Did you even read what I linked? Here's what it said:
Like I said - the contract has been renegotiated at least once.
So again, go back, re-read the article, for real this tie, and update your thinking beyond 2007.
Where has it ever been released that they have renegotiated the contract? Engadget does not know anything about the contract. For all we know the contract could have had a clause that stated once X number of iPhones were sold then the profit sharing would stop and at&t would be able to offer the iPhones at a subsidized price. So until Jobs steps on to the stage to say there is an iPhone model on its' way to other carriers, it's just pure speculation. And he will not be at CES as people have said as it is not his personality to share the stage with so many other companies.
There are a lot of folks on VZW, Sprint, T-Mobile that won't leave for one reason or another. Those markets have to be in the sights of Apple, as that's new revenue. And they have a duty to their shareholders to make as much revenue as possible.
My reason for not leaving... I simply can't. My ONLY other option [than VZW] is Cellular One. Yes, I'm part of the 3% of American that CAN'T get AT&T. The majority of my family is on VZW (with a few on AT&T, in different states/areas), and good luck with choice of phones on Cellular One.
I will be very disappointed with Apple if Sprint gets a CDMA iPhone and VZW doesn't. I'm sick of waiting.
Our area's cell reception is bad enough. For one, apparently our town is in a low area, and the closest towers are ~10 miles away. Thankfully we can send/receive emails & texts fine, but good luck making a call, even if standing on the front porch. Forget the Network Extender. Options for internet include wireless (~700k MBPS) or satellite, which has a too slow of latency for the NE to work (tried it). I'm sure there's other options we could invest in, but it'd most likely be too expensive. Heck, our neighbor even told VZW he'd give them the land to put a tower on, and passed petitions around. I haven't heard of anything being done, but they were all filled, I'm sure. And no, I'm really NOT in the middle of no where (mid between IND & STL), but things are just behind the times. My town of 300 doesn't even have mail delivery...
Yes, I know, an iPhone wouldn't make any of this better, but it'd sure make me happy!
I am a little confused. My Verizon phone was able to roam on GSM because they used TDMA. Tell it was shutdown. The phone recognizes it as Analog. If PCS has TDMA, It could be technically be used on GSM.
Originally Posted by Tabla
Y'know, I'm used to hysterical 14-year-old ******** on the internet, but this is exceptional. Never before in human history have so many nerds hyperventilated so publicly over so little.
Sorry to hear that, but have you considered getting an unlocked one and putting it on Cell One?
It seems there's to many problems with the unlocked ones. Plus, most of my family, who I text A LOT, have VZW, and they'd have to watch their # texts, to me. I'm generally overall happy with Verizon. We had Cell One, YEARS ago, but as soon as VZW got in the area, most everyone switched. I've just NEVER been happy with their selection of phones. If they don't get the iPhone this winter, I don't have a clue as to what my husband and I will get.
P.S. - I think you missed a few important words (exclusivity) in the above quote:
P. P. S. - It was Apple's lawyers that were talking about the five-year exclusivity period. I figure that they would probably know if they had an exclusive contract with AT&T. You can read their entire brief here if you would like to expand your knowledge.
I read the brief. As I've said before, I think people make invalid assumptions based on the content of that brief. Apple's lawyers used the equivalent of a "neither confirm nor deny" by using only the verbiage and information from the class action complaint against itself. Basically, the lawyers are saying the class action complaint is contradictory because it says that the exclusivity contract was a secret, but it also says that the contract was published in USA Today. It was immaterial to the argument to verify or contradict the terms of the contract in order to invalidate the claim. I understand you might read that and interpret it differently, but a lot of famous reading material is interpreted differently by others.
Further, no terms about the contract have been published, let alone confirmed. For you to contradict the speculation of others by citing a supposed contract for which you have no knowledge of other than an implication of a 5 year duration is absurd. There could be a million contingency terms based on year-over-year sales increases, market share, agreement not to sell Android phones, prorated buyout terms, etc, any of which could already have happened. In mobile phone terms, its possible the contract was terminated and Apple and AT&T are operating on a month-to-month basis, with Apple continuing to pull cash from AT&T up until the second they sell the first T-Mobile or Verizon or Sprint phone.
There's no arguing that the time is ripe for Apple to expand their US market in the face of the huge Android market growth. Continuing to constantly berate anyone who contributes to more speculation based on your gut feeling and the flimsy argument of a 5-year contract is both annoying and unintelligent. Why don't you find some reputable market analysts that say Apple should NOT expand to other carriers--that they're better off remaining exclusively tied to AT&T? At this point, I'm sure Apple's advisors are saying that waiting until 2012 and allowing unrestrained Android market growth will cost billions in the long-run.
