Which is probably when I'll buy my next iPhone after my 2007 iPhone on T-Mobile finally gives out after putting in 4 years of faithful service (I got it in March 2008)
This is a no-brainer to me for Apple. They are thinking on a global scale, not just the US. Apple won't have to make a new phone, and can make it available to double the amount of US customers that it serves now. While it's impact in the US will be marginal, they can roll this out this year, and then add verizon when it transitions into 4G networks.
According to this article - linked from your previous web-link - T-Mobile only has 33.7M Subscribers in the USA, not 150 like you state, which is the global number.
What are you thanking him for? You should thank Steve Jobs. In a few days Apple will sell millions of iPhone 4 handsets and ATT will sell millions of 2 year contracts. Your stocks are safe. You "win."
And the rest of us will be stuck with Verizon's awful network. So we win too.
They may be just two countries that support CDMA, but Apple is a US company and I believe the US has more CDMA users than any other single country.
CDMA might be a huge network in the USA, globally GSM has them beat hands down. China alone has more subscribers than any single country:
China Mobile: 539M(illion)
China Unicom: 147M
with a total of around 747M subscribers, with only 65M subscribers on CDMA.
I'd say that beats the snot out of USA numbers. They also have a population of more than 1.3B(illion) people too, the most populous contry in the world. 55% of the country owns a cell phone. And that's just China alone!
Forth of all, when I was stranded, a good Samaritan stopped and let me borrow his Verizon phone to call the AAA club and guess what? It worked just fine. So Verizon has some kinda trick when it comes to making phone calls on a cell phone that ATT needs to learn.
whether you can make a call depends on proximity to an applicable cell tower and the current density of use.
you were in an area with no nearby ATT tower and/or a lot of folks using it. whereas there was a Verizon tower nearby and fairly quiet at the time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
The question isn't which is the easiest and cheapest to support, the question is why haven't they supported it yet? Apple will sometimes add HW that they don't advertise for whatever reason. I suppose it's possible the iPhone 4 has a fifth UMTS band to support 1700MHz but it's simply not listed because they are bound to AT&T until a certain date. We'll know by the 25th when iFixit does a teardown.
It is unlikely that they have such a band because that would encourage unlocking since now it is possible to have T-Mobile 3g and not be stuck on edge if you unlock.
We won't see anything that supports T-Mobile until the contracts (which court docs proved are until 2012) are up.
And those contracts were likely for the phone not 'GSM based phones' so no Apple won't make a separate CDMA phone for the US to get around it. And likely not anywhere since the lack of a CDMA phone for the Asian Market and an CDMA ipad is a strong sign of their dislike of the tech.
It looks like Apple is using the X-GOLD 616 - PMB 9801 in the iPhone 4. The X-GOLD 616 supports up to five HSPA bands.
These are the 3 chips used in the iPad and 3G iPhones. TriQuint Power Amps: TQM616035 (UMTS Bands V&VI = Frequency Band 850MHz & 800MHz?), TQM666032B, and TQM676031A.
PS: For comparison,the iPad 3G is using the same X-Gold 608 found in older iPhones that support 3G which means they don't support HSUPA so they only have an upload max speed of 384kbps.
[QUOTE=charlituna;1649986]whether you can make a call depends on proximity to an applicable cell tower and the current density of use. you were in an area with no nearby ATT tower and/or a lot of folks using it. whereas there was a Verizon tower nearby and fairly quiet at the time. QUOTE=solipsism;1649893]
I don't think a lot of people were chatting on ATT's network at that time of the morning, so let's go with the lack of towers theory.
Ramsey New Jersey is where the incident occurred. And yes, there is little or no service there to this day. There wasn't any service there ten years ago either when the iPhone didn't exist. Why not? North Jersey is one of the most densely populated areas in the country. Why is ATT not interested in this region? Why is there coverage just down the road in either direction? Why is ATT coverage so spotty?
Verizon's coverage is solid throughout North Jersey. Why?
And I'm not just talking about data, 3G or edge. I'm talking about phone calls. How long has ATT been in business? Shouldn't they have phone service figured out by now? Is not ATT a descendent of American Telephone and Telegraph? A company that was around a hundred years ago?
There is no excuse. If you have good coverage and you're happy with your service, then bless you, you got lucky. Enjoy it. But please don't defend them.
Point being, CDMA isn't that huge and was a very wise decision by Apple to support this network.
In comparison to GSM it doesn't look big, but in it's a very huge market that could eventually be tapped. Especially in the US where the iPhone would sell very well and the stock would increase so fas that it would leave Exxon in the dust.
