she will have zero knowledge about it or not any more than anyone here obviously.
Lol we (macrumors community) will have more info probably.
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 to Verizon Wireless?
- Thread starter SeanEE89
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Lol we (macrumors community) will have more info probably.
i know she probably doesnt read anything on the internet. Shes like 50, so shes probably not trolling the macrumors forums. she could have read it in the WSJ, but i dont know. just throwing it out there, for what its worth. understanding that phrase goes a long way towards understanding a sentence. that means it could or could not be credible, but its something nice to throw out there, especially since everyone is so hell bent on verizon not ever getting an iphone.
Is that 100% true? If that is, then wow. 10000% no iphone for Verizon this year. Apple just announced their biggest update to the iphone in years, multitasking. On Verizon it wouldn't even really work. No voip over 3G? Sorry skype and iChat (and iChat IS coming). Push notifications could be a disaster. Ooof. 2011 tho...
Yes, that is correct.
CDMA never could do Voice and data acess together.
Kinda like the old 56K modems where if you were online you couldnt talk on the house phone.
That's misleading. YES, you could do VOIP over 3G because the voice becomes data. Skype and iChat would work just fine as they are both data (not voice).
Tell me, how many times have you actually pulled the phone away from your head during a conversation to surf the web? I can count how many times I have on one hand. And I've got 6 fingers on that hand! J/K
And no, this doesn't mean no iPhone for Verizon, although what appear to be a bunch of Verizon haters here seem to think otherwise.
I'm not in love with Verizon, their pricing is high. But objectively they have the best coverage and very good 3G data. I've managed a corporate wireless program on multiple carriers and Verizon was the least headache re: coverage. 98% of our salesmen preferred Verizon. One in Colorado needed AT&T because it got better service in the hilly areas by his home. Billing for a hundred phones was a bitch though. Edit: spread across the nation in multiple billing systems....argghhh!
It would be a win for all of us if they got the iPhone. I wonder if all these people just work for AT&T or something? I can't understand their intense loyalty for one carrier. Or maybe they just don't want more ppl getting the iPhone?
@ Geckotek
Yeah I guess I kind of just blurting it out w/o thinking about the logistics about data streams. So good point. Also, as a note, I am not a diehard AT&T fan by any means, I have always had pretty decent and easy service (including customer service) with them and am content. I have also lived in major cities for a while now (not NYC which I hear is a train wreck). A lot of my family and friends have Verizon and I would not be opposed to them after my contract is over.
As for my original point, while it holds less credence in regards to things such as VOIP and despite you, and your crazy 6 finger thingy you got going on, I still think Apple would view the lack of full multi-tasking support to make switching to Verizon problematic and somewhat rudimentary.
Yeah I guess I kind of just blurting it out w/o thinking about the logistics about data streams. So good point. Also, as a note, I am not a diehard AT&T fan by any means, I have always had pretty decent and easy service (including customer service) with them and am content. I have also lived in major cities for a while now (not NYC which I hear is a train wreck). A lot of my family and friends have Verizon and I would not be opposed to them after my contract is over.
As for my original point, while it holds less credence in regards to things such as VOIP and despite you, and your crazy 6 finger thingy you got going on
, I still think Apple would view the lack of full multi-tasking support to make switching to Verizon problematic and somewhat rudimentary.
@ Geckotek
Yeah I guess I kind of just blurting it out w/o thinking about the logistics about data streams. So good point. Also, as a note, I am not a diehard AT&T fan by any means, I have always had pretty decent and easy service (including customer service) with them and am content. I have also lived in major cities for a while now (not NYC which I hear is a train wreck). A lot of my family and friends have Verizon and I would not be opposed to them after my contract is over.
As for my original point, while it holds less credence in regards to things such as VOIP and despite you, and your crazy 6 finger thingy you got going on
It wouldn't remove multi-tasking support. It would limit it only on the occasions where you are on a call and need to access an app that requires a data connection.
So you could still access multi-task with any apps you wanted when not a call and you could multi-task with apps that don't require data services when in a call.
Don't forget, the original iPhone was released on EDGE!!
Remember how crazy everybody thought that was?! Did I mention that a hybrid CDMA/LTE phone might be likely? This would also resolve the simultaneous voice & data issues for users that had access to LTE. Verizon will be turning on 25-30 markets in Q4 of this year. THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER!BTW, my Verizon hater statement wasn't directed at you.
