Great point! If it's indeed true that Apple went to Verizon first, then I'd bet that explains why.
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 on Verizon - hope lives
- Thread starter yadmonkey
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Great point! If it's indeed true that Apple went to Verizon first, then I'd bet that explains why.
don't get your hopes up
I can't believe this is still be talked about. The amount of incorrect info being thrown around as fact is amazing.
1. America is not the biggest cell phone market in the world, that is China, hell china mobile has more customers then there are people in the U.S.
2. Apple and AT&T have a 6 yr exclusive contract for the iPhone that started in June 2007, and they cannot develop a competitive version till then.
3. 3G is not a at&t technology, it is simply a easier way to describe a technology. The first 3G standard for gsm was UMTS, now HSDPA and HSUPA, which stand for high speed download packet access and high speed upload packet access. EVDO is simply a CDMA version of 3G. 3G is the third generation of wireless. LTE, 4G is going to be rolled out in 2009-10.
If there is ever going to be a iPhone for verizon it would be a LTE version, since at&t would both be using that when the 5 year contract runs out. The reason I know about the contract is because I work for at&t. Hopefully this info was helpful to some, but knowing how many people refuse to believe the truth on here, espically if it goes against what they want to believe i doubt it will.
I can't believe this is still be talked about. The amount of incorrect info being thrown around as fact is amazing.
1. America is not the biggest cell phone market in the world, that is China, hell china mobile has more customers then there are people in the U.S.
2. Apple and AT&T have a 6 yr exclusive contract for the iPhone that started in June 2007, and they cannot develop a competitive version till then.
3. 3G is not a at&t technology, it is simply a easier way to describe a technology. The first 3G standard for gsm was UMTS, now HSDPA and HSUPA, which stand for high speed download packet access and high speed upload packet access. EVDO is simply a CDMA version of 3G. 3G is the third generation of wireless. LTE, 4G is going to be rolled out in 2009-10.
If there is ever going to be a iPhone for verizon it would be a LTE version, since at&t would both be using that when the 5 year contract runs out. The reason I know about the contract is because I work for at&t. Hopefully this info was helpful to some, but knowing how many people refuse to believe the truth on here, espically if it goes against what they want to believe i doubt it will.
Did somebody in this thread insinuate otherwise? However, pure numbers don't tell the whole story. Verizon's 80 million represent some of the wealthiest consumers in the world, by global standards.
Yes, they are fewer than the Chinese customers by far. China has a population of about 1.33 billion people or about 4.4x the 301 million people in the USA. Do you think China is buying 4.4 times as many Macs as we are? I don't know, but I doubt it. Do you think that the GDP of China is 4.4 times our own? Hint: It's not. It's less than ours. In 2003 the average urban annual income was US$ 1,058 and for rural areas was US$ 328.
In other words, these are not 1.3 billion potential iPhone customers. I don't have good demographic research on China with which to estimate truly how large the target market size for the iPhone would be in China. Do you? I doubt it's 4.4x our own. And I'll bet you that amongst people there who make as much as average U.S. cellular customers, the iPhone will be a harder sell than it is here.
Source please. Everyone seems to think the contact is 5 years, but please show me the source for that info.
I think I see what you're saying here. Technically, EVDO is 3G. I still have seen no good evidence of a long term exclusive. If such an agreement has been in place since 6/2007, then why is AT&T talking about their "new agreement" with Apple? They do mention exclusivity, but don't say for how long. I think if it was long term, they'd be advertising it. This press release had some potentially negative news for investors (short term losses), so you'd think they'd be looking to spruce it up with some good details about a long term exclusive.
I can vouch for that fact. I purchased an iPhone when they first came out. I was so impressed that I started looking at other Apple products. I happened to be working in Ontario, CA for quite a while last year and at the weekends I started frequenting the Apple store in Rancho Cucamonga. Anyway to cut a long story short I purchased my first Mac (the MBA) when they were announced and shortly afterwards added a MP then an Apple TV. Needless to say that initial Apple purchase lead me to spend close to $6,000 on Apple products.
