iPhone will Never Ever... EVER Be On Verizon... at least until...

[Cleverboy]

Until what? Right? I'll tell you, but first let me say this.

It's odd to my how many people can read the same articles, see the same reports, and hear the same information... and still keep thinking that the iPhone will be coming to Verizon "soonish".

It's NOT HAPPENING. Why so bold? Time to stop equivocating. Because somebody sure needs to be. Here's a post that is calling out the future. Everyone keeps thinking Verizon isn't who they are and Apple isn't who they are, and that the iPhone is "so popular" that Verizon will be coaxed into brokering a deal. Heh. Right.

The Reality(tm):

1. NO CDMA 5-YEAR EXCLUSIVE. iPhone came out in 2007. It's 2009. Apple has a 5 year no-CDMA-iPhone agreement with AT&T. (Has this been renegotiated like the "exclusivity" agreement to expire next year? Questions, questions... we'll likely see T-Mobile before anything else.)

2. APPSTORE. Verizon has pledged that ALL PHONES on its network MUST buy apps through Verizon's own App Store. Apple says: Um, no. Moreover, even making an exception for Apple would open the flood gates for equal treatment complaints. From Apple's perspective, allowing Verizon to insinuate itself into that space in a non-starter... suggesting that Apple would need to re-educate consumers on one specific network as "different" from all the rest of their customers.

3. NETWORK CONTROL. Verizon won't allow any manufacturer to become involved with its provisioning and activation system. As far as they're concerned, that's just silly. AT&T's activation via iTunes has worked well (when it worked), but this is far too invasive for the type of "device approval" needed style of network Verizon runs.

4. EXPENSIVE R&D. Making a phone for Verizon in the US, would be a U.S. specific development cost. Verizon's CDMA is a US specific technology. The rest of the world overwhelmingly uses GSM.

5. NO NEED. Verizon doesn't NEED the iPhone (its a "nice to have"). Apple doesn't NEED Verizon (their customers would love it though). OS makers and manufacturers are quickly catching up. Sprint is the network that would gain the MOST from getting the iPhone. Verizon has been doing a stellar job without Apple and will continue to. Even if they didn't get the tablet (which they clearly will), they already had one anyway.

So... where's the "until" you say? Well, the "until" is that Verizon MAY get the iPhone years from now, when LTE is the ubiquitous standard and has to be fallen back TO and not FROM. That's crazy far off in my book.

So... "It's not coming! Spread the word!" It's like believing the tooth fairy at this point... helps you believe in a world without rules but isn't very filling. Wait for T-Mobile or Metro PCS if you have to. It's not going to be Verizon for a good long tome.

~ CB

[blancoBronco]

FINALLY!!! someone who thinks like this

I have used some of your examples as reasons it will never happen too, but they always get shut down.

You're right: it will NEVER happen

[nullx86]

It wont happen until Verizon switches to GMRS which is rumored to be happening mid 2010... I'm not really sure how much truth is held on the matter, but last I saw on google and other sites, it is being slowly implemented

[SqB]

I don't know about the switching to GSM argument, but that seems viable.

As for the appstore argument, I think the cow has already gotten out of the gate on that one. Verizon would probably like to keep control of the apps and content just like ATT and Sprint used to want to do the same. They wanted you to get all your web, ringtones, apps etc from them alone. AppStore and similar Nokia and Android products are certainly going to kill that. If they insist on maintaining that "you must get your content" from us line, they will get marginalized in the smartphone market, not just for iPhones.

[elfxmilhouse]

Originally Posted by nullx86

It wont happen until Verizon switches to GMRS which is rumored to be happening mid 2010... I'm not really sure how much truth is held on the matter, but last I saw on google and other sites, it is being slowly implemented

uhhh... GMRS? as in walkie talkies?

can i use my motorola 2 way radios on verizon next year?

[kdarling]

1. 5-YEAR EXCLUSIVE. iPhone came out in 2007. It's 2009.

Where have you been? It turned out not to be five years. It was two years, got renewed and now ends next summer. Even ATT says they're trying to renegotiate again.

2. APPSTORE. Verizon has pledged that ALL PHONES on its network MUST buy apps through Verizon's own App Store.

Wrong. Verizon is simply installing its own store on WM and Blackberry phones. Those users can still buy from any store, though, as always.

