Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I work for Verizon Wireless as a Customer Care Rep. I really have no idea if Verizon will be getting the iPhone, but I do get about 10 calls a day that pertain to this issue. I am constantly asked "when will Verizon get the iPhone?" and I am also constantly hung up on when I tell customers that no information has been released to me. I get many calls a day and it always seems like I get more good calls than terrible calls.

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

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

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

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

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

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

and now as I end all my calls,

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


The tec (total equipment coverage) is one thing that Apple wouldn't go with at all. Apple provides its own insurance on all of its equipment. That might be one reason on why Verizon didn't get the iPhone in '07 is because they weren't happy they couldn't charge for insurance.
 
Aren't W-CDMA and LTE GSM deriatives though?
Hey, go read up on it yourself. I'm just presenting the information I found on Wikipedia which is backed up by industry publication sources listed on those pages.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Anyhow it seems that a lot of people around here are big fans of AT&T and feel that AT&T is like Apple as a company so I don't know if many would even switch if Verizon offered the iPhone. It seems like Apple and AT&T are still pretty friendly and happy with each other. I would assume you can rest easy that the exclusive partnership will remain over the near future.
 
I am all for Verizon getting the iPhone. However, these exclusive deals need to die already. They are bad for consumers. What we need is the choice to bring the iPhone to whatever carrier we want.

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

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

The iPhone moving away from AT&T (exclusive) will actually improve AT&Ts service because it will reduce the network load over time.
 
No, no it's not.
Pointing out your competitor's flaws isn't any more competition than trash talking between rival boxers, rival football coaches or political figureheads.
It's just petty posturing and/or mud-slinging. Nothing more.
Improving your network, service, price rates, plans, features etc in order to entice more people to sign up for your service or buy your product, on the other hand, IS competition.
Well in those commercials Verizon clearly says they have more 3G coverage throughout America and that they are the most reliable. Verizon clearly invests a lot into their network, otherwise it would not be as good as it is now.
 
The tec (total equipment coverage) is one thing that Apple wouldn't go with at all. Apple provides its own insurance on all of its equipment.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Which leaves out most dumbphones. That's where VCast and ATT and Sprint Mobile Video come in... they're all that's available for non-smartphones.
 
Apple does NOT provide insurance on the iPhone. If you break or lose it, you're out of luck unless you've gotten your own home insurance or similar. You're probably thinking of a warranty, which is a totally different thing.

That's interesting that there is no insurance offered for the iPhone. I have a Asurion through Verizon for $7.99 a month on my Droid. I assumed AT&T would offer the same sort of plan for their customers. I know that some homeowners or renters policies will cover a lost or damaged phone, but it is nice to have the stand alone coverage available. Theft, loss and accidents do happen and it would be pretty expensive to pay out of pocket for a replacement.
 
Apple does NOT provide insurance on the iPhone. If you break or lose it, you're out of luck unless you've gotten your own home insurance or similar. You're probably thinking of a warranty, which is a totally different thing.

Yes my mistake I meant the extended warranty. Apple would never go for the insurance.
 
They are but verizon has many more customers than AT&T and more people would have probably switched from other networks.

This is just an assumption.

The Verizon fanboys are out in droves!

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

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


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

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

This is one of many reasons why Telus and Bell decided to go with HSPA (UTMS) before going LTE. They have access to the iPhone right now and it can be used as a fallback mode for LTE when that standard finally becomes a reality. They also have access to revenue from roaming international travellers visiting Canada right now.
He doesn't work for none of them. He's what I would cat an ABA (Anyone But Apple).
 
If Apple released a CDMA phone for Verizon today, would that phone be able to simultaneously use voice and data like you can on a GSM network?

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

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

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

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

I would think that the iPhone going to Verizon would also be good for current AT&T customers. I can promise you that AT&T would speed up their 3G conversion and we might even see a little competition on plan pricing.
 
If Apple released a CDMA phone for Verizon today, would that phone be able to simultaneously use voice and data like you can on a GSM network?