I'm not questioning whether I think Verizon will come or not, I'm questioning the comments that say it's not financially viable for Apple to create a CDMA iPhone. I'd also like a TD-SCDMA iPhone but I bet there would be more subscribers buying an iPhone on Verizon's with their piddly 100M subs than on China Mobile's TD-SCDMA with a staggering 550M subs.
We don't know what the contracts are to date, but it seems obvious to me that T-Mobile USA would be the easiest and cheapest add for the number of subscribers so if they aren't getting it then Verizon or Sprint isn't getting.
T-Mobile would get the iPhone before Verizon? Just because they use the same protocols as AT&T and dozens of other carriers around the world that sell the iPhone? Are you sure you want to go out on a limb with a prediction like that?
Nah, you're not seeing the big picture.
T-Mobile subsidiaries are already official iPhone carriers in something like eight European countries. All Apple has to do is include the 1700MHz AWS band for T-Mobile USA's 3G data service.
Note that T-Mobile USA is already quite happy to have jailbroken iPhones on their GSM (voice) and EDGE (2.5G) networks.
Why is ATT not interested in this region? Why is there coverage just down the road in either direction? Why is ATT coverage so spotty?
Verizon's coverage is solid throughout North Jersey. Why?
And I'm not just talking about data, 3G or edge. I'm talking about phone calls. How long has ATT been in business? Shouldn't they have phone service figured out by now? Is not ATT a descendent of American Telephone and Telegraph? A company that was around a hundred years ago?
Your questions are very loaded. For starters there are business reasons that fall under priorities. Supporting, say, a rural area is less important than supporting, say, a congested metropolis. Then there are frequencies and radio technologies that make one work better in one area over another. Then there are logistical issues, like an inability to put up the towers you so desperately need.
Quote:
There is no excuse. If you have good coverage and you're happy with your service, then bless you, you got lucky. Enjoy it. But please don't defend them.
Not knowing an answer doesn't mean there isn't one. It also doesn't mean that AT&T can't be blamed for being lazy, cheap and/or incompetent, but you first need to establish a sound answer not make a wild claim based on comparing to disparate cellular technologies in your area.
Not knowing an answer doesn't mean there isn't one. It also doesn't mean that AT&T can't be blamed for being lazy, cheap and/or incompetent, but you first need to establish a sound answer not make a wild claim based on comparing to disparate cellular technologies in your area.
Establish a sound answer? How am I supposed to do that? Climb up on a telephone pole and start rooting around? I have a job to go to and a back yard that needs to be cut and laundry to be washed. I don't have time to study the intricacies of cell phone networks.
I don't know how a car works either, but I do expect it to take me all the way to work without dying.
The only reason I have time to be on this forum is because I am on vacation this week. And rather than go to a nice warm island, I am here trying to put the values of a customer over corporate greed, which is the real reason for ATT's exclusivity.
Now if you will excuse me, I'm going to the doctor to have my head examined.
"Vertical integration." As often as I hear it, I still hate this term. It means virtually nothing to me. (I know what is supposed to mean, it is just so cold and vague.)
According to this article - linked from your previous web-link - T-Mobile only has 33.7M Subscribers in the USA, not 150 like you state, which is the global number.
PatsFan83 did not say there were 150 million T-Mobile subscribers in the US. Just that T-Mobile has 150 millions subscribers (which happens to be worldwide).
And the iPhone is already (and has been) on T-Mobile in Germany.
I have been a T-mobile subscriber since they were Voicestream and they have great customer service and great prices. However, their 3G network is slow and not very reliable. My partner has an iPhone on AT&T here and he often has a signal when I do not. Hopefully if T-moble gets the iPhone, T-mobile will allow it to run on their wi-fi network as this is a HUGE benefit for when I have no 3G signal.
I am not saying I support AT&T, however, I am curious if anyone really knows what would happen if we moved traffic off AT&T's network and put it on any other network. I am under the belief that the iPhone has grown the need for broadband considerably and anyones network would suffer the same or worse.
Bottom line is there would be network problems and likely more severe network problems with any carrier under the same circumstances.
I am thinking we are expecting everything to be perfect when it is clear that wireless networking and peripherals are being improved and made more reliable as time goes on.
Comments
This ever so important observation is relevant to the way Apple are thinking about which network they will add next.
After AT&T contract expires in 2012.
