1. Welcome to Verizon Forums - the unofficial Verizon community! Have a question about Verizon? Click HERE to get started.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Expecting Cell Phone Forums? We recently moved Verizon specific content to VerizonForums.com. If you previously had an account on CPF, it has been transferred!
    Dismiss Notice

Did Apple just trump AT&T? It appears so...

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by Oxford, Dec 1, 2007.

  1. Oxford

    Oxford Guest

    This rings true of what I've been saying all along, it appears even AT&T
    is now scared of Apple and its business intentions...

    Keep in mind, the iPhone is only one small update away from making EVERY
    iPhone compatible with VoIP, then simply dropping the old cell network
    like a hot potato.

    AT&T needs to be very careful here, Apple is a much stronger company, so
    they need to play nice or end up like IBM.

    ---

    Important Parts Here:

    What I believe is troubling the relationship between AT&T and Apple is
    the upcoming auction for 700-MHz wireless spectrum and AT&T's discovery
    that -- as I have predicted for weeks -- Apple will be joining Google in
    bidding. AT&T thought its five-year "exclusive" iPhone agreement with
    Apple would have precluded such a bid, but that just shows how poorly
    Randall Stephenson understood Steve Jobs. Steve always hurts his friends
    to see how much they really love him, so AT&T probably should have
    expected this kind of corporate body blow.

    To his credit, Stephenson took the dispute to the streets this way,
    showing he isn't intimidated by Jobs. It was a bold and rare response
    for big business and was definitely unexpected by Cupertino, which won't
    underestimate AT&T again.

    I'm not privy to any inside details here, but there are two ways I can
    see Jobs rationalizing his auction position and they aren't necessarily
    exclusive. He could claim to intend the 700-MHz auction participation as
    a pure investment, just a good use for the $30+ billion Apple has
    squirreled away.

    Nah.

    Or Jobs could tell AT&T that Apple is investing solely in a DATA network
    for which it has no voice ambitions. Maybe all MacBooks will soon get
    700-MHz access cards.

    This excuse rings truer, but of course it would still be a scam on
    Steve's part.

    It would not surprise me at all if this were the case and when the
    700-MHz network is finally up and running Jobs claims astonishment that
    the most popular data application is Voice over IP, a direct competitor
    to AT&T Wireless. This may be part of the reason why Apple has been so
    slow approving third-party iPhone applications. Wouldn't your first
    application be a VoIP client?

    ---

    Full Article Here:

    http://snipurl.com/1uh83

    -
     



    › See More: Did Apple just trump AT&T? It appears so...
  2. ZnU

    ZnU Guest

    In article
    <linuxlovesosx-432F91.12591301122007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net>,
    Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:

    > This rings true of what I've been saying all along, it appears even AT&T
    > is now scared of Apple and its business intentions...
    >
    > Keep in mind, the iPhone is only one small update away from making EVERY
    > iPhone compatible with VoIP, then simply dropping the old cell network
    > like a hot potato.


    Um... and using what network instead? The iPhone couldn't use some
    hypothetical 700 MHz network without a hardware upgrade, unless Apple
    has been doing something very sneaky (and implausible).

    It would be interesting to see Apple get this spectrum, but I wouldn't
    consider it too likely. It would be just as interesting to see Google
    get this spectrum, and that might even have a lot of the same benefits
    for Apple. That's more likely, but far from a forgone conclusion.

    [snip]

    --
    "That's George Washington, the first president, of course. The interesting thing
    about him is that I read three--three or four books about him last year. Isn't
    that interesting?"
    - George W. Bush to reporter Kai Diekmann, May 5, 2006
     
  3. Oxford

    Oxford Guest

    ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote:

    > > This rings true of what I've been saying all along, it appears even AT&T
    > > is now scared of Apple and its business intentions...
    > >
    > > Keep in mind, the iPhone is only one small update away from making EVERY
    > > iPhone compatible with VoIP, then simply dropping the old cell network
    > > like a hot potato.

    >
    > Um... and using what network instead? The iPhone couldn't use some
    > hypothetical 700 MHz network without a hardware upgrade, unless Apple
    > has been doing something very sneaky (and implausible).


    802.11 of course, that offers plenty of speed and coupling it with free
    phone calls to any other iPhone would be about the 6th Killer App in the
    history of the industry, 4th one directly relating to Apple/SJ hardware.
    (visicalc, pagemaker, www, then iChatIP)

    > It would be interesting to see Apple get this spectrum, but I wouldn't
    > consider it too likely. It would be just as interesting to see Google
    > get this spectrum, and that might even have a lot of the same benefits
    > for Apple. That's more likely, but far from a forgone conclusion.


    yes, I kinda doubt Apple will purchase the spectrum outright, but a
    tandem Google deal makes sense now that Google has officially said they
    aren't going to build a phone.

    The whole spectrum is still 400 days away from being usable, so on the
    "way out there" side of things, Apple could offer a $49 iChatIP box that
    connects up to literally billions of old Analog TV's and makes them all
    two way video walkie talkies. (smirk)

    apple has a very long history with phones and phone phreaking, so it
    will be interesting IF they bid, or tandem bid with Google.

    -
     
  4. CozmicDebris

    CozmicDebris Guest

    Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in news:linuxlovesosx-
    432F91.12591301122007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net:

    > This rings true of what I've been saying all along, it appears even AT&T
    > is now scared of Apple and its business intentions...


    Hardly, moron.

    >
    > Keep in mind, the iPhone is only one small update away from making EVERY
    > iPhone compatible with VoIP, then simply dropping the old cell network
    > like a hot potato.



    Which will make it nothing more than an overpriced iPod.

    >
    > AT&T needs to be very careful here, Apple is a much stronger company, so
    > they need to play nice or end up like IBM.


    You mean they'll kick the crap out of Apple products?

    >
    > ---
    >
    > Important Parts Here:
    >
    > What I believe is troubling the relationship between AT&T and Apple is
    > the upcoming auction for 700-MHz wireless spectrum and AT&T's discovery
    > that -- as I have predicted for weeks -- Apple will be joining Google in
    > bidding.



    Actually, they won't. You're making this up. Google has stated that they
    will be bidding without any partnerships.



    > AT&T thought its five-year "exclusive" iPhone agreement with
    > Apple would have precluded such a bid, but that just shows how poorly
    > Randall Stephenson understood Steve Jobs.


    No- AT&T figured out what a piece of crap they were sold.
     
  5. ZnU

    ZnU Guest

    In article
    <linuxlovesosx-7C18BB.13404001122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net>,
    Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:

    > ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote:
    >
    > > > This rings true of what I've been saying all along, it appears even AT&T
    > > > is now scared of Apple and its business intentions...
    > > >
    > > > Keep in mind, the iPhone is only one small update away from making EVERY
    > > > iPhone compatible with VoIP, then simply dropping the old cell network
    > > > like a hot potato.

    > >
    > > Um... and using what network instead? The iPhone couldn't use some
    > > hypothetical 700 MHz network without a hardware upgrade, unless Apple
    > > has been doing something very sneaky (and implausible).

    >
    > 802.11 of course, that offers plenty of speed and coupling it with free
    > phone calls to any other iPhone would be about the 6th Killer App in the
    > history of the industry, 4th one directly relating to Apple/SJ hardware.
    > (visicalc, pagemaker, www, then iChatIP)


    It would be nice to have VoIP for when there's WiFi around, but the idea
    of using WiFi in place of the cellular network is, at present, nuts.
    Even in areas with nearly blanket WiFi coverage, there's no mechanism to
    do transparent handoffs between access points using commodity hardware.
    I'd rather not have to stand in one place for the duration of a call.

    [snip]

    --
    "That's George Washington, the first president, of course. The interesting thing
    about him is that I read three--three or four books about him last year. Isn't
    that interesting?"
    - George W. Bush to reporter Kai Diekmann, May 5, 2006
     
  6. In article
    <linuxlovesosx-7C18BB.13404001122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net>,
    Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:

    > yes, I kinda doubt Apple will purchase the spectrum outright, but a
    > tandem Google deal makes sense now that Google has officially said they
    > aren't going to build a phone.
    >


    And that they are providing the software to let other people do
    so--software that doesn't have anything to do with iPhone.

    --
    http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
    Author of _Harald_, a fantasy without magic.
    Published by Baen, in bookstores now
     
  7. In article
    <linuxlovesosx-7C18BB.13404001122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net>,
    Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:

    > apple has a very long history with phones and phone phreaking,


    Well, let's see. I'm pretty sure Steve Jobs did drugs when he was
    younger, so you can just as easily say that Apple has a very long
    history of drug abuse with its top officers.

    I'm also sure that Jobs takes a shit every day, so you can also say that
    Apple has a long history of being involved with waste management.

    Oxturd keeps talking about the days when a couple of college
    students/droputs sold some phone phreaking boxes to make extra money,
    and somehow in his mind that makes Apple an expert in telecommunications.

    Of course, Oxturd also thinks that Adele Goldberg served "milk and
    cookies" when Apple visited PARC, so...
     
  8. CozmicDebris

    CozmicDebris Guest

    Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in
    news:linuxlovesosx-7C18BB.13404001122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net:

    > ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote:
    >
    >> > This rings true of what I've been saying all along, it appears even
    >> > AT&T is now scared of Apple and its business intentions...
    >> >
    >> > Keep in mind, the iPhone is only one small update away from making
    >> > EVERY iPhone compatible with VoIP, then simply dropping the old
    >> > cell network like a hot potato.

    >>
    >> Um... and using what network instead? The iPhone couldn't use some
    >> hypothetical 700 MHz network without a hardware upgrade, unless Apple
    >> has been doing something very sneaky (and implausible).

    >
    > 802.11 of course,


    802.11x is not a network, dimwit.

    > that offers plenty of speed


    And yet connection speed can be a quarter of 3G speeds.


    > and coupling it with
    > free phone calls to any other iPhone would be about the 6th Killer App
    > in the history of the industry, 4th one directly relating to Apple/SJ
    > hardware. (visicalc, pagemaker, www, then iChatIP)


    Sorry- I get free phone calls to other cells now. Apple did not invent
    that.

    >
    >> It would be interesting to see Apple get this spectrum, but I
    >> wouldn't consider it too likely. It would be just as interesting to
    >> see Google get this spectrum, and that might even have a lot of the
    >> same benefits for Apple. That's more likely, but far from a forgone
    >> conclusion.

    >
    > yes, I kinda doubt Apple will purchase the spectrum outright, but a
    > tandem Google deal makes sense now that Google has officially said
    > they aren't going to build a phone.


    Not going to happen, clueless twit.

    >
    > The whole spectrum is still 400 days away from being usable, so on the
    > "way out there" side of things, Apple could offer a $49 iChatIP box
    > that connects up to literally billions of old Analog TV's and makes
    > them all two way video walkie talkies. (smirk)


    Damn- you are a complete idiot. Why would you propose such an open
    violation of the spectrum guidelines?

    >
    > apple has a very long history with phones and phone phreaking,


    short history, actually.

    > so it
    > will be interesting IF they bid, or tandem bid with Google.
    >


    They won't.
     
  9. DTC

    DTC Guest

    Oxford wrote:
    > The whole spectrum is still 400 days away from being usable, so on the
    > "way out there" side of things


    You are confused.

    The spectrum is 400 days (?) from being AWARDED.

    Next comes type certification of equipment.

    Then the manufacturing of equipment (mainly chipsets).

    Then the network build out.

    Or are you dreaming that in 400 days everything will magically start
    working?
     
  10. Oxford

    Oxford Guest

    DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote:

    > The spectrum is 400 days (?) from being AWARDED.
    >
    > Next comes type certification of equipment.
    >
    > Then the manufacturing of equipment (mainly chipsets).
    >
    > Then the network build out.
    >
    > Or are you dreaming that in 400 days everything will magically start
    > working?


    it apple wins, they'll have product on day one. that's just how they
    roll.
     
  11. CozmicDebris

    CozmicDebris Guest

    Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in news:linuxlovesosx-
    DA81AC.22385901122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net:

    > DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote:
    >
    >> The spectrum is 400 days (?) from being AWARDED.
    >>
    >> Next comes type certification of equipment.
    >>
    >> Then the manufacturing of equipment (mainly chipsets).
    >>
    >> Then the network build out.
    >>
    >> Or are you dreaming that in 400 days everything will magically start
    >> working?

    >
    > it apple wins, they'll have product on day one. that's just how they
    > roll.
    >


    That would mean that they are building the network now. Funny- I don't see
    any expenses for that in their financial reports. So tell me- how are they
    building the netwrok today to be ready for day one?
     
  12. Ness-Net

    Ness-Net Guest

    You truly ARE a fucking idiot!!!

    Do even a slight bit of homework before you make your
    completely stupid statements.

    It amazes me that you can be so clueless....


    "Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in message
    news:linuxlovesosx-DA81AC.22385901122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net...
    > DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote:
    >
    >> The spectrum is 400 days (?) from being AWARDED.
    >>
    >> Next comes type certification of equipment.
    >>
    >> Then the manufacturing of equipment (mainly chipsets).
    >>
    >> Then the network build out.
    >>
    >> Or are you dreaming that in 400 days everything will magically start
    >> working?

    >
    > it apple wins, they'll have product on day one. that's just how they
    > roll.
     
  13. In article
    <linuxlovesosx-DA81AC.22385901122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net>,
    Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:

    > DTC <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote:
    >
    > > The spectrum is 400 days (?) from being AWARDED.
    > >
    > > Next comes type certification of equipment.
    > >
    > > Then the manufacturing of equipment (mainly chipsets).
    > >
    > > Then the network build out.
    > >
    > > Or are you dreaming that in 400 days everything will magically start
    > > working?

    >
    > it apple wins, they'll have product on day one. that's just how they
    > roll.


    So, that's your prediction? For everyone to see?

    What waffling will you use when that doesn't happen? What excuse will
    you have about how you "really didn't mean THAT" when that doesn't
    happen?
     
  14. Cubit

    Cubit Guest

    Lawyers.
    Contract terms.

    "Oxford" <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in message
    news:linuxlovesosx-432F91.12591301122007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net...
    > This rings true of what I've been saying all along, it appears even AT&T
    > is now scared of Apple and its business intentions...
    >
    > Keep in mind, the iPhone is only one small update away from making EVERY
    > iPhone compatible with VoIP, then simply dropping the old cell network
    > like a hot potato.
    >
    > AT&T needs to be very careful here, Apple is a much stronger company, so
    > they need to play nice or end up like IBM.
    >
    > ---
    >
    > Important Parts Here:
    >
    > What I believe is troubling the relationship between AT&T and Apple is
    > the upcoming auction for 700-MHz wireless spectrum and AT&T's discovery
    > that -- as I have predicted for weeks -- Apple will be joining Google in
    > bidding. AT&T thought its five-year "exclusive" iPhone agreement with
    > Apple would have precluded such a bid, but that just shows how poorly
    > Randall Stephenson understood Steve Jobs. Steve always hurts his friends
    > to see how much they really love him, so AT&T probably should have
    > expected this kind of corporate body blow.
    >
    > To his credit, Stephenson took the dispute to the streets this way,
    > showing he isn't intimidated by Jobs. It was a bold and rare response
    > for big business and was definitely unexpected by Cupertino, which won't
    > underestimate AT&T again.
    >
    > I'm not privy to any inside details here, but there are two ways I can
    > see Jobs rationalizing his auction position and they aren't necessarily
    > exclusive. He could claim to intend the 700-MHz auction participation as
    > a pure investment, just a good use for the $30+ billion Apple has
    > squirreled away.
    >
    > Nah.
    >
    > Or Jobs could tell AT&T that Apple is investing solely in a DATA network
    > for which it has no voice ambitions. Maybe all MacBooks will soon get
    > 700-MHz access cards.
    >
    > This excuse rings truer, but of course it would still be a scam on
    > Steve's part.
    >
    > It would not surprise me at all if this were the case and when the
    > 700-MHz network is finally up and running Jobs claims astonishment that
    > the most popular data application is Voice over IP, a direct competitor
    > to AT&T Wireless. This may be part of the reason why Apple has been so
    > slow approving third-party iPhone applications. Wouldn't your first
    > application be a VoIP client?
    >
    > ---
    >
    > Full Article Here:
    >
    > http://snipurl.com/1uh83
    >
    > -
     
  15. Bill Kearney

    Bill Kearney Guest

    > apple has a very long history with phones and phone phreaking, so it
    > will be interesting IF they bid, or tandem bid with Google.


    Um, no. Jobs and Woz had a short period of time where they made money being
    thieves building blue boxes to steal long distance service.

    You've got your head so far up your ass you can practically see daylight
    again.
     
  16. Oxford

    Oxford Guest

    "Bill Kearney" <wkearney-99@hot-mail-com> wrote:

    > > apple has a very long history with phones and phone phreaking, so it
    > > will be interesting IF they bid, or tandem bid with Google.

    >
    > Um, no. Jobs and Woz had a short period of time where they made money being
    > thieves building blue boxes to steal long distance service.
    >
    > You've got your head so far up your ass you can practically see daylight
    > again.


    but apple continued to develop telephony ideas throughout its history.
    knowledge navigator was a wireless phone concept, the shipping product
    GeoPort was a telephony device. Apple developed several software only
    phones, all long before the iPhone became so successful.

    the difference is, i know Apple's history better than anyone posting
    here, so this knowledge confuses many people, mainly the so called "cell
    experts" which simply don't understand apple's deep, lifelong interest
    in wireless communications.

    they simply have no idea... i do...

    http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1377/847455044_3bffa46ca8.jpg

    http://snipurl.com/1uim8

    -
     
  17. CozmicDebris

    CozmicDebris Guest

    Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote in
    news:linuxlovesosx-1429AD.10140102122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net:

    > "Bill Kearney" <wkearney-99@hot-mail-com> wrote:
    >
    >> > apple has a very long history with phones and phone phreaking, so
    >> > it will be interesting IF they bid, or tandem bid with Google.

    >>
    >> Um, no. Jobs and Woz had a short period of time where they made
    >> money being thieves building blue boxes to steal long distance
    >> service.
    >>
    >> You've got your head so far up your ass you can practically see
    >> daylight again.

    >
    > but apple continued to develop telephony ideas throughout its history.
    > knowledge navigator was a wireless phone concept, the shipping product
    > GeoPort was a telephony device. Apple developed several software only
    > phones, all long before the iPhone became so successful.


    So they have no experience with hardware phones, only second rate software
    solutions. Ehanks for clarifying.

    >
    > the difference is, i know Apple's history better than anyone posting
    > here,


    Not true.

    > so this knowledge confuses many people,


    No- your stupidity confuses many people.

    > mainly the so called
    > "cell experts" which simply don't understand apple's deep, lifelong
    > interest in wireless communications.


    We don't understand it because it doesn't exist.

    >
    > they simply have no idea... i do...
    >


    You barely understand how to power your computer on.
     
  18. Edgar

    Edgar Guest

    On 2007-12-02 11:14:01 -0600, Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> said:
    >
    > the difference is, i know Apple's history better than anyone posting
    > here, so this knowledge confuses many people, mainly the so called "cell
    > experts" which simply don't understand apple's deep, lifelong interest
    > in wireless communications.
    >
    > they simply have no idea... i do...


    As I stated before...GO SHOOT YOURSELF IN THE HEAD! You are way to
    stupid to live another minute. You are wasting oxygen that others can
    use.
    >
     
  19. In article
    <linuxlovesosx-1429AD.10140102122007@mpls-nnrp-04.inet.qwest.net>,
    Oxford <linuxlovesosx@superart.com> wrote:

    > the difference is, i know Apple's history better than anyone posting
    > here,


    Hey, Oxford: who is Adele Goldberg, and what crucial role did she play
    in Steve Jobs's world?

    Since you know Apple's history better than anyone posting here,
    CERTAINLY you know the answer to THIS one.

    Especially since the key to the answer was SPOON FED to you awhile back.
     
  20. Oxford

    Oxford Guest

    CozmicDebris <isheforreal> wrote:

    > >> You've got your head so far up your ass you can practically see
    > >> daylight again.

    > >
    > > but apple continued to develop telephony ideas throughout its history.
    > > knowledge navigator was a wireless phone concept, the shipping product
    > > GeoPort was a telephony device. Apple developed several software only
    > > phones, all long before the iPhone became so successful.

    >
    > So they have no experience with hardware phones, only second rate software
    > solutions. Ehanks for clarifying.


    ah, three hardware phones from apple...

    http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1377/847455044_3bffa46ca8.jpg

    http://snipurl.com/1uim8

    http://www.memoirevive.ch/newsservice/data/upimages/GeoPortvsAppleModem.J
    PG

    apple as always built the best... so I guess the question is... why do
    you hate quality so much?

    > > the difference is, i know Apple's history better than anyone posting
    > > here,

    >
    > Not true.


    name someone better... bet you can't.

    > > so this knowledge confuses many people,

    >
    > No- your stupidity confuses many people.


    i only post facts, if you disagree, you are wrong. it's that simple.

    > > mainly the so called
    > > "cell experts" which simply don't understand apple's deep, lifelong
    > > interest in wireless communications.

    >
    > We don't understand it because it doesn't exist.


    oh, but watch a little video... which clearly proves my point. done
    around 1989, long before most cell companies were around...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WdS4TscWH8

    > > they simply have no idea... i do...
    > >

    >
    > You barely understand how to power your computer on.


    yes, and that is because on a Mac you only turn it on ONCE, then let the
    sophisticated hardware and software allow it to sleep / wake for the
    rest of its life...

    but you are still using a PC so wouldn't know much about sophisticated
    computing equipment such as Apple builds.

    -
     

Welcome to VerizonForums!

Unfortunately you can't reply until you log in or sign up.


Forgot your password?