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
Whole heartedly agree. I love Apple like most people on these forums, but the blatant fanboys refusing to believe that the iPhone will move to CDMA technology is absurd. There are other parts of the world that use the technology, yeah it may not be dominate like GSM, but it is used in other parts of the world. It also gives Apple the chance to sell the hardware, the hardware that they make money on.
CDMA is dominant in the US and will be for the next few years until LTE fully deployed across the entire network. VZW will have a significant coverage come June. They are way ahead of schedule of deploying LTE covering the major markets. CDMA will be the fall back technology when LTE is offered in rural areas for the next 5-10 years. If Apple didn't develop the CDMA iPhone they are just leaving money on the table.
What's wrong with Atom? ARM chip should be fine if you prefer a small tablet (7" or so). For bigger models ARM chip will be underpowered and you probably will not see full OS/X on it (which many people really want).
Why doesn't Apple just sell the iPhone on ALL carriers WORLDWIDE? There has to be something to these exclusivity deals for Apple to actually sign them.
I think the amount of iPhones Apple would sell on Verizon have been GREATLY exaggerated.
At WWDC 09 apple said they sold 40m iPhone OS devices. Lets just say thats 60m now. Now assume 50% are iTouches and 50 percent of those phones are sold in America. That means Apple has sold 15million iPhones for AT&T. Now even out of those some have been replacements for other iPhones, some have been exported but lets just forget that. Now at&t has about 80m subscribers. So even a generous 15m iPhone users only equal about 20 (odds are 15 is more accurate) percent of all at&t phones.
So what gives? If the iPhone is the greatest thing since sliced bread why hasn't it completely taken over at&t's sales. Here is the problem. MOST PEOPLE ARE CHEAP. Its not even the price of the iPhone thats the problem but the contract. People don't want to spend the extra 30 dollars a month on the data plan. This not the carrier is the biggest hurdle to iPhone sales.
Furthermore its been over 2yrs since the iPhone came out. That means anyone from any other network has had time for their ETF to run out. The core group of iPhone lovers which is what all the iPhone sales so far have been based off arent on verizon anymore since if those people really really really wanted a iPhone they could have got it by now. What this means is that a Verizon iPhone would only appeal to people who are willing to switch back to Verizon and the small group of people on Verizon who never left because they LOVE the network. The majority would be just like the people on AT&T who are just too cheap to pay for service.
So ya a Verizon iPhone would increase sales but not by a ungodly amount. Remember the iPhone made its mark by getting people who weren't into smart phones to get one. And those people now already have a smartphone.
Care factor zero. GSM is the dominant technology now in "North America". CDMA used to be dominant but that era has passed.
You are misinformed if you think that an LTE phone will fall back on CDMA2000 technology as a fallback. LTE is an evolution of UMTS/FOMA/HSPA. W-CDMA is not compatible with CDMA2000 in any way and only supplies the air interface for 3G and 4G GSM standards. The core network of LTE and it's predecessor UMTS is GSM. All CDMA carriers in Canada implemented HSPA+ as a stepping stone and fallback network for their future LTE network.
An LTE handset will fall back on UMTS and then possibly Edge much like how UMTS/HSPA phones fall back to to Edge and then GPRS when Edge is not available.
If you did not get it the first time, LTE is not compatible with EVDO. CDMA2000 is ancient technology.
Actually, WCDMA used in UMTS-3G derives from the same origins as EVDO, and they have as many similarities as they have differences. And we were talking only about the air interface:
Networks using any CDMA air protocol require different cell planning than the old GSM TDMA setup. This is a well known problem with AT&T and is why they're planning over a thousand new cell sites among their current ones.
Only if the LTE handset also has older UMTS and GPRS radios in it to switch over to.
Likewise, if the LTE handset has an EVDO radio in it, then it can fall back to that. Verizon's already tested that with combination LTE+CDMA phones like the older test model whose picture is attached at the end of this post.
What you don't seem to grasp, is that LTE is not natively compatible with either GSM or CDMA2000 networks. It's an separate addon to both older systems, and requires brand new radios and a brand new IP based backend.
You're clearly not an engineer. You have also previously claimed that LTE uses W-CDMA, which is totally incorrect.
Instead of always attacking people who try to help you understand, perhaps you should learn to ask questions instead.
Attachments
It's very simple...
There would be an LTE radio and a CDMA radio in the phone so it could fall back to CDMA.
General reply:
I'm still waiting for a valid reason why Apple should just ignore the largest wireless service in the U.S. that happens to have the best network just because it's CDMA.
I'm also still waiting for a valid reason why it's such a big deal IF the Verizon logo was put on the phone. 99.9% of the population will not care.
And you can write this down: a Verizon iPhone would not be crippled in any way, shape, or form.
Consider Apple's position. They have stretched the huge and vast AT&T network despite massive upgrades and backhaul install to the point it is screaming (loudly) and is broken much of the time in densely populated areas.
The iSlate (ATNN) will jam the networks it is deployed on with a bunch of people suddenly downloading video content which is not yet prevalent on the iPhone platform.
Apple needs to have nearly 100% of the "new" traffic go to a "new" network. So it will be compatible with Verizon, Sprint, and others. Apple is about to hog essentially ALL of the bandwidth in the entire USA with "toys", and it is going to impact people getting actual work done on phones and Blackberries.
