Wow talk about a ridiculous post. Verizon sucks and so does their service just like AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Analyst Claims: Qualcomm 3G Chip Destined for Verizon iPhone, Tablet Based on P.A. Semi Processor
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Wow talk about a ridiculous post. Verizon sucks and so does their service just like AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile.
True, excepting the Droids, most of Verizon's recent smartphones have been dual mode CDMA+GSM, including models from Samsung, HTC and RIM.
Verizon also will unlock the GSM sides for overseas, and people have even hacked some of the phones onto ATT stateside. Since Apple hates unlocked phones, that Verizon service probably wouldn't be allowed if it was dual mode.
---------------
As for all those opining that Verizon would have the same problems as ATT, it's not technically possible for that to happen:
1) Both 3G networks use a form of CDMA, and tower placement is critical. Verizon used CDMA for both 2G and 3G and is okay. ATT started with 2G GPRS and added WCDMA radios later to get 3G.
ATT has recently said that their placement is far less than ideal, which results in congestion and dropped users. That's why they will have to add over a thousand towers to correct things.
2) ATT had to share frequencies between both their old GSM network and their new UMTS-3G one... unlike in Europe, where the 2100 band was set aside for UMTS. This causes congestion and interference.
3) Verizon keeps data and voice on separate carriers. A data user overload cannot affect voice users. On ATT's 3G network, a data overload can and does cause dropped voice and data calls.
However, both carriers have the need to upgrade their backhaul. Too many data users causes slowdowns.
The iphone is coming to Verizon this year. You want to know why?
1. Apple can't afford not to. They had an easy run over the past 3 years due to lack of competition but with Android and WebOS releasing on Verizon, there's too much at stake now by not playing with Verizon.
2. ATT releasing a whole bunch of new Android phones and WebOS phones. This signals that they are preparing for their post exclusive contract period during which others are getting the iphone.
3. 50% of iphones in the world are sold in the US. So this is a huge market which would be even more profitable for Apple if they release the iPhone on Verizon, a larger carrier than ATT.
4. Apple cannot afford being associated with ATT's service and reputation for any longer. As I said, they had an easy run over the past 3 years but the game has changed significantly with the debut of Android and WebOS on Verizon.
1. Apple can't afford not to. They had an easy run over the past 3 years due to lack of competition but with Android and WebOS releasing on Verizon, there's too much at stake now by not playing with Verizon.
2. ATT releasing a whole bunch of new Android phones and WebOS phones. This signals that they are preparing for their post exclusive contract period during which others are getting the iphone.
3. 50% of iphones in the world are sold in the US. So this is a huge market which would be even more profitable for Apple if they release the iPhone on Verizon, a larger carrier than ATT.
4. Apple cannot afford being associated with ATT's service and reputation for any longer. As I said, they had an easy run over the past 3 years but the game has changed significantly with the debut of Android and WebOS on Verizon.
There is another alternative. AT&T and Verizon could enter into a network sharing agreement whereby any phone user could use the other network's towers when it is the only "viable" option. That usage shall be calculated as a percentage of monthly usage and that percentage of the monthly fee actually collected tendered to the other carrier.
There would be offsets, but whatever the net usage, one carrier would prevail over the other.
Barely.
Rocketman
There would be offsets, but whatever the net usage, one carrier would prevail over the other.
Barely.
Rocketman
AT&T and Verizon going into a roaming agreement is probably not going to happen anytime soon and I don't think that's even possible. Your phone number would either be tied to the GSM or CDMA radio, it can't be tied to both. Maybe when LTE comes out something can be worked out but right now, it ain't happening.
It sounds like all of the carriers in the US suck compared to other countries. Verizon is no better and only seems "better" because nobody is stressing their networks with an easy to use smart phone.
People have been able to tether for years but almost nobody does it on other phones because it is a pain in the arse to set it up. The same thing applies to watching Youtube and browsing the web. The reason why AT&T is blocking tethering on the iPhone is because iPhone users use way more data than any other smart phone users. It would be even worse if they started tethering.
If Verizon did get an iPhone, it would have to be a generic world phone that was mainly GSM but with CDMA as an option. It would not be branded in any way for Verizon. I could never see Apple doing a run for any CDMA carriers for a CDMA only phone at this point.