Which is probably when I'll buy my next iPhone after my 2007 iPhone on T-Mobile finally gives out after putting in 4 years of faithful service
This is a no-brainer to me for Apple. They are thinking on a global scale, not just the US. Apple won't have to make a new phone, and can make it available to double the amount of US customers that it serves now. While it's impact in the US will be marginal, they can roll this out this year, and then add verizon when it transitions into 4G networks.
T-Mobile 150 million subscribers
Verizon 93 million
ATT 87 million
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...work_operators
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...#United_States
According to this article - linked from your previous web-link - T-Mobile only has 33.7M Subscribers in the USA, not 150 like you state, which is the global number.
Also, according to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verizon_Wireless, Verizon has 104.8M subscribers.
If anyone is intersted, sprint has 48.1M subscribers, the 4th of the big 4 mobile companies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprint_Nextel_Corporation
However, both are Wiki articles and the sources need to be checked.
thank you!!
What are you thanking him for? You should thank Steve Jobs. In a few days Apple will sell millions of iPhone 4 handsets and ATT will sell millions of 2 year contracts. Your stocks are safe. You "win."
And the rest of us will be stuck with Verizon's awful network. So we win too.
Engadget says "First, a factoid: America and Canada are just two of an extremely small group of nations that support CDMA."
This ever so important observation is relevant to the way Apple are thinking about which network they will add next.
They may be just two countries that support CDMA, but Apple is a US company and I believe the US has more CDMA users than any other single country.
They may be just two countries that support CDMA, but Apple is a US company and I believe the US has more CDMA users than any other single country.
But what they want is more users outright and as fast as possible... CDMA users in themselves aren't the goal.
No duh. I've been saying that for years iPhone will come to T-Mobile first, thanks for catching up with me, Shaw Wu.
I know. I knew it as a 'duh Wu' the moment I saw the headline.
They may be just two countries that support CDMA, but Apple is a US company and I believe the US has more CDMA users than any other single country.
CDMA might be a huge network in the USA, globally GSM has them beat hands down. China alone has more subscribers than any single country:
China Mobile: 539M(illion)
China Unicom: 147M
with a total of around 747M subscribers, with only 65M subscribers on CDMA.
I'd say that beats the snot out of USA numbers. They also have a population of more than 1.3B(illion) people too, the most populous contry in the world. 55% of the country owns a cell phone. And that's just China alone!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...c_region#China
Now, India, the second most populous country (i think) has 584M(illion) subscribers on about 10 networks...ALL GSM! well, except for about 68M.
Point being, CDMA isn't that huge and was a very wise decision by Apple to support this network.
Forth of all, when I was stranded, a good Samaritan stopped and let me borrow his Verizon phone to call the AAA club and guess what? It worked just fine. So Verizon has some kinda trick when it comes to making phone calls on a cell phone that ATT needs to learn.
whether you can make a call depends on proximity to an applicable cell tower and the current density of use.
you were in an area with no nearby ATT tower and/or a lot of folks using it. whereas there was a Verizon tower nearby and fairly quiet at the time.
The question isn't which is the easiest and cheapest to support, the question is why haven't they supported it yet? Apple will sometimes add HW that they don't advertise for whatever reason. I suppose it's possible the iPhone 4 has a fifth UMTS band to support 1700MHz but it's simply not listed because they are bound to AT&T until a certain date. We'll know by the 25th when iFixit does a teardown.
It is unlikely that they have such a band because that would encourage unlocking since now it is possible to have T-Mobile 3g and not be stuck on edge if you unlock.
We won't see anything that supports T-Mobile until the contracts (which court docs proved are until 2012) are up.
And those contracts were likely for the phone not 'GSM based phones' so no Apple won't make a separate CDMA phone for the US to get around it. And likely not anywhere since the lack of a CDMA phone for the Asian Market and an CDMA ipad is a strong sign of their dislike of the tech.
These are the 3 chips used in the iPad and 3G iPhones. TriQuint Power Amps: TQM616035 (UMTS Bands V&VI = Frequency Band 850MHz & 800MHz?), TQM666032B, and TQM676031A.
PS: For comparison,the iPad 3G is using the same X-Gold 608 found in older iPhones that support 3G which means they don't support HSUPA so they only have an upload max speed of 384kbps.
I don't think a lot of people were chatting on ATT's network at that time of the morning, so let's go with the lack of towers theory.
Ramsey New Jersey is where the incident occurred. And yes, there is little or no service there to this day. There wasn't any service there ten years ago either when the iPhone didn't exist. Why not? North Jersey is one of the most densely populated areas in the country. Why is ATT not interested in this region? Why is there coverage just down the road in either direction? Why is ATT coverage so spotty?
