Prince McLeanSpeaking during Apple's second-fiscal quarter conference call, Cook reiterated that Apple chose AT&T (then named Cingular) as its exclusive partner in the US because of its support for GSM, the mobile networking standard in use worldwide by the majority of cellular phone providers. That enabled Apple to launch and sell one unit globally.
The second generation iPhone 3G added support for UMTS service, the third generation mobile network standard that all GSM providers are moving toward. Development of UMTS is managed by the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) organization.
While many phone makers sell versions of their handsets for both GSM/UMTS worldwide and Qualcomm's rival CDMA mobile network technology operated by Sprint and Verizon Wireless in the US, doing so requires twice the development effort. Taking on that extra effort is becoming increasingly less attractive as CDMA providers make plans to transition to the next generation of mobile networks.
"CDMA doesnt really have a life to it after a certain point in time," Cook said during the call, dashing any fantasies of the iPhone becoming available to Sprint and Verizon users in the next few years. Cook was referring to the entire Qualcomm CDMA stack in comparison with 3GPP GSM/UMTS specifications, as UMTS actually uses a related W-CDMA carrier technology as opposed to GSM's TDMA signaling.
For Verizon, the primary competitor to AT&T in the US, the next generation mobile network means Long Term Evolution (LTE). That future specification is sometimes referred to as 4G, but is really the next stage of 3GPP development. AT&T currently operates a 3GPP Release 5 network now being upgraded to incorporate newer improvements in the 3GPP specifications; LTE is simply a name attached to the forthcoming 3GPP Release 8.
Once LTE networks are built out over the next several years, Verizon's CEO told the Wall Street Journal that an LTE version of the iPhone would make Apple "more likely" to want to work with Verizon in addition to AT&T. If all goes according to plan, at some point early in the next decade both Verizon and AT&T will operate compatible networks, just like all the providers in Europe.
However, AT&T has already stated that it plans to upgrade its existing network incrementally, which is a much easier path toward LTE than Verizon's plans to completely replace its CDMA/EVDO network with LTE. During that time, AT&T will also be able to continue to advertise a faster mobile network, and Apple will be able to leverage global support for 3GPP mobile networks to release increasingly faster versions of the iPhone.
Thomas Sibilly
Andrew Orr
Wesley Hilliard
Marko Zivkovic
Malcolm Owen
Andrew O'Hara
Christine McKee
99 Comments
I don't know about being the best wireless provider in the US, but att is certainly the best provider in my area. I switched to att in 2001 and I'm very satisfied.
The article needs to be changed. A non-CDMA iPhone dashes all hopes for Sprint (as far as I know, they'll be using WiMax as their 4G tech) and Verizon until they switch to LTE.
Common sense dictates that Apple wasn't going to bother with a CDMA phone, especially when carriers are openly switching away from that technology. Since it's also obvious that Apple doesn't have ready an LTE iPhone right now, they were bound to deny any inkling of talking to Verizon.
Rest assured, in two years when LTE chipsets are mature and Verizon and AT&T's 4G LTE networks are up and running, that's when Apple will seriously begin talking to Verizon about potentially supporting the iPhone. Until then "iPhone on Verizon" rumors aren't even rumors, they're fantasies.
Also, do we know if the bands AT&T and Verizon are using for LTE will even be compatible? I thought that during the FCC Wireless auction they got separate bands. Did they get exclusive rights to the portion of spectrum they won? What about the what bands the rest of the world is using? All of this is pretty important information in terms of inter-compatability in trying to build a "world phone" that's a lot easier to manufacture.
I've been with CellularOne/Cingular/AT&T for as long as I can remember. I've never had any problems with them at all.
I think Apple made a good choice to go with AT&T for the U.S. Biggest GSM carrier in the US which also allowed Apple to market the same hardware to other countries using GSM. Good move. Sprint/Verizon on the other hand won't be going anywhere outside the U.S. so not much point to make separate hardware to satisfy them.
I wonder what the CEO of Verizon thought of after his comments from a few days ago. I guess he's a bit red at the moment.
The article needs to be changed. A non-CDMA iPhone dashes all hopes for Sprint (as far as I know, they'll be using WiMax as their 4G tech) and Verizon until they switch to LTE.
Common sense dictates that Apple wasn't going to bother with a CDMA phone, especially when carriers are openly switching away from that technology. Since it's also obvious that Apple doesn't have ready an LTE iPhone right now, they were bound to deny any inkling of talking to Verizon.
Rest assured, in two years when LTE chipsets are mature and Verizon and AT&T's 4G LTE networks are up and running, that's when Apple will seriously begin talking to Verizon about potentially supporting the iPhone. Until then "iPhone on Verizon" rumors aren't even rumors, they're fantasies.
Getting an iPhone to be LTE ready isn't the problem. Getting the backbone to be LTE ready is the problem. What smart person would wait 2 years from today and plan for another carrier when your current carrier was on a wiser spec with a broader world acceptance, especially when your goal is to sell this phone to the globe, not just to the United States? I'd prefer AT&T incrementally updating to the standard than wait for an entire rip out and replace by Verizon.
Wanting to be GSM-only only doesn't explain why Apple hasn't made a deal with T-Mobile. In cities like Seattle, service would be better. I know people with jail-broken iPhones who use T-Mobile because even with a data plan it costs them less. An a lot of us aren't on the go enough to justify $70 or more a month for AT&T's pricey package.