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 Preparation and Demands for iPhone?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How is it tacky that a company that makes, sells and whose software is on the phone has a logo on it?
Have you ever seen a Chevy go down the road without a logo or anything on it? (Besides the ones whose owners removed them)
It's not tacky just because Apple doesn't do it. By that argument, all the words and crap Apple has at the bottom of the back of the iPhone are tacky, because my Incredible certainly doesn't have all that crap.
Gruber is basically confirming the WSJ leak by asking "What I’m curious about is who leaked the confirmation: someone at Verizon, or someone at Apple? And was it authorized?"
As for the leak, I suspect it was a strategic leak by Apple to blunt Verizon Android holiday sales in anticipation of the upcoming VeriPhone.
As for the leak, I suspect it was a strategic leak by Apple to blunt Verizon Android holiday sales in anticipation of the upcoming VeriPhone.
Or maybe they both approved the leak....
http://blogs.wsj.com/marketbeat/201...erizon-iphone-headlines/?KEYWORDS=TING-I+TSAI
http://blogs.wsj.com/marketbeat/201...erizon-iphone-headlines/?KEYWORDS=TING-I+TSAI
Apple: we want iPhone on Verizon too.
Verizon: just get rid of your App store and its gravy, baby.
Apple: !@#* You.
It boggles my mind that anyone who follows Apple to the point of reading and commenting in this forum thinks there will ever be an iPhone 1) with any logo other than the 
2) with any app store other than the App Store 3) with any apps preinstalled that are not personally chosen by Steve Jobs and 4) with any way to purchase content other than iTunes.
Verizon will not get a single concession from Apple. They will not even be allowed to have the Verizon logo instead of the on startup. What in Apple's history makes anyone think they will be allowed to change anything about the iPhone? Apple has not given in on 99 cent TV rentals or 1.99 purchases. They didn't give in on 99 cent songs or 9.99 albums until the labels agreed to go DRM-free. They have not, to my knowledge, allowed any other carrier to install anything on the iPhone prepurchase. They do not allow preinstalled crapware or even the Intel sticker on their computers - if I remember correctly, my last Macbook didn't even have a trial of iWork installed! And the only time I'm aware of any 3rd party seller being allowed to even offer Apple products at prices other than Apple's MSRP is Walmart with it's measly $2 off on the iPhone. I could have missed a minor instance of any other the above, I suppose, but I haven't seen it.
The price of doing business with Apple is a willingness to do business on Apple's terms. You may think this is a bad business practice for Apple's sake or that it makes them a bully company and you are free to choose to bring your business elsewhere. But if you don't acknowledge this, you haven't been paying attention.
2) with any app store other than the App Store 3) with any apps preinstalled that are not personally chosen by Steve Jobs and 4) with any way to purchase content other than iTunes.Verizon will not get a single concession from Apple. They will not even be allowed to have the Verizon logo instead of the
on startup. What in Apple's history makes anyone think they will be allowed to change anything about the iPhone? Apple has not given in on 99 cent TV rentals or 1.99 purchases. They didn't give in on 99 cent songs or 9.99 albums until the labels agreed to go DRM-free. They have not, to my knowledge, allowed any other carrier to install anything on the iPhone prepurchase. They do not allow preinstalled crapware or even the Intel sticker on their computers - if I remember correctly, my last Macbook didn't even have a trial of iWork installed! And the only time I'm aware of any 3rd party seller being allowed to even offer Apple products at prices other than Apple's MSRP is Walmart with it's measly $2 off on the iPhone. I could have missed a minor instance of any other the above, I suppose, but I haven't seen it.The price of doing business with Apple is a willingness to do business on Apple's terms. You may think this is a bad business practice for Apple's sake or that it makes them a bully company and you are free to choose to bring your business elsewhere. But if you don't acknowledge this, you haven't been paying attention.
other personal needs... I need a tactile keyboard, I need a USB port, I need to install my own apps. Android allows phone manufacturers to build to just about any user spec [damn the experience, full checklist ahead].
and 'prototype' means what to you... a product in the box, or an idea on a breadboard? to me its the latter.
so, you're saying that apple sold ATT on handwaving and vapour? and verizon made a sound business decision based on the facts presented.
If USAtoday via Arstechnica in 2007 is to be believed, Verizon was asked 'years before' and turned down the opportunity. basically the same time your appleinsider article is based on... just highlighting different parts of the USAToday interview of a VZ VP.
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2007/01/6788.ars
It's interesting the 'years before' didn't make it into appleinsider article.
sounds like a risky [ie aggressive] decision to me. They could have said, 'nope, the network isn't ready, come back in 4 years'
oh, and....
