PDA

View Full Version : Verizon Claims Network Ready for iPhone Should Apple Choose to Strike Deal




Pages : [1] 2

MacRumors
Dec 18, 2009, 03:06 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/12/18/verizon-claims-network-ready-for-iphone-should-apple-choose-to-strike-deal/)

A BusinessWeek report (http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/dec2009/tc20091217_788391.htm) from last night has received significant attention today for its focus on Verizon's claimed readiness should the company and Apple strike a deal to bring the iPhone to the largest U.S. wireless carrier next year.Verizon Wireless has even made upgrades that would make its network more capable of handling extra traffic that would be generated by the iPhone, Verizon Wireless Chief Technology Officer Anthony Melone says in an interview.

"We have put things in place already," Melone tells Bloomberg BusinessWeek. "We are prepared to support that traffic."Verizon has been seen by many customers disgruntled with AT&T's network performance as a likely partner for Apple once the iPhone maker's exclusivity agreement with AT&T expires.

The report notes that the iPhone has placed tremendous stress on AT&T's network, causing data traffic to explode by 5,000% over the past few years. Consequently, many have wondered whether any other U.S. mobile provider would have been able to meet the iPhone demand had they been able to offer the device. The BusinessWeek report points to a vague comment from Melone stating that Verizon has similarly seen growth of 1,000% per year, although recent comments (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2354549,00.asp) from Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg have pegged the growth at substantially closer to 100% per year. Still, Verizon remains confident that it will be able to provide a quality customer experience for iPhone users should the opportunity arise.

Article Link: Verizon Claims Network Ready for iPhone Should Apple Choose to Strike Deal (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/12/18/verizon-claims-network-ready-for-iphone-should-apple-choose-to-strike-deal/)



Unspeaked
Dec 18, 2009, 03:12 PM
What do you expect them to say?

"No, our network would totally fold under the pressure if we ever got an iPhone."

I'll believe it if/when I see it.

the-oz-man
Dec 18, 2009, 03:13 PM
What is this upgraded network that you speak of . . . ? Being an AT&T customer, I'm unfamiliar with this term.

Andronicus
Dec 18, 2009, 03:14 PM
I think it's a tounge in cheek jab at AT&T.

Xavier
Dec 18, 2009, 03:16 PM
I think it's a tounge in cheek jab at AT&T.

Agreed.

I would love to see the iPhone come to Verizon, but like stated above, will believe it when I see it.

velocityg4
Dec 18, 2009, 03:16 PM
I wonder what they mean by being able to handle the extra traffic?

To me that would mean being able to handle every current and projected iPhone customer being able to use maximum upload/download simultaneously. :D

gan6660
Dec 18, 2009, 03:16 PM
AT&T has a terrible network. Apple and Verizon would have both made tremendous amounts of money if they just tried harder to make a deal with each other in 2007.

adder7712
Dec 18, 2009, 03:16 PM
Upgraded? As in LTE?

thegoldenmackid
Dec 18, 2009, 03:17 PM
What do you expect them to say?

"No, our network would totally fold under the pressure if we ever got an iPhone."

I'll believe it if/when I see it.

I could see that...

Xavier
Dec 18, 2009, 03:19 PM
AT&T has a terrible network. Apple and Verizon would have both made tremendous amounts of money if they just tried harder to make a deal with each other in 2007.

Well, if they would have, we probably wouldn't have seen an iPhone that is as 'open' as it is today. The App store would definitely be different.

Grimace
Dec 18, 2009, 03:19 PM
Actually, AT&T's network isn't so bad (in terms of its infrastructure). It is gotten slammed by iPhone users more so than AT&T and Apple ever imagined. Projections were made for 3 years of exclusivity -- how could either have known that data would explode so much? The reality is that it is overburdened, but it isn't because it is shoddy.

Any carrier would have been slammed, and now Verizon looks like they want to say, "hey holiday customers, don't buy just yet..." ;)

darthraige
Dec 18, 2009, 03:20 PM
The end of AT&T is coming soon, and will be merging once again, only this time, with Verizon. I can see a merge happening in the future.

williej81
Dec 18, 2009, 03:23 PM
AT&T has a terrible network. Apple and Verizon would have both made tremendous amounts of money if they just tried harder to make a deal with each other in 2007.

I kind of thought Apple was already making a tremendous amount of money on the iPhone.

mike2q
Dec 18, 2009, 03:23 PM
Of course its a jab at AT&T. I've had AT&T and I'm back with Verizon. AT&T works fine in my home town but I travel a lot and Verizon works more places. Especially when I'm outside whatever city I'm in or on small highways.

Verizon has its problems and I miss my iPhone (I have the Moto Droid now) but in the end coverage is king. I need my email and my calls and I need them everywhere.

Verizon may very well have the capacity. Non-Euro standard Verizon may be but my understanding of CDMA is that the digital spread spectrum allows more users per tower than GSM.

ravenvii
Dec 18, 2009, 03:24 PM
The end of AT&T is coming soon, and will be merging once again, only this time, with Verizon. I can see a merge happening in the future.

I might be wrong (and god knows it'll probably happen anyway), but I doubt that the federal government would approve the merger of the largest cell phone company with the second largest (and it's not like the largest has 80% of the market while the second largest has 12% of the market, either).

schwell
Dec 18, 2009, 03:24 PM
Funny one Verizon guy says 100% growth in data per year the other says 1000%. They need to get their story straight.

gan6660
Dec 18, 2009, 03:25 PM
The end of AT&T is coming soon, and will be merging once again, only this time, with Verizon. I can see a merge happening in the future.


I dont see that happening. That would created too much of a monopoly and the FCC would not go for that. Now AT&t and Sprint I can see.

Also the AT&T network was terrible even before the iPhone.

Diseal3
Dec 18, 2009, 03:25 PM
The end of AT&T is coming soon, and will be merging once again, only this time, with Verizon. I can see a merge happening in the future.

Are you crazy? Do you remember the last time a a carrier with 2 TOTALLY different network infrastructures merged and how it went.. mhm.. sprint/nextel. Now sprint is trying to sell them off! This won't happen. The FCC would never allow it.

bastard
Dec 18, 2009, 03:26 PM
It's ubiquitous that the iPhone will appear on Verizon; especially with this post. Things are looking up.

Jayomat
Dec 18, 2009, 03:26 PM
Well, if they would have, we probably wouldn't have seen an iPhone that is as 'open' as it is today. The App store would definitely be different.

why is that? please elaborate?

JtheLemur
Dec 18, 2009, 03:27 PM
Could never use a phone that wouldn't allow me to use data + voice at the same time. Sure hope VZN is talking about their LTE infrastructure, not the existing CDMA kit.

2strokedude
Dec 18, 2009, 03:27 PM
Well, if they would have, we probably wouldn't have seen an iPhone that is as 'open' as it is today. The App store would definitely be different.

True

gan6660
Dec 18, 2009, 03:28 PM
I kind of thought Apple was already making a tremendous amount of money on the iPhone.

They are but verizon has many more customers than AT&T and more people would have probably switched from other networks.

Frisco
Dec 18, 2009, 03:29 PM
Would Visual Voice mail work on Verizon?

jav6454
Dec 18, 2009, 03:30 PM
Just smack talk by Verizon...

reallynotnick
Dec 18, 2009, 03:35 PM
How about we launch the iPhone on all 4 networks? Now no one would have anything to bitch about.

Personally I am holding out for either T-Mobile or Sprint because their prices are way better then ATT or Verizon.

goobot
Dec 18, 2009, 03:36 PM
most features wouldnt work on version network. its just version being pissy nothing more

goobot
Dec 18, 2009, 03:37 PM
How about we launch the iPhone on all 4 networks? Now no one would have anything to bitch about.

Personally I am holding out for either T-Mobile or Sprint because their prices are way better then ATT or Verizon.

unlock

Rocketman
Dec 18, 2009, 03:38 PM
Verizon will say whatever it can to leave the impression people could switch to them as a means to maintain mindshare. However in reality AT&T has an exclusive, that exclusive is valid through mid-2010 and possibly longer on the original device.

If there is a new form factor device, all bets are off, and if Apple wishes to make a "crippleware" phone for Verizon's dead-end version of 3G, that could happen too, but it will not be "the" iPhone.

The only area where Verizon has a slight edge over AT&T (note pun) is LTE. Verizon has more nodes deployed and tested than AT&T as of today, at least as far as public disclosures have indicated.

If the new device has LTE as one of the radio options, which I hope and believe to be the case, then it would be compatible with either AT&T or Verizon in the late 2010 to 2012 and beyond release timeframes.

The only problem there is LTE is not well deployed by either and they both publicly state 2012 for general LTE rollout on a widespread basis. The fallback on a new form factor device is 3G and 2.5G and wifi, so we have the Verizon style 3G dead end issue again. If the new device also has that protocol via the Qualcomm chip, then this rumor might make sense. But again only for the new device and only 2H2010 and beyond, and only if it is ALSO accessable on the AT&T network.

Desperate rumor or factual leak? Wanna bet?

Rocketman

VenusianSky
Dec 18, 2009, 03:39 PM
The end of AT&T is coming soon, and will be merging once again, only this time, with Verizon. I can see a merge happening in the future.

So the basis of your prediction is that a Verizon executive said their network is ready to handle the iPhone, a merger is imminent?

That would be like saying, the end of Apple is coming soon. Since the Apple computer is capable of running the Windows OS, Apple will soon merge with Microsoft and form one single dominant hardware/software company.

nsayer
Dec 18, 2009, 03:43 PM
This is absolutely concrete proof that the iPhone will not be coming to Verizon any time soon.

nsayer
Dec 18, 2009, 03:52 PM
Well, if they would have, we probably wouldn't have seen an iPhone that is as 'open' as it is today. The App store would definitely be different.

Nonsense. The store is the way it is because Steve wanted it that way. Verizon wasn't willing to be Steve's bitch and AT&T was. Simple as that.

Remember the ROKR? That's what happened the last time Steve wanted an Apple phone and caved into the desires of the network partner. Never again.

If AT&T had refused, then the next call would have been to T-Mobile or Sprint.

NoExpectations
Dec 18, 2009, 03:54 PM
Verizon isn't getting the iPhone for many years. So, there is no risk for them to say that "we are ready". This promise will never be tested. Verizon's network has never been stressed....and it won't be for a while.

Verizon's network (CDMA) is stuck at 1.4Mb. At least AT&T is at 3.2Mb now....going to 7.2Mb soon. Also, AT&T offers thousands of free wireless hotspots to offload their traffic.

Hey Verizon, will your network be ready to support concurrent voice and data access? :)

huntercr
Dec 18, 2009, 03:54 PM
I might be wrong (and god knows it'll probably happen anyway), but I doubt that the federal government would approve the merger of the largest cell phone company with the second largest (and it's not like the largest has 80% of the market while the second largest has 12% of the market, either).

Not to mention their cell technologies are completely incompatible. If anything, Verizon might buy Sprint ( since they use CDMA ).
AT&T could merge with t-mobile then I suppose.
I'd prefer to have competition, myself.

Either way, Apple has this in the bag. Verizon can beckon "come to the table with a good deal that benefits us" and Apple will say, "ok... we'll make a good deal with.... all the other phone companies.. sound good to you, Verizon?"

And then Verizon will sit in a corner and cry :)

nsayer
Dec 18, 2009, 03:56 PM
And then Verizon will sit in a corner and cry :)

They'd never give up as long as there are still lobbyists in D.C......

deegle
Dec 18, 2009, 04:03 PM
Please, if Verizon had relased its Kung Fu grip for just a second and actually worked with Apple to get the iPhone on its network (back in 2007) everyone would be slamming them now for having a crappy network. I had AT&T before the iPhone and I have the iPhone now. I also had Verizon before all of that. I never had much of an issue with either provider and I have travelled along the east and west coast. I like Verizon and I like AT&T but Verizon just doesn't have the same amount of data usage as AT&T does becasue they lost out on the iPhone to begin with. Naturally AT&T's network will be taxed. It's offering a phone that encourages lots of data usage. AT&T stepped up to the plate and hit a home run. Verizon (and some of its customers) are still crying foul ball. Let it go and be happy with the Droid. Please?

MacCheetah3
Dec 18, 2009, 04:06 PM
Hi
How about we launch the iPhone on all 4 networks? Now no one would have anything to bitch about.

Personally I am holding out for either T-Mobile or Sprint because their prices are way better then ATT or Verizon.
This is what I'm waiting for and would be good for all carriers, to some extent anyway. It would certainly help distribute the load and give superb coverage but yet each network would still gain $$$ by getting payments from usage of their cell towers. Basically, I can't wait when all cellular networks in the U.S. go LTE ( 4G ).

AidenShaw
Dec 18, 2009, 04:09 PM
To me that would mean being able to handle every current and projected iPhone customer being able to use maximum upload/download simultaneously. :D

Outside of small LANs or expensive supercomputer clusters, no network of any kind can handle that load. I have $100K 240-port Cisco GbE switches in my lab - and they're oversubscribed 8 to 1 (at any point in time only 1 in 8 ports can sustain full bandwidth). If I'd spent $600K, I could have bought a 200 port switch that would run 100%.

Conversely, if any carrier built a network that could run at 100%, you'd balk at paying the charges required for that investment.


Verizon's network (CDMA) is stuck at 1.4Mb. At least AT&T is at 3.2Mb now....going to 7.2Mb soon. Also, AT&T offers thousands of free wireless hotspots to offload their traffic...

Better to actually deliver 1.4 to your customers, than to promise a theoretical 7.2 and drop calls and fall back to EDGE.

powers74
Dec 18, 2009, 04:17 PM
should the company and Apple strike a deal to bring the iPhone to the largest U.S. wireless carrier next year.

Strike a deal? Like what kind of deal? Like everything the same except Verizon gets to push the iPhone in ads? Or... everything the same, except Verizon gets to charge for visual voicemail? Or.... everything the same except Verizon gets a cut of app revinue? Verizon is going to have to play ball by Apple's rules or there's no game. They are going to have to really change there attitude from a couple years ago if it's going to happen.

ArrowSmith
Dec 18, 2009, 04:17 PM
What's wrong with you people? Voice + data at the same time? Can't you just carry on a conversation w/o HAVING to text someone else at the same time? No wonder our society is deteriorating!

bbplayer5
Dec 18, 2009, 04:18 PM
Finally, a real carrier for this phone. Please release this...

Screw AT&T!!!

And the people claiming that Verizons network cant handle it? You are ridiculous and base that on 0 fact at all. Ive had nothing but an awesome experience with the droid, and am waiting for the iPhone to come to verizon finally!

ArrowSmith
Dec 18, 2009, 04:18 PM
Please, if Verizon had relased its Kung Fu grip for just a second and actually worked with Apple to get the iPhone on its network (back in 2007) everyone would be slamming them now for having a crappy network. I had AT&T before the iPhone and I have the iPhone now. I also had Verizon before all of that. I never had much of an issue with either provider and I have travelled along the east and west coast. I like Verizon and I like AT&T but Verizon just doesn't have the same amount of data usage as AT&T does becasue they lost out on the iPhone to begin with. Naturally AT&T's network will be taxed. It's offering a phone that encourages lots of data usage. AT&T stepped up to the plate and hit a home run. Verizon (and some of its customers) are still crying foul ball. Let it go and be happy with the Droid. Please?

Puh-leese. It's just that people are so ga-ga about the iPhone that they put up with crappy voice quality, dropped calls and slow text messaging. The Apple kool-aid is that strong.

SpinThis!
Dec 18, 2009, 04:19 PM
Verizon wasn't willing to be Steve's bitch and AT&T was. Simple as that.
It was Cingular actually. at&t was in the process of buying out Cingular shortly thereafter.

SleepyHead157
Dec 18, 2009, 04:19 PM
Until I see Verizon actually get the iPhone and handle the data usage, they shouldn't really say much. I recently moved from the iPhone to the HTC Hero on Sprint because of the costs of the data/text plans from AT&T under a 5-line family plan, but AT&T's problems are not because they're coverage is bad. For the most part, their coverage is great outside of major metropolitan cities, like NYC. Too bad, I live right smack in the middle of NYC. When I was away in school upstate, AT&T coverage was great. Once I came back to the city, they started having tons of dropped calls, not to mention degraded towers all over the city.

I would like to see Verizon get the iPhone though. Better options for the consumer and of course more money for the carriers and Apple.

Mousse
Dec 18, 2009, 04:20 PM
I would love to see the iPhone come to Verizon, but like stated above, will believe it when I see it.

I don't see that happen any time soon. Maybe after Jobs leaves Apple, but not a day earlier. I'm under the impression that SJ isn't the sort to forgive and forget. The There's a Map for That ad's, though mainly targeted at AT&T, has poked fun at Apple's iPhone ads as well. Jobs can't be too happy about that. And touting Droid as being superior to the iPhone in those Verizon ads gotta chaff as well.

xc runner
Dec 18, 2009, 04:21 PM
If apple was smart they should just have it unlocked the iphone and had it available for anyone. All products have life cycles, which we do not know how long they will last, but every product in a sense dies. They struck gold so why not run with it?

As for people that don't believe that the FCC wouldn't allow a monopoly, don't be completely sure. I bet at one point they'll allow it; we have natural monopolies already. As mobile phone increase in numbers and users I wouldn't be completely surprised if the government selected a company to become the monopoly in order to cover all Americans.

satcomer
Dec 18, 2009, 04:22 PM
I will believe it when I see it. Anything else is just rumor

bbplayer5
Dec 18, 2009, 04:26 PM
Verizon isn't getting the iPhone for many years. So, there is no risk for them to say that "we are ready". This promise will never be tested. Verizon's network has never been stressed....and it won't be for a while.

Verizon's network (CDMA) is stuck at 1.4Mb. At least AT&T is at 3.2Mb now....going to 7.2Mb soon. Also, AT&T offers thousands of free wireless hotspots to offload their traffic.

Hey Verizon, will your network be ready to support concurrent voice and data access? :)


My Droid speed test is always 2.2 mbs... iPhone 3GS 800k tops. Not sure where you get your data from.

powers74
Dec 18, 2009, 04:27 PM
Funny one Verizon guy says 100% growth in data per year the other says 1000%. They need to get their story straight.

100%, 1000%... $250,000, $150,000, $100,000... It's all the same...

Puh-leese. It's just that people are so ga-ga about the iPhone that they put up with crappy voice quality, dropped calls and slow text messaging. The Apple kool-aid is that strong.

