digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Verizon passed up Apple iPhone deal

engadget.com — While Cingular (er, AT&T, but you know what we mean) couldn't seem prouder of its iPhone exclusivity, apparently Apple's first choice was Verizon, but the two companies couldn't agree on a deal that worked for both companies.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • mbryant25, on 10/12/2007, -54/+10Chances are it will end up on all the major carriers within a year after the release anyway.
    • korimickster, on 10/12/2007, -18/+37Nope.

      "In a deal concluded from secretive discussions beginning in February 2005, Cingular Wireless will be the exclusive carrier of the iPhone in the United States and will remain so until 2009.[14] The iPhone may be purchased only with a two-year service plan with Cingular.[15]" - Wiki

      By the balls, I tell ya... by the balls.
    • TheReport, on 10/12/2007, -48/+26""In a deal concluded from secretive discussions beginning in February 2005, Cingular Wireless will be the exclusive carrier of the iPhone in the United States and will remain so until 2009.[14] The iPhone may be purchased only with a two-year service plan with Cingular.[15]" - Wiki"

      It's funny you are quoting Wikipedia. This is the same source that said at one point that Adam Curry invented Podcasting. Yeah try not to get to comfortable with relying on Wikipedia to much. It will come back and bite you in the Ass.
    • mrFREEZE, on 10/12/2007, -45/+7What I love about you kids is that a lot of you have found out the hard way that in a school research paper, you can get an 'F' for using Wikipedia as a source. Silly retards. ;p
    • incabulos, on 10/12/2007, -25/+42This is really funny:

      Talks began as far back as two years ago, but Apple's demands were steep[...] Apple wanted a percentage of monthly service fees, control over distribution that would limit iPhone sales to Apple and Verizon stores, and even some control over service and support for iPhone customers. "They would have been stepping in between us and our customers to the point where we would have almost had to take a back seat ... on hardware and service support," say Gerace.

      So basically, Apple was going to fix everything that terribly sucks about Verizon: lack of phone/network features, lack of customer support, terrible customer experience in stores, and stupid greedy managers that can't tell the difference between $0.0002/min and 2 cents/min. Hah! Imagine that. I just wish I didn't need to own a phone. The whole Ma Bell thing makes me ill.
    • skyshock21, on 10/12/2007, -28/+5This should tell you something - Verizon isn't that hard up for business, and Cingular is.

      I think I might check out Cingular after my contract w/ Sprint is up...
    • DeadWisdom, on 10/12/2007, -2/+64Except, you clueless twits, the Wikipedia article has sources listed directly in that quote. He cut-and-pasted the section so you don't see the links to the footers to the sources of the New York Times and San Francisco Chronicle. How's it feel to get nailed so hard?
    • taintparty, on 10/12/2007, -24/+3"The whole Ma Bell thing makes me ill."

      Way to go, you look like a complete moron. Guess who owns Cingular you little iTurd? AT&T, the real AT&T that sends your phone call info to the gov't. The real AT&T that owns everything and buys everyone, that AT&T. So have fun being iWatched by your iPhone. Maybe next time you'll think before you fanboy.
    • roomforpanic, on 10/12/2007, -3/+87They passed it up because they thought Apple offered them .02 million instead of .02 billion
    • signal15, on 10/12/2007, -15/+4The only thing that could be worse than Cingular is Verizon or some other non-GSM carrier.
    • ricodued, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4Kormickster:

      Tell that to Rockstar about GTA (PS2 exclusivity agreement).
    • rasterbator, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The real issue: Apple told them no support for their sucky v-cast, and they cried. Verizon most likely leaked the iPhone after that.
    • klaymen, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1um.......they could always come out with a new phone.



      maybe the power phone will be on the verizon network?
    • broomett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0rico...there is NO ocmparison to Rockstar having exclusivity with the console that was by far the market leader and Apple trying to make demands when they themsevles know their phone will have less than 1% market.
  • schlongmeister, on 10/12/2007, -5/+144Verizon probably would've crippled certain features on the phone anyway.
    • korimickster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+59Absolutely. I bought a Razr from Verizon as soon as it came out, only to return it the next day because every feature is crippled on the thing. Greedy bastards.

      Probably why they passed on the iPhone.
    • Korexz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+130Certain features, or ALL FEATURES?

      I got a Samsung SCH-A950 when it got released... the MP3 Phone... until VZW rolled out VCAST Music... then the firmware update took my MP3 playback function away.

      I filed a BBB complaint... spent 3 hours on the phone with some VP at VZW explaining why I filed the BBB complaint. The BBB agreed that VZW was in the wrong... but VZW stalled until the day before the complaint deadline, which left me no time complete the complaint process.

      VZW = FRAUD.
    • roosterjm2k2, on 10/12/2007, -31/+2Funny, my chocolate has almost every feature enabled...

