Verizon opens up about "Any Apps, Any Device"

We still don't know what happened in the 700MHz auction, but Verizon's going full steam ahead with its open-network policy, holding a press conference today to detail the "Any Apps, Any Device" plan announced back in November. Things should get rolling retail-style by the second half of the year, and it looks like all hardware manufacturers have to do is get their devices certified by Verizon, which characterized the technical requirements as being only slightly stricter than industry standards -- the goal is to allow access to the network without causing problems, but other than that there aren't any UI rules or anything like that. Peace out, BREW. Only FCC-approved devices will be taken in for testing, and there's a fee for certification, but in return manufacturers are promised a four-week turnaround (eight weeks for the "best practices" cert), with mandatory re-testing every 36 months. As far as apps go, it's a free for all -- customers can do as they wish. Verizon said that the open policy will still be in force when LTE rolls out -- the big push into EV-DO was a winning bet, so it's going to try and be aggressive with 4G as well. The best part? A new flat-rate, multi-device service plan is being considered that would allow all your mobile devices to connect for the price of a single subscription. All in all, a surprising set of announcements for Big Red -- in one fell swoop, it's gone from the most locked-down carrier being at least on par with the GSM networks, and potentially even more flexible if these pricing plans actually pan out. Hmmm, is that a mad rush of Android devs we hear?

[Jeff @ Mar 19th 2008 3:30PM]

Forgive my ignorance, however does this mean iPhone on Verizon?

[James @ Mar 19th 2008 3:36PM]

nope only cdma devices

[Andrew @ Mar 19th 2008 3:36PM]

doesn't appear so.

[snowenloe @ Mar 19th 2008 3:42PM]

No iPhone as of yet. Isn't AT&T moving towards LTE as well? If so I would think that one day we would see the iPhone on Verizons network. Even if AT&T weren't heading in the same direction, Apple only has a five year exclusive commitment I believe. I'm assuming after the five years is up, it's on for the rest of the carriers.

[Jeff @ Mar 19th 2008 3:43PM]

Rats...

and double Rats...

[DT @ Mar 19th 2008 3:44PM]

The only way I can see that happening before 2012 (when AT&T's exclusivity runs out) is if Apple releases a CDMA iPhone for Japan. It may be possible then to import it and use it on VZW, but only IF it gets FCC approval. I'm not sure if Japan-only phones ever go to the FCC, though. Maybe they have to be certified to be used on roam in US, but I have no idea. Perhaps Apple can submit it to the FCC with no intention of selling it in the US, though, to sneak onto VZW's (and Sprint's) network via Japan.

[Jesse S @ Mar 19th 2008 3:50PM]

LTE is for data...

[CB17 @ Mar 19th 2008 4:00PM]

@Jesse

That's not true. Maybe on Verizon because they're still gonna use CDMA, but on GSM networks, LTE will be used for both just like HSPA.

[Bill @ Mar 19th 2008 4:15PM]

DT, I've been thinking the same thing. It's a longshot for a number of reasons, but not totally impossible. Is Japan CDMA? I didn't realize that. I thought Korea was though.

Only time will tell, I suppose.

[xbit @ Mar 19th 2008 7:32PM]

Japan uses a variety of technologies. The biggest network (60% market share) uses UMTS/HSDPA though.

[Jamar @ Mar 20th 2008 7:12AM]

Oh, and due to some stupid government decision made in the 90s the Japanese CDMA network runs on different frequencies than the rest of the world (transmit/receive is reversed on the 800 band and EVDO is on the 2100MHz band- yes, same as 3G UMTS).

[Isaac @ Mar 19th 2008 3:32PM]

An example of a telecom company doing something good for the consumers?

I don't believe it.

[DT @ Mar 19th 2008 3:45PM]

No, an example of a telecom company realizing that the winds are changing direction, and if they want to retain customers, they have to loosen up. This is in the pursuit of dollars, make no mistake.

[Erick @ Mar 19th 2008 4:17PM]

@DT

Isnt that the point of a business? Job #1 to be profitable in a general sense? I see nothing wrong with that philosophy as long as you arent TRYING to screw your employees or your customer.

