Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Verizon iPhone 4

engadget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 161 posts

Re: Verizon iPhone 4

#131

Post by code_duck »

Anechoic wrote: post #122
code_duck wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If people wanted an iPhone, they could have just gone to AT&T and bought an iPhone. While this will probably reduce sales of Android phones through Verizon, I certainly don't think it means it is 'all over'. I agree prices may drop on Android phones, and manufacturers may have to step up their game a bit more especially in terms of software. With Android phones you have a choice of prices, different hardware configur…

If people wanted an iPhone, they could have just gone to AT&T and bought an iPhone. My sister really wanted an iPhone but she absolutely did not want to switch from VZW (she travels a lot and voice calls are a priority), so she got a Droid. The Droid has been good enough, but she's been asking me about iPhone on Verizon ever since the rumors started; a couple of weeks ago when the rumors started to heat up, she told…

That's a good point, that people may be bound by contracts already, yet looking to buy a new phone. I'm sure I'll buy a new phone or two by the time my two year contract is up with Verizon in 2012. As a mobile developer, though, I was already going to buy an iPhone 5 and a Nexus.

Re: Verizon iPhone 4

#132

Post by radicaldreamer »

brudgers wrote: post #27
arthurschreiber wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's very unlikely that there will ever be a white version of the iphone 4, anyway.

At least not with a glass case from what I read. Apparently it was difficult to make the white case opaque. http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/white-iphone-4s-biggest-...

That's really unfortunate. I love the aesthetics of the white 3GS and was looking forward to a white iPhone 4.

Re: Verizon iPhone 4

#133

Post by berberich »

takameyer wrote: post #76
kenjackson wrote: post #67

Curious, how big do people think this will be? Will Apple double its US userbase or will it be an incremental bump? I tend to think incremental. The people in the US today who really want an iPhone have moved to ATT. The holdouts are those that: 1) Hate AT&T. 2) Are on a business plan who is tied to Verizon. 3) Those on a family plan, but aren't calling the shots. For most of the people in 1-3, they already have a Ve…

4.) Not having an AT&T carrier in the area. Being from a state where AT&T is not an available phone service (South Dakota), this is a big deal. I'm not sure how many other states have this issue. We have been waiting for this since the iPhone was released. It will be great to finally have another smart phone option from a big player. Though I'll probably stick to my Android phone.

Exactly. Same case up in North Dakota. AT&T now owns Altel and has finally rebranded it, making it the second biggest carrier here behind Verizon. But, as far as I know, they're still running Altel's CDMA network. Not sure if they're ever planning on building out a GSM network.

Re: Verizon iPhone 4

#134

Post by treyp »

stanleydrew wrote: post #124
mziulu wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could someone please explain how this hotspot feature usually works for smartphones? I'm having a discussion with a friend about this, but we're going nowhere since I don't own a smartphone and thus I'm not really sure what's the default here and how this iPhone does things differently. [edit] what I expect is this: if I'm connected to a wifi hotspot to browse the Internet and I receive a telephone call, I should not…

The hotspot feature turns the phone into a wireless router where the connection to the internet is provided through the phone's data connection. I don't think an incoming phone call would cause the wifi network to disassociate from any devices, but connected devices wouldn't be able to access the internet. This would be akin to disconnecting your modem from your home wireless router. Devices can still access the netw…

does this apply to SMS too? if the phone gets an incoming text, will it disconnect the internet?

Re: Verizon iPhone 4

#135

Post by InclinedPlane »

orangecat wrote: post #126
InclinedPlane wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is basically what is called "tethering", using the 3G internet connection of the phone for other devices (such as your laptop), except that the "tether" is no a physical connection but just a wifi connection. In other words, you put your phone into this mode and you can connect to it through wifi and have wireless internet anywhere you have 3G coverage. AT&T does not offer the same service.

AT&T does not offer the same service. Of course, it's worth noting that tethering isn't a "service" that carriers have to build or support. It's an inherent capability of a sufficiently advanced computing device that has access to two networks simultaneously. But in a textbook case of non-neutrality, AT&T (and others) prevent you from using that capability unless you pay them to remove the entirely artificial restric…

Quite so. AT&T restricts your ability to tether, because there are still unlimited data plans and they don't want people to fully take advantage of those plans.

Re: Verizon iPhone 4

#136

Post by mdasen »

hvs wrote: post #18
redial wrote: post #7

Is it both CDMA and GSM or just CDMA?

