or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Verizon continues assault on AT&T with series of holiday ads
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Verizon continues assault on AT&T with series of holiday ads - Page 2

post #41 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andyinc91 View Post

i dont see why verizon has to keep using the iPhone in their anti-at&t commercials. if they wanna get on Apple's good side in order to get the iPhone next year, why dont they use some of at&t's other smart phones so that they can still show at&t having a lesser network, but not involving the iPhone in that negativity

Verizon doesn't need the iPhone and obviously is flaunting that. They must just love lobbing these insults at both AT&T and Apple. And these are direct insults at Apple because they feature the white iPHone so prominently and mock Apple's own ad line of "There's an App for that". Which was one of the worst commercials ever - THAT VOICE????
post #42 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Verizon doesn't need the iPhone and obviously is flaunting that. They must just love lobbing these insults at both AT&T and Apple. And these are direct insults at Apple because they feature the white iPHone so prominently and mock Apple's own ad line of "There's an App for that". Which was one of the worst commercials ever - THAT VOICE????

Had AT&T not gone with the iPhone we wouldn't be seeing these ads. Verizon clearly has Apple on the mind.
post #43 of 144
So Apple finally gets bashed and everyone is boohooing. Shouldn't have bashed PCs for 3 years I guess.
Microsoft on the other hand has taken the high road at least with their positive attitude Windows 7 commercials. I actually find them fascinating!.
post #44 of 144
Yes I travel for business and vacations across the Atlantic. That's why I have an iPhone
post #45 of 144
It's funny how they ONLY and ALWAYS target the Apple
iPhone in these Verizon 3G vs. AT&T 3G ads.

Maybe this can mean something?..
post #46 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

So Apple finally gets bashed and everyone is boohooing. Shouldn't have bashed PCs for 3 years I guess.
Microsoft on the other hand has taken the high road at least with their positive attitude Windows 7 commercials. I actually find them fascinating!.

Apple bashing is only effective . . . when it's effective. Quarterly numbers are the only real measure.

And Microsoft tried the Apple attacks already, and failed miserably.
post #47 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Had AT&T not gone with the iPhone we wouldn't be seeing these ads. Verizon clearly has Apple on the mind.

??? If Verizon had the iPhone of course you wouldn't -at least from Verizon. Don't quite get that statement.
Verizon want to stops switchers from leaving - clearly, Can you blame them? Anyone who leave Verizon for AT&T is only going for an iPhone- nothing else I can assure you.
post #48 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Apple bashing is only effective . . . when it's effective. Quarterly numbers are the only real measure.

And Microsoft tried the Apple attacks already, and failed miserably.

They got their point across and Apple dropped all their prices so not quite sure how they weren't effective?\
post #49 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Well it's one of our economy's major breadwinners - isn't it?

Yes. I travel regularly across the atlantic for business and vacations. That's why I have an iPhone
post #50 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexhasfun28 View Post

It's funny how they ONLY and ALWAYS target the Apple
iPhone in these Verizon 3G vs. AT&T 3G ads.

Maybe this can mean something?..

It means they are sick as fk of people flocking to AT&t because of the iPhone. AT&T is supposedly the worst carrier, yet its business is booming, thanks to Apple. Verizon is seeing that consumers will put up with a seemingly horrible carrier just to get their hands on the iPhone, and they can't stand it.

Verizon would like a "Premier device" as well, and the mindshare and cachet that goes with it.
post #51 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexhasfun28 View Post

It's funny how they ONLY and ALWAYS target the Apple
iPhone in these Verizon 3G vs. AT&T 3G ads.

Maybe this can mean something?..

They are trying to stop switchers. Verizon is NOT getting the iPhone. Steve Jobs must be so pissed at these attacks. Especially the "iDont" add which is both Verizon's and Motorola's
post #52 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

They got their point across and Apple dropped all their prices so not quite sure how they weren't effective?\

If you mean "effective" by MS spending hundreds of millions of dollars in order to help Apple sell *more* Macs in a recession, while turning out a horrible quarter themselves, then yes, they sure were effective.
post #53 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by anothersmartphoneuser View Post

Yes. I travel regularly across the atlantic for business and vacations. That's why I have an iPhone

Just don't go to Turkey- I hear AT&T charges an arm and a leg for coverage.
post #54 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

If you mean "effective" by MS spending hundreds of millions of dollars in order to help Apple sell *more* Macs in a recession, while turning out a horrible quarter themselves, then yes, they sure were effective.

