Mark Thompson wrote:
> In its first full quarter of sales, the iPhone has already climbed past
> Microsoft¹s entire lineup of Windows Mobile smartphones in North
> America, according to figures compiled by Canalys and published by
> Symbian.
> Another thing is that GSM adoption is expanding in North, Central and
> South America which will continue the success of the GSM format Apple
> choose to support over CDMA. Verizon is begining to test converting
> their phone system to GSM as already noted.
Actually, CDMA continues to gain market share at the expense of GSM
worldwide, and in North America has the largest subscriber base (which
is why Apple went to Verizon with the iPhone first).
The reason Verizon passed AT&T in the number of subscribers is because
of their superior network. See the latest Consumer Reports for details.
This is the reason that Apple approached Verizon first, they didn't care
about GSM versus CDMA, they wanted the premium carrier for their new
product.
It's all moot, as the entire world is moving to CDMA, albeit a different
version than the one used by Verizon, Sprint, and the carriers in Korea.
In article <4773bf0b$0$84195$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, SMS ???? ? wrote:
> Actually, CDMA continues to gain market share at the expense of GSM
> worldwide, and in North America has the largest subscriber base (which
> is why Apple went to Verizon with the iPhone first).
Actually thats not quite true. If it is, why is Verizon going to go
with LTE and not Qualcomm's 4G standard? Also Qualcomm is a greedy
company and charges high licensing fees. GSM is an open standard
whereas CDMA is propietary.
Apple went to Verizon at first as there IS MORE U.S CDMA
customers than GSM customers. APPLE wanted to lock down its Iphone
which is very common on CDMA systems. Verizon, the largest of the CDMA
providers didn't want to play ball, therefore, Apple went to the next
largest market penetration. That would be AT&T/Cingular
--
From the Desk of the Sysop of:
Planet Maca's Opus, a Free open BBS system. telnet://pinkrose.dhis.org
Web Site: http://pinkrose.dhis.org, Dialup 860-618-3091 300-33600 bps
The New Cnews maintainer
B'ichela
In article <Jtq9sq.nrt@pinkrose.net.dhis.org>, B'ichela
<mdalene@pinkrose.dhis.org> wrote:
> Actually thats not quite true. If it is, why is Verizon going to go
> with LTE and not Qualcomm's 4G standard? Also Qualcomm is a greedy
> company and charges high licensing fees. GSM is an open standard
> whereas CDMA is propietary.
> Apple went to Verizon at first as there IS MORE U.S CDMA
> customers than GSM customers. APPLE wanted to lock down its Iphone
> which is very common on CDMA systems. Verizon, the largest of the CDMA
> providers didn't want to play ball, therefore, Apple went to the next
> largest market penetration. That would be AT&T/Cingular
The more likely scenario is that Verizon wanted to cripple the phone
like they do all of their others, and Apple told them to get lost.
"Mr. Strat" <rag@nospam.techline.com> wrote in message
news:271220072028114099%rag@nospam.techline.com...
> In article <Jtq9sq.nrt@pinkrose.net.dhis.org>, B'ichela
> <mdalene@pinkrose.dhis.org> wrote:
>
>> Actually thats not quite true. If it is, why is Verizon going to go
>> with LTE and not Qualcomm's 4G standard? Also Qualcomm is a greedy
>> company and charges high licensing fees. GSM is an open standard
>> whereas CDMA is propietary.
>> Apple went to Verizon at first as there IS MORE U.S CDMA
>> customers than GSM customers. APPLE wanted to lock down its Iphone
>> which is very common on CDMA systems. Verizon, the largest of the CDMA
>> providers didn't want to play ball, therefore, Apple went to the next
>> largest market penetration. That would be AT&T/Cingular
>
> The more likely scenario is that Verizon wanted to cripple the phone
> like they do all of their others, and Apple told them to get lost.
Mr. Strat wrote:
> In article <Sn%cj.35034$Pv2.34038@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net> , Kevin
> Weaver <kevinkeithweaver@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> No. Verizon turned Apple down.
>
> Regardless, Verizon still sucks due to their predatory business
> practices.
While their business practices may suck, and I've criticized them
repeatedly for some of the crap they pull, you of course understand how
they've now managed to pass AT&T in retail subscribers.
Every survey of users as to what matters most to them gives the same
result--coverage. Handset selection is usually somewhere near the bottom
of the survey results.
If you look at Consumer Reports, JD Power, or any other independent
survey, the results are always the same, and always overwhelming when it
comes to coverage comparisons. In Consumer Reports it's listed as "No
Service." In 17 out of 20 markets, Verizon had the best score for "No
Service," while in the other three they were tied with Alltel.
In article <477534cf$0$84210$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, SMS
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> While their business practices may suck, and I've criticized them
> repeatedly for some of the crap they pull, you of course understand how
> they've now managed to pass AT&T in retail subscribers.
No way I'll stand up for AT&T. I use TMO. Although this area is heavily
Verizon, I've had no problems with coverage.
But I'm guessing that the reason Apple didn't go with Verizon is
because Verizon wanted to cripple the iPhone like they do the rest of
their phones and Apple wouldn't let them.
I'm hoping to see a non-carrier specific version of the iPhone at
MacWorld in a couple weeks so I can dump my RAZR when my contract is up
later this year.
> But I'm guessing that the reason Apple didn't go with Verizon is
> because Verizon wanted to cripple the iPhone like they do the rest of
> their phones and Apple wouldn't let them.
I doubt it. Apple did the kind of things that Verizon does. I.e. if you
want to use an iTunes song as a ring tone you have to pay twice, once
for the song and once to use it as a ringtone. People complain about
Verizon disabling ringtone creation in Motorola Phone Tools, with good
reason, what Verizon did was a despicable act because they thought it
would cut into ringtone sales. But when Jobs announced the ability to
pay a second time for iTunes songs to be used as ringtones, he got
thunderous applause.
Verizon would not pay Apple a monthly fee per handset. They were willing
to give up the customers that chose AT&T solely for the iPhone
availability. I think it was a dumb decision by Verizon, but then I
don't have access to all the studies led to their decision.
Everyone knew the iPhone was a success, but wow!
Linear Mode
