'The Truth Hurts': Verizon Zings AT&T in Advertising Spat

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/17/the-truth-hurts-verizon-zings-atandt-in-advertising-spat/)

Earlier this month, AT&T filed suit (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/03/atandt-files-complaint-against-verizon-over-3g-coverage-map-commercials/) against rival Verizon over a series of Verizon commercials attacking AT&T's wireless network, claiming that the ads were "blatantly false and misleading" (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/13/atandt-publicly-responds-to-verizon-ad-campaign/).

Late yesterday, Engadget reported (http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/16/verizon-responds-to-atandts-map-for-that-lawsuit-the-truth-hurt/) that Verizon had filed a 53-page legal response to the lawsuit, and taken the opportunity to focus the case on what it claims is AT&T's failure to commit the resources to build out its network appropriately. The tone of Verizon's response is set from the very first sentence of its response's introduction:AT&T did not file this lawsuit because Verizon's "There’s A Map For That" advertisements are untrue; AT&T sued because Verizon's ads are true and the truth hurts.Six pages later, Verizon concludes its introduction with a similar take:In the final analysis, AT&T seeks emergency relief because Verizon's side-by-side, apples-to-apples comparison of its own 3G coverage with AT&T's confirms what the marketplace has been saying for months: AT&T failed to invest adequately in the necessary infrastructure to expand its 3G coverage to support its growth in smartphone business, and the usefulness of its service to smartphone users has suffered accordingly. AT&T may not like the message that the ads send, but this Court should reject its efforts to silence the messenger.The remainder of the document consists of Verizon's argument that its commercials touting five times more 3G coverage than AT&T are truthful, a fact that AT&T has at its most basic level admitted. Verizon parries AT&T's complaint that blank areas on the AT&T coverage maps used in Verizon ads are misleading consumers into thinking that no coverage is available when in fact non-3G coverage is offered in those areas by noting that it has held itself to the same standard as AT&T, showing as blank on its own coverage map depictions any areas not covered by its 3G network.

Verizon also takes issue with the procedural details of AT&T's lawsuit, claiming that the company has neither shown that irreparable damage to AT&T from Verizon's ads is likely nor demonstrated why infringement of Verizon's First Amendment freedom of speech should be permitted. Finally, Verizon points to the "free flow of commercial information" as being crucial to consumers, noting that comparative advertising is a common and effective means of assisting customers with purchasing decisions while also driving pricing competition and innovation.

Article Link: 'The Truth Hurts': Verizon Zings AT&T in Advertising Spat (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/17/the-truth-hurts-verizon-zings-atandt-in-advertising-spat/)

[thegoldenmackid]

Hopefully AT&T will shut up & fix their network respond

[kiljoy616]

Oh no you did not say that, haha, Verizon spanking AT&T.

When is AT&T going to get rid of all their old fart executive and get new blood.
Maybe then they would actually be taken serious.:rolleyes:

[bbplayer5]

QQ AT&T! Horrible network.

[krye]

3...2...1...fight!

[Truffy]

Sounds like the ads are a case of perfectly reasonable "fair comment" on the part of Verizon.

[ChadJK]

LMAO! Too funny and too true. AT&T sucks so bad. The fact that Apple fanboys are so obsessed with owning an iPhone that they will break contract with their existing carrier to sign on with the WORST carrier in the US is just really sad.

[usclaneyj]

Looks to me like Verizon is absolutely right and AT&T is going to end up looking very foolish.

[Cachiro]

Att I want my money back and some extra for all the trouble & headaches.

[Beric]

Good for Verizon. Let's see what AT&T has to say to that.

Glad to be a Verizon user.

[crees!]

So is "Zing" the Android equivalent to a Zune "squirt".

[sanford]

LMAO! Too funny and too true. AT&T sucks so bad. The fact that Apple fanboys are so obsessed with owning an iPhone that they will break contract with their existing carrier to sign on with the WORST carrier in the US is just really sad.

I get great coverage, 3G and voice everywhere I am most of the time. I get great voice and 9 of 10 times EDGE service out in the boondocks. I don't see what the deal is. I know AT&T has problems in some areas, but go w/ the carrier+phone combo that works best in the area you most use your phone.

Then again I don't spend much time in small towns or driving through them.

[ditzy]

As far as I can tell AT&T don't have a leg to stand on. To me it is very clear that the ad is about 3G coverage. Unless the maps are inaccurate, which AT&T don't seem to be claiming, they're just going to have to put up with it.
Or improve their service.

[CQd44]

What are they, 12?

[ChazUK]

I can't wait to see how this all ends up.

[SwiftLives]

I was told that Verizon's 3G network is just for data. AT&T's carries both data and voice. (I could be wrong).

Personally, I haven't had any trouble with AT&T. Dropped calls are rare (once a month if that often). 3G Data is speedy. Edge is horrible, but my area is covered by 3G.

But I think Verizon will win this PR war.

And I suspect Apple is secretly disgusted with AT&T and would love to open the iPhone up to rival carriers. They just have to be sure they can justify the cost of a new iPhone with different technology that would pretty much only work in the US on Verizon's network.

[jlbrown23]

Someone in AT&T legal should really get fired for this. As anyone who has used both services already knows, Verizon is clearly the better carrier. All that AT&T is doing with this lawsuit is giving the issue more press, all of which will point out what we already know. And on top of it they will look like whiny babies who spend more time suing other people for pointing out their service problems than they spend actually trying to fix them.

[Goona]

****kkk you Verizon, why can't your useless network use voice and data at the same time. Why don't you mention that in your wonderful ads.

[ChazUK]

****kkk you Verizon, why can't your useless network use voice and data at the same time. Why don't you mention that in your wonderful ads.

Nothing stopping AT&T doing just that is there? :confused:

AT&T need to respond with facts like that as it is a plus point.

[Gregintosh]

I hope Verizon wins and AT&T is forced to step up its game. I am tired of the dropped calls and the lack of reception all around the city (Chicago). I say this as both an iPhone user and someone who depends on AT&T for their paycheck.

[Cachiro]

Someone in AT&T legal should really get fired for this. As anyone who has used both services already knows, Verizon is clearly the better carrier. All that AT&T is doing with this lawsuit is giving the issue more press, all of which will point out what we already know. And on top of it they will look like whiny babies who spend more time suing other people for pointing out their service problems than they spend actually trying to fix them.

Well said. Nice Thanks!!

[CQd44]

I hope Verizon wins and AT&T is forced to step up its game. I am tired of the dropped calls and the lack of reception all around the city (Chicago). I say this as both an iPhone user and someone who depends on AT&T for their paycheck.

geeze, chicago and you still get dropped calls?

I've only had one dropped call with t mobile and it was out of the blue. I wasn't driving or in the boonies or anything either. I called back and continued my conversation.

[TheSpaz]

Why doesn't AT&T come up with a commercial to combat Verizon's?

Why doesn't AT&T's commercial show a map of their total coverage compared to Verizon's total coverage? I bet AT&T has better coverage than Verizon.

[ChazUK]

Why doesn't AT&T come up with a commercial to combat Verizon's?

Why doesn't AT&T's commercial show a map of their total coverage compared to Verizon's total coverage? I bet AT&T has better coverage than Verizon.

It's probably hard for them to do so. Comparing their EDGE network versus Verzion's 3G would most likely also be torn apart by some press.

AT&T seem to be getting a lot of bad press over this whole thing.

[sanford]

geeze, chicago and you still get dropped calls?

I've only had one dropped call with t mobile and it was out of the blue. I wasn't driving or in the boonies or anything either. I called back and continued my conversation.

We have great AT&T coverage in Texas. That's why. My best friend in LA, she has problems w/ voice in some areas, others not at all.

I've use Sprint, T-Mobile, Verizon and AT&T and have friends who use all of them. Universally, Sprint is terrible. Everyone else reports equal problems with the other 3 at various times. It's just an ad war. AT&T has less coverage penetration, especially in rural areas, but they have the phone everyone wants. Verizon has decent phones but not THE hot phone, but better coverage penetration. So they're going to scuffle. AT&T's complaint was that the Verizon map seemed to indicate that the areas represented by white, AT&T had no data coverage. But they have decent EDGE in those areas. They have a point. Had Verizon used some other color and noted it was EDGE-only for AT&T's weak spots then this wouldn't have come up, but then it wouldn't be a proper ad, would it? They're not going to tell you the clear, credible truth, not either company.

[mr_matalino]

I cannot see the misrepresentation that AT&T is complaining about. The whole Verizon commercial talks about 3G coverage and the map is clearly labeled "3G coverage". AT&T is all worried because it doesn't show EDGE coverage?? C'mon!

[carmenodie]

like little boys fighting.
Verizon has a point but they don't have the iphone. They are smarting from all the defectors running to at&t for the iphone. Now Verizon has the Moto Droid but c'mon. That is a step back from the iphone which is a power house product right out the box. I don't have a freaking V cast product like all them smart phones on Verizon. The moto droid doesn't have an app store or a multimedia ecosystem like the iphone and they won't get ine either. Why? Cause Verizon pimps all their phones.
I have the iphone and I'm not leaving at&t.
Also, did you hear all the noise coming from the net about how Verizon has increased their early termination fee. It is now $350.00 bucks. Go over to engadget(I'm not spamming) to read the article. WTF! Yeah, Verizon is really trying hard to keep the suckers on their network.
Oh, did you also hear how NASA is using the iphone as a chemical sensor? The iphone is more than what Apple has us to believe it is. It is a revolutionary product far beyond that rebranded, gimmicky trash coming down the pike from them tired cell phone vendors.

[Rootus]

Meh. They all suck. Verizon has the slimiest business practices of any wireless carrier (e.g. disabling data transfer on the RAZR so that you are forced to download pictures through the Verizon network ... for a fee, of course).

AT&T may not have as good a coverage, but in my experience what this demonstrates is that having coverage across large swaths of unpopulated desert does not benefit many people. I rarely lose 3G coverage. :shrug:

Also worth noting ... I took my iPhone down to Loreto, Mexico a few weeks ago for a couple weeks and I had 3G coverage the entire time down there. What kind of coverage would I have had if I were a Verizon customer?

[javaJake]

Good gravy, where does the madness end? Why can't customers be given the choice of whether or not to pay attention to Verizon commercials? Why can't AT&T come back with their own ad campaign? Why must the government be called in every time AT&T has an issue?

Jealous much, AT&T? Is that it? :rolleyes:

</mild rant>

[kdarling]

And I suspect Apple is secretly disgusted with AT&T and would love to open the iPhone up to rival carriers. They just have to be sure they can justify the cost of a new iPhone with different technology that would pretty much only work in the US on Verizon's network.

Every other phone manufacturer can justify the cost.

Apple wouldn't make a CDMA-only phone, though. They'd most likely do the same as HTC, Samsung and RIM, and make a combination GSM + CDMA phone.

A combo phone means one factory model, that can be sold to both GSM carriers and to the 130+ million North American CDMA users (and however many other compatible users, I believe New Zealand is one).

[Xavier]

buzz-zing!

.. AT&T still has better phones though. Verizon, please do something about that (Yes the Droid is nice)

[Goona]

CDMA is inferior technology, which is why it's being dumped. Bell and Telus in Canada just dumped it and moved to GSM. Why should Apple jump onto an inferior and dying technology?

[sanford]

Meh. They all suck. Verizon has the slimiest business practices of any wireless carrier (e.g. disabling data transfer on the RAZR so that you are forced to download pictures through the Verizon network ... for a fee, of course).

AT&T may not have as good a coverage, but in my experience what this demonstrates is that having coverage across large swaths of unpopulated desert does not benefit many people. I rarely lose 3G coverage. :shrug:

Also worth noting ... I took my iPhone down to Loreto, Mexico a few weeks ago for a couple weeks and I had 3G coverage the entire time down there. What kind of coverage would I have had if I were a Verizon customer?

AT&T does have great international coverage arrangements. I get great voice and 3G coverage in the EU.

[*LTD*]

As long as the iPhone is locked to AT&T, the "truth" doesn't really matter.

[tuhoops]

I was told that Verizon's 3G network is just for data. AT&T's carries both data and voice. (I could be wrong).

Personally, I haven't had any trouble with AT&T. Dropped calls are rare (once a month if that often). 3G Data is speedy. Edge is horrible, but my area is covered by 3G.

But I think Verizon will win this PR war.

And I suspect Apple is secretly disgusted with AT&T and would love to open the iPhone up to rival carriers. They just have to be sure they can justify the cost of a new iPhone with different technology that would pretty much only work in the US on Verizon's network.

Verizon's EVDO Rev A can't handle voice & data simultaneously. So, you can't be on a call and check your email at the same time, etc. AT&T's 3G does handle voice & data simultaneously. This is a big difference IMHO. That said, AT&T should just be concentrating on improving their existing 3G network and working diligently to have the best, most expansive 4G network.

[sanford]

Verizon's EVDO Rev A can't handle voice & data simultaneously. So, you can't be on a call and check your email at the same time, etc. AT&T's 3G does handle voice & data simultaneously. This is a big difference IMHO. That said, AT&T should just be concentrating on improving their existing 3G network and working diligently to have the best, most expansive 4G network.

You're kidding. So I can't be on a call and get an email from whomever I'm on the call with? Or look up something on the web or via a web App and tell the caller? I do that all the time. That would be a deal-breaker for me w/ Verizon, if that's the case.

[shiseiryu1]

AT&T needs to stop wasting time and money with its lawyers and instead focus on expanding it's 3G service. There is still no 3G service in the Asheville, NC area even though reps said that it would come late summer...then September..then November. I would SO switch to Verizon if I could get the iPhone on that network.

[jaredmauch]

AT&T finally is getting what they've been deserving. Even if it's just their Mobility(Cingular) division.

I hope they have some similar wake-up calls given to all their lines of business. I'm tired of their still-monopoly selves giving me crappy service for PSTN as well as Cellular. I regularly get dropped calls with AT&T enough that I will avoid those roads while on a call. The baseband crashes on the iPhone all the time for me. Its easy to see how the JB community would find holes in it.

I'm waiting for something more than FTT-maybe-neighborhood, more like FIOS for internet access at home. I wish there was real competition instead of the faux competition. It's just sad. Makes me want to return to Japan where there is real [fast] internet access and better cellular coverage.

[guzhogi]

I knew that the maps in the commercial were for 3G coverage only. Because they actually say their 3G coverage, not total coverage (3G or not). But, to be fair to AT&T, I can see how people would think that the maps for for total coverage. Mainly because people practically never take the time to actually pay attention to what things say. I'm a techie where I work, & we have a color printer & a black & white printer in my office. I have a big sign on the color printer that says "This is the color printer" & a sign that says "This is the black & white printer" on the black & white printer. You won't believe how many people ask me "Is this the color printer? Or is it that one?" Reading: it makes life a whole lot easier.

[sanford]

AT&T needs to stop wasting time and money with its lawyers and instead focus on expanding it's 3G service. There is still no 3G service in the Asheville, NC area even though reps said that it would come late summer...then September..then November. I would SO switch to Verizon if I could get the iPhone on that network.

That's pretty much the point I was making: You have to pick the best phone on the best carrier for the area in which you'll use the phone most. For some people the phone matters more, for some the service type and coverage.

But a $350 contract cancellation fee is outrageous. I'd not sign for that, ever.

[drbroom]

Look the facts are that Verizon is right; AT&T's 3G service is awful! There is nothing AT&T can do about it but stop crying and start fixing it! That said I would love to have my iPhone on Verizon.

However Verizon has problems of their own... For example read Pogues article on how Verizon OVER charges it users and f#(k$ with it's members... (http://www.nytimes.com/indexes/2009/11/12/technology/circuitsemail/index.html?8cir&emc=cir).

Look they are all bad and we (as users) love to see them fight! I am an OLD time Apple developer and love what Google is doing too (anything that messes with M$ is a good thing in my book).

All in all, the droid, the Apple tablet and what ever next interesting mobile device that comes down the road, I hope is open to what ever service we want to put them on...

