Seeing as the iPhone is sold in 80 countries. Adding Verizon would be a small percentage in sales growth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhegge64
Apple has to realize that having ATT as the exclusive carrier or iPhone, long term, is a bad idea. I guarantee that if they brought Verizon on board, there sales would go through the roof. But someone once said, if you want guarantee, buy a toaster.
That ranks right up there with "Blu-ray is a bag of hurt."- UTTER NONSENSE.
That's why Blu-Ray is having a banner year this year. The snobbery of Apple sometimes is baffling.
Blu-Ray's investors will be lucky to recover the money it cost to develop the standard and slug it out with HD-DVD. Certainly it's superior to broadcast, cable, satellite or legally downloaded HD content, but with all of those alternatives available on consumers' current equipment, and the internet already a, if not the, preferred mode for purchasing audio, Blu-Ray depends on hundreds of millions of people buying a new player, tearing their media centers apart again to get it installed and then pay significantly higher rental and purchase prices in a terrible economy - and that's when they can find Blu-Ray copies to rent or purchase.
Blu-Ray was about 3 years too late to the party, arriving after other caterers had mind share. It will remain as a niche product at the end of the road for optical disc tech for a decade or more but will never be ubiquitous in the world's homes (unless they all have PS-3's).
Just too much infrastructure to put in place when so many other "good enough" solutions exist that don't require it.
For reference, consider the histories of two other sound delivery technologies clearly superior to Audio CD's: SACD and DVD-Audio, which both ended with the acronym DOA for consumers, even if they survive among some hobbyists and recording industry professsionals (but not even as popular as ancient, fragile, dust-collecting, warm, analog vinyl).
Quote:
Originally Posted by iluomo
Where do you use your phone in SF? It seems inconceivable that you use it around the city much. It is only a testament to how much I love the iPhone that I don't dump AT&T and go back to Verizon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gbran
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mentalward
No native network coverage in Montana. ...The lack of coverage seems to be the case for folks in many midwestern/northwestern areas (It was reported in the news here that there is no native AT&T coverage at all in Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, or South Dakota
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
I'd say that my worst AT&T coverage was in SF and Oakland areas. Sometimes it would literally fluctuate on the handset every few seconds. It's been about a year so I hope things have improved.
All anecdotal, but I've read a 100's of threads on these topics and I'm always taken not so much that there are huge gaps in ATT coverage in many whole states, but how regularly they get slammed by iPhone loving former Verizon customers in so many major cities where they've had forever to build out, and plenty of user density to pay for plenty of good equipment.
Not just SF/Oakland and KC as here, but in other threads, nearly always about constantly dropped calls in NYC and often about the same thing in LA.
The iPhone is by far the premiere hand-held mobile internet access device and media (and now "app" and game playing) machine. But until it's the most reliably-connected phone I can get, it sadly still doesn't meet my needs.
Luckily tho, there's still the alternative of a tiny, tiny Verizon (or other) phone and an iPod Touch. Also meaning I can multi-task while talking, something Apple says I won't be able to do on an iPhone anytime soon, and with a mic adapter, I can Skype on the Touch.
Best of both worlds, chums, at least in wi-fied areas. Not to mention more change left in your pocket.
Questions for the people that want Verizon to have the iPhone....
? How do you propose this to happen?
? Do you want Apple to break their contract with AT&T?
? Do you not think there would be a lawsuit and huge penalty if they did?
? Do contractual agreements and inter-corporate loyalty mean nothing to you?
? Would you want to buy from a company that breaks it's deals so flippantly?
? How would this GSM/UMTS iPhone work on Verizon's network?
? Do you propose that Apple just sells the devices contract free in their stores and online only for the full retail price of $700?
? Do you propose they re-engineer and test a second iPhone with CDMA/CDMA2000, making it 4 phones they have to keep in stock?
? Do you propose that Sprint and T-Mobile get in on this deal, too?
? When Verizon wants to charge for YouTube, Google Maps, Visual Voicemail, OTA purchases what will you say?
? When Verizon wants to have control over the App Store what will you say?
? When Verizon tells Apple that they must disable WiFi and refuses to charge only $30 for unlimited data due to the high rate of usage on iPhones, what will you say?
? Why does every other desirable new handset do carrier lock-ins if it's such a poor choice for companies?
? Why do these desirable handsets from cellphone vendors with many years experience often start off with only one radio type if it so simple and cheap?
? Why didn't Apple just sell to every country out of the gate if it so much easier to make money without controlled product rollouts?
