First off: I'm not pro-AT&T. In fact, I don't have an iPhone yet because of AT&T.
From the tone of many on here, it sure sounds like there's a lot of pro-AT&T peeps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirkgray
But I completely understand Apple's position on this. A Verizon iPhone would be bad for Apple.
Currently Apple builds one iPhone. It works around the world with multiple carriers. This matches Apple's ease of use model. If they were to build a Verizon version of the iPhone, it would be for one segment of one market. When a Verizon iPhone user went on holiday overseas and their iPhone wouldn't work, Apple would catch the the flack. "My friend's iPhone worked in Europe. Why won't mine!!!" People don't want a technical explanation, they just want it to work.
Qualcomm (and others) have a chip in development that can do both CDMA and GSM. This question once that chip comes out becomes COMPETELY mute.
This GSM issue vs. CDMA issue is at best a red herring. Why? Because of LTE. Even with LTE, phones would STILL ALWAYS HAVE TO BE BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE. So, if you are a CDMA carrier, your phones will ALWAYS have to be CDMA compatible. This issue is not going away anytime soon.
So, if you think that Apple will wait 10 to 15 years to be on board the LARGEST WIRELESS CARRIER IN THE UNITED STATES, then I'd have to say that many of you are out of your mind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirkgray
While most countries regulated (yeah there's that nasty word) their carriers, requiring them to standardize on one system, the USA took a hands off approach. This let carriers develop separate standards. This allowed them to further lock in customers.
The simple fact is, until the other US carriers move to world standard protocols (as will happen with 4G), there is little to no chance Apple will support them. Apple is all about standards and one-size fits all. The American cell industry is not.
The fact of the matter is that Apple generates well over 60% of their iPhones sales FROM THE UNITED STATES ALONE. So, if you think that it's a smart LONG TERM STRATEGY to restrict itself to ONE US carrier, then I don't know what to say.
I can understand not going with VZW or Sprint due to CDMA (although I still think that strategy for long-term viability is STUPID), but AT LEAST ADD ANOTHER GSM NETWORK.
I don't know that it's bad, but the ball was firmly in Verizon's court and they rejected the iPhone first. Sucks to be them now. I'm sure there were further discussions even after that point, and a deal obviously still couldn't be worked out. Verizon, apparently, believes their own press releases about how superior their network is and how that's all that matters
I can promise you that Verizon Wireless (note my use of WIRELESS) is not hurting at all. Their #s are quite good, and yes the Droid is helping them (yes... I know you all here hate the droid, but it is helping VZW very well).
By the way, who cares that VZW rejected Apple first? This is business. There's always another day both for Apple and VZW. This happens ALL THE TIME.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42
Finally, for all the posturing about how it's no big deal to have another SKU with CDMA chips - yes it is! All you have to do is compare Apple's profitability to other makers and it's pretty obvious they know what they are doing. Why do you think Southwest Airlines is far more profitable than United? They have a very simplified fleet that reaps savings in training, maintenance, parts and on down the line. It's a huge ripple effect and common sense to anyone who has had to manage any kind of product or system in the real world. Simplicity pays off huge in multiple, complex, interrelated ways that aren't obvious until you start diving into the details.
If true, it's a done deal. No verizon iPhone until 4G is prevelant - two years or more at least. How long was 3G out before chips that had the power profiles Apple was comfortable with to finally launch the iPhone 3G?
I can't say I'm surprised because I'm not - it was rather obvious when it became apparent Verizon passed on the iPhone the first time that a CDMA iPhone was highly unlikely.
I'm sorry to tell you that this 4G excuse is a RED HERRING. Why?
Backwards compatibility.
CDMA LTE phones will HAVE TO BE BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE TO CDMA. So, this notion that LTE is going to solve the "CDMA" issue is nonsense. It won't.
What will solve it? The chips coming out this year that are both CDMA and GSM compatible. This will ultimately render the CDMA vs. GSM argument mute.
