12-02-2015 11:33 PM
1,084 ... 3031323334 ...
tools
  1. garak0410's Avatar
    One the most enduring things about this post is how dedicated we fans are on wanting these phones on Verizon. I only wish our voice could be heard loud and clear. I did notice Mary Jo Foley, last week, said that while it is still doubtful, she thinks the door isn't closed yet on Verizon and she wouldn't go into details.
    aximtreo likes this.
    10-26-2015 11:58 AM
  2. to_be_announced's Avatar
    I'm just saying that the loss of Verizon carrying the 950 or 950 XL is not the impact that people make it out to be.... It's not negligible, but it does not near the significance implied by repeatedly saying, "the phones won't be on the largest US carrier." It isn't a potential loss of 1/2, 1/3 or even 1/4 of American users, statistically it is just 1/8.

    T-Mo by itself (even as the 3rd largest US carrier) represents a more significant loss and when you add in Metro PCS you are now at nearly double the loss represented by Verizon and T-Mobile's track record with Windows Phone offerings and support is known to be abysmal.

    I find this sobering in light of how many claim Verizon is such a powerhouse of support and potential for Windows Phone.
    NO ONE is saying that Verizon is a powerhouse of support and potential. Especially on the support side. But it does have potential. The graphic above shows that 12%, which while not alot, is also not small either. Putting out a product knowing that it cuts off 12% of your customer base is just not good no matter how you look at it. No one is expecting Verizon to support these phones, but since they are phones essentially released for people like us, the Microsoft fans, it should be easy to assume that most of us are capable of making it work on the CDMA network by placing an activated sim in the phone. Microsoft it self has stated that these phones are essentially for the MS fans that have been waiting forever for a flagship.
    10-26-2015 12:53 PM
  3. RumoredNow's Avatar
    Putting out a product knowing that it cuts off 12% of your customer base is just not good no matter how you look at it.
    12% in the US not of the total base and remember that WP support in the US lags way behind other regions. Again, it is not negligible, but it is also not the whole ball game.
    10-26-2015 12:57 PM
  4. Penny_1's Avatar
    12% in the US not of the total base and remember that WP support in the US lags way behind other regions. Again, it is not negligible, but it is also not the whole ball game.
    I don't know, I think the point that almost everybody is missing is that Verizon may not constitute much of WP's global marketshare, but it is absolutely crucial from a developer engagement standpoint. We have a lot of popular app developers in the U.S., and the reality is that they don't all go by the global marketshare statistics. Many of them are small teams or even individuals that notice what is right in front of them, and as long as Windows Phone doesn't get in front of those people frequently, they're not really going to worry about its existence.

    That's my perspective at least, as a web developer. Developers tend to support what they use or are familiar with more than actually making decisions objectively.
    jas o, aximtreo and nwildcat like this.
    10-26-2015 03:33 PM
  5. RumoredNow's Avatar
    Developers tend to support what they use or are familiar with more than actually making decisions objectively.
    Wait... Evan Spiegel is not objective?

    Mind blown.

    10-26-2015 03:58 PM
  6. Chelovek's Avatar
    Remember when the iPhone first came out...only AT&T carried it. Now even Obama Wireless carries it. If Windows will just stick with it for more than five quarters, Verizon will eventually get it.
    10-26-2015 04:36 PM
  7. Generalheed's Avatar
    Remember when the iPhone first came out...only AT&T carried it. Now even Obama Wireless carries it. If Windows will just stick with it for more than five quarters, Verizon will eventually get it.
    Umm, I'm not sure if that was an attempt to incite political debate here or if "Obama Wireless" was just a typo lol. I'll just assume you meant Verizon instead of Obama. But anyways, the Lumia 950 doesn't have nearly the same demand the iPhone did for Verizon to carry it.
    to_be_announced likes this.
    10-27-2015 08:25 AM
  8. mjperry51's Avatar
    Remember when the iPhone first came out...only AT&T carried it. Now even Obama Wireless carries it. If Windows will just stick with it for more than five quarters, Verizon will eventually get it.
    While that may, the dynamics are not equal.

