Ok judge for yourself, but I think this is rumor-mongering at its worst.
::this comes from macrumors.com

I think that anyone that high up in Apple would trigger a Google result.

Uhh, for starters, Apple has never been a service based company...

TutAnGeek wrote:


.mac is a service..

They also founded Applelink, which we now know as AOL. With a company they started becoming that big, you would think that they are capable of making another big company, such as a cell phone provider. I do think, though, that if they created another company or division like that, they would keep it forever.


Why I edited :: Spelling error.

Post edited by: whitlock, at: 2004/12/29 12:22

<[censored] more capital to get off the ground than .Mac, and Applelink (Applelink was never national, was it?). .Mac meant some new code and say, 100 new servers at a cost of $1,500 each to them. A national cell phone provider would require an imense, diversified infrastructure across the US. Simply the land rights for each tower may cost $1,500, not to mention the cost of the equipment itself, and then the infrastucture to connect them all. And you're looking at thousands of towers to get a truly "cellphone users a full, personal communications and information environment."

The author addresses this, saying that they will start off using another network as its backbone. That's got to be a lot of money if they will completely subsidize the roaming costs to make their product fiscally competitive.

Apple does not have enough capital to start being it's own company so it has to operate as a CLEC. Virgin operates through other networks and also I heard Time Warner Cable was going to do a deal with Sprint (Rumor) in the Kansas City area to provide cell phone services.

Everyone wants a piece of the piece of the pie. And also, on December 28th, it's a Spanish tradition to post fake news. I'd take that into mind as well.

Apple creates services that promote the use of their products. .Mac sells macs, the iTunes music store sells iPod.

.Mac and iTMS were created to fill a void because nothing like them existed before. Cellular networks already exist and work well (actually they are light years behind but that's another discussion). Nokia, Sony-Ericsson, Motorola, Panasonic, LG, etc etc don't own networks, and Tmobile Cingular Verizon, etc etc don't make handsets. If rumors of the Apple iPhone are correct it wouldn't make any sense to create a national network around it just to get people to buy it.

However, creating a new wireless service based on existing towers is EXTREMELY easy if you are willing to make the financial concessions. Virgin Wireless simply rebrands and sells Sprint service. Boost Wireless was an entirely new brand created to target teens that ran on the Nextel network. I'm sure there are more examples, but I can't think of any off the top of my head. All this, and I still say that doing it would be stupid given the cosolidation happening across the industry at this time
Cingular+ATT & Nextel+Sprint & behemoth Verizon

Oh and for those of you on Sextel (Sprint Nextel) or Verizon, all signs point to incompatibility with the iPhone. GSM will, more likey than not, be the wireless standard that Apple will use for the iPhone. That means it will be compatible with Tmobile and Cingular ATT in the states, and almost every single wireless network around the world. I just hope that Apple doesn't allow someone with lots of money (Cingular) to buy exclusive rights to the phone like moto did with the RAZR. I'm a Tmo customer and wasn't all too happy about that .

I prefer CDMA as opposed to GSM. Even though I work for a providor that uses GSM, I still prefer CDMA. It *just works, have clear signal, and don't worry about dropping calls. Works great with my Treo as well.


*Why I edited: 'jsut' is not a word, but 'just' is

Post edited by: whitlock, at: 2004/12/30 01:01