3. NETWORK CONTROL. Verizon won't allow any manufacturer to become involved with its provisioning and activation system

That wouldn't be surprising, but I've never heard that. Got a source? Hopefully not the same source for the previous myths.

4. EXPENSIVE R&D. Making a phone for Verizon in the US, would be a U.S. specific development cost. Verizon's CDMA is a US specific technology. The rest of the world overwhelmingly uses GSM.

First, the rest of the world isn't buying iPhones as much as Americans are. Basically, the USA is buying a hundred times as many by population. Tapping the CDMA population could be a market as large as the rest of the world.

Second, where do you get the R&D cost thing? Good grief. Radios are not hard. Every phone maker does it.

And remember that Apple already changed once when they added a CDMA radio to get 3G.

5. NO NEED. Verizon doesn't NEED the iPhone (its a "nice to have").

Now this I agree with.

[Maverick1337]

I am still wondering, won't Vcast mobile on VZW phones conflict with Apple's iTunes store?

[Flhusky]

Originally Posted by Maverick1337

I am still wondering, won't Vcast mobile on VZW phones conflict with Apple's iTunes store?

Doesn't AT&T Mobile TV conflict with iTunes
The one point the OP missed, Apple would NOT allow VZ to butcher the UI with their shiat.

[kdarling]

Originally Posted by Flhusky

The one point the OP missed, Apple would NOT allow VZ to butcher the UI with their shiat.

Since Verizon doesn't change the UIs on their smartphones, that would not be a concern.

-----

Remember, Apple courted Verizon for a year, not the other way 'round. And they never showed Verizon a prototype, which might've changed history.

Also, many of Verizon's original objections don't exist any more. Apple now sells through WalMart, Best Buy, and other Verizon partners. Apple allows subsidies now. Apple has both 3G and GPS now. The lack of these basics were valid Verizon reasons to not want an unknown device at the time.

So what's left? What are some remaining valid reasons against a deal?

Revenue sharing is a sticker, but it's negotiable.

Sharing warranty decisions was an original blocking point.

And who knows if Verizon would want the phone branded. (My guess is that a lot of people here in NYC would actually like it. They could lord it over the ATT model owners. Oh look, he has a Verizon iPhone... bet it works in this tunnel! *swoon*)

[nateo200]

Originally Posted by kdarling

Where have you been? It turned out not to be five years. It was two years, got renewed and now ends next summer. Even ATT says they're trying to renegotiate again.


Wrong. Verizon is simply installing its own store on WM and Blackberry phones. Those users can still buy from any store, though, as always.


That wouldn't be surprising, but I've never heard that. Got a source? Hopefully not the same source for the previous myths.


First, the rest of the world isn't buying iPhones as much as Americans are. Basically, the USA is buying a hundred times as many by population. Tapping the CDMA population could be a market as large as the rest of the world.

Second, where do you get the R&D cost thing? Good grief. Radios are not hard. Every phone maker does it.

And remember that Apple already changed once when they added a CDMA radio to get 3G.


Now this I agree with.

Did you seriously omit the no CDMA part? It specifically said No CDMA 5 year contract. Second WCDMA/UMTS and CDMA/CDMA2000 are two WAY different standards even though they sound similar. Apple isn't going to release two flavours of the iPhone if anything thy would just add a radio but I doubt that. Screw CDMA, GSM/UMTS is THE standard and if carriers want an iPhone they better shape up.

[Nermal]

Originally Posted by nateo200

Second WCDMA/UMTS and CDMA/CDMA2000 are two WAY different standards even though they sound similar.

I think kdarling's point was that Apple has added an additional radio in the past and should have no issues with doing it again.

[nateo200]

Originally Posted by Nermal

I think kdarling's point was that Apple has added an additional radio in the past and should have no issues with doing it again.

Yes they added another radio that is yet another world standard that compliments another world standard (GSM). It would be like everyone at a private school wearing a uniform and then having some idiot rebel and wear purple. Just won't happen.

[kdarling]

Originally Posted by nateo200

Did you seriously omit the no CDMA part? It specifically said No CDMA 5 year contract.

Sorry, didn't think it was important, since I've never heard of such an exclusive. Got a non-Apple-forum link?

Second WCDMA/UMTS and CDMA/CDMA2000 are two WAY different standards even though they sound similar.

Actually, the two CDMA variations share a common origin and have as many similarities as differences. And they're much closer than GSM's TDMA.

Adding the first WCDMA radio for 3G was a big leap. Adding or switching to a different CDMA, would not be as big.

