Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iPhone on Verizon in 2008?

dear lord i was only relaying what i found, don't have to go all i'm better than you, my bad for sharing information and wondering if something works.
 
Tallest Skil said:
For the first, No.
Click to expand...

why outright no? no information backing up your statement. At least the article cited two other articles that showed evidence against the exclusive plan, and yeah maybe it could have been reworked with the release of the new iphone, but have you noticed any press releases about that? Nope
 
klinney said:
why outright no? no information backing up your statement.
Click to expand...

Don't need to. No is No.

What you have here is a house of cards. It doesn't fall on us to disprove your case when you have yet to prove it.


At least the article cited two other articles that showed evidence against the exclusive plan
Click to expand...

Nnno. The blog post pointed to two articles that claimed an agreement was in place but disagreed on the end date. Not knowing for sure when an exclusivity agreement ends is not grounds for assuming the agreement doesn't exist at all.

Even less assuring is that the purported rumor is coming from a supposed anonymous source who works at Verizon. It could very easily be some rogue employee who's trying to spread FUD in the hopes it might somehow dampen sales of the iPhone during the Christmas season, or at least delay the defection of Verizon Wireless customers to AT&T. Verizon is no stranger to rogue employees. And considering the dud that RIM handed Verizon in the form of the Blackberry Storm, the motivation is pretty clear.

Which brings me to another fault in this rumor's logic: why invest so much in exclusivity of the Storm for the holiday season, including releasing it way before it's ready for prime time, if Verizon is going to get an iPhone anyway? It makes no sense.

Finally, considering that the iPhone has outsold Blackberries, and there's 13 million units sold, Apple just isn't hurting or desperate to reach people. They're doing pretty well as is, even in a very challenging retail environment. It doesn't strike me as Steve Jobs' style to go hat in hand in good times, to a self-avowed corporate enemy who has spent a lot of time producing anti-iPhone propaganda and very much operates as if it's at war with the iPhone. Not to mention the lack of logic in Verizon's spending over a year feeding BS to their customers about how the iPhone is horrible, only to do an abrupt about-face and start pushing the very same handset.

, and yeah maybe it could have been reworked with the release of the new iphone, but have you noticed any press releases about that? Nope
Click to expand...

Even if I could make sense of this statement, I'm pretty sure it would still prove nothing.
 
scaredpoet said:
Don't need to. No is No.

What you have here is a house of cards. It doesn't fall on us to disprove your case when you have yet to prove it.




Nnno. The blog post pointed to two articles that claimed an agreement was in place but disagreed on the end date. Not knowing for sure when an exclusivity agreement ends is not grounds for assuming the agreement doesn't exist at all.

Even less assuring is that the purported rumor is coming from a supposed anonymous source who works at Verizon. It could very easily be some rogue employee who's trying to spread FUD in the hopes it might somehow dampen sales of the iPhone during the Christmas season, or at least delay the defection of Verizon Wireless customers to AT&T. Verizon is no stranger to rogue employees. And considering the dud that RIM handed Verizon in the form of the Blackberry Storm, the motivation is pretty clear.

Which brings me to another fault in this rumor's logic: why invest so much in exclusivity of the Storm for the holiday season, including releasing it way before it's ready for prime time, if Verizon is going to get an iPhone anyway? It makes no sense.

Finally, considering that the iPhone has outsold Blackberries, and there's 13 million units sold, Apple just isn't hurting or desperate to reach people. They're doing pretty well as is, even in a very challenging retail environment. It doesn't strike me as Steve Jobs' style to go hat in hand in good times, to a self-avowed corporate enemy who has spent a lot of time producing anti-iPhone propaganda and very much operates as if it's at war with the iPhone. Not to mention the lack of logic in Verizon's spending over a year feeding BS to their customers about how the iPhone is horrible, only to do an abrupt about-face and start pushing the very same handset.



Even if I could make sense of this statement, I'm pretty sure it would still prove nothing.
Click to expand...

If Apple is hurting or desperate why are thy now selling those same iPhones at Wal-Mart for a hundred bucks less...?
 
Man this thread is stupid.....