Do I now love my Apple stuff - you bet (and an added bonus - no more Windose)
Then I'll attest to the contrary. My family's been using AT&T in one form or another (PacBell, then switched to the old AT&T which got bought out by Cingular; we renew our contracts rather than change carriers). I've never had fewer than 3 bars (except during the acquisition period when the cellphones couldn't decide which network to use) and I've only had dropped calls when calling people using other carriers. Even with my iPhone, I consistently have a strong signal no matter which part of the Bay Area I'm in (except for the Tube; no one gets a signal in there anyway).
There's always exceptions, especially in anecdotal evidence, but large scale surveys point to a different answer. The number of indicated bars doesn't always correlate to dropped call rate. A poor internal network can also be the culprit.
Then you're lucky. The areas you frequent must simply have better coverage than most of the Bay Area. I'm sure it varies depending on where you are. But my brother, who lives in the East Bay, has consistently crappy coverage. And if you put Verizon's and AT&T's northern California coverage maps side by side, you will see a huge advantage for Verizon.
Tell me, what do you do for AT&T, exactly? Because unless you are the CEO or one of the very top managers, how would you know the terms of a top secret contract, which they haven't shared with ANYONE outside of a select few? This is a fact.
I have seen COUNTLESS examples over the years of people who work for the cell phone companies, in the stores and tech support call centers, claiming they know inside information, and later turning out to be way wrong. I'm sure they sincerely believe what they are saying, but I think a lot of bad information comes from above. Unless it was in an official memo, you can bet it is wrong.
I completely agree, except that the disinformation is being spread by those on your side of the fence, my friend.
Calling someone on another carrier should never make you drop a call. Unless you're talking about them dropping calls, in which case why don't you just say you haven't dropped calls?
I will concur. My mom works for AT&T and she has no clue about anything in regards to the iPhone (except what my dad and I tell her, and that's just what the public knows).
Indeed. I'm mostly going around the South and southern part of the East Bay; I'd figure coverage in the more hilly parts of the East Bay would be more spotty.
I remember this rumor around when the first gen iPhone was coming out. If anything, they likely will release a CDMA version for another country, and we might have some hope in America then. I don't think that at this stage, though, they'd release a Verizon-specific version of the iPhone. Maybe in '09 or '10, but not this year.
Regardless of who wants and doesn't want the iPhone on Verizon, there's a lot to be said for not developing a CDMA version. Not enough people understand the difference in CDMA vs GSM to choose on technological merits alone, so they follow their personal experience, the cool devices, the attractive deals and the advertising catch phrases...
I'm not saying Apple wouldn't, but why would they spend time and money developing two models of iPhone considering each standard's worldwide market coverage? Apple can keep the process simple and focus on one iPhone technology thereby reducing overall development time, testing, production costs and inventory issues.
If Apple wants to reach the world population with iPhone, it can be done almost entirely with GSM alone. The fact is, CDMA coverage is almost always overlapped by GSM coverage while the opposite is not true. Apple is currently losing out on less than 500 million customers worldwide, due only to the fact that those customers are already with a CDMA provider. Most of those 500 million customers are still potential iPhone owners by switching carriers.
GSM: 740 GSM mobile operators across 219 countries and territories.
GSM general information.
Worldwide GSM carriers.
CDMA: 258 mobile operators across 98 countries and territories.
CDMA general information.
Worldwide CDMA carriers.
Source: wirelessintelligence.com
I'm not saying Apple wouldn't, but why would they spend time and money developing two models of iPhone considering each standard's worldwide market coverage? Apple can keep the process simple and focus on one iPhone technology thereby reducing overall development time, testing, production costs and inventory issues.
If Apple wants to reach the world population with iPhone, it can be done almost entirely with GSM alone. The fact is, CDMA coverage is almost always overlapped by GSM coverage while the opposite is not true. Apple is currently losing out on less than 500 million customers worldwide, due only to the fact that those customers are already with a CDMA provider. Most of those 500 million customers are still potential iPhone owners by switching carriers.