[ethana2 @ Mar 19th 2008 4:36PM]

They were trying.

...so have they realized that data is data is data yet? Text messages should cost /nothing/.
No? WiMax come quickly! ..What tablet should I buy?

[DT @ Mar 19th 2008 5:07PM]

@Erick,
I've never said it was a problem. Nothing wrong with making a profit; that's why companies exist. I'm just saying that VZW isn't doing this out of the goodness of their hearts, it's profit-driven.

[Jake Tobak @ Mar 19th 2008 6:13PM]

@DT

That's exactly it.
I wasn't gonna switch from Verizon just for the iPhone, but I'd do anything for the Android ~_^

[Jesse S @ Mar 19th 2008 3:32PM]

Needs moar R-UIM.

[Naveed @ Mar 19th 2008 3:38PM]

Someone at verizon is smart and wants their company to STAY on top.

[Scott @ Mar 20th 2008 12:32PM]

What "top" are you referring to? Obviously not the most subscribers in the US, because AT&T has that covered: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_mobile_phone_companies

[Jeff @ Mar 19th 2008 3:45PM]

They missed the iPhone bandwagon.

The next big thing are Android devices in cell tech. Smart move.

[Jesse S @ Mar 19th 2008 3:51PM]

No they didn't. They were offered it first, and they didn't want it, because Apple was too controlling.

1 million people is almost a drop in the bucket for ATT and Verizon.

Doesn't ATT still have higher churn than Verizon? (Churn is the rate of people leaving.)

[Jeff @ Mar 19th 2008 3:56PM]

That's what I meant. Verizon was offered the iPhone rights first (my understanding) and they refused.

Now Verizon is trying to get onto the next highly hyped tech, whether or not it will succeed in the end.

[CB17 @ Mar 19th 2008 4:02PM]

Actually, if you read the Wired article about it, they weren't offered it first. Apple went to talk with Verizon after Cingular was taking a long time to come back with an answer. But there was nothing ever serious in the conversations with Verizon.

[ethana2 @ Mar 19th 2008 4:38PM]

Apple is all about control as much if not more than microsoft is about standards in-compliance and market dominance.

I'm not going to give either company my money ever again, if I can help it.
(Lookin' good so far!)

[Garti Lutsdon McPheligan @ Mar 20th 2008 12:03AM]

/@ethana2/

/You/ /ripped/ /Microsoft/ /a/ /new/ /one/ /there/, /buddy/.

[Peter B @ Mar 19th 2008 3:53PM]

Its silly to think Apple wont put out a CDMA iPhone now. They had one in development before Verizon told them to forget it. Apple wanted to simply sell the hardware without a carrier subsidy to begin with, so they would only need initial VZW approval. Get the thing approved, and then sell it in the Apple store. Then let customers go to VZW, Sprint, USCC or Altel and activate it themselves. Step 3, Profit.

[Kamokazi @ Mar 19th 2008 3:57PM]

And step 4, get sued by AT&T for violating their exclusivity agreement.

I think not.

[Alan @ Mar 19th 2008 4:02PM]

You forgot about the revenue apple gets from the service plan. They want the iphone to stick with Cingular for as along as they can so they can get the service payments.

[steven @ Mar 19th 2008 3:57PM]

Does anyone know if Verizon has any plans to unlock the software-crippled features on its current phones? I would love to have gps access via google maps on my blackberry 8830.

[Kyle @ Mar 19th 2008 4:04PM]

You and me both Steven.....I was so bummed after I purchased it and found out. 8830 is a great device, but opening up GPS would make it that much more of a good alternative to the iphone.

[Dorf @ Mar 19th 2008 4:47PM]

Do you have the latest firmware for the 8830? I was pretty sure you could use GPS with google maps?

[dizilbdog @ Mar 19th 2008 4:00PM]

I don't think this is going to be that good. Most of the good phones are GSM made. Also most of the public don't know the difference between a GSM And CDMA device. CDMA is really just in the united states GSM is all over. I don't think Nokia is going to be jumping on the CDMA now that Verizon says it's "Open"...

