 8"x5.5"? At best it it could only be the same size as the Kindle. Perhaps the 10" screens could be also serve as new input device? Interestingly enough Apple's bluetooth keyboard is close to 10".



    Anyone find it weird that Apple doesn't list the dimensions for their keyboards anywhere on their website?



    a 10" diagonal display with a 16:9 aspect ratio would be 8.72" x 4.9". Pretty close, but that is only the display, you're right that Apple couldn't make it smaller, and we haven't even gotten into weight. The Kindle is 10oz, which is pretty decent for holding for hours on end.



    Apple doesn't list most specs that other companies do. Other cellphone vendors list the theoretical max speeds of their cellular radios, yet Apple has never done that, yet they get sued for false advertising.
  • Reply 54 of 94
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GQB View Post


    Agreed...

    If the pad is tied to any sort of contract of phone connection, I'm going to be deeply disappointed.

    I have no interest in mobile connectivity with the pad, only wi-fi.

    I hope the Verizon talks are about the iPhone lite (ahem, iPhone nano) alluded to in the article.



    Yes, as long as there is an option for 3G/4G SIM card or whatever is used on CDMA. It would be nice to be able to pay for the service separately and optionally.
  • Reply 55 of 94
    ajitmdajitmd Posts: 365member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post


    For the sake of argument, what does it take to build out a network? Can you say why a 3G network can not use 2G equipment. Obviously you have some insight that others are missing and maybe you can explain how networks are built and why it will be done so quickly.



    The 2G network that is used by most of the world consists of GSM technology. Basically the frequency sub-slices are divided into time slots. Each conversation takes its "turn" at using the time slot. It is like being in room with 8 people and each taking the turn to talk to the respective party in compressed mode. Simple to implement. Data can also be carried over the same channels.



    3G uses a variation of CDMA technology. It is like being in a big room with large number of people. Each person is talking to the person they want to talk in a unique language. With good volume control, the other people talking in a different language became back-ground noise. Power control very important. Data can be carrier together with voice with time priority to voice.



    The UMTS version of 3G that ATT and EU, etc use use a wide channel of about 5 MHz and it is asynch. So it is difficult to implement in term of power control, rake receivers, etc. Uses more power. Probably hi burst data speed theoretically. Hand-offs are more difficult and can have dropped calls when in motion. Not easy to upgrade from GSM to UMTS/WCDMA. Tower spacing changes, etc. It is what I would call truck load upgrading.



    The Verizon version of 3G that is favored by QCOM, uses 1.25 MH channels for voice preferably and some data. Also uses synchronous transmission. More efficient and stable... uses less power. In combination with 800-900 MHz bands, optimum tower spacing gives good network performance. The EVDO implementation dedicates the channels to data. This way there is not conflict between voice and data. Easier to implement sectors with CDMA EVDO. Upgrades here involve card upgrades, network transmission upgrades.



    Any upgrade that the Telcos talk about, take much longer to implement. 4G should be no exception. Apple is better of grabbing market share... the sooner the better. Much easier to grab CDMA market share than the pie in the sky 4G 3-5 years from now.



    CDMA0EVDO is used in the US, Canada, Japan, Korea, India, China. May be has 20% of the 3G market. However, the VZ market is rich market to pass by. Now that the iPhone is a proven product, Apple should be able to get favorable terms.
  • Reply 56 of 94
    olternautolternaut Posts: 1,376member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post


    For the sake of argument, what does it take to build out a network? Can you say why a 3G network can not use 2G equipment. Obviously you have some insight that others are missing and maybe you can explain how networks are built and why it will be done so quickly.



    Why do you seem so against the possibility that Verizon and everyone else is working hard to get 4G up and running by late next year? What does it take to build out a network?

    Google it.

    And for that matter google the numerous articles on Verizon's and the industry's incentive to invest in getting LTE networks up and running as soon as possible.



    What does it take to get a network up? Blood sweat and tears I would imagine!
  • Reply 57 of 94
    olternautolternaut Posts: 1,376member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by carloblackmore View Post


    Please explain to me how a 10" (diagonal) screen could produce a device that is smaller than the Kindle which is 8"x5.5"? At best it it could only be the same size as the Kindle. Perhaps the 10" screens could be also serve as new input device? Interestingly enough Apple's bluetooth keyboard is close to 10".



    Anyone find it weird that Apple doesn't list the dimensions for their keyboards anywhere on their website?



    It would mean the screen for the Apple device goes closely from edge to edge. Have you seen the kindle? The screen is so small in comparison to the rest of the body.
  • Reply 58 of 94
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    a 10" diagonal display with a 16:9 aspect ratio would be 8.72" x 4.9". Pretty close, but that is only the display, you're right that Apple couldn't make it smaller, and we haven't even gotten into weight. The Kindle is 10oz, which is pretty decent for holding for hours on end.



    Apple doesn't list most specs that other companies do. Other cellphone vendors list the theoretical max speeds of their cellular radios, yet Apple has never done that, yet they get sued for false advertising.



    And the new Kindle is already pretty thin too. Hmmm, now I'm really curious what a 10" screen order would be for. They go through the trouble of listing the dimensions of every other piece of hardware in their online store (even the little plugin Airport Express brick) - but nada on the keyboard and mouse - weird. Just called Apple customer service and they had no clue either.
  • Reply 59 of 94
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by carloblackmore View Post


    And the new Kindle is already pretty thin too. Hmmm, now I'm really curious what a 10" screen order would be for. They go through the trouble of listing the dimensions of every other piece of hardware in their online store (even the little plugin Airport Express brick) - but nada on the keyboard and mouse - weird. Just called Apple customer service and they had no clue either.



    I see what you are saying. I thought you meant some technical stuff about the keys themselves. Yeah, that is odd that they don't list those size dimensions. There are plenty of Google hits, but the sizes seem to vary... so take your pick.
  • Reply 60 of 94
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Olternaut View Post


    Why do you seem so against the possibility that Verizon and everyone else is working hard to get 4G up and running by late next year? What does it take to build out a network?

    Google it.



    Seriously, you are setting yourself for major disappointment if you think that the US will be blanketed in LTE next year. You are buying into Verizon's latest marketing ploy. It's can't possibly happen. Check out the smaller by land area, dense by population, more advanced countries with a well entrenched cellular network with more than a 1:1 ratio of cellphone users to populace. They don't have LTE, so why do you think Verizon is going to create it when the standard isn't finished, and there is no available HW to implement. It is impossible to have an LTE iPhone next year!
Sign In or Register to comment.