No insider info here, no leaked secrets, just an aging but wily geek putting himself in the place of Verizon Wireless and guessing how that mobile carrier will handle next year’s rumored iPhone introduction on its U. S. network. I’d go for a knockout punch and I think Verizon will, too.
Apple’s iPhone is coming to Verizon sometime early next year as AT&T loses its exclusive deal for the iconic smartphone. It could be as soon as January. Verizon will want to use this opportunity to grab disaffected iPhone users from AT&T because surveys have shown American iPhone users love their handsets, but not their carrier. So Verizon, which already appears to have the better network, will have to emphasize that advantage. I expect they’ll do so by making the iPhone their first Long-Term Evolution (LTE) 4G handset.
It’s the network, stupid. To get a big win from whatever huge amount Verizon is no-doubt paying Apple, the company has to steal customers from other carriers, not just get existing Verizon users to buy subsidized iPhones. AT&T’s weakness is its perceived network quality and unwillingness to allow iPhones to act as WiFi hotspots, called tethering. That’s why I think Verizon will make its iPhone LTE capable and allow it to do tethering with the goal of getting AT&T iPhone users to defect in droves.
There are at least 10 million AT&T iPhone users whose contracts are within months of ending, Every one of those users is up for grabs by Verizon.
Verizon can afford to do this because it is protected by that five gigabyte per month bandwidth cap. And since the LTE network went live in 38 cities just last week and will be rolling-out nationwide in coming months, Verizon will have plenty of network capacity to show off. Those first iPhone4G (4V?) customers should get blazing fast performance compared to the overcrowded and under-provisioned AT&T network.
Verizon already offers tethering on its Android phones, so it is logical they’ll continue that with any iPhone, especially since it is doubtful Verizon will throw an LTE Android phone on the network before the iPhone has had a chance to wreak havoc for a few months. That gives Apple an advantage I’m sure it wants over Google/Android.
All iPhones to date have used GSM networks but Verizon is CDMA, not GSM, so a new radio will be required in any case. Why not, then, go LTE (or, more likely WCDMA/LTE)? By offering a true 4G iPhone, Verizon will get the marketing boost it needs to take back those same iPhone customers it lost to AT&T plus some. Apple, too, will regain an advantage over most competing smartphones. It’s win-win for both Apple and Verizon. And it is noteworthy that Verizon launched LTE without any phones for the network or WiFi hotspots — just a pair of USB adapters for laptops. That’s bound to change, of course, with my guess being the LTE strategy taking-on a decided iPhone caste.
Understand that AT&T, too, has its own LTE network coming. So if Verizon is going to take advantage of clear network superiority, they’ll have to move soon.
At least that’s how I would do it. What do you think will happen?
As much as many of my friends hope you’re right and that Verizon will offer a new iPhone in a Q1 2011 time frame, I don’t think it’s likely.
Remember when the first iPhone launched? Apple announced in January so as to beat the FCC from disclosing details of the iPhone before Apple could. I would venture a guess that a new WCDMA/LTE would require all new approvals from the FCC in much the same way the original iPhone did and thus no be eligible for an early ’11 launch.
I think it’s more likely we’ll see a January announcement with a May/June launch. Then Apple and Verizon get up to six months of “iPhone for Verizon” stories in the press, and Verizon really gets value for the money they paid Apple as people hold off renewing with AT&T or jumping ship form Verizon for an AT&T iPhone.
It could be a very long, cold Winter for AT&T.
You are probably correct.
Not exactly. Apple is getting FCC approval for every year, for each new model. Those are requested 6 weeks in advance of launch and approved (until now, anyway) 3 weeks afterwards.
Search for a story of Apple requesting silence from FCC about the iPad’s form-factor and design prior to its launch, as a condition of its FCC filing.
I sure reveled in your comment, Bob!
But you were correct and Verizon gets to sell the iPhone sooner rather than later.
Well done.
A rosy scenario, whether it comes to pass is likely to be an engineering & supply issue more than a business one. Apple has taken criticism for battery life, and cited that as a reason for the lack of 3G on the 1st generation. An iPhone 4 with multi-tasking and LTE will be a real juice hog.
