Yes - I think that was pretty clear from the start, and I've been expecting it to happen too.
But I was responding to the comment that they would not remove the tethering monthly charge while there are unlimited data plans, and pointing out that the tethering part is not unlimited, so it shouldn't be a factor.
I should have added the 'Off topic:' qualifier. Hopefully people won't be nonplussed when they finally drop the hammer but I think that's inevitable.
Personally, I'd much rather pay per GB since I'm not a heavy data user, but cell phone providers have never liked that model for voice or data.
I wonder if it's more cost effective for many to just tether your phone. It's $20 for 2GB, right?
I will just connect it to the minimum plan. I don't expect many (if any) months will go over 250MB. Plus I mainly want it for Find My iPad and care about the convenience of having it always connected. Just have to make sure I'm not downloading 50MB apps or syncing to iCloud over cellular.
1) This isn't rocket science. It's says right there in the text you copy and pasted. "700MHz and 2100MHz LTE bands" How could have possibly missed the Verizon iPad only has 700MHz for LTE.
2) I have no idea you'd include text about the LTE bands for Europe it doesn't include. Are you sill under the impression that the Verizon iPad includes them or is it something more bizarre like Europe is the only place outside the US to travel.
You may travel overseas a lot, but the fact of the matter is you reside in the U.S. and that is where you will use your iPad the most. would you at least be willing to admit that not having the hotspot functionality would be a disadvantage to most people? The same question for the size of the LTE networks currently in place. Unless you are irrationally married to defending AT&T at al costs, surely you can admit that having an LTE network in over 3x as many cities as AT&T could be an advantage for most people that travel domestically.
In terms of overseas usage. The AI story confirms the 2100MHz will not be LTE compatible overseas. And as the previous poster pointed out, even if it were it would only be in a handful of places. By and large, they are essentially the same for foreign travel. The main differences being when used in the U.S. and in that scenario Verizon clearly wins.
You may travel overseas a lot, but the fact of the matter is you reside in the U.S. and that is where you will use your iPad the most. would you at least be willing to admit that not having the hotspot functionality would be a disadvantage to most people? The same question for the size of the LTE networks currently in place. Unless you are irrationally married to defending AT&T at al costs, surely you can admit that having an LTE network in over 3x as many cities as AT&T could be an advantage for most people that travel domestically.
In terms of overseas usage. The AI story confirms the 2100MHz will not be LTE compatible overseas. And as the previous poster pointed out, even if it were it would only be in a handful of places. By and large, they are essentially the same for foreign travel. The main differences being when used in the U.S. and in that scenario Verizon clearly wins.
If you can't stick with the original debate at least don't change yours around. To restate, for the last time, the person who commented to me said the "Verizon model has every capability the AT&T model has" and that "verizon wins" in reference to being used outside the US. As I've pointed out ad nauseum 1) it's not exactly as the AT&T model has 2x the LTE bands, and as I queried 2) if they are exactly the same then how can Verizon win in regards to being used outside the US.
PS: Tip for next time... Trying using logical instead of emotion and you may have saved yourself this embarrassment.
If you can't stick with the original debate at least don't change yours around. To restate, for the last time, the person who commented to me said the "Verizon model has every capability the AT&T model has" and that "verizon wins" in reference to being used outside the US. As I've pointed out ad nauseum 1) it's not exactly as the AT&T model has 2x the LTE bands, and as I queried 2) if they are exactly the same then how can Verizon win in regards to being used outside the US.
PS: Tip for next time... Trying using logical instead of emotion and you may have saved yourself this embarrassment.
Charlie Sheen is that you? You are definitely winning!
I didn't change the argument. What you were debating with the other guy has nothing to do with my arguments. Am I not allowed to add additional points to the discussion? This is not a trial where I am not allowed to bring in new evidence after closing arguments. I simply pointed out and expounded on the fact that having hotspot capability, which is the premise of the article btw, would be a huge advantage for Verizon iPad owners. You chose to ignore that. I also pointed out that Verizon has a far larger LTE network which you also chose to ignore.
