Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Communications Businesses Wireless Networking Apple Hardware

Verizon Rejected iPhone Deal 290

Posted by kdawson
from the just-saying-no dept.
SnowDog74 writes "According to an article in USA Today, Verizon Wireless rejected an Apple deal over the iPhone. The article says that Verizon wasn't happy with the strict terms Apple demanded — a Verizon Wireless VP is quoted saying that Apple wanted a cut of monthly revenues and control of the customer relationship. What's perhaps equally interesting, however, is the implication from sources that say Cingular's exclusive 5-year deal with Apple applies within the United States only. If this is true, it undermines some of the criticism Apple has been receiving for their business strategy surrounding the iPhone, given the size of the cell-phone market outside the US."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Verizon Rejected iPhone Deal

Comments Filter:
  • iGot (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 29, 2007 @09:19PM (#17808064)
    iGot First Post

    Thanks,
    Cingular
  • interesting? no. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by grub (11606) <slashdot@grub.net> on Monday January 29, 2007 @09:21PM (#17808078) Homepage Journal

    What's perhaps equally interesting, however, is the implication from sources that say Cingular's exclusive 5-year deal with Apple applies within the United States only.

    duh... perhaps Cingular isn't used outside the US (or very much?) They aren't in .ca, for example.
    • by Andy_R (114137) on Monday January 29, 2007 @09:24PM (#17808134) Homepage Journal
      Exactly. Cingular have no visible presence at all here in Britain either, nobody expected that deal to apply here either.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Why does that matter? The deal with Cingular has been reported to mean that the iPhone is exclusively available to Cingular customers. For Apple to sell the phone overseas, that exclusivity clause would have to specifically indicate the US market only or Apple could get sued by Cingular for selling the iPhone in other countries.

      So it's still important to note that the deal with Cingular applies only to the US market because it opens up the possibility that the iPhone will be available to users in other co
  • by sporkme (983186) * on Monday January 29, 2007 @09:21PM (#17808086) Homepage
    Granted, the revenue stream from added features seems to be the principal deal-breaker, but TFA also highlights that Verizon would be cut out of certain customer service decisions. However you feel about the company, they do pride themselves on their customer satisfaction numbers. As a retailer, I found their policies to err on the side of customer benefit.

    Apple's terms would have cut out major retailers when it comes to the handset, making it more difficult to retain those retail partners. It also would have taken warranty policy from the carrier to the manufacturer - and the iPhone would be the only handset with this arrangement. I think customers would have hated it, but maybe Apple planned to be more fair. How are they on iPod warranty?

    Verizon has been treading lightly with retailers since their split with Radio Shack (over R$ revenue). The separation hurt both companies right off the bat, and the implications of the separation are still developing. If Wal-Mart and Best Buy were cut out of the iPhone deal, they might have such a sour taste that they skip off to Cingular instead.

    If Cingular's terms do not exclude third-party retailers, Verizon will suffer anyway.
    • by AoT (107216)
      Apple's terms would have cut out major retailers when it comes to the handset, making it more difficult to retain those retail partners.

      I'd guess that this would be for a limited time, and for the benefit of Apple. Those big stores are notorious (ahem.. Walmart) for using their bulk buying to get better deals.

      Or maybe Apple just wants all that foot traffic into their store, and they won't be able to supply Apple stores, cell stores, and big chain retailers.
    • by Tarwn (458323) on Monday January 29, 2007 @10:06PM (#17808554) Homepage
      Customer service numbers? They might pride themselves on those numbers, but they are as full of crap as their systems. I'm sorry, any company who has a known issue of the IVR dropping options off of peoples accounts for years, that then decides to not fix the IVR system is not what I would call customer-oriented.
      Or how about the fact that they care so much about their customers that they require their call reps to handle anything non-call related in their spare moments between making call quotas? You know, those little things like recalculating bills that have gone awry (see IVR) or filing the paperwork...

      My wife worked for Verizon, the only thing they care less about then their customers is their computer systems - except for th mice, those have to be installed by an expert technician. Probably not the same one that installed the fully tested software update that took down your entire department yesterday, cannot be backed out of, and is costing you your paycheck (if your not answering phones, your not earning...)