Doubtful as iPhone 4’s battery life is even better then prior models, and yet much much faster. LTE circuitry is theoretically even more efficient. Multitasking is more of a branding and lock down on the API functionality. Carefully orchestrated to prevent rogue processes from doing anything more then what Apple allows (access to audio, one download thread, and one messaging server based call -read: no true background processing and thus battery draw). The appearance of apps multitasking is an illusion. They pick up where they left off and thats enforced by a design standard, not a multitasking process -no such multitasking process exists. In the end, it allows the user to task-switch, or better said, for the *user* to multitask -not the phone and also without the battery draw.
AT&T has offered tethering for months now. Also, from my deep and thorough reading of 4G/LTE rollouts (i.e. three or four 2 page articles on the web) it appears that initially, 4G won’t be any faster than 3G. And some 3G technologies are actually faster than the most common 4G implementations.
One of the reasons the AT&T network sucks is because all of those iPhones are choking it with data. Verizon has a more robust network, but it wouldn’t surprise me if their network gets throttled as well.
All the more reason, then, to throw Verizon’s bandwidth hog on what is essentially an empty network.
But that’s the thing – it’s not an empty network. They’re testing it now with the wireless cards. Sure people will complain if its down, but they’ll be able to some of the kinks out before phones hit it. But once phones start hitting it, it’ll be devoured and soon be filled up.
What Apple/iPhone did to AT&T it will do to Verizon. They may get a couple month reprieve, but it _will_ do it.
AT&T stands to gain a lot by having another carrier with the iPhone in the US now – as it will show exactly that it’s not AT&T’s network that is the problem, but the massive amounts of people using bandwidth hogging functionality.
LTE will help in that it makes everything a data network. BUT the rollout is a problem for Verizon – if they don’t have the coverage that AT&T does then the phone will have to fall back to WCDMA and crawl at the slow speeds of Verizon’s _existing_ network.
So yes, an iPhone would have to be LTE+WCDMA as one model, and LTE+GSM as another model.
Verizon doesn’t use W-CDMA, they use CDMA, aka cdmaOne, aka IS-95. W-CDMA extends the basic technology of CDMA, but the real-world implementations of each are incompatible.
W-CDMA is actually the technology used for the 3G standards used by most GSM carriers, including AT&T and T-Mobile in the U.S.: UMTS, HSDPA, HSUPA, HSPA, HSPA+.
Verizon and Sprint’s 3G tech is EVDO, which *does not* use W-CDMA.
Confusing? Yes.
Moral: Just don’t use the term “W-CDMA,” because it may be confusing to readers.
A roughly equivalent term for W-CDMA is UMTS, which can be used to imply its follow-on technologies of HSDPA, HSUPA, HSPA, HSPA+, etc.
If it’s any help, here’s a simplified cheat sheet for the four major U.S. carriers:
AT&T – GSM (2G); UMTS [W-CDMA]/HSDPA/HSUPA (3G); eventually LTE (4G)
T-Mobile – GSM (2G); UMTS [W-CDMA]/HSDPA/HSPA+ (3G); probably eventually LTE (4G)
[T-Mobile is branding their HSPA+ as “4G,” but this is purely marketing]
Sprint – CDMA (2G); EVDO (3G); WiMax (4G)
Verizon – CDMA (2G); EVDO (3G); LTE (4G)
A 4G iPhone on Verizon would need to be CDMA/EVDO/LTE in order to ensure constant voice and data usability across their entire coverage area. It’s likely Apple would include GSM/UMTS hardware, as well, to allow worldwide roaming, so it’d be GSM/UMTS/CDMA/EVDO/LTE. I’m sure Apple would ideally like to keep manufacturing only a single iPhone model. They might start with a model of the iPhone 4 specifically for Verizon, though, leaving out the chip for 1900 Mhz 2G+3G service on AT&T to save a little money and space on the motherboard. Verizon would no doubt like this, too, so that customers with their unique model of iPhone couldn’t switch to AT&T without getting a new phone.
