Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What's the chance that something big is coming to Verizon after the holidays but it's coming from Planet Google?
 
I'm a Verizon user and am dying for an iPhone but, AT&T just isn't reliable enough where I live (L.A.). AT&T worked fine for me in Texas when I had them but, as soon as I moved out here, there were too many dead spots and dropped calls. To be honest, I think all the carriers fundamentally suck in principle, I'm just forced to use the one that gives me reliable service.

My question is if AT&T's exclusivity indeed DOESN'T expire until 2012, then what's the deal with the lack of AT&T iPhone commercials on TV these days? There was a time, not so long ago, when it seemd like every other TV commercial was AT&T whoring the iPhone. Now, it seems like I never see iPhone ads on TV and AT&T is touting every other phone EXCEPT the iPhone.
 
4G is a myth

V CAST Media Manager is Verizon's version of Apples walled garden of content sales and control. They are not compatible.

This ought to be interesting. It was a deal breaker the first time Apple pitched the iPhone to Verizon, perhaps this time they've caved, so they could join Apple and hope some of the hype & success slides their way.

This is going to be one interesting movie.... :)
 
My question is if AT&T's exclusivity indeed DOESN'T expire until 2012, then what's the deal with the lack of AT&T iPhone commercials on TV these days? There was a time, not so long ago, when it seemd like every other TV commercial was AT&T whoring the iPhone. Now, it seems like I never see iPhone ads on TV and AT&T is touting every other phone EXCEPT the iPhone.

Didn't Apple just release a new commercial in the last few weeks about the longer life of the iPhone 4 battery compared to other smartphones? If not for this commercial, I would have gone alone with your argument.
 
Maybe baby

Super interesting thread here. Very enjoyable reading, at least for most of the messages. (except for the ditzo who cant see why Apple would have two seperate iphone upgrade dates, one in Jan and one in June.....it makes complete business sense).


The minute I saw Verizons announcement out of nowhere about rolling out the LTE network in 1/3 of the country on Dec 5, my ears went up. I mean why do that if there isnt something following it soon after? It sure SEEMs like they are "setting the table" for something.

I guess we'll find out soon enough.

I just really hope the Verizon Iphone is available in White from Day One. The white is sharp looking.
 
Super interesting thread here. Very enjoyable reading, at least for most of the messages. (except for the ditzo who cant see why Apple would have two seperate iphone upgrade dates, one in Jan and one in June.....it makes complete business sense).


The minute I saw Verizons announcement out of nowhere about rolling out the LTE network in 1/3 of the country on Dec 5, my ears went up. I mean why do that if there isnt something following it soon after? It sure SEEMs like they are "setting the table" for something.

I guess we'll find out soon enough.

I just really hope the Verizon Iphone is available in White from Day One. The white is sharp looking.

Yes- that caught my attention too. Wouldn't they rather "go live" with LTE in 2/3 or the whole country at once? I think if they had their choice, they would... so it would make sense that they are going to be getting a device that can take advantage of LTE where it is available, and stay on 3g where it isn't.
 
On your first point: It is also the company that came out with the iphone 4 and its antenna problems.
yes the tragic design flaw that only existed in the US in the areas where ATT service blows.

Same design flaw recently confirmed on the HTC even

As for these rumors, I don't believe said site on anything. Their record is so spotty it is a joke. Also if Apple was going to release a CDMA phone why haven't they for countries like China where I is the dominate cell phone tech. Instead they went with the second place carrier who supports GSM. Even all the talk that they are hiring CDMA knowledged engineers which 'proves' they are working on a Verizon phone falls apart when you consider the unlocked, no exclusives iPad. So that staff could be working on the product.

I won't go so far as to say that a CDMA iPhone would never happen, or an LTE Verizon iPhone. I just do buy that it is coming this soon. For a number of reasons. And no one has shown me proof reasonable enough to think otherwise


I thought it was odd he would know any details 6 months in advance of release, but perhaps he was briefed because the launch was imminent.

I wouldn't believe it. They allegedly don't tell their own stores anything because they feel they can't trust the staff (who are mostly college aged kids) not to post glamour it on their facebook, etc. No way would they tell another company like Radio Shack especially this early
 
Last edited:
Also if Apple was going to release a CDMA phone why haven't they for countries like China where I is the dominate cell phone tech. Instead they went with the second place carrier who supports GSM.



CDMA is not even close to being the dominate tech in cellular in China.

Correct. Some numbers to back that up.

