[besson3c]

I'm just wondering, and this question is directed at those who have been customers through a network upgrade and have paid attention, how do these work?

If one were to buy the Verizon iPhone 4 today, when it is time to release the Verizon 4G version of the iPhone 4, will a purchase of a new phone be necessary? If so, will there be a discounted price? Or, is this handled through updatable software?

[ort888]

If one were to buy the Verizon iPhone 4 today, when it is time to release the Verizon 4G version of the iPhone 4, will a purchase of a new phone be necessary?

YES. At the unsubsidized price of something like $600.

If so, will there be a discounted price?

NOPE.

Or, is this handled through updatable software?

HECK NOPE. Completely new hardware is required.

Expect no favors from any of the big Telecom companies. When you buy an iPhone from Verizon at a subsidized price you are signing on for 2 years. Any new device will need to be purchased at the full unsubsidized price. Breaking contract early will result in early termination fees.

[mduell]

The CDMA iPhone 4 is not software updatable to LTE 4G; similarly the GSM iPhone 4 isn't software updatable to 4G (HSPA+).

If you buy CDMA iPhone 4 today, you'll probably get a discounted LTE 4G iPhone because the first LTE 4G iPhone will be iPhone 6 in 2012. Apple has been avoiding the leading edge of cellular standards in the last four iPhone releases and I don't expect that to change this year.

[besson3c]

My thinking is that it would suck and annoy if the CDMA iPhone 4 was made obsolete within 6 months or so for a substantially better phone on what is hyped to be a substantially faster/better network.

[Spheric Harlot]

4G is years away from sensible coverage.

[Big Mac]

I had to double check that the OP was besson. Are you putting us on with such rudimentary tech questions?

[besson3c]

Nahhh, I'm lazy when it comes to keeping up on what the cell phone companies put out cause I'm not really a phone person, and since I know that many of you guys are it is sometimes useful and quicker to get some opinions and ideas here.

[imitchellg5]

Considering that the Verizon iPhone 4 is CDMA and Verizon's "4G" technology is LTE, a GSM standard, there will be zero compatibility.

[besson3c]

Ahh, the LTE is GSM...

It will be wonderful to consolidate on the superior GSM technology, but I can see why some are saying that it will take years for Verizon to finish this switchover - that's a ton of infrastructure to replace. I see Verizon advertising their 4G network though, is their plan to roll it out little by little to select areas?

[imitchellg5]

Verizon's LTE rollout is actually pretty strong, it's live in 48 markets right now (mostly the largest NFL cities and airports). But then again, Verizon have been building up their LTE network for quite a while, it was originally activated in the first market (Seattle) for testing back in 2008.

We'll see how well they can maintain two totally different networks. I suspect that when they flip the switch for voice over LTE in 2012 that we'll have a lot of AT&T-style complaints.

[besson3c]

So, any guesses how long it will be before we see the LTE Verizon iPhone?

I'm assuming that Verizon will check your zip code so that they aren't pushing LTE phones in areas where there is no LTE coverage yet?

[Big Mac]

A lot of rumor sites are now predicting that there will soon be a hybrid GSM/CDMA iPhone, a single iPhone 5 so to speak for all markets. Qualcomm has the chipset for such a device, but I don't buy we'll ever see that sort of iPhone. That possibility has pretty much been eliminated by the release of the CDMA iPhone, which means that there are two separate model development paths for GSM and CDMA. Btw, that's very unlike Apple and its original strategy of having one iPhone model for all markets segmented only by storage capacity. I didn't think we'd see a Verizon iPhone unless and until such a hybrid model.

Anyway, if Apple is aggressive, then we'll see LTE support on the GSM and CDMA models next year. If Apple is more conservative like it was with 3G support, we may be two iPhone generations away from it. I guess a lot depends on how energy efficient the LTE chipsets prove to be. It makes sense in hindsight that Apple held back on 3G support on the original iPhone because it definitely does drain the battery faster than Edge - seems to me that this is true even when data isn't being used. If LTE is a battery hog Apple may hold off a generation for greater efficiency in future designs.

[besson3c]

Why will it take so long if LTE is considered prime-time and is being consumed as we speak?