Apple could keep making the current iPhone 4 for AT&T and the rest of the world, and then unify all the chips into a 5th gen iPhone they’d release in summer 2011. This would give time for the Qualcomm GSM/CDMA combo chip for phones to go into production.
In most cases competition is a good thing. Apple (not AT&T) clearly raised the bar on what a cell phone could be. Google responded with Android. Lets face it competition is making both Android and the iPhone much better than if they were alone in the market.
AT&T for its part has acted like a spoiled brat. They seem to think they are entitled to our business and money. Lets hope Verizon doesn’t let their upcoming business success go to their head.
We are Sprint customers. It was a purely economic decision. We are a family of 6 and Sprint made us the best offer. For a few years their customer service was pretty bad. It is better now. Their network is not as far reaching as others, but where they operate they work well. We are very pleased with our new plan and our new phones. Sprint heard their customers and are becoming a better and more competitive company. It will take them years to undo the damage of the past. At least they are trying now. So we decided to stay with them.
I am an ex-Sprint user, who made the move to iPhone once I was convinced that Sprint/Nextel was a marriage made in hell. they may be better now, but they hurt me several times (the cut over from sprint billing to nextel billing and my autobill pay cost me $100 in fees, and they couldn’t figure it out (they accepted my bill pay no errors, but didn’t post it to my new account number), until they had totally turned me off as a customer.
The iPhone will come to Verizon in late January early February. I expect an early January announcement with a FCC release (@Vincent) a day after the announcement.
It will be the CDMA version of the iPhone 4. No changes other than the wireless protocol.
We won’t see a LTE version of the iPhone until 2012. Apple just won’t compromise battery life for an extra 500k of speed. The chipsets and power efficiency have to improve.
Agree.
Verizon has much better 3G geographic coverage, even if max download speed is a little slower than AT&T’s 3G.
An LTE-only iPhone would not have that advantage.
We’ll see….
You’re probably right about 2012, I think we’re at least 6 months and more likely 18 months from an LTE iPhone. Apple will let the technology mature before getting involved. When it appears there’s no way it will be LTE only without 3G and 2G support. There would just be too many holes in coverage.
I’m not so sure most early LTE users will find an “empty” network. I’m no expert but I understand much of the current bottleneck is in the backhaul. I’m betting these new 4G radios will be sitting on the same towers as the 3G radios, sharing their backhaul (and bottleneck).
Well, LTE would be a great choice, given the timing of VZW lighting up their 4G network, but it would *have* to be a CDMA/LTE combo device if they expect anyone to talk on it. A dual radio like that would presumably also allow for simultaneous voice calls/data use – -a GSM only feature that AT&T has loved to market in the past.
In its current implementation LTE really does need CDMA because the revision of LTE Verizon is deploying doesn’t support voice…
Just out of curiousity, you are aware that a “geek” is a circus freak who decapitates animals with his teeth, aren’t you? Being a geek is actually a gruesome branch of the criminal spectrum.
Words change meaning over time: neologism, “the introduction or use of new words or new senses of existing words.”
Geek doesn’t mean what it used to.
This is true. I was terribly opposed to the term “geek” for many years for just this reason, preferring by far the term “nerd.” But geeks have taken over the Earth it seems, so I have lately adjusted. In the first draft of this column (believe it or not, I actually do revisions) I used the term nerd then changed it to geek.
Regarding… “It’s the network stupid,” we get it but the carriers are still fighting it. VZW requires that you pay for tethering but if you root your Android phone you can get it for free. This shows they are still trying to control the handset by dumbing it down or charging for something which you should just get for free as part of the network service. Since I own the device, I want to choose the network based on the network service offering. I’m still waiting for competition on network service alone.
Your analyst is right, but your conclusion is wrong. The device that will be announced is an LTE iPad.
Except for the fact this will create another SKU fork (skew-fork?) in apple’s normally lean product line. Wifi, wifi+3g, wifi+LTE, PLUS the new iPad with facetime camera capability.