Most likely not, even if it sported a hybrid chip. A Verizon iPhone, at this time, would be restricted to utilizing CDMA, which would not be able to handle voice+data simultaneously.
 
I see you live in Canada. Is Verizon or AT&T even available there? I have a Motorola Droid and I don't feel it is locked down at all nor am I forced to use Verizon's services. Other then a couple of Verizon logos the Droid operates exactly as Google and Motorola intended it to. Also, Verizon is moving more and more to Android and there is no indication that future handsets will be locked down.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

BTW. A dual mode phone would just add to the cost that everyone has to pay and make it more prone to break for no added benefit for the vast majority of customers in other countries. No other country wants a CDMA phone.
 
@aristotle:
From everything that I have read I thought LTE was using OFDM not WCDMA due to the better use of spectrum. It appears that since LTE is technically all ip based it could run on top of any existing network though (assuming Wiki is right).
 
*Sigh*
In Canada, up until November 5th, there was one company in Canada that offered GSM networks compatible with the iPhone called Rogers. It used to be called Rogers AT&T several years ago. In fact, I have an old SIM from my 2G Krzr that has a Rogers AT&T logo on it. Fido is another carrier brand that was a competitor but it now owned by Rogers. They still maintain a distinct brand and different account price points. Fido targets city dwellers while Rogers targets rural customers. Both offer service outside of cities but Rogers offers wider coverage in the country in the base price.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Where is the proof that a dual mode phone is more likely to break??? As far as cost is concerned... How could the addition of millions of new customers cause phone prices to rise? If anything it would reduce the cost.
 
Verizon's Data Transfer is Nearly Four Times Slower than AT&T's

within the locations of Wall Street, Grand Central Terminal, Union Square, or Madison Square Park:

iPhone beats Droid in Manhattan speed tests

unionsquare.jpg


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

So much for 3G equality.
 
within the locations of Wall Street, Grand Central Terminal, Union Square, or Madison Square Park:

iPhone beats Droid in Manhattan speed tests

unionsquare.jpg


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

So much for 3G equality.

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

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

Verizon will probably be a better home for the iPhone, but thinking the iPhone being on their network will make it perfect is being completely ridiculous. You'll still have dropped calls. You will still have a drop off in a lot of areas from EV-DO Rev. A to Rev. 0. You're still dealing with a wireless connection that can fail at any time. Be reasonable with your expectations and you won't be completely upset at the service you receive.
 
Everyone keeps talking about how Verizon will be a better home for the iPhone. I'm in basic agreement with them, but I'd love to see them handle a 5000% increase in data traffic on their network. I would wait until it happens and then probably wait until my AT&T contract runs out before jumping over. AT&T in my area has great 3G coverage. It's when you get out into a rural area where it drops down to EDGE. I was well aware of that going into my contract and I'm not surprised when it happens.

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

Quite true.

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

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

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

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

Perhaps Verizon will be more willing to make concessions this time around - we'll find out, soon enough.
 
The tec (total equipment coverage) is one thing that Apple wouldn't go with at all. Apple provides its own insurance on all of its equipment. That might be one reason on why Verizon didn't get the iPhone in '07 is because they weren't happy they couldn't charge for insurance.

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

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

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

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

They don't have to abandon GSM to get CDMA. Every other phone manufacturer has both GSM and CDMA models. In fact, I'd say it was far more likely that Apple would build a single dual mode GSM+CDMA phone. Almost all the latest Verizon smartphones are dual mode (excepting Droids).
Wouldn't making the iPhone a dual mode phone make the overall design a bit bulkier?
 
Verizon would be choking, perhaps even more severely than AT&T did, with a 5000% increase in the data transfer load on their network - "There's a Map for That" notwithstanding.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The remaining biggest sticking points would include offering insurance and branding, IMO. Apple is terrified of the insurance since it could mean lots of people claiming a "lost" phone that gets sold overseas and thus gives no monthly revenue. Verizon would want branding to let people know which phone it is. However, if it were a dual mode CDMA+GSM phone, then the branding need could disappear.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.