Verizon Wireless opens network to "Any Apps, Any Device" in 2008
By Thomas Ricker 
posted November 27th 2007 7:59AM
posted November 27th 2007 7:59AM
By the end of 2008, Verizon Wireless will open their network to any device which meets a "minimum technical standard." What that standard is, exactly, VZW isn't saying yet -- that will come in "early 2008." So any device (including applications) tested and certified in VZW's new $20 Million test lab is fair game for use on their wireless network. In other words, Verizon becomes the data pipe, and nothing more for these new "bring-your-own" customers. It's too early to say if this is a watershed moment or not. Verizon certainly thinks so with Lowell McAdam, Verizon Wireless president and chief executive officer, calling it, "a transformation point in the 20-year history of mass market wireless devices." As usual, the devil (certification fees, turnaround times for testing, those magical minimum technical standards, etc.) might be in the details.P.S. In case you're wondering, Verizon is currently not a member of Android's Open Handset Alliance.
Update: More from Verizon on this. Dick Lynch, Verizon's CTO says, "If someone has the technical capability of building something in their basement on a breadboard ... have at it," which should quickly open the market to small-scale device companies. Also of note, only CDMA devices will be supported (naturally) and pricing should be "competitive."
my money is on Adroid, what else would it be?
My money is maybe Nokia steps in. They have been making unlocked phones for a while. Why not make some CDMA goodness? Nothing like a nice unlocked N95 or E90. I would EASILY drop 1k for a E90 so i could use The Verizon Network with EVDO rev. A and TV?!? Match made in heaven really. Nokia makes gsm phones because it is the world standard not just for cell phones but the world standard for UNLOCKED cell phones. Everyone that knows anything about Cell phone technology knows that CDMA is the BETTER technology, but it is less used. So maybe Nokia will jump on board... I hope so at least!
sprint has started unlocking phones in california or they are going to and they're gonna start in other states in the middle of 2008 most likely.
Are we yanks finally moving towards what the Europeans have had for years? Once someone brings the details to light and if it turns out Verizon is making this offer as good as it sounds I'll join their network on principle.
We've had this for years, too. You just had to use a GSM provider. But it's clear that they're doing this because Sprint is, too. Definitely a good move, IMHO. Start using R-UIM cards, and the awesomeness will be complete!
thank you erwos. You see it my way. I've been saying, start using R-UIM!! Then you'll have iphones on sprint and verizon. Imagine that! I also heard that sprint is considering R-UIM cards.
Holy hell, their afraid, THEIR AFRAID!!!
whose afrayed?
Their != They're
This has been a recording.
Maybe 'their afrayed?'
So, any device that Verizon has tested will be allowed on their network? I'm pretty sure thats how it works now...
they're probably gonna do what sprint announced. You find an unlocked CDMA phone, BOOM its on the network. They will probably unlock their phones too like sprint.
While I welcome this with open arms, im wondering what type of "minimum technical standard." they are refering too. I have a feeling its going to be something like "if we can take your phone, load our UI and software then sure!" Although, it may be nice to snag a sprint phone and use it on VZW or possibly import a korean phone too
Except... umm... Qualcom owns a ton of the patents to CDMA technology... so yes... any device... assuming they can afford to work with Qualcom.
Damn... I wish this was ATT announcing this...
AT&T doesn't need to announce this. You can already pop your AT&T SIM card into any unlocked GSM phone and it'll work.
I was being sacrastic... apparently the sarcasm tags don't work on this site!
Is Verizon signaling an eventual (nearterm) end to phone subsidies?
And will the other carriers fall over themselves to follow?
Without subsidies the carrier profits rise or, more importantly to endusers, the carriers' plans SHOULD fall (albeit with somewhat higher phone costs).
The phone manufacturers may not be happy about this however.
Capitalism 101: It's how we got here in the first place.
Only the nerds (us) care about the lock-in required by carrier subsidies. Joe Consumer just wants a clamshell device that comes free with their commitment. If VZW quits selling subsidized handsets they'll immediately begin plummeting to the bottom of the "New Subscriber Growth" segment (historically one of their strongest). Spend an afternoon in your local cellular store and count the number of consumers that a.) come in asking about ways to avoid carrier subsidies because they want their device to travel to other networks, and then count the number that b.) come in asking which phones are free.
It's not that different than that now. You go get any unlocked, unsubsidized GSM device (quad-band) and throw your SIM card in it here, T-Mobile or AT&T doesn't care. Take their free one, use it as a back, and sign the shortest contract available. They don't have a problem with it.
How easy is it to put devices on Verizon's CDMA network? I mean, it's not like finding an unlocked device and throwing your SIM card in...
You've a.) gotta have an unlocked CDMA device, that b.) functions on their spectrum and c.) is registered by them (tying it to their account. That seems like a serious bottleneck, and that prior to their "Any Device" lab process.
This smells like a PR campaign rather than a practical use. Not like you're going to be importing the new hotness from Europe to use on it...
Could be for importing the new hotness from Korea, maybe? I could see a Verizon-supported "tested imports" store. Maybe. No, never mind, it's just my dreams.
Well, there are not a lot of devices now but maybe this move will provide some incentive for more to appear...
@ Rollins
Only SK Telecom would be cross compatible. The other providers (KT and LG) function on the 1700 MHZ bandwidth, unavailable to Verizon Wireless in America. SK Telecom is 800 only (VZW is 800/1900) which means that there are plenty of places where your device wouldn't work (Norfolk, Richmond, Milwaukee, Miami, Orlando, Jacksonville, Chicago, etc.).
Verizon's not telling us that what they're hoping is to create an industry, not piggyback off an existing one like we're thinking. We'll see these products well after the OHA vaporware ships.
if it's not gonna work in Chicago, NO DEAL. I'm a chicagoan and:
CHICAGO PWNS
This will likely coincide with their move to LTE for 4G
http://www.engadget.com/2007/09/21/verizon-dumps-cdma-for-gsm-based-lte-in-4g-networks/
I agree, though I'm still not sure if their move to LTE signals an eventual move to GSM. Does anyone know? Is it even possible to use LTE on a CDMA network?
@jjd:
It hasn't been finalized yet, but as it stands LTE will be using an entirely different air interface than CDMA, and will require new phones. If and when Verizon deploys LTE, they'll likely be selling dual-mode LTE/CDMA phones for quite a while.
As of right now, the built-in GPS on my Blackberry 8830 doesn't meet their "minimum technical standard" so it has been disabled by them. There is probably very little hope that anything at all will change in 2008.
and by "minimum technical standard" they mean it can't run VZ Navigator
Honestly, I'd be happy enough if this just meant I wouldn't have to deal with Verizon's BS generic UI. Hell, maybe we can even get a little bluetooth functionality out of the deal, huh?
Verizon nears the NON Suckage level.
They still have a ways to go, but they are doing it..
Now, about getting me some damn FIOS......
As was said. The devil is in the details. Verizon wouldn't be doing anything that doesn't make them a lot of money. I am very skeptical about this being "good news". I am just waiting for the other shoe to fall. I am a Verizon customer, both land and cell, and know firsthand just how little they care about the customers.
1. You can thank Apple and Google for this change of heart.
2. No one knows what VZW will approve (or how long it will take).
3. Despite the PR, they have to be pissed about not taking the iPhone
Apple? Is that the company that agreed to lock its phone to a specific network basically everywhere it sells them?
Are we talking about the same thing here?
I guess in a round about way you could thank apple. I agree that them locking the iPhone on AT&T brought all of these things that have been going on for years into the lime light. It just took "the hot new device" for people to start caring about it. There were people in congress pointing out that the iphone wouldn't work without AT&T service like it was some kind of revelation. When that started to lead to talk about "cellphone bill of rights" and greater regulation you started seeing Verizon taking a lot of these steps to cut things off at the pass.
Apple has played a fairly big role in bringing to light DRM-related issues. Although locking handsets to specific carriers isn't DRM per se, it follows along the same ideals of the big corporations locking our products down, making it nearly impossible for us to use them as openly or as freely as we would like. Stevie wrote a big letter to the public about his views on DRM and the future of open sourced music, and weeks later, iTunes Plus was released (DRM-free file downloads on iTunes). Apple spat in the face of NBC when they demanded higher pricing on television episodes and stricter DRM protection on their content (and subsequently, NBC left iTunes).
Although the iPhone is a great example of what carriers should NOT be doing with their handsets (carrier-specific locking), I don't really think Apple had much of a choice. There is *no way* AT&T (or any other provider) would've accepted a partnership with Apple without exclusivity. It's a necessary evil if you're looking to launch a potentially-huge handset like the iPhone. Based on Apple's track record, if it were plausible, I whole heartedly believe Apple would've released the iPhone carrier-free. Unfortunately, without a partnership with AT&T, Apple probably wouldn't have been able to garner the success needed to launch the product.
Verizon is a company that is so obsessed with restricting their handsets (look at their non-smartphone devices nowadays, laden with Verizon logos, stripped bluetooth profiles and the infamous sub-par standardized "RED" interface). They never would've taken on the iPhone, simply because Apple and Verizon wouldn't have agreed on the terms of the device, Verizon wouldn't have given up everything that it has come to financially rely on (BREW contracts from app developers, etc...) and hand over almost total-device-control to Apple. I doubt we'll see much of anything come from this "watershed moment."
Yeah, I'm wondering where my FIOS is as well... My buddy, who lives about three blocks away has had it available to him for almost a year now and I still can't get it....
An open CDMA network in the US?
Holy shit. I came before I could get my pants off.
If this means R-UIM, I will cum again.
Holy shit.
I bought the Voyager because I knew there would be no dropped calls and voice mail would arrive in a timely manner. VZ is hands down the best service in NYC. AT&T was always dropping calls, delayed voice mail and no service signal on my 14 days using an iPhone. I used to be with Sprint and they were dreadful... tried Helio and they sell the ocean with NO software sync.. are so bad they keep your money... even when you return a device 15 days into the 30 day trial. September 24th the Ocean was returned to them and still no money or even an email confirming a credit will be applied... they keep losing my info. Helio the company that behaves like it's a bankrupt.
So keep complaining about VZ, I do but remember you could be with scum like Helio and dropped call hell with AT&T and Sprint.
Verizon at least is making a step in the right direction.
P.S.
Verizon like Apple is in the business of making money. What's good for Apple is good for Verizon? Yet I hear very few complaints about Apple's closed system. After the new iMac and Leopard please don't let anyone comment on the beauty of great design compared to Verizon.
I agree with other posters about Verizon trying to out run any legislation that could come their way.
The other the thing is that Verizon has been talking about going to LTE a GSM standard. If they are thinking about going this route you want to change the corporate culture now rather then later. Or they are prepping for Google if they win the 700mhz auction. Because this is the route the Google is probably going to go, and Verizon better be ready or start losing to a another company that wants Verizon's money
So can i bring a unlocked GSM phone to Verizon, or will they stick with CDMA?
VZW is an evil, evil company. Whatever this is, my guess is it's not good. I was a VZW customer since 1998 and switched because of their exorbitant data charges. I just can't see them opening anything up that they can't charge huge amounts of money for and control from end to end.
Who knows, maybe I'm wrong...
Verizon, the company that charges to download a ring-tone. The company that blocks GPS in a cell phone.
Did Verizon get religion and begin thinking of the customer?? Not a chance. this is both an effort to delay/stop Open Network legislation and to create yet another cash flow opportunity. If they get to test and approve the applications/devices, they will build in a tariff for using the device. Remember, Ma Bell made millions on $0.10 phone calls; Verizon will tack on a fee for every device and - most likely - every transaction. "It's my pipes" as SBC CEO once said.
I had V for land,cable and cell but they never delivered the integrated bill with discounts so I dropped all of it. Now have ATT GSM as my only phone. (My house is wired to transfer cell signals to regular house phones.)
Verizon is still a monopoly mindset and it will take legislation to foce them to change.
R C G
Exactly. This is just another way for VZW's Dyson-grade money vacuum to go into a new market. How much will "certification" cost? $20 Million test labs have to justify their existence, you know. Does anyone think for one minute that the API and developer tools will be free? Does anyone think that there won't be some Qualcom patent license that will need to be obtained?
This reminds me of electric power deregulation. It was sold to everyone as "open market" meaning that anyone with a Honda generator could start selling power. What we ended up with is more of the same old thing, but much worse.
This is a piece of PR masterwork from the folks at Verizon. For those who have been following the Open Platform debate (an initiative to require an open platform for interconnection of any devices/applications on a small piece of the upcoming 700MHz band that's going to be auctioned in January), you know that Verizon has been 100% against the idea. Verizon has been so entirely against the idea that they contacted the Chairman of the FCC asking that he kill it while, at the same time, they sued the FCC to prevent open platform requirements from going through.
Verizon, in a nutshell, hates the idea of an open platform for the interconnection of devices and applications -- to the point that the FCC Chairman called me and Harold Feld into his office to attempt to get the Public Interest Spectrum Coalition to back off on our open platform demands.
So what's this news really about? Basically, Verizon wants to be able to charge customers (at a price and rate still to be set) to access the services and applications they want on the devices they own. Verizon is, attempting to turn the applications you have bought and paid for (or downloaded for free if you're using free open source software) into commodity so that they can charge you a second time to access them via the Verizon network. In essence, Verizon is adding a corporate tax that goes straight into their coffers for the so-called "privilege" to run the services and applications you want, on the devices you've already bought and paid for. On a digital communications network, data is data is data -- the network doesn't care if the packet is voice, video, text, or any other media -- an open platform should require that data is treated the same way as it is on a DSL line. The idea that Verizon would be able to differentiate among services (and charge users a second time to access an "open platform") is ridiculous. Yet without some sort of rule to stop this form of corporate malfeasance, it's unlikely that we'll ever see cellular DSL-esque services from Verizon.
However this plays out, it's quite likely that Verizon will now be going after the C-band in the January 2008 spectrum auction. Between this and the Android announcement by Google, we could see a fairly interesting bidding war between the two.
You make it sound like Verizon is the only carrier trying to curb the pending legislation. All the major carriers are doing everything possible. Its not just big bad Verizon. When it comes to cell providors you must pick the lesser of the evils. Bash Verizon all you want but give equal time to the other horrible carriers such as AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint & Alltel with their weasly tactics.
A very good point. Telecom incumbents have been engaging in anti-competitive, anti-consumer behavior for years (and in the case of AT&T, decades and decades). I think if you take a look at my public statements you'll see that I've fought AT&T on numerous occasions (relatively recently over their state video franchising maneuver in Illinois). In this case, I question Verizon specifically because they are the ones who've come out with a public position that is seemingly quite at odds with their inside the beltway behavior. If any of the other carriers were doing likewise, I'd be commenting on them as well.
Screw waiting for Verizon to join in with Android, Ill just buy an unlocked Android phone and use it on Verizon.
Duh!
This sounds ... err "smells" ... like nothing more than Verizon's attempt to deal with Android - and within the confines of its own increasingly marginalized network. More and more, they seem to be caught reacting rather than moving forward.
This announcement dovetails nicely with Sprint's move to allow people to unlock their phones to take to another carrier.