      All cell phone companies disable certain features of their phones, to keep inline with the services they provide, and to not hinder their existing services. Its called business. Nextel's i870 phone has the ability to use MP3s as ringtones straight off the card...but nextel removed that feature so that you had to use their service to Download the tone. Similar things are done across the board by all companies.
    • EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12That's one reason why you want third party applications for a phone. I have a Samsung SCH-i730 through Verizon and there's nothing they can do to keep me from putting Skype, streaming media, instant messaging, or other applications/data on my phone. The iPhone may not be "crippled" per se, but I guarantee you Apple will not release applications that interfere with Cingular's revenue stream.
    • DuraznosTJ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Oh they did. But there's ways around that....
    • Hoov, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2Most of these features get unlocked by making a few tweaks anyway.
    • adml_shake, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I got the A950 when it came out, I love the phone, but I agree that it's complete ***** at everything that they crippled on it. It wasn't that hard to get around it though, I found ways to get my own ring tones, and get the MP3 player back.
      www.cellphonehacks.com, I believe is the site I started off at.
    • brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4My Verizon RAZR works perfectly via Bluetooth. I can load all the ringtones and transfer all the photos I want. I haven't had to use VZWpix or my picture messages up at all.
    • skribble, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3@rooster

      Ummm no. Cingular doesn't cripple their phones, and while T-Mobile makes sure all their phones are locked to their network, I don't believe they cripple the functionality either.

      As far as balancing phone co's with coverage Cingular is seems to be the lesser of all evils (T-Mobile seems best over all but their coverage sucks outside of major cities and intestates.)

      While Verizon arguablely has the best coverage (though as of about 18-24 months ago I've never not been in a cingular covered area, even in bum-fu(|( middle of nowhere cornfields Illinois). they nickle and dime you to death, cripple their phones, and have the *worst* customer service in the business.
    • hasbeen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Uh, Cingular cripples phones as much as any carrier. I have two identical phones from Cingular, one has the default cingular firmware, and the other one I flashed to get the most up-to-date firmware from the manufacturer. The difference is like day and night. A lot of useful things are missing on the phone I didn't flash.
    • theBrink, on 10/12/2007, -12/+14anyone else feel like smacking the living ***** out of the next person to say "ITS A BUSINESS!" ***** you and I hope you never breed.
    • skribble, on 10/12/2007, -6/+0@hasbeen

      Wait, a phone you upgraded is better then a phone with older software? Seriously? Wow... amazing.

      The thing is that cingluar allows you to make that upgrade without turning the phone into a paper weight. They do choose software, but that's not the same thing as breaking bluetooth so you can't transfer certain files and such.
    • Agret, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17"All cell phone companies disable certain features of their phones, to keep inline with the services they provide, and to not hinder their existing services"
      Wow, if you guys in the USA believe that ***** you've got problems. In Australia providers never disable certain features.
    • hasbeen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2skribble- I suppose I should clarify. I got these phones when they were JUST released by cingular. Hence there was no upgrade really, it was just that one had the cingular firmware and the other didn't. Regardless, the difference was that certain features were SPECIFICALLY disabled by the cingular software. Also, cingular does not offer upgrades for that phone. In fact, that upgrade feature was specifically disabled by cingular. I had to flash it 'illegally' which ended up costing $30 for a special cable and online credit.
    • samdu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5My last phone was T616 that I got through Cingular. They didn't cripple it in any way. I was shocked, actually, when my dad got his phone at Verizon and found out that, despite being Bluetooth, the only thing he could use the Bluetooth for was a headset. Meanwhile I was transferring files to and from my phone over Bluetooth with no hassles whatsoever. Turns out that Verizon was hit with a class action suit over their false advertising when it came to Bluetooth.
    • RomeyRome, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4"Verizon probably would've crippled certain features on the phone anyway."

      Yeh. Like 3g, GPS, 3rd party apps, oh, wait...
    • dtm1017, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3If you have a VZW RAZR, flash it to the alltel firmware. It makes all of the difference, I'm not kidding. Not to mention you get rid of all of the ***** that vzw puts on there. Works great too, even get it now works!
    • fr34k5h0w, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Ya I bought a RAZR V3c off of eBay and flashed it to the Alltel firmware (I'm on Alltel anyways). Alltel doesn't disable any features (except the useless ringtones, but a simple SEEM edit fixes that). If I remember correctly, the Alltel firmware is very similar to the default Motorola firmware, but don't take my word on that.
    • dtm1017, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1The Alltel firmware is the real Moto firmware.
  • Korexz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17Nice, excuse me while I call Verizon to cancel my contract for FREE thanks to the material adverse affect in txt message rates from .10 to .15

    Do a search for material change and verizon :

    http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/12/verizon-increases-sms-rates-customers-now-free-of-their-contr/

