Verizon, 4G and iPhones

cgriffin21 writes "Verizon plans to launch its 4G LTE network in 38 major U.S. metropolitan areas by year's end, in an ambitious rollout that will also drape high-speed mobile broadband coverage over 60 airports." Not coincidentally, everyone and their brother is talking about iPhone on Verizon in 2011, and what that means to Android.

Comments

It means nothing to Android.

[Kenja]

If I wanted an iPhone, I would have gotten one. But since I wanted to write my own apps, Android was a much more attractive platform.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody cares if the iPhone comes to Verizon anymore. Maybe this would've been a big deal a year ago, but Verizon already has a nice stable of devices which are superior now.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[Anonymous Coward]

iPhone does let you write your own apps, fandroid.

Heck, you can even jailbreak it and do what you want.

Get the facts, not the propaganda.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[chemicaldave]

If I wanted an iPhone, I would have gotten one. But since I wanted to write my own apps, Android was a much more attractive platform.

Rather, it means nothing to Android users who are also programmers/developers. Perhaps you haven't talked to a mobile-tech layperson in a while. Many customers are dying for an iPhone to become available on their networks. There's still a large chunk of users who would rather wait than switch carriers.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[SailorSpork]

And I'm sure you are not representative of the average iPhone user, who is willing to pay $0.99 for an application that makes farting noises at the press of a big button or has the clothes fall of the pretty lady when the phone is tipped sideways. This would eat substantially into Android's share if iPhone was offered in other networks.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[kehren77]

So it means nothing to Android for you. For those of us who merely can't stand AT&T's crappy network, it means a lot.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[mlts]

The iPhone will not be coming to Verizon anytime soon, no matter how many people post wishful texts onto Macrumors about it:

1: Even with LTE out, it will be years before previous protocols (GSM, CDMA) will be made completely redundant. Even now, if I go to rural areas, phones fall back to EDGE or even GPRS. Until LTE completely replaces GSM and CDMA, you won't find an iPhone on Verizon. Otherwise it would have to fall back to something, and that would be CDMA.

2: Apple is not going to put in CDMA in their devices. It is an obsolete "3G" protocol, and makes about as much sense as putting in AMPS back in phones. If Apple did CDMA, it wouldn't be in the US. The US's CDMA protocol is deliberately crippled and incompatible with the "real" standards. Other countries with CDMA like China use R/UIM cards for their devices (similar functionality as SIM cards.) It will be understandable for Apple to do CDMA for these markets, but not in the US where they are thriving with GSM based equipment.

3: Why would Apple bother with Verizon? T-Mobile would make far more sense because it would take another band for T-Mo's 3G, but it wouldn't take a completely new antenna. Also, Verizon showed Apple the door in the past. I doubt they will get a second chance.

So because it would require Apple to add another antenna into an already packed device, CDMA is not going to happen, unless Apple is gunning for a market where CDMA is a requirement.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[Anonymous Coward]

Is your name Android? You've stated that it means nothing to Android, but I think you meant it means nothing to you. Everyone in my family is on Verizon and they have Android phones because they wanted something similar to an iPhone but they didn't want to switch to AT&T. I bet you at least 50% of verizon Android users would have an iPhone if they could get one. You have to understand that most people aren't technical like us.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[Anonymous Coward]

It is an obsolete "3G" protocol

Kind of like how the original iPhone only worked on that obsolete 2G protocol.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[Andy Dodd]

I don't think it means anything for Android. In fact, it could be good for Android.

It seems like AT&T is doing everything they can to milk the iPhone exclusivity and not piss off Apple enough to start selling iPhones through other carriers. Just look at AT&T's piss poor rollout of Android-based handsets - One of the linked articles links to another article about three new Android phones coming out for AT&T from Motorola. Note that every single one of these "new" phones lags at least 4-6 months behind Verizon's Android offerings, and in terms of hardware specs, behind even some of AT&T's Windows Mobile offerings. (HVGA or QVGA screen? Are you kidding me? My Tilt 2 came out last October and has a full WVGA screen. Also note that nearly everyone including Motorola is moving to 1 GHz+ Snapdragon-based phones except these three low-speed offerings for AT&T.)

I'm beginning to be tempted to return to Verizon. I ditched Verizon for AT&T 3-4 years ago because I was sick of Verizon phones coming out 6-9 months after Sprint with numerous features removed (such as the Treo 650's lack of Bluetooth DUN on VZW). Now, a few years later, VZW has done a complete about-face (at least with Android) which completely shocked me, and AT&T is now doing the same crap Verizon did a few years ago in the name of milking the iPhone for all it's worth.

Once AT&T loses iPhone exclusivity, they're going to have to shape up with their Android offerings, otherwise Verizon will have both the iPhone and superior Android offerings for those that don't want an iPhone. Meanwhile, it is getting to the point where all AT&T has is the iPhone.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[SETIGuy]

iPhone does let you write your own apps, fandroid.

And if you pay $99, Steve Jobs will even let you run your apps on your own phone.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[Anonymous Coward]

If I wanted an iPhone, I would have gotten one. But since I wanted to write my own apps, Android was a much more attractive platform.

i have an iPhone, and i write my own apps! maybe you should learn objective C, Then you could write apps for the iPhone too!

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[Andy Dodd]

While the CPU in the iPhone is an "Apple spec" CPU, most likely the radio chipset is from a third party.

Most such third parties offer roughly equivalent GSM and CDMA chipsets (In fact, probably 50%+ of the GSM/UMTS smartphone market is powered by Qualcomm chipsets, despite Qualcomm being the creator and backer of cdmaOne/CDMA2000), making it not too difficult to make a CDMA version of a phone and a GSM version.

Also, you show a fundamental lack of understanding of RF and communications engineering. New band = new antenna. Same bands but different protocol = no new antenna, just a different baseband processor. Therefore, adding T-Mobile's additional band is the least likely route for Apple to go.

Changing the iPhone from GSM/UMTS to CDMA2000 (note: UMTS uses a CDMA modulation scheme, one of the reasons Qualcomm is involved in that market despite them backing a competing protocol/air interface suite - they're good at making CDMA chipsets whether it is the UMTS protocol/air interface suite or CDMA2000) most likely entails:
1) Switch out the baseband processor chip. Note that as I said before, nearly all UMTS chipset providers also provide CDMA2000 chipsets that are very similar and require little engineering
2) Remove the now unneeded SIM slot (what was that about a packed device?)

That's about it

Note: Right now, Apple gets their radio chipsets from Infineon, but there is a lot of evidence pointing to them moving to Qualcomm for the 5th gen iPhone, with the ability to produce a CDMA version being one of a number of reasons, Infineon getting purchased by Intel being a bigger reason - see http://touchreviews.net/iphone-5-qualcomm-radio-chip/ - I don't know about Infineon chipsets, but it is VERY easy to make both a CDMA2000 and GSM/UMTS version of a phone if you use Qualcomm for your radio chipsets, which is why a large portion of HTC's GSM product line have near identical CDMA equivalents.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[tibman]

I'm dying for a good android phone that doesn't cost so much.. all the used ones on ebay are pricy. I've been hunting for a good android phone every other day for two weeks now. I consider myself a tech-person but i don't have gobs of money to spend on toys.. i usually get them used or just build them. Unfortunately hand-held things are horrible things to try building yourself.. very clunky.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[mlts]

When the original iPhone came out, 3G was not widespread. It was in some metropolitan areas, just like Clear is now, but it was not available outside of large cities. Because of this and the lag time between getting the phone designed versus hitting the market, Apple apparently decided to make it EDGE only.

Apple is not going to put out an iPhone next year that will be LTE capable for a similar reason. As of now, there is only one LTE network up and running in one town, and only one dumbphone can take advantage of it. It is going to take at least two years for LTE to be widespread. Apple will not release a device until LTE is commonplace.

So, expect the next year's iPhone not to be revolutionary, but evolutionary; like how the 3GS is over the 3G. It will sport an antenna redesign. Most likely it will get a capacity bump to 64GB, and perhaps a slight boost in the MHz department.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[jandrese]

Yes, why would Apple care about the largest mobile phone provider in the US? It's such a mystery.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[mlts]

Apple won't be dropping the MicroSIM tray anytime soon. Instead, if they are aiming to have a device for China, they will need it to support R/UIM cards, if they are choosing to go that route.

Yes, it is possible for Apple do do a baseband redesign. However will it be profitable for them to switch to a protocol that won't gain them anything in bandwidth [1]? Perhaps in other markets, but not the US.

[1]: Since CDMA2000 1X Advanced isn't here yet, moving to current CDMA is going to cause a loss of features -- namely the ability to talk and use IP functions at the same time.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[AmigaMMC]

I got an iPhone 4 last July and deeply regret it for many reasons. I wish I had switched to a Droid.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[Anonymous Coward]

as a non-programmer/developer (but rather, someone in the arts field), I much prefer Android for the simple fact that I'm tied-in to Google Apps for my business. And since I'm the only employee, their infrastructure is awesome (free!). I can sync email, calendar, etc etc

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[Anonymous Coward]

Careful. Your iObsession is leaking.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[Anonymous Coward]

And the foxconn and other sources confirming a Qualcomm CDMA radio based iPhone are what, completely baseless?

Not that I'm convinced that a CDMA iPhone would be available on Verizon, but that's because of Verizon's CEO's comments on 9/23 about the iPhone; not because of some deluded belief that Apple wouldn't bother. As you point out, they could sell a CDMA based iPhone in China quite easily.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[Drathus]

Can write and install apps on your iPhone without having to pay Apple any money for that right?

Android's SDK is free, and you only have to pay a one time $25 fee if you want to publish the app in the market. However, unlike the iPhone/iPad you don't HAVE to publish in the market as you can link to the install files and people can install them if they chose.

As far as I know not only do you need an Apple computer to be able to write iPhone/iPad apps, but you have to pay $100 /per year/ for the right to do so.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[KingMotley]

I got an iPhone 4 last July too, and I love it. Androids UI is slow and clunky, unrefined. It's also missing the apps I use on a daily basis (Netflix, Comcast, a couple others). It doesn't auto hyperlink phone numbers in the browser either, how ancient.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[rthille]

I have no idea what the toolset is like for Android. Not even sure how it is for the iPhone, but given its heritage, and conversations I've had with iPhone developers, I'd imagine that developing iPhone apps would be much more enjoyable than developing apps for Android.

Now, as for getting paid and being able to release whatever sort of app you want, Android totally wins there.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple is not going to put out an iPhone next year that will be LTE capable for a similar reason. As of now, there is only one LTE network up and running in one town, and only one dumbphone can take advantage of it. It is going to take at least two years for LTE to be widespread. Apple will not release a device until LTE is commonplace.

LTE will be commonplace next year. Verizon is planning to cover 100M pops before the end of next year.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[mcgrew]

I wouldn't mind having an iPhone. But there are two problems with it:

1. It costs too much
2. AT&T

Of course, Verizon isn't much better (or wasn't the last time I used them).

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why not a Gobi chip?

Make the next iPhone a true world phone. Just not sure if the next Gobi will have WiMax / LTE frequencies in it.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[mjwx]

While the CPU in the iPhone is an "Apple spec" CPU, most likely the radio chipset is from a third party.

The CPU in the Iphone is the Samsung developed and made Hummingbird core (bog standard ARMv7). The radio chipset is made by Infeneon (prolific maker of TPM's).

The Hummingbird core is also used in a Qualcomm SnapDragon SOC for the Samsung Galaxy S (or whatever the US networks have labelled it).

Whilst we're on it, the "Retina" display was developed and produced by LG Electronics. NAND Flash is Samsung.

I dont buy into Apple rumours, they've been saying that there will be a Verizon Iphone every year since it was released, the last one was meant to be 4G but wasn't. So I'll make this prediction, the Iphone 5 will be on the same carriers, with minor hardware improvements just like the Iphone 3G, 3GS and 4.

Also it means nothing to Android, Android is looking to outpace Iphone in corporate uptake by Q1 next year and that's where Android will win, so that means the fight is vs RIM not Apple.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[pslam]

The CPU in the Iphone is the Samsung developed and made Hummingbird core (bog standard ARMv7).

If you think a smartphone SoC is defined just by the spec of the application core(s), which are a tiny fraction of its size, you've got it wrong. Hint: two SoCs with identical application cores can be vastly different in performance due to all that other stuff in the chip.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[mjwx]

If you think a smartphone SoC is defined just by the spec of the application core(s),

The OP asked for the make of the CPU, in this context the CPU is the Hummingbird core. A SOC contains far more then a CPU thank you.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[pslam]

The OP asked for the make of the CPU, in this context the CPU is the Hummingbird core. A SOC contains far more then a CPU thank you.

The OP asked no such thing. In what context is the CPU thought of as just the application core?

You might as well call a Xilinx Virtex 5 FPGA a PowerPC 440, because it has one in it. That would of course ignore the gigantic array of parallel multipliers and programmable logic it has. Calling the A4 a Samsung Hummingbird is disingenuous.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

I don't get the gripe about the price. Even unsubsidised, it's pretty good value. The 16GB 3G iPhone I've got was about the same price as the Treo 600 I used before it.

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[mcgrew]

It probably is a good value, but I can't see paying that much for any device I'm likely to lose or break in the next year. Hell, I've only had my Motorola i776 about a year and it's already due for retirement (I may get an android, but they may well be too expensive too).

I paid about $300 for a netbook with a dual core processor, 1 gig of Ram and a 180 gig hard drive, web cam and microphone. It's about the size fo a hardbound book (actually a little smaller). What will an iPhone do that it won't, besides make phone calls? Why should a phone cost more than a computer?

Re:It means nothing to Android.

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

What will an iPhone do that it won't, besides make phone calls?

Fit in most pockets?

Question

[KillaGouge]

the ultimate question I have, is will Verizon make you use V-cast apps? Will they force you to use Bing? Will they even allow you to use the App Store?

Re:Question

[Pojut]

From what I understand, V-Cast has been a major point of contention between Apple and Verizon. At least, that's what the rumors are saying...

That being said, I don't know why Verizon pushes their V-Cast services so hard...out of all the people I know that use Verizon, I don't know anyone that actually uses anything V-Cast has to offer.

Re:Question

[blueg3]

Well, they don't make you use V-cast or Bing on Android phones, and they let you use the Marketplace.

At least, this is true for 2 Verizon Android phones, which is how many I have experience with.

Re:Question

[kilfarsnar]

Hah? I have a Droid X on Verizon and I can use Google to search, download from the Android Market, and haven't touched V-Cast.

Re:Question

[rrossman2]

As others have said.. seriously? Have you not played with an Android (or any other smart phone on Verizon?) You can download and install your own apps with or without a store.. Windows Mobile, Android, BB OS, etc.

I don't know where you read that, or got that idea, but no. Samsung Fantastic: Market works fine. Can install apps from websites fine. Etc Etc.

My BlackBerry: Used the BB App World just fine. Installed from Websites just fine, etc, etc.

My old Win Mobile phone: No app store, could install from websites just fine, etc.

Re:Question

[mlts]

I have a Droid X on my desk right by my iPhone. I have yet to use V-cast or Bing, and I have used the Google App Store to purchase a number of apps to make life easier. Android and Verizon have their faults, but access to the App Store isn't one of them.

Re:Question

[Anonymous Coward]

Bing will be replaceable with standard Google search on Froyo. Supposedly, it was never that Verizon blocked Google search, it's that Google never put their widget and search provider on the market because they couldn't package it as a single APK. Apparently, this is fixed in Froyo.

Far as I know, the rest of the Verizon is in, VCast and all.

4G LTE might be the bees knees, but knowing Verizon, they'll charge for 4g access at all then _extra_ for tethering, and probably even more to uncap it and more to unthrottle it, etc. If so, Sprint is going to look a lot nicer. I get a lot of bars with vzw where I am, but damn if they're not the most annoyingly nickel-and-dime outfit.

Re:Question

[tlhIngan]

As others have said.. seriously? Have you not played with an Android (or any other smart phone on Verizon?) You can download and install your own apps with or without a store.. Windows Mobile, Android, BB OS, etc.

Carriers are just wising up to the fact that Motorola, HTC, etc., are really still their bitches when it comes to Android phones. As they figure out more and more of Android, the restrictions will be coming down the pipeline. This can be seen as each carrier pre-loads each Android phone with tons of crapware.