Yes it is.

I will believe it when I see it. Anything else is just rumor

Yes it is.

FoxyKaye
Dec 18, 2009, 04:28 PM
Excellent!

Droid now, LTE iPhone in 2012. Should have never left Verizon...

AppleMojo
Dec 18, 2009, 04:30 PM
Would Visual Voice mail work on Verizon?

Besides the network infrastructure, in order to support Apple the carrier needs to add additional feature support.

I remember when the original iPhone was to be released the changes required for visual voicemail among other things was causing problems and delays.

As with anything... if Verizon did get a contract with Apple, I can't wait to see all of the "Verizon sucks" comments... cause that's just the way this forum rolls.

Stridder44
Dec 18, 2009, 04:31 PM
Competition = awesome. :D

bbplayer5
Dec 18, 2009, 04:31 PM
Verizon isn't getting the iPhone for many years. So, there is no risk for them to say that "we are ready". This promise will never be tested. Verizon's network has never been stressed....and it won't be for a while.

Verizon's network (CDMA) is stuck at 1.4Mb. At least AT&T is at 3.2Mb now....going to 7.2Mb soon. Also, AT&T offers thousands of free wireless hotspots to offload their traffic.

Hey Verizon, will your network be ready to support concurrent voice and data access? :)


My Droid speed test is always 2.2 mbs... iPhone 3GS 800k tops. Not sure where you get your data from. CDMA Rev A can top 3mps.

EMT123
Dec 18, 2009, 04:35 PM
The end of AT&T is coming soon, and will be merging once again, only this time, with Verizon. I can see a merge happening in the future.

Anti-trust laws would not allow that to happen.

SpinThis!
Dec 18, 2009, 04:40 PM
I don't see that happen any time soon. Maybe after Jobs leaves Apple, but not a day earlier. I'm under the impression that SJ isn't the sort to forgive and forget.

Anything is possible really. It wasn't too long ago Apple was burning Intel bunnies, now Apple gets special treatment from Intel.

The dealbreaker, as far as I know, is one of Apple's requirements years ago for the iPhone was control of service and support of the device and no carrier logos on the device, among other things. I'm not so sure Verizon is willing to do either. There might be a compromise but I can't see Apple allowing a VCast store app and icon on the iPhone anytime soon either.

Besides the network infrastructure, in order to support Apple the carrier needs to add additional feature support.
Verizon actually offers visual voicemail as an additional service. Not sure how it compares to the iPhone's but they do offer (http://wirelesssupport.verizon.com/features/calling_features/visual_voice_mail.html?t=3) some variant of it.

MizzouCowboy
Dec 18, 2009, 04:53 PM
This is the funniest thing I've read in a long time. Verizon's network would fold like a house of cheap cards under the weight of the iPhone.

bbplayer5
Dec 18, 2009, 04:54 PM
My guess is it will be on Verizon this year coming in July. The 3Gs was underwhelming for a reason. They didnt waste resources on a revolutionary phone when they knew their AT&T contract was up.

I cant wait for it to be on Verizon :)

xIGmanIx
Dec 18, 2009, 04:58 PM
all posturing. My issues with AT&T have been on non-iPhone related device, my work BB. It randomly shuts off and drops calls like it is its job. Not sure if verizon could have handled it and we will never know, but i think everyone expects 24/7 uptime/service on their smart phone.

scottness
Dec 18, 2009, 05:03 PM
Just another line in the game. Doesn't bring us closer to anything.

cleric
Dec 18, 2009, 05:05 PM
Would Visual Voice mail work on Verizon?
For $5/month it would work different ;-)

mattster16
Dec 18, 2009, 05:05 PM
What's wrong with you people? Voice + data at the same time? Can't you just carry on a conversation w/o HAVING to text someone else at the same time? No wonder our society is deteriorating!

Texting isn't data, you can text and talk at the same time on any network.

I use voice+data all the time. Some of us use our phones for things other than social interaction. It's not like I'm talking to my friends and surfing facebook. Sometimes I'll be on the phone with a co-worker or client while I'm on the road and need to look at an email or look something up pertinent to the conversation. It would suck to have to say "hold on I need to look at that email, let me call you back", hang up, look up the email, remember the information or jot it down and then call back. Hopefully something else doesn't come up in the conversation requiring you to hang up again to use data...

maturola
Dec 18, 2009, 05:06 PM
AT&T has a terrible network. Apple and Verizon would have both made tremendous amounts of money if they just tried harder to make a deal with each other in 2007.

Wrong, the technology for a hybrid phone was not available back them, Developing a CDMA phone for Half of the US market make no sense. Specially when that company is already working on phasing that technology out in favor of a 4G.

People always focus on US market when for apple that market is really a very small % of their iPhone revenue.

note: i don't disagree on the "At&t network sucks", but it was the right Business decision for Apple.

ruinfx
Dec 18, 2009, 05:19 PM
This is absolutely concrete proof that the iPhone will not be coming to Verizon any time soon.

agreed. no way they would make this statement if they already had a deal lined up for 2010.

Rocketman
Dec 18, 2009, 05:27 PM
Better to actually deliver 1.4 to your customers, than to promise a theoretical 7.2 and drop calls and fall back to EDGE.

Not if you are charging for 7.2 and funding the network build-out with customer money. Better for who? We ARE talking AT&T here. Say what you will about them, but they are forward leaning on capacity and future tech buildout.

Apple can't even deploy a "tablet" until the network exists. The newton was LONG before its time and the iPhone was years ahead of its time. LTE will facilitate some very interesting things indeed.

Are we there yet?

Rocketman

5000% total growth in 2.5 years and the network did not drop entirely to its knees? Hmmm. That's amazing.

bbplayer5
Dec 18, 2009, 05:28 PM
agreed. no way they would make this statement if they already had a deal lined up for 2010.

Is that a serious statement? How does that statement in any way, shape, or form mean its not coming?

Seems more like they are in talks already to me... if not a done deal. Why do you think Verizon changed the xmas toy commercial to "spotty 3G" from "good luck surfing the web with that thing".

Emphasis on network, not device. Verizon has superior coverage, and hopefully gets the iPhone.

Westside guy
Dec 18, 2009, 05:30 PM
Having been a Verizon customer once upon a time, I have to wonder what the iPhone experience will be like with them as your carrier. Given the silly and arbitrary restrictions Verizon seems to always place on their phones, I just can't see people being anything but incredibly disappointed.

(note that I'm a T-Mobile customer, not an AT&T customer)


Bluetooth transfers for pictures, files, ringtones, address book sync, etc. - as far as I know Verizon has always disabled most Bluetooth functionality in an attempt to sell people their for-fee equivalent services (this is why I left them in the first place). Has that changed?

Visual Voicemail - will Verizon allow and/or support it? Hard to see Verizon letting you pick and choose the messages you'll listen to. edit: Ah, just read some more. Of course they will offer it... for an additional fee. That's the Verizon Way.

Accessing 3G-based services during a phone call - will they let you do it with the iPhone, even though they supposedly don't allow it with Droid?

chomomo
Dec 18, 2009, 05:32 PM
Competition = awesome. :D


Maybe Verizon should strike a deal with Pystar to make cdma Iphones
:rolleyes:

bbplayer5
Dec 18, 2009, 05:38 PM
Having been a Verizon customer once upon a time, I have to wonder what the iPhone experience will be like with them as your carrier. Given the silly and arbitrary restrictions Verizon seems to always place on their phones, I just can't see people being anything but incredibly disappointed.

(note that I'm a T-Mobile customer, not an AT&T customer)


Bluetooth transfers for pictures, files, ringtones, address book sync, etc. - as far as I know Verizon has always disabled most Bluetooth functionality in an attempt to sell people their for-fee equivalent services (this is why I left them in the first place). Has that changed?

Visual Voicemail - will Verizon allow and/or support it? Hard to see Verizon letting you pick and choose the messages you'll listen to. edit: Ah, just read some more. Of course they will offer it... for an additional fee. That's the Verizon Way.

Accessing 3G-based services during a phone call - will they let you do it with the iPhone, even though they supposedly don't allow it with Droid?



Ill speak on the Droids behalf for these

- Google on the Droid is basically like Mobile Me for iPhone... All contacts synced all the time, calendars, settings, etc. And... FREE.

- Visual voicemail is on the phone but Verizon charges 2.99 for it. Thats why most of us use Google Voice for visual voicemail which is again.. FREE.

- No, you cant access 3G while on a call with the droid unless you are on wifi. And Ive never really wanted to do this anyway so I dont care about it. Id rather have a network that works for calls (since its a phone first and foremost) than a network where I can multitask pointlessly. Not to mention... a lot of the time on my 3Gs, I cant surf the web while in a call. The network is unable to connect.

phineas
Dec 18, 2009, 05:40 PM
Just smack talk by Verizon...


If its smack talk than prove to the MacRumors community that its smack talk


Iphone + Verizon = Should be such a pleasure as long as the pricing structure remains the same.

alexhasfun28
Dec 18, 2009, 05:41 PM
I believe iPhone is no where close to Verizon WIreless. And I don't see AT&T's contract expiring(which I really hope so.) No to Verizon, Just because the anti-iPhone ads going on, the v-cast,. Etc. It's just pure jealousy of Verizon.
I see more potential in Sprint or T-Mobile. And that's easy potential right there.
Apple is smarter than this, they know they wouldn't want a company that likes to be naughty and be "un-business like."
Yeah, I know it's competition, but then it's also Karma!
Think different..
:apple:

bbplayer5
Dec 18, 2009, 05:44 PM
I believe iPhone is no where close to Verizon WIreless. And I don't see AT&T's contract expiring(which I really hope so.) No to Verizon, Just because the anti-iPhone ads going on, the v-cast,. Etc. It's just pure jealousy of Verizon.
I see more potential in Sprint or T-Mobile. And that's easy potential right there.
Apple is smarter than this, they know they wouldn't want a company that likes to be naughty and be "un-business like."
Yeah, I know it's competition, but then it's also Karma!
Think different..
:apple:

Apple is smarter than what?! Verizon is a HUGE company, and the potential customers are endless. Why in gods name would they release it on t-mobile and sprint?! Sprint btw... is CDMA, so if they make it for them, they will most likely make it for Verizon.

ChazUK
Dec 18, 2009, 05:52 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android Eclair; en-gb Build/ECLAIR) AppleWebKit/530.17 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/530.17)

I've gotta admit, looking in from the outside, this ATT vs Verizon ad campaign has been fascinating.

I wilk say that for a phone that Verizon have publicly mocked in an ad, they seem to be focusing on it a bit now...

adder7712
Dec 18, 2009, 05:54 PM
Verizon may very well have the capacity. Non-Euro standard Verizon may be but my understanding of CDMA is that the digital spread spectrum allows more users per tower than GSM. If I'm not mistaken, GSM/UMTS are digital.

jaw04005
Dec 18, 2009, 06:05 PM
Well, I guess I have no reason to bitch at AT&T anymore. Whether it was coincidence or not, I’ve been hounding AT&T’s “Mark the Spot” iPhone app with dropped call and data failure (from inside my home) reports everyday since it debuted.

As of Monday this week, I went from one to three bars INSIDE my house (with horrible call quality and many dropped calls) and around 100-150 kbit/s of 3G data to five full bars constantly INSIDE my house with 1700 kbit/s of 3G data consistently (according to SpeedTest’s iPhone app).

That’s faster than a lot of people’s DSL and cable Internet.

Verizon will get the iPhone eventually. At this point, I think Apple will likely wait until LTE is deployed, but they may offer them a CDMA version since they apparently produce a special iPhone model just for China.

huntercr
Dec 18, 2009, 06:06 PM
They'd never give up as long as there are still lobbyists in D.C......

What would they lobby? Apple refusing to let them sell the iPhone?

Of course this would never happen because Verizon will cave and welcome them with a very nice offer. Apple will wait until they have a network that can handle phone + data at the same time though.

Maserati7200
Dec 18, 2009, 06:07 PM
I believe iPhone is no where close to Verizon WIreless. And I don't see AT&T's contract expiring(which I really hope so.) No to Verizon, Just because the anti-iPhone ads going on, the v-cast,. Etc. It's just pure jealousy of Verizon.
:apple:
Well, according to to you, the Mac vs. PC commercials are also pure jealousy. Pointing out your competitor's flaws isn't jealousy, it's competition.

bbplayer5
Dec 18, 2009, 06:07 PM
Well, I guess I have no reason to bitch at AT&T anymore. Whether it was coincidence or not, I’ve pretty been hounding AT&T’s “Mark the Spot” iPhone app with dropped call and data failure (from inside my home) reports everyday since it debuted.

As of Monday this week, I went from one to three bars INSIDE my house (with horrible call quality and many dropped calls) and around 100-150 kbit/s of 3G data to five full bars constantly INSIDE my house with 1700 kbit/s of 3G data consistently (according to SpeedTest’s iPhone app).

That’s faster than a lot of people’s DSL and cable Internet.


Ive gotten close to twice that speed on verizon.

NoExpectations
Dec 18, 2009, 06:11 PM
My Droid speed test is always 2.2 mbs...

Not sure how you can get 2.2Mb....I thought that the theoretical limit on Verizon's CDMA is 1.4Mb. Were you on wifi?

It all depends on where you are at. Root Wireless, a new, independent network performance monitoring company not affiliated with any Wireless Carrier, just released data comparing wireless carriers in several markets including New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Chicago. The data showed AT&T's 3G network outpaced Verizon's, producing far fewer peaks and valleys in network capacity and much greater data speeds.

http://www.rootwireless.com/

bbplayer5
Dec 18, 2009, 06:11 PM
Not sure how you can get 2.2Mb....I thought that the theoretical limit on Verizon's CDMA is 1.4Mb. Were you on wifi?

It all depends on where you are at. Root Wireless, a new, independent network performance monitoring company not affiliated with any Wireless Carrier, just released data comparing wireless carriers in several markets including New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Chicago. The data showed AT&T's 3G network outpaced Verizon's, producing far fewer peaks and valleys in network capacity and much greater data speeds.

http://www.rootwireless.com/

CDMA Rev A has a max around 3.4 mbs. I always score around 2.1 to 2.4 in the Allentown PA area on Verizon, 800k max on the 3Gs.

Xibalba
Dec 18, 2009, 06:12 PM
What do you expect them to say?

"No, our network would totally fold under the pressure if we ever got an iPhone."

I'll believe it if/when I see it.

my thoughts exactly.

i would welcome the opportunity for a Verizon iPhone - it's an incredible piece of hardware and that would end the whining of Verizon folks not wanting to make the switch to AT&T...

str1f3
Dec 18, 2009, 06:13 PM
Ill speak on the Droids behalf for these

- Google on the Droid is basically like Mobile Me for iPhone... All contacts synced all the time, calendars, settings, etc. And... FREE.

- Visual voicemail is on the phone but Verizon charges 2.99 for it. Thats why most of us use Google Voice for visual voicemail which is again.. FREE.

- No, you cant access 3G while on a call with the droid unless you are on wifi. And Ive never really wanted to do this anyway so I dont care about it. Id rather have a network that works for calls (since its a phone first and foremost) than a network where I can multitask pointlessly. Not to mention... a lot of the time on my 3Gs, I cant surf the web while in a call. The network is unable to connect.


While very nice I'll say this:

While it may be MobileMe for free, MobileMe doesn't go through your emails & etc to provide you ads. MobileMe has a better UI (though less features such as keyboard shortcuts and sharing options) and is ad-free.

I will say GV is nice but as always there is privacy concerns with Google and they don't get near the heat as Facebook when it comes to this.

As for voice and data, many people including myself, use this feature. If the iPhone is offered on Verizon in the next revision it'll be a factor in weighing my decision to switch. Just look at the the Apple ads and ask yourself if you would ever be in that position.

I'll consider switching but this is just rumor-mongering and is nothing close to concrete.

str1f3
Dec 18, 2009, 06:22 PM
CDMA Rev A has a max around 3.4 mbs. I always score around 2.1 to 2.4 in the Allentown PA area on Verizon, 800k max on the 3Gs.

You must be right next to a tower or something because:


http://www.evdoinfo.com/content/view/37/61/



EVDO, or Evolution Data Only/Evolution Data Optimized, is a 3G mobile broadband technology used by Verizon, Sprint, and Alltel that provides typical speeds of 600-1400kbps download (with bursts up to 2000kbps) and 500-800kbps upload completely wirelessly.

alexhasfun28
Dec 18, 2009, 06:26 PM
Well, according to to you, the Mac vs. PC commercials are also pure jealousy. Pointing out your competitor's flaws isn't jealousy, it's competition.

Mac vs. PC are two completely different subjects. That's Company vs. Company.
AT&T vs Verizon is Carrier+Network+Speed+ etc.
Those two are wayyyyy too different.
:apple:

jaw04005
Dec 18, 2009, 06:27 PM
Google on the Droid is basically like Mobile Me for iPhone... All contacts synced all the time, calendars, settings, etc. And… FREE.

What’s your point? Google offers all of that on the iPhone for free also via the iPhone’s built-in Microsoft ActiveSync/Exchange protocol.

alexhasfun28
Dec 18, 2009, 06:32 PM
Apple is smarter than what?! Verizon is a HUGE company, and the potential customers are endless. Why in gods name would they release it on t-mobile and sprint?! Sprint btw... is CDMA, so if they make it for them, they will most likely make it for Verizon.

Smarter to make better choices at carriers by now. By what's good and not good.(It's in the comment, obviously.)
&Why?
Because both companys have better rate plans for consumers, both are better for an iPhone, and good coverage. Yeah i know Sprint is CDMA. Duh? Everybody has known that for a while man.

btw: i think someones on the Verizon network.

Can you hear me now?

str1f3
Dec 18, 2009, 06:39 PM
Apple is smarter than what?! Verizon is a HUGE company, and the potential customers are endless. Why in gods name would they release it on t-mobile and sprint?! Sprint btw... is CDMA, so if they make it for them, they will most likely make it for Verizon.

Saw this in a reply and had to comment. Verizon is not a large company. They are OWNED by a LARGE company. They would release on T-Mobile because it is already GSM. It would take little adjustment. It's a different story with Sprint because they're using Wi-Max. If Verizon gets the iPhone, expect T-Mobile as well because of the AT&T contract expiration.

alexhasfun28
Dec 18, 2009, 06:50 PM
Saw this in a reply and had to comment. Verizon is not a large company. They are OWNED by a LARGE company. They would release on T-Mobile because it is already GSM. It would take little adjustment. It's a different story with Sprint because they're using Wi-Max. If Verizon gets the iPhone, expect T-Mobile as well because of the AT&T contract expiration.