[sanford]

I knew that the maps in the commercial were for 3G coverage only. Because they actually say their 3G coverage, not total coverage (3G or not). But, to be fair to AT&T, I can see how people would think that the maps for for total coverage. Mainly because people practically never take the time to actually pay attention to what things say. I'm a techie where I work, & we have a color printer & a black & white printer in my office. I have a big sign on the color printer that says "This is the color printer" & a sign that says "This is the black & white printer" on the black & white printer. You won't believe how many people ask me "Is this the color printer? Or is it that one?" Reading: it makes life a whole lot easier.

Exactly. It's not that Verizon absolutely misrepresents the coverage on the map. It's that the maps look like the usual total coverage maps, so AT&T is claiming they are designed to mislead the audience -- which of course they are. Not that AT&T doesn't mislead in advertising. But their point is not what the ad actually says, but what the ad may be most commonly be interpreted to say. Which is a matter for a court to evaluate.

[mattwolfmatt]

Check and Mate.

[reckless2k2]

Why doesn't AT&T come up with a commercial to combat Verizon's?

Why doesn't AT&T's commercial show a map of their total coverage compared to Verizon's total coverage? I bet AT&T has better coverage than Verizon.

The problem herein lies that Verizon does have better voice and data coverage across the US. It can be easily verified comparing maps. I have personal experience with both and can say that Verizon is better.

Unfortunately, Verizon doesn't have nearly as many phone offerings and the prices trend higher. The real issue is that Verizon doesn't have the iPhone. I mean we are in a Mac forum talking about the iPhone. I've always stood behind that fact that if Verizon got the iPhone, I may switch. The may is really more dependent on how much the overall charges are going to be. I'm sure AT&T does the overall prices better which is definitely a consideration that must be taken into account with overall cost of doing business.

The reason I switched from Verizon was because of the higher pricing. And this was before the iPhone. The device works well in the areas that I need it. If I started traveling regularly again, I'd have to jump back to Verizon.

[jholzner]

You're kidding. So I can't be on a call and get an email from whomever I'm on the call with? Or look up something on the web or via a web App and tell the caller? I do that all the time. That would be a deal-breaker for me w/ Verizon, if that's the case.

It's a deal-breaker 'cause it is in fact the case with VZW. Then again, it was also the case with Edge which I was stuck on until we finally got 3G here two months ago.

[acurafan]

note to ATT: upgrade your network already! :mad:

note to Verizon: upgrade to LTE already! :rolleyes:

can't wait to get off ATT, i hate their coverage/service too.

[robanga]

Maybe...just maybe companies should expend their energy telling the public why there products are good, and not why the competition is bad. (including Apple)

The Brits have some good laws about this.

[sanford]

It's a deal-breaker 'cause it is in fact the case with VZW. Then again, it was also the case with Edge which I was stuck on until we finally got 3G here two months ago.

Absolutely. I had an EDGE iPhone originally, and I hated I couldn't do anything w/ data while on voice. I mean I'd go to do it all the time and then remember, oh wait, I can't, I'll have to call you back. Nightmare for convenience and usability.

[rjtyork]

Add my voice to the many screaming that ATT's network sucks. I love my iPhone, but it can't be the world's best phone on the world's worst provider. The only thing about this is that Apple saved ATT by letting them have the iPhone exclusively. If Apple wouldn't have done that, how many of these ATT employees would be added to our growing unemployment population? But then again... Bad companies need to die out. I hope by the time the iPhone goes to other carriers, the economy will be turning around so that ATT can go out nice and peaceful.

[dogzilla]

All this pointless arguing of whether AT&T or Verizon is better strikes me as incredibly stupid. Let's face it, in just about any metric you want to measure, *both* AT&T and Verizon suck. The point of this campaign by Verizon isn't to attract new customers - it's to stem the wholesale defection of its customers to the iPhone. Notice how quickly they changed to focusing on AT&Ts network as opposed to attacking the iPhone itself (eg: iDon't campaign). They realized quickly that attacking the iPhone made them look peevish and out of touch.

Their current campaign is quite effective, and AT&T is only making themselves look even dumber by lodging a legal complaint. When they heard about the lawsuit, I'm sure the Verizon folks were rubbing their hands in glee, and I'm certain their response was prepared well in advance.

But for everyday customers to be fooled by this theater into a "Verizon/AT&T is better" pissing match is ridiculous. You're acting like the mindless consumers *both* companies want you to be - easily distracted by irrelevant posturing while ignoring the obvious fact that neither company can even approach what a rational person would call "good service".

And Americans wonder why the rest of the world laughs at us.

[Gregintosh]

geeze, chicago and you still get dropped calls?

I've only had one dropped call with t mobile and it was out of the blue. I wasn't driving or in the boonies or anything either. I called back and continued my conversation.

Yes, downtown Chicago is terrible reception, always dropping the signal. The GPS also becomes very unreliable. 3G nor Edge work properly. It often oscillates between the two networks and No service.

Elsewhere in the city the reception is a bit better but it often drops calls and is super slow.

[kryptonianjorel]

like little boys fighting.
Verizon has a point but they don't have the iphone. They are smarting from all the defectors running to at&t for the iphone. Now Verizon has the Moto Droid but c'mon. That is a step back from the iphone which is a power house product right out the box. I don't have a freaking V cast product like all them smart phones on Verizon. The moto droid doesn't have an app store or a multimedia ecosystem like the iphone and they won't get ine either. Why? Cause Verizon pimps all their phones.
I have the iphone and I'm not leaving at&t.
Also, did you hear all the noise coming from the net about how Verizon has increased their early termination fee. It is now $350.00 bucks. Go over to engadget(I'm not spamming) to read the article. WTF! Yeah, Verizon is really trying hard to keep the suckers on their network.
Oh, did you also hear how NASA is using the iphone as a chemical sensor? The iphone is more than what Apple has us to believe it is. It is a revolutionary product far beyond that rebranded, gimmicky trash coming down the pike from them tired cell phone vendors.

Holy hell! from they way you're arguing this, you'd think someone is refusing you your toy!

So now that your tantrum is out of the way, lets get some facts straight.

The Motorola Droid is a Google Experience phone. Do you know what that means? Verizon is hands off. Verizon tried controlling all of the features of their phones, but they have relinquished control since the days of the RAZR.

Android does have an app store, and while it is not as vast as Apple's app store, quantity =! quality. There are 2 devices on the market that can use the Apple app store, whereas the Android app store has multiple phones on multiple networks. Give it time, and we'll see whos app store wins.

You do know that ETF stands for 'Early Termination Fee', right? ETFs aren't a problem if YOU DON'T BREAK YOUR CONTRACT. Verizon doesn't want to be shafted by the people who get crazy subsidies and then cancel their service! Just because AT&T is fine with it doesn't mean the other carriers should be.

The chemical sensor thing? Thats one of your master points? Its a handheld device with a decent SDK. I don't see why that makes it special.

The iPhone is getting old, my friend. Same interface, form-factor since it was introduced. People are tired of it, and especially tired of AT&T

The iPhone may be your savior device, but when it can't hold a call due to AT&T crap service, its not much of a phone; it just becomes the "i"

[Fastshutter]

That's pretty much the point I was making: You have to pick the best phone on the best carrier for the area in which you'll use the phone most. For some people the phone matters more, for some the service type and coverage.

But a $350 contract cancellation fee is outrageous. I'd not sign for that, ever.

This.

I live in an area with excellent 3G coverage. One dropped call inside a department store in a year in a half. Never understood all the AT&T hate until my wife traveled to New Jersey for her job. H-O-L-Y H-E-L-L what terrible 3G service. Call quality was dismal, calls dropped two or three times every night, and many time she sent text messages saying the phone wouldn't even dial out. If we had to be relocated to NJ for her job, we would drop our iPhones for Droids in a heartbeat.

[kdarling]

.. AT&T still has better phones though. Verizon, please do something about that (Yes the Droid is nice)

Have you looked at Verizon's smartphone lineup lately? They've come a long way in a very short time. There's almost too much choice now.


Touch Pro 2
Imagio (with mediaFlo TV)
Droid, Eris.
Storm 2.
Omnia 2 coming.
Palm Pre and Pixi early 2010.
Strong rumor says HD2 with Android coming by end of year.


Several of those are combo GSM+CDMA phones, and all except the Pixi have WiFi.

We could also soon see the first new third party phone under Verizon's open device policy... the Saygus Android phone with video calling. (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2355772,00.asp)


.

[benspratling]

Gees... Forget 3G, I'd like it if AT&T's EDGE coverage could reach my granddad's house, where the family will have Thanksgiving dinner.

Two years ago, my dad and I felt cool with our iPhones... until our cousin's got texts and phone calls. and none of our "web apps" worked any more.

[bruinsrme]

The problem herein lies that Verizon does have better voice and data coverage across the US. It can be easily verified comparing maps. I have personal experience with both and can say that Verizon is better.

Unfortunately, Verizon doesn't have nearly as many phone offerings and the prices trend higher. The real issue is that Verizon doesn't have the iPhone. I mean we are in a Mac forum talking about the iPhone. I've always stood behind that fact that if Verizon got the iPhone, I may switch. The may is really more dependent on how much the overall charges are going to be. I'm sure AT&T does the overall prices better which is definitely a consideration that must be taken into account with overall cost of doing business.

The reason I switched from Verizon was because of the higher pricing. And this was before the iPhone. The device works well in the areas that I need it. If I started traveling regularly again, I'd have to jump back to Verizon.

Verizon I had 52 phones to choose from, ATT 49

I think Verizon has better phones but that is as much of a personal choice/preference as whitey tighties vs boxers

ATT may have overall lower prices but with lesser coverage saving a couple of bucks doesn't do me any good when I can't use my phone.
Dollar for Dollar Verizon was $3.74 cheaper with 3 regular phones.

[Goona]

Holy hell! from they way you're arguing this, you'd think someone is refusing you your toy!

So now that your tantrum is out of the way, lets get some facts straight.

The Motorola Droid is a Google Experience phone. Do you know what that means? Verizon is hands off. Verizon tried controlling all of the features of their phones, but they have relinquished control since the days of the RAZR.

Android does have an app store, and while it is not as vast as Apple's app store, quantity =! quality. There are 2 devices on the market that can use the Apple app store, whereas the Android app store has multiple phones on multiple networks. Give it time, and we'll see whos app store wins.

You do know that ETF stands for 'Early Termination Fee', right? ETFs aren't a problem if YOU DON'T BREAK YOUR CONTRACT. Verizon doesn't want to be shafted by the people who get crazy subsidies and then cancel their service! Just because AT&T is fine with it doesn't mean the other carriers should be.

The chemical sensor thing? Thats one of your master points? Its a handheld device with a decent SDK. I don't see why that makes it special.

The iPhone is getting old, my friend. Same interface, form-factor since it was introduced. People are tired of it, and especially tired of AT&T

The iPhone may be your savior device, but when it can't hold a call due to AT&T crap service, its not much of a phone; it just becomes the "i"

LOL at the iphone getting old, is that why Apple can't keep up with demand, is that why the iphone has the highest satisfaction rates in the industry. How many of your Droids has Verizon told, why won't they tell us. I bet you they didn't even outsell the first generation iphone numbers on AT&T in the US and that was a 600 dollar phone!

[PeterQVenkman]

Oooo, sick burn, Verizon!

I love it when companies get all catty.

[sterno74]

LMAO! Too funny and too true. AT&T sucks so bad. The fact that Apple fanboys are so obsessed with owning an iPhone that they will break contract with their existing carrier to sign on with the WORST carrier in the US is just really sad.

I know this is blatant troll bait, but the reality is that I like the iPhone quite a bit and I've found the network to be sufficient. I'm not thrilled with the coverage but generally it works where I need it to work. It's certainly no worse than my previous experience with T-Mobile which I'd been loyal to for years until I switched to the iPhone.

Having said that, if Apple ever signs a deal to bring the iPhone to Verizon, I'm gone. Right now I realize it's largely a hardware issue more than anything else. But with new chips available from Qualcomm that can run on both the Verizon and AT&T infrastructure, I'm optimistic that I can have some freedom to choose my network.

Frankly, so far as it goes, my problems with AT&T haven't been about the network per se. It's been about their policies which largely extend from their poor network infrastructure. Specifically, their slow movement on getting MMS operational (not critical, but their hackey work around before was horrible), and their refusal to allow iPhone tethering. I used to be able to tether on T-mobile and while it was slow, it at least got me basic Internet service pretty much anywhere.

[bbplayer5]

AT&T 3G + Edge + GPRS = Still less coverage than Verizon 3G.

[Goona]

AT&T is the worst carrier but yet they have 80 million plus subscribers and are gaining more every quarter. If it wasn't for Verizon buying alltell, At&T would be in the lead for subs, yeah so much for being the worst carrier.

[kryptonianjorel]

LOL at the iphone getting old, is that why Apple can't keep up with demand, is that why the iphone has the highest satisfaction rates in the industry. How many of your Droids has Verizon told, why won't they tell us. I bet you they didn't even outsell the first generation iphone numbers on AT&T in the US and that was a 600 dollar phone!

[citation needed]

[studiomusic]

Show a map of AT&T's iPhone coverage vs. Verizon's iPhone coverage.

[DakotaGuy]

Good for Verizon. Let's see what AT&T has to say to that.

Glad to be a Verizon user.

I am also glad to have a very reliable network. The iPhone is a great device, however I am very happy with my new Droid. I am also satisified with my 3G coverage on Verizon. Whenever I have signal (which is most of the time even in very rural areas) 3G is lit up on my phone.

It is possible that AT&T works better for some people in some areas, but I'd say overall Verizon is being honest with these commercials. AT&T is going to go away from this lawsuit with mud on their face. It seems they can't handle the truth.

[carlgo]

It is nice that they are fighting over something important. This can only help the consumer.

Is it even possible that enough cell towers can ever be built by anyone to actually ever really work? Maybe cell service as we know it has to be replaced by something else that could actually work.

[kryptonianjorel]

AT&T is the worst carrier but yet they have 80 million plus subscribers and are gaining more every quarter. If it wasn't for Verizon buying alltell, At&T would be in the lead for subs, yeah so much for being the worst carrier.

Verizon had to sell a portion of those customers to AT&T!!!! Are you ignorant?

Keep deluding yourself fanboy!

Verizon's whole map is 3G. He's 100% correct here, my misinformed friend

[Goona]

[citation needed]



No, its not relevant. Best you put your laptop away during recess or you may have it taken away! Don't think I didn't warn you

How many of your precious Droids have been sold, why isn't Verizon telling us, meanwhile I can provide you with the number of iphones sold in the first weekend by Apple, all we have are estimates with the Droid and it still falls shorts of the number of first generation iphones sold, get a clue!

[dmmcintyre3]

At my house:
Verizon: 3-5/5
AT&T: 0/5 (Would not even make call)
Sprint: 0-1/5
T-Mobile: ???

Verizon was measured with a 5 year old phone. 5/5 with a new one everywhere
AT&T was measured with a iPhone 3GS
Sprint was measured with a pile of junk winmobile thing with 20 min standby battery life
T-Mobile is unknown

[smeagol]

I live in the NYC area, got the original iPhone back in the old days, been with AT&T even longer and for the most part things worked fine. I recently upgraded to the 3GS, absolutely love the phone, and starting to get pretty annoyed with AT&T's spotty service. It went from being an okay network to absolutely horrible. Just this past weekend, driving along the Westside Hwy aka waterfront with no buildings to block reception, and my call dropped 4 times... 4 times within the space of 10 minutes :mad:

AT&T should have prepared looong in advance for the iPhone. Love it or hate it, from the first time the iPhone was shown everyone knew it was a revolutionary device that would be the new yardstick others would be measured against, yet AT&T took the wait and see approach instead of having the foresight to beef things up. Now that iPhones are selling in NYC, Chicago and San Francisco like m&m's they're choking and struggling to keep up. They always seem to be behind the damn curve.

If I were AT&T I would patch the remaining holes in their abysmal 3G network in high population density areas, skip spending billions to get 3G from sea to shining sea and start deploying 4G, Verizon is launching 4G "this year" in select cities and I see history repeating itself when "4G map for that ads" surface.

