Having a vibrate mode that makes noise is...
well, it defeats the purpose of putting the phone on vibrate.
I'll agree that it's not particularly noticeable, but you know what you do when you want it to be noticeable? Turn the ringer back on.
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.
Verizon iPhone Carries World-Mode 'Gobi' Chip From Qualcomm
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Having a vibrate mode that makes noise is...
well, it defeats the purpose of putting the phone on vibrate.
I'll agree that it's not particularly noticeable, but you know what you do when you want it to be noticeable? Turn the ringer back on.
Yep add a vSIM chip to this puppy and they have a world phone*. I can see this chip or the 9600 which includes LTE in the next iPad with a vSIM so that you can load up sims from providers anywhere. After all the iPad is pure data and tends not to be locked to contract so lower threat level to Carriers.
*funny term it seems to mean works everywhere including America instead of just GSM which works everywhere except parts of America.
Yes, because Apple currently doesn't offer an iPhone that can be used around the world.
Ok so Apple will from now on use Qualcomm chips on their iPhones...that much is well known by now. Obviously Qualcomm makes CDMA-only chips as well, but Apple decided to go with a dual mode while at the same time completely making the GSM side disabled. It might be that these chips are very good and efficient and what not... Therefore this iphone 4 destined for Verizon is indeed capable of GSM compatibility but won't do it.
My questions are for the more engineer-savvy:
1) Have the internals on the ViPhone been modified to a certain degree where allowing this chip to do its proper dual band work meant that including the SIM slot or whatever other connecting cables needed would make it impossible in its current frame?
2) Is all that's missing is a SIM slot? I mean...usually in world phones you will see both functions with their corresponding "stuff" if you will on the phone to make both bands work...is everything in place BUT the SIM slot?
If this phone was perfectly capable of being a world phone in its current frame....and Apple simply decided to keep the GSM side dormant, and not give you access to a sim slot! then my guess is that they decided on a business decision to not enable it for the 4...and wait for later generations, after all this might actually be something other than an iPhone 4.
My questions are for the more engineer-savvy:
1) Have the internals on the ViPhone been modified to a certain degree where allowing this chip to do its proper dual band work meant that including the SIM slot or whatever other connecting cables needed would make it impossible in its current frame?
2) Is all that's missing is a SIM slot? I mean...usually in world phones you will see both functions with their corresponding "stuff" if you will on the phone to make both bands work...is everything in place BUT the SIM slot?
If this phone was perfectly capable of being a world phone in its current frame....and Apple simply decided to keep the GSM side dormant, and not give you access to a sim slot! then my guess is that they decided on a business decision to not enable it for the 4...and wait for later generations, after all this might actually be something other than an iPhone 4.
Or you could just by a different phone if the iPhone doesn't meet your needs..
The decision may actually be an appeasement to carriers. If people are unlocking and/or switching carriers often because their phone allows them to, carriers are going to be upset for subsidizing that cost, even if they recoup it in ETFs. They're about market share AND profits.
It will also drive commonality for future phones. Supposedly this chip does T-mobile 3G too, so they can buy bushels and buckets of the same radio and put them in the different iphones as they see fit. Of course, they could go with a common design, but the minor cosmetic differences needed between versions may be acceptable to them if they want to minimize churn for carrier relationships.
As for the GSM frequencies
1) They need the SIM slot
2) they need an antenna that supports the frequencies
3) they need software that allows the radio to work at those frequencies
It will also drive commonality for future phones. Supposedly this chip does T-mobile 3G too, so they can buy bushels and buckets of the same radio and put them in the different iphones as they see fit. Of course, they could go with a common design, but the minor cosmetic differences needed between versions may be acceptable to them if they want to minimize churn for carrier relationships.