Finally! someone is on the wagon with me.
Also, Verizon is a big company, but what makes it big is it's deifferent features.
Like, Wireless, Internet, and Home service.
If they're "big" of a company, why can't they support the visual voicemail.
They just like to think of themeselves smart and ignorant.

SnapMac
Dec 18, 2009, 06:51 PM
Folks...There is reason Apple went with AT&T nothing short of Visual Voicemail and being able to simultaneously receive data and use voice. Regardless of the debate and how large the US CDMA network is it's still a step backward from GSM in terms of functionality.

Speculation:
That being said it's HIGHLY UNLIKELY that Apple would create a new CDMA version of the iPhone and abandon their WORLDWIDE customer base. If Verizon is touting an iPhone available on there network, it will have to be new technology (LTE, etc). However, being that LTE is as widespread as the current technologies available, they run the same risk of being targeted for network availability as they have done to AT&T as of late "there's a map for that".

junker
Dec 18, 2009, 06:53 PM
I've been an iphone user since OCT 2007 with the first gen... now on 3GS. I'm in the Raleigh NC, Metro area and have had 1-2 bar in my house and have accepted it since day one.

However, recently the degradation has become MORE than a nuisance - now I am CONSTANTLY getting:

1. Dropped calls (it'll read 4-5 bars of 3g service though)
2. Seriously delayed voice mails (1/2 hour yersterday and two experiences of the vm being recved the next day after being left!)
3. Straight to VM phone calls(no rings)
4. Complete loss of service for a 5 mile stretch down major road that normally has 5 bars the whole distance.

I completely blame AT&T.

To top off my recent frustrations... I dropped and shattered the iphone today.
*********************K!!!!! (Imagine in a blood-curdling monkey scream voice)

I CANNOT WAIT for a new carrier option.... I would SO much love to use T-mobile. My area has awesome t-mobile (but they could ahve crappy 3g service...dont know)

Verizon, Sprint, T-mobile, AT&T - I don't care. let the market fight it out. Cut this exclusivity crap deal please, Apple.
Other than that - Happy Holidays..

alexhasfun28
Dec 18, 2009, 07:24 PM
I'm suprised everybody is starting to gang up on Verizon now.
Little, by little,..
:apple:

RazHyena
Dec 18, 2009, 07:27 PM
Who cares if they're bluffing or not. Just give people an option between the two carriers for crying out loud. :mad:

...this spring, that is.

AidenShaw
Dec 18, 2009, 07:49 PM
You must be right next to a tower or something because:

http://www.evdoinfo.com/content/view/37/61/

EVDO, or Evolution Data Only/Evolution Data Optimized, is a 3G mobile broadband technology used by Verizon, Sprint, and Alltel that provides typical speeds of 600-1400kbps download (with bursts up to 2000kbps) and 500-800kbps upload completely wirelessly.

The page that you link to shows:

EVDO Rev A has a peak data rate of 3,000 kbps, but realistic speeds average around 600Kbps-1,400Kbps Download with bursts to 2.0Mbps and 500Kbps-800Kbps Upload with bursts to 1.8Mbps.

Here is a real-world speedtest done using a USB760 on Verizon's network in Dallas, Tx with a very strong signal:

http://www.speedtest.net/result/363794443.png

which is entirely in line with the claim. What is there about a good network that you don't understand? ;)

str1f3
Dec 18, 2009, 07:53 PM
Speculation: That being said it's HIGHLY UNLIKELY that Apple would create a new CDMA version of the iPhone and abandon their WORLDWIDE customer base. If Verizon is touting an iPhone available on there network, it will have to be new technology (LTE, etc). However, being that LTE is as widespread as the current technologies available, they run the same risk of being targeted for network availability as they have done to AT&T as of late "there's a map for that".


If there is a Verizon iPhone, the Qualcomm chips (at least I believe it is) that are supposed to be a hybrid chip won't be ready until 2011. It will be interesting to see what happens at the next iPhone intro. Forget about LTE because any chip that would support it, would still have to fall back to CDMA. It will take Verizon years to move LTE.

In order for Verizon to have the iPhone, there will have to be a concious effort by Apple to support the "platform".

NoExpectations
Dec 18, 2009, 07:58 PM
Remember iPhone OS 2.0.2? This version was specifically released to address software problems on the iPhone that caused communication problems on 3G.

It's happened before...it could be happening again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iphone_software

str1f3
Dec 18, 2009, 08:18 PM
The page that you link to shows:

EVDO Rev A has a peak data rate of 3,000 kbps, but realistic speeds average around 600Kbps-1,400Kbps Download with bursts to 2.0Mbps and 500Kbps-800Kbps Upload with bursts to 1.8Mbps.

Here is a real-world speedtest done using a USB760 on Verizon's network in Dallas, Tx with a very strong signal:

http://www.speedtest.net/result/363794443.png

which is entirely in line with the claim. What is there about a good network that you don't understand? ;)

I don't question his speed and I don't know if that is the average speed as well. I live in NYC so I fully expect the speed to be slower. These are things to consider when I have an iPhone 3G. As of this moment, I would switch to Verizon just to know I'll be able to complete a call but it also concerns me about voice/data simultaneously and that GSM is a worldwide standard.

aristotle
Dec 18, 2009, 08:35 PM
AT&T has a terrible network. Apple and Verizon would have both made tremendous amounts of money if they just tried harder to make a deal with each other in 2007.
Look, I get it that you are an American and Americans tend to see their country as the centre of the universe but let's get back to reality here.

Verizon is approximately the same size as AT&T in terms of total subscribers but AT&T has a larger mix of smart phone users both because they have access to more smartphone models and because of the customer mix.Even if Verizon had access to more smartphones, they would not have more smart phone users than AT&T. CMDA network users are perfectly happy with dumb phones with texting, calling, walled garden WAP internet and MMS. They don't care about browsing the web and are perfectly happy paying 3 bucks for ringtones on their carrier's WAP store on their phone.

Then there is the other issue of the rest of the world that does not give a crap about CDMA and use GSM instead. Apple made a lot more money selling in the US on AT&T let alone how much they made selling GSM iPhones 3G/3GS worldwide than Verizon could ever provide.

You might be unhappy with your service on AT&T, assuming you even have an iPhone, but did you consider calling AT&T about your issues and talking to them like an adult? I had problems earlier today with Fido in Canada when calling with my 3GS inside my appartment and I called their technical support. The lady on the line reset my settings on their end and got me to reset my network settings. I'm now able to call on 3G again on my 3GS while at home.

djdole
Dec 18, 2009, 08:36 PM
Until Verizon's network is capable of providing both voice AND data at the same time, they aren't ready.
If they can (which last I checked, they couldn't) then AWESOME!
Apple, DO IT... um ....just wait till after I buy a handful more stock...k? ^_^

And let the plan price-wars begin! Competition is AWESOME.
Maybe then they'll both push to upgrade their networks to be in line with...say....Japan's INSANELY FAST cell network? :p

str1f3
Dec 18, 2009, 08:51 PM
Until Verizon's network is capable of providing both voice AND data at the same time, they aren't ready.
If they can (which last I checked, they couldn't) then AWESOME!
Apple, DO IT... um ....just wait till after I buy a handful more stock...k? ^_^

And let the plan price-wars begin! Competition is AWESOME.
Maybe then they'll both push to upgrade their networks to be in line with...say....Japan's INSANELY FAST cell network? :p

Ha, now you're taliking fairytales! Japanese manufacturers actually cares about Japan while Americans care about their own pockets. We can't even get health care reform passed much less have any sense of nationalism.

aristotle
Dec 18, 2009, 08:56 PM
I've been an iphone user since OCT 2007 with the first gen... now on 3GS. I'm in the Raleigh NC, Metro area and have had 1-2 bar in my house and have accepted it since day one.

However, recently the degradation has become MORE than a nuisance - now I am CONSTANTLY getting:

1. Dropped calls (it'll read 4-5 bars of 3g service though)
2. Seriously delayed voice mails (1/2 hour yersterday and two experiences of the vm being recved the next day after being left!)
3. Straight to VM phone calls(no rings)
4. Complete loss of service for a 5 mile stretch down major road that normally has 5 bars the whole distance.

I completely blame AT&T.

To top off my recent frustrations... I dropped and shattered the iphone today.
*********************K!!!!! (Imagine in a blood-curdling monkey scream voice)

I CANNOT WAIT for a new carrier option.... I would SO much love to use T-mobile. My area has awesome t-mobile (but they could ahve crappy 3g service...dont know)

Verizon, Sprint, T-mobile, AT&T - I don't care. let the market fight it out. Cut this exclusivity crap deal please, Apple.
Other than that - Happy Holidays..
Wow. If you used that sort of language when calling AT&T, no wonder you have bad service. I used to work in technical support at my company a few years ago and so I have to tell you that if you treat people badly you will get bad service.

For 1 through 5, call AT&T calmly and tell them your situation. Ask them if they could refresh your settings on their end then turn off your iPhone and back on again. Next, go to Settings, General, Reset, Reset Network settings.

Your phone will give you a progress bar (do not panic or turn off the phone), it will then reboot automatically. Now try out your phone.

PS. You're welcome.

aristotle
Dec 18, 2009, 09:00 PM
Ive gotten close to twice that speed on verizon.
And 0 bytes per second outside of the continental US. :p

nsayer
Dec 18, 2009, 09:14 PM
Is that a serious statement? How does that statement in any way, shape, or form mean its not coming?


Because that entire press release is, more or less, taunting. You don't taunt potential business partners, particularly not in the press.


Seems more like they are in talks already to me... if not a done deal.


Is that a serious statement?

AidenShaw
Dec 18, 2009, 09:53 PM
To top off my recent frustrations... I dropped and shattered the iphone today.
*********************K!!!!! (Imagine in a blood-curdling monkey scream voice)

Oh, that hurts. For me, I'm happy that Verizon covers my WinMo smartphone in the accidental damage plan.

... and I don't have a problem with dropped calls.


Dropped phone - covered.

Dropped calls - don't have them.

ckhris
Dec 18, 2009, 10:00 PM
I'll go back to verizon provided they don't lock anything down. Verizon here in Houston was definately better for me but I'm willing to sacrafice service for the phone.

DMann
Dec 18, 2009, 10:33 PM
Wow. If you used that sort of language when calling AT&T, no wonder you have bad service. I used to work in technical support at my company a few years ago and so I have to tell you that if you treat people badly you will get bad service.

True that - I've never had anything but courteous encounters with AT&T reps, who've always been more than happy to accommodate requests for plan adjustments, etc.

Giving them attitude only seems to increase the likelihood of reciprocation in kind - they've been very generous in granting bonus minutes, texts, etc.

Rot'nApple
Dec 18, 2009, 10:38 PM
"Verizon Wireless has even made upgrades that would make its network more capable of handling extra traffic that would be generated by the iPhone, Verizon Wireless Chief Technology Officer Anthony Melone says in an interview.

"We have put things in place already," Melone tells Bloomberg BusinessWeek. "We are prepared to support that traffic.""

So I guess Verizon wasn't prepared as much as they claim seeing as how they only saw a 1000% increase in data use and yet still according to their quote had to "make upgrades", "put things in place" in order to be "prepared to support that traffic" which apparently would have stymied Verizon if they had to contend with the 5000% data increase that AT&T had to deal with. :eek:

Hey Verizon, you know where you can stick that "There's a Map for That!" :rolleyes:

binaryskies
Dec 18, 2009, 11:18 PM
Hopefully Apple will see that AT&T and the iPhone need to part ways. When I had Verizon I loved it. I didn't have the iPhone nor used data as much as I do now..but the service was always amazing. If Verizon ever ends up getting the iPhone I would pay cancelation fee (which knowing AT&T will be jacked up for iPhone users trying to make the switch) in a heartbeat and switch..

heisetax
Dec 19, 2009, 12:39 AM
AT&T has a terrible network. Apple and Verizon would have both made tremendous amounts of money if they just tried harder to make a deal with each other in 2007.

Being a long time customer of Verizon I know from experience how many of my telephone's features were disabled. In 2077 I do not believe that Verizon was willing to give up the needed control to Apple. Two things have happened since then that points to possible changes needed at Verizon to make the iPhone work. First Verizon has been quite hands off with the Motorola Droid smartphone. This was partly because they saw the success that the iPhone has had at AT&T & they want some now.

With both AT&T & Verizon having the iPhone the network demand would probably be smaller for AT&T & thus smaller for Verizon. This together should help the iPhone network user have a better faster connection. AT&T would be preferred in areas that they have better coverage than Verizon while Verizon would do better in areas that they have better coverage. For those that move around they can just stay with AT&T or Verizon using the same cell phone connection rule of going with the system that works the best most of the time.

This would help both companies do better. Now only if Apple will be able to make a phone for the Verizon network. Then they bot must come to the proper agreements. The Droid on Verizon shows that Verizon has it in them. Their other smart & dumb phones have show why the iPhone would never have worked on Verizon back in 2007.

Mr. Gates
Dec 19, 2009, 12:59 AM
I really hope this happens.

In hopes AT&T lowers rates.

ssteve
Dec 19, 2009, 01:02 AM
What's wrong with you people? Voice + data at the same time? Can't you just carry on a conversation w/o HAVING to text someone else at the same time? No wonder our society is deteriorating!

You are so right. and society is going fast too.....

Terminal.app
Dec 19, 2009, 01:32 AM
Would Visual Voice mail work on Verizon?

Yep, I'm using it now on my BlackBerry 9630.

Verizon wasn't willing to be Steve's bitch and AT&T was.

Perhaps, but it ended up backfiring badly. AT&T has been (daringly) making Apple their bitch, and they will probably soon feel the wrath. :D

If AT&T had refused, then the next call would have been to T-Mobile or Sprint.

T-Mobile's network is even more of a joke than AT&T's. No chance in hell of that happening, then or ever.

Better to actually deliver 1.4 to your customers, than to promise a theoretical 7.2 and drop calls and fall back to EDGE.

Exactly.

Doctor Q
Dec 19, 2009, 01:45 AM
Given that Verizon is ready, AT&T should end its exclusive arrangement with Apple because then a percentage of its customers will switch to other carriers, which will put less demand on their data network, thereby improving their service! :)

DMann
Dec 19, 2009, 02:46 AM
Better to actually deliver 1.4 to your customers, than to promise a theoretical 7.2 and drop calls and fall back to EDGE.

Exactly.

Except for the realization that Edge has been reaching close to 1.2 at this time - not so shabby, by comparison.

Access to data while on a voice call is, IMO, a far greater value for me, than not having that capability at all.

3G access in the vicinity of large cities has been pretty reliable, for the most part, with noticeable improvement over the past year.

MorphingDragon
Dec 19, 2009, 02:48 AM
Except for the realization that Edge has been reaching close to 1.2 at this time - not so shabby, by comparison.

Access to data while on a voice call is, IMO, a far greater value for me, than not having that capability at all.

3G access in the vicinity of large cities has been pretty reliable, for the most part, with noticeable improvement over the past year.

Gah, damn US Mobile Market. Why won the NZ Gov do something about our Duopolies.

DMann
Dec 19, 2009, 02:54 AM
Gah, damn US Mobile Market. Why won the NZ Gov do something about our Duopolies.

You can blame this mostly on Lobbyists, for a start.

MorphingDragon
Dec 19, 2009, 03:03 AM
You can blame this mostly on Lobbyists, for a start.

I think you misread my statement. Or I mis-typed it.

You lucky B@stards in the US, you get such healthy Cellphone Competition compared to New Zealand. The government wont do anything about the Telecom and Vodafone duopoly and for a long time the lowest text price was 20c and the lowest call price was 80c + Termination rates. 2degrees is trying to do something but they cant do much until they get all their own towers set up.

This is why I dont get all the complaining that you yanks spout. You guys are waaaay better off than other countries... apart from Europe.... and Aisa.

DMann
Dec 19, 2009, 04:45 AM
I think you misread my statement. Or I mis-typed it.

You lucky B@stards in the US, you get such healthy Cellphone Competition compared to New Zealand. The government wont do anything about the Telecom and Vodafone duopoly and for a long time the lowest text price was 20c and the lowest call price was 80c + Termination rates. 2degrees is trying to do something but they cant do much until they get all their own towers set up.

This is why I dont get all the complaining that you yanks spout. You guys are waaaay better off than other countries... apart from Europe.... and Aisa.

I'm with you on this - I really don't relate to the relentless ranting, and bi****** about cell phone companies, here in the US.

Sure, there's room for improvement, but rates have dropped significantly since fifteen years ago, as reliability and extras (roll over minutes, free calls to cell phones for AT&T customers) have increased.

Hope a start-up company shakes things up, soon, for you, down under, so as to pull those exorbitant, 'highway robbery' rates down under, as well.

Surklyn
Dec 19, 2009, 06:07 AM
Well, I guess I have no reason to bitch at AT&T anymore. Whether it was coincidence or not, I’ve been hounding AT&T’s “Mark the Spot” iPhone app with dropped call and data failure (from inside my home) reports everyday since it debuted.

As of Monday this week, I went from one to three bars INSIDE my house (with horrible call quality and many dropped calls) and around 100-150 kbit/s of 3G data to five full bars constantly INSIDE my house with 1700 kbit/s of 3G data consistently (according to SpeedTest’s iPhone app).

That’s faster than a lot of people’s DSL and cable Internet.

Verizon will get the iPhone eventually. At this point, I think Apple will likely wait until LTE is deployed, but they may offer them a CDMA version since they apparently produce a special iPhone model just for China.


I agree!! LOL. I got no bars in my house with AT&T. (Infact, this is the ONLY reason why I haven't been happy with AT&T.) As of 2 days ago, I consistently get 2 bars!! (It's not 5 bars but I get signal in my HOUSE!!) Amen. AT&T solved my problem. Happy customer again.

Wombert
Dec 19, 2009, 06:13 AM
What's wrong with you people? Voice + data at the same time? Can't you just carry on a conversation w/o HAVING to text someone else at the same time? No wonder our society is deteriorating!

Uh huh. And whilst your surfing the web, nobody can call you. Very nice.

