Apple in Tablet Discussions with Both AT&T and Verizon [Archive]

MacRumors

Jan 21, 2010, 11:03 PM

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/01/21/apple-in-tablet-discussions-with-both-atandt-and-verizon/)

Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/01/21/verizon-att-carry-apple-tablet/) reports that Apple is in last minute negotiations with both AT&T and Verizon to provide wireless service for their upcoming tablet device. Support for both networks suggests that Apple will be producing two versions of the device to support the different wireless standards:Nevertheless, Apple is in talks with both AT&T and Verizon to support the tablet, according to sources within the companies: One version of the device will run on CDMA networks such as Verizon's, and one will operate on GSM networks like that owned by AT&T. The upcoming Apple tablet is expected to have Wi-Fi connectivity, but has also been said to have optional 3G service for internet use when away from a hotspot. Even if deals are reached by next week's event, Fox News does not believe data pricing plans will be settled by that time.

Article Link: Apple in Tablet Discussions with Both AT&T and Verizon (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/01/21/apple-in-tablet-discussions-with-both-atandt-and-verizon/)

LloydBraun89

Jan 21, 2010, 11:07 PM

I doubt there would need to be two versions. It seems like it would be big enough to fit both cdma and gsm chips. and whats with all the fox news articles lately?

abijnk

Jan 21, 2010, 11:08 PM

I would like this for the simple convenience of having everything on one account.

thegoldenmackid

Jan 21, 2010, 11:08 PM

Once again, your source in Apple news: Fox News.

HiRez

Jan 21, 2010, 11:12 PM

Chintan100

Jan 21, 2010, 11:14 PM

I doubt there would need to be two versions. It seems like it would be big enough to fit both cdma and gsm chips. and whats with all the fox news articles lately?

Yes, i too believe there would be just one version initially like the original iPhone and it may go the kindle way of paying for the bandwidth if you access content from their store while you needing to pay only for the content. This will make more and more people read news, do whatever on the Tablet.

Marcusjlang

Jan 21, 2010, 11:21 PM

I know this isn't completely related, but it's sort of on subject, and I really want to know the answer.

Is it actually possible that we will see a VZN phone this year? I mean... does ATT run through 2010, or does it end in June? Also if we do get a VZN iPhone, do we keep ATT too? Sorry if it sounds like a dumb question, I just need to know?

cmaier

Jan 21, 2010, 11:23 PM

v724510

Jan 21, 2010, 11:35 PM

I'll be so mad if I need to sign another 2 year commitment with ATT for $30 a month for the tablet. That is nothing short of rape

Yankee617

Jan 21, 2010, 11:36 PM

I doubt there would need to be two versions. It seems like it would be big enough to fit both cdma and gsm chips. and whats with all the fox news articles lately?

Agreed. Anyone buying a Tablet should be able to use it in either, or BOTH, networks.

ThunderSkunk

Jan 21, 2010, 11:37 PM

Not another device that comes with a mandatory monthly payment.

It's the only dealbreaker.

Marcusjlang

Jan 21, 2010, 11:40 PM

Yes, ATT won't go away.

But it is possible for us to get VZN phone, like the exclusivity contract is expiring or something?

puckhead193

Jan 21, 2010, 11:46 PM

what about the iphone on the big red :rolleyes:
fox news doesn't have any info on laptops or mac pros

cmaier

Jan 21, 2010, 11:47 PM

But it is possible for us to get VZN phone, like the exclusivity contract is expiring or something?

No way to know. Personally I doubt Apple would bother doing the engineering work at this point - I would assume they'd wait until 4G. But anything's possible.

NewSc2

Jan 21, 2010, 11:48 PM

Agreed. Anyone buying a Tablet should be able to use it in either, or BOTH, networks.

Or neither. A 3G contract on top of my iPhone would be a 100% deal breaker for me (until jailbroken/iPhone tethering apps appear).

And to that point, it makes no sense. Verizon iPad vs. AT&T iPad? With a phone, I'd sorta understand, but a tablet/computer?

cmaier

Jan 21, 2010, 11:49 PM

Or neither. A 3G contract on top of my iPhone would be a 100% deal breaker for me (until jailbroken/iPhone tethering apps appear).

And to that point, it makes no sense. Verizon iPad vs. AT&T iPad? With a phone, I'd sorta understand, but a tablet/computer?

Happens all the time with various netbooks.

Ca$hflow

Jan 21, 2010, 11:55 PM

Definitely not getting it if a wireless plan is required. Sick of overpayimg poor wireless service

makkystyle

Jan 21, 2010, 11:58 PM

One of the earlier rumors (I believe it was from Boy Genius) stated that they are using a Qualcomm chipset. Qualcomm makes a GSM/CDMA combo chip, which was also rumored for iPhone use. There have been other rumors that these chips were in short supply still (as it's pretty new) but it seems unlikely to me that Apple would make two devices that are so similar to each other. It's really not like them to diversify their product offerings that much.

stormj

Jan 22, 2010, 12:00 AM

I seriously doubt that Apple's exclusivity deal re: the iPhone extends to all of their products. They could have a VZW tablet with or without AT&T.

So, here's the two versions:

VZW iPad: Works everywhere but won't allow you to remove pointless crapware icons from your launcher/desktop. Works all over US, but only US.

ATT iPad: Works nowhere in the US.

Slayerboym88

Jan 22, 2010, 12:02 AM

Rhymecrafter

Jan 22, 2010, 12:09 AM

I love me some Steve Job's merchandise, but I absolutely refuse to pay for another wireless plan. My prayer for REAL HOPE AND CHANGE consists of AT&T allowing tethering from the (iPad) to the iPhone. That way, I can finally get the "change I can believe in" back in my pocket.:apple:

Every rumour I have seen tends to indicate CDMA/GSM as an option or as needed. Wifi seems to be the big push here. I think your all getting a little uptight on the access plan for no reason :o

chasemac

Jan 22, 2010, 12:15 AM

Apple hasn't even released the device yet but even if they do. If it has a monthly service charge in addition to my iPhone's and my .mac I'm out!

Nostromo

Jan 22, 2010, 12:39 AM

Wireless service is too much wired to the contents of my wallet.

jav6454

Jan 22, 2010, 12:51 AM

I'll be so mad if I need to sign another 2 year commitment with ATT for $30 a month for the tablet. That is nothing short of rape

Verizon will give you the same $30 extra a month treatment. Dont worry.

Bakafish

Jan 22, 2010, 12:54 AM

I can't see Apple shipping two versions of a device. If they are going to provide 3G in the units (which seems plausible, but not a sure bet) I can't see them wanting to support two different models (x how ever many different devices they actually announce.) If the radios are modular, and can be swapped out, well, that's another story. But they don't even like to do that with batteries, so I'd say it's just noise. On the other hand, if they have a chip that supports both frequencies (Broadcom was supposed to come through with one) or if it supports ATT 3G (and the world) + 4G which Verison will support down the road, then I could see it.

Exclusivity is what gives them the big subsidies though, and truthfully, the subsidies are all coming from the voice side of the contract. DATA is just something carriers provide because they have to, they resent that they get payed 1/10000th the price per bit for DATA compared to SMS and a fraction of the rate they get for voice. And bits are bits. So why are they going to want to offer big subsidies for the new Apple Slablet? (TM) The DATA deals for eBooks are because they are pretty useless for doing much more than downloading small bundles every once in a while. A Slablet will be consuming tons of data, and a good VOIP candidate as well.

So I guess my question is, why would Apple go so far out of their way to support two carriers when there is very little chance of significant subsidies offsetting the cost of their device? They are better off focusing all their efforts on one carrier for the most favorable data rates, and given that they have the iPhone contract coming up for renegotiation, AT&T will probably be quite compliant. AT&T may suck, but it hasn't stopped Apple from making a little bit of money selling iPhones. And as losing a voice connection is far more frustrating (for typical users, calm down!) than data spottiness, I imagine they would be ambivalent about it.

My bet is, if they support 3G, they will not give any details about what carrier will be supported until right before it ships.

ThunderSkunk

Jan 22, 2010, 01:04 AM

NiteWaves77

Jan 22, 2010, 01:05 AM

I'll be so mad if I need to sign another 2 year commitment with ATT for $30 a month for the tablet. That is nothing short of rape

Son, I used to pay $5/hour for text scrolling up my black and white monitor at 1200 baud. You kids don't know what rape is. Get some historical perspective.

Peace

Jan 22, 2010, 01:07 AM

Son, I used to pay $5/hour for text scrolling up my black and white monitor at 1200 baud. You kids don't know what rape is. Get some historical perspective.

Perspective? I pay $149 a month for 2 iPhones and I will NOT pay more just to have the device.

And gas was $.99 a gallon then too.

NiteWaves77

Jan 22, 2010, 01:10 AM

Perspective? I pay $149 a month for 2 iPhones and I will NOT pay more just to have the device.

I said historical perspective. But, God, you people are so emphatic -- like you can't breathe without the latest Apple merch. Like it's your right, somehow.

I'm glad you won't be buying one if it requires a wireless contract. That's more bandwidth for us upwardly mobile users! Wheee! :cool:

BatPhone

Jan 22, 2010, 01:23 AM

Son, I used to pay $5/hour for text scrolling up my black and white monitor at 1200 baud. You kids don't know what rape is. Get some historical perspective.