GSM!!!!

You do realize that At&t's network is GSM, and VERIZON IS NOT?! With that said, you should also realize that the iphone is a GSM phone....
 
just fyi CDMA GSM who cares the worlds most garbage phone the Razr is on CDMA and GMS networks so that is no excuse for why iPhone can't be on Verizon. If Apple is smart the iPhone will be like a Blackberry on everyones networks ranking in the bucks. I have been on AT&T and just left them as a matter of fact so if the iPhone wasn't enough for me to stay with them that should tell you what I think of AT&T's service. Every service out there has there pros and cons so who cares if this service does this and that service does that in the long wrong it will be always be about what is going to make more money.

:apple:Bullitt
 
Bullitt said:
the worlds most garbage phone the Razr is on CDMA and GMS networks so that is no excuse for why iPhone can't be on Verizon.
Click to expand...

Maybe Apple doesn't want to make a garbage phone...

If Apple is smart the iPhone will be like a Blackberry on everyones networks ranking in the bucks.
Click to expand...

This was October. They don't need to.

Every service out there has there pros and cons so who cares if this service does this and that service does that
Click to expand...

GSM "does" has more of a future than CDMA.

in the long wrong it will be always be about what is going to make more money.
Click to expand...

Well, there is no long run for CDMA. It's going away in two to three years. there is no money to be made in the design, production, and licensing of a phone that will run on soon-dead tech.
 
Tallest Skil said:
Well, there is no long run for CDMA. It's going away in two to three years. there is no money to be made in the design, production, and licensing of a phone that will run on soon-dead tech.
Click to expand...

CDMA will be around for years after LTE arrives, just as GSM will be around for years after LTE.

LTE is NOT GSM, despite the naive things you read in blogs. It is simply a 4G setup that many GSM and CDMA carriers are going to use. It can replace either GSM or CDMA, or simply augment it.

For example, Verizon says they'll start deploying LTE this year. ATT says they won't until 2012. Does that mean it's a CDMA standard, since Verizon is deploying first? No, but guess what: Verizon gets to make a lot of standards decisions that others will likely follow.

And just as the 3G iPhone falls back on EDGE, the first LTE phones will (for years) have to include either a CDMA or GSM radio set to fall back on outside of LTE coverage.

They might have to include such a radio for many years anyway. Why? Because it's not set in stone that carriers will use LTE for VOIP to replace their old voice network. They might use LTE for data only, and only in phones that require very high speed data.

Summary: LTE != GSM. LTE != necessarily voice replacement.
 
I think the whole CDMA thing being a barrier is a bit overblown. Some people from the Apple iPhone team came to speak at my work a few weeks ago and they were explaining that there are 10 radios in the iPhone to make it compatible with all the networks it is currently on. For example there's the GSM radio, a radio for Japan, one for GPS, etc...

So really how hard would it be to throw CDMA in there? I'm skeptical of the iPhone coming to Verizon in the near future (I hope it does), but I would guess the fact that Verizon is CDMA is not the main reason.

I of course could be wrong as I really don't know much about mobile phone technology, just my thoughts
 
Let's get with the program ATT

Verizon Wireless Network Extender:
http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/store/accessory?action=gotoFeatures

T-mobile hotspot at home:
http://www.t-mobile.com/shop/addons/services/information.aspx?tp=Svc_Tab_TMobileAtHome

To Whomever It may concern:

Please don’t tell anyone, but I have wanted an iPhone since it came out. I cannot justify buying one. I am a Verizon client because ATT has no coverage where I live. If ATT would provide a similar Network Extender service as Verizon and T-Mobil provides above, I would rush out ant get an iPhone or four (4).

Verizon has started to offer Network Extender. (link above)
T-Mobile provides Hot Spot @ Home. (link above)

Let’s go ATT. You’re not a monopoly anymore are you? Don’t you want more clients? Apple nudge these guys along won’t you?