And AT&T's already restricting the ability to sideload apps. Sure you can use ADB and other commands to push apps still (they just removed the checkbox), but it's getting to the point where the phones are not only getting more and more locked down, but carriers are realizing that they don't have to be so open anymore.

Hell, didn't Verizon announce their own Android app store? Who's gonna bet that the Google Marketplace app suddenly disappears from Verizon phones?

I suppose it's pretty sad that it's only Apple to smack down the carriers - you can be sure AT&T among others wish that Apple would preload a bunch of their apps onto their phones already instead of having to fight it out in the App Store or include a brochure with every sale to say how to improve your AT&T iPhone experience by downloading their apps.

Re:Question

[Captain Spam]

That being said, I don't know why Verizon pushes their V-Cast services so hard...out of all the people I know that use Verizon, I don't know anyone that actually uses anything V-Cast has to offer.

Our logic states that because nobody uses V-Cast and hasn't used it in the X years it's been around, perhaps they should realize their failure, stop pushing it, and try something else, as it's clear nobody wants it.

Their logic states that because nobody uses V-Cast and hasn't used it in the X years it's been around, it obviously has not been pushed hard enough, as it's clear these customers are misbehaving by not throwing their money at it.

Re:Question

[kehren77]

Agreed. I can't believe that enough people use V-Cast for Verizon to make back the licensing fees they must be paying to have the content.

Re:Question

[Anonymous Coward]

Vcast is marketed to average consumers of multi-media handsets. I don't believe many tech enthusiasts are buying from Vcast. For that matter it would surprise me if the early adopter tech enthusiasts use iTunes either, as it seems a little un-negotiable and bossy to use. I don't care for iTunes myself, but I can see the value and appeal for folks that aren't genuinely interested in flexible software.
I cant imagine Verizon has any say about people connecting their iDevices to iTunes. Naturally a VZW iPhone will have full compatibility with all things Apple. Isn't that the point? To get the Apple ecosystem on another US carrier? If VZW had the desire to sell an iPhone that doesn't easily work with iTunes they would be crazy. Oh wait. They did, and its called Android. When iPhone becomes available on VZW nothing will have changed except the brand faithful will feel less like victims.

Re:Question

[Anonymous Coward]

He's both retarded and believes everything he reads on teh interwebz, you inconsiderate clod!

Re:Question

[PipsqueakOnAP133]

No. Absolutely not.

Re:Question

[Anonymous Coward]

From what i've read LTE is supposed to be able to fall back to the older "GSM" standards, so theoretically yes! What frequencies VZ is allotted may not allow for that though, since TMO and ATT already have all the standard USA GSM frequencies called for. however if it does work you will NOT get 4G speeds on your old phone!!!

if you really want something speedy NOW, id say go to TMO, their HSPA+ network has a theoretical 22mbps NOW, i have seen real world speed tests hitting 10mbps, and some point in the future they are going to upgrade the HSPA+ to 44mbps. You can have this NOW, while Verizon stumbles though working out the quirks and limited coverage on their LTE network and the inevitable limited selection of LTE handsets for the 1st year or so. By then TMO will likely be rolling out LTE themselves. even if you dont get one of the few HSPA+ capable phones on TMO, the wide selection of HSPA phones will still use the HSPA+ network at lower speeds. you can expect real world speeds of around 5mbps. Which is about the speed you get on sprint/clearwire that they are trying to pawn off as a 4g network! lmao

Re:Question

[numbski]

I dunno - if I were able to watch NFL games off my handset without having to pay for Sunday Ticket's "To-Go" service, I might do it.

Too bad I like T-Mobile better than AT&T and Verizon both, and I have Clearwire's iSpot ($25/mo for WiMax) - and the combination of those is *still* cheaper than AT&T, likely to also be true of Verizon.

There's a reason AT&T adamantly refuses to carrier unlock iPhones. Meanwhile, back at the ranch - I wonder how open Sprint will be to jailbroken/carrier unlocked CDMA iPhones? Think they'll be as welcoming as T-Mobile is to GSM iPhones?

Re:Question

[__aaelyr464]

Stop drinking the anti-VZ kool aid. On four different Android phones on Verizon, nothing you said holds true (Droid, Incredible, Droid X, Droid 2). Yes, there are APPS that Verizon makes exclusive, such as VZ Navigator or the account manager...but really? No one is forced to use Bing or anything.

Not allowing someone to use the iTunes apps store with an iPhone is synonymous to selling an Android phone without the battery. I also believe Apple would have a slight problem with Verizon trying to do such a thing.

Re:Question

[Pojut]

Given that Sprint is still trying to recover from their PR disaster a few years ago, I'd think they would do whatever it takes to get people signing contracts with them.

Re:Question

[ceoyoyo]

If Verizon wants the iPhone they will. There's no way Apple will allow someone to shut out their app store, or even offer a carrier-specific alternative, and a carrier needs Apple to do that.

With Android, on the other hand, the carriers can do whatever they want. So far they've gone along with Google, mostly.

Re:Question

[lowrydr310]

That's precisely why I hate Verizon. I don't like any carrier-specific services; they're typically not nearly as good and don't have the same support that third party products/services do. It's been a while since I looked at Verizon, but the last time I checked they wanted to charge extra to use their navigation. At the time, Sprint had a pretty sweet deal on a Blackberry curve that had absolutely no restrictions; I could load my own ringtones, share files, MMS, use Google Maps to nagivate, etc.

Now having said that, I know that most other carriers do the same thing. Sprint pushes their garbage pretty hard, especially on their Android phones (NFL, Nascar, SprintTV). Fortunately there are many modified ROMs available that cut the junk; another added benefit is that most of those ROMs have more support than the official ROMs from Sprint.

Re:Question

[lowrydr310]

It's seriously nice to be able to install my own APKs. The one gripe I have with Android is that there's no built-in file explorer or terminal emulator. I know there are plenty of good third party explorers or terminals, however I wonder why Android didn't just take the extra step and bundle one of their own.

Re:Question

[SETIGuy]

the ultimate question I have, is will Verizon make you use V-cast apps? Will they force you to use Bing? Will they even allow you to use the App Store?

Verizon doesn't make Android phones use V-cast apps (although they can be installed if the user wants them). Verizon doesn't force Android phones to use Bing. Most, if not all, default to Google. Verizon Android phones use the Marketplace for apps and Amazon.com for music, so I assume a Verizon iPhone would use the App Store for apps and iTunes for music.

Re:Question

[SETIGuy]

Hell, didn't Verizon announce their own Android app store?

Yes, it appears as a separate tab in the Marketplace app. You can go there to install all the Vcast apps.

Who's gonna bet that the Google Marketplace app suddenly disappears from Verizon phones?

If it does, you go to a Google website and download the Marketplace app. If Verizon prevents that, then we all go find a different carrier when our contracts are up. If the Verizon app store is as closed and controlled as the Apple AppStore, I would leave.

Re:Question

[lightversusdark]

Verizon Android phones that do not have "Droid" branding are locked to Bing search.
Switching from Bing to e.g. Google is not possible without a ROM flash.
It is possible to install all the Google apps for voice search and maps, but Bing is cooked into the ROM as the default.

It's the result of a complicated mess of agreements between Google, LucasFilm, Microsoft, Motorola and Verizon.
I have heard that Verizon got $500m up front for the Bing deal, and/or $2 per handset shipped.

You might note that Microsoft are suing only Motorola over Android patents, not HTC or even Google.
The official line is that all the other companies are licensing patents from Microsoft, but Motorola are not.
The fact is, Motorola is the only Android handset manufacturer who has not announced a Windows Phone 7 device.
Food for thought.

Re:Question

[Confusador]

I can't speak to your experience, of course, but it looks like VZ is taking a new stance on their more recent offerings. Case in point, the Fascinate.

...It's not like you can change it, either. There's no way to change the in-browser search engine - it's stuck being Bing....
Similar to the Droid 2, you also cannot remove the Verizon bookmarks. Trying to do so gets you a nice error message.

The missing piece

[Midnight Thunder]

In many way this is what will allow Verizon to get the iPhone. When the iPhone 5 comes out it is bound to support 4G, so even if Verizon is not an official partner, people will be able to use the phone there.

I have never been convinced that Apple would want to add CDMA capability, just for Verizon, because of the extra licensing costs and the fact Verizon had already announced that it was putting in place a 4G GSM network. I may still be wrong about Qualcomm-CDMA support being added (CDMA is part of GSM in the form of wave encoding, not protocol), though we will see.

Re:The missing piece

[Pojut]

If nothing else, adding GSM to a portion of their network will at least open up consumer options regarding which phones they want to use. I have a feeling that unlocked phones may become even more commonplace in this country once they can be used on all the major US carriers.

Re:The missing piece

[kerryfi]

This just allows them to sell more Iphones in the universe, and grow marketshare. Then when the Iphone 5 comes out all of those 4 users would want it.

Re:The missing piece

[nine-times]

In many way this is what will allow Verizon to get the iPhone. When the iPhone 5 comes out it is bound to support 4G, so even if Verizon is not an official partner, people will be able to use the phone there.

That's not exactly clear. Will the phone be unlocked? Will all carriers be using the same frequencies for 4G?

Re:The missing piece

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no such thing as 4G GSM. 4G is LTE, which is OFDMA (and based on CDMA). GSM is ancient 2G TDMA. Verizon will be CDMA (3G) and LTE (4G). Although it will use a SIM card, it will most definitely not use GSM.

Re:The missing piece

[AvitarX]

But we actually have fracturing not unification happening in the US.

T-mobile and AT&T used to have compatible networks, now though, to get 3G on T-mobile it needs to be a T-mobile phone.

Re:The missing piece

[Midnight Thunder]

That's not exactly clear. Will the phone be unlocked? Will all carriers be using the same frequencies for 4G?

If you buy your phone contract free elsewhere it should be unlocked. Chances are not all carries will be using the same frequencies, so the phone will need to support them. One other bonus for Verizon, other than getting more phone selection at lower cost, is access to roaming customers.

Re:The missing piece

[UnknowingFool]

No the missing piece that everyone conveniently forgets is AT&T. They have a deal with Apple that makes the iPhone exclusive to them until 2012. Until that deal is canceled or altered, there is no chance Verizon will get an iPhone in 2011. Even Verizon says that any Verizon iPhone announcement will come from Apple not from them.

Before anyone quips about how they heard it on the internet about the Verizon iPhone 2011 from a reliable source, I suggest that they trace back to the original source of the information. Almost always the source is an "analyst" not connected to Verizon, Apple, or AT&T. Most often, the source is an analyst whose livelihood relies on people paying attention to their predictions. I think it's just another example of if something is repeated enough times, people believe it's a fact. Ever since the original iPhone in 2007, there has been a rumor that there will be a Verizon iPhone next year. The year comes and goes and it gets repeated again.

Re:The missing piece

[aristotle-dude]

But we actually have fracturing not unification happening in the US.

T-mobile and AT&T used to have compatible networks, now though, to get 3G on T-mobile it needs to be a T-mobile phone.

To get unified head to head competition, you, the consumer needs to complain loudly to the FCC to do whatever they need to do to get everyone access to the same frequency bands on GSM/HSPA. WIthout consumer/citizen pressure, it will never happen.

Canada used to be fractured between GSM and CDMA as well but enough pressure was brought to bear that the CDMA carrier ended up rolling out HSPA+ to compete directly with the established GSM/HSPA carriers and now people in Canada can choose Rogers, Fido (city focused brand of Rogers), Bell, Telus or Virgin (city focused brand of Bell) as a carrier and buy either a subsidized (locked) iPhone from one of those carriers or an unsubsidized unlocked model from Apple stored directly.

Re:The missing piece

[LiMikeTnux]

There is "no such thing" as 4G right now, anyway. It is nothing more than a marketing term, while they work out which standards apply.

Re:The missing piece

[Altus]

Is it really worth it to buy an unlocked phone though? As it is you get a big discount on a new phone in exchange for your contract. I am not aware of any provider that gives you a monthly discount in exchange for not taking advantage of that discount. If you know of one I would be very interested.

I think that is what would have to change because as it is, having no contract isn't that much of an advantage, assuming you know you will want to have a phone for the next 2 years and getting a deep discount on a new phone is very attractive.

Re:The missing piece

[Anonymous Coward]

Except you forget that AT&T's performance has been terrible. Apple likely has an out, there.

Re:The missing piece

[Altus]

Do you have a source for that 2012 contract bit? I have never been able to find a concrete bit of data on how long the exclusive deal between Apple and AT&T is.

I agree with you that Apple will be the one to announce any change and not verizon, though I wouldnt be surprised if the info gets leaked ahead of time. That said, you wouldn't know a real leak from the constant rumors unless someone looses an iPhone at a bar that has Verizon in the top bar instead of AT&T

Re:The missing piece

[Paradise Pete]

They have a deal with Apple that makes the iPhone exclusive to them until 2012.

With only one more year, it'd be pretty easy for Apple to renegotiate. They could offer ATT better terms going forward, or alternatively not deal with them at all later if they don't cooperate. That contract doesn't have a lot of power at this point.

Re:The missing piece

[UnknowingFool]

I haven't read the exclusivity deal and don't know what options Apple has to get out of it. I don't know if AT&T would ever agree on such a clause. For the sake of argument, Apple has a "network performance" clause in the deal. AT&T would likely fight it. The legal battle will take a while, far longer than the end of deal (2012) would have been. So what benefit would it give Apple to spend all the money and resources to end the contract a year early?

Re:The missing piece

[aristotle-dude]

There is no such thing as 4G GSM. 4G is LTE, which is OFDMA (and based on CDMA). GSM is ancient 2G TDMA. Verizon will be CDMA (3G) and LTE (4G). Although it will use a SIM card, it will most definitely not use GSM.

Hey Verizon drone/employee, stop with the FUD. HSPA is marketed as as 3G GSM in many markets. It uses W-CDMA for an air interface but the core network can be shared with established 2G (EDGE). W-CDMA is not directly based on CDMA2000 (used by Sprint/Verizon) but only shares a similar air interface strategy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP_Long_Term_Evolution
 

3GPP Long Term Evolution (LTE), is the latest standard in the mobile network technology tree that previously realized the GSM/EDGE and UMTS/HSxPA network technologies.

Much of the standard addresses upgrading 3G UMTS to 4G mobile communications technology, which is essentially a mobile broadband system with enhanced multimedia services built on top.

LTE is the evolution of the UMTS standard (aka 3G GSM aka HSPA aka FOMA). The 4G upgrade path for CDMA died on the operating table which forced carriers like Verizon to switch to upgrading to LTE instead.

Re:The missing piece

[Swanktastic]

As far as I can tell, this assertion is speculation as well. According to court filings, it appears Apple and AT&T signed a 5 year exclusivity contract in 2007 as the iPhone was launching. It was not clear at all at the time how popular the iPhone would become. There's no reason to believe the contract has remained intact for 4 years. That's eons for consumer electronics contracts. It's much more likely that exclusivity, margins, etc. were all renegotiated as each side learned more about how the iPhone was performing in the market.

Re:The missing piece

[mlts]

IIRC, 4G is technically voice and data on the same stack. The dedicated radio needed for voice is replaced by VoIP.

Of course, this brings in some issues: Phones need to do QoS so if someone is yapping on the device while doing a hefty torrent, the conversation doesn't get interrupted.

Re:The missing piece

[UnknowingFool]

Google is your friend:
"at&t iphone exclusivity"

It was reported back in May 2010 by engadget, mashable, and CNN for starters. The deal was disclosed in relation to a class-action lawsuit about Apple monopoly power and illegal tying.

Re:The missing piece

[Pojut]

I completely agree...the "New Every Two" deal that Verizon has had going for a while has been enough for me to stay with them (as has their extensive coverage where I live.) Still, however small, there is a market for unlocked devices, and being able to use the same phone on more carriers is certainly a good thing for that market.

By proxy, I think this would also help out the second-hand market.

Re:The missing piece

[tomz16]

In many way this is what will allow Verizon to get the iPhone. When the iPhone 5 comes out it is bound to support 4G, so even if Verizon is not an official partner, people will be able to use the phone there.

