http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/10/...tandt-signed-five-year-iphone-exclusivity-de/
Looks like im not switching!
Looks like im not switching!
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple and AT&T signed five-year iPhone exclusivity deal
- Thread starter bjones521
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
My problems lie equally with both Apple and AT&T. To be honest it wasn't until AT&T started messing with my bill that I really had any grievance with them.
When I first got my iPhone I was happy. However looking at things now. I find no reason to be with AT&T if you don't like their service, the iPhone is just not worth their service.
Of course now I'm going through the same thing debating whether I want to join up with T Mobile so I can get a Nexus One, that won't cost me $600.
When I first got my iPhone I was happy. However looking at things now. I find no reason to be with AT&T if you don't like their service, the iPhone is just not worth their service.
Of course now I'm going through the same thing debating whether I want to join up with T Mobile so I can get a Nexus One, that won't cost me $600.
Even better when I tell you that I hadn't seen the post before mine until after I posted my reply.
Apple has always had a way with words.
The Apple comment at the bottom of page 5 of their brief doesn't come right out and say that it was five years.
Apple states that they and ATT had announced an exclusive deal. That's all that was said officially. No timeline was given.
Apple then disingenuously comments that the plaintiffs brought up the original USAToday five-year article and therefore should not have been shocked at a long exclusivity. However, that was not an official Apple-ATT announcement.
Note that USAToday later wrote another article claiming it was only two years, extended one more year(*) by the 3G model. So if Apple is depending on that newspaper to be their announcer, they need to do a better job. I think instead Apple simply uses their articles as smokescreens.
(*) "In exchange for its payout, AT&T got a year extension, into 2010, on its exclusive distribution deal with Apple, people familiar with the matter say. Sources asked to not be named because the terms are confidential." - USAToday
The Apple comment at the bottom of page 5 of their brief doesn't come right out and say that it was five years.
Apple states that they and ATT had announced an exclusive deal. That's all that was said officially. No timeline was given.
Apple then disingenuously comments that the plaintiffs brought up the original USAToday five-year article and therefore should not have been shocked at a long exclusivity. However, that was not an official Apple-ATT announcement.
Note that USAToday later wrote another article claiming it was only two years, extended one more year(*) by the 3G model. So if Apple is depending on that newspaper to be their announcer, they need to do a better job. I think instead Apple simply uses their articles as smokescreens.
(*) "In exchange for its payout, AT&T got a year extension, into 2010, on its exclusive distribution deal with Apple, people familiar with the matter say. Sources asked to not be named because the terms are confidential." - USAToday
Quite the opposite. It would secure at least 5 more years of VZW speculation threads.
Even better when I tell you that I hadn't seen the post before mine until after I posted my reply.
haha
, it's like you all had some secret ESP going on, none the less bonus points for the chuckle it provided me!
And I guess those of us who are not fanboys, but don't get good service w/ AT&T....but still enjoy the iPhone...are we supposed to "Eat it" too?
I understand where your coming from, but why would want your iPhone on an even crappier network. Verizon may not have all the dropped calls that AT&T does, but the data is a helluva lot better than verizon. If apple dropped AT&T and went with verizon with it's inferior cdma network, the data would be total ****. Everyone would come back to AT&T anyway. But that's just my opinion, i have service where i need it, I don't use voice as much as data so i really don't give a damn.
I don't know why people lust after verizon. If you're unhappy with AT&T, go to verizon. They have plenty of good phones, they're not the iPhone but they have good phones.
I've had decent service with ATT, though I may opt for the incredible, I ran some numbers and it looks like if I stick with ATT, I'll spend less $$. Verizon appears to be a bit more expensive
I've had decent service with ATT, though I may opt for the incredible, I ran some numbers and it looks like if I stick with ATT, I'll spend less $$. Verizon appears to be a bit more expensive
Speaking from experience, (I've used both carriers extensively and supported a nationwide salesforce on both networks) that's not true. Verizon has a very good data network. A little slower than AT&T at this point, but that's very recent. At the time I switched to AT&T it was actually faster.
And it kills me that it's ok on this forum to call someone an "f'n fanboy" (like leaving letters out makes the word any better) but not ok to send them to "**************************.com".
