backtop


Print 63 comment(s) - last by atlmann10.. on Oct 13 at 2:48 PM


The Wall Street Journal says the iPhone is coming to Verizon early next year.  (Source: FoneArena)
New carrier is unlikely to turn back the Android tide, but should make Apple a tidy sum of cash

Since the launch of the iPhone one critical factor has remained constant.  In the smartphone's biggest market -- the United States -- the iPhone was sold exclusively on AT&T.  But that's about to change.

The Wall Street Journal claims that multiple sources brief by Apple have said that a CDMA iPhone will land early next year on Verizon's network.  CDMA is Verizon's 3G tech of choice.  Sprint also uses CDMA, while T-Mobile and AT&T utilize GSM, a rival standard.

The iPhone undeniably helped AT&T hang on to its second place spot in the U.S.  However, many customers -- particularly in 2007 and 2008 -- were disgruntled about AT&T's poor voice network.  While AT&T has made a concerted effort to improve, the experience has still left a bitter taste in many's mouth, and many still hold a negative opinion about the carrier's quality of service. 

Meanwhile the iPhone is struggling to stave off dozens of handsets sporting Google's Android operating system which have flooded the U.S. market.  Android has already passed the iPhone in U.S. sales and analysts generally believe that it is only a matter of time before it does the same worldwide.  More worrisome for Apple, interest in the iPhone is also dropping.

A shift to Verizon, the nation's largest carrier, could help Apple somewhat with both problems. According to James Ratcliffe at Barclays Capital, a Verizon iPhone would grow the carrier's subscriber base by 900,000 in 2011 and sell 9 million iPhones in total (most sales going to existing customers).  Hudson Square Research, on the other hand, believes that Verizon could gain even more new subscribers, estimating that 4 million iPhone users would switch from AT&T -- roughly 18 percent of AT&T's iPhone subscriber base.

Verizon Communications Inc. President Lowell McAdam refused to confirm or deny the rumors of an Apple deal, stating, "At some point our business interests are going to align.  I fully expect it, but I don't have anything to say."

The report offers a lot of compelling details to support its claims that the Verizon iPhone is real.  It claims that Pegatron Technology Corp., a contract manufacturer subsidiary of Taiwanese electronics giant Asustek Computer Inc. won the contract to produce the phone.  And reportedly Qualcomm is providing the CDMA chipset for the new phone, though the form factor will stay the same.

A Verizon iPhone was already prophesied earlier this year by 
Bloomberg, which says the phone will land in January (coinciding with one of Apple's typical product launch times).  However, one of the sources briefed by Apple told The Wall Street Journal offers a new piece of information -- Apple is also working on a different form factor of its popular device.

If it truly exists, the real question is whether this form factor is bigger or smaller than the existing iPhone.  A likely scenario seems a smaller candy-bar like phone, similar to the iPod Nano 5G.

The need for a Verizon iPhone is illustrated most clearly by subscriber numbers.  According to market researchers at Comscore, in August 2009 there were only 866,000 Android smartphones, compared to 7.8 million iPhones in the U.S.  In August 2010 Android had exploded to 10.9 million phones, while Apple managed an impressive, but lesser growth to 13.5 million handsets.

Ultimately despite the "danger" of getting passed by Android, the release of a Verizon iPhone may be more about bumping up profit and less about staving off its competitor.  After all, Apple currently has only 2.8 percent market share in the global phone market, but it makes 39 percent of its profits thanks to its ability to move less-than-premium hardware at premium prices and its aggressive negotiation of supply deals.  Android eventually passing Apple seems inevitable, even if Apple does launch a Verizon iPhone, but the new phone could send the already profitable company soaring to new heights in profitability.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

I hope this is true...
By SusanCnett on 10/7/10, Rating: 0
RE: I hope this is true...
By Sazabi19 on 10/7/2010 9:24:49 AM , Rating: 3
Why not get an android based phone then? They have apps for music... they even have 1 built in. I'm not seeing the problem here or the reason why you NEED an iPhone for music purposes. That is stupid honestly.