Don't be so sure. IIRC, verizon is using the sim-less variant of LTE. So if the MEID isn't in the database the phone isn't getting on the network without committing a felony! The mere existence of a CDMA iphone doesn't mean that it will be easy to get on Verizon.

I have never been convinced that Apple would want to add CDMA capability, just for Verizon, because of the extra licensing costs and the fact Verizon had already announced that it was putting in place a 4G GSM network. I may still be wrong about Qualcomm-CDMA support being added (CDMA is part of GSM in the form of wave encoding, not protocol), though we will see.

Again, don't be so sure. A CDMA-less verizon phone is pretty much a paperweight for the forseeable decade. LTE rollout will be *very* limited initially (mostly large markets). Also, to correct you, GSM is TDMA. Modern 3G GSM data (e.g. HSDPA) is CDMA.

Re:The missing piece

[UnknowingFool]

With only one more year, it'd be pretty easy for Apple to renegotiate. They could offer ATT better terms going forward, or alternatively not deal with them at all later if they don't cooperate. That contract doesn't have a lot of power at this point.

A contract is still a contract. They could extend it and negotiate a new contract, but it doesn't do Apple or AT&T a lot of good to alter the original terms of it at this point. And if they did, you'd hear it from Apple or AT&T first, not some analyst. They're only guessing at best. And I bet if you told the analyst about the deal, he/she would have not known about it.

Re:The missing piece

[Midnight Thunder]

There is no such thing as 4G GSM. 4G is LTE, which is OFDMA (and based on CDMA). GSM is ancient 2G TDMA. Verizon will be CDMA (3G) and LTE (4G). Although it will use a SIM card, it will most definitely not use GSM.

You are mixing concepts and also letting yourself get lost in the marketing. GSM is a technology umbrella governed by the GSM Association. Traditionally when people talk about CDMA at a high level they are talking about Qualcomm CDMA, which is a protocol for mobile communication, which also happens to be using CDMA encoding. Since 3G GSM, WCDMA encoding schema has been incorporated, but this is not Qualcomm's solution.

In North America 3G and 4G had been used without context and originally talked about Qualcomm's technologies. To avoid confusion new terms were used to differentiate the GSM based solutions.

Some of the technologies which make up the GSM portfolio:

http://www.gsmworld.com/technology/index.htm

Outside of North America when people talk about GSM, they don't think about 2G, 3G, etc, but about the general mobile communication technology.

Re:The missing piece

[radeon21]

T-Mobile does, I believe it's something on the order of $20/month for their everything plan

Re:The missing piece

[Bassman59]

That said, you wouldn't know a real leak from the constant rumors unless someone looses an iPhone at a bar that has Verizon in the top bar instead of AT&T

jeez a FOUR DIGITAL /. ID, and still you can't spell.

Re:The missing piece

[Anonymous Coward]

HSPA is marketed as as 3G GSM

Marketed as, but isn't.

Re:The missing piece

[Hintertux]

It seems so wasteful to sell so many phones.

Re:The missing piece

[Vancorps]

Sprint rolled out Wimax here in Arizona so I say 4G is here right now, I have a tower not 500 yards away from me. I do wish all the carriers would go with a single technical standard but then they would have to compete with their networks and all of their networks have problems. I give Sprint the edge right now with voice coverage as I can always make a call while ATT I would rank last in voice coverage. Verizon seems to be the spot in the middle with coverage.

Re:The missing piece

[Andy Dodd]

Rumor has it they're possibly switching to Qualcomm baseband processor chipsets for the iPhone 5 for a variety of reasons. Note that Qualcomm does produce GSM/UMTS baseband chips, in fact a large portion of the GSM smartphone market uses various Qualcomm MSM silicon.

Once you're using Qualcomm MSM silicon for your GSM/UMTS solution, it's not too difficult to swap in the CDMA2000 version of that chip and get Sprint/Verizon support. Look at the large number of HTC GSM phones that have CDMA variants. (As to licensing fees - no matter what Qualcomm gets paid, and if you use their MSM chipsets you probably don't have to pay them patent royalties.)

Re:The missing piece

[Anonymous Coward]

DIGITAL?

Re:The missing piece

[Anonymous Coward]

Incorrect.

CDMA is not part of GSM in any way, shape, or form -- including this "wave encoding" of which you speak. Not only is the multiplexing a completely different methodology -- hence the terms "Code Division Multiple Access" and "Time Division Multiple Access" (GSM) -- but the protocols are completely different beasts. This is to say nothing of network management, interference mitigation, coverage density, cell capacity, and so on.

In addition, LTE is not GSM. The fact that it is *replacing* GSM does not make it GSM. By that logic, LTE would also be CDMA, as it is replacing that as well. And it would also be WiMax, since Clearwire announced that they will be moving to LTE within a few years.

Just because you work for AT&T doesn't mean we want your FUD.

Re:The missing piece

[Anonymous Coward]

There is such a carrier in the US. T-Mobile offers the same plan at $20 less per month and no contract when you just ask for a SIM. It turns out you save about $0 or $60 after the two year deal, but the phone is yours (not SIM locked) and you can upgrade anytime you want instead of having to wait for the two year contract to come into "upgrade" status. This is why I purchased my Nexus One from Google up front instead of the T-Mobile and Google deal with reduced pricing.

Re:The missing piece

[Altus]

Ah, that explains it. That was shortly after the last time I bothered to try to hunt down that information.

After that point I just went out and bought a phone.

Re:The missing piece

[yabos]

"jeez a FOUR DIGITAL /. ID, and still you can't spell."
Apparently, you can't either

Re:The missing piece

[Overzeetop]

Actually, the original contract is established fact. Speculation is that Apple has re-negotiated the contract so that they can add (or switch to) other carriers. Unless the disclosure included a provision forbidding Apple from making public notice of the change, it would be in apple's corporate interest to announce the availability on new carriers. Why? to prevent people from buying current smartphone stock and save their money (and subsidies) for the new iPhone.

It's very unlikely that a renegotiation has occured, as I'm sure there were lots of negotiations at the start. Everyone presumes that Apple has gotten the raw end of the deal, and if that's the case I would bet a dollar that AT&T is not interested in letting Apple back out.

Re:The missing piece

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple Prepping CDMA iPhone

Re:The missing piece

[aristotle-dude]

HSPA is marketed as as 3G GSM

Marketed as, but isn't.

Yes it is. It was developed as the third generation upgrade to Edge (2G GSM) and it shares the same core network (think routers) as Edge so the same core can be used by both Edge and 3G towers.

GPRS, Edge and HSPA were developed by the same committee for use by the GSM association members.

Re:The missing piece

[Swanktastic]

OK, point taken, but you're splitting hairs. There's no way to know for certain that the contract written 4 years ago is still valid, so they're both speculation unless you happen to be an Apple exec. And what fund is Slashdot if we can't speculate?

To your point, it would be MORE rational for Apple to let the public know that they're locked up with AT&T till 2012. This avoids uncertainty for the folks holding out on buying an iPhone due to lingering doubts about Verizon availability. To my knowledge, there's no provision in the 2007 document requiring the secrecy, so either Apple is being stupid or something else has been signed in the meantime.

Re:The missing piece

[Anonymous Coward]

1. There won't be a 4G only phone on Verizon for 2-3 years because 4G coverage won't be ubiquitous for some time and phones will need to be able to roam.
2. Lots of other phone makers find it profitable to make CDMA handsets just for Verizon and you are forgetting there are other markets that have CDMA carriers (China & Korea for example) so its not just Verizon.
3. Its been reported that Apple/AT&T have a 5 year exclusive contract signed in 2007, which would put the date as 2012, not 2011, so this whole rumor is probably just smoke again. (Of course maybe Apple thinks it will make more money breaking the contract and paying penalties - or maybe it thinks it can dissuade android adoption and hold market share longer term)

The other thing that's probably lost in all this is that AT&T will start pushing Android instead of merely offering (mostly) second tier handsets. Its also likely Apple gets especially good margins as part of the exclusivity deal which would go away. So while it would likely help Apple sales - there would be other trade offs that may not be as favorable for Apple as everyone thinks.

Re:The missing piece

[aztektum]

I thought Apple had said in court filings rather recently that the agreement exists and people complaining about being locked to AT&T should have considered that before signing on the dotted line. To me that sounds like they're still honoring the agreement.

Re:The missing piece

[slapout]

With GSM and CDMA being around so long already, I don't see why there's not already cheap, off the shelf, radios that support both formats the phone markers can just pick and put in there phones.

Re:The missing piece

[aristotle-dude]

Multiplexing in only a small part of the a wireless standard. There are many components including the core network which is shared by Edge, 3G and LTE. HSPA is the 3G standard used by GSM carriers. FULL STOP. LTE is the evolution of HSPA (UMTS).

Nobody except pedantic misinformed nerds on the net talk about TDMA in relation to GSM in an attempt to confuse the issue.

What matters is that EVDO, which is used by CDMA2000 in North America is incompatible with LTE while HSPA is an upgrade path to LTE. You cannot upgrade an EVDO network directly to LTE.

Re:The missing piece

[LiENUS]

Don't be so sure. IIRC, verizon is using the sim-less variant of LTE. So if the MEID isn't in the database the phone isn't getting on the network without committing a felony! The mere existence of a CDMA iphone doesn't mean that it will be easy to get on Verizon.

Weird.... http://phandroid.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/lte-4g-verizon-sim-cards.jpg

Re:The missing piece

[Midnight Thunder]

With GSM and CDMA being around so long already, I don't see why there's not already cheap, off the shelf, radios that support both formats the phone markers can just pick and put in there phones.

I doubt the problem is the technology and is more the licensing issues. Just take a look at the mobile litigation fest going on.

Re:The missing piece

[Anonymous Coward]

The contract I signed several years ago gives me a lower price per minute/month than anything available now. Signing a new contract would cost more per minute/month over the course of a year or two than buying an unlocked phone does.

Re:The missing piece

[Drathus]

Don't be so sure. IIRC, verizon is using the sim-less variant of LTE.

Engadget and others posted pictures of Verizon branded 4G LTE SIM cards.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/19/verizons-4g-lte-sim-in-the-wild/

Re:The missing piece

[UnknowingFool]

OK, point taken, but you're splitting hairs. There's no way to know for certain that the contract written 4 years ago is still valid, so they're both speculation unless you happen to be an Apple exec. And what fund is Slashdot if we can't speculate?

Well being a lawsuit, the deal being disclosed was part of discovery. No other deals were disclosed. Judges tend to dislike it when a party hides information especially when ordered to disclose it. It's safe to assume that at the time of the disclosure (May 2010), there were no other deals. There might be now but not then.

To my knowledge, there's no provision in the 2007 document requiring the secrecy, so either Apple is being stupid or something else has been signed in the meantime.

No but there's no provision requiring disclosure, either. "iPhone is exclusive to AT&T**" **Only until 2012 is not as simple as without the asterisks .

Re:The missing piece

[asdfghjklqwertyuiop]

Going that route at least means you can possibly have a truly open phone firmware-wise... if there are any left to buy, that is.

Re:The missing piece

[Bassman59]

"jeez a FOUR DIGITAL /. ID, and still you can't spell." Apparently, you can't either

Goddamn iPhone!

Re:The missing piece

[tlhIngan]

Canada used to be fractured between GSM and CDMA as well but enough pressure was brought to bear that the CDMA carrier ended up rolling out HSPA+ to compete directly with the established GSM/HSPA carriers and now people in Canada can choose Rogers, Fido (city focused brand of Rogers), Bell, Telus or Virgin (city focused brand of Bell) as a carrier and buy either a subsidized (locked) iPhone from one of those carriers or an unsubsidized unlocked model from Apple stored directly.

Still is. Some phones, like the Palm Pre, are "CDMA" only. (Scarequotes refer to the marketing term, not the technology).

But there are two reasons why Bell and Telus also have HSPA+ networks.

First, "CDMA" as we known it has no 4G solution. Thus, any "CDMA" carrier can either go WiMax (Sprint), or LTE (Verizon, and rest of world).

Secondly, and more importantly, Bell was a big sponsor of the 2010 Vancouver Olympics. Guess what phones power the majority of the world? Yes, GSM phones. Bell was paying for the Olympics, and all that juicy roaming revenue was going to go straight to... Rogers, their competitor. By rolling out a 3G network in advance, they can try to capture back some of that roaming revenue instead of giving it all away.

It's not that the CRTC forced them or anything - if it wasn't for the Olympics, they wouldn't bother with HSPA+, and just go straight to LTE.

Though I'm sure Rogers was hoping the iPhone would be "exclusive" to them for awhile and not suddenly have Bell and Telus also selling iPhones.

Re:The missing piece

[csboyer]

The best way to describe them to refer to the Qualcomm standard as CDMA2000, and the 3G GSM standard as UMTS or WCDMA.

Re:The missing piece

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a grand total of one company offering a plan without the phone subsidy built in. That would be T-Mobile and their "Even More Plus" plan. Unsurprisingly if you've looked at the numbers, that plan is $10/month cheaper than the ones with the phone subsidy (actually the difference can be much larger, since data/messaging isn't required and unlike AT&T they don't add an extra pile of fees on to the advertised price). In exchange for a 2-year contract, the carriers subsidize the phone to the tune of around $200. You've saved $200 up-front in exchange for paying $240 over the next two years, enough said.

Re:The missing piece

[MojoStan]

There is such a carrier in the US. T-Mobile offers the same plan at $20 less per month and no contract when you just ask for a SIM.

Here's a link to T-Mobile's "Individual Plans" showing the no-contract, no-subsidy discounts: http://www.t-mobile.com/shop/plans/Cell-Phone-Plans.aspx?catgroup=Individual&WT.z_shop_plansLP=individual

Yes, that's a $20 discount per month for a talk/text/data plan. However, T-Mobile's cheapest talk/text/data plan seems $10 more expensive ($80 with contract, $60 without contract) compared to other carriers (e.g. Sprint's $70/mo with contract).

This is why I purchased my Nexus One from Google up front instead of the T-Mobile and Google deal with reduced pricing.

What I like about an unsubsidized Nexus One is the option to only buy a calling plan and just use Wi-fi for the other functions (like an iPod Touch). Subsidized smartphones require you to have a $30 per month data plan, but the Nexus One would allow me to buy data only when I need it, right?

Re:The missing piece

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

It might not only be about Verizon. There are many other CMDA networks outside the US, even in places where GSM is popular.

Re:The missing piece

[Caetel]

Maybe not in the US where different networks use incompatible/mostly incompatible technologies/frequencies, but one of the main benefits to not being locked into a 2 year contract is exactly that - you've got the freedom to change provider or in other words your current provider hasn't got you over a barrel.

Ultimately though, the total cost of ownership (cost for phone + ongoing service cost), at least in the UK, is comparable. The networks aren't discounting anything - the phone cost is rolled into the monthly bill which, combined with the contact, is basically the network giving you a 18 month/2 year loan for the cost of the phone.

too little too late

[SoupGuru]

Tons of people got tired of waiting for the iPhone on Verizon and had to settle for an Android phone only figure out, "Hey, this Android stuff is actually pretty cool!" and now have no desire for an iPhone. So Apple might get more of the currently-smartphoneless-on-Verizon demographic when their contracts allow them to upgrade, but I think they've lost every single one that's bought into Android up to this point.

Re:too little too late

[Pojut]

The one advantage iPhones still have over Android phones would be gaming. There are some great emulators available for Android, but other than that, it has nothing on the iPhone when it comes to gaming.

That being said, excluding gaming, it's Android for me all the way.

Re:too little too late

[Darkness404]

Sure, but touch-screen devices suck for gaming no matter what you are running on them. Granted, tethering a Bluetooth controller like a Wii-Remote with a Classic Controller attached makes gaming downright awesome on both platforms.

And quite honestly, I'd rather play a good retro game than play any more of the iPhone's half-baked "games".

Re:too little too late

[Pojut]

Sure, but touch-screen devices suck for gaming no matter what you are running on them.

Agreed (except for tower defense games...those were made for a finger). I was referring more to the quantity and quality of games available in the Apple app store compared to the Android app store.

And quite honestly, I'd rather play a good retro game than play any more of the iPhone's half-baked "games".