I understand the question about the hybrid vs. separate phone issue, as I understand it the antenna needed a redesign for the Verizon iPhone, so perhaps it would be tough to design a hybrid antenna in addition to chipset? Apple loves to market their stuff as the best in the world, but I understand why some of you figure that it will take them that long to support the LTE network assuming it is substantially better than the current CDMA network?

[Big Mac]

The biggest factor is that Apple is conservative with its designs. It most often does not go after the bleeding edge of available technology, at least not in this modern Apple era. Based on the fact that the Verizon iPhone came out when it did, we know that no hybrid GSM-CDMA-LTE super iPhone is coming any time soon. It looks like they're on two shared yet different development tracks. As for LTE for either [GSM or CDMA model types], if Apple follows the same kind of release schedule it followed before, we won't see it until next year at the earliest. Apple will want a mature LTE network and mature (efficient, low power) LTE chipset before releasing an LTE iPhone.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

The biggest factor is that Apple is conservative with its designs. It most often does not go after the bleeding edge of available technology, at least not in this modern Apple era.

Reading that statement in a thread about the iPhone almost made my head explode.

iPhone was WAY ahead of what was even on the technological RADAR at the time it was introduced. After its demonstration in January 2007, RIM actually called bullshit (according to recently disclosed internal communiqués) and decided that what they were showing and claiming, especially in regard to battery life, simply wasn't possible at the time.

Apple compromises on features that they figure will be detrimental to the overall experience. In 2007, adding a UMTS chipset would have cut battery life considerably. Other manufacturers had UMTS modules, but they were either dumbphones or didn't have a 3.5" multitouch screen to support. Additionally, 3G coverage in the US - iPhone's home market - was marginal at the time.

LTE is now available in a bunch of airports and two handfuls of cities. Whoop-de-doo. Euro cell providers are claiming a full-scale 4G rollout in 2012/2013 here. That means it'll probably be useful in around 2015. Considering I regularly get 3 Mbit downloads via 3G on my iPhone 3GS, I really don't see pressure on Apple to incorporate battery-eating semi-completed chipset technology for day-after-tomorrow's infrastructure just yet.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

Considering that the Verizon iPhone 4 is CDMA and Verizon's "4G" technology is LTE, a GSM standard, there will be zero compatibility.

And UMTS, the 3G GSM standard, is W-CDMA.

Much like CISC vs RISC from the bad old days, everyone is taking the highlights of both for the newer standards.

Originally Posted by besson3c 

So, any guesses how long it will be before we see the LTE Verizon iPhone?

17 months - June 2012

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I'm assuming that Verizon will check your zip code so that they aren't pushing LTE phones in areas where there is no LTE coverage yet?

Because people never travel?

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Why will it take so long if LTE is considered prime-time and is being consumed as we speak?

There's still no voice standard on LTE (it will be VoIP since LTE is all-IP, but still not agreed on) and Apple has so far lagged the leading edge of radio standards by 12-18 months (on 3G, 3.6Mbps HSDPA, 7.2Mbps). I expect the June 2011 iPhone to be 21Mbps HSPA+, since that emerged in use about half a year ago.

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

iPhone was WAY ahead of what was even on the technological RADAR at the time it was introduced. After its demonstration in January 2007, RIM actually called bullshit (according to recently disclosed internal communiqués) and decided that what they were showing and claiming, especially in regard to battery life, simply wasn't possible at the time.

what? Are you talking about software? The iPhone battery life is in the back half of the pack. Not as bad as a 4G Evo, but way behind the Blackberries at every release. BBs still get days of battery life in real world use, while the iPhone users I know are charging up at least one during the workday. Apple was also behind RIM in implementing GPS and is still behind on BT features.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by mduell 

what? Are you talking about software? The iPhone battery life is in the back half of the pack. Not as bad as a 4G Evo, but way behind the Blackberries at every release. BBs still get days of battery life in real world use, while the iPhone users I know are charging up at least one during the workday. Apple was also behind RIM in implementing GPS and is still behind on BT features.

Um, I'm talking about the hardware necessary to DRIVE the software, and, you might have missed it, I was talking about 2007.

3.5" multi-touch screen, processor capable of running the OS and graphics, etc., while still supporting the functionality the other competitors were offering - the smarter ones of which hardly got several days of battery life in real-world use at the time.

