Service where I am at is great....I get 4-5 bars inside my home now. I think that AT&T installed a new tower near me....or added that new frequency that is able to penetrate walls.
If your service is so bad, why didn't you return the phone?.....you had 30 days.
We're now in the 3rd year of AT&T/iPhone exclusivity with each other.
My coverage is not that bad- just not as good as my old Verizon crap phone.
The "Misfit Toys" one is pure genius. That being said, I know everyone loves to crap on AT&T's service, but I have no complaints here in the Raleigh, NC area.
indeed. i'm in LA and have had no issues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseymac
Santa, if you're listening, all I want for Christmas is a Verizon iPhone.
you must be talking Christmas 2011 cause that is when it is plausible
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Lame. They could have got a real iPhone.
or perhaps not. there are rules about using products in ads, tv shows etc. if they didn't have the proper permissions they could get sued. and I doubt Apple would say yes since the ads are bashing a partner
Quote:
Originally Posted by alandail
Verizon can't directly attack the iPhone too much since sometime next year they'll be selling it.
MIGHT. not will. and the might is at this point unlikely. despite the articles about the 3way chipset it also says that it will be sampling next summer. which means it isn't likely to show up for real for up to a year after that.
the best we might have next summer is unlocked phones good for all GSM carriers. but even a fight between ATT and TMobile could produce better rates etc so it is still all good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s
I think that you are reading the ads wrong. These ads are in no way an attack on Apple or the iPhone -- they are direct assault on AT&T.
it would be more plausible an argument if they toss a blackberry or two in the ads. to cover the notion of all smart phones. instead they only use, and clearly show that it is meant to be, iphones.
also there have been articles saying that ATT's Edge is 90% the speed of Verizon's 3g with ATT's 3g being slightly faster. which is why they are taking issue with the ads even though the maps are clearly marked "3g coverage". so they need to whip up some ads on this point to counter the ads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andyinc91
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,
perhaps they know that despite this talk of a dual chip, tri-chip, Apple has no plans to support CDMA so they aren't really losing anything taking shots at the iphone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple
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!
at the time that they made that announcement it was the best choice. ATT was better than TMobile and the choice was to support GSM not CDMA. Also, for all we know ATT promised them that the network was enough to cover the traffic and being improved all the time.
trouble was that the iphone was more popular than anyone expected. and ATT can't keep up. As perhaps TMobile would not have been able to, or even Verizon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
Too bad the ads won't really achieve much because the iPhone . . . is not available on Verizon. And the iPhone's growth isn't slowing down anytime soon.
Here's today's MDN take:
Verizon had better be careful. This is Steve Jobs they're dealing with and this ad is sure to come up, if not played on a huge screen, when Verizon again comes begging Apple for an iPhone deal. Or maybe Verizon just has a death wish: iPhone 4G in the U.S. on AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint.
Spot on.
actually no it isn't. they blew it with the last comment. Sprint is NOT going LTE. they are supporting Wimax. so no iphone for them.
I can't tell you how many things I used to dread doing here in NYC (land of the lines) but now waiting is a vacation with the iPhone. Last week I had a doctor's appointment with an hour plus wait- no problem. Same thing with a post office pick up on Saturday- the line was 45 minutes, again no problem.
I thought the Business Blunder of the Decade was the iPhone locked into AT&FEE for 3 years and counting with such lousy coverage, late MMS, and still no tethering. Imagine how much more APple could have made if the iPhone were offered on more than one carrier. As much as Apple has made off its iPhone, AT&Fee has more than made riding on its back.
Yeah... nerds think that tethering and MMS are important, but nerds always have trouble understanding how little the other 95% of the population cares about what they care about.
Apple might have made more in the first two years if Verizon could also sell the iPhone, but it might have made less (because ATT paid sky high prices for the iPhone, which wouldn't have been as high without that exclusivity). By the time the 3GS came out, I do think that Apple started leaving real money on the table. The true masterstroke would be switching the VERIZON exclusivity for the next gen iPhone (assuming 4G was ready, which it is not) and then get a king's ransom from Verizon for all those hordes of switchers.