GSM: 740 GSM mobile operators across 219 countries and territories.
GSM general information.
Worldwide GSM carriers.
CDMA: 258 mobile operators across 98 countries and territories.
CDMA general information.
Worldwide CDMA carriers.
Source: wirelessintelligence.com
I'm sure glad you took the time to come in here and post that.
If you had Verizon, you'd realize it doesn't blow, fanboy!
I thought Nokia's original obstacle was the Qualcomm disputes...Qualcomm owns many of the patents related to CDMA, and since Nokia and Qualcomm were in a slap-fight in court over patents, Nokia avoided CDMA markets. Then they were making good money on the unlocked GSM market, and in the last year or two became concerned that OTHER companies were doing that PLUS gaining ground in CDMA (LG, Samsung, HTC) and so decided to bite the bullet and start some CDMA lines. It's a complicated and litigious tale.
As for iPhone on Verizon, I'd be shocked if it happened, but with the acquisition of Alltel it makes it slightly more likely. I think the big question is a numbers game: How many more subscribers will Apple gain with a CDMA iPhone versus cost to develop a CDMA iPhone vs spending that money on GSM networks overseas? I'm not saying it doesn't make a great deal of sense, I am just saying that if Apple polled it and found that 5% of Verizon users would buy an iPhone, but they could gain those same number through selling in Europe, does it make sense to develop the phone? Is the magic number 15% of VZW customers? As low as 1%?
Keep in mind I pulled the percentages out of my butt. It's just that everything in business is a trade-off, and so it becomes a cost-benefit analysis. I would not be shocked if someone at Apple is in the middle of evaluating that exact scenario, or if there's someone who routinely revisits those numbers...
I'm sure glad you took the time to come in here and post that.
If you had Verizon, you'd realize it doesn't blow, fanboy!
Well my whole family has Verizon, they all have the same piece of crap phone they give everyone.
I have an iPhone because I refused to switch when I saw kids hanging out of windows at my school trying to send a text message with Verizon. No service anywhere. I have service everywhere, not one complaint since day one.
Every Verizon phone has the same interface, they're boring. But enjoy yours. You responding to me wasted as much time as me posting originally.
Have a great day.
For the record, despite all my arguments for why a CDMA iPhone makes sense for Apple, I would also be shocked if it happens. But unlike many here, I think it's far from out of the question. Though there's nothing solid to say it will happen either, and they have been very very quiet about it.
Very true. If Apple's resources are stretched thin just dealing with GSM/3G, then certainly their focus will stay on that for the time being because the worldwide market potential is MUCH bigger, as everyone has argued. Certainly that was the case for rolling out the first generation iPhone. But I think now, especially that the 3G design is done and in production, they are more likely to have folks available to complete the CDMA design, if they choose to do it, and maybe it is already well underway.
I appreciate that you took the time to actually compose an argument and present it with some thought... something so many have failed to do in this thread!
Anyway, I urge you to read post #78, in which I explain to the best of my ability that it's not about raw numbers, but about low-hanging fruit. The summary: Who is more likely to buy more iPhones - the 1.3 billion people in a country where the average metropolitan (wealthiest) annual income is US $1058 or the 80 million people in the most wealthy country in the world? Worldwide figures aren't all that impressive to me because most people worldwide who own cell phones would either laugh or cry at the idea of spending even $200 on a cell phone, much less a significant monthly data charge.
The other argument which comes up continually (this isn't directed at you, skwoytek) is the old "AT&T works great for me" statement. It's irrelevant because for many of us, AT&T is not an option. They worked great for me when I lived in NYC, but that doesn't change the fact that they are horrible in Colorado outside of the downtown areas. They are horrible in so many spots that they are consistently one of the lowest rated networks nationally for network availability (see post 81). If they work great for you, wonderful - I'm not trying to take anything away from that. But for so many of us, they don't, so switching isn't remotely an option. For the love of logic and reason, do you really think people would be pining for a CDMA iPhone if AT&T was a good option for them?