? Why would a for profit company allow the original iPhone to get the v2 OS if it will prevent people from upgrading?
? Why would they let the iPhone 3 and original iPhone, going into its 3rd year, get the v3 OS if will prevent even one person from buying a new iPhone?
? Is it just possible that you are only thinking of some short term desire and not looking at it from Apple's long term perspective?
Some of those questions, especially about Verizon, probably don't exist anymore but they were the Verizon prior to the iPhone's launch. Most of them about about how handset makers with loads of experience do have carrier contracts, start with CDMA or GSM, and only release to certain countries at one time are still valid. If these companies do the same thing as Apple, even if less successful, then why is what Apple is doing is bad for their business model. You are wanting something, and I understand that AT&T isn't the best carrier for many of your areas, but without actually thinking through why things are the way they are.
All anecdotal, but I've read a 100's of threads on these topics and I'm always taken not so much that there are huge gaps in ATT coverage in many whole states, but how regularly they get slammed by iPhone loving former Verizon customers in so many major cities where they've had forever to build out, and plenty of user density to pay for plenty of good equipment.
Absolutely it is anecdotal. I'm in Ohio right now and I've been getting nearly 2Mbps down/700Kbps up on AT&T. Quite pleased.
That ranks right up there with "Blu-ray is a bag of hurt."- UTTER NONSENSE.
That's why Blu-Ray is having a banner year this year. The snobbery of Apple sometimes is baffling.
Dude, Blu-ray doesn't have a chance as a snowball in Hell, until I see George Lucas put ALL six of his Star Wars films on Blu-Ray. When I see that then I back Blu-ray for now I rather buy 720p Movies from iTunes!
Again, you're talking numbers and neglecting the non-monetary benefits/costs. Apple and ATT have a LEGAL AGREEMENT that forbids Apple from selling phones to Verizon. The costs of breaking that agreement could be ANYTHING, and are not related to the profits that Apple might earn from selling those Verizon iPhones.
[/B]
I'm not talking about breaking any agreement. NO ONE knows the real agreement and when it expires. I'm saying Apple should have reduced the exclusivity period or not continue it after the original period expires.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
...You are absolutely right, they could have not sided with a carrier and come out with a GSM/UMTS and A CDMA/CDMA2000 iPhone right out of the gate. They could have sold it with every major carrier.
They would also have issues with battery life to radios as it was their first device. They wouldn't have been able to get $20 unlimited data like they did with AT&T. They wouldn't have gotten the unlimited data to drop over the next year for the rest of the US to $30. They wouldn't have been able to include Visual Voicemail as a free feature. They probably would ...
I'm not arguing that a sole carrier wasn't a good idea in the beginning.. I'm referring to the current time. I don't know all the agreements, but obviously the iPhone line has established itself, and now the once-necessary UMTS/AT&T exclusivity is only hurting it's sales in the USA.
Some of those questions, especially about Verizon, probably don't exist anymore but they were the Verizon prior to the iPhone's launch. Most of them about about how handset makers with loads of experience do have carrier contracts, start with CDMA or GSM, and only release to certain countries at one time are still valid. If these companies do the same thing as Apple, even if less successful, then why is what Apple is doing is bad for their business model. You are wanting something, and I understand that AT&T isn't the best carrier for many of your areas, but without actually thinking through why things are the way they are.
Absolutely. It was the right and only choice for Apple to get what they wanted and what we as consumers want (wifi, app store, Apple support, etc.). The iphone could not have been the game changer it is had Apple not played hardball with it's carrier, AT&T. The carrier exclusivity is the price of that game changing.
Verizon would not play ball and now they suffer. It makes some sense but not a lot to make a CDMA2000/EV-DO phone given the stretching of Apple's engineering resources (talking to friends there) which could better be employed in developing their LTE platform with UMTS 3G fallback. I won't claim that AT&T is perfect, but I find it acceptable in the Bay Area and where I travel. Maybe AT&T has lulled me into very low expectations... but I don't hear my Verizon buddies waxing lyrical over their service either.
What I love about these forums is the indignance of people who seem both offended and think that other people and especially Apple care that the iPhone or AT&T is not what they need. No-one makes a product that works for everyone, if they did, it would be the lowest common denominator and garbage. Everything is trade offs and the whiners were traded out. Sorry. Get over it.
Absolutely. It was the right and only choice for Apple to get what they wanted and what we as consumers want (wifi, app store, Apple support, etc.). The iphone could not have been the game changer it is had Apple not played hardball with it's carrier, AT&T. The carrier exclusivity is the price of that game changing.
