If Apple stays true to their culture, they will build *really* cool looking towers that nobody else can put their gear on. I cannot see them entering into agreements with VZ or AT&T. I also do not think they want to sully their brand by purchasing T-Mobil.

Could be wrong, though.

steelkidney: Skarekrough: steelkidney: ElPollotonto: Am I the only one happy with my provider? (sprint)

No. I'm pretty happy with your provider as well. :)

Third.

So how the hell is it that I keep on hearing about them tanking?

Because we're the only three four people that like them.

i guess they could outright buy clearwire

iTower! I love it! I can't wait to learn how to hold it so it can work properly.

I can see it now - Apple - "fark it, we're going to 6G".

After Apple crushes the Carriers, will they see see them driven before you, and hear the lamentation of their women?

hbomb1129: lanciepants: I'd imagine they'd have to gobble up the likes of T-Mobiles or Sprint in order to get the necessary spectrum, towers, etc. Getting into the national carrier buisness isn't exactly thing you do over a weekend.

I'd love to see this, in order to knock the carriers in-line (looking at you AT&T) but I see it as little more than hit whoring from the author.

This only works IF Apple doesn't overcharge like they are want to do with their hardware. I'm also curious how this might play into anti-trust laws. Also will the carrier be able to carry non Apple devices?

I hear yea, there are so many of those self evident follow-up questions that it really makes me question veracity of this article. Obviously Verizon and AT&T wouldn't take this lying down and would file FTC complaints and or law suits. Apple and the DOJ are already starting to tango to the anti-trust bop. Not to mention the carrier business is cut throat, with regular races to the bottom in terms of profit margins.

Apple is making a killing selling devices. Getting into the carrier business would open them up to various legal proceedings, restrict their potential customer based on available coverage, not to mention being a colossal drain on their resources. I just don't see how this behooves them or their business.

But then again these are tech journalists and they've never been burdened by things like facts or honesty. Just a couple weeks ago a bunch of sites reported Apple CEO Timothy Cook had met with game developer Valve, and were spinning rumors of an inevitable Apple buy-out. Not three days later both companies douse the story with water saying they've never met, nor have any plans to. So yea, I'll take this article with a Mt. Everest sized grain of salt.

This guy is full of shiat.

steelkidney: ElPollotonto: Am I the only one happy with my provider? (sprint)

No. I'm pretty happy with your provider as well. :)

Hell, I'm pretty happy with AT&T. My guess is that your happiness with your cell carrier depends on your location more than anything else. If you have good signal, chances are you are happy with them. Of course, I've heard nightmare stories about billing and customer service issues, but I've not experienced them. In the 15 or so years I've had a cell phone, I've never had a reason to switch carriers...they've switched (GTE Mobile > Cellular One > AT&T Wireless > Cingular Wireless > AT&T Wireless again), but I never have.

/ CSB

Nightsweat: I can see it now - Apple - "fark it, we're going to 6G".

I love you deeply

If they do it, it will be done incrementally. They'll start with phone calls first and then text messaging will come with iTower 2. And it will be magical.

Was the 'unlikely' tag taking a siesta?

hbomb1129: Alonjar: B-b-b-but they dont have a network!!!!

Not many carriers do. Most towers are owned and operated by behind the scenes companies, they merely lease access to people like Verizon.

This could potentially work out well for apple, and fits right in with their aggressive approach to proprietary everything.

Verizon and other carriers owns their towers.
http://www.cellreception.com/towers/t owers.php?city=dallas&state_abr= t x&filter_verizon=1

There's a difference between owning the tower and owning the hardware/antennas that hang on the tower.

You can set your own towers, FAA register & light them if they are over 200' tall, and then have the infrastructure and crew to monitor/maintain/relamp them. And then you're also responsible for maintaining the physical plant at the tower site (environmental systems, power, backup power, etc).

