Verizon users screwed again

[anon4705295]

As Yogi used to say "deja vu all over again"... man what a bunch of whiners ...

Jobs & Co said iOS5 would be released "in the fall" which means it won't be here for anyone "soon" (in a month or so) except the developers who already have the beta 1 available to them ... it will be here when it gets here... and it appears that it will be available for both ATT & VZW customers at the same time... so please stop the whinging...

We're not whining because we don't get ios5 until the fall, we're upset because Apple is furthering the fragmentation between Verizon and AT&T with the music cloud beta. In case you AT&T people forgot, we don't even have 4.3 yet...

 

[Fausty82]

No, that was a rumor and proved false. I don't remember who said it, whether it was someone from Verizon or Apple, but Verizon was never offered the iPhone first, Apple went right to AT&T. So yeah, that's not true.

And it's not really like Xbox versus PS3, because those are different devices. This is the iPhone 4. Two variations on the same exact device.

VZW was not offered the iPhone because the CDMA version did not exist... to go worldwide, Apple chose the worldwide standard of GSM... AT&T and T-Mobile were the only two major GSM carriers in the country. End of story.

 

[Rusty Shackelford#IM]

We're not whining because we don't get ios5 until the fall, we're upset because Apple is furthering the fragmentation between Verizon and AT&T with the music cloud beta. In case you AT&T people forgot, we don't even have 4.3 yet...

I guess that's what we get for having the superior network. I kid, I kid. But seriously.

 

[Fausty82]

We're not whining because we don't get ios5 until the fall, we're upset because Apple is furthering the fragmentation between Verizon and AT&T with the music cloud beta. In case you AT&T people forgot, we don't even have 4.3 yet...

Understood... but what features are you missing? Airplay? VZW did get the mobile hotspot first... again, I don't see anything worth getting your panties in a bunch over... by the time iOS5 rolls out TO EVERYONE there will be no more fragmentation...

 

[anon(4712533)]

So, you are a registered developer?

No but I do have an iPad2 with 4.3.3 so I can see the beta iCloud stuff.

 

[anon4705295]

VZW was not offered the iPhone because the CDMA version did not exist... to go worldwide, Apple chose the worldwide standard of GSM... AT&T and T-Mobile were the only two major GSM carriers in the country. End of story.

That goes exactly with what I was saying...

 

[anon4705295]

Understood... but what features are you missing? Airplay? VZW did get the mobile hotspot first... again, I don't see anything worth getting your panties in a bunch over... by the time iOS5 rolls out TO EVERYONE there will be no more fragmentation...

We got the hotspot first yeah, but AT&T got it within a reasonable amount of time. It's looking like we're not going to 4.3 AT ALL. That's a big difference.

I would use airplay. Frequently. I would love a faster Safari - I use the mobile browser for probably half of my Internet browsing overall. I would LOVE to be able to use the music cloud feature. Sounds to me like it's plenty to "get my panties in a bunch over.". Also, this is the Verizon iPhone forum, is it not, so if you don't want to read about people talking about their Verizon iPhones, good or bad, then don't come into this forum... and please don't assume that just because you don't use something it means that no one would use it, especially those who don't even get the chance. I really don't think it's too much to ask that ALL iPhone 4s have the same features. It's looking like we will have to wait for the rest of June, July, August, and most of September (at the earliest) before we see these features that everyone else has. This stinks.

 

[Disturbed_Angel]

Yes, I was really hoping to start checking out the few iCloud features that were going in to effect, with the thought that by saying 4.3 they really meant 4.3 and 4.2.8, but no, we are left out of the fun along with the several other features touched on above. I can see (maybe) that the CDMA vs GSM need different iOS versions for some strange reason, but both have had updates after the CDMA version came out, I see no reason why the features are not universal across the board.

 

[audit]

Anyone with VZW can register for a dev account and download the CDMA version of IOS 5. Really don't see what the big deal is. I downloaded and installed the GSM one on my wife's 3GS last night with no problem.

 

[anon4705295]

To the contrary, Apple approached Verizon about the iPhone prior to going with ATT. Verizon did not pick up the original iPhone because Apple was far too aggressive in it's revenue sharing goals. Apple wanted too big a slice of the pie and could not come to an agreement with Verizon.

Additionally, Verizon wasn't willing to give up the ability to be the primary source for customer service provider in terms of faulty hardware, etc. Verizon's stance at the time was that if you were having a problem with your phone, they wanted you to bring it to one of their stores to have their own technicians work on it. Apple, on the other hand, had no desire to let this go.

To say that Verizon was not offered the iPhone is inaccurate. Verizon was offered the opportunity, but didn't want to give up as much of the money as Apple wanted. Apple had better bargaining ability with ATT, who was all to eager to make concessions to Apple in order to gain an exclusive contract to offer the original iPhone.

The GSM vs. CDMA debate in this thread is moot because should Verizon have reached an agreement with Apple, the original iPhone would have been a CDMA device. To go world-wide, after proving the iPhone's marketability and profitability, Apple would have had to come up with another (GSM-capable) iPhone.

You can choose to disagree, that's up to you, but my wife, who has been with Verizon Wireless for more years than she'd care for me to comment on, shared with me the whole sordid story years ago when it all when down in the first place.

No, that was a rumor and is false. According to an interview with Verizon's CEO in BusinessWeek, he says Verizon was never in the running to first offer the iPhone. Here's the interview: Charlie Rose Talks to Verizon CEO Seidenberg - BusinessWeek

 

[anon4705295]

Anyone with VZW can register for a dev account and download the CDMA version of IOS 5. Really don't see what the big deal is. I downloaded and installed the GSM one on my wife's 3GS last night with no problem.