Maybe I need to simplify it for some of you: In some areas, Verizon does blow. In many areas, AT&T does blow. Maybe you can look past the filter of your own experience and stretch your imagination far enough to understand that for many of us, Verizon is the only option which doesn't blow.
redman042 said:
I wouldn't be surprised either way. I think part of what you and I end up arguing against isn't the possibility that it will never happen. Anyone who has read our posts with a modicum of reading comprehension should understand that. What I think we're arguing against is the certainty with which people argue against the possibility that it will happen, usually with little to back it up and often accompanied by a sarcastic and rude remark.
OK, so here are the facts --
(1) Apple & ATT have a 5+ year contract. They went to Verizon first, but Verizon didn't feel like being bossed around. ATT had a bad rep the past year or two, so they jumped on the iPhone bandwagon. ATT thought they were going to be convincing people to switch carriers, but then Apple comes out with an iPod Touch almost immediately after the announcement of the iPhone. I'm just curious what things would be like if Verizon accepted the 5 year agreement... would Apple still be making GSM iPhones for the rest of the world? Seems like it worked out in Apple's favor that they only need to develop GSM iPhones now.
(2) No CDMA carrier in the U.S. will sell the iPhone before 2012 (that's the year the world's supposed to end anyway, so don't be worried =^).
(3) CDMA is better than GSM, that's why all GSM carriers are switching to W-CDMA!! AHHAHAA =^p
(1) Apple & ATT have a 5+ year contract. They went to Verizon first, but Verizon didn't feel like being bossed around. ATT had a bad rep the past year or two, so they jumped on the iPhone bandwagon. ATT thought they were going to be convincing people to switch carriers, but then Apple comes out with an iPod Touch almost immediately after the announcement of the iPhone. I'm just curious what things would be like if Verizon accepted the 5 year agreement... would Apple still be making GSM iPhones for the rest of the world? Seems like it worked out in Apple's favor that they only need to develop GSM iPhones now.
(2) No CDMA carrier in the U.S. will sell the iPhone before 2012 (that's the year the world's supposed to end anyway, so don't be worried =^).
(3) CDMA is better than GSM, that's why all GSM carriers are switching to W-CDMA!! AHHAHAA =^p
You appear to be muddling many mobile data terms... You're basically confusing data protocols with wireless transmission methods, who's using them and the relevance of each.
Exactly! I go back and forth on the benefit for them. On the one hand, more customers, yay! On the other hand, at what cost?
The other thing I wonder about is how many people on verizon would buy an iphone. This could probably be extrapolated from the number of people who switched from Verizon to AT&T, or just as a corresponding percentage of current iPhone users to current USA cell phone users (paging Dr Q!). My guess is that is the predominant answer to whether or not there will be a CDMA iphone. If it's big enough to really really really push the needle on numbers, then the odds will obviously increase. Has anyone actually figured out what the demand is on Verizon for it? I would be curious even in a straw poll, one done not by a techie site like macrumors but from a more diversified cross section. We all have techie mac goggles on, so we're a higher percentage of potential buyers in general on this site. What about the man/woman on the street?
You're muddling with muddling.
Future entails all carriers using some form/derivative of CDMA services with VoIP calling. All cell phone carriers use VoIP. Face the facts! They just charge extra for voice because that's how it used to be, and they think that's how it always will be.
Any CDMA device that Apple creates would be a "competitive product" to ATT, and would put Apple in deep doo doo. They aren't going to release a CDMA phone, people... get it thru your heads. If you can't, then just keep it *inside* your heads.
I know a Doctor that switched to the iPhone within the first month because of his Apple loyalty, leaving behind the better carrier (Verizon) and his family plan.... so he has to pay more for voice minutes.
More I think about it, the Apple & ATT deal was really good for Apple, really good for companies/customers outside of the US, just OK for ATT, and good enough for everybody who's not switching to ATT (ME!) -- they can still get an iPod Touch or get an unlocked 3G iPhone in a couple months in addition to their regular phone. Everybody wins.