I want an iPhone too!

pjb
 
pjb said:
Verizon Wireless Network Extender:
http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/store/accessory?action=gotoFeatures

T-mobile hotspot at home:
http://www.t-mobile.com/shop/addons/services/information.aspx?tp=Svc_Tab_TMobileAtHome

To Whomever It may concern:

Please don’t tell anyone, but I have wanted an iPhone since it came out. I cannot justify buying one. I am a Verizon client because ATT has no coverage where I live. If ATT would provide a similar Network Extender service as Verizon and T-Mobil provides above, I would rush out ant get an iPhone or four (4).

Verizon has started to offer Network Extender. (link above)
T-Mobile provides Hot Spot @ Home. (link above)

Let’s go ATT. You’re not a monopoly anymore are you? Don’t you want more clients? Apple nudge these guys along won’t you?

I want an iPhone too!

pjb
Click to expand...

Should be here soon: http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2009/...g-microcell-everything-but-the-date-and-pric/
 
The whole "CDMA is dead in another year or so" argument is stupid. First, Apple created a EDGE only phone only to release a 3G version the next year! Obviously your arguments about Apple not wanting to create a phone on "dead" or soon to be replaced technology doesnt really have basis as CDMA will be around jus as EDGE still will be around.

Now that Verizon and Alltel combined Verizon have combined we are talking about a company with over 80 million subscribers with who knows how many people are crying for an iPhone. That is a HUGE market of untapped cash for Apple. If they make a CDMA iPhone people will buy it, period. I dont even think Apple could keep up with the demand for a Verizon iPhone. Lets not forget about Sprint too.
 
JoJoCal19 said:
The whole "CDMA is dead in another year or so" argument is stupid. First, Apple created a EDGE only phone only to release a 3G version the next year!
Click to expand...

Because of battery concerns. And EDGE is still useable on the iPhone 3G.

Obviously your arguments about Apple not wanting to create a phone on "dead" or soon to be replaced technology doesnt really have basis as CDMA will be around jus as EDGE still will be around.
Click to expand...

The only difference is... you would need double the coms chips in the phone to keep CDMA support. Meaning worse battery life.

...80 million subscribers... That is a HUGE market of untapped cash for Apple.
Click to expand...

300 million potential CDMA users in the U.S. versus 6.7 billion GSM users on the rest of the planet. Plus the 300 million again since the U.S. also has GSM networks. Do the math.
 
Stang68 said:
Yea, but do you think Apple is going to really sit with AT&T for 4 more years? I think they will eventually buy out the contract. Maybe not this year, but possibly next summer.
Click to expand...

Nope.

What, you think AT&T has no money? Do you think AT&T is stupid?

The iPhone was the best thing to happen to them since the introduction of the service agreement. They are not going to let that go. At any cost.
 
You made my point

butterfly0fdoom said:
Well, Verizon's exclusively CDMA until they start rolling out 4G in 2010. No way Apple's going to go through the trouble of re-engineering the iPhone for Verizon. Nothing to do with the contracts, more to do with the components.

That's something that irks me. Do you not understand that GSM and CDMA are completely different and incompatible? You can make petitions and complain on forums all you want, but the fact of the matter is, it has less to do with contracts than it has to do with the internal components. As someone pointed out, CDMA RAZRs were thicker than GSM RAZRs, demonstrating the extent of the differences of the technologies.

And this just goes to establish that Verizon's going to run into some serious problems when they transition to 4G.
Click to expand...

I know all to well that GSM and CDMA are completely different....but look they made a RAZR in both CDMA AND GSM,

I'm not saying its going to happen...just that it can happen. I'm happy with my phone and my service right now. I have ATT for my work phone and the service in my area sucks. Verizon is perfect for me. I have an iTouch and that is fine for now. If Verizon ever did have the iPhone I would consider getting it. But no way would I switch to ATT for it..
 
Small White Car said:
So, excluding babies, people without phones, and those CDMA users, I'm left with the claim that there are more GSM users than there are humans!

Are lemurs using cell phones now? Zebras? :eek:
Click to expand...

haha I thought the same thing.

ive heard they are burrying cellphones with the dead, for the after life, of course. sorta like what the egyptians did. so maybe they are still keeping up with the contracts. could account for the missing 100,000,000+ GSM users
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back