As for the GSM frequencies
1) They need the SIM slot
2) they need an antenna that supports the frequencies
3) they need software that allows the radio to work at those frequencies
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Agree... Apple does have big incentive to develop an all signals in one all in one phone. I will have to read more about antenna design requirements, however despite the obvious greed factor, is it clear that providing sim and multisignal capability is seemingly far more profitable. Right now, playing networks against each other is working very well. Nobody suspects the iPhone, the carriers are blamed now, but common sense dictates Apple should make compatability a non issue. Personally I don't care how greedy Apple is... I am able to write off all my Apple purchases from making a wonderful living trading Apple stock. Bottom line, if you're smart money spent on Apple pays inarguable dividends. AAPL will assuredly be the first trillion dollar market cap company in history. $$$$$$$$$$
a.phoenicis said:
Agree... Apple does have big incentive to develop an all signals in one all in one phone. I will have to read more about antenna design requirements, however despite the obvious greed factor, is it clear that providing sim and multisignal capability is seemingly far more profitable. Right now, playing networks against each other is working very well. Nobody suspects the iPhone, the carriers are blamed now, but common sense dictates Apple should make compatability a non issue. Personally I don't care how greedy Apple is... I am able to write off all my Apple purchases from making a wonderful living trading Apple stock. Bottom line, if you're smart money spent on Apple pays inarguable dividends. AAPL will assuredly be the first trillion dollar market cap company in history. $$$$$
$$$$$
Then they should have not used a flat pane of glass for the back. At this point, why even bother with vibration.
The dual-mode chip shouldn't come as a surprise. Just because they are using it, however, doesn't mean they are going to make a dual-mode phone. Apple isn't exactly known for making features of the various chips available - the iPhone supports FM radio after all.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
A quieter, softer vibrate motor? Can barely feel the original!!
A quieter, softer vibrate motor? Can barely feel the original!!
Does anybody remember the video which showed an iPhone 4 frame with the seams placed in the positions as the iPhone 4 Verizon, AND the frame/antenna also had the sim slot? The picture below shows this and as you can see there is the seam next to the top of the housing frame (close to the camera).
Attachments
I believe you meant that Verizon LTE covers as many people now, as AT&T's 3G did four years ago when the iPhone 3G came out.
Yes, I meant that the same antenna that works for AT&T should also work for Verizon, if Apple wanted to make a world phone.
It's really too bad that there are so many GSM frequencies to support, but that's a consequence of different world areas releasing different frequencies for cellular usage at different times. Too bad there wasn't a world standard in the beginning.
Interesting....
Those clever rascals in Cupertino.
If this is true (and you seem to know your RF based on your post history), that means that the antenna redesign on the Verizon Iphone 4 wasn't needed for CDMA support - but in fact was to fix the "AntennaGate" problem with the Iphone 4.
Therefore, when the Iphone 5 comes out with the Verizon Iphone 4 antenna, the fans will believe that it's not a fix for the problem in the Iphone 4, but needed for CDMA.
I hope that the class-action lawyers realize what's up, though.
Those clever rascals in Cupertino.
If this is true (and you seem to know your RF based on your post history), that means that the antenna redesign on the Verizon Iphone 4 wasn't needed for CDMA support - but in fact was to fix the "AntennaGate" problem with the Iphone 4.
Therefore, when the Iphone 5 comes out with the Verizon Iphone 4 antenna, the fans will believe that it's not a fix for the problem in the Iphone 4, but needed for CDMA.
I hope that the class-action lawyers realize what's up, though.
This decision has nothing to do with antennas. The Verizon iPhone has to support 850/1900MHz. The AT&T iPhone already supports 850/1900/900/1800/2100MHz. So, the Verizon iPhone already supports the bands needed for AT&T. Now, Apple might have (and probably did) tune the Verizon iPhone's antennas specifically for 850/1900 since it doesn't need to support the global frequencies, but that would lend credence to the argument that increased reception on the Verizon iPhone isn't an indication that AT&T's network is bad, but that Apple's antenna design is.
