Verizon Claims Network Ready for iPhone Should Apple Choose to Strike Deal

[kdarling]

I just got locked into Verizon due to combining 3 separate lines into one family plan + state discount via brother and mom, meaning my bill is half of what it was with more minutes to boot.

... snip...

If nothing else, you win the prize for the longest first post by a newbie (and there have been more new posters lately than we've seen in years).

Welcome aboard.

 

[DakotaGuy]

... are what I am using in my post.

I mean, Verizon was the best network in my little world a year ago, but now they are not for actual reasons that matter to me. I just don't understand why my service has gotten worse as time goes on despite my alerting them to it; isn't progress progressive? So when I see an AT&T phone working in my apartment, I conclude: these realities are entirely subjective, and maybe "best" is not always accurate in this case.
Like I said, it gives me pause to see my dinky voice calls cutting out already; what might happen if Verizon had the type and degree of usage that AT&T does? Isn't that what they say they can do, after all? They swagger and strut about it! But, like all male egotism and machismo, it is trumped up to hide weaknesses plainly visible. I'm not making this up, you know.

I understand what you mean about some networks working better in certain areas, but that doesn't have anything to do with CDMA or GSM technology. CDMA towers generally have a longer range which doesn't really effect you, but does in rural areas.

You speak about your little world, but if you came to my little world AT&T service would be worthless. It's barely able to pull voice let alone data off of an old cobbled up GSM roaming network. When my uncle and aunt came to visit me their iPhones became iBricks. AT&T has basically told the rural US to forget about 3G because there is no profit in providing service to those areas. Verizon has 3G just about anywhere you can throw a dart on a map.

Just because you have poor service with Verizon doesn't mean everyone else does. I'd say on average, for most people in all different regions of the country you would see more issues with AT&T then with Verizon.

 

[ChewableC]

Thanks, Veteran Poster

Yes, I am wordy, but I am probably one of the many not doing things he should be doing by giving this so much attention.





Yes,
I think .... that is accurate now that I consider it.

Maybe the other new posters stem from the 10%+ unemployment? I haven't debated like this since, well, I didn't have a job (high school). But I do; that's my problem.

 

[kdarling]

Yes, I am wordy, but I am probably one of the many not doing things he should be doing by giving this so much attention.

Ha! Quite true of most of us, I suspect.

Maybe the other new posters stem from the 10%+ unemployment? I haven't debated like this since, well, I didn't have a job (high school). But I do; that's my problem.

Unemployment and/or the fact that schools are out for the holidays.

 

[DakotaGuy]

Yes, I am wordy, but I am probably one of the many not doing things he should be doing by giving this so much attention.





Yes,
I think .... that is accurate now that I consider it.

Maybe the other new posters stem from the 10%+ unemployment? I haven't debated like this since, well, I didn't have a job (high school). But I do; that's my problem.

Well I will welcome you to the boards as well... Sorry if I appeared to be the first person to jump on you, but I thought that the metaphors that you were using to criticize Verizon were awfully exaggerated. Believe it or not CDMA is actually the newer technology and is a more secure technology, but I am not going to get into all of that right now. I don't feel I am enough of an expert to make my case. Your right the world standard is GSM, but the reasons it became that standard wasn't because it was better. There were many other market influences and governments making decisions.

Really not much of this will matter in a few years as everyone in the US goes to 4G. That will be the game changer. Who can actually get 4G rolled out across the nation first. Verizon or AT&T?

If you don't like Verizon then by all means you should have moved over to AT&T. I know I would never go with a carrier who did not offer reliable service where I lived.

I live in the Black Hills of South Dakota near a town called Deadwood (you might have heard of it) and I don't feel that I should be penalized because I live in a rural area. I love where I live and I feel that I should have access to the same technology as you do. If it wasn't for Verizon I wouldn't have crap. I am not saying that Verizon isn't about making profit, because they are, they ALL are, but Verizon is also about providing service to all different market areas, not just the largest market areas that make the most profit. MaBell could care less. All of this is my opinion, but if you also lived in a rural area you would see why we defend Verizon like we do.

Anyhow have a great night and welcome to the boards. Talking about newbies on the board... I can't believe I have been on here since January 2002. Wow has technology changed. I remember posting about the G4 hitting 1 Ghz!

 

[ChewableC]

Let me put it this way

If nothing else, you win the prize for the longest first post by a newbie (and there have been more new posters lately than we've seen in years).

Welcome aboard.

