iPhone will Never Ever... EVER Be On Verizon... at least until...

Discussion in 'iPhone' started by Cleverboy, Sep 24, 2009.

  1. Cleverboy macrumors 65816

    Cleverboy

    Joined:
    May 25, 2007
    Location:
    Pocket Universe, nth Dimensional Complex Manifold
    #1
    Until what? Right? I'll tell you, but first let me say this.

    It's odd to my how many people can read the same articles, see the same reports, and hear the same information... and still keep thinking that the iPhone will be coming to Verizon "soonish".

    It's NOT HAPPENING. Why so bold? Time to stop equivocating. Because somebody sure needs to be. Here's a post that is calling out the future. Everyone keeps thinking Verizon isn't who they are and Apple isn't who they are, and that the iPhone is "so popular" that Verizon will be coaxed into brokering a deal. Heh. Right.

    The Reality(tm):

    So... where's the "until" you say? Well, the "until" is that Verizon MAY get the iPhone years from now, when LTE is the ubiquitous standard and has to be fallen back TO and not FROM. That's crazy far off in my book.

    So... "It's not coming! Spread the word!" It's like believing the tooth fairy at this point... helps you believe in a world without rules but isn't very filling. Wait for T-Mobile or Metro PCS if you have to. It's not going to be Verizon for a good long tome.

    ~ CB
     
  2. blancoBronco macrumors 6502a

    blancoBronco

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2009
    Location:
    South Tampa
    #2
    FINALLY!!! someone who thinks like this

    I have used some of your examples as reasons it will never happen too, but they always get shut down.

    You're right: it will NEVER happen
     
  3. nullx86 macrumors 6502a

    nullx86

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2009
    Location:
    Wilmington/Jacksonville, NC
    #3
    It wont happen until Verizon switches to GMRS which is rumored to be happening mid 2010... I'm not really sure how much truth is held on the matter, but last I saw on google and other sites, it is being slowly implemented
     
  4. SqB macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2008
    Location:
    Northern Colorado
    #4
    I don't know about the switching to GSM argument, but that seems viable.

    As for the appstore argument, I think the cow has already gotten out of the gate on that one. Verizon would probably like to keep control of the apps and content just like ATT and Sprint used to want to do the same. They wanted you to get all your web, ringtones, apps etc from them alone. AppStore and similar Nokia and Android products are certainly going to kill that. If they insist on maintaining that "you must get your content" from us line, they will get marginalized in the smartphone market, not just for iPhones.
     
  5. kdarling macrumors demi-god

    kdarling

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    First university coding class = 46 years ago
    #5
    Where have you been? It turned out not to be five years. It was two years, got renewed and now ends next summer. Even ATT says they're trying to renegotiate again.

    Wrong. Verizon is simply installing its own store on WM and Blackberry phones. Those users can still buy from any store, though, as always.

    That wouldn't be surprising, but I've never heard that. Got a source? Hopefully not the same source for the previous myths.

    First, the rest of the world isn't buying iPhones as much as Americans are. Basically, the USA is buying a hundred times as many by population. Tapping the CDMA population could be a market as large as the rest of the world.

    Second, where do you get the R&D cost thing? Good grief. Radios are not hard. Every phone maker does it.

    And remember that Apple already changed once when they added a CDMA radio to get 3G.

    Now this I agree with.
     
  6. Maverick1337 macrumors 65816

    Maverick1337

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2008
    #6
    I am still wondering, won't Vcast mobile on VZW phones conflict with Apple's iTunes store?
     
  7. nateo200 macrumors 68030

    nateo200

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Location:
    Northern District NY
    #7
    Did you seriously omit the no CDMA part? It specifically said No CDMA 5 year contract. Second WCDMA/UMTS and CDMA/CDMA2000 are two WAY different standards even though they sound similar. Apple isn't going to release two flavours of the iPhone if anything thy would just add a radio but I doubt that. Screw CDMA, GSM/UMTS is THE standard and if carriers want an iPhone they better shape up.
     
  8. tadad1 macrumors 6502a

    tadad1

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2008
  9. jav6454 macrumors P6

    jav6454

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #9
    Sorry but WCDMA =/= CDMA.
     
  10. nateo200 macrumors 68030

    nateo200

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Location:
    Northern District NY
    #10
    No but I heard from a friends that his brother said his aunt told him she heard from her bosses sister in law that the Easter bunny might hide CDMA200 iPhones in eggs on Easter :/
     
  11. Nermal Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #11
    I think kdarling's point was that Apple has added an additional radio in the past and should have no issues with doing it again.
     
  12. Flhusky macrumors 6502a

    Flhusky

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2007
    Location:
    Florida
    #12
    Doesn't AT&T Mobile TV conflict with iTunes :rolleyes:
    The one point the OP missed, Apple would NOT allow VZ to butcher the UI with their shiat.
     
