Verizon's Wi-Fi Calling Coming to Galaxy S6 on Monday, iPhone 'Early Next Year'

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
47,078
9,057



Verizon yesterday announced that it will begin rolling out support for Wi-Fi Calling next week, starting on Monday with Samsung's Galaxy S6 and S6 Edge. iPhone users will need to wait a bit longer, with an update enabling the feature expected "early next year."

Wi-Fi Calling will initially be available on the Samsung Galaxy S 6 and Samsung Galaxy S 6 Edge and will be rolled out as a software update in phases. Additional Android and iOS devices will receive Wi-Fi Calling capabilities via future software updates expected early next year.
Wi-Fi Calling allows phone calls to be automatically placed over Wi-Fi connections in areas where cellular service is poor, seamlessly transitioning between cellular and Wi-Fi as needed.

Sprint and T-Mobile have supported the feature for some time, and AT&T launched its support in early October. AT&T made waves by claiming Sprint and T-Mobile have been offering the feature illegally, due to Federal Communications Commission requirements for supporting a teletypewriter (TTY) feature for deaf and hard-of-hearing users.

AT&T received its waiver from the FCC just days later, and Verizon followed with its own request, with the FCC approving it

Article Link: Verizon's Wi-Fi Calling Coming to Galaxy S6 on Monday, iPhone 'Early Next Year'
 

malexandria

Suspended
Mar 25, 2009
971
426
I don't understand why carriers can't activate these types of service across all devices at the same time. Not knowing anything about the telecom tech, but it seems like WiFi calling is a Carrier thing and not necessarily based on the device. Only reason to delay seems to be from a capacity standpoint?
 

69Mustang

macrumors 604
Jan 7, 2014
7,124
12,952
In between a rock and a hard place
Why aren't the MVNOs that lease the big companies network also receiving this feature?
They are. Republic Wireless has had wifi calling as one of their main features since inception. They're on Sprint's network. My 9 yr old has a Moto G on Republic. Her bill is $10 bucks a month; primarily because of the wifi calling ability. She pays her own bill.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AirunJae

cburton

macrumors regular
Jul 17, 2008
173
10
They are. Republic Wireless has had wifi calling as one of their main features since inception. They're on Sprint's network. My 9 yr old has a Moto G on Republic. Her bill is $10 bucks a month; primarily because of the wifi calling ability. She pays her own bill.
Wish Cricket would turn it on!

Chris
 

Rocketman

macrumors 603
I don't understand why carriers can't activate these types of service across all devices at the same time. Not knowing anything about the telecom tech, but it seems like WiFi calling is a Carrier thing and not necessarily based on the device. Only reason to delay seems to be from a capacity standpoint?
Wifi calling takes traffic OFF the network and shifts it to your local ISPs. It is a loss of revenue perception which went away a long time ago when unlimited calling became ubiquitous. It is backward thinking by the carriers. iPhone 1 was capable of supporting wifi calling. The carriers wanted the per minute revenue to get massive income to build out networks. If you remember some of the first iPhone users got bills from AT&T with each and every data connection listed, with some bills hundreds of pages long. AT&T changed their billing software to only state total time used.

But that metadata of each connection, time, tower used remained in their databases of course. That's how they compensate tower owners. Remember way farther back, cell sites were auctioned off to individuals. Boy has that been a great investment!

Rocketman
 
  • Like
Reactions: Avieshek

ldman15

macrumors newbie
May 1, 2015
5
28
Could Verizon be any slower? I live in a rural area where cell service is sketchy so I maintain a LAN line. I'd like to cancel that LAN line! It doesn't help that Verizon is the most expensive carrier of the bunch.
I agree. I too live in an area where cell service isn't the best. I have been waiting for them to activate wifi calling for a while now and now they finally do it but they only put it on the Samsung phones first. Bad move. I'm already close to switching to another carrier because the price is so high with Verizon. And as a company I have not been impressed with their moves as of late.
 

inhalexhale1

macrumors 65816
Jul 17, 2011
1,037
670
PA
This reeks of ********.