China Mobile (GSM) = 558M subscribers (World's largest carrier)
China Unicom (GSM) = 152M subscribers
Verizon (CDMA) = 92M subscribers
China Telecom (CDMA) = 85M subscribers
China Mobile (TD-SCDMA*) = 17M subscribers
*not the same CDMA Verizon or China Telecom uses so doesn't really count

As you can see, GSM subscribers in China FAR outweigh the CDMA subscribers. Also, Verizon has more CDMA subscribers than China (not counting TD-SCDMA since it's not the same tech).

However, China Mobile's GSM network is 2G. They are rapidly rolling out TD-SCDMA as their 3G replacement. This will eat away at the GSM subscriber base. This is also why China Unicom has the iPhone and China Mobile didn't. A lot of people wondered why the larger company didn't get it.
 
Correct. Some numbers to back that up.

China Mobile (GSM) = 558M subscribers (World's largest carrier)

. . .

However, China Mobile's GSM network is 2G.

Yes I'm well aware of China Mobile's vast GSM Edge network. But this is a 3g phone. So that 558 Million actually doesn't count given that it would be like giving the phone to T-Mobile knowing that they can't support 3g. And Apple doesn't pull moves like that since it would open them up for lawsuits (if someone unlocks on their own, that's on them).

The real numbers to look at are 152 Million valid GSM 3g subscribers against 178 Million CDMA customers. And no contract prohibiting having a phone for both. So again, if this is about making money, why didn't they make a CDMA phone for that second group. Assuming they are open to having a CDMA iphone at all.
 
Yes I'm well aware of China Mobile's vast GSM Edge network. But this is a 3g phone. So that 558 Million actually doesn't count given that it would be like giving the phone to T-Mobile knowing that they can't support 3g. And Apple doesn't pull moves like that since it would open them up for lawsuits (if someone unlocks on their own, that's on them).

The real numbers to look at are 152 Million valid GSM 3g subscribers against 178 Million CDMA customers. And no contract prohibiting having a phone for both. So again, if this is about making money, why didn't they make a CDMA phone for that second group. Assuming they are open to having a CDMA iphone at all.

I don't think China has much interest in the iPhone.
 
Yes I'm well aware of China Mobile's vast GSM Edge network. But this is a 3g phone. So that 558 Million actually doesn't count given that it would be like giving the phone to T-Mobile knowing that they can't support 3g. And Apple doesn't pull moves like that since it would open them up for lawsuits (if someone unlocks on their own, that's on them).

The real numbers to look at are 152 Million valid GSM 3g subscribers against 178 Million CDMA customers. And no contract prohibiting having a phone for both. So again, if this is about making money, why didn't they make a CDMA phone for that second group. Assuming they are open to having a CDMA iphone at all.

You can't add. That would be 152M GSM 3G subscribers vs 85M CDMA subscribers. And to answer the last question, probably because they had a GSM phone all ready to go.

And on what basis would someone have a lawsuit? Because the phone has more capability than the network????? Sorry, no basis for a lawsuit there. That just makes no sense.

I don't think China has much interest in the iPhone.

We're talking about China specifically.

Edit: DOH! You changed your post. (actually, Apple had problems keeping up w/ demand in China)
 
i usually just read these and do not post, but i decided to finally register and join the action. i know the arguement against lte in the iphone for vzw, but i say why wouldnt they? they like to be on the cutting edge dont they? as to the arguement on the original being edge not 3g, there was no 3g android when the original iphone came out now android has a significant share of the smartphone market and they are coming out with lte devices at ces for verizon. why would apple wnat to be so far behind android phones in terms of lte and 3g. i think that if apple were to launch a lte phone in june, then why not just launch it in february? what is the difference in a few months when people will be buying up lte android phones in droves after CES
 
i usually just read these and do not post, but i decided to finally register and join the action. i know the arguement against lte in the iphone for vzw, but i say why wouldnt they? they like to be on the cutting edge dont they? as to the arguement on the original being edge not 3g, there was no 3g android when the original iphone came out now android has a significant share of the smartphone market and they are coming out with lte devices at ces for verizon. why would apple wnat to be so far behind android phones in terms of lte and 3g. i think that if apple were to launch a lte phone in june, then why not just launch it in february? what is the difference in a few months when people will be buying up lte android phones in droves after CES

Apple usually isn't cutting edge. I mean why wasn't the first iPhone 3g when there was 3G in the US and EU? That and LTE chipsets are kinda new, voice isn't working over LTE yet. It would probably be easier and cheaper to just do CDMA (which Apple is already new at). LTE also might cause a negative effect on batt. life which Apple doesn't like etc. etc.

Remember all the reasons why the first iPhone didn't have 3g? something about chipsets not mature enough (i disagree), battery life (disagree), and I thought there was something about PCB space too but dunno.

Hell we haven't seen any job ads for LTE engineers either.