But I think this is the path for Apple… an LTE/3G iPad to run on ATT’s ‘evolving’ network, and working on Verizon’s built out LTE. I only see this in late 2011.
Considering that Verizon’s LTE network currently isn’t voice-capable, it wouldn’t be surprising at all if Apple’s first device with LTE is an LTE version of the iPad. If it’s going to be on Verizon, though, it’s going to also need EVDO so it’ll work in Verizon areas where LTE hasn’t been rolled out, yet.
Apple *may* keep their SKUs down to a manageable number by simply revising the “3G” iPad models so that they all have combined HSDPA and LTE (and EVDO) radios in them. The iPad has enough room inside for the extra chips, its battery is large enough that any extra drain that might result from LTE won’t be much of a practical problem, and the price premium of $130 for the 3G model should be able to cover the cost of the extra parts and development. In fact the $130 price premium may have been intentionally set higher than necessary (it seems that way to me) to give them some elasticity in their margins so that they can add further network hardware like this without changing the price. It’s a very Apple kind of thing to do for their hardware revisions.
As far as FaceTime cameras, once them add them to the iPad, *all* new models will have them. No separate SKUs there. There’s a slim chance they’d keep a low-end first generation iPad available at a discount price, but they didn’t do that with the iPod touch on its last update when they added a FaceTime camera to it, so I don’t think so.
Does anyone know whether the Verizon iPhone will allow people to surf/text/send email while they’re talking on the CDMA network? My understanding is that the CDMA’s engineering just won’t allow that — even on an iPhone. If that’s true, my hunch is that the early adapter types (the ones who seem more likely to want to multitask while they’re talking) may have some second thoughts.
Fair point or not? Anyone?
Phil,
As a long term Verizon Wireless customer (10+ years) I frankly have never had an issue with the whole talk vs. surf thing. When I’m on my phone, I want to talk, when I’m not on my phone I want my e-mail, etc.
You can make up a story about being on a bluetooth headset and wanting to look at say Google Maps at the same time, or maybe open an e-mail you’re sending me while we are on the phone, but I have never had that problem and I haven’t really heard anyone complaining about it that loudly. You can get around it by using Wi-Fi for all your data stuff as well.
It MIGHT be an issue with something the size of an iPad, but then you don’t have talk there at all at the moment… so again, no big deal.
I think that’s why AT&T pulled those spot ads touting that capability… it just doesn’t resonate with anybody.
Michael
Bob, your predictions of late have been far from reality. There will not be a LTE iPhone before 2012. Apple doesn’t sell beta test devices, especially not to beta test someone else’s network. And as a couple of people pointed out, this would ruin iPhone battery life, which is way more important to most people than a little extra speed. If that wasn’t the case the 4G Android EVO with its 2 hour battery life would be outselling the iPhone.
Apple’s biggest iPhone problem by far: they can’t make them fast enough. Releasing a CDMA Verizon iPhone in January will be bad enough for further pushing their production capabilities to the limit. They don’t need any bleeding edge tech to make their job even harder.
Two or three months ago when the buzz was reaching a faver peak, I said on Engadget Mobile that it wouldn’t be in Verizon’s or Apple’s best interest to introduce a CDMA iPhone; there are just too many different, incompatible flavors of CDMA. Now, they did put one together for the Chinese Domestic Market, but that phone is unusable elsewhere and has other differences required by the government there.
Verizon’s only play, and Apple’s longer-term strategy, is to move to LTE, as every other handset and practically every network provider is doing. By producing an LTE iPhone 4v, Apple, ever the strategic thinkers, have an LTE handset they could reprogram for other markets. One problem looming is the different frequency ranges some carriers are opting to use, with some settling into the 700mghz range, and some the 800mghz range. I think this will eventually settle down into the 700Mghz range, and eventually the GSMA will standardize this.
Verizon will be rolling out LTE starting this month, with heavy marketing ramping up to Super Bowl Sunday. They may announce an LTE iPhone, but I doubt it, as Apple doesn’t like any info released until they are confident they have most of the bugs worked out. There may be some credible leaks in the February-March timeframe, but I would expect Apple to preannounce a ‘major event’ for the May timeframe.
