iPhone on Verizon: 'A Decision That is Exclusively in Apple's Court'

[kdarling]

The fact that you have to wait till the carrier 'offers it' to you shows just how backwards the United States phone and mobile service is -

If you meant having to wait for a carrier to offer each phone, then I'm all for your rant! One cause is exclusivity, of course. For example, Sprint often pays to get phones six months ahead of others.

But you haven't answered my original question of Verizon sticking with CDMA when all carriers have moved onto W-CDMA (which is basically GSM)

Not sure I understand your question.

Verizon and Sprint didn't have to move to WCDMA. They started with CDMA and upgraded it to EVDO.

Now they're adding an LTE overlay. They intend to keep CDMA for voice until 2020 or longer, while replacing EVDO with LTE.

Thus they can still have inexpensive voice-only phones, with 4G being available for smartphones and such.

It's expected that GSM carriers will do something very similar.

 

[samab]

<rant>

The fact that you have to wait till the carrier 'offers it' to you shows just how backwards the United States phone and mobile service is - christ, it reminds me of New Zealand 30 years ago when you had to rent your phone and getting a line installed would take 6 weeks! But you haven't answered my original question of Verizon sticking with CDMA when all carriers have moved onto W-CDMA (which is basically GSM) - When is Verizon going to make the leap out of the primordial ooze of 2001 technology and get with the programme? Add to that the fact that the receiver of the call pays as well - I'm surprised anyone can be bothered having a phone in the US!

</rant>

You should know how backwards the New Zealand mobile market is --- Vodafone NZ just got charged with anti-trust charges by the New Zealand regulators.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601081&sid=a9_uHzqqYK9Q

American telecom companies haven't faced anti-trust charges for the last 25 years now.

The rest of the world is like 5 year old kids --- easily getting distracted by shiny objects.

 

[butterfly0fdoom]

Verizon and Sprint didn't have to move to WCDMA. They started with CDMA and upgraded it to EVDO.

Now they're adding an LTE overlay. They intend to keep CDMA for voice until 2020 or longer, while replacing EVDO with LTE.

Thus they can still have inexpensive voice-only phones, with 4G being available for smartphones and such.

It's expected that GSM carriers will do something very similar.

Sprint isn't, Sprint's going with WiMax for 4G.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

<rant>

The fact that you have to wait till the carrier 'offers it' to you shows just how backwards the United States phone and mobile service is - christ, it reminds me of New Zealand 30 years ago when you had to rent your phone and getting a line installed would take 6 weeks! But you haven't answered my original question of Verizon sticking with CDMA when all carriers have moved onto W-CDMA (which is basically GSM) - When is Verizon going to make the leap out of the primordial ooze of 2001 technology and get with the programme? Add to that the fact that the receiver of the call pays as well - I'm surprised anyone can be bothered having a phone in the US!

</rant>

Simple really and it takes looking no farther than how well Verizon deployed it 3G network compared to AT&T.

AT&T (and other W-CDMA) required new towers and new equipment to be put up because well it was CDMA techology for the phones which is different than GSM and the equipment is different. Now Verizon on the other hand which had been using CDMA just had to do a software upgrade and minor equipment upgrades to kick it to 3G speeds. Going W-CDMA would of required different equipment to be put in place.

So think about it. Verizon had 2 choices 3G deployed very quickly and cheaply or spend billions to converted over to W-CDMA and still have to support and expanded the original system. Cost wise Verizon made a better choice and debatable they made a better choice than the rest of the world when they wend with CDMA back in the day since the equipment used lasted a hell of a lot longer than GSM based equipment did before it reach the end of it life hand had to be replaced by something else (4G compared to GSM only making to though 2G)

 

[LagunaSol]

most of your "Game changing" argument is comparing the iPhone (smart phone) to dumb phones. Not exactly in the same playing field.

Seems your silly argument about the minimal impact of the iPhone is disputed by the chief marketing officer of Verizon himself:

"And I've got to give Apple credit. They revolutionized the industry as a new player and that's extraordinary. But we have to show that iPhone is not untouchable."

Revolutionized the industry. End of story. Not that anyone with any common sense couldn't already recognize how wrong you are (and will continue to be, with much protest and gnashing of teeth).

 

[kdarling]

Sprint isn't, Sprint's going with WiMax for 4G.

Right, thanks, good correction. I had written "they", meaning just Verizon... but then went back and put in Sprint in the first sentence at the last second and didn't change the "they" later on.

Interestingly, WiMax shares a lot with LTE. Similar air interface, and an IP backend. Some of the WiMax equipment makers were able to quickly adapt their stuff for LTE.

Seems your silly argument about the minimal impact of the iPhone is disputed by the chief marketing officer of Verizon himself:

Hey, you mean we can start quoting Verizon officials as sources of iPhone gospel?

Cool.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Seems your silly argument about the minimal impact of the iPhone is disputed by the chief marketing officer of Verizon himself:

"And I've got to give Apple credit. They revolutionized the industry as a new player and that's extraordinary. But we have to show that iPhone is not untouchable."

Revolutionized the industry. End of story. Not that anyone with any common sense couldn't already recognize how wrong you are (and will continue to be, with much protest and gnashing of teeth).

You wanna a cookie for finding a quite from finding a quite from a marketing cheif

Sorry the guy is a marketing chief. You took one part of it and it is still from a guy who is in marketing. Did I ever say that the iPhone was only a minor splash but I will not give it credit for massive game changing you blind apple fanboys like to give it.

Apple did some great things but it showed multitouch works but that was it. Touch screen was not new. It got multitouch and the name to work.

Lets see the list from the fanboys claimed the iPhone was the first to the table
1. Wifi (already shown it was out on other phone before hand)
2. Touch screen (sorry phones had it out before the iPhone)

The iPhone tied the iPod to the phone which was big and improved mobile web browsing. By far the biggest thing the iPhone had going for it was the Apple Label which carriers massive weight.

 

[dejo]

You wanna a cookie for finding a quite from finding a quite from a marketing cheif

Hey, Rodimus. Take a chill-pill, relax, and take just an extra second or two to look over what you are posting before you hit that Submit Reply button. 'Cuz holy cow, that is one (among many) messed up sentence.

 

[LagunaSol]

You wanna a cookie for finding a quite from finding a quite from a marketing cheif

I didn't "find" a "quite" (quote) - it was in the news story today from the Droid announcement from Verizon.

And if the chief marketing officer for Verizon (who doesn't even sell the iPhone) calls the iPhone revolutionary and some anonymous anti-Apple troll on the Internet claims the iPhone was an insignificant blip in a chain of events that would have happened anyway, I believe the real credibility is in the Verizon guy. But hey, keep on truckin'.

Did I ever say that the iPhone was only a minor splash but I will not give it credit for massive game changing you blind apple fanboys like to give it.

You love using the old "blind Apple fanboy" schtick in response to anything that goes against your anti-Apple agenda, but being a blind Apple hater doesn't seem to differentiate you all that much from that which you rage about.

And apparently not only do "blind Apple fanboys" recognize the iPhone for being a massive game changer, but Apple's competitors do too. And they even say so - publicly.

Feel the burn.