RUMOR: iPhone 4.0 to include Multitasking
- Thread starter JonE
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 26
- Views 3K
Yes, why didn't they let you use it with the Apple Mobile service - Oh, they don't offer a mobile service! Perhaps that's why you had to buy that service elsewhere. AT&T had the foresight to see what the iPhone was and locked it in to their service. The other vendors were too shortsighted to see it and lost out - their bad.
mperdue-
Hindsight is 20/20 you know. Today we think what Verizon did was foolish but was it, really? History lesson: Back in 2007, Verizon's policy with all their supported phones was to CONTROL the final offerings to make sure the offering was completely compatible with their service. Now ( again in retrospect) what did that buy them? It bought them the #1 position in the industry for customer satisfaction. With Apple, iphone, Ap[ple insisted on being in control of what the iphone offered and this was the main stumbling block between a successful agreement between the two companies, but with AT&T looking to have a device to put them on the map, in the wireless business, at any cost, they agreed to take that with the exclusivity. We also know that Apple, back then had serious production limitations with certain parts of the iphone, namely the memory which was in very short supply. So, li,miting the offering to a carrier that wasn'y very popular then didn't hurt their limited production capability at all. Apple and AT&T was a pretty good match, IMO. The marriage was mutual beneficial. For Apple, it allowed them to grow at a pace consistent with their production capacity. For AT&T, it gave them something exclusive that drew a huge customer base they they otherwise would never have.
Today, the Apple story is different and they are ready to break out huge but AT&T's conservative technical growth until recently is what's limiting the sales. It's a real good thing that Apple is breaking out to all carriers because I doubt Verizon will be able to handle the load alone.
IF the islate or whatever they will call it is offered with an exclusivity to one carrier, I won't like it either. What I stated was not to mean that I wanted Apple to have a mobile carrier service, what I wanted was for Apple to have no exclusive carrier. But, I do understand why it may have been necessary in 2007 when the iphone was introduced.
All I want is to have my own choice of carriers, or no carrier and in the islate case just use it with my wifi here at home. Hopefully, today we will know what's up with Apple.
Hindsight is 20/20 you know. Today we think what Verizon did was foolish but was it, really? History lesson: Back in 2007, Verizon's policy with all their supported phones was to CONTROL the final offerings to make sure the offering was completely compatible with their service. Now ( again in retrospect) what did that buy them? It bought them the #1 position in the industry for customer satisfaction. With Apple, iphone, Ap[ple insisted on being in control of what the iphone offered and this was the main stumbling block between a successful agreement between the two companies, but with AT&T looking to have a device to put them on the map, in the wireless business, at any cost, they agreed to take that with the exclusivity. We also know that Apple, back then had serious production limitations with certain parts of the iphone, namely the memory which was in very short supply. So, li,miting the offering to a carrier that wasn'y very popular then didn't hurt their limited production capability at all. Apple and AT&T was a pretty good match, IMO. The marriage was mutual beneficial. For Apple, it allowed them to grow at a pace consistent with their production capacity. For AT&T, it gave them something exclusive that drew a huge customer base they they otherwise would never have.
Today, the Apple story is different and they are ready to break out huge but AT&T's conservative technical growth until recently is what's limiting the sales. It's a real good thing that Apple is breaking out to all carriers because I doubt Verizon will be able to handle the load alone.
IF the islate or whatever they will call it is offered with an exclusivity to one carrier, I won't like it either. What I stated was not to mean that I wanted Apple to have a mobile carrier service, what I wanted was for Apple to have no exclusive carrier. But, I do understand why it may have been necessary in 2007 when the iphone was introduced.
All I want is to have my own choice of carriers, or no carrier and in the islate case just use it with my wifi here at home. Hopefully, today we will know what's up with Apple.
Yeah, AT&T is just so screwed up and Verizon so together. That must be why Verizon posted a 4th quarter loss and is looking to cut 13,000 jobs. AT&T made a good choice with the iPhone and the competition is still playing catch-up.
So what happened to any iPhone news yesterday at the press conference?? I was hoping for either: a) a new iPhone 4.0 announcement for this summer or perhaps earlier and/or b) 4.0 OS software announcement plus an announcement of a price drop for the 3GS 8GB to $99.
I've been waiting to an upgrade my 2G iPhone and the $99 3G 8GB is tempting, but not if the the 3GS will soon be the same price.
I've been waiting to an upgrade my 2G iPhone and the $99 3G 8GB is tempting, but not if the the 3GS will soon be the same price.
I got the impression early on that the PC was dedicated to the intro of the ipad, not a general state of Apple products development. If I chat with my video editor friends, they were disappointed in not hearing anything about FCP improvements too.