RE: I hope this is true...
By rickcole3 on 10/7/2010 9:31:52 AM , Rating: 2
Instead of calling the person stupid perhaps you may consider that there is a reason they want the iOS interface? They could have an extensive library of iTunes songs and don't want to convert them all to mp3? Perhaps they prefer the interface of iOS? Just because people don't jump over to your choice of mobile operating system doesn't make them "stupid". It's called consumer choice. You made one with Android. Why belittle someone for preferring something else?


RE: I hope this is true...
By Raraniel on 10/7/2010 9:33:13 AM , Rating: 5
He needs the iphone 4. Give him the iphone 4. The one with the bigger gee-bees.


RE: I hope this is true...
By xpax on 10/7/2010 11:48:48 AM , Rating: 5
I don't care.


RE: I hope this is true...
By DN23 on 10/7/2010 1:27:52 PM , Rating: 4
This F-ing thing prints money!


RE: I hope this is true...
By deltadeltadelta on 10/12/2010 10:59:18 AM , Rating: 1
I do not care.


RE: I hope this is true...
By sviola on 10/7/2010 10:38:57 AM , Rating: 3
I think what he is saying is that there are options in Verizon that would fit her needs (phone+music player) that she could have right away, so her complain is just unnecessary.

But I agree with you on the name calling...


RE: I hope this is true...
By charrytg on 10/7/2010 12:07:59 PM , Rating: 2
So it wouldn't be stupid to change a carrier just so that you could have a particular brand of smartphone, but it would be stupid to suck it up and stick with the carrier you like, and get a comparable smartphone?


RE: I hope this is true...
By Sazabi19 on 10/7/2010 1:02:51 PM , Rating: 2
I think you have read what i said wrong. I said THAT was stupid, not the person. People are not stupid for ideologies, they are stupid becuase of what they do.


RE: I hope this is true...
By Ammohunt on 10/7/2010 2:24:52 PM , Rating: 2
True but extremely ignorant people follow leftist ideologies doesn't that make them temporarily stupid?


RE: I hope this is true...
By omnicronx on 10/7/2010 2:25:59 PM , Rating: 2
Does the interface make the music sound any better?

Consumer choice is just that, a choice, but it does not make said choice logical by any means..

Perhaps he uses the iPod for iOS apps too, that you could not get on Android, but if Music is the only reason he carries around two devices then you really have to wonder if he is just trying to validate his purchase of an iPhone4..

(battery life which is always my concern does not seem to be an issue either, as he seems content with having one device if it fits 'his needs')


RE: I hope this is true...
By omnicronx on 10/7/2010 2:27:36 PM , Rating: 2
Heck perhaps the guy does not have a smartphone at all..

I know many people that have a 5 year old phone, but got an iPod touch to fill the void.

Who knows ;)


RE: I hope this is true...
By Devo2007 on 10/7/2010 10:19:54 AM , Rating: 2
Find me a GOOD Android app that does gapless playback as well as an iPhone/iPod Touch and I'll bite. Museek & Lithium are the only apps I've seen to promise it. Museek sucks (I kept getting errors while scanning my media collection), and Lithium's gapless playback never worked for me.


RE: I hope this is true...
By meepstone on 10/7/2010 10:39:19 AM , Rating: 1
Can't wait 2 seconds? Doesn't seem like a big deal to me. But then again i dont have a.d.d.


RE: I hope this is true...
By bollwerk on 10/7/2010 11:58:48 AM , Rating: 1
Gapless playback is important for albums that are continuous mixes. I listen to a lot of house/trance music and nearly all of it is a continuous mix from beginning to end. There was a time when itunes (and the ipod) didn't have gapless playback and it was really annoying.


RE: I hope this is true...
By dark matter on 10/7/2010 7:44:31 PM , Rating: 2
This begs the question, why break up a continuous mix into separate tracks in the first place.

