I would wait until version 10 or 11. Just think of the USB ports it will have then.
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.
iPad Headed to AT&T and Verizon Retail Stores on October 28th
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I would wait until version 10 or 11. Just think of the USB ports it will have then.
So what? Having a phone with one carrier doesn't mean you must have other devices with the same carrier. If Apple also sold a 4G iPad with $10/month 5GB data plan on the Sprint network, would you choose the AT&T 3G iPad with the $14-25/month data plans, even if coverage was equal?
It's no different than the fact that Sprint/CLEAR sells a device made for the iPad/iPhone with a $25/month Unlimited contract free data plan...
Two huge flaws in this presumption.
1. What network do you think all those Droid phones sold over about the last 10 months run on ? Likewise the USB modems and miFi units sold. Any one of those categories isn't as big relatively as the iPhone presence on ATT's network, but rather extreme to classify this as untested. Sure there are a wider variety of bandwidth hogging apps on iPhone, but there are several that run on Droid phones also.
2. Verizon has spent 10's of millions deploying a LTE network. Not sure why they would couple wide spread adoptance of iPads (and iPhones) and not deploy them onto that new network. There is a marginally creditable argument for keeping the phones off since likely need to run voice and data on separate radios ( e.g., some sort of MIMO set up where transmitting on different frequencies). However, for the iPad, it is more than weird that Apple would reject LTE data modem on a device that primarily relies on a data modem.
Timing wise the Android based tablets launching on Verizon pre Decemeber are somewhat at a disadvantage since Verizon is going to change the network in the Decemeber-March timeframe. Notice that the iPad refresh launch window lines up with that.
With Verizon's approval and cooperation it would not have been a big problem to :
a. deploy LTE test cells to the San Francisco area early after the initial test trails in Boston and Seattle successfully concluded. Lets say by January.
b. Give Apple access, post iPad announcement, to the test cells from Jan-Sept for field testing.
c. testing and validating a cell data modem is easier than testing and validating a voice+data system. It would be a simpler first step to start interactions with a new carrier with that approach.
It probably wouldn't be too hard drop a new iPad next Jan-March that leveraged that new network when it went live. Even if Apple and Verizon later come out with a stunted iPhone that is hobbled on the , at that point "previous generation" , data network you still would have tracked the iPad traffic off to distinct frequency and network. The growth rate on iPad is as least as high as the iPhone was.
Selling with the MiFi bundle is a nice way of working out the corporate interaction logistical glitches also with a simpler device ( requires less integration. ) Step two would be a device where worked out account activation integration.
If you sit in AT&T fastest empty cell range and Verizon's fastest empty cell range then AT&T's will be faster. For example, after hours at Apple HQ the verizon device would probably most of the time.
The more muddled issue is what happens when the coverage and/or cell serviced unit density is different between the two. Also how widespread that unequal locations are.
Never going the happen on a widespread basis. You can't pragmatically decouple the radios from the antenna. That is all the more true once start integrating one or both of those into the rest of the phone device's other components. Which frequencies and/or how many radios simultaneously transmit impacts both. Some reason why you don't see "plug in GSM/3G/etc." radio set-ups in current phones. In an extremely tightly integrated device, changing one component impacts the other components also.
Second, pragmatically it is a licensing nightmare since the "system" isn't really complete until you "plug in" the seperate halves of the device.
Show me where that ABI report is discredited? Show me one substantive report showing AT&T pushed more data. Edit: OH! AT&T refuted the report...pwahahaha...well of course they did!
Verizon's network has been tested, they have had FAR more data devices on their network far longer than AT&T has. Back when AT&T was still on Edge, all business users were flocking to Sprint and Verizon for 3G aircards.
Also, recent reports show Android phones are pulling more data than iPhones. Most likely due to the profile of the typical Android phone customer.
Hahahaha, and you're REALLY gonna say that Verizon is slower than Sprint and T-Mobile? EDIT: Where did you get that idea??!
http://www.pcworld.com/article/1895...rlds_second_3g_wireless_performance_test.html
Yes, the average nationwide in the areas where AT&T actually has 3G data are now faster, but that only changed in the last year. The year before that Verizon was the fastest. And that slower bandwidth isn't exactly that much different. Heck, even AT&T's own commercial reflected that all but Luke Wilson's head was downloaded.
How old is this report?! For one, Verizon now has around 92 Mil customers and AT&T around 88 Mil....both are MUCH larger now than this report...but Verizon is larger than AT&T at this moment.
And a report that shows the number of hits on webpages by different browsers != the amount of data downloaded by that same browser. You can't use a browser report as proof.
Which makes perfect sense since they only had Edge before the iPhone was introduced. Sprint and Verizon had all the data-centric customers.