Verizon would not play ball and now they suffer. It makes some sense but not a lot to make a CDMA2000/EV-DO phone given the stretching of Apple's engineering resources (talking to friends there) which could better be employed in developing their LTE platform with UMTS 3G fallback. I won't claim that AT&T is perfect, but I find it acceptable in the Bay Area and where I travel. Maybe AT&T has lulled me into very low expectations... but I don't hear my Verizon buddies waxing lyrical over their service either.
What I love about these forums is the indignance of people who seem both offended and think that other people and especially Apple care that the iPhone or AT&T is not what they need. No-one makes a product that works for everyone, if they did, it would be the lowest common denominator and garbage. Everything is trade offs and the whiners were traded out. Sorry. Get over it.
Let's forget Verizon until Lte is fully here. Rumor has it AT&T's agreement is up next year (AT&T wants badly to extend to 2011+). With a T-Mobile radio added to the iPhone instead and T-Mobile building out their network ASAP, would they stay the "4th forth largest" carrier in the USofA. How about 3rd, 2nd or? Competition is a good thing and most of us do root for the underdog.
Where do you use your phone in SF? It seems inconceivable that you use it around the city much. It's astonishing to me how bad AT&T coverage is. I know the difference because I was on Verizon before.
Ditto, for Orange County and Los Angeles. I was a Verizon customer and never had problems with dropped calls or coverage. Now it's a daily occurrence. Just yesterday when I was going to a baseball game and needed to meet up with a friend. Our conversation was garbled and then eventually dropped. I pulled over and tried to call him and got ATT blue screen of death--AKA CALL FAILED. Luckily I heard enough tidbits to know where he was, but otherwise I would have been screwed. This was right in the middle of Anaheim California! Not exactly a podunk town in the middle of nowhere.
I'd like to point out that it was Cingular that was working with Apple before the iPhone. I switched to Cingular when my contract was up with Verizon because of the rumor that they were going to be the iPhone provider. I was pretty happy with Cingular and heard good things about their customer service and network. The person that handled the telco stuff at my former job told me that Cingular had third party contracts with other providers (in particular T-Moblie) to extend their network. When ATT bought Cingular those contracts were voided, and I vaguely remember something about there being anti-trust issues for ATT to perpetuate those contracts. So correct me if I'm wrong, ATT didn't really know it was going to have the iPhone until they bought Cingular. The iPhone came out 4 or 5 months after the acquisition. This is one of the reasons I think that ATT was caught flat-footed with their data network. That, and they suck.
Funny right before this I was reading about how the iPod Touch sales numbers were close to the iPhone now. This set off fantasizing about how I could possibly ditch ATT and the iPhone to go with another carrier (using a Treo so I can get my SlingBox to work) and a somehow tethered iPod touch. One can dream right?
I'm not arguing that a sole carrier wasn't a good idea in the beginning.. I'm referring to the current time. I don't know all the agreements, but obviously the iPhone line has established itself, and now the once-necessary UMTS/AT&T exclusivity is only hurting it's sales in the USA.
If exclusivity hurts cellphone vendor's sales then why do they all do it? Why do some only sell a device in certain countries or on certain carriers or with certain radios? These aren't companies making their first entry into the mobile phone market, these are well entrenched companies with a long history of making phones.
AT&T was pretty much dead. Cingular and SBC merged, then bought AT&T and changed the name of the combined company to AT&T. AT&T as we knew it is gone. The people running the company today are from SBC and Cingular.
Quote:
Originally Posted by heavydevelopment
I'd like to point out that it was Cingular that was working with Apple before the iPhone. I switched to Cingular when my contract was up with Verizon because of the rumor that they were going to be the iPhone provider. I was pretty happy with Cingular and heard good things about their customer service and network. The person that handled the telco stuff at my former job told me that Cingular had third party contracts with other providers (in particular T-Moblie) to extend their network. When ATT bought Cingular those contracts were voided, and I vaguely remember something about there being anti-trust issues for ATT to perpetuate those contracts. So correct me if I'm wrong, ATT didn't really know it was going to have the iPhone until they bought Cingular. The iPhone came out 4 or 5 months after the acquisition. This is one of the reasons I think that ATT was caught flat-footed with their data network. That, and they suck.
DVD sales are decreasing because all optical media sales are decreasing. Blu-ray increasing doesn't fill the gap.