MorphingDragon
Dec 19, 2009, 06:13 AM
I'm with you on this - I really don't relate to the relentless ranting, and bi****** about cell phone companies, here in the US.

Sure, there's room for improvement, but rates have dropped significantly since fifteen years ago, as reliability and extras (roll over minutes, free calls to cell phones for AT&T customers) have increased.

Hope a start-up company shakes things up, soon, for you, down under, so as to pull those exorbitant, 'highway robbery' rates down under, as well.

There is a start up company, but they cant offer prepay plans until the green areas become blue.

http://www.2degreesmobile.co.nz/coverage

Yes and all this contract BS is non-news to residence of Aus and NZ. NZ is prepay country.

kdarling
Dec 19, 2009, 07:34 AM
Sure, there's room for improvement, but rates have dropped significantly since fifteen years ago, as reliability and extras (roll over minutes, free calls to cell phones for AT&T customers) have increased.

Ten years ago, I was lucky to get 10 Kbps on a cell. And it was charged per minute of connection, not by the byte. Surfing the web slowly was expensive !

In the USA now, we all pay just one dollar a day for 200Kbps - 2Mbps comms anywhere we go. Incredible deal.

Uh huh. And whilst your surfing the web, nobody can call you. Very nice.

That's only true of GSM EDGE. CDMA implements voice priority, so incoming calls always pause the data connection and allow the user to choose. Not ideal, but better.

CQd44
Dec 19, 2009, 07:45 AM
To people saying that the iPhone going to Verizon will be bad because they can't use it outside of the US:

not everyone that owns an iPhone travels internationally all the time.

scoobydoo99
Dec 19, 2009, 08:33 AM
AT&T has a terrible network. Apple and Verizon would have both made tremendous amounts of money if they just tried harder to make a deal with each other in 2007.

OBVIOUSLY, since Apple and AT&T made tremendous amounts of money!

As far as tried harder, WTF does that mean?! Apple laid down their demands, Verizon told them to shove it. Verizon has regretted it ever since.

kdarling
Dec 19, 2009, 08:34 AM
To people saying that the iPhone going to Verizon will be bad because they can't use it outside of the US:
not everyone that owns an iPhone travels internationally all the time.

The USA iPhone was always a bad choice for an international phone anyway, since it's locked down to ATT, can't use local SIMs and doesn't have a way to transfer contacts onto a SIM.

Except for the Droids, most of the latest smartphones on Verizon have been dual mode CDMA+GSM/UMTS. And they'll unlock the GSM side if asked.

If Apple were to make a deal with Verizon, it seems most likely that the next iPhone would be dual mode CDMA+GSM as well. That way, there's only one hardware design.

(LTE isn't widespread enough to support yet.)

junker
Dec 19, 2009, 09:28 AM
Wow. If you used that sort of language when calling AT&T, no wonder you have bad service. I used to work in technical support at my company a few years ago and so I have to tell you that if you treat people badly you will get bad service.

For 1 through 5, call AT&T calmly and tell them your situation. Ask them if they could refresh your settings on their end then turn off your iPhone and back on again. Next, go to Settings, General, Reset, Reset Network settings.

Your phone will give you a progress bar (do not panic or turn off the phone), it will then reboot automatically. Now try out your phone.

PS. You're welcome.

I will try that thanks.

Otherwise your post is a bit assumptive and rude as well. Did I ever state that I called and tried to deal with a rep with bad language? You must be referring to my frustration at breaking my phone after having had many bad experiences with the network... well, I won't apologize for being frustrated or having a good time with said expression. Please note I tried to have fun with it by indicating the parallel monkey scream.

Advice is well appreciated and will be pursued, but the presumption that I speak to a rep like that is off-base. Venting frustration on an online forum about breaking your phone and suddenly starting to have bad service is different that dealing with a rep.

ichrisers
Dec 19, 2009, 09:57 AM
I think the iphone will stay with AT&T at least for now. Apple always wants to surprise there customers sooo this verizon things is NOT going to happen. AT&T will probably get another contract because that how Apple works :apple: its too hyped up to be true

jaw04005
Dec 19, 2009, 10:44 AM
I agree!! LOL. I got no bars in my house with AT&T. (Infact, this is the ONLY reason why I haven't been happy with AT&T.) As of 2 days ago, I consistently get 2 bars!! (It's not 5 bars but I get signal in my HOUSE!!) Amen. AT&T solved my problem. Happy customer again.

I would keep reporting problems. Maybe they’ll boost your tower. :)

I couldn’t be happier. My iPhone was practically unusable in my home. I had to stand outside or at a window to get reception before.

hookedonitunes
Dec 19, 2009, 11:02 AM
Verizon may very well have the capacity. Non-Euro standard Verizon may be but my understanding of CDMA is that the digital spread spectrum allows more users per tower than GSM.

Your understanding is correct, in a way. With CDMA, there is "always room for one more." i.e. if the network is up to capacity and someone will try to make a call, the call will go through, but at the expense of voice quality to everyone on that cell site. That is why sometimes you hear someone sound like a robot (that and when they are going out of a service area). Of course this is always YMMV, but that's the general principle of CDMA.

crackbookpro
Dec 19, 2009, 11:25 AM
I kind of thought Apple was already making a tremendous amount of money on the iPhone.

Not the amount of money that still can be made - There is a market oppurtunity for the iPhone to come to Verizon.

...and I am talking about a lot of dough!

aristotle
Dec 19, 2009, 01:22 PM
It seems as if American consumers have been deliberately lead into thinking that going to a carrier store and complaining to the helpless CSR's will get you satisfaction. The CSR's do not have the authority to fix your problems and usually have to call on your behalf to technical support/customer service at the mothership anyway. If you have an actual hardware failure, go to the store. Otherwise, call your carrier.

You are much better off calling AT&T directly, explaining your situation and getting them to try the refresh of your account settings, reset your network settings on the iPhone and trying to make calls. It worked for me in Canada and it might work for you.

Don't swear or even give them any drama when you call the help line. Save the drama for your local theatre auditions. They are not to blame for your problem and are simply doing their job to serve you as best as they can.

SnapMac
Dec 19, 2009, 01:50 PM
In order for Verizon to have the iPhone, there will have to be a concious effort by Apple to support the "platform".
So basically (by your words above) Apple would have to do the one thing have NEVER done...bend for another company?? Building a CDMA version of the iPhone abandons a world wide customer not to mention would piss off A LOT of 3Gs owners that are tired of their AT&T service. In order to move to the new Verizon carrier, they would have to purchase a new iPhone. I doubt Apple would create that type of fiasco for their customers.

Doesn't really matter to me though. I am one of the few that really has no problems with AT&T. I live in a little town just outside of Indianapolis and we don't have 3G coverage here. I keep 4-5 bars in town and pick up 3G just outside of town. Drive 25 minutes north and the nearest towns are city wide Wi-Fi. I have dropped one call in the time I have owned an iPhone (currently a 3G upgraded from the original iPhone purchased in Oct 07). I have a small business & 5 kids so I do a lot of talking.

aristotle
Dec 19, 2009, 02:07 PM
There will never be a CDMA version of the iPhone. If you want competition in the US like we now have in Canada, get Verizon and Sprint customers to threaten to cancel their contracts if those carriers do not get off their arses and do what CDMA carriers have done in Canada. Build a better network than the incumbent GSM/HSPA network. I'm happy with my Fido service and the price point that I have for data but I am jealous of the better network Telus/Bell customers now have access to.

LTE is too far away and WiMax is an ugly kludge that only is useful for computer users with a Wimax modem. It is not an cellular network standard. Tell Sprint and Verizon to get out of the stone age. In order for the US to catch up with the rest of the world technologically, they need to implement HSPA/HSUPA right now at speeds of 21Mbps or faster. Otherwise, your country will look primitive even compared to your neighbours to the north.

Ljohnson72
Dec 19, 2009, 03:10 PM
I have phones on both AT&T and Verizon. In my house my iPhone get 4 bars, 1 on my Verizon phones.

DMann
Dec 19, 2009, 03:26 PM
I have phones on both AT&T and Verizon. In my house my iPhone get 4 bars, 1 on my Verizon phones.

I've heard this from many Verizon users on the East Coast, all of who claim to have 'one bar reception' in locations where AT&T's signal is four.

Apparently, in regard to the span of Verizon's infamous map, 'coverage' seems to be assessed independently of signal strength.

Perhaps, there ought to be 'A Map for That.'

Maserati7200
Dec 19, 2009, 03:31 PM
Mac vs. PC are two completely different subjects. That's Company vs. Company.
AT&T vs Verizon is Carrier+Network+Speed+ etc.
Those two are wayyyyy too different.
:apple:

At&T and verizon are both companies. In Mac vs. PC commercials they compare aspects such as ease of use, customer support etc. In these commercials they compare 3G range and network reliability. Again, pointing out your competitors flaws, just as the Mac vs. PC commercials do, and just as these commercials do, is competition straight out.

rstansby
Dec 19, 2009, 03:38 PM
I can't wait to see all of the "Verizon sucks" comments...

"There's a URL for that" :p
http://www.verizonsucksass.com/

kdarling
Dec 19, 2009, 04:19 PM
Verizon may very well have the capacity. Non-Euro standard Verizon may be but my understanding of CDMA is that the digital spread spectrum allows more users per tower than GSM.

Yes, CDMA radios allow more users and more bandwidth than TDMA. It was well known at the beginning of mid-1990s 2G digital phone design that CDMA was going to be the primary choice for the eventual 3G air transport.

Which is exactly why GSM added a CDMA radio to get 3G capability in its phones. That's what UMTS/3G/WCDMA is... a second CDMA radio network coexisting with the original old technology GPRS/TDMA radio network.

It's also why Verizon skipped ahead and used CDMA radios from the start. This allowed them to fully deploy 3G in this large country years ago.

(Sidenote: the CDMA we're talking about here is the air protocol, not the common "CDMA" term for the total network used by Sprint and Verizon.)

Building a CDMA version of the iPhone abandons a world wide customer not to mention would piss off A LOT of 3Gs owners that are tired of their AT&T service.

They don't have to abandon GSM to get CDMA. Every other phone manufacturer has both GSM and CDMA models. In fact, I'd say it was far more likely that Apple would build a single dual mode GSM+CDMA phone. Almost all the latest Verizon smartphones are dual mode (excepting Droids).

I've heard this from many Verizon users on the East Coast, all of who claim to have 'one bar reception' in locations where AT&T's signal is four.

Apparently, in regard to the span of Verizon's infamous map, 'coverage' seems to be assessed independently of signal strength.

Mostly, yes. The same goes for ATT's 3G map.

Number of bars in signal strength is almost meaningless with respect to CDMA networks such as Verizon and ATT's 3G. What counts is the usable signal to noise ratio. One bar with good cell placement is as good as four bars with poor placement and too many users per cell.

twoodcc
Dec 19, 2009, 06:27 PM
i just don't see apple doing that now. maybe with 4G, maybe

adder7712
Dec 19, 2009, 06:38 PM
i just don't see apple doing that now. maybe with 4G, maybe Yeah since LTE is the evolution of UMTS and obviously uses SIM cards and is a international standard. Telia already has an LTE network installed in Stockholm. ;)[/quote]

They don't have to abandon GSM to get CDMA. Every other phone manufacturer has both GSM and CDMA models. In fact, I'd say it was far more likely that Apple would build a single dual mode GSM+CDMA phone. Almost all the latest Verizon smartphones are dual mode (excepting Droids). Not every manufacturer has CDMA phones, Sony Ericsson quit producing CDMA phones and Nokia's newer and better models don't have CDMA variants.

Another problem with CDMA is that data and voice are different bands, you loose EVDO, no more data. With UMTS, even if you loose HSDPA, you can still have data as UMTS itself can received data at a reasonable rate (500 kb/s).

ImAlwaysRight
Dec 19, 2009, 09:00 PM
I have phones on both AT&T and Verizon. In my house my iPhone get 4 bars, 1 on my Verizon phones.

AT&T reception has been great for me at home and all around my city, first on a Sony phone, now iPhone. Sprint on the other hand ... I could get reception in my home in the far corner of the house if standing, if I sat down in the room the call would drop. Never tried Verizon, but Verizon has always been more costly.

kdarling
Dec 19, 2009, 09:02 PM
Yeah since LTE is the evolution of UMTS and obviously uses SIM cards and is a international standard. Telia already has an LTE network installed in Stockholm. ;)

Note that LTE is an "evolution" of UMTS in name only. It's got a totally different air interface and backend system. For both GSM and CDMA2000 networks, it's a coexistent system.

Not every manufacturer has CDMA phones, Sony Ericsson quit producing CDMA phones and Nokia's newer and better models don't have CDMA variants.

That's true. The point is, they've all done it before. It's not rocket science.

Another problem with CDMA is that data and voice are different bands, you loose EVDO, no more data. With UMTS, even if you loose HSDPA, you can still have data as UMTS itself can received data at a reasonable rate (500 kb/s).

You're mixing terms. HSDPA is just an improvement on UMTS, just as Rev A is an improvement of EVDO.

If you lose UMTS, you fall back on EDGE. If you lose EVDO, you fall back on 1X. In either case, data flow continues.

Regards.

djdole
Dec 19, 2009, 10:35 PM
Well, according to to you, the Mac vs. PC commercials are also pure jealousy. Pointing out your competitor's flaws isn't jealousy, it's competition.

No, no it's not.
Pointing out your competitor's flaws isn't any more competition than trash talking between rival boxers, rival football coaches or political figureheads.
It's just petty posturing and/or mud-slinging. Nothing more.
Improving your network, service, price rates, plans, features etc in order to entice more people to sign up for your service or buy your product, on the other hand, IS competition.

nitra.candy
Dec 19, 2009, 10:48 PM
Every time I read one of these things about Verizon being a better system for the iPhone I have to laugh at the comments.

I wonder if you people who tout Verizon's services realize that Apple as a phone developer is better off on AT&T.

Verizon, which is a CDMA network is only available in North America, nearly every other country in the world uses GSM. Why would you limit yourself to a carrier that offers services only in North America, when you could build your phone to the system that is available world wide.

I do agree that they should sell the phone unlocked to be able to use on any carrier (GSM carrier) though

ProwlingTiger
Dec 19, 2009, 10:58 PM
I say make them wait. They had first dibs on it and refused. Now they shall suffer the wrath of not siding with Apple...for at least a couple more years!

blipper
Dec 19, 2009, 11:23 PM
I've heard this from many Verizon users on the East Coast, all of who claim to have 'one bar reception' in locations where AT&T's signal is four.

Apparently, in regard to the span of Verizon's infamous map, 'coverage' seems to be assessed independently of signal strength.

Perhaps, there ought to be 'A Map for That.'

Doubtful. I've got an iPhone and a Verizon phone and 9/10 here on the East Coast the Verizon phone has more bars and acts like it too. I've had the same experience in Washington State as well. Nobody I know has had a better experience with ATT and its predecessors.

DMann
Dec 20, 2009, 01:42 AM
Doubtful. I've got an iPhone and a Verizon phone and 9/10 here on the East Coast the Verizon phone has more bars and acts like it too. I've had the same experience in Washington State as well. Nobody I know has had a better experience with ATT and its predecessors.

Where are you located on the East Coast?

aristotle
Dec 20, 2009, 01:58 AM
@kdarling: I'm convinced now that you work for Verizon or Sprint spreading misinformation. UTMS uses W-CDMA as the air interface just like LTE will. Go ahead and google it yourself. LTE is an evolution of UTMS. Stop spreading FUD.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W-CDMA_(UMTS)

W-CDMA (Wideband Code Division Multiple Access), UMTS-FDD, UTRA-FDD, or IMT-2000 CDMA Direct Spread is an air interface found in 3G mobile telecommunications networks. It is the basis of Japan's NTT DoCoMo's FOMA service and the most-commonly used member of the UMTS family and sometimes used as a synonym for UMTS.


While not an evolutionary upgrade on the airside, it uses the same core network as the 2G GSM networks deployed worldwide, allowing dual-mode operation along with GSM/EDGE; a feat it shares with other members of the UMTS family.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Mobile_Telecommunications_System
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOMA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP_Long_Term_Evolution

LTE is a set of enhancements to the Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS) which will be introduced in 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Release 8.

:rolleyes:
Please stop spreading lies. I've already corrected you on this but I suspect that you have me on ignore for some reason. Maybe someone else could quote me for truth to end this madness.

This is one of many reasons why Telus and Bell decided to go with HSPA (UTMS) before going LTE. They have access to the iPhone right now and it can be used as a fallback mode for LTE when that standard finally becomes a reality. They also have access to revenue from roaming international travellers visiting Canada right now.

cgates7900
Dec 20, 2009, 03:14 AM
I work for Verizon Wireless as a Customer Care Rep. I really have no idea if Verizon will be getting the iPhone, but I do get about 10 calls a day that pertain to this issue. I am constantly asked "when will Verizon get the iPhone?" and I am also constantly hung up on when I tell customers that no information has been released to me. I get many calls a day and it always seems like I get more good calls than terrible calls.

Most bad calls I get are about bill issues, most of which I am able to assist with. But rarely it seems I get calls about customers never getting reception or about slow data transmission rates. Also, Verizon does offer Visual Voicemail. It differs between handheld, where the env3 touch has a different version than some other phones.

I also feel as though Verizon would have no problem not having the Media Center or Get It Now download through V Cast, because these are not available on most Blackberry's on the Verizon Network.

Also I think one advantage would be that Asurion (Verizon insurance) would most likely be willing to offer tec (total equipment coverage) for the iphone, much as they do for the netbooks Verizon offers.

The data and voice simultaneously would not have any effect on me because I have never used this feature, and even if you are using data, the network puts priority for voice so the data would stop so that could answer the call.

Another thing is that Verizon does offer sim card slots on global ready phones so that you could use them in non cdma countrys. I feel that apple could ready the iPhone so that it could be used in this way for global use and to also be used for the Verizon network.

The only thing I see that could cause any issues is Verizon not being able to get over the iPhone not having a VZW logo :rolleyes:

and now as I end all my calls,

"I'd like to thank you for being a valued customer, and for choosing Verizon Wireless, and you have a wonderful evening":p

MorphingDragon
Dec 20, 2009, 04:09 AM
@kdarling: I'm convinced now that you work for Verizon or Sprint spreading misinformation. UTMS uses W-CDMA as the air interface just like LTE will. Go ahead and google it yourself. LTE is an evolution of UTMS. Stop spreading FUD.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W-CDMA_(UMTS)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Mobile_Telecommunications_System
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOMA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP_Long_Term_Evolution

:rolleyes:
Please stop spreading lies. I've already corrected you on this but I suspect that you have me on ignore for some reason. Maybe someone else could quote me for truth to end this madness.