Or you can just lease tower space from a company like American Tower and let them be responsible for all of that. You give them the antennas, they hang them and run the coax, and they give you rack space in the shelter at the base of the tower. The equipment in the rack and the antenna has your property tags on them and you get access, but that's about it.

lilbjorn: Was the 'unlikely' tag taking a siesta?

Really. Apple's the most valuable company in the world and is making money hand-over-fist selling devices. Why would they even think about investing nearly a trillion dollars to build out a global wireless network and attempt to compete in a market space that has so low an ROI. Just because they file some patent applications for networking technology doesn't mean that they intend to do anything other than license it.

I read a few other articles on that site. They pretty much don't know what the fark they are talking about.

LOL. And you thought people already complained about the cost of their crappy wireless plan.

BGR posting an unlikely and implausible rumor? I've never seen that happen before.

Given that the person quoted was speaking at a MVNO conference, I suspect that _if_ Apple was going to get into the business, they'd do so as a MVNO. However, I'd be shocked if their contracts with the carriers don't all have a clause that Apple won't operate a competing network. Further, I suspect the DOJ would look very closely at such an operation.

Or you can just lease tower space from a company like American Tower and let them be responsible for all of that. You give them the antennas, they hang them and run the coax, and they give you rack space in the shelter at the base of the tower. The equipment in the rack and the antenna has your property tags on them and you get access, but that's about it.

Existing cell networks are at capacity, thanks to the iPhone and other smartphones. The major network providers are already doing everything they can to expand capacity for their users. Leasing someone else's crowded bandwidth gives you more crowded bandwidth and frustrated users.

Thus there is absolutely no way Apple can garner enough network bandwidth to offer its own network service at the level of service its users would expect without establishing its own network infrastructure. It would be breaking a very profitable business model for everyone (most particularly for Apple).

Instead, I would believe the rumors that Apple is going to get into the 'feature phone' market with a cheaper/smaller/less capable version of the iPhone, and then offer those for prepaid use with the smaller providers for more market penetration.

Happy birthday to this rumor! Five years old already? Wow, the years just fly by.

Leasing someone else's crowded bandwidth does not introduce a net increase in total bandwidth consumption. The only thing that does that is an increase in active users-- a factor which is not tied to the identity of the available carriers.

It is reasonable to suggest that Apple could get into the market using existing infrastructure while incrementally building up and integrating their own.

If the billing is going to be done through iTunes, does that mean that Jailbreakers need not apply?

pixeled: hbomb1129: This only works IF Apple doesn't overcharge like they are want to do with their hardware

That's adorable.

Unlike Samsung, Microsoft, Google, etc, Apple has a research and development budget.

You should really stop felatting your iPhone. The look is really unbecoming.

Stabone33: Yeah, that and a COMPLETE LACK OF WIRELESS INFRASTRUCTURE.

Right, because clearly you need a wireless infrastructure to be a mobile service provider. Just ask Metro PCS, Virgin Mobile, StraightTalk...

...oh wait.

Stabone33: Yeah, that and a COMPLETE LACK OF WIRELESS INFRASTRUCTURE.

Right, because clearly you need a wireless infrastructure to be a mobile service provider. Just ask Metro PCS, Virgin Mobile, StraightTalk...

...oh wait.

Keep reading....

ElPollotonto: Am I the only one happy with my provider? (sprint)

I'm happy with T-Mobile. The only problem of any kind I've ever had is that there's a Target store I frequent where I don't get a signal inside.

Although my phone is getting old and tired, and I wish they had a better selection of basic phones. (I'm not interested in a smart phone. An iPod Touch and a just-phone phone better fits my needs.)

100 Watt Walrus: An iPod Touch and a just-phone phone better fits my needs.

Is there a difference between the iPhone and the iPod Touch other than the iPhone has wide-area radio comm?

Stabone33: Or you can just lease tower space from a company like American Tower and let them be responsible for all of that. You give them the antennas, they hang them and run the coax, and they give you rack space in the shelter at the base of the tower. The equipment in the rack and the antenna has your property tags on them and you get access, but that's about it.

