I think Verizon is kicking themselves in the you know what for turning down Apple's five year offer to be exclusive iPhone carrier. Now they are desperate to compete with AT&T, which even though it's coverage and service are inferior, they are doing a booming business because everyone wants an iPhone, especially in foreign markets. So now we get this sour grapes ad from Verizon. But Apple is fed up with AT&T also, so Verizon might yet get to carry the iPhone soon. Hopefully the Feds will push this along by getting rid of the monopolistic practices of mobile phones in this country.
Oh please, you're arguing semantics. Everyone who doesn't have their head up Apple's a@@ knows the ads are attacking Microsoft.
"PCs", by their very nature, are a combination of MS software and box makers. That's what makes for the all over PC experience, and it's what distinguishes Apple from its competitors. Hence, their ads talk about PCs, not Microsoft or Dell. And certainly not any particular device, which is what Verizon is doing.
Quote:
Again, semantics. The ad is attacking AT&T. One of the things that makes one network desirable over another is the available phones. Thus Verizon targets a product offered by the competition that they obviously feel is losing them customers.
You sure you know what "semantics" means? We're talking about an ad that explicitly targets the iPhone. You can infer that the competition extends to the network, but that's not what's in the ad.
OTOH, Verizon does have an ad-- "There's a map for that", which does pretty clearly go after AT&T.
Quote:
Because Apple is just as much a control freak as Verizon? Neither was willing to make the concessions necessary to make that partnership work.
Except that Apple is a handset manufacturer and Verizon is carrier. Why should Apple need to "compromise" on what kind of handset they want to sell? Are you in favor with PC manufacturers being obliged to compromise with ISPs? Because it sounds like you're in favor of cell carriers getting to be more than dumb pipes.
Quote:
That AT&T didn't realize the consequences of the iPhone or how Apple would sell them down the river every chance they got or was just too eager to get any advantage they could against their competitors.
I don't even know what that means. Sounds like you have issues.
Quote:
What does history have to do with anything? History shows that Apple makes users wait for 3 generations for basic features that other devices have had for years, iPhones and iPods alike. My Verizon phone has features that the iPhone still doesn't have. Bluetooth on the iPhone is practically useless for anything beyond hands free. The physical keyboard makes texting and emailing a breeze.
Definitely issues, but, whatever. Sounds like you like your Verizon phone, good for you. That's not actually what the thread is about, though, is it?
No - not always. Not when by "competing" all they do is spin and skew the facts, as opposed to building a better product. This happened with the iPod - it can't do this, it can't do that - and my favourite ... "it's a closed system".
Calling it vaporware seems like a desperate attempt to discredit something you (and I) know nothing about. Since you're a regular visitor to this, you're already aware that Verizon announced they'd have an Android phone in the near future. Having seen the commercial, you now know the name (Droid) and the month it will arrive (November). Hardly sounds like vaporware to me.
I think anyone questions whether or not Verizon is going to actually have an Android phone, though, I think the question is how good a phone it will be.
They're running ads putting this particular phone up against the iPhone when they don't have any actual product to show. And, given how Verizon likes to mess with phones, it's not inevitable that Droid will be comparable to other Android phones already on the market.
The sharp break between the happy, shiny world of the iDon't, with its bright, singsong music, then the dystopian techno grunge of the Droid, makes me think the Terminator is about to arrive.
Seriously, giving the impression that SkyNet is about to be turned on and all that is good in the world is going to be swept away, may be a way to sell it to those who WANT the machines to win, but hey, I'll stick with happy and shiny!
You know, I've often been surprised by the tone of lots of smartphone ads.
It seems to me that Apple markets the iPhone as an easy to use device that does all kinds of things that you might find useful. They do so in an affable style that suggests that any and all are welcome to the party.
Pretty much everybody else seems to be positioning their phones as drugs, or hipster nightlife accessory, or object of tech fetishization, or, as in the case of Droid, some kind of cybernetic invasion from the future.
In other words, they're marketing to kids. Apple has had a lot of success by making and marketing a device that appeals to pretty much everyone. I wonder why everyone else seems to be determined to scare off anyone over the age of 20?
The sharp break between the happy, shiny world of the iDon't, with its bright, singsong music, then the dystopian techno grunge of the Droid, makes me think the Terminator is about to arrive.
Seriously, giving the impression that SkyNet is about to be turned on and all that is good in the world is going to be swept away, may be a way to sell it to those who WANT the machines to win, but hey, I'll stick with happy and shiny!
extremely good analysis. the ad had the same effect on me although I didn't realize it until you said something. from an advertising aspect, you are dead on.
So much for Verizon ever carrying the iPhone. A big bridge has been burnt.
Some may cheer at the flames, but a potential (and major) alternative iPhone carrier has just disqualified itself.
i doubt that...i think apple would thoroughly enjoy having verizon do a 180 and carry the iphone. it would be a huge statement in support of the device.
the thing that stuck out the most was when they said "idon't have an open development platform." seeing how successful the app store has been, the normal consumer wouldn't really recognize that as a problem.
although developers would definitely see it as a problem...but that's a pretty small segment to market to.
It'll be interesting to see what Verizon has done to Android when Droid is released. Some people have noticed that, while ostensibly a Motorola handset, the name "Droid" has actually been licensed from Lucasfilm to Verizon.
Ha, yup. Noticed the trademark mention in this ad.
So much for Verizon ever carrying the iPhone. A big bridge has been burnt.
Some may cheer at the flames, but a potential (and major) alternative iPhone carrier has just disqualified itself.
That was my first thought also.
Common wisdom has it that the iPhone is about to go multi-carrier, and on the eve of that expectation, Verizon does the one thing that will count them out.
Either they made the completely foolhardy choice to reject Apple yet again, or the iPhone is staying with AT&T is my guess. I can't imagine if Apple actually was in talks with them they would turn them down a second time.
You know, I've often been surprised by the tone of lots of smartphone ads.
It seems to me that Apple markets the iPhone as an easy to use device that does all kinds of things that you might find useful. They do so in an affable style that suggests that any and all are welcome to the party.
Pretty much everybody else seems to be positioning their phones as drugs, or hipster nightlife accessory, or object of tech fetishization, or, as in the case of Droid, some kind of cybernetic invasion from the future.
In other words, they're marketing to kids. Apple has had a lot of success by making and marketing a device that appeals to pretty much everyone. I wonder why everyone else seems to be determined to scare off anyone over the age of 20?
Totally agree about the iPhone ads vs. other smartphone ads. People talk a lot about how they hate the "There's an app for that." ads, but they're memorable and they show a clear solution to a particular problem, all the while showing off the interface of the iPhone.
Common wisdom has it that the iPhone is about to go multi-carrier, and on the eve of that expectation, Verizon does the one thing that will count them out.
Either they made the completely foolhardy choice to reject Apple yet again, or the iPhone is staying with AT&T is my guess. I can't imagine if Apple actually was in talks with them they would turn them down a second time.
Verizon wants every phone they carry to ship with their brain dead "app store." Apple's never going to agree to that.
Again, it's pretty clear that Verizon wants to be much more than a passive provider of infrastructure, and Apple isn't going to go there. Personally, I think Verizon is swimming against the tide here, and their desire to make Verizon the platform is foolhardy.
the thing that stuck out the most was when they said "idon't have an open development platform." seeing how successful the app store has been, the normal consumer wouldn't really recognize that as a problem. ...
This is part of the problem of marketing Android and to an extent the problem is the same as that for Linux.
Most people if told that their iPhone doesn't "multi-task" wouldn't have a clue what you're talking about. Several things in the ad would only appeal to developers and only to those developers that have a huge investment in open source, given that many open source developers already make iPhone apps. Marketing to a small group of already "in-the-know" developers is a very bad strategy.
If you are going to market a new consumer product, it's a good idea to say what it does that the competition doesn't, but they should stick to things average consumers can see and have experience with. Integrated contact management (something the iPhone lacks and all other mobiles have), is fairly arcane in itself, but it's something that most users of these devices would know about, and it's not even mentioned.
Bringing up the old saw about the battery being removable is stupid also. How many people complain about that now we've had a few years of iPhone mania? How many other phones have already moved to sealed batteries as well? This ad is full of objections that mostly don't matter and that mostly the consumers they are selling to won't know about, or care about.
i doubt that...i think apple would thoroughly enjoy having verizon do a 180 and carry the iphone. it would be a huge statement in support of the device.
Your statement should be rewritten as "i think Verizon would thoroughly enjoy having Apple do a 180 and build CDMA version of the iphone."
Verizon got the message Tim Cook when he clearly stated Apple is not interested in developing a CDMA iPhone and "maybe" they will consider multi carrier if 4G networks start rolling out in the States. The only major GSM carrier in the States is T-Mobile and their 3G network is not supported by the iPhone (Edge still works though).
Totally agree about the iPhone ads vs. other smartphone ads. People talk a lot about how they hate the "There's an app for that." ads, but they're memorable and they show a clear solution to a particular problem, all the while showing off the interface of the iPhone.
Yeah, like that. That style of trippy surrealism is generally used to sell things like video game consoles, softdrinks, MP3 players, etc. Stuff that you can be pretty sure you're going to be selling to a younger demographic, or, at the very least, an aging geek demographic.
Given the cost of owning and operating a smartphone, I can't understand why no one else other than Apple thinks it's a good idea to pitch your phone to adults and non-gearheads.
Of course, these are the same manufacturers that, prior to the iPhone, didn't think it was particularly important to make phones that anyone could use, easily, so who knows what motivates them?
Verizon wants every phone they carry to ship with their brain dead "app store." Apple's never going to agree to that.
Again, it's pretty clear that Verizon wants to be much more than a passive provider of infrastructure, and Apple isn't going to go there. Personally, I think Verizon is swimming against the tide here, and their desire to make Verizon the platform is foolhardy.
Totally agree.
You'd think the writing was on the wall for the carriers also after the FCC investigation and the almost instant capitulation of AT&T over tethering and Skype. Any smart CEO of a carrier can see where things are going.
Perhaps they have dreams of buying a handset manufacturer?
Either way, if I owned Verizon stock and saw that ad, I'd sell it right away. It shows that they just aren't even playing the same game as everyone else, let alone playing it smart. It almost makes them seems delusional.
This is part of the problem of marketing Android and to an extent the problem is the same as that for Linux.
Most people if told that their iPhone doesn't "multi-task" wouldn't have a clue what you're talking about. Several things in the ad would only appeal to developers and only to those developers that have a huge investment in open source, given that many open source developers already make iPhone apps. Marketing to a small group of already "in-the-know" developers is a very bad strategy.
If you are going to market a new consumer product, it's a good idea to say what it does that the competition doesn't, but they should stick to things average consumers can see and have experience with. Integrated contact management (something the iPhone lacks and all other mobiles have), is fairly arcane in itself, but it's something that most users of these devices would know about, and it's not even mentioned.
Bringing up the old saw about the battery being removable is stupid also. How many people complain about that now we've had a few years of iPhone mania? How many other phones have already moved to sealed batteries as well? This ad is full of objections that mostly don't matter and that mostly the consumers they are selling to won't know about, or care about.
I think the case here is the ad hinges on making a "long" list of "iDon'ts", so they pretty much had to pad it. Like you say, "open development platform" might as well be "shorter traces on the circuit board" for all the impact it has on the general buying public, and "photos in the dark" and "runs widgets" are just pathetic.
If they had stuck to mainstream, understandable competitive advantages, they would have had to settle for "real keyboard" and maybe either "replaceable battery" or "simultaneous apps."
So when your actual list of "iDon'ts" runs to three, two of which most people don't really care that much about, maybe your campaign based around that list is ill-conceived.
I think the case here is the ad hinges on making a "long" list of "iDon'ts", so they pretty much had to pad it. Like you say, "open development platform" might as well be "shorter traces on the circuit board" for all the impact it has on the general buying public, and "photos in the dark" and "runs widgets" are just pathetic.
If they had stuck to mainstream, understandable competitive advantages, they would have had to settle for "real keyboard" and maybe either "replaceable battery" or "simultaneous apps."
So when your actual list of "iDon'ts" runs to three, two of which most people don't really care that much about, maybe your campaign based around that list is ill-conceived.
The more I think about it and the more I read this thread, it seems the whole campaign was just not thought out.
They are marketing to the wrong people (kids, developers), exaggerating the product (the Droid looks like a block of wood in reality, not very cool at all), and generally insulting everyone else in the business. Empty bragging is never pretty, even in advertising.
Either they made the completely foolhardy choice to reject Apple yet again, or the iPhone is staying with AT&T is my guess. I can't imagine if Apple actually was in talks with them they would turn them down a second time.
Perhaps they wouldn't turn Apple down a year ago. Or even 6-9 months ago. But my hunch is that they're now betting the farm on Android.
With apparently 12 new Android phones coming in the next year, it looks like it's a three way horse race. Aligning themselves Android and BB, puts them in a decent spot. No iPhone, but two out of three ain't bad.
Comments
Oh please, you're arguing semantics. Everyone who doesn't have their head up Apple's a@@ knows the ads are attacking Microsoft.
"PCs", by their very nature, are a combination of MS software and box makers. That's what makes for the all over PC experience, and it's what distinguishes Apple from its competitors. Hence, their ads talk about PCs, not Microsoft or Dell. And certainly not any particular device, which is what Verizon is doing.
Again, semantics. The ad is attacking AT&T. One of the things that makes one network desirable over another is the available phones. Thus Verizon targets a product offered by the competition that they obviously feel is losing them customers.
You sure you know what "semantics" means? We're talking about an ad that explicitly targets the iPhone. You can infer that the competition extends to the network, but that's not what's in the ad.
OTOH, Verizon does have an ad-- "There's a map for that", which does pretty clearly go after AT&T.
Because Apple is just as much a control freak as Verizon? Neither was willing to make the concessions necessary to make that partnership work.
Except that Apple is a handset manufacturer and Verizon is carrier. Why should Apple need to "compromise" on what kind of handset they want to sell? Are you in favor with PC manufacturers being obliged to compromise with ISPs? Because it sounds like you're in favor of cell carriers getting to be more than dumb pipes.
That AT&T didn't realize the consequences of the iPhone or how Apple would sell them down the river every chance they got or was just too eager to get any advantage they could against their competitors.
I don't even know what that means. Sounds like you have issues.
What does history have to do with anything? History shows that Apple makes users wait for 3 generations for basic features that other devices have had for years, iPhones and iPods alike. My Verizon phone has features that the iPhone still doesn't have. Bluetooth on the iPhone is practically useless for anything beyond hands free. The physical keyboard makes texting and emailing a breeze.
Definitely issues, but, whatever. Sounds like you like your Verizon phone, good for you. That's not actually what the thread is about, though, is it?
How about a law which says all cars must be made with gas, diesel, LPG and electric variants?
Dream on.
Hopefully the Feds will push this along by getting rid of the monopolistic practices of mobile phones in this country.
All valid points. Competition = good.
No - not always. Not when by "competing" all they do is spin and skew the facts, as opposed to building a better product. This happened with the iPod - it can't do this, it can't do that - and my favourite ... "it's a closed system".
Calling it vaporware seems like a desperate attempt to discredit something you (and I) know nothing about. Since you're a regular visitor to this, you're already aware that Verizon announced they'd have an Android phone in the near future. Having seen the commercial, you now know the name (Droid) and the month it will arrive (November). Hardly sounds like vaporware to me.
I think anyone questions whether or not Verizon is going to actually have an Android phone, though, I think the question is how good a phone it will be.
They're running ads putting this particular phone up against the iPhone when they don't have any actual product to show. And, given how Verizon likes to mess with phones, it's not inevitable that Droid will be comparable to other Android phones already on the market.
The language of the ad surprises me:
The sharp break between the happy, shiny world of the iDon't, with its bright, singsong music, then the dystopian techno grunge of the Droid, makes me think the Terminator is about to arrive.
Seriously, giving the impression that SkyNet is about to be turned on and all that is good in the world is going to be swept away, may be a way to sell it to those who WANT the machines to win, but hey, I'll stick with happy and shiny!
You know, I've often been surprised by the tone of lots of smartphone ads.
It seems to me that Apple markets the iPhone as an easy to use device that does all kinds of things that you might find useful. They do so in an affable style that suggests that any and all are welcome to the party.
Pretty much everybody else seems to be positioning their phones as drugs, or hipster nightlife accessory, or object of tech fetishization, or, as in the case of Droid, some kind of cybernetic invasion from the future.
In other words, they're marketing to kids. Apple has had a lot of success by making and marketing a device that appeals to pretty much everyone. I wonder why everyone else seems to be determined to scare off anyone over the age of 20?
The language of the ad surprises me:
The sharp break between the happy, shiny world of the iDon't, with its bright, singsong music, then the dystopian techno grunge of the Droid, makes me think the Terminator is about to arrive.
Seriously, giving the impression that SkyNet is about to be turned on and all that is good in the world is going to be swept away, may be a way to sell it to those who WANT the machines to win, but hey, I'll stick with happy and shiny!
extremely good analysis. the ad had the same effect on me although I didn't realize it until you said something. from an advertising aspect, you are dead on.
So much for Verizon ever carrying the iPhone. A big bridge has been burnt.
Some may cheer at the flames, but a potential (and major) alternative iPhone carrier has just disqualified itself.
i doubt that...i think apple would thoroughly enjoy having verizon do a 180 and carry the iphone. it would be a huge statement in support of the device.
although developers would definitely see it as a problem...but that's a pretty small segment to market to.
It'll be interesting to see what Verizon has done to Android when Droid is released. Some people have noticed that, while ostensibly a Motorola handset, the name "Droid" has actually been licensed from Lucasfilm to Verizon.
Ha, yup. Noticed the trademark mention in this ad.
So much for Verizon ever carrying the iPhone. A big bridge has been burnt.
Some may cheer at the flames, but a potential (and major) alternative iPhone carrier has just disqualified itself.
That was my first thought also.
Common wisdom has it that the iPhone is about to go multi-carrier, and on the eve of that expectation, Verizon does the one thing that will count them out.
Either they made the completely foolhardy choice to reject Apple yet again, or the iPhone is staying with AT&T is my guess. I can't imagine if Apple actually was in talks with them they would turn them down a second time.
You know, I've often been surprised by the tone of lots of smartphone ads.
It seems to me that Apple markets the iPhone as an easy to use device that does all kinds of things that you might find useful. They do so in an affable style that suggests that any and all are welcome to the party.
Pretty much everybody else seems to be positioning their phones as drugs, or hipster nightlife accessory, or object of tech fetishization, or, as in the case of Droid, some kind of cybernetic invasion from the future.
In other words, they're marketing to kids. Apple has had a lot of success by making and marketing a device that appeals to pretty much everyone. I wonder why everyone else seems to be determined to scare off anyone over the age of 20?
Totally agree about the iPhone ads vs. other smartphone ads. People talk a lot about how they hate the "There's an app for that." ads, but they're memorable and they show a clear solution to a particular problem, all the while showing off the interface of the iPhone.
On the other hand, you have the Pre which has some kind of surreal gibberish about reincarnation.
That was my first thought also.
Common wisdom has it that the iPhone is about to go multi-carrier, and on the eve of that expectation, Verizon does the one thing that will count them out.
Either they made the completely foolhardy choice to reject Apple yet again, or the iPhone is staying with AT&T is my guess. I can't imagine if Apple actually was in talks with them they would turn them down a second time.
Verizon wants every phone they carry to ship with their brain dead "app store." Apple's never going to agree to that.
Again, it's pretty clear that Verizon wants to be much more than a passive provider of infrastructure, and Apple isn't going to go there. Personally, I think Verizon is swimming against the tide here, and their desire to make Verizon the platform is foolhardy.
the thing that stuck out the most was when they said "idon't have an open development platform." seeing how successful the app store has been, the normal consumer wouldn't really recognize that as a problem. ...
This is part of the problem of marketing Android and to an extent the problem is the same as that for Linux.
Most people if told that their iPhone doesn't "multi-task" wouldn't have a clue what you're talking about. Several things in the ad would only appeal to developers and only to those developers that have a huge investment in open source, given that many open source developers already make iPhone apps. Marketing to a small group of already "in-the-know" developers is a very bad strategy.
If you are going to market a new consumer product, it's a good idea to say what it does that the competition doesn't, but they should stick to things average consumers can see and have experience with. Integrated contact management (something the iPhone lacks and all other mobiles have), is fairly arcane in itself, but it's something that most users of these devices would know about, and it's not even mentioned.
Bringing up the old saw about the battery being removable is stupid also. How many people complain about that now we've had a few years of iPhone mania? How many other phones have already moved to sealed batteries as well? This ad is full of objections that mostly don't matter and that mostly the consumers they are selling to won't know about, or care about.
i doubt that...i think apple would thoroughly enjoy having verizon do a 180 and carry the iphone. it would be a huge statement in support of the device.
Your statement should be rewritten as "i think Verizon would thoroughly enjoy having Apple do a 180 and build CDMA version of the iphone."
Verizon got the message Tim Cook when he clearly stated Apple is not interested in developing a CDMA iPhone and "maybe" they will consider multi carrier if 4G networks start rolling out in the States. The only major GSM carrier in the States is T-Mobile and their 3G network is not supported by the iPhone (Edge still works though).