There's a simpler reason for why Apple didn't just create a combined model. The Verizon iPhone 4 is superior to the AT&T iPhone 4 when used with AT&T's network. The iPhone 4 for AT&T supports HSPA 7.2. The iPhone 4 for Verizon supports CDMA and HSPA+ 14.4. Apple wants to make sure that it sells out of all the iPhone 4s that it created that are only HSPA 7.2. That won't happen if people know can get an iPhone 4 that supports HSPA+ 14.4.
If Apple had included a SIM slot, people would want that phone over the AT&T iPhone. With the inclusion of a SIM slot, it's a better phone. Not only is the network speed faster, but you could switch between AT&T and Verizon without re-buying your phone. Apple doesn't want customers to start buying this new device and see large stockpiles of the old one go unsold and the Verizon iPhone is likely more expensive to produce because of this chip. So, Apple doesn't include a SIM slot and almost no one is the wiser (and even if they are, they can't do anything about it).
There's a simpler reason for why Apple didn't just create a combined model. The Verizon iPhone 4 is superior to the AT&T iPhone 4 when used with AT&T's network. The iPhone 4 for AT&T supports HSPA 7.2. The iPhone 4 for Verizon supports CDMA and HSPA+ 14.4. Apple wants to make sure that it sells out of all the iPhone 4s that it created that are only HSPA 7.2. That won't happen if people know can get an iPhone 4 that supports HSPA+ 14.4.
If Apple had included a SIM slot, people would want that phone over the AT&T iPhone. With the inclusion of a SIM slot, it's a better phone. Not only is the network speed faster, but you could switch between AT&T and Verizon without re-buying your phone. Apple doesn't want customers to start buying this new device and see large stockpiles of the old one go unsold and the Verizon iPhone is likely more expensive to produce because of this chip. So, Apple doesn't include a SIM slot and almost no one is the wiser (and even if they are, they can't do anything about it).
verizon built the phone for apple and left out the sim slot ? damn, what else do the do for them? maybe verizon can fix the att designed antenna for them.
1. Umm Verizon Network is 800/1900Mhz not 850...
2. Phone needs much more than just chip and the antenna to operate on multiple technologies. There are many other RF components needed in order for a phone to successfully operate.
3. Your post is not very accurate by all means, but I like your imagination.
Due to reasons that I don't understand, the lower CDMA band is often referred to as both 800 and 850. I learned that some time ago when trying to figure out whether my "800" phone could roam on an "850" network. The answer was yes, it could.
apple stupid with or without steve jobs, methinks not...
he's so infused into the System..
it's all planned...
1984
cool
he's so infused into the System..
it's all planned...
1984
cool
Lol, why don't you try a smartphone. Also, your old CDMA phone was most likely capable of both 800 and 850mhz.
Ain't happening with two different technologies where the antennas are tuned completely different.
Unless you are a cutting edge RF tech and know something that noone else knows.
Actually, you'd need to use cutting edge RF technology to create an antenna system on a portable that would work on 800 but not 850 - or vice versa.
Ever notice in the T-Mobile commercials the T-Mobile Girl never makes fun of iPhone just the AT&T / Verizon networks? I would bet that Verizon paid to get the iPhone early before the iPhone 5 to get a jump start on T-Mobile and any other carriers Sprint???
Not quite. CDMA amplifiers tuners and other components function VERY differently compared to their GSM counterpart and in a handheld device fine tuning is crucial by all means. From the ability to make calls to your battery consumption. It's extremely vague to claim or believe that by using CDMA antenna and all it's components you can expect to seamlessly get connected to a GSM network with no GSM RF components.
YES t-mobile
and nothing stopping sprint too (except wimax! lol. if only the qcomm supported that, and the iphone could have a real future on sprint)
but what if apple does the integrated sim? sounds much better, and would solve the problem of needing a sim. plus it wakes up less space
and nothing stopping sprint too (except wimax! lol. if only the qcomm supported that, and the iphone could have a real future on sprint)
but what if apple does the integrated sim? sounds much better, and would solve the problem of needing a sim. plus it wakes up less space