    It's fair to say that Apple carries a lot more "gotta have" presence in the consumer market than Microsoft. It's trendy. I'm reminded of the Big Bang Theory episode where Sheldon tells Raj who has just gotten an IPod "You'll be sorry when Microsoft comes out with a music player".

    Who carries a Zune player now? Even with the IPhone including a music player they still sell a ton of IPods.

    I would love for Verizon to to "get it". I just don't see an environment where the planets align properly. What is the compelling business reason for Verizon to change course WRT Windows Phone??
    10-27-2015 08:29 AM
  9. anywhereanytime's Avatar
    I would love for Verizon to to "get it". I just don't see an environment where the planets align properly. What is the compelling business reason for Verizon to change course WRT Windows Phone??
    Anyone who has used Windows Phone "knows" that it is far better for "business users" = ONLY large and small companies WILL IMPACT Verizon's decision.

    Anyone see a good article on the benefits of Windows Phone in BUSINESS?

    I am sad to say, that Microsoft's failure to get Windows Phone "delivered before mid-November" is HURTING this whole effort!
    10-27-2015 11:41 AM
  10. miraidave's Avatar
    The 950XL Dual Sim RM-1116 documents are up on the FCC website, along with user manual.

    Can't post link until I have 10 posts, so got to [https: / / apps.fcc.gov / oetcf / eas /reports / GenericSearch.cfm] without the spaces and search for PYARM-1116.

    In the manual, it clearly states that "You can only use your device on the LTE TDD 2300-2400 (40), 2570-2620
    (38); LTE FDD 700 (12), 700 (17), 700 (28), 800 (20), 850 (5), 900 (8),
    1700/2100 (4), 1800 (3), 1900 (2), 2100 (1), 2600 (7); WCDMA 850, 900,
    1700/2100, 1900, 2100; and GSM 850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz networks. You
    need a subscription with a service provider."

    So the 950XL Dual Sim will definitely not work with Verizon. The only hope now is for Microsoft either certify the single sim for CDMA and Band 13, or they release a Verizon variant, which doesn't seem likely.
    TexasLabRat and MikeSo like this.
    10-27-2015 12:41 PM
  11. TexasLabRat's Avatar
    the 950xl dual sim rm-1116 documents are up on the fcc website, along with user manual.

    Can't post link until i have 10 posts, so got to [https: / / apps.fcc.gov / oetcf / eas /reports / genericsearch.cfm] without the spaces and search for pyarm-1116.

    In the manual, it clearly states that "you can only use your device on the lte tdd 2300-2400 (40), 2570-2620
    (38); lte fdd 700 (12), 700 (17), 700 (28), 800 (20), 850 (5), 900 (8),
    1700/2100 (4), 1800 (3), 1900 (2), 2100 (1), 2600 (7); wcdma 850, 900,
    1700/2100, 1900, 2100; and gsm 850, 900, 1800, 1900 mhz networks. You
    need a subscription with a service provider."

    so the 950xl dual sim will definitely not work with verizon. The only hope now is for microsoft either certify the single sim for cdma and band 13, or they release a verizon variant, which doesn't seem likely.

    in addition, here are the bands tested for certification which create the legal framework in which the phone is allowed to operate in the U.S.


    Head Configuration
    Mode
    Reported*
    SAR value
    (1g avg)
    SAR limit
    (1g avg)
    Result
    Plot #
    LTE700 (Band 12)
    0.14 W/kg
    1.6 W/kg
    PASSED
    H1
    LTE700 (Band 17)
    0.15 W/kg
    1.6 W/kg
    PASSED
    H2
    4-slot GPRS850