So no, it most likely will not have LTE, and there has not been any valid hints that it would either.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't believe it. They allegedly don't tell their own stores anything because they feel they can't trust the staff (who are mostly college aged kids) not to post glamour it on their facebook, etc. No way would they tell another company like Radio Shack especially this early


Trust me Verizon employees do not know if they are getting the iPhone 6 months in advance...The boss's don't trust them to change out light bulbs in their stores, why would they give them critical data that could change their stocks????
 
i know the arguement against lte in the iphone for vzw, but i say why wouldnt they? they like to be on the cutting edge dont they?

Yes they do. BUT not when it means a crap ass experience for the customer. Because that just results in returns, complaints etc. LTE right now is only in a handful of major cities and not even perfect coverage there.

As for the whole "but android" argument, Apple doesn't do things just because everyone else does. Which is why we still don't have blu-ray in their computers despite every other computer (including even some so called netbooks) having had blu-ray drives for at least the last year. We also don't have Flash in the iphone etc despite every other smart phone having Flash and every other announced tablet saying it would.
 
My question is if AT&T's exclusivity indeed DOESN'T expire until 2012, then what's the deal with the lack of AT&T iPhone commercials on TV these days? There was a time, not so long ago, when it seemd like every other TV commercial was AT&T whoring the iPhone. Now, it seems like I never see iPhone ads on TV and AT&T is touting every other phone EXCEPT the iPhone.

Well AT&T has never directly designed commercials around the iPhone. Those commercials have always been done by Apple and just simply put have the carrier logo at the end of it.
 
Yes they do. BUT not when it means a crap ass experience for the customer. Because that just results in returns, complaints etc. LTE right now is only in a handful of major cities and not even perfect coverage there.

As for the whole "but android" argument, Apple doesn't do things just because everyone else does. Which is why we still don't have blu-ray in their computers despite every other computer (including even some so called netbooks) having had blu-ray drives for at least the last year. We also don't have Flash in the iphone etc despite every other smart phone having Flash and every other announced tablet saying it would.

I don't buy the flash argument. Thats actually a pretty complicated subject...
But I see what you mean.

Now, can anyone please explain what the difference between 'true 4G' and LTE?
Is LTE something else entirely? Something that bridges the CDMA and GSM technologies, allowing CDMA phones to use chips, and chip-based phones to be compatible with CDMA networks?
I've wikipediaed the whole deal, but i don't really get it...
It seems like there are *two* kinds of LTE as well. Is that where the difference between true 4G and fake 4G lies? One is LTE, and the other is TRUE LTE?
And how can a carrier say it has 4G, if its not *really* 4G? is it just a glorified 3G system?

On a different note, Christmas is here... any news on the Verizon iPhone release?

Sry for so many questions
 
I don't buy the flash argument. Thats actually a pretty complicated subject...

Well yes, there's the whole "Adobe doesn't make Flash for the Mac, they make it for Windows and lazily port it" stuff. But that's actually part of the point. Apple values the user experience more than following the herd. So they leave out some crap port of Flash rather than include it because 'all other phones have Flash so we have to also, even if it sucks'

Now, can anyone please explain what the difference between 'true 4G' and LTE?
Is LTE something else entirely? Something that bridges the CDMA and GSM technologies, allowing CDMA phones to use chips, and chip-based phones to be compatible with CDMA networks?

My understanding is that LTE is a whole new language, totally different from both CDMA and GSM. So phones would be, for a time, dual chips.

As for the 'real 4g' and 'fake 4g' I've been told that it is not unlike the HD video issue that has cropped up thanks to folks like itunes and Amazon. They use 720p video which is high def when compared to standard def, but purists say that HD is 1080p/i or higher.

In the same way there is 4g in the sense of 4th generation which is an improvement over the 3rd generation. and 4g which is 4th generation AND a particular minimum level of speed etc. And so say the naysayers, many folks saying '4g' mean the former and not the latter.
 
Yes they do. BUT not when it means a crap ass experience for the customer. Because that just results in returns, complaints etc. LTE right now is only in a handful of major cities and not even perfect coverage there.

Verizon's LTE covers about as many people now, as AT&T's 3G did back when the iPhone 3G came out.

Apple is not just about pro-user experience. They also make decisions based on saving money (no 3G chip at first) and gaining market access (disabling WiFi for China at first).

My understanding is that LTE is a whole new language, totally different from both CDMA and GSM. So phones would be, for a time, dual chips.

Correct.

In the same way there is 4g in the sense of 4th generation which is an improvement over the 3rd generation. and 4g which is 4th generation AND a particular minimum level of speed etc. And so say the naysayers, many folks saying '4g' mean the former and not the latter.

Correct.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.