There are some really good ones available for the iPhone. There are a couple of good ones for Android as well (Zenonia, Stranded, Pirates and Traders...), but overall there are definitely more quality titles available for the iPhone.

I do love how there are emulators (and even rom packs, although you can still use "standard" rom files loaded on an SD card) available right from the official Android app store...when people ask me to describe a major difference between the Android and iPhone app stores, I just say "emulators".

Re:too little too late

[Anonymous Coward]

There are some great emulators available for Android, but other than that, it has nothing on the iPhone when it comes to gaming.

That's changing rapidly. Feint recently added Android support, and the games are coming out fast. Fruit Ninja and Mini Squadron generated a little bit of buzz. Angry Birds is in beta right now, Galcon was released awhile ago. Gaming is growing on the Android. By the end of next year the iPhone could easily lose the gaming advantage.

Re:too little too late

[stephanruby]

Tons of people got tired of waiting for the iPhone on Verizon...

That's certainly true enough, but that must not be the only reason. For instance, one of the Galaxy Suite phones on AT&T, the AT&T Captivate, has been selling very well against the iPhone. So being on AT&T can not be considered the only reason people are making the switch to Android anymore.

I wonder if the AT&T Captivate is selling for the same price AT&T is selling the iPhone for?

Overall, and despite their initial problems with gps (which I don't they've sorted out yet), the Galaxy Suite phones have been doing very well worldwide (I think Samsung sold 5 million Galaxy S phones, that number completely eclipses the number of Droid Incredibles/Droid X that are currently being sold!?!).

Re:too little too late

[jellomizer]

They are both emerging markets. You are making the assumption that the market is already saturated.

Just like at AT&T you will get iPhone customers and Android Customers there will be new users on both. Some will be unhappy with each other and switch.

There is no point in this religious zeal over iPhone vs. Android. And what will ultimately happen. iPhone will be the biggest in Market share for devices, Android will be the largest market share in total numbers. Meaning the iPhone will be the Top Selling Phone but there will be more Android installations.

The Android is cool and is competitive to the iPhone which is cool in different ways. People will stick to their camp. New users will choose one or the other. A few swappers who will be evangelicalized to the other side. Side A will make a cool app Side B will make a copy. Side A will say how horrible the trade offs that B took is while Side B does the same.

Is iPhone for Verizon a threat to Android, perhaps in a short run. As there are some people who use Android as a substitute for an iPhone, but after a quarter or two, it will balance and be back to normal competition.

Normal Competition will mean both sides makes new and cool stuff to play with.

Re:too little too late

[soupd]

Unless you're already bought into the Apple ecosystem of iTMS media and/or even MobileMe. Sure, there are alternatives if you have non-Apple smartphone but for those who want things to 'just work', the iPhone will still be a draw.

Re:too little too late

[Anonymous Coward]

I was kinda worried about the emulators on the app store... are they legal. Should I worry about spying from these programs, and which rom packs/emulators do you use?

Re:too little too late

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Sure, but touch-screen devices suck for gaming no matter what you are running on them.

That entirely depends on the type of game and if it was designed for a touchscreen or not.

Nothing?

[geoffrobinson]

"If I wanted an iPhone, I would have gotten one."

I, I, I.

How something impacts Android is completely dependent on how it would affect you? There may be a few people out there who decided to go with Android because they didn't want to switch to AT&T.

Re:Nothing?

[Enry]

Apple had their chance to completely dominate the phone market and they've blown it with their exclusivity to AT&T/GSM. The gap gave Android a chance to get started with Verizon (and Sprint and T-Mobile), and now that the iPhone is possibly coming, existing Verizon customers won't care:

1) We're already locked in 1-2 year contracts so we're not going to pay $500 for a new phone
2) Verizon and Apple will likely not give many price breaks
3) AT&T users may jump ship, but that's only to Verizon's benefit
4) Android has a full set of applications and is a much more open format.

Re:Nothing?

[MozeeToby]

Android is the fastest selling smartphone OS, there are any number of Android options and lots of people who talk up Androids to their friends and families (myself included). If Android hasn't created a strong enough following to survive (and thrive) with the iPhone as real competition (it never was with it being tied to ATT in my opinion) then it deserves to die, and I say that as a die-hard Android fan. So... maybe not nothing, but it shouldn't really effect Android long term if Android is as serious a competitor for the iPhone as a lot of people think it is.

Re:Nothing?

[MrHanky]

There are more people who will ditch AT&T for Verizon than there are people who will ditch Android for iPhone, for the simple fact that the U.S. isn't the whole world. Also, some people dislike the need for going through a goddamn 12 step program just to change the ringtone. For a few things where there's money involved for Apple, the iPhone is remarkably user hostile.

Re:Nothing?

[Anonymous Coward]

For a few things where there's money involved for Apple, the iPhone is remarkably user hostile.

For a lot of things where there's money involved for Verizon, their Android devices are remarkably user hostible.

More and more recent Android devices released for Verizon are locking the standard, cross-app non-geographic searching to Bing ... are locking the standard cross-app geographic searching to a choice between a version of Bing Maps that's been deliberately hobbled to omit turn-by-turn directions and a version of Verizon's subscription-based VZNavigator, etc.

Re:Nothing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, and in the rest of the world, iPhone is more popular than Android.

Look it up, I'm serious.

Re:Nothing?

[AshtangiMan]

If only those 2 year contracts came to an end. I have to wait an entire month . . . Oh that's right, I am thinking to change when my contract is up. Though I am thinking of going from iPhone to DroidX. The iPhone 3G is good, but annoyingly slow, and some of the policies that changed with upgrades to newer iOS don't sit well with me, so I am still running 3.0. The only thing I might miss is the talk and surf which does come in very handy. So I am covered by your number 3. Most of my friends and family have Verizon, and they have all mentioned wanting to switch to the iPhone, so I am not sure your option 1 is very correct, though it may slow the adoption. In my mind that can only help Verizon as it gives the network the opportunity to grow with the demand.

Re:Nothing?

[postbigbang]

Agreed. AT&T is Southwest Bell with lipstick. They had the worst customer service, lousiest coverage, and weakest share. Apple needed to have a CDMA phone along with its GSM offering. They could have covered all bases, but had to capitulate to the fact that AT&T and most of the world is GSM. So they made their choice.

I stuck with Verizon not because of any love whatsoever, rather they have coverage and a decently designed data coverage network. At the top are the same bunch of monopolistic-minded greedy execs seeking to suck every last coin out of your pocket-- customer churn be damned.

Android isn't a piece of cake, but on the whole, the values behind it (and not Google as a company behind it) will continue to overtake Apple. Verizon should careful; in the post-9/11 market capitalization atmosphere, they could follow Sprint's fate easily, IMHO. Quality and service count. If they keep their eye on this, they'll do well.

Re:Nothing?

[Tharsman]

There are more people who will ditch AT&T for Verizon than there are people who will ditch Android for iPhone, for the simple fact that the U.S. isn't the whole world. Also, some people dislike the need for going through a goddamn 12 step program just to change the ringtone. For a few things where there's money involved for Apple, the iPhone is remarkably user hostile.

12 step?

Settings > Sounds > Ringtones > select ringtone from list and exit.

On android:

Settings > Sounds and Display > Phone Ringtone > select ringtone from list > OK > now exit.

Re:Nothing?

[AshtangiMan]

Yes it is . . . I could give dozens of examples like the changing ringtone (why wouldn't that be built into iTunes . . . ?) but I'm just going to get rid of the iPhone. I'm glad it came out though, as without it I doubt the current android offerings would be nearly as good. Hell, I might even still be using a RAZR.

Re:Nothing?

[Enry]

What I mean is all the people that wanted a true smartphone got one in the past year - they got a Droid. Few will want to pay again to get an iPhone. That leaves you with the people whose contracts are almost up and haven't upgraded. Around here (Boston), that's a fairly small number. I see almost as many Droid phones as I do iPhones.

Oh, and the talk-and-surf works when you're on wifi. I don't know if LTE lets you do that.

Re:Nothing?

[MrHanky]

That's like saying the Chateau Latour wines had the chance to dominate the market if only they were sold in more restaurants.

1) They're hideously expensive
2) Although they're good, many others are also good, quite a few at a much lower price.
3) Even if they were the best in the world, they're not to everyone's taste.
4) Most people just want to get sloshed.

Re:Nothing?

[tibman]

I just googled it and top link said you are wrong:
http://www.electronista.com/articles/10/08/12/analysts.say.android.passing.ios.near.blackberry/
http://gorumors.com/crunchies/how-many-smartphones-does-nokia-sell-worldwide/

Re:Nothing?

[0100010001010011]

Not too long ago Apple didn't have one of the most popular phones on the market. Instead, they were the underdog. The ROKR was an epic failure and no one really knew if Apple could pull off a phone.

But they went shopping around anyway, more or less 'begging' to let someone take their yet un announced product. Not only that, they were asking the network to NOT have total control of the device. (These were the days when Verizon would cripple a phone to turn a quick $.50 making you send a photo on their network). In addition to that they were asking them to upgrade their servers, spend money, so that it could do this fancy thing called 'Visual Voicemail.' In return for all of this, Apple would sign a exclusivity contract with said network.

Sprint* said thank you and respectfully declined. AT&T also declined. Verizon's CEO went above declining and more or less gave Jobs the finger. Cingular said 'what the heck' and let Apple in.

AT&T bought Cingular, honored the contract and here we are today.

It was a HUGE gamble. It paid off, but Apple had never made a phone before. There was no "AppStore". The iPod Touch didn't exist. iTunes Music store existed, but wasn't a dominant force in the marketplace and still DRM protected.

But Apple didn't "blow" anything. No one predicted the iPhone's success, not even Apple. AT&T is clinging to that contract like a liferaft, because they know the second it is up Verizon is going to bend over backwards to accomodate the iPhone.
* All gathered from internet hearsay over the years.

Re:Nothing?

[Anonymous Coward]

but only a few - most didn't get iphones because we just don't like Apple :)

Re:Nothing?

[MrHanky]

True. Android has almost caught up with the iPhone in half the time.

Re:Nothing?

[Anonymous Coward]

DroidX is locked down, Verizon botched the Froyo rollout on it (though I would hope it's fixed now), and trust me you won't like Verizon's V-Cast shovelware. I recommend the Samsung Fascinate, which has a form factor more like an iPhone and a beeyootiful AMOLED screen protected by Gorilla Glass. I don't even use a screen protector on mine. The Fascinate also has the best camera of all the Galaxy S variants. And it's one-click rootable.

Downside is Bing, but that goes away when they roll out Froyo (or you could just root it)

Re:Nothing?

[flappinbooger]

I recall hearing noise that Apple got into bed with ATT because ATT demanded exclusivity in exchange for the beating it would take to it's network.

IOW, major carriers were afraid of the iphone when it was first being developed because it would be a data hog, and ATT only agreed to it if it was an exclusive deal.

No I don't remember where I heard this from but it was years ago. Now, it's a moot point because carriers have upgraded (well, maybe not ATT yet, lol)

Anyone else hear this? For me, I haven't made the smart phone jump yet but it's time. At the moment I'm leaning towards android because it's more "open" and I like the AP models. At the same time, I hate what VZW does to their phones (crippling features, ugly interface, not open) and ATT seems to leave their phones alone. So maybe an android on ATT? Hmmm.... Is that crazy?

Re:Nothing?

[Enry]

Bad analogy is bad.

Re:Nothing?

[pherthyl]

>> 1) We're already locked in 1-2 year contracts so we're not going to pay $500 for a new phone

Uhh.. There is a constant swarm of people with contracts expiring. What a stupid thing to say.

>> 2) Verizon and Apple will likely not give many price breaks

This makes no sense. Of course there will be huge incentives for contracts, just like with any other phone.

>> 3) AT&T users may jump ship, but that's only to Verizon's benefit

That's half the equation, yes. The other half is verizon customers wanting an iPhone.

>> 4) Android has a full set of applications and is a much more open format.

iPhone has way more apps, and the "openness" means precisely nothing to 99% of regular customers.

Re:Nothing?

[MrHanky]

Your fantasy about the iPhone dominating the market is worse.

Re:Nothing?

[pherthyl]

>> That leaves you with the people whose contracts are almost up and haven't upgraded. Around here (Boston), that's a fairly small number

Bahaha. What, did you conduct a survey of the people of Boston?
"My 3 friends don't plan on upgrading so therefore no one in Boston is planning to upgrade".

Re:Nothing?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it is disingenuous to say that Apple could have dominated the market without their exclusivity. The spread of Android has more to do with the merits of Android than the lack of iPhone availability. Your numbered points are kind of arbitrary. 1. Not all users are currently under contract, many are close to the end of their contract. So these are possible iPhone customers. 2. What? I really don't understand your point. The iPhone would be subsidized like any other phone... 3. Isn't this the point? iPhone helps Verizon? Verizon helps iPhone... don't see your point. 4. So what? iPhone has more app in a less open format. Do you think the average Verizon customer cares more about an open format than the selection of Apps? iPhone has a lot more apps...

I think a large chunk of Verizon customers will care. I also think a large chunk of non-Verizon customers will care....

Re:Nothing?

[yabos]

Apple approached Verizon for the first iPhone but Verizon wanted too much control. Only AT&T would allow Apple the control that they have, but it came at the cost of an exclusive deal.

Re:Nothing?

[nine-times]

Well...

A) I'm not sure Apple's goal is to completely dominate the phone market.

B) I'm not sure they could have gotten a real start in the cell phone market without an exclusivity deal. Supposedly the AT&T exclusivity was the price Apple paid for making the device the way they wanted, carrier support for visual voicemail, and unlimited data plans.

C) iPhones range between $99 and $299, so I don't know where you're getting the $500 price.

D) I know many people who have said that they really really wanted an iPhone but were not willing to give up Verizon's superior coverage. I had an Android phone for a little while because I wanted to be on Verizon, but I switched back because the Droid Incredible was incredibly annoying.

E) For most practical purposes, Android is only moderately more open. The Android market's approval process is more open, but that's about it. You're still restricted in what you can do by what carriers/manufacturers will allow. Most people aren't going to want to screw around with the kernel, and those who do will basically have to hack their phone to get it installed.

Re:Nothing?

[MrHanky]

You forgot making the ringtone available first: The iPhone is this user friendly.

Frankly, I find it astonishing that people can pretend Apple "just works", when in reality you have to go through this kind of nonsense for even the simplest of tasks.

Re:Nothing?

[AmigaMMC]

Yeah good luck with that, have you tried putting a new ringtone on the iPhone? I gave up.

Re:Nothing?

[Anonymous Coward]

The funny thing about AT&T and "talk and surf" they have been talking up (claiming to be the only carrier who allows it). I had to test out the theory with my Verizon Palm Pre Plus (I am one of the suckers :P) - I can talk, surf, play games, look things up, etc - all at the same time. Not sure if Android allows it, but WebOS sure does. Not an AT&T vs. Verizon function, just an OS function. You may not have to miss it at all.

Re:Nothing?

[immakiku]

Getting ringtone: iTunes->Ringtones->find the one you want->purchase

Re:Nothing?

[Shakrai]

DroidX is locked down

Says who? You can root it, remove the bloatware and generally do whatever the hell you want with it if you are inclined to do so.

Verizon botched the Froyo rollout on it

"Botched"? They missed a deadline because of Exchange issues but the roll out did eventually happen and seems to be going just fine.

and trust me you won't like Verizon's V-Cast shovelware

Thankfully you aren't required to use it. It's just an icon on the phone. You can even remove that icon if you are inclined to do so.

Re:Nothing?

[Tharsman]

First off, that's not "changing a ringtone", that's "creating a ringtone".

That aside, I just use free apps. You know, there is an app for that! Well, many apps for that!

Re:Nothing?

[Shakrai]

pple had their chance to completely dominate the phone market and they've blown it with their exclusivity to AT&T/GSM.

For shits and giggles, how could Apple have "dominated" the phone market even if they hadn't gone exclusive with AT&T? Do you think that Google would never have tried if the iPhone had a larger marketshare? Do you think that RIM would have just folded up shop and quit the market if the iPhone had a larger marketshare?