Those ads only ran for 4- 6 months . How many millions in TV ads did Apple spend on Justin Long's nonsense for 3 plus YEARS attacking PC yet gained virtually nada in market share?
post #55 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Those ads only ran for 4- 6 months . How many millions in TV ads did Apple spend on Justin Long's nonsense for 3 plus YEARS attacking PC yet gained virtually nada in market share?

Apple actually spends less on advertising than MS. Far less.

And Apple only gained record Mac sales from those ads, for several years now. Market share in the Premium end is going to be naturally limited, keep that in mind. In fact those ads helped play a role in Apple clinching the Premium end.

The Get a Mac ads were hugely successful.
post #56 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Apple actually spends less on advertising than MS. Far less.

And Apple only gained record Mac sales from those ads, for several years now. Market share in the Premium end is going to be naturally limited, keep that in mind.

The Get a Mac ads were hugely successful.

Apple spends much much more on TV advertising- bar none. Microsof'st is all in print advertising up to this past year.

The "I'm a PC, you're a MAC" ads began well (positive) became increasingly negative and were more entertaining than anything else.

And trust me Apple want more than just Premium and with the amount of PC attacks they show. They just refuse to lower their price to be competitive. The MacBook should sell for $699 tops. There is nothing "Premium " about it!
post #57 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Apple spends much much more on TV advertising- bar none. Microsof'st is all in print advertising up to this past year.

The "I'm a PC, you're a MAC" ads began well (positive) became increasingly negative and were more entertaining than anything else.

http://www.penn-olson.com/2009/10/31...s-3x-of-apple/

http://brainstormtech.blogs.fortune....alf-a-billion/

This year, at least, was a big year for MS ad spending. In all fairness, Apple spent nearly the same in 2008, and MS spent less than Apple that year.
post #58 of 144
The first one is funny. However, they do compliment the iPhone and attack AT&T, which make sense.
post #59 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by OnePotato View Post

Looks like for AT&T, practically the whole country is a deadzone. I'm surprised I haven't been hearing more about how in most of the country you get zero bars with AT&T.

the actual coverage map looks like this



The verizon ads only show the 3G coverage area.
post #60 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameronj View Post

You're being overly apologetic for ATT.

You're not being critical enough of Verizon.

Quote:
There's no denying that Verizon has better overall coverage,

Apparently that's the case, just as there's no denying 1001 is a bigger number than 1000. Close is good enough in horseshoes and hand grenades. Verizon also nickle-and-dimes its customers more, too.

Quote:
and in doing so you are only making your own argument weaker. Yes, the iPhone is great and ATT's network is not the worst thing in the world.

Time to switch!

Quote:
But calls do drop quite often and many iPhone users are on ATT only because they have to be.

Much is the same for many Verizon users. So what's your point?

Quote:
And yes, I have an iPhone 3GS, in Washington DC, and I drop about, oh, 5 calls a day. Predictable where I'll drop them, which is even sadder.

Let me guess, it's when you're behind a hill or in a little ravine. The fact that it's predictable is a good thing, no? Are Verizon's dropped calls unpredictable... and happy?

Is your iPhone jailbroken?

Quote:
I spend my day driving the major roads of the DC area to and from client sites, not back roads, not out in some tiny city, but right in one of the strongest areas in the country for service. Still, pretty sad. If I can get a Verizon iPhone next year, I will. I've been on ATT in its various forms for 10 years now.

Try a Verizon phone for a couple weeks and see if it doesn't drop calls when you're driving about. The parkways and major roads of DC go 'round and through some decent hills. My experience with Verizon, in the locations I cared about, was that its coverage was worse than AT&T.
post #61 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by OnePotato View Post

Looks like for AT&T, practically the whole country is a deadzone. I'm surprised I haven't been hearing more about how in most of the country you get zero bars with AT&T.

The maps Verizon has been showing only indicate the 3G coverage areas, not the overall coverage. This is the reason AT&T filed suit against Verizon over the ads.
post #62 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

And Verizon is very clear in its ads they are talking about 3G coverage. Which is really all that matters because ATT Edge coverage is useless.

What do you mean by "useless"?
post #63 of 144
Absolutely Brilliant!

There's Really Nothing Else To Say
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
post #64 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by alandail View Post

the actual coverage map looks like this



The verizon ads only show the 3G coverage area.


