The Verizon iPhone 4 | Hacker News Reader

The Verizon iPhone 4

daringfireball.net

89 pointstortilla54 comments

> it could be that the GSM iPhones have hardware or driver problems that the CDMA iPhone 4 does not. But, alas for AT&T, GSM iPhone users around the world do not share in the problems of GSM iPhone users in the United States.

Certainly not true. Writing from Europe: I've had all the iPhone 4 dropped call problems in the middle of the city whenever I've forgotten how to "safely" hold the phone until I've bought the bumper case. My provider here is T Mobile.

The problem here is not related to the "death-grip." The problems with AT&T's network affect all versions of the iPhone, not just the iPhone 4.

As a Canadian, I never get to see how well the AT&T data speeds are on an iPhone (the prices are insane for roaming), but on the times where I've needed to do voice calls, the AT&T experience is—at best—not great. I don't have that problem here in Canada.

I haven’t seen any widespread coverage about problems with the iPhone in Germany.

I consider it natural to the way of the coverage in German speaking countries. Don't forget that it was "old news" for Europe since iPhones 4 were first available in the U.S. I own the iPhone 4 and I can easily repeat the "death grip" whenever I want. However I also almost never see anybody using the 4 without the bumper case.

Complaints about the iPhone (all iPhones, not just 4) in the US went way beyond the death grip, real or imagined.

Let me guess: you don't own iPhone 4 and even haven't tried to borrow one and try it in common urban circumstances?

Why don't you believe the guy who reports his own Eropean experiences? I just claim that the "death grip" is simply not the AT&T issue but the real iPhone 4 issue.

I do have an iphone 4 and live in germany, too, and have not once experienced a dropped call, no matter how hard I actually tried to do the "death grip".

UK based Cambridge Technology Centre was able to repeat the death grip too:

http://www.electronicsweekly.com/Articles/2010/07/30/49184/c...

It is dependent on location, my experience is that in more urban areas the problems are more prominent, you probably live in some small city or a city with less providers or mobile phone users, or you haven't tried it in the bigger and denser located buildings. I can repeat the problems in the center of the city easily, but not so easy at my home. And it's not that I'm wasting time trying to repeat it -- it just happens if I hold it without the bumper case.

Once again: Death grip is the real "feature" of iPhone 4 when 3G is used. And it's the iPhone 4 problem, not the AT&T problem.

I had bad service in NC (just south of Raleigh, near Fort Bragg), but was astonished to find that moving to Tampa made my service worse. I drop calls, can hardly hear, and lose data signal constantly. I'm ready to switch, even though I just bought a brand new iPhone 4 a few months ago.

My only concern is this - why buy an iPhone 4 on Verizon when the next model is due in a few months? Will be interesting to see if this pisses people off.

My only concern is this - why buy an iPhone 4 on Verizon when the next model is due in a few months? Will be interesting to see if this pisses people off.

That’s one of the downsides of having such a simple product line. Who (except for a tiny minority) even knows when HTC or Samsung release a new phone? The announcement of a new iPhone makes headlines and it’s also introduced as a replacement, not just another different model. (Technology progresses. Blaming any tech company for introducing a newer, better and cheaper model is stupid. A phone you buy today will be just as good in three years.)

My guess would be that people will not be very pissed. There will be lame jokes but not much outrage. I think that Apple will go for a two-year rhythm when it comes to major iPhone updates and that the next iPhone will consequently mostly receive a speed and RAM bump, maybe some nice software features and some cool hardware thing (NFC?) and that the case and other specs will stay the same. (Except for changing the case I don’t even know what they could conceivably do to make this a major update.) Current iPhones would obviously equally benefit from software updates (well, mostly – hopefully).

Apple will definitely continue to sell the current iPhone even after the next model has been introduced – just like they are still selling the 3GS now.

You're probably right, but I distinctly remember buying my first Apple product, which was a 3G. I just returned from Afghanistan and was stoked to have an iPhone. 31 days later (1 day post-return option), the 3GS came out and I watched with horror as all of my friends had a much better phone than I bought just weeks prior.

I got over it, but I learned that I had to keep an eye on release cycles to avoid having that happen again. I believe many Verizon iPhone users will learn the same thing.

AT&T has horrible service on MacDill AFB; they have impeccable coverage in the rest of the Tampa Bay area except the exact middle of the 275 bridge to Pinellas. I'm not sure how other carriers do on MacDill.