I understand what you mean about some networks working better in certain areas, but that doesn't have anything to do with CDMA or GSM technology. CDMA towers generallyce would be worthless. It's barely able to pull voice let alone data off of an old cobbled up GSM roaming network. When my uncle and aunt came to visit me their iPhones became iBricks. AT&T has basically told the rural US to forget about 3G because there is no profit in providing service to those areas. Verizon has 3G just about anywhere you can throw a dart on a map.

Just because you have poor service with Verizon doesn't mean everyone else does. I'd say on average, for most people in all different regions of the country you would see more issues with AT&T then with Verizon.

I totally agree that AT&T probably doesn't care that his signals aren't as long and strong as Verizon's, but that's just like, well, natural endowments in the animal kingdom: Verizon just happens to reach out and touch more people due to its own God-given girth, in this case longer, stronger CDMA signals, as you so observantly noted. Verizon satisfies with its youthful bravado, but he has not been in a true relationship of equality, one that tests all of his attributes, you might say.

I am sure that the Adam who is AT&T is laughing all the way to the bank with his Apple, as so many people are in a contract with them for the sake of the Iphone, yet are dissatisfied and underserved. But Verizon claiming itself better in completely different circumstances, employing a different, err, tool that has, well, a different, less "multitasking" reach (even though it is, at the moment, pleasing its particular harem and talking about it) than that of AT&T's at-times prematurely disappointing but more experienced, well-rounded, you could say, voice-AND-data-at-once means of fulfillment is indicative of Verizon's seeming pubescence in these matters, no? And we all must grow up at some point and give our people what they want: in this case two things at once and 24/7.

And, no, AT&T does not always succeed, but he is a worldy man to Verizon's boasting boy. To not even put-out beneath the weight of the outer world's many appetites is to remain the eternal, narcissistic adolescent, no?

And adolescents are charming but ultimately not yet worth their salt when the nights travails have concluded, wouldn't you agree? I must retire now to my boudoir...Good night.

 

[DMann]

I switched to Verizon 5 years ago because their coverage was flawless all over New York City, most importantly in my apt.--until last spring. Reception suddenly became spotty, jumping up and down, cutting calls if I so much as moved an inch from my perch on the windowsill (that's why I left T-Mobile back in the day!) and, disturbingly, in random outdoor places throughout the city. So, 3 trouble tickets and a replaced phone later, Verizon claimed their technicians found no problem in my neighborhood and that I should just get a Network Extender... for $250! This cheap trick was launched, I discovered, at the same time I began having issues.

I had left Verizon for T-Mobile in 2003, primarily because of their deceptive 'extra charges' which had been plaguing my monthly bill, as well as for their substandard customer service - reps which were quite unaccommodating.

In June, 2007, I switched over to AT&T - great customer service, consistently accommodating, courteous, and roll-over minutes which are highly appreciated.

I live in Manhattan, Upper West Side, where coverage and signal happen to be excellent - far better than T-Mobile had ever been.

Ironically, while on conference calls, the client using Verizon cell service is, repeatedly, the one to drop out of the conversation. Verizon's coverage is not consistent in NYC, and several associates have complained about it.

Network extender... for $250? Not without a written guarantee

Anyway, good to have you aboard. Welcome!

 

[macunsat4now]

Apple's Voracious Appetite

No, I don't have an iPhone, but I do have a contract with an ISP, a broadband hookup and run Snow Leopard on a Mac. What does that have to do with this debate, you ask?

Snow Leopard is designed to sync with the iPhone, iTouch, etc. It, and apparently it, and those devices constantly reach out into the internet, using software like Bonjour. SL vis nDNSResponder hooks up with an IP address somewhere in cyberspace, without user initiation. That makes an iPhone faster and more functional than other smartphones, creates Broadband usage and creates demand that outstrips supply of broadband capability.

ISP's are in business to make money. Their infrastructure costs money to create. They will have to charge users for the infrastructure to pay the cost of its creation, hire people to run it and create profits for shareholders. Even if you are in a socialist economy, the first two parts of the equation still exist.

Apple needs to recognize that and create software switches on its products that will enable the user to determine whether they want to have virtually instantaneous connections and pay for them, or if they prefer a slower connection and save money.

So, the real issue here is why hasn't Apple created such a switch?

 

[1MegaByte]

Open Market

MAYBE we won't have ONE monopoly cell phone company that is allowed to provide service for the iPhone.
MAYBE we will have more than one cell phone company that will be able to offer service for the iPhone.

Heaven forbid we live in an Open Market economy.