      Yep, customers are number one, provided you qualify that statement as "after everythig else but the computer systems..."
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by sporkme (983186) *
        I don't doubt any of this. Big companies can never seem to nail the IT end of things. I never had a problem, however, calling in and getting problems solved with a Real Human Being (TM). For Sprint, Cingular and prepaid cellular accounts, getting problems fixed is typically a monumental task. I think Verizon's call center employees are more likely to be willing and able to help compared to other providers, based on my experience. We used a special number that got us straight to the retention department
    • by um... Lucas (13147) on Monday January 29, 2007 @10:52PM (#17808946) Homepage Journal
      As a retailer, I found their policies to err on the side of customer benefit.

      Ermm... I had 4 lines on a family plan...We were all happily using our 1800 minutes or whatever, and i was paying 170 or 180 a month. One month, there was a crisis in the family, and the total of calls was quite a bit in excess of our minutes, to the point that my bill was $680... I called customer service and explained the situation, and they said they'ed forward that along with a backdated request to up my minute allotment since i never went over and always paid on time... They said that this was a situation they've had before and that was usually the way that it was remedied... a few days later, i got a call from them that said that billing had determined that it "wasn't in the customers best interest" to do so...

      Now, if they had said "sorry, but there's nothing we can do about it" that'd have been one thing... But they said "there is something we do about that" and then turned around and decided NOT to... That has made me one unhappy verizon customer... Of course, I'm sticking with them because my contracts up in June, and guess what comes out then on another network?

      So no... I can't see how verizon is a customer service oriented carrier... everything with them is like pulling teeth...
      • by sporkme (983186) *
        For those who read that, the thing to do in this circumstance is to proceed like you are going to cancel your contract. Be friendly. You will likely be transferred two or more times. When you reach the person that is actually going to be canceling the account, calmly explain the circumstances leading up to that moment, and how it is more beneficial to simply pay the cancellation fees and call it a day. You will find that they are happy to capitulate. I recently managed to "con" one of my contracted serv
  • by TheSlashaway (1032228) on Monday January 29, 2007 @09:22PM (#17808098)
    Let's see how Verizon feels at the end of the year when a googazilion iPhones are sold.
    • by Divebus (860563)
      Do you suppose the rejection of the iPhone deal had anything to do with the fact Verizon was planning services which compete against everything on it? Not suggesting that Verizon will dry up and blow away anytime soon, but this is the highest profile threat Verizon will face in all those areas [voice in head: but it's only Cingular].
    • Yeah, and Apple gets 500 googazilion dollars of revenue.

      Then gets sued by Google for revenue similarity...
    • When the phone is released and it's overpriced for the casual market and underpowered for the business market and even if they sell a decent number of units it will be considered a flop because Jobs set the bar too high... maybe Verizon will be sitting back thinking "I'm glad we dodged that one."

    • not sure they care (Score:3, Informative)

      by johnpaul191 (240105)
      honestly, Verizon is often kind of behind the curve on the newest and coolest phones. i always assumed they were secure with massive business plans and didn't have to deal with that.
      on the other side, maybe they didn't want anything to do with it. they are notorious for ruining cool potential features to ensure a revenue stream. they try to cripple cameraphones with that terrible pixplace thing, they trash bluetooth. i would think the iPhone is not screwed down enough for them, though it's possible the nego
    • ...because everybody and their uncle's wazoo already has a RAZR and won't be eligible to get another carrier-subsidized phone until their 2-year contract comes up for renewal.
  • Five years? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Rodness (168429) on Monday January 29, 2007 @09:24PM (#17808126)
    That's one hell of an exclusive deal. As much as I hate Cingular and their pricing plans, I'm not sure I can wait five years for other networks to have that phone... especially if they put out a nano-sized version.

    Sigh... why oh why can't I have my apple and eat it too?
    • by Dr. Spork (142693)
      I'm confused about what the contract says. Will the phones be locked by contract to work only on Cingular, or is the deal that Cingular will be the only carrier to offer them to their customers?