Face it, your AT&T iPad is inferior stateside and at best on par outside the country. Caveat emptor.
I wonder if it's more cost effective for many to just tether your phone. It's $20 for 2GB, right?
I will just connect it to the minimum plan. I don't expect many (if any) months will go over 250MB. Plus I mainly want it for Find My iPad and care about the convenience of having it always connected. Just have to make sure I'm not downloading 50MB apps or syncing to iCloud over cellular.
So you mean that you will mostly tether the iPad to the iPhone's data connection? That works, except you lose the LTE speeds - if they matter or are available in your area. Depends how much you care about saving $15 per month. What's another $15 etc...
You may travel overseas a lot, but the fact of the matter is you reside in the U.S. and that is where you will use your iPad the most. would you at least be willing to admit that not having the hotspot functionality would be a disadvantage to most people? The same question for the size of the LTE networks currently in place. Unless you are irrationally married to defending AT&T at al costs, surely you can admit that having an LTE network in over 3x as many cities as AT&T could be an advantage for most people that travel domestically.
In terms of overseas usage. The AI story confirms the 2100MHz will not be LTE compatible overseas. And as the previous poster pointed out, even if it were it would only be in a handful of places. By and large, they are essentially the same for foreign travel. The main differences being when used in the U.S. and in that scenario Verizon clearly wins.
I wonder if Apple considered just making one version that would work on both. Presumably a bit more in component costs, but there ought to be some economy in designing and manufacturing fewer versions.
From my experience with an ATV2 over 802.11n WiFi via "high speed" cable modem internet connection, I can't even imagine how painful the experience would be with an ATV3 via cellular modem connection.
Thanks for that. I guess there's always connecting the iPad to the TV via a cable, though.
Anyway, I haven't committed yet, but will still be looking into the possibility that this new device may be a step towards needing only one data plan for all one's computing needs. The worst I can do is waste $129 on a radio in my new Pad that I won't really need, and on the other hand, I could save many times that much if it pans out.
[QUOTE=SolipsismX;2067668]So we have my post clearly talking about taking it out of the country. Yet this guy states that Verizon wins yet Verizon has 1/2 the LTE spectrum as the AT&T iPad model.
"This guy" would like to state that NEITHER model will work on LTE outside of North America... so your point is simply moot, brutha. Verizon wins... spectrum-wise. Period. Done. Seeya!!!
["This guy" would like to state that NEITHER model will work on LTE outside of North America... so your point is simply moot, brutha. Verizon wins... spectrum-wise. Period. Done. Seeya!!!
North America isn't a country. Where do you kids go to school? Or rather, do you go to school?
Charlie Sheen is that you? You are definitely winning!
I didn't change the argument. What you were debating with the other guy has nothing to do with my arguments. Am I not allowed to add additional points to the discussion? This is not a trial where I am not allowed to bring in new evidence after closing arguments. I simply pointed out and expounded on the fact that having hotspot capability, which is the premise of the article btw, would be a huge advantage for Verizon iPad owners. You chose to ignore that. I also pointed out that Verizon has a far larger LTE network which you also chose to ignore.
Face it, your AT&T iPad is inferior stateside and at best on par outside the country. Caveat emptor.
Hello everyone- just joined.
Lol- are you wasting or time or what? That SX guy must be receiving his pension from AT&T for all that BS. Just look at the coverage maps or maybe he's map illiterate.
There are so many obvious reasons why he is in denial- I quote the following and post the link afterwards:
"If you want to keep costs down, Verizon is the way to go. If you intend to use a lot of data, Verizon is also the better choice. If you plan to stick to 2GB or 3GB, AT&T wins out. But Verizon at least gives you more options. And then there’s this:"
BTW- I just ordered a 64GB Verizon iPad (and proud of it) though have had an AT&Fee iPhone for years. So sick of all their