It's been repeatedly stated that betas aren't the most stable ever and can tank your device. Plus I don't have a hundred bucks lying around (I saved up for my iPhone for almost a year). The issue is that we STILL don't have 4.3 after all of this time ugh. I am saving up so that I can get a more stable beta, but I don't want to ruin my phone by putting it on it yet.

 

[douglaswilson]

I was hoping after a day went by I would get up and something would have changed and we would have access to iOS5 or a 4.3 update would have come out. I can see nothing has changed yet!

 

[Eclipse0001]

That's not a fair statement, as Apple was selling the iPhone 3+ years before Verizon was given a shot. I don't recall AT&T's initial iPhone release being so big and selling out as fast as it was with Verizon. Just saying.

To my knowledge, Verizon never sold out of the iPhone. At least they didn't in the area that I live in...

 

[Fausty82]

You can choose to disagree, that's up to you, but my wife, who has been with Verizon Wireless for more years than she'd care for me to comment on, shared with me the whole sordid story years ago when it all when down in the first place.

Are you saying that your wife was a party to these discussions? I call BS. I've been with AT&T since 1997 (yes, ALL of the different flavors of AT&T)... that is totally irrelevant... as is your wife's tenure... bottom line is, you're flat out mistaken.

 

[Duvi]

No, that was a rumor and proved false. I don't remember who said it, whether it was someone from Verizon or Apple, but Verizon was never offered the iPhone first, Apple went right to AT&T. So yeah, that's not true.

And it's not really like Xbox versus PS3, because those are different devices. This is the iPhone 4. Two variations on the same exact device.

It is true. Wish I could talk more about how I know about this, but I won't. Verizon said no and even if they would have said yes, it doesn't mean Apple would have went with Verizon... there were other things that had to be agreed upon like who would handle warranty (both parties wanted control of it), the percentage of the iPhone data plan that Apple wanted and several other reasons.

Regardless of whether it's true and even if we do go that route, the fact that Verizon isn't pushing the iPhone like AT&T did when they had it is enough. As soon as the Thunderbolt was mentioned, Verizon iPhone commercials seemed non-existent. To me, that's a snub.

With Xbox vs. PS3, the video games are exactly the same and play the same on both, but one gets certain 'downloadable content' first (xbox) before the other (ps3). If you want to look at it that way, CDMA and GSM are polar opposites and that's enough to be two different devices. Simultaneous voice + data on UMTS/GSM, whereas I have to end the call on Verizon to get Google maps to work. One can hold more users on one signle tower (cdma) than the other (gsm). Browsing speeds are different as well. You go to the best CDMA coverage with the ViPhone and than the best UMTS coverage with the iPhone (AT&T) and they are not even close in numbers. Verizon isn't stupid, this is the reason they're pushing 4G LTE out so aggressively. Where both services have equal coverage, you'd be better off with the UMTS version. Heck, is the ViPhone a world phone? There's another difference.

 

[anon4705295]

The Xbox and the PS3 go by different names, though. Obviously they considered them to have enough differences that they're not called the same thing. The iPhone 4 is an iPhone 4, and saying GSM or CDMA is not required for the label. If it can be called an iPhone 4, than I, and I'm sure many others, feel they all should be treated the same.

 

[Fausty82]

The Xbox and the PS3 go by different names, though. Obviously they considered them to have enough differences that they're not called the same thing. The iPhone 4 is an iPhone 4, and saying GSM or CDMA is not required for the label. If it can be called an iPhone 4, than I, and I'm sure many others, feel they all should be treated the same.

Except in the case of the iPhone4, despite having the same name, they are vastly different beasts... they work differently, have different strengths and weaknesses... and no matter what you call the devices, they are NOT the same and cannot be compared or treated as the same. When the next iPhone comes out with the Qualcomm dual technology chip, THEN they will be the same phone... though they will still function differently on their respective systems (GSM and CDMW)... the unity will come with the LTE/4G versions when, for all intents, purposes and functions, they will be the same. Until then, YMWV (your mileage WILL vary).

 

[Duvi]

The Xbox and the PS3 go by different names, though. Obviously they considered them to have enough differences that they're not called the same thing. The iPhone 4 is an iPhone 4, and saying GSM or CDMA is not required for the label. If it can be called an iPhone 4, than I, and I'm sure many others, feel they all should be treated the same.

I knew you'd say that, but if they were the same, why would it have to go through the FCC again? If they were the same, wouldn't they have the same SKU? Heck, wouldn't they be able to work on both AT&T or Verizon?

With my example, the GAMES (keyword) are just like the ViPhone and the iPhone for AT&T. They have the same name, but work on two different systems.

 

[anon4705295]

I think you both are missing my point... It's obvious they have a lot of differences. My issue is that Apple chose to label them as the same. Despite their differences, I think that choosing to put them under the same name means Apple has an obligation, in good will towards its customers, to treat them as the same.

You might feel differently, but you're also not sitting here, as one of Verizon's millions of iPhone owners, still with 4.2.x. What burns me even more is that the 3GS has a better OS than us. That's just messed up.

 

[Fausty82]

I think you both are missing my point... It's obvious they have a lot of differences. My issue is that Apple chose to label them as the same. Despite their differences, I think that choosing to put them under the same name means Apple has an obligation, in good will towards its customers, to treat them as the same.

You might feel differently, but you're also not sitting here, as one of Verizon's millions of iPhone owners, still with 4.2.x. What burns me even more is that the 3GS has a better OS than us. That's just messed up.

And you have missed my point... that no matter what Apple or anyone else calls them, they are different. And because they are different, it may well be IMPOSSIBLE for them to "treat them as the same".