Which hardware aspect of the iPhone, except for the missing 3G receiver, was NOT state-of-the-art or way BEYOND it at the time, pray tell?

RIM thought iPhone was impossible in 2007 | Electronista

RIM had a complete internal panic when Apple unveiled the iPhone in 2007, a former employee revealed this weekend. The BlackBerry maker is now known to have held multiple all-hands meetings on January 10 that year, a day after the iPhone was on stage, and to have made outlandish claims about its features. Apple was effectively accused of lying as it was supposedly impossible that a device could have such a large touchscreen but still get a usable lifespan away from a power outlet.

Do you even REMEMBER what the phonescape looked like in 2007?

I do.

[besson3c]

It looks like the wireless hotspot feature will cost another $20/month. Lame.

Perhaps an Android phone is in the cards for me after all.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Which hardware aspect of the iPhone, except for the missing 3G receiver, was NOT state-of-the-art or way BEYOND it at the time, pray tell?

Off the top of my head BT stack, battery life, and wifi antenna (range). And it was a 6 month preannouncement, so of course it was expected to be ahead of everything on the market at the time.

Do you even REMEMBER what the phonescape looked like in 2007?[/QUOTE]

Yes, I believe I was rocking a BB 8700.

Originally Posted by besson3c 

It looks like the wireless hotspot feature will cost another $20/month. Lame.

$20 for 2GB AKA still cheaper than the other guys.

[Big Mac]

besson, I honestly would recommend an Android phone for you. Unless you're really into iOS, that is. Android is less elegant but more powerful and certainly more open. I think it would also appeal to your geekier side moreso than iOS.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by mduell 

Off the top of my head BT stack, battery life, and wifi antenna (range). And it was a 6 month preannouncement, so of course it was expected to be ahead of everything on the market at the time.

It also didn't (and still doesn't) have wireless syncing of contacts. But the really big thing in 2007 was the complete lack of a public API for writing custom apps, at all. At the time, you were expected to write web pages using AJAX. It wasn't until the Android announcement that Apple actually changed their mind and started developing a real API in order to compete.

At the time, Engadget wrote an article claiming that the iPhone did not actually qualify as a smartphone.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by mduell 

$20 for 2GB AKA still cheaper than the other guys.

Not cheaper than Android, which you can root and setup tethering on without having to pay extra, right?

[mduell]

Sure if you don't care about the contract. You could jailbreak your iPhone to do the same.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by mduell 

Sure if you don't care about the contract. You could jailbreak your iPhone to do the same.

With Pdanet? The Best Way to Tether Your iPhone to Your Laptop (for Free)


Which phone is going to give you less hassles being jailbroken as far as breaking across releases? This isn't a leading question, it looks like jailbreaking will be in the cards for me with either phone (I still haven't committed to either).

[The Godfather]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

besson, I honestly would recommend an Android phone for you. Unless you're really into iOS, that is. Android is less elegant but more powerful and certainly more open. I think it would also appeal to your geekier side moreso than iOS.

However, by not releasing it under the GPL, Google has given "Tivoization" power to the cell phone manufacturers and carriers. What this means for you is that you can't upgrade your phone OS.

How's that?

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

It looks like the wireless hotspot feature will cost another $20/month. Lame.

Perhaps an Android phone is in the cards for me after all.

That's what it cost for every phone on Verizon, apart from the Pre Plus and Pixi Plus which have it for free. VZW make it hard to root any of the current Droid lineup apart from the Incredible.

[besson3c]

Ironically it looks like the iPhone + MyWi or PdaNet will be my best bet for free tethering.

AFAIK, it appears that the following is true:

- official tethering support with no hacks or apps needed costs extra on both networks for both Android and iPhone phones

- PDANet for Android phones allows for USB tethering without rooting the phone, but no WiFi hotspot. I think the HTC Droid Incredible supports WiFi so maybe a future update of PDANet will support this, but until then it looks like only one device can be tethered via USB (or slower Bluetooth) using PDANet

- Using MyWi or PDANet you can setup a free Wifi hotspot with your iPhone, but this requires jailbreaking

- Using the android-wifi-tether project you can setup Wifi Android hotspots on rooted phones


I'm not really seeing the downside to MyWi + a jailbroken iPhone, aside from having to be careful about not updating the iPhone until the jailbreaking and MyWi software have also been updated, am I missing something? Even with this necessary caution, it is still not a given that all Verizon/AT&T Android phones will even be upgradeable to Android 2.3, or even 2.2. I don't see the wisdom of a phone where the software will be potentially frozen in time at some point.