I still doubt that Apple will bother with a world phone but if they do, it won't be just Verizon that will get it but it would be offered to Sprint and all other carriers around the world (both CDMA and GSM).
Verizon is not the centre of the universe.
PS. Verizon would never, ever, ever offer unlimited data and would probably offer a 5GB cap plan.
PPS. Don't listen to Kdarling. W-CDMA is nothing like CDMA2000. HSPA/UMTS uses W-CDMA for the air interface only. The core network is GSM based. Also, not all regions covered by AT&T use the same frequency band for GSM/HSPA.
In sort, Kdarling obviously works for either Sprint or Verizon.
People have been able to tether for years but almost nobody does it on other phones because it is a pain in the arse to set it up. The same thing applies to watching Youtube and browsing the web. The reason why AT&T is blocking tethering on the iPhone is because iPhone users use way more data than any other smart phone users. It would be even worse if they started tethering.
If Verizon did get an iPhone, it would have to be a generic world phone that was mainly GSM but with CDMA as an option. It would not be branded in any way for Verizon. I could never see Apple doing a run for any CDMA carriers for a CDMA only phone at this point.
I still doubt that Apple will bother with a world phone but if they do, it won't be just Verizon that will get it but it would be offered to Sprint and all other carriers around the world (both CDMA and GSM).
Verizon is not the centre of the universe.
PS. Verizon would never, ever, ever offer unlimited data and would probably offer a 5GB cap plan.
PPS. Don't listen to Kdarling. W-CDMA is nothing like CDMA2000. HSPA/UMTS uses W-CDMA for the air interface only. The core network is GSM based. Also, not all regions covered by AT&T use the same frequency band for GSM/HSPA.
In sort, Kdarling obviously works for either Sprint or Verizon.
Say what you want, but the Slate runs a full-blown operating system. Not one where the only goal is selling content through iTunes.
We have to wait and see what happen now they are in the China Market.
Can't imagine that 50% will stay that high.
1. That 50% was based on past sales numbers. It has gone down since launches on multiple carriers in several European countries, in several Asian countries and on two new carriers in Canada.
2. Verizon, like CDMA carriers in Canada had a limited amount of smartphone handsets available and most of those where dual mode phones from blackberry which were almost exclusively sold to business customers with large contracts. Most non-business customers had flip phones. If those customers wanted smart phones, they could have bought one or switched carriers to a GSM carrier and most people who wanted an iPhone already switched.
Verizon could very well have slightly more customers than AT&T but the demographics of CDMA carriers tend to be people who talk and text a lot which is why their plans are geared toward those types of phones rather than towards smart phones.
Ask the average Verizon customer (ie, people who do not hang out in these forums) and they would probably say no to any phone that required a data plan because it would be out of their budget range.
It may be true that CDMA users lean towards talk/text as opposed to smartphones but I don't think this is some inherent quality of CDMA users or GSM users. I don't know how it is up in Canada but in the US, CDMA is significantly more widespread than GSM, but of course, suffers from the lack of phones due to CDMA being a much less popular world standard than GSM, as well as Verizon's decisions to restrict their lineup. Therefore, Verizon customers generally stuck to dumbphones which they knew at least worked reliably rather than switch to the less reliable GSM networks in order to get the bells and whistles of a wider array of smartphones. And this included myself, you have no idea how many times I've debated switching to ATT for the iPhone but refrained even though I live in NJ which is apparently well covered according to the ATT coverage map.
And ATT would release all the new smartphones because they need to have that leverage over Verizon since their network itself is pathetic. Similarly, Verizon has a superior network as leverage so they don't need to release new phones consistently and can do it at a pace they prefer for maximum profit. Sadly, that's how the current cell phone market is in the US. With the iphone exclusivity expiring in a few months, I can guarantee that you will see a major overhaul of ATT's network since they know that they don't have their cash cow to fill their pockets and they will actually have to start providing reliable service (a novel idea, I know). Similarly Verizon has made its move and has started offering untouched smartphones such as the Droid and soon to be released Palm Pre, something that would have seemed ludicrous even just 2 years ago (remember, they rejected the first iPhone when it was offered to them).
If hypothetically every smartphone released from today onwards was released in both GSM and CDMA versions, I can guarantee you that most people, including all the so called techie GSM users, would switch to Verizon.
P.S. regarding budgets, Verizon has the most expensive voice plans in the US as far as I know so I don't think customer's budgets are necessarily the issue.
