I wouldn't have a problem if AT&T is the only carrier for this phone. My problem is with the sparce coverage AT&T currently offers on the East Coast. Instead of showing commericals that state that have the most bars, they should really say you need all 5 bars to make the call!
I didn't realize it was Apple who came up with the idea of exclusivity for the iPhone. I always had thought AT&T went to them with an offer and Apple decided "Why not?" Any word on how much AT&T paid for that exlusivity? The more I learn about Apple, the more I dislike their practices.
Every company is in it for the money, but Apple just makes it so much more abundantly clear. When they develop a product, it seems they're really not motivated by the idea of making a positive impact. They are only motivated by how much $$ they can squeeze out of their small pool of customers. If they had the cure for cancer, they would only be looking at dollar signs. "If they want it bad enough, it won't matter. Put that pill in a shiny white capsule and people will gladly pay double!"
[citation][nom]psimitry[/nom]I thought the deal with Verizon turning down the iPhone originally was that they weren't willing to use Verizon's media service and software exclusively.[/citation]
Yes, there were certain issues which led to Verizon ultimately turning down the offer, but I just can't believe that they weren't willing to work something out.
I think Verizon was right to walk away. They would have had to make too many concessions.
You also have to remember that Verizon's biggest bulk of subscribers are business contracts. And when the iphone first came out, it had NO 3G, no Exchange support, and from a business perspective, was not much more than a paperweight. Very glad that verizon did not bring that mess on their networks.
While it was probably the right decision to decline the iphone when it first came out, I sure hope they do get one soon..verizon doesn't seem to have the selection that at&t does, and i'd like to get a good phone for my next one
Am I crazy, but I do remember that ATT signed 5 year exclusive contract with apple. That was all over internet when iPhone was introduced.
As for why Verizon did not sign contract, it was also discussed all over internet - Verizon did not want to loose control over the phones! Verizon wanted to sell, do support and control the use of the phone, and apple did not like it. Apple wanted wireless company simply be a provider of wireless service and that's all.
Verizon had their reasons. Apple wanted complete control of the device in terms of sales and marketing and Verizon said no. Just go look at the Apple Store, they are the only place you'll find that offers an AT&T phone with absolutely ZERO AT&T logos. Verizon wasn't ready to bend over for Apple and they won't be ready again.
Apple has more to gain than Verizon does. Verizon is the largest carrier, has a deal with BlackBerry for touch screen phones (they'll get it right the second time), and has plenty of other worthy devices. The worst thing about the iPhone is AT&T.
IMHO this whole situation stinks. Why is it that in other countries, you have laws that deal with phones being only locked by their SIM card, where here, you have 5 different networks, and any one of them can sell non-standardized phones...
Asia, the Middle East, Europe, have better phones, and yet, don't have locked phones.
I'm just going to wait for the BlackBerry Storm II in September. Apple should have worked harder for the Verizon contract in the beginning. The fact that Apple had to settle for AT&T (and I do say settle for) means they either were to selfish in their demands, or did a poor job selling the product to Verizon.
AT&T's cell service is nothing compared to Verizon. At least in the cities near me, their coverage is pretty poor.
Its because Verizon would ge very little out of the deal. A few more subs and a few data plans here and their. Ultimately Verizon makes alot of money on its apps store. With the iPhone all apps are purchased from the Apple store therefore verizon would get no extra income from apps however those apps would be downloaded and using verizons 3g network. Extra network load without the extra pay out.
It is just a sign of the unfair capitalism that is throughout this business world.he same type of greediness that brought the economy down.
A device like a cell phone should not be exclusive to one company.
Shame on you Apple !!!
[citation][nom]gorehound[/nom]It is just a sign of the unfair capitalism that is throughout this business world.he same type of greediness that brought the economy down.A device like a cell phone should not be exclusive to one company.Shame on you Apple !!![/citation]
So, a business that spends millions of dollars in R&D on a phone should not be able to sell it to who ever they want at what ever price they want?
If Socialism is soooooo great, then WHY didn't a company from another country create the iphone?
Also, WHY are prices LOWER for just about EVERYTHING here in the USA, where FREE Markets/Capitalism exist and, even with the stronger Euro & Pound, prices are higher in the UK & Europe?
Here's a lesson on 3rd grade Social Studies: Capitalism allows people to offer services and goods at what ever price they want. It is the FREE MARKET that decides what those prices are. If Apple sold their iphone for $2000, only a few would buy it and Apple would be losing millions of dollars. Due to the Free Market, Apple is able to sell them at $200-300, continually improve the phone thru R&D and make a profit.
For the current economy, it was not greed and Wall Street that caused this recession. It was certain Democrats forcing banks to provide loans to poor people - people who could not afford a mortgage. These loans were sometimes called "NINJA" loans: No Income No Job & Assets. A few years ago, a bank in Chicago wouldn't give home loans to people with little to no money and/or poor credit. Obama and his "community organizers" sued this bank stating they were not giving "fair" access to home loans. The bank responded saying that they would lose money and go out of business if they had to provide these types of loans. Being Chicago, the "Windy City", the bank lost in court which caused a ripple across the country. Every bank now knew that if they didn't give these loans, they would be sued and lose due to the precedent.
Actaully Cellphones are cheaper in Europe.... The Black Berry Storm is Free with two year contract on Vodafone's network. The difference between the Euro model and the American Model is this. I can buy a phone for full price and go on ANY network i want. Here I am locked to a carrier for 2 years if i want an Awesome phone.
Verizon Wireless's business model is one where Carrier retains all control over the devices on their network. This has caused them to have the WORST Phones on the market due to the HORRIBLE Bloatware they install on their phones. End to discussion is this. Verizon Wireless's business plan is a step back not a step forward for the customer. They will never get an iPhone because as they are going LTE they are keeping CDMA for voice.... That means all phones on their network will have to be GSM/CDMA phones... DO you think Apple is going to make a Hybrid phone which will INCREASE production costs?
You guys missed the point of the article. The reason Verizon didn't sign with Apple is because they could not. Their CDMA technology is old and only used in the US and very few other places. Apple would have not been able to sell many phones outside the US if they went with CDMA.