Why not make one really large MP3


RE: I hope this is true...
By charrytg on 10/7/2010 12:10:07 PM , Rating: 2
Don't use low quality storage, and you won't have gaps. You would not have noticed this with an apple product, as they do not give you freedom of choice with storage.


RE: I hope this is true...
By MozeeToby on 10/7/2010 12:21:33 PM , Rating: 1
First and foremost, that just isn't true. The gap is caused by the way the MP3 format is defined, it has nothing to do with storage at all. From the Wiki:
quote:
Most lossy audio compression schemes add a small amount of silence to the beginning of a track. One reason that this happens is because many such schemes involve a time/frequency domain transform (such as an MDCT) which can introduce gaps called encoder delay. These gaps can be enlarged at decode time when a reverse-MDCT is performed, because the reverse transform will also introduce gaps (decoder delay) of its own.
It's something you have to program around and it isn't as easy a problem to solve as one might expect, especially as different encoders will add different amounts of delay (you can't just cut the first X seconds of the track and hope). A single field on the MP3 header that records the encoder-delay would go a long way to addressing the problem, leaving only the decoder delay (which the decoder should be able to calculate and remove) but that field is not present in the MP3 standard.

There is at least one app on the marketplace that seems to do gapless playback, the Museek Music Player. Reviews vary wildly from excellent to horrible, so if you're interested you'll just have to try it out and see for yourself. A better solution would be to put your music in a format that doesn't introduce the delays, Ogg Vorbis or FLAC for instance. Finding a music source that supplies those formats is left as an exercise to the ready.


RE: I hope this is true...
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/7/2010 10:23:39 AM , Rating: 2
Mine has a music app built into already, works great, I can drag and drop mp3 right to my phone and start playing right away.


RE: I hope this is true...
By psenechal on 10/7/10, Rating: 0
RE: I hope this is true...
By MozeeToby on 10/7/2010 5:25:02 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, legitimately curious, not trolling:

What kinds of apps don't have equivalents on Android? And have you checked recently? When I got my Droid a year ago there were plenty of apps that I wished I could get but that has changed quite rapidly (though I still can't order a Chipotle burrito on my Droid, which would make me sad if I lived near a Chipotle).


RE: I hope this is true...
By kmmatney on 10/7/2010 6:02:44 PM , Rating: 2
The thing about the Apple store is that you just have to get an App once, and you can use it on all your devices - iPod, iPhone, and iPad.


RE: I hope this is true...
By UnWeave on 10/7/10, Rating: 0
RE: I hope this is true...
By dark matter on 10/7/2010 7:47:08 PM , Rating: 2
Widely regarded doesn't mean it's a fact. A mean, people still bought the iPhone despite all the numerous faults with it. Just because a lot of people say something, doesn't mean it actually is.


RE: I hope this is true...
By UnWeave on 10/11/2010 1:25:24 PM , Rating: 2
The level of Apple-hate on here really astounds me.

"The iPhone 4 has the best sound quality of any smartphone [currently available]" is a fact, or as close as it can be. Google it, go look on audio forums, read opinions of those who know what they are taking about and THEN rate me down if you still disagree. And I can't believe anyone took issue with my comment that, if the user already has iTunes purchases, it makes sense to get an iPhone.

I guess it's just not possible to say something good about something with an Apple logo on it and get away with it.


RE: I hope this is true...
By lantzn on 10/7/10, Rating: 0
RE: I hope this is true...
By Belard on 10/8/2010 5:31:58 AM , Rating: 2
I have an new Android... I like it.

In one of our offices, there are 4 guys with iPhones and were reading how Android was taking over the market and asked me what I thought.

My opinion... keep what they have. It works and they are happy.

I'm not much into MP3/music on my phone - so an Android was a better fit for me. There are MANY apps for the iPhone that are not out for Android... but I'd say in a year or so, that's going to change.