Geckotek, not expecting a real answer I suppose, but any idea if AT&T and Verizon would be using the same frequencies for LTE or dedicated?
Why anyone would hope otherwise is an equal mystery. Why do you care AT ALL if the phone comes to Verizon?
I continue to be puzzled by those who jump up and vehemently shout "NO VERIZON". What difference does it make to you? Why do you care so passionately about it? The CDMA iPhone that will be out by year-end won't harm you in any way. Don't worry, it will be fine.
He cares because he works for AT&T. At least that's the only reasonable explanation. Or maybe his ex works for Verizon and he hates them by proxy?
They declined, their loss.
AT&T has experience with the iPhone on their network Verizon doesn't. AT&T probably has more money to spend on the network that Verizon if someone craps up.
I also don't want to see the share prices of T drop.
What's best for the iPhone is market penetration. More sales revenue to support more R&D. How in the world will the iPhone compete with Android if that OS platform is being sold through all four US carriers while the iPhone is on only one? How does a responsible corporation just ignore over 100 million potential US customers? And that's not to mention China Telecom with its 100 million potential CDMA customers.
The other platforms are not optimised to use the iPhone. The last thing a company wants is a meltdown on their network. This will not only give them a bad name, but it will fry a hell of a lot of things.
Verizon, for one, says they are ready to go with the iPhone right now.
Don't know about the other two, but I have little doubt they can accomodate the iPhone and would dearly love to have the chance, assuming they can work out a distribution deal that satisfies them and Apple. I suspect that's been the stumbling block with Verizon since the very beginning and is the reason Apple went with AT&T exclusively.
They say they are ready, but is their network actually ready? Can we realistically test over 500k iPhones simultanously on their network?
Hmmmmm...sounds familiar.
A) Do you really think AT&T had an "iPhone optimized" network (whatever that means) when they got the iPhone? Are they truly handling the iPhone well now?
B) Verizon has the advantage of seeing what the iPhone has done to AT&T. They can now prepare themselves more readily than AT&T was able to since AT&T went first.
C) Verizon added 423k subscribers in the last 3 months. True, not iPhones...but what makes you think they will gain 500k iPhones all at once? Verizon is a VERY strong company (like AT&T) with an even stronger network. They're big boys, I'm sure they realize what an iPhone on their network means.
You're just throwing up crap arguments here....come on!
Hmmmmm...sounds familiar.
A) Do you really think AT&T had an "iPhone optimized" network (whatever that means) when they got the iPhone? Are they truly handling the iPhone well now?
B) Verizon has the advantage of seeing what the iPhone has done to AT&T. They can now prepare themselves more readily than AT&T was able to since AT&T went first.
C) Verizon added 423k subscribers in the last 3 months. True, not iPhones...but what makes you think they will gain 500k iPhones all at once? Verizon is a VERY strong company (like AT&T) with an even stronger network. They're big boys, I'm sure they realize what an iPhone on their network means.
You're just throwing up crap arguments here....come on!
A) From what I know, they had the most resources to be able to handle. Since the iPhone is optimised for CDMA only, the network would have been able to handle it. The optimisation would probably have only come in at around OS 2.0. Probably if I used "optimised network", you'll know where I'm coming from, "iPhone optimised" is now misleading.
B) AT&T still however, have the more experience with the iPhone.
C) I know Verizon. I know AT&T. I chose to become effectively, through proxy, a shareholder of T before the iPhone.
It wouldn't be a hard thing to find out. Likely something a network engineer could estimate with a high degree of accuracy.
I can't imagine that it's something to worry about. I'm pretty confident that if AT&T can hack the bandwidth demands, Verizon can too.
Ok then. Unfortunately, I'm not engineer. Still at sixth-form college (16-18) studying A Levels sciences and maths, with limited understanding in further mathematics.
As I've suggested, possible confirmation that 2010 is out of the question:
https://www.macrumors.com/2010/05/0...exclusivity-through-2010-with-ipad-data-deal/
https://www.macrumors.com/2010/05/0...exclusivity-through-2010-with-ipad-data-deal/
I saw that this morning. As a rumor, I'm not sure it has more credibility than than the one the WSJ released, but I have to confess, that's new information that has made me re-think the timing issue.