Is this accurate research?

[Big Mac]

1. There's the possibility jailbroken tethering apps won't work. I tried a couple of free ones and they didn't seem to have any effect;

2. Your carrier could catch you and charge you up the arse (seems pretty easy for them to do just by reading the client browser data).

3. Jailbreaks aren't guaranteed going forward. The iPhone Dev Team hasn't updated their blog in weeks, and while there has been talk that the team is waiting for iOS 4.3 before releasing a new JB, I'm a bit concerned about the lack updates. Apple's been getting better and better with security.

[imitchellg5]

4.3 is going to be very hard to jailbreak.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

1. There's the possibility jailbroken tethering apps won't work. I tried a couple of free ones and they didn't seem to have any effect;

2. Your carrier could catch you and charge you up the arse (seems pretty easy for them to do just by reading the client browser data).

3. Jailbreaks aren't guaranteed going forward. The iPhone Dev Team hasn't updated their blog in weeks, and while there has been talk that the team is waiting for iOS 4.3 before releasing a new JB, I'm a bit concerned about the lack updates. Apple's been getting better and better with security.

I figure that there are no guarntees that things won't break with android either as new apps aren't tested on older android versions that the carriers will leave you hanging with. Flawed reasoning?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

4.3 is going to be very hard to jailbreak.

Why?

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I figure that there are no guarntees that things won't break with android either as new apps aren't tested on older android versions that the carriers will leave you hanging with. Flawed reasoning?

True. With all that I've said, I definitely prefer iOS over Android. I just assumed that given your background as a more technical/coding/Unix type who appreciates getting into the guts of things, Android may be a better choice for you from that standpoint. The Android platform is fragmented, though, and I was very surprised when I started seeing that some phones get orphaned with older versions of the OS.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Why?

Uh, let me rephrase. iOS 4.3 will be very difficult to do an untethered jailbreak.

[besson3c]

A reasonable assumption, but I'm not really a phone person since I'm constantly parked in front of my computer, so something that "just works" is fine. Tethering and email/web access is all I care about, really

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

Uh, let me rephrase. iOS 4.3 will be very difficult to do an untethered jailbreak.

What is an untethered jailbreak?

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

What is an untethered jailbreak?

An untethered jailbreak is a jailbreak that only stays jailbroken as long as the phone is on or on standby. Rebooting will require you to reconnect to iTunes, restore the device, and re-jailbreak.

[besson3c]

What about 4.3 will make things so hard?

[The Godfather]

Because Verizon does not sell jailbreakable phones.
The iPod got an unbreakable OS eventually, so will the iPhone.

[besson3c]

Ahhhhh, so you think the software will have changed substantially enough to necessitate a whole new jailbreaking scheme?

[The Godfather]

By the number of iPhone 4 units flooding Craigslist, I expect that there will be people queueing around the block, and there will be a shortage of CDMA iPhones.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Ahhhhh, so you think the software will have changed substantially enough to necessitate a whole new jailbreaking scheme?

No, it already HAS changed enough. The jailbreak for the 4.3 beta is only tethered, and the dev team has been mum about a proper jailbreak. Generally when that happens it's not a good sign. Remember, Apple is actively working against jailbreaking when designing updates.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

No, it already HAS changed enough. The jailbreak for the 4.3 beta is only tethered, and the dev team has been mum about a proper jailbreak. Generally when that happens it's not a good sign. Remember, Apple is actively working against jailbreaking when designing updates.

4.21 is a tethered jailbreak too - no?

[King Bob On The Cob]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

No, it already HAS changed enough. The jailbreak for the 4.3 beta is only tethered, and the dev team has been mum about a proper jailbreak. Generally when that happens it's not a good sign. Remember, Apple is actively working against jailbreaking when designing updates.