Lastly, Verizon is not completely out of the woods, the main reason they made those ads is because they're hemorrhaging alot of their customers to AT&T because of the iPhone, they had first dibs on the iPhone and rejected it, so the truth does indeed hurt for both those sorry fools.

[iPoodOverZune]

This reminds me of those Alltel commercials featuring ATT & Verizon fighting with each other. I could not find that ad, but the others in the series were very funny as well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AquAS4jcs4E&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlBxHG4vfKw&feature=related

[Mike2128]

I never saw anyone with the original iPhone complain about lack of simultaneous voice/data connection (except for myself). One advantage to CDMA 3G over EDGE is data interrupt, which would allow calls to come through in place of data. My EDGE iPhone always sent calls straight to voicemail if there was an active data transfer.

With regards to 3G GSM, yes, you do get voice/data which is nice, but it also overloads capacity even if someone is only making a voice call on 3G. With CDMA, the cell tower can have separate allotments for voice calls and data sessions.

Not taking sides as I've had all 3 iPhones (and use Apple everything else) and now have a Droid and a Storm 2. They all have their advantages or else there'd only be one phone, one carrier.

[kryptonianjorel]

How many of your precious Droids have been sold, why isn't Verizon telling us, meanwhile I can provide you with the number of iphones sold in the first weekend by Apple, all we have are estimates with the Droid and it still falls shorts of the number of first generation iphones sold, get a clue!

I'm not a detective, so I'll let the clue thing slide. Why is it you think that the number of units sold matter in this circumstance? You keep going back to that; are you trying to compensate for something?

When the iPhone came out, I would have loved to get it for verizon. The AT&T contract, while great in the beginning, has really come back to burn Apple. People keep leaving AT&T because of the bad service and dropped calls. Their iPhone experience has been ruined by AT&T. That'll stick in people's mind if the iPhone comes to verizon.

[DakotaGuy]

Keep deluding yourself fanboy!

I can't remember the last time I didn't see 3G lit-up on a Verizon phone. I guess if it also makes me a Verizon fanboy to expect a great network when I pay my monthly cell bill so be it.

[Goona]

I never saw anyone with the original iPhone complain about lack of simultaneous voice/data connection (except for myself). One advantage to CDMA 3G over EDGE is data interrupt, which would allow calls to come through in place of data. My EDGE iPhone always sent calls straight to voicemail if there was an active data transfer.

With regards to 3G GSM, yes, you do get voice/data which is nice, but it also overloads capacity even if someone is only making a voice call on 3G. With CDMA, the cell tower can have separate allotments for voice calls and data sessions.

Not taking sides as I've had all 3 iPhones (and use Apple everything else) and now have a Droid and a Storm 2. They all have their advantages or else there'd only be one phone, one carrier.

Errrrm who cares if they didn't complain then, we are talking about now. It's now advantage that is present with AT&T, and Verizon doesn't have it with their network.

[mattster16]

Technically I know Verizon will most likely come out on top in this. I can also see where AT&T is coming from, but probably w/o legal standing. The general population is pretty stupid when it comes to technology. I guarantee there are tons of people who think those maps represent coverage, even people who think 3G=cell phone service. Verizon is using that to their advantage and legally they have their bases covered.

In a way AT&T left themselves vulnerable to this attack.

Advertisements taking advantage of consumer ignorance will become more and more common as the world becomes more complex and dare I say people become more and more stupid and passive. Companies will be able to craft campaigns that get one somewhat true point across on a simple level, while on another more technical/complex/less understood level cover themselves legally.

Not saying it is true in this case, but this does have a potential negative. Using this lack of consumer knowledge on very technical issues, corporations can falsely (but of course covering themselves legally with language not understood by the consumer) attack a competitor that has decided to use a different business model or technology.

Please do not try to interpret this post as Verizon vs. AT&T. I'm just commenting on the advertising tactic itself. This tactic has always been used, but I feel our technical world is making it easier to accomplish.

[Goona]

I'm not a detective, so I'll let the clue thing slide. Why is it you think that the number of units sold matter in this circumstance? You keep going back to that; are you trying to compensate for something?

When the iPhone came out, I would have loved to get it for verizon. The AT&T contract, while great in the beginning, has really come back to burn Apple. People keep leaving AT&T because of the bad service and dropped calls. Their iPhone experience has been ruined by AT&T. That'll stick in people's mind if the iPhone comes to verizon.

It is relevant because he said the iphone is getting old, how can a phone that is getting old, Apple can't keep up with demand for the phone. Why does it have the highest satisfaction rates in the industry. If the Droid as a superior as he said it is, why isn't Verizon telling us how many of their so called superior phones which they depict in their ads have sold? It's been a week, where are the numbers Verizon.

[Mike2128]

Errrrm who cares if they didn't complain then, we are talking about now. It's now advantage that is present with AT&T, and Verizon doesn't have it with their network.

Ok. Enjoy your iPhone.

[Macsterguy]

Apple got in bed with AT&T and now needs to find a way to "split the sheets". The iPhone had a 2-year jump on all competition but now the race is very close with the Droid. Nothing lasts forever...

Comparing the networks - Verizon wins, hands down. Because of this, 2009 "was" the year of the iPhone and now Google with Android will close the gap in 2010 and beyond. Nothing else has come close so far...

Don't get me wrong, the iPhone isn't dead... No, now things get interesting...

By "thinking different", Apple once again revolutionized an entire market segment with smart phones and needs to do it again (can we say tablet thingy?).

Somehow, I think they will...

[kryptonianjorel]

It is relevant because he said the iphone is getting old, how can a phone that is getting old, Apple can't keep up with demand for the phone. Why does it have the highest satisfaction rates in the industry.


[citation needed]

If the Droid as a superior as he said it is, why isn't Verizon telling us how many of their so called superior phones which they depict in their ads have sold? It's been a week, where are the numbers Verizon.

Verizon/Motorola has no need to tell you how many devices have sold?

Obviously the 1982 Toyota Camry is superior to a Lamborghini, I mean, they certainly sold more than all Lambo's sold combined...

[mattster16]

The iPhone had a 2-year jump on all competition but now the race is very close with the Droid.


Do you have any data for that? Just curious.

[Goona]

Apple got in bed with AT&T and now needs to find a way to "split the sheets". The iPhone had a 2-year jump on all competition but now the race is very close with the Droid. Nothing lasts forever...

Comparing the networks - Verizon wins, hands down. Because of this, 2009 "was" the year of the iPhone and now Google with Android will close the gap in 2010 and beyond. Nothing else has come close so far...

Don't get me wrong, the iPhone isn't dead... No, now things get interesting...

By "thinking different", Apple once again revolutionized an entire market segment with smart phones and needs to do it again (can we say tablet thingy?).

Somehow, I think they will...
Meh we heard the same thing with the Pre and it had more hype! Now that the Pre has failed y'all have moved onto your next one that you want to lift the pedestal. It seems as if people are so desperate for their iphone killer that they will lift ayt

[LagunaSol]

Have you looked at Verizon's smartphone lineup lately? They've come a long way in a very short time. There's almost too much choice now.


Touch Pro 2
Imagio (with mediaFlo TV)
Droid, Eris.
Storm 2.
Omnia 2 coming.
Palm Pre and Pixi early 2010.
Strong rumor says HD2 with Android coming by end of year.




That looks like the McDonald's Value Menu - lots of stuff, none worth eating.

I'm waiting for the iDon't ads for the DROID to mention that DROID only gives you 256 MB for app storage. :rolleyes:

Dealbreaker.

For the record, I hate all carriers (AT&T included - stupid text messaging plan rip off!) but Verizon are the biggest weasels in the den.

(Actually, I kinda liked T-Mobile while I had them - though I hated my phone with a burning rage (Sony T610).)

[Goona]

[citation needed]



Verizon/Motorola has no need to tell you how many devices have sold?

Obviously the 1982 Toyota Camry is superior to a Lamborghini, I mean, they certainly sold more than all Lambo's sold combined...

Go and read Apple's last conference call, or go and pick up your latest edition of Consumer Reports, or JD and Power surveys, or any of the numerous industry satisfaction rates.

Yeah but Verizon/Motorola had a need shoving all those idon't commercials in our face the past month but now that they released their phone, they don't want to to tell us how successfull it is?

That looks like the McDonald's Value Menu - lots of stuff, none worth eating.

I'm waiting for the iDon't ads for the DROID to mention that DROID only gives you 256 MB for app storage. :rolleyes:

Dealbreaker.

Or wait for it...How many they sold! Why isn't Verizon trumpeting that!

[topmounter]

I'd like to see some traffic modeling done on what would happen to Verizon's network with AT&T's data traffic :) There's a reason why Verizon slammed the door on Steve Jobs and the iPhone.

Of course you have to wonder, should ATT have done the same?

Sure, they've gained customers, but at what cost to the bottom line? I pay about the same for my iPhone now as I did with my WinMo and Symbian phones, but I'm FAR FAR more demanding on ATT's network with the iPhone.

[kdarling]

How many of your precious Droids have been sold, why isn't Verizon telling us, meanwhile I can provide you with the number of iphones sold in the first weekend by Apple, all we have are estimates with the Droid and it still falls shorts of the number of first generation iphones sold, get a clue!

Now you're being extra silly. Of course you can provide iPhone numbers... it's been three years.

But at the time, no one knew how many first model iPhones were sold until Apple's and ATT's earning calls a few weeks later. Everyone used estimates at first.

So since all we have are Droid estimates (between 100K and 250K), you're jumping the gun to directly compare numbers.

In any case, considering the first iPhone had six months' worth of huge hype preceding its launch, versus a week or so of slight ads for Droid, the Droid seems to have done very well.

I'm waiting for the iDon't ads for the DROID to mention that DROID only gives you 256 MB for app storage. :rolleyes:

Dealbreaker.

So you're saying that you think the first iPhone was a failure because it had ZERO third party app storage available? Oh wait... it didn't fail after all.

The Android app limit still allows hundreds of apps, along with their data on the SD card. And I hear that the whole scheme is going to change anyway... just as the iPhone changed over time.

[kryptonianjorel]

Meh we heard the same thing with the Pre and it had more hype! Now that the Pre has failed y'all have moved onto your next one that you want to lift the pedestal. It seems as if people are so desperate for their iphone killer that they will lift anything up. It must be hard seeing the iphone getting all the attention.

Edit button...works great

That looks like the McDonald's Value Menu - lots of stuff, none worth eating.

I'm waiting for the iDon't ads for the DROID to mention that DROID only gives you 256 MB for app storage. :rolleyes:

Dealbreaker.

My friend, you are mislead. It has 256MB to store boot files. Only the .exe equivalent needs to be stored on the internal storage (which is a few KB to a MB in MOST cases) All supporting files can be stored on the SD card.

If that doesn't suit you, root it. It adds features to the phone just like jailbreaking does the iPhone...

[Mike2128]

I'm waiting for the iDon't ads for the DROID to mention that DROID only gives you 256 MB for app storage. :rolleyes:

Dealbreaker.

It also works differently in managing applications. The only files stored in the 256MB are the executables, all data used/written by the app itself is stored on the removable memory. Most app files are 2 MB or less.

edit: beat me to it.

[LagunaSol]

Have you looked at Verizon's smartphone lineup lately? They've come a long way in a very short time. There's almost too much choice now.

Based on the fact that half the phones on your list are merely rumored or pending, I think the word "now" is a little optimistic, no?

[Pierrick]

Every other phone manufacturer can justify the cost.

Apple wouldn't make a CDMA-only phone, though. They'd most likely do the same as HTC, Samsung and RIM, and make a combination GSM + CDMA phone.

A combo phone means one factory model, that can be sold to both GSM carriers and to the 130+ million North American CDMA users (and however many other compatible users, I believe New Zealand is one).
CDMA is a dying technology!

Telecom New Zealand has upgraded to a UMTS-based network, as well as Telstra in Australia.

[bruinsrme]

That looks like the McDonald's Value Menu - lots of stuff, none worth eating.

I'm waiting for the iDon't ads for the DROID to mention that DROID only gives you 256 MB for app storage. :rolleyes:

Dealbreaker.



So if it only cmes with 256M for apps what is the 16G used for?

[imikem]

A world map, showing GSM coverage vs. CDMA. A lot of white area on there for Verizon.

Not that I really care. I have the iPhone, I get 3G. Fun to see the titans slugging it out though. Competition is good. This will likely speed up the network upgrades.

[LagunaSol]

In any case, considering the first iPhone had six months' worth of huge hype preceding its launch, versus a week or so of slight ads for Droid, the Droid seems to have done very well.

Are you seriously going to ignore the incredible amount of hype the Droid got before launch?

[musicaleuphoria]

Suck it Trebek.

[macsimo]

What a lot people fail to mention is that AT & T has several advantages over Verizon. Roll over minutes, easy wordwide use, voice and data at the same time. So while people feel the need to bash AT & T, those same people should be bashing Verizon for not offering those services. As far as 3G coverage is concerned, Verizon is using an old network, CDMA. AT & T switched to the worldwide standard, GSM, several years ago. There network isn't nearly as old. So it wouldn't be as well developed. All we seem to hear about is how bad AT & T is. I will admit that AT & T should have gone on the offensive touting their advantages. In other words, both companies have strengths AND weaknesses. Verizon is not perfect either!

[DDMaKeeg]

Ok, yes AT&T's network cannot support the amount of data being consumed on it. But we have to remember that CDMA is old tech compared to GPRS. Verizon 3G does not allow simultaneous voice and data. That means if your surfing the web, using a web-based app, or downloading email, you will not get any calls. You cannot be talking on the phone and surfing or emailing at the same time. = Dealbreaker for me. AT&T should be responding with their 3G advantages.

[kryptonianjorel]

CDMA is a dying technology!

Telecom New Zealand has upgraded to a UMTS-based network, as well as Telstra in Australia.

CDMA is dying. I think thats one of the reasons Verizon is pushing LTE so fast. They'll still use their CDMA network for 10+ years while they blanket the states with LTE, but then it'll be gone forever

[Mike2128]

That means if your surfing the web, using a web-based app, or downloading email, you will not get any calls.

Yes you will.

[phineas]

This should be interesting in the end we all know that VZW's network is much much better than AT&T's over sold , under managed network.

I'd love to see an advertisement on tv during prime time where both CEO's duke it out on national tv and tell the TRUTH.

Glad my contract's up December 6th, although I am not throwing my iPhone away but will hold out and see if Verizon will be getting the iPhone.

AT&T's been living too high on the hog, Apple is going to sever the umbilical cord and than AT&T's really going to feel the crunch, especially the ones that left Verizon for the iPhone are going to jump right back over.

Come on Verizon, and for what its worth the Android is pretty good, the call clarity is fantastic. But the monthly cost's are ridiculous

[kryptonianjorel]

What a lot people fail to mention is that AT & T has several advantages over Verizon. Roll over minutes, easy wordwide use, voice and data at the same time. So while people feel the need to bash AT & T, those same people should be bashing Verizon for not offering those services. As far as 3G coverage is concerned, Verizon is using an old network, CDMA. AT & T switched to the worldwide standard, GSM, several years ago. There network isn't nearly as old. So it wouldn't be as well developed. All we seem to hear about is how bad AT & T is. I will admit that AT & T should have gone on the offensive touting their advantages. In other words, both companies have strengths AND weaknesses. Verizon is not perfect either!

What you call advantages, I call moot points. Roll over minutes are useless if you're substantially under your usage every month, which is easy since verizon has a lot of free calling (M2M, Night/weekend). Worldwide is easy too, buy a verizon globalphone, or if you're just going on vacation, call verizon and they'll send you free rental globalphone. What is the point of voice and data at the same time (especially with the non-multitasking iPhone)? If I'm on a call, I don't need data access.

The only thing 'wrong' with CDMA is that most of the rest of the world uses GSM. CDMA is a fine technology

[kdarling]

That means if your surfing the web, using a web-based app, or downloading email, you will not get any calls.

No, that's incorrect. That's the way EDGE behaves.

CDMA lets the calls through. It just pauses the data until the call is over.