  • kenvsryu, on 10/12/2007, -3/+40They wouldn't wanna lose the title of 'The company with the most boring cell phones.'
    • klaymen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2they're like the EA of the cell phone industry
  • dcbebop, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2Do you think at Verizon they're publically castrating the guys responsible for this slip up?
    • EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Given the terms of the contract it may not have been worth it for Verizon. Even if the iPhone is a huge success (no guarantee) it might have been more trouble than it was worth. I doubt they're losing any sleep over their decision.
  • i4mt3hwin, on 10/12/2007, -12/+2Alltel > Verizon > Cingular

    and as for the castrating, no. I'm sure they new how popular another apple product would be, but i'm also sure they know how much it would of made them.
  • Yashar, on 10/12/2007, -8/+21As if Apple didn't already make over $200 on each iPhone, on top of that they want a portion of the monthly service charge. Verizon and Apple have something in common, they are both greedy bastards.
    • superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4On the other hand, if they are using part of that service money to pay for tech support - sure Cingular is going to answer some calls, but what makes you think Applecare will not also be getting iPhone calls as well? It does sync with computers you know...
  • DyDx, on 10/12/2007, -14/+21I'm glad Verizon didn't get it. I can't believe Apple went to Verizon first -- CDMA is old, ***** technology and Verizon's prices are way too high. People would be very pissed if it were not a GSM phone. All hail SIM cards!

    Not to mention that they cripple their phones. Whoo
    • elipabst, on 10/12/2007, -13/+7Yeah, but at least you don't have to hold your phone directly against the nearest cell tower to get any freakin service.
      /Had Sprint
      //It sucked
    • SteveMax, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Yes. Thank you, Verizon: you opened the possibility for people all around the world to unlock (at some point) their iPhones and use them in whatever operator they fancy (except the very few CDMA ones that still exist in the civilized world, but those don't count anywhere but in the USA).
    • MaxPayne3476, on 10/12/2007, -7/+16DyDx,

      Search the pros and cons of both CDMA and GSM. Which has consistently better service? Now stfu and crawl back into your crevice.
    • billoday, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Sprint is CDMA as well
    • EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Verizon (and other providers to varying degrees) crippling their phones is a huge issue. Number portability was a great first step towards keeping carries in check, but I think we also need legislation that allows us to use our phones as we please.

      That being said I fail to see how Verizon's smart phones are crippled in any sense of the term. No features have been disabled, many include 3G, and all allow for third party apps.
    • icmp, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15I cant disagree about your comment regarding VZW crippling their phones or charging higher than average prices for service but who the hell is digging your comment up for you suggesting that CDMA is "old, ***** technology" when the reality is the complete opposite ?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CDMA

      GSM is 2G, 1xEV-DO CDMA is 3G

      3GSM is what ? W-CDMA ?! Oh noes!

      Thanks.
    • SteveMax, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3CDMA is a modulation scheme. CdmaOne is the 2G technology that Verizon, Sprint and other "CDMA" companies employ (a technology that uses CDMA modulation).
      TDMA is another modulation scheme. GSM is the 2G technology that basically every carrier in the world employ (a technology that uses TDMA modulation).

      Now, both 3G technologies use the CDMA modulation, but this is basically their only resemblance to CdmaOne. The fact that the American GSM carriers aren't pushing 3G strongly enough over there doesn't mean that most of the current 3G phones on the market aren't GSM-compatible.
    • drunkturkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3GSM vs. CDMA: http://tech.yahoo.com/blog/null/1278
    • DyDx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I'm merely referring to the shorthand that CDMA = no SIM card and GSM = sim card. It's absurd that they would use a technology that does not give the customer more flexibility and choice.

      Also, just because Verizon has better reception in your particular area does not mean CDMA > GSM, it just means there are more Verizon towers in your area. In plenty of places Cingular and T-Mobile have much better reception than Verizon or Sprint. It's just that Verizon is geared towards business users so they have the major cities covered like a jimmy hat.
    • fr34k5h0w, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Ehm, I believe the reason that CDMA has a better coverage is because it can default back to Analog if needed, though most towers are being changed to Digital w/EV-DO. Out here in the boondocks we can only get CDMA. Whenever someone with GSM comes in, they ask how we survive w/out a cell phone. We just hafta tell them "It's the Network" (TM).
    • wowbagger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Apple are smart enough not to get stuck with a dead end technology.
      While we all know CDMA and W-CDMA are based on the same technology, we are all smart enough to know that Sprint and Verizon deploy their CDMA technology that is incompatible with what the rest of the world uses for W-CDMA - UMTS.

      Carriers worldwide are dropping CDMA2000 networks like hot potatoes, look at Telestra in Australia for example, tearing down an old CDMA2k network and deploying an 850mhz HSDPA network in it's place.

      I highly doubt Apple would not have noticed the at worst demise at best lack of significance of these old networks.

    • drunkturkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Actually, my most of the execs at my company ($20B/yr in revenue) go with Cingular or T-mobile because of the international support. Otherwise, they have to call Verizon, get a phone shipped to them at a crazy rate that they can then take overseas. Verizon lost a lot of our business due to this.
  • Hegemony, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12They probably couldn't work it out because Verizon kept getting confused by decimal places in the paperwork. They didn't know that .02 cents isn't the same as .02 dollars even two years ago. Unlike Verizon, Apple can understand basic math.
  • Herkimer56, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6There are no limits to human greed and stupidity.
    • MrUnderbridge, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2Verizon is a company. If by "greedy", you mean they're doing "due dilligence" to "maximize shareholder returns," then yes, that's their job and legal obligation. It's a company, not a charity.