So my point, as an embedded engineer, is that Apple has already shown a willingness to redesign for newer radio chipsets.

Apple isn't going to release two flavours of the iPhone if anything thy would just add a radio but I doubt that.

Saying that Apple won't have two models at once, is a common argument. Might even be valid. Or, as you suggest, adding a radio would work. New chipsets support LTE, CDMA and GSM all at once.

Screw CDMA, GSM/UMTS is THE standard and if carriers want an iPhone they better shape up.

GSM isn't the overwhelming standard in the USA, and Verizon only operates there.

[michael31986]

i agree with everything u said!

[tadad1]

What? No Tooth Fairy!!!!!!!!!!

[nateo200]

Originally Posted by tadad1

What? No Tooth Fairy!!!!!!!!!!

No but I heard from a friends that his brother said his aunt told him she heard from her bosses sister in law that the Easter bunny might hide CDMA200 iPhones in eggs on Easter :/

[jav6454]

Originally Posted by kdarling

And remember that Apple already changed once when they added a CDMA radio to get 3G.

Sorry but WCDMA =/= CDMA.

[Cleverboy]

Originally Posted by kdarling

Where have you been? It turned out not to be five years. It was two years, got renewed and now ends next summer. Even ATT says they're trying to renegotiate again.

Interesting, my bullet might have been unclear. AT&T Exclusivity separate from a ban on CDMA compatible iPhones.

This is what I'd read early on, and that it became convoluted into the notion that the AT&T exclusivity was 5 years instead of the 3 it turned out to be (very early on). The "no CDMA iPhone for 5 years" part has never been refuted or contradicted. Considering how people tend to glaze over details, it doesn't sound like AT&T or Apple will EVER have to refute or comment on it either. They'll be allowed to get away with generic statements until the 5 years is up, and by that time, no one will care.

Originally Posted by kdarling

Wrong. Verizon is simply installing its own store on WM and Blackberry phones. Those users can still buy from any store, though, as always.

No. I'm sure I'm quite right here, as draconian as it sounds. Verizon isn't "simply installing" anything. They WILL NOT SELL a phone that doesn't have their App Store installed and other App Stores NOT PRESENT. This is, as they say, a NON-STARTER, as Apple's system requires pre-installation of the AppStore and requires the AppStore be THE exclusive outlet for iPhone apps.

Originally Posted by kdarling

Verizon is not coming up with its own mobile operating system that handset makes will have to use. Instead, what they're doing is reportedly demanding that any mobile phone sold by Verizon comes with default access to only Verizon's app store, Ryan Hughes, VP Partner Management told GigaOM. That includes popular smart phone makers like Windows Mobile, Android, Blackberry and Palm.

If you'd rather access the Android Marketplace, Blackberry App World or any of the other app stores, you can still do that by downloading the store onto your phone or by visiting the app store online.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/16836...ne_makers.html

Originally Posted by kdarling

That wouldn't be surprising, but I've never heard that. Got a source? Hopefully not the same source for the previous myths.

The last two are hardly myths, although I'll agree much has been confused over the years. This last one? WSJ did an article about why the iPhone didn't come to Verizon, and they specifically talked about Verizon not wanting to give Apple as much access to the consumer as Apple wanted. We later learned that Apple intended to allow customer activation through iTunes in order to facilitate sales through the Apple Store. I think 1+1=2 on this one, but you can draw your own conclusion. The nature of Verizon's network is NOT the same as GSM. When they talk about "there are too many mobile operating systems to work with and certifying applications across eight or nine operating systems, plus many different handsets, has slowed the delivery of new software to subscribers." this really the nature of their network. Whether its VCAST or VZNavigator, Verizon really wants to be the "go to", and refuses steadfastly to be a "dumb pipe".

Originally Posted by kdarling

First, the rest of the world isn't buying iPhones as much as Americans are. Basically, the USA is buying a hundred times as many by population. Tapping the CDMA population could be a market as large as the rest of the world.

The juice isn't worth the squeeze. At the end of the day, either they come out with a different phone, or they integrate it all into one new model. I'd say they would be better off not investing time into a network that has policies so hostile to smart-phone-manufacturer/consumer relationships. If Verizon had a more open-door policy, it would be a different story, but that's simply not their business model (neither for revenue NOR for business practices). Plus, I'd lay odds that Apple might have to take a chance on a more unpredicatable chipset to join Quad-Band GSM/CDMA/LTE into one low battery-usage, high performance handset. Apple has enough trouble with its GSM chipset field testing. I'd almost ask why such a hypothetical beast *wouldn't* explode... or send uncommon amounts of excess radiation. Why open yourself up for such problems? Greed? Nah. Apple is too patient to want to go for the full-monty.

