yadmonkey, I just joined this forum a few moments ago to throw my full support behind your initial post. I've been getting my arse flamed on Howardforums for a very similar thread that I started a month ago on the same subject (and this was before the keynote). I know your frustration. I've found that no matter what clear and well-thought-out arguments I make, the AT&T fanboys toss the same worn-out arguments back at me, with little substantiation and little truth. The bottom line is that they have their iPhone already, so they really see no reason at all to bother thinking about your discussion points and whether they have any merit. They won't for a moment think like a businessman and ask themselves whether the CEO of a successful company like Apple would ignore 80 million potential customers out of the principal of the matter. They just don't care. It's far easier and more satisfying for them to come in here and trash your ideas because of a few rumors and myths that have gained WAY too much notoriety in the press.
For the rest of you, let's get a few facts straight. First of all, this IS a speculative thread. Yadmonkey said that outright. He has no facts that specifically point to a CDMA iPhone. He's deducing this conclusion from a few potential signs. Accept that.
Second, the supposed 5 Year Agreement was NEVER a confirmed fact, and neither was the statement that Apple was barred from making a CDMA iPhone. This was a rumor published in ONE paper, USA Today from an "inside source". A lot of people here have very inventive memories when they say things like the terms of the agreement were "announced". The terms of the agreement are a closely-guarded corporate secret and neither party has ever officially announced ANYTHING. Do a little digging and you'll find out it's true. Isn't it a little suspicious that they are keeping the terms so secret? Makes me think they are not as favorable to AT&T as they want you to think.
So it's not the big stretch everyone thinks it is for Yadmonkey to say that the 5 year term was a myth. I agree that the July 10 press release from AT&T is slippery and vague. AT&T's sudden revelation that they are going to lose money on the phone over the next few years is also very interesting. What a sudden and dramatic change.
Lastly, you guys that like to bash CDMA and say it's not worth developing a phone for, or that a future technology like LTE matters now in this fast-paced business, are not paying attention to the cell phone industry. Yadmonkey has already made a number of great (and generally ignored) points on this, so I will only say the following: Who is the other hot smartphone maker right now, the only one who has a prayer at competing with Apple in the long run? That's right, RIM (Blackberry). Did they bother with CDMA? You bet they did, and they continue to. They even sell world phones with both radios, because they know both markets are important. Their very first touch phone (the Thunder), which looks mighty nice I must say, will start as a CDMA Exclusive! And the Bold will intro on both networks on launch. Yes, it costs money to revise the iPhone design for CDMA, and it's not just "dropping in a new chip", but many companies have done this many times, so it ain't THAT hard. And I'm extremely confident in saying that they will MORE than make their money back. The iPhone is friggin HOT, and they would sell plenty to customers that don't want to switch for various reasons, or areas that AT&T doesn't even serve.
I think the chances are quite good we will see a CDMA iPhone in 6 months to a year max. And no, I don't believe for a second that salespeople at an Apple Store received any kind of memo revealing the terms of this clearly secret agreement. If they did that, they might as well put them on a Goodyear Blimp and fly it over New York too.