[austin @ Mar 19th 2008 4:14PM]

CDMA is also Japan and S. Korea, both of whom know how to make a slick device. From what I've seen of NTT Docomo and SK Telecom's offerings, they're at minimum two years ahead of what we have available in the US.

It's also noteworthy to state that SK Telecom CDMA phones use SIM cards. If this is part of Verizon's plan, I say hell yeah.

[Jesse S @ Mar 19th 2008 4:17PM]

R-UIM, like SIM, but not SIM.

[raulr @ Mar 19th 2008 4:27PM]

As mentioned, CDMA is in Japan and S. Korea. But it is also in Canada, Mexico, India, and some Latin American countries. Still, GSM is everywhere except S. Korea.

[huh @ Mar 19th 2008 6:40PM]

Many manufacturers are working on CDMA/GSM phones. They know having a phone that works on multiple networks expands the target audience and gives higher sales. All a person needs to do is pay a carrier to use with the device.

[xbit @ Mar 19th 2008 7:35PM]

"CDMA is also Japan and S. Korea, both of whom know how to make a slick device."

Two problems:

- Not many people can read Korean/Japanese.
- Most Japanese handsets are VERY tightly locked down.

[CB17 @ Mar 19th 2008 4:03PM]

On par with GSM? Why is Verizon getting their hand held with this? This still isn't even CLOSE to GSM in terms of open availability for phones. Not only that, but where's Verizon's SIM cards? Yeah that's what I thought.

Also they're only guaranteeing any apps for the phones that they WON'T support. What about phones that THEY sell. And why DON'T they support the phones they certify. GSM carriers try and support phones even if they're not sold directly from them (well at least ATT does).

[foeix @ Mar 19th 2008 6:16PM]

Spot on CB17. To mention even slightly that this move equates to the transparency and ease of use a SIM card provides is far fetched.

4 weeks turn around time for VZW on a device? - thats nice and all but I can place my SIM in any device that will accept it as soon as I can get my hands on it. Literally ANY DEVICE, from anywhere, with out any ones approval be that AT&T's or the FCC's.

[James @ Mar 19th 2008 10:31PM]

Thats one of my biggest gripes about the iphone that nobody ever mentions.

[Fanfoot @ Mar 19th 2008 4:09PM]

So what? As long as Verizon has older versions of firmware on their phones, prohibits things like tethering or bluetooth on devices with those capabilities, enforces lousy u/i's on the phones they sell, prices everything higher than other carriers they will still suck. They *do* have the best network where I live, but come on, a press release is enough to get all the haters to love them? Lets wait and see what happens here...

[DT @ Mar 19th 2008 5:11PM]

Perhaps you neglected to read the article, but the whole point is that you can use whatever phone, with whatever software, with whatever features, as long as it meets pretty loose compatibility requirements. I'm sure VZW will still sell phones, and they will probably cripple them somewhat and splash their interface all over, but I'm certain that will diminish over time, as the crippling has. VZW phones these days are pretty full-featured.

[okay @ Mar 19th 2008 6:30PM]

Fanfoo, you missed the whole point. You should re-read the press release. Verizon wont be limiting the applications on the phones that are approved. So buy one of the approved phones that has an application to allow tethering your device. You dont have to choose a restricted Verizon phone anymore, thats the big news in this story.

They also hinted at a possible flat fee plan that would allow you to use any approved devices. Even if a tethering application isn't created by one of the newly approved devices, you can buy a separate cellular modem and use that on the same plan (no additional money spent). Then you wont need to tether and you wont be paying for two plans.

If this is as good as it sounds its leaps beyond what any other US carrier has provided their customers. Even at a premium cost it will be easier & maybe cheaper to have multiple devices on one plan than multiple devices on multiple plans like the other carriers.

I'm guessing one of the new Android devices approved for Verizon will allow you to tether with some 3rd party app.

[James @ Mar 19th 2008 10:34PM]

I bet the cost of these verizon approved devices are going to be very high.

[Brian @ Mar 20th 2008 4:12AM]

@okay

No, it's not going to be cheaper. We have plans like that now - they are called family plans. Or you can SIM swap if you have a GSM provider.