No it doesn't, and at the moment, in the world, sales in a lot of areas are decreasing, especially, but Blu-ray is increasing. And I would rather own a blu-ray disc with HD video, and HD audio than what is available via download.
Apple has to realize that having ATT as the exclusive carrier or iPhone, long term, is a bad idea. I guarantee that if they brought Verizon on board, there sales would go through the roof. But someone once said, if you want guarantee, buy a toaster.
Personally, I will not switch from Verizon to ATT (tried ATT once, so I am experienced) just to get an iPhone. I have too many friends and family on Verizon (free calling) that embeds me into loyalty. Which I can imagine many other are influenced by.
An iPod Touch would likely give people 99% of what non-ATT users need....cool factor and capabilities.
If I remember history correctly, Verizon was offered iPhone exclusivity first and they turned it down. I would suggest that the carrier that you're so loyal to lacked foresight to bring it's customers great new product. Don't blame Apple & AT&T for picking up the ball and running with it. Sure you can say that Apple's contract offer to Verizon and AT&T was perhaps a bitter pill to swallow from a carrier's perspective but who got the job done and took the risk... AT&T.
As far as coverage goes, it's all dependent on where you are. Some carriers have better coverage than others in certain areas and that's never going to change unless everyone starts sharing the same towers (never). There's been multiple times I've been camping in the middle of nowhere in Eastern WA and I've been able to place a call with AT&T (AT&T Wireless/Cingular) while my friends with Verizon & T-Mobile phones are dead in the water. Sure I had to stand on a rock to place the call, but I could still do it (not iPhone specific). In fact there a small mall near us where my wife's G1 has no service while I'm at 4 bars.
As far as the iPod Touch, it's nice (my wife has one) but without phone & 3G data capabilities it doesn't work for me as I feel like I only have half of an iPhone. Not to mention the early versions had no mic or speaker. Why would I want to carry two devices when I can barely keep track of one? Plus you can't call your iPod Touch to locate it when it's buried in the couchl
That ranks right up there with "Blu-ray is a bag of hurt."- UTTER NONSENSE.
That's why Blu-Ray is having a banner year this year. The snobbery of Apple sometimes is baffling.
We not forget the Net-Book comments either... Or the PDA comments from 1999... Nor the larger than life monitors from the 80's... Things change, and today rather quickly.
And when will people wake and and see Sprint has CDMA... It's called NEXTEL. T-Mobile is CDMA (900/1700/1800) and YES you can get a Verizon phone that works on CDMA, it's called a Verizon WORLD phone (quad band).
CDMA is nothing but a networking base like TCP/IP. Except in this case someone owns the antenna's and patents. Verizon out here in Central PA owns some of those antenna's. When I was having MAJOR issues with my iPhone I asked the ATT phone rep where the nearest tower was. She gave me the exact location, even said it was near a pond (OK, on her map it was a pond, out here we call it a LAKE). By the road, next to the "pond" there was an antenna with the words "VERIZON" on it. My signal strength was 5 bars, 1/2 mile away back to No Service and I could see the antenna.
CDMA and GSM are just different types of transmissions. One works by time the other works by points. GSM is weak when it comes to a lot of people as you can only split up a second so many ways. However CDMA is weak when it comes to getting a lot of people on. This is why ATT will "drop" calls and Verizon simply won't "make" calls.
Anyways... Don't fall for the He Said/She Said.
Bonus Points: Who owns and runs the largest fiber optic network in the US that is leased to T-Mobile, ATT, Sprint and even the US Government? All your iPhone traffic travels along this trunk line at some point.
Let's forget Verizon until Lte is fully here. Rumor has it AT&T's agreement is up next year (AT&T wants badly to extend to 2011+). With a T-Mobile radio added to the iPhone instead and T-Mobile building out their network ASAP, would they stay the "4th forth largest" carrier in the USofA. How about 3rd, 2nd or? Competition is a good thing and most of us do root for the underdog.
You can stick an iPhone on a T-mobile line, it's been done. GSM works on 4 frequency's. 850mhz (US only) 900/1700/1800 mhz. Aside from that it's the SIM which is like a mac address.
Bonus Points: Who owns and runs the largest fiber optic network in the US that is leased to T-Mobile, ATT, Sprint and even the US Government? All your iPhone traffic travels along this trunk line at some point.
You can stick an iPhone on a T-mobile line, it's been done. GSM works on 4 frequency's. 850mhz (US only) 900/1700/1800 mhz. Aside from that it's the SIM which is like a mac address.