RE: I hope this is true...
By adiposity on 10/8/2010 1:39:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Why not get an android based phone then? They have apps for music... they even have 1 built in. I'm not seeing the problem here or the reason why you NEED an iPhone for music purposes. That is stupid honestly.


This is a pretty ignorant comment. For most people who have iPhones/iPods, music is not even the #1 use. The #1 use is is apps/games. This is also the same for Android. To tell someone to get an Android phone over an iPhone just because they both have music is...retarded.

I vastly prefer my Droid over an iPhone. But it does have annoying flaws:

1. cannot edit previous entered search (Droid2 fixes this with blur)
2. Cannot undelete e-mails in imap mode (or move between folders at all)
3. cannot use touchscreen to "bubble-focus" on text, making it hard to edit on screen text (Droid2 fixes this with blur)
4. Phone screen activates when making a bluetooth call, even when in your pocket. This leads to pocket pressing of mute, speakerphone, and numbers.
5. Bluetooth voice-dial is terrible (and only exists in 2.2). It does not give you a chance to confirm who it is dialing, but rather, just DIALS! And since the recognition is so bad...that gets really annoying.
6. I have to turn wireless on/off frequently to get connected to WIFI. I also have to reset bluetooth on occasion to get it to connect.
7. There is no built-in way of setting wallpapers that doesn't drastically down-sample your images. I am forced to use "wallpaper set and save" (a working but annoyingly designed program) to use images I designed to be exactly my screen resolution.

Now, I love my Droid, and for obvious reasons, prefer it over an iPhone. But with the exception of #6, my GF's iPhone does not have any of these problems. It's kind of embarrassing.

The question of apps is still heavily in favor of iPhone as well, but at least we are catching up on that front. Google really needs to fix some of these Android annoyances. At least motorola/htc are addressing some of them.


RE: I hope this is true...
By Gio6518 on 10/7/2010 2:21:02 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I am tired of carrying both a phone and an iPod Touch.


Every smartphone on the market is capable of being a full function media player. I was doing this on win mobile before Apple even released its first iPod...I know that some people arent aware of this.

Some people also believe that since they purchase music on iTunes its not compatible with anything else also not true. There are also programs out there that remove the DRM (copy protection) from those files.

http://mp3.about.com/od/essentialsoftware/tp/best_...


So Long...
By Sazabi19 on 10/7/2010 8:27:17 AM , Rating: 4
AT&T. I have a really odd feeling you are about to get a really big boot.




RE: So Long...
By Shatbot on 10/7/2010 8:49:46 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
A likely scenario seems a smaller candy-bar like phone, similar to the iPod Nano 5G.


This strikes me as a strange thing to say, sure it's a possibility, but likely? I grabbed my flatmates nano and tried it out. Perhaps as a way of getting into the lower end phone market, but I was thinking it might be a keyboard or something.

Imagine internet browsing on a nano, that retina display could come back to haunt you. "Pixels? I can't even read the Header"


RE: So Long...
By dubldwn on 10/7/2010 11:31:34 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah certainly from Verizon’s perspective this would be an opportunity to take some subscribers from AT&T. Especially those of us that get decent AT&T service. 4” screen, revised design, these things can be compelling, especially with phones advancing so quickly. Although the iPhone 4 would be fine, too. A tiny iPhone nano? No.

But hey, what do I know? Ask Steve. Maybe the Nano, then 6 months later, the cheaper Nano, then iPhone 4, then iPhone 5.


RE: So Long...
By yolamorse on 10/7/2010 9:46:51 AM , Rating: 2
The iPhone's potential for market dominance is being dragged down by AT&T with its well-deserved reputation for poor service. Interesting that Apple chose a service provider with over a century of experience operating as a monopoly and which still acts toward its customers as if it were one. for ppl who like watching movies on iphone i recommend thee to use aneesoft apps, all very good ones


RE: So Long...
By Targon on 10/7/2010 2:25:33 PM , Rating: 2
What do you think Verizon is then? Verizon is an even worse COMPANY, even if their service quality is better.