Again, you can use something like Skype if you need voice and data at the same time, although it's not ideal IMO. Or use WiFi, again not ideal.

[DakotaGuy]

I'd like to see some traffic modeling done on what would happen to Verizon's network with AT&T's data traffic :) There's a reason why Verizon slammed the door on Steve Jobs and the iPhone.

Of course you have to wonder, should ATT have done the same?

Sure, they've gained customers, but at what cost to the bottom line? I pay about the same for my iPhone now as I did with my WinMo and Symbian phones, but I'm FAR FAR more demanding on ATT's network with the iPhone.

Maybe someone could explain to me how high data use affects the coverage area and dropped voice calls. I would think coverage and dropped voice would have more to do with the amount and quality of towers then the 3G data network being taxed.

[Truffy]

So you're saying that you think the first iPhone was a failure because it had ZERO third party app storage available? Oh wait... it didn't fail after all.
Then again, there was no expectation for an app store. Apple created that 'market need' later! :)

[idea_hamster]

"Injustice is relatively easy to bear; what stings is justice."

Dear AT&T:
**** + GBTW.
KTHXBY.

What an embarrassment. :rolleyes:

[LagunaSol]

My friend, you are mislead. It has 256MB to store boot files. Only the .exe equivalent needs to be stored on the internal storage (which is a few KB to a MB in MOST cases) All supporting files can be stored on the SD card.

It's still a silly limitation (and yes, it is a limitation) not shared by the iPhone and not mentioned in the iDon't ads.

You can bet power users are going to run into that app memory ceiling.

[itsmeok]

Oh, its ON now!! Grab a towel AT&T, you just got served!! :D

[ChazUK]

Wirelessly posted (Opera/9.30 (Nintendo Wii; U; ; 3642; en))

Christ.... So much hate for the Droid and even more disinformation about Android...

With the storage space issue, let me explain it this way:

Doom on Android
Stored on rom: Binary executable
Stored on SD Card: WAD files containing level data, sound etc.

The same applies for emulators (binary on 256mb, rom files on sd card).

Is the concept that difficult to grasp?

[swingerofbirch]

I think up until this point Verizon had been on the higher ground. However, that statement that "AT&T sued because Verizon's ads are true and the truth hurts."

I mean come on. I am not a lawyer, but to me, that sounds like language a lawyer would want to avoid. Why would you suppose the motive of another company? Just state the facts and let them speak for themselves. You come off classier.

[Macsterguy]

Meh we heard the same thing with the Pre and it had more hype! Now that the Pre has failed y'all have moved onto your next one that you want to lift the pedestal. It seems as if people are so desperate for their iphone killer that they will lift ayt

Meh, you didn't hear that from me... The pre is not good hardware and it's software came from left field... Also, my name isn't "y'all" - But I am from Texas... :)

I have purchased 12 iPhones for my business and family so clearly, I do not want it to die and it won't (any time soon).

It is simple...
• The AT&T network isn't nearly as good as Verizon's for most - Fact
• The Droid is good hardware (according to ALL reviewers) - Fact
• Android (this is Google by the way, Not windows) is a good platform that is only 2.0 and will get even better - Fact
• There will be many smart phones running Android to suite all taste and needs
• There is only one iPhone (so far) - Fact

[LagunaSol]

CDMA lets the calls through. It just pauses the data until the call is over.

Again, you can use something like Skype if you need voice and data at the same time, although it's not ideal IMO. Or use WiFi, again not ideal.

Dandy.

"Well mom, I would look up the address for you in Google Maps, but I can't while I'm talking to you. Um, yeah, it's a Verizon thing. Let me look up the address and call you back. Or wait - why don't you call me back on my Skype number? That way I could look up the address while we're talking. Here's my Skype number..." :rolleyes:

As I mentioned previously, I hate all carriers. For AT&T users to be arguing with Verizon users simply amounts to "We suck less. Sorta."

[kdarling]

It's still a silly limitation (and yes, it is a limitation) not shared by the iPhone and not mentioned in the iDon't ads.

The iPhone had limits on apps at first too. Still has app size limits, IIRC. 2GB max? Remember everyone wondering how GPS apps would be possible?

You can bet power users are going to run into that app memory ceiling.

Yeah, it's not like the iPhone has power user limits. *cough* multitasking *cough*

And the arbitrary limit on the number of iPhone apps that we can install, see and use at one time... because of not having homescreen folders.

:rolleyes:

[mattster16]

Yes, downtown Chicago is terrible reception, always dropping the signal. The GPS also becomes very unreliable. 3G nor Edge work properly. It often oscillates between the two networks and No service.

Elsewhere in the city the reception is a bit better but it often drops calls and is super slow.

GPS really has nothing to do with AT&T. That's just because of the tall buildings in Chicago, the phone can't get a good satellite lock.

[Macsterguy]

Do you have any data for that? Just curious.

Plenty - Google - Droid reviews (Oh and you will probably use Google to do that) You know, Google:
• Google, the maker of Android.
• Google, the best voice recognition on the planet (gee, voice recognition + smart phone = good things)
• Google - Free navigation on the Droid

Need more data? Google it... :)

[kryptonianjorel]

It's still a silly limitation (and yes, it is a limitation) not shared by the iPhone and not mentioned in the iDon't ads.

You can bet power users are going to run into that app memory ceiling.

Find me 16 GB of apps for either platform (that don't overlap functionality 100,000 ifart apps dont count) and I'll eat my hat

[ChazUK]

Dandy.

"Well mom, I would look up the address for you in Google Maps, but I can't while I'm talking to you. Um, yeah, it's a Verizon thing. Let me look up the address and call you back. Or wait - why don't you call me back on my Skype number? That way I could look up the address while we're talking. Here's my Skype number..." :rolleyes:

As I mentioned previously, I hate all carriers. For AT&T users to be arguing with Verizon users simply amounts to "We suck less. Sorta."

Is this opposed "Well mom, I.... <drop>" (phones mom again)
Mom: "What happened there"
"Oh nothing, I got cut off, as I was saying I'll look up that address for you in google maps." loads google maps and waits patiently as it searches for the address on EDGE and finally gets what she needed"
"Mom you there? Mom? Mooooooooom!!!!!"

Of course this is a far fetched situation but it could happen.

EDIT - The other option is for dear old Mom to install Google maps on her own phone as it is out on a multitude of mobile formats.

[sanford]

Suck it Trebek.

Amen. I was about to say, I really enjoyed seeing Transformers: ROF w/ my kids, who also loved it. I understand some of you hated that movie. I'm okay with that. Really, I am. For a bunch of (mostly) free-market capitalist, democratic Americans we do so awfully want to be fascists about nearly everything.

[LagunaSol]

Christ.... So much hate for the Droid and even more disinformation about Android...

With the storage space issue, let me explain it this way:

Doom on Android
Stored on rom: Binary executable
Stored on SD Card: WAD files containing level data, sound etc.

The same applies for emulators (binary on 256mb, rom files on sd card).

Is the concept that difficult to grasp?

Ah, so the 256MB ceiling isn't a limitation worth acknowledging, eh? Whatever.


• There will be many smart phones running Android to suite all taste and needs

I'm actually rooting for Android as I see it ultimately as a Windows Mobile killer. And anyone who can thwart Microsoft's control of a market is a friend of mine.

But I do think the hardware fragmentation ("all tastes and needs") for Android will become more liability than advantage in the long run, as will its lack of a cohesive design philosophy - with every manufacturer making Android "its own." I think the integrated model (a la iPhone/iPod, Zune) is going to be the most consumer-friendly offering in the mobile phone space.

[nkawtg72]

LMAO! Too funny and too true. AT&T sucks so bad. The fact that Apple fanboys are so obsessed with owning an iPhone that they will break contract with their existing carrier to sign on with the WORST carrier in the US is just really sad.

hey genius, i don't tell you what kind of toilet paper to wipe your big butt with so don't tell me what cell carrier to use.

not that it's your business, but i was with Cingular before AT&T bought it. as others have stated with their experiences, my AT&T service has been flawless. i'm not saying AT&T is perfect. hell, even i hate their customer service. cingular had great CS by the way and never any problems with the service.

also, what the hell does this have to do with apple fanboys?! my iphone has also worked as advertised and it's what works for me. no one forced me to buy it, not apple, not at&t. i made a decision to buy it, because i didn't like any phone i had up to that point, and i believed it would do all the things i felt i had been wanting from a phone.

if you don't like iphones, and you don't like AT&T then there are plenty of other options out there for you, BUT i don't need you getting up in my business. do whatever the hell you want.

ON TOPIC now, since you couldn't be:
i think verizon and at&t are both right in this case. at&t definitely doesn't have as large an area covered by 3G as verizon. verizon is right for calling them out on it. at the same time, i think verizon is being stupid to suggest that at&t can't demonstrate that any harm has come of these ads. WTF?! who are they kidding with an argument like that. if no harm to at&t was ever going to come of these ads, then why would verizon have invested in them. that's the whole point of them, to get people to not like at&t and go to verizon. DUH!!!

it's pretty obvious that verizon would definitely gain the advantage if consumers misinterpreted the ads and thought that at&t didn't have coverage at all in areas that weren't mark. hell, lots of people don't understand what 3G even is, let alone, that there is something called 2G/edge to fill in the gaps. verizon definitely wins here when the consumer is ignorant in this situation.

all that said, i don't think it means at&t has any legal argument. if it bothers them that much, they should fight back with "better" more detailed, educational, advertising of their own and point out that they actually have "more" coverage than verizon, and maybe even demonstrate how they are constantly adding 3g coverage (if they in fact are).

[LagunaSol]

Is this opposed "Well mom, I.... <drop>" (phones mom again)
Mom: "What happened there"
"Oh nothing, I got cut off, as I was saying I'll look up that address for you in google maps." loads google maps and waits patiently as it searches for the address on EDGE and finally gets what she needed"
"Mom you there? Mom? Mooooooooom!!!!!"

Of course this is a far fetched situation but it could happen.

I've never had any call reliability problems on AT&T, but I know there are users who do (as there are users that have call reliability problems on Verizon - it's true!).

[sanford]

I think up until this point Verizon had been on the higher ground. However, that statement that "AT&T sued because Verizon's ads are true and the truth hurts."

I mean come on. I am not a lawyer, but to me, that sounds like language a lawyer would want to avoid. Why would you suppose the motive of another company? Just state the facts and let them speak for themselves. You come off classier.

It's not legal terminology. It's in there, rather wisely, because they know the contents of the suit will make it into the press. This is a PR war. That's what is interesting about it, if you like PR scuffles. I don't care AT&T or Verizon wins. I like my iPhone and my AT&T coverage is great most places I use it -- and I've never had a bad customer service experience with AT&T -- so I'll stick w/ that. I don't need AT&T to beat up Verizon in a lawsuit or a PR war to want to stick w/ my iPhone.

[kryptonianjorel]

Ah, so the 256MB ceiling isn't a limitation worth acknowledging, eh? Whatever.



Thats the only 'limitation' you acknowledge

[Mike2128]

It's not that 256 MB for app executables isn't a limitation, clearly it is by definition. Just saying in practice, it's a lot. I've installed somewhere around 50 apps/widgets/plug-ins and have only used roughly 60 MB, 8 of that going to DocumentsToGo.

[Fastshutter]

How many of your precious Droids have been sold, why isn't Verizon telling us, meanwhile I can provide you with the number of iphones sold in the first weekend by Apple, all we have are estimates with the Droid and it still falls shorts of the number of first generation iphones sold, get a clue!

Verizon sold 250,000 the first week.
http://news.softpedia.com/news/250-000-DROID-Units-Sold-in-One-Week-127160.shtml

So what do you mean 'Verizon isn't telling us?'

[ChazUK]

Ah, so the 256MB ceiling isn't a limitation worth acknowledging, eh? Whatever.

It's certainly not the end of the world and hardly detremental compared to any applications on the iPhone.

A 500K, 1MB or even 1.5MB binary executable is all that is needed on the paltry 256MB.

Say that each executable was around 1.5MB, that leaves you limited to a tiny 170 applications.

OH NOES!

[uncle.zed]

I'm sorry,
but what tha heck does it have to do with Mac or even Apple rumors???

[LagunaSol]

Thats the only 'limitation' you acknowledge

There are plenty of limitations to Android, its jambalaya approach to UI being one of them.

That said, I'm still rooting for Android to do well (and kill Windows Mobile).

[CWallace]

I'd like to see some traffic modeling done on what would happen to Verizon's network with AT&T's data traffic :) There's a reason why Verizon slammed the door on Steve Jobs and the iPhone.

Exactly.

Toss a few million iPhones consuming a few terrabytes of data on Verizon's network and see how well it holds up.

Yes, AT&T's service is clearly less than desirable in many areas and AT&T should continue to focus on improving it's performance in those areas rather then engage in silly tit-for-tats with Verizon.

But Verizon's network is not nearly as stressed as AT&Ts, both due to lack of high-data customers and the current technical inability to handle voice and data calls from a device simultaneously.

[ChazUK]

I've never had any call reliability problems on AT&T, but I know there are users who do (as there are users that have call reliability problems on Verizon - it's true!).

I acknowledge this but it just shows that anecdotal situations mean bugger all to the majority of people.

Say you want to email someone on your iPhone whilst using a GPS app? Get ready to close the app down before emailing the person. We can all make up some crazy situations to suit all sides of the equation.

I for one am glad that in the UK we use GSM (so the data/voice thing isn't an issue), have generally good coverage and that I now own a phone that can fully multitask

[Macsterguy]

Ah, so the 256MB ceiling isn't a limitation worth acknowledging, eh? Whatever.



I'm actually rooting for Android as I see it ultimately as a Windows Mobile killer. And anyone who can thwart Microsoft's control of a market is a friend of mine.

But I do think the hardware fragmentation ("all tastes and needs") for Android will become more liability than advantage in the long run, as will its lack of a cohesive design philosophy - with every manufacturer making Android "its own." I think the integrated model (a la iPhone/iPod, Zune) is going to be the most consumer-friendly offering in the mobile phone space.

Good points

[libertyforall]

GO VERIZON! ;-)

AT&T is a dinosaur!

[rockland]

Both companies are so loathsome, so nasty, and so incompetent that I'm rooting for both to somehow lose this battle.

I can't wait for the FCC to show some teeth and protect consumers from these outrageous extortionary contracts. Let me just buy the phone I want! And choose the carrier I want, for as long as I want.

The technical differences between networks should be easier to navigate, carriers should no longer "subsidize" the costs of the handsets, and consumers should no longer be slaves to the carriers' whims -- and in the case of AT&T to their mediocre service and overpricing.

FCC? FTC? Will the real consumer agency please stand up and protect consumers, rather than oligopolists?

[kdarling]

Maybe someone could explain to me how high data use affects the coverage area and dropped voice calls. I would think coverage and dropped voice would have more to do with the amount and quality of towers then the 3G data network being taxed.

Excellent question.

2G systems often used timeslots. Basically, only one phone or the tower could talk at a time. This has obvious user and speed limitations in a cell.

CDMA radios, which are used by both ATT and Verizon for 3G, steps past 2G timeslot (one talker at a time) limitations by basically allowing everyone to instead talk at the same time.

The usual analogy is to a roomful of talking people. You are able to "tune" your ear to listen to just one person.

However, as more people talk, each person has to talk louder to be heard. The rising noise level causes some side effects, a primary one being that the working size of the cell gets smaller. (The in-out change of usable size according to load is called "cell breathing".)

(z x T x z) = starting Tower radius() with users of type x and z.

z (xxTxx) z = smaller Tower radius with more users.

Note the Z users are now outside of that Tower's coverage. So...

1) Phones on the contracting edges have to offload to a different cell or be dropped.

2) If the cells are poorly planned for CDMA because they were originally set up for GSM non-3G (e.g. many ATT towers), the cells can contract enough to open up dead spots = those phone calls are dropped.

3) New callers can be refused because the noise level is too high.

Now the key: for GSM 3G, both voice and data calls are part of this talking party. So more users of either kind, affects both.

Verizon chose to separate voice and data, so data loads cannot affect voice calls.