And 250 MB for $14.99 on AT&T isn't a premium?
How about 5 GB for $50 on Verizon?
Both carriers have price points that are attractive for different users. I'm guessing this was Verizon's goal.
5 GB for $50 is in fact better than 2 GB for $25
Edit: I'm not a fan of any of the tiered plans. I can't believe how little data they are giving. It's absolutely ridiculous. But anybody that tries to argue either side is clearly a fanboy.....they both suck....they just suck differently.
No Verizon Hot Spots for iPad Wifi?
Oddly, Verizon's "Verizon Wi-Fi" service (which allows access through any Verizon hot spot) is still Windows (XP and Vista) only (as is there set top box media manager). Evidently they need to install some sort of crapware before you can access it, and the crapware is Windows only.
http://www22.verizon.com/ResidentialHelp/FiOSInternet/Networking/Setup/Wi-Fi/124647.htm
Oddly, Verizon's "Verizon Wi-Fi" service (which allows access through any Verizon hot spot) is still Windows (XP and Vista) only (as is there set top box media manager). Evidently they need to install some sort of crapware before you can access it, and the crapware is Windows only.
http://www22.verizon.com/ResidentialHelp/FiOSInternet/Networking/Setup/Wi-Fi/124647.htm
Precisely. They will succeed. Take for example, todays event of Steve giving free iPads to the rescued miners in Spain. It was on every network on the planet for the most part.
Let's see iPad sales for the remainder of the month compared to the first 13 days.
The assimilation is unstoppable, and rightly so.
He gave them iPOds not iPAds
Oops. You are correct. Cheap shot by Steve. Should have given them iPads. Missed opportunity. Who want's an iPod. After all, it's simply a small iPad.
I guess that's your experience, but my experience of supporting a nationwide salesforce that also travels constantly says otherwise. I had over 100 users all over the US. There were only 2 users that had issues with Verizon and we had to switch to AT&T. One was in the Rocky Mountains and the other a rural area of Dallas...(that one actually surprised me since Verizon is usually better in rural areas.)
By $5, anything lower and AT&T is the better choice because of the freedom. For instance you can get the 2GB plan for 25 and if you NEED another 1GB get it vs. Verizon where you need to get $35 period because the 1GB for 20 doubles if you go over.
yeah, my take on this is that Apple is a very big hurry to get their devices in as many retail outlets as possible. They didn't want to wait for either a CDMA or LTE modem to be go through whatever process is necessary to design, test, and manufacture. Hence, we get the WiFi + MiFi.
But in the future I fully expect them to throw in...most likely...an LTE modem. Unless LTE modems suck up too much battery, then we'll see CDMA first.
I was joking around
I love being a statistical anomaly and would choose the AT&T plan regardless
Here is what this means. Verizon and Apple now have a formal business relationship. Which means that there WILL be a Verizon compatible iPhone. Say what you want but it is inevitable now!
Also for all of you out there that are complaining about the 1GB of data thing you need to actually do your homework before you speak because there will be a 3GB, and 5GB plan as well.
Also for all of you out there that are complaining about the 1GB of data thing you need to actually do your homework before you speak because there will be a 3GB, and 5GB plan as well.
If indeed Apple is building a CDMA iPhone for Verizon, one thing is for sure. They are not going to make the same mistake they did with the GSM version.
The Verizon model will be built to Verizons specs for their network. Verizons smart enough to demand that Apple build this phone right. They are not about to be a victim of Apples finger pointing.
If Apple had built the GSM iPhone to AT&T's specs, the phone performance would have been excellent. The iPhone would be known as a good phone, and AT&T would not have been blamed for what they could not control.
Don't get me wrong I'm not defending AT&T, but it is what it is. Every AT&T phone I have (other than my iPhone 3, 3Gs, and 4) performs very well, does not drop calls and is very fast on AT&T's 3G network.
The GSM version shipped with a chip that was not quite right for the AT&T network that _Apple_ chose to do business with.
The sad fact was Apple's success in blaming it all on AT&T, and getting most everyone to believe it.
The Verizon model will be built to Verizons specs for their network. Verizons smart enough to demand that Apple build this phone right. They are not about to be a victim of Apples finger pointing.
If Apple had built the GSM iPhone to AT&T's specs, the phone performance would have been excellent. The iPhone would be known as a good phone, and AT&T would not have been blamed for what they could not control.
Don't get me wrong I'm not defending AT&T, but it is what it is. Every AT&T phone I have (other than my iPhone 3, 3Gs, and 4) performs very well, does not drop calls and is very fast on AT&T's 3G network.