RE: So Long...
By lantzn on 10/7/2010 3:35:03 PM , Rating: 2
No doubt, I left Verizon some years back for treating us Mac users as second class citizens and for dumbing down their phones.


By Constable odo on 10/7/2010 3:26:40 PM , Rating: 2
The smartphone sector is a business and about making money. Who sells the most units or has the largest market share doesn't necessary make the most money. I'd rather that iOS held 20% of the market share and 60% of the financial share. Android market share will eventually hold majority market share. I'd say it was inevitable because it's a good OS and it is free for the taking. It's just that free doesn't translate into making money, so Google is losing out on lots of revenue and I have my doubts they'll ever make much money from Android. Android seems to be totally disrupting the mobile industry and it does appear to be a good thing for Android-using smartphone vendors while it's a scourge for those that don't use it. Nokia, RIM and MS are getting killed. Theoretically, Apple isn't making as much revenue as it might have if Android didn't exist.

Android is such an odd business model that appears broken. I find it rather puzzling and I don't get its purpose at all besides being an act of charity by Google to the mobile masses.




RE: The Android tide should matter little to Apple
By lantzn on 10/7/2010 3:46:34 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah the problem is the Android market share is adding up ALL phones with droid OS, not just smart phones with equivalent features to the iPhone. Now those numbers would be interesting to know.
It's like Ford taking the sales of ALL their vehicles made and comparing them with a single model Ferrari sales and saying, 'see, we sell more cars then they do'. Ours must be better.


By theapparition on 10/7/2010 3:58:41 PM , Rating: 2
It's not about being better. To continue your analogy, I doubt anyone at Ferrari or Ford would argue that Ferrari's are more performance oriented than Fords, but the same people would conclude that Ford does have more marketshare.

Only uninformed teenagers equate marketshare with better. There have been many instances where the superior product didn't "win" against the competition.

But in this case, most Android handsets are on par or better than the iPhone.


By SirKronan on 10/8/2010 4:04:55 AM , Rating: 2
I would say that several Android handsets are better than the iPhone, but not most. Droid Eris, anyone??

Ultimately it depends on your definition of "better." I call the Incredible mostly a tie with the current iPhone, and would consider the Droid X and Galaxy S "better." The Evo? Not better. Better at some things? Yes. Much worse? Yes, also. There are tradeoffs, of course, but overall, I don't think that most Android's are quite on par with at least the iPhone 4 yet. It outclasses most Android phones in web browsing speed, battery life, and camera quality. You might say, "well with Froyo, Android wins." Do most Android handsets out there have Froyo on them yet? The number is quickly growing but the answer is still a resounding NO.

A lot of older android devices that are out there in the hundreds of thousands are not even slated to get 2.2, even though they probably need the boost from the compiler much more than the latest and greatest android phones.


By EasyC on 10/8/2010 6:55:08 AM , Rating: 2
How can you claim the EVO is "much worse" than the iPhone 4? Sounds like someone is a bit biased.

The EVO > iPhone 4 in pretty much everything, except screen density and perhaps gaming. I don't people who game without a physical keypad of some sort though. Oh and did I mention it makes calls?


By Amber B on 10/12/2010 3:18:57 PM , Rating: 2
Actually as an employee of a cell phone provider, the majority of android phones do currently run froyo or will in the next month. Is apple releasing an update to make the iphone run faster? No


copy paste?
By solarrocker on 10/7/10, Rating: 0
RE: copy paste?
By invidious on 10/7/2010 8:51:42 AM , Rating: 4
bad journalism? shock value? being a tool? take your pick.


RE: copy paste?
By Chudilo on 10/7/2010 10:13:40 AM , Rating: 2
Gee I wonder who the author is ? No surprise there. This is regular quality for him. Maybe he is trying to make that into his signature sentence. Like the "And that's how the cookie crumbles". I am not claiming I could write a better article, however I do not consider myself a journalist.