    0.39 W/kg
    1.6 W/kg
    PASSED
    H3
    WCDMA850 (Band 5)
    0.32 W/kg
    1.6 W/kg
    PASSED
    H4
    LTE850 (Band 5)
    0.24 W/kg
    1.6 W/kg
    PASSED
    H5
    WCDMA1700/2100 (Band 4)
    0.45 W/kg
    1.6 W/kg
    PASSED
    H6
    LTE1700/2100 (Band 4)
    0.39 W/kg
    1.6 W/kg
    PASSED
    H7
    4-slot GPRS1900
    0.23 W/kg
    1.6 W/kg
    PASSED
    H8
    WCDMA1900 (Band 2)
    0.38 W/kg
    1.6 W/kg
    PASSED
    H9
    LTE1900 (Band 2)
    0.27 W/kg
    1.6 W/kg
    PASSED
    H10
    LTE2500 (Band 7)
    0.47 W/kg
    1.6 W/kg
    PASSED
    H11
    WLAN2450
    1.01 W/kg
    1.6 W/kg
    PASSED
    H12
    WLAN5000
    1.05 W/kg
    1.6 W/kg
    PASSED
    H13
    Maximum of SPEAG combined multiband algorithm results
    4-slot GPRS850 + WLAN2450
    1.15 W/kg
    1.6 W/kg
    PASSED
    H14
    4-slot GPRS850 + WLAN5000
    1.06 W/kg
    1.6 W/kg
    PASSED
    H15
    10-27-2015 12:45 PM
  12. mjperry51's Avatar
    Anyone who has used Windows Phone "knows" that it is far better for "business users" = ONLY large and small companies WILL IMPACT Verizon's decision.

    Anyone see a good article on the benefits of Windows Phone in BUSINESS?

    I am sad to say, that Microsoft's failure to get Windows Phone "delivered before mid-November" is HURTING this whole effort!
    Perhaps I should have phrased it "What is Verizon's compelling business reason to change course WRT Windows Phone?"

    Or in other words,what's in it for Verizon??
    10-27-2015 02:51 PM
  13. ksj1's Avatar
    I am sad to say, that Microsoft's failure to get Windows Phone "delivered before mid-November" is HURTING this whole effort!
    Is it mid-November already? I must have been asleep the last 3 weeks...
    libra89 likes this.
    10-27-2015 03:02 PM
  14. HoosierDaddy's Avatar
    Perhaps I should have phrased it "What is Verizon's compelling business reason to change course WRT Windows Phone?"

    Or in other words,what's in it for Verizon??
    Who knows what demands Verizon made? In the past they have demanded exclusive models. Carriers want to add their own crapware. Carriers want to delay or deny firmware or OS updates if that saves them money OR encourages more people to upgrade their phone than to stop using the carrier. None of those things are in the best interest of the customers or of Microsoft. My best guess is that some decision maker at Verizon thinks Microsoft will eventually cave in because they have in the past. As a phone user, I hope MS doesn't give an inch because MS' best interests coincidentally are MUCH closer to phone users' interests than Verizon's interests are.
    RumoredNow, aximtreo and libra89 like this.
    10-27-2015 04:41 PM
  15. to_be_announced's Avatar
    The 950XL Dual Sim RM-1116 documents are up on the FCC website, along with user manual.

    Can't post link until I have 10 posts, so got to [https: / / apps.fcc.gov / oetcf / eas /reports / GenericSearch.cfm] without the spaces and search for PYARM-1116.

    In the manual, it clearly states that "You can only use your device on the LTE TDD 2300-2400 (40), 2570-2620
    (38); LTE FDD 700 (12), 700 (17), 700 (28), 800 (20), 850 (5), 900 (8),
    1700/2100 (4), 1800 (3), 1900 (2), 2100 (1), 2600 (7); WCDMA 850, 900,
    1700/2100, 1900, 2100; and GSM 850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz networks. You
    need a subscription with a service provider."

    So the 950XL Dual Sim will definitely not work with Verizon. The only hope now is for Microsoft either certify the single sim for CDMA and Band 13, or they release a Verizon variant, which doesn't seem likely.
    Welp. That would seem to settle it then. No Verizon for these phones. While the writing was pretty much on the wall, we held out hope as long as we could.

