Yes, but two of the USA's largest carriers are CDMA - primarily Verizon, which has the broadest coverage. If the iPhone is not available as CDMA (either in the form of an all-in-one "world phone" or separate CDMA and GSM versions), then Apple is literally cutting themselves out of 60% of the market in the US. There's no way they won't have a CDMA version at some point. However, if Apple picks a specific US carrier (most likely Cingular, if this is so), then they can have a GSM version exclusive to Cingular and later offer CDMA for other carriers after exclusive contracts run out. Just as other manufacturers do.
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.
iPhone and Cell Phone Market Dynamics
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes, but two of the USA's largest carriers are CDMA - primarily Verizon, which has the broadest coverage. If the iPhone is not available as CDMA (either in the form of an all-in-one "world phone" or separate CDMA and GSM versions), then Apple is literally cutting themselves out of 60% of the market in the US. There's no way they won't have a CDMA version at some point. However, if Apple picks a specific US carrier (most likely Cingular, if this is so), then they can have a GSM version exclusive to Cingular and later offer CDMA for other carriers after exclusive contracts run out. Just as other manufacturers do.
People are just more familiar with that concept over there, and I also think it's because your currencies (namely the british pound -- my god! $75 for a cab ride in london???) allow phone prices to be a little cheaper.
* * *
I don't think the unlocked idea is bad -- in fact, I think it's the only way to go. I just think they need to market the hell out of it to get the idea across, and they already have a lot of channels to work through.
* * *
I just came up with a thought:
Cingular: 60M
Verizon: 60M
Sprint: 60M
T-Mobile: 30M
GSM: Cingular + T-Mobile = 90M
CDMA: Verizon + Sprint = 120M
There are more people on CDMA than GSM in America -- if they do unlocked GSM only, they'll only get the smaller half of the market. How'd they address this issue?
The concept of an "unlocked" phone is more popular in Europe and Asia, but customers can buy a phone independent of service and buy service in the form of SIM cards from Cingular or T-Mobile. This concept, however, is less familiar in the U.S. and could introduce some confusion to the consumers.
Bring on the "confusion" I say.
Bring on the "confusion" I say.
GSM vs CDMA
I agree with those who say Apple will need to release a CDMA version of this phone, at least in North America where CDMA has a leading market share. (This assumes, of course, that they will be making this phone available to work with other carriers' networks, and not asking consumers to switch to an Apple-branded MVNO network).
Beyond market share an additional reason, in the US and Canada, is the availability of much higher-speed data networks from the CDMA providers ... Verizon, Sprint, Bell, Telus. Remember that Jobs & Co. are not averse to pushing the envelope when it comes to getting people to adopt newer technologies. They did it with floppy disks. They recently did it with modems. It would be entirely consistent for them to roll out this phone with data services (tied to .mac) that benefit greatly from being on the fastest possible networks.
In Europe, Asia and elsewhere the situation may be different ... 3G and more evolved EDGE networks may be in place ... but in North America, if you're interested in mobile data coverage your best bets are WiFi hotspots and EVDO CDMA networks. That's likely to matter to Apple.
Certainly they're likely to offer a GSM version as well ... Apple markets worldwide ... but I don't see them locking themselves down to GSM providers any more than Motorola does.
Finally, as to pricing and whether Apple will sell unlocked versions apart from the carriers ... remember, it's not just a phone! It's probably an iPod and a PDA as well. Unless you win a raffle, you don't get either of those free these days ... people already pay a lot of money for them, and some people, including me, would gladly pay not to have to carry two or three of those devices.
I wouldn't be surprised if I could walk into my local Apple store (in the US) and ask for one of three models: CDMA-A, CDMA-B, or GSM quad band. That would cover all of the carriers except Nextel. You can get an unlocked quad-band GSM phone to be recognized by a network by plugging in a SIM, and the CDMA networks will similarly allow you to register a compatible phone with them, wherever you got it. Moreover, you might be able to switch among those carriers by merely buying and changing a removable chipset ... allowing consumers to pick the providers and plans they want.
I agree with those who say Apple will need to release a CDMA version of this phone, at least in North America where CDMA has a leading market share. (This assumes, of course, that they will be making this phone available to work with other carriers' networks, and not asking consumers to switch to an Apple-branded MVNO network).
Beyond market share an additional reason, in the US and Canada, is the availability of much higher-speed data networks from the CDMA providers ... Verizon, Sprint, Bell, Telus. Remember that Jobs & Co. are not averse to pushing the envelope when it comes to getting people to adopt newer technologies. They did it with floppy disks. They recently did it with modems. It would be entirely consistent for them to roll out this phone with data services (tied to .mac) that benefit greatly from being on the fastest possible networks.
In Europe, Asia and elsewhere the situation may be different ... 3G and more evolved EDGE networks may be in place ... but in North America, if you're interested in mobile data coverage your best bets are WiFi hotspots and EVDO CDMA networks. That's likely to matter to Apple.
Certainly they're likely to offer a GSM version as well ... Apple markets worldwide ... but I don't see them locking themselves down to GSM providers any more than Motorola does.
Finally, as to pricing and whether Apple will sell unlocked versions apart from the carriers ... remember, it's not just a phone! It's probably an iPod and a PDA as well. Unless you win a raffle, you don't get either of those free these days ... people already pay a lot of money for them, and some people, including me, would gladly pay not to have to carry two or three of those devices.
I wouldn't be surprised if I could walk into my local Apple store (in the US) and ask for one of three models: CDMA-A, CDMA-B, or GSM quad band. That would cover all of the carriers except Nextel. You can get an unlocked quad-band GSM phone to be recognized by a network by plugging in a SIM, and the CDMA networks will similarly allow you to register a compatible phone with them, wherever you got it. Moreover, you might be able to switch among those carriers by merely buying and changing a removable chipset ... allowing consumers to pick the providers and plans they want.
I'm tired of people saying US consumers are stupid. Almost everyone I know is also tired of that marketing. Most people don't believe most of the crap politicians and business men sell but we are forced to buy it because we have no other choice.
I really do hope Apple comes along and gets rid of the idiotic locked phones strategy. Honestly, no one likes contracts except the companies selling them.
I really do hope Apple comes along and gets rid of the idiotic locked phones strategy. Honestly, no one likes contracts except the companies selling them.
Well put. I also don't believe that American consumers are stupid. As others have noted, we buy into certain things because there is frequently no other choice. We've all seen and read the ads from the varioius cell phone companies, and they all look and sound alike at this point.
I have Cingular, and I have no complaints about the service itself. It always works, and there are always 3-5 bars showing wherever I go. But, I would love to able to simply purchase my own phone, then get service from any of the carriers.
Sort of off the topic: In adult hands, most cell phones last a long time. I know a lot of people with "older" (four to five years old) handsets, and they work just fine. Well, several of these people have recently received nice notes with their statements, saying that if they do not upgrade to new handsets soon, they will be charged extra. Cingular and Verizon are two outfits doing this. Anyone get one of these notices?
Not strictly true. My last 3 phones from O2 have all been bought from an O2 store and been unlocked when I tried another SIM in them
And had a minimum of O2 branding and changes to the firmware.The past 2 years, I've been offered the choice of having a new phone OR keeping my current phone and having a subsidised service plan for the next year.
I'm quite happy with my current 'new phone' each year - I keep one old one for emergencies and sell one on to someone in the office on PAYG who wants an updated one. There are a lot of great phones out there that I can get for 'nothing' each year - the Apple phone would have to offer a lot more than just being better at synching with iTunes for me to want to buy one outright.
Wouldn't that be some sort of extortion and a pretty damn illegal thing to do ?
personally, at first, I think Apple will be selling iPhones, just like they sell iPods. In the store and online. I think Apple is willing to bet that people will toss the phone that came with their plan and just use the iPhone instead.
This also allows them to make the device mostly an iPod, with the added benefit that it can also make phonecalls.
I could easily be wrong, but it seems to me, if they can come up with an iPod that also has basic phone functionality (phone, camera, calendar) with a really good interface (a first for any phone) and really good syncing software on the Mac/PC side (another first) they'd be able to find more than enough people to buy one. Apple is always about the integration between hardware and software, and this is where the biggest fault lies with phones today, and why so many people don't use 80% of their phones' features.
This situation isn't actually all that different from where mp3 players stood before the iPod...
Once the iPhone takes off, then they'll start thinking about putting (their no doubt already far-along-in-development) smart phone on the market.
This also allows them to make the device mostly an iPod, with the added benefit that it can also make phonecalls.
I could easily be wrong, but it seems to me, if they can come up with an iPod that also has basic phone functionality (phone, camera, calendar) with a really good interface (a first for any phone) and really good syncing software on the Mac/PC side (another first) they'd be able to find more than enough people to buy one. Apple is always about the integration between hardware and software, and this is where the biggest fault lies with phones today, and why so many people don't use 80% of their phones' features.
This situation isn't actually all that different from where mp3 players stood before the iPod...
Once the iPhone takes off, then they'll start thinking about putting (their no doubt already far-along-in-development) smart phone on the market.
Not quite extortion...
Arstechnica.com said:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060801-7400.html
Ah that clears it up. I thought they were just adding some fees without any serious reasons but to get you to upgrade to a newer phone.
Of course, it's possible that Apple won't sell the phone in the US market because it's too complicated. The rest of the world is a huge market
For all you people who want Apple to provide their own network, would you really but into it? As much as I want the iPhone, I know I wouldn't. My family and most of my friends use Verizon, so it doesn't make any sense to lose the in-calling.
I'm wondering how cost effective this will be. The cellular market is pretty tapped, dare I say its like reinventing the wheel to get some wheel action.
I disagree.
It really doesn't make economical sense to develop a CDAM phone, at least not in a initial stage. The world market share is basically too small. GSM/UMTS has more than one billion users. CDMA users are just a fraction of that.
Besides, isn't the biggest CDMA player i US (Verizon) known its procrastination when it comes to accepting new phones in their net? I doubt Apple would want to become that dependent on a single company that clearly has conflicting interest when it comes e.g. to downloading music.
GSM is the way it should be, if it's not going to be a 3G or 4G phone then it's gotta be GSM.
I'm on a contract now but that will finish eventually and then all I'd need to do is grab the phone, a $2 SIM card and get them to carry over my number (it's free to do this here) and I'd be all set.
I'm on a contract now but that will finish eventually and then all I'd need to do is grab the phone, a $2 SIM card and get them to carry over my number (it's free to do this here) and I'd be all set.
I don't see why you'd need to make CDMA or GSM only. Why not one GSM and one CDMA so you get all your bases covered? Besides, there are other places in the world besides North America that uses CDMA.
once again, Verizon does not support third party phones, they dont even activate them. Their phones are locked, have crippled bluetooth and have all the same ugly red interface (except the smartphones). Do you think Apple will destroy the ipod interface with the ugly verizon logo everywhere? and do you think Verizon wants you to use their network to download music from the competing apple store? I dont see any CDMA apple phone in north america.
Cisco was probably laughing behind when we were all talking about rumours of iphone by apple... I hope apple fan will just boycott iphone by cisco.. damn cisco!
anyway.. i'm glad that apple phone will not be called iphone.. it's such a common name anyway.. but i don't want a macphone either
There's always Sprint.