      In other words, will there be an unlocked iPhone available into which I can install my T-Mobile sim card? It's not clear to me that the five-year deal precludes that. Besides, even if it does, I'm sure unlocked iPhones will be available on the internet, since they will be demanded in other countries. Is there anyth

      • Is there anything standing in the way of them just working with a T-Mobile sim card, like any other unlocked phone?

        Possibly. It's been fairly well documented that Apple's deal with Cingular involved them modifying the Cingular system in order to support the Visual Voice Mail feature.

        Whether this will happen with other carriers around the world remains to be seen. I suspect what will happen is that when you roam on another carrier (say T-Mobile or something outside the country) your phone will work OK

    • As much as I hate Cingular and their pricing plans, I'm not sure I can wait five years for other networks to have that phone..

      What, you mean $31,000 a month for Cingular service [heraldtribune.com] isn't cheap enough for you?
    • Re:Five years? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Frogbert (589961) <.frogbert. .at. .gmail.com.> on Monday January 29, 2007 @10:22PM (#17808692)
      Americans need to get with the program. I don't know how your phone systems work there, but in the rest of the world all you need to do to change phones is to buy the phone and put your sim card in it. What is going on over there?
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by jZnat (793348) *
        Competing standards on how to transmit and receive on the phone (GSM isn't the only one here), and mobile phone company subsidising of cell phone prices with contracts (otherwise the phones are a lot more expensive, and I don't even know where you can buy the normal, unlocked phones without a contract).
        • by Buran (150348)
          "I don't even know where you can buy the normal, unlocked phones without a contract)."

          Like a zillion other things ... on the website of the company that manufactures them.

          Who would have ever imagined that?
        • by G-funk (22712)
          Why are contract phones locked? They're not here (in .au). Who gives a shit if you're also paying verizon for your actual service, if you've signed a contract to pay cingular every month for a year?
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by AaronLawrence (600990) *
          The question wasn't "why do the carriers do it" but "why do americans put up with it?"

          Land of the Free to be shafted and used by the corporations?
      • A mixture of CDMA [wikipedia.org] and GSM as opposed to pure GSM plus a cell phone market where all companies lock the phones you buy to only work with that carrier. Fortunately, the laws just changed (I believe by a court ruling) such that having a third part unlock your phone for you is now completely legal.
      • Re:Five years? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by dcam (615646) <david.uberconcept@com> on Tuesday January 30, 2007 @01:24AM (#17810144) Homepage
        The biggest WTF in the US mobile phone system is you pay to recieve calls.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by squiggleslash (241428)

          As I've said before, you pay for calls to mobiles whether it's "mobile party pays" or "calling party pays". Unless, of course, you never make calls, but that's hardly a rational moral argument in terms of who should pay. "I'm a cheap bastard, so I expect everyone else to pay for my mobile phone". Right.

          Assuming you're like most people and accept roughly the same number of calls to mobiles as you make, you're no worse off with one system over the other, except in that US carriers have tried to make the ta

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by anothy (83176)
        you've missed the point. it's overwhelmingly likely that you'll be able to do exactly that with the iPhone, just like you can with the vast majority of other GSM phones in the states (getting phones unlocked is not tremendously difficult, and when it costs you anything, i've never seen it break about $20). but with a two year contract, i'm tied to paying that operator, like it or not. let's say my bill's $40/month; that's $960. certainly more money than most people are wiling to just eat. the early terminat
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by MojoStan (776183)
          you've missed the point. it's overwhelmingly likely that you'll be able to do exactly that with the iPhone, just like you can with the vast majority of other GSM phones in the states (getting phones unlocked is not tremendously difficult, and when it costs you anything, i've never seen it break about $20).

          Not according to Glenn Lurie, Cingular's president of national distribution. From a PC Magazine article [pcmag.com]:

          While "there are bad guys out there that unlock phones," Lurie said, Apple and Cingular are taking unspecified steps to make the phone more difficult to unlock and use on other GSM carriers in the US.

          So Cingular and Apple will supposedly make it difficult to unlock the iPhone. Also, you're a B

      • by MattHaffner (101554) on Tuesday January 30, 2007 @02:13AM (#17810436)
        Americans need to get with the program.

        What? We are the program. We made it, we run it, we sell it. Free market, baaay-beee! Get with the program!