      As to whether this is a stupid decision, time will tell.
  • illt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Tmobile may not have the user base of cingular or verizon in the us, but they seem to be a much better fit with apple.
    they are huge in europe too. it's too bad.
    • Layzie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11I have a tmobile SDA(sda 2 for europeans) and I love it. Tmobile is seriously underrated.
    • OMGWTFROFLMAO, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7how is Tmobile a much better fit? I have tmobile (and have had it for 6-7 years now) and wouldn't change services for the world, but I don't see the connection between the two.
    • KraigR, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I really like t-mobile in every way except the actual coverage area....too bad really.
    • jcaino, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2i have verizon (coverage cannot be beat, plus i'm n their vzw cc, so i get some perks)

      but i totally agree - tmobile would have been PERFECT for the iphone. as long as you''re ignorning short term sales.

      and quick, high volume, short term sales is whats going to make the iphone or break it. that's why apple needed to go with a carrier with a large customer base.

      face it, tmobile just doesn't have the US mobile base to launch this phone (although, arguably, it could have prompted a lot of people to switch services) and apple is more concerned about its US shipping primarily because it helps set the global stage (Sorry korea, but you just cant use those phones anywhere else)

      oh, and all big companies are greedy. money makes the world spin, yo.
    • RyeBrye, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3T-Mobile's coverage area is the same as Cingular's coverage area because of free roaming.
    • skribble, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@Rye

      Not quite. legacy TDMA used the 850 frequency so when Cingular/ATT (and companies it swallowed) switched to GSM they used that frequency so they could make simple switches with existing transceivers. T-Mobile uses 900 which is the common European GSM frequency. Most new transceivers are 1800 or 1900 so it doesn't make a big difference, in rule US there is still lots of old 850 GSM out there which T-Mobile phones don't get.
    • Refrag, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I couldn't get the Iphone if they went with T-Mobile because T-Mobile isn't in my area. Their coverage is too limited in the US.
  • mrbelvedr, on 10/12/2007, -12/+1*****!
  • JRumph, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Cellphone companies don't make money on the hardware, which they generally heavily subsidize (think two year contracts). Apple wanted a cut of the service fee, Verizon's main source of revenue. At first glance it looks like Verizon made a bone-headed move, but until you run the numbers you won't really know. Apple may have just wanted far too much money for it to make it profitable to Verizon.
  • totorototoro, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14Jesus, typically ***** USA Today reporting, followed by typically ***** lack of follow-up/questioning by the blog media. Where is the proof Apple went to Verizon first, then had to settle with Cingular? Wouldn't it be possible that Apple sent negotiators to all three big carriers at the same time? Did T-Mobile get approached as well?
    • trm3446, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@toto - Good point. I heard thru Sprint employee that Sprint also declined the iPhone. For whatever reason, Sprint didn't like the terms and didn't see how it would be beneficial to them.
    • NSResponder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It wouldn't surprise me if every single cell carrier that doesn't have the iPhone this year claims to have turned it down.

      -jcr

  • VTmruhlin, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10I can see how they'd have a problem butting heads like this. Both companies are huge on branding. So Verizon would have wanted to call it the vPhone and hard-code an ugly red color scheme in, laden with Verizon logos. Apple would have wanted their own logos everywhere, so the end product would just look nasty.
    • MaxPayne3476, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1that is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
    • Refrag, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3True, except Apple doesn't go slapping their logos everywhere. The Ipod is logo-less on the front. It's just an etched Apple and iPod logo on the back. The GUI doesn't have a logo either.
  • HappyScrappy, on 10/12/2007, -10/+6It's not true.

    The phone was quad-band GSM from day 1. Since Verizon doesn't do GSM, they were never in the running.
    • EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Proof?
    • ToddML, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Right because its impossible to have CDMA and GSM versions of the same phone.

      /end sarcasm.
    • MrUnderbridge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Is that what AppleInsider said? Did they have a shadowy unnamed source deep within Apple to back it up?
  • flessa, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6I hope you all keep in mind that Verizon Wireless is like a whole different company compared to Verizon Communications. I have Verzion Fios fiber optic internet, and well...its amazing. The install tech was friendly and helpful and the service is reliable, cheap, and blazing fast at 20mbps/5mbps.
  • thewayne, on 10/12/2007, -18/+10It is for the best. The Iphone is going to be an embarrassment to Jobs.

    Digg down if you dare! Stinkin Apple Fanboys!


    :0
  • chrisxkelley, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7My hatred for verizon just went up a level. I'm sick of their *****- everything from intentionally crippling bluetooth, to ***** service i've gotten from customer service reps.