Jail broken, I believe is the term. Where do they go, T-Mobile. I was thinking Apple adding T-Mobiles GSM radio which I think is 1900mhz? to the iphone June 2010 4th generation. Also T-Mobile, now, expanding their network with the possible knowledge from SJ & CO.
Comments
Apple has to realize that having ATT as the exclusive carrier or iPhone, long term, is a bad idea. I guarantee that if they brought Verizon on board, there sales would go through the roof. But someone once said, if you want guarantee, buy a toaster.
That ranks right up there with "Blu-ray is a bag of hurt."- UTTER NONSENSE.
That's why Blu-Ray is having a banner year this year. The snobbery of Apple sometimes is baffling.
Blu-Ray's investors will be lucky to recover the money it cost to develop the standard and slug it out with HD-DVD. Certainly it's superior to broadcast, cable, satellite or legally downloaded HD content, but with all of those alternatives available on consumers' current equipment, and the internet already a, if not the, preferred mode for purchasing audio, Blu-Ray depends on hundreds of millions of people buying a new player, tearing their media centers apart again to get it installed and then pay significantly higher rental and purchase prices in a terrible economy - and that's when they can find Blu-Ray copies to rent or purchase.
Blu-Ray was about 3 years too late to the party, arriving after other caterers had mind share. It will remain as a niche product at the end of the road for optical disc tech for a decade or more but will never be ubiquitous in the world's homes (unless they all have PS-3's).
Just too much infrastructure to put in place when so many other "good enough" solutions exist that don't require it.
For reference, consider the histories of two other sound delivery technologies clearly superior to Audio CD's: SACD and DVD-Audio, which both ended with the acronym DOA for consumers, even if they survive among some hobbyists and recording industry professsionals (but not even as popular as ancient, fragile, dust-collecting, warm, analog vinyl).
Where do you use your phone in SF? It seems inconceivable that you use it around the city much. It is only a testament to how much I love the iPhone that I don't dump AT&T and go back to Verizon.
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.
No native network coverage in Montana. ...The lack of coverage seems to be the case for folks in many midwestern/northwestern areas (It was reported in the news here that there is no native AT&T coverage at all in Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, or South Dakota
I'd say that my worst AT&T coverage was in SF and Oakland areas. Sometimes it would literally fluctuate on the handset every few seconds. It's been about a year so I hope things have improved.
All anecdotal, but I've read a 100's of threads on these topics and I'm always taken not so much that there are huge gaps in ATT coverage in many whole states, but how regularly they get slammed by iPhone loving former Verizon customers in so many major cities where they've had forever to build out, and plenty of user density to pay for plenty of good equipment.
Not just SF/Oakland and KC as here, but in other threads, nearly always about constantly dropped calls in NYC and often about the same thing in LA.
The iPhone is by far the premiere hand-held mobile internet access device and media (and now "app" and game playing) machine. But until it's the most reliably-connected phone I can get, it sadly still doesn't meet my needs.
Luckily tho, there's still the alternative of a tiny, tiny Verizon (or other) phone and an iPod Touch. Also meaning I can multi-task while talking, something Apple says I won't be able to do on an iPhone anytime soon, and with a mic adapter, I can Skype on the Touch.
Best of both worlds, chums, at least in wi-fied areas. Not to mention more change left in your pocket.
? How do you propose this to happen?
? Do you want Apple to break their contract with AT&T?
? Do you not think there would be a lawsuit and huge penalty if they did?
? Do contractual agreements and inter-corporate loyalty mean nothing to you?
? Would you want to buy from a company that breaks it's deals so flippantly?
? How would this GSM/UMTS iPhone work on Verizon's network?
? Do you propose that Apple just sells the devices contract free in their stores and online only for the full retail price of $700?
? Do you propose they re-engineer and test a second iPhone with CDMA/CDMA2000, making it 4 phones they have to keep in stock?
? Do you propose that Sprint and T-Mobile get in on this deal, too?
? When Verizon wants to charge for YouTube, Google Maps, Visual Voicemail, OTA purchases what will you say?
? When Verizon wants to have control over the App Store what will you say?
? When Verizon tells Apple that they must disable WiFi and refuses to charge only $30 for unlimited data due to the high rate of usage on iPhones, what will you say?
? Why does every other desirable new handset do carrier lock-ins if it's such a poor choice for companies?
? Why do these desirable handsets from cellphone vendors with many years experience often start off with only one radio type if it so simple and cheap?
? Why didn't Apple just sell to every country out of the gate if it so much easier to make money without controlled product rollouts?