        I mean look at our cable, land-line, and internet markets. It's all about competition and survival-of-the-fittest over here. The consumer rules! We have the best services for the best prices anywhere in the world. By definition. Anything, anywhere else is just some mock-up of the free market we have in place here in the U-S-of-A, likely held together with some pseudo-socialist glue. Our companies live and die in the market trenches without any pansy help from the government. Sheee-ooot.

        Cheney/Lay 2008!
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by babbling (952366)
      What's so special about the phone? It can't run 3rd party applications, so the only interesting things it can do are:
      - Play music crippled by DRM
      - Surf the net
      - A few features that all PDAs have, such as calendar and notes

      The interface is nice because it's a big touch screen, but if my experience with Apple hardware is anything to go by, it won't be very durable.

      The only thing the iPhone has over other PDA phones is Steve Jobs and Apple marketing it. By the time it comes out there will probably already be a
      • by Rodness (168429)
        Actually, I want it because the interface for phone calls and text messages blows everything else away.

        I don't care so much about the ipod functionality (I already have one that I only use at the gym) or the web browser. I want it because I can't manage a conference call or even call waiting on my phone without dropping someone 70% of the time.

        3rd party apps? Who the hell cares. It's a phone. It makes phone calls. That's what I want it for. There are no good third party apps anyway.

        DRM? Fairplay vs P
      • by aesiamun (862627)
        Yeah because it can't play mp3 files or unecumbered aac files...

        jackass
      • by rolfwind (528248)
        1. There are benefits only to Apple - Multitouch as it is implemented in the iPhone is propietary, owned by Apple (bought up by, actually, look up Fingerworks in google) and is not available elsewhere in its current implementation. I have a Fingerworks Keyboard, it works very well and there has not been a replacement - look up on ebay - people buy the keyboards used for $600-900, they were $299 retail before the company shut down when they sold.

        2. I find it hilarious that people think that something "as
        • If I had mod points, I would have marked you as 'troll' So you can put two fingers on the screen at the same time - this is definitely not a new concept. Some of the touch screen kit I used in the military (electronic warfare) was doing this more than 10 years ago.

          I had a logitech keyboard with built in touch pad that could handle two and three finger presses just fine (interpreted as middle or right mouse click) 8 years ago.

          The phone pretty much does suck for very valid reasons. I have a nokia N80 (no touc
      • First off, the iPhone can play plain old MP3s. If you wanna rip your music to them, go right ahead. They do still sell CDs, don't they?

        Second, the term "crippled" is an exaggeration, especially when compared to other DRM schemes. Yes, you can play music "crippled" by DRM so that you can only play it on five different computers. Or you can play music "crippled" by DRM on an unlimited number of iPhones or iPods. Or you can burn it to an unlimited number of CDs, so long as you only want five copies of the sam

  • by Ankou (261125) on Monday January 29, 2007 @09:25PM (#17808140)
    Ya think this is one of those times like when the guy who didn't sign the Beatles for a record deal? At anyrate, I find it funny that there are statements like free 18 months [thestreet.com] switching from Verizon to Cinguar with the iPhone. I have no idea if this is true or not, but it would be quite a slap in the face. Maby this will be a wakeup call to the cell phone companies that they are completly clueless about the market they control.
    • by Veinor (871770) <veinor&gmail,com> on Monday January 29, 2007 @09:32PM (#17808232)
      The Consumerist has reported that the free 18 months is false [consumerist.com] (original story [barrons.com])
    • Apple is a fashion brand, and Cingular (AT&T) probably is not. One of the biggest headaches for Apple is getting the right branding partners so that the iphone does not get associated with stodgy/boring services. Cell phone companies really hate churn. The iphone will probably have significant brand loyalty (as ipods do) and an exclusive deal will combat churn. However Cingular will have to come up with suitable ad campaigns etc to make sure that they appeal to the apple set otherwise both brands will s
    • Maby this will be a wakeup call to the cell phone companies that they are completly clueless about the market they control.

      Or maybe it will be a wakeup call to Apple fans to remind them that the company that made the iPod also made the flop that was the Newton. They're not infallible, and given the terms Apple was demanding, it would definitely need to be to make it worth it.

