Some of them do sometimes. Then they get on the cover of Business Week and are taken seriously for the next several quarters, or until their lucky streak ends, whichever comes first.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cxc273
We don't know anything about Apple's plans for iPhone in the U.S., whether they will expand carriers or not. The only thing we know for absolute certainty is that Apple is about profit, not market share.
I think that you are mistaking a means with an end. If increased market share were seen to be the best means to maximizing total profits, then Apple would be using that method.
All AT&T would need to say is "We have signed on for anther 2 years with Apple and the iPhone." and I would go out and buy the newest iPhone to replace my iPhone 3G (that has seen better days).
I wanted to see if there would be a Verizon jump, but to be honest, I never loved Verizon when I had them.
All AT&T would need to say is "We have signed on for anther 2 years with Apple and the iPhone." and I would go out and buy the newest iPhone to replace my iPhone 3G (that has seen better days).
I wanted to see if there would be a Verizon jump, but to be honest, I never loved Verizon when I had them.
There was a study done recently (and reported in the New York Times) that AT&T's network is better overall (except perhaps in NY city and San Fran) than Verizon's. And, AT&T's problems were partly because of the iPhone.
Verizon has got everyone brainwashed as a result of their heavy advertising.
The longer Apple waits to deploy a CDMA iPhone, the longer Android has to establish a foothold with Verizon.
That's a pretty good thesis, especially from a US-centric perspective. Ultimately though, the question back to Apple is if Android is really a threat to their business model.
From my perspective, Android is a significant threat over a 2-year horizon, much more so than RIM. If quality Android phones are available on the other three carriers, Apple will be stuck with the lion's share of AT&T's smart phone subscribers, but will be limited on growth.
There was a study done recently (and reported in the New York Times) that AT&T's network is better overall (except perhaps in NY city and San Fran) than Verizon's. And, AT&T's problems were partly because of the iPhone.
Verizon has got everyone brainwashed as a result of their heavy advertising.
That study came from a small company that nobody has ever heard of.
Meanwhile, well known companies that are known for non-bias like Consumer Reports and JD Powers continue to rank Verizon at the top.
That's a pretty good thesis, especially from a US-centric perspective. Ultimately though, the question back to Apple is if Android is really a threat to their business model.
From my perspective, Android is a significant threat over a 2-year horizon, much more so than RIM. If quality Android phones are available on the other three carriers, Apple will be stuck with the lion's share of AT&T's smart phone subscribers, but will be limited on growth.
Google is by far --- much more dangerous in the long term. Google is big and rich --- if they want to, they can afford to lose money on the Android for the next 5 years.
An alternative way to look at the Android-Verizon vs. iPhone-ATT matchup is to consider the reasonably likely alternative that i-A simply defeats A-V, the same way that Apple defeated every iPod challenger, including ones that were doing well before the iPod. Apple is a hardware company, it's been building devices for a long time, it has a good relationship with its customers, it has successful retail stores, it has a big head start, and it is willing to devote enormous resources into the iPhone (relatively more than Google). The smart money should be on i-A over A-V. Apple stuck to its iTunes-iPod alliance, and they seem to have been right. I think that Verizon will want some control over the iPhone that Apple is never going to give them. A defeated Verizon might be different.
On a related point raised earlier, I think that the AT&T-iPad deal is a two-edged sword. No one really can say who will use 3G on an iPad and how much. My guess is that iPads won't be used much on 3G, compared to smart phones, because they're too big to carry everywhere. Plus, many of the early adopters will be iPhone owners. So, I think that the rates are probably a good bet for AT&T. The absence of contracts will entice customers. However, if I'm wrong and usage is high, AT&T doesn't have an obligation either. They can change the rates any time they want. AT&T probably underestimated iPhone 2.5G usage, and so they raised the rates in later plans.
Apple was NEVER going to Intel... remember that one? That's good for a laugh today, remember we wouldn't have half the devices we have today if Apple didn't make that gutsy leap.