Yes, very true! But there have been reports of other foreign networks having overload as well with the iPhone. And I don't want to live in a restricted wireless world!
I take back what I said, as I remembered that there's a Commie version of the iPhone now.
Non-exclusivity HAS to help AT&T, whoever get it. Takes the stress off of the network and the 2nd carrier takes some.
Having people switch over from other networks is the MOST important thing to wireless carriers. That's why all the marketing is AGAINST someone else. Because not only does it make your market share larger but it takes away from there share. It wouldn't surprise me if AT&T pays more to Apple to keep the iPhone exclusive.
Exactly. If Verizon suddenly got 15 million people using iPhone level data usage there network out take a huge beating.
Sick of the Euro-Focus
When people say they buy a GSM phone so they can talk internationally, they really mean, talk from Europe. Low tech countries and of no economic and military importance to the U.S. such as South Korea and Japan (heard of them??) use CDMA. So please pull your heads out and realize that just because the continent you speak of uses a certain technology, doesn't mean the rest of the world does. I mean, I know no one here has yet heard of Sony, Samsung, or Toyota, and the countries they come from, but trust me, I know they'll be huge one day.
Hello Peeps, wake up!
Proudly supporting the military overseas (and thankfully not in Europe!)
When people say they buy a GSM phone so they can talk internationally, they really mean, talk from Europe. Low tech countries and of no economic and military importance to the U.S. such as South Korea and Japan (heard of them??) use CDMA. So please pull your heads out and realize that just because the continent you speak of uses a certain technology, doesn't mean the rest of the world does. I mean, I know no one here has yet heard of Sony, Samsung, or Toyota, and the countries they come from, but trust me, I know they'll be huge one day.
Hello Peeps, wake up!
Proudly supporting the military overseas (and thankfully not in Europe!)
As discussed in another thread, the iPhone really isn't that data intensive outside of perhaps YouTube usage. Even ATT says it's not the major data user on their network.
Non-iPhone featurephone and smartphones use more realtime connections and data. They're the ones who are Slinging, Skyping, IM'ing and Pandora'ing over 3G. And they're already out there on every network.
The upshot is simply what ATT themselves say: their network wasn't ready to handle so much data from every type of phone. They've said that they've had to throw away their old planning tools, because they didn't fit today's world.
I dunno. Do you think that many people would leave AT&T?
Seems more likely that there'll simply be millions more new iPhone owners on other networks, and AT&T will still have theirs for the most part.
I wouldn't buy the "nobody is stressing their networks" argument unless I could see some data about how much more bandwidth is used per subscriber on Verizon vs. AT&T. I know plenty of people who use smartphones on Verizon and although I'd never say I know for sure what these figures are, I'd venture to guess that the iPhone coming to VZW wouldn't necessarily be as disruptive as some might claim it will be.
I know I would, for one. I switched to AT&T from Verizon when the 3G came out, and while AT&T's service has markedly increased in quality in the year and a half that I've had it, it's still maddeningly frustrating at times. The only reason I haven't already switched back is because I'm obviously invested in and attached to my iPhone.
It won't matter as long as Verizon has prepared for impact on their network. it makes sense for Verizon to be the next carrier as Apple really has accomplished all it can with ATT. They are in the business of making money and going on big red would make them a lot of $$$.
HAHAAHAH I absolutely cannot wait until the day this actually happens. YOu people will look like such fools. You people just dont want to believe it. Just think about it, Apple is not going to stay with one carrier forever, I just dont understand why you people are having such a hard time believing it, thats why i think you just dont want it to happen so your not believing it.
Yep, that's both the bad and the good thing about the Internet for the past decade. Everything we say is now captured forever.
If you make predictions, people can go back and see that you were wrong or right.
If you say childish things, they're immortalized no matter how much you grow up later.
If you make personal attacks, your own kids and grandkids can look them up one day and see what a jerk you were.
Be nice. Be kind. Be smart. Think more than shallow thoughts. And always pretend like you're posting to yourself and your family.
If you make predictions, people can go back and see that you were wrong or right.
If you say childish things, they're immortalized no matter how much you grow up later.
If you make personal attacks, your own kids and grandkids can look them up one day and see what a jerk you were.
Be nice. Be kind. Be smart. Think more than shallow thoughts. And always pretend like you're posting to yourself and your family.