This is one of many reasons why Telus and Bell decided to go with HSPA (UTMS) before going LTE. They have access to the iPhone right now and it can be used as a fallback mode for LTE when that standard finally becomes a reality. They also have access to revenue from roaming international travellers visiting Canada right now.

Aren't W-CDMA and LTE GSM deriatives though?

cjmillsnun
Dec 20, 2009, 04:44 AM
That's only true of GSM EDGE. CDMA implements voice priority, so incoming calls always pause the data connection and allow the user to choose. Not ideal, but better.

Wrong, GSM Edge will kill the net connection and allow voice straight through. Again, not ideal, but at least you get your call.

Graceflanger
Dec 20, 2009, 11:40 AM
Finally, a real carrier for this phone. Please release this...

Screw AT&T!!!

And the people claiming that Verizons network cant handle it? You are ridiculous and base that on 0 fact at all. Ive had nothing but an awesome experience with the droid, and am waiting for the iPhone to come to verizon finally!

Ok so you are saying that Verizon could handle all of the current and future iPhone users and have ZERO problems. Am I right? Well I and probably alot of other people think you are wrong cause there is really no way of knowing that at all. Yes you may have droid through Verizon but they don't have iPhone. Verizon has a fraction of droid owners compared to iPhone owners on AT&T and that will/would cause stress on any network.

Graceflanger
Dec 20, 2009, 11:45 AM
I work for Verizon Wireless as a Customer Care Rep. I really have no idea if Verizon will be getting the iPhone, but I do get about 10 calls a day that pertain to this issue. I am constantly asked "when will Verizon get the iPhone?" and I am also constantly hung up on when I tell customers that no information has been released to me. I get many calls a day and it always seems like I get more good calls than terrible calls.

Most bad calls I get are about bill issues, most of which I am able to assist with. But rarely it seems I get calls about customers never getting reception or about slow data transmission rates. Also, Verizon does offer Visual Voicemail. It differs between handheld, where the env3 touch has a different version than some other phones.

I also feel as though Verizon would have no problem not having the Media Center or Get It Now download through V Cast, because these are not available on most Blackberry's on the Verizon Network.

Also I think one advantage would be that Asurion (Verizon insurance) would most likely be willing to offer tec (total equipment coverage) for the iphone, much as they do for the netbooks Verizon offers.

The data and voice simultaneously would not have any effect on me because I have never used this feature, and even if you are using data, the network puts priority for voice so the data would stop so that could answer the call.

Another thing is that Verizon does offer sim card slots on global ready phones so that you could use them in non cdma countrys. I feel that apple could ready the iPhone so that it could be used in this way for global use and to also be used for the Verizon network.

The only thing I see that could cause any issues is Verizon not being able to get over the iPhone not having a VZW logo :rolleyes:

and now as I end all my calls,

"I'd like to thank you for being a valued customer, and for choosing Verizon Wireless, and you have a wonderful evening":p


The tec (total equipment coverage) is one thing that Apple wouldn't go with at all. Apple provides its own insurance on all of its equipment. That might be one reason on why Verizon didn't get the iPhone in '07 is because they weren't happy they couldn't charge for insurance.

aristotle
Dec 20, 2009, 11:46 AM
Aren't W-CDMA and LTE GSM deriatives though?
Hey, go read up on it yourself. I'm just presenting the information I found on Wikipedia which is backed up by industry publication sources listed on those pages.

It clearly states that W-CDMA is the air interface for UMTS and that it will also be used for LTE. There is no LTE GSM, just LTE which is an evolution of GSM standards where we progress from GSM GPRS to GSM Edge to UMTS/HSPA/HSDPA to LTE in the future. LTE uses SIM cards just like previous GSM standards and it is an improvement rather than a radical change from UMTS/FOMA/HSPA.

If people affiliated with Verizon are telling you differently, they are obviously lying because they don't want customers to know that they are planning on switching to a competing standard from what they are currently using.

If Verizon was interested in providing the best services for their customers, they would swallow their pride and start working on an HSPA/UMTS network on their way to LTE. Because HSPA is a more mature standard than LTE, handsets are currently available to take advantage of it. There are no LTE handsets on the market. Verizon is run by a bunch of idiots. They think that they can hold back progress by holding out the carrot of LTE "some day" rather than focusing on building for the future.

For all of the screwups of AT&T, at least they are investing money on improving their network now unlike Verizon.

PS. cgates7900's post perfectly illustrates how out of touch they are with the rest of the world. He is talking about V-cast and other proprietary services of their network offered on their locked down and branded CDMA phones. They are not interested in providing the fastest wireless possible for the American public. They are only interested in the nickel and dime game with consumers with dinky services that really do not add anything. Most people have a TV at home and there are a lot of DVRs on the market. Why is V-cast needed? Can't you just get a Slingbox and have the carriers allow streaming from it or at least use it on WiFi?

DakotaGuy
Dec 20, 2009, 12:59 PM
Hey, go read up on it yourself. I'm just presenting the information I found on Wikipedia which is backed up by industry publication sources listed on those pages.

It clearly states that W-CDMA is the air interface for UMTS and that it will also be used for LTE. There is no LTE GSM, just LTE which is an evolution of GSM standards where we progress from GSM GPRS to GSM Edge to UMTS/HSPA/HSDPA to LTE in the future. LTE uses SIM cards just like previous GSM standards and it is an improvement rather than a radical change from UMTS/FOMA/HSPA.

If people affiliated with Verizon are telling you differently, they are obviously lying because they don't want customers to know that they are planning on switching to a competing standard from what they are currently using.

If Verizon was interested in providing the best services for their customers, they would swallow their pride and start working on an HSPA/UMTS network on their way to LTE. Because HSPA is a more mature standard than LTE, handsets are currently available to take advantage of it. There are no LTE handsets on the market. Verizon is run by a bunch of idiots. They think that they can hold back progress by holding out the carrot of LTE "some day" rather than focusing on building for the future.

For all of the screwups of AT&T, at least they are investing money on improving their network now unlike Verizon.

PS. cgates7900's post perfectly illustrates how out of touch they are with the rest of the world. He is talking about V-cast and other proprietary services of their network offered on their locked down and branded CDMA phones. They are not interested in providing the fastest wireless possible for the American public. They are only interested in the nickel and dime game with consumers with dinky services that really do not add anything. Most people have a TV at home and there are a lot of DVRs on the market. Why is V-cast needed? Can't you just get a Slingbox and have the carriers allow streaming from it or at least use it on WiFi?

I see you live in Canada. Is Verizon or AT&T even available there? I have a Motorola Droid and I don't feel it is locked down at all nor am I forced to use Verizon's services. Other then a couple of Verizon logos the Droid operates exactly as Google and Motorola intended it to. Also, Verizon is moving more and more to Android and there is no indication that future handsets will be locked down.

Verizon does not need to move their network over to HSPA/UMTS before deploying LTE. Considering that Verizon pretty much covers the entire United States do you have any idea the cost of that and the time involved? I can promise it would be a LOT more economical to make a dual band iPhone then to change over an entire network.

Verizon will deploy LTE over their traditional CDMA voice network. They have already stated that their CDMA network is very stable for voice applications. If Apple wants Verizon to sell an iPhone it will be a CDMA device no matter what data technology it is using (either EV-DO rev. A or LTE).

I think it is funny that people argue that Apple cannot make a cell phone that can handle both CDMA and GSM frequencies. I guess it is too hard for them. Just because Apple offers a CDMA compatible iPhone it does not mean your GSM version is going away. Knowing Apple the same phone would be able to handle any network.

Anyhow it seems that a lot of people around here are big fans of AT&T and feel that AT&T is like Apple as a company so I don't know if many would even switch if Verizon offered the iPhone. It seems like Apple and AT&T are still pretty friendly and happy with each other. I would assume you can rest easy that the exclusive partnership will remain over the near future.

/dev/toaster
Dec 20, 2009, 01:13 PM
I am all for Verizon getting the iPhone. However, these exclusive deals need to die already. They are bad for consumers. What we need is the choice to bring the iPhone to whatever carrier we want.

Spreading the iPhone across multiple networks is really the only solution. Even Verizons network would get in a trouble if *ALL* of the iPhone customers moved over to it (in the US).

I am so done with AT&T, if Apple resigns and agreement with them I am switching to an Android. What good is the best phone if you can't use the service. Not a single street event I attended in San Francisco over the past 2 years allowed me to use my phone. I couldn't even send a single damn text message. I would much rather have the #2 phone with a much better network.

The iPhone moving away from AT&T (exclusive) will actually improve AT&Ts service because it will reduce the network load over time.

Maserati7200
Dec 20, 2009, 02:10 PM
No, no it's not.
Pointing out your competitor's flaws isn't any more competition than trash talking between rival boxers, rival football coaches or political figureheads.
It's just petty posturing and/or mud-slinging. Nothing more.
Improving your network, service, price rates, plans, features etc in order to entice more people to sign up for your service or buy your product, on the other hand, IS competition.
Well in those commercials Verizon clearly says they have more 3G coverage throughout America and that they are the most reliable. Verizon clearly invests a lot into their network, otherwise it would not be as good as it is now.

kdarling
Dec 20, 2009, 02:12 PM
The tec (total equipment coverage) is one thing that Apple wouldn't go with at all. Apple provides its own insurance on all of its equipment.

Apple does NOT provide insurance on the iPhone. If you break or lose it, you're out of luck unless you've gotten your own home insurance or similar. You're probably thinking of a warranty, which is a totally different thing.

PS. cgates7900's post perfectly illustrates how out of touch they are with the rest of the world. He is talking about V-cast and other proprietary services of their network offered on their locked down and branded CDMA phones. They are not interested in providing the fastest wireless possible for the American public. They are only interested in the nickel and dime game with consumers with dinky services that really do not add anything.

True, EVERY carrier, CDMA or GSM, has proprietary extra services that (as you put it) they "nickel and dime" for.

A common example is carrier-branded GPS navigator software. Another is carrier-branded mobile TV. Yet another is tethering. And ALL carriers sell ringtones, graphics and apps just for their own phones.

It makes sense to charge for extra services. Would you rather they raised rates for everyone? Most carriers do offer a higher all-in-one rate with most/all add-on services like navigation and TV.

As for the apps, I would love to see a common development platform outside of carrier control for dumbphones. Java was once promised for that, before systems like BREW arose.

Most people have a TV at home and there are a lot of DVRs on the market. Why is V-cast needed? Can't you just get a Slingbox and have the carriers allow streaming from it or at least use it on WiFi?

Sure, people use Slingbox all the time... on networks and devices where it's allowed (e.g. Verizon, not ATT) and there's a device player available.

Which leaves out most dumbphones. That's where VCast and ATT and Sprint Mobile Video come in... they're all that's available for non-smartphones.

DakotaGuy
Dec 20, 2009, 02:59 PM
Apple does NOT provide insurance on the iPhone. If you break or lose it, you're out of luck unless you've gotten your own home insurance or similar. You're probably thinking of a warranty, which is a totally different thing.

That's interesting that there is no insurance offered for the iPhone. I have a Asurion through Verizon for $7.99 a month on my Droid. I assumed AT&T would offer the same sort of plan for their customers. I know that some homeowners or renters policies will cover a lost or damaged phone, but it is nice to have the stand alone coverage available. Theft, loss and accidents do happen and it would be pretty expensive to pay out of pocket for a replacement.

Graceflanger
Dec 20, 2009, 03:42 PM
Apple does NOT provide insurance on the iPhone. If you break or lose it, you're out of luck unless you've gotten your own home insurance or similar. You're probably thinking of a warranty, which is a totally different thing.

Yes my mistake I meant the extended warranty. Apple would never go for the insurance.

Goona
Dec 20, 2009, 03:44 PM
They are but verizon has many more customers than AT&T and more people would have probably switched from other networks.

This is just an assumption.

The Verizon fanboys are out in droves!

@kdarling: I'm convinced now that you work for Verizon or Sprint spreading misinformation. UTMS uses W-CDMA as the air interface just like LTE will. Go ahead and google it yourself. LTE is an evolution of UTMS. Stop spreading FUD.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W-CDMA_(UMTS)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Mobile_Telecommunications_System
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOMA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP_Long_Term_Evolution

:rolleyes:
Please stop spreading lies. I've already corrected you on this but I suspect that you have me on ignore for some reason. Maybe someone else could quote me for truth to end this madness.

This is one of many reasons why Telus and Bell decided to go with HSPA (UTMS) before going LTE. They have access to the iPhone right now and it can be used as a fallback mode for LTE when that standard finally becomes a reality. They also have access to revenue from roaming international travellers visiting Canada right now.
He doesn't work for none of them. He's what I would cat an ABA (Anyone But Apple).

psukhu
Dec 20, 2009, 04:24 PM
If Apple released a CDMA phone for Verizon today, would that phone be able to simultaneously use voice and data like you can on a GSM network?

For example, would you be able to use the Webex app to attend a meeting or would you be able to receive emails while on a phone call? It seems that this limitation would need to be overcome since Apple has a commercial asking if your network and phone can do that.

Also, what is Verizon's actual EDVO download speed and how that that compare to the 3G GSM download speeds with US GSM carriers? I think most US consumers seem to be dark when it comes to CDMA vs GSM.

DakotaGuy
Dec 20, 2009, 04:41 PM
The Verizon fanboys are out in droves!

Well when are you the nation's largest, most reliable 3G network you are going to have a lot of fans!

I would like to see the iPhone offered on all of the networks, not just AT&T. Why people like you want the iPhone restricted to only AT&T puzzles me. Choice is good. I guess people who want the Verizon network and a great phone will just have to do what I did and get a Droid.

I would think that the iPhone going to Verizon would also be good for current AT&T customers. I can promise you that AT&T would speed up their 3G conversion and we might even see a little competition on plan pricing.

DMann
Dec 20, 2009, 05:06 PM
If Apple released a CDMA phone for Verizon today, would that phone be able to simultaneously use voice and data like you can on a GSM network?

Most likely not, even if it sported a hybrid chip. A Verizon iPhone, at this time, would be restricted to utilizing CDMA, which would not be able to handle voice+data simultaneously.

aristotle
Dec 20, 2009, 05:39 PM
I see you live in Canada. Is Verizon or AT&T even available there? I have a Motorola Droid and I don't feel it is locked down at all nor am I forced to use Verizon's services. Other then a couple of Verizon logos the Droid operates exactly as Google and Motorola intended it to. Also, Verizon is moving more and more to Android and there is no indication that future handsets will be locked down.

Verizon does not need to move their network over to HSPA/UMTS before deploying LTE. Considering that Verizon pretty much covers the entire United States do you have any idea the cost of that and the time involved? I can promise it would be a LOT more economical to make a dual band iPhone then to change over an entire network.

Verizon will deploy LTE over their traditional CDMA voice network. They have already stated that their CDMA network is very stable for voice applications. If Apple wants Verizon to sell an iPhone it will be a CDMA device no matter what data technology it is using (either EV-DO rev. A or LTE).

I think it is funny that people argue that Apple cannot make a cell phone that can handle both CDMA and GSM frequencies. I guess it is too hard for them. Just because Apple offers a CDMA compatible iPhone it does not mean your GSM version is going away. Knowing Apple the same phone would be able to handle any network.

Anyhow it seems that a lot of people around here are big fans of AT&T and feel that AT&T is like Apple as a company so I don't know if many would even switch if Verizon offered the iPhone. It seems like Apple and AT&T are still pretty friendly and happy with each other. I would assume you can rest easy that the exclusive partnership will remain over the near future.
*Sigh*
In Canada, up until November 5th, there was one company in Canada that offered GSM networks compatible with the iPhone called Rogers. It used to be called Rogers AT&T several years ago. In fact, I have an old SIM from my 2G Krzr that has a Rogers AT&T logo on it. Fido is another carrier brand that was a competitor but it now owned by Rogers. They still maintain a distinct brand and different account price points. Fido targets city dwellers while Rogers targets rural customers. Both offer service outside of cities but Rogers offers wider coverage in the country in the base price.

All of the other carriers used CDMA2000 with EVDO just like Verizon and Sprint use in the United States before November.

We now have three independent carriers (Rogers/Fido, Telus and Bell) in Canada which have the iPhone on HSPA networks because the two major CDMA carriers decided to deploy HSPA+ at 21Mbps. That is 7 times as fast as CDMA EVDO and over twice as fast as Sprints WiMax. It is faster than American "4G". Do you still need a reason?

Those two CDMA carriers still have CDMA networks but they will be phasing them out eventually as customers move over to the new faster network.

Telus and Bell now have access to more handsets, faster wireless modems and access to revenue from roaming international visitors from Europe and the US who are on GSM carriers like AT&T.

You have bought the Verizon party line hook line and sinker. LTE is years away. There are 0 handsets for LTE.

Last year, Canada was in the same boat as the US with just one GSM company controlling two brands and a bunch of CDMA carriers. Are you telling me that you are happy with the status quo? Really? How much Verizon stock do you own? Do you hate the idea of real competition between carriers?

BTW. A dual mode phone would just add to the cost that everyone has to pay and make it more prone to break for no added benefit for the vast majority of customers in other countries. No other country wants a CDMA phone.

diamond.g
Dec 20, 2009, 06:36 PM
@aristotle:
From everything that I have read I thought LTE was using OFDM not WCDMA due to the better use of spectrum. It appears that since LTE is technically all ip based it could run on top of any existing network though (assuming Wiki is right).

DakotaGuy
Dec 20, 2009, 06:36 PM
*Sigh*
In Canada, up until November 5th, there was one company in Canada that offered GSM networks compatible with the iPhone called Rogers. It used to be called Rogers AT&T several years ago. In fact, I have an old SIM from my 2G Krzr that has a Rogers AT&T logo on it. Fido is another carrier brand that was a competitor but it now owned by Rogers. They still maintain a distinct brand and different account price points. Fido targets city dwellers while Rogers targets rural customers. Both offer service outside of cities but Rogers offers wider coverage in the country in the base price.

All of the other carriers used CDMA2000 with EVDO just like Verizon and Sprint use in the United States before November.

We now have three independent carriers (Rogers/Fido, Telus and Bell) in Canada which have the iPhone on HSPA networks because the two major CDMA carriers decided to deploy HSPA+ at 21Mbps. That is 7 times as fast as CDMA EVDO and over twice as fast as Sprints WiMax. It is faster than American "4G". Do you still need a reason?

Those two CDMA carriers still have CDMA networks but they will be phasing them out eventually as customers move over to the new faster network.

Telus and Bell now have access to more handsets, faster wireless modems and access to revenue from roaming international visitors from Europe and the US who are on GSM carriers like AT&T.

You have bought the Verizon party line hook line and sinker. LTE is years away. There are 0 handsets for LTE.

Last year, Canada was in the same boat as the US with just one GSM company controlling two brands and a bunch of CDMA carriers. Are you telling me that you are happy with the status quo? Really? How much Verizon stock do you own? Do you hate the idea of real competition between carriers?

BTW. A dual mode phone would just add to the cost that everyone has to pay and make it more prone to break for no added benefit for the vast majority of customers in other countries. No other country wants a CDMA phone.

I'd love to see the number of towers that Verizon operates compared to the number of towers your Canadian companies have installed. Changing over a network is not something you can do in a few months especially when you are a company the size of Verizon. It is NOT feasible to tear out their current equipment and attempt to transition over to the 3G that AT&T is using and then transition again to 4G. They are already starting 4G "LTE" trials and plan to start installing 4G networks over the top of their CDMA network. Verizon covers some very remote rural areas with their EV-DO 3G network and there is no way they are going to transition voice to another standard at this time.

There is plenty of competition here in the US. Apparently you don't watch US television and see the current Verizon - AT&T battle. Competition has nothing to do with the "type" of network they run. What matters to most customers is coverage and reliability. You can jump up and down and say well AT&T is GSM so it is way better, but the maps say otherwise and so does customer satisfaction surveys.

Last look at where I live. Would you really suggest AT&T over Verizon for me? Oops I forget AT&T doesn't even operate in my state (yet). They have purchased the old Alltel assets that had to be divested in the Verizon merger. Right now, Alltel covers SD with statewide 3G CDMA service. I expect AT&T will shut down many of the towers and transition the rest to EDGE since they will not deploy 3G outside of major market areas. I am advising most of my friends to make the switch like I did to Verizon before AT&T takes over the Alltel properties and starts to reduce service.

I expect that Verizon will make a play for US Cellular before 2010 is over which will fuel the fire even more for a Verizon iPhone.

The last thing I want to comment on is this...
BTW. A dual mode phone would just add to the cost that everyone has to pay and make it more prone to break for no added benefit for the vast majority of customers in other countries. No other country wants a CDMA phone.

Where is the proof that a dual mode phone is more likely to break??? As far as cost is concerned... How could the addition of millions of new customers cause phone prices to rise? If anything it would reduce the cost.

DMann
Dec 21, 2009, 12:15 AM
within the locations of Wall Street, Grand Central Terminal, Union Square, or Madison Square Park:

iPhone beats Droid in Manhattan speed tests (http://venturebeat.com/2009/12/18/iphone-beats-droid-in-manhattan-speed-tests/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Venturebeat+%28VentureBeat%29)

http://venturebeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/unionsquare.jpg

However, the Droid did fair better in Times Square, Central Park, and Rockefeller Center.

So much for 3G equality.

DakotaGuy
Dec 21, 2009, 01:00 AM
within the locations of Wall Street, Grand Central Terminal, Union Square, or Madison Square Park:

iPhone beats Droid in Manhattan speed tests (http://venturebeat.com/2009/12/18/iphone-beats-droid-in-manhattan-speed-tests/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Venturebeat+%28VentureBeat%29)

http://venturebeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/unionsquare.jpg

However, the Droid did fair better in Times Square, Central Park, and Rockefeller Center.

So much for 3G equality.

Well AT&T's 3G network is designed to be faster so it is no surprise that it would beat Verizon in certain real world speed tests. The fact that Verizon is still running faster in some areas means that AT&T is not implementing the network properly.

I'd love to see how dropped calls compare in those areas between AT&T and Verizon. That would be interesting if anyone had data like that.

ajkst1
Dec 21, 2009, 01:28 AM
Everyone keeps talking about how Verizon will be a better home for the iPhone. I'm in basic agreement with them, but I'd love to see them handle a 5000% increase in data traffic on their network. I would wait until it happens and then probably wait until my AT&T contract runs out before jumping over. AT&T in my area has great 3G coverage. It's when you get out into a rural area where it drops down to EDGE. I was well aware of that going into my contract and I'm not surprised when it happens.

Verizon will probably be a better home for the iPhone, but thinking the iPhone being on their network will make it perfect is being completely ridiculous. You'll still have dropped calls. You will still have a drop off in a lot of areas from EV-DO Rev. A to Rev. 0. You're still dealing with a wireless connection that can fail at any time. Be reasonable with your expectations and you won't be completely upset at the service you receive.

maceleven
Dec 21, 2009, 02:01 AM
dual post

maceleven
Dec 21, 2009, 02:03 AM
http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f242/elijahenoch2006/map-for-that.jpg:D

DMann
Dec 21, 2009, 02:09 AM
Everyone keeps talking about how Verizon will be a better home for the iPhone. I'm in basic agreement with them, but I'd love to see them handle a 5000% increase in data traffic on their network. I would wait until it happens and then probably wait until my AT&T contract runs out before jumping over. AT&T in my area has great 3G coverage. It's when you get out into a rural area where it drops down to EDGE. I was well aware of that going into my contract and I'm not surprised when it happens.

Verizon will probably be a better home for the iPhone, but thinking the iPhone being on their network will make it perfect is being completely ridiculous. You'll still have dropped calls. You will still have a drop off in a lot of areas from EV-DO Rev. A to Rev. 0. You're still dealing with a wireless connection that can fail at any time. Be reasonable with your expectations and you won't be completely upset at the service you receive.

Quite true.

Verizon would be choking, perhaps even more severely than AT&T did, with a 5000% increase in the data transfer load on their network - "There's a Map for That" notwithstanding.

Porting the iPhone to Verizon would justifiably equalize the load, distributing it amongst the two carriers, thus providing a better experience for all.

I'll be sticking with AT&T, as I rely on simultaneous data+voice capabilities, as well as appreciate the higher data transfer speeds.

With customers switching over to Verizon, in tandem with the continuous expansion of their network, AT&T's service would subsequently improve.

Perhaps Verizon will be more willing to make concessions this time around - we'll find out, soon enough.

cgates7900
Dec 21, 2009, 02:17 AM
The tec (total equipment coverage) is one thing that Apple wouldn't go with at all. Apple provides its own insurance on all of its equipment. That might be one reason on why Verizon didn't get the iPhone in '07 is because they weren't happy they couldn't charge for insurance.

This doesn't make alot of sense because the tec is not payed for by the manufacturer of the device. The insurance company (Asurion) pays the cost of the replacement and they are the ones that get the $5.99 per month. So really it wouldn't be apple that would be paying the cost of the insurance, much as the other carriers (htc, motorola, lg ect.) do not have to pay the cost to replace

jjack50
Dec 21, 2009, 07:00 AM
Besides the network infrastructure, in order to support Apple the carrier needs to add additional feature support.

I remember when the original iPhone was to be released the changes required for visual voicemail among other things was causing problems and delays.

As with anything... if Verizon did get a contract with Apple, I can't wait to see all of the "Verizon sucks" comments... cause that's just the way this forum rolls.

Visual Voicemail is currently offered on Verizon. At least on the Blackberry Storm.

SnapMac
Dec 21, 2009, 07:12 AM
They don't have to abandon GSM to get CDMA. Every other phone manufacturer has both GSM and CDMA models. In fact, I'd say it was far more likely that Apple would build a single dual mode GSM+CDMA phone. Almost all the latest Verizon smartphones are dual mode (excepting Droids).

Wouldn't making the iPhone a dual mode phone make the overall design a bit bulkier?

kdarling
Dec 21, 2009, 07:17 AM
Verizon would be choking, perhaps even more severely than AT&T did, with a 5000% increase in the data transfer load on their network - "There's a Map for That" notwithstanding.

Curious where you got the "5000%" from. ATT's CTO John Donovan recently said that the data traffic increased by 18 times (not 50) in the past few years, and voice traffic doubled. He also said that the iPhone, although a major factor, wasn't the primary reason. He said quick-messaging phones were.

As for "choking", ATT is not really experiencing that as far as too much data goes. Their problems are more related to not having planned out a more robust CDMA cell network for 3G, which has led to dropped calls during loads.

Porting the iPhone to Verizon would justifiably equalize the load, distributing it amongst the two carriers, thus providing a better experience for all.

I don't think enough people would leave ATT to make a difference to their problems. All that would probably happen, is that another 10 million iPhone users would appear on Verizon... which would be good news for developers.

Perhaps Verizon will be more willing to make concessions this time around - we'll find out, soon enough.

Some of the original Apple-Verizon sticking points are now moot. Verizon wanted the iPhone sold through its partners such as Best Buy. That now is done. Verizon wanted to give subsidies to its customers instead of giving that money to Apple, as ATT did the first year. Customer subsidies are now the norm. Verizon would've wanted 3G, and GPS for E911. The iPhone now has those.

The remaining biggest sticking points would include offering insurance and branding, IMO. Apple is terrified of the insurance since it could mean lots of people claiming a "lost" phone that gets sold overseas and thus gives no monthly revenue. Verizon would want branding to let people know which phone it is. However, if it were a dual mode CDMA+GSM phone, then the branding need could disappear.

SnapMac
Dec 21, 2009, 07:27 AM
I also feel as though Verizon would have no problem not having the Media Center or Get It Now download through V Cast, because these are not available on most Blackberry's on the Verizon Network.
This wouldn't matter at all anyone as there is nothing in the VCast offering that isn't available in Apple's iTunes store

Also I think one advantage would be that Asurion (Verizon insurance) would most likely be willing to offer tec (total equipment coverage) for the iphone, much as they do for the netbooks Verizon offers.
This also wouldn't matter since Apple covers all of their products through their own insurance programs.

The data and voice simultaneously would not have any effect on me because I have never used this feature, and even if you are using data, the network puts priority for voice so the data would stop so that could answer the call.
This may not be an issue for you, but it would single handedly be why unfortunately AT&T would have to be my carrier of choice. I don't have nearly the issues most here (or on the thousands of other blogs) have with AT&T, but that doesn't mean I like them. I think they need to step their game up, but that's the case with every other carrier as well as far as I'm concerned. However, I use this feature (which really shouldn't be a feature. With today's technology it should be standard on ALL networks...period!) daily and I suspect a lot of other iPhone owners do as well. It's a deal breaker for me.

My wife is getting an iPhone at it's next release. She has been researching the medical apps she will need and want when she gets it. Currently she is a Verizon subscriber, but will making the switch to AT&T as it stands. I'm sure she would like to stick with Verizon, but she needs simultaneous voice & data as well. We've been discussing this article a bit and she stated that not having that capability is deal breaker for her as well. The geeks here don't get that all the tech talk they are spewing, matters none to the average iPhone owner...to most of us it's the little things that count!

kdarling
Dec 21, 2009, 08:06 AM
Wouldn't making the iPhone a dual mode phone make the overall design a bit bulkier?

Would at least need room for another antenna, so it might need to expand slightly in some dimension.

Not a direct comparison because the dual mode Imagio also has a TV tuner, larger screen and battery, but for example:

iPhone 3GS - 116 x 62 x 12mm - 1150mAh - 3.5" 480x320
HTC Imagio - 118 x 62 x 14mm - 1500mAh - 3.6" 800x480 +TV+removable back

Goona
Dec 21, 2009, 08:17 AM
within the locations of Wall Street, Grand Central Terminal, Union Square, or Madison Square Park:

iPhone beats Droid in Manhattan speed tests (http://venturebeat.com/2009/12/18/iphone-beats-droid-in-manhattan-speed-tests/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Venturebeat+%28VentureBeat%29)

http://venturebeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/unionsquare.jpg

However, the Droid did fair better in Times Square, Central Park, and Rockefeller Center.

So much for 3G equality.

The Verizon fanboys told us this is not possible. I mean you can't get a signal in the whole of New York with the iphone. :eek:

DakotaGuy
Dec 21, 2009, 09:01 AM
The Verizon fanboys told us this is not possible. I mean you can't get a signal in the whole of New York with the iphone. :eek:

I'd love to see some information on who has a higher dropped call rate in those areas. I know you think AT&T is perfect, but they are not.

Lara F
Dec 21, 2009, 09:32 AM
This also wouldn't matter since Apple covers all of their products through their own insurance programs.

If Verizon covers loss or theft (a fairly big deal in cities) then that's something Apple most certainly does NOT cover which would give me much peace of mind.

Goona
Dec 21, 2009, 10:19 AM
I'd love to see some information on who has a higher dropped call rate in those areas. I know you think AT&T is perfect, but they are not.

No this study shows that the FUD Verizon stockholders and users have been spreading is being found out. According to them, the iphone is unusable in New York. I wanna see how Verizon's so called superior network would handle if all those millions of iphone users were on it.

TraceyS/FL
Dec 21, 2009, 10:29 AM
If Verizon covers loss or theft (a fairly big deal in cities) then that's something Apple most certainly does NOT cover which would give me much peace of mind.

They do. They even cover it when you drop it in the toilet. For theft you must file a police report and send that to them.

It's a $50 deductible - but i have a new phone and not a new contract!

Graceflanger
Dec 21, 2009, 10:58 AM
The Verizon fanboys told us this is not possible. I mean you can't get a signal in the whole of New York with the iphone. :eek:

lol i was thinking the same thing.

kdarling
Dec 21, 2009, 10:59 AM
No this study shows that the FUD Verizon stockholders and users have been spreading is being found out. According to them, the iphone is unusable in New York.

No one's used the word "unusable", except perhaps ATT users themselves. Stop making stuff up.

If you need a really good example of who says there are problems in NYC, just read ATT's own PR firm's release from a few days ago:

"AT&T has suffered in New York and San Francisco from better than average iPhone penetration. In these two cities, AT&T has been too successful in selling the iPhone, to the point where the network has been severely strained.”

Of course, now you'll have to claim that ATT is spreading FUD about themselves :rolleyes:

Graceflanger
Dec 21, 2009, 11:01 AM
Well AT&T's 3G network is designed to be faster so it is no surprise that it would beat Verizon in certain real world speed tests. The fact that Verizon is still running faster in some areas means that AT&T is not implementing the network properly.

I'd love to see how dropped calls compare in those areas between AT&T and Verizon. That would be interesting if anyone had data like that.

Well from thinking from a Wifi point of view I would think that the faster the data speed the better connection is..so IF I'm right then the iPhone prob wouldn't have that many dropped calls in the areas they beat Droid.

ULFoaf
Dec 21, 2009, 11:06 AM
I think the unspoken message is "get ready, iPhone users! You can switch to us soon!"

DMann
Dec 21, 2009, 11:10 AM
He also said that the iPhone, although a major factor, wasn't the primary reason. He said quick-messaging phones were.

"AT&T has suffered in New York and San Francisco from better than average iPhone penetration. In these two cities, AT&T has been too successful in selling the iPhone, to the point where the network has been severely strained.”

Come on John Donovan, which is the primary reason?

Pick a story, and stick with it.

Goona
Dec 21, 2009, 11:52 AM
No one's used the word "unusable", except perhaps ATT users themselves. Stop making stuff up.

If you need a really good example of who says there are problems in NYC, just read ATT's own PR firm's release from a few days ago:



Of course, now you'll have to claim that ATT is spreading FUD about themselves :rolleyes:

Of course he's admitting AT&T is having problems with all those iPhones on their network. I've been to New York and it's hard to get a good sig al there especially in Manhattan. Unlike Verizon and their fanboys who want us to believe that their network doesn't suffer such problems, AT&T admitted they have problems they are trying to fix. And yes most of the FUD is being spread by Verizon fanboys who want the iPhone on their network. The average iPhone user doesn't have such problems which is why Apple can't keep up with demand. Keep spreading FUD.

carlgo
Dec 21, 2009, 12:12 PM
One issue that doesn't get discussed enough is that of towers. How is all of this promised expansion going to happen when towers are becoming more and more difficult to get ok'ed by local regulators?

Locally, busloads of people are going to the county hearings to oppose giant fake trees. Some worry about health issues. In some areas eco-vandals are actually knocking them down.

Opposition to towers is nation-wide and it seems to be getting worse all the time. You can disagree with this, but it is a problem.

Compound this by multiplying all the carriers and you are talking about forests of towers if they all were to expand coverage to every reasonably populated area.

It seems that either some other technology will have to be used, or there will have to be some sharing of the physical towers, much like trucking companies use the same highways.

kdarling
Dec 21, 2009, 12:17 PM
Of course he's admitting AT&T is having problems with all those iPhones on their network. I've been to New York and it's hard to get a good sig al there especially in Manhattan.

Nice to see you try to backpedal with respect to ATT having problems.

Unlike Verizon and their fanboys who want us to believe that their network doesn't suffer such problems, AT&T admitted they have problems they are trying to fix.

Exactly. It's ATT who brought up the problems, not your fantasized Verizon fanboys.

And yes most of the FUD is being spread by Verizon fanboys who want the iPhone on their network. The average iPhone user doesn't have such problems which is why Apple can't keep up with demand. Keep spreading FUD.

All that people have been doing on this thread, is pointing out ATT's own scatter-shot attempts to explain away problems.

First their CEO de la Vega blames their new 850Mhz usage in NYC causing 30% more traffic, since people in buildings can now actually use their phones. Then he blames data hogs and says ATT needs to get users to do less data.

Then their CTO Donovan blames overloads half on the iPhone and half on other phones, claiming their old network prediction models sucked and they don't have enough towers or backhaul. (Why the heck do they keep adding customers if they KNOW already they can't handle them?)

Then their press agency goes solo and releases a note blaming too many iPhones for causing problems in NYC, while also claiming ATT is best in class in NYC, citing unscientific reports and one they helped pay for.

No one else needs to spread any FUD... ATT is doing just great on their own.

Come on John Donovan, which is the primary reason?
Pick a story, and stick with it.

Perfectly put.

From everything they've said above so far, it sounds like they simply sold too many smartphones to too many customers in certain areas, without having the network to back them up yet.