The GSM version shipped with a chip that was not quite right for the AT&T network that _Apple_ chose to do business with.
The sad fact was Apple's success in blaming it all on AT&T, and getting most everyone to believe it.
What spec would that be?? You mean CDMA right? There is no special "spec" for Verizon's network. Same for AT&T. They are are both IEEE standards.
And before I had an iPhone I had a Samsung A747 flip and it dropped more calls than I had dropped on both Sprint and Verizon the entire time I had them both. AT&T had issues BEFORE the iPhone, the iPhone just amplified it.
I've never seen a single report stating that Apple used a "chip that was not quite right".
Guess again. It's only $10 per GB of overage on Verizon.
Apple used a GSM chip that was meant for EU where the towers are really close together, not America where they are more spread apart.
http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/splash/ipad_faq.jsp
You need the 3GB or 5GB plan for $10 per GB. It's $20 per GB on the lower plan.
Got any documentation on this? I've never read such a thing. Pretty sure distance between towers doesn't matter. In fact, that makes no sense at all since people buy EU based GSM phones for use in the states all the time. The entire basis of that argument means people would have difficulty roaming back and forth.
Hmmm...missed that.
You guess again... Fourth Q & A What are iPad Mifi data plans (paraphrasing):? - $20 for 1 GB ($20/1 GB Overage)
Verizons thinking... make overage less costly on more expensive plans so people sign up for the higher priced monthly data plans... is what I read somewhere.
Anyway, if your on VWZ and you go over your 1 GB, it's $20 for an additional GB.
You guess again... Fourth Q & A What are iPad Mifi data plans (paraphrasing):? - $20 for 1 GB ($20/1 GB Overage)
Verizons thinking... make overage less costly on more expensive plans so people sign up for the higher priced monthly data plans... is what I read somewhere.
Anyway, if your on VWZ and you go over your 1 GB, it's $20 for an additional GB.
I don't get the massive amount of people being purposely ignorant on these data plans. Its amazing the amount of pure narrow mindedness the ATT vs VZN is.
Its like people are defending their family name. At the same time people are cursing a tiny data plan as being completely unrealistic, they are focusing on the 1GB VZN plan as if it were the only data range anyone would be interested in.
This is very, very simple.
By Usage price comparison only:
<250 MB - Go with ATT
<1GB - Go with VZN
<3GB - Go with ATT
3GB-4GB -Decision lies in other details, price is not a determining factor
>4GB - GO with VZN
Even if it is a month to month plan (which I doubt because a Verizon MiFi hotspot device comes with a contract according to their website), I still wouldn't buy it from Verizon. Verizon is charging you the base model price for a WiFi + 3G device in exchange for a base model WiFi ONLY device.
Instead of doubting, read the press releases. It's month to month, at a $10 discount over the normal MiFi price if you go for the 5GB plan.
No, it's for a combination that not only has 3G, but can act as a WiFi hotspot for others around you. And it comes with a case.
If you're trying to find something worthwhile to knock, just say that it's the same price but missing the GPS.
I don't need gps in my iPad, it's too big for turn by turn navigation where my iPhone excels in the dashboard dock. Wifi location is enough for me for GPS. More than that, this also gives me added wireless network presence for my iPhone to pull down maps from the web.
And a separate device EASILY is better hardware capability in that I can use it with any wifi capable device. So my laptop, my wife's laptop, my ipad, my iPhone, my PSP, etc. and I can use any 5 of them at the same time. Also, it puts me past the 20MB file download limits imposed by 3G connectivity on both my iPhone and my iPad (if it were a 3G iPad).
You haven't seen the Mifi clearly. It's about the size of a stack of 3 or 4 credit cards, it easily fits in the netbook sleeve I already use for the iPad without adding extra bulk and can use the same iPad charger I already carry with me. The extra charging cable amounts to another short USB cable. The battery easily lasts 4 hours of use as well under most circumstances as tested with my friend's Mifi.
If you price it at that rate. If you buy (and use) the 3GB rate from Verizon, AT&T and Verizon are at the same price point ($25 for 2GB + $10 for 1GB overage on AT&T). At $20 Verizon beats the hell out of 200MB for $15 from AT&T.
"Lost call" is in fact relevant though too because signal coverage for data is not always equal. We already know that AT&T has issues in many major metropolitan areas (San Francisco for example and my experience in NYC has been less than stellar). In the building I work, it's a complete AT&T black out area (despite full bars stepping one foot out of the building). Everyone with Verizon where I work stays at full signal. That will appropriately shape opinions of networks.
For me this plan FINALLY makes sense for me to pull the trigger on Verizon. I've already got someone lined up to buy the iPad off of me for mostly full price after I get it too.