Verizon CEO says that the carrier never had a shot at the original Apple iPhone
It's a great story and one that seems perfectly believable except for one little, minute detail. It never happened. According to Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg, Apple was concentrating on GSM technology with the first iPhone and thus, Verizon was not considered for Apple's first-generation touchscreen handset.
In a recent interview with Charlie Rose (who spoke with Seidenberg in June 2009 as we recently reported in our nostalgic look back at phoneArena's coverage of rumors about a Verizon branded Apple iPhone), the Verizon CEO said that Apple had wanted one carrier to carry the new device in every major market, and since the Cupertino based firm had been focusing on GSM, the firm chose AT&T. As Apple started expanding the iPhone to multiple carriers in other countries, Verizon and Apple returned to the bargaining table.
As for who started the recent talks that led to the Verizon iPhone, Big Red's top executive said that he had called Steve Jobs and gone out to visit him. Said Seidenberg, "We consciously reached out to them more than once. This was the view that we had that...eventually their interests would align with ours." He also made an interesting statement when he called the Apple-Verizon partnership a strategic one considering that Verizon is further along in 4G than other carriers (we are not sure that Sprint or T-Mobile would agree).
As for those Verizon customers who worry that the carrier will start to focus on the iPhone to the exclusion of other products, Seidenberg's comment left no doubt that there should be no worries in that department. "We're going to continue to do a great job on the BlackBerry and a great job on the Droid," the CEO stated.
1. downphoenix posted on 14 Jan 2011, 12:47 0
Verizon further along 4G than Sprint or T-Mobile? Steve Jobs just LOVES to get it wrong, doesn't he? Remember he also said they selected AT&T for the fastest, most capable network, we all know how well that went.
4. clevername posted on 14 Jan 2011, 13:15 4
The statement of verizon's 4G being further along was made by Seidenberg not Jobs. The paragraph quotes the vzw CEO and then makes further comments, followed by the paraphrase of his statement on vzw's 4G. If the writer was quoting jobs he would have had to state that jobs said it. Read it again with that in mind and you'll come out with a different view. It's basic journalism. Also if you need further convincing, the article states that this all came from an interview with Seidenberg.
45. taylor (unregistered) posted on 17 Jan 2011, 10:31 0
Just an fyi, no one has a 4g network.. the basis of having one is a connection speed of over 100 megabits. and Wimax not really a good 4g network running on 2.5 gigaherts spectrum and t-mobile HSPA+ is just a faster 3g network. Verizon 4g LTE (Long term evolution) is at 5-12 megabits with the long term ability to reach 100 megs. Get your facts straight
46. vzwservesmewell posted on 17 Jan 2011, 17:37 0
To add/correct to Taylor's rant, VZW's LTE Network is a TRUE 4th Generation technology whether or not it's operating at its potential top speeds or not. WiMax is a 4G technology too, just not one that will be around in the future.. HSPA+ is like 3.5G. It's an enhancement to GSM's 3G and a way for carriers like T-Mobile and ATT to buy some time... In conclusion, since VZW is the only company with an LTE network rolling out, and because LTE will be the future Global standard as far as anyone can tell, VZW is in fact further along in their 4G roll out... That's the way I see it anyway
2. JeffdaBeat posted on 14 Jan 2011, 12:48 3
Verizon will focus on whatever people want to buy. If most folks want the iPhone then Verizon will push the iPhone. If the trend continues to Android, then Verizon will continue what they've been doing of course in the respect of their partners. But if they want me to believe that they are going to push RIM...I've got an lol for them. You don't try and sell a dead horse of no one is in the market for dead horses.
12. horsemeat (unregistered) posted on 14 Jan 2011, 14:16 3
horsemeat is making a comeback!
16. stilt posted on 14 Jan 2011, 15:32 1
DROIDS are tens times better than the iphone in many ways, i could name all of them but i'll just throw this one out there ADOBE FLASH PLAYER 10.1 and better coming soon. iphone nada nice device, pretty, very very very revolutionary, but no droids and android OS all together has technology wise killed the iphone, oh yeah the iphone has all the hype hype hype but if you just own a android OS or motorola droid product everyone one would feel exactly how I do, Steve Jobs saw what the androids were better deep inside himself and now agrees to throw his product into VZW lineup cause he know droids are slaughtering. He will never admit that and non of the iphone fans either but its there.
try to watch a tv episode that you missed or forgot to record when it aired, and go to a iphone and try to go to the network website to see full episodes offerings for free, it will say adobe flash 10.1 is needed to view video then you'll just have to wait until it airs again once sindication starts lol that just one example of a iphone failure,, need i say death grip lmao
24. taco50 (banned) posted on 14 Jan 2011, 16:07 2
Is that why Verizon went to Steve Jobs asking for the iPhone? You seem to have a reading comprehension problem.