Apple has never had an update out that wasn't jailbroken in some way or another. I don't see 4.3 being any different.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

4.21 is a tethered jailbreak too - no?

It depends on the device. For 3GS I think it is tethered and for iPhone 4 I don't think it is. I could be wrong though.

Originally Posted by King Bob On The Cob 

Apple has never had an update out that wasn't jailbroken in some way or another. I don't see 4.3 being any different.

Again, it depends on the device. For example, I had a third generation iPod touch when it was launched and it wasn't until last August that it was actually jailbreakable in ANY form.

[Big Mac]

Apple is becoming better and better at eliminating vulnerabilities that allow for jailbreaking and unlocking. Some on the iPhone Dev Team have hinted that they won't be releasing a new proper jailbreak until 4.3. The claim is that they don't want to waste whatever vulnerability they have in the pipeline on a temporary 4.2.x update and would rather dedicate it to 4.3. I'm not happy with the fact that the main Dev Team blog hasn't been updated in something like more than a month, though. We'll have to see what happens in the weeks after 4.3 comes out.

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

It depends on the device. For 3GS I think it is tethered and for iPhone 4 I don't think it is. I could be wrong though.

Not quite. The 3GS that had the "old boot ROM" and the 3G are untethered permanently because of the flaw in the boot rom. 3GSs with the new boot rom and the the 4 are tethered at this point.

[King Bob On The Cob]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

It depends on the device. For 3GS I think it is tethered and for iPhone 4 I don't think it is. I could be wrong though.

Again, it depends on the device. For example, I had a third generation iPod touch when it was launched and it wasn't until last August that it was actually jailbreakable in ANY form.

Well, it was jailbroken, but geohot sat on the jailbreak for a very long time.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

It depends on the device. For 3GS I think it is tethered and for iPhone 4 I don't think it is. I could be wrong though.

Again, it depends on the device. For example, I had a third generation iPod touch when it was launched and it wasn't until last August that it was actually jailbreakable in ANY form.

You are, at least according to this (I finally remember where I read this

Download Intelliborn Products

iPhone/iPad/iPod Touch users of 4.2.1
Use redsn0w on Windows or Mac released November 25, 2010. This works great for iPhone 3G,early editions of 3GS. For iPhone 4, iPad, and later models of iPhone 3GS, this jailbreak will be "tethered", which means you will have to be connected to a PC to boot your iDevice. The community is working on an "untethered" jailbreak.

I successfully jailbroke my iPod Touch, but I haven't tried powering it off since.

[besson3c]

I'm leaning very strongly towards the AT&T iPhone and just staying on iOS 4.2.1.

Like I said, There seems to be no guarantees that I'll get updates at all or updates that will continue to support the tethering hacks on either Android or iPhone phones, the entry level AT&T family plans are a little cheaper than the Verizon plans, plus I won't have to deal with calls interrupting my internet stuff, the GSM phone will be better internationally, and I much prefer the AT&T website to the Verizon site for making changes and finding information. I understand that Verizon coverage is a little better, but oddly enough I don't much care if I get a dropped call or missed or something here and there, I've been putting up with problems for a while with my current Verizon phone, and to me this phone is more useful as a portable internet device than an actual phone. Plus, there is always Skype which I use quite frequently.

I like the idea that the Android rooting is just a modified version of the open kernel, but the fact that AT&T is generally a year behind the latest Android releases and the whole software upgrade matrix (and knowing when/if phones will be upgradeable, if at all) is so messed up on both carriers is a turn off.

I may not care about the features in 4.3+ or Android 2.2/2.3+ anyway.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Apple is becoming better and better at eliminating vulnerabilities that allow for jailbreaking and unlocking.

Nicely phrased.

It's worth expounding on this: Apple isn't blocking jailbreaks out of pure maliciousness.

That a jailbreak is possible by definition constitutes a security problem for the platform. In an always-on networked mobile device, having a remote hack that can be activated simply by visiting a scripted web page (as was the case with at least one notorious jailbreak) is a security *nightmare*.

Apple must, in the interest of the platform and its users, do everything they can to plug these vulnerabilities.

[The Godfather]

Coming to a Wikileak sooner or later: the only doors left open will be for the KGB, CIA, FBI, the Indian government, China's Communist Party, Netanyahu, Etc.