[CWallace]

I'm actually rooting for Android as I see it ultimately as a Windows Mobile killer. And anyone who can thwart Microsoft's control of a market is a friend of mine.

But I do think the hardware fragmentation ("all tastes and needs") for Android will become more liability than advantage in the long run, as will its lack of a cohesive design philosophy - with every manufacturer making Android "its own." I think the integrated model (a la iPhone/iPod, Zune) is going to be the most consumer-friendly offering in the mobile phone space.

Microsoft doesn't control the smartphone market because Windows Mobile is so fragmented. They have been unsuccessful in leveraging their PC monopoly position into a monopoly position on other platforms, including PDAs, smartphones, video game devices, set-top TV boxes, etc.

And the same problem is going to afflict Android. Windows Mobile is (in)famous for effectively requiring a new phone to get a new OS and the features it brings. Android is looking no different, with the Gen 1 Android phones said to be not able to be updated to Android OS 2.0 (or if they are, lacking a number of the features).

Since Microsoft makes their money off the Windows Mobile OS, they don't care if people have to buy a new phone - heck, they likely encourage it because that means another WM license sale with the new handset. And with the OEMs offering so many phones within their own lines, trying to figure out an OS upgrade strategy is too much of a hassle for them - and they'd rather sell you a new phone with a new contract, anyway.

Google is giving the Android OS away, so they don't have a vested interest in forcing users to buy new handsets to generate new license fees. Instead, Google is making their money off the advertisements bundled with their Android applications as well as selling the demographic data. But since they don't make money off the handsets, they are not trying to bring any cohesion to the handset market, instead giving the OEMS and carriers free reign to do what they want - as long as they have those ad-supported Google apps installed (and even that seems optional, since an "Android with Google Phone" has the apps and an "Android" phone doesn't).

[iPhoneNYC]

Recently there has been a great quote rolling around about Goldman Sachs which I also offer as appropriate to ATT's position in the cell-phone market: "is a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money." For two and a half years ATT has delivered sub-par service at high rates on the iPhone. Can't we please open this up to other carriers???

[LagunaSol]

There's a reason why Verizon slammed the door on Steve Jobs and the iPhone.

The reason Verizon slammed the door is because Jobs wouldn't let them call his baby the V-Phone with the V-OS (including V-Mail, V-Address Book, V-Etc.).

The pre-iPhone Verizon was much different than the "Crap, we need to change our philosophy to compete with the iPhone" Verizon of today.

If anything, Verizon fans should be praising Apple for forcing Verizon to change its control-freak ways.

(Yes, now someone needs to force Apple to change its control-freak ways - perhaps that someone will be Android.)

Both companies are so loathsome, so nasty, and so incompetent that I'm rooting for both to somehow lose this battle.

Agree 100%. Both AT&T and Verizon (oh, and Sprint too) suck rocks. Perhaps Google will roll out a free wireless service too? ;)

[kryptonianjorel]

Both companies are so loathsome, so nasty, and so incompetent that I'm rooting for both to somehow lose this battle.

I can't wait for the FCC to show some teeth and protect consumers from these outrageous extortionary contracts. Let me just buy the phone I want! And choose the carrier I want, for as long as I want.

The technical differences between networks should be easier to navigate, carriers should no longer "subsidize" the costs of the handsets, and consumers should no longer be slaves to the carriers' whims -- and in the case of AT&T to their mediocre service and overpricing.

FCC? FTC? Will the real consumer agency please stand up and protect consumers, rather than oligopolists?

How are the contracts extortionary? I'd love to hear this one. Don't want a subsidy? Don't get one, nobody is forcing you. I, like many others, enjoy buying a $600 phone for $200 when I sign a contract.

How are we slaves? Because we signed contracts? If you don't want a contract, go prepaid or contractless. Don't like the price, pick a different carrier.

Your points are moot

[akadmon]

No complaints about AT&T here in eastern Mass. I get decent 3CG reception in at least 95% of the areas, probably more. Can't remember last time I saw the E on my iPhone or had a dropped call.

You think AT&T is evil? Good luck with Verizon! In my experience, Verizon customer service is far worse than AT&T, and the company is greedy as hell and uber control minded. Christ, before I got rid of my landline, my phone bill was routinely ~$70 for "unlimited local calling" <SNORT>. And don't get me started on their long distance rates! Now I pay half this much for unlimted world calling on Vonage+Skype.

[HyperX13]

I don't know about Verizon. I travel in car quite a bit. Whenever I drive through Minneapolis, my Verizon phone would drop calls in at least 6 areas. ATT and TMobile would stay on. As a matter of fact I was on a long conference call using ATT between Madison and Chicago and not a single drop for entire 2 hours.

I will say that Verizons data cards are excellent and ATT data cards are pathetic.

I also like the flexibility of taking my phone to Europe and it working there.

My issues with ATT is customer support. It seems like I am always talked down to. Tmobile has the best customer support bar none.

[bergmef]

hey genius, i don't tell you what kind of toilet paper to wipe your big butt with so don't tell me what cell carrier to use.

not that it's your business, but i was with Cingular before AT&T bought it. as others have stated with their experiences, my AT&T service has been flawless. i'm not saying AT&T is perfect. hell, even i hate their customer service. cingular had great CS by the way and never any problems with the service.

also, what the hell does this have to do with apple fanboys?! my iphone has also worked as advertised and it's what works for me. no one forced me to buy it, not apple, not at&t. i made a decision to buy it, because i didn't like any phone i had up to that point, and i believed it would do all the things i felt i had been wanting from a phone.

if you don't like iphones, and you don't like AT&T then there are plenty of other options out there for you, BUT i don't need you getting up in my business. do whatever the hell you want.

ON TOPIC now, since you couldn't be:
i think verizon and at&t are both right in this case. at&t definitely doesn't have as large an area covered by 3G as verizon. verizon is right for calling them out on it. at the same time, i think verizon is being stupid to suggest that at&t can't demonstrate that any harm has come of these ads. WTF?! who are they kidding with an argument like that. if no harm to at&t was ever going to come of these ads, then why would verizon have invested in them. that's the whole point of them, to get people to not like at&t and go to verizon. DUH!!!

it's pretty obvious that verizon would definitely gain the advantage if consumers misinterpreted the ads and thought that at&t didn't have coverage at all in areas that weren't mark. hell, lots of people don't understand what 3G even is, let alone, that there is something called 2G/edge to fill in the gaps. verizon definitely wins here when the consumer is ignorant in this situation.

all that said, i don't think it means at&t has any legal argument. if it bothers them that much, they should fight back with "better" more detailed, educational, advertising of their own and point out that they actually have "more" coverage than verizon, and maybe even demonstrate how they are constantly adding 3g coverage (if they in fact are).


I don't think it's to get new customers now, or that it's saying the iphone is bad. I think over the next 8 months, verizon will be driving the point home that 'ATandT' is not as good as them. Next year when 3G for ATandT is built out a bit better, you'll see 'hey, look at our LTE map, it's as good as the ATandT 3G map was when you were buying the iphone with them'. For verizon, they finished the initial LTE testing with 10 towers each in Seattle and Boston. ATand T announced they are moving up the initial testing for LTE to 2011. Bad news is they will be a year or 2 behind (minimum) on the LTE front. Good news is, verizon is the beta tester for all the new chipsets. My guess, you'll see the iphone on verizon middle of next year with cdma/LTE/svdo (not the mega chip, seperate chips), or at that time it will be promise with a released date being named. The big disclaimer is that the report of the contract length between apple and ATandT must be accurate (mid 2010). Otherwise, all bets are off.

just my 2cents, made up completely in my head (except the LTE testing and ATandT's LTE announcement).

EDIT -> disclaimer, I use verizon, I tested them all and because of the valley I live in, verizon is the only one with a signal right now. I continue to bug people that come over 'who is your cell service with ... any bars?'

[Rodimus Prime]

CDMA is inferior technology, which is why it's being dumped. Bell and Telus in Canada just dumped it and moved to GSM. Why should Apple jump onto an inferior and dying technology?

Again as it has been pointed out before CDMA is not an inferior technology. It is the current technology everyone is using. 3G is a CDMA base tech. Now yes there are 2 standards of CDMA but still it is CDMA and everyone switching over to CDMA because it is a better technology than was GSM originally was based on. GSM standard only became the world leader not because it was better but because they did not have to pay royalties to Quadcom.


****kkk you Verizon, why can't your useless network use voice and data at the same time. Why don't you mention that in your wonderful ads.


Ok, yes AT&T's network cannot support the amount of data being consumed on it. But we have to remember that CDMA is old tech compared to GPRS. Verizon 3G does not allow simultaneous voice and data. That means if your surfing the web, using a web-based app, or downloading email, you will not get any calls. You cannot be talking on the phone and surfing or emailing at the same time. = Dealbreaker for me. AT&T should be responding with their 3G advantages.

People keep saying that but lets be real hear. How often do you really need both data and phone call at the same time. The answer is pretty rarely. I have a curve 8900 (Edge) and the lack of pulling data at the the same time I am on the phone has little effect on me. Yes it is annoying at times but for the most part not a huge deal. If I really need to pull data while on the phone I just try to make sure I have WIFI and it solves the problem.

One thing no one though about is Verizon set up which does not allow Data while on the phone in some ways is a great way to help the network. Instead of requiring 4 connections back to the tower like ATT set up does (2 upstream, 2 down) they only require 2. Doubles the amount of room per tower since only 2 of the frequencies are lock up compared to ATT 4.

Remember all cell phones are nothing more than very advance 2 ways raidos so the principles work out exactly the same.

[kdarling]

The reason Verizon slammed the door is because Jobs wouldn't let them call his baby the V-Phone with the V-OS (including V-Mail, V-Address Book, V-Etc.).

Cute, but of course incorrect. And Verizon didn't slam anything (http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2007-01-28-verizon-iphone_x.htm?POE=TECISVA).

Apple was the one making demands, including where the phone could be sold (ironically, it's now sold in all those places they originally refused).

Apple tried from mid-2005 to mid-2006 to get Verizon to sign up for a phone that didn't even exist yet. Eventually Apple gave up and signed an exclusive with Cingular, who had nothing to lose.

[mattster16]

Plenty - Google - Droid reviews (Oh and you will probably use Google to do that) You know, Google:
• Google, the maker of Android.
• Google, the best voice recognition on the planet (gee, voice recognition + smart phone = good things)
• Google - Free navigation on the Droid

Need more data? Google it... :)

I asked for Data, not Droid reviews. You said the race between Android and iPhone was close - I'd like those numbers.

[LagunaSol]

Cute, but of course incorrect. And Verizon didn't slam anything (http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2007-01-28-verizon-iphone_x.htm?POE=TECISVA).

Apple was the one making demands, including where the phone could be sold (ironically, it's now sold in all those places they originally refused).

Apple tried from mid-2005 to mid-2006 to get Verizon to sign up for a phone that didn't even exist yet. Eventually Apple gave up and signed an exclusive with Cingular, who had nothing to lose.

Yes, I'm sure Verizon had no demands of its own (namely over the software). :rolleyes:

It looks like the "nothing to lose" carrier was the big winner in this deal.

[sterlingindigo]

Spend the money on the needed upgrades, not the defense.

[Bafflefish]

And the same problem is going to afflict Android. Windows Mobile is (in)famous for effectively requiring a new phone to get a new OS and the features it brings. Android is looking no different, with the Gen 1 Android phones said to be not able to be updated to Android OS 2.0 (or if they are, lacking a number of the features).
To be fair, there are features (MMS, anyone?) that Apple and AT&T have rolled out for the iPhone, that not all models support (the original EDGE-based iPhone still has to depend upon receiving a text message with a URL and username/password to access MMS messages).

[LagunaSol]

People keep saying that but lets be real hear. How often do you really need both data and phone call at the same time.

More often than I need 4 simultaneously-running third-party apps, actually.

[Bafflefish]

More often than I need 4 simultaneously-running third-party apps, actually.
How are you running four third-party apps on the iPhone at once?

[LagunaSol]

How are you running four third-party apps on the iPhone at once?

I'm not of course - but running four third-party apps simultaneously on the Droid seems to be a big selling point in Verizon's marketing.

[kryptonianjorel]

I'm not of course - but running four third-party apps simultaneously on the Droid seems to be a big selling point in Verizon's marketing.

Its nice being able to use my web browser without having to close pandora....

[Bafflefish]

If anything, Verizon fans should be praising Apple for forcing Verizon to change its control-freak ways.
Back around 2004-2007, just about the only carrier that wasn't really a "control-freak" was T-Mobile. Everyone else tended to put fairly great restrictions on devices, and T-Mobile was just about the only one who allowed phones sold by them, for their network, to take advantage of features others (such as Verizon, Cingular, Sprint, etc.) locked out: Bluetooth syncing to a PC, custom ringtones from your PC (not having to purchase them), tethering (although eventually they ended that).

How exactly has Apple forced Verizon to do anything? From what I can tell, the iPhone is still one of the most restrictive devices available (unless you jailbreak it).

[ChazUK]

Its nice being able to use my web browser without having to close pandora....
This is why I dropped my iPhone too.

Last.fm audio streaming whilst browsing, emailing, texting and whatever else I want to do = Heaven for me.

[Bafflefish]

I'm not of course - but running four third-party apps simultaneously on the Droid seems to be a big selling point in Verizon's marketing.
That's because multi-tasking is a big deal. I use an iPhone, and not a day goes by where I don't get annoyed with the fact that I have to close one app to open another.

It's one of the major reasons why I'm considering switching to the Droid.

[Stately]

Blatantly false and misleading . . I'm sorry, but I don't think so AT&T. :cool:

[rockland]

How are the contracts extortionary? I'd love to hear this one. Don't want a subsidy? Don't get one, nobody is forcing you. I, like many others, enjoy buying a $600 phone for $200 when I sign a contract.

How are we slaves? Because we signed contracts? If you don't want a contract, go prepaid or contractless. Don't like the price, pick a different carrier.

Your points are moot

Dear KJ,

I'm an iPhone owner. Unless I missed something somewhere, the only way I can use a non-jailbroken iPhone is by signing a contract with AT&T. It's extortionary because, unlike the phone, which I can choose or not choose, and which bears a fixed input cost, I basically HAVE to pay what AT&T says I HAVE to pay in order to own the phone I CHOOSE to buy. And I have no way, short of paying an extremely steep fee or jailbreaking my phone, which I won't do, of punishing this (or any other) carrier for poor service -- both technical (coverage) and customer.

There's the extortion right there. The whole system here is anticompetitive.

[mattster16]

I don't know about Verizon. I travel in car quite a bit. Whenever I drive through Minneapolis, my Verizon phone would drop calls in at least 6 areas. ATT and TMobile would stay on. As a matter of fact I was on a long conference call using ATT between Madison and Chicago and not a single drop for entire 2 hours.


ATT coverege is near flawless in Mpls/St.Paul, at least in my experience. I never have voice issues and data is always very fast. I rarely see my phone drop below 5 bars (occasionally I get 4).

I had Verizon before for about 3 weeks and it was horrible. I even tried a new phone from them during that time. Dropped calls like mad and I couldn't even get service some areas in downtown Chicago and constantly had very few bars.

Sprint was also wonderful while I had it (before I used data) and I'm a big fan of their $69.99/mo unlimited mobile calls/text/data plan. I'd consider getting the htc hero with them if I was looking for a new phone.

Never tried T-Mobile.

[freediverdude]

Hey Verizon, there's an ETF for that.

And about this app storage thing, if I have more than one storage card, how am I supposed to know which card has the supporting data for the app I want to use at the moment? Absurd.

[Stately]

As far as I can tell AT&T don't have a leg to stand on. To me it is very clear that the ad is about 3G coverage. Unless the maps are inaccurate, which AT&T don't seem to be claiming, they're just going to have to put up with it.
Or improve their service.

A suit is ridiculous, because it is proven. Millions of people can't be lying about something like this, so Verizon is not alone. Many are being inconvenienced by AT&T in more than one way. It's just a fact that is being stated. As you and many others have stated, they need to up their performance.

[Rodimus Prime]

I'm not of course - but running four third-party apps simultaneously on the Droid seems to be a big selling point in Verizon's marketing.