  • by twbecker (315312) on Monday January 29, 2007 @09:27PM (#17808174)
    that has no intention of switching to Cingular, iPhone or no, I can believe this. Verizon gives me the best coverage and call quality (which believe it or not is what I value in a cell phone company ;), but they demand total control of their phones and what you put on them in return. Between neutered Bluetooth and very few ways to get anything onto the device short of VCAST, they make Cingular's openness seem pretty tempting. But I've heard too many complaints about Cingular's network to consider switching.
    • I've used Verizon & Cingular (since back when it was ATT Wireless). 3 years ago I would've agreed with you 100%, but I haven't had any trouble with Cingular's network in recent memory. You also can't use your Verizon phone overseas but I doubt that affects too many people here. The only pain-in-the-ass with Cingular was making sure that modified phone flexes were capable of switching back & forth between ATT and Cingular towers. I haven't mucked with that in a while so I'm not sure if it's still

    • by Buran (150348) on Monday January 29, 2007 @11:02PM (#17809030)
      "but they demand total control of their phones and what you put on them in return."

      That's exactly why Verizon would never accept the iPhone. Apple wants total control over the phone and its design and how it looks. Verizon wants the same.

      What do you get when two immovable objects stare across a room at each other?

      The third one that realizes that denying people the ability to do what they want with what they pay for gets the big deal. Cingular doesn't cripple its phones.

      Verizon getting the iPhone would have shocked me.

      I'm also glad it didn't go CDMA in general -- I don't want to have to call support just to do something simple like change phones.
  • I don't think iPhone will be a hit in Europe or Asia like it might be here in America. Two thirds of Apple's revenue comes from the USA [sec.gov]. It's clear that Europe and Asia are not as infatuated with Apple's products as America.
    • by Critical_ (25211)
      Surprisingly enough, I would agree with what you have to say. I've been living in the UK for the last 7 months and Apple products aren't the hip-thing here. Sony seems to be all the rage for just about everything consumer electronic-y.
    • by minus_273 (174041)
      i think that just means europe and asia dont have enough money. being in asia right now,i can say rest assured, ipods are big here
    • by StikyPad (445176)
      ...not as infatuated with Apple's products as America.

      Look, you euro-prude, iPods are SHINY! Apple clearly knows how to give us what we wa.. ohhhh, shiny!
  • Apple iPhone (Score:5, Insightful)

    by softcoder (252233) on Monday January 29, 2007 @09:31PM (#17808214)
    Well there has already been an announcement from a Canadian cell phone company that they will also be carrying the iPhone. You will note too that Apple chose GSM, the European and worldwide standard, as opposed to CDMA, a primarily NA one, for the phone. Does that tell you anything?
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by icebike (68054)
      "You will note too that Apple chose GSM, the European and worldwide standard, as opposed to CDMA, a primarily NA one, for the phone. Does that tell you anything?"

      Yes, it tells us that GSM penetration in the US and Canada is almost at 50% of the area covered by CDMA.

      Its really pointless the keep harping on this CDMA/GSM rag. GMS is fine for itty-bitty countries where you can't get out of sight of the nearest town. It takes vastly more towers than CDMA. In Canada, and the US those towers are being built at

      • Its really pointless the keep harping on this CDMA/GSM rag.

        The problem I've seen with phones that use Qualcomm's IS-95 [wikipedia.org] system (often called CDMA after its physical layer) is that phones for IS-95 often support only Qualcomm's BREW environment [wikipedia.org], which uses digital signature requirements to shut out developers of shareware, freeware, and free software from porting their software to common IS-95 phones. As I understand it, phones that support GSM are more likely to support Java ME MIDP [wikipedia.org], which generally allows anybody to compile and run a midlet.

