Apple's New Calling: The iPhone

In article <st%[email protected]>,
"Mij Adyaw" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Apple may have made a serious mistake in not offering the phone on America's
> Most Reliable Network. It is interesting that they chose GSM rather than the
> technically superior CDMA.

Because the world is abandoning CDMA.

---

› See More: Apple's New Calling: The iPhone

In article <[email protected]>,
"Mij Adyaw" <[email protected]> wrote:

> yes.

Which "yes".

At 10 Jan 2007 16:50:09 -0800 SMS wrote:


> T-Mobile's problem is that there are two many areas in the U.S. where
> their coverage is poor, by virtue of their late entry, and their 1900
MHz
> network.

I'm not sure "late entry" is an excuse. T-Mo simply hasn't benefited as
greatly from mergers as other carriers. The individual wireless
companies that comprised, say, Cingular (PacBell, AT&T Wireless, SBMS and
BellSouth) were certainly no bigger than T-Mo is currently. Same goes
for Verizon's "ancestors." With the exception of Sprint and Nextel (who
themselves merged together, of course) all of the "national" cellular
companies are amalgams of smaller regional ones, due to the fact that the
FCC originally kept cellular regional in order to allow more players in a
very spectrum-limited game. Only after the five 1900MHz licenses per
market were established to augment the two original 800MHz licenses, were
cellular companies really allowed to merge to create the national
carriers we have today.

I'm certainly not arguing with your premise that T-Mo is limited in
coverage compared to other carriers- I'm only arguing with your reasons
why. ;-)

T-Mo really wasn't much later in the game than Sprint, who for a very
long time was the industry leader in native coverage (because the FCC
didn't limit the total territory of 1900MHz carriers like they did 800.)
Sadly, T-Mo's biggest problem is they're sort of a fifth wheel now- all
the companies who would have benefitted most from reciprocal roaming
agreements with them have merged into their largest competitor!


> With Cingular GSM, you can get all the world coverage that T-Mobile
> offers, though you may pay a bit more for international coverage on
other
> T-Mobile networks outside the U.S., than T-Mobile USA customers pay (not
> sure of this actually).

Probably six of one, half dozen of the other. Roaming rates are by
country rather than by carrier, so I suspect Cingular leverages T-Mo's
competition against them in foreign countries.


> I'd compare the iPhone more to the Newton. Cool technology, but enough
> gotchas to limit its appeal. No 3G, only available on a poor network,
and
> less capability than PDA phones, though a much cooler design.

I'm not sure all of that is accurate. 3G is probably coming (and
frankly, unless you're tethering a computer, I find EDGE perfectly
acceptable for PDA use), and despite your problem with Cingular, they
certainly have a decent network, even if it's not the absolute best. As
far as less capability than a PDA phone, it's certainly better spec'd with
a more robust OS, so I expect 3rd party developers will be on this thing
like flies on a horse.

> But not to worry, the first version of any product has always got some
> design issues. In a couple of years there may be a CDMA version, and a
> GSM version with 3G, as well as a way to load applications onto it.

Did I miss something in the keynote? Why is everyone assuming you won't
be able to load apps on this device? Heck, you can load apps on an iPod!




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Mij Adyaw <[email protected]> wrote:

> Apple may have made a serious mistake in not offering the phone on America's
> Most Reliable Network. It is interesting that they chose GSM rather than the
> technically superior CDMA.

Had they done that it had been unusable outside the US.

They did, however, make an error when they choosed to support EDGE but
not 3G.

And what about FM and DAB radio support?
--
Per Erik Rønne
http://www.RQNNE.dk

Steve Hix wrote:
> In article <st%[email protected]>,
> "Mij Adyaw" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Apple may have made a serious mistake in not offering the phone on America's
>> Most Reliable Network. It is interesting that they chose GSM rather than the
>> technically superior CDMA.
>
> Because the world is abandoning CDMA.

CDMA's market share keeps increasing, not only in the U.S., but
especially outside the U.S.. The whole world is moving to CDMA, in one
form or another.

larwe wrote:
> SMS wrote:
>
>> I'd compare the iPhone more to the Newton. Cool technology, but enough
>> gotchas to limit its appeal. No 3G, only available on a poor network,
>
> What is the actual market penetration of 3G in general in the United
> States (Apple's primary market)?

3G is available in all major metro areas, and most minor metro areas.
Cingular is way behind Sprint and Verizon in 3G deployment, but they are
rapidly deploying HSDPA, and in six months or so should have equal
coverage to the other two major carriers.

Sprint is now making a big deal about their 3G speed, versus Cingular's
EDGE speed, but this is an unfair comparison, as Cingular will have 3G
coverage as good as Sprint's by the end of the year, and already has 3G
coverage in the large metro areas.

SMS wrote:

> > What is the actual market penetration of 3G in general in the United
> > States (Apple's primary market)?
>
> 3G is available in all major metro areas, and most minor metro areas.

That's coverage; not what I was asking. I know the carriers want to
sell streaming pornography to every cellphone in the world, but who is
buying 3G service right now, and for what are they using it?

Besides streaming video, I haven't yet seen an application. All the
carriers either lock out or charge EXORBITANT rates for the one
application I'd find useful, which is using the phone as a cellular
modem with my laptop.