I can't help but feel like not having data while using voice would be a bigger annoyance to me than Gruber found it. I often look up maps while on the phone with someone. Also losing wi-fi during a call could be frustrating.

I completely agree. I use data fairly regularly when I'm on the phone. That is enough of a factor for me that I don't think I could switch until it gets resolved with Verizon's network updates.

WiFi and calls work simultaneously, it's only 2G/3G data that's affected.

I think that yesiamahuman meant the hotspot tethering functionality by 'WiFi.'

Think it's interesting that John Gruber got a review device provided by Apple. I don't recall them ever really reaching out to bloggers in the past.

I wonder if Gizmodo got one?

It seems that a bunch of bloggers received pre-release Verizon iPhones for review. It's probably because expectations have already been set for the iPhone 4 and Apple doesn't need to worry about reviews negatively affecting initial sales.

It's not often that you see two reviews for essentially identical products from the same source. This was a pretty smart move by Apple.

http://techcrunch.com/2011/02/02/verizon-iphone-review/

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/03/technology/personaltech/03...

http://www.wired.com/reviews/2011/02/verizon-iphone/

http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/02/verizon-iphone-review/

MG Siegler over at TechCrunch did. He just published his review, which was pretty much the same as John's. But Gizmodo... ha. That'll be the day!

No problem, but she's a he.

Could it perhaps have been supplied by Verizon instead? They'd be the ones with the most to gain right now in terms of PR - get all the bloggers to talk about how much better the network is since the hardware itself is a non-story (which is exactly what the ones I've read have said so far).

UPDATE: The footnote in Gruber's article actually says "supplied by Apple" so... guess not. :)

Apple invited Gruber as press to the iPhone 4 Antennagate conference last year. He was also invited to the opening of the Philly Apple Store. Apple isn't the only one reaching out to Gruber — Google sent him a Nexus S for review as well (which I don't think he ever got around to writing).

But Grubber was not invited to the Verizon iPhone announcement. https://twitter.com/gruber/status/24937327675580416

That was Verizon's event and they sent out the invites.

Which was actually an Apple Event in disguise. Gizmodo, Ryan Block and Leo Laporte were not invited.

Macworld wasn't invited to Verizon's iPhone event too.

My (uneducated) guess is that Verizon handled the event, but Apple passed along a blacklist to Verizon.

Apple has warmed to Gruber in the last year. One of Steve Jobs' replies to a customer email quoted him directly and said that he was "very insightful"

http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/10/steve-jobs-responds-to-ipho...

"and positive" don't forget that ;)

I'm curious about the wifi tethering. Ad-hoc wifi networks created on a Mac are only WEP-"protected"; I wonder if the iPhone's is a true WPA(2) access point. I wouldn't be comfortable walking around with an effectively wide-open WEP AP attached to my mobile data connection.

I also wouldn't be too presumptuous about getting the AP feature in previous hardware, if it is a true access point - 'master' mode isn't supported by all wifi hardware, although it may well purely be a firmware ("baseband") issue. I don't expect to get the feature on my old iPhone 3G, though it would be a nice bonus on the iPad.

  Verizon sells phones. They will continue to sell phones. They will continue to own and push (and control) the Droid brand. The iPhone, though, is a phone they don’t need to own, push, or control. Apple will sell it for them. Verizon just needs to sell their core competency: cellular networking.

That it's exactly what verizon does not want

Why? What is your reasoning?

Traditionally (and to this day) mobile connection providers don’t want to become ‘mere’ data pipes, as it becomes difficult to differentiate yourself from competitors. To this end the mobile companies have been furiously ‘value-adding’ for the past 15 years (given a certain definition of value). In the UK at least this has lead to operator branded phones, an operator defined catalogue of phones available to buy, operator ‘enhanced’ phone firmware, operator apps, highstreet operator-run shops and plenty more failed projects including music stores, walled content gardens, etc etc.

At least Verizon is well-poised to be the one carrier that truly benefits from the move being "mere pipes", simply because they have long been the US carrier with the "best" coverage and reliability.

I’m not USian so I have no direct experience, but the reviews of the Verizon iPhone4 are showing about half the upload and two thirds the download speeds that users are getting on AT&T. Is AT&T’s coverage really bad enough to warrant that drop in speed?

In SF and NY? (And some other major cities) Yes, yes it is.

Coverage is one aspect and congestion is another.

Although AT&T advertizes itself as reaching 99% of the US population, the signal does not seem to penetrate buildings, basements etc. as well as Verizon's does.