I know so many of you pro-AT&T people are "against CDMA" (I'm befuddled on why you guys care so much), but I can promise you that CDMA is not going away for at least another 10 to 15 years.
Qualcomm (and others) have a chip in development that can do both CDMA and GSM. This question once that chip comes out becomes COMPETELY mute.
It's out and in phones right now. The problem is why aren't they used in every phone if they are great. RiM has it in the BB Storm for N. America but that same phone everywhere else only gets GSM/3GSM. Then there is the problem with the N. American version of the Storm still not working on N. American 3GSM networks as it only has the 2100MHz band. I'm guessing it's a combination of cost, size of baseband chip (including number of needed radios), and power usage that prevents this from being a one-size-fits-all model. When you look at the iPhone and how thin it is I can't imagine that being an option in any regard.
It's out and in phones right now. The problem is why aren't they used in every phone if they are great. RiM has it in the BB Storm for N. America but that same phone everywhere else only gets GSM/3GSM. Then there is the problem with the N. American version of the Storm still not working on N. American 3GSM networks as it only has the 2100MHz band. I'm guessing it's a combination of cost, size of baseband chip (including number of needed radios), and power usage that prevents this from being a one-size-fits-all model. When you look at the iPhone and how thin it is I can't imagine that being an option in any regard.
That's one chip in many. Sorry, but this "excuse" of GSM, is that... and excuse. That's like saying that after Pentium 1, there's nothing after that. It's an evolution.
If Apple really wants to double their hardware sales long term, they will eventually HAVE to look at a carrier outside of AT&T. Eventually, Apple will run out of "new subscribers" and/or switchers.
Regardless, the crux of my issue really has nothing to do with VZW or AT&T. My issue is why there are so many pro-AT&T folks that just can't see Apple going with another carrier, let alone VZW. It makes absolutely no sense to me.
AT&T is not Apple guys! Really, they're not! They're TWO DIFFERENT COMPANIES!
I can't think how any of them could make a world-mode baseband chip and all the radio chips that are smaller than just a GSM-based on CDMA-based phone. Even if the cost, power, etc. is the same or better the size will bigger. I'd expect a separate CDMA-based version before I expect a world-mode option as the only option.
Maybe that "leak" of a taller iPhone by 6.3mm is for a separate worldmode version for a CDMA carrier o be sold alongside the GSM-based version.
Quote:
Regardless, the crux of my issue really has nothing to do with VZW or AT&T. My issue is why there are so many pro-AT&T folks that just can't see Apple going with another carrier, let alone VZW. It makes absolutely no sense to me.
I'd like to see another carrier come on board, especially Verizon. My stock will skyrocket, iPhone users will jump from AT&T to Verizon giving me more bandwidth, and people will stop bitching at it. However, I don't think that will happen. If it does I think we'll get a heads up. Maybe in March when they introduce the iPhone OS 4.0 SDK and demo like they've been doing for the last two years.
Those analysts should have just asked me. I've said all along that Apple won't be on Verizon until they have very good 4G coverage. CDMA is near end-of-life.
You guys got that? Good, so shut up with your idiotic speculation and start using your brain.
"idiotic speculation" would be suggesting that a technology that is currently in widespread use by over 100 million mobile phone subscribers in the USA with an excellent 3G coverage footprint is going to be "end of life" after Verizon puts up a couple dozen 4G towers...
Regardless, the crux of my issue really has nothing to do with VZW or AT&T. My issue is why there are so many pro-AT&T folks that just can't see Apple going with another carrier, let alone VZW. It makes absolutely no sense to me.
w00master
It's because Verizon is a bag of sleaze. Apple will never partner with them with their current mgmt/ corporate sleaze.
Those analysts should have just asked me. I've said all along that Apple won't be on Verizon until they have very good 4G coverage. CDMA is near end-of-life.
You guys got that? Good, so shut up with your idiotic speculation and start using your brain.
It won't stop, but yes you're right it has been common sense since the iPhone announcement in 2007.
The only people who didn't see this coming are the Verizon fanbois...
The only reason I am a "fan boi" is AT&T coverage totally BLOWS here. My wife has an iPhone and she CONSTANTLY asks for my v phone to make a phone call.
She is happy as a lark when she actually HAS coverage. Meanwhile at our house she is lucky to get a call while our mobile broadband from Verizon hums merrily along.
Every time I see those stupid AT&T commercials that say "our maps are smaller but it is better" I want to thrown something.
I was really hoping Verizon would get the Iphone, but seeing that Android looks like its doing well, I will be fine picking up the Nexus One. The addition of multitouch pushed me over the edge.
However, I agree with the feeling that the Iphone isn't making its way to Verizon until they no longer depend on a CDMA network. Unfortunately its going to take a couple years at least, oh well I'm happy Verizon has made great strides to provide very good options despite not having the Iphone.
if it were about the availability of 4G coverage only, then Sprint with WiMax would be the most likely candidate for the next iPhone and that is not going to happen.
Yup, those predictions were off. And now the iPad presents it's own issues and momentum.
Yes, it does suck to be Verizon!
How so?
With Android having more momentum per day, I don't think Verizon is in a bad position here at all. In my town with really abysmal, almost non-existant AT&T coverage, where almost every other provider has 3G (even T-Mobile is getting it soon!), why should Apple think "Hey, this is a great idea to stick with AT&T?" Multi-carrier is the way to go, and if they aren't going to open it up to VZW, at least try opening it up to the other major GSM carrier in the US.
Funny part is, if T-Mobile got the iPhone, I bet a good number of you would be jumping to them.
Comments
First off: I'm not pro-AT&T. In fact, I don't have an iPhone yet because of AT&T.
From the tone of many on here, it sure sounds like there's a lot of pro-AT&T peeps.
But I completely understand Apple's position on this. A Verizon iPhone would be bad for Apple.
Currently Apple builds one iPhone. It works around the world with multiple carriers. This matches Apple's ease of use model. If they were to build a Verizon version of the iPhone, it would be for one segment of one market. When a Verizon iPhone user went on holiday overseas and their iPhone wouldn't work, Apple would catch the the flack. "My friend's iPhone worked in Europe. Why won't mine!!!" People don't want a technical explanation, they just want it to work.
Qualcomm (and others) have a chip in development that can do both CDMA and GSM. This question once that chip comes out becomes COMPETELY mute.
This GSM issue vs. CDMA issue is at best a red herring. Why? Because of LTE. Even with LTE, phones would STILL ALWAYS HAVE TO BE BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE. So, if you are a CDMA carrier, your phones will ALWAYS have to be CDMA compatible. This issue is not going away anytime soon.
So, if you think that Apple will wait 10 to 15 years to be on board the LARGEST WIRELESS CARRIER IN THE UNITED STATES, then I'd have to say that many of you are out of your mind.
While most countries regulated (yeah there's that nasty word) their carriers, requiring them to standardize on one system, the USA took a hands off approach. This let carriers develop separate standards. This allowed them to further lock in customers.
The simple fact is, until the other US carriers move to world standard protocols (as will happen with 4G), there is little to no chance Apple will support them. Apple is all about standards and one-size fits all. The American cell industry is not.
The fact of the matter is that Apple generates well over 60% of their iPhones sales FROM THE UNITED STATES ALONE. So, if you think that it's a smart LONG TERM STRATEGY to restrict itself to ONE US carrier, then I don't know what to say.
I can understand not going with VZW or Sprint due to CDMA (although I still think that strategy for long-term viability is STUPID), but AT LEAST ADD ANOTHER GSM NETWORK.
w00master
I don't know that it's bad, but the ball was firmly in Verizon's court and they rejected the iPhone first. Sucks to be them now. I'm sure there were further discussions even after that point, and a deal obviously still couldn't be worked out. Verizon, apparently, believes their own press releases about how superior their network is and how that's all that matters
I can promise you that Verizon Wireless (note my use of WIRELESS) is not hurting at all. Their #s are quite good, and yes the Droid is helping them (yes... I know you all here hate the droid, but it is helping VZW very well).
By the way, who cares that VZW rejected Apple first? This is business. There's always another day both for Apple and VZW. This happens ALL THE TIME.
Finally, for all the posturing about how it's no big deal to have another SKU with CDMA chips - yes it is! All you have to do is compare Apple's profitability to other makers and it's pretty obvious they know what they are doing. Why do you think Southwest Airlines is far more profitable than United? They have a very simplified fleet that reaps savings in training, maintenance, parts and on down the line. It's a huge ripple effect and common sense to anyone who has had to manage any kind of product or system in the real world. Simplicity pays off huge in multiple, complex, interrelated ways that aren't obvious until you start diving into the details.
If true, it's a done deal. No verizon iPhone until 4G is prevelant - two years or more at least. How long was 3G out before chips that had the power profiles Apple was comfortable with to finally launch the iPhone 3G?
I can't say I'm surprised because I'm not - it was rather obvious when it became apparent Verizon passed on the iPhone the first time that a CDMA iPhone was highly unlikely.
I'm sorry to tell you that this 4G excuse is a RED HERRING. Why?
Backwards compatibility.
CDMA LTE phones will HAVE TO BE BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE TO CDMA. So, this notion that LTE is going to solve the "CDMA" issue is nonsense. It won't.
What will solve it? The chips coming out this year that are both CDMA and GSM compatible. This will ultimately render the CDMA vs. GSM argument mute.
I know so many of you pro-AT&T people are "against CDMA" (I'm befuddled on why you guys care so much), but I can promise you that CDMA is not going away for at least another 10 to 15 years.
w00master
Qualcomm (and others) have a chip in development that can do both CDMA and GSM. This question once that chip comes out becomes COMPETELY mute.
It's out and in phones right now. The problem is why aren't they used in every phone if they are great. RiM has it in the BB Storm for N. America but that same phone everywhere else only gets GSM/3GSM. Then there is the problem with the N. American version of the Storm still not working on N. American 3GSM networks as it only has the 2100MHz band. I'm guessing it's a combination of cost, size of baseband chip (including number of needed radios), and power usage that prevents this from being a one-size-fits-all model. When you look at the iPhone and how thin it is I can't imagine that being an option in any regard.
It's out and in phones right now. The problem is why aren't they used in every phone if they are great. RiM has it in the BB Storm for N. America but that same phone everywhere else only gets GSM/3GSM. Then there is the problem with the N. American version of the Storm still not working on N. American 3GSM networks as it only has the 2100MHz band. I'm guessing it's a combination of cost, size of baseband chip (including number of needed radios), and power usage that prevents this from being a one-size-fits-all model. When you look at the iPhone and how thin it is I can't imagine that being an option in any regard.
That's one chip in many. Sorry, but this "excuse" of GSM, is that... and excuse. That's like saying that after Pentium 1, there's nothing after that. It's an evolution.
If Apple really wants to double their hardware sales long term, they will eventually HAVE to look at a carrier outside of AT&T. Eventually, Apple will run out of "new subscribers" and/or switchers.
Regardless, the crux of my issue really has nothing to do with VZW or AT&T. My issue is why there are so many pro-AT&T folks that just can't see Apple going with another carrier, let alone VZW. It makes absolutely no sense to me.
AT&T is not Apple guys! Really, they're not! They're TWO DIFFERENT COMPANIES!
w00master
I mean if they're right all the time why aren't they just trading stocks and options on their ideas an worth a gazillion dollars?
No one but Apple knows what they have up their sleeve...
That's one chip in many.
I can't think how any of them could make a world-mode baseband chip and all the radio chips that are smaller than just a GSM-based on CDMA-based phone. Even if the cost, power, etc. is the same or better the size will bigger. I'd expect a separate CDMA-based version before I expect a world-mode option as the only option.
Maybe that "leak" of a taller iPhone by 6.3mm is for a separate worldmode version for a CDMA carrier o be sold alongside the GSM-based version.
Regardless, the crux of my issue really has nothing to do with VZW or AT&T. My issue is why there are so many pro-AT&T folks that just can't see Apple going with another carrier, let alone VZW. It makes absolutely no sense to me.
I'd like to see another carrier come on board, especially Verizon. My stock will skyrocket, iPhone users will jump from AT&T to Verizon giving me more bandwidth, and people will stop bitching at it. However, I don't think that will happen. If it does I think we'll get a heads up. Maybe in March when they introduce the iPhone OS 4.0 SDK and demo like they've been doing for the last two years.
Those analysts should have just asked me. I've said all along that Apple won't be on Verizon until they have very good 4G coverage. CDMA is near end-of-life.
You guys got that? Good, so shut up with your idiotic speculation and start using your brain.
"idiotic speculation" would be suggesting that a technology that is currently in widespread use by over 100 million mobile phone subscribers in the USA with an excellent 3G coverage footprint is going to be "end of life" after Verizon puts up a couple dozen 4G towers...
Regardless, the crux of my issue really has nothing to do with VZW or AT&T. My issue is why there are so many pro-AT&T folks that just can't see Apple going with another carrier, let alone VZW. It makes absolutely no sense to me.
w00master
It's because Verizon is a bag of sleaze. Apple will never partner with them with their current mgmt/ corporate sleaze.
Those analysts should have just asked me. I've said all along that Apple won't be on Verizon until they have very good 4G coverage. CDMA is near end-of-life.
You guys got that? Good, so shut up with your idiotic speculation and start using your brain.
It won't stop, but yes you're right it has been common sense since the iPhone announcement in 2007.
Well duh!
The only people who didn't see this coming are the Verizon fanbois...
The only reason I am a "fan boi" is AT&T coverage totally BLOWS here. My wife has an iPhone and she CONSTANTLY asks for my v phone to make a phone call.
She is happy as a lark when she actually HAS coverage. Meanwhile at our house she is lucky to get a call while our mobile broadband from Verizon hums merrily along.
Every time I see those stupid AT&T commercials that say "our maps are smaller but it is better" I want to thrown something.
However, I agree with the feeling that the Iphone isn't making its way to Verizon until they no longer depend on a CDMA network. Unfortunately its going to take a couple years at least, oh well I'm happy Verizon has made great strides to provide very good options despite not having the Iphone.
If these analysts are so sharp, why are they working as analysts?
I mean if they're right all the time why aren't they just trading stocks and options on their ideas an worth a gazillion dollars?
No one but Apple knows what they have up their sleeve...
One of the best posts overs. Sure people have said roughly the same thing but not with such poetic brevity. Cheers.
Android is proving to be a strong competitor to the iPhone and is predicted to overtake it in a few years.
Yup, those predictions were off. And now the iPad presents it's own issues and momentum.
Yes, it does suck to be Verizon!
Yup, those predictions were off. And now the iPad presents it's own issues and momentum.
Yes, it does suck to be Verizon!
How so?
With Android having more momentum per day, I don't think Verizon is in a bad position here at all. In my town with really abysmal, almost non-existant AT&T coverage, where almost every other provider has 3G (even T-Mobile is getting it soon!), why should Apple think "Hey, this is a great idea to stick with AT&T?" Multi-carrier is the way to go, and if they aren't going to open it up to VZW, at least try opening it up to the other major GSM carrier in the US.
Funny part is, if T-Mobile got the iPhone, I bet a good number of you would be jumping to them.