Considering Apple's contract negotiation behaviors with the music, movie, and television industries, the most likely hold-up is negotiations with the other carriers to provide Apple with the most money or meet their (often) consumer-friendly requirements (pricing, unlimited plans, etc). It's possible Apple is working to get as many carriers on board as possible for launch before giving up the AT&T cash. Heck, Verizon sometimes offers to pay termination fees to another carrier to get a new subscriber--maybe Apple's working to get them to pay THEIR termination fee!
The posters in this thread have provided dozens of rumors and industry reports, yet you continue to counter with ONE speculation that Apple and AT&T have a flat 5 year exclusivity contract that is impossible or too expensive to get out of. Look at the football world--college coaches get 5 year extensions that cost millions in buyouts, but they still get fired in 2 years; players sign multi-million dollar multi-year contracts with a team only to have another team buy it out for ridiculous amounts of money--yet the team owners still come out on top at the end.
The posters in this thread have provided dozens of rumors and industry reports, yet you continue to counter with ONE speculation that Apple and AT&T have a flat 5 year exclusivity contract that is impossible or too expensive to get out of. Look at the football world--college coaches get 5 year extensions that cost millions in buyouts, but they still get fired in 2 years; players sign multi-million dollar multi-year contracts with a team only to have another team buy it out for ridiculous amounts of money--yet the team owners still come out on top at the end.
Decent argument, mainly just well-written.
These rumors and "industry reports" that you're talking about aren't much more than you or I coming in here and typing whatever the hell we want to. Many of these websites most likely publish Verizon iPhone rumors because they get page hits. You and the rest of the team in here visit their site because they supposedly heard about the recent Pegatron contract with Apple.
Believe what you want but I'm not expecting Verizon (or any other U.S. carrier) to get an iPhone until around 6/12.
I used to think the same way as you. However you are seeing the more reliable analysts like Gruber predicting it coming next year. These guys don't get it wrong very often.
I used to think the same way as you. However you are seeing the more reliable analysts like Gruber predicting it coming next year. These guys don't get it wrong very often.
Gruber's not an analyst, but he's much better: he's a knowledgeable tech writer who has known, accurate sources within Apple. If he says the CDMA iPhone's codename is N92 and that it's moved later into testing stages, there's not much reason to doubt him, especially not when the Wall Street Journal and other major leakers tend to back him up.
Verizon iPhone in January is a very real possibility. Not certain, but it's no longer fairy dust.
Right, I trust Gruber in that Apple has a CDMA iPhone codenamed N92. However, Gruber sometimes uses a tongue-in-cheek delivery of insider information--other times he just combines other rumors with what he knows. I'd say in this case he's not sure about the January 2011 release date, but it sounds good to him.
He adds though, that negotiations with VZW are still an unknown. I still believe there WERE negotiations in the past years when the VZW iPhone rumors swirled around, but that VZW and Apple could not come to terms that would make up for the money from AT&T and that overall market share was still showing marked growth. At this point though, VZW is in a significantly better position having successfully deployed Android phones and grabbed smartphone market share.
It's been said before that it would be too expensive for Apple to develop a CDMA phone, that CDMA was dead, or that it was simply too difficult. I think all that is ridiculously false--it is and always has been about money. Releasing an LTE/CDMA iPhone would be a blockbuster feature, but its both in (ala USB on iMacs) and out of character (original iPhone on EDGE) for Apple.
I will be very disappointed with Apple if Sprint gets a CDMA iPhone and VZW doesn't. I'm sick of waiting.
Everyone is assuming that a CDMA Iphone will go to Verizon. With the history of Apple & Verizon, that may not be a slam dunk.
Sprint would probably bend over backwards to get the Iphone (stroke Jobs ego !!) That could be...
& What would the Iphone do to the Verizon network with all the Androids running around. Sprint may be a better fit, with a largely under-utilized network, hmmmm......
Oh and reading Gruber's post - NONE of that points to Verizon, rather, a CDMA Iphone is on the horizon (which would NOT be able to multitask on the current Verizon network). I think if you spun Gruber's arguments, you may point toward a Sprint Iphone (witness Jobs chutzpah) which would get Apple the best of both worlds - Increased market share / exposure with increased profit margin. It would be a win / win for all parties, Apple & Sprint.
Understand, this is just my opinion, I have no facts to back it up, but ...
I saw this article in the Huffington Post. Sounds real especially the comments by AT&T.
Note the last paragraph where the analyst in question is being shown to have regularly pulled stuff out of his ***, so I would take anything he says with a grain of salt.
Nevertheless, there are mounting indicators for a CDMA iPhone some time next year. Now whether it'll come to VZW, that's another question to be answered.
Originally Posted by kupe
Bookmarks