        • by anothy (83176) on Tuesday January 30, 2007 @01:53AM (#17810318) Homepage
          you've identified three separate things which are entirely unrelated, and implied a correlation.
          first, choice of network technology has nothing to do with application environment. Sprint, for example, is the second largest CDMA operator in the US, and does not sell a BREW phone (to the best of my knowledge; certainly the vast majority, at least, of their phones are Java-based phones). it is true that BREW is a sure sign of a CDMA phone, but the inverse is not true. even on Verizon's network, for example, see the Palm devices as a counter-example: no BREW even available.
          second, choice of application environment has nothing to do with signing requirements. several operators who have java application environments on their phones require signing or other forms of controlled distribution and application loading for apps to run; see, for example, Nextel. also, nearly every vendor that allows unsigned apps to run on their devices (which is most of them) restricts unsigned apps' access to certain features, most commonly the PIM functions and things relating directly to the phone network, like sending SMS messages. to access those features, every network i've looked at (which is all the major US ones and a small handful of european ones) require signing.
    • You will note too that Apple chose GSM, the European and worldwide standard, as opposed to CDMA, a primarily NA one, for the phone. Does that tell you anything?
      Err... the point of this article was that they went to Verizon first. So we can't say they went GSM to get the Euro market if their first choice was CDMA. What it tells me is that they could could put either technology in the iPhone if they choose to.
  • it undermines some of the criticism Apple has been receiving for their business strategy surrounding the iPhone

    Can you elaborate on this...
  • Cingular's iPhone data plan for slower speed is more than twice of what I pay ($15/mo) for unlimited data access through Sprint's vision network on my Windows Mobile Phone (which replaced Treo 600). I am happy with the service and don't want people trying to steal my "iPod phone" which is probably even easier with SIM cards to replace (not sure if iPhone has a SIM card). I am not switching. My phone works well.
  • by schnoid (834307) on Monday January 29, 2007 @09:37PM (#17808280)
    People act like the iphone is THE gadget that will ruin all other service providers if they don't have it. Considering its hardly even a smartphone because you can't even add software to it, it seems to be very lacking. Its only major benefit over something like a treo is the size and style of the phone. People need to get a grip. Other cell providers will not be going out of business over this.
  • by r00t (33219) on Monday January 29, 2007 @09:37PM (#17808288) Journal
    Verizon wants to disable EVERYTHING on the phone that isn't pay-per-use. If you were thinking the iPhone was restrictive, think again.

    • Not sure if that's an American(R) thing or just a Verizon(TM) thing, but it disappoints me greatly that elsewhere phones are being used in innovative ways that America(R) can only dream of.

      $5 for Internet on my phone per month, plus data? 10 cents a piece for a text message that is less than 250 bytes? $3 per ringtone that I can get on iTunes(TM) for a single $? Not to mention the numbers listed as having called my phone that I have never heard of? Measuring calls in minutes instead of seconds?

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Reaperducer (871695)

        $5 for Internet on my phone per month, plus data? 10 cents a piece for a text message that is less than 250 bytes? $3 per ringtone that I can get on iTunes(TM) for a single $? Not to mention the numbers listed as having called my phone that I have never heard of? Measuring calls in minutes instead of seconds?

        Doesn't sound like you need a new country, just a new phone company.

        $5/month for unlimited data? Sounds like T-Mobile USA. 10 cent text messages? Sounds like T-Mobile USA and a number of others. I

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Paulrothrock (685079)

          Outside of some large urban centers, smaller carriers are really hit-or-miss. I had T-Mobile for a long time. When I lived in Scranton, PA I had no trouble using it. Full coverage even out in the hills at school.

          But when I moved to Harrisburg, I had horrible service. I couldn't even use it at my parents house within line of sight of a cell tower less then a mile away. That's when I switched to Cingular. My wife and I have been extremely pleased with the coverage and haven't had any troubles with dropped ca

      • $5 for Internet on my phone per month, plus data?
        $5?! Try $50 for unlimited data here in Canada, that is what Rogers is milking me for. Otherwise its $.35 per kilobyte. North America is in stone age when it comes to communication services.
  • Glamorous, yeah, and it looks really impressive at PR time. But when the cameras are off and you're just hanging around the apartment trying to have a relationship, you spend a whole lotta time ducking the cellphones being thrown at your head. [msn.com]

    IBM decided Apple wasn't worth the pain. Looks like Verizon's making that same call, too.


    "Steve Jobs makes Simon Cowell look positively sycophantic."
    • IBM decided Apple wasn't worth the pain. Looks like Verizon's making that same call, too.