Can you imagine? You've been with ATT for 3 years for the iPhone, and you're hooked, though you do wish you could have Verizon's network. Suddenly the next gen iPhone is only on Verizon! I bet Apple could charge Verizon $1000 per sale (with a two year contract and those high cancellation fees) and Verizon would happily pay it. Of course this would piss off a lot of customers, but the financial windfall would be obscene.
Quote:
Did Apple actually think entering the cellphone market wasn't going to be competitive? I'm surprised it actually took this long.
Entering the cell phone market has been anything but competitive for Apple.
Yeah... nerds think that tethering and MMS are important, but nerds always have trouble understanding how little the other 95% of the population cares about what they care about.
Apple might have made more in the first two years if Verizon could also sell the iPhone, but it might have made less (because ATT paid sky high prices for the iPhone, which wouldn't have been as high without that exclusivity). By the time the 3GS came out, I do think that Apple started leaving real money on the table. The true masterstroke would be switching the VERIZON exclusivity for the next gen iPhone (assuming 4G was ready, which it is not) and then get a king's ransom from Verizon for all those hordes of switchers.
Entering the cell phone market has been anything but competitive for Apple.
Well Verizon didn't want it - so how was that competitive? ( I meant cellphone market in general)
You're a blind homer, apparently. ATT isn't a little worse than Verizon. Nearly everyone on ATT complains about dropped calls at some point, while Verizon users look at you and say "you drop calls? why would you put up with that?"
I had more dropped calls with a Samsung phone on Verizon than with any other phone on any other network.
Well Verizon didn't want it - so how was that competitive? ( I meant cellphone market in general)
Verizon wanted it, they just didn't want it at the price (both dollars and loss of control) that was asked. And that's the definition of competition my slow friend.
I had more dropped calls with a Samsung phone on Verizon than with any other phone on any other network.
So....
Then I guess we should throw out all of the market research that contradicts your single experience, right? Did you consider that you didn't even eliminate the phone as the cause of the problems?
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 don't see anyone "boohooing". MIcrosoft, on the other hand, realized that their "laptop hunter" commercials weren't really effective at anything other than making a bunch of 20-something nerds lust over Lauren. I find their new "shiny happy people" commercials fascinating, too, although maybe not for the same reason you do.
I agree with both of you. I had Verizon for about 5 years and never had a problem except they were behind the curve with offering the newest phones. When my contract was up last year I switched to AT&T and the iPhone 3Gs.
I have never had a problem with AT&T and their coverage.
My 13 year old son still has a verizon phone and we compare signal strength all the time and everywhere we go. We both always have just about the same signal strength. I have not noticed a difference in networks from Verizon to AT&T!
Except of couse now I have the iphone which is a all in one phone, music player and all around entertainment device! It is like carrying a min laptop wherever I go!
Verizon wanted it, they just didn't want it at the price (both dollars and loss of control) that was asked. And that's the definition of competition my slow friend.
My slowest friend- and when you don't counter offer for said prodfuct and simply reject it instead there is NO competition. It is called rejection plain and simply- surely you know that defintion.
For APPL longs, we also want the iPhone on every large network.
Correct. We heard it said that Steve will not give the iPhone to Verizon after their initial rejection of the original iPhone proposal and now these ads. But there is a fine line between Steve being a prophet and a CEO. He can get away with more than your average CEO in terms of dictating corporate policy based on his personal philosophy because of the successful track record. But his first responsibility as a CEO is to maximize profits for the shareholders.
My slowest friend- and when you don't counter offer for said prodfuct and simply reject it instead there is NO competition. It is called rejection plain and simply- surely you know that defintion.
I'm impressed to know that you were in on the negotiations.