Re:Nothing?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's just like how nobody bought a Droid X because everyone had just upgraded to a Droid Incredible and signed a new contract. And nobody bought a Droid 2 because we all had just upgraded to a Droid X and signed a new contract.

Re:Nothing?

[MrHanky]

No, there's no creation involved at all. Second, this is something you can do easily on any phone, with no editing. The availability of apps solves a problem that simply isn't there on any other phone. Fact is, changing a ringtone on the iPhone is user hostile by design.

Re:Nothing?

[evildarkdeathclicheo]

To Verizon's benefit? Verizon has a better network, but that network will crumble under an onslaught of additional smartphone users. What may be Verizon's benefit will not be the benefit of their customers, who, right now, only stay because of the network. The iphone will be the equalizer of mediocrity. -W

Re:Nothing?

[thopkins]

The $500 is for the phone with no subsidy. Once you're under contract, you aren't eligible for the subsidy.

Re:Nothing?

[MrHanky]

Exactly. If you make simple things difficult enough, people will pay for even a complicated solution. That's the intention of Apple's design. Make people buy more stuff! And there's an app for that!

Re:Nothing?

[nine-times]

Not everyone is under contract, and people's contracts expire all the time.

Re:Nothing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Please check your facts. AT&T did not buy Cingular; Cingular bought AT&T.

Re:Nothing?

[b0bby]

Please check your facts. AT&T did not buy Cingular; Cingular bought AT&T.

My understanding is that Cingular bought AT&T wireless (2004-ish), then AT&T bought Cingular (2007-ish).

Re:Nothing?

[Enry]

Yes, to Verizon's benefit. They were able to see what happened to AT&T's network. AT&T has been playing catchup since day 1. Verizon has been able to sit back and upgrade their systems in relative security. We're now at the point where Verizon Droid users use 25% more data per month than iPhone users and noone is claiming that Verizon's network stinks.

Re:Nothing?

[spleck]

Been covered before. Palm and Android can talk and surf as long as you're on WiFi. Current EVDO, not so much.

Re:Nothing?

[Enry]

RIM is pretty well dead. They'll hang on like Palm at this point.

Android would have come out and had its users but when I upgraded my phone before I got my Droid, I would have purchased an iPhone if it were available on Verizon, and I may not have purchased the Droid if it were available when I upgraded that time.

AT&T/Apple stumbled, and Google was able to take advantage of it.

Re:Nothing?

[Enry]

And those that are expiring now are mostly turning to the Droid. There are a few holdouts (my parents for two) that are waiting for the iPhone on Verizon. Don't get me wrong, it will be a hot seller, but Android isn't going away anytime soon.

Re:Nothing?

[KingMotley]

Not everyone is willing to be tied to a particular carrier for 2 years. It's still a $500 phone, it's just under certain circumstances, you are allowing the carrier to pay $200 of that price for you, in exchange for you agreeing to use their service for a minimum of 2 years, otherwise you have to pay it back (prorated) when you cancel.

Re:Nothing?

[Enry]

Great. Prove me wrong. I've already given my reasons why I'm right.

Re:Nothing?

[spleck]

AT&T bought Cingular, honored the contract and here we are today.

Actually, Cingular bought AT&T Wireless, then renamed itself AT&T Mobility. Even though they spent all that money to come up with "Cingular", "AT&T" still had more brand power.

Re:Nothing?

[Shakrai]

RIM is pretty well dead. They'll hang on like Palm at this point.

RIM is doing just fine in the corporate and governmental world.

Android would have come out and had its users but when I upgraded my phone before I got my Droid, I would have purchased an iPhone if it were available on Verizon, and I may not have purchased the Droid if it were available when I upgraded that time.

So you are taking your own decisions and applying them to the millions of people that are part of the smartphone market? That's kind of silly. Android would have established a foot hold regardless of what Apple did. Each has it's own strengths and weaknesses. Apple's exclusivity might have helped Google gain market share faster than it otherwise would have but I don't see how you make the leap from that to Apple would have "dominated" the market.

Besides, you miss the larger picture. Could Apple have gotten the phone to market the way they wanted without going exclusive? I don't like their business practices but they did force one carrier to allow them to sell a phone outside of their walled garden. The rest had to follow just to compete. Apple will never see a dime of my money but I'm grateful to them for opening up this market in the same manner as they opened up the online music market.

Re:Nothing?

[Anonymous Coward]

C) iPhones range between $99 and $299, so I don't know where you're getting the $500 price.

The $99 to $299 range includes a 2-year contract.

Re:Nothing?

[Enry]

So much FAIL here I don't really know where to start.

Uhh.. There is a constant swarm of people with contracts expiring. What a stupid thing to say.

Yes, and they're mostly going to get Android phones now. Anyone who had their contract expire in the past year has been able to get an Android phone. Those on two year contracts may be expiring soon and maybe they will want an iPhone.

This makes no sense. Of course there will be huge incentives for contracts, just like with any other phone.

What incentives exist for the iPhone on AT&T now? None.

That's half the equation, yes. The other half is verizon customers wanting an iPhone.

But in that case, the net number of iPhone devices remains the same. There's no gain for Apple.

iPhone has way more apps, and the "openness" means precisely nothing to 99% of regular customers.

Apples and ..err.. Droids. The Apple app store has been around far longer than Android's. The Android app store has really only been gaining traction in the past year and the quality of apps and number have been steadily increasing. Google even has the app inventor and a very open marketplace. The openness means that a larger variety of apps are available, increasing customer choice.

Unless you thing having 400 different fart apps is choice.

Re:Nothing?

[h4rr4r]

Says me. You cannot replace the kernel, meaning no real OS replacements. This means when motorola stops supporting it you are screwed, unlike say a G1 which can run 2.2 even though support for it ended long ago, since cyanogenmod 6 is available for it.

Re:Nothing?

[RobertLTux]

its a bit complicated but
Cingular bought att wireless then since the DeathStar was in the process of rebuilding THE PARENT COMPANY bought Cingular so you are correct but missing the details as to which ATT was bought/ did the buying.

Re:Nothing?

[Anonymous Coward]

And yet a single phone model on a single carrier still takes a huge slice of the pie which Android has only recently (this year) managed to catch up with, and only by being offered by EVERY carrier.

Reality distortion field indeed...

Re:Nothing?

[Enry]

RIM is doing just fine in the corporate and governmental world.

Neither are exactly growth markets. Those groups already have Blackberries and they're not going to do anything but go down. RIM has gone from 36% of the smartphone market at the beginning of the year to 21% in August, all that was loss to the Android who went from 8% to 19%. iPhone usage was pretty stable.

So you are taking your own decisions and applying them to the millions of people that are part of the smartphone market?

Since I was one of the people that would have bought an iPhone if it were available on Verizon and instead bought a Droid? Yeah. And the millions of people who have also bought Droid devices in the past year seem to agree with me.

Could Apple have gotten the phone to market the way they wanted without going exclusive?

Who knows? Maybe the iPhone was the straw that broke Verizon's back on allowing open handsets.

Re:Nothing?

[JourneymanMereel]

DroidX is locked down

Says who? You can root it, remove the bloatware and generally do whatever the hell you want with it if you are inclined to do so.

You can also jailbreak an iPhone, yet we* complain constantly about how locked down the iPhone is.

*The collective /. we

Re:Nothing?

[nine-times]

A) I didn't say Android was going away anytime soon.

B) I don't disagree that many people with contracts expiring now are getting Droid phones. However, there will also be people with expired/expiring contracts when the iPhone 5 is released, and the question is more about what will happen then.

Re:Nothing?

[nine-times]

Sure, but in that sense, many of the popular Android phones are ~$500 too.

Re:Nothing?

[JourneymanMereel]

For all their flaws, Sprint tends to be one of the more open carriers. Also, while they don't seem to make as much noise, if you're interested in openess don't overlook Palm. While their entire OS isn't Open Source, it is still based on Linux so those parts are open source. Of course, Android is the same way... the core OS may be open source, but the Google apps, MFG additions, and carrier additions typically aren't. Also, Palm doesn't make you hack your phone to get root access. Want root access, put it in developer mode by entering one well known code. Wanna update but worried you might loose your root access? Well stop worrying... that happens all the time in Android and iOS worlds, but not on webOS :).

Re:Nothing?

[Lifyre]

The Verizon Android phones tend not to be too mucked up by Verizon as opposed to the makers filling them with bloatware. The interfaces are all done by Motorola or HTC, etc... and Verizon hasn't crippled any of the features, I have full access to the GPS, WiFi, 3G, and everything else the phone has to offer. I can even install any app I want, something ATT will not allow.

As for ATT and Adroid have you looked at the lock downs, garbage, and restrictions ATT has put on them? In the psat ATT has left their phones alone for the most part, I think that time is past.

Re:Nothing?

[Shakrai]

Which I don't understand. The question for me isn't whether or not the carrier locks down my phone. The question is whether or not I can do what I want with it. If I can then I'll buy the phone. If not I'll find something else.

Verizon locks down the ability of all their dumbphones to accept ringtones and wallpapers outside of the VCast walled garden. With many models of Motorola phones it's trivially easy to bypass these restrictions and do what you want. Some of the Motorola phones (the RAZR line was famous for this) even had leaked versions of non-VZW firmware that could be loaded. I bought these phones knowing full well that I could customize them to do what I want and still have access to Verizon's network.

Ditto with the smartphones. Virtually all of the android phones can be rooted. That gives you the ability to remove unwanted Verizon software (VCast, VZ Navigator, etc.), the ability to enable wi-fi tethering without paying an additional fee for the privilege, the ability to block ads and so on. This is all I could ask for from my phone, so I'm content to own a Motorola Droid-X.

If you want more than that then Verizon and the Android line of phones they offer probably isn't for you. There's nothing stopping you from buying a completely unlocked GSM phone and going with T-Mobile or AT&T. Heck, I'd join T-Mobile in a New York Minute if they had decent rural coverage. Their network in Upstate NY is a pathetic joke though. Verizon works just about everywhere around these parts. I can do everything I want to with the phones that I've bought from them. What more do I need?

Re:Nothing?

[Anonymous Coward]

4) Android has a full set of applications and is a much more open format.

Untrue. Android got no game.

Re:Nothing?

[Sancho]

Which I don't understand. The question for me isn't whether or not the carrier locks down my phone. The question is whether or not I can do what I want with it. If I can then I'll buy the phone. If not I'll find something else.

Part of the problem (for me) is that if I jailbreak my iPhone*, I eventually get to make a tough choice: apply a security patch or keep my jailbreak. Maybe the new firmware will be jailbroken, maybe not. Maybe there will be a third-party patch, and maybe not. But the problem is that I have to make that choice.

With the DroidX, can you replace the kernel? If not, and there is a kernel exploit, then what? You're running a vulnerable phone until Verizon decides to push an update (if they ever do.) The problem is that our phones are becoming more and more like computers, with all of the advantages and disadvantages that comes along with that, but we don't have the ability to do whatever we want with the software on those computers.

* I don't own an iPhone, but for the sake of this post, pretend that I do.

Re:Nothing?

[natehoy]

I got my smartphone nearly two years ago, issued by my company (a BlackBerry). My contract is up in another few months. We had our choice of three BlackBerry models (81xx, 83xx, and 88xx) and two carriers (Verizon and AT&T).

A significant population of people really wanted iPhones, but at the time they were most certainly NOT ready for corporate prime time.

More importantly, AT&T's coverage is a little worse than Verizon's up in this area, too, so locking into AT&T for everyone was completely impractical.

Now things are very different.

If my company decides to replace our phones when the contract is up, who knows what options will be available to us? iPhone seems to be ready for corporate use now - they've beefed them up to acceptable security, added remote wipe, encrypted the onboard data, etc. A lot of things that, much as I'm a fan of the Droid OS, Droid has yet to deliver as far as I know. So I suspect it'll be iPhone or BlackBerry for us.

Of course, the iPhone is still impractical at the moment, because there are a lot of people who were forced to choose Verizon for their BlackBerries simply because AT&T lacked coverage at their houses or places where they needed it. This despite the fact that Verizon crippled the GPS and a few other features on the phone, so there was a decided preference for AT&T for most of us (fortunately, I'm in a good AT&T coverage area at home so I was able to use AT&T). If your phone don't work, then it don't work. So unless the iPhone was somehow available on Verizon, it's simply not an option around here for many people.

But if the iPhone hits Verizon, there's little reason to even offer AT&T any more at work. They could easily consolidate to the platform most people seem to want (iPhone) on the carrier that has better coverage around these parts (Verizon) and consolidate to one single handset model rather than six and one carrier rather than two. They'd need fewer swap spares and probably get better pricing on plans, too.

Personally, I'd prefer a newer BlackBerry, but hey - I'm not paying for it. If the company decides to standardize on Verizon iPhones, then that's what I'll carry. And it'll beat the hell out of paying for my own phone.

Re:Nothing?

[flappinbooger]

Ah. I see. I haven't really had a ton of phones, but I specifically recall one example in the past. This was probably 3 or 4 years ago by now.

I had a razor phone on ATT. It started off on cingular and changed to ATT during the time I had it. It was totally "free" and I had access to whatever I wanted, I could "hack" it.

So, then for whatever reason my company changed to verizon, and we all got verizon razor phones. I couldn't even import the phone book into the new verizon phone.... Yikes.

Good to know that a vzw android doesn't get messed with like their cheapo phones! tnx.

Re:Nothing?

[node 3]

Apple had their chance to completely dominate the phone market and they've blown it

Are you insane? They do dominate the phone market. And if they come out with a Verizon iPhone, that can only help continue that domination.

Re:Nothing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Changing the ringtone is easy. Adding new ringtones is another story.

That being told, I can't get ringtones on my wife's non-smartphone nokia without paying an inflated 1.99 per mutilated-song audio-clip.

Re:Nothing?

[node 3]

What I mean is all the people that wanted a true smartphone got one in the past year - they got a Droid. Few will want to pay again to get an iPhone.

Disregard my previous question to you, I now have the answer. You are insane.

Re:Nothing?

[falsified]

Botched how? It was delayed by a bit, but for a good reason, and at least Verizon tries to announce these upgrades ahead of time. And I can't really complain about an easy-as-pie OTA upgrade.

I have a Droid and I have no clue what V-Cast even is, or how to get to it.

I have Market, which damn well better stay there. I can also download and install .apk files from the internet.

One-click rooting is now available for other Android phones, and easy on the Droid. I haven't really bothered because the stock software is fine. I can even tether, and Verizon's network makes this a pleasant experience.

But yes, with all your sadface removed, the Fascinate looks like a nice phone.

Re:Nothing?

[MrHanky]

No, you haven't given a single plausible reason, never mind a valid one, so I don't have to do anything except point out that your fantasy about the world's most expensive phone dominating the market is patently ridiculous.

Re:Nothing?

[node 3]

Been covered before. Palm and Android can talk and surf as long as you're on WiFi. Current EVDO, not so much.

That's not the same thing. That's pure apologetics. AT&T's 3G network allows you to use your data 3G connection simultaneously with your 3G voice connection. This is a feature that is not possible on the CDMA carriers, and there's nothing Palm or Android can do about this.

Talking while using WiFi is something else entirely, and is only potentially limited by hardware or software.

Re:Nothing?

[falsified]

I agree with most of your points, but it remains true that the average iPhone app is nicer than Android's stuff. (For reference, I have a Droid now, and I used to have an iPhone.) It shouldn't really matter WHY it's true to a consumer.

I have what I need, but iPhone's selection tends to be more polished, and developers seem to spend a lot more time on the iPhone version of their app if they have an iPhone and a Droid version. An easy side-by-side comparison would be Pandora or Urbanspoon.

This is getting better, slowly, but it does often feel like the Android selection is a step behind. Not a deal breaker for me, but it is frustrating, given most Android phones have better specs than the iPhone.

Re:Nothing?

[node 3]

1) iPhones are $99, $199, and $299, with a two year contract. Android phones are sometimes free with a two year contract (and often also requiring the purchase of another phone, but there are always sales of some sort). That is not "hideously expensive".
2) True
3) They are the best in the world, but it is true they aren't to everyone's taste. They are, however, to most people's taste.
4) True, but that is more of a universal constant than something that will affect one over the other.

Re:Nothing?