    Cingular, here I come.
  • SirBotchness, on 10/12/2007, -10/+3Don't care, i get free phone service. why would i be bothered paying to cancel, then paying to get an overpriced phone, then pay a 2 year contracts worth of monthly service and an activation fee? Have fun supporting a monopoly like AT&T while you macfeinds constantly bash M$ for being one. hypocrites.
    • kirk06, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Oh wah! Cry me a river. Good day to you.
    • G-RaZoR, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2You sir, are an idiot.

      That is all.
  • wjackson, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3I think that the push for a Verizon partnership was a smart move. Most consumers don't care about the network or underlying technologies implemented by the carriers; they simply want the phone and it's features to work. Provided that you power-cycle your phone on a reasonable basis, Verizon's service, coverage, and reliability is vastly superior to that of their competitors.

    Don't even get me started on Cingular.

    Apple could have done some amazing things if they had been able to *supplement* Verizon's customer service, product support, and the like in this partnership. Ah well. I'm gonna buy an iPhone regardless :o)
  • kirk06, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Leave it to Verizon to ***** something up. You know, I've been with the V for over three years now. Switched from Cingular because I couldn't stand them...customer service was bad all around.
    But honestly, I think I'd rather have sub-par customer service and the ability to choose (and to not get raped) than to be nickeled and dimed to death by Verizon. I used to swear by the V...now, I can't help but regret my decision.

    See you in January 2008, Cingular! (or maybe sooner!)
  • pcgeek101, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1"Passed up" and "could mutually agree upon" are two different things. Buried accordingly.
  • drjekelmrhyde, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Cingular got ATTWS for its business customers thats why Apple want Cingular plus it 51 million customer base ,worldwide GSM, and how Cingular handled the RZAR craze
    • drunkturkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Don't look for this phone to be in businesses anytime soon. The business world is MS based, and if this cannot support MS Apps, then companies will not allow their employees to purchase such an expensive toy.
    • PhillyMJS, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@drunkturkey:

      Wrong. The iPhone will become the new status symbol for corporate VIPs. Saw this kind of thing all the time at various jobs over the years-- some high-powered executive would stroll in with some pricey, just-released phone or handheld that he bought without first consulting anyone, and then demand that IT get it to work with the company's systems. IT might have refused to turn on the appropriate services so the Mac users in the design department could use Microsoft Entourage to get their mail from the Exchange server and get their work done, but by God they'll turn 'em on for the CEO with his shiny new iPhone!

      ***** like that is why I will never again work for a large company. I'll starve before I put up with that kind of crap anymore.
    • drunkturkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1For business users, it comes down to ease of use, hence the reason Blackberry is is so popular. It does e-mail, your calendar, and allows you to talk on the phone. Yes, it's added some new features in the past couple years, but in general, the current executive guard is happy with what the blackberry (and similar smart phones) have to offer. The iPhone, in my opinion, will be too much for most of the business users. I think the iPhone will be a popular personal phone, and maybe a replacement for some pods. Guess we'll just have to wait to see...
  • mrdctaylor, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Sprint continues to dig their hole deeper. First, they merge with Nextel. Then, they proceed to screw the Nextel business customers they were trying to court. Then, they cannot get any decent handsets. Something like the iPhone could've turned them around...but instead....well, I guess they'll keep plugging along and keep hemorrhaging customers. I'm an ex-Sprint employee, so it is kinda hard to watch. But having worked in their IT shop for 10 years, it doesn't surprise me in the least. Marketing has no clue. Cell/PCS service is a commodity. Handsets tend to drive sales to a certain extent.
    • itsme92, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I guess phones drive service, but not for some people.

      I started out on Sprint (this was years ago). I had all sorts of problems with no service, dropped calls, and awful call quality (this was in a major metropolitan area btw). The service was so awful that I paid the termination fee to get out of that contract. I went without a phone for several years, and then I signed on with Verizon. Six years into buying service from them and I haven't looked back. I also will not consider signing on with anyone else because Verizon has a great voice network and I got so badly burned by Sprint in the past that I don't want to even try anybody else for fear of getting locked into a contract with poor service.

      But I will admit, I don't like Verizon for crippling their phones. But for me, a phone is a phone, I don't use any of the other features. Although I was going to use it to sync my address book via bluetooth to my computer. But when I got home and found I had to pay Verizon for that, I said forget that. So their loss, I guess, because if I need to look up a number in my computer, I just call it with my landline phone, meaning I'm not paying Verizon for a voice call.
  • FUElitists, on 10/12/2007, -17/+6Apple can go suck a big dick. They suck. Enjoy your stupid big retard button phone just because apple told you to. Steve jobs is ***** you in the ass as we speak.
  • vinmark, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1i am ticked i don't want to leave verizon, dang it all!!!! why did they have to be dumb and pass
  • DigitalBrian, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3I would love a iPhone, but never in a million years even if they GAVE me money would I sign up with Cingular or AT&T's crappy service, and I know many people who says the same, so I guess Apple made a popo by signing with them *lol*