Who are you kidding, suggesting that you know the details of offers and counter offers? Don't you know if you're going to BS, stick to BS that's within the realm of believability? Everyone here knows that neither you nor anyone else who's talking has intimate details of the negotiations. It's all speculation that has become folklore.
Oh, and don't start a sentence with 'and,' it makes you sound uneducated.
'3) A large majority of people do not travel outside of the US'
That's just f***ing sad.
Perhaps it should be clarified as, it isn't necessary to make a phone decision based off where you will be 2% of the time as opposed to 98% of the time.
I can buy a $20 Nokia for those instances where GSM is necessary to get the job done.
What school did Verizon's marketing people graduate from? Clown School? Everybody knows that you do *not* mention your competition's name in your ads. You might *imply* who you're talking about, you might say "here's our competition's coverage map" without saying your competition's name, but never mention your competitor's name, because that just improves his name recognition. When people decide to actually go buy cellular service they don't do it immediately after an ad, they do it some time later, and by that time they will have forgotten who is who and often tend to go to the carrier with the best name recognition. "AT&T? Sounds familiar, lots of ads mentioning their name, sounds good to me."
I mean, I'm not a marketing guru, but this is what was taught to me by people who *are* marketing gurus, which makes me wonder about the sanity of the people at Verizon. And BTW, you want the fastest 3G network? Sprint. By a landslide. I've used'em all, and Sprint's 3G network wins hands-down, coverage isn't great but where there *is* coverage it runs at speeds that Verizon and AT&T can only dream about.
Comments
3 years? Mine was 2.
Service where I am at is great....I get 4-5 bars inside my home now. I think that AT&T installed a new tower near me....or added that new frequency that is able to penetrate walls.
If your service is so bad, why didn't you return the phone?.....you had 30 days.
We're now in the 3rd year of AT&T/iPhone exclusivity with each other.
My coverage is not that bad- just not as good as my old Verizon crap phone.
He's one of those that knew about AT&T and their service issues, then went ahead anyway and got an iPhone. And then keeps complaining about AT&T.
Witness the power of the iPhone.
I absolutely love my iPhone. It completes me.
The "Misfit Toys" one is pure genius. That being said, I know everyone loves to crap on AT&T's service, but I have no complaints here in the Raleigh, NC area.
indeed. i'm in LA and have had no issues.
Santa, if you're listening, all I want for Christmas is a Verizon iPhone.
you must be talking Christmas 2011 cause that is when it is plausible
Lame. They could have got a real iPhone.
or perhaps not. there are rules about using products in ads, tv shows etc. if they didn't have the proper permissions they could get sued. and I doubt Apple would say yes since the ads are bashing a partner
Verizon can't directly attack the iPhone too much since sometime next year they'll be selling it.
MIGHT. not will. and the might is at this point unlikely. despite the articles about the 3way chipset it also says that it will be sampling next summer. which means it isn't likely to show up for real for up to a year after that.
the best we might have next summer is unlocked phones good for all GSM carriers. but even a fight between ATT and TMobile could produce better rates etc so it is still all good.
I think that you are reading the ads wrong. These ads are in no way an attack on Apple or the iPhone -- they are direct assault on AT&T.
it would be more plausible an argument if they toss a blackberry or two in the ads. to cover the notion of all smart phones. instead they only use, and clearly show that it is meant to be, iphones.
also there have been articles saying that ATT's Edge is 90% the speed of Verizon's 3g with ATT's 3g being slightly faster. which is why they are taking issue with the ads even though the maps are clearly marked "3g coverage". so they need to whip up some ads on this point to counter the ads.
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,
perhaps they know that despite this talk of a dual chip, tri-chip, Apple has no plans to support CDMA so they aren't really losing anything taking shots at the iphone.
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!
at the time that they made that announcement it was the best choice. ATT was better than TMobile and the choice was to support GSM not CDMA. Also, for all we know ATT promised them that the network was enough to cover the traffic and being improved all the time.
trouble was that the iphone was more popular than anyone expected. and ATT can't keep up. As perhaps TMobile would not have been able to, or even Verizon.
Too bad the ads won't really achieve much because the iPhone . . . is not available on Verizon. And the iPhone's growth isn't slowing down anytime soon.
Here's today's MDN take:
Verizon had better be careful. This is Steve Jobs they're dealing with and this ad is sure to come up, if not played on a huge screen, when Verizon again comes begging Apple for an iPhone deal. Or maybe Verizon just has a death wish: iPhone 4G in the U.S. on AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint.
Spot on.
actually no it isn't. they blew it with the last comment. Sprint is NOT going LTE. they are supporting Wimax. so no iphone for them.
I guess you missed the later article
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...n_q3_2010.html
about the next generation of iPhone being a UMTS/CDMA hybrid and that it will be available on Verizon.
guess you missed that it was a rumor and not an announcement from Jobs and company. that's when something is real. not when AI etc say it might happen
I absolutely love my iPhone. It completes me.
Same here.
Same here.
I can't tell you how many things I used to dread doing here in NYC (land of the lines) but now waiting is a vacation with the iPhone. Last week I had a doctor's appointment with an hour plus wait- no problem. Same thing with a post office pick up on Saturday- the line was 45 minutes, again no problem.
I thought the Business Blunder of the Decade was the iPhone locked into AT&FEE for 3 years and counting with such lousy coverage, late MMS, and still no tethering. Imagine how much more APple could have made if the iPhone were offered on more than one carrier. As much as Apple has made off its iPhone, AT&Fee has more than made riding on its back.
Yeah... nerds think that tethering and MMS are important, but nerds always have trouble understanding how little the other 95% of the population cares about what they care about.
Apple might have made more in the first two years if Verizon could also sell the iPhone, but it might have made less (because ATT paid sky high prices for the iPhone, which wouldn't have been as high without that exclusivity). By the time the 3GS came out, I do think that Apple started leaving real money on the table. The true masterstroke would be switching the VERIZON exclusivity for the next gen iPhone (assuming 4G was ready, which it is not) and then get a king's ransom from Verizon for all those hordes of switchers.
Can you imagine? You've been with ATT for 3 years for the iPhone, and you're hooked, though you do wish you could have Verizon's network. Suddenly the next gen iPhone is only on Verizon! I bet Apple could charge Verizon $1000 per sale (with a two year contract and those high cancellation fees) and Verizon would happily pay it. Of course this would piss off a lot of customers, but the financial windfall would be obscene.
Did Apple actually think entering the cellphone market wasn't going to be competitive? I'm surprised it actually took this long.
Entering the cell phone market has been anything but competitive for Apple.
Yeah... nerds think that tethering and MMS are important, but nerds always have trouble understanding how little the other 95% of the population cares about what they care about.
Apple might have made more in the first two years if Verizon could also sell the iPhone, but it might have made less (because ATT paid sky high prices for the iPhone, which wouldn't have been as high without that exclusivity). By the time the 3GS came out, I do think that Apple started leaving real money on the table. The true masterstroke would be switching the VERIZON exclusivity for the next gen iPhone (assuming 4G was ready, which it is not) and then get a king's ransom from Verizon for all those hordes of switchers.
Entering the cell phone market has been anything but competitive for Apple.
Well Verizon didn't want it - so how was that competitive? ( I meant cellphone market in general)
You're a blind homer, apparently. ATT isn't a little worse than Verizon. Nearly everyone on ATT complains about dropped calls at some point, while Verizon users look at you and say "you drop calls? why would you put up with that?"
I had more dropped calls with a Samsung phone on Verizon than with any other phone on any other network.
So....
Microsoft on the other hand has taken the high road at least with their positive attitude Windows 7 commercials. I actually find them fascinating!.
Well Verizon didn't want it - so how was that competitive? ( I meant cellphone market in general)
Verizon wanted it, they just didn't want it at the price (both dollars and loss of control) that was asked. And that's the definition of competition my slow friend.
I had more dropped calls with a Samsung phone on Verizon than with any other phone on any other network.
So....
Then I guess we should throw out all of the market research that contradicts your single experience, right? Did you consider that you didn't even eliminate the phone as the cause of the problems?
Duh
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 don't see anyone "boohooing". MIcrosoft, on the other hand, realized that their "laptop hunter" commercials weren't really effective at anything other than making a bunch of 20-something nerds lust over Lauren. I find their new "shiny happy people" commercials fascinating, too, although maybe not for the same reason you do.
Same here.
I agree with both of you. I had Verizon for about 5 years and never had a problem except they were behind the curve with offering the newest phones. When my contract was up last year I switched to AT&T and the iPhone 3Gs.
I have never had a problem with AT&T and their coverage.
My 13 year old son still has a verizon phone and we compare signal strength all the time and everywhere we go. We both always have just about the same signal strength. I have not noticed a difference in networks from Verizon to AT&T!
Except of couse now I have the iphone which is a all in one phone, music player and all around entertainment device! It is like carrying a min laptop wherever I go!
Verizon wanted it, they just didn't want it at the price (both dollars and loss of control) that was asked. And that's the definition of competition my slow friend.
My slowest friend- and when you don't counter offer for said prodfuct and simply reject it instead there is NO competition. It is called rejection plain and simply- surely you know that defintion.
For APPL longs, we also want the iPhone on every large network.
Correct. We heard it said that Steve will not give the iPhone to Verizon after their initial rejection of the original iPhone proposal and now these ads. But there is a fine line between Steve being a prophet and a CEO. He can get away with more than your average CEO in terms of dictating corporate policy based on his personal philosophy because of the successful track record. But his first responsibility as a CEO is to maximize profits for the shareholders.
My slowest friend- and when you don't counter offer for said prodfuct and simply reject it instead there is NO competition. It is called rejection plain and simply- surely you know that defintion.
I'm impressed to know that you were in on the negotiations.
Who are you kidding, suggesting that you know the details of offers and counter offers? Don't you know if you're going to BS, stick to BS that's within the realm of believability? Everyone here knows that neither you nor anyone else who's talking has intimate details of the negotiations. It's all speculation that has become folklore.
Oh, and don't start a sentence with 'and,' it makes you sound uneducated.
Oh, and don't start a sentence with 'and,' it makes you sound uneducated.
I am. And therefore, why are you talking to me?
'3) A large majority of people do not travel outside of the US'
That's just f***ing sad.
Perhaps it should be clarified as, it isn't necessary to make a phone decision based off where you will be 2% of the time as opposed to 98% of the time.
I can buy a $20 Nokia for those instances where GSM is necessary to get the job done.
Verizon:
"Come enjoy our faster, more reliable network, with a whole range of lousy phones that aren't the iPhone!"
Winner.
Did the iPhone become the #1 phone on the market yet? Or is that still the Blackberry?
What school did Verizon's marketing people graduate from? Clown School? Everybody knows that you do *not* mention your competition's name in your ads. You might *imply* who you're talking about, you might say "here's our competition's coverage map" without saying your competition's name, but never mention your competitor's name, because that just improves his name recognition. When people decide to actually go buy cellular service they don't do it immediately after an ad, they do it some time later, and by that time they will have forgotten who is who and often tend to go to the carrier with the best name recognition. "AT&T? Sounds familiar, lots of ads mentioning their name, sounds good to me."
I mean, I'm not a marketing guru, but this is what was taught to me by people who *are* marketing gurus, which makes me wonder about the sanity of the people at Verizon. And BTW, you want the fastest 3G network? Sprint. By a landslide. I've used'em all, and Sprint's 3G network wins hands-down, coverage isn't great but where there *is* coverage it runs at speeds that Verizon and AT&T can only dream about.