      Well, there might be some truth in that, but I think what really happened was different. Apple certainly is demanding in what they ask for, because they have customers with certain expectations to cater for. The portable and compact computer markets is where its at. For that you need low power and high performance, not something that is easy to achieve. IBM has little interest to invest in that market, but Intel does.
  • by Rix (54095) on Monday January 29, 2007 @09:41PM (#17808318)
    However, I believe we have the right to demand locked phones be unlocked, so I'm not sure how that will play out.
  • Cingular is suffering and hungry. Cingular as a name doesn't even exist anymore, but is reverting back to the ATT brand name.

    Verizon sucks, but doesn't need Apple's business.

    Aside from the fact the the iPhone is overrated, I think that the deal will hurt Cingular in the long run. Sharing revenues (not profits) could end being a case of "giving away the farm to sell a horse" kind of deal for Cingular.
  • Good (Score:3, Informative)

    by tehaxer (959342) on Monday January 29, 2007 @09:53PM (#17808444)
    Verizon's the best carrier in the US, and they rejected a stupid phone that came with a bunch of rules that would have been bad for them and their customers. I have no doubt that apple fanpeople will eat up the phone, but I don't think the hype is enough to carry a non-fanperson all the way through buying a 500$ phone that is about the same size as the new Samsung (and probably other companies') PDA phones, yet doesn't have real pda functionality, integration with things that matter (mine is 2 years old and handles exchange, secure imap and smtp, has picsel, a great browser which samsung quietly distributes, and which apple I'm sure would devote an entire SHOW to since they have such limited resources that creating such a thing would feel like a big deal to them), a keyboard, 3g networking, 3rd party programs, sd slot? (Not sure...). It's not a good fit for a Verizon or Sprint, since they're serious carriers. Cingular is perfect for the iPhone. T-Mobile, too.


    I mean, telling everyone a product you're releasing into a market that has generally been considered the highest of high tech for the last 5 years, then actually using 'High Technology' as the 4th bullet point on the front of the box and all your advertising is pretty stupid. I think the Verizon decision makers probably played out a sales scenerio in their heads between one of their reps and someone like me (I'd imagine a fairly typical Verizon customer), realized it made them look like idiots ("But but, it's HIGH techNOLOGY!!") and decided they'd let the kiddie carriers deal with the kiddie customers.


    eff ell aim!

  • Lucky us (Score:3, Insightful)

    by fermion (181285) on Monday January 29, 2007 @10:03PM (#17808540) Homepage Journal
    While verizon might be good for some people, for those of us with good Cingular coverage, verizon just seems like an overpriced, pompous, and unresponsive company. They probably would have wanted to do stuff like cut out the address book feature and have music and video transferable only over their network.

    While I understand that many people find Cingular to be joke, I am happy that cingular was flexible enough to adopt a phone that will likely force them to reevaluate their business model. They will certainly have rethink the data rates, and they are not likely to make any money off music downloads.

    In a couple years, I am sure verizon, and it's customers, will be perfectly happy with the iPod knockoff Zunefone, with it's verizon only music downloads and it's DRM protected overpriced ringtones. I am sure everyone will continue to say how great Verizon is, and how the Zunefone surpasses the Apple phone is copies, although even today, with existing products, neither is true.

  • by straponego (521991) on Monday January 29, 2007 @10:15PM (#17808622)
    I could swear the clowntards at Cingular were crowing about a two year exclusive deal. Also, they mentioned that the Cingular name and logo would ALWAYS be on screen. Doesn't that mean they were effectively lying about the resolution, as some of the resolution will always be used only in a user-hostile fashion?

    Ah well, the hardware looks great and it's certainly a platform which could handle almost everything you could want from the current generation. Too bad it's going to be on a crappy, slow network run by a company which is gloating about how badly it can treat its customers due to having a monopoly.

    Good news: this will make Linux-based phones much better, much sooner.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      You have to sign a 2 year contract to get the phone from Cingular.

      Cingular signed a 5 year contract with Apple.

      I wonder what the 'early cancelation fee' is for that contract.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by MojoStan (776183)
      I could swear the clowntards at Cingular were crowing about a two year exclusive deal.

      As another replier hinted, you might have misinterpreted the required two year Cingular service contract that iPhone buyers must agree to. However, I think you're correct about them being clowntards...

      Also, they mentioned that the Cingular name and logo would ALWAYS be on screen. Doesn't that mean they were effectively lying about the resolution, as some of the resolution will always be used only in a user-hostile fa

  • Fuck Verizon (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Mix+Master+Nixon (1018716) on Monday January 29, 2007 @11:17PM (#17809152)
    A loathsome company even by teleco standards, they really and truly despise their customers and Microsoft could learn a thing or two about pure rancid evil from them. I've had multiple friends and relatives tell tales of $1000 deposits to get cell phone service from them. That is so far out of proportion to reality it boggles the mind. The ONLY thing they have going for them is that they have better coverage than their competition - but it's not worth it, not even close, and the competition is rapidly catching up to them. All their phones are hobbled with their awful, locked-down software - even if it WASN'T locked down, their software is pure crap. When my contract with them is up, I run far far away, and they never get another dime of my money for anything, ever.

    And I can't help but think that I'm not the only person who feels this way. Their customer-hostile antics will eventually bite them in the ass, and I am going to enjoy watching that happen as much as I'd enjoy watching Microsoft implode - maybe more.
    • I was someone who had to pay $1000 deposit. My credit used to be really bad, but I have been working hard for the past few years to repair it. Verizon does have a much larger deposit requirements then other providers. With a self phone, who can blame them honestly.

      I payed $600 for my Treo 700p when it came out, so the same price for an iPhone is no problem at all. (in fact, I will be buying 2 ... 1 for me and one for the girlfriend). I pay about $250 a month for my phone currently. Why ? The cost is
  • smart move (Score:4, Interesting)

    by PureCreditor (300490) on Monday January 29, 2007 @11:24PM (#17809210)
    by far the world's users who are willing to pay premiums for nice phones reside outside USA. go with verizon, and u'll limit yourself to handful of CDMA countries. go with cingular, and u'll open up nearly every country in europe and asia.

    people in USA are too used to these "$49 RAZR" deals that they can't possible imagine paying $499 for the iPhone. european and asian users will. now if we can get Apple to strike deals with SK Telecom or NTT DoCoMo, then u're all set.
  • by siberian (14177) on Tuesday January 30, 2007 @12:20AM (#17809674)
    Was chatting with the local Cingular store manager and he mentioned that the iPhone is only to be sold from the Apple store. The local store franchises will not be allowed to sell these units.

    He was a bit peeved, he's fielding 10 calls a day on the damn thing and just feels the dollars flying down the block to the Apple Store.

    In Palo Alto on University Ave.

    Might be common knowledge, I was suprised.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by nuckin futs (574289)
      go watch the keynote on the iphone introduction. Fast forward to about an hour and 8 minutes into it.
      Steve Jobs mentioned it will be available in Apple Stores AND Cingular Stores.
  • Premature death (Score:3, Insightful)

    by denoir (960304) on Tuesday January 30, 2007 @11:16AM (#17813808)
    This whole iPhone discussion is mot likely to be irrelevant as they presented it way too early. I discussed this with a friend of mine that works for Sony-Ericsson and apparently both Nokia and Ericsson are capable of crunching out a new model from design to distribution in roughly 2.5 months. I'm guessing that Motorola, Samsung and the others are no worse.

    If they are inclined to do so (and given the hype around the iPhone), the established phone developers can come up with something very similar and have it out earlier and at a lower cost. Nokia's Aeon concept [engadgetmobile.com] looks like a promising candidate to build on as does the Siemens-Benq's Black Box [gizmodo.com] concept. In addition, IIRC the Aeon prototype was fuel cell powered.

    At least from a European and especially Japanese perspective the iPhone is already severely outdated. No 3G, no GPS etc? It's a beautiful phone, but the eye candy can be imitated and cloned and used in a better phone. Assuming that the other phone companies are complete nitwits they can easily create a more attractive package and get it out earlier and cheaper.

"No problem is so formidable that you can't walk away from it." -- C. Schulz

Working...