ATT being left behind??

[BladesOfSteel]

Okay, pure speculation here -

It's been widely reported that Jobs has sparred with ATT a few times over the last 3-4 years. It has even been reported that he wanted to leave ATT as many as six times.

Now with the VZ iPhone knocking on the door, what is stopping Apple for dropping ATT?

The 10-12 million iPhone users, right?? Well, Apple has been known to drop whatever they deem unnecessary and move forward with or without those effected.

For instance, the floppy disk - back in 1998 (if I remember correctly), Apple didn't include it in it's iMac. How many people were affected by that? How many people had macs prior to 1998 that were left with the choice of upgrading - and transferring the data from the floppies to CDs or sticking with their old Mac Quadras/Performas?

Apple also had a major change with the PowerPC/Intel move. Now, the PowerPCs were still supported for a year or two after the move to Intel was complete, but still, it is just another sign that Apple isn't afraid to make a bold move.

To a lesser extent, Apple sorta did the same thing (as the floppy) with the MacBook Air. Sure you can buy a separate external CD drive, but I think it would be foolish to think that Jobs/Apple aren't trying to get people away from optical type storage.

The move to drop ATT might anger some - but it would also drive some to move to Verizon - certainly more then the number that would migrate over simply for the "verizon" iPhone. That correlates to more sales - which Apple is primarily concerned about.

Just a thought.

 

[jav6454]

A unwise thought that is. Business potential in those AT&T customers outweighs Verizon.

Also, it won't happen at all. Why? GSM. I think you can manage to think why that matters.

 

[paulrbeers]

No. Apple drops support for proprietary formats and older technology, it doesn't drop users entirely. Why would you want to limit your user base?

 

[MacDawg]

I don't see any rational reason (or evidence) for this whatsoever

 

[stewart715]

No, I don't see that happening. Investors of AAPL put alot of pressure on the company and I don't believe that would be a sound business decision. Having access to 180 million customers (ATT+VZW) is what they want. Besides, both networks are going to have a "4G" speed network fully adapted within 3 years (or so they say).

 

[macsrcool1234]

Because dropping such a massive source of revenue because you don't "like" them is a terrible move. There's no doubt that AT&T brings a massive source of revenue.

And while I like Verizon better, I have no problem admitting that AT&T has greatly improved and frankly is not as bad as the media makes them out to be.

If Jobs did that, it would probably be the end of his career....for good this time.

 

[BladesOfSteel]

No. Apple drops support for proprietary formats and older technology, it doesn't drop users entirely. Why would you want to limit your user base?

Just like they have for the past 3+ years?

 

[GolpherZX]

A unwise thought that is. Business potential in those AT&T customers outweighs Verizon.

Also, it won't happen at all. Why? GSM. I think you can manage to think why that matters.

It could happen. VZW = GSM (LTE is the 3GPP next network standard).

Why not. I did a look at coverage maps this morning showing a coworker why I was willing to switch. ATT's 3G coverage is poor. VZW is quite the impressive 3G network. Compare them nationwide for yourself. I was looking in the midwest specifically at Wisconsin and Indiana. I think we know who wins there. More map wars on the way!!!!

 

[jav6454]

Just like they have for the past 3+ years?

Yet they received a fair compensation for that limitation. Something Verizon will be unwilling to do.

It could happen. VZW = GSM (LTE is the 3GPP next network standard).

Why not. I did a look at coverage maps this morning showing a coworker why I was willing to switch. ATT's 3G coverage is poor. VZW is quite the impressive 3G network. Compare them nationwide for yourself. I was looking in the midwest specifically at Wisconsin and Indiana. I think we know who wins there. More map wars on the way!!!!

And here I thought all dumb comments were done.... how wrong was I.

 

[GolpherZX]

Yet they received a fair compensation for that limitation. Something Verizon will be unwilling to do.

But it is likely something Verizon has done considering the phone isn't coming out on Sprint.

 

[jav6454]

But it is likely something Verizon has done considering the phone isn't coming out on Sprint.

Yet, the iPhone was never meant to work on other GSM carriers and, oh look! The Dev Team made it so!

 

[VulchR]

It is perhaps worth noting that in the UK Apple increased the number of phone companies offering the iPhone rather than simply switching from BT to another company. Apple won't abandon AT&T, if nothing else than to play Verizon and ATT against each other.

 

[Stealthipad]

How do you figure that AT&T is being left behind. They will still sell the iPhone 4 and will sell the iPhone 5, too!

 

[BladesOfSteel]

I don't see any rational reason (or evidence) for this whatsoever

Truth be told, either do I.

A simple thought came to me, and decided to entertain the idea by creating this thread.

My heartfelt apologies to the esteemed jav6454 for contributing to the dumbing down of the forums here at macrumors.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

It could happen. VZW = GSM (LTE is the 3GPP next network standard).

Why not. I did a look at coverage maps this morning showing a coworker why I was willing to switch. ATT's 3G coverage is poor. VZW is quite the impressive 3G network. Compare them nationwide for yourself. I was looking in the midwest specifically at Wisconsin and Indiana. I think we know who wins there. More map wars on the way!!!!

and yet it will be over a decade before VZW will be fullys GSM. They will require all phones on their network to support the older formats as a fall back.
Take for example the fact that we still fully support GPRS on AT&T because it is a good fall back. GPRS is pre EDGE.
Hell AT&T still supports edge and 3G (WCDMA) has been in use since 2004-05ish. EDGE is supported world wide because it is a great fall back.