... and every one of their ads is crystal clear about that fact.
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
post #65 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

And Verizon is very clear in its ads they are talking about 3G coverage. Which is really all that matters because ATT Edge coverage is useless.

edge is far from useless - it's what I use myself most of the time as there is no 3G in my small town. Edge is fast enough for what I do that I don't even bother to turn on wifi and typically don't bother to turn on 3G when I'm in a 3G capable area.

And the commercials are certainly misleading - in this very thread someone thought it meant there was no coverage outside of the areas shown in the ad.

There are certainly places I don't get reception. THere are also places my wife doesn't get reception with her Verizon phone.
post #66 of 144
I take it no one here has read Daniel's (AKA Prince McClean) article outlining legitimate reasons why "Verizon getting an iPhone" claims are unfounded. It's here for those who missed it:

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/1...ng-to-verizon/

CDMA is a dying technology. Telecom here in New Zealand is ditching its CDMA network for WCDMA because it can't use its phones elsewhere in the world very easily instead having to use World Mode phones which are kind of pathetic. Also Telecom's phones have been so feature poor that Vodafone was trouncing them. Hell, Vodafone's bottom end phone has BlueTooth and web browsing which is more than some of Telecom's top end phones had.

If Verizon is insisting on continuing using CDMA then all the features that makes the iPhone a great phone will largely be useless under CDMA. CDMA 3G is no way near as good as WCDMA and I've seen the two working side by side with a test between Vodafone's UMTS network and Telecom's CDMA network and Telecom failed miserably.

I'm picking that in the right spots the battle between the two would probably favour AT&T instead of Verizon.
post #67 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissionGrey View Post

The first one is funny!

the next two not so much.

Haven't seen them yet. Still, hard to imagine attvevervwinning. The 3G coverage is preety bad. They would lose in a heartbeat and when in edge you can access maps. So pretty bad if someone is lost.

Yea, let me hang up, see where I am and call you back.

Ahh huh.
post #68 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Apple actually spends less on advertising than MS. Far less.

And Apple only gained record Mac sales from those ads, for several years now. Market share in the Premium end is going to be naturally limited, keep that in mind. In fact those ads helped play a role in Apple clinching the Premium end.

The Get a Mac ads were hugely successful.

US

It's well known and documented that apples main marketing is done by leaks, buzz and rumors. The commercials are for the technically challengeqith regard to msft commercials we now have lower priced macs but at the same time lower paid and knowlegable staff as the ine to one procare used to be $99'for both and the trainers new logic, fcp, motion. Now itanjuat iLife man. For the same group the get a mac campaign targets not to mention, bless their hearts, lower pay. Working in apple retail used to be quite a thing I imagine. All the theatres showing logic, fcp with major talent in the audience. Now it's just iLife users.

Peace.
post #69 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by anothersmartphoneuser View Post

'3) A large majority of people do not travel outside of the US'

That's just f***ing sad.

that's actually... debatable!
post #70 of 144
These ads are Verizon putting pressure on Apple to give them the iPhone. Nothing more nothing less.

Verizon needs the iPhone, or they continue losing to AT&T.

For APPL longs, we also want the iPhone on every large network. That way the 50% market share a la iPod, will happen all the more quickly.
post #71 of 144
They'll pay. For one ad or for four. Where's the difference?

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #72 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psych_guy View Post

Coverage in the SF Bay Area is just fine. I have never had a problem the whole time I've been with Cingular/AT&T. If and when the iPhone goes to Verizon, I say bring it on. The more whiners that jump to that network and drag down Verizon's quality, the better AT&T's service gets. Personally I can't wait.

San Francisco coverage is terrible - fluctuating signal, dropped calls all the time, all around downtown. I live in Hayes Valley and lose signal at home, in the garage, on the local sections of 101 and 280, in the Financial District, etc. I have just grown to expect this - don't we all expect dropped calls ;-)

For me, down on the Peninsula, 3G coverage and signal is fine, East bay is mostly good, South Bay, no real problems so far. A lot of the utterly justified griping is about the city of SF.
post #73 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameronj View Post

Edge is not "equivalent to 3G except slower" - it's slower and has the same weakness that you fault CDMA for right below.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dagamer34 View Post

EDGE doesn't allow data at the same time as a phone call. Therefore, EDGE != slower 3G

While the "equivalent to 3G except slower" might be questionable, I think these criticisms of it are a little questionable too. If 3G is defined as allowing data at the same time as a phone call, then Verizon doesn't have any 3G at all.
post #74 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseymac View Post

AT&T deserves to be attacked for their poor service.