Originally Posted by kdarling

Second, where do you get the R&D cost thing? Good grief. Radios are not hard. Every phone maker does it.

I see. Well, you put it so simply... why wouldn't I just agree? If Apple were knocking off phones left and right, and had a dozen skus, I'd agree with you. "Hey, why not, throw another shrimp on the barbie!" Unfortunately, Apple encounters HUGE risks of delay when chipsets or certain parts do not function properly in production testing. Doing an "all-in-one" would be a triumph for this level of phone... but by the time it was sufficiently tested and ready, I suspect it would be far later than they would like it to be. Devil's advocate though? I suspect Apple has already designed a rudimentary CDMA iPhone. I just don't see this thing going anywhere but into Apple's prototype museum.

Originally Posted by kdarling

And remember that Apple already changed once when they added a CDMA radio to get 3G.

With such distinct differences between UMTS (W-CDMA) and CDMA, I can't see how anyone could capitalize on any tenuous relationship between the two other than being able to reuse the letters maybe?

Now this I agree with.

Please send emergency medical services to this location. The author of this message has just gone into shock.

Considering all of these HUGE, INSURMOUNTABLE hurdles... let's all just agree that the iPhone will NEVER, EVER be on Verizon and be done with it. At the end of the day, there will be plenty of other great phones coming out on the Verizon network... plus, Apple will have other meaningful relationships with Verizon. No need to make everything about a connection that will never happen and doesn't need to.

~ CB

[citi]

Originally Posted by Cleverboy

Interesting, my bullet might have been unclear. AT&T Exclusivity separate from a ban on CDMA compatible iPhones.

No. I'm sure I'm quite right here, as draconian as it sounds. Verizon isn't "simply installing" anything. They WILL NOT SELL a phone that doesn't have their App Store installed and other App Stores NOT PRESENT. This is, as they say, a NON-STARTER, as Apple's system requires pre-installation of the AppStore and requires the AppStore be THE exclusive outlet for iPhone apps.

~ CB

You are quite wrong. Have you looked at Blackberry Lately? Have you looked at the Droid? Both of these phone have their own app stores, that are preinstalled on the device. The verizon app store on my blackberry Storm has visual voice mail, vacast, song ID and myverizon. I'd hardly call that an appstore.

The days of Verizon locking down systems are long gone. I think you are confusing smartphones, for the standard LGs and Nokias floating around. Then yes, you are correct on Verizon pushing their appstore. NOT on smartphones. In fact winmo phones don't have an appstore either. If you don't know, or really use the carrier, perhaps keep misinformation to yourself.

[Cleverboy]

Originally Posted by citi

The days of Verizon locking down systems are long gone. I think you are confusing smartphones, for the standard LGs and Nokias floating around. Then yes, you are correct on Verizon pushing their appstore. NOT on smartphones. In fact winmo phones don't have an appstore either. If you don't know, or really use the carrier, perhaps keep misinformation to yourself.

No... I'm not. This thread is just too long to track all the statements. I was referring to Verizon's new App Store for Smart Phones initiative (this is from July of this year!)

And while Verizon is romancing developers, the carrier isn’t as solicitous of its handset partners. Verizon’s Ryan Hughes, VP Partner Management, said in an interview Friday that the network operator’s app store will be the sole marketplace on devices sold by the company, meaning stores such as Research In Motion’s BlackBerry App World or Microsoft’s Windows Mobile Marketplace won’t get placement on Verizon handsets unless a consumer downloads them. Hughes also said that Verizon is focusing on aggregating content from four different developer communities: Windows Mobile, Palm, Android and BlackBerry.

http://gigaom.com/2009/07/13/verizon...u-hear-me-now/

I'm guessing however, that they've reversed course, following their slipping numbers compared to AT&T. Trust me, I have all my indicators lined up, but apparently I'm challenging Murphy's Law.

It appears Apple is about to upset my Apple cart.

Report: Apple to launch Verizon iPhone in Q3 2010
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...n_q3_2010.html

Good article though.