And how would the loss of data on those services only while you are on a phone call matter. It just means the updates are done when you get off the phone or get in range of a wifi.

It is not like you will be looking at your phone during that time.

Thank you for a failure to address the argument.

[ChazUK]

And about this app storage thing, if I have more than one storage card, how am I supposed to know which card has the supporting data for the app I want to use at the moment? Absurd.

Why would you need multiple cards? Get an 8GB, 16GB or 32Gb card whatever suits your needs.

Are we saying a platform with upgradable storage space is worse than one you can't upgrade? Absurd.

[HD303]

Service is so bad in the Denver market, I called and complained enough that I had $100 taken off my bill (3 iphones on the account).

Granted it took over 45 minutes of talking with an AT&T rep, but I stood my ground, and the rep could not reasonably tell me that my service was anywhere up to speed as it should be.

FYI.

[slolifesux]

i cant say for certain that vzw voice doesnt work on vzw 3g but if thats the case, maybe thats why att 3g service is terrible.

[kryptonianjorel]

Dear KJ,

I'm an iPhone owner. Unless I missed something somewhere, the only way I can use a non-jailbroken iPhone is by signing a contract with AT&T. It's extortionary because, unlike the phone, which I can choose or not choose, and which bears a fixed input cost, I basically HAVE to pay what AT&T says I HAVE to pay in order to own the phone I CHOOSE to buy. And I have no way, short of paying an extremely steep fee or jailbreaking my phone, which I won't do, of punishing this (or any other) carrier for poor service -- both technical (coverage) and customer.

There's the extortion right there. The whole system here is anticompetitive.

You can buy the phone and use it as a pay-as-you-go phone. No contract. You can own the phone and not use it on AT&T's network. Nobody is forcing you to use the phone at all; use it as a glorified iPod touch for all I care. AT&T can charge whatever they want because they're a COMPANY. Don't buy it if you can't afford it.

[ferrous]

What I propose is all costumers who have been negatively affected by the AT&T's poor network should file a class action lawsuit against ATT's false advertisement and charging for 3G where they can't provide it.

I was drawn to ATT by their claims to be the fastest 3G network in the nation, bought iPhones and now I regret porting all my family phones to ATT, I should have stayed where I was because I was at least able to make phone calls without being dropped every second call! Now I'm paying data plan on two iPhones and I'm told by the ATT and Apple "support" to turn off 3G and keep on Edge, heck, when I told them I will if I don't have to pay for the 3G data plan, i will be fine with that. They said no way. Do you guys see this nonsense?

So I hope ATT get their a$$e$ sued because I'm sure they have plenty of money saved up by not working on upgrading of their networks.

[La Porta]

Dear KJ,

I'm an iPhone owner. Unless I missed something somewhere, the only way I can use a non-jailbroken iPhone is by signing a contract with AT&T. It's extortionary because, unlike the phone, which I can choose or not choose, and which bears a fixed input cost, I basically HAVE to pay what AT&T says I HAVE to pay in order to own the phone I CHOOSE to buy. And I have no way, short of paying an extremely steep fee or jailbreaking my phone, which I won't do, of punishing this (or any other) carrier for poor service -- both technical (coverage) and customer.

There's the extortion right there. The whole system here is anticompetitive.

No one is forcing anything. Yes, you chose to buy the phone, but it also comes with that contract. Don't want the contract? Then don't buy the phone. That's like saying "but my car only runs on gasoline and I want it to use diesel....that's unfair!" Ok, the go and buy a diesel car and pass up the gas one. No one is FORCING you to buy one or the other, and the type of fuel it uses is just part of the package.

I, for one, have my celll phone and my iPod Touch. I don't like AT&Ts service. Therefore, I just don't buy the iPhone and continue to wait it out. Your world will not end by your not having an iPhone.

[bigjnyc]

All this pointless arguing of whether AT&T or Verizon is better strikes me as incredibly stupid. Let's face it, in just about any metric you want to measure, *both* AT&T and Verizon suck. The point of this campaign by Verizon isn't to attract new customers - it's to stem the wholesale defection of its customers to the iPhone. Notice how quickly they changed to focusing on AT&Ts network as opposed to attacking the iPhone itself (eg: iDon't campaign). They realized quickly that attacking the iPhone made them look peevish and out of touch.

Their current campaign is quite effective, and AT&T is only making themselves look even dumber by lodging a legal complaint. When they heard about the lawsuit, I'm sure the Verizon folks were rubbing their hands in glee, and I'm certain their response was prepared well in advance.

But for everyday customers to be fooled by this theater into a "Verizon/AT&T is better" pissing match is ridiculous. You're acting like the mindless consumers *both* companies want you to be - easily distracted by irrelevant posturing while ignoring the obvious fact that neither company can even approach what a rational person would call "good service".

And Americans wonder why the rest of the world laughs at us.

Well said sir! I co-sign with the above.

[MorphingDragon]

Dear KJ,

I'm an iPhone owner. Unless I missed something somewhere, the only way I can use a non-jailbroken iPhone is by signing a contract with AT&T. It's extortionary because, unlike the phone, which I can choose or not choose, and which bears a fixed input cost, I basically HAVE to pay what AT&T says I HAVE to pay in order to own the phone I CHOOSE to buy. And I have no way, short of paying an extremely steep fee or jailbreaking my phone, which I won't do, of punishing this (or any other) carrier for poor service -- both technical (coverage) and customer.

There's the extortion right there. The whole system here is anticompetitive.

Who wants an iPhone straight from New Zealand. Get your hot fresh Unlocked iPhones only $1500. :D

[BJWanlund]

To quote Han Solo: "Great, kid! Don't get cocky." :D

(BTW, that was aimed SQUARELY at Verizon)

BJ

[PeterQVenkman]

Wow, are there really carrier fanboys? Are you guys honestly arguing about this when all networks basically rape your wallet equally? :confused:

Why hold allegiance to a provider?

[smeagol]

Show a map of AT&T's iPhone coverage vs. Verizon's iPhone coverage.

Funny!!! :D

[rockland]

No one is forcing anything. Yes, you chose to buy the phone, but it also comes with that contract. Don't want the contract? Then don't buy the phone. That's like saying "but my car only runs on gasoline and I want it to use diesel....that's unfair!" Ok, the go and buy a diesel car and pass up the gas one. No one is FORCING you to buy one or the other, and the type of fuel it uses is just part of the package.

I, for one, have my celll phone and my iPod Touch. I don't like AT&Ts service. Therefore, I just don't buy the iPhone and continue to wait it out. Your world will not end by your not having an iPhone.

Geez, why all the hostility? Is it un-American to say I'd like to be able to choose my handset (and pay its full cost) and ALSO choose my carrier?

I picked the iPhone cuz I love it! I want to also pick my carrier, and I want carriers to compete, where technically feasible, for my business. I want a carrier that competes to give me the best service, that makes me happy (or at least happy enough...!). There is absolutely no reason why this should be impossible -- or why I should be FORCED to be tied to a carrier just because I chose a certain phone. That way lies mediocrity and consumer abuse.

I thought those fundamental, free-market principles were what American capitalism was all about. I'm not asking for a free lunch, or the impossible.

The car/fuel analogy is faulty because most cars can shop at any station. If every car could only stop at ONE type of station... AND had no control over the subsequent quality (or availability or price) of that station, wouldn't everybody get their knickers in a bunch over that?

[MorphingDragon]

Wow, are there really carrier fanboys? Are you guys honestly arguing about this when all networks basically rape your wallet equally? :confused:

Why hold allegiance to a provider?

The case in New Zealand is, Just about everybody uses prepay okay. Telecom and Vodafone charge 20c per text and 89c a minutte for phone calls. While 2Degrees charges 9c a text and 44c a minute. They also give you free stuff when yoy topup. Who would you be a fanboy too?

[RazHyena]

Seriously AT&T, knock it off. :mad:

The solution is right in front of you(invest in your infrastructure) and still you push this baseless lawsuit. :mad:

Verizon's pummeling will not cease until your network sucks less. Fact.

[smeagol]

The iPhone and AT&T are like that couple you see on the street sometimes, where the girl is drop-dead gorgeous and the guy is... how the hell did he end up with her anyway!? :eek:

[yojitani]

I can't speak for Verizon, but ATT's 3G coverage is crap. It's not even available here yet.

[RyanR.]

To: AT&T
From RyanR.

Please stop wasting time and money on legal stuff and use that time and money to get me 3G. If I don't have 3G before summer when my contract is up I'm out....:rolleyes:

[njchris]

like little boys fighting.
Verizon has a point but they don't have the iphone. They are smarting from all the defectors running to at&t for the iphone. Now Verizon has the Moto Droid but c'mon. That is a step back from the iphone which is a power house product right out the box. I don't have a freaking V cast product like all them smart phones on Verizon. The moto droid doesn't have an app store or a multimedia ecosystem like the iphone and they won't get ine either. Why? Cause Verizon pimps all their phones.
I have the iphone and I'm not leaving at&t.
Also, did you hear all the noise coming from the net about how Verizon has increased their early termination fee. It is now $350.00 bucks. Go over to engadget(I'm not spamming) to read the article. WTF! Yeah, Verizon is really trying hard to keep the suckers on their network.
Oh, did you also hear how NASA is using the iphone as a chemical sensor? The iphone is more than what Apple has us to believe it is. It is a revolutionary product far beyond that rebranded, gimmicky trash coming down the pike from them tired cell phone vendors.

With the exception of the termination fee, this really just sounds like fanboy talk.

Verizon is a business and is pointing out some weaker aspects of AT&T's network. AT&T can just do ads about what's weak on Verizon's instead of crying about it.

Would you expect Verizon not to try to show their strengths against their competitor, who is taking business because of the iPhone?

I don't really get your point.

[marksandvig]

Suck it Trebek.

Kebert Xela

[akacaj]

AT&T is the worst thing that happened to the iPhone. You have no idea how bad it is until you use a verizon phone!

[LagunaSol]

It is not like you will be looking at your phone during that time.

Thank you for a failure to address the argument.

Bzzt. WRONG. I do this all the time. Put the phone on speaker (or while using a headset) and switch to Google Maps or the browser to check something.

Can't do this with Verizon unless you're within WiFi range.

Its nice being able to use my web browser without having to close pandora....

That's honestly one of the very few times I care about multitasking - having to close Slacker Radio when I want to do anything else.

As for all my other apps, closing, launching, closing and relaunching is rarely a big deal for me as most of the apps I use remember their last state, so starting them up again is not much different than switching to an app running in the background, practically speaking.

Would I like multitasking as an option on the iPhone? Of course. Does the lack thereof impact me much on a daily basis? Not really. It's a selling point that most consumers won't really care about (or even really understand).

[slolifesux]

Kebert Xela

best quote yet!

[CWallace]

To be fair, there are features (MMS, anyone?) that Apple and AT&T have rolled out for the iPhone, that not all models support (the original EDGE-based iPhone still has to depend upon receiving a text message with a URL and username/password to access MMS messages).

Very true. And those without a 3GS cannot take advantage of applications that require/interface with the onboard compass.

However, because it controls both the hardware and the OS, you do not need to buy a new iPhone to gain access to new versions of the OS nor many of the features that OS offers. Apple is also able to force application developers to update their applications to support the new OS. And because Apple only has to write for one core foundation (even if there are multiple models with different features and specifications), it improves both release time and stability.

This combination of availability and backwards-compatability are the two main reasons why iPhone OS adoption is so high. Yes, being free helps (witness the much higher adoption rate amongst iPhone owners versus iPod Touch owners), however if you either can't get an update or the update breaks functionality or applications, then a free price isn't the greatest incentive.

And that is where I have some fears with Android. When Apple releases a new major OS update for the iPhone, you can reasonably expect it's going to work on every iPhone out there.

With Android, as with Windows Mobile, that is likely not going to be the case. OEMs are likely not going to spend money porting the new OS version to unpopular models or hardware architectures in their line-up. And even if they do, the owners of that handset may not be able to acquire it if their service provider does not make it available to them.

Application developers are not going to be required to ensure that a new version of the OS will break their application. And with the handset manufacturers and service providers controlling the UI, it's possible an application might not work across Android hardware or provider platforms or due to differences in OS versions.




I'm probably coming across with some as an "Android Hater" or "iPhone Fanboi", but it's the Android user experience and platform execution that has me worried.

Apple has worked hard to ensure a stable platform execution, even if it means less flexibility through restrictions on code access and application types and an application approval process that seems to be based more on whim than technical merit.

Google doesn't make money licensing the hardware, the OS nor the applications. They also don't appear to be getting a cut of the service contract revenues. Where Google makes their money is selling advertising and user demographic data. Like Microsoft with Windows Mobile, Google's goal with Android is to push their applications because that is where they make the money. It's also why the offer many/most of them on the iPhone platform, even though it directly competes with Android hardware and service providers.

[shawnce]

And how would the loss of data on those services only while you are on a phone call matter. It just means the updates are done when you get off the phone or get in range of a wifi.

It is not like you will be looking at your phone during that time.

Thank you for a failure to address the argument. On my iPhone I, on a weekly basis, talk with coworkers (etc.) using a headset while at the same time sending/receiving email, viewing a live data stream from a remote system, poking around on facebook, etc.

I could not do this without having the ability use both voice and data at the same time.

[robanga]

AT&T is the worst thing that happened to the iPhone. You have no idea how bad it is until you use a verizon phone!

How horrible of a move was it? How many units have they sold? What a disaster AT&T was for Apple.

[djchuckc27]

Anyone get good 3G coverage in San Antonio / Austin area?? I live in Vegas (which gets great coverage BTW) and I hope to have the same experince when I move back home for XMAS!!! :D

[Rodimus Prime]

On my iPhone I, on a weekly basis, talk with coworkers (etc.) using a headset while at the same time sending/receiving email, viewing a live data stream from a remote system, poking around on facebook, etc.

I could not do this without having the ability use both voice and data at the same time.
And you are being very rude to the person on the other end of the phone.

Bzzt. WRONG. I do this all the time. Put the phone on speaker (or while using a headset) and switch to Google Maps or the browser to check something.

Can't do this with Verizon unless you're within WiFi range.




And something both of you just proved to me is you are not really listening the person you are talking you. If you are poking around on something mindless (like facebook) you clearly are not listening to the person on the other end and are being rude. It getting pushed to the back ground and filter threw it.

[mattster16]

And you are being very rude to the person on the other end of the phone.




And something both of you just proved to me is you are not really listening the person you are talking you. If you are poking around on something mindless (like facebook) you clearly are not listening to the person on the other end and are being rude. It getting pushed to the back ground and filter threw it.

I agree with you, multitasking really is becoming a societal and decorum problem. Studies have been done to show that the people who think they are good at multitasking are actually the worst at it. I hope you aren't using this as an argument to say it's a good thing Verizon doesn't allow simultaneous data and voice though... There are times it is useful and I think it will become more useful in the future.

[LagunaSol]

And something both of you just proved to me is you are not really listening the person you are talking you. If you are poking around on something mindless (like facebook) you clearly are not listening to the person on the other end and are being rude. It getting pushed to the back ground and filter threw it.

What are you talking about??? I pointed out in my original example exactly how I would do this. "Here, let me look up the address for you in Google Maps. OK, here's the address..."

Yeah, that's killer rude all right! :rolleyes:

There are plenty of ways you would use simultaneous data and voice to interact with the caller on the other end, not ignore him/her.

Funny how you can slam Apple's deficiencies all day long yet so easily dismiss deficiencies in competitors' products. "Simultaneous data and voice isn't a feature, it's rude!" Uh huh.

Keep drinking the anti-Apple koolaid. Whatever. Your endless (and poorly written) anti-Apple diatribes grow tiresome.

I hope you aren't using this as an argument to say it's a good thing Verizon doesn't allow simultaneous data and voice though... There are times it is useful and I think it will become more useful in the future.

Of course he is.

[Full of Win]

Give em' a kick in the teeth for me Verizon!

[Mark Booth]

AT&T: IMPROVE YOUR DAMN NETWORK!!