Historical perspective ? :rolleyes:

We dont live in the stone ages anymore pops !

iMaggot

Jan 22, 2010, 01:37 AM

LMAO i still don't get all the hype for the "iPad".
I already have one, it's called an iPhone ;).

Cobaltplasma

Jan 22, 2010, 01:38 AM

I have to agree with others prior, I don't think there will be two versions since there's enough physical space to commit both of the chipsets at once. Instead, actually, I think that Apple is talking with Verizon and asking them if they want to support this, giving them a fair shake at a slice of the pie, and then asking AT&T if they think this will sell if the iPhone crowd has to shell out yet another wireless monthly plan; in other words (me being all naive and what not..perhaps just hopeful), I have a feeling that Apple is going to be pushing AT&T to let iPhone customers piggyback their iTablet usage onto their iPhone data plans, maybe have non-AT&T users pay for a monthly plan and AT&T getting a percentage back for whatever gets sold on their network, same for Verizon.

This is, of course, purely speculative, but I really think Apple already knows that there are a ton of iPhone users out there who would be pretty upset if they found out their revolutionary new gizmo came with yet another $30/month premium to pay and will try their best to maximize their profits with the iSlate/Tablet/Pad.

AT&T likely knows this, but they're also aware that Verizon is quickly creeping into the picture, so most likely all parties will play nice since I'm sure Verizon wouldn't mind getting a cut of the Apple pie and AT&T wants to keep as much of it to themselves for as long as possible.

BigMacIain

Jan 22, 2010, 01:41 AM

The very fact that this is being discussed (AT&T/Verizon) reinforces my suspicion that (yet again) it will be restrained by local/national restrictions and will be US-only for a long time. Like the iPhone and the iTunes Store before it.

kernkraft

Jan 22, 2010, 02:07 AM

Tablet? Are you saying that Apple is planning to release a tablet-like device? Oh, my god!

XciteMe

Jan 22, 2010, 02:11 AM

I'll be so mad if I need to sign another 2 year commitment with ATT for $30 a month for the tablet. That is nothing short of rape

How about you don't buy one??? You already have an iPhone, and I'm assuming lap top, what need do you have for what is essentially a bigger more expensive phoneless version of it?????

To show off or because you buy anything with 'Apple' on it, both of which make no sense at all.

And if you do buy it (for Christ's sakes) why should service be free???

acidfast7

Jan 22, 2010, 02:36 AM

no 4G LTE? we've already rolled that out in Stockholm and it would be nice to use it. I want my 180Mb/s wireless (so I can download torrents at the cafe).

4np

Jan 22, 2010, 02:42 AM

It's silly to limit your device to only one of the two networks. What if you go abroad? Or if you want to switch networks at some point? If so, I would go for the most common standard, hence AT&T... But perhaps the device is capable of both but just contains a sim lock to the carrier of choice?

koobcamuk

Jan 22, 2010, 02:53 AM

Not another device that comes with a mandatory monthly payment.
It's the only dealbreaker.

But it's the cornerstone of the American financial market...

Tie people up in contracts to things they can't pay.... then cry when they can't pay... and the system breaks.

Son, I used to pay $5/hour for text scrolling up my black and white monitor at 1200 baud. You kids don't know what rape is. Get some historical perspective.

I really hope an actual rape victim does not read this insensitive, nonsensical statement.

Yr Blues

Jan 22, 2010, 03:04 AM

There will probably be a card slot to choose between different carrier styles—I mean even T-Mobile has a different GSM style than AT&T, and I don't they'd rule out smaller companies.

It's a lot larger so it would have the modular space needed. It would be a good long term strategy as well. But perhaps it can only be installed in the Apple Store and not user serviceable.

Also, It's probably going to have a plan for existing iPhone users, like an extra $15-25 a month—like a family plan. Or not. Who the hell knows what they're up to? IMHO, I think they're going for a subsidized free service like the Kindle, where all the media companies and advertisers are paying for the bandwidth.

bigjohn

Jan 22, 2010, 03:26 AM

Son, I used to pay $5/hour for text scrolling up my black and white monitor at 1200 baud. You kids don't know what rape is. Get some historical perspective.

i've been digitizing old vhs tapes, saw an ad today for DSL for $59.95 a month... that was 2001

bigjohn

Jan 22, 2010, 03:28 AM

3G service or not, I still can't find a decent reason to own this device.

that said, i hope Mr. J can sort me out on the 27th - he has a way of doing that.

Corax

Jan 22, 2010, 03:36 AM

I think it may be true.
In another topic I also posted about there possibly being 2 versions.
7" and 10" or somewhere around that.
7" inch quatripples the space of the iphone's 3,5" and great for iphone OS, 10" is still smaller than the MacBooks display but usable for Mac OS X...

I didn't read anywhere that it may not be sold without a contract, so please be cool here. ;)

Ah what do I know...we'll just have to wait and see!:apple::cool:

Nostromo

Jan 22, 2010, 03:46 AM

3G service or not, I still can't find a decent reason to own this device.

that said, i hope Mr. J can sort me out on the 27th - he has a way of doing that.

Decency and computing...

You got yourself a seminar.

GroundLoop

Jan 22, 2010, 05:07 AM

The carriers are going to get their fair share of money out of this deal. Maybe the carrier fees will be packaged in the price of the content. Maybe it will be a separate data plan.

Maybe these fees will allow AT&T to finally upgrade its network since it can't even keep up with the iPhone. As far as Verizon goes, this device will go a long way to helping them fund the LTE upgrades coming in the next two years.

Hickman

Master Chief

Jan 22, 2010, 05:08 AM

Son, I used to pay $5/hour for text scrolling up my black and white monitor at 1200 baud. You kids don't know what rape is. Get some historical perspective.
Apple and Oranges. These days people get a subsidized product in return for their money. Just to name one, but pretty important difference. I mean some things may look pretty cheap these days, but it is the additional contract that will bother most people. And content won't be free forever so.... Making it even more expensive. And as a dad of four children, all having their own contract already (six in total) I am getting pretty sick of it yes.

Do I want to pay for yet another contract? No. I do not. But I also know that this isn't going to change anything.

Analog Kid

Jan 22, 2010, 05:10 AM

Seems odd that Apple would still be negotiating partnership deals days before announcing. Odder that they haven't chosen a air protocol yet. It's possible the report is just old news-- the negotiating was happening last month-- but more likely this is Apple Rumor click whoring.

rdlink

Jan 22, 2010, 05:12 AM

They can keep it if it requires me to sign a contract with either Verizon or AT&T. There's no way I'm going to sign a deal with the worst, most incompetent, most evil wireless company in the world, (AT&T) or the most proprietary, US-centric, closed down wireless company (Vzn).

T-Mobile is not only a better company, but they offer a richer experience when I travel internationally, and have much better pricing plans, both domestically and internationally. I truly hope that Apple keeps it in mind that there are already 750,000 iPhones running on T-Mobile's US network, (including mine) even though people have to give up their warranties and 3G to do it.

I see all of these posts whining about paying more to AT&T. How about we all start voting with our pocket books? T-Mobile is the closest thing you have to a friend in the wireless industry.

bergmef

Jan 22, 2010, 05:17 AM

I still think, since we are only a week away, a lot of the rumors are being done by apple to sniff out the disloyal employees. I honestly believe for every event, they are able to sniff out one or two more. The other theory is, one of the rumors is correct ... so now they flood all kinds of crazy stuff so that one is not focused on by any media.

ChocoTaco

Jan 22, 2010, 05:45 AM

sishaw

Jan 22, 2010, 05:56 AM

They can keep it if it requires me to sign a contract with either Verizon or AT&T.

Reading the article, it seems to me that the 3G connectivity is optional, and the device will also work on WiFi networks. A number of people have made this same comment, but I didn't see anywhere that a contract is "required," it is an option.

grayskies

Jan 22, 2010, 06:21 AM

I hope it's not required to have a service. It's nice to be connected but it always seems when I need to be connected away from a hotspot, I can't get a good signal.

I've contemplated dumping my phones ( probably not gonna happen ) because I'm sick of paying high monthly plans. (crappy services too)

I think this product is gonna be costly...making contract subsidies look enticing.

mlblacy

Jan 22, 2010, 06:26 AM

Verizon will give you the same $30 extra a month treatment. Dont worry.

yes... but it will cost you $45, lol...

grayskies

Jan 22, 2010, 06:28 AM

Son, I used to pay $5/hour for text scrolling up my black and white monitor at 1200 baud. You kids don't know what rape is. Get some historical perspective.

- good point

But, more things almost require internet service. DMV charges extra money for transactions in person, pushing people to online transactions.

It not a great argument but, as you say, some perspective.

Apple and Oranges. These days people get a subsidized product in return for their money. Just to name one, but pretty important difference. I mean some things may look pretty cheap these days, but it is the additional contract that will bother most people. And content won't be free forever so.... Making it even more expensive. And as a dad of four children, all having their own contract already (six in total) I am getting pretty sick of it yes.

Do I want to pay for yet another contract? No. I do not. But I also know that this isn't going to change anything.