    I bet Apple was out to get on Verizon because of the all digital net they have, it would have made sense, but when egos collide there are no deals to be made.
    • monkeyrun, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"all digital net"

      I would be amazed if any part of Cingular's network is Analog ...
  • mobilehavoc, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Wow, just gained a whole lot of respect for Verizon...
  • atomsforpeace, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Lesser of two evils.. it's ultimately better that they went with Cingular over Verizon. Cingular's CEO may not have looked like the brightest tool in the shed at the Apple Keynote speech, but I'm sure he can at least acknowledge that 1 dollar does not equal 1 cent. Basic math skills ftw.
  • raid517, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3There's one thing I think Apple are missing with the iPhone - and it's something I think is significant - and that's the girl factor. The iPhone - as interesting as it may be - is from what I have seen a really very butch and manly looking design. It may be easy to use - but it is right up there with the most gadgety of all gadgets produced to date. So again - it seems very much a man thing. The iPod on the other hand, did/does have the girl factor. Ask most girls what they think of the iPod - and the majority tend to call it 'cute.' I am just not sure that the iPhone is 'cute' in the same way that the iPod is.

    Virtually none of the women I have asked have said that they like the design and that they would use it. I just wonder how much of a hit it is likely to be, if Apple through their rush to simply appear 'innovative' inadvertantly exclude 50% of the population of the world from using what they probably think is the next big product to supercede the iPod?
    • raid517, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2And you digg that down why? Sorry I know it's not necessarily related to the story - but it is a useful point that I think a lot of people have missed.

      I've been mulling it over for a while and waiting for an iPhone story to say it - so this seemed as good as any.

      I guess the detractors might be hard core Apple fans who simply instinctively digg any negative points made about Apple down in an almost involuntary reflex action - but what the hey. How many girls can you see using this device?
    • Pureeviljester, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1dugg down cause it's stupid to mull over. the razor is a girly design, i see fagatrons walking around with it... so who cares
  • charingrosario, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I was really hoping the iPhone deal was with Verizon... I don't have Cingular in my area, so it'll be a long time before I can get one. :-(
  • geekee, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Wow, Apple is greedy.

    "They also give us an idea of what exactly is behind the Apple / Cingular agreement: Apple wanted a percentage of monthly service fees, control over distribution that would limit iPhone sales to Apple and Verizon stores, and even some control over service and support for iPhone customers."
    • winnch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Wow, Apple is greedy.

      "They also give us an idea of what exactly is behind the Apple / Cingular agreement: Apple wanted a percentage of monthly service fees, control over distribution that would limit iPhone sales to Apple and Verizon stores, and even some control over service and support for iPhone customers."

      Greedy?

      Apple develop visual voicemail, which moves folks off voice and onto data. Why shouldn't Apple get a cut of that superior service they created?

      Furthermore, given how awful customer service is from cell phone companies, it's in the best of Apple and customers that Apple demand more control over the customer experience.

      Greed? Not quite. It'll be transparent to you and give you a better experience.
  • bshellenberg, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Apple needs the carriers to take their phone FAR MORE than carriers need another phone (they already have every manufacturer bothering them every day to add a new phone to their service offerings). Apple is just too bloody ignorant and arrogant to understand this; they really think they've built something so revolutionary that the carriers should let them in on a piece of the carrier business. Note to Apple: Your phone ain't all that special; not in the least.
    • superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3And yet at least one carrier thought they were something special. Perhaps they know something you do not.

      You cannot deny there is a lot of positive buzz around the iPhone feature set. Well, you can deny this, but then I guess you'd only be carrying forth the delusion you currently live within.
    • broomett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0superkendall...and you cannot deny that most people don't give a ***** about it because of the price. It is not like Cingular was BEGGING for Apple to let them be the carrier. So your statement of "well, we know there was one." is just stupid. Just because two copanies get in a deal together does not mean that they both think it is the greatest thing since slice bread.
  • IchiroBoston, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I think Verizon screwed up too. I have always had Verizon service and 5-10 years ago it did make a difference (Coverage), in my opinion Verizon might have the most coverage... but ATT or most other carriers are not that far behind... good enough for me. Verizon is going to lose 3 accounts from me.

    Can you imagine if ATT comes out and says.. "3 year contract and we will pay your early termination fee"? I am actually surprised carriers don't do this already, it is common practice with business leases..etc
    • broomett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0You are seriously going to switch just for a ***** PHONE? Seriously...you need to get a social life. Buying overpriced pieces of crap will not get you laid.