  13. nateo200 macrumors 68030

    nateo200

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Location:
    Northern District NY
    #13
    Yes they added another radio that is yet another world standard that compliments another world standard (GSM). It would be like everyone at a private school wearing a uniform and then having some idiot rebel and wear purple. Just won't happen.
     
  14. kdarling macrumors demi-god

    kdarling

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    First university coding class = 46 years ago
    #14
    Sorry, didn't think it was important, since I've never heard of such an exclusive. Got a non-Apple-forum link?

    Actually, the two CDMA variations share a common origin and have as many similarities as differences. And they're much closer than GSM's TDMA.

    Adding the first WCDMA radio for 3G was a big leap. Adding or switching to a different CDMA, would not be as big.

    So my point, as an embedded engineer, is that Apple has already shown a willingness to redesign for newer radio chipsets.

    Saying that Apple won't have two models at once, is a common argument. Might even be valid. Or, as you suggest, adding a radio would work. New chipsets support LTE, CDMA and GSM all at once.

    GSM isn't the overwhelming standard in the USA, and Verizon only operates there.
     
  15. michael31986 macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
  16. bruinsrme macrumors 601

    bruinsrme

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    #16
    Does it say anything about something other than the "iPhone" if say Apple would call it something different?
     
  17. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #17
    Actually if Verizon use RIMs with their CDMA network, it wouldn't so bad. I'm sure Apple could some how put in a chip that detected which chip is inserted.
     
  18. mattroman246 macrumors 6502

    mattroman246

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Location:
    Upstate NY
    #18
    I 100% agree, nice to finally see someone telling it how it is/ accepting reality.
     
  19. Cleverboy thread starter macrumors 65816

    Cleverboy

    Joined:
    May 25, 2007
    Location:
    Pocket Universe, nth Dimensional Complex Manifold
    #19
    Interesting, my bullet might have been unclear. AT&T Exclusivity separate from a ban on CDMA compatible iPhones.

    This is what I'd read early on, and that it became convoluted into the notion that the AT&T exclusivity was 5 years instead of the 3 it turned out to be (very early on). The "no CDMA iPhone for 5 years" part has never been refuted or contradicted. Considering how people tend to glaze over details, it doesn't sound like AT&T or Apple will EVER have to refute or comment on it either. They'll be allowed to get away with generic statements until the 5 years is up, and by that time, no one will care.

    No. I'm sure I'm quite right here, as draconian as it sounds. Verizon isn't "simply installing" anything. They WILL NOT SELL a phone that doesn't have their App Store installed and other App Stores NOT PRESENT. This is, as they say, a NON-STARTER, as Apple's system requires pre-installation of the AppStore and requires the AppStore be THE exclusive outlet for iPhone apps.

    http://www.pcworld.com/article/168361/verizons_app_store_plans_likely_to_irk_phone_makers.html

    The last two are hardly myths, although I'll agree much has been confused over the years. This last one? WSJ did an article about why the iPhone didn't come to Verizon, and they specifically talked about Verizon not wanting to give Apple as much access to the consumer as Apple wanted. We later learned that Apple intended to allow customer activation through iTunes in order to facilitate sales through the Apple Store. I think 1+1=2 on this one, but you can draw your own conclusion. The nature of Verizon's network is NOT the same as GSM. When they talk about "there are too many mobile operating systems to work with and certifying applications across eight or nine operating systems, plus many different handsets, has slowed the delivery of new software to subscribers." this really the nature of their network. Whether its VCAST or VZNavigator, Verizon really wants to be the "go to", and refuses steadfastly to be a "dumb pipe".

    The juice isn't worth the squeeze. At the end of the day, either they come out with a different phone, or they integrate it all into one new model. I'd say they would be better off not investing time into a network that has policies so hostile to smart-phone-manufacturer/consumer relationships. If Verizon had a more open-door policy, it would be a different story, but that's simply not their business model (neither for revenue NOR for business practices). Plus, I'd lay odds that Apple might have to take a chance on a more unpredicatable chipset to join Quad-Band GSM/CDMA/LTE into one low battery-usage, high performance handset. Apple has enough trouble with its GSM chipset field testing. I'd almost ask why such a hypothetical beast *wouldn't* explode... or send uncommon amounts of excess radiation. Why open yourself up for such problems? Greed? Nah. Apple is too patient to want to go for the full-monty.
    I see. Well, you put it so simply... why wouldn't I just agree? :D If Apple were knocking off phones left and right, and had a dozen skus, I'd agree with you. "Hey, why not, throw another shrimp on the barbie!" Unfortunately, Apple encounters HUGE risks of delay when chipsets or certain parts do not function properly in production testing. Doing an "all-in-one" would be a triumph for this level of phone... but by the time it was sufficiently tested and ready, I suspect it would be far later than they would like it to be. Devil's advocate though? I suspect Apple has already designed a rudimentary CDMA iPhone. I just don't see this thing going anywhere but into Apple's prototype museum.

