Really ? I can arrange that for you. I'll just head on over to the Apple Store here, buy it for 649$ and ship it to you if you paypal me 800$.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mid-2011 iPhone to Utilize Dual-Mode GSM/CDMA Chip, Skip 4G?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Really ? I can arrange that for you. I'll just head on over to the Apple Store here, buy it for 649$ and ship it to you if you paypal me 800$.
I want the iPhone 4 32GB, last time I checked, it was priced at around $800 in the UK.
I would assume then that it would be cheaper in the US, if this rumor were to come true.
It isn't actually "4G" yet anyway.
Any carrier claiming that they have "4G" is full of crap. That's marketing-speak for 3.9G. What they're rolling out now is First-Release 3GPP LTE, "3G Partnership Project Long Term Advanced." Yes, it's much faster than basic 3G, but no, it's not all-IP packet-switched and thus not as flexible and universal as true 4G will be. And the final 4G spec is still not finalized yet.
The real 4G will most likely use LTE Advanced, and it won't be rolled out until 2012. So who knows how long it will take to become widely used enough for Apple to care about it.
At first I figured Apple would rope-a-dope the criticism of AT&T until 4G became widely available, possibly as early as 2013. But there's simply too much money to be made by Frankensteining a CDMA/GSM interim phone while those legacy standards are still around. And don't forget that Apple and Google are in a long-term battle for eyeballs on iAds and AdMob ads. (I think iAd was designed for HDTV screens from the start, but that's another post...)
All I know is what I read on Wikipedia:
3.9G aka LTE
4G aka LTE Advanced
Any carrier claiming that they have "4G" is full of crap. That's marketing-speak for 3.9G. What they're rolling out now is First-Release 3GPP LTE, "3G Partnership Project Long Term Advanced." Yes, it's much faster than basic 3G, but no, it's not all-IP packet-switched and thus not as flexible and universal as true 4G will be. And the final 4G spec is still not finalized yet.
The real 4G will most likely use LTE Advanced, and it won't be rolled out until 2012. So who knows how long it will take to become widely used enough for Apple to care about it.
At first I figured Apple would rope-a-dope the criticism of AT&T until 4G became widely available, possibly as early as 2013. But there's simply too much money to be made by Frankensteining a CDMA/GSM interim phone while those legacy standards are still around. And don't forget that Apple and Google are in a long-term battle for eyeballs on iAds and AdMob ads. (I think iAd was designed for HDTV screens from the start, but that's another post...)
All I know is what I read on Wikipedia:
3.9G aka LTE
4G aka LTE Advanced
question....what smartphone was the original iPhone competing against? Android didn't exist, and the iPhone hadn't gone global...check out ALL the facts
I think it is true there are many different players in different phases of the game when it comes to LTE (hell, even 3G) rollout. But one thing is for sure, no one (anywhere in the world) is past the "novelty test market" phase.
Besides, the apps for a 4G network just don't exist. On a well-developed and deployed 3G network you can handle quite a bit of videoconferencing (assuming the infrastructure in the middle is there, too).
The 3G providers out there haven't even matured their 3G networks yet, and it really doesn't matter how great VZW's motivation or interest in deploying LTE quickly might be, it can't happen that quickly. Lighting up test markets itself will take 12-18 months, and that's based on the most aggressive schedule put forth by the telcos themselves (who have a history of rampant optimism in their network PR pieces).
All this ignores the fact that there is no 4G chipset, SoC, processor, and power source combo that COULD drive apps such as full motion video, 100% cloud-streamed media players, etc for more than an hour worth of use.
I am not sure what the rush is to see this technology in handsets before the network, applications, and systems are built out. Let alone the batteries
.
Besides, the apps for a 4G network just don't exist. On a well-developed and deployed 3G network you can handle quite a bit of videoconferencing (assuming the infrastructure in the middle is there, too).
The 3G providers out there haven't even matured their 3G networks yet, and it really doesn't matter how great VZW's motivation or interest in deploying LTE quickly might be, it can't happen that quickly. Lighting up test markets itself will take 12-18 months, and that's based on the most aggressive schedule put forth by the telcos themselves (who have a history of rampant optimism in their network PR pieces).