      People WILL laugh at you behind your back when you pull out your phone in front of them in a last ditch pathetic attempt to to garner attention.
  • SoxFanNH, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1IM surprised considering how tight Verizon controls their current phones (locking out 1/2 the features) that they wouldn't got for the iPhone. Makes me wonder how restricted the iPhone will be with Cingular... interesting
  • o2o2o2o2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Doesn't make sense. If I'm not mistaken, the following is true:

    Verizon = CDMA
    Cingular = GSM
    Rest of the World = GSM

    Why would apple make a phone just for the USA cdma networks and another for the rest of the world? Sounds like they said no because they are not going to support GSM not because of not being able to strike a deal with Apple. The phone just would'nt work on thier network.
    • MikeSobe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It could have been USA exclusive to Verizon and apple could still have the right to make a GSM version for overseas. You have no idea what the details were.
    • awhiteflame, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If I recall correctly, isn't Japan mostly CDMA? I thought I read that they're going to have to make a CDMA version for Japan in years to come.
    • fredinator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1i wonder what its gunna be like in other countries (australia for me). hope we dont get locked in with a contract, but at least australian telcos arent to bad (except telstra internet, that sucks).
    • paoniapbud, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Japan actually uses a completely different technology than the rest of the world. It is a myth that the "rest of the world" uses GSM. Actually China uses CDMA, as does 60 other countries.

    • fr34k5h0w, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1They'd pry make two versions, like Motorola did with the RAZR. One being GSM and one being CDMA. Hence the V3 and the V3c (c for CDMA)
  • aserer511, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think this was a wise business move. Conjecture, but I think cingular may have a more hip userbase than VZW, who may rely a little more on corporate. I personally have VZW...but I'm not hip. :P
  • youpidou, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Wow :) Pretty much exactly what I guessed yesterday on this Digg entry: http://www.digg.com/apple/Apple_Turning_Cell_Phone_Market_Upside_Down

    "If Cingular don't subsidize the iPhone, then they "owe" Apple hundreds of dollars per customer. Could it be that Apple has a revenue share agreement with Cingular? So that instead of getting lower price for their phones, they get a share of the actual phone bills? It makes some sense, since operators only subsidize because they know they will get *more* money back through the bills over the lock-in period. It could give Apple higher revenues and better control over pricing."

    Basically, it means that nobody needs to know the real price of the iPhone, because Apple will fix the rebate, not the operator.
    • broomett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Please explain how this turns the cell market upside down.

      Please exaplin how ANY phone that its own company agrees willlbe lucky to get 1% market share will turn an industry upside down.
  • snakesonasam, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0whoever at verizon who said no to the deal must be crying so hard right now
    i kinda feel bad for the sorry sucker
    • broomett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Why would they be crying now? No one cares about the iPhone already and it is just 3 weeks after the announcement. NO ONE is talkingabout how they are going to switch to Cingular just for the priviledge of getting stuck in a 2 year contract AND paying $500 for a ***** phone.

      Remember the iPod HiFi?
  • randall814, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2It's quite ridiculous to see everyone saying "Greedy bastards." You start a business to make as much money as possible. Once you're on the scale of Apple and Verizon, this principle REALLY kicks in gear. Steve Jobs said in the keynote that they wanted to have prices similar to phones near its level of functionality (I'm looking at you, 8525). The 8525 is $399 with the contract, which is up there, yet it can't do what the iPhone can and it has far less storage space. Yes, it's expensive as ***** and that will be a huge hurdle for a lot of consumers, but it's a price that makes sense. Apple makes $200 off of that, but so what? If people were pretty much going to buy your product (customer loyalty is one of the biggest business factors, Mr. iPod) and you could get away with making a 30% margin on it, would you not do it because a percentage of those buyers thought you were greedy?

    "Nah, we're going to make too much money this way, what a terrible idea." What people fail to understand is that if Apple sells it closer to cost, margin is terribly low. If it costs Apple $260 to build and they sell it too close to that price, then it doesn't matter how many people are going to jump on the bandwagon because Apple would almost be in the whole. Not to mention, how are they going to sell any iPods when you can something that does 6000 times more stuff for the same price? (and don't give me any ***** about the ***** non-iPod players on the market that do more because they have FM radio and a voice recorder. Who the ***** would want that when you can choose any song in the world?)

    Oh, and no, not all carriers cripple their phones. I have a run of the mill Nokia from Alltel Wireless, but via my MacBook and the phone's bluetooth, I can pretty much do whatever the hell I want with it. I fill it to the gills with MP3's and also create my own ringtones. In 320Kbps, mind you...not that 32Kbps that Verizon is selling you at 2 bucks a pop.
    • broomett, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0randall...be sure to never call the record labels greedy bastards for charing so much for CDs. Or Microsoft, etc.

      Apple is not greedy. Just stupid. Their price has made this new devide more likely to become the next iPod HiFi rather than the iPod. No one cares already, just three weeks after the announcement.
  • dtm1017, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The only reason that I use Verizon is because their service is simply better. I have all of the major carriers in my region and friends that use them but when it comes down to it, the ability to make calls is more important that the software that it's running on. Plus you can flash your Verizon RAZR to Alltel if you really want....
  • MindlessSoul, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I'm scared by what the monthly fees could be ($40 to maybe even as high as $120 with a "data service plan"?).
    That's probably the reason I won't buy one.
    • winnch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1To put it in perspective, I have a Blackberry Pearl with unlimited data. I pay $29 for voice and $19 for unlimited data on EDGE through T-Mobile. Cingular's unlimited data was a little more expensive. Really though it's not that bad. Certainly worth it.
  • winnch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I doubt Verizon was the "first choice," as their userbase is smaller than Cingular's. More likely, Apple contacted all the major GSM networks in the States during these discussions. From a business perspective, it's always smarter to work partners against each other when you have a hot, exclusive product.