RE: copy paste?
By acase on 10/7/2010 12:36:31 PM , Rating: 2
BOOM goes the dynamite!


RE: copy paste?
By kmmatney on 10/7/10, Rating: 0
Coincidence?
By vapore0n on 10/7/2010 8:49:04 AM , Rating: 2
Verizon plans to turn on LTE, ditch the unlimited data plan, and now it may get the iphone?
I see a trend here. And I dont like it.

Lets hope big red is more reasonable than big blue.




RE: Coincidence?
By SpaceRanger on 10/7/2010 9:26:01 AM , Rating: 2
I doubt it. I don't like the trend you are noticing as well. I still have an old Motorola Q9m, and I went to go change plans recently. I was FORCED to take a data plan even though I never use my phone for data purposes. Didn't like that one bit.


Oregon Trail
By RugMuch on 10/7/2010 1:38:14 PM , Rating: 2
Lets face it Mac is good for one thing and one thing only. Playing Oregon Trail.




RE: Oregon Trail
By lantzn on 10/7/2010 3:39:14 PM , Rating: 2
What?!? I can't seem to find one mention of the word Mac in this article. Bias anyone?


By Drafter on 10/8/2010 9:42:26 PM , Rating: 2
By year end and into Q1 2011, there are going to be dual-core Android Gingerbread phones on the market that will completely out-spec the current iPhone hardware. For starters, it's looking like 4G LTE data speeds, micro HDMI out, 32GB micro SDHC expandable, higher quality front/rear cameras, further improvements on already awesome Google apps, a polished and more function user interface, a robust marketplace, a dedicate rooting/romming/theming community and so on. Google thus far has done nothing but prove there platform is future proof on the big red network.

Maybe a Verizon iPhone will be on a lot of people's "interested" list, but I'm thinking you would have to be an ill-advised consumer to choose this phone over what's going to be available from the Gingerbread loaded hardware coming to a Motorola/HTC/Samsung phone near you. And then there's WinPhone7 which will eventually hit Verizon. The user interface looks like a winner...just have to see if it can mature when it's up against all this competition.

Is Apple about to get a taste of what happened to the Palm Pre?




By atlmann10 on 10/13/2010 2:48:22 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah; I got a Samsung Galaxy S Pro (Epic) on Sprint for almost 30 days, and loved it, but Sprint's service in my home is non-existent even though I am in a premier city for there Wimax network. So I returned it and turned my Verizon phone back on. Then thought about it and I knew Gingerbread as well as dual core phone processors (Samsung also just unveiled 20nm memory although not fully operational device, but shortly) and also better resolution mobile camera's were released a week ago or so.

So I will just keep my crappy old Verizon phone until they get the iPhone as well as new Android phones then upgrade.

I laugh at the people freaking that every provider is going tiered on data plans. Tiered data is cheaper, and if you download your apps through you home wireless network rather than the phone all you'll use is operational data which is far, far less.


The iPhone is a status symbol!
By Amber B on 10/12/2010 3:17:09 PM , Rating: 2
Ok, having owned both the iphone and the droid x, I can say without reservation, the only reason people ask for the iphone is because it is a status symbol. The droid os is faster and the market is much better on the droid. For the people complaining about the itunes, how bad is it that you don't have to download a thousand itunes that you paid for again on the phone, instead, you have unlimited access to hundreds of free music apps that work beautifully without having to pull out your credit card each time you download one!




RE: The iPhone is a status symbol!
By atlmann10 on 10/13/2010 2:40:10 PM , Rating: 2
No, No, No the reason the want the iPhone is because it comes with the free Gee Bee's, don't you know anything http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL7yD-0pqZg !


Nooo!!!!!
By Anoxanmore on 10/7/2010 8:29:21 AM , Rating: 2
I wanted my Ocarina App on Droid before the iPhone came to Verizon...