All this ignores the fact that there is no 4G chipset, SoC, processor, and power source combo that COULD drive apps such as full motion video, 100% cloud-streamed media players, etc for more than an hour worth of use.
I am not sure what the rush is to see this technology in handsets before the network, applications, and systems are built out. Let alone the batteries
.
the fallacy of your words is in the "futureproofing" no cellular will EVER be "future proofed" ....there will always be another technology right around the corner...how else will they get people to buy new phones every 18 months?
The trick is getting people to buy in June 2011. We're right now seeing all these LTE rollouts and plans. By June 2011, LTE will be the marketing buzzword.
Lacking LTE when it's going to be plastered all over will probably mean Android will again soar past the iPhone next year, even more than they have this year. Who wants last year's tech ?
He's not joking in that LTE has been deployed in Europe, but it's kinda like how Sprint says WiMax has been deployed in North America.
LTE networks exist in Oslo, Stockholm, and a few other cities. Are they fully deployed? No. Are there any interesting handsets? No.
Why are they there? Because in order to build handsets, you need to have at least one reasonable network to test with. It's not like you can build the handset, release it, and magically expect it to work perfectly when the network gets deployed in your area. Consider it a beta test.
UMTS/3G was tested first in Japan by NTT Docomo. You can thank them and their million handset recall for providing your working UMTS network.
Your connection speeds might be amazing, but until the rest of us can get some WiMax reception, have some sense of it's reliability, and understand how much of a battery penalty it costs us, your experience doesn't really help us.
As long as Apple isn't sacrificing my battery life in favor of a cheaper solution to the problem of supporting two cell provider types...
Meaning, as long as the CDMA chip isn't constantly (or even occasionally) using any battery, (because I won't be switching to Verizon or another CDMA provider any time soon).
:-\
Meaning, as long as the CDMA chip isn't constantly (or even occasionally) using any battery, (because I won't be switching to Verizon or another CDMA provider any time soon).
:-\
1) Most likely.
2) Most likely.
3) No. While Apple might hesitate because of battery life, I'd think that it'd be a bigger concern would be that there wouldn't be enough time to test a LTE iPhone with a network and verify that it works well. Besides, look at how long it took AT&T to get decent 3G coverage. 5 years?
At least with Flash they are proposing an alternative, even if it is not yet ready or in great availability. What is the alternative to 4G ?
3G's a decent alternative. Seriously.
Except for tethering a laptop, how many people would actually benefit from having a 4G handset anyway? I'd say it's minimal.
Yeah, and well the gasoline powered engine is a decent alternative to electric vehicules too, you don't see many people championing living in the past on that now do you ?
Yeah, and well the gasoline powered engine is a decent alternative to electric vehicules too, you don't see many people championing living in the past on that now do you ?
I don't see how this supports your argument. Electric cars aren't exactly owning the road these days. Hybrids are making inroads, but pure electric cars are impractical and unreliable.
Yes! BeyondtheTech is right. And if you do not need ESPN, why pay for it on your cable bundle, oh and if you don't have any kids, why pay for the Disney Channel?
We need a TEAPARTY for tech.
Fine, go with hybrids then if that makes my argument easier to swallow. The fact is the past is hardly a decent alternative to the present/future. 3G is last year's tech.
Agreed. I can see the ads now "Why do they call it 4G when it is not 4G to begin with?"
I hope this is true...
A dual CDMA/GSM mode iphone makes alot of sense, but this new 5th generation iphone will not be released until June 2011. I am not sure Apple will announce it in January either, like so many people are saying, that will just hurt iPhone 4 sales. Competition is good, hopefully this will create a carrier price war and the prices for all these plans will start to fall.
A dual CDMA/GSM mode iphone makes alot of sense, but this new 5th generation iphone will not be released until June 2011. I am not sure Apple will announce it in January either, like so many people are saying, that will just hurt iPhone 4 sales. Competition is good, hopefully this will create a carrier price war and the prices for all these plans will start to fall.
I purposely signed a one year contract with VZW because of 4G, I'd hate to be locking into a 2 year 3G contract at this stage. It makes even less sense to be locked into a long term contract in 2011 when 4G phones will be hitting the market in increasing volumes.