"[...]Apple wanted a cut of Verizon’s monthly service fees, veto power over how and where iPhones could be sold, and control of the customer service relationship for iPhone users. Why did Cingular agree to terms Verizon rejected?" http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/07/04/how-att-picked-up-the-iphone-a-brief-history-of-mobiles/
this is fundamentally going against the carrier sales model of the previous 10 years of feature phones.
fine... each was telling their shareholders "we got them by the b*lls...." but in reality, looking at the above, did Apple change _IT'S_ business model... at all?
I'm not saying there wasn't a quid pro quo, but ATT (cingular) at the time needed to establish their US brand to justify the GSM product space that was an also ran in the US, and almost all 'hot' feature phones being sold at the time were going to Verizon or Sprint/Nextel.
The interesting item is that while ATT got apple to 'Bend Over' the contribution to the bottom lines of the iPhone Brand (profits & shareholder ROI) seem to be significantly leaning Apple's way. That's the sort of 'B*tch' I'd like to be;-).
and it runs counter to the claim that Apple stuck to it's requirements and got them, because Cingular/ATT was being shut out of 'hot phones' because of the market dominance of CDMA in the US, and they needed a define their new network with a flagship phone.
Bottom line, your analysis basically says that Verizon had the opportunity that ATT had, chose not to based on the deal on the table was unacceptable.... So either Verizon was a terrible negotiator, or not as visionary as ATT (iknowing that they could change the terms of the agreement later). ATT's market share is up. So the decision met their needs. Did the decision meet Verizon's?
Either way, Verizon had a chance, and turned it down.
Having both verizon and at&t plans at this moment, I can say they both have their positives and negatives. And ultimately they both suck equally.
ATT pros: iphone, and 3G data speed
cons: crappy coverage, terrible voice service
Verizon pros: excellent coverage and no dropped calls
cons: terrible customer service, and no iphone
I went on vacation a few months back and in downtown Huntsville Alabama I couldnt make a phone call on my iphone because there was no service but my verizon phone had 5 bars. sitting at my house in baltimore suburbs, my 3G service goes in and out allot for no apparent reason and on my 6 mile drive home if im on the phone, it will drop my call in the same 2 spots without fail every time.
I tell people the iphone is a great toy but a terrible phone. I like it because I have movies on it for my son, keep my music on it, able to check my email here and there, and love some of the apps such as the remote app and fios dvr app.
my verizon plan has been ready for renewal for months, and I cant bring myself to get a droid if iphone is on the horizon, but at the same time if the speed is going to be that bad on cdma, then why bother.
its coverage vs speed and features and they both weigh equally.
ATT pros: iphone, and 3G data speed
cons: crappy coverage, terrible voice service
Verizon pros: excellent coverage and no dropped calls
cons: terrible customer service, and no iphone
I went on vacation a few months back and in downtown Huntsville Alabama I couldnt make a phone call on my iphone because there was no service but my verizon phone had 5 bars. sitting at my house in baltimore suburbs, my 3G service goes in and out allot for no apparent reason and on my 6 mile drive home if im on the phone, it will drop my call in the same 2 spots without fail every time.
I tell people the iphone is a great toy but a terrible phone. I like it because I have movies on it for my son, keep my music on it, able to check my email here and there, and love some of the apps such as the remote app and fios dvr app.
my verizon plan has been ready for renewal for months, and I cant bring myself to get a droid if iphone is on the horizon, but at the same time if the speed is going to be that bad on cdma, then why bother.
its coverage vs speed and features and they both weigh equally.
Yeah well mine doesn't work in a close suburb of Cleveland when I go there, which infuriates me to no end.
Oh well, my family has a good couple laughs at my expense and really, at Apples expense.
Does anyone take into account that it has been nearly a year and a half since Apple announced the iPhone for China Telecom? and that those subscribers (43 million of them) would be up for a hardware refresh in the next 7 months (assuming a 2 year contract)?
It gets tedious that everyone thinks CDMA = Verizon, and that Apple + CDMA = Verizon, or some United States-based CDMA carrier.
The WSJ would seriously lose credibility if this new 'CDMA iPhone' didn't make it to Verizon, and causes a lot of Verizon fanboys (including a fair number on this forum) to go cry in their pillows on their bed because their network didn't get what they wanted.
In short, Steve is in charge of his product, not a newspaper.
BL.
Well I highly doubt all this CDMA talk. so lets say 'anyone but ATT' instead.
And the iphone is so popular that any network is going to feel the strain. But someone else might have better resources to adapt and expand
Apple: we want iPhone on Verizon too.
Verizon: just get rid of your App store and its gravy, baby.
Apple: !@#* You.
This is not in the slightest bit funny. Every smartphone from droid to palm has their own appstore. Where is the humour in something so far fetched?
Interesting news. With morbid fascination, I'm following this story.