But not Steve Jobs? I thought it was him that worked the deal with Cingular(AT&T) and then telling us consumers at the iPhone introduction in January that Cingular/AT&T was the best choice!

I'd love to see the reasoning why Apple's tablet, if indeed a true product, is announced by Steve and if it requires a carrier networks signal, which carrier that would be and if not AT&T, the best according to Steve, then why not, Steve?!!!!! \

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #75 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo2 View Post

The maps Verizon has been showing only indicate the 3G coverage areas, not the overall coverage. This is the reason AT&T filed suit against Verizon over the ads.

I'm not sure AT&T is actually concerned with whether their suit has any merit or not, but, by suing Verizon for false advertising, they can create some doubt about how truthful Verizon is being in their ads.
post #76 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

So Apple finally gets bashed and everyone is boohooing. Shouldn't have bashed PCs for 3 years I guess.
Microsoft on the other hand has taken the high road at least with their positive attitude Windows 7 commercials. I actually find them fascinating!.

I guess you haven't been reading my posts.

While I'm not anti-iPhone, I do find it disgusting whenever I read iPhone great / AT&T bad posts (hey, as I post, the misfit toy ad is on), anyway, I find it disgusting for those who solely blame AT&T when it takes two to make a contract and Apple creates the phone and then doesn't have a suitable cellular carrier partner to network on? So they made a deal with the devil (Cingular/AT&T) knowing how lacking it was and then Apple tells us that the iPhone GSM technology is the future and the best carrier to partner with is Cingular/AT&T.

I just wish those AT&T bashers, while they can make a half truth argument, to remember what AT&Ts partner, Apple, said about them when all this started! That's all.


Quote:
Microsoft on the other hand has taken the high road at least with their positive attitude Windows 7 commercials.

MS takes the high road? Why would MS bash Apple in their Windows 7 ad, where, according to the YouTube videos I have seen highlighting Windows 7 features, Microsoft has made their product more Mac like. What with even better background / wallpaper customization and the ability to have gadgets all over the screen versus the sidebar found in MS Vista and the taskbar, now has "icons' that make it look more Mac "Dock" like, or have a cluttered desktop with a lot of open apps, just "violently" shake (as one video of features stated) and all the open windows clear out (hello, it's called Apple Expose), etc... how can MS bash Apple with such exciting innovations?

But to prove I'm just not all about bashing MS, I will give them "kudos" for their dock "Preview" of web pages.

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #77 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

MS takes the high road? Why would MS bash Apple in their Windows 7 ad, where, according to the YouTube videos I have seen highlighting Windows 7 features, Microsoft has made their product more Mac like. What with even better background / wallpaper customization and the ability to have gadgets all over the screen versus the sidebar found in MS Vista and the taskbar, now has "icons' that make it look more Mac "Dock" like, etc... how can MS bash Apple with such exciting innovations?

MS stopped with the "PC's are affordable, Macs are not" campaign after six months. You think there is nothing about Apple even besides that, that can be critiqued effectively? Who ever thought the iPhone would ever be attacked be it indirectly in most of the ads?
post #78 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

But not Steve Jobs? I thought it was him that worked the deal with Cingular(AT&T) and then telling us consumers at the iPhone introduction in January that Cingular/AT&T was the best choice!

I'd love to see the reasoning why Apple's tablet, if indeed a true product, is announced by Steve and if it requires a carrier networks signal, which carrier that would be and if not AT&T, the best according to Steve, then why not, Steve?!!!!! \

If it require a carrier signal than its not gonna do well in this economy.
post #79 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo2 View Post

The maps Verizon has been showing only indicate the 3G coverage areas, not the overall coverage. This is the reason AT&T filed suit against Verizon over the ads.

Well if they showed overall coverage AT&T would lose there as well. Verizon has a blanket completely covering the entire the USA including Hawaii and Alaska .
AT&T does not.
post #80 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Well if they showed overall coverage AT&T would lose there as well. Verizon has a blanket completely covering the entire the USA including Hawaii and Alaska .
AT&T does not.

Well, if they showed Global Coverage, your Verizon CDMA-only phone would not work in most of the world....your AT&T 3G phone would.

See this map?


<blank>


This is the map where Verizon supports the iPhone today.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Verizon continues assault on AT&T with series of holiday ads