DakotaGuy
Dec 21, 2009, 12:40 PM
And yes most of the FUD is being spread by Verizon fanboys who want the iPhone on their network. The average iPhone user doesn't have such problems which is why Apple can't keep up with demand. Keep spreading FUD.

First of all why would it matter to you if Verizon got the iPhone? I don't understand that. It's not like they are taking it away from AT&T and giving it to Verizon only. If Verizon gets it either it would be a CDMA model for Verizon or a dual band phone for everyone. It is not going to impact you as an AT&T customer.

As far as most iPhone customers having no problems and being very happy with their service I don't know, maybe your right, but I sure do see a LOT of complaints all over the internet about AT&T.

Unlike Verizon and their fanboys who want us to believe that their network doesn't suffer such problems, AT&T admitted they have problems they are trying to fix.

Where are all these documented problems that Verizon is having? Why would Verizon admit to problems they don't have? Every cell carrier has issues on a small scale with coverage in certain areas. As company you only have to admit to problems when they are having a major effect on many customers to try and improve PR with your customers.

RaZaK
Dec 21, 2009, 03:47 PM
Would Visual Voice mail work on Verizon?

they'll charge you $3-4 per month like they do for the Droid.

I swear they just love pissing off customers. They're so arrogant because of their coverage quality.

RaZaK
Dec 21, 2009, 03:50 PM
Goona sounds like a AT&T employee desperate to defend his beloved company.

the iPhone coming to Verizon would be huge. If Verizon can find a way to allow data usage on the iPhone during a phone call, life would be perfect.

Regardless of which carrier gets\keeps the iPhone, Apple will always come out on top. It just means more iPhones sold for them. :D

First of all why would it matter to you if Verizon got the iPhone? I don't understand that. It's not like they are taking it away from AT&T and giving it to Verizon only. If Verizon gets it either it would be a CDMA model for Verizon or a dual band phone for everyone. It is not going to impact you as an AT&T customer.

As far as most iPhone customers having no problems and being very happy with their service I don't know, maybe your right, but I sure do see a LOT of complaints all over the internet about AT&T.



Where are all these documented problems that Verizon is having? Why would Verizon admit to problems they don't have? Every cell carrier has issues on a small scale with coverage in certain areas. As company you only have to admit to problems when they are having a major effect on many customers to try and improve PR with your customers.

MorphingDragon
Dec 21, 2009, 03:53 PM
the iPhone coming to Verizon would be huge. If Verizon can find a way to allow data usage on the iPhone during a phone call, life would be perfect.


So wishful.

JoEw
Dec 21, 2009, 03:55 PM
name one time apple has ever changed there technology to conform to an out of date technology. .......thats what i thought.
don't expect iPhone on Verizon until they drop CDMA.

MorphingDragon
Dec 21, 2009, 03:57 PM
name one time apple has ever changed there technology to conform to an out of date technology. .......thats what i thought.
don't expect iPhone on Verizon until they drop CDMA.

Thats going to be a looong long time.

JoEw
Dec 21, 2009, 04:02 PM
Thats going to be a looong long time.

then the iphone will not be on Verizon for a long time. 2012 is when Verizon "claims" they will no longer be using CDMA. So I'm calling 2012.

MorphingDragon
Dec 21, 2009, 04:04 PM
then the iphone will not be on Verizon for a long time. 2012 is when Verizon "claims" they will no longer be using CDMA. So I'm calling 2012.

Too bad CDMA didnt win, it was a better tech apart form its internet access problems. It could handle a bigger load on the same netwrking equipment. Plus at least Sony would be the ones on a power high, not Nokia.

JoEw
Dec 21, 2009, 04:24 PM
Too bad CDMA didnt win, it was a better tech apart form its internet access problems. It could handle a bigger load on the same netwrking equipment. Plus at least Sony would be the ones on a power high, not Nokia.

LTE is the future and Verizon needs to get there network up to it as soon as possible, otherwise they will ultimately fall behind all the other networks. If somehow Apple and Verizon can work out a deal (which is highly unlikely given the recent bashing Verizon has been giving ATT & iPhone) it would be a hybrid chip with LTE and CDMA compatibility. So the iPhone could be on Verizon while they are upgrading it LTE. This would also allow the iPhone in theory to work on all 4 major U.S phone networks.

kdarling
Dec 21, 2009, 04:36 PM
then the iphone will not be on Verizon for a long time. 2012 is when Verizon "claims" they will no longer be using CDMA. So I'm calling 2012.

Correction:

Verizon says they're keeping CDMA through at least 2019 for voice, and perhaps beyond. (ATT would most likely do something similar... why throw away a perfectly good network that works with cheap phones?)

As for LTE, Verizon said they plan to have it fully deployed four years from now (by the end of 2013 or the beginning of 2014).

kdarling
Dec 21, 2009, 08:48 PM
@aristotle:
From everything that I have read I thought LTE was using OFDM not WCDMA due to the better use of spectrum.

You are correct.

LTE does NOT use WCDMA for the air interface. LTE uses OFDM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP_long_term_evolution#E-UTRAN_Air_Interface)for its downlink.

And the LTE backend being all IP would be totally new to AT&T.

In other words, it's yet another new network coexisting with the original GSM towers, just as UMTS 3G does.

My delay in response is because Aristotle (and jav6454) are so confused with their misreading of UMTS and LTE articles, that it's taking me a while to come up with a clear enough explanation so they can understand how they got misled by certain phrases concerning the word "UMTS" and marketing speak such as "evolution".

It's as if someone read that a Hybrid car would be an "evolution" of the current model, and they jumped to the conclusion that their old car secretly had a big electric motor, just waiting to be turned on.

Oddly, all they have to do is think for one second about what they're claiming (that ATT can upgrade to LTE via software), and they'd realize that it doesn't make sense. If such magic were possible, why not do it now?

Goona
Dec 21, 2009, 09:52 PM
AT&T wins another speed test:

http://gizmodo.com/5428343/our-2009-12+city-3g-data-mega-test-att-won?skyline=true&s=x

The Verizon employees spreading FUD told us it's not possible for this to happen.

AeroE1
Dec 21, 2009, 10:37 PM
Personally I hope Verizon doesn't get the iPhone. I don't mind the problems with AT&T.

The problem I have with Verizon is that they charge for the stupidest things, they don't offer roll over minutes and everyone I know with their network has the same problem AT&T has.

I will get rid of my iPhone if Apple moves to the Verizon network. I'd rather a Windows phone then the Verizon network.


Hopefully Apple isn't that stupid to sign with Verizon.

AeroE1
Dec 21, 2009, 10:42 PM
kdarling,

if the frequencies and amplifiers are the same I don't see why they can't flash the hardware. I "think" modern phone towers use boards that contain FPGA devices (Field Programmable Gate Arrays) which effectively allow their hardware logic gates to be reprogrammed with software. So it IS somewhat possible to upgrade the systems without fully replacing them. The limit on this would be the transmitter frequencies and the data rate capability of the hardware. If for some magic reason they can use the same or similar frequencies and only swap out the amplifiers to allow them to transmit more speed (again most likely a function of frequency) then in theory they could upgrade the FPGA software to put new hardware in them that is faster or works better. Aside from that I'd be willing to bet that all the hardware they have is upgradable in phases.

AidenShaw
Dec 21, 2009, 10:50 PM
AT&T wins another speed test:

http://gizmodo.com/5428343/our-2009-12+city-3g-data-mega-test-att-won?skyline=true&s=x

The Verizon employees spreading FUD told us it's not possible for this to happen.

And Gizmodo says "We didn't test dropped voice calls".... :eek:

Saturday night my husband and I (with WinMo Verizon phones) were in the city (SF) with another couple (a pair of Iphones). We were having dinner at a restaurant in the Hayes (Café Altano (http://www.yelp.com/biz/cafe-altano-san-francisco-2)).

We needed to check theatre times. Iphone 1. No data signal. Iphone 2. No data signal. WinMo 1. 3 bars, full EV-DO A, got the times right away.

None of us were Verizon employees - but the Iphones were useless. The Verizon phones worked fine.

Goona
Dec 22, 2009, 01:25 AM
And Gizmodo says "We didn't test dropped voice calls".... :eek:

Saturday night my husband and I (with WinMo Verizon phones) were in the city (SF) with another couple (a pair of Iphones). We were having dinner at a restaurant in the Hayes (Café Altano (http://www.yelp.com/biz/cafe-altano-san-francisco-2)).

We needed to check theatre times. Iphone 1. No data signal. Iphone 2. No data signal. WinMo 1. 3 bars, full EV-DO A, got the times right away.

None of us were Verizon employees - but the Iphones were useless. The Verizon phones worked fine.

Yeah I believe you. :rolleyes:

DMann
Dec 22, 2009, 02:27 AM
Yeah I believe you. :rolleyes:

The credibility of a story teller, one who repeatedly overlooks details, such as referring to an iPhone as an Iphone, is suspect from the outset.

I've traveled throughout the San Francisco Bay area for an entire week in July for a wedding, riding through the Morgan Hill areas, Santa Cruz, Monterey Counties, and Sonoma County.

Coverage was excellent - not one dropped call, and data was available in 3G for most of the time, falling back to Edge occasionally along the Sonoma Coast, an area which, I've been told, Verizon's reception was notoriously spotty.

Although a Huge AT&T 3G Outage in San Francisco Area (http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/huge_att_3g_outage_san_francisco_area) was reported to have occurred last week, don't expect the story teller to acknowledge that small tidbit of information.

He seems, instead, more content in glibly reveling in his petty anecdotes, than in revealing the entire scenario.

MorphingDragon
Dec 22, 2009, 03:31 AM
And Gizmodo says "We didn't test dropped voice calls".... :eek:

Saturday night my husband and I (with WinMo Verizon phones) were in the city (SF) with another couple (a pair of Iphones). We were having dinner at a restaurant in the Hayes (Café Altano (http://www.yelp.com/biz/cafe-altano-san-francisco-2)).

We needed to check theatre times. Iphone 1. No data signal. Iphone 2. No data signal. WinMo 1. 3 bars, full EV-DO A, got the times right away.

None of us were Verizon employees - but the Iphones were useless. The Verizon phones worked fine.

So you're blaming the iPhone for AT&T's crappy signal in your area? And I though you were non-biased in this area.

bergmef
Dec 22, 2009, 05:12 AM
So you're blaming the iPhone for AT&T's crappy signal in your area? And I though you were non-biased in this area.

Did you read what he wrote? He said no signal, so the iphone (Iphones/IPHONE ... not sure how to write it) couldn't be used. If he was saying the iphone/Iphone/IPHONE was crap, then he would have said plenty of bars but it didn't work.

Y'all need to lighten up. Some areas are better than others for different cell carriers. Who cares. It's not life and death (unless calling 911). For me, if it comes to a carrier with decent coverage where I live/work/travel, then I'll consider it.

MorphingDragon
Dec 22, 2009, 05:21 AM
Did you read what he wrote? He said no signal, so the iphone (Iphones/IPHONE ... not sure how to write it) couldn't be used. If he was saying the iphone/Iphone/IPHONE was crap, then he would have said plenty of bars but it didn't work.

Y'all need to lighten up. Some areas are better than others for different cell carriers. Who cares. It's not life and death (unless calling 911). For me, if it comes to a carrier with decent coverage where I live/work/travel, then I'll consider it.

"but the Iphones were useless. The Verizon phones worked fine."

bergmef
Dec 22, 2009, 05:33 AM
"but the Iphones were useless. The Verizon phones worked fine."

Because they had no data ... good grief.

Iphone 1. No data signal. Iphone 2. No data signal. WinMo 1. 3 bars, full EV-DO A, got the times right away.

None of us were Verizon employees - but the Iphones were useless. The Verizon phones worked fine.

MorphingDragon
Dec 22, 2009, 05:42 AM
Because they had no data ... good grief.

Iphone 1. No data signal. Iphone 2. No data signal. WinMo 1. 3 bars, full EV-DO A, got the times right away.

None of us were Verizon employees - but the Iphones were useless. The Verizon phones worked fine.

I'm not arguing his points, I'm arguing how he said it. Good Grief, learn some english comprehension.

bergmef
Dec 22, 2009, 05:57 AM
I'm not arguing his points, I'm arguing how he said it. Good Grief, learn some english comprehension.

Ah, grammar police. My apologies, I was reading the forum for the content. Have a nice day.

MorphingDragon
Dec 22, 2009, 06:03 AM
Ah, grammar police. My apologies, I was reading the forum for the content. Have a nice day.

Nope, not even talking about grammar. Theres is a lot more to english than just words.

bergmef
Dec 22, 2009, 06:06 AM
Nope, not even talking about grammar. Theres is a lot more to english than just words.

LOL, you are funny. You must crack your friend up.

MorphingDragon
Dec 22, 2009, 06:43 AM
LOL, you are funny. You must crack your friend up.

:rolleyes:

Its just that little off piece of tone in his last sentence that puts it off.

AidenShaw
Dec 22, 2009, 07:24 AM
Yeah I believe you. :rolleyes:

Thank you. I would not want to think that you're ignoring facts (even anecdotes) that don't fit your world model.

After all, what's the real value of a phone being faster if tested in one part of the city, when there are other parts of the city where it gets 0 bps?


:rolleyes:

Its just that little off piece of tone in his last sentence that puts it off.

I should have said "the Iphones were useless in that restaurant at 602 Hayes Street" - but you should have been able to figure that out from context (you know, those words). ;)

bruinsrme
Dec 22, 2009, 07:45 AM
And Gizmodo says "We didn't test dropped voice calls".... :eek:

Saturday night my husband and I (with WinMo Verizon phones) were in the city (SF) with another couple (a pair of Iphones). We were having dinner at a restaurant in the Hayes (Café Altano (http://www.yelp.com/biz/cafe-altano-san-francisco-2)).

We needed to check theatre times. Iphone 1. No data signal. Iphone 2. No data signal. WinMo 1. 3 bars, full EV-DO A, got the times right away.

None of us were Verizon employees - but the Iphones were useless. The Verizon phones worked fine.

I take a lot of crap from my verizon friends about coverage, dropped connectivity and so on. I can't count the number of times they have been able to get info off the internet quicker than me, as I bounce back and forth between edge to 3g. Changing towers while on the hi ways, forget it mind as well let them get the info.
AT&T in my area has added a good number of 3g towers along the interstates as of late but the coverage my verizon friends get is better.
I has said it before I would rather have a slower network with seamless coverage than a spotty fast network.
1 year left on he current AT&T contract, then I will be looking at all the options out there.

alent1234
Dec 22, 2009, 08:13 AM
And Gizmodo says "We didn't test dropped voice calls".... :eek:

Saturday night my husband and I (with WinMo Verizon phones) were in the city (SF) with another couple (a pair of Iphones). We were having dinner at a restaurant in the Hayes (Café Altano (http://www.yelp.com/biz/cafe-altano-san-francisco-2)).

We needed to check theatre times. Iphone 1. No data signal. Iphone 2. No data signal. WinMo 1. 3 bars, full EV-DO A, got the times right away.

None of us were Verizon employees - but the Iphones were useless. The Verizon phones worked fine.

SF is full of hills like NYC is full of tall buildings. cell phone signals don't like hills and it's hard to place towers to cover every square inch.

over the summer i was visiting family and had my iphone and sprint BB. the sprint had crappy coverage in that part of NYC and other people with Sprint in the area say the same thing. the iphone works great in the area. and in manhattan my iphone works a lot better than my Sprint BB which is always going on roaming every other block

few weeks ago i was doing some IT consulting and my iphone saved me hours and hours of work and solved a problem that had my stumped. my friend's Verizon blackberry was useless

there is no carrier that covers every square inch of the USA with it's signal

Goona
Dec 22, 2009, 08:18 AM
Thank you. I would not want to think that you're ignoring facts (even anecdotes) that don't fit your world model.

After all, what's the real value of a phone being faster if tested in one part of the city, when there are other parts of the city where it gets 0 bps?






Dude I wouldn't have expected anything differently from you.

AidenShaw
Dec 22, 2009, 08:53 AM
SF is full of hills like NYC is full of tall buildings. cell phone signals don't like hills and it's hard to place towers to cover every square inch.

True, but 602 Hayes St isn't in a skyscraper canyon - it's in a flat area with 2 to 3 story buildings. It's well known that AT&T coverage is poor in the Bay area - that restaurant was unlucky enough to be in an AT&T dead zone.

MorphingDragon
Dec 22, 2009, 02:22 PM
I should have said "the Iphones were useless in that restaurant at 602 Hayes Street" - but you should have been able to figure that out from context (you know, those words). ;)

You didn't do very well at analysis in English did you?

ccarillo
Dec 22, 2009, 03:09 PM
Any network that experiences that kind of growth would have issues. I have had verizon in the past, and they are horrible.. their plans are, their customer service does.. I am on AT&T and my service is fine, I drop calls, but in the same spots I dropped calls when I had verizon.

When and if they get an iphone, we will be reading the same complaints about their service, no doubt!

kdarling
Dec 22, 2009, 03:12 PM
You didn't do very well at analysis in English did you?

No need to be so rude. He's not the one having the problem understanding.

The rest of us knew exactly what he meant, perhaps because it also happens to us all the time.

Go inside most restaurants where I live in the northern NJ hills, and ATT phones have no signal, while other carriers' phones do. It's just the way it is.

DMann
Dec 22, 2009, 03:16 PM
I should have said "the Iphones were useless in that restaurant at 602 Hayes Street" - but you should have been able to figure that out from context (you know, those words). ;)

No, to be clear, you should have said: "the iPhones were unable to retrieve data in that restaurant at 602 Hayes Street."

The iPhones were not useless, since they were still able to function, make calls, and run apps.

Furthermore, 3G service in the Bay Area happened to have been disrupted from 12/11-12/12 (http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/huge_att_3g_outage_san_francisco_area), during the time you claim to have been there - a factor which, for the sake of your precious little anecdote, you have conveniently chosen to ignore:

"Reports are showing up in various places indicating that AT&T is having major service disruptions in the San Francisco Bay Area. The nature of the problem seems to vary based on location. In some areas, calls are going through but data and SMS are down....Customers are reporting that AT&T reps are informing them of a 24-48 hour wait to get data and SMS services back up. AT&T has made a statement saying, “We are seeing a hardware issue in downtown San Francisco that is causing some degradation in service. GSM and EDGE voice and data services are still accessible. Our experts are aware and working to resolve as quickly as possible.” Indeed, users are reporting that turning off 3G results in solid EDGE access."

