“Speculation is rife that Apple will end its exclusive U.S. iPhone service deal with AT&T when the current contract expires in June 2010 and begin to offer phones that work with the Verizon network,” iSuppli analyst Francis Sideco said in a research note today. “However, iSuppli doesn’t believe this will be the case. The main reason Apple is likely to stick with AT&T beyond 2010 is the relatively wide usage and growth expected for the HSPA air standard used by the carrier for 3G data.”

As Sideco explains, “Cumulative global subscribers of HSPA wireless services, consisting of High-Speed Downlink Packet Access (HSDPA) and High-Speed Uplink Packet Access (HSUPA), are set to rise to 1.4 billion in 2012, up from 269.1 million in 2009. In contrast, cumulative subscribers for the EVDO standard used by Verizon will amount to 304.6 million in 2013, up from 145.2 million in 2009.”

A point worth noting, though it’s hard to imagine that Apple (AAPL) doesn’t harbor some resentment toward AT&T (T), which has undermined its carefully crafted iPhone experience. And if that’s the case, wouldn’t it make more sense for the company to extend its deal with AT&T, but not as an exclusive? That would allow Apple to hammer out a second deal with Verizon (VZ), which, according to some analysts, would more than double U.S. iPhone sales in the near term.

As Bernstein Research analyst Toni Sacconaghi noted this summer, “Verizon’s postpaid subscriber base is not only larger than AT&T’s, but more importantly, is untapped whereas we estimate more than 10 percent of AT&T’s postpaid users already have an iPhone.”

By all appearances, the Pre is a slick little device. But is it formidable enough to stand its ground next to Apple’s iPhone, Research in Motion’s (RIMM) BlackBerry and the groaning board of Android devices currently in the handset market product pipeline? Palm (PALM) certainly seems to think so. In fact, the company is so confident in the Pre that CEO Ed Colligan seems to think it won’t need a sub-$200 price point to pull share from Apple (AAPL), et al. “Why would we do that when we have a significantly better product,” he asked ATD’s Peter Kafka earlier this afternoon.

Well, here’s one reason: To stay in business. Because despite Colligan’s claims of a “significantly better product,” Palm hasn’t raised the smartphone bar much (if at all) with the Pre. In fact, the device is as noteworthy for the features it may not include as for those it does. Absent from today’s grand unveiling was any mention of video. Also missing was a rival to Apple’s App Store and the robust developer-consumer ecosystem Apple has created around the iPhone and iPod touch. Even Google’s (GOOG) Android OS debuted with that. And the name; well, “Pre” isn’t likely to do very much for Palm’s already much diminished brand recognition.

Now, perhaps video and an app store are coming. But even if they do, will the Pre really be worth paying a premium for, as Colligan suggests? I’m not so sure–especially when the inevitable updates to the iPhone and BlackBerry remove the few advantages it does have over those devices. “Fast Web browsing” and “efficient multitasking” just aren’t big differentiators anymore.

That magnetized conductive charging platform sure is nice, though.

UPDATE: Turns out Palm is planning an App Store rival. According to the Pre press release, “The platform’s flexible environment will also allow developers to distribute their applications over-the-air via an on-device Palm application store.” And though no mention was made of video during Thursday’s Pre unveiling, the device will support it–both on the device and streaming. Said a Palm spokesperson, “The Pre has video playback, including YouTube video from the internet.”

PREVIOUSLY:

• Yeah. Those PC Guys Never Stood a Chance, Palm.
• Palm: Spare Change for Financial Viability?
• Alms for Palm?
• Palm New-ness: A Target Price of Zero
• Palm: Hey … Hello? Excuse Me … Over Here!

“After extensive review, DHS [Department of Homeland Security] has advised that it does not believe there are public-safety risks sufficient to justify disapproval of the USITC’s limited exclusion order,” U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab wrote in her decision. “DHS has also advised that Broadcom Corporation’s offer of royalty-free public-safety licensing to state and local public safety organizations and its licensing agreements with two major wireless carriers will ameliorate to a significant degree concerns regarding the order’s potential effect on public-safety wireless broadband systems and 3G network deployment. We also understand that other market participants are investigating the use of a noninfringing software workaround. We believe that such licensing agreements and workarounds will address in large part the concerns raised about delay in 3G network deployment.”

Quite a nasty turn of events for Qualcomm. The company had lobbied–fiercely–for White House intervention to reverse the ITC ruling, arguing that allowing it to remain would harm consumers, telecom carriers and handset makers. But the administration apparently didn’t buy it, and without the sort of deus ex machina it could have offered, Qualcomm is nearly out of options. It is facing an immediate ban on all forthcoming handsets running its WCDMA and EVDO chips–a potentially devastating blow to the company’s hugely important chip IP licensing business.

“If I’m one of Qualcomm’s customers, I’m furious,” Gartner analyst Michael King told the Associated Press. “My product line has the potential to be disrupted. The merits of the case notwithstanding, the fact they let it get this far is going to be somewhat unconscionable to their customers.”

Qualcomm, which is working on a software workaround to avoid any infringement on the Broadcom technology in question, is pursuing a stay of the ITC ban. Third time’s a charm, right?