This will be interesting.
Rocketman
EXACTLY! I'm sure Steve Jobs is thoroughly annoyed with Qualcomm for not being able to come out with that dual mode 3G chip on time.
It's going to be very awkward to have 2 different sets of iphones that are not compatible with each other.
It's going to be awkward like that till the next set of iphones comes out.
So if your not a new iphone user and you want to switch to Verizon well....you might have to spend another $200 bucks to get a new iphone under a new contract. But that would mean paying a termination fee to AT&T right?
"Hey, check out the new guy"
"What are you doing here? You can download apps and browse the web."
"Yeah, people will LOVE you!"
(ATT map pops up over its head)
"Ohhhhhhhh"
It was a compliment to the phone, and only dissed ATT. You can easily visualize a follow up ad with Verizon's map rescuing it from the island.
Likewise, Apple's "can your network do this" ad carefully avoiding mentioning Verizon.
Whoa! So Engadgetmobile has a hands on a Verizon Palm Pre Plus and guess what.... no Verizon logo, anywhere. Now I dont think thats an actual retail model but Ive seen other pre-release phone hands on that have had the Verizon logo. If the Pre comes out without the Verizon logo I guess that can blow another hole in the Verizon iPhone haters arguments.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
No, Apple demanded an unprecedented deal from Verizon at the time and Verizon chose not to give in to such demands. Imagine a business customer coming in to your company telling you how they want your service and dictating their terms. That is Apple (when we are not looking at history with Rose- (or Apple-) colored glasses).
It turns out that it was a bad move by Verizon, but I can sympathize with not wanting an outside company to dictate to my company exactly how I am going to serve them and their product(s). As a result, the player (Apple) ended up having to play with a lessor choice (not their first choice). It happened to work out well for AT&T and Apple too, but let's not re-imagine history simply because we love Apple.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Steve Jobs: "We have to get past the idea that for Apple to win, Microsoft must lose."
This is extraordinarily similar. We (users) lose nothing if the iPhone expands it's market to carriers beyond AT&T. AT&T is NOT Apple. If iPhones (and Tablets) can work with more than one 3G provider, we at least get some potential for some real competition in important benefits like price on the service side of the iPhone equation. For example, when there is an ability to get an iPhone or Tablet from either AT&T or Verizon, then we have a little bit of the power of competition pressuring both to give us a better deal on service. If we can only get an iPhone with either- but only ONE- provider, there is no pressure to provide a better deal whatsoever.
That many people in this and other threads detest the idea, makes no sense at all. You win by getting to go with whoever you want. You lose by allowing some company (Apple's deal with AT&T) to force you to go with only ONE 3G provider if you want Apple's product.
Love AT&T? Stick with 'em.
Love Verizon? Stick with 'em or switch to 'em.
Everybody wins with choice except the 3G monopoly that exists when ONE company holds the exclusive offer.
I can't believe there is even debate/fight about the potential to gain service choices beyond ONE source.
This is extraordinarily similar. We (users) lose nothing if the iPhone expands it's market to carriers beyond AT&T. AT&T is NOT Apple. If iPhones (and Tablets) can work with more than one 3G provider, we at least get some potential for some real competition in important benefits like price on the service side of the iPhone equation. For example, when there is an ability to get an iPhone or Tablet from either AT&T or Verizon, then we have a little bit of the power of competition pressuring both to give us a better deal on service. If we can only get an iPhone with either- but only ONE- provider, there is no pressure to provide a better deal whatsoever.
That many people in this and other threads detest the idea, makes no sense at all. You win by getting to go with whoever you want. You lose by allowing some company (Apple's deal with AT&T) to force you to go with only ONE 3G provider if you want Apple's product.
Love AT&T? Stick with 'em.
Love Verizon? Stick with 'em or switch to 'em.
Everybody wins with choice except the 3G monopoly that exists when ONE company holds the exclusive offer.
I can't believe there is even debate/fight about the potential to gain service choices beyond ONE source.
Some people here will pick a fight if you say that the sun rises in the east.
Agreed! Tmob will have the iPhone before verizon. My thoughts:
the mention of expansion to tmob and then verizon in the latter part if 2010 if at all this year
Because some people here see AT&T and Apple as one. If you attack one you attack the other.
Give me a second to check my Droid. No V-CAST and no Bing search icons. Okay now please tell me why you are certain that Verizon is going to do this to the iPhone?
Did I say "I am certain that Verizon is going to do this to the iPhone?" I don't even think Verizon is going to GET the iPhone.
You made the statement so either you believe it is likely to happen or are just trying to get people who would like to see the iPhone on Verizon fired up.
I was just providing the proof that they have not done it to their Android phones so I don't see why they would do it to an iPhone.
When someone claimed that Verizon would not cripple the iPhone you responded with this:
"Mmm. Deliciously spammy undeletable V-CAST and Bing search icons."
When I said that they have done nothing like that on the Droid you turn around and say you never made a statement.
So what is it? Either you said it or you didn't. I think that the fact they have not done this to their Android phones is a much better indication of how they would handle the iPhone then your opinion that they will install spammy undeletable V-CAST and Bing search icons just because you don't like Verizon.
I said the thing in quotes. I did not say I thought a verizon iphone (which I believe will not happen, anyway) would have those features.