Apple has a much larger enemy than Verizon... it's called Google. Remember, Steve didn't sit there and bash Verizon in his Town Hall, but he did bash Google. Likewise, Google is quickly going multi-carrier... they are full out taking Apple on with Android devices on AT&T. The Nexus One is on it's way there, check your FCC filings on it.
Now, if Google, a relative n00b to the cell phone world, can get multi-carrier this quick, why is it taking Apple so long?
GSM vs. CDMA? Rrrrrrriiiiiiggggghhhhhttttt. I don't know for sure, but how much do you want to bet that there's been CDMA prototypes of the iPhone from Day 1 working on the Infinite Loop campus? Remember Project Marklar? That's the Intel builds of Mac OS X that existed from Day 1. Remember, right from the words of Steve Jobs himself, "Mac OS X is processor independent." It ran on PowerPC, ran from the beginning on x86, and was easily adopted to ARM. So, if that's Apple's modus operandi, why would they make the iPhone software dependent on GSM? I'm betting the work is already done... and I'm betting concepts of every iPhone have been running on CDMA, it makes perfect sense because UMTS itself is a variant of CDMA, if not for Qualcomm's work on UMTS, 3G would be nonexistent except for Qualcomm's CDMA2000. Apple itself has put out hiring notices for CDMA/EVDO engineers, now why would they have hired people to create this technology if they don't release it at some point?
Sure, Verizon could be playing hardball here in negotiations. They'd be foolish to do it they way they're bleeding customers. Make no mistake, the real enemy here is Google, and Verizon is a means to an end. It's a means to further hurt Google. If the VZ/Google partnership is eroded, that makes Google a nomad and it really screws their ability to spread Android.
Did it ever occur to you guys that nothing has been announced for verizon so as not to eat into AT&T/Apple profits? im sure Apple/VZW have something up their sleeve and both will be released together this summer and shock the U.S.
There are two reasons why I haven't gotten another iPhone since I bought the 1st generation iPhone. The first is I haven't been impressed enough to get the 2nd or 3rd generation models. The fact that the iPhone is still lacking true multi capabilities is bad. The iPhone is the only smart phone on the market that doesn't do this now. CNET News has pointed this out numerous times. The second reason is AT&T. I hate them and will not sign another contract with them. There signal sucks half of the time, calls drop and I get voicemails from missed calls 30 minutes after the call was made most of the time. Thank god my current contract is up with them now. If the 4th generation comes out to be a disappointment like the last two I may be moving on to another brand of smart phone that works with the Verizon network. I hope Apple does come to there senses and signs a deal with Verizon. Their pride will hurt them in the end if they do not and Google will continue to prevail over the iPhone because that is most likely what I will get next.
Did it ever occur to you guys that nothing has been announced for verizon so as not to eat into AT&T/Apple profits? im sure Apple/VZW have something up their sleeve and both will be released together this summer and shock the U.S.
I have a 3g didn't want to upgrade to the "S" because of AT&T...heard the rumours of a possible Verizon iphone and immediately started making plans for an upgrade this summer. It's so bad my iphone is an expensive ipod touch. Too frustrating! Tempted to buy a palm pre (Verizon) to use as a phone and keep the iphone for music if Verizon doesn't happen.
I wonder if Apple has any idea of subscribers would prefering AT&T to go away.
There was a study done recently (and reported in the New York Times) that AT&T's network is better overall (except perhaps in NY city and San Fran) than Verizon's. And, AT&T's problems were partly because of the iPhone.
Verizon has got everyone brainwashed as a result of their heavy advertising.
Budwieser used to advertise it was the best beer "in the world"! Spin Spin Spin.
I live in L.A. wear headphones sit at my desk and attempt to talk with my iphone. The phone doesn't move - the bars dance and it is overall frustrating repeating myself. The AT&T tech told me to turn off 3G so I did?!?! The improvement was negligible. Finally gave up being cool, and use a land line.
It wouldn't surprise me if Apple hedged its bets while talking up AT&T, only to switch suddenly. E.g., the Intel conversion.