    In fact, it's more likely Apple leveraged discussions with Verizon with the aim of improving their negotiations with Cingular. After all, I'm convinced the Motorola iTunes phone project was used by Apple as a way of building a relationship with Cingular and learning the mobile business.

    I doubt Apple ever believed in the Motorola phone -- especially since they were developing a far superior iPhone all along.

    It's similar to the HP iPod. I doubt Apple was ever too interested in branding the iPod as an Apple/HP product. More likely, it was a way to have a short-term increase in distribution channels, while developing proof to retailers that customers wanted an Apple product -- not an HP, as customers still clamored to by the Apple version online, even with the option of buying a more familiar (from a PC user's perspective) HP product. (Though certainly it was also a ploy to quickly get iTunes onto more PCs.)
    • broomett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Verizon and Cingular's subscriber base is virtually identical. Cingular has about 60 million and Verizon has 57 million. If you take away pre-paid customers, chances are that Verizon has more contract customers. (Cingular has much better pre-paid plans than Verizon, cso chances are there are much fewer Verizon pre-paid.) Remember, over half of all cell phone users in hte Us are PRE-PAID. Apple didn't care about them.
  • ryanbmsu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I wonder how many revision and updates the iPhone will go through before making it to other carriers. I am usually happy to be an early adopter but I am hoping they will take notice of the current so-called pitfalls and release a better product down the road.
  • datcrazydj, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2At least they didn't go to Sprint. Phew. Now I don't have to see people walking around with iPhones yelling at it with their stupid walkie-talkies. >.>
    • deadsenator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Do you mean Nextel? Yes, those are fairly annoying devices. Good for construction sites and the like, but terrible for milling about among other humans. Makes me feel punchy.
  • Dorian822, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Wow...Verizon has become, in my opinion, the retarded inbred that appears on the Jerry Springer show to complain about how unfair their cousin/sexual partner is being with them. Verizon has become a real loser in regards to their phone service, their prices, their rates, and their packages. If they keep this up, they'll be the next bought out company.

    Really stupid move, Verizon, REALLY stupid.
    • randall814, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1i meant to give you a thumbs up but instead i buried it like a dick. sorry.
    • paoniapbud, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Interesting Dorian. Verizon has just become the largest carrier in the US(by total revenue numbers). They are by far the strongest most profitable company among wireless carriers right now. Check out 4th quarter results:

      http://www.webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?aId=26903
    • broomett, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Yeah! HORRIBLE move to not pay through the nose to be able to sell a phone that no one wants.

      Just 3 weeks after the announcement and all you hear now is the collective yawn of the cell phone buying public.I bet if 11 months ago someone posted that Apple approached Bose with a plan to incorpoarte their Apple HiFi into their sound systems and Bost told them no, you would have said "Stupid move, Bose. Stupid move."

      Apple has FAR more misses than hits. Even recently. If you don't see that, you have let yourself drift so far away from reality in your quetst to swallow Steve Jobs' semen that you are hopeless.

      Yeah...poor Verizon. They could only buy Apple 1 1/2 times over if they wanted.
    • MScrip, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0> "Yeah! HORRIBLE move to not pay through the nose to be able to sell a phone that no one wants."

      I was thinking the same thing. I don't think Verizon is sad about this. Everyone is going crazy about a phone that hasn't even been released yet... so we'll see if those same people will actually pay the money for an iPhone.

      When the Razr came out, it was $300. Now they are FREE.

      However, Apple products tend to stay the same price forever. If the iPhone is $600 at launch, it will remain $600 forever. People may want an iPhone (for whatever reason), but we'll see if they actually switch carriers and pay to get one.

      All wireless carriers have free phones, mid-priced phones and expensive phones. Now Cingular has one extra very expensive phone too. Since wireless carriers make the bulk of their money on the service, and considering that only 5% of people buy a $300+ phone, I don't think Verizon is gonna miss the iPhone.
  • wowbagger, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Verizon is the carrier you go when you don't know what you are doing or you don't mind a crippled phone.
    Sprint is where you go when you have sucky credit or are an illegal mexican.
    T-Mobile is where you go when can't get cingular
    Cingular is where you go when you want an iPhone.
    • broomett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Wow. . no fanboyism there.

      Do you think you look anything other than like a complte idiot with this post?
  • robshoy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm glad, I've got Cingular, and I love it. All of my friends who have Verizon always complain about it.
  • top5recrds, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Goodbye Verizon, Hello Cingular! Can you hear me now Verizon?
    • randall814, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That's what the people around me are constantly asking their customer service department. ***** Verizon, their crippled phones, and that toolbag from the commercials.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 54 of 54 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.