This would very likely have been the cause for a lack of data signal at Café Altano.

Your incidental tale seems to be rather shallow, from this perspective.

AidenShaw
Dec 22, 2009, 03:23 PM
Furthermore, 3G service in the Bay Area happened to have been disrupted from 12/11-12/12 (http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/huge_att_3g_outage_san_francisco_area), during the time you claim to have been there - a factor which, for the sake of your precious little anecdote, you have conveniently chosen to ignore:

FAIL.

Saturday night was the 19th.


No, to be clear, you should have said: "the iPhones were unable to retrieve data in that restaurant at 602 Hayes Street."

The iPhones were not useless, since they were still able to function, make calls, and run apps.

Furthermore, 3G service in the Bay Area happened to have been disrupted from 12/11-12/12 (http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/huge_att_3g_outage_san_francisco_area), during the time you claim to have been there - a factor which, for the sake of your precious little anecdote, you have conveniently chosen to ignore:

"Reports are showing up in various places indicating that AT&T is having major service disruptions in the San Francisco Bay Area. The nature of the problem seems to vary based on location. In some areas, calls are going through but data and SMS are down....Customers are reporting that AT&T reps are informing them of a 24-48 hour wait to get data and SMS services back up. AT&T has made a statement saying, “We are seeing a hardware issue in downtown San Francisco that is causing some degradation in service. GSM and EDGE voice and data services are still accessible. Our experts are aware and working to resolve as quickly as possible.” Indeed, users are reporting that turning off 3G results in solid EDGE access."

This would very likely have been the cause for a lack of data signal at Café Altano.

Your incidental tale seems to be rather shallow, from this perspective.

DMann
Dec 22, 2009, 03:27 PM
FAIL.

Saturday night was the 19th.

And yet, your tale seems shallow, nonetheless.

MorphingDragon
Dec 22, 2009, 03:34 PM
No need to be so rude. He's not the one having the problem understanding.

The rest of us knew exactly what he meant, perhaps because it also happens to us all the time.

Go inside most restaurants where I live in the northern NJ hills, and ATT phones have no signal, while other carriers' phones do. It's just the way it is.

I know what he meant and I'll say it again. Its not what he said, its how he said it.

DMann
Dec 22, 2009, 03:51 PM
I know what he meant and I'll say it again. Its not what he said, its how he said it.

Your assessment is correct.

Let's compare the following statements:

A rational and unbiased way to describe a problem:

Go inside most restaurants where I live in the northern NJ hills, and ATT phones have no signal, while other carriers' phones do. It's just the way it is.

An oddly biased approach, pitting a specific phone, with no mention of the carrier, against a specific OS and a specific carrier:

We needed to check theatre times. Iphone 1. No data signal. Iphone 2. No data signal. WinMo 1. 3 bars, full EV-DO A, got the times right away.

None of us were Verizon employees - but the Iphones were useless. The Verizon phones worked fine.

Might there be an agenda here?

You decide.

charliehustle
Dec 22, 2009, 03:56 PM
Being from Canada, and seeing multiple networks carry the iPhone now (after a few years of exclusivity from Rogers) don't you guys think that it's possible to have multiple carriers inside the US if apple has done that in other countries?

Just wondering because from what I've read, most people are a little skeptical about it.

AidenShaw
Dec 22, 2009, 04:14 PM
An oddly biased approach, pitting a specific phone, with no mention of the carrier, against a specific OS and a specific carrier

A specific phone that is exclusive to one carrier. Please, think. In the US, how can you separate the Iphone from AT&T? A few days ago I said "nice phone on a sucky carrier == sucky phone". Note that this thread is about Verizon?

The WinMo/Verizon statement is to anchor that it's a smartphone on another carrier that we're comparing.

What about apologizing for your long-winded insult due to the fact that you confused the dates? I notice that you don't respond when you're proven to be in error.

MorphingDragon
Dec 22, 2009, 04:20 PM
A specific phone that is exclusive to one carrier. Please, think. In the US, how can you separate the Iphone from AT&T? A few days ago I said "nice phone on a sucky carrier == sucky phone". Note that this thread is about Verizon?

The WinMo/Verizon statement is to anchor that it's a smartphone on another carrier that we're comparing.

What about apologizing for your long-winded insult due to the fact that you confused the dates? I notice that you don't respond when you're proven to be in error.

Import one for overseas, I'm more than happy to export phones form New Zealand.

Your assessment is correct.

Let's compare the following statements:

A rational and unbiased way to describe a problem:



An oddly biased approach, pitting a specific phone, with no mention of the carrier, against a specific OS and a specific carrier:



Might there be an agenda here?

You decide.

Doesn't even have to be an agenda. The hot new form of Prejudice is sub-conscious discrimination.

DMann
Dec 22, 2009, 04:38 PM
What about apologizing for your long-winded insult due to the fact that you confused the dates? I notice that you don't respond when you're proven to be in error.
No dates were confused, as no date was specified at the outset.

You, however, seem to be averting the issue.

A specific phone that is exclusive to one carrier. Please, think. In the US, how can you separate the Iphone from AT&T? A few days ago I said "nice phone on a sucky carrier == sucky phone". Note that this thread is about Verizon?

The WinMo/Verizon statement is to anchor that it's a smartphone on another carrier that we're comparing.

Nonsense.

You glibly stated that "the Iphones were useless. The Verizon phones worked fine."

The issue here, is that you deemed the iPhone useless, when it was indeed functional, while stating that the Verizon phones worked fine, all without addressing the fact that AT&T's lack of data signal might have been a factor.

Unlike kdarlings post, you chose to make a snide condemnation of the phone itself.

Doesn't even have to be an agenda. The hot new form of Prejudice is sub-conscious discrimination.

Yes, this is true, although it might well be more of a conscious effort than a sub-conscious one, in this case.

AidenShaw
Dec 22, 2009, 05:41 PM
No dates were confused, as no date was specified at the outset.

Boy, are you in denial. If on Monday someone types "Saturday night my husband and I were in the city" on a real-time message board, it should be pretty clear that the most recent Saturday night is the reference. You're backpedaling so fast that your legs are a blur.


You glibly stated that "the Iphones were useless. The Verizon phones worked fine."

Again, in context it was "We needed to check theatre times...but the Iphones were useless."

They *were* useless for the task of checking the times. And not even an EDGE fallback so that they were "slow" instead of "useless" - the Iphone user said "I can't get anything".

And note the use of a past tense - "the Iphones were useless". I didn't start a new top-level thread saying "Iphones are useless", I said that in the context of a task they were useless at one point in time and space.


The issue here, is that you deemed the iPhone useless, when it was indeed functional, while stating that the Verizon phones worked fine, all without addressing the fact that AT&T's lack of data signal might have been a factor.

When the Iphone is exclusive to a carrier - it makes no practical difference to the end user if the tool is "useless" for a task because the tool is bad, or if it is useless because the carrier is bad. No practical difference at all.

You've got your knickers in a bunch over a couple of words, when most readers see the big picture that maybe an Iphone on Verizon would have been able to check the theatre times last Saturday.


Unlike kdarlings post, you chose to make a snide condemnation of the phone itself.

Like MorphingDragon, you seem to be hung up on some perceived slight of Cupertino's little jewel. People looking at this in the broader context of this thread named "Verizon Claims Network Ready for iPhone Should Apple Choose to Strike Deal" will take it as a simple anecdote that last Saturday, at a certain restaurant in Hayes Valley, Verizon phones had a strong 3G signal and AT&T didn't even have EDGE.

And, Mr. Grammar Policeman - I don't see any posts by "kdarlings". Did you mean "kdarling's" ?

MorphingDragon
Dec 22, 2009, 07:20 PM
Boy, are you in denial. If on Monday someone types "Saturday night my husband and I were in the city" on a real-time message board, it should be pretty clear that the most recent Saturday night is the reference. You're backpedaling so fast that your legs are a blur.




Again, in context it was "We needed to check theatre times...but the Iphones were useless."

They *were* useless for the task of checking the times. And not even an EDGE fallback so that they were "slow" instead of "useless" - the Iphone user said "I can't get anything".

And note the use of a past tense - "the Iphones were useless". I didn't start a new top-level thread saying "Iphones are useless", I said that in the context of a task they were useless at one point in time and space.




When the Iphone is exclusive to a carrier - it makes no practical difference to the end user if the tool is "useless" for a task because the tool is bad, or if it is useless because the carrier is bad. No practical difference at all.

You've got your knickers in a bunch over a couple of words, when most readers see the big picture that maybe an Iphone on Verizon would have been able to check the theatre times last Saturday.




Like MorphingDragon, you seem to be hung up on some perceived slight of Cupertino's little jewel. People looking at this in the broader context of this thread named "Verizon Claims Network Ready for iPhone Should Apple Choose to Strike Deal" will take it as a simple anecdote that last Saturday, at a certain restaurant in Hayes Valley, Verizon phones had a strong 3G signal and AT&T didn't even have EDGE.

And, Mr. Grammar Policeman - I don't see any posts by "kdarlings". Did you mean "kdarling's" ?

Aiden, I'm going to tell you now. Fix the inconsistencies.

---

FTR, I dont have an iPhone nor do I care. Infact I have an N97 (Work paid for it). So I suggest you stop putting words into poeple mouths and keep your story the same if you have any chance of resisting Dmann.

AidenShaw
Dec 22, 2009, 07:47 PM
Aiden, I'm going to tell you now. Fix the inconsistencies.

And I'll ask you to point out the "inconsistencies".

"Useless for a particular task" is not the same as "useless" - no inconsistency.

"Useless for a particular task" doesn't imply it's useless because of inherent design or its carrier - it means that it can't do what you need at the point and time that you need that task. No inconsistency.

You two are deep-ending over one word - "useless". We had one need, the Iphone could not fulfill that need, it was "useless" for solving our problem. Other smartphones from a different carrier fulfilled our need. Simple.

MorphingDragon
Dec 22, 2009, 07:51 PM
And I'll ask you to point out the "inconsistencies".

"Useless for a particular task" is not the same as "useless" - no inconsistency.

"Useless for a particular task" doesn't imply it's useless because of inherent design or its carrier - it means that it can't do what you need at the point and time that you need that task. No inconsistency.

You two are deep-ending over one word - "useless". We had one need, the Iphone could not fulfill that need, it was "useless" for solving our problem. Other smartphones from a different carrier fulfilled our need. Simple.

You dont even know what I'm talking about. Its not A word its THE sentence.

AidenShaw
Dec 22, 2009, 07:58 PM
You dont even know what I'm talking about. Its not A word its THE sentence.

But you are *not* talking about it.

Please point out the inconsistencies. If you can't describe what you think the flaws in my argument are, how can I improve my argument?

(And Mr. Grammar Policeman would point out that you are missing three apostrophes in two sentences.)

DMann
Dec 23, 2009, 01:51 AM
Boy, are you in denial. If on Monday someone types "Saturday night my husband and I were in the city" on a real-time message board, it should be pretty clear that the most recent Saturday night is the reference. You're backpedaling so fast that your legs are a blur.

You call that backpedalling?

No, backpedalling would involve changing the story, altering what was previously stated in an attempt to rectify it, the way you so often do.

You mentioned Saturday, which happens to be a day, not a date. 12/12 just so happens to be a recent Saturday - nothing was changed.

Ironically, it seems that you're the one getting his panties in a twist, here:

Again, in context it was "We needed to check theatre times...but the Iphones were useless."

They *were* useless for the task of checking the times. And not even an EDGE fallback so that they were "slow" instead of "useless" - the Iphone user said "I can't get anything".

And note the use of a past tense - "the Iphones were useless". I didn't start a new top-level thread saying "Iphones are useless", I said that in the context of a task they were useless at one point in time and space.

No, they were not 'useless,' since calling the theatre for movie times would have been a feasible option.

When the Iphone is exclusive to a carrier - it makes no practical difference to the end user if the tool is "useless" for a task because the tool is bad, or if it is useless because the carrier is bad. No practical difference at all.

You've got your knickers in a bunch over a couple of words, when most readers see the big picture that maybe an Iphone on Verizon would have been able to check the theatre times last Saturday.

Again, it seems that the only one here, with his knickers tied in a bunch, is you.

If the phone is able to function at the time; make a call, and run apps, it is not rendered useless - no practical difference, you say?

Your attempts at justifying your previous drivel remain entertaining - keep it up, you're almost backpedalling.

Like MorphingDragon, you seem to be hung up on some perceived slight of Cupertino's little jewel. People looking at this in the broader context of this thread named "Verizon Claims Network Ready for iPhone Should Apple Choose to Strike Deal" will take it as a simple anecdote that last Saturday, at a certain restaurant in Hayes Valley, Verizon phones had a strong 3G signal and AT&T didn't even have EDGE.

I've always been in favor of having the iPhone carried on Verizon's network.

You, however, seem to be the one hung up on, and quite perturbed by, Apple's success - your revealing denigrating remarks make this clear.

Once again, this will go down as one of the most notable moments, ever, for the Hypocrisy Hall of Fame:

And, Mr. Grammar Policeman - I don't see any posts by "kdarlings". Did you mean "kdarling's" ?

He hypocritically attempts to point out a punctuation error, and in doing so, quite cluelessly, places the question mark after the quotation marks.

Priceless, in a most profound way.

MorphingDragon
Dec 23, 2009, 04:47 AM
But you are *not* talking about it.

Please point out the inconsistencies. If you can't describe what you think the flaws in my argument are, how can I improve my argument?

(And Mr. Grammar Policeman would point out that you are missing three apostrophes in two sentences.)

Unless its formal writing I couldn't care less about punctuation.

I'll leave the inconsitencies to Dmann as he seems to be the one that cares about them... oh wait.

I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT A WORD. I was talking about the Timbre and general feel. If you cant understand that, there's no point even trying to discuss this. A SINGLE WORD A SENTENCE DOES NOT MAKE.

AidenShaw
Dec 23, 2009, 08:46 AM
He hypocritically attempts to point out a punctuation error, and in doing so, quite cluelessly, places the question mark after the quotation marks.

Priceless, in a most profound way.

The Chicago Manual of Style (http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/CMS_FAQ/Quotations/Quotations28.html) addresses this case, saying:

...so the question mark must go outside the quotation marks.

DMann
Dec 23, 2009, 11:18 AM
The Chicago Manual of Style (http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/CMS_FAQ/Quotations/Quotations28.html) addresses this case, saying:

...so the question mark must go outside the quotation marks.

Wrong Again.

In this particular case, you are the one asking the question.

However, you're using the quotation marks as "air quotes," and not for an actual quotation.

The rule you cited does not apply.

AidenShaw
Dec 23, 2009, 05:50 PM
The Chicago Manual of Style (http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/CMS_FAQ/Quotations/Quotations28.html) addresses this case, saying:

...so the question mark must go outside the quotation marks.

In this particular case, you are the one asking the question.

However, you're using the quotation marks as "air quotes," and not for an actual quotation.

The rule you cited does not apply.

Yes - because *I* am asking the question, the question mark does not belong inside the quotation from you, or inside my quoted suggestion for what you intended to write. You can't be serious about the "air quotes" remark, can you? I quoted from you, and offered a corrected version in quotes - not "air" quotes.

I think that the Chicago Manual of Style example is relevant - for the reason that they give (putting the question mark inside the quotes transfers the question to your statement, when the question is mine and therefore the question mark belongs outside).

Anyway, I'm through here - go ahead and post the last word, since that seems to be important to you. I won't respond unless you actually add some value to this tangent - and probably not even if you do.

DMann
Dec 24, 2009, 01:34 PM
Yes - because *I* am asking the question, the question mark does not belong inside the quotation from you, or inside my quoted suggestion for what you intended to write. You can't be serious about the "air quotes" remark, can you? I quoted from you, and offered a corrected version in quotes - not "air" quotes.

Bingo.

Your quoted suggestion (single word extraction, hardly a quotation) has now become your quoted suggestion - it is apparently no longer mine, since you altered it, unless, you're attempting to put words into other's mouths.

Please point out the inconsistencies. If you can't describe what you think the flaws in my argument are, how can I improve my argument?

(And Mr. Grammar Policeman would point out that you are missing three apostrophes in two sentences.)

We'll be more than willing to point out your inconsistencies, of which there are many, after a final round of holiday shopping.

MorphingDragon
Dec 24, 2009, 04:04 PM
Bingo.

Your quoted suggestion (single word extraction, hardly a quotation) has now become your quoted suggestion - it is apparently no longer mine, since you altered it, unless, you're attempting to put words into other's mouths.



We'll be more than willing to point out your inconsistencies, of which there are many, after a final round of holiday shopping.

What round, its already X-Mas day in the place that nobody is supposed to know about...

AidenShaw
Dec 24, 2009, 07:00 PM
What round, its already X-Mas day in the place that nobody is supposed to know about...

Any unusual holiday folklore down there, like Santa's sleigh being pulled by flying kangaroos?


"Roodolph the red-nosed 'roo, had a very shiny nose..."

MorphingDragon
Dec 24, 2009, 11:28 PM
Any unusual holiday folklore down there, like Santa's sleigh being pulled by flying kangaroos?


"Roodolph the red-nosed 'roo, had a very shiny nose..."

I'm not Australian, I'm Kiwi and no not really. Theres some New Zealand Christmas carols but not on the strange spectrum.

AidenShaw
Dec 25, 2009, 12:27 AM
I'm not Australian, I'm Kiwi and no not really. Theres some New Zealand Christmas carols but not on the strange spectrum.

As long as there's nothing involving sheep, fine! ;)

(The 'roo bit was tongue-in-cheek, nothing sets a Kiwi off like a kangaroo joke ;) )...

MorphingDragon
Dec 25, 2009, 01:03 AM
As long as there's nothing involving sheep, fine! ;)

(The 'roo bit was tongue-in-cheek, nothing sets a Kiwi off like a kangaroo joke ;) )...

What setting off?

dwa375
Dec 27, 2009, 03:08 PM
I used Verizon for years and was completely satisfied. One year ago I went to work for a company that provides AT&T service and I use a BB 9000.

ATT sucks! Dropped calls increasing, unavailable service/internet increasing. It has been the horrible experience I expected.

If iPhone goes to verizon - my family service goes there as well.