Because I've used both and in my area Verizon is better. It's that simple. I'm not a fanboy, Verizon is expensive. But my experience on AT&T has been painful.
Edit: Oh, and it is a phone first...so voice services rank very slightly higher in importance to me.
And I want an iPhone. What part of that do you, a MacRumors member, not understand? At the time I came to AT&T, iPhone had no decent competitor. But now that there are competitors, I have WAY too much invested in apps and accessories (car, clock radio, etc..) to jump off the iPhone unless the product is leaps and bounds better.
I have a verizon phone that i use for work and everybody in our office hates it. Our emails are always lagged behind from when they are sent and our data cards are slower than dial-up. The exec's all have iphones. Their offices range from arizona to nyc and they love the att network. The bottom line is is that apple will never support a network that is archaic as verizon. When LTE comes out, im sure that it will be a launch phone for verizon, but i really dont care, im sticking to att no matter because i believe that they are a superior carrier....verizon can still f off
I love it how people who actually know nothing about wireless technology call Verizon's network archaic. I used to work in wireless, I assure you there is nothing archaic about it. (I was there for the transition from analog to TDMA which eventually bacame GSM and the later the rollout of CDMA...which despite popular belief, came out after GSM) And the data cards worked great when I used them.
I am now a messaging admin and have users on both Verizon and AT&T nationwide (California to NY). Neither complain about messages coming slower (except the iPhone users, but that's an ISA issue, not an AT&T issue.)
And once again, an abreviation of a very offensive word. What's up w/ this forum?
Edit: If AT&T works great for you, that is awesome. I'm happy for you. Can you not accept that I enjoy the iPhone and would enjoy it more on Verizon? Why do you have to be so rude? I'm not here bashing AT&T.
+1
Except I must correct your math. 5 years from 2007 would be 2012, so only a couple of more years.
So I concede, Android is making some big waves. Anybody think Apple is regretting the 5 year commitment?
It really is true that where you live determines how good each carrier is for you.
My fiance and I were with AT&T for almost 8 years before (stupidly) switching to Sprint late last year. We'd had some screw ups on our AT&T bill and were having problems with dropped calls, so she just got fed up one day and said let's switch. I figured, why not? BIG MISTAKE!
Here in central Kentucky, Sprint's coverage is awful. We had tons of dropped calls, bad reception, etc. So, when Sprint changed something in the user agreement and we had the option of opting out without an ETF, we took it and RAN back to AT&T. For us, it was the best decision we could've made.
Of course, the fact that I got my first iPhone when we came back made it all that more enjoyable! But, for some reason, we don't have the dropped call problems anymore with AT&T.
My fiance and I were with AT&T for almost 8 years before (stupidly) switching to Sprint late last year. We'd had some screw ups on our AT&T bill and were having problems with dropped calls, so she just got fed up one day and said let's switch. I figured, why not? BIG MISTAKE!
Here in central Kentucky, Sprint's coverage is awful. We had tons of dropped calls, bad reception, etc. So, when Sprint changed something in the user agreement and we had the option of opting out without an ETF, we took it and RAN back to AT&T. For us, it was the best decision we could've made.
Of course, the fact that I got my first iPhone when we came back made it all that more enjoyable! But, for some reason, we don't have the dropped call problems anymore with AT&T.
+1
Except I must correct your math. 5 years from 2007 would be 2012, so only a couple of more years.
Unless it dates from when the contract was signed (mid-year 2006), which makes it 2011
Remember how Apple pushed hard to launch the iPhone beginning just a few days before the middle of 2007 ? I often wonder if the 2006 contract had a requirement that the first sale had to take place within a year or else the delay would trigger some kind of penalty.
Unless it dates from when the contract was signed (mid-year 2006), which makes it 2011
Remember how Apple pushed hard to launch the iPhone beginning just a few days before the middle of 2007 ? I often wonder if the 2006 contract had a requirement that the first sale had to take place within a year or else the delay would trigger some kind of penalty.
the exclusive arrangement refers to how long and by who...the phone went on sale in 2007 + 5 would be 2012, there was no iPhone in 2006 so there can be no contract to sell a product that is not in existence...and even if they did sign in 2006 it wouldn't have taken effect until the iPhone was availiable for sale