27. JeffdaBeat posted on 14 Jan 2011, 16:13 1
Um...what just happened?
I just said Verizon will push whatever makes them money. I never said any one phone was better than the other. How did this turn into yet another Apple Vs. Google conversation? If I was dissing anything, it would be RIM...
What happened to reading comprehension in school?
...Oh and about Flash...all the sites I go to have been converted to HTML5...which works on Android, iOS, and Palm without a plugin...jussayin.
42. CRICKETownz posted on 16 Jan 2011, 13:28 0
the Blackberry comment may be in regard to the business customer base. though a lot seem to be interested in the features of the Droid/iPhone but they still prefer Blackberry as a device. i sell a huge amount of BB Bolds to business customers. businesses realize Android & iOs will do corp. functions but still prefer the Blackberry set up. i wouldnt exactly call it a "dead horse"...its not like we're talkin about nokia here.
48. vzwservesmewell posted on 17 Jan 2011, 17:58 0
Maybe not a Dead horse but definitely cancerous... It will be a slow decline for RIM but a decline nonetheless, unless innovation re-invigorates them. Remember Nextel? I realize its not a fair comparison but Nextel was a company whose subscriber base was majority business and as consumer interest dwindled their business subscribers slowly but surely followed suit...which was to leave iDEN for something better. As I said before, unless RIM gets innovative, the same will happen because ultimately your businesses are made up of those same consumers who will be begging their bosses and MIS peeps to get on board with the latest and greatest...
47. vzwservesmewell posted on 17 Jan 2011, 17:45 0
JeffdaBeat, you are so right. RIM really came too little too late with 6.0. I heard a really funny story that involved some big RIM representatives and an owner with a large Indirect Verizon Agent where the RIM reps were wondering why they weren't selling their phones and then demonstrating 6.0 in the Torch were literally laughed at... It's actually surprising how they are letting this market slide away from them.. not surprising that it is. They also need to take a lesson from "The Social Network" movie and not under estimate the value of "Cool"
3. Ashnnat posted on 14 Jan 2011, 13:10 1
I can almost buy, except for one minuscule detail that doesn't make sense:
If Apple realy wanted iPhone to be GSM from the beggining, then why they are going backwards with a CDMA model? Would'nt made much more sense to go with LTE iPhone? Sorry Ivan and Steve-O, but I'm not buying it. Not that it matter$, of cour$e, what I, phonearena, or anyone el$e already waiting in line think$.
7. shellnick2003 posted on 14 Jan 2011, 13:24 0
It was prolly b/c of the demand for an iPhone on Verizon. They will prolly release a LTE iPhone sometime after everyone has spent their pretty pennies on the CDMA iPhone, just to make more money off the customers.
8. JohnBFTL (unregistered) posted on 14 Jan 2011, 13:42 2
Backwards with a CDMA model? CDMA is a far more advanced technology than GSM. The reason GSM is so widely used throughout the world is because it is so much cheaper to develop than CDMA. It may not be as versitile when traveling abroad, but in terms of ability, CDMA is a way superior radio signal.
9. Ashnnat posted on 14 Jan 2011, 13:54 0
That might be true or not true. But when I say backwards is because most of the industry, including Verizon themselves, is moving towards LTE 4G tech.
11. JohnBFTL (unregistered) posted on 14 Jan 2011, 14:04 2
LTE is not a voice technology though. It's like UMTS or HSPA/HSPA+. It covers the data network. The reason people assume GSM is better in terms of boasting simultaneous voice and data capabilities is because the GSM is conducting the voice frequency while the UMTS or HSPA/HSPA+ is conducting data transfer, where as CDMA2000 conducts both. Try going on the web while connected to EDGE. It won't work because that is relying on the GSM network.
The reason Verizon is releasing a non-LTE iPhone is because Apple would have to completely redesign the hardware for the phone. That would take too long. It's a business, not a charity. They don't care about you.
13. horsemeat (unregistered) posted on 14 Jan 2011, 14:18 1
14. JeffdaBeat posted on 14 Jan 2011, 14:26 2
And one thing people tend to forget is that an LTE phone still has to have a calling network to back it up in the case that LTE isn't available. Until everything is VoIP, you are going to have hybrid phones LTE/CDMA or LTE/GSM.