It needs a different antenna configuration for CDMA, so I'm guessing that it doesn't support GSM.

Antenna configuration has more to do with the bands supported than the technology used. It does require a different chipset to support CDMA.

There are CDMA/GSM phones available by implementing both technologies (and Qualcomm does provide hybrid chips). The Droid 2 Global is the best example right now. It supports CDMA 850/1900; GSM 850/900/1800/1900; UMTS 850, 1900, 2100.

Re: Verizon iPhone 4

#137

Post by msbarnett »

shizcakes wrote: post #118

I really, REALLY hope Apple prevents Verizon from "verizon-ifying" this phone. They constantly put un-removable bookmarks, bloatware apps, and other bullshit on their phones. That will be a total deal breaker for me, if they do.

From Ars Technica[1]:

Apple’s own Phil Schiller assured the press that Verizon would not be loading up the device with crapware, too. “We want the experience to be the same for every iPhone user. So there are no special Verizon Apps preinstalled,” Schiller told Ars. “AT&T offers customers some apps via the App Store. I’ll let Verizon comment if they are working on anything for that.”

[1]: http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/01/pics-of-the-new-an...

Re: Verizon iPhone 4

#138

Post by kurtsiegfried »

treyp wrote: post #134
stanleydrew wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hotspot feature turns the phone into a wireless router where the connection to the internet is provided through the phone's data connection. I don't think an incoming phone call would cause the wifi network to disassociate from any devices, but connected devices wouldn't be able to access the internet. This would be akin to disconnecting your modem from your home wireless router. Devices can still access the netw…

does this apply to SMS too? if the phone gets an incoming text, will it disconnect the internet?

No, SMS is different, you can receive a text during a phone call, or during a data session.

Re: Verizon iPhone 4

#139

Post by mdasen »

takameyer wrote: post #76
kenjackson wrote: post #67

Curious, how big do people think this will be? Will Apple double its US userbase or will it be an incremental bump? I tend to think incremental. The people in the US today who really want an iPhone have moved to ATT. The holdouts are those that: 1) Hate AT&T. 2) Are on a business plan who is tied to Verizon. 3) Those on a family plan, but aren't calling the shots. For most of the people in 1-3, they already have a Ve…

4.) Not having an AT&T carrier in the area. Being from a state where AT&T is not an available phone service (South Dakota), this is a big deal. I'm not sure how many other states have this issue. We have been waiting for this since the iPhone was released. It will be great to finally have another smart phone option from a big player. Though I'll probably stick to my Android phone.

AT&T is converting Alltel's network in the Dakotas to UMTS. You can see the coverage at http://www.att.com/network/ (just click on the coverage tab at the bottom). Alltel had served rural western markets well for many years and the network will likely be stronger than Verizon's once it's launched (likely later this month).

Because of the way cellular licensing was done (two licenses in each market and 700ish markets in the country), it meant that many carriers were left with large holes in their networks over the years. Sure, later on a bunch of other license were made available, but something like a 1900MHz license isn't useful for rural coverage because the signals don't travel as far as lower frequency signals. So, in most rural communities you got the choice between two carriers. Now, some rural communities only have one real option due to mergers and the relaxation of the rule that no company can control both cellular licenses in a market.

Suffice it to say, Alltel's network in your area will soon be running UMTS/HSPA under AT&T's ownership. AT&T really couldn't enter the market without buying their way into the 850MHz licenses in the area. Alltel and Verizon owned them. Now Verizon and AT&T own them.

If you really want to see the state of rural wireless improve, write to the FCC or your state utilities commission and tell them that you want to make sure that one or two companies can't control all of the low-frequency spectrum required for rural coverage. Right now, AT&T and Verizon have merged their way into becoming the only two companies with the licences needed to provide rural coverage. Even looking at the 700MHz auction, it's clear that the situation won't change much. AT&T and Verizon took the majority of the licenses with smaller bidders getting some scraps. So, the far-penetrating spectrum is being concentrated in the hands of two carriers. If you'd like that situation to change, demand that new low-frequency spectrum go to carriers other than the big two. It's one thing for Verizon and AT&T to say that they need more spectrum in major metro areas because they have more customers. It's another thing to say that they want to have an oligopoly on the spectrum that can serve rural areas.

Post reply on HN