Totally agree about the iPhone ads vs. other smartphone ads. People talk a lot about how they hate the "There's an app for that." ads, but they're memorable and they show a clear solution to a particular problem, all the while showing off the interface of the iPhone.
On the other hand, you have the Pre which has some kind of surreal gibberish about reincarnation.
Yeah, like that. That style of trippy surrealism is generally used to sell things like video game consoles, softdrinks, MP3 players, etc. Stuff that you can be pretty sure you're going to be selling to a younger demographic, or, at the very least, an aging geek demographic.
Given the cost of owning and operating a smartphone, I can't understand why no one else other than Apple thinks it's a good idea to pitch your phone to adults and non-gearheads.
Of course, these are the same manufacturers that, prior to the iPhone, didn't think it was particularly important to make phones that anyone could use, easily, so who knows what motivates them?
Verizon wants every phone they carry to ship with their brain dead "app store." Apple's never going to agree to that.
Again, it's pretty clear that Verizon wants to be much more than a passive provider of infrastructure, and Apple isn't going to go there. Personally, I think Verizon is swimming against the tide here, and their desire to make Verizon the platform is foolhardy.
Totally agree.
You'd think the writing was on the wall for the carriers also after the FCC investigation and the almost instant capitulation of AT&T over tethering and Skype. Any smart CEO of a carrier can see where things are going.
Perhaps they have dreams of buying a handset manufacturer?
Either way, if I owned Verizon stock and saw that ad, I'd sell it right away. It shows that they just aren't even playing the same game as everyone else, let alone playing it smart. It almost makes them seems delusional.
This is part of the problem of marketing Android and to an extent the problem is the same as that for Linux.
Most people if told that their iPhone doesn't "multi-task" wouldn't have a clue what you're talking about. Several things in the ad would only appeal to developers and only to those developers that have a huge investment in open source, given that many open source developers already make iPhone apps. Marketing to a small group of already "in-the-know" developers is a very bad strategy.
If you are going to market a new consumer product, it's a good idea to say what it does that the competition doesn't, but they should stick to things average consumers can see and have experience with. Integrated contact management (something the iPhone lacks and all other mobiles have), is fairly arcane in itself, but it's something that most users of these devices would know about, and it's not even mentioned.
Bringing up the old saw about the battery being removable is stupid also. How many people complain about that now we've had a few years of iPhone mania? How many other phones have already moved to sealed batteries as well? This ad is full of objections that mostly don't matter and that mostly the consumers they are selling to won't know about, or care about.
I think the case here is the ad hinges on making a "long" list of "iDon'ts", so they pretty much had to pad it. Like you say, "open development platform" might as well be "shorter traces on the circuit board" for all the impact it has on the general buying public, and "photos in the dark" and "runs widgets" are just pathetic.
If they had stuck to mainstream, understandable competitive advantages, they would have had to settle for "real keyboard" and maybe either "replaceable battery" or "simultaneous apps."
So when your actual list of "iDon'ts" runs to three, two of which most people don't really care that much about, maybe your campaign based around that list is ill-conceived.
I think the case here is the ad hinges on making a "long" list of "iDon'ts", so they pretty much had to pad it. Like you say, "open development platform" might as well be "shorter traces on the circuit board" for all the impact it has on the general buying public, and "photos in the dark" and "runs widgets" are just pathetic.
If they had stuck to mainstream, understandable competitive advantages, they would have had to settle for "real keyboard" and maybe either "replaceable battery" or "simultaneous apps."
So when your actual list of "iDon'ts" runs to three, two of which most people don't really care that much about, maybe your campaign based around that list is ill-conceived.
The more I think about it and the more I read this thread, it seems the whole campaign was just not thought out.
They are marketing to the wrong people (kids, developers), exaggerating the product (the Droid looks like a block of wood in reality, not very cool at all), and generally insulting everyone else in the business. Empty bragging is never pretty, even in advertising.
It's just a juvenile, negative, mess really.
Either they made the completely foolhardy choice to reject Apple yet again, or the iPhone is staying with AT&T is my guess. I can't imagine if Apple actually was in talks with them they would turn them down a second time.
Perhaps they wouldn't turn Apple down a year ago. Or even 6-9 months ago. But my hunch is that they're now betting the farm on Android.
With apparently 12 new Android phones coming in the next year, it looks like it's a three way horse race. Aligning themselves Android and BB, puts them in a decent spot. No iPhone, but two out of three ain't bad.