21. Ashnnat posted on 14 Jan 2011, 15:57 0
"They don't care about you."
Exactly my whole point.
37. bakr (unregistered) posted on 15 Jan 2011, 08:05 1
LTE will support voice when Verizon changes to VOIP for voice services.
36. JDraper (unregistered) posted on 15 Jan 2011, 05:55 0
CDMA is not a superior radio signal. CDMA is the combination of digital for data and analog for voice. It is the analog that allows companies like Verizon and Sprint to offer coverage in the back end parts of the country. CDMA can only evolve so far as a technology where GSM is still in its infancy. GSM also has the capability to produce Voice and Data at the same time while CDMA makes you choose. CDMA relies on those old analog signals to function properly and when the FCC gets there way and turns analog off all they will have is digital to rely on and Verizon's digital footprint is almost non-exsistant to T-Mobile's or AT&T's.
38. bakr (unregistered) posted on 15 Jan 2011, 08:16 0
Ummm... check your facts. The government has already ordered Verizon to shut down their analog system and Verizon complied OVER 2 YEARS AGO!
43. Gawain posted on 16 Jan 2011, 16:08 1
If Verizon and Sprint had migrated their 1XRTT/CDMA to EV-DV instead of EV-DO, data/voice at the same time would not be an issue. As for GSM, the only reason why AT&T or T-Mobile can offer data and voice at the same time is in their HSPA markets where the data rides a separate frequency altogether. It's not some magic technological miracle. It's two radios working at the same time. CDMA is not an analog signal, it is a code-based, spread spectrum digital technology that uses spectrum more efficiently than GSM, more securely than GSM and provides better soft-hand-offs than GSM (which doesn't do soft-hand-offs at all). GSM is a time-divided, channel-divided technology like the old TDMA run by the "old" AT&T (McCaw markets).
CDMA is a far superior standard to GSM. The reasons it isn't as far reaching in areas like western Europe has to do with laws about open-device architecture. CDMA devices are hard-coded to their carriers in most respects whereas a SIM card is all you need to make a GSM device work.
17. stilt posted on 14 Jan 2011, 15:38 1
good point everyone is gonna jump and burn there upgrades or whatever to get a 3g cdma iphone then the iphone lte from VZW will come out or the even better htc thunderbolt, or even better motorola bionic and everyone is gonna be like "DANG I SHOULD HAVE WAITED!!" but i do feel sorry for at&t they are gonna start bashing like hell now and giving stuff away for free to stay afloat cause even people with the iphone now want it on VZW.
6. tbuchs2001 (unregistered) posted on 14 Jan 2011, 13:23 1
i for one am waiting on one of the new androids, i say no to the iphone with all the newer things coming out
10. ibap posted on 14 Jan 2011, 14:02 0
If you want a global splash with just one radio, GSM would have to be it. I'm just surprised it took this long for Apple to move to CDMA, whether it was contractually constrained by ATT, or whether it was technology issues, that held them up.
World iPhone next with both technologies?
15. DOGIEFRESH posted on 14 Jan 2011, 15:24 1
Dude CDMA superior than GSM......??? Are u on crack or what....??? Just because slow-rizon has more footpring and coverage that AT&T and other GSM carriers in the USA it doesn't mean is superior, get ur suitcase and travel outside of the trailer park that you living at and see why there isn't any CDMA carriers in Europe who are years ahead more advanced than United States in cell tech and see why HSPA is really superior than CDMA, just to set u a little example.....since 2003 when it was created 3GSM had more than 7 upgrades and still evolving to 52mbps, CDMA had only 3 revs and that's it.........!!!!!!
19. stilt posted on 14 Jan 2011, 15:54 1
and look at the cellular usage in the US it way more usage than any other country for get the other countries millions and millions of people arent on business trips or splurging on just going out of the country rreally people other than business people dont care about talking on the phone that much cause they are wealthy they dont care about phone and crap like that young people do teenagers do phone geekds do not international,
I have had people come in to buy a phone and be like so where is you global phones? then i ask the question are you going out of the country they say i might one day" huh one day if you do go out of the country use skype mobile to skype to skype which VZW only offers on smartphones,
i know its fiction but look at action movies and whatnot when they are in other countries they show them using some rinky dink flip phone not a droid or iphone or windows mobile, or nothing fancy just a regular phone that just works, but then look at a american movie they are showing droids and iphones, and the fancy stuff
im not saying other countries are to mediocre to want high tech, but the US which is mostly CDMA now is where the biggest and rapid sales
are so stop talking about what you can do out of the country on GSM name 1000 people that you know that needs to go out of the country all the time?? CDMA is good
26. taco50 (banned) posted on 14 Jan 2011, 16:10 0
Are you 12? Skype mobile only works stateside on Verizon phones.