Existing cell networks are at capacity, thanks to the iPhone and other smartphones. The major network providers are already doing everything they can to expand capacity for their users. Leasing someone else's crowded bandwidth gives you more crowded bandwidth and frustrated users.

Thus there is absolutely no way Apple can garner enough network bandwidth to offer its own network service at the level of service its users would expect without establishing its own network infrastructure. It would be breaking a very profitable business model for everyone (most particularly for Apple).

Instead, I would believe the rumors that Apple is going to get into the 'feature phone' market with a cheaper/smaller/less capable version of the iPhone, and then offer those for prepaid use with the smaller providers for more market penetration.

LOL. Capacity is strangled by backhaul, but instead of really concentrating on getting more backhaul installed (Switching towers to fiber), the major networks are spending all their money trying to buy frequencies to maintain leverage on other carriers. (See: AT&T's attempted buyout of T-Mobile).

ElPollotonto: Am I the only one happy with my provider? (sprint)

Dunno about Sprint, but I've had no complaints with T-Mobile. Well, except the fact they were almost purchased by AT&T.

And speaking of... I could easily see Apple buying AT&T, but keeping the AT&T name and the AT&T executives, thus ensuring the financial collapse of Apple. (Yes, that was sarcasm, but history tends to repeat itself. AT&T tends to behave like a virus.)

garkola: "making hardware obsolete in a short time frame"

Not sure where that's coming from. I just sold my macbook that was introduced in 11/06 - still works great. I've got two mini's that are the same generation (core duo) chugging away as media servers. Even my original iPhone and 3G are working great.

I fact, I can take that original iPhone and sell it on eBay for $60, which is a great price for a 5 year old cellphone.

In fact, most of Apple's hardware lasts for a ridiculously long time, and has great resale value. The same can't be said for most computers/devices.

My sister bought, I believe, the original iPod Touch model, and something about an update last year removed some sort of functionality - I don't remember off the top of my head exactly what it was, but it was something she used a lot, and she complained about it three times. She ended up selling it to someone else and buying a newer model, for more money of course.

I myself received a 2nd gen Touch as a gift, and for the first six months I had it, it didn't work properly - kept shutting off in the middle of songs for no reason. Come to find out later, that software update that they charged $9.99 for? (2009) Well, I decided to finally pay up when they cut the price in half. Lo and behold, the farking thing started working the way it was supposed to. I had to pay them to fix something that shouldn't have been wrong in the first place.

Apple can bite me, is what I'm saying. Maybe 5 years is a good life for an iPhone, that's nice for you, but they still keep proving The Oatmeal right.

garkola: "making hardware obsolete in a short time frame"

Not sure where that's coming from. I just sold my macbook that was introduced in 11/06 - still works great. I've got two mini's that are the same generation (core duo) chugging away as media servers. Even my original iPhone and 3G are working great.

I fact, I can take that original iPhone and sell it on eBay for $60, which is a great price for a 5 year old cellphone.

In fact, most of Apple's hardware lasts for a ridiculously long time, and has great resale value. The same can't be said for most computers/devices.

Perhaps you should brush up on the difference between "obsolete" and "functional". Then you might be a bit more sure about where it's coming from.

If not, consider again that you're on at least your fourth computer in 5 and a half years, and third cell phone in less than 5 years. See: obsolete.

JackieRabbit: Just because they file some patent applications for networking technology doesn't mean that they intend to do anything other than license it.

Some people are still stuck in that antiquated mindset of a patent leading to a product. They're not used to this modern notion that patents are actually intended to discourage others from entering a space or sit in a filing cabinet so that you can submarine some schmuck later.

steelkidney: Zion21: Can I please have an unlimited data plan that doesn't cost an arm and a leg now?

Probably. Apple is well-known for reasonable prices. Especially for deliberately undercutting competitor's prices.

This is some exceptionally dry wit.

profplump: 100 Watt Walrus: An iPod Touch and a just-phone phone better fits my needs.

Is there a difference between the iPhone and the iPod Touch other than the iPhone has wide-area radio comm?

A few differences. The iPhone has a better camera, with a flash. The iPhone has Siri, if you're into that sort of thing. The iPhone's phone is a built-in part of the software, whereas if you want to use iPod Touch as a phone, it's a bit of a DIY. You can hold the iPhone to your ear like ye olde tyme telephones instead of having to use Bluetooth or headset or speaker.

In short, if you have an iPod Touch, realistically you still need a cell phone of some kind unless you never leave the house. But for non-phone purposes, the differences are negligible.

MrEricSir: Stabone33: Yeah, that and a COMPLETE LACK OF WIRELESS INFRASTRUCTURE.

Right, because clearly you need a wireless infrastructure to be a mobile service provider. Just ask Metro PCS, Virgin Mobile, StraightTalk...

...oh wait.

I've got Straight Talk in my iPhone 4S. I just dropped Straight Talk's SIM in my AT&T locked iPhone. Instead of showing "AT&T" in the carrier field, it shows "HOME". Just changed the data APN and the data started to flow. No jailbreaking or unlocking required (except if you want MMS). Works really well, I get AT&T's HSPA+ coverage without AT&T's prices. Also, I don't have to count my minutes or texts.

dustman81: I've got Straight Talk in my iPhone 4S. I just dropped Straight Talk's SIM in my AT&T locked iPhone. Instead of showing "AT&T" in the carrier field, it shows "HOME". Just changed the data APN and the data started to flow. No jailbreaking or unlocking required (except if you want MMS). Works really well, I get AT&T's HSPA+ coverage without AT&T's prices. Also, I don't have to count my minutes or texts.

Been thinking about doing this myself once the contract runs out, although I'd probably want to switch my number to Google Voice first to make up for the missing features. I understand visual voicemail also doesn't work with Straight Talk?

MrEricSir: dustman81: I've got Straight Talk in my iPhone 4S. I just dropped Straight Talk's SIM in my AT&T locked iPhone. Instead of showing "AT&T" in the carrier field, it shows "HOME". Just changed the data APN and the data started to flow. No jailbreaking or unlocking required (except if you want MMS). Works really well, I get AT&T's HSPA+ coverage without AT&T's prices. Also, I don't have to count my minutes or texts.

Been thinking about doing this myself once the contract runs out, although I'd probably want to switch my number to Google Voice first to make up for the missing features. I understand visual voicemail also doesn't work with Straight Talk?

Visual Voicemail doesn't work, but the Voicemail icon in the Phone app will dial into your Straight Talk mailbox.

<
If not, consider again that you're on at least your fourth computer in 5 and a half years, and third cell phone in less than 5 years. See: obsolete.
>

I buy it because I want to, not because I have to. Big difference.

Most of the older machines are still in use (except for the SE/30 and B&W, of course). The older iPhones I use for development and testing, because there are still people using them in real life.

ProfessorOhki: I know the iPhone sells well, but does it sell well enough justifying their own network?

/What you think they'd service competing handsets?
//Maybe if mandated

Doubtful. The estimates vary quite a bit, but range from about 50-75 million iphones world wide as of about this time last year. That number reflects all iphones, including those that are no longer in use. All of these iphones are on other networks, so we can assume that most of those are locked into a contract. If Apple were to launch its own mobile network, people would have to break contracts, which is often a deterrent from switching networks. In order to get those people, Apple would have to offer some sort of incentive for people to break contracts.
Also, 50-75 million subscribers in terms of mobile networks is not a lot, when you consider how many people use basic cell phone service (read: non-smartphones) which apple is not likely to start making.
Then there's ipads. Data packages for ipads are ~$30. Unless there's a lower price, I'm not sure how Apple would convince people to stop paying AT&T or Verizon for iPad data packages and start paying it to their new, untested, fledgling network.
Frankly, I don't think the numbers support a forcing all current subscribers to move to a proprietary network. However, If they DON'T force existing iphone customers to move, I don't see how they will get enough subscribers to willingly switch or start new service to make it worth their effort.