    54a78a9754dec_-_cryinggifs_01_1.gif
    10-27-2015 05:16 PM
  16. HoosierDaddy's Avatar
    Welp. That would seem to settle it then. No Verizon for these phones. While the writing was pretty much on the wall, we held out hope as long as we could.
    I still haven't heard or seen anything that says the bands aren't just disabled in software. Until I do, I have to think all it would take is a software update (OS or firmware) and the phones being certified to use those bands.
    10-27-2015 05:30 PM
  17. mjperry51's Avatar
    Who knows what demands Verizon made? In the past they have demanded exclusive models. Carriers want to add their own crapware. Carriers want to delay or deny firmware or OS updates if that saves them money OR encourages more people to upgrade their phone than to stop using the carrier. None of those things are in the best interest of the customers or of Microsoft. My best guess is that some decision maker at Verizon thinks Microsoft will eventually cave in because they have in the past. As a phone user, I hope MS doesn't give an inch because MS' best interests coincidentally are MUCH closer to phone users' interests than Verizon's interests are.
    I'm not choosing sides - I"m just asking the question, based on the fact Verizon will do what they believe to be in their best business interest, as will Microsoft. . . .
    10-27-2015 05:34 PM
  18. HoosierDaddy's Avatar
    I'm not choosing sides - I"m just asking the question, based on the fact Verizon will do what they believe to be in their best business interest, as will Microsoft. . . .
    Nobody has to choose sides. But if they DO, MS's interests are coincidentally closer to end user's best interests than Verizon's are. That's why I like what MS is doing even though I can't imagine ever using Verizon as a carrier. FWIW, I suspect Verizon customers will eventually be able to use 950s or 950 Xls on Verizon. All it will take is Verizon saying okay without a bunch of customer harming conditions. Between the way MS wants to do business and the way the un-carrier is shaking up all the other US carriers, better days are coming for all USA phone users. Old school US carrier behavior is terrible for phone users whether they realize it or not until they are out from under.
    RumoredNow likes this.
    10-27-2015 07:12 PM
  19. psiu_glen's Avatar
    Nobody has to choose sides. But if they DO, MS's interests are coincidentally closer to end user's best interests than Verizon's are. That's why I like what MS is doing even though I can't imagine ever using Verizon as a carrier. FWIW, I suspect Verizon customers will eventually be able to use 950s or 950 Xls on Verizon. All it will take is Verizon saying okay without a bunch of customer harming conditions. Between the way MS wants to do business and the way the un-carrier is shaking up all the other US carriers, better days are coming for all USA phone users. Old school US carrier behavior is terrible for phone users whether they realize it or not until they are out from under.
    Verizon has nothing to say about it. MS has the bands required for VZW usage disabled. End of story.

    If MS enabled those, I could just get an unlocked 950/XL, take my already activated SIM, pop it in, and be off and running.

    Keep an old Verizon phone around for any plan changes and free insurance, and case closed.
    aximtreo, DavidinCT and tgp like this.
    10-27-2015 09:37 PM
  20. tgp's Avatar
    Nobody has to choose sides. But if they DO, MS's interests are coincidentally closer to end user's best interests than Verizon's are.
    Since we're just guessing anyway, I'll throw my 2 in here. I suspect that AT&T is as much to blame as anyone. Verizon can't, or won't, do anything to block the phones on their network, even if they do not officially support them (as with the factory unlocked iPhones, last several Nexus devices, Moto X Pure Edition). Microsoft of course wants the phones to work on as many carriers as possible.

    This leaves AT&T as the only remaining suspect. They probably put some sort of demands on Microsoft. I bet Microsoft fell on their knees and worshipped AT&T, begging and pleading, to get them to carry the 950.

    I've read here that AT&T pays a lot of money to Microsoft for the privilege of carrying their phones. I don't know for sure, but I highly doubt that this is the case. If AT&T were to invest that much into Microsoft's phones, they would certainly do everything they could to push them. They do not, and never have. I'm guessing it is the other way around, that Microsoft pays AT&T a boatload of money to carry their phones. And AT&T still writes the terms.

    I know, I know, there are all kinds of holes in this theory. But there are holes in every other theory I've read here too.
    10-27-2015 09:57 PM
  21. sprtfan's Avatar
    I still haven't heard or seen anything that says the bands aren't just disabled in software. Until I do, I have to think all it would take is a software update (OS or firmware) and the phones being certified to use those bands.
    I think the problem here is even if it is just disabled in software, Microsoft would have to resubmit the phone for testing. This is not normally done from what people have said earlier in this thread and would be more likely for Microsoft to release a different but similar phone if the decided to go this route. I'm just using info I've gathered from this thread for this so hopefully someone will correct me if I'm wrong.
    libra89 likes this.
    10-27-2015 11:04 PM
  22. badshar's Avatar
    So was Mr. MacPhisto wrong this time?
    10-27-2015 11:14 PM
  23. HoosierDaddy's Avatar
    Verizon has nothing to say about it. MS has the bands required for VZW usage disabled. End of story.
    Sure they did. Both benefit from Verizon selling these phones.