The American technological rift between CDMA providers (including Sprint and Verizon) and GSM/UMTS providers (T-Moblie and AT&T) was widely expected to remain in place until Verizon moved to LTE, the next generation of UMTS service.

In other countries, CDMA providers have either shut down their networks and moved entirely to UMTS service (as Telstra did in Australia) or added a UMTS overlay to their existing CDMA service (as Bell and Telus just recently did in Canada). In the US, Verizon decided to do neither, and instead will only be investing in a new next generation LTE network that won't be completed for years.

This appeared to leave little opportunity for a Verizon iPhone before 2011, but Qualcomm's "worldmode" hybrid component enables Apple to continue offering a single iPhone version that can be sold by both AT&T and Verizon in the US, and on virtually every carrier outside the US.

It does however give AT&T a year to improve its 3G network and roll out the 3G MicroCell before being hit with mass defections from iPhone users irate over service issues. AT&T can still advertise that its 3G network is faster than Verizon's CDMA2000 coverage, and that it offers some features that CDMA2000 does not, including simultaneous voice and data and easy to use, multiple party conference calling.

Conclusion:
1. Apple is hellbent on CRUSHING its competition and saw an opportunity.
2. Verizon is more desperate to keep its customers than I thought.
3. Verizon is evil.

Verizon is evil? Why is that? Two reasons. They just launched ads saying how the Droid is better, then increased cancellation fees on the Droid, and now they're going to gradually start seeping in the rumor that the iPhone is coming in 2010. How rude!

~ CB

[chstr]

but..... but..... but.... verizon is soooo much better .... sniffle

[ynotm]

1. NO CDMA 5-YEAR EXCLUSIVE. iPhone came out in 2007. It's 2009. Apple has a 5 year no-CDMA-iPhone agreement with AT&T. (Has this been renegotiated like the "exclusivity" agreement to expire next year? Questions, questions... we'll likely see T-Mobile before anything else.)

Never heard of this, do you have a source? I remember 5 year exclusivity (which seemed to disappear after a year, which I thought was very odd), but a 5 year ban on CDMA versions is a very strange request. I'd love to see proof of this.

2. APPSTORE. Verizon has pledged that ALL PHONES on its network MUST buy apps through Verizon's own App Store. Apple says: Um, no. Moreover, even making an exception for Apple would open the flood gates for equal treatment complaints. From Apple's perspective, allowing Verizon to insinuate itself into that space in a non-starter... suggesting that Apple would need to re-educate consumers on one specific network as "different" from all the rest of their customers.

Nonsense. My parents both have Verizon blackberries, no Verizon store, but Blackberry App World.

Not only that, Verizon would literally be driving themselves out of the smartphone market with that policy. RIM, Android, WM6.5+, and Symbian all have appstores now.

This is FUD, plain and simple.

3. NETWORK CONTROL. Verizon won't allow any manufacturer to become involved with its provisioning and activation system. As far as they're concerned, that's just silly. AT&T's activation via iTunes has worked well (when it worked), but this is far too invasive for the type of "device approval" needed style of network Verizon runs.

Apple dropped iTunes activation with the 3G release (and only brought it back much, much later). It's something they seem to be flexible on now.

Not only that, I don't seem to recall anyone doing activations like this prior to the iPhone. If they could start it once on one network, it stands to reason it could happen again (especially with Verizon moving, albeit glacially slow, towards a more open policy [practically a necessity with the move to LTE and it's rules])

4. EXPENSIVE R&D. Making a phone for Verizon in the US, would be a U.S. specific development cost. Verizon's CDMA is a US specific technology. The rest of the world overwhelmingly uses GSM.

How on earth is it expensive? The phone is done, and dropping in a new radio would be a few million dollars of R&D tops. Verizon has around 100 million subscribers. Even if they nab, say, just 8% (educated guess, but probably close to the % of ATT subscribers) of those customers, and assuming the margins on an iPhone after marketing, R&D and components are something like 20% ($40 on the subsidized price of the volume SKU 16GB 3GS - very low ball estimate here), you're looking at $320 million+ in profit. Not a bad return, and I would bet those numbers extremely conservative. And that's only Verizon. Sprint has another 50 million subscribers (and if Apple's exclusivity was lost to VZ, you can bet the phone isn't just going to Verizon but to at least every major carrier in the US)

Furthermore, I wouldn't be surprised if they already have a CDMA version of the phone inside their walls. People said for years that OSX would never be on the x86 platform, but then BOOM, it was, and was revealed to have been all along. It's extremely conceivable that Apple would hedge their bets again - especially since their first partner choice was verizon. If the AT&T deal for some reason goes sour (admittedly unlikely), they can quickly switch to the largest provider in America (still their biggest market by far) in this case.

This argument has never made any sense to me. If every other cell phone manufacturer can get their devices working across all networks, why can't Apple? It's not cost holding up a CDMA release.

5. NO NEED. Verizon doesn't NEED the iPhone (its a "nice to have"). Apple doesn't NEED Verizon (their customers would love it though). OS makers and manufacturers are quickly catching up. Sprint is the network that would gain the MOST from getting the iPhone. Verizon has been doing a stellar job without Apple and will continue to. Even if they didn't get the tablet (which they clearly will), they already had one anyway.

Apple not needing them? Maybe true. But the AT&T market for iPhones is very finite (and theoretically, already becoming saturated, as we may be seeing signs of with the introduction of a $99 iPhone), and to grow their install base they will eventually be forced to move to VZ in America. As for Verizon, I know plenty of people who left Verizon for the iPhone (myself included), and it's an exodus I'm sure Verizon would love to stop.

[sinsin07]

Word of advice to the OP, if you are going to use the word "clever" (as in cleverboy), in your handle, then you need to live up to it. Nothing about your raving was clever or original. Next time you think you have something "clever" to post, call somebody.

[alent1234]

Originally Posted by ynotm

Never heard of this, do you have a source? I remember 5 year exclusivity (which seemed to disappear after a year, which I thought was very odd), but a 5 year ban on CDMA versions is a very strange request. I'd love to see proof of this.


Nonsense. My parents both have Verizon blackberries, no Verizon store, but Blackberry App World.

Not only that, Verizon would literally be driving themselves out of the smartphone market with that policy. RIM, Android, WM6.5+, and Symbian all have appstores now.

This is FUD, plain and simple.


Apple dropped iTunes activation with the 3G release (and only brought it back much, much later). It's something they seem to be flexible on now.

Not only that, I don't seem to recall anyone doing activations like this prior to the iPhone. If they could start it once on one network, it stands to reason it could happen again (especially with Verizon moving, albeit glacially slow, towards a more open policy [practically a necessity with the move to LTE and it's rules])


How on earth is it expensive? The phone is done, and dropping in a new radio would be a few million dollars of R&D tops. Verizon has around 100 million subscribers. Even if they nab, say, just 8% (educated guess, but probably close to the % of ATT subscribers) of those customers, and assuming the margins on an iPhone after marketing, R&D and components are something like 20% ($40 on the subsidized price of the volume SKU 16GB 3GS - very low ball estimate here), you're looking at $320 million+ in profit. Not a bad return, and I would bet those numbers extremely conservative. And that's only Verizon. Sprint has another 50 million subscribers (and if Apple's exclusivity was lost to VZ, you can bet the phone isn't just going to Verizon but to at least every major carrier in the US)

Furthermore, I wouldn't be surprised if they already have a CDMA version of the phone inside their walls. People said for years that OSX would never be on the x86 platform, but then BOOM, it was, and was revealed to have been all along. It's extremely conceivable that Apple would hedge their bets again - especially since their first partner choice was verizon. If the AT&T deal for some reason goes sour (admittedly unlikely), they can quickly switch to the largest provider in America (still their biggest market by far) in this case.

This argument has never made any sense to me. If every other cell phone manufacturer can get their devices working across all networks, why can't Apple? It's not cost holding up a CDMA release.


Apple not needing them? Maybe true. But the AT&T market for iPhones is very finite (and theoretically, already becoming saturated, as we may be seeing signs of with the introduction of a $99 iPhone), and to grow their install base they will eventually be forced to move to VZ in America. As for Verizon, I know plenty of people who left Verizon for the iPhone (myself included), and it's an exodus I'm sure Verizon would love to stop.

not all blackberries work on CDMA/GSM at once. it's a premium feature meant for some business users.

for CDMA they would have to rewrite parts of the networking software in the iPhone OS and depending how some apps are written there could be compatibility issues

[mmzplanet]

http://news.cnet.com/8301-30686_3-10361144-266.html

If VZW will not pick up the Palm Pre for the reasons listed in this article.... we can forget a VZW iPhone.

Although VZW may compromise with a device that will sell like crazy (iPhone) on their network.