VERIZON: I'll be back the very second that the iPhone is available on your network.

Apple: Make the iPhone available on ALL networks! Letting the CONSUMER decide which network they want to use the iPhone on is the ONLY way these companies will truly compete with each other for iPhone business.

BTW, I live in San Diego and I have pretty damn good AT&T 3G coverage. But I visit places where the AT&T 3G coverage SUCKS. And, yes, Verizon has much better coverage in those places because I've used my data card with my laptop in those places!

Mark

[Rodimus Prime]

I agree with you, multitasking really is becoming a societal and decorum problem. Studies have been done to show that the people who think they are good at multitasking are actually the worst at it. I hope you aren't using this as an argument to say it's a good thing Verizon doesn't allow simultaneous data and voice though... There are times it is useful and I think it will become more useful in the future.

No I am not but I have pointed out taht most of the time when people want to do it they are being rude and not really listening.

As for a reason for Verizon not to currently allow it. Well one reason is it provides a lot room for phones on there network. AT&T set 3G requires 4 channels per phone to be lock up compared to Verizon 2 channels.
The 4 channels for ATT are
1. Data Send
2. Data Receive
3. Voice Send
4. Voice receive.

Compared to Verizon
1. Send
2. Receive

So as it stand Verizon set up allows more phones to be on a given tower at any one time.


I was more pointing out and calling those 2 on rude behavior on a phone. Mindless surfing the web while on the phone is not an excuse and is rude.
The biggest people saying that it is sucks that it not there want it to be rude but do not come up with a reason on the few times that it more than a minor inconveniences and could not be worked out over the phone.

[JAT]

I'm a techie where I work, & we have a color printer & a black & white printer in my office. I have a big sign on the color printer that says "This is the color printer" & a sign that says "This is the black & white printer" on the black & white printer. You won't believe how many people ask me "Is this the color printer? Or is it that one?" Reading: it makes life a whole lot easier.

Assuming none of them are being facetious due to the big signs, I'd shoot them. Trust me, we and they will be better off.

[LagunaSol]

I was more pointing out and calling those 2 on rude behavior on a phone. Mindless surfing the web while on the phone is not an excuse and is rude.

I'd love to know where I mentioned mindless surfing the web while on a call.

Link please?

[PlayRadioPlay]

LMAO! Too funny and too true. AT&T sucks so bad. The fact that Apple fanboys are so obsessed with owning an iPhone that they will break contract with their existing carrier to sign on with the WORST carrier in the US is just really sad.

As much as I hate AT&T, if you think they are the "WORST", you are mistaken.

I switched to AT&T 4 years ago before the iPhone because I had Verizon, and I couldn't make or receive calls in my home. AT&T had coverage in my area (Aledo, TX). I live in the boondocks, and I have spotty 3g, but constant Edge.

Once again, I hate AT&T, but they are certainly not the worst. All of the mobile carriers are sick, money-hungry corporations. Not just AT&T.

[diamond.g]

What are you talking about??? I pointed out in my original example exactly how I would do this. "Here, let me look up the address for you in Google Maps. OK, here's the address..."

Yeah, that's killer rude all right! :rolleyes:

There are plenty of ways you would use simultaneous data and voice to interact with the caller on the other end, not ignore him/her.

Funny how you can slam Apple's deficiencies all day long yet so easily dismiss deficiencies in competitors' products. "Simultaneous data and voice isn't a feature, it's rude!" Uh huh.

Keep drinking the anti-Apple koolaid. Whatever. Your endless (and poorly written) anti-Apple diatribes grow tiresome.



Of course he is.

What I find amusing is all the things that the original iPhone couldn't/can't do get swept under the rug... I remember being told that doing voice and data at the same time wasn't important when I had first gotten my iPhone. Nor was MMS, or tethering, or native applications.

The only thing I kinda wish they did with UTMS voice and data would be to run them on separate bands that way people talking on the phone around me doesn't send my internet speeds into the toilet (or vice verse).

[amusedchimp]

i'm loving this

spent over 3 years on verizon here in the sf bay area
... maybe 1 or 2 dropped calls (literally) during that period.
then, 1 year after my contract expired
i succumbed to the seduction of the iphone 3g.
I love my iphone.. it is fun and useful in ways i'd never even imagined.
but as a phone on the att network .it sucks big time.
spotty service
dropped calls every day
reception at home waivers from strong to non existent minute by minute.
and even when there appears to be a strong signal it drops calls.

still a year left on my contract. no change ? > will have to seriously consider giving up my beloved iphone .

its really gratifying to see att called out on its abrogation of responsibility to its customers in a large and public way.

[quantum003]

i'm loving this

spent over 3 years on verizon here in the sf bay area
... maybe 1 or 2 dropped calls (literally) during that period.
then, 1 year after my contract expired
i succumbed to the seduction of the iphone 3g.
I love my iphone.. it is fun and useful in ways i'd never even imagined.
but as a phone on the att network .it sucks big time.
spotty service
dropped calls every day
reception at home waivers from strong to non existent minute by minute.
and even when there appears to be a strong signal it drops calls.

still a year left on my contract. no change ? > will have to seriously consider giving up my beloved iphone .

its really gratifying to see att called out on its abrogation of responsibility to its customers in a large and public way.

Rather than type up my own comments and feelings I'll just say "same here".

I have found that when my text messages fail to send it is sometimes helpful to shut down my iPhone, turn it back on, shut it down again, turn it back on and THEN try again. Sometimes I can get a few texts to go through before they start failing to send again! Gotta love a good iPhone hack!

http://www.asu.edu/courses/git335/images/_nb_mediaFrames/1324iphoneHacks.jpg

[alecgold]

Overhere it is the same with tmobile that has a mediocre network but the exclusive contract for the iPhone. So I did go the expensive way and bought a factory unlocked iPhone and went with the right network.
Works like a charm. 98 out of a 100 times I have pretty fast internet.

I really am looking with a lot of fun on to the situation on the other side of the pond :D AT&T really didn't like this ad from verizon! Hehe.

but even if verizon gets to sell the iPhone it's not unlikely that they have big problems with the amount of traffic that several millions of iPhones can generate. Just look at the face of a larger companies ICO when someone suggests giving a lot of people an iPhone.

[PeterQVenkman]

The case in New Zealand is, Just about everybody uses prepay okay. Telecom and Vodafone charge 20c per text and 89c a minutte for phone calls. While 2Degrees charges 9c a text and 44c a minute. They also give you free stuff when yoy topup. Who would you be a fanboy too?

Hmmm, sounds different down there. Don't see how that applies to Verizon vs. AT&T.

I still wouldn't be a fanboy to a phone company for raping me less than the next corporation.

[stepnw1f]

LMAO! Too funny and too true. AT&T sucks so bad. The fact that Apple fanboys are so obsessed with owning an iPhone that they will break contract with their existing carrier to sign on with the WORST carrier in the US is just really sad.

Nah, what's sad is a person wasting their time trolling on a discussion board to just try to insult people. How old are ya, 10?

[LagunaSol]

What I find amusing is all the things that the original iPhone couldn't/can't do get swept under the rug.

By whom? People here have been griping about MMS, tethering, native apps, etc. since day one.

Speaking of tethering, I haven't heard the Verizon/DROID fans wave that feature around much after Verizon announced it would cost $30 a month on top of your regular data plan. :rolleyes:

[The Monkey]

Geez, why all the hostility? Is it un-American to say I'd like to be able to choose my handset (and pay its full cost) and ALSO choose my carrier?

I picked the iPhone cuz I love it! I want to also pick my carrier, and I want carriers to compete, where technically feasible, for my business. I want a carrier that competes to give me the best service, that makes me happy (or at least happy enough...!). There is absolutely no reason why this should be impossible -- or why I should be FORCED to be tied to a carrier just because I chose a certain phone. That way lies mediocrity and consumer abuse.

I thought those fundamental, free-market principles were what American capitalism was all about. I'm not asking for a free lunch, or the impossible.

The car/fuel analogy is faulty because most cars can shop at any station. If every car could only stop at ONE type of station... AND had no control over the subsequent quality (or availability or price) of that station, wouldn't everybody get their knickers in a bunch over that?

The above post is, of course, correct. The problem with the corporate apologists on this board (i.e., the majority) is that they think they actually are supporting "fundamental, free-market principles" by resorting to the tired and silly refrain of "Don't like it, don't buy it." Through a combination of no regulatory oversight whatsover in the recent past, carefully crafted messages, and general ignorance, it appears that many consumers now consider corporations good; consumer advocacy bad. Unreal.

[LagunaSol]

The problem with the corporate apologists on this board (i.e., the majority) is that they think they actually are supporting "fundamental, free-market principles" by resorting to the tired and silly refrain of "Don't like it, don't buy it."

Um, "Don't like it, don't buy it" is exactly what fundamental free-market principles are all about.

[BrianKonarsMac]

I hope Verizon crushes AT&T in court - their commercial was perfectly legit, and AT&T is just upset over being exposed for their lack of investment.

[The Monkey]

The post above illustrates my point precisely. Competition is what the free market is about. The "don't like it, don't buy it" is the refrain used to defend the anticompetitive practices that define the US cellular industry.

[rockland]

The above post is, of course, correct. The problem with the corporate apologists on this board (i.e., the majority) is that they think they actually are supporting "fundamental, free-market principles" by resorting to the tired and silly refrain of "Don't like it, don't buy it." Through a combination of no regulatory oversight whatsover in the recent past, carefully crafted messages, and general ignorance, it appears that many consumers now consider corporations good; consumer advocacy bad. Unreal.

Thanks TM. I got nothing against corporations. I just get pissed off at uncompetitive behavior such as this one, which antitrust lawyers call "tying".

Choice means more than take it or leave it. Choice means choose the BEST carrier for you, that works with the BEST phone for you. Only regulatory agencies, be they the FCC, the FTC, or the DOJ can break up these unholy deals. (In selecting a desperate, mediocre carrier for this deal, Apple is not without blame either, by the way.)

[LagunaSol]

The post above illustrates my point precisely. Competition is what the free market is about. The "don't like it, don't buy it" is the refrain used to defend the anticompetitive practices that define the US cellular industry.

Competition is "don't like it, don't buy it." The consumers decide what they will tolerate and what they won't by voting with their dollars.

I would love to know your solution for the "wireless carriers suck" (which they do) dilemma we're all in right now. A new government department I imagine? :rolleyes:

[TheSlush]

A summary of Verizon's 6-page response:

:rolleyes:

[The Monkey]

Competition is "don't like it, don't buy it." The consumers decide what they will tolerate and what they won't by voting with their dollars.

I would love to know your solution for the "wireless carriers suck" (which they do) dilemma we're all in right now. A new government department I imagine? :rolleyes:

Another typical refrain! I'll bet you're going to accuse me of being a socialist next!

Why do you think wireless carriers suck? They don't respond to "don't like it, don't buy it." Why not? Because they don't have to. They can survive by providing crap service and phones tied to outrageous contracts.

We have all the regulatory agencies we need. They just didn't do anything for most of a decade. That seemed to work out well, didn't it? A DOJ/FTC doing its job would eliminate the illegal tying arrangements that have become the de facto standard (which does not make it legal), and let these companies truly compete. That's in your best interest, yet you (and not just you, but most others on this board) seem terrified of it. Why?

[La Porta]

Geez, why all the hostility? Is it un-American to say I'd like to be able to choose my handset (and pay its full cost) and ALSO choose my carrier?

I honestly am not trying to be hostile, I just don't understand how people think that they have a leg to stand on with that argument. Seriously, Apple could have not even have made the iPhone...or could decide to discontinue it tomorrow. Then where would you have been/be? They have no "responsibility" to anyone: they are not a government that is accountable to a populace. All they have to do is make sure that the terms of the agreement of sale are satisfied when you pay money. If they don't (i.e. DOA equipment), then yes, they are responsible. Short of that, they can make and sell things as they please: they invent these devices and sell them. No one has a "right" to have them. Also, my analogy with the fuel still holds: I never said anything about service stations. Even if you include them, you still can chose what car (or phone) you like, but sometimes you cant chose which fuel (or service) it runs on. If you want to add "service availability" into it, consider that a lot of fuel stations don't have diesel available at them...just like AT&T coverage might not be everywhere.

You technically can do whatever you want. You can open the iPhone, modify it electronically if you have the know-how, and get it to work on other networks. It is possible. No one is going to throw you in jail if you do so.

Do I think it is ridiculous that you can only use this on AT&T? Absolutely. Is there anything I can do about it...and should there be anything I can do about it? No. I can understand that you and others are upset about it, but arguing that it is "unfair" is not the same as "that stinks." Unfortunate and unfair are vastly different....and I do believe that not being able to use your service is unfortunate...but not unfair.

[rockland]

Competition is "don't like it, don't buy it." The consumers decide what they will tolerate and what they won't by voting with their dollars.

I would love to know your solution for the "wireless carriers suck" (which they do) dilemma we're all in right now. A new government department I imagine? :rolleyes:

Competition in economic terms means consumers are given a CHOICE of services, and market powers determine the winner. Which gives the players a reason to compete. When players are secure in knowing that whether they suck or not, their business will not be lost, that's not competition. That's monopoly. And that's not a free market.

And no, you DON'T need a new government department... You just need the existing agencies charged with regulation (the aforementioned FCC, FTC, or DOJ) to get off their duffs and do their job.

When the market is fair, carriers won't suck (so much:)) -- because their consumers will be empowered to punish them for sucking. That's the way our economic system is supposed to work.

[The Monkey]

They have no "responsibility" to anyone: they are not a government that is accountable to a populace. All they have to do is make sure that the terms of the agreement of sale are satisfied when you pay money.

Of course Apple has a responsibility to "someone." In fact, it's the sole purpose for its existence: to generate profit for its shareholders, to whom it is absolutely 100% accountable.

[heisetax]

We have great AT&T coverage in Texas. That's why. My best friend in LA, she has problems w/ voice in some areas, others not at all.

I've use Sprint, T-Mobile, Verizon and AT&T and have friends who use all of them. Universally, Sprint is terrible. Everyone else reports equal problems with the other 3 at various times. It's just an ad war. AT&T has less coverage penetration, especially in rural areas, but they have the phone everyone wants. Verizon has decent phones but not THE hot phone, but better coverage penetration. So they're going to scuffle. AT&T's complaint was that the Verizon map seemed to indicate that the areas represented by white, AT&T had no data coverage. But they have decent EDGE in those areas. They have a point. Had Verizon used some other color and noted it was EDGE-only for AT&T's weak spots then this wouldn't have come up, but then it wouldn't be a proper ad, would it? They're not going to tell you the clear, credible truth, not either company.

But the Verizon ad only dealt with AT&T's 3G network. It is AT&T's place to show what they want. AT&T includes their Edge network because they know that Verizon is correct with their AT&T 3G network's limited coverage.

If Verizon would have been smart & courted Apple to get the iPhone then AT&T could be doing something similar to show Verizon weaknesses.

It the Droid works well maybe we can have some competition. This will let us see how good of a network Verizon actually has. On paper it looks good & better than AT&T. Let's get some equal data flow & see what happens in the real world.

[happydude]

hard to argue against that. eat it at&t. and common, apple, end the exclusivity deal already!!!

[The Monkey]

But the Verizon ad only dealt with AT&T's 3G network. It is AT&T's place to show what they want. AT&T includes their Edge network because they know that Verizon is correct with their AT&T 3G network's limited coverage.


The problem is that an advertiser is responsible for all reasonable takeaways from its advertisements. So, if it is unclear or ambiguous that Verizon was referring only to the 3G network, then arguably it has a problem. However, in my opinion, to think it was a map of all coverage is not a reasonable takeaway. AT&T likely is trying to decide whether to do a consumer survey, if it hasn't already, although those are often highly unreliable.

[inkswamp]

I don't have any complaints about AT&T's service in my area, but this whole debacle is really making them look like a bunch of whiners. They could slam Verizon right back on any number of topics. There are enough reports out there in the public realm to justify AT&T slamming Verizon on their horrible customer service but they chose to litigate which is weak.