The data services I use (SMS and email) would not be significantly
improved by moving to 3G. Web browsing on a cellphone is so damn
annoying (inherently, due to keyboard, screen and rendering engine
issues) that adding high speed to it wouldn't appreciably improve the
situation.

Tim Smith <[email protected]> writes:

> The fact that Apple already had worked with Cingular on a phone probably
> was a factor, too--the Motorola ROKR. Apple was pleased with the
> collaboration with Cingular on that. It was Motorola that screwed that
> phone up, not Cingular.

That's not entirely obvious. That's what's usually blamed,
but my experience talking to folks - regardless of their
interest in the ROKR or not - shows that (a) folks don't
change cellular carriers often, even for a cool phone and
(b) almost uniform hatred of Cingular in particular as a
carrier. Moreover (c) unless someone's up for a contract
renewal - even if they don't have to change carriers to do
it - that's a big deterrent.

Tying a product to cellular carriers - and their contracts -
has a huge impact on potential market penetration. About the
only exception that's made it above that is probably the RAZR,
but note that that's available on *all* carriers, and unlocked
as well.

--
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks. The rest gets trashed.
No HTML in E-Mail! -- http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
Are you posting responses that are easy for others to follow?
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting

SMS wrote:

> > Because the world is abandoning CDMA.
>
> CDMA's market share keeps increasing, not only in the U.S., but

If by "CDMA" you mean specifically IS-95 and its derivatives, I don't
think you're correct.

If by "CDMA" you mean generically any system that uses CDMA to achieve
channel separation, then you're right because next-generation GSM uses
CDMA technology

IS-95 has a good (if quirky) frontend with a relatively poor backend.

GSM has a good (if complex) backend with a fairly limited TDMA
frontend, particularly unsuited to building out coverage over wide
areas.

On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 20:50:44 -0600, Kurt wrote
(in article <[email protected]>):


> It was downhill from the Startac for Motorola.

Very good point. That was the last "Gee, I gotta have one of
those" cell phones, and that was a long time ago.


--
Lefty
All of God's creatures have a place..........
..........right next to the potatoes and gravy.
See also: http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/images/iProduct.gif

On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 20:46:18 -0600, Kurt wrote
(in article <[email protected]>):

> In article <[email protected]>,
> Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> At 10 Jan 2007 15:07:11 +0000 [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>
>>> You apparently haven't been reading a fair cross section of reviews...
>>>
>>
>> Good reviews won't make a $500 phone more attractive to those not willing
>> to spend half a grand on a phone. It will certainly be a success, but
>> not a RAZR-like success, at least not at first.
>>
> But the Razr is a crap phone. Tons of user complaints.

Well, I have one, and half of the supposed features I never even bother
to use. like voice-activated dialing. 2 minutes with the moto manual,
and you don't feel like fooling with it. It makes and receives calls,
and has decent battery life. I'll be moving to an iPhone when they're
available, can't wait.



--
Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)
"The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those
who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

In article <[email protected]>,
Lefty Bigfoot <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 20:50:44 -0600, Kurt wrote (in article
> <[email protected]>):
>
> > It was downhill from the Startac for Motorola.
>
> Very good point. That was the last "Gee, I gotta have one of those"
> cell phones, and that was a long time ago.

I dunno. I see a *lot* of RAZR phones around here. Seems like about a
third of the phones I see are RAZRs.

On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 08:26:23 -0600, Tim McNamara wrote
(in article <[email protected]>):

> In article <[email protected]>,
> Lefty Bigfoot <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 20:50:44 -0600, Kurt wrote (in article
>> <[email protected]>):
>>
>>> It was downhill from the Startac for Motorola.
>>
>> Very good point. That was the last "Gee, I gotta have one of those"
>> cell phones, and that was a long time ago.
>
> I dunno. I see a *lot* of RAZR phones around here. Seems like about a
> third of the phones I see are RAZRs.

Yeah, but when the startac came out, all you had to do was walk
in a room with one, and a crowd would for around wanting to look
at it and play with it. RAZRs are popular and all, but not the
same buzz.

Guess what will happen the first time somebody walks in with an
iPhone?

:-)



--
Lefty
All of God's creatures have a place..........
..........right next to the potatoes and gravy.
See also: http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/images/iProduct.gif

On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 08:19:50 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>[email protected] wrote:
>
>>> Not true. Well, yes, Sprint is usually worse, but Cingular's coverage is
>>> consistently worse than Verizon's, in every region of the country.
>>
>> Only if you include the Analog coverage.
>
>Unlikely. Most Verizon handsets no longer include AMPS, yet Verizon
>still beat Cingular in every metro area in the country, in many by huge
>margins.


And your URL for this fantasy claim......

In article <[email protected]>,
"larwe" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Looks as if there was an iCal icon on the iPhone, and likely that will
> sync with a .mac account. What more do you want out of a PDA?

Ironically, despite Steve's disdain, a stylus. The last generation
Newton actually had excellent handwriting recognition. Apple invented
the PDA, but killed it just when it fulfilled its promise. I actually
used one for seven years before I finally couldn't deal with the battery
situation and the lack of syncing.

Anyway, a PDA needs good data entry (I could actually take notes on the
Newton) and I don't think an onscreen keyboard is it. Nevertheless, I
think the iPhone would be acceptable as a PDA with a good information
management system. Anyone familiar with MoreInfo on the Newton will know
what I mean.

--
John S. Heaney
I don't train in Aikido to protect myself from the world,
but to protect the world from me.