AT&T loses its exclusivity, but as they are rolling out LTE as well, they will be able to add the LTE iPhone in a year, as Verizon won’t have more than that long for exclusivity. T-Mobile will also be upgrading its HSPA+ network to LTE, anothe software upgrade, essentially, but they will have some problems with frequency range, as they do now with their weird 1700Mghz AWS band. Expect some merger activity, whether a business combination or network sharing, with another major carrier, possibly Sprint, as they have backed themselves into the WiMax corner and are looking for a way out.
I would think with Vodaphone looking for any way to unload its VZW stake to propose a three-way swap with Deutsche Telekom for T-Mobile, but something is defintiely coming down the pike in 2011 involving Sprint, T-Mobile and VZW.
All iPhones officially sold in China have been on China Unicom, using GSM and W-CDMA, which is the air interface for the UMTS/HSDPA/HSUPA flavors of 3G. W-CDMA is not compatible with the older standard known as CDMA, aka cdmaOne, aka IS-95.
The only difference between the iPhones originally sold by Apple in China and the iPhones sold everywhere else in the world was that the the ones sold in China were initially non-Wi-Fi capable. Since the Chinese government have relaxed their regulations on Wi-Fi the iPhones sold in China are now identical to the ones sold everywhere else.
There’s never been a CDMA iPhone in China or anywhere else.
(China Telecom is the carrier in China that uses CDMA. They don’t have the iPhone.)
Expect an LTE iPad2 from Verizon, possibly in time for Superbowl Sunday.
I agree with Nate. One thing about CDMA, this year, the spec to use voice and data at the same time was approved. The carriers have to implement that. It’s very possible that it was one of the sticking points between Apple and Verizon.
Michael, I don’t agree with you. Since you’re on a network that doesn’t allow it, you don’t know what you’re missing. Since I’m on one that does, I don’t want to lose the ability I already have, and that I DO use. In fact, a lot of people use this ability. It’s very useful.
I agree wholeheartedly Robert.
This whole web chatter about the Verizon iPhone being CDMA-based, whether IS-95 and/or the newer cdma2000/EVDO variant, is complete nutsense (that’s not a typo, by the way).
Verizon has spent tens of billions so far upgrading its 3G to 4G LTE lite (the first revision of this standard will only be enhanced IMT-2000 of 10-30Mbps). Official ITU definition for 4G actually will be the full blown 100Mbps full IP-based network. The first LTE iteration will use OFDM signalling similar to WiFi 802.11 then proceeds toward MIMO-SCM (courtesy Multicarrier Techniques for 4G Mobile
Communications, Shinsuke Hara and Ramjee Prasad).
So, why would Apple or Verizon use 3G, or enhanced 3G, for the first Verizon iPhone? Remember one of the neatest feature of HSDPA, HSPA+ based iPhones is the ability to make/receive calls while accessing the IP network! cdma2000 even with latest EV/DO cannot do this. One has to tear down the call channel to switch to the data channel. One or the other – never both simulataneously. This feature alone disqualifies cdma2000 from the iPhone.
Another, cdma2000 EV/DO is an antiquated cellular technology going forward from 2010. LTE lite is about to be released to the first 38 cities in the US by Verizon and needing a “killer” smartphone. What better way to introduce a killer smartphone than the next iPhone 5 LTE? It worked for AT&T’s image upgrade from then Cingular brand.
OK so Apple did use GPRS/GSM with their first handsets but this was due to the readiness of the 3G/HSDPA infrastructure at the time. Apple wanted instant impact that just was not ready for AT&T’s spotty 3G network in early 2007. We are now in late 2010 and 3G coverage in many cities are still spotty.
This is a golden opportunity for Verizon to capture and even recapture lost customers that went to AT&T (I know I am). With Verizon’s LTE using the much-vaunted 700 MHz spectrum (remember those crazy FCC TV spectrum sale?) there should not be any drop calls or long connect times.