    So its a sure thing that MS told Verizon they could sell these phones as long as they understood it could be sold by others and that Verizon agreed to let MS update the handset firmware and OS as needed.

    And its a sure thing that Verizon told them we will sell them if you back off on one or both of those.

    So both parties had a say. It's a case of both sides believing they would get their way or would be better off than accepting the other's terms. Negotiations are not foolproof. That's why some people don't get the car they want for $x when the same salesman just sold the same car to another customer for less than $x. The car salesman incorrectly believed the 2nd customer would pay more for whatever reasons his instincts and training told him.

    In this case I suspect Microsoft was not bluffing about their requirements while Verizon might have been bluffing or incorrectly calculating the values of their terms. Not having Verizon hurts Microsoft but Verizon's demands (if they match previous ones) could hurt MS more.

    So both parties lose as things stand. And I am willing to bet that if either side backs down it will be Verizon because they are the only ones with something to gain.

    MS loses without Verizon, but loses maybe even more with Verizon and and no ability to push critical updates in a timely manner or no ability to sell the phones elsewhere in the US.

    Verizon on the other hand would be better off with MS terms than not being to offer these phones. Now Verizon may find another source for Windows Phones which is also a win for MS since they are as interested in having more Windows users as they are in selling phones.

    What I would like to know is what incentives MS is giving 3rd party WP10 makers to ensure or make it more likely those phones can get Windows updates without carrier roadblocks.
    RumoredNow and libra89 like this.
    10-28-2015 12:20 AM
  24. psiu_glen's Avatar
    Sure they did. Both benefit from Verizon selling these phones.

    So its a sure thing that MS told Verizon they could sell these phones as long as they understood it could be sold by others and that Verizon agreed to let MS update the handset firmware and OS as needed.

    Again, so what? Right now, if Verizon wanted those phones on their network, they could do NOTHING.

    MS could have simply sold unlocked phones, from their store, and they would work on Verizon with an already activated line. That's the only hiccup. If Verizon didn't want to have a new WP in their stores, with Continuum accessories to sell, microSD cards at rip off prices for, that is their loss. Yes, they probably wanted all sorts of junk, giant logos, and who knows what else on a "Verizon branded" version.

    But pure and simple, if the unlocked phones come out with those bands disabled? That's all on MS.

    VZW are a merry load of butt weasels, but the MS apologists really need to understand this. MS is locking the phones to prevent them from going on Verizon's network.
    10-28-2015 01:18 AM
  25. sprtfan's Avatar
    What I would like to know is what incentives MS is giving 3rd party WP10 makers to ensure or make it more likely those phones can get Windows updates without carrier roadblocks.
    I still wonder if one of those incentives to 3rd party WP10 makers is not having to compete against the 950/950xl on Verizon. MS would benefit if Samsung or LG released a flagship WP10 on Verizon. The 3rd parties maybe willing to try if the potential for a larger market share is there. I'm on Verizon and would get a 950 if I could and wouldn't really even consider anything else. If I can't, I'll wait and see what other options I may have before thinking about switching carriers.
    10-28-2015 01:38 AM
1,084 ... 3031323334 ...

Similar Threads

  1. 950/950XL - QI charging...1.0 or 1.2 ?
    By DavidinCT in forum Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-26-2016, 07:43 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-05-2015, 05:19 AM
  3. Day time while running/exercising on Band 2
    By smatofu in forum Microsoft Band & Band 2
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 10-09-2015, 10:07 AM
  4. Will we be able to preorder online at MS Store?
    By jlangner in forum Microsoft Lumia 950
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-08-2015, 10:41 PM
  5. Why won't my computer wake from sleep mode after installing Windows 10?
    By Windows Central Question in forum Windows 10
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-06-2015, 09:16 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD