Verizon is pathetic and are a bunch of liars!!!! !!
OMG- Verizon has done it. They have incurred such ire, such wrath. They have joined ranks now with the likes of Microsoft, Google, Palm, Adobe, the Beatles, etc.
Here is a map of where you support the iPhone today.
Verizon's back is against a wall. They are now forced to use deceptive ads to slow the exodus to AT&T. They should have just accepted the iPhone when they had the chance. Any techno-buff would have known that the Apple iPhone was going to change the mobile industry forever.
The word "coverage" as it relates to telecommunications refers to geography, not population. Even AT&T's "Coverage Viewer" on their own website only shows geographic coverage, not population coverage.
So how is it misleading because Verizon does not specify something that even AT&T does not specify in its own marketing?
AT&T is too embarrassed to publish a full-US 3G coverage map on their own website. The default map is GSM only. To view 3G, you have to choose a "select area" and then zoom out from there.
The Verizon ad clearly states "3G coverage". It does not say "white = no coverage at all". 53% of the idiots surveyed might have thought that, but good luck convincing a federal judge/jury that.
They are now forced to use deceptive ads to slow the exodus to AT&T.
Deceptive? I do not think that word means what you think it means. Or perhaps you are incapable of understanding the map, with the large print "3G COVERAGE" sitting directly beneath it. Only a dullard would find it deceptive in any way, shape or form.
Verizon's back is against a wall. They are now forced to use deceptive ads to slow the exodus to AT&T. They should have just accepted the iPhone when they had the chance. Any techno-buff would have known that the Apple iPhone was going to change the mobile industry forever.
Actually, I think it's the other way around. AT&T's back is against the wall, and is desperately trying to salvage what little bit of credibility they have before they lose the iPhone exclusivity in the US. Verizon has held its own very well considering the masses flocking to AT&T for the iPhone (in spite of, not because of, their network).
I'm pretty sure Apple is getting tired of all the snickering at iPhone events when they make an announcement about new features that require carrier support. AT&T is the one who was handed a huge opportunity on a silver platter by Apple, and by most objective accounts has totally blown it.
I am not sure why AT&T is so upset. They weren't taken to court for making claims of the fewest dropped calls. i don't use my phone that often, only have the 450 minute plan, and and up with a few dropped calls per week. I never had that issue with Sprint or T-Mobile. If anyone has been doing false advertising, it has been AT&T. I am not a fan of Verizon, but I will take whoever I can once the iPhone is released from its exclusivity contract in the US. I live in Orlando, FL. We should have great coverage. I end up on edge way too often. AT&T's coverage is almost as bad as their customer service.
Actually, I think it's the other way around. AT&T's back is against the wall, and is desperately trying to salvage what little bit of credibility they have before they lose the iPhone exclusivity in the US. Verizon has held its own very well considering the masses flocking to AT&T for the iPhone (in spite of, not because of, their network).
I'm pretty sure Apple is getting tired of all the snickering at iPhone events when they make an announcement about new features that require carrier support. AT&T is the one who was handed a huge opportunity on a silver platter by Apple, and by most objective accounts has totally blown it.
I see your point about ATT not grasping the opportunity more, but I think ATT's exclusivity was always going to end at some point. (Perhaps, stating the obvious, but bear with me)
It should be better for us, the consumer. I would hope as ATT builds their network they will be offering incentives for us to 'stay' with ATT. Such as lower data rate plans. I would like to see an unlimited voice/data plan from ATT for about $75/month.
All things being equal between ATT & Verizon, the rollover minutes is a huge feature and if Verizon 'matched' it I would consider moving. But no rollover, is a deal breaker.
You CAN'T show a difference when Verizon's 3G average speed is 600-1400 kbps and AT&T's 3G average speed is 700-1700 kbps.
Sure you can. It's not about speed difference so much as it's about speed over a certain amount of coverage.
Hypothetically let's say VZ is doing 1400kbps all over the midwest, but dropping to 900kbps in the other 2/3 of the country. Then let's say ATT is pushing 1700kps over 3/4 of the country, but dropping all the way down to 700kbps in congested city centers. Which service would you prefer to have? Depends on who you are and where you live. I know these aren't the actual figures, especially considering so much ATT 2.5G coverage, but it would be interesting to find out what the actuals are.
So the question becomes, who has the overall best speed and coverage per capita? If you're the winner here, that would make for some good marketing. If you're not the winner here, you stay quiet.
Actually, I think it's the other way around. AT&T's back is against the wall, and is desperately trying to salvage what little bit of credibility they have before they lose the iPhone exclusivity in the US. Verizon has held its own very well considering the masses flocking to AT&T for the iPhone (in spite of, not because of, their network).
I'm pretty sure Apple is getting tired of all the snickering at iPhone events when they make an announcement about new features that require carrier support. AT&T is the one who was handed a huge opportunity on a silver platter by Apple, and by most objective accounts has totally blown it.
Wow. If adding a record number of customers, achieving the lowest industry churn, and returning the highest profit margins (Wireless) is your definition of "blown it", what would you define as a success? Was Verizon a success by saying "no" to Apple?
As far as the snickering at that one Apple event, it was located in San Fran where there are a LARGE number of iPhone users. Yes, AT&T does have a performance issue there. That doesn't mean that this situation exists everywhere. Here in the midwest, service is fine. In my home, I actually get 4-5 bars now....AT&T must have opened up a new frequency or installed a new tower.
Sure you can. It's not about speed difference so much as it's about speed over a certain amount of coverage.
Hypothetically let's say VZ is doing 1400kbps all over the midwest, but dropping to 900kbps in the other 2/3 of the country. Then let's say ATT is pushing 1700kps over 3/4 of the country, but dropping all the way down to 700kbps in congested city centers. Which service would you prefer to have? Depends on who you are and where you live. I know these aren't the actual figures, especially considering so much ATT 2.5G coverage, but it would be interesting to find out what the actuals are.
So the question becomes, who has the overall best speed and coverage per capita? If you're the winner here, that would make for some good marketing. If you're not the winner here, you stay quiet.
Except the midwest isn't where the geeks are (the iphone fans).
The fact is that Verizon is a baby bell in the north east (where the geeks are), AT&T is a baby bell in the south (where the geeks aren't). It is natural for the landline incumbent to have a stronger wireless network in their own landline territory (i.e. Verizon Wireless is stronger in New York City). American Idol winners are mostly country music type because AT&T Wireless subscribers are in the south and they are the people voting.
The iphone fans are going to be living more in Verizon's territory than AT&T territory. You are going to see those AT&T's 1700 kbps speed south of the Mason-Dixon Line --- but the problem is that the geeks don't live there.
All things being equal between ATT & Verizon, the rollover minutes is a huge feature and if Verizon 'matched' it I would consider moving. But no rollover, is a deal breaker.
I am little concerned about Verizon's new $350 Termination Fee. I'd better be sure that I like that new phone.
Someone also mentioned that Verizon charges $3 a month for Visual Voicemail?
I am little concerned about Verizon's new $350 Termination Fee. I'd better be sure that I like that new phone.
Someone also mentioned that Verizon charges $3 a month for Visual Voicemail?
yep 3 a month for VVM, 7 a month for insurance, I think VZ navigator is another 10, and they also have a video service that can be an extra 20 a month.
I mean, it's not so much weirder than AT&T charging 20 a month for unlimited text messaging on the iphone when it's included on plans for other phones...
$350 to determine if you'll be with verizon for 2 years is a bit steep. Maybe that's for a 1 year contract?
The ads are misleading. But without concrete proof of actual lies or deception, AT&T isn't going to win this one.
I think it's time AT&T put the smack down with some ads of their own, showing their total coverage, and maybe speed comparisons. You only have a few seconds to show and convince consumers of what you have to say.
Exactly show that the ipHOne works outside of the 3G area in some ads.
Show how the iPHone is better than the Droid. Show benefits like rollover minutes. Advertise.
Prince McLean is wrong on all the information on his article.
All the RED area shown on the Verizon commercial are ev-do rev A coverage --- 600-1400 kbps average download speed, 3.1 mbps peak max download speed.
The only thing you can say is that Verizon's 3G coverage --- covers a lot of corn fields in the midwest where there are more cows than humans.
Even Verizon doesn't make this claim. Source please.
I'm looking at Verizon's own maps and they don't claim Rev A in all places they claim 3G. Remember -- anything CDMA is technically 3G; that doesn't make it faster than EDGE. That is why those ads are misleading.
My point is that Verizon does have better high-speed coverage; but that doesn't mean they should exaggerate it.
yI mean, it's not so much weirder than AT&T charging 20 a month for unlimited text messaging on the iphone when it's included on plans for other phones?
What other phones include it? From what I can see AT&T is very specific about which phones get which kind of plan. All smartphones get unlimited data for $30 and unlimited SMS for $20.
If AT&T wins this, I predict someone at VZ will be loosing their job, not good press to attack the competition with bad facts and have the courts come down on you.
ROTFLMAO!!! Verizon is telling the 100% TRUTH!! Actual ATT 3G coverage is almost non-existant in ENTIRE states. The 3 G system is mostly a 1900 Mhz system. What does that mean? NO efficient wall penetration. Sure they are going to 850 Mhz in SOME populated areas but overall their system is absolute crap.
Comments
Here is a map of where you support the iPhone today.
Verizon is pathetic and are a bunch of liars!!!! !!
OMG- Verizon has done it. They have incurred such ire, such wrath. They have joined ranks now with the likes of Microsoft, Google, Palm, Adobe, the Beatles, etc.
Did I leave anybody out?
Does Apple have any friends?
< blank >
Here is a map of where you support the iPhone today.
Verizon's back is against a wall. They are now forced to use deceptive ads to slow the exodus to AT&T. They should have just accepted the iPhone when they had the chance. Any techno-buff would have known that the Apple iPhone was going to change the mobile industry forever.
So how is it misleading because Verizon does not specify something that even AT&T does not specify in its own marketing?
AT&T is too embarrassed to publish a full-US 3G coverage map on their own website. The default map is GSM only. To view 3G, you have to choose a "select area" and then zoom out from there.
The Verizon ad clearly states "3G coverage". It does not say "white = no coverage at all". 53% of the idiots surveyed might have thought that, but good luck convincing a federal judge/jury that.
They are now forced to use deceptive ads to slow the exodus to AT&T.
Deceptive? I do not think that word means what you think it means. Or perhaps you are incapable of understanding the map, with the large print "3G COVERAGE" sitting directly beneath it. Only a dullard would find it deceptive in any way, shape or form.
Verizon.
They had their chance.
To their credit...ATT took theirs.
But it was a poisoned chalice regardless.
Apple broke the power of the phone network companies.
A precedent has been set.
Apple's star is rising. And M$ is nowhere.
How ironic.
The 3rd Great Age is upon us.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Good Post!
Verizon's back is against a wall. They are now forced to use deceptive ads to slow the exodus to AT&T. They should have just accepted the iPhone when they had the chance. Any techno-buff would have known that the Apple iPhone was going to change the mobile industry forever.
Actually, I think it's the other way around. AT&T's back is against the wall, and is desperately trying to salvage what little bit of credibility they have before they lose the iPhone exclusivity in the US. Verizon has held its own very well considering the masses flocking to AT&T for the iPhone (in spite of, not because of, their network).
I'm pretty sure Apple is getting tired of all the snickering at iPhone events when they make an announcement about new features that require carrier support. AT&T is the one who was handed a huge opportunity on a silver platter by Apple, and by most objective accounts has totally blown it.
Actually, I think it's the other way around. AT&T's back is against the wall, and is desperately trying to salvage what little bit of credibility they have before they lose the iPhone exclusivity in the US. Verizon has held its own very well considering the masses flocking to AT&T for the iPhone (in spite of, not because of, their network).
I'm pretty sure Apple is getting tired of all the snickering at iPhone events when they make an announcement about new features that require carrier support. AT&T is the one who was handed a huge opportunity on a silver platter by Apple, and by most objective accounts has totally blown it.
I see your point about ATT not grasping the opportunity more, but I think ATT's exclusivity was always going to end at some point. (Perhaps, stating the obvious, but bear with me)
It should be better for us, the consumer. I would hope as ATT builds their network they will be offering incentives for us to 'stay' with ATT. Such as lower data rate plans. I would like to see an unlimited voice/data plan from ATT for about $75/month.
All things being equal between ATT & Verizon, the rollover minutes is a huge feature and if Verizon 'matched' it I would consider moving. But no rollover, is a deal breaker.
You CAN'T show a difference when Verizon's 3G average speed is 600-1400 kbps and AT&T's 3G average speed is 700-1700 kbps.
Sure you can. It's not about speed difference so much as it's about speed over a certain amount of coverage.
Hypothetically let's say VZ is doing 1400kbps all over the midwest, but dropping to 900kbps in the other 2/3 of the country. Then let's say ATT is pushing 1700kps over 3/4 of the country, but dropping all the way down to 700kbps in congested city centers. Which service would you prefer to have? Depends on who you are and where you live. I know these aren't the actual figures, especially considering so much ATT 2.5G coverage, but it would be interesting to find out what the actuals are.
So the question becomes, who has the overall best speed and coverage per capita? If you're the winner here, that would make for some good marketing. If you're not the winner here, you stay quiet.
Actually, I think it's the other way around. AT&T's back is against the wall, and is desperately trying to salvage what little bit of credibility they have before they lose the iPhone exclusivity in the US. Verizon has held its own very well considering the masses flocking to AT&T for the iPhone (in spite of, not because of, their network).