? Why would a for profit company allow the original iPhone to get the v2 OS if it will prevent people from upgrading?
? Why would they let the iPhone 3 and original iPhone, going into its 3rd year, get the v3 OS if will prevent even one person from buying a new iPhone?
? Is it just possible that you are only thinking of some short term desire and not looking at it from Apple's long term perspective?
Some of those questions, especially about Verizon, probably don't exist anymore but they were the Verizon prior to the iPhone's launch. Most of them about about how handset makers with loads of experience do have carrier contracts, start with CDMA or GSM, and only release to certain countries at one time are still valid. If these companies do the same thing as Apple, even if less successful, then why is what Apple is doing is bad for their business model. You are wanting something, and I understand that AT&T isn't the best carrier for many of your areas, but without actually thinking through why things are the way they are.
All anecdotal, but I've read a 100's of threads on these topics and I'm always taken not so much that there are huge gaps in ATT coverage in many whole states, but how regularly they get slammed by iPhone loving former Verizon customers in so many major cities where they've had forever to build out, and plenty of user density to pay for plenty of good equipment.
Absolutely it is anecdotal. I'm in Ohio right now and I've been getting nearly 2Mbps down/700Kbps up on AT&T. Quite pleased.
That ranks right up there with "Blu-ray is a bag of hurt."- UTTER NONSENSE.
That's why Blu-Ray is having a banner year this year. The snobbery of Apple sometimes is baffling.
Dude, Blu-ray doesn't have a chance as a snowball in Hell, until I see George Lucas put ALL six of his Star Wars films on Blu-Ray. When I see that then I back Blu-ray for now I rather buy 720p Movies from iTunes!
Again, you're talking numbers and neglecting the non-monetary benefits/costs. Apple and ATT have a LEGAL AGREEMENT that forbids Apple from selling phones to Verizon. The costs of breaking that agreement could be ANYTHING, and are not related to the profits that Apple might earn from selling those Verizon iPhones.
[/B]
I'm not talking about breaking any agreement. NO ONE knows the real agreement and when it expires. I'm saying Apple should have reduced the exclusivity period or not continue it after the original period expires.
...You are absolutely right, they could have not sided with a carrier and come out with a GSM/UMTS and A CDMA/CDMA2000 iPhone right out of the gate. They could have sold it with every major carrier.
They would also have issues with battery life to radios as it was their first device. They wouldn't have been able to get $20 unlimited data like they did with AT&T. They wouldn't have gotten the unlimited data to drop over the next year for the rest of the US to $30. They wouldn't have been able to include Visual Voicemail as a free feature. They probably would ...
I'm not arguing that a sole carrier wasn't a good idea in the beginning.. I'm referring to the current time. I don't know all the agreements, but obviously the iPhone line has established itself, and now the once-necessary UMTS/AT&T exclusivity is only hurting it's sales in the USA.
Some of those questions, especially about Verizon, probably don't exist anymore but they were the Verizon prior to the iPhone's launch. Most of them about about how handset makers with loads of experience do have carrier contracts, start with CDMA or GSM, and only release to certain countries at one time are still valid. If these companies do the same thing as Apple, even if less successful, then why is what Apple is doing is bad for their business model. You are wanting something, and I understand that AT&T isn't the best carrier for many of your areas, but without actually thinking through why things are the way they are.
Absolutely. It was the right and only choice for Apple to get what they wanted and what we as consumers want (wifi, app store, Apple support, etc.). The iphone could not have been the game changer it is had Apple not played hardball with it's carrier, AT&T. The carrier exclusivity is the price of that game changing.
Verizon would not play ball and now they suffer. It makes some sense but not a lot to make a CDMA2000/EV-DO phone given the stretching of Apple's engineering resources (talking to friends there) which could better be employed in developing their LTE platform with UMTS 3G fallback. I won't claim that AT&T is perfect, but I find it acceptable in the Bay Area and where I travel. Maybe AT&T has lulled me into very low expectations... but I don't hear my Verizon buddies waxing lyrical over their service either.
What I love about these forums is the indignance of people who seem both offended and think that other people and especially Apple care that the iPhone or AT&T is not what they need. No-one makes a product that works for everyone, if they did, it would be the lowest common denominator and garbage. Everything is trade offs and the whiners were traded out. Sorry. Get over it.
Absolutely. It was the right and only choice for Apple to get what they wanted and what we as consumers want (wifi, app store, Apple support, etc.). The iphone could not have been the game changer it is had Apple not played hardball with it's carrier, AT&T. The carrier exclusivity is the price of that game changing.