They're either being paid off, or are lazy.
I used a Note 4 for a few weeks. The verizon branding is EVERYWHERE. Hardware, and so much crap you can't delete in the software. I'm sure they have incentives to push the galaxy over the iPhone.
 

shareef777

Suspended
Jul 26, 2005
2,445
3,218
Chicago, IL
That's exactly what Samsung did. And that's why it took so long for them to announce it after they got the waiver. They were trying to sell early access to the highest bidder. It has nothing to do with testing it out on a few devices at a time. It's about money. It's always about money.
Yep. It's all about money. For Verizon, for Samsung, for APPLE. Out of those three, which one has the MOST money? It's the reason we still have 16GB base iPhones.
 

philipk

macrumors 6502
Jun 11, 2008
431
184
Could Verizon be any slower? I live in a rural area where cell service is sketchy so I maintain a LAN line. I'd like to cancel that LAN line! It doesn't help that Verizon is the most expensive carrier of the bunch.
I am in the same boat.

Yes, Verizon is the most expensive of the bunch but for me it is the only real choice. T-Mobile is non-existent as they don't market here. I have been told Sprint doesn't work. When I moved here two years ago with AT&T, it worked in about 50% of the area and not in my house.

Verizon works in 95% of the area and 75% of the time in my house. No real choice.

My cable landline is gone when WiFi calling is 99% reliable!
 

2457282

Suspended
Dec 6, 2012
3,327
3,006
There was a time when verizon was considered the best, mainly because of it call quality and signal strength. Then with the iPhone's, verizon's decision to use CDMA was a glaring problem since one could not call and surf at the same time. now with LTE, the network advantage is minimal if there is one. And they continue to lag behind everyone else in terms of features such as wifi calling. add the fact they are the most expensive of all the carriers and I just don't see why people stick with them.

I am on AT&T which is only a little cheaper, but their network now is as good as verizon. With Tmob way out there on on features and pricing, they just lack the network (although that is getting better daily). I suspect I will be switching soonish, but I am sure it won't be to verizon.
 

philipk

macrumors 6502
Jun 11, 2008
431
184
And they continue to lag behind everyone else in terms of features such as wifi calling. add the fact they are the most expensive of all the carriers and I just don't see why people stick with them.

I am on AT&T which is only a little cheaper, but their network now is as good as verizon.
I don't know where you live but AT&T is NOT as good as Verizon in much or even most of the country except for cities larger that 100,000.

I had AT&T from the iPhone 3 until two years ago after having Sprint first. In the urban areas it was great but it didn't work well in the rural areas.

I now live in a rural area in a village of about 3,000 people. Verizon is still the only real option. AT&T advertised they had two new towers in our county. Friends said it only helped on the major Interstate that runs through the county. That Interstate is ten miles from our village.

So please don't claim that Verizon isn't tops in coverage from rural areas.

This post is being written by a person who had to hold his nose to switch to Verizon. I was with Sprint from the day they opened shop until buying the iPhone 3 and then I was with AT&T. Both are superior to Verizon in (most) urban areas.
 
Last edited:

joueboy

macrumors 68000
Jul 3, 2008
1,575
1,515
This kind of decision making is very likely influenced by whoever benefits but not for the customers. Like exclusivity of some devices from color to features and some are just minors. Mostly for marketing purposes to have an advantage over the other but not in a very obvious manner. Samsung probably paid or giving a commission for every Samsung phone sold during this period. So they ACTIVATED early that feature earlier than iPhone. I said the word ACTIVATED because that feature is already there since iOS 8. It's not like it cost them so much money and it takes a lot of effort in their part to enable the feature.
 

sziehr

macrumors 6502a
Jun 11, 2009
666
481
This is highly market to market. Sadly I am in the vzw or bust boat. There are still little regional monopolies where att "does not see a market" because Verizon was there for so long they own 90+% of the customers already. So I have to say I am not surprised they went with who would pay them to advertise there ****** feature first. If I could leave these clowns I would oh well welcome to American telecom monopoles are favored not broken.
 
  • Like
Reactions: philipk

bpeeps

macrumors 68040
May 6, 2011
3,033
2,715
Why is it taking Verizon so long? The other carriers activated it for all eligible phones at once.
This is not true. ATT wifi calling still is not enabled for many Android phones.