    With such distinct differences between UMTS (W-CDMA) and CDMA, I can't see how anyone could capitalize on any tenuous relationship between the two other than being able to reuse the letters maybe?
    Please send emergency medical services to this location. The author of this message has just gone into shock. ;)

    Considering all of these HUGE, INSURMOUNTABLE hurdles... let's all just agree that the iPhone will NEVER, EVER be on Verizon and be done with it. At the end of the day, there will be plenty of other great phones coming out on the Verizon network... plus, Apple will have other meaningful relationships with Verizon. No need to make everything about a connection that will never happen and doesn't need to.

    ~ CB
     
  20. kdarling macrumors demi-god

    kdarling

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    First university coding class = 46 years ago
    #20
    Since Verizon doesn't change the UIs on their smartphones, that would not be a concern.

    -----

    Remember, Apple courted Verizon for a year, not the other way 'round. And they never showed Verizon a prototype, which might've changed history.

    Also, many of Verizon's original objections don't exist any more. Apple now sells through WalMart, Best Buy, and other Verizon partners. Apple allows subsidies now. Apple has both 3G and GPS now. The lack of these basics were valid Verizon reasons to not want an unknown device at the time.

    So what's left? What are some remaining valid reasons against a deal?

    Revenue sharing is a sticker, but it's negotiable.

    Sharing warranty decisions was an original blocking point.

    And who knows if Verizon would want the phone branded. (My guess is that a lot of people here in NYC would actually like it. They could lord it over the ATT model owners. Oh look, he has a Verizon iPhone... bet it works in this tunnel! *swoon*)
     
  21. Cleverboy thread starter macrumors 65816

    Cleverboy

    Joined:
    May 25, 2007
    Location:
    Pocket Universe, nth Dimensional Complex Manifold
    #21
    Would have, could have.

    Not true. They've just evolved their objections (its been a few years now). The main issue continues to be "control". Both Verizon and Apple are control freaks. Apple sells a boat, while Verizon sells the water. In the end, both want to dictate things about their relationship that neither will back down on in the end. As I said earlier, its in their natures... and likewise, they both provide a good experience to customers.

    Source for this? My understanding has always been that Apple chose not to release a 3G phone because AT&T's 3G network wasn't developed enough. At the time they were negotiating, Verizon wasn't in a position to disagree with a non-3G phone, as the phone didn't even exist! As far as GPS is concerned, this is another stumbling block. My understanding... which, on this, might be limited... is that Verizon (at that time) required VZNavigator to be the exclusive application for using the phone's GPS system. Furthermore, the initial iPhone had no original provision for GPS out of the gate. As we learned, location services would be added to the SDK later. Had a deal been brokered however, there is NO telling how things would have worked out. The Google "Maps" app might have been something else entirely.

    Oh... EVERYTHING. Why are you pretending you care that the iPhone has a "chance" of getting on Verizon. Is it so bad that it will never happen?
    MUCH smaller qualms than the 5 points I've mentioned.
    Fun.

    ~ CB
     
  22. nehunte macrumors 6502

    nehunte

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2009
    #22
    Hey guess what? None of you will NEVER EVER know what will happen. Quit trying to act tough using "facts" when this is mere speculation.

    This is like every other damn iPhone to Verizon thread on this site. We'll have to wait till the CEO of either company makes an announcement. I don't understand why this is talked about over and over and over and over and over again.

    /rant
     
  23. saving107 macrumors 603

    saving107

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Location:
    San Jose, Ca
    #23
    agreed.

    and I'm not trying to add fuel to this fire, but I remember reading on Apple.com/careers that they were hiring CDMA Engineers back in 2007. this story was covered my engadget or gizmodo back then. if I find the link I'll post it.
     
  24. JoshGlzBrk macrumors 6502a

    JoshGlzBrk

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    #24
    Think of it this way, suppose you're the manager of pretty much any retail store, you have many employees but you have that one that always seems to convince customers to buy items or is very helpful. This employee really helps your business... And one day they tell you he/she is going to a different retailer and quitting. You would offer more money to keep them around. And this is exactly what AT&T will do but on a much more massive scale. If apple wants to run away, they will just give them millions more to keep that jewel around.

    Same goes for the NFL, NBA, etc.

    It just won't happen until AT&T runs out of money which won't be anytime soon.
     
  25. saving107 macrumors 603

    saving107

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Location:
    San Jose, Ca
    #25

Share This Page