Coming to congestion,the iPhone led to heavy 2G and 3G usage by subscribers and AT&T's network in highly dense areas really struggles badly with the data congestion.

The above applies to voice calls too.

The reasoning is that what would happen if and when AT&T's (or another carrier's) service becomes the same or better than Verizon's? They would lose ALL their edge right at that moment.

They would want to differentiate themselves by having exclusive phones, apps, services etc. that they can bilk money from. Though I think carriers/OEMs of both phones and computers can add more value by NOT shipping the crapware, it's almost universally bad and crash prone.

I think AT&T will be hard hit by the lack of iPhone exclusivity. Their Android offerings suck(perhaps intentionally) and their network has been getting real bad press over the past few years compared to even Tmobile or Sprint(which do have some very nice Android options).

What I wonder is if Verizon will continue with their massive Android advertising, without it Android's U.S. numbers might slow down. It is very interesting that Motorola's best new Android phone, the Atrix, is an ATT exclusive.

Fun times!

They probably will. AT&T seemed to spend a lot of time and effort promoting other non-iPhones. The people who want iPhones are probably already sold on them. Apple is also advertising it, too. The networks likely still feel a need to reach out to the people who don't care about the hardware itself and just want the services they offer, so they can use the other phones for that purpose.

I care very much about the hardware I use, I just don't care very much for the iPhone hardware. Your phrasing makes it seem like all those ruffians that don't care about hardware are relegated to the Android bin. In practice, I would say those that care about their hardware are more likely to choose an Android phone as they actually have a choice over their phone and its hardware, not to mention the better customization of their phone if they're into that sort of thing.

From an article I read a few weeks ago, the Atrix is just the name of the version they're selling AT&T, while the Bionic is the name of the version they're selling Verizon. One has more RAM, the other has more ROM, and the Verizon version supports LTE, but otherwise the same phone...

The media, desktop and laptop docks (and accompanying settop & webtop software) appear to be exclusive to the Atrix version.

Verizon advertises the Droid, not Android. And the Droid brand belongs to Verizon.

The fact that "Android" and "Droid" are becoming synonymous for many people is very, very good for Verizon.

The fact that "Android" and "Droid" are becoming synonymous for many people is very, very good for Verizon.

Is it? It seems to me that people (correctly) see them as equivalent so what's the value in owning the "Droid" trademark?

"I want a Droid."

"Come to T-Mobile, we have Androids!"

"OK!"

Interestingly enough, I think Verizon is paying Lucasfilm trademark rights for Droid; they don't actually own it. Not being pedantic, I just think it's interesting.

Consumer confusion between "Droid" and "Android" goes deep. I developed an Android app version of an existing iOS app, and the client wanted the splash screen & all marketing materials to refer to it as the "Droid" version. I explained to them that Droid is a trademark of Lucasfilm licensed to only Verizon, and both Lucasfilm and Verizon would probably not like to see it appearing on any old Android handset running the app. The designer said I was being needlessly pedantic and refused -- "Droid" was aesthetically more pleasing -- and the marketing people thought "Droid" was more commonly used.

I had to escalate it to the top to get them to drop it. And they still think I was wrong.

I'd love to see whether the average person realizes that Droid and Android aren't the same thing. It always seemed like a huge concession for Google to let Verizon essentially own the public face of Android, but I guess they were feeling the pressure when they made that call...

Can Verizon label a non-Android phone as a Droid?

Droid is a trademark, owned my Lucasfilm, for which verizon pays licensing rights.

It would be up to the terms of the licensing agreement, but it is possible.

Probably not. While the Droid mark is a distinct trade mark, it seems to me that Google would have a compelling argument that calling a non-Android Droid would lead to confusion amongst consumers.

Additionally, although unlikely, it may be the case that the licence Verizon has been granted by Lucasfilm relates only to Android phones. As the licence agreement is not public, it's difficult to know whether this is the case or not.

I had a 1st gen iPhone the day they came out. Loved that phone. Sadly I couldn't stand AT&T's customer service. So I went to verizon and bought a Droid. Loved that phone too, but anymore I just want a iPhone again. I miss having my easy integration with my contacts, iTunes, and iPhoto

Anyways I will be waiting till this summer for when the next generation supposedly comes out.

In the next few days we'll find out if the problems were with the network, with the phone, or both.

Nope. iPhones have for a long time now been available on tons of carriers all over the world. The phone's fine (though not great).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com