Now I'm hoping the rumors about Apple switching to Verizon is true. I'm starting to think they would be a better partner for Apple solely because they're willing to put up a fight.

[chstr]

Oh no you di-int!!!!

haha eat it att you suck balls :p

[archipellago]

.and think of this quote..

"in some parts of america I honestly think that people have begun to mate with vegetables.."

Jeremy Clarkson BBC TV 2007


Apple forever trumpet the 'completeness' of the user experience with their products. Remember SJ at the launcxh of the iPhone saying the killer app was the phone?

laugh??

Apple went with ATT despite the consumer, they went for the $$$$ as ATT paid the most. Same with O2 in the UK..

I wish some of you Apple apologists could see through iCon for what it actually is.

If it wasn't funny it'd be tragic...

[rockland]

I honestly am not trying to be hostile, I just don't understand how people think that they have a leg to stand on with that argument. Seriously, Apple could have not even have made the iPhone...or could decide to discontinue it tomorrow. Then where would you have been/be? They have no "responsibility" to anyone: they are not a government that is accountable to a populace. All they have to do is make sure that the terms of the agreement of sale are satisfied when you pay money. If they don't (i.e. DOA equipment), then yes, they are responsible. Short of that, they can make and sell things as they please: they invent these devices and sell them. No one has a "right" to have them. Also, my analogy with the fuel still holds: I never said anything about service stations. Even if you include them, you still can chose what car (or phone) you like, but sometimes you cant chose which fuel (or service) it runs on. If you want to add "service availability" into it, consider that a lot of fuel stations don't have diesel available at them...just like AT&T coverage might not be everywhere.

You technically can do whatever you want. You can open the iPhone, modify it electronically if you have the know-how, and get it to work on other networks. It is possible. No one is going to throw you in jail if you do so.

Do I think it is ridiculous that you can only use this on AT&T? Absolutely. Is there anything I can do about it...and should there be anything I can do about it? No. I can understand that you and others are upset about it, but arguing that it is "unfair" is not the same as "that stinks." Unfortunate and unfair are vastly different....and I do believe that not being able to use your service is unfortunate...but not unfair.

Dear LP,

I totally agree that Apple didn't have to make the iPhone. That's not my argument. I'm not some namby-pamby lib'rul crying that I should have what I want and if I can't SOMEONE should do something about it. I'm only saying that the way this model is set up -- with "exclusive, subsidized" contracts for a given phone is simply anticompetitive.

I don't want a subsidized phone tied to a devil's bargain (which is actually no bargain at all, once you do the math). I simply want competition in carriers, just as handset makers compete. That's all. There is no technical reason why (at least some of the carriers) could not compete for the business of people who own cell phones. The only reason they do not compete is because of these deals that are designed to LOCK OUT competition.

[archipellago]

Dear LP,

I totally agree that Apple didn't have to make the iPhone. That's not my argument. I'm not some namby-pamby lib'rul crying that I should have what I want and if I can't SOMEONE should do something about it. I'm only saying that the way this model is set up -- with "exclusive, subsidized" contracts for a given phone is simply anticompetitive.

I don't want a subsidized phone tied to a devil's bargain (which is actually no bargain at all, once you do the math). I simply want competition in carriers, just as handset makers compete. That's all. There is no technical reason why (at least some of the carriers) could not compete for the business of people who own cell phones. The only reason they do not compete is because of these deals that are designed to LOCK OUT competition.

+1

Apple's idea..

[rockland]

+1

Apple's idea..

Absolutely. That's why I said Apple shares the blame. They undoubtedly were in the driver's seat with a weakened, insecure carrier, and extracted the best deal they could get -- their customers be damned.

Their tendency toward obsessive control -- which is so good for creating beautiful, powerful products -- is a little less good in their market (and after-market) practices.

But at least they create products that are beautiful and practical and inspiring -- which is why so many people are fanatics. The carriers, not so much...

[TheSlush]

Show a map of AT&T's iPhone coverage vs. Verizon's iPhone coverage.

LOL. Right on.

[slapppy]

Seems to me that Verizon got it right with the ad. Verizon 3G coverage versus AT&T 3G coverage. Big words right on your face. How much more clearer does AT&T want it to be? Verizon basically body slammed AT&T with 3G coverage. It's the truth, right there, front and center.

[Johnny2009]

I went to a Verizon Store this past weekend and tried the DROID... What a piece of crap!!! Seriously...it was very very hard to get around on it and the slider keyboard sucks ass... The iPhone is so much better then that Droid, its no contest... All this crap that is going on with ATT and Verizon is just jealousy on Verizon's part because ATT is catching up with them in total customers across the board... Verizon's colors suits them well... RED, because of all the bleeding from people switching to ATT for the iPhone... Verizon you can take your crappy APP Store and V-Cast and phone crippling and shove it... Oh, and one more thing... I do not know of one single Verizon phone that doesnt have their crappy logo on it...

[TheSlush]

I knew that the maps in the commercial were for 3G coverage only. Because they actually say their 3G coverage, not total coverage (3G or not). But, to be fair to AT&T, I can see how people would think that the maps for for total coverage. Mainly because people practically never take the time to actually pay attention to what things say. I'm a techie where I work, & we have a color printer & a black & white printer in my office. I have a big sign on the color printer that says "This is the color printer" & a sign that says "This is the black & white printer" on the black & white printer. You won't believe how many people ask me "Is this the color printer? Or is it that one?" Reading: it makes life a whole lot easier.

The 3G coverage maps in Verizon's ads may or may not have been secretly meant to mislead viewers, but in any case they are technically accurate as labelled. Therefore, any confusion is the fault of the inattentive (or illiterate) viewer. AT&T may have an "emotional" complaint here, but I just don't think they really have much of a "legal" complaint. The courts can't legislate people's attentiveness! (Nor should they.)

[newguineafan]

I live in New Jersey, and the best carriers are as follows:

Verizon
AT&T
Sprint
T-Mobile

I've been a Verizon customer for a long time, but let's face it. For years, Verizon has been a controlling and manipulating company. Up until very recently, almost all of their phones have had that piss-poor VZ Navigator as the default interface.

But AT&T sucks for not upgrading their networks. Trust me, I've used AT&T as well and they are downright terrible. Dropped calls, ****** service, you name it. That's the only reason I (and most people) refused to switch to the iPhone.

Only recently has Verizon begun to offer better phones. If we were talking about Verizon phones last year, the best phone I could offer up would have been the Omnia. Meh.

AT&T, improve your ****** service instead of bitching about being sued. Verizon, stop your controlling and cry-baby tactics.

Enough said.

[erikdiamond]

Good gravy, where does the madness end?

As long as we have Arabs and Jews fighting over land in the middle east, the madness never ends. :-P

[The Monkey]

The 3G coverage maps in Verizon's ads may or may not have been secretly meant to mislead viewers, but in any case they are technically accurate as labelled. Therefore, any confusion is the fault of the inattentive (or illiterate) viewer. AT&T may have an "emotional" complaint here, but I just don't think they really have much of a "legal" complaint. The courts can't legislate people's attentiveness! (Nor should they.)

Not exactly. An advertising claim can be literally true but still likely to mislead or confuse consumers, a doctrine recognized by the courts as "false by necessary implication." Such a claim is actionable. It is difficult to prove such claims without consumer survey data, but a court will sometimes substitute its own judgment for the consumer (although this more often happens in disputes before self-regulatory organizations such as NAD).

Also, the courts don't legislate. That's the legislature.

[Xibalba]

LMAO! Too funny and too true. AT&T sucks so bad. The fact that Apple fanboys are so obsessed with owning an iPhone that they will break contract with their existing carrier to sign on with the WORST carrier in the US is just really sad.

This is exactly what I did 2 years ago - break contract to obtain an iPhone and it was the best decision that I have made in quite some time. I would rather have an incredible hardware device that works the best for me even with poorer coverage than great coverage but a poor device with subpar features and functionality.

Plus, I personally have had little problems with AT&T service except where I live but Verizon and Sprint are equally poor in my neighborhood. Most of the time I am around wifi anyways - making the network a moot point.

As a physician, I depend on the iPhone to improve quality of care at point of care - including in the office and hospital bedside. No other phone hardware can compete with the functionality of the iPhone for me. I welcome the Android OS with anticipation, but am not confident any hardware will come out to rival the quality of the iPhone. Until better hardware comes out, I will continue to upgrade my iPhone yearly...

[twoodcc]

AT&T does need to work on it's network, but i also don't like what version is doing with the ads either

[dukebound85]

AT&T does need to work on it's network, but i also don't like what version is doing with the ads either

its the same nature as the obnoxious apple ads, which i hate

[newguineafan]

AT&T does need to work on it's network, but i also don't like what version is doing with the ads either

Damn that Version.

[Full of Win]

Um, "Don't like it, don't buy it" is exactly what fundamental free-market principles are all about.
Ding Ding Ding we have a winner


This is exactly what the free market is all about, a competition of ideas and skills. May the company with the best service, product or idea win. This 'nanny' stuff of going to the government for judicial relief from ads that are accurate is BUNK.

[Sweetbike40]

As much as i love my iPhone, it sucks as a phone/email/texts.... i've blamed it on the phone but i realized it has to do with the 3G service. Sometimes my email will lag forever to send.... i thought it was my email service settings but as soon as i kind find wi-fi, it sends instantly. Voicemail.....why do i get voicemail hours after the person leaves a message? Do they realize how bad this is?????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AT&T BLOWS.

[MorphingDragon]

This 'nanny' stuff of going to the government for judicial relief from ads that are accurate is BUNK.

Tribunals FTW!

---

He says while sweden is busy making 1MBS Broadband a human right. :rolleyes: Now thats the type of Government control I want. :D

[MxChino]

Where the hell are you people calling from that you have to be able to look up data while on the phone? I'm around a computer or have WIFI access almost everywhere I'm making calls from.

[NiteWaves77]

Woe to those who switch to Verizon's superior network only to find out the company's suits require handset manufactures to shut off basic features like Bluetooth object transfer.

Would you like a bowl of barf or bag of dog crap? The choice is yours!

[Techhie]

Where the hell are you people calling from that you have to be able to look up data while on the phone? I'm around a computer or have WIFI access almost everywhere I'm making calls from.

There are some people that aren't next to a laptop all day :rolleyes:

[MadMacxxx]

Where the hell are you people calling from that you have to be able to look up data while on the phone? I'm around a computer or have WIFI access almost everywhere I'm making calls from.

Well good for you! You don't represent everyone. So don't worry about where or how people are making their calls, the fact is that AT&T's overall network coverage is poor in comparison to the other US networks. It doesn't matter that I personally get great service in my local area, I'm just 1 tiny part of the equation.

[archipellago]

Ding Ding Ding we have a winner


This is exactly what the free market is all about, a competition of ideas and skills. May the company with the best service, product or idea win. This 'nanny' stuff of going to the government for judicial relief from ads that are accurate is BUNK.

Hungry?

see that loaf of bread over there at $50?

"don't like it, don't buy it.."

ding.ding, we have something...but it ain't a winner!

[Techhie]

Hungry?

see that loaf of bread over there at $50?

"don't like it, don't buy it.."

ding.ding, we have something...but it ain't a winner!

That's right, in these parts it's called a winrar

[The Monkey]

Hungry?

see that loaf of bread over there at $50?

"don't like it, don't buy it.."

ding.ding, we have something...but it ain't a winner!

Exactly. The complete and utter lack of even the most basic understanding of economics and anticompetitive behavior is very disconcerting. Of course, that's one of the reasons we find ourselves in our current predicament.

I encourage many of the people in this thread to check out the antitrust section of DOJ's website and the entire FTC website. There is a wealth of information there, much of it apolitical.

[rockland]

Ding Ding Ding we have a winner


This is exactly what the free market is all about, a competition of ideas and skills. May the company with the best service, product or idea win. This 'nanny' stuff of going to the government for judicial relief from ads that are accurate is BUNK.

Um, FoW, you're confusing 2 different topics from this post. Nobody is looking for judicial relief from ads!

[Full of Win]

Hungry?

see that loaf of bread over there at $50?

"don't like it, don't buy it.."

ding.ding, we have something...but it ain't a winner!

Welcome to the free market. If no one buys it, the cost will have to be reduced or the bread will go bad and the profit lost.

[The Monkey]

Welcome to the free market. If no one buys it, the cost will have to be reduced or the bread will go bad and the profit lost.


Wrong again. Your superficial analysis works sometimes, but you ignore the many dynamic factors at work here. Only in a market that is operating properly will your prediction come true. In a market with restraints on competition, the bread goes bad and you pay more for it.

[kdarling]

Woe to those who switch to Verizon's superior network only to find out the company's suits require handset manufactures to shut off basic features like Bluetooth object transfer.


Nope. Verizon does not shut off Bluetooth options on their smartphones.

The only major company that is missing a lot of useful Bluetooth stacks on their smartphones is Apple. There's no BT object transfer on the iPhone... or keyboard or serial or other useful protocols.

[czachorski]

Wrong again. Your superficial analysis works sometimes, but you ignore the many dynamic factors at work here. Only in a market that is operating properly will your prediction come true. In a market with restraints on competition, the bread goes bad and you pay more for it.

Or you buy potatoes - there are plenty of cheap ones in the cell market. But you can't expect a nice cinnamon swirl cinnabon bread for the price of plain white, and then cry market foul when you don't get it.

[The Monkey]

Or you buy potatoes - there are plenty of cheap ones in the cell market. But you can't expect a nice cinnamon swirl cinnabon bread for the price of plain white, and then cry market foul when you don't get it.

What?

[czachorski]

What?

I find it odd to be complaining about $50 bread when $5 potatoes are available on the next vendor stand, and the $50 dollar bread is selling at that price, and therefore priced that way, because people have a taste for it because it is really good bread, and then attempting to blame the $50 bread on market constraints, rather than free market dynamics.

Or I may have completely mis-understood the past dozen or so posts. That's possible - they were a little confusing.

[The Monkey]

I find it odd to be complaining about $50 bread when $5 potatoes are available on the next vendor stand, and the $50 dollar bread is selling at that price, and therefore priced that way, because people have a taste for it because it is really good bread, and then attempting to blame the $50 bread on market constraints, rather than free market dynamics.

Or I may have completely mis-understood the past dozen or so posts. That's possible - they were a little confusing.

I think I get your point now (the cinnabons threw me off--and made me hungry). If I follow you, you're making the argument that commodity pricing exists, but people are still shelling out $50 for the bells and whistles, which proves that the market is working as it should? I disagree. Of course, that could be the case, but it isn't in the wireless world. That $50 bread is tied unlawfully to a contract/exclusive arrangment. The $50 is artificially inflated due to this arrangement such that the consumer is paying $50 for something that should cost less with competition. In other words, just because people are buying something at a given price does not mean anticompetitive behavior is not at play. These potato/bread/contract analogies are getting confusing, but hopefully you get my point.

One may disagree that the cell carriers are running afoul of the antitrust laws, but the trite "don't like it, don't buy it" that seems to be the credo of this board is short-sighted and intellectually lazy. And that's unfortunate.

[pavvento]

I've been trying to figure out this chicken and egg thing for a while:

Did we need to over legislate because our citizens became stupid and lazy, or did our citizens become stupid and lazy because we over legislate?

A 100% truthful ad has a possibility of being pulled because some people might not accurately interpret the information? Come on.

The reason the 'if you don't like it don't buy it' doesn't work is because people have lost willpower over material goods. It's become 'if you don't like it, but it and then complain to your legislator or friend or website about how unfair it is, all the while giving money to the company you don't like.'

[mac*jedi*g]

They know they have yet to lockup an extension with Apple after the June/July 2010 deadline. The fear is Apple will consider a contract with Verizon opening a shift in all the progress AT&T made while holding the exclusivity contract with them. AT&T has had a tremendous increase in new customers because of it. With a new iPhone model coming out about the same time next year, AT&T stands to lose a significant amount of users based on the fact that many iPhone 3G owners did not upgrade to GS this year, and should be ready to purchase the next generation during that time. But will they stay on a suspected network that clearly shows they are indifferent in keeping up, and improving their product?

I'm sure a survey would show: NO