If Apple and Verizon pulls an LTE iPhone rabbit out of their hats, I will be one of those people in line to get an iPhone 5 LTE! My 3GS works just fine but I was a loyal Verizon wireless customer but had to satiate my appetite for the iPhone.
C’mon Apple and Verizon. What do you have to lose? Zilch!
“Official ITU definition for 4G actually will be the full blown 100Mbps” Yes, that is true. But all that means is that the ITU is totally useless. They can say it’s 1 or 10 Gbps for that matter, it won’t change the laws of physics and politics both of which are involved in wireless.
I’m surprised that a new radio will be needed. So Apple are to produce two radio versions? Or is CDMA built-in along with GSM already but perhaps just not yet enabled? An old trick engineers have used in the past.
If not then that’s going to cause major limitations in the resale market, not to mention two repair facility strands for servicing.
Hmmmm. Just sounds too complicated. But I’m probably being innocent or naive. I’m in the UK so don’t think problem this arises – yet.
As for the mock-up graphic of the iPhone Verizon Lite… The bitten Apple logo looks way to big for Apple’s design aesthetic. Just sayin’ ;-))
CDMA technology is fundamentally different from GSM and it’s not a matter of using the same chips with some parts enabled or disabled.
Qualcomm is supposed to be working on a combination CDMA/GSM chipset, but it’s not expected to be available in quantity until well into 2011. It may be that Apple is waiting on production of this chipset so that they can continue to manufacture only one model of iPhone, rather than a CDMA model for Verizon and/or Sprint in the U.S. (which would also need GSM/UMTS chips in it to roam in most countries outside of the U.S., anyway), and a GSM/UMTS model for AT&T and the rest of the world. (To add T-Mobile in the U.S. would require adding yet another chip, for 3G on the 1700 Mhz band they use.)
One version of the Qualcomm chip you mentioned has been around since 2008. It’s called Gobi and it comes with many laptops and umpcs. My umpc (www.oqo.com) can switch it’s firmware between cdma and hspa and be used globally. However the US wireless oligopoly tries to force the chips and devices to be locked to one carrier since they ultimately have the power to decide which devices are allowed on their networks.
If Apple and Verizon somehow allows the iPhone 4/5v LTE to make/receive calls simultaneously with data access then this would have to be a simultaneous dual physical radio interface. LTE lite would take care of the IP data layer while the cdma2000 would handle the voice. That would certainly work. The fallback would just be a downgrade in which you can call or surf the net but not simultaneously.
Then in this situation I would think that battery life would not be what we expect. Much worse than the 3GS I have where it is almost tethered to the power charger at all times. In this case, I would not think Apple/Verizon release one if this “hack in the lab” can’t even finish a normal day’s battery usage – and what is a “normal” day mean anyways?
So I suspect: 1) Wait for the LTE lite to support voice (iPhone 5 timeframe?), 2) Fallback to cdma2000/1xEV/DO (which I really doubt), or 3) The Verizon rumours are just that…
Yet another reason NOT to buy the first or second generation of anything – unless you are one of THOSE people that HAS to have the latest & greatest.
I wish Apple would come out with a device/service similar to TracPhone. I have one and my service NEVER drops out. Why? Cloud telephony. Gee – who’d a thunk it!
Screw independent carriers. I pay as I go for what I want.
A whole different tack that no one on any site seems to address:
IF Apple made the kind of deal you suggest, one that would try to immediately pull large numbers from AT&T, what would AT&T do??? Ignore it? Or tell Apple that they would no longer give Apple the terms of their current contract? This would seemingly cost Apple $$ on the AT&T side. Would that somehow be made up on the VZ side? Somehow I doubt it. Apple truly needs to balance any future contracts with other providers so as not to kill the goose. A pretty tricky situation and not at all as straightforward as just going to a 2nd provider.
You have obviously never been threatened by an Apple lawyer. I have. They are the most rabid of their ilk and will do ANYTHING to win. AT&T has nothing like the Apple legal department (or Apple’s deep pockets). This is no contest: AT&T will pay-up.
I’ll make a prediction about Verizon:
They’ll suck every penny they can from their iPhone customers by nickel and diming them every which way. To Verizon, there customers are much more than people who use phones: They’re also little ATM machines full of cash.
The ITU 4G definition actually makes common sense. The intent is to duplicate the wireline speed (say Fast Ethernet) over a wireless channel. 100Mbps is a very reasonable and not an unrealistic target. It has been demonstrated with many wireless technologies including narrowband 802.11n, WiMax, ultrawideband, etc.
This 100Mbps target is intended for the follow-up wireless signalling scheme:MIMO-SCM 5-10 years from initial LTE lite rollout in 2010 (or early 2011). This scheme can theoretically allocate more bandwidth in a 20/40 MHz channel. This is perfect for those 700MHz spectrum channels Verizon, AT&T, and others bought from the FCC.
Never underestimate the ingenuity of the mind – intelligent mind. We can work with the limits of Physics by bending it a little. Remember when someone said that 1200bps modem was the theoretical limit? 😉
Those wireless high speeds are all short range. That’s why I mentioned the laws of physics AND politics. 100 mbps is the equivalent of 5 HDTV over the air channels. Sure it can be done but over what distance and using what bandwidth and at what power level and for how many point to point connections at once?
Uh, bright group ‘a readers ya got yerself here, Bob. Don’ mean ta be all sensitive an’ whatnot but um, we’ve all heard ‘a tetherin. No need ta ‘splain it.
While YOU may have heard of tethering, many readers haven’t. In fact I got a question about it this afternoon from one reader — the editor of a major Apple fansite. Go figure.
So Apple makes an LTE iPhone for Verizon. They leave out any CDMA/EVDO compatibility because that’s “old tech,” and the phone’s got LTE, so there’s no need for it, right? (Ignoring the fact that Verizon’s LTE network isn’t voice-capable, yet.)
Verizon sells this LTE iPhone, but has to tell their customers “Oh by the way, this phone only works in the 38 cities and airports* on this list where we’re rolled out LTE so far. We know the breadth of our network is one of our major selling points, but not with this handset.”
Well, *that’s* not going to happen.
Maybe Apple includes all of the current iPhone 4’s GSM/UMTS (WCDMA) radios in this Verizon LTE iPhone, so it can roam off of Verizon’s network in the U.S., and on GSM/UMTS carriers outside of the U.S. Then Verizon can tell their customers “You’ll only be able to use our superior network in the 38 cities and airports* on this list where we’ve rolled out LTE so far, but don’t worry, outside of those areas you can roam on the (inferior) AT&T network.”
No, I don’t think that’ll hapen, either.
So, if there’s any chance at all that an iPhone comes out on Verizon before they’ve finished a full roll out of LTE across their entire network (and *that’s* not going to happen by January/February/March of 2011), then there’s NO WAY it’s going to be an LTE-only handset. Plus there’s the already-mentioned minor problem that Verizon’s LTE network doesn’t support voice yet, anyway.
In order for a Verizon iPhone to operate in the U.S. outside of the limited areas covered by Verizon’s LTE deployment*, without roaming to a different carrier like AT&T, either it’s going to have to have a CDMA/EVDO radio, or Verizon is going to have to deploy GSM/UMTS across their entire coverage area. Which one of those is more likely to happen?
Alternately, Apple could be waiting for Verizon to fully roll out voice-capable LTE across their entire coverage area. That’s not going to be seen until 2012/2013, or even later, though.
Simultaneous voice and data? Well, that’s really a much less fundamental problem.
*Yes, Verizon’s going to continue expanding their LTE coverage over the next few years past the current 38 cities & airports, but for all of 2011 at least there’s still going to be a list or map of “Verizon LTE coverage” that’s much smaller in area than their full coverage map.
I still just don’t buy it, any of it. I don’t think that the nazis who manage Verizon will submit to the degree of control that Apple insists on, and I don’t think that Apple will ship an iPhone that isn’t a “world phone.”
Dead on. That’s what the VZ iPhone dreamers always conveniently forget: the personalities involved. The iPhone was originally planned to go on VZ, but VZ insisted on branding it and embedding VCast while Apple would only let their logo and apps be on it. That was the irreconcilable difference. This is Apple, who turned down a lot of money from Intel to keep the stickers off their computers. Jobs isn’t as desperate for market share as people seem to believe (or hope).
I doubt VZ has changed their tune. With Android, they are perfectly welcome to make the experience as Verizonish as possible. They’re addicted to branding.
Whatever relatively small amount Verizon is willing to pay Apple for the (non-exculsive) privilege of carrying the iPhone, AT&T is willing to pay much MORE to maintain their exclusive. Simply put, an exclusive arrangement is worth a lot more than a non-exclusive…especially when you have a crap network populated by users who are DESPERATE to jump ship (if only they could take their iPhones with them).
From Apple’s perspective, sure, they might sell a few more phones per year if iPhone were also available on Verizon, but they’d have to give up a BIG wad of AT&T exclusivity cash for that. And, really, how many more iPhones would they sell? 20% more? 30% more? Most of the (former) Verizon customers who desperately wanted iPhones have already bought them and made the switch to AT&T. The only new potential iPhone customers are the rural users who have no AT&T coverage.
I think the white iPhone is just a negotiating ploy. It’s allows Apple to squeeze an even better deal out of AT&T for their next multi-year exclusive. Apple’s happy to let the rumors fly.
Every rumor I’ve heard of AT&T iPhone exclusivity ending it’s always been about the iPhone coming to Verizon, What about Sprint and T-Mobile? Don’t the subscribers on Sprint/T-Mobile want the iPhone too? For Apple, don’t they just want to sell iPhones? Put in support for the 1700 MHz AWS bands, that covers T-Mobile, and maybe a WiMax version for Sprint.
There was a WSJ article about the verizon iPhone supporting CDMA. Their 4G network does not have the coverage of their older network. The phones should support both…
It would seem that few people in this discussion have heard of software programmable radios (a.k.a. Software Defined Radio). I sell Intermec handhelds (heavy duty use type of handhelds) and we’ve sold that capability in the CN50 for more than a year (allowing switching between Verizon and GSM networks with little trouble).
I wouldn’t be surprised Apple would want to show off the capability of changing one’s network. Notice that Motorola already has this feature in one of their latest phones (meant to be great to travel from country to country).
You may want to read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software-defined_radio
Voice on the rev1 VZW iPhone will transmit as VoIP on the LTE data channel –
[…] about the end of the year and that Verizon will start offering iPhones maybe as early as January. Cringely points out that Apple will have to come out with a new model of iPhone, to do that since the […]
Sorry for the huge review, but I’m really loving the new Zune, and hope this, as well as the excellent reviews some other people have written, will help you decide if it’s the right choice for you.
Buy $10 Replica Designer Sunglasses with 3-day FREE SHIPPING
loyal employees. The land was purchased but the building never started because Jobs lost his job in a political battle with then-CEO John Sculley sending Apple into its own Dark Ages.
Bending Machines…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » Verizon LTE iPhone4V – Cringely on technology[…]…
mobile network payments…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » Verizon LTE iPhone4V – Cringely on technology[…]…
i phone 2011…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » Verizon LTE iPhone4V – Cringely on technology[…]…
seven percent return…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » Verizon LTE iPhone4V – Cringely on technology[…]…
products, services, brands, businesses, etc, the more…
they will be inclined to take your words seriously. the reason for this is that you have proven your trustworthiness and credibility and other people know that they can count on you to be honest and to always steer them in…
Prosecutors believe McInerney seo on wordpress shot King to death in an eighth grade classroom iin Oxnard.
They will help you to prevent mental issues, but focus on your child’s report cards.
After you become a graduate, you will find yourself to be in
the right position andd a greatly satisfying job. Clinical
PsychologistsRepresenting most psychologists, the clinical interview or seo on wordpress self-reports.