How does it get any more open than, "you can choose any unlocked device you want and use it with your service without even having to tell us"? I don't need to get my devices "approved" by T-Mobile. I don't have to call them to get the ESNs added to my account.

I can use ANY unlocked GSM 1900 device. Period. There are no rules, no exceptions, and there is no approval process.

If you want 3G, AT&T offers HSDPA. T-Mobile will be soon. Why should I switch to a provider with limited phone choices using a dead-end technology (CDMA2000)?

[Prokanda @ Mar 20th 2008 5:18AM]

@Brian:

you might want to read the article again... it says that Verizon is going to require that the MANUFACTURERS submit applications for their devices compatibility.. not the end user. (and it'll only need renewing every 3 years).

not to mention.. cdma might be dead to YOU but in MY house, GSM doesn't get signal.. not even spotty signal. my friends have to go out the front door to their cars to make calls. had a friend who broke up with his girlfriend, came over to drink with some buddies, crash (instead of getting a DUI) and when he woke up and headed home, had calls from his parents about them contacting the cops thinking he was suicidal about his ex....

what if it had been a real emergency? GSM failed. CDMA gets better signal in EVERY section of my area (Hampton Roads, VA.. 7 very large cities with 5 military bases and a BUNCH of people). so if they can't get GSM right in this area, but CDMA can... maybe cdma isn't at a dead-end. sure, LTE is looking like the next best thing, but cdma is still pulling strong for many many people.

as for the comment about "limited choice"... uh.. have you ever been into a verizon store? or gone to their webpage? att has a longer LIST of phones.. but many of the choices on there are refurb options, several color choices for many of the models.. verizon actually has a comparable selection.. many of them "feature" phones... not to mention, lately verizon has been on a binge with bringing new devices into the fold. heck, even sprint's starting to understand that customers want more choices.. and they lost what... 29.5 billion last quarter or something like that? ok, att has the iphone.. yay. we have smartphones, we have the voyager & enV, the blackberries, the chocolate & venus, the samsungs with the 3.0mp camera...

(and as a side note, I've had Suncom [what att used to be in my area before cingular], t-mobile, sprint, verizon, primeco [now ntelos], and helio. so I'm not picking sides without having had my fair share of experience with most of the big providers... I also go on what friends/family/colleagues/customers tell me their experiences have been like with each provider... and verizon is #1 (sprint #2) for coverage and lowest number of dropped calls in my HUGE/heavily populated area.)

so, we all have our opinions.. but please realize, your opinion is doesn't necessarily match the next guy's. some of us actually like to make calls/send texts in our homes/offices.

[Scott @ Mar 20th 2008 12:38PM]

Prokanda, you realize that the opposite could be true where GSM gets a signal but CDMA does not? I've seen this myself, after all, it's merely a byproduct of where the cellular towers are placed. Talk about your anecdotal evidence!

[Fanfoot @ Mar 20th 2008 5:33PM]

I'll wait until I see proof before I get all excited about this.

If lots of manufacturers make phones available without a contract that will work on Verizon's network, and neither Verizon nor the manufacturer charge a large premium for the privaledge of using them, then I'll be impressed.

Seems likely this will be the equivalent of "unlocked" GSM phones, i.e. the ones that are so expensive that nobody buys them because there is no contract commitment. If so, then this isn't really all that important. The phones that will continue to matter to most people are the ones that Verizon offers. And if those are still limited in selection (where is my antenna-less Treo, or Centro or Nokia, or ...), and have features disabled (IR, tethering, bluetooth), and lousy UIs then this announcement won't mean beans.

[Prokanda @ Mar 21st 2008 4:40AM]

@Scott:

I think you missed my point.. Brian was talking about how much better GSM + SIM is and how CDMA is a deadend technology (even though he obviously hasn't looked at what you're allowed to do when it comes to switching phones/getting highspeed data with verizon).

I was stating the fact that while his opinion may be true for him, GSM is not a viable option for those of us that can't get GSM signal in our homes/places that we spend most of our time.

So you kinda responded in reverse. HE was the one stating that CDMA was useless in comparison and I was taking the same stance with him that you tried to take with me. Next time, try to better comprehend what someone is saying... please?