I jumped from AT&T to verizon last year (Nexus -> Droidx), if VZW does start carrying the iPhone, I'm wondering how many android users would come to the dark side
AT&T does it because they're apple's lap dog. VZW isn't about the sell the farm just to get the iPhone. AT&T is giving apple a ton of concessions, I don't think VZW has been that willing. Plus apple like the control and they have that with at&t. They'll likely give up some of that control when going with them
I don't see that Apple has given any other cellular provider, anywhere across the globe, any concessions on control of their device. I highly doubt that they would start with Verizon.
Actually you might be surprised. The issue here is degradation of the ratings. The networks are worried that the precious 25k crew that makes up the Nielsen sample will jump to rentals and they will lose ad money. But it is unlikely to really be an issue same as the Netflix deals, Hulu etc. And they will toss in for whatever money they can get for the community pot to supplement the big money.
Verizon can have a Vcast app if they want- nobody will end up using it anyway. But a Verizon logo on the phone is a dealbreaker.
It's tacky because it's plastering a bunch of advertising on the phone. It's not about whether Verizon "deserves" to have their name on the phone; it's that adding a bunch of advertising is...tacky. Whether Apple or anyone else adds it.
Yes, cars have logos. But my car, which is much larger than my phone, has fewer logos than a Droid X. But, yes, it would be tacky if my car was also plastered with logos from the company that designed the stereo, made the upholstery, and designed the spark plugs.
And, yeah, the iPhone would be better if it didn't have the FCC stuff on the bottom of the back of the phone. (At least it's on the back).
And are you seriously suggesting that your phone would not look better (or would even look worse?) if the Verizon logo weren't on the front of the phone? (And, for that matter, don't you think that your phone looks better than the X because it only has two logos on it, rather than 5?).
Yes sir, and for the reasons that you stated: Cingular needed phones, and had far less to lose.
ATT was willing to take their set-aside customer subsidy money and give it to Apple as the nicer termed "revenue sharing" for the first year.
Unlike Verizon at the time, ATT didn't have 3G and A-GPS on all their smartphones, the former because they had little 3G coverage, and the latter because they had chosen a cheaper and far less accurate non-GPS E911 solution.
So yes, considering the only "Apple phone" that Verizon had seen was the Motorola co-project ROKR... which had failed partly due to greedy limitations imposed by Apple... and here Apple was wanting to build basically what Verizon would consider a crippled featurephone... who in their right mind would make a deal that apparently would rip off their sales partners and customers?
Hindsight is great, but it sounds like it was a valid business decision at the time, considering the information they had.
4g expected in my area by the end of 2010... when the iphone comes out with 4g I am switching to vzw.... well had to edit my post... will see how the tiered data plans go since I am on unlimited with ATT now and enjoy the netflix and pandora app more than I should and further edit... if I have a logo on my phone I will be replacing the back or whatever as soon as they have replacements out without a logo because I think it would look tacky on an iPhone... Yes I know plenty of other people have logo's on what they make but would you want to buy the Honda if it was plastered with some other providers logo like xm radio or something...
T-Mobile has the plans in place, although you are obviously limited to their list of phones. Or a few that sorta transfer from AT&T, like the iPhone.
Some of us hardly notice it. Until I read this thread, I had only a vague awareness of the logos on my X. Looking at them now, except for the Motorola shield on the back, they seem to be in a blueish gray script that doesn't stand out very well against the black background, so it doesn't really make the NASCAR scale.
Since I don't stare at my phone, but rather use it as it is intended, I could care less if it had 3 logos, 1 logo or 5 logos. It's not like the logos are big blinking billboards. My incredible simply has a silver verizon checkmark logo on the front and on the back is the HTC logo (which is much the same as the apple logo on the back of my iPhone) and in small, light gray writing it says with google.
In fact, my phone has LESS on the back of it than the iPhone, and really if you're worried about a phone looking tacky when your using it, the back of it is more important than the front, which is pressed up against your face.
I really don't get the argument against logos. What product in the world doesn't have some sort of logo on it? I'd argue that apple products have some of the most prominent logo placement of any product - the shining white light of my Macbook Pro's Apple logo is a perfect example, along with the shiny silver apple on the back of my iPhone.
The company designed and built the product, why can't they put a simple logo on it? Even the stapler sitting on the desk next to me has a logo on it.
This is my point exactly. We're not talking about logos that are sticking out like advertisements, they are simple and often muted logos on a product made by the company.
Apple's logos on the other hand tend to stick out from the product and notify everyone around "HEY I'M USING AN APPLE PRODUCT"
There will be another carrier getting the iPhone soon. Apple has to get in with multiple carriers to compete with Google. Be glad you've got an iPhone with AT&T right now. At least we can sit back until June and see how Verizon's network harnesses an influx of iPhone users.