Ouch...I thought two contracts was bad. :eek:

BryanLyle

Jan 22, 2010, 06:29 AM

I'll just use my MiFi (from Verizon) for my internet connection. Apple is not a big fan of creating two versions of a product, so I would find it hard to believe they would do it for this.

Kar98

Jan 22, 2010, 06:31 AM

I doubt there would need to be two versions. It seems like it would be big enough to fit both cdma and gsm chips. and whats with all the fox news articles lately?

Came to post that.
And you're right. In fact some Verizon phones do come with both CDMA and GSM built in.

Chupa Chupa

Jan 22, 2010, 06:41 AM

The upcoming Apple tablet is expected to have Wi-Fi connectivity, but has also been said to have optional 3G service for internet use when away from a hotspot.

Sheesh. Which syllable of OP-TION-AL do you guys not understand?

If you think Apple is going to include free 24/7 3G connectivity then you need to get off the meds. They might include 3G connectivity when d/ling iTunes media, but across the board "no extra charge" service, not happening with this bandwidth sucker.

Big deal? No. Free Wi-Fi hotspots are everywhere these days.

infiniteentropy

Jan 22, 2010, 06:55 AM

Big deal? No. Free Wi-Fi hotspots are everywhere these days.

Maybe in some big cities like San Francisco... I'm near Grand Rapids, MI (#1 in poverty growth this year! Go team!) and really Wi-Fi hotspots are still difficult to come by apart from coffee shops. I used to use a RAZR with an iPod Touch but found myself increasingly cut off from my e-mail and such when not in the office or at home. Which led me to the iPhone contract I'm regretting at times now... heh.

Anyways, yeah, there are still some fairly big metro areas (Grand Rapids is over 1M people, has been for a decade) that just haven't "gotten there" yet. So for those of us in that situation, the 3G / EDGE connection is the only way to stay connected when not stationary. Sad but true... :(

jonnysods

Jan 22, 2010, 06:58 AM

With less than a week to go before the press announcement, they would be negotiating still on major features like carrier deals?

Doesn't seem like Apple to have things not 100% lined up?

Ports

Jan 22, 2010, 07:14 AM

Free Wi-Fi is the key folks::D

ldkaplan

Jan 22, 2010, 07:15 AM

I'll be so mad if I need to sign another 2 year commitment with ATT for $30 a month for the tablet. That is nothing short of rape

It's only rape if you can't walk away.

You wanting a cool gadget, buying a subsidized device and paying a monthly fee is consensual. Nobody making you buy an item that you don't need.

kdarling

Jan 22, 2010, 07:16 AM

You know...

The CEOs of both ATT and Verizon have been talking up tiered data plans lately.

Perhaps it's all preparation for the coming tablet's communication plan(s).

Perhaps no plan needed if paying via book / magazine sales, then tiered plans for music / video / web access.

thaprofessor33

Jan 22, 2010, 07:22 AM

I am only buying one if there is no monthly fee attached.

levitynyc

Jan 22, 2010, 07:27 AM

If I can tether my iPhone, then I'm in.

Otherwise I always have my MacBook with me if I need more screen real estate than my iPhone.

azentropy

Jan 22, 2010, 07:31 AM

I'm not going for another device that has a monthly, and not sure if WiFi only on a $700+ device would do it either.

I'm thinking possibly that the rumor that the tablet will have two dock connectors is that maybe you can dock (tether) it to an iPhone to get 3G, and then dock it to power/computer as well. Of course AT&T will probably still charge extra for that tethering...

AidenShaw

Jan 22, 2010, 07:34 AM

There will probably be a card slot to choose between different carrier styles—I mean even T-Mobile has a different GSM style than AT&T, and I don't they'd rule out smaller companies.

For 3G (not voice), one chip/antenna can do it all:

http://www.gobianywhere.com/consumer.php

Wireless Freedom with carrier choice
•Choose from multiple carriers worldwide for the best coverage and rates
•Switch wireless carriers at any time through the life of your laptop
•Free yourself from cords, cards, plugs or hunting for hot spots, you can even cut the cord to your home based Internet service

Dell offers a gobi option - so when you get a Dell with 3G it is not bound to a carrier. The 3G radio even handles GPS with the same chip.

NoExpectations

Jan 22, 2010, 07:34 AM

I'll be so mad if I need to sign another 2 year commitment with ATT for $30 a month for the tablet. That is nothing short of rape

You have a choice...get a discount with a 2 year contract OR pay full price.

Jeez.

For me, if they offer 2 types, CDMA or GSM, why would I get the CDMA (US only) versus the GSM (Global access)?

Winni

Jan 22, 2010, 07:35 AM

I'll be so mad if I need to sign another 2 year commitment with ATT for $30 a month for the tablet. That is nothing short of rape

Then don't let them "rape" you. You can live a very happy life WITHOUT Apple's gadgets. In fact, your life will probably be happier without any electronic toy device or the addiction to always have the latest and greatest trendy toy. After all, so far the world has worked pretty well without a tablet PC, and nobody has yet told us where this thing will improve the quality of a consumer life or what it enables us to do what we cannot already do today without it.

As far as I am concerned, this thing will probably be as useless as a sand flea in my butt.

xerent

Jan 22, 2010, 07:45 AM

If the tablet has bluetooth, tethering will work, but jailbreaking might be required. :(

Stella

Jan 22, 2010, 07:51 AM

If the tablet has bluetooth, tethering will work, but jailbreaking might be required. :(

Tethering will also work if the Tablet has Wifi.

Tethering over BT (2.x) would be a bit brutal.

jocknerd

Jan 22, 2010, 07:52 AM

Apple, don't screw this up and force me into getting a data plan for this thing. Its not a phone. Tell people to use it like I want to. If you can't access WiFi, then bring along a mi-fi for your 3G coverage. Portable and works on more than one device.

If you sell this device and it requires me to sign up for a data plan, I'll walk away.

wolfpackfan

Jan 22, 2010, 07:52 AM

I'm hoping the Tablet will have 3G with some sort of subsidized cost (like some of the netbooks have now). If so, I will get one and sign up for the plan (hopefully not at $60). Then I plan to downgrade my iPhone to a regular old cell phone and drop the data plan basically letting the Tablet replace my iPhone. I'll just use my iPhone as a Touch (or end up giving it to my daughter who's original iPhone is in sad shape).

wolfpackfan

Jan 22, 2010, 07:54 AM

Apple, don't screw this up and force me into getting a data plan for this thing.

No where at all has it ever been suggested that a data plan would be mandatory. Not sure where folks are coming up with this idea. If they do offer 3G it will be completely optional.

dcurtis

Jan 22, 2010, 07:56 AM

Do you think that maybe Apple is trying to setup something where they pay AT&T / Verizon a fee per download on the network?

Also, if you're on Verizon or AT&T and you have multiple devices, shouldn't you really be allowed to run two to three devices on your account? Data costs for these phone companies is ridiculous. Get the damn network built and get people their coverage then sit back and rake in the money. People thinking too much in the *now*.

HobeSoundDarryl

Jan 22, 2010, 07:56 AM

With less than a week to go before the press announcement, they would be negotiating still on major features like carrier deals?

Doesn't seem like Apple to have things not 100% lined up?

...like using the name iPhone owned by a completely separate corporation?

HobeSoundDarryl

Jan 22, 2010, 08:02 AM

You know...

The CEOs of both ATT and Verizon have been talking up tiered data plans lately.

Perhaps it's all preparation for the coming tablet's communication plan(s).

Perhaps, but this is Verizon & AT&T we're talking about... companies that have worked very hard to crush and/or buy their way to pseudo-monopolies. I think it is wishful thinking to imagine that a tiered structure might reduce their average subscription fee per customer for customer benefit. Instead, I would imagine they would flex their monopolistic muscles to start from that point and build tiered pricing upwards. More simply, if you are paying $100/month for a service now, the tiers would be more likely along the lines for $100, 125, 150, etc vs. $50, 75, and 100.

That's how such stuff goes when monopolies or near-monopolies are allowed to merge & purge their way to dominance. End users (us) don't win at their expense.

Zeos

Jan 22, 2010, 08:07 AM

My informal source, who is a programmer for a subcontractor and has been decently reliable, has said that Apple had been working on seamless tethering functionality between the iPhone and the Pad, but there have been difficulties, including serious resistance from carriers. Fundamentals for the new functionality were supposed to be built into 4.0 with a roll-out in the spring or summer, but the whole approach may have been scrapped.

SteveSparks

Jan 22, 2010, 08:07 AM

I can Have wifi ANY PLACE i GO ! Why would I suddenly want to pay for it? I actually kind of kick myself for getting an iPhone ! .....Better to have a $#!tty phone with an iPod Touch ! ( WIFI and all ...)

Which is why the Touch does not have a camera, lots of people would ditch the iPhone for a touch if it had a camera. I'd rather pay $10 for a phone that I can drop-kick and then have my touch in a nice case on my belt. However I want a camera, because I have kids and like to have a camera.

drober30

Jan 22, 2010, 08:09 AM

drober30

Jan 22, 2010, 08:12 AM

Le Big Mac

Jan 22, 2010, 08:14 AM

Agreed. Anyone buying a Tablet should be able to use it in either, or BOTH, networks.

Yeah, I don't care to be locked into either provider. Fine if what they're doing is simply negotiating some sort of subsidy with service. But I'd rather a tablet that comes without contract and can be used (even only with an external dongle) with any carrier who is providing the service.

Besides, a Verizon Apple Tablet will be totally outdated when V roles out 4G/LTE in a year or so.

koobcamuk

Jan 22, 2010, 08:17 AM

Apple needs to build or take over it's own data network! Then they would have no restrictions.

They can either afford it or get investors easily.

I would just like to say...
There are other countries than the USA

and also
most other countries have SIM cards not CDMA

So please, get real.

The iPad will be released worldwide, to cater for a world market.

HobeSoundDarryl

Jan 22, 2010, 08:27 AM

People, step outside yourselves and look at this from the seller's end of things.

Apple wants to sell tons of these Tablets. I've heard 10M in one year is the goal. Apple wants to make the Apple margin on all their sales. Apple knows that pricing is an important variable regardless of how great this thing might seem. So, it is easy to imagine the OPTION for a subsidized version. That's how the masses that want a "cheap" price can get the latest & greatest for just a few hundred dollars... just like the iPhone. Yes, that cheap price comes with a contract, but Apple has a TOTAL (we want our margin) price they want for this thing. Either YOU pay that total, or you plus a subsidizing company pay it. Your choice.

It should be obvious that AT&T's network is fairly overloaded. I see much too much gripes about it on this site, other sites, and in the press. If you are Apple you know this too. If Apple wants to keep ramping up the sales of iPhones and now this Tablet year over year, can AT&T build out their network fast enough to handle the coming additional load? Worse, does AT&T even WANT to do that?

Meanwhile, there is this other "whole" network, advertising "there's a map for that" very, very obviously making the point that their 3G is in many more places than AT&T. Remembering that Apple's goal is to sell many more iPhones (and Tablets) this coming year... noting that AT&T's network seems increasingly constrained to support that sales goal... and noting that the exclusivity contract with AT&T is apparently up for ending... it only makes sense to build BOTH 3G options into this new Tablet. That opens up a whole other market of buyers hooked to Verizon enough that they don't want to switch to AT&T. And I saw yesterday that that market is apparently 80M people deep.

Those with AT&T interested in iPhones have probably got one by now. Those with Verizon wanting an iPhone so bad that they would cancel, pay, and switch have mostly done so. Those with Verizon who won't switch are a very ready market hungry for the wonders of an iPhone or iPhone-like device on the Verizon network. Apple would be foolish not to build BOTH into this Tablet (and into the next iPhone too). It's not like building both in adds much cost to the hardware.

So, following this logic, here's what I expect related to the Tablet:

OPTIONAL 3G, meaning cheaper price with contract, but "expensive" without (let iPhone with and without pricing be your guide to guess your Tablet price... my guess is $799 without a contract)
OPTIONAL 3G in the same Tablet build (not 2 separate models) making it 3G compatible for BOTH AT&T and Verizon (and others). Among obvious benefits, that makes one model sellable to the 80M Verizon subs, plus capable of being sold and/or used anywhere in the rest of the world.
Verizon will have a short speaking part at the event welcoming this new device into the mix, praising Apple, and so on (then no more iPhone-slighting commercials).

Exercising your option to NOT buy one with a contract (by laying out the TOTAL price Apple will want for this thing up front... and probably griping about it), you'll have the rich access experience anytime you are near a good free wifi (but hopefully wimax) access point, but you won't have the access the internet anywhere at anytime experience you can get with 3G.

AT&T might (that's MIGHT) roll out a plan to let iPhone subscribers add a Tablet to their plan:

for an extra monthly fee (but maybe not quite as much as adding a second iPhone) OR
for a one-time (ahem "setup" fee) so that it shares your iPhone contract... probably in a "use one or the other but not both at the same time" arrangement

...probably with a renewed contractual commitment of up to 24 months. Why? If the exclusivity deal is going to end, they'll want to re-lock you up for another 24-month term, and they'll be motivated to make some concessions on monthly cost to do so.

I expect phone functionality to be included in this device so that a person who would want to use this as their phone (too) could... not by holding it up to their ear, but by using earbuds with mic much like using a laptop as a phone. That way those who want their phone and want a Tablet but don't want 2 contracts, could opt for just a Tablet and let it also be their new, next generation phone. Furthermore, this functionality would allow Verizon to advertise this as the "iPhone has come to Verizon" built into the new Apple Tablet, which could grab a lot of sales of this even before the regular iPhone is available to Verizon subs. I, for one, am most interested in this particular feature, as I find the iPhone too small, and would welcome a Tablet-like device to (also) cover that base.

Lastly, no one should go into this imagining any kind of free 3G "like the Kindle" (Apple won't/can't eat the 3G cost of iTunes media that is tens to hundreds of times bigger than Kindle media). No one should imagine that AT&T or Verizon will shoot themselves in the foot to give us a super cheap full 3G option just to help Apple sell more Tablets. And no one should imagine that Apple would be foolish enough to lock this device into a REQUIRED 3G contract when there is so little reason to do so; by making both options available, they can sell to the maximum possible audience.

Cander

Jan 22, 2010, 08:35 AM

hehe

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/

Stately

Jan 22, 2010, 08:40 AM

Chupa Chupa

Jan 22, 2010, 08:46 AM

I will be with Verizon. Hopefully they are smart enough and or have learned their lessons early by watching AT&T use it's customers up. If they are smart, they will have numerous plans that actually make sense, instead of having ridiculously priced plans that also manage to go over the set monthly price cap no matter what. Maybe some sort of prepaid with full benefits will be in order.
AT&T commercials are a joke lol, they are talking about themselves. It reminds me of how when you were little and you would try to make fun of your big brother to get him back or something and no matter what you said, it was like, "stop talkin' about yourself like that, that's not nice" lol and your only comeback would be a cheesy . ."Hold on, I'm talking about youuu." and by that time they walked away lol. AT&T is that annoying little brother right now lol, GO AWAY!

Have you been watching Verizon lately? They just jacked up their ETF rates for smart phones to $350. Their data plans have always been the most expensive too. They have better 3G coverage but that is about all they have going for them. If you think they are more consumer oriented than ATT you are going to become disappointed quickly. All wireless companies suck. I think it's just a story of the grass is greener when it comes to Verizon, but people will find out Verizon just painted the brown grass and it will rub off.

spencers

Jan 22, 2010, 08:53 AM

All these Apple products on AT&T going to bring the networks to their knees!
Oh wait...

stockscalper

Jan 22, 2010, 08:56 AM

Now there's a reliable source of information - Faux Neuse!

HobeSoundDarryl

Jan 22, 2010, 08:57 AM

Have you been watching Verizon lately? They just jacked up their ETF rates for smart phones to $350. Their data plans have always been the most expensive too. They have better 3G coverage but that is about all they have going for them. If you think they are more consumer oriented than ATT you are going to become disappointed quickly. All wireless companies suck. I think it's just a story of the grass is greener when it comes to Verizon, but people will find out Verizon just painted the brown grass and it will rub off.

Adding to this very accurate summation, all you really have to do is ask yourself what would move any provider to offer lower rates for us? The only thing that drives end user rates down is competition. If a competitor offers about the same level of service for less, the other competitor has to match or lose customers. When the national market is really just a handful of competitors (perhaps it is really just 2 competitors), collusion on pricing is EASY. Keep your pricing about the same, and the people must pay up.

Neither AT&T or Verizon want to battle on price. Could they? Absolutely. But why do so when they are just about the only games in towns for most of the population? Their objective is to maximize profits, which is not accomplished by dropping prices, unless such price reductions make up for the per-customer loss in volume. However, when you are a pseudo monopoly you still get all those customers at your (overly) high price as long as your (ahem) competitor(?) keeps their prices high too.

Our system is broken when competition is reduced down to 1 or 2 players. Capitalism fails the end user when this occurs. The only card we can play is to opt out... as in quit BOTH. If enough consumers decide they don't need a cell phone, prices will come down by both of them to try to woo us back. But as much as we all gripe about the robbery of high 3G rates, we choose to pay them anyway. And as long as the crowd does that too, there's absolutely NO reason for rates to get any cheaper (just the opposite actually).

bigmc6000

Jan 22, 2010, 09:04 AM

Son, I used to pay $5/hour for text scrolling up my black and white monitor at 1200 baud. You kids don't know what rape is. Get some historical perspective.

Please don't tell me that NiteWaves got put in timeout for that î (up arrow :))

Wiss

Jan 22, 2010, 09:04 AM

I would just teather the new device to my iPhone. At least that is what the logical person would do...

Oh wait, AT&T won't let that happen; too logical and no additional $$$ for AT&T!

HobeSoundDarryl

Jan 22, 2010, 09:09 AM

I would just teather the new device to my iPhone. At least that is what the logical person would do...

Oh wait, AT&T won't let that happen; too logical and no additional $$$ for AT&T!

And locking tethering to just the Tablet won't be easy. I can foresee a very quick hack creation to unlock Tablet-only Tethering to laptops, etc. I just don't see tethering as the way this gets done. I can see a special add-on option for Tablets so that they share an account, thus same end result, but probably with a higher monthly or at least a one-time "setup" fee... or maybe that fee is waived with a fresh 24-month commitment.

fswmacguy

Jan 22, 2010, 09:11 AM

Judging by FOX News' track record, I call BS on any of their Apple rumors.

macnchiefs

Jan 22, 2010, 09:14 AM

Easy folks. 3G is going to be optional and not mandatory.

MacDaddy901

Jan 22, 2010, 09:15 AM

Makes sense. Apple doesn't want to screw over iPhone users, but doesn't want to limit itself to AT&T's network. I think this is a strong possibility and makes me even more excited about a Verizon iPhone.

Drag'nGT

Jan 22, 2010, 09:20 AM

Easy folks. 3G is going to be optional and not mandatory.

But thank God it is an option. The way these rumors have been going on they seem to chant WiFi only which makes no sense at freaking all.

It is in Apple's best interest to run on AT&T and VZW. I'm not a VZW fan but business is to make money.

Frazzle

Jan 22, 2010, 09:37 AM

Just sell me a cool device with WiFi and a SIM tray and let me figure out if, when and how I want to use it. Sheesh.

There are more countries than just the US. I'm on an unlimited data plan here for $12 a month and I can put that SIM into any device I want.

So I do not want to be forced into the arms of some phone company just because of a device. It cheapens the whole experience. It is soooo last century. I had to get my iPhone from Belgium because they do not allow locking. Why can't other countries follow suit.

steviec

Jan 22, 2010, 09:41 AM

HobeSoundDarryl

Jan 22, 2010, 09:50 AM

Maybe Apple will be offering the Wireless for free but limit what it can do, for example, when the wireless connects it allows you to purchase content from approved publishers. This would allow you to download books, magazines, maybe songs, maybe apps. However, it would not allow you to stream all day, download the latest Blu-Ray movie from Rapidshare or any other large size content, that would be left to WI-Fi only.

It sort of works for Amazon.

That's wishful thinking though. Think about what really happens at Amazon. It costs Amazon 15 cents per megabyte downloaded via 3G (see: http://www.macrumors.com/2010/01/20/amazon-tweaks-kindle-store-royalty-program-ahead-of-apple-tablet-launch/). They bill that into the price of the books that are downloaded. Those book's median size is only about 368K. So that only costs Amazon (you) about 6 cents more to cover the "free" download. That's pretty easy to eat within the media's price. And Apple could set this same arrangement up for text-heavy, Kindle (small media file) size content too.

But, as soon as you step up to other iTunes media, the math gets messy. For example, if an iTunes plus song is about 8MBs on average, you can do the math yourself to see how much it will cost to cover the 3G if Apple can strike the same deal that Amazon struck with 3G providers. Now apply that to a 800MB TV show or a 2GB movie.

Anything more than black & white, text-heavy media (well below 1Mb in file size) gets very expensive to bundle into the price we pay for that media (via an Amazon-type arrangement). I can easily see the same Kindle-like content with the 3G download cost built in. But step it up to everything else from iTunes, and SOMEBODY will need to pay up if it is going to be downloaded over 3G. And hint: it won't be Apple.

Eye4Desyn

Jan 22, 2010, 09:51 AM

My prayer for REAL HOPE AND CHANGE consists of AT&T allowing tethering from the (iPad) to the iPhone. That way, I can finally get the "change I can believe in" back in my pocket.:apple:

I think you're on to something here. Since we still haven't seen tethering ability with the iPhone in the U.S., it would make perfect sense to unveil it now with the rumored tablet to have that connectivity while on the go. However, I do remember that tethering capability through the iPhone was going to come at a co$t.

I agree with most people here in that another monthly data plan would be robbery. I like the idea that if you have multiple devices with one carrier, then said carrier (ATT or Verizon) should offer some form of a discount with the data portion of the contract.

Disc Golfer

Jan 22, 2010, 10:00 AM

Having to pay for both home internet & mobile internet = fail

Cander

Jan 22, 2010, 10:04 AM

Having to pay for both home internet & mobile internet = fail

Not knowing the definition of optional = fail

I WAS the one

Jan 22, 2010, 10:05 AM

Ok. Let me tell you something. I owned 4 Macs two desktops and two portables. Three iPods including an iPod touch that I use everyday with my android phone. I want a tablet so I can give my touch to my wife and start using the tablet at work... as a bigger iPod touch with my apps and all. Get it? No ATT in my life.

Mark Booth

Jan 22, 2010, 10:19 AM

These rumors are 5 days behind the times. On Monday (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=9108003&highlight=optional#post9108003), I wrote this:

Name: iSlate
Price points: $799 & $899
GUI: Unbelievably cool and NOT just a "big iPhone"
WiFi: Yes
Bluetooth: Yes
Built-in cellular data: Optional
Ability to be legally tethered to iPhone data: Yes (with additional cost monthly tethering plan)
Ship date: March 26, 2010

On January 27, I will be proven right on all counts!

Mark

Disc Golfer

Jan 22, 2010, 10:26 AM

Not knowing the definition of optional = fail
So if you don't pay for it you don't get it.. thats like saying a macbook doesn't actually cost a thousand bucks, as long as you don't buy one. :rolleyes:

olternaut

Jan 22, 2010, 10:36 AM

I think I'm going to be waiting for version 2 of this thing. Just too many things that need to be worked out. One thing that I hope happens is for wireless providers to offer a discounted package if you have both an iPhone and a tablet with them. Paying for all these separate data services each month is really starting to get expensive.

That would be the smart move. Unfortunately, I don't think I will be smart enough to resist the temptation to get this thing as soon as it is available. :p

JimGr

Jan 22, 2010, 10:36 AM

I can Have wifi ANY PLACE i GO ! Why would I suddenly want to pay for it? I actually kind of kick myself for getting an iPhone ! .....Better to have a $#!tty phone with an iPod Touch ! ( WIFI and all ...)

That's exactly what I have always done. My wife has an iPhone she bought while we lived in Thailand so it is not jailbroken and not tied to any service plan. We have the same carrier and the same plan. My little stupid phone gets two bars when standing next to my wife who has no service detected. Somebody has some sort of antenna issues.

I don't have a data plan and I don't want one. The Newton (lets all call it what we want while we can) is not likely to leave my house very often and can thus access the home network.

mwp98223

Jan 22, 2010, 10:39 AM

I'll be so mad if I need to sign another 2 year commitment with ATT for $30 a month for the tablet. That is nothing short of rape

So don't buy it. If you don't like the services or prices you have the option not to buy the thing.

mattster16

Jan 22, 2010, 10:45 AM

Agreed. Anyone buying a Tablet should be able to use it in either, or BOTH, networks.

Yes, it would suck to be stuck with one or the other permanently. Verizon has more coverage, but at&t is much, much faster in my experience (at least where I live).

MattBaker

Jan 22, 2010, 11:03 AM

HobeSoundDarryl

Jan 22, 2010, 11:18 AM

Yes, it would suck to be stuck with one or the other permanently. Verizon has more coverage, but at&t is much, much faster in my experience (at least where I live).

While I am very confident that OPTIONAL 3G will be built in covering both kinds of 3G networks (AT&T & Verizon), I don't know if I would think about this Tablet as getting "stuck", mostly because I suspect this Tablet will be more iPhone/Touch vs. Mac. By this, I mean, if you buy an iPhone, within about 2 years, you're feeling a lot of hardware envy/(self) pressure to step up to the iPhone 3G Mach 4, and so on such that the (iPhone) product you own is feeling increasingly obsolete. I very much expect this giant iPhone + device to be like that... that the Tablet that is rolled out 2 years from now will be so much "more" than this first one, we'll want to upgrade. And the one that rolls out 1-2 years after that one will be so much "more", we'll want to upgrade again.

I think Apple loves that piece of this kind of hardware sales, unlike the Mac-side where you can go many more years without feeling as much of an overwhelming need to upgrade. For example, I'm still getting by just fine on the laptop side using a Powerbook G4 (though it's time to retire is finally drawing near).

HobeSoundDarryl

Jan 22, 2010, 11:22 AM

It's pretty late in the game for Apple to decide between carriers. More likely they've had the deal(s) in place for months.

If they're discussing anything days before the announcement, it's something trivial like what color shirts the AT&T and Verizon reps will wear when they stand on stage during the announcement.

Or Apple is so hooked to secrecy that they can't risk trusting either with many details about this new thing... so they've saved most of the details until very close to when they show it.

I take this rumor- if true- to mean that it is going to get shown to us next week, but not be available for several more months. Apple gets both players to commit to their parts now, then irons out fine details about both plans later.

sishaw

Jan 22, 2010, 11:45 AM

Here's what I think:

1. 3G data plans will be available from both Verizon and AT&T

2. Data will not be a cheap add-on, although it will be optional (of course there will be wi-fi).

3. There will be discounts to incentivize multi-year contracts. Look for $30/mo. plans with substantial discounts for 2 and 3 year commitments.

I have absolutely no basis for any of this, except it seems logical. No one is going to give away cheap data, this device will be too much of a potential golden goose. However, long-term customer retention is in the phone company's interest, hence the multi-year discounts.

hoits2000

Jan 22, 2010, 11:47 AM

I just noticed that my att wireless phone bill email came title; "Your AT&T Mobility Bill is Ready to View" instead of your At&T Wireless bill is ready. Hint of what is to come for itablet coverage?

Ammo

Jan 22, 2010, 12:00 PM

sishaw

Jan 22, 2010, 12:48 PM

This.

And an iPad on Verizon makes an eventual iPhone on Verizon a foregone conclusion!!!!!

Yup. It wouldn't surprise me too much if it were announced also on the 27th, coming later in the year.

Riemann Zeta

Jan 22, 2010, 12:54 PM

Not another device that comes with a mandatory monthly payment.

It's the only dealbreaker.
Yep, mandatory wireless contracting would be an absolute dealbreaker for me. I am sick of the new industry strategy that turns every technology purchase into a recurring monthly charge. This idea of 'cloud' computing is nothing but a way for corporations to force people to "pay per play" to access information/media. The overarching goal is to remove the concept of discrete individual ownership: it's their device, their network, their media, their files, etc... and you are contractually obligated to keep paying and paying for the privilege of renting it.

cmaier

Jan 22, 2010, 12:57 PM

Yep, mandatory wireless contracting would be an absolute dealbreaker for me. I am sick of the new industry strategy that turns every technology purchase into a recurring monthly charge. This idea of 'cloud' computing is nothing but a way for corporations to force people to "pay per play" to access information/media. The overarching goal is to remove the concept of discrete individual ownership: it's their device, their network, their media, their files, etc... and you are contractually obligated to keep paying and paying for the privilege of renting it.

Verizon aircards don't even require contracts, so I doubt this will.

oldwatery

Jan 22, 2010, 12:59 PM

Not that I am remotely interested in a big iTouch..but if this comes with mandatory internet connectivity then it is going to be a huge deal breaker for many people.
I already pay way too much for my cable and iPhone access. This had better be an option.

TraceyS/FL

Jan 22, 2010, 01:05 PM

I"m still really hoping that Apple pushes the "big 2" into a pre-paid type of access.

I'm willing to pay $30 for a card - say even 2gb - that doesn't expire in 30 days. Heck, given the data numbers i've seen thrown around - i'll go 1gb that lasts 90 days or so.

I was hoping to get the Verizon Palm Pixi with the wifi feature.... but i'm not paying the tethering charge for it. I don't need data on the phone part - just give me the wifi for my Touch. I'm back to pondering a MiFi for now. I'm out of contract Verizon and don't have to have data on my Treo - i'm just waiting to see how it all plays out....

But i'll keep dreaming for a new method of delivering data to this device...

EETFUK

Jan 22, 2010, 01:55 PM

That's my plan as soon as this service contract it up.
...unless it's still less to take the $200 penalty, and use an iPod touch & Skype starting now. Need to figure that out yet.

American cell companies straight-up suck, and I'm tired of supporting their gluttony and laziness by throwing money away at them.

Same here. I already use my iPod Touch + Skype and it is so much cheaper this way! The only problem is finding the Wi-fi hotspots to get service for my Skype! So, it's not a complete fix, but i'd like to get rid of my cell phone and just use my iPod. It doesn't look like it will happen anytime soon though...

/dev/toaster

Jan 22, 2010, 01:57 PM

Sorry, but Fox "News" is not a reliable news outlet.

Nostromo

Jan 22, 2010, 01:59 PM

/dev/toaster

Jan 22, 2010, 02:01 PM

Verizon aircards don't even require contracts, so I doubt this will.

Uh ... the EVDO card I have required a 2 year agreement with Verizon.

cmaier

Jan 22, 2010, 02:36 PM

Uh ... the EVDO card I have required a 2 year agreement with Verizon.

You may have bought it that way, or from a retailer that only sells it that way, but verizon allows pay-as-you-go on their aircards. They also allow monthly contracts. The pay-as-you-go just changed the way it works (it's what I use), but it's still available. Now you pay for a day, a week, or a month, each with a cap (I think it's 50MB, 250MB, 500MB or something like that).

kdarling

Jan 22, 2010, 04:27 PM

Have you been watching Verizon lately? They just jacked up their ETF rates for smart phones to $350.

Meaningless to the majority of people who don't switch carriers all the time. Or just buy the phone outright and it's meaningless to you, too.

Their data plans have always been the most expensive too.

They've been the same price as ATT's data plans for at least a couple of years now.

They have better 3G coverage but that is about all they have going for them.

All? That's a major reason to sign up with a 3G provider... you pick one that has coverage and speed and capacity where you live and travel.

ldkaplan

Jan 22, 2010, 04:32 PM

Who cares about 3g?

The most important question is whether it has a calculator.

CubusX

Jan 22, 2010, 08:08 PM

If Apple was smart they would design an iPhone and a tablet device that would run on both networks, or just walk away from ATT (ATT has hurt Apple's image) .

It's the only way to keep customers happy and increase their revenue ten fold.

ATT is getting slammed every which way possible due to the lack of 3G coverage. They are way out on the upgrades, all the revenue is going in the big-wigs pockets. Verizon will have an operating 4G network before ATT even gets a plan together on fixing their 3G network.

Apple would be foolish not to ride the Verizon train. More iPhones on a larger network that is known for business devices. Can you hear all the registers ringing?

Lets go Apple and release news about an iPhone on Verizon in 2010.

diabolic

Jan 22, 2010, 08:25 PM

Having to pay for both home internet & mobile internet = fail

Everyone has to pay for both now. Why would a tablet make it any different? A new device isn't going to change how internet providers or cell phone companies charge for access.

torbjoern

Jan 22, 2010, 08:39 PM

All? That's a major reason to sign up with a 3G provider... you pick one that has coverage and speed and capacity where you live and travel.I bet the device will be locked to AT&T (for U.S. customers) for 12 to 24 months after purchase if 3G is supported.

HyperZboy

Jan 23, 2010, 03:18 AM

Sorry, but Fox "News" is not a reliable news outlet.

And MSNBC has sportscaster Keith Olbermann for credibility plus its website is co-owned & managed by MICROSOFT!

Choose your lack of reliability carefully.

At least Rush Limbaugh is a Mac fanatic and Mac laptops are prominently featured on several FOX News Channel programs.

nullx86

Jan 23, 2010, 03:47 AM

Once again, your source in Apple news: Fox News.

This.

Can we just add a filter to prevent anything coming from/about Fox News? We'll cut the ******** in half instantly :cool::rolleyes:

mattwolfmatt

Jan 23, 2010, 09:39 AM

Could someone tell the "powers that be" to make an entry here detailing all the major rumors we have heard about the tablet since the beginning? I think it would be fun to look at all that info now when we are so close to the reveal..

Arn usually does one the evening before or the morning of the event. Look for one on Tuesday night or Wednesday morning.

mattwolfmatt

Jan 23, 2010, 09:42 AM

Sorry, but Fox "News" is not a reliable news outlet.

First of all, just because you disagree with their opinion people doesn't make their news unreliable.

Secondly, if you want Mac News, go to apple.com. If you want Mac rumors, you've come to the right place.

I think the reason so many Mac fans hate Foxnews is the obvious left-leaning direction of Mac fans. I get that. But it's also the "I hate #1" attitude intrenched in our thinking. Microsoft is #1, we hate them. Foxnews is #1. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/30/fox-news-dominates-3q-200_n_304260.html) They must be evil, too.

carlgo

Jan 23, 2010, 10:32 AM

If your going to get a tablet instead of a laptop, then I understand the appeal. I just don't see me wanting a macbook pro (which I already have) an iPhone (which I already have) and a Tablet. Well, I can see me "wanting" one...

I know if any company can bring out the wow factor in a product it's Apple so I look forward to the 27th. However, as many have stated already, no way I can afford to or even be willing to pay for an additional data plan.

I think my iPhone bill for my wife and I at $145.00 a month is ridicules! Then there is DirecTV, high speed Internet, Home Phone (I don't want everyone calling me on my cell phone) all this stuff adds up and becomes annoying.

I really enjoy my TV, Internet and iPhone so for entertainment and enjoyment, the money is well spent but again it adds up.

Exactly like me. Is connecting to the world a luxury? Well, Apple and AT&T, cable/sat companies, DSL service, etc. sure don't cater to poor people, do they? And as many have pointed out, it seems that even the more fortunate people are being stretched about as far as can be.

These industries have pretty much decided on serving the wealthier segment of the world with devices and connections that only they can afford. It is easier and more profitable than trying to provide products and services for everyone.

cmaier

Jan 23, 2010, 10:35 AM

First of all, just because you disagree with their opinion people doesn't make their news unreliable.

True. The fact that they repeatedly use video from one event to illustrate another event (ie: they fake the news) is what makes them unreliable.

SPNarwhal

Jan 23, 2010, 11:22 AM

why is it so impossible for apple to go with sprint?
they already have a 4g network, you would think they'd want to take advantage of it.

zedsdead

Jan 23, 2010, 11:24 AM

True. The fact that they repeatedly use video from one event to illustrate another event (ie: they fake the news) is what makes them unreliable.

This Fox News bashing NEEDS TO STOP. These forums are not about politics.

As for the thread, I just hope that ATT will have a better price point for people already signed up for the iPhone (although I highly doubt it).

cmaier

Jan 23, 2010, 11:31 AM

This Fox News bashing NEEDS TO STOP. These forums are not about politics.

As for the thread, I just hope that ATT will have a better price point for people already signed up for the iPhone (although I highly doubt it).

The veracity and reliability of the source of the rumor is highly relevant to the topic at hand. In this case the source is, has been pointed out, questionable.

zedsdead

Jan 23, 2010, 12:38 PM

The veracity and reliability of the source of the rumor is highly relevant to the topic at hand. In this case the source is, has been pointed out, questionable.

Does fox have some past history of being repeatedly wrong about Apple rumors?

twoodcc

Jan 23, 2010, 12:52 PM

i highly doubt they'll have 1 version for each carrier. instead, they'll have 1 version that works on both if possible, or they'll pick 1 carrier

HobeSoundDarryl

Jan 23, 2010, 01:44 PM

Exactly like me. Is connecting to the world a luxury? Well, Apple and AT&T, cable/sat companies, DSL service, etc. sure don't cater to poor people, do they? And as many have pointed out, it seems that even the more fortunate people are being stretched about as far as can be.

These industries have pretty much decided on serving the wealthier segment of the world with devices and connections that only they can afford. It is easier and more profitable than trying to provide products and services for everyone.

No, it's not that at all. Do you have their services? Are you in what you consider "the wealthier segment"?

What makes this work is pseudo-monopoly, where the competition is too thin for the natural competition of capitalism to work for us buyers of such services. The other thing that makes it work is that enough of the crowd- wealthy segment and not- finds a way to pay whatever price is required to keep such services.

In a (national) duopoly like AT&T and Verizon, neither feels ANY pressure to roll out lower cost plans (there's no real competitors fighting them on price). Any time a new entry gains enough ground to start giving them some trouble (on pricing) they gobble them up (Alcatel for example) or crush them on a local level (such as the various maneuvering to crush city-wide free wifi/wimax efforts), then resume duopoly pricing.

The ONE solution that remains is for the crowd to choose not to pay... that is, drop service. If enough people would decide they could live without 3G service, prices would come down in efforts to win back falling subscriber bases.

But, the steadily growing pool of subscribers shows that we can't do that... we (apparently) MUST have our phone anytime/anywhere service, and will pay just about whatever they ask to keep it that way. That's why business is soooo good in that industry, and why your mall has 3-5 kiosks (sometimes more than one from the same company) and every strip mall has 1-2 3G stores as well. You don't have that many retail spots unless just about every one is profitable.

It's funny to read the comments made by people whining about the high cost of service, often bundled with comments how they have everyone in their household set up with 3G service. Does every single person in the world need phone anywhere/anytime service? Of course not. But many choose to pay up for it anyway. That's what feeds the power of the duopoly Goliaths.

The same for the cable/satt business. Who ever sees their cable/satt bill go down (without changing providers... and then only for what is usually a promotional period)? There again you have pseudo monopolies. As they test price increase after price increase and the crowd accepts (griping & complaining, but accepts) each increase, they win. That acceptance says that we value the service MORE than the money we pay for the service. If enough of the crowd would decide that TV signals are not worth the next price increase, prices would come down. Until then, it is only more and more profitable to keep raising the prices.

Griping & complaining about ripoff prices accomplishes nothing. Quitting the service- and getting enough others to quit with you- is the only remaining way to get a better (permanent, non-promotional) deal.

Or some new technological breakthrough, which would make the business model obsolete. But then the duopolies would be quick to buy and suppress any patent that would negatively impact their cash cow, cash flows. On this particular issue, I'd love to see new patent legislation that makes each patent a "use it or lose it" proposition, meaning you can't own patents for defensive (keep things the same) purposes. But some of those kinds of ideas are probably wilder to actually realize, than the wildest speculation about the capabilities of this tablet.

deconstruct60

Jan 23, 2010, 02:44 PM

Happens all the time with various netbooks.

Of the latest models, basic netbook is completely tied to one network ?
They've been on several flavors.
i. generic netbook with bundled wireless card.
ii. netbook with one specific wireless card built in.
iii. netbook with a generic wireless card built in that is preconfigured to that carrier.

Only the second is the problem. The ranks of the third have been increasing growing. (not large corporate buyer wants to wed their either mobile computing capacity to some vendor when next year or two the corporate alliance folks dump wireless vendor A for wireless vendor B )

The option for a dongle card sticking out of it. *Cough* like Apple's design tendencies lately are for some big honking USB thing hanging out of the side of their device.

The option of different circuit boards in a huge "build to order" exercise ... increased inventory and logistic headaches. ( another reason why Dell/HP/Sony et. al. are going the third option route too. )

If it is just a 3G data modem it is goofy to come out with a solution that is tied to one wireless vendor. Locked devices are an impediment. Not sure why Apple wants to line up with an impediment.

deconstruct60

Jan 23, 2010, 03:29 PM

First of all, just because you disagree with their opinion people doesn't make their news unreliable.

opinions are not news. Fox is a dubious source because they ambiguously flip flop between delivering opinion and news. They run a news segment and then slice "news like" opinion and propaganda pieces between them.

There is nothing wrong with talking heads blowing hot air who say ridiculous stuff to boast their ratings. That's fine entertainment. That is not news. Their marquee investigative "reporter" is Geraldo. Clearly a more a unusually high journalistic standards... *cough*.

Fox's approach to investigative reporting (can skip to 3:18 to get to the point):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcjzdoiL0j4

Foxnews is #1. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/30/fox-news-dominates-3q-200_n_304260.html) They must be evil, too.

Most viewers is more an indicator of entertainment value than of news fidelity. I know more than a few folks who watch it for laughs and giggles.

deconstruct60

Jan 23, 2010, 03:44 PM

Seems odd that Apple would still be negotiating partnership deals days before announcing. Odder that they haven't chosen a air protocol yet.

If you have a device that does all of the 3G data protocols it doesn't matter which carrier because it is the same exact hardware coming off the line regardless. The only thing have to work out is activation logistics.... which can be done in the time between when announcement is made late Janurary and when the device is actually sold ( mid/late March - June ).

Even more so if using a base radio that has already been qualified on all of their networks and just need to maybe tweak some config issues for this specific design.

It is old, established news for devices to have this capability (they already exist and are already on the market). There is nothing revolutionary about it.

deconstruct60

Jan 23, 2010, 03:57 PM

Tethering will also work if the Tablet has Wifi.

Tethering over BT (2.x) would be a bit brutal.

Can make it work with WiFi but your going to seriously drain the battery life out of your iPhone doing it. You'll have both radios going full blast 3G and WiFi. You'll need to create a local IP address for the tethering process so now the iPhone has to be a router also. So can add router code overhead load to the CPU overhead.

Is the battery going to drain to nothing in a couple minutes? No. Are you trimming minutes off of your phone? Yes. If you don't talk much or can plug in somewhere often it may not matter. For those who are currently stretching for a days worth of charge out of their iPhone. Doing that will likely be a tipping point.

In contrast, if have a MiFi like device, if you are just talking on the phone can turn it off and it is a separate battery. That's why there are folks who have a "not as smart" phone and perhaps a iPod Touch (or netbook ) now in those kind of devices. Stay away from the subsidy built-in plans and can get decent value if not sucking down GBs in a month.

If the tablet can do substantive things the iPhone can't that will increase web traffic ( e.g., Flash gaming sites , etc. ) that will put that much more strain on their wireless data networks. That increase in usage it going to come with increased price. ( the "unlimited" on the iPhone is predicated on it not being as functional as a more mainstream computer. ) The people with iPhones (and relatively larger screens) do more web surfing than those folks on similar capable phones and smaller screens. With a device where have a full fledged browser and a full sized screen to view it with the amount and traffic will increase because of the very same drivers.

rdowns

Jan 23, 2010, 04:22 PM

Could someone tell the "powers that be" to make an entry here detailing all the major rumors we have heard about the tablet since the beginning? I think it would be fun to look at all that info now when we are so close to the reveal..

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=safari&rls=en&q=rumor+roundup+site%3Amacrumors.com&aq=f&aql=&aqi=&oq=

Here are a bunch of older ones. It will be done a day or two after the event.

marksman

Jan 23, 2010, 05:51 PM

TraceyS/FL

Jan 23, 2010, 05:58 PM

I think the wireless company might end up getting backdoored here.

I already pay for two data fees for two iphones. I am not going to pay for another one.

What I will do though, is drop my data plan from one or more iphones and get a data plan for the iPad that is seperate from any voice plan.

People have been wanting to do this all along, and now people will be doing it. Instead of people thinking about tethering an iPad to an iPhone they need to think about tethering an iPhone to an iPad.

Ultimately the wireless companies are gong to find themselves stuck with seperate data plans, and having things unbundled, which will hurt them in the short term as people will cut back or turn off voice plans in some cases.

Have a wireless data charge for the iPod, use it to feed via wifi or bluetooth to the iPhone and then have apps that handle voip or whatever between the two.

YOu won't do that if you are on AT&T though. All iPhones require the $30 data plan (same for Verizon - all smartphones require data).

The only hope here is that Apple uses their leverage and forces some sort of "change"/"shake-up".

I'm hoping for that..... frankly, i'd rather pay Apple for the data to not have a contract and possibly have a better offer of "pay as you go".

Analog Kid

Jan 23, 2010, 06:09 PM

I would just like to say...
There are other countries than the USA
While Apple is probably looking at an international release, a US targeted product is not unreasonable. People seem to get annoyed that an American company would focus primarily on the American market-- which also happens to dwarf the rest of the world. There's money to be made elsewhere, but if you're going to pick one market to start with...

HobeSoundDarryl

Jan 23, 2010, 06:31 PM

YOu won't do that if you are on AT&T though. All iPhones require the $30 data plan (same for Verizon - all smartphones require data).

The only hope here is that Apple uses their leverage and forces some sort of "change"/"shake-up".

I'm hoping for that..... frankly, i'd rather pay Apple for the data to not have a contract and possibly have a better offer of "pay as you go".

What leverage? No one should conjure ANY illusion that Apple is going to be able to get 3G providers to take a big hit to their revenues in support of selling more Apple products. The last thing that AT&T and Verizon want is ANY kind of special 3G price arrangement they can choose to offer on their network that yields a cheaper 3G phone/phone-like (VOIP) solution for millions of their customers.

They don't win by giving any discount data-only plan that then is eaten up by lots of us (via a Tablet/iPhone/Touch) with a VOIP calling solution.

Just put yourself in their shoes when you think of these kinds of things, and ask the ultimate capitalism question: what in this for me? In our own shoes, it's potentially big monthly cash savings. In their shoes, our big monthly savings is their big per-customer loss.

HobeSoundDarryl

Jan 23, 2010, 06:38 PM

While Apple is probably looking at an international release, a US targeted product is not unreasonable. People seem to get annoyed that an American company would focus primarily on the American market-- which also happens to dwarf the rest of the world. There's money to be made elsewhere, but if you're going to pick one market to start with...

That's right. One of the few things we (Americans) still have over the rest of the world that could be leveraged for real and meaningful change is that the U.S. is still THE world's best market. If you create anything anywhere in the world, the #2 place (besides your own backyard) where you want to try to sell it is to "those crazy Americans." We appear to be consumers of anything and everything. Too bad this reality is not leveraged much for our benefit.

Analog Kid

Jan 23, 2010, 07:18 PM

If you have a device that does all of the 3G data protocols it doesn't matter which carrier because it is the same exact hardware coming off the line regardless. The only thing have to work out is activation logistics.... which can be done in the time between when announcement is made late Janurary and when the device is actually sold ( mid/late March - June ).

Even more so if using a base radio that has already been qualified on all of their networks and just need to maybe tweak some config issues for this specific design.

It is old, established news for devices to have this capability (they already exist and are already on the market). There is nothing revolutionary about it.
Releasing a product and saying "we don't know who's going to be providing service, but we'll find someone" would not be acceptable to any marketing department I've ever encountered.

Putting in a more costly multi-protocol radio would suggest that they aren't planning to tie the device to any carrier, and therefore wouldn't need to make these arrangements.

Alternatively, they may be trying to set up non-exclusive subsidy deals with multiple carriers, but I find that the least likely option.

And MSNBC has sportscaster Keith Olbermann for credibility plus its website is co-owned & managed by MICROSOFT!

Choose your lack of reliability carefully.

At least Rush Limbaugh is a Mac fanatic and Mac laptops are prominently featured on several FOX News Channel programs.
I don't really know much about Olbermann, but you're welcome to question his reliability when Mac Rumors quotes his reports. Limbaugh doesn't work for Fox.

Whether it's an analyst, blogger, or news channel-- part of consuming rumors is judging the reliability of the source. FNC is the source leading this thread, and they have gone out of their way to put politics ahead of news. That will be commented on just as much as whether people like Verizon or AT&T because it is relevant to the thread. If the thread was about conflicting reports coming from FNC and MSNBC, then comparisons would make sense but lashing out at random and unrelated media sources suggests a persecution complex...

Having said that, I think Fox is uniquely qualified to traffic in rumors and speculation and have no problem with their reports being linked here. Eventually MR will be able to refer to FNC's track record on rumors just like they do for other sources.

On the other hand, I've always thought Bob Costas was a little shifty and have no faith in his Apple rumors.

Analog Kid

Jan 23, 2010, 07:25 PM

That's right. One of the few things we (Americans) still have over the rest of the world that could be leveraged for real and meaningful change is that the U.S. is still THE world's best market. If you create anything anywhere in the world, the #2 place (besides your own backyard) where you want to try to sell it is to "those crazy Americans." We appear to be consumers of anything and everything. Too bad this reality is not leveraged much for our benefit.
Biggest is a fact, best is a judgement that will based on more than just size.

And I think the US gets plenty of leverage out of its market size. As an example-- this international forum is conducting all conversation in English.

TraceyS/FL

Jan 23, 2010, 07:34 PM

What leverage? No one should conjure ANY illusion that Apple is going to be able to get 3G providers to take a big hit to their revenues in support of selling more Apple products. The last thing that AT&T and Verizon want is ANY kind of special 3G price arrangement they can choose to offer on their network that yields a cheaper 3G phone/phone-like (VOIP) solution for millions of their customers.

They don't win by giving any discount data-only plan that then is eaten up by lots of us (via a Tablet/iPhone/Touch) with a VOIP calling solution.

Just put yourself in their shoes when you think of these kinds of things, and ask the ultimate capitalism question: what in this for me? In our own shoes, it's potentially big monthly cash savings. In their shoes, our big monthly savings is their big per-customer loss.
They have a "hot" product (potentially) and have proven to be in the drivers seat with the iPhone.

I said HOPE, not that it would - but i am HOPING they are able to force some change.

If Apple and a potential "hot product" can't shake things up, we are doomed to be mired in the muck that is ATT/Verizon for the rest of all time.....

I read part of an article yesterday that said women who look at things as "half full" have way less of a chance of having a heart attack, so hey, i'm trying to look at things that way in the name of growing old with my kids! :D

HobeSoundDarryl

Jan 23, 2010, 07:36 PM

Biggest is a fact, best is a judgement that will based on more than just size.

And I think the US gets plenty of leverage out of its market size. As an example-- this international forum is conducting all conversation in English.

I'm not thinking what language a group of people choose to converse in is the level of leverage I was thinking of. Nice? Sure. But, I would think the world's hungriest buyers (of everything) could get a little more than just our language spoken at international forums. I'm thinking more along the lines of something the average citizen of the U.S. would see as a direct benefit.

deconstruct60

Jan 23, 2010, 08:31 PM

Releasing a product and saying "we don't know who's going to be providing service, but we'll find someone" would not be acceptable to any marketing department I've ever encountered.

If Apple wanted to sell unlocked stuff and they stepped to Tmobile ( which readily accepts and has service plans oriented to unlocked devices ) or Sprint would they would say : "Nah! we don't want your device" ? They'd be all over it like white on rice with few questions asked. The two more likely candidates to posture for a better deal are ....... Verizon and ATT .

If multivendor it doesn't make much sense to stop with just those two.
Especially if you have hardware that is compatible with all four Verizon, Sprint, Tmobile, and ATT .

My guess is that they both want it ( verizon and att) but are trying to talk Apple into kicking the other one in the shins and not offer it to their competitor. Apple's best barganing position in that case is to move forward on the plan that releases on both. As they get more and more desperate to kick the competitor can just chop the other guy off if get them to put crazy stupid money on the table to do it. Apple is better served though without taking the crazy stupid money though. They need a multivendor distribution model anyway since worldwide this goofy situation is illegal anyway.

remember this is not a phone. Every single cell vendor out there right now is trying to get people to buy more data plans ( because that is biggest growth revenue). A generic data plan consuming device is great. There is little need or incentive to lock it up to a single vendor. (e.g., the MiFi devices that popped up on most vendors offerings. Except ATT's which is clogged anyway. )
They all need tons of more revenue to pay for the 4G roll out that so many want to happen "tomorrow" and , at least in the US, to pay for the 4G spectrum they had to pay billions for to deploy it on.

Putting in a more costly multi-protocol radio would suggest that they aren't planning to tie the device to any carrier, and therefore wouldn't need to make these arrangements.

What value added customer benefit is served by tying the device to one service vendor?

However, what are the more natural retail outlets for these besides the Apple store. Those would be ATT , Sprint , Verizon , and Tmobile stores.
Folks could buy preconfigured and it runs devices straight out of the box from any one of those stores. In contrast, what happens at the Apple store if don't have a configuration/initialization agreement in place? You send the person off with something that isn't hooked up? Even a radio with personalities still has to be configured as to which one of the flavors it is working with.

Look at the recent issues that Google had with selling phones for the glitches that pop up if you haven't worked out your relationships ahead of time.

Alternatively, they may be trying to set up non-exclusive subsidy deals with multiple carriers, but I find that the least likely option.

Apple trying to set the subsidy level is dubious. Especially if they are going to sell unlocked versions themselves. If service retailer wants to sell them at $500 and another wants to sell them at $550 why should apple care if the cell company is buying them from Apple at $700 wholesale ?
That is like complaining about a store that offers "no interest credit for 6 months" to their customers to buy an Apple product. Apple got its money. stop.

Especially if the cell companies are competing with data plans at different prices. Frankly, there is a decent case for antitrust violations for colluding with several vendors to all set their service+device prices all at some fixed level.