2 ms·

The Verizon iPhone story is both my favourite and most hated tech story. It's my most hated because I'm sick of hearing it. Every month it pops up. It's my fa

by cletus 16y ago

The Verizon iPhone story is both my favourite and most hated tech story. It's my most hated because I'm sick of hearing it. Every month it pops up. It's my favourite because it's a classic example of rumourmongering becoming "news" perpetuated by people who don't really understand Apple at all. See, it doesn't matter what % increase in revenue or market size Verizon would deliver to Apple, there is still one huge problem: CDMA technically doesn't support simultaneous voice and data. There is no getting around that (beyond the inevitable transition to LTE). Anyone who thinks that Apple will release a CDMA version of the phone and then try to explain to consumers that version A can do this but version B can't is, well, off their rocker. A CDMA iPad however is a completely different matter, but I digress... Just like Apple could make more money--at least in the short term--by releasing a new phone more often than every year. The fact is though that people don't like the instant obsolescence of tech products. You buy an iPhone 4 today and you know it's as good as an iPhone will get til mid next year. Compare that to the anarchic shotgun world of Android handsets. Apple is driven by product and user experience not market research ("market data" isn't quite the same thing).

fragmede 16y ago
> CDMA technically doesn't support simultaneous voice and data. So? Push voice as packets over data then. Not trivial but then Apple has an army of engineers for that.
kenjackson 16y ago
"Anyone who thinks that Apple will release a CDMA version of the phone and then try to explain to consumers that version A can do this but version B can't is, well, off their rocker." Apple does this with every product they ship. And in some cases they have even more extreme cases. For example, upgrade to the latest iPod Nano and whoa, no camera. So wait, if I get the old version I get a camera and now I completely lose it. But if I go up to the iPod touch I get the camera, but the classic line never had one? I seriously doubt Apple is not moving to CDMA because of the issue you site. If anything its because CDMAs life is a relatively short one now. Further, my point wasn't that they go to CDMA, it was that I suspect that they have analyzed that market up and down. I bet they've gotten data from ATT to know what percent of their users use voice/data concurrently. I think Apple knows more about the market then they let on.
- extension 16y ago
  For example, upgrade to the latest iPod Nano and whoa, no camera. So wait, if I get the old version I get a camera and now I completely lose it. But if I go up to the iPod touch I get the camera, but the classic line never had one? But this is a deliberate choice by Apple, not one forced on them by technology. And users understand that this year's iPod Nano is a different product from last year's, with different features. iPhone CDMA vs iPhone GSM is gibberish to them.
  - kenjackson 16y ago
    I'm not sure if customers care about the distinction of confusion caused at the initiative of Apple versus that caused at the initiative of the "technology". Regarding GSM vs CDMA specifically, there is hardly been any type of outcry regarding voice/data on CDMA, even amongst people who move from GSM to CDMA. In fact, I've never herad anyone complain about it. The only real complaint I've heard about CDMA is that you can't use it anywere, except the USA and like three other countries. But no one says, "I can't use voice and data on my phone". In any case I think we're bickering about a meta issue. I really couldn't care less if Apple goes to Verizon or not. I'm not on Vertizon and I don't want an iPhone. What I do believe is that Apple has a very good understanding of what it means to go to Verizon.
    - cletus 16y ago
      It doesn't come up because the US mobile phone market is almost completely balkanized: how many handsets are released in GSM and CDMA versions (or even that do both GSM and CDMA)? Hardly any. Buying a cell phone in the US basically means picking a carrier and then picking a handset. In almost every other country--and certainly those that are GSM based (including all of Europe and Australia)--have handsets that are interchangeable on networks. Why there aren't cross-technology phones (barring some minor exceptions) is exactly why Apple won't do it either. Particularly because CDMA is a dying technology anyway (at least in the developed world).
      - kenjackson 16y ago

by cletus 16y ago

fragmede 16y ago

> CDMA technically doesn't support simultaneous voice and data. So? Push voice as packets over data then. Not trivial but then Apple has an army of engineers for that.

kenjackson 16y ago

"Anyone who thinks that Apple will release a CDMA version of the phone and then try to explain to consumers that version A can do this but version B can't is, well, off their rocker." Apple does this with every product they ship. And in some cases they have even more extreme cases. For example, upgrade to the latest iPod Nano and whoa, no camera. So wait, if I get the old version I get a camera and now I completely lose it. But if I go up to the iPod touch I get the camera, but the classic line never had one? I seriously doubt Apple is not moving to CDMA because of the issue you site. If anything its because CDMAs life is a relatively short one now. Further, my point wasn't that they go to CDMA, it was that I suspect that they have analyzed that market up and down. I bet they've gotten data from ATT to know what percent of their users use voice/data concurrently. I think Apple knows more about the market then they let on.

extension 16y ago
For example, upgrade to the latest iPod Nano and whoa, no camera. So wait, if I get the old version I get a camera and now I completely lose it. But if I go up to the iPod touch I get the camera, but the classic line never had one? But this is a deliberate choice by Apple, not one forced on them by technology. And users understand that this year's iPod Nano is a different product from last year's, with different features. iPhone CDMA vs iPhone GSM is gibberish to them.
- kenjackson 16y ago
  I'm not sure if customers care about the distinction of confusion caused at the initiative of Apple versus that caused at the initiative of the "technology". Regarding GSM vs CDMA specifically, there is hardly been any type of outcry regarding voice/data on CDMA, even amongst people who move from GSM to CDMA. In fact, I've never herad anyone complain about it. The only real complaint I've heard about CDMA is that you can't use it anywere, except the USA and like three other countries. But no one says, "I can't use voice and data on my phone". In any case I think we're bickering about a meta issue. I really couldn't care less if Apple goes to Verizon or not. I'm not on Vertizon and I don't want an iPhone. What I do believe is that Apple has a very good understanding of what it means to go to Verizon.
  - cletus 16y ago
    It doesn't come up because the US mobile phone market is almost completely balkanized: how many handsets are released in GSM and CDMA versions (or even that do both GSM and CDMA)? Hardly any. Buying a cell phone in the US basically means picking a carrier and then picking a handset. In almost every other country--and certainly those that are GSM based (including all of Europe and Australia)--have handsets that are interchangeable on networks. Why there aren't cross-technology phones (barring some minor exceptions) is exactly why Apple won't do it either. Particularly because CDMA is a dying technology anyway (at least in the developed world).
    - kenjackson 16y ago