Verizon would not play ball and now they suffer. It makes some sense but not a lot to make a CDMA2000/EV-DO phone given the stretching of Apple's engineering resources (talking to friends there) which could better be employed in developing their LTE platform with UMTS 3G fallback. I won't claim that AT&T is perfect, but I find it acceptable in the Bay Area and where I travel. Maybe AT&T has lulled me into very low expectations... but I don't hear my Verizon buddies waxing lyrical over their service either.
What I love about these forums is the indignance of people who seem both offended and think that other people and especially Apple care that the iPhone or AT&T is not what they need. No-one makes a product that works for everyone, if they did, it would be the lowest common denominator and garbage. Everything is trade offs and the whiners were traded out. Sorry. Get over it.
Let's forget Verizon until Lte is fully here. Rumor has it AT&T's agreement is up next year (AT&T wants badly to extend to 2011+). With a T-Mobile radio added to the iPhone instead and T-Mobile building out their network ASAP, would they stay the "4th forth largest" carrier in the USofA. How about 3rd, 2nd or? Competition is a good thing and most of us do root for the underdog.
Where do you use your phone in SF? It seems inconceivable that you use it around the city much. It's astonishing to me how bad AT&T coverage is. I know the difference because I was on Verizon before.
Ditto, for Orange County and Los Angeles. I was a Verizon customer and never had problems with dropped calls or coverage. Now it's a daily occurrence. Just yesterday when I was going to a baseball game and needed to meet up with a friend. Our conversation was garbled and then eventually dropped. I pulled over and tried to call him and got ATT blue screen of death--AKA CALL FAILED. Luckily I heard enough tidbits to know where he was, but otherwise I would have been screwed. This was right in the middle of Anaheim California! Not exactly a podunk town in the middle of nowhere.
I'd like to point out that it was Cingular that was working with Apple before the iPhone. I switched to Cingular when my contract was up with Verizon because of the rumor that they were going to be the iPhone provider. I was pretty happy with Cingular and heard good things about their customer service and network. The person that handled the telco stuff at my former job told me that Cingular had third party contracts with other providers (in particular T-Moblie) to extend their network. When ATT bought Cingular those contracts were voided, and I vaguely remember something about there being anti-trust issues for ATT to perpetuate those contracts. So correct me if I'm wrong, ATT didn't really know it was going to have the iPhone until they bought Cingular. The iPhone came out 4 or 5 months after the acquisition. This is one of the reasons I think that ATT was caught flat-footed with their data network. That, and they suck.
Funny right before this I was reading about how the iPod Touch sales numbers were close to the iPhone now. This set off fantasizing about how I could possibly ditch ATT and the iPhone to go with another carrier (using a Treo so I can get my SlingBox to work) and a somehow tethered iPod touch. One can dream right?
don't cdma radios require less battery than gsm, or is it the other way around?
I'm not arguing that a sole carrier wasn't a good idea in the beginning.. I'm referring to the current time. I don't know all the agreements, but obviously the iPhone line has established itself, and now the once-necessary UMTS/AT&T exclusivity is only hurting it's sales in the USA.
If exclusivity hurts cellphone vendor's sales then why do they all do it? Why do some only sell a device in certain countries or on certain carriers or with certain radios? These aren't companies making their first entry into the mobile phone market, these are well entrenched companies with a long history of making phones.
I'd like to point out that it was Cingular that was working with Apple before the iPhone. I switched to Cingular when my contract was up with Verizon because of the rumor that they were going to be the iPhone provider. I was pretty happy with Cingular and heard good things about their customer service and network. The person that handled the telco stuff at my former job told me that Cingular had third party contracts with other providers (in particular T-Moblie) to extend their network. When ATT bought Cingular those contracts were voided, and I vaguely remember something about there being anti-trust issues for ATT to perpetuate those contracts. So correct me if I'm wrong, ATT didn't really know it was going to have the iPhone until they bought Cingular. The iPhone came out 4 or 5 months after the acquisition. This is one of the reasons I think that ATT was caught flat-footed with their data network. That, and they suck.
DVD sales are decreasing because all optical media sales are decreasing. Blu-ray increasing doesn't fill the gap.
No it doesn't, and at the moment, in the world, sales in a lot of areas are decreasing, especially, but Blu-ray is increasing. And I would rather own a blu-ray disc with HD video, and HD audio than what is available via download.
Apple has to realize that having ATT as the exclusive carrier or iPhone, long term, is a bad idea. I guarantee that if they brought Verizon on board, there sales would go through the roof. But someone once said, if you want guarantee, buy a toaster.