Damn you smule... damn you!!!!!




iDroid
By zippyzoo on 10/7/2010 1:52:48 PM , Rating: 2
I can't wait to get an iPhone and stick Droid to it.




Verizon?
By FredEx on 10/7/2010 7:39:41 PM , Rating: 2
In my area Verizon and AT&T suck. I can't understand the mindset that puts up with a crap provider just so they can say they have X phone. I dropped Alltel a few years ago since they entered in to a deal with Verizon to ride on their system in areas where they didn't have their own presence...I never could stay connected to the Verizon system. Before that for years I never had a problem. Shortly after Verizon bought Alltel. People I knew still with Alltel left in huge numbers after that, service everywhere around me went to hell. To this day I hear people still complain about Verizon. Friends on AT&T are the same, but they have their iPhones.




By sleepeeg3 on 10/8/2010 1:55:09 AM , Rating: 2
"Verizon iPhone a Done Deal" - Headline
"The Wall Street Journal claims..." - Body

The WSJ started this rumor before. Again they claim to have "inside sources."

The facts: AT&T has an exclusive iPhone licensing deal with Apple until 2012, which began in 2007.
http://www.macworld.com/article/151172/2010/05/app...
Unless they break this contract or there is some sort of means for breaking it, there will be no Verizon iPhone next year.

Just more rubbish from this blogger.




By theagentsmith on 10/8/2010 9:11:58 AM , Rating: 2
It wouldn't be a problem if all US carriers would have used GSM/HSPA technology as AT&T and T-Mobile did.
Two incompatible transmission standards are a nonsense and who lose are American customers which cannot easily switch from a carrier to another just by swapping the SIM card as in Europe (I speak from Italy).
GSM is used all over the world, most phones are quadriband so they can work flawlessly in almost every land.
The same could be said about NTSC television standard and 110V AC current, but thanks to new HD standards and switching PSUs these are becoming less a problem. Plus I see many people will have also 240V AC to charge new EV cars faster.




CDMA 3G data limitations
By Chaser on 10/8/2010 1:44:09 PM , Rating: 2
I'm no CDMA/GSM 3G expert but for me there's a lot to consider here. As a former 3G, Droid and now Sprint EVO owner (on both Verizon and Sprint) I must admit that being able to do data and voice simultaneously over GSM is significant. When I owned my 3G there were numerous times when I'd look something up while on a call or have navigation going while talking.

It seems to me that until Verizon gets their LTE service deployed that's kind of a let down compared to the GSM iPhone -and really every CDMA app phone over 3G.

So its like a catch 22. Crap AT&T 3G network but can do both or vastly better Verizon 3G but can't do both at the same time. I think I'll wait until next year.

And the EVO's 4G is good but still very limited nationally not to mention 4G mode changes your standby time to about 3 hours if you are lucky.




verizon iPhone?
By Jane999 on 10/8/2010 10:46:58 PM , Rating: 2
The rumor-mill is running over time in predicitng Verizon iPhone possibility. Since its release in 2007, the iPhone has only been available in models compatible with UMTS-GSM networks. I will say now what I have always said: I will believe it when I see the phones on the shelf in a Verizon store
Though according to TechCrunch, Apple is buying millions of CDMA chipsets for a Verizon iPhone launch. Daring Fireball’s John Gruber penned an interesting piece and says that the CDMA iPhone is just one step below “design verification test,” He also notes that now is about the time that Apple will have to begin committing to full-scale production for such a project if it is planning a January launch as rumored, and consequently leaks are shows that a CDMA iPhone may finally be becoming a reality.
ifunia/news/apple-to-offer-verizon-cdma-iphone-in -january-2011/




not so fast, folks
By wolfwannabe on 10/7/10, Rating: -1
"Let's face it, we're not changing the world. We're building a product that helps people buy more crap - and watch porn." -- Seagate CEO Bill Watkins














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki