Besides the reliability of the network, Verizon has vastly superior customer service over AT & T. My year with AT & T was the absolute worst customer service experience I have ever had with any company with any product/service. I've been with both and Verizon is by far the best.
with 4G on the horizon, how much is anyone going to spend getting a better 3G experience for users??? (as an interesting side note - with VoIP, why are we still building cell networks anyway - just wifi and wiMax everywhere...)
I'm still on GPRS (2.5G) 80% of my day with about 10% EDGE (2.75G) and 10% 3G here in the UK on O2. The iPhone 3GS was my first 3G phone.. 6 years after 3G phones started going. If 4G standards are yet ratified globally then investing in 3G makes sense. And there will be millions of 3G phones out there for years to come.
I wonder how other networks performance would compare if they actually had a usable mobile internet devices for sale on their networks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnmcboston
I've loved Verizon's coverage while I was with them, but they are notorious for hobbling their phones and trying to nickel and dime you to death. If (when?) iphone goes over there, I'm curious what they'd try to disable...
I can't see Apple putting up with that. Although some of the old limitations we used to see like bluetooth file transfer haven't made it to iPhone yet anyhow...
can't see Apple putting up with that. Although some of the old limitations we used to see like bluetooth file transfer haven't made it to iPhone yet anyhow...
agreed. they would try to charge for every service - google maps, weather, data transfers from iTunes/App Store.
Get out of your fantasy world. Verizon sucks the big one. At&t rules the roost in terms of reliability and service. For every one of you there two at&t customers who are perfectly satisfied. The "grass is always greener" syndrome is alive and well.
Not in NY my friend.
Having said that, I wouldn't trade in my iPhone for anything in the world. It's much better than anything Verizon has or will have because like to previous poster noted if they control the APP store and other stuff, Apple won't be going there.
I have had a consistent problem with dropped calls on AT&T on my 3GS, and even on original iPhone. AT&T pricing is far higher than its level of service deserves. The data rate in my area is only 540K avg. bleh!
It isn't that simple. The iPhone increases the strain on anyones 3G network, since it ups usage. Thus speeds are lower. I'm in Canada, so really don't know how the two stack up, but Verizons average 3G speeds will drop if they get the iPhone. On the flip side, AT&T's speeds will increase as iPhone users vacate the carrier, so there should be a floor where AT&T would stop losing users due to 3G speeds.
That's what I was thinking. I wonder if anyone knows what that actual capacity of the two carriers is?
BRING IT ON VERIZON.. i would switch to them in a heartbeat . ATT has THE WORST coverage in my city New York City and I am sick of the bad reception and dropped calls , plus all my friends and family members have verizon and i could take advantage of my current verizon DSL plan by bundling it with my iphone ... bye bye ATT, HELLO VERIZON ... can you hear me now???
See, I'm the exact opposite. I had Verizon, and could not use my phone in my house. Step outside, and I had 3 bars, step inside, no signal. AT&T, however, I have 3 bars in and out of the house (I'm in rural PA, so I rarely get really great coverage, and don't have 3G in my town, but the next town over does)
It would be better if Apple just openned up to all carriers, then you could choose Verizon since it is better for you, and I could choose ATT, since that is better for me.
I hope AT&T doesn't get the extension. If they did then that would mean they'd have no motivation to expidite fixing their network problems. I say part ways on exclusitivity and let AT&T scramble to make good on their coverage and bandwidth. Who cares if they have the faster network if you cannot even get any signal.
Besides the reliability of the network, Verizon has vastly superior customer service over AT & T. My year with AT & T was the absolute worst customer service experience I have ever had with any company with any product/service. I've been with both and Verizon is by far the best.
I find just the opposite, if I go to the VZ store I sometimes had to wait 1 hr to talk to someone. I've never had any problems with/at AT&T. I also get horrible reception on VZ phones in my house (and I'm in the middle of NYC) while AT&T comes in crystal clear.
TDMA is a dying technology, until VZ switches their service is dated.
They won't - It will need to be an LTE (4G) version that ATT and Verizon will be going to starting Next Year - at least as far as Verizon is concerned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by davebarnes
Why would Apple manufacture a CDMA iPhone?
R&D expense for a phone that would only work on one carrier in the entire world.
I find just the opposite, if I go to the VZ store I sometimes had to wait 1 hr to talk to someone. I've never had any problems with/at AT&T. I also get horrible reception on VZ phones in my house (and I'm in the middle of NYC) while AT&T comes in crystal clear.
TDMA is a dying technology, until VZ switches their service is dated.
It's CDMA, not TDMA! On Verizon Customer Service there is a BIG Difference between the Personal Side and the Coporate Side. In my opinion being a telecom manager for a large manufacturer Verizon's Corporate Systems and Service are very good / easy to work with, but agree that on the Personal Side a big majority of Verizon Store employees are clueless and what's worse pretend like they know what they are talking about.
We just want choice. Give us a phone for each carrier. Give us non glossy options on the Mac. You know we'll pay extra for it.
I see some of the AT@T defenders have returned. Not mad about MMS and tethering anymore?
I'd like a choice. I think that would erase the biggest complaint about the iPhone in the US.
I've always been a little surprised at both the people who hated AT&T and the people who loved them. Maybe it's a blind spot of mine, but prior to the iPhone, I used Sprint, AT&T, T-mobile. I didn't especially like any of them, but I didn't much see them being different from one another either.
The following comments are from someone who could switch carriers and forget it the next day...
At least AT&T was flexible enough to sign with Apple. Verizon, if I recall, was so stuck in the old mindset of uber-control that they refused. AT&T has gotten a few black eyes during their iPhone years, and I think they pretty much earned some of them (MMS and tethering). But on the other hand, sometimes when I hear them being criticized, I find myself thinking "Don't the other guys pretty much play the same game?"
I don't tether, but I'd imagine that tethering would suck lots more of AT&T's bandwidth. And they'll no doubt get criticized for that too. I have an unlimited data plan. But it's not unreasonable to admit that the cost for this data plan were based on a very calculated prediction of how much bandwidth the average user would consume. I suspect that (1) they were surprised at how much bandwidth we really DO use, and that (2) the extra bandwidth entailed with tethering is quite terrifying to them. They know it'll be a huge hit on their network, and they know people are gonna throw the "unlimited" word in their face. I imagine the real stalling point is just trying to find a way to limit it and monetize it.
The MMS problem seems to be a different matter, and I think that counts as a genuine black eye for them, but I don't understand the roadblock from there standpoint. But the tethering thing... that just doesn't sound all that evil, to me. It just sounds like pragmatism. And personally, I don't look forward to tethering becoming widespread, because it seems like my iPhone speeds will go down.
Maybe I'm wrong. Like I say, I'm not too much into the partisan stuff between carriers. I'm far too distracted by my own partisan issues between the OS vendors
2. Since Apple won't make a CDMA iPhone (face it people, they won't, end of discussion, unless its for China...), even if they did switch over to making a LTE version next year only for Verizon,
They most probably already have CDMA prototypes up and working, just as they did for ATT before they sold them on it years ago. Things get complicated with LTE, because all carriers will be moving to that well before whatever 4G turns out to become...that includes BOTH ATT and Verizon. You want to get your best deal when ATT comes asking for an extension? Show up with a fully functioning CDMA iPhone.
Here, here, Jerseymac: a little choice would be nice.
Hopefully the FCC will step in, because rumor has it that AT&T got another 2 years of exclusivity with the iPhone 3GS.
Choice is great, but exactly what would this do for consumers if Apple was not allowed to offer an exclusivity for the iPhone to a carrier? Would this prevent other vendors and carriers from also having exclusivity, or just Apple? Would this prevent AT&T from selling the iPhone and/or marketing the iPhone in their stores? Would this prevent AT&T from subsidizing the iPhone? Would this prevent Apple working with AT&T to bring new services to the device that otherwise would not get developed? Would this require Apple to make another device that works on T-Mobile’s 3G, Sprint and Verizon?
I don’t see any viable change coming about from such a motion with the disconnected US mobile setup. The government should have stepped in a long time ago to get the US on mobile technology path. Now we have to wait until LTE is in place and GSM, WCDMA, CDMA, and CDMA2000 are near obsolesced before it’s resolved. I say ’near’ because I figure by then there will be small, power-freindly chips that have all those radios in one. It seems like such a decision would merely make the iPhone sold in Apple Stores unlocked at an inflated full retail price. Since there is no discount for the iPhone being in or out of contract there is no benefit for the average US consumer, regardless of the carrier they use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasein
They most probably already have CDMA prototypes up and working, just as they did for ATT before they sold them on it years ago. Things get complicated with LTE, because all carriers will be moving to that well before whatever 4G turns out to become...that includes BOTH ATT and Verizon.
I think Sprint is still banking on WiMAX for their 4G tech at this point. Though they’ll probably be absorbed before LTE is prominent enough to make an impact on mobile phones.
Quote:
You want to get your best deal when ATT comes asking for an extension? Show up with a fully functioning CDMA iPhone.
That is what I’d do. There is no SIM card required with CDMA, the voice algorithm is better than GSM, and use CDMA for voice with CDMA2000 for data does assist in battery usage when measuring talk time with 3G turned on.
That's an advantage? Then how do you use a phone with more than one provider? GSM allows me to use my phone with different providers all over the world just by changing the SIM.
That is what I’d do. There is no SIM card required with CDMA, the voice algorithm is better than GSM, and use CDMA for voice with CDMA2000 for data does assist in battery usage when measuring talk time with 3G turned on.
Hey solipism, did you hear- AT&T really does suck! I keep getting validated daily lately- huh? Matte scrrens, AT&T , etc
Though I guess I have to put up with AT&T now, now that I'm in it.
Comments
with 4G on the horizon, how much is anyone going to spend getting a better 3G experience for users??? (as an interesting side note - with VoIP, why are we still building cell networks anyway - just wifi and wiMax everywhere...)
I'm still on GPRS (2.5G) 80% of my day with about 10% EDGE (2.75G) and 10% 3G here in the UK on O2. The iPhone 3GS was my first 3G phone.. 6 years after 3G phones started going. If 4G standards are yet ratified globally then investing in 3G makes sense. And there will be millions of 3G phones out there for years to come.
I wonder how other networks performance would compare if they actually had a usable mobile internet devices for sale on their networks.
I've loved Verizon's coverage while I was with them, but they are notorious for hobbling their phones and trying to nickel and dime you to death. If (when?) iphone goes over there, I'm curious what they'd try to disable...
I can't see Apple putting up with that. Although some of the old limitations we used to see like bluetooth file transfer haven't made it to iPhone yet anyhow...
But no one listens!!
agreed. they would try to charge for every service - google maps, weather, data transfers from iTunes/App Store.
Get out of your fantasy world. Verizon sucks the big one. At&t rules the roost in terms of reliability and service. For every one of you there two at&t customers who are perfectly satisfied. The "grass is always greener" syndrome is alive and well.
Not in NY my friend.
Having said that, I wouldn't trade in my iPhone for anything in the world. It's much better than anything Verizon has or will have because like to previous poster noted if they control the APP store and other stuff, Apple won't be going there.
It isn't that simple. The iPhone increases the strain on anyones 3G network, since it ups usage. Thus speeds are lower. I'm in Canada, so really don't know how the two stack up, but Verizons average 3G speeds will drop if they get the iPhone. On the flip side, AT&T's speeds will increase as iPhone users vacate the carrier, so there should be a floor where AT&T would stop losing users due to 3G speeds.
That's what I was thinking. I wonder if anyone knows what that actual capacity of the two carriers is?
BRING IT ON VERIZON.. i would switch to them in a heartbeat . ATT has THE WORST coverage in my city New York City and I am sick of the bad reception and dropped calls , plus all my friends and family members have verizon and i could take advantage of my current verizon DSL plan by bundling it with my iphone ... bye bye ATT, HELLO VERIZON ... can you hear me now???
See, I'm the exact opposite. I had Verizon, and could not use my phone in my house. Step outside, and I had 3 bars, step inside, no signal. AT&T, however, I have 3 bars in and out of the house (I'm in rural PA, so I rarely get really great coverage, and don't have 3G in my town, but the next town over does)
It would be better if Apple just openned up to all carriers, then you could choose Verizon since it is better for you, and I could choose ATT, since that is better for me.
Analyst says iPhone is lifeblood of AT&T success
TARP for AT&T more like it.
I would like to see the iPhone opened up to more carriers and let them fight it out for our dollars in better quality and service.
Besides the reliability of the network, Verizon has vastly superior customer service over AT & T. My year with AT & T was the absolute worst customer service experience I have ever had with any company with any product/service. I've been with both and Verizon is by far the best.
I find just the opposite, if I go to the VZ store I sometimes had to wait 1 hr to talk to someone. I've never had any problems with/at AT&T. I also get horrible reception on VZ phones in my house (and I'm in the middle of NYC) while AT&T comes in crystal clear.
TDMA is a dying technology, until VZ switches their service is dated.
Why would Apple manufacture a CDMA iPhone?
R&D expense for a phone that would only work on one carrier in the entire world.
More complicated supply chain issues.
I find just the opposite, if I go to the VZ store I sometimes had to wait 1 hr to talk to someone. I've never had any problems with/at AT&T. I also get horrible reception on VZ phones in my house (and I'm in the middle of NYC) while AT&T comes in crystal clear.
TDMA is a dying technology, until VZ switches their service is dated.
It's CDMA, not TDMA! On Verizon Customer Service there is a BIG Difference between the Personal Side and the Coporate Side. In my opinion being a telecom manager for a large manufacturer Verizon's Corporate Systems and Service are very good / easy to work with, but agree that on the Personal Side a big majority of Verizon Store employees are clueless and what's worse pretend like they know what they are talking about.
Hopefully the FCC will step in, because rumor has it that AT&T got another 2 years of exclusivity with the iPhone 3GS.
We just want choice. Give us a phone for each carrier. Give us non glossy options on the Mac. You know we'll pay extra for it.
I see some of the AT@T defenders have returned. Not mad about MMS and tethering anymore?