I'm pretty sure Apple is getting tired of all the snickering at iPhone events when they make an announcement about new features that require carrier support. AT&T is the one who was handed a huge opportunity on a silver platter by Apple, and by most objective accounts has totally blown it.
Wow. If adding a record number of customers, achieving the lowest industry churn, and returning the highest profit margins (Wireless) is your definition of "blown it", what would you define as a success? Was Verizon a success by saying "no" to Apple?
As far as the snickering at that one Apple event, it was located in San Fran where there are a LARGE number of iPhone users. Yes, AT&T does have a performance issue there. That doesn't mean that this situation exists everywhere. Here in the midwest, service is fine. In my home, I actually get 4-5 bars now....AT&T must have opened up a new frequency or installed a new tower.
Sure you can. It's not about speed difference so much as it's about speed over a certain amount of coverage.
Hypothetically let's say VZ is doing 1400kbps all over the midwest, but dropping to 900kbps in the other 2/3 of the country. Then let's say ATT is pushing 1700kps over 3/4 of the country, but dropping all the way down to 700kbps in congested city centers. Which service would you prefer to have? Depends on who you are and where you live. I know these aren't the actual figures, especially considering so much ATT 2.5G coverage, but it would be interesting to find out what the actuals are.
So the question becomes, who has the overall best speed and coverage per capita? If you're the winner here, that would make for some good marketing. If you're not the winner here, you stay quiet.
Except the midwest isn't where the geeks are (the iphone fans).
The fact is that Verizon is a baby bell in the north east (where the geeks are), AT&T is a baby bell in the south (where the geeks aren't). It is natural for the landline incumbent to have a stronger wireless network in their own landline territory (i.e. Verizon Wireless is stronger in New York City). American Idol winners are mostly country music type because AT&T Wireless subscribers are in the south and they are the people voting.
The iphone fans are going to be living more in Verizon's territory than AT&T territory. You are going to see those AT&T's 1700 kbps speed south of the Mason-Dixon Line --- but the problem is that the geeks don't live there.
All things being equal between ATT & Verizon, the rollover minutes is a huge feature and if Verizon 'matched' it I would consider moving. But no rollover, is a deal breaker.
I am little concerned about Verizon's new $350 Termination Fee. I'd better be sure that I like that new phone.
Someone also mentioned that Verizon charges $3 a month for Visual Voicemail?
I am little concerned about Verizon's new $350 Termination Fee. I'd better be sure that I like that new phone.
Someone also mentioned that Verizon charges $3 a month for Visual Voicemail?
yep 3 a month for VVM, 7 a month for insurance, I think VZ navigator is another 10, and they also have a video service that can be an extra 20 a month.
I mean, it's not so much weirder than AT&T charging 20 a month for unlimited text messaging on the iphone when it's included on plans for other phones...
$350 to determine if you'll be with verizon for 2 years is a bit steep. Maybe that's for a 1 year contract?
The ads are misleading. But without concrete proof of actual lies or deception, AT&T isn't going to win this one.
I think it's time AT&T put the smack down with some ads of their own, showing their total coverage, and maybe speed comparisons. You only have a few seconds to show and convince consumers of what you have to say.
Exactly show that the ipHOne works outside of the 3G area in some ads.
Show how the iPHone is better than the Droid. Show benefits like rollover minutes. Advertise.
Prince McLean is wrong on all the information on his article.
All the RED area shown on the Verizon commercial are ev-do rev A coverage --- 600-1400 kbps average download speed, 3.1 mbps peak max download speed.
The only thing you can say is that Verizon's 3G coverage --- covers a lot of corn fields in the midwest where there are more cows than humans.
Even Verizon doesn't make this claim. Source please.
I'm looking at Verizon's own maps and they don't claim Rev A in all places they claim 3G. Remember -- anything CDMA is technically 3G; that doesn't make it faster than EDGE. That is why those ads are misleading.
My point is that Verizon does have better high-speed coverage; but that doesn't mean they should exaggerate it.
yI mean, it's not so much weirder than AT&T charging 20 a month for unlimited text messaging on the iphone when it's included on plans for other phones?
What other phones include it? From what I can see AT&T is very specific about which phones get which kind of plan. All smartphones get unlimited data for $30 and unlimited SMS for $20.
If AT&T wins this, I predict someone at VZ will be loosing their job, not good press to attack the competition with bad facts and have the courts come down on you.
ROTFLMAO!!! Verizon is telling the 100% TRUTH!! Actual ATT 3G coverage is almost non-existant in ENTIRE states. The 3 G system is mostly a 1900 Mhz system. What does that mean? NO efficient wall penetration. Sure they are going to 850 Mhz in SOME populated areas but overall their system is absolute crap.