Personally, I will not switch from Verizon to ATT (tried ATT once, so I am experienced) just to get an iPhone. I have too many friends and family on Verizon (free calling) that embeds me into loyalty. Which I can imagine many other are influenced by.
An iPod Touch would likely give people 99% of what non-ATT users need....cool factor and capabilities.
If I remember history correctly, Verizon was offered iPhone exclusivity first and they turned it down. I would suggest that the carrier that you're so loyal to lacked foresight to bring it's customers great new product. Don't blame Apple & AT&T for picking up the ball and running with it. Sure you can say that Apple's contract offer to Verizon and AT&T was perhaps a bitter pill to swallow from a carrier's perspective but who got the job done and took the risk... AT&T.
As far as coverage goes, it's all dependent on where you are. Some carriers have better coverage than others in certain areas and that's never going to change unless everyone starts sharing the same towers (never). There's been multiple times I've been camping in the middle of nowhere in Eastern WA and I've been able to place a call with AT&T (AT&T Wireless/Cingular) while my friends with Verizon & T-Mobile phones are dead in the water. Sure I had to stand on a rock to place the call, but I could still do it (not iPhone specific). In fact there a small mall near us where my wife's G1 has no service while I'm at 4 bars.
As far as the iPod Touch, it's nice (my wife has one) but without phone & 3G data capabilities it doesn't work for me as I feel like I only have half of an iPhone. Not to mention the early versions had no mic or speaker. Why would I want to carry two devices when I can barely keep track of one? Plus you can't call your iPod Touch to locate it when it's buried in the couchl
That ranks right up there with "Blu-ray is a bag of hurt."- UTTER NONSENSE.
That's why Blu-Ray is having a banner year this year. The snobbery of Apple sometimes is baffling.
We not forget the Net-Book comments either... Or the PDA comments from 1999... Nor the larger than life monitors from the 80's... Things change, and today rather quickly.
And when will people wake and and see Sprint has CDMA... It's called NEXTEL. T-Mobile is CDMA (900/1700/1800) and YES you can get a Verizon phone that works on CDMA, it's called a Verizon WORLD phone (quad band).
CDMA is nothing but a networking base like TCP/IP. Except in this case someone owns the antenna's and patents. Verizon out here in Central PA owns some of those antenna's. When I was having MAJOR issues with my iPhone I asked the ATT phone rep where the nearest tower was. She gave me the exact location, even said it was near a pond (OK, on her map it was a pond, out here we call it a LAKE). By the road, next to the "pond" there was an antenna with the words "VERIZON" on it. My signal strength was 5 bars, 1/2 mile away back to No Service and I could see the antenna.
CDMA and GSM are just different types of transmissions. One works by time the other works by points. GSM is weak when it comes to a lot of people as you can only split up a second so many ways. However CDMA is weak when it comes to getting a lot of people on. This is why ATT will "drop" calls and Verizon simply won't "make" calls.
Anyways... Don't fall for the He Said/She Said.
Bonus Points: Who owns and runs the largest fiber optic network in the US that is leased to T-Mobile, ATT, Sprint and even the US Government? All your iPhone traffic travels along this trunk line at some point.
Let's forget Verizon until Lte is fully here. Rumor has it AT&T's agreement is up next year (AT&T wants badly to extend to 2011+). With a T-Mobile radio added to the iPhone instead and T-Mobile building out their network ASAP, would they stay the "4th forth largest" carrier in the USofA. How about 3rd, 2nd or? Competition is a good thing and most of us do root for the underdog.
You can stick an iPhone on a T-mobile line, it's been done. GSM works on 4 frequency's. 850mhz (US only) 900/1700/1800 mhz. Aside from that it's the SIM which is like a mac address.
Bonus Points: Who owns and runs the largest fiber optic network in the US that is leased to T-Mobile, ATT, Sprint and even the US Government? All your iPhone traffic travels along this trunk line at some point.
According to Cringely, it's Google.
You can stick an iPhone on a T-mobile line, it's been done. GSM works on 4 frequency's. 850mhz (US only) 900/1700/1800 mhz. Aside from that it's the SIM which is like a mac address.
Jail broken, I believe is the term. Where do they go, T-Mobile. I was thinking Apple adding T-Mobiles GSM radio which I think is 1900mhz? to the iphone June 2010 4th generation. Also T-Mobile, now, expanding their network with the possible knowledge from SJ & CO.