I'd like a choice. I think that would erase the biggest complaint about the iPhone in the US.
I've always been a little surprised at both the people who hated AT&T and the people who loved them. Maybe it's a blind spot of mine, but prior to the iPhone, I used Sprint, AT&T, T-mobile. I didn't especially like any of them, but I didn't much see them being different from one another either.
The following comments are from someone who could switch carriers and forget it the next day...
At least AT&T was flexible enough to sign with Apple. Verizon, if I recall, was so stuck in the old mindset of uber-control that they refused. AT&T has gotten a few black eyes during their iPhone years, and I think they pretty much earned some of them (MMS and tethering). But on the other hand, sometimes when I hear them being criticized, I find myself thinking "Don't the other guys pretty much play the same game?"
I don't tether, but I'd imagine that tethering would suck lots more of AT&T's bandwidth. And they'll no doubt get criticized for that too. I have an unlimited data plan. But it's not unreasonable to admit that the cost for this data plan were based on a very calculated prediction of how much bandwidth the average user would consume. I suspect that (1) they were surprised at how much bandwidth we really DO use, and that (2) the extra bandwidth entailed with tethering is quite terrifying to them. They know it'll be a huge hit on their network, and they know people are gonna throw the "unlimited" word in their face. I imagine the real stalling point is just trying to find a way to limit it and monetize it.
The MMS problem seems to be a different matter, and I think that counts as a genuine black eye for them, but I don't understand the roadblock from there standpoint. But the tethering thing... that just doesn't sound all that evil, to me. It just sounds like pragmatism. And personally, I don't look forward to tethering becoming widespread, because it seems like my iPhone speeds will go down.
Maybe I'm wrong. Like I say, I'm not too much into the partisan stuff between carriers. I'm far too distracted by my own partisan issues between the OS vendors
Two important flaws I can see:
2. Since Apple won't make a CDMA iPhone (face it people, they won't, end of discussion, unless its for China...), even if they did switch over to making a LTE version next year only for Verizon,
They most probably already have CDMA prototypes up and working, just as they did for ATT before they sold them on it years ago. Things get complicated with LTE, because all carriers will be moving to that well before whatever 4G turns out to become...that includes BOTH ATT and Verizon. You want to get your best deal when ATT comes asking for an extension? Show up with a fully functioning CDMA iPhone.
Here, here, Jerseymac: a little choice would be nice.
Hopefully the FCC will step in, because rumor has it that AT&T got another 2 years of exclusivity with the iPhone 3GS.
Choice is great, but exactly what would this do for consumers if Apple was not allowed to offer an exclusivity for the iPhone to a carrier? Would this prevent other vendors and carriers from also having exclusivity, or just Apple? Would this prevent AT&T from selling the iPhone and/or marketing the iPhone in their stores? Would this prevent AT&T from subsidizing the iPhone? Would this prevent Apple working with AT&T to bring new services to the device that otherwise would not get developed? Would this require Apple to make another device that works on T-Mobile’s 3G, Sprint and Verizon?
I don’t see any viable change coming about from such a motion with the disconnected US mobile setup. The government should have stepped in a long time ago to get the US on mobile technology path. Now we have to wait until LTE is in place and GSM, WCDMA, CDMA, and CDMA2000 are near obsolesced before it’s resolved. I say ’near’ because I figure by then there will be small, power-freindly chips that have all those radios in one. It seems like such a decision would merely make the iPhone sold in Apple Stores unlocked at an inflated full retail price. Since there is no discount for the iPhone being in or out of contract there is no benefit for the average US consumer, regardless of the carrier they use.
They most probably already have CDMA prototypes up and working, just as they did for ATT before they sold them on it years ago. Things get complicated with LTE, because all carriers will be moving to that well before whatever 4G turns out to become...that includes BOTH ATT and Verizon.
I think Sprint is still banking on WiMAX for their 4G tech at this point. Though they’ll probably be absorbed before LTE is prominent enough to make an impact on mobile phones.
You want to get your best deal when ATT comes asking for an extension? Show up with a fully functioning CDMA iPhone.
That is what I’d do. There is no SIM card required with CDMA, the voice algorithm is better than GSM, and use CDMA for voice with CDMA2000 for data does assist in battery usage when measuring talk time with 3G turned on.
There is no SIM card required with CDMA
That's an advantage? Then how do you use a phone with more than one provider? GSM allows me to use my phone with different providers all over the world just by changing the SIM.
That is what I’d do. There is no SIM card required with CDMA, the voice algorithm is better than GSM, and use CDMA for voice with CDMA2000 for data does assist in battery usage when measuring talk time with 3G turned on.
Hey solipism, did you hear- AT&T really does suck! I keep getting validated daily lately- huh? Matte scrrens, AT&T , etc
Though I guess I have to put up with AT&T now, now that I'm in it.