 

[sarcosis]

While the though is valid one since it's currently seen as a single carrier market for the iPhone here in the US right now, I don't think it's going to be in the long run. It would be foolish for Apple to drop AT&T right now. It simply has too large a footprint right now. Not everyone is going to rush to switch. When making a decision such as this is highly more complicated than dumping a CD/Floppy Drive.

The only scenario I see this happening is if AT&T doesn't evolve with the rest of the world. It's very easy to keep AT&T since the iPhone was to be a worldwide product. The world runs on GSM so it's a simple conversion for a nice kickback. So if AT&T stops evolving, which I don't see that happening, but you never know, that's when it will happen. Otherwise, it's going to be a two carrier game. Likely AT&T and the rest of the world getting the refresh first and the CDMA playing catch up until LTE voice+Data are united and it will become united just judging on the refresh cycles.

 

[Rooftop voter]

It could happen. VZW = GSM (LTE is the 3GPP next network standard).

Why not. I did a look at coverage maps this morning showing a coworker why I was willing to switch. ATT's 3G coverage is poor. VZW is quite the impressive 3G network. Compare them nationwide for yourself. I was looking in the midwest specifically at Wisconsin and Indiana. I think we know who wins there. More map wars on the way!!!!

Actually you really can't go by the maps. They use different standards, and what verizon calls 3G att does not. You could be in a place where verizon has 3G and att doesn't and you could still get faster download speeds on att than Verizons 3G. If you where to look at a coverage map that showed what at&ts coverage looks like using the download speeds that verizon calls 3G, they look pretty similar. Now, how each performs in your area is another story.

 

[maflynn]

It could happen. VZW = GSM (LTE is the 3GPP next network standard).

AT&T is about a year away from having 4G ready but VZW has one now. While I don't expect to see a 4G iPhone 4, i.e., today its going to be CDMA only. Verizon Wireless is in better standing to roll out an iPhone 5 that is 4.

 

[asleep]

Vaya con Dios, AT&T.

 

[kdarling]

Actually you really can't go by the maps. They use different standards, and what verizon calls 3G att does not.

Sorry, you're repeating a myth.

The idea that that parts weren't EVDO got started with someone on a forum misreading the maps and thinking it was 1XRTT, and then compared it with EDGE. By the time they got corrected, the web echo chamber had spread the mistake.

Even ATT calls it 3G. They never disputed Verizon's 3G map even when they were engaged in lawsuits over coverage.

Cheers!

 

[goosnarrggh]

and yet it will be over a decade before VZW will be fullys GSM. They will require all phones on their network to support the older formats as a fall back.
Take for example the fact that we still fully support GPRS on AT&T because it is a good fall back. GPRS is pre EDGE.
Hell AT&T still supports edge and 3G (WCDMA) has been in use since 2004-05ish. EDGE is supported world wide because it is a great fall back.

An interesting counterpoint:
In Canada, two nationwide networks were GSM (and its successors) based (Rogers and Fido), and two networks were CDMA based (Bell and Telus).

Out of nowhere, Bell and Telus announced that they had been working together for the past few years to build an entire new nationwide network, shared between customers of both carriers, based upon HSPA. Bell and Telus continue to support their existing CDMA customer base, but they are pretty much exclusively selling new phones based on HSPA.

And yet, Bell and Telus offer absolutely ZERO fall-back options to EDGE and GPRS. Customers who own an HSPA phone on Bell and Telus (the vast majority of new connections), have exactly two possible connection states: HSPA, or no connectivity whatsoever.

It would be possible for Verizon to do something similar.

 

[zephxiii]

An interesting counterpoint:
In Canada, two nationwide networks were GSM (and its successors) based (Rogers and Fido), and two networks were CDMA based (Bell and Telus).

Out of nowhere, Bell and Telus announced that they had been working together for the past few years to build an entire new nationwide network, shared between customers of both carriers, based upon HSPA. Bell and Telus continue to support their existing CDMA customer base, but they are pretty much exclusively selling new phones based on HSPA.

And yet, Bell and Telus offer absolutely ZERO fall-back options to EDGE and GPRS. Customers who own an HSPA phone on Bell and Telus (the vast majority of new connections), have exactly two possible connection states: HSPA, or no connectivity whatsoever.

It would be possible for Verizon to do something similar.

Judging by VZW's intention to be fully LTE across the network in a short period of time, yes they can do something similar. The only thing that scares me is right now they are talking about LTE only being on 700mhz..not a lot of spectrum to support everyone.

In all honesty I don't think they will stick to 700mhz only, eventually LTE will be deployed in other chunks of spectrum to add capacity.


And no, Apple won't be dropping AT&T from their list of iphone carriers, it's a dumb thought to think of.

 

[bid2ask77]

No, I don't see that happening. Investors of AAPL put alot of pressure on the company and I don't believe that would be a sound business decision. Having access to 180 million customers (ATT+VZW) is what they want. Besides, both networks are going to have a "4G" speed network fully adapted within 3 years (or so they say).

Agreed well said

 

[kdarling]

EDGE is supported world wide because it is a great fall back.

Not always.

When the first iPhone came out for sale, a lot of the UK had GPRS and UMTS-3G... but almost no EDGE.

There was a mad scramble to add EDGE to their GPRS networks... just to handle the 3G-less iPhone.

Many people will also remember how slow EDGE was in the USA (max ~80Kbps) before AT&T spent months boosting it in order that the first iPhone would not be ridiculously slow. This was time and money wasted that should've been spent on deploying 3G instead.

 

[Stealthipad]

Vaya con Dios, AT&T.

Don't let the door . . . . . . .