6 ms·
I saw that on their page - I wasn't as offended about the pricing differential as the post, but I was groaning during the whole verizon pitch. I wonder how much
by mangoman 6y ago
I saw that on their page - I wasn't as offended about the pricing differential as the post, but I was groaning during the whole verizon pitch. I wonder how much verizon paid for that placement. It felt extremely out of place and very cringy IMO.
- ralph84 6y agoAt least they didn't force a U2 album on you this time
- vineyardmike 6y agoListening to U2 Album >>> Listening to Verizon talk about 5g
- buzzerbetrayed 6y agoNot when listening to Verizon talk only lasts for 5 minutes, but the U2 Album is stuck in your library for years.
- tomjakubowski 6y agoThe U2 album has some evil way of popping up and finding its way onto my Apple devices (and then auto playing) no matter how I try and remove it from my library. It is my albatross.
- noizejoy 6y agoInteresting - but that hasn’t been my experience. I removed that U2 album shortly after it was included in my library, and it hasn’t shown up on any of my devices since then.
- alteria 6y agoThe whole presentation I was wondering how much Verizon paid as well. Between the pricing reveal and the conflation of their 28GHz deployment as a standard 5G experience, it seemed like it was the iPhone sponsored by Verizon.
- WWLink 6y agoI wonder if that means we'll start seeing iPhones with carrier branding.
- cglong 6y agoLike the whole AT&T "5Ge" thing that Apple gave in on? :(
- orev 6y agoThe carrier contracts likely don’t give any leeway on that. They just provide the image and Apple has to show it.
- kindatrue 6y agoContracts never stopped Steve Jobs from doing what he thought was right for his customers.
- Schiendelman 6y agoThey most certainly did - like having Maps go out half-baked because they couldn't get a contract for what they wanted.
- geerlingguy 6y agoI know he was sad to see his TV/Movies/VOD plans fall through and eventually the 'meh' Apple TV concept was born.
- roamerz 6y agoI agree with that. Apple should not appear to be in bed with any particular vendor. They have done a good job in the past maintaining their independence and it should continue. It’s just a chip off their armor but they are additive.
- rgovostes 6y agoThe first four models of iPhone were exclusive to Cingular/AT&T in the US until 2011. The first unlocked devices were sold in 2012.
- lotsofpulp 6y agoThat was back when they were trying to break the mobile networks hold on phone software. There’s no reason for Apple to sell out now, except for being a sell out. It’s a shameful look for Apple.
- Bud 6y agoNormally I'd agree, but in this case there is one possible justification: Verizon is the only carrier supporting the highest-speed variant of 5G, at least for now and the foreseeable future. And Apple wanted to highlight those speeds.
- whoisburbansky 6y agoAgreed that I think this is pretty much the only reason why, and it makes sense for them to do that; what's the point of selling 5G on a flagship phone if you can't even get past 4G speeds on other networks' "5G"?
- vineyardmike 6y agoPick your apple-sheep/skeptic variety: Realistically, its a pandemic where they already delayed production and apple probably didn't have anything else big finished to present besides typical camera upgrades and a new body. Or apple-cynically, apple stopped innovating and the iphone is now just playing catch up to android blah blah blah.
- floatingatoll 6y agoI remember the iPhone launching as an AT&T exclusive or something back in the day. Did whichever US carrier it was get the same duration of exclusive placement?
- 2bitencryption 6y agoAh, Cingular wireless, gobbled up by AT&T after the iPhone announcement.
- acheron 6y agoThat’s not what happened. Cingular was jointly owned by SBC and BellSouth. The two companies merged, and SBC also bought out AT&T and rebranded themselves. Once Cingular was solely owned by a company named AT&T, it was rebranded to match the parent company.
- DaiPlusPlus 6y agoI understand that was more because AT&T/Cingular was the only carrier willing to allow a phone that they literally weren’t allowed to see until launch day onto their network. Didn’t the other carriers baulk at Apple and tell them to pound-sand for thinking they’d let them use their network without any oversight of their phone’s software system or similar?
- FireBeyond 6y agoPlus Visual Voicemail, if I recall.
- orev 6y agoYes. At the time, Verizon was doing things like completely blocking Bluetooth for anything other than headsets, because they wanted to force people to use their mobile data to get pictures off their phones.
- rblatz 6y agoAt the time Verizon also mandated every phone on their network had a whip style antenna. The networks had a stranglehold on the handset market, and it took the iPhone to break it.
- JumpCrisscross 6y ago> I wonder how much verizon paid for that placement My guess is either buildout commitments or prioritisation for iPhones.
- kindatrue 6y agoSteve Jobs was rolling in his grave
- tchalla 6y agoAT&T also has the same "Special Offer" as Verizon for iPhone 12 and iPhone 12 Mini. No difference for Pro and Pro Max models. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24780791 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24780791
- PascLeRasc 6y agoI had forgotten how much I hated Android manufacturers making "Verizon versions" with the carrier name on the forehead and back case. That part of the event felt really cheap.