Verizon's coverage is solid throughout North Jersey. Why?
And I'm not just talking about data, 3G or edge. I'm talking about phone calls. How long has ATT been in business? Shouldn't they have phone service figured out by now? Is not ATT a descendent of American Telephone and Telegraph? A company that was around a hundred years ago?
There is no excuse. If you have good coverage and you're happy with your service, then bless you, you got lucky. Enjoy it. But please don't defend them.
Point being, CDMA isn't that huge and was a very wise decision by Apple to support this network.
In comparison to GSM it doesn't look big, but in it's a very huge market that could eventually be tapped. Especially in the US where the iPhone would sell very well and the stock would increase so fas that it would leave Exxon in the dust.
I'm not questioning whether I think Verizon will come or not, I'm questioning the comments that say it's not financially viable for Apple to create a CDMA iPhone. I'd also like a TD-SCDMA iPhone but I bet there would be more subscribers buying an iPhone on Verizon's with their piddly 100M subs than on China Mobile's TD-SCDMA with a staggering 550M subs.
We don't know what the contracts are to date, but it seems obvious to me that T-Mobile USA would be the easiest and cheapest add for the number of subscribers so if they aren't getting it then Verizon or Sprint isn't getting.
T-Mobile would get the iPhone before Verizon? Just because they use the same protocols as AT&T and dozens of other carriers around the world that sell the iPhone? Are you sure you want to go out on a limb with a prediction like that?
Nah, you're not seeing the big picture.
T-Mobile subsidiaries are already official iPhone carriers in something like eight European countries. All Apple has to do is include the 1700MHz AWS band for T-Mobile USA's 3G data service.
Note that T-Mobile USA is already quite happy to have jailbroken iPhones on their GSM (voice) and EDGE (2.5G) networks.
Why is ATT not interested in this region? Why is there coverage just down the road in either direction? Why is ATT coverage so spotty?
Verizon's coverage is solid throughout North Jersey. Why?
And I'm not just talking about data, 3G or edge. I'm talking about phone calls. How long has ATT been in business? Shouldn't they have phone service figured out by now? Is not ATT a descendent of American Telephone and Telegraph? A company that was around a hundred years ago?
Your questions are very loaded. For starters there are business reasons that fall under priorities. Supporting, say, a rural area is less important than supporting, say, a congested metropolis. Then there are frequencies and radio technologies that make one work better in one area over another. Then there are logistical issues, like an inability to put up the towers you so desperately need.
There is no excuse. If you have good coverage and you're happy with your service, then bless you, you got lucky. Enjoy it. But please don't defend them.
Not knowing an answer doesn't mean there isn't one. It also doesn't mean that AT&T can't be blamed for being lazy, cheap and/or incompetent, but you first need to establish a sound answer not make a wild claim based on comparing to disparate cellular technologies in your area.
Not knowing an answer doesn't mean there isn't one. It also doesn't mean that AT&T can't be blamed for being lazy, cheap and/or incompetent, but you first need to establish a sound answer not make a wild claim based on comparing to disparate cellular technologies in your area.
Establish a sound answer? How am I supposed to do that? Climb up on a telephone pole and start rooting around? I have a job to go to and a back yard that needs to be cut and laundry to be washed. I don't have time to study the intricacies of cell phone networks.
I don't know how a car works either, but I do expect it to take me all the way to work without dying.
The only reason I have time to be on this forum is because I am on vacation this week. And rather than go to a nice warm island, I am here trying to put the values of a customer over corporate greed, which is the real reason for ATT's exclusivity.
Now if you will excuse me, I'm going to the doctor to have my head examined.
Establish a sound answer? How am I supposed to do that?
You're not, that's why you and I can only have theories and why we can't say as an absolute statement "there is no excuse."
According to this article - linked from your previous web-link - T-Mobile only has 33.7M Subscribers in the USA, not 150 like you state, which is the global number.
PatsFan83 did not say there were 150 million T-Mobile subscribers in the US. Just that T-Mobile has 150 millions subscribers (which happens to be worldwide).
And the iPhone is already (and has been) on T-Mobile in Germany.
Bottom line is there would be network problems and likely more severe network problems with any carrier under the same circumstances.
I am thinking we are expecting everything to be perfect when it is clear that wireless networking and peripherals are being improved and made more reliable as time goes on.
Can anyone quantify this?