This line of thinking leads me to suspect that the iPad actually has the hardware for 1700MHz (T-Mobile's 3G)--but it's just disabled in firmware. When the middle of the year comes along: AT&T exclusivity ends, new iPhone with all GSM bands, oh, and the iPad actually has been hardware-capable of T-Mobile 3G all along. We just didn't tell anyone because we were under exclusivity.
Even if the above is a pipe dream, you can be sure that hardware designs (and tested prototypes) exist for CDMA and 1700MHz supporting iPhones and iPads, whether Steve hates Verizon or not. Steve may carry grudges but he's not an idiot.
Heck, Apple may come out with a CDMA device that isn't an "iPhone" (nudge, wink) just to adhere to the letter of the exclusivity agreement with AT&T while flouting the spirit of it.
In the meantime I'll keep using Android on T-Mobile. Maybe one day Apple will sell a multiband unlocked iPhone.
Ok. I work at Verizon. So, let me break the news to everyone.
APPLE WILL NEVER MAKE AN iPHONE FOR VERIZON CDMA.
If you haven't heard, Verizon is switching to LTE (4G) network.
It's being tested in a few cities now, and has been for a while.
CDMA is a DYING network. Verizon is "trying" to have LTE going strong in select cities by end of 2010, and will "try" to have it complete by end of 2011.
When LTE is up and running, then you might see an iPhone on Verizon. Until then you don't need a 60 page report to tell you it's NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
Reason 2 iphone will Never go to Verizon CDMA. You can't use Data and Voice at SAME TIME.
Some say big deal, but to me it is. I talk with my wife while at lunch,(only have 30 min) and surf the web to catch up on things while talking.
Why would apple make a phone for a network that being replaced as we speak?
Did Apple make the new iPad Verizon compatible? No, and it's not even a released product! Then why would they make the iPhone for Verizon?
As for my service with AT&T, it's Great. I have rollover, so I never have to worry about minutes. My 3G, where I live, is flawless.
Most important to me... I do not have to call customer service every freaking bill cycle because my bill had charges I didn't expect!
If you missed it. I work at Verizon and get a BIG discount but choose to carry a full priced family plan thru AT&T instead.
These kind of devices are at the start of the standard S-curve for new technologies. There are still many different standards (as there were at the start of the PC) but it is thinning out already and the growth phase has begun. In this phase, volume is most important.
The situation is of course slightly different than the beginning of the PC-era because all these new technologies (iPhone OS, Android, Chrome) already share a large part (internet protocols and standards), but I would say that even if it gets Apple more profit to stay with AT&T (and worldwide with other exclusive carriers) they have to decide not to milk the cow too much but to expand the number of cows as fast as they can.
If the data-only plan for iPad with VoIP-apps takes hold, we will see the end of voice-specific service anyway.
Maybe that is what will happen anyway : iPhone and iPad move to data only with VoIP functionality for voice.
Ok. I work at Verizon. So, let me break the news to everyone.
APPLE WILL NEVER MAKE AN iPHONE FOR VERIZON CDMA.
If you haven't heard, Verizon is switching to LTE (4G) network.
It's being tested in a few cities now, and has been for a while.
CDMA is a DYING network. Verizon is "trying" to have LTE going strong in select cities by end of 2010, and will "try" to have it complete by end of 2011.
When LTE is up and running, then you might see an iPhone on Verizon. Until then you don't need a 60 page report to tell you it's NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
Reason 2 iphone will Never go to Verizon CDMA. You can't use Data and Voice at SAME TIME.
Some say big deal, but to me it is. I talk with my wife while at lunch,(only have 30 min) and surf the web to catch up on things while talking.
Why would apple make a phone for a network that being replaced as we speak?
Did Apple make the new iPad Verizon compatible? No, and it's not even a released product! Then why would they make the iPhone for Verizon?
As for my service with AT&T, it's Great. I have rollover, so I never have to worry about minutes. My 3G, where I live, is flawless.
Most important to me... I do not have to call customer service every freaking bill cycle because my bill had charges I didn't expect!