[node 3]

The $500 is for the phone with no subsidy. Once you're under contract, you aren't eligible for the subsidy.

Droid X is $570 without a contract. Acting like the iPhone is super expensive ignores the fact that *all* smartphones are similarly expensive (without a contract) or similarly inexpensive (with one).

Re:Nothing?

[cbhacking]

My understanding is that rooting an Android device is generally vastly easier than doing the same to an iPhone. Granted, I don't have either, but my friends with Droids have all manner of unsanctioned functionality enabled.

Re:Nothing?

[node 3]

There are more people who will ditch AT&T for Verizon than there are people who will ditch Android for iPhone

I'll take "imaginary facts pulled from my ass for $100, Alex"

for the simple fact that the U.S. isn't the whole world

That proves this how exactly?

Also, some people dislike the need for going through a goddamn 12 step program just to change the ringtone.

Are you fucking high? Settings -> Sounds -> Ringtone. How does Android do this that is so much better?

For a few things where there's money involved for Apple, the iPhone is remarkably user hostile.

That demonstrates your ignorance of Apple products. They don't design their UI's specifically around what they will directly benefit financially from. They design them around how people will use them. By making the best product they can, they sell more and make more money. Services like the iTunes stores aren't primarily sources of profit. They have them because by controlling those, they can exert more control over the quality of their products than their competitors can, leading to a more attractive product to the consumer.

That doesn't come without a cost, though. If they can't keep the quality of their offerings high, then there's the opportunity for someone else to step in and provide something better. With Apple's model, the company lives or dies based on Apple's abilities. With other products, like Android, its success is dependent on the collective actions of various and disparate companies.

Re:Nothing?

[node 3]

And yet a single phone model on a single carrier still takes a huge slice of the pie which Android has only recently (this year) managed to catch up with, and only by being offered by EVERY carrier.

Exactly. In terms of sales opportunities, Android has had a clear advantage over iPhone for well over a year now, and even with that, Android is only now reaching parity in terms of new units sold.

Currently, the only things Android has going for it over iPhone that the average consumer truly cares about are carrier choice and price. This story is about alleviating one of those things. As for price, being more expensive than some MP3 players didn't seem to harm the iPod much. Once people can truly chose between Android and iPhone, we'll see how things really stack up. The only thing that will keep Android up in this game will be pricing. Specifically, as a free phone, because even with a $50 Android vs a $99 iPhone, consumers are going to chose the iPhone. It's just that up to this point, Verizon customers were not even offered this choice.

Re:Nothing?

[MrHanky]

iPhones are only $99 if you disregard the cost of the contract. If you do, you're an idiot. Since you insist on being an idiot, I can only assume you work in marketing, and evidently you do: it's patently untrue that the iPhone is the best phone in the world if you take regular phone functionality into consideration, or even just email -- if your fingers get wet and cold, it's practically useless. Since those drawbacks are pretty extreme, it's simply not the best phone in the world. It's just more pleasant to use in a very limited number of situations.

Re:Nothing?

[Anonymous Coward]

It didn't come at the cost of an exclusive deal, Steve Jobs wanted an exclusive deal in exchange for marketing assistance, still a fairly common arrangement at the time and still today, as many Android models are exclusive to their carriers. Pretty sure you can only get a Motorola Droid X at Verizon.

Because of the exclusive arrangement, Cingular/ATT markets the iPhone using its own dollars because iPhone lust leads to ATT customers, where as a generic phone that can be bought at any carrier doesn't get pushed. You could argue that the iPhone was going to be a smash hit and didn't need that exclusivity, but thats the magic of hindsight. When released there were all sorts of doubts that it would have any lasting appeal, esp. because Apple priced it high in case it did flop, they would have a better chance of recovering R&D.

Re:Nothing?

[MrHanky]

I've already replied to your presumed counterpoints; you're adding nothing but stupidity to the discussion.

Re:Nothing?

[Anonymous Coward]

What I mean is all the people that wanted a true smartphone got one in the past year - they got a Droid. Few will want to pay again to get an iPhone.

Disregard my previous question to you, I now have the answer. You are insane.

I thought that was obvious from the get go. Once people know the iPhone is coming, if they are interested, they will wait. To lure me onto a data plan, they will likely approve me going to an iPhone from my flip phone before my contract is up.

And those of use who wanted an iPhone may have recognized the Droid is not an iPhone and bought an iPod Touch to go with their flip phone. From what i hear I'm not that much less connected than someone on ATT's network

Re:Nothing?

[i_b_don]

"but we don't have the ability to do whatever we want with the software on those computers."

I've never in my life felt in any way restricted as to what OS I put on my computer. I've never felt that my ability to do with it what I want was under seige but in the smartphone world it feels like all the scummiest corporate characters in the world are reaching out to put their slimy hands on your phone.

Apple wants to parent you and tell you what you can and can't do with your phone. Verizon and the other big phone companies want to install hooks that prevent you from using free market apps, that force you to use their tools/marketplaces so you have to see and purchase what they want you to purchase. They also want to kill net neutrality so they will have complete control over the airwaves so they can squish competitors at will. You will see their ads. You will buy from their stores. You will be limited in what you can do on your phone!

There is a constant war going on between these evil companies and us (apple being only mildly evil). They've subverted Android and are locking it down. The Nexus One is dead. They're killing net neutrality. We're losing.

In comparison you know what my computer feels like to me? Utter freedom. Microsoft looks like a positive saint in comparison to these people and Windows OS...a bastion of openness. I can put whatever I want on my PC. No one reaches out and fights me for control. It is mine. Exactly how i want it to be.

My phone is nothing like my computer.

I just wish it was.

d

Re:Nothing?

[Shakrai]

With the DroidX, can you replace the kernel? If not, and there is a kernel exploit, then what? You're running a vulnerable phone until Verizon decides to push an update (if they ever do.) The problem is that our phones are becoming more and more like computers, with all of the advantages and disadvantages that comes along with that, but we don't have the ability to do whatever we want with the software on those computers.

*shrug*, you don't always have a promise of a security update with a lot of software packages, even open source ones. I do what you are saying but it isn't enough to operate as a deal-breaker for me.

Re:Nothing?

[0100010001010011]

How could anyone get confused

Re:Nothing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Fandroids love to constantly mention how the Marketplace is so much more open and gives a greater variety of quality apps, and yet never name specifics about what makes it "better".

Re:Nothing?

[Sancho]

Certainly not, but you can look at track records. No phone in history (that I'm aware of) has been updated like the iPhone. Most computer operating system vendors supply updates for security, some (Microsoft, for example) for longer than others.

Re:Nothing?

[Sancho]

The problem is that our phones are becoming more and more like computers..., but we don't have the ability to do whatever we want with the software on those computers.

In fact, the computers I was referring to were the phones.

Re:Nothing?

[node 3]

iPhones are only $99 if you disregard the cost of the contract. If you do, you're an idiot.

Hmm... Let's see what I wrote, shall we?

"iPhones are $99, $199, and $299, with a two year contract."

Well, sheee-it. Did you even read the post you replied to? It's not like the two-year contract is some sort of iPhone-only thing, it applies to all smartphones. You can buy it unsubsidized for $500+ (like the Droid X, which is $570), or buy it at a lower price with a contract.

The only idiocy here is anyone who seems to think that contracts are some sort of downside for the iPhone in relation to Android.

Since you insist on being an idiot, I can only assume you work in marketing, and evidently you do:

You do realize your ass isn't a oracle, and you can't just accept everything that you pull out of it as a fact, right?

it's patently untrue that the iPhone is the best phone in the world

Correct. But they are the best smartphone in the world.

if your fingers get wet and cold, it's practically useless.

What the fuck? What did I tell you about making stuff up?

Since those drawbacks are pretty extreme, it's simply not the best phone in the world.

Those are imaginary drawbacks that don't even make any sense. It's ludicrous to claim that "wet and cold" hands are some sort of huge issue with the iPhone.

It's just more pleasant to use in a very limited number of situations.

When you're ready to quit making shit up and actually making honest points, do let me know won't you?

Re:Nothing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Some of us are glad it's not easy to have custom ringtones on an iPhone. I wish other manufactures made it harder, then perhaps public places would be less like hell whenever a phone rings.

Re:Nothing?

[worx101]

Highly depends on the phone and the version of android it is running at the time.

Re:Nothing?

[EETech1]

I was an Alltel customer that got sold to Verizon, and my touch pro 2 lost it's ability to surf and talk when that happened! It's very annoying when tethering! Alltel used that as a selling point as well!

Re:Nothing?

[KingMotley]

Yes

Re:Nothing?

[Aqualung812]

Are you fucking high? Settings -> Sounds -> Ringtone. How does Android do this that is so much better?

I followed those directions on my iPhone, but I still can't find how I can put my own ringtone for a SMS message. More then 6 iPhone users in a room and someone gets a text? At least two people will be checking their phones.

Seriously, I don't know how this has not been fixed. I can't imagine that the people AT Apple, with all of them on their iPhones, don't get annoyed on an hourly basis with not knowing who in the room got the text message!

Re:Nothing?

[hazydave]

LTE is like EvDO -- it's IP-only. Verizon could easily support voice and data on 3G today, they'd just have to support it using VoIP, rather than some built-in 3G voice protocol as they offer in UMTS (GSM's 3G, which also includes HSPA/HSPA+). Any old smart phone of today can do VoIP... as the Skype application clearly demonstrates.

They'll have the same question to answer for LTE. So will AT&T.

Re:Nothing?

[hazydave]

Or that whole "Android is just better than iPhone" thing... some people will appreciate that, too. That's why I have an Android phone. I evaluated iPhone, and found is sorely wanting.

Re:Nothing?

[jscotta44]

Everyone has their own issues and needs. Specifically, where did you find the iPhone lacking as compared to the whichever Android phone you purchased?

Re:Nothing?

[jscotta44]

I do it all the time. I either buy one directly from iTunes, if available. Or I choose a song/sound from my library, run it through with an iOS app or Garage Band (free app) and create it then drag it to my desktop iTunes and it is on my iOS device the next time I sync.

Really, did you try to screw up the process? It is very, very easy or at least should be for someone posting to /. I know 70 year-old men (marketing types if you can believe it) that do this all the time, as well.

Re:Nothing?

[jscotta44]

I agree that the Apple provided Message app should have the ability to let you set your own tone. I'm sure that there are no Adroid apps that are missing something – perfection personified.

Seriously, though, if you don't like the built-in SMS app, then download another from the App store.

Re:Nothing?

[steveg]

Pacific Bell owned Cingular. SBC bought PacBell (and other Baby Bells as well) and got Cingular. Then SBC bought AT&T, and since they really, really wanted to put things back to where they were before the Bell system was broken up, they then renamed themselves AT&T since they now owned the name.

I'm pretty sure they bought AT&T for the name alone.

Re:Nothing?

[Aqualung812]

Seriously, though, if you don't like the built-in SMS app, then download another from the App store.

I don't see any that would replace the built-in app, at least not in the official US iTunes store.

Re:Nothing?

[Lifyre]

No problem! I've had the same problem. It is what caused me to move to Cingular from Verizon many years ago, better freer phones on Cingular. I've basically moved to Verizon for the same reasons and the better customer service.

Not going to happen. Here's why.

[aristotle-dude]

Ever notice that beyond the bold carrier emblems on the phones themselves that virtually all smartphones sold on Verizon are advertised by Verizon instead of the handset makers themselves? Contrast that with the iPhone which might be sold exclusively in the US on AT&T but it is marketed by Apple directly and there are no AT&T (or other carriers for that matter) logos anywhere to be found on the phone or in the manuals.

Those other handset makers have allowed themselves to be relegated OEMs for the carriers while Apple markets directly to the consumer and only used the carriers as subsidized sales channels. This means that Apple manufactures one model (save for the Chinese no-Wifi model) for use worldwide and only enters IMEIs into their database to as sim LOCKED for any carrier that requests it. Except for different manuals and charger models, the iPhone you buy in the US/Canada or the UK only differ in what is included in the box and the phone itself is the same production run.

Even assuming that Verizon agreed to no branding on the phone either physically or in software/logo form, Apple would have to either create a special run for Verizon (CDMA) or raise the costs for every iPhone manufactured by switching to a CDMA/GSM model for no added benefit for people living outside of the US.

Re:Not going to happen. Here's why.

[ceejayoz]

Ever notice that beyond the bold carrier emblems on the phones themselves that virtually all smartphones sold on Verizon are advertised by Verizon instead of the handset makers themselves? Contrast that with the iPhone which might be sold exclusively in the US on AT&T but it is marketed by Apple directly and there are no AT&T (or other carriers for that matter) logos anywhere to be found on the phone or in the manuals.

Other AT&T phones have AT&T branding all over them, just like the other cell phone networks. I'd imagine AT&T wanted the iPhone branded with their logo, but that they got shot down. I also suspect Apple wouldn't give on that issue in talks with Verizon.

Re:Not going to happen. Here's why.

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple is already making a CDMA iPhone, and it's on Verizon. Rolls out in Q1. Try to keep up.

Re:Not going to happen. Here's why.

[Bassman59]

Ever notice that beyond the bold carrier emblems on the phones themselves that virtually all smartphones sold on Verizon are advertised by Verizon instead of the handset makers themselves? Contrast that with the iPhone which might be sold exclusively in the US on AT&T but it is marketed by Apple directly and there are no AT&T (or other carriers for that matter) logos anywhere to be found on the phone or in the manuals.

I see your point, and I agree with it, but if you look in the upper-left corner of an iPhone by the signal-strength meter (please, enough with the idiot "how many bars?" crap), you'll see the magic letters "AT&T."

Re:Not going to happen. Here's why.

[Bassman59]

Apple is already making a CDMA iPhone, and it's on Verizon. Rolls out in Q1. Try to keep up.

Yeah, sure, right.

Re:Not going to happen. Here's why.

[WeirdKid]

You're mostly right with your reasoning, but I don't think that will stop it from happening.

The original discussions between Apple and Verizon broke down because Verizon wasn't willing to give "ownership" of the customer to Apple. Verizon leverages (or used to leverage) its channel to nickel and dime its subscribers (e.g. disable bluetooth file browsing so they can charge you 25 cents to export a photo via an email to yourself or extort a monthly PictureMail package from you). Apple wanted none of that; they wanted a different uncluttered experience for iPhone users, and AT&T was more than willing to let them have it in exchange for exclusivity.

With Android, Verizon has started to loosen its grip on the subscriber a bit: a non-Verizon app store (The Marketplace) was a huge step for them. Remember, a few years ago, Verizon phones were much more limited. In fact, as a policy, Verizon refused WiFi capability for any phone on their network. I remember having discussions with their enterprise sales teams where they'd say things like, "Why would you ever want to waste your time and money building out a WiFi network when we've built the most reliable 3G network with coverage everywhere?" Umm... simultaneous voice and data, best path call routing with fixed-mobile convergence, coverage sucks in some buildings, etc. They've since realized that WiFi is a great way to offload some data traffic and maintain a more constant QoS for their customers. Anyway, this, along with attitudes toward Bluetooth and VoIP have changed, largely due to the influence of Android and Google.

On a side note, Google has been slacking a bit as a partner for Verizon. Verizon has been pushing and pushing them to make certain changes to the platform to make it more "enterprise ready" (e.g. device-wide policy enforcement, encrypted storage, for a couple), and it's taking too darn long. So, MOT and VZW have started to take some of this into their own hands, because their enterprise customers are telling them "no droids until they are at least as secure as the iPhone, but ideally as secure as Blackberry". Perhaps bringing another Android competitor into the stable will spur Google into action.

Anyway, my point is that Verizon is much more "open" than it used to be, but don't mistake "open" for FOSS in this discussion -- Verizon doesn't give a crap about that. They are simply more willing now to allow customers and partners to do more with their network, because they've proven to themselves that their network quality is enough to maintain retention and grow sales. So whereas before Verizon wanted no part of the Apple/iTunes/iPhone experience for fear of dilution of their brand and services, now they've "grown up", you could say, and they are willing to just Be The Network for some of their customers. Because, in the end, customers are customers.

Now after I've said all that, all my contacts at Apple and AT&T remind me that it was a 5 year deal for exclusivity, and that takes us into 2012. However, what they don't know is whether the iPad 3G deal modified that original agreement or not.

Re:Not going to happen. Here's why.

[Dog-Cow]

In all likelihood, that's just telling you whose network you are on.

But I really don't have anything to base that on; I'm just guessing.

Re:Not going to happen. Here's why.

[SwabTheDeck]

So, where's the part where you explain why it's not going to happen? AT&T had branding all over their phones before the iPhone came around, so what makes you think Verizon would be unwilling to make the same concession? As far as hardware is concerned, if they go with a combined CDMA/GSM chip, it's likely that the cost to buy the chips from the supplier will be nearly the same, or negligibly higher (~$1-2). For that price, they get access to close to half of the US cell phone market that they didn't have previously. Seems like a good deal to me. If history is any indicator, most of Apple's partners eventually concede to Apple's way of doing business (see: everything in the iTunes store).

Re:Not going to happen. Here's why.

[aristotle-dude]

Ever notice that beyond the bold carrier emblems on the phones themselves that virtually all smartphones sold on Verizon are advertised by Verizon instead of the handset makers themselves? Contrast that with the iPhone which might be sold exclusively in the US on AT&T but it is marketed by Apple directly and there are no AT&T (or other carriers for that matter) logos anywhere to be found on the phone or in the manuals.

I see your point, and I agree with it, but if you look in the upper-left corner of an iPhone by the signal-strength meter (please, enough with the idiot "how many bars?" crap), you'll see the magic letters "AT&T."

When I go down to the US with my Canadian (FIDO) phone, I get AT&T displayed in the corner or Cingular depending on whether I'm in the continental US states or Hawaii. When I was in Japan, it displayed NTT Docomo and various carriers as I traveled throughout Europe.

The carrier string will display whatever network you happen to be on at the moment.

Re:Not going to happen. Here's why.

[magus_melchior]

switching to a CDMA/GSM model for no added benefit for people living outside of the US.

No added benefit for western/northern Europe and Australia, perhaps. Verizon is transitioning to a GSM 4G network anyway, so this point will most likely be moot by the time iPhones are sold on Verizon (if ever).

Re:Not going to happen. Here's why.

[aristotle-dude]

So, where's the part where you explain why it's not going to happen? AT&T had branding all over their phones before the iPhone came around, so what makes you think Verizon would be unwilling to make the same concession? As far as hardware is concerned, if they go with a combined CDMA/GSM chip, it's likely that the cost to buy the chips from the supplier will be nearly the same, or negligibly higher (~$1-2). For that price, they get access to close to half of the US cell phone market that they didn't have previously. Seems like a good deal to me. If history is any indicator, most of Apple's partners eventually concede to Apple's way of doing business (see: everything in the iTunes store).

The requirements for such a chip would have to at least support the status quo support for GSM and HSPA which would be UMTS/HSDPA/HSUPA (850, 900, 1900, 2100 MHz) frequency bands and GSM/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz) for GSM. Very few GSM phones other than the iPhone support that many regions let alone so called "WORLD" phones. I have heard horror stories from business people with a so-called "WORLD" RIM handset not working when they arrived in Japan or some part of Europe because it only supported a few frequencies compared with a GSM version.

Re:Not going to happen. Here's why.

[ArtDent]

Q1 2008? 2009? 2010?

It's hard to know which unsubstantiated rumour you're referring to.

Re:Not going to happen. Here's why.

[Anonymous Coward]

That is because satisfied users are what allows apple to continue as a business.

They sell/lease to *me*, while the other phone makers sell to the carriers and don't care at all what you think of the phone, so long as the carriers can bundle it a way they makes profit.

Re:Not going to happen. Here's why.

[Sean0michael]

That's not entirely true. HTC now advertises quite a few of its new handsets that feature Android.

But it is mostly true, as I usually see a new phone advertised with the carrier and not on its own.

LTE != 4G

[Scyber]

It doesn't meet the requirements for 4G.

Re:LTE != 4G

[LiMikeTnux]

there is no "4G" as of yet, but if anything, LTE would be exactly what is required. It is also, by design, more scalable while using less resources than HSDPA+ As of now they are still working on what "4G" actually defines, and until then, it is nothing more than a marketing term.

Re:LTE != 4G

[Anonymous Coward]

Just like the current WiMax.
LTE Advanced will be 4G.
Anyways do we really care about the number of Gs? Why don't they just give us the bandwidth?

Re:LTE != 4G

[MistrBlank]

Here... let me fix that for you,

4G (as Clear and Sprint want you to believe) does not meet LTE.

Re:LTE != 4G

[SpectreBlofeld]

It may not exactly meet the specifications of the body that exists to define these things, but it's certainly fourth-generation (for VZW anyway). AMPS, 1xRTT, EVDO, LTE. I count four.

Data plan pricing

[Isaac-Lew]

How much (more) are people willing to pay for data on a Verizon iPhone? None of the articles I've read even mention this.
I think Sprint is a likelier target, given that a) they already have a 4G network deployed in a lot of cities b) their customers are prepared to pay a surcharge for 4G - $10/month c) said data plan is unlimited.

Re:Data plan pricing

[gorzek]

The $10 surcharge is precisely why I won't get a 4G phone when my Sprint contract is up for renewal. If it wasn't for the free mobile calls across the board I would've dropped my Sprint phone for an alternative a while ago. I already pay $70 + fees and taxes per month for it, and now they want me to pay $10 extra a month for the privilege of 4G? Shove it.

I remember when cell phone plan prices were going down, now they just seem to be climbing ever upward.

Re:Data plan pricing

[Isaac-Lew]

Even with the 4G surcharge, a voice+data plan on Sprint is still cheaper than a comparable plan on Verizon or AT&T (plus, the Sprint plan is unlimited mobile-to-mobile, as well as unlimited 3G/4G data).

Re:Data plan pricing

[gorzek]

I'd just like to know what the hell happened to competition in mobile phone service. Carriers used to fight tooth and nail over customers, now it just seems like they collude to screw their customers as much as possible.

On the iPhone coming to Verizon

[Iphtashu Fitz]

I'll just cut and paste a comment I made about this on another site:

How many years have they been predicting this, and how many times have those predictions failed to come true? I used to say that I won't believe this until Verizon or Apple themselves announce it. I'm now at the point where I won't believe it until I'm actually holding a Verizon iPhone in my hand, and even then I'll be dubious.

Re:On the iPhone coming to Verizon

[Anonymous Coward]

OK. Thanks for the heads-up. Let me know when you do. I look forward to reading it.

Re:On the iPhone coming to Verizon

[Missing.Matter]

That was the case with the iPad. It was predicted since the Newton, and never came to fruition until 2010. If you predict something even remotely likely for long enough, it's bound to come true.

Re:On the iPhone coming to Verizon

[Pojut]

If you predict something even remotely likely for long enough, it's bound to come true.

You mean like Iraq having weapons of mass destru-

**NO CARRIER**

High speed still with low usage caps?

[DigitalSorceress]

I'm all for high-speed mobile Internet, but will they continue with their abysmally low usage caps?

WOOT! I can watch a full HD movie, streaming it almost in real-time... well, most of it anyway: capped out before the climax? Ahh well, I can finish it once my billing cycle rolls back around.

Yes, I know it's not quite that bad, but you get the point: at the same time all sorts of ISPs and mobile network operators are increasing speeds and falling all over themselves to tell you how quickly you can do stuff, they're capping out monthly transfer at cripplingly low numbers.

Verizon vPhone

[Anonymous Coward]

I have never done business with such a money hungry company as Verizon. When Verizon gets a phone, it looses a portion of its functionality before they start selling it. I used to be a customer until every phone I bought from them removed file transfer functionality. But you can happily purchase ringtones from them for $2 each or pay them $35 to backup your pictures, contacts and calendars. Maybe they'll add a 'data sync' plan for $20 a month that will allow users to backup their vPhone with iTunes. God forbid you ever download a video clip even as a v-cast subscriber. $3 royalty charges in addition to the monthly v-cast billing for each download. I can easily see Verizon's version of the iPhone as being the first smartphone with bloatware on it, because there is no way they are going to let their users enjoy any sort of extra features (videos, games, productivity apps) without having to go through one of their apps and pay outrageous fees.

Re:Verizon vPhone

[rickb928]

"I can easily see Verizon's version of the iPhone as being the first smartphone with bloatware on it"

You haven't been paying attention. Samsung in particular is adding plenty of bloatware to the Galaxy phones.

See? Android rules! :)

Re:Verizon vPhone

[Hatta]

I can easily see Verizon's version of the iPhone as being the first smartphone with bloatware on it

All smartphones have bloatware on them. It's what makes them smartphones instead of just phones.

I don't care about phones.

[characterZer0]

GSM and CDMA are fine for making phone calls. If Verizon had 4G, they could offer regular internet service faster than many LECs and cable companies are able/willing to offer.

Re:I don't care about phones.

[SpectreBlofeld]

There are benefits to the phone side as well. The 700 mhz Verizon is employing has a much greater range than the current frequencies, building walls are much more easily penetrated (meaning less dropped calls in the elevator or whatever), and more people can make calls on the same tower (more bandwidth). It's good all around.

Banned for life!!

[thestudio_bob]

But since I wanted to write my own apps...

Gee, so Apple has banned you from writing iPhone apps? Gosh, that sucks.

Re:Banned for life!!

[Anonymous Coward]

I think what he means is that he doesn't want to deal with some Apple bureaucrat rejecting his apps.

Question

[mark72005]

Will those of us slumming on AT&T be able to switch to Verizon with the iPhone we currently have?

Verizon iPhone

[SETIGuy]

Even if it was my "new every 2" year, I wouldn't be getting an iPhone. I like to play classic games on console emulators on my phone. I like to be able to visit flash based web sites when necessary. I also like to be able to transfer things back and forth over USB and bluetooth without worrying about whether I'm allowed to do that. I don't buy my music from iTunes. I like free tethering.

Of course Verizon will love the iPhone, because the whole concept fits in with their control freak persona.

Re:Verizon iPhone

[SuperKendall]

Even if it was my "new every 2" year, I wouldn't be getting an iPhone. I like to play classic games on console emulators on my phone. I like to be able to visit flash based web sites when necessary. I also like to be able to transfer things back and forth over USB and bluetooth without worrying about whether I'm allowed to do that. I don't buy my music from iTunes. I like free tethering.

Then buy an iPhone an jailbreak. You can do all of that.

Or buy an Android device after you do the research to figure out if you can root the model you are thinking to buy...

Re:Verizon iPhone

[SETIGuy]

I don't have to root my Verizon Android phone to do any of those things.

Who will back down?

[Mr_Silver]

Assuming this is true, it'll be interesting to see who will back down when it comes to customising the handset. You don't need me to tell you that Verizon are notoriously bad at modifying a device to suit their ends and that Apple are unrepentant that the experience of the iPhone should not be compromised by the whims of a carrier.

However Apple's growth in the US isn't really doing so well as it used to and any meaningful increase in market share will need to come from new operators. Now you could argue that Apple isn't about market share but revenue and whilst that is true, the last thing they want is developers defecting to Android because it gives them a larger target. Apple have been lucky that Google haven't really been on the ball with the Android Market. It still isn't available in many major countries and the user experience (especially when it comes to finding new content) isn't the best. However Google will eventually sort this out.

We may all joke about Ballmer jumping up and down yelling "Developers! Developers!" but he was right. If iOS starts losing its shine then Apple will need to find other ways to encourage people to continue developing for them. One of those has been to relax the restrictions and make it clearer for developers to understand the accreditation process - although sadly, I think this may have been more a case of fending off pending lawsuits, rather than realising that they may be on the cusp of a backlash.

This lack of market-share in the US means that Apple need Verizon far more than Verizon needs Apple. Which puts Verizon in a far stronger negotiating position. If Apple capitulate, then other operators may see this as an open invitation to try and push their requirements on Apple for future devices. In a future like this, iOS would suffer in the same way Android has, that is the carriers dictating the user experience.

I really hope Verizon don't win.

Re:Who will back down?

[mlts]

If the carriers win over Apple, it will be a black day. Regardless if you love Apple or hate them, having the carrier dictate the terms of what goes on the device is not a good thing.

First, user interfaces. Do we want every device sporting a new UI just so carrier "A" can look different from "B"? I don't want to have to twiddle a spinning cube to find the app I need, nor use some oddball UI only made just to be different.

Second, crapware. On the iPhone, it does need activation, but it doesn't require anything more than that. Motorola phones have to be tied to an E-mail account (which gets a full mirror of all your contacts and other data) before they can be used for anything other than dialing 911.

Third, markets. I'm sure each carrier will want its own app market. One CDMA carrier on Windows Mobile smartphones (not PDAs) used to force all app makers to purchase a key from them for over $1000 if they wanted their apps to run on their device. In most cases, more markets would be a good thing, but in this scenario, each cellular provider would have their own walled garden separate from everyone else's. Add exclusive licensing restrictions preventing a developer from selling their app in more than one cellular provider's marketplace, and you will find that you might have to buy your phone and choose your carrier depending on which of them carried the app you needed for your business.

Re:Who will back down?

[Overzeetop]

Handset customization and nickel/dime charges is exactly why Verizon doesn't have the iPhone already. Apple and Verizon have already played chicken on this issue once, and Verizon lost. Steve Jobs knows what he wants and what works. He won't let an outside vendor screw with his product. If anything, Apple is in a stronger position today that it was 4 years ago because the iPhone has been such a success. Sure, Verizon offers an added customer base, but the hallmark of Apple is that there stuff works the same everywhere. Jobs won't allow a fractured user experience.

God Chips

[Anonymous Coward]

Chipset makers are pushing WiMax and LTE together. Specifically, they've said that FD-LTE and WiMax are only separated by one or two patents covering the uplink channel, and they aren't going to support making separate chipsets anymore.

Qualcomm, Samsung and Beceem have all publicly said that their next chips will be multimode "God Chips" that can do FD-LTE, TD-LTE and WiMax with only software changes.

Qualcomm is rumored to be building the chipset for the CDMA iPhone. Given what Qualcomm is pushing other vendors to do, don't be suprised if it's radio core is powered by one of the new multimode chips that would enable it to work on Verizon's TD-LTE, Sprint's WiMax, and any FD-LTE replacement for WiMax in the future.

In fact, Qualcomm also makes a CPU core that uses the same ARM instruction set as all the other smartphone CPUs. I wouldn't be suprised if they're selling Apple a single solution and doing all the integration themselves. Apple could just be an OEM on this one.

That's the future-proof solution, anyway.

China Mobile's 3G is CDMA

[jaypaulw]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Mobile

That might end up being a big market.

Re:China Mobile's 3G is CDMA

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

so is NTT DoCoMo and everyone in Japan who isn't SoftBank.

not only smartphones...

[kallistoteles]

I work as an productionengineer with the digital LTE units in the base station, and with all the work I put in to this, I hope you will use it to more than just smartphones... :)

Carrier fear of commoditization?

[swb]

I think all carriers hate to be "just" carriers and fear a day in the future when their only product is commoditized and forced into head-head competition with other carriers.

The strategy seems to have always been with Verizon to restrict phone capabilities to force the use of Verizon products or services (eg, bluetooth restrictions on file sharing, photo downloads via USB, etc).

I can't believe there has been a time in recent memory when Apple would have ever agreed to crippling their product or surrendering their user experience to Verizon's fairly naked profit motives.

My next phone...

[Anonymous Coward]

will be a phone. One of those cheapy pre-paid Walmart jobs that has unlimited voice for $35/mo. I'm done with Smart Phones. They make my work follow me everywhere.

It means nothing to Android

[0xdeadbeef]

If I wanted an iPhone, I would have gotten one. Oh, wait, I did, because I write software for them.

But I use an Android phone as my personal device because it does more. And considering how popular Android devices have become, even among those who are not tech-savvy, means that the platform is going to be around for a long time.

A note on speeds

[twoallbeefpatties]

I live in Houston in an apartment complex a bit outside of the downtown areas. My complex has an exclusive contract with a small cable provider, for which they are the only source of landline internet to the apartment. Their rates are about average, about $45 for 3 Mbps down / 0.3 Mbps up, discounts for cable bundling. I was a bit disappointed, though, that they didn't have an option to pay extra for a higher-speed package.

Houston already has access to WiMax 4G internet coverage from Spring/Clear. The speeds are about the same as what I'm getting for cable now, with a monthly cost of around $60, minus the price of the modem. I'm actually still considering trying it out so that I'm just paying a bit more to get mobile net, but...

A quick Google search on LTE speeds suggests that the download speed for Verizon's new network will be somewhere in the range of 6-12 Mbps down / 3-5 Mbps up. If they can sell an unlimited data package at around $60/month, then that is going to make their mobile speeds directly competitive with landline carriers. I know that downtown Houston and some of the other "nice" areas have access to AT&T's U-Verse and other providers that offer better speed packages, but even for them, you're still talking about a wireless mobile provider providing competitive speeds against landlines.

I'm not sure whether to be hopeful about the rate of new wireless development or to be sorrowful about the state of local monopolies and the effect that has on landline development. Either way, if I'm still stuck in this apartment by the time Verizon gets their new network rolled out, I might just end up as an early adopter.

Re:A note on speeds

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, you could get a higher theoretical bandwidth by using a mobile device. My current Verizon phone has pretty good download bandwidth and the speeds are reasonable (I think it averages about 1.2 Mbit/sec and maybe has hit 2 on occasion), but the further you get away from your source the worse your speeds are going to get. You have to factor in latency to your connection speed. If you're just web browsing, your mobile connection is going to have a huge impact. If you're ever at home on your wireless network, try pinging a website, then plug in and ping it. The wired connection should have a faster ping response. Now, consider that instead of going to your router, you're going to some Verizon tower. The ping time is going to be worse. When I was driving down the east coast earlier this summer I was testing some of this out on my phone and in some cases was getting 1 second ping times. This is just going to destroy your internet experience, especially on poorly designed web pages that require you to download lots of tiny images. Some things were just unusable, even with a decent Mbit/sec rating. Just remember that when you go wireless, your effective bandwidth typically goes down (you're also more prone to dropping packets).

There are pros and cons to wireless, because it is definitely more convenient to be able to go anywhere that there's data service and do your thing. Make sure you weigh in everything, because it's also possible that the 3 Mbps down / 0.3 Mbps up data plan could be cheaper and faster than the LTE plan for your typical everyday activities.

Wrong carrier.

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

Everyone hears CDMA iPhone and translates it in their brains as, "oh, must be on Verizon."

Verizon right now isn't hurting like...

Sprint is.

Sprint's more willing to make the sweetheart deal to bring Apple on board.

Sprint's hurting. They *need* the iPhone.

Re:Wrong carrier.

[Sean0michael]

Sprint is upgrading to 4G on WiMax technology, and fast. They're pushing their EVO and such pretty heavily, along with their generous $70 talk-text-web plans. They're not likely to be interested in an iPhone unless its 4G, which just doesn't seem to be the case.

To boot, Sprint's 3G network is even less capable of handling the traffic than AT&T's, so I doubt their eager for the extra data the iPhone will bring.

Impact on Android

[ISurfTooMuch]

I don't think this will have much of an impact on Android. First, the folks who really want an iPhone will have already gotten one. Also, I don't think that people chose Android as a "poor man's iPhone". In fact, I think that many folks who get Android do it because they don't want the iPhone. And people are viewing this from a U.S. perspective, as if the iPhone and Android are only sold here. If you want to see how this may all play out, look overseas, where the iPhone is often sold by multiple carriers in a single country. In those places, Android is doing just fine.

But, on a side note, if Verizon does get the iPhone, I think a lot of people are going to be schooled on the incompatibility of different carriers' networks when they try to take their AT&T iPhones to be activated on Verizon and learn that they'll need to buy another handset. Mark my words, people are going to freak out, and this will definitely make it onto the tech section of CNN's Web site.

With $10 surcharge Sprint is still cheapest

[Envy Life]

Excellent point. Mod parent up

Ain't all it's cracked up to be

[Pointy_Hair]

VZW has brought out their version of popular GSM phones before. What you get is a watered down, restricted version of the original. My first experience with that was when the Moto Razr came out. I still use my 1st gen razr for cheap international roaming. The one my wife got through VZW is about a notch up from a furniture store prop. At least with the VZW iPhone, that will mean no international roaming (ala Blackberry 8830 - despite it's disabled gps feature intended to "force" you to buy the VZW add-on), unlocking it will be difficult and ultimately pointless, and no simultaneous voice and data.

The WSJ reported that one major reason Apple did not partner with VZW on the iPhone in the beginning boiled down to control over applications. As far as I can tell, VZW is still wrapped around the axle of trying to profit off of proprietary content that is widely available and free elsewhere (if your phone supports it). Their voice and data networks simply rock, but their cobbled up, proprietary phone choices keep me away. Apple and AT&T aren't exactly known for their openness, but at least you get the full feature set.

As far as 3G 4G or 12G, who really cares anymore? None of the providers really can or are willing to deliver anything close to theoretical speeds. When they finally do upgrade, it takes them another year to refresh their phone offerings to really take advantage of any increase. Just take the marketing fluff, multiply by 0.2, and that's what you can expect.

$500 Verizon iPhone

[Scareduck]

Re Apple's price, you're looking at a $300 phone on the new network. (The old $99 iPhone won't work on the new Verizon network, as the WSJ article makes clear; it's either one or the other, but Verizon won't offer a dual-mode phone.) Add to that maybe $200 to break your existing contract, and yeah, it's $500 deal.

Re:$500 Verizon iPhone

[nine-times]

Claiming that iPhones cost $500 because you have to break your existing contract is a bit unfair. iPhones are basically no more expensive than Android phones.

Re:$500 Verizon iPhone

[Sancho]

The pedantry here is astounding.

The $500 price came up because of this tidbit in one of the ancestor comments:

now that the iPhone is possibly coming, existing Verizon customers won't care: now that the iPhone is possibly coming, existing Verizon customers won't care:
1) We're already locked in 1-2 year contracts so we're not going to pay $500 for a new phone

The whole point was that people already under contract on Verizon won't (likely) want to pay $500 for a new phone.

This is the problem with not paying attention to the ancestor posts.

Re:$500 Verizon iPhone

[nine-times]

It's true, I didn't read his comment carefully enough at first to understand where he was getting the $500 price tag, but certainly part of the reason I didn't understand at first is because it's complete nonsense.

Of course the number of people who break their contract in order to buy an iPhone will be low. The number of people who break their contract to buy *any* phone is low. How many people do you think broke their contract to buy a Droid?

So the $500 number is irrelevant, and implying that iPhones cost $500 is misleading. Whenever a new phone comes out, there are some people who are under contract, some people who are not under contract, and some people who are about to fulfill their contract.

There's nothing special about the iPhone that makes it magically get released right after everyone in the world signs on for a 2 year contract, and then makes it get pulled from the market right before their contract expires. Getting a Verizon iPhone (should it be released) will not require breaking your contract. It will only require that you're patient enough to either (a) already have fulfilled your contract at some point without getting a new phone; or (b) wait until your current contract expires.

Re:$500 Verizon iPhone

[node 3]

Of course the number of people who break their contract in order to buy an iPhone will be low. The number of people who break their contract to buy *any* phone is low. How many people do you think broke their contract to buy a Droid?

That's an interesting point. I would wager vast sums of money that more people would break their contract for an iPhone than would for an Android phone, even though the overall numbers for both should be rather small.

Re:$500 Verizon iPhone

[Sancho]

The assertion of his post was that AT&T exclusivity for iPhones in the US allowed Android to get a foothold in the market that carrier-agnostic iPhone availability would have stifled. Now he didn't exactly back that up--rather, he stated that if the iPhone comes to Verizon, a bunch of people simply won't care. And he listed a few reasons for that, one of which is that for current Verizon customers to switch, they will have to pony up the full price of the phone. And he was seemingly replying directly to this statement from his parent:

There may be a few people out there who decided to go with Android because they didn't want to switch to AT&T.

Now I'm not sure why any of it matters, anyway, but his point are valid. AT&T has had exclusivity for over three years. Anyone wanting an iPhone and willing to switch carriers has had more than enough time to fulfill their current contracts and switch. In the meantime, Android has flourished on the other carriers, and has essentially been billed as an alternative to the iPhone. In fact, the Droid (Verizon's first Android phone) shipped in late 2009--over two years since the first iPhone. I note two years because that's the magic number for most contracts. The Droid and various other Android phones on Verizon have sucked up a good chunk of the iPhone's potential customers, and all of those people are now locked into a contract.

I don't think that the $500 cost is misleading--I think it's irrelevant. The only thing it points to is the fact that the iPhone likely won't make a huge splash on Verizon, as most people have had plenty of time to switch or try new platforms and get locked in. It has little to do with what I perceived as the point of the post--which was that Apple could have essentially ruled the market if they hadn't given exclusivity to AT&T from day one. Apple has an uphill battle now on their new carrier, whereas they'd just be a juggernaut if things had gone a little differently three years ago.

Re:$500 Verizon iPhone

[nine-times]

And he listed a few reasons for that, one of which is that for current Verizon customers to switch, they will have to pony up the full price of the phone.

Right, and that's a silly point to make, since some Verizon customers will be eligible for an upgrade, while the will become eligible for an upgrade at some point. All of them will eventually have the option of upgrading.

The only thing it points to is the fact that the iPhone likely won't make a huge splash on Verizon

Yeah... except you could have said the same thing about any previous phone release-- "it won't make a big splash because some people will be locked into contracts when the new device comes out." Maybe there's enough truth to that to say no cell phone is ever capable of "making a big splash".

However, that doesn't really say whether an iPhone on Verizon would or wouldn't steal Android customers. It just means that if it does steal a lot of Android customers, some of those customers are likely to wait some amount of time (months or years) to be stolen, while others might be stolen immediately.

Why do fanboys want their OS to dominate?

[spleck]

Is it really such a big problem if neither iOS or Android "win"? I'd much rather have choice and competition from here until eternity.

I saw how things stagnated when Microsoft dominated.

Re:Why do fanboys want their OS to dominate?

[mjwx]

To answer your question, fanboys cannot stand the notion that their platform is not number 1 in the eyes of everyone. They have too much emotionally invested in a product to allow themselves to see it fail in any possible way.

Is it really such a big problem if neither iOS or Android "win"?

No, As an Android fan (not fanboy, I am well aware of Android's flaws) I would also like to see some competition but I dont think the Iphone is up to the challenge. Android has surpassed the Iphone in every way except marketshare in just 18 months compared to 3 years without a mammoth marketing budget like Apple. Matching and overtaking Apple in marketshare is only a matter of time now with Android units shipping more then Apple units per day. Just like Microsoft, Apple are very slow to react to competition. It took almost a year since Android's release just to get copy/paste working on the Iphone and it's still nowhere near the implementation I had on my HTC Dream.

I place more stock in Meego or BlackBerry's yet unreleased OS (BB OS 6?) to keep Android on it's toes. WinMo is dead in the water and as much as I dont want to say this, WebOS is a dead horse that HP is trying to bring back to life by flogging it.

I saw how things stagnated when Microsoft dominated.

Not all monopolies end with stagnation, only artificially maintained ones like Microsoft are guaranteed to end up that way. Google has held a search monopoly for at least the last 8 years yet search has not stagnated, that is because Google has a natural monopoly in search which is maintained by improving their product as opposed to strong-arming suppliers and using underhanded tactics against the competition.

That being said, I dont like monopolies (or oligopolies) either.

Ya!

[Anonymous Coward]

Those that already have multiple choices for broadband get an even better service option, while those of us who are stuck with raw shit, will still get shit! WTG FCC! Thanks verizon! I am going to increase my tax burden (coming soon most likely) to support such enlightened regulations and policies!

Free

[SuperKendall]

And if you pay $99, Steve Jobs will even let you run your apps on your own phone.

You can do it for free if you jailbreak.

The $99 is really more to be able to deploy to the App Store. Perhaps you've heard of it?

Sounds right to me...

[SuperKendall]

This seems like the most astute comment here. Mod up!

meanwhile, I'm stuck with an iBrick

[jsepeta]

i've been trying for 5 weeks to get AT&T to fix my damned bill from 2006. i overpaid them due to a billing error on their part, and when they spun off their wireless services to cingular, they gave me a refund. now they say i can't buy a new iphone because i still owe them money. but they can't pull up my records so it's caught in this deathgrip of the AT&T "ICU process". bastards.

meanwhile, i tried to get a jailbroken iphone to work on tmobile and instead had to do a full restore, but then it froze and is stuck on the "connect to iTunes" screen. mutherfuck.

Re:meanwhile, I'm stuck with an iBrick

[dwightk]

that's not what brick means

Does this count?

[selex]

Does it count when ATT has no reception, but Verizon does. So I turn on mobile hotspot on my Droid X, and let my friend's iPhone connect to in the internet? Because I had to do it yesterday.

Selex

A New World (One Without You) Whoa!

[duane534]

There was a time when Apple computers did something their PC counterparts didn't. They were stable and secure where PCs weren't. They had high-end hardware where PCs didn't. The market changed. Windows 7 included fine-grained security controls. Toshiba, et. al. trounced even Apple in hardware reliability. Apple became just a name. There was a time when Apple MP3 players did something their generic counterparts didn't. They were better MP3 players. iTunes blew Windows Media Player out of the water, too. The market changed. Better MP3 players came out. Phones, et. al. started playing music, too, and streaming it from online, even. For free. Apple became just a name. There was a time when Apple phones did something more than BlackBerries, Palms, and Android devices did. They had an App Store. They had a nice web browser. They were reliable. The market changed. A smartphone drops calls. Which is it? iPhone. A smartphone overheats? iPhone. A smartphone is riddled with restrictions on paid content... See a pattern? Now, look at the market. BlackBerry just released the Torch. Yeah, the screen isn't amazing. OK? The web browser renders pixel for pixel how an iPhone does. It plays music like an iPhone does. Oh, yeah. Except, the BlackBerry can run multi-task more freely, text message more quickly, receive messages faster, go longer on a charge, and on... Same story on Android. Same story on Palm, to a degree. Remind me again why a Verizon customer should give two thoughts about a phone MAYBE coming that has less capabilities than half the current lineup?

SIMs

[DigiJunkie]

2) Remove the now unneeded SIM slot (what was that about a packed device?)

Keep in mind the SIMs are currently needed for the foreign markets (eg Aus & NZ).

I'm not sure even Apple are big enough to bring out a SIMless handset and force Telcos, internationally, to go SIMless.

prk.

Re:SIMs

[lazybeam]

I thought the comment about removing the SIM slot was only for CDMA phones (USA), where the UMTS phones (ATT & ROW) would keep the SIM slot.

The iPhone already supports 1900MHz

[tlambert]

The iPhone already supports 1900MHz; if it didn't, it would not work in Brazil or large sections of Europe, which require dual-band phones.

http://www.apple.com/iphone/specs.html

So T-Mobile Edge support would be a carrier package load, which is a software-only change. The problem with 1900MHz is you need roughly twice as many towers to cover the same geographic area, which has been deployed in Europe, but less so in the U.S..

I personally don't think T-Mobile is likely, but I think Verizon is even less likely. I think this is wishful thinking by two guys at the Wall Street Journal.

-- Terry

Re:The iPhone already supports 1900MHz

[Andy Dodd]

I'm referring to UMTS1700 support. Only a few carriers around the world support UMTS1700.

(UMTS1700 is the main reason why manufacturers now have to make phones with different designs for TMo and AT&T - I have yet to see a single phone that supports 3G on both T-Mobile and AT&T.)

Re:Nothing? Talk and Serf

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey buddy Don't believe the AT & T marketing hype. I have a Droid Eris, you know the lesser known 528HZ real first Verizon Android Phone. Its a year old. I have Android 2.2 on it. And even when it was new with Android 1.5 on it and I can surf, talk and do a third or fourth thing on it all at the same time, yeah because Android and Linux are multitasking. True Multitasking., and Verizon 3G network is faster than At& T 's 3G. Get you facts straight first please.

iOS SMS Apps

[jscotta44]

Hmmmwhat are you looking for that one of the ones there don't do for you? I counted 116 apps for SMS. I'm sure many don't fit the normal idea for SMS, but I know that some do.

BTWthis was all in the official iTunes Store (US).