Agreed. I'm not sure that I would want a CDMA-only iPhone. No international coverage, no concurrent voice/data, relatively slow access (compared to the newer 3G speeds about to come out).
Verizon would have to be real aggressive on their price and monthly plans to win over new customers.
Are you convincing yourself or others? Sounds like flawed reasoning, especially when this article answers your "no international coverage" issue (dual radio.)
Comparing today's networks to those "about to come" is unrealistic. AT&T isn't the only company looking to upgrade their network. Verizon's got LTE er whatever, and Sprint's already got 4G in many major cities.
It's like me saying I don't want to switch to AT&T for an iphone because of it's relatively slow access compared to the 4G Sprint's about to get.
BTW, Sprint's CDMA network has faster transfer rates than AT&T's.
This rumour is at least a little more believable. I?d still rather see a T-Mobile USA compatible device. They would likely bend to Apple?s will and nd AT&T is clearly being pushed to their network limits with a 5000% growth in data usage in 3 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Consultant
I seriously doubt there will be a verizon only iPhone. CDMA is a dead technology.
CDMA is a dead-end tech that has peaked in the US, and is clearly obsolescing, but it?s neither dead nor obsolete at this time. CDMA will be around on Verizon?s network for at least the next decade and will be viable to Verizon and Sprint as the primary voice and data connection for at least the next 5 years. There is plenty of time for vendors to invest in and make money off CDMA-absed phones.
Are you convincing yourself or others? Sounds like flawed reasoning, especially when this article answers your "no international coverage" issue (dual radio.)
Comparing today's networks to those "about to come" is unrealistic. AT&T isn't the only company looking to upgrade their network. Verizon's got LTE er whatever, and Sprint's already got 4G in many major cities.
It's like me saying I don't want to switch to AT&T for an iphone because of it's relatively slow access compared to the 4G Sprint's about to get.
BTW, Sprint's CDMA network has faster transfer rates than AT&T's.
I was talking about a CDMA-ONLY phone. Read my comments again.
So would a Verizon-only phone not have access to visual voice mail? That'd suck, though the new users probably wouldn't know the difference.
If AT&T holds a patent on it (?), then there is no way they'd let Verizon have access to it. Not after the "there's a map for that" ads...
Verizon charges $2.99 for visual voicemail. The only way I would switch to Verizon is if they charged a lower rate for their monthly plans than AT&T, kept a similar ETF (none of that $350 crap), didn't charge extra for visual voicemail and didn't charge 30 bucks extra for tethering. Otherwise, I will stick with my solid AT&T service here in Houston.
This rumour is at least a little more believable. I’d still rather see a T-Mobile USA compatible device. They would likely bend to Apple’s will and nd AT&T is clearly being pushed to their network limits with a 5000% growth in data usage in 3 years.
T-Mobile is the WORST network. After all the griping about AT&T and their 3G from so many, you would want to go to T-Mobile?
BTW, Sprint's CDMA network has faster transfer rates than AT&T's.
Apple is never going to partner up with Sprint with their push towards a proprietary 4G network. Not when all the other networks will be standardized on LTE.
Besides, Sprint doesn't even run their own network anymore, Ericsson does.
I hear you on this, and I'm not going to stake my reputation on what I'm about to say, but I do think there's a market for a CDMA Verizon Wireless iPhone. Yes, it'll be out of date the moment it's released, but that doesn't mean it also won't sell into the millions.
...And sell millions again when they transition to whatever new system (LTE)...
Verizon charges $2.99 for visual voicemail. The only way I would switch to Verizon is if they charged a lower rate for their monthly plans than AT&T, kept a similar ETF (none of that $350 crap), didn't charge extra for visual voicemail and didn't charge 30 bucks extra for tethering. Otherwise, I will stick with my solid AT&T service here in Houston.
It's odd, but now that the $350 has been questioned by a member of Congress, they're saying that it's "optional", whatever that means. There's a bill that's just come up that will prevent things like this.
I don't get the whole "CDMA-only" comments. Just about all new Blackberries for VerizonWireless's network are worldphone capable. Maybe someone can explain why Apple wouldn't produce a VZW phone that's worldphone capable???
Separately, CDMA may be a dead-end technology but so is GSM, an even older technology. They are both going to go away at some point.
I don't get the whole "CDMA-only" comments. Just about all new Blackberries for VerizonWireless's network are worldphone capable. Maybe someone can explain why Apple wouldn't produce a VZW phone that's worldphone capable???
That's the rub. Qualcomm now has a radio chip out that will do both GSM (AT&T) and CDMA (Verizon) networks, but this story says that a Verizon iPhone would be a one-off CDMA-only iPhone. I don't buy it, neither do most of the people on this thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson1
Separately, CDMA may be a dead-end technology but so is GSM, and even older technology. They are both going to go away at some point.
BTW, GSM phones are worldwide, have the potential for a higher speed intermediate upgrade, and have a clear upgrade path to LTE.
World phones already exist--plenty of verizon blackberries already have CDMA/GSM compatibility. There is nothing stopping Apple from using that instead of a CDMA/GSM/LTE next year if it's not ready. 4G won't be large enough or big enough to be useful until at least 2011-12 when those chips would then be available. In the meantime a CDMA/GSM world configuration for all iPhones in 2010 is a no brainer...
I think the analyst is right about a WCDMA/CDMA/LTE chipset timeframe. But for a "worldphone" that works on WCDMA/CDMA alone, doesn't the Qualcomm Gobi already do that?
You can get that chipset already as an embedded module for laptops, Xpress cards, and such. Other than a battery hit, I don't see what would stop someone from using this chipset in a mobile handheld (like an iPhone).
What would keep Apple from using that chipset in an iPhone for summer 2010? Nothing that I can see. What am I missing here?
That's the rub. Qualcomm now has a radio chip out that will do both GSM (AT&T) and CDMA (Verizon) networks, but this story says that a Verizon iPhone would be a one-off CDMA-only iPhone. I don't buy it, neither do most of the people on this thread.
BTW, GSM phones are worldwide, have a higher speed intermediate step, and have an upgrade path to LTE.
Apparently, this is a new chip, and not fully tested. In order for Apple to use it in a phone, they would have to totally redesign the phone, and then send it in for FCC testing. Only after it passes could they send it in for manufacturing.
There are some other chips out there, but they're based on older tchnology, and use more power, and have less features.
I think the analyst is right about a WCDMA/CDMA/LTE chipset timeframe. But for a "worldphone" that works on WCDMA/CDMA alone, doesn't the Qualcomm Gobi already do that?
You can get that chipset already as an embedded module for laptops, Xpress cards, and such. Other than a battery hit, I don't see what would stop someone from using this chipset in a mobile handheld (like an iPhone).
What would keep Apple from using that chipset in an iPhone for summer 2010? Nothing that I can see. What am I missing here?
It's brand new, and is just now coming out. Apple would have needed it a good 6 months ago for a June 2010 release.
Look at the 3G coverage. It's those teeny bits that are dark magenta. Can you see them?
Even EDGE is very sparse.
They have a solid following, they already are in with the parent company and they are GSM-based. I know people who have spent a premium on iPhones on T-Mobile just to run it on EDGE. it?s not about what I want but what I think the mostly liekly carrier is based on the easiest path.
Comments
Agreed. I'm not sure that I would want a CDMA-only iPhone. No international coverage, no concurrent voice/data, relatively slow access (compared to the newer 3G speeds about to come out).
Verizon would have to be real aggressive on their price and monthly plans to win over new customers.
Are you convincing yourself or others? Sounds like flawed reasoning, especially when this article answers your "no international coverage" issue (dual radio.)
Comparing today's networks to those "about to come" is unrealistic. AT&T isn't the only company looking to upgrade their network. Verizon's got LTE er whatever, and Sprint's already got 4G in many major cities.
It's like me saying I don't want to switch to AT&T for an iphone because of it's relatively slow access compared to the 4G Sprint's about to get.
BTW, Sprint's CDMA network has faster transfer rates than AT&T's.
Verizon already has visual voicemail for an extra 3 bucks a month on many existing phones, so I don't see how this would be an "AT&T only" thing.
So, it's true....Verizon Nickels and Dimes.
I seriously doubt there will be a verizon only iPhone. CDMA is a dead technology.
CDMA is a dead-end tech that has peaked in the US, and is clearly obsolescing, but it?s neither dead nor obsolete at this time. CDMA will be around on Verizon?s network for at least the next decade and will be viable to Verizon and Sprint as the primary voice and data connection for at least the next 5 years. There is plenty of time for vendors to invest in and make money off CDMA-absed phones.
They would also get Verizon to stop those Ads against them. (Hmm! I wonder if that's not Verizon's plan.)
Personally, I think it would only ramp up the negative ads between them.
I believe it's Apple's patent.
Thanks.
Are you convincing yourself or others? Sounds like flawed reasoning, especially when this article answers your "no international coverage" issue (dual radio.)
Comparing today's networks to those "about to come" is unrealistic. AT&T isn't the only company looking to upgrade their network. Verizon's got LTE er whatever, and Sprint's already got 4G in many major cities.
It's like me saying I don't want to switch to AT&T for an iphone because of it's relatively slow access compared to the 4G Sprint's about to get.
BTW, Sprint's CDMA network has faster transfer rates than AT&T's.
I was talking about a CDMA-ONLY phone. Read my comments again.
So would a Verizon-only phone not have access to visual voice mail? That'd suck, though the new users probably wouldn't know the difference.
If AT&T holds a patent on it (?), then there is no way they'd let Verizon have access to it. Not after the "there's a map for that" ads...
Verizon charges $2.99 for visual voicemail. The only way I would switch to Verizon is if they charged a lower rate for their monthly plans than AT&T, kept a similar ETF (none of that $350 crap), didn't charge extra for visual voicemail and didn't charge 30 bucks extra for tethering. Otherwise, I will stick with my solid AT&T service here in Houston.
This rumour is at least a little more believable. I’d still rather see a T-Mobile USA compatible device. They would likely bend to Apple’s will and nd AT&T is clearly being pushed to their network limits with a 5000% growth in data usage in 3 years.
T-Mobile is the WORST network. After all the griping about AT&T and their 3G from so many, you would want to go to T-Mobile?
http://coverage.t-mobile.com/default.aspx?MapType=Data
Look at the 3G coverage. It's those teeny bits that are dark magenta. Can you see them?
Even EDGE is very sparse.
BTW, Sprint's CDMA network has faster transfer rates than AT&T's.
Apple is never going to partner up with Sprint with their push towards a proprietary 4G network. Not when all the other networks will be standardized on LTE.
Besides, Sprint doesn't even run their own network anymore, Ericsson does.
I hear you on this, and I'm not going to stake my reputation on what I'm about to say, but I do think there's a market for a CDMA Verizon Wireless iPhone. Yes, it'll be out of date the moment it's released, but that doesn't mean it also won't sell into the millions.
...And sell millions again when they transition to whatever new system (LTE)...
Personally, I think it would only ramp up the negative ads between them.
If Verizon got the iPhone you think they would ramp the anti iPhone Ads up even further?
Verizon charges $2.99 for visual voicemail. The only way I would switch to Verizon is if they charged a lower rate for their monthly plans than AT&T, kept a similar ETF (none of that $350 crap), didn't charge extra for visual voicemail and didn't charge 30 bucks extra for tethering. Otherwise, I will stick with my solid AT&T service here in Houston.
It's odd, but now that the $350 has been questioned by a member of Congress, they're saying that it's "optional", whatever that means. There's a bill that's just come up that will prevent things like this.
Separately, CDMA may be a dead-end technology but so is GSM, an even older technology. They are both going to go away at some point.
If Verizon got the iPhone you think they would ramp the anti iPhone Ads up even further?
Sorry, I wasn't very clear. Verizon would ramp up the CDMA vs. GSM map ads even further. Something like:
"Why run your iPhone on the sparse blue network when you can run it on the big red network?"
(FWIW, I get great AT&T coverage everywhere I need it and Verizon is a bit spotty near my house.)
I don't get the whole "CDMA-only" comments. Just about all new Blackberries for VerizonWireless's network are worldphone capable. Maybe someone can explain why Apple wouldn't produce a VZW phone that's worldphone capable???
That's the rub. Qualcomm now has a radio chip out that will do both GSM (AT&T) and CDMA (Verizon) networks, but this story says that a Verizon iPhone would be a one-off CDMA-only iPhone. I don't buy it, neither do most of the people on this thread.
Separately, CDMA may be a dead-end technology but so is GSM, and even older technology. They are both going to go away at some point.
BTW, GSM phones are worldwide, have the potential for a higher speed intermediate upgrade, and have a clear upgrade path to LTE.
World phones already exist--plenty of verizon blackberries already have CDMA/GSM compatibility. There is nothing stopping Apple from using that instead of a CDMA/GSM/LTE next year if it's not ready. 4G won't be large enough or big enough to be useful until at least 2011-12 when those chips would then be available. In the meantime a CDMA/GSM world configuration for all iPhones in 2010 is a no brainer...
Sorry, I wasn't very clear. Verizon would ramp up the CDMA vs. GSM map ads even further. Something like:
(FWIW, I get great AT&T coverage everywhere I need it and Verizon is a bit spotty near my house.)
Ok. I was talking about their heavy handed anti iPhone commercials.
You can get that chipset already as an embedded module for laptops, Xpress cards, and such. Other than a battery hit, I don't see what would stop someone from using this chipset in a mobile handheld (like an iPhone).
What would keep Apple from using that chipset in an iPhone for summer 2010? Nothing that I can see. What am I missing here?
That's the rub. Qualcomm now has a radio chip out that will do both GSM (AT&T) and CDMA (Verizon) networks, but this story says that a Verizon iPhone would be a one-off CDMA-only iPhone. I don't buy it, neither do most of the people on this thread.
BTW, GSM phones are worldwide, have a higher speed intermediate step, and have an upgrade path to LTE.
Apparently, this is a new chip, and not fully tested. In order for Apple to use it in a phone, they would have to totally redesign the phone, and then send it in for FCC testing. Only after it passes could they send it in for manufacturing.
There are some other chips out there, but they're based on older tchnology, and use more power, and have less features.
I think the analyst is right about a WCDMA/CDMA/LTE chipset timeframe. But for a "worldphone" that works on WCDMA/CDMA alone, doesn't the Qualcomm Gobi already do that?
You can get that chipset already as an embedded module for laptops, Xpress cards, and such. Other than a battery hit, I don't see what would stop someone from using this chipset in a mobile handheld (like an iPhone).
What would keep Apple from using that chipset in an iPhone for summer 2010? Nothing that I can see. What am I missing here?
It's brand new, and is just now coming out. Apple would have needed it a good 6 months ago for a June 2010 release.
T-Mobile is the WORST network. After all the griping about AT&T and their 3G from so many, you would want to go to T-Mobile?
http://coverage.t-mobile.com/default.aspx?MapType=Data
Look at the 3G coverage. It's those teeny bits that are dark magenta. Can you see them?
Even EDGE is very sparse.
They have a solid following, they already are in with the parent company and they are GSM-based. I know people who have spent a premium on iPhones on T-Mobile just to run it on EDGE. it?s not about what I want but what I think the mostly liekly carrier is based on the easiest path.