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

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.


“Then they pop up and say ‘Hello, surprise! Give us your money or we will shut you down!' Screw them. Seriously, screw them. You can quote me on that.” -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng referencing patent trolls














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