Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple MVNO Patent Reveals Abandoned Possibility

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
68,622
39,500


A newly published patent application reveals an abandoned possibility for the Apple iPhone. The patent details the methods for Apple to act as a "mobile virtual network operator" (MVNO).
When iPhone first connects to wireless network, it sends iTunes MVNO server it's ID and location, and get's back the information with the available networks, services and rates in the area.
Click to expand...
Network selection can be done manually or simply based on the best price. All billing would have been consolidated under iTunes. This possibility was discussed here on MacRumors back in 2005.

An earlier Wired article on the iPhone's origins had previously revealed that Apple was prepared to try to launch the iPhone themselves, if negotiations with Cingular (AT&T) fell through:
Apple was also prepared to buy wireless minutes wholesale and become a de facto carrier itself.
Click to expand...
As readers know, negotiations were successful, and Apple launched the iPhone on AT&T exclusively. It's still interesting to see the other options Apple had explored in launching their own iPhone.

Article Link
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2008/04/10/apple-mvno-patent-reveals-abandoned-possibility/
that is pretty interesting information. wonder what things would have been like if apple was its own carrier...

proly more delays on the computer updates :p
 
based on the awesome $20/mnth data plan from ATT I think Apple made the right choice. I cant imagine Apple getting a better deal on minutes and data on their own not to mention we would probably miss out on Visual Voicemail.
 
MVNOs don't live long, at least in the post-paid world.

Both ESPN and Disney poured a ton of money into launching their own MVNOs. neither MVNO is around today.

Pre-paid MVNOs have had some success w/ voice/text (Tracfone, Virgin Mobile), but wouldn't work well with the iPhone (unlimited data)
 
When iPhone first connects to wireless network, it sends iTunes MVNO server it's ID and location, and get's back the information with the available networks, services and rates in the area.
Click to expand...

I'm going to be sick.
 
I would have been much more likely to buy an iPhone had Apple been the carrier. I think the failure of MVNO's in general is a huge statement about the oligoboly that is the mobile phone industry.

The new 900mhz (er, is that the right frequency? Whatever all the recent C and D Block auction business was about) with it's regulated openness might give some breathing room for new players, but we'll see.
 
They still might decide to go down the MVNO route once whatever deals they've signed with O2 / AT&T / whoever expire. And there's still the MVNO possibility in as yet iPhone-free countries.

If Apple did go MVNO, it would really shake the market up - and in a good way. But the obstacle would be the existing networks, who'd not be willing to give Apple a good wholesale deal.

mogzieee said:
more american stuff not worth mentioning in the UK!
Click to expand...

MVNOs are very relevant to the UK. Virgin is one and there's a ton of others. Even 3 used to (and possibly still does) borrow the O2 network.

SL
 
IMHO too bad they didn't go this route - the iPhone would be a much more attractive device to me (and I bet a lot of other people as well) if I wouldn't have to be tied to AT&T. Oh well... I just bought an iPod touch and have an independent cell phone on the carrier of my choice and that works for me like a charm.
 
mogzieee said:
more american stuff not worth mentioning in the UK!
Click to expand...

Not totally true! It could have applied at a global level, meaning that wherever you are in the world you are only paying the price of a local (mobile) call to call within that country. So an iPhone owner in the UK can go over to the States and pay AT&T or Verizon rates for calls to US numbers as an American iPhone user would normally, and vice-versa.

No use to me, but would have pleased cheapskate pond hoppers :)
 
What a coincidence i was talking to a Rogers operator, fixing my blackberry, and i was asking when he might think that they will be getting the IPhone.

He said two interesting things, 1st that they were supposed to get it for chrismass but name rights were not settled by then and that now Apple was considering starting their own phone service (subcontracting to rogers).

Interesting that this news comes in just after my discussion.

More to come I guess as seems that the rights for Canada have been settled.

Can't wait anymore.....
 
Mudbug said:
IMHO too bad they didn't go this route - the iPhone would be a much more attractive device to me (and I bet a lot of other people as well) if I wouldn't have to be tied to AT&T. Oh well... I just bought an iPod touch and have an independent cell phone on the carrier of my choice and that works for me like a charm.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Once reason I unlocked my iPhone was because I don't like many of the choices/policies/attitudes AT&T has as a company. T-Mobile may not be a saint, but at least they're not powerful enough (yet) to make some of the ill-conceived and far reaching decisions that AT&T (and SBC, Cigular, etc.) has.
 
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)

I agree with most here. I think that despite the way that a lot of people feel about AT&T, it was a way to get the phone into the hands of a bunch of people in the US with fewer headaches. It would have been difficult for Apple to start its own cell service provider even if the bought the minutes wholesale. I'm glad the deal worked out. It seems to be beneficial to all parties involved.
 
I think Apple really wanted a carrier to go with so if the device was not to be a success they werent left trying to be a reseller and then it gets ugly if they found it too expensive etc and needed to move people back over to a normal carrier setup.

Also the visual vmail may or may not have been possible in the sense that the wholesale carrier would be less likely to invest the money into the technology required as it would be Apple's phone network and not the carriers, at least in the way it was promoted.
 
randomrazor said:
Apple is a US company so deal with it buddy
Click to expand...

Apple is a US based, but very global company (thankfully).

That being said, I do agree that as this is an American site covering on a corporation that's headquartered in California, USA, a little US bias is in order.

But isn't this all a little off-topic?
 
MVNO is still not out of question

It's not necessarily an abandoned opportunity. It would have been very difficult for Apple to launch an MVNO right from the start. They had to go AT&T/exclusive contract route.

But once that contract runs out, Apple is free to do whatever they like. The can decide to go MVNO route then. With tens of millions of iPhone users out there Apple will have incredible leverage with all mobile operators, and can demand MVNO access to any network.

And it's not like your iPhone has to be on AT&T network. Simple firmware update when you next connect your iPhone to iTunes can set it free, or give it access to Apple's MVNO offering.

And when iPhone starts a bidding war for it's users between AT&T and T-Mobile, some interesting things might happen. And in Europe and Asia, where 3-5 GSM operators could start the bidding war, even more so.
 
Interesting but irrelevant. Apple and the iPhone are locked to AT&T until 2012 here in the U.S. Keep on hacking! ;)
 
I guess if this were the case they would have put a bit more effort into stopping unlocks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back