If you missed it. I work at Verizon and get a BIG discount but choose to carry a full priced family plan thru AT&T instead.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but won't dozens of millions of people have CDMA phones in their pocket for YEARS? Most people don't upgrade until the have a new free phone or even longer, ie two to three years. For example, most people over 30. My parents and other family have 3 or 4 year old phones. I only do it every 2 years when it's free. So just because LTE is turned on doesn't mean CDMA is turned off. Unless I'm wrong? Is VZ going to give everyone new free LTE phones? That just doesn't seem to make sense... I imagine it will be several years before there are more LTE users than CDMA, right? It's like the transition from PPC to intel or OS 9 to OS X. Or XP to Win 7. Takes time. Years.
edit. it really does appear VZ is on track on LTE, they say they're opening in 30 markets for LTE in a few months, covering 100 million people. Wow, I guess an Apple iPhone with VZ LTE could come this summer! I just wonder what kind of contract obligation Apple and AT&T have. \
Comments
Have the analysts ever gotten anything right?
Some of them do sometimes. Then they get on the cover of Business Week and are taken seriously for the next several quarters, or until their lucky streak ends, whichever comes first.
We don't know anything about Apple's plans for iPhone in the U.S., whether they will expand carriers or not. The only thing we know for absolute certainty is that Apple is about profit, not market share.
I think that you are mistaking a means with an end. If increased market share were seen to be the best means to maximizing total profits, then Apple would be using that method.
I wanted to see if there would be a Verizon jump, but to be honest, I never loved Verizon when I had them.
What about in the early days of the PC? Do you discount Apple's role in the demise of the early competing systems like Commodore et. al?
They had a role, just like IBM, Microsoft and mismanagement did. Apple did not put Commodore out of business.
All AT&T would need to say is "We have signed on for anther 2 years with Apple and the iPhone." and I would go out and buy the newest iPhone to replace my iPhone 3G (that has seen better days).
I wanted to see if there would be a Verizon jump, but to be honest, I never loved Verizon when I had them.
There was a study done recently (and reported in the New York Times) that AT&T's network is better overall (except perhaps in NY city and San Fran) than Verizon's. And, AT&T's problems were partly because of the iPhone.
Verizon has got everyone brainwashed as a result of their heavy advertising.
The longer Apple waits to deploy a CDMA iPhone, the longer Android has to establish a foothold with Verizon.
That's a pretty good thesis, especially from a US-centric perspective. Ultimately though, the question back to Apple is if Android is really a threat to their business model.
From my perspective, Android is a significant threat over a 2-year horizon, much more so than RIM. If quality Android phones are available on the other three carriers, Apple will be stuck with the lion's share of AT&T's smart phone subscribers, but will be limited on growth.
There was a study done recently (and reported in the New York Times) that AT&T's network is better overall (except perhaps in NY city and San Fran) than Verizon's. And, AT&T's problems were partly because of the iPhone.
Verizon has got everyone brainwashed as a result of their heavy advertising.
That study came from a small company that nobody has ever heard of.
Meanwhile, well known companies that are known for non-bias like Consumer Reports and JD Powers continue to rank Verizon at the top.
That's a pretty good thesis, especially from a US-centric perspective. Ultimately though, the question back to Apple is if Android is really a threat to their business model.
From my perspective, Android is a significant threat over a 2-year horizon, much more so than RIM. If quality Android phones are available on the other three carriers, Apple will be stuck with the lion's share of AT&T's smart phone subscribers, but will be limited on growth.
Google is by far --- much more dangerous in the long term. Google is big and rich --- if they want to, they can afford to lose money on the Android for the next 5 years.
On a related point raised earlier, I think that the AT&T-iPad deal is a two-edged sword. No one really can say who will use 3G on an iPad and how much. My guess is that iPads won't be used much on 3G, compared to smart phones, because they're too big to carry everywhere. Plus, many of the early adopters will be iPhone owners. So, I think that the rates are probably a good bet for AT&T. The absence of contracts will entice customers. However, if I'm wrong and usage is high, AT&T doesn't have an obligation either. They can change the rates any time they want. AT&T probably underestimated iPhone 2.5G usage, and so they raised the rates in later plans.
Apple was NEVER going to Intel... remember that one? That's good for a laugh today, remember we wouldn't have half the devices we have today if Apple didn't make that gutsy leap.
Apple has a much larger enemy than Verizon... it's called Google. Remember, Steve didn't sit there and bash Verizon in his Town Hall, but he did bash Google. Likewise, Google is quickly going multi-carrier... they are full out taking Apple on with Android devices on AT&T. The Nexus One is on it's way there, check your FCC filings on it.
Now, if Google, a relative n00b to the cell phone world, can get multi-carrier this quick, why is it taking Apple so long?
GSM vs. CDMA? Rrrrrrriiiiiiggggghhhhhttttt. I don't know for sure, but how much do you want to bet that there's been CDMA prototypes of the iPhone from Day 1 working on the Infinite Loop campus? Remember Project Marklar? That's the Intel builds of Mac OS X that existed from Day 1. Remember, right from the words of Steve Jobs himself, "Mac OS X is processor independent." It ran on PowerPC, ran from the beginning on x86, and was easily adopted to ARM. So, if that's Apple's modus operandi, why would they make the iPhone software dependent on GSM? I'm betting the work is already done... and I'm betting concepts of every iPhone have been running on CDMA, it makes perfect sense because UMTS itself is a variant of CDMA, if not for Qualcomm's work on UMTS, 3G would be nonexistent except for Qualcomm's CDMA2000. Apple itself has put out hiring notices for CDMA/EVDO engineers, now why would they have hired people to create this technology if they don't release it at some point?
Sure, Verizon could be playing hardball here in negotiations. They'd be foolish to do it they way they're bleeding customers. Make no mistake, the real enemy here is Google, and Verizon is a means to an end. It's a means to further hurt Google. If the VZ/Google partnership is eroded, that makes Google a nomad and it really screws their ability to spread Android.
Steve will never deal with Verizon. When he first came to them for a deal, they turned him down. Now, it's "I'll destroy you, Verizon."
I wouldn't go that far, but Verizon's CEO will have to kneel and kiss Steve's ring before a deal can be done.
Did it ever occur to you guys that nothing has been announced for verizon so as not to eat into AT&T/Apple profits? im sure Apple/VZW have something up their sleeve and both will be released together this summer and shock the U.S.
I have a 3g didn't want to upgrade to the "S" because of AT&T...heard the rumours of a possible Verizon iphone and immediately started making plans for an upgrade this summer. It's so bad my iphone is an expensive ipod touch. Too frustrating! Tempted to buy a palm pre (Verizon) to use as a phone and keep the iphone for music if Verizon doesn't happen.
I wonder if Apple has any idea of subscribers would prefering AT&T to go away.
There was a study done recently (and reported in the New York Times) that AT&T's network is better overall (except perhaps in NY city and San Fran) than Verizon's. And, AT&T's problems were partly because of the iPhone.
Verizon has got everyone brainwashed as a result of their heavy advertising.
Budwieser used to advertise it was the best beer "in the world"! Spin Spin Spin.
I live in L.A. wear headphones sit at my desk and attempt to talk with my iphone. The phone doesn't move - the bars dance and it is overall frustrating repeating myself. The AT&T tech told me to turn off 3G so I did?!?! The improvement was negligible. Finally gave up being cool, and use a land line.
I wouldn't go that far, but Verizon's CEO will have to kneel and kiss Steve's ring before a deal can be done.
Intel's CEO dressed up in a bunny suit for the Apple keynote.
Business is business.
This line of thinking leads me to suspect that the iPad actually has the hardware for 1700MHz (T-Mobile's 3G)--but it's just disabled in firmware. When the middle of the year comes along: AT&T exclusivity ends, new iPhone with all GSM bands, oh, and the iPad actually has been hardware-capable of T-Mobile 3G all along. We just didn't tell anyone because we were under exclusivity.
Even if the above is a pipe dream, you can be sure that hardware designs (and tested prototypes) exist for CDMA and 1700MHz supporting iPhones and iPads, whether Steve hates Verizon or not. Steve may carry grudges but he's not an idiot.
Heck, Apple may come out with a CDMA device that isn't an "iPhone" (nudge, wink) just to adhere to the letter of the exclusivity agreement with AT&T while flouting the spirit of it.
In the meantime I'll keep using Android on T-Mobile. Maybe one day Apple will sell a multiband unlocked iPhone.
APPLE WILL NEVER MAKE AN iPHONE FOR VERIZON CDMA.
If you haven't heard, Verizon is switching to LTE (4G) network.
It's being tested in a few cities now, and has been for a while.
CDMA is a DYING network. Verizon is "trying" to have LTE going strong in select cities by end of 2010, and will "try" to have it complete by end of 2011.
When LTE is up and running, then you might see an iPhone on Verizon. Until then you don't need a 60 page report to tell you it's NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
Reason 2 iphone will Never go to Verizon CDMA. You can't use Data and Voice at SAME TIME.
Some say big deal, but to me it is. I talk with my wife while at lunch,(only have 30 min) and surf the web to catch up on things while talking.
Why would apple make a phone for a network that being replaced as we speak?
Did Apple make the new iPad Verizon compatible?
As for my service with AT&T, it's Great. I have rollover, so I never have to worry about minutes. My 3G, where I live, is flawless.
Most important to me... I do not have to call customer service every freaking bill cycle because my bill had charges I didn't expect!
If you missed it. I work at Verizon and get a BIG discount but choose to carry a full priced family plan thru AT&T instead.
The situation is of course slightly different than the beginning of the PC-era because all these new technologies (iPhone OS, Android, Chrome) already share a large part (internet protocols and standards), but I would say that even if it gets Apple more profit to stay with AT&T (and worldwide with other exclusive carriers) they have to decide not to milk the cow too much but to expand the number of cows as fast as they can.
If the data-only plan for iPad with VoIP-apps takes hold, we will see the end of voice-specific service anyway.
Maybe that is what will happen anyway : iPhone and iPad move to data only with VoIP functionality for voice.
Ok. I work at Verizon. So, let me break the news to everyone.
APPLE WILL NEVER MAKE AN iPHONE FOR VERIZON CDMA.
If you haven't heard, Verizon is switching to LTE (4G) network.
It's being tested in a few cities now, and has been for a while.
CDMA is a DYING network. Verizon is "trying" to have LTE going strong in select cities by end of 2010, and will "try" to have it complete by end of 2011.
When LTE is up and running, then you might see an iPhone on Verizon. Until then you don't need a 60 page report to tell you it's NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
Reason 2 iphone will Never go to Verizon CDMA. You can't use Data and Voice at SAME TIME.
Some say big deal, but to me it is. I talk with my wife while at lunch,(only have 30 min) and surf the web to catch up on things while talking.
Why would apple make a phone for a network that being replaced as we speak?
Did Apple make the new iPad Verizon compatible?
As for my service with AT&T, it's Great. I have rollover, so I never have to worry about minutes. My 3G, where I live, is flawless.
Most important to me... I do not have to call customer service every freaking bill cycle because my bill had charges I didn't expect!
If you missed it. I work at Verizon and get a BIG discount but choose to carry a full priced family plan thru AT&T instead.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but won't dozens of millions of people have CDMA phones in their pocket for YEARS? Most people don't upgrade until the have a new free phone or even longer, ie two to three years. For example, most people over 30. My parents and other family have 3 or 4 year old phones. I only do it every 2 years when it's free. So just because LTE is turned on doesn't mean CDMA is turned off. Unless I'm wrong? Is VZ going to give everyone new free LTE phones? That just doesn't seem to make sense... I imagine it will be several years before there are more LTE users than CDMA, right? It's like the transition from PPC to intel or OS 9 to OS X. Or XP to Win 7. Takes time. Years.
edit. it really does appear VZ is on track on LTE, they say they're opening in 30 markets for LTE in a few months, covering 100 million people. Wow, I guess an Apple iPhone with VZ LTE could come this summer! I just wonder what kind of contract obligation Apple and AT&T have.
http://news.vzw.com/LTE/Overview.html