25. JohnBFTL (unregistered) posted on 14 Jan 2011, 16:08 1
CDMA has an infinite number of calls it can carry on one tower. Each call has its own binary code that it carries. GSM can only hold a set number of calls per channel. Once a tower is full, it will start to hand off to the next closest tower, in which case if the towers closest to that one are full, it would not get returned because that space would be filled, causing more dropped calls. Like I said before, the reason most other countries have GSM is because it is less expensive to develop and maintain. Europe is not far more advanced than us in wireless. Japan is, but only in terms of handset development, not network development.
18. spinelessrabbit posted on 14 Jan 2011, 15:52 0
last i checked slowrizon cdma was pretty outdated i lived in vegas where the service was horrible att on the other hand no issues
22. stilt posted on 14 Jan 2011, 15:59 0
yeah right you were probably in a bunker with the verizon cell phone and then used a At&t pay landline to compare signal strengh and call quality lol
20. cellulartechnology101 (unregistered) posted on 14 Jan 2011, 15:56 1
@dogiefresh- #1 Europe is not years ahead of us.
#2 the only reason why GSM is more global is cuz Europe made it illegal to have more than one industry standard for cell phone technology, where in the great US of A we have a choice.
#3 CDMA is far more superior and advanced.
A. It was invented by the U.S. military back in world war 2.
B. It was classified technology for them for so long. They only de-classified it in the late 80's and it wasn't available for consumer use until the late 90's.
C. CDMA is more secure where as GSM is easily hackable. Ever heard of cloning someone's sim card?
23. stilt posted on 14 Jan 2011, 16:06 0
all great points cellulartechnology101, you cant tell people nothing they always want to turn whats golden into cooper. smh
people will never enjoy or be satisfied with anything, why are any of use even talking about what steve, and ivan, schmo, and jkahdfkljhf h are doing with there products we arent profile at all money wise so just enjoy whatever you want to spend your money on cause all we are doing is making these rich ass rich people richer, and paying phone companies and manufacturers more and more money then argue about the products like what we even say matters, SMDHAU "Shaking My Damn Head At Us"
28. taco50 (banned) posted on 14 Jan 2011, 16:13 0
I'm laughing at all the VZW fan boys now that the truth came out and Verizon was never on the running for an iPhone.
29. Whateverman posted on 14 Jan 2011, 16:51 1
You know what's really funny... calling a carrier slow after they took your carrier's best device, add an "obsolete" CDMA radio and hotspot to it, and the thing toys like a jet! That must really hurt. But its okay, you'll still have your PRECIOUS. Our will just be faster, have more coverage, wont have death grip issues, will have hotspots first! Lol.
30. DOGIEFRESH posted on 14 Jan 2011, 18:07 0
You can say whatever u want, but the real proof is out there in the field:
- 6 time faster than any CDMA carrier, tested.....!!!
- Voice and data at the same time
- Best handset selection
- Still room for upgrades
- More than 40 carriers around the world switched from CDMA to GSM
Can you name the same with any CDMA carrier fanboy, go to sleep...!!!!
31. Whateverman posted on 14 Jan 2011, 21:18 0
I've done about 10 different searches on CDMA vs gsm, and nowhere have I found anything saying gsm is 6 times faster. Matter a fact, everything I found says CDMA is faster. By any chance do you have a link or anything? I'd like to see this for myself.
32. DOGIEFRESH posted on 14 Jan 2011, 22:55 0
10 diff searches where Little Rock Arkansas, the REdneck Land....???? Leave the trailer park fanboy see the world dude you're one of the main reasons why Europeans and Japanese people potrait Americans as morons...!!!!
33. DOGIEFRESH posted on 14 Jan 2011, 22:59 0
Make it simple use wikepedia and look back on past post of this website. I give u an example:
Teltra (Largest Autralian carrier firts to clock 14mbps dowlink in 2006) CDMA is yet to score over 7mbps...!!!
34. Whateverman posted on 14 Jan 2011, 23:58 0
You take that same stupid trailer park jab on every post and it still ain't funny. Second, I've never been to a trailer park but I'll stop by and say hi next time your home. Third, my passport has probably been stamped more times than yours, so don't assume you know me. Lastly, you seem to be a man of few brain cells, so I'll type slow so you can understand :). I just wanted to know where to find the 6x faster claim you just made, if you got nothing, that's cool. But Japan and Europe are of no interest to me when it comes to cell phone service because I live in the US. I just wanna know why none of ATT phones I've test were ever faster than mine (with the exception of one iPhone). I've tested Droids, Curves, Storms, Touch Pro 2s and everything else against several different ATT phones and NEVER, have I witnessed this blazing speed rabbit fanboys like you believe you have. Maybe VZW is just a whole lot faster just in the areas I go to, idk. But even that one iPhone that beat my Droid was about a half a second faster. Not hardly six times faster! I was just looking for proof, but since you have none... Peace!
35. DOGIEFRESH posted on 15 Jan 2011, 01:38 0
Let me breath and laugh a bit hahahaha, u probably got those passports stamps in ur ass but let me explain you slowwwwly like slow-rizon the carrier u kiss a lot of ass for. take a look at this linkwww.gsmworld.com, u will information about several carriers running 21mbps and a handfull rocking 42mbps and those aren't peak speeds. Ok with that said do the math 42 max from HSPA+ and 5mps from wich is the fastest available from a couple of carriers not slow-rizon is equal 8 times the speed, so where u found CDMA is faster and more advanced.....??? Do you see why u making yourself a moron with every silly shit you post.....!!!! Everything I write here is from real facts but your fanboy mind can't take it is not my fault, peace out partneryeeeehawwww....!!!!
39. Whateverman posted on 15 Jan 2011, 13:35 1
Oohhh, i see! You want to compare ATT's 4G (HSPA+, even though they will be going to LTE later) to VZW's 3G (CDMA) speeds. What I thought we were doing was comparing 3G to 3G. You know ATTs WCDMA vs VZWs EVDO, which would have been a fair comparison. So technically and theoretically, you're right. ATTs theoretical 4g speeds are much faster, but the numbers you quoted are just that...theoretical! ATT themselves say hspa+ should be able to reach max speed of 14.4 Mbps, but this isn't real world. ATT hasn't released any of their actual test speeds, but LTE published real world speeds are at 12 Mbps right now, so why wouldn't they just stick with HSPA+ since it's soooo fast?
As for why I think CDMA is better, I get more coverage, I don't drop calls like when I had tmobile or ATT, and as I said my phone spanks every other phone I've run up against including a ton of iPhones. I don't think ATTs network is slow but mine is just a little faster and I prove it every time one of my friends with ATT wants to see who has the fastest network!
Bottom line, you have given a bunch of reasons why I should buy a gsm phone for countries in which I don't live, but nothing that was worthy of making a switch to ATT here in the US. Even your best phone will be on VZW in just a few weeks. So What else you got?
40. DOGIEFRESH posted on 15 Jan 2011, 15:04 0
AT&T and GSM carriers don't need fanboys like you have what you deserve and is outdated obsolete stuff, BTW we wasn't debating about US carriers I was the technology and you keep bringin the same shit over and over, slow-rizon is not the best carrier in the world and sure is not the largest that's my point I show you facts why HSPA blows CDMA out of the water but is not my fault that you're a 100% moron am sure all the americans are not like you. I live between Canada, US and Australia one of their carriers like Telstra for example smokes out slow-rizon in coverage, speed and performance, US is not ahead of any of those countries in cell tech but is something that probably a fanboy like you will never understand. End of debate....!!!
41. Whateverman posted on 15 Jan 2011, 16:42 0
Why are you posting in an article where two US carriers are the topic of conversation then? And why are you getting your panties all in a bunch? Do you happen to have one of these Telstra phones we can test? And still you can't explain why the two GSM carriers here in the US are rated as the two worst carriers! If this technology is so advanced and so superior, why do their customers rate them as the two worst US carriers? There are lots of people who hate VZW, clearly you are one of them, but they still rated VZW higher then yours. EVER CDMA CARRIER was rated higher than yours! So based on the facts, I would have to say ATT service sucks! Oh and fanboys are the ones who go around using names like "slow rizon" to express their frustration for choosing the wrong provider. I've acknowledged that ATT was a great company that made some really smart decisions. I just like using the best OS, in one of the best phones, on the best network in my area. If ATT works for you, that's great! But my difference of opinion doesn't mean I'm a moron. Just means I have a difference of opinion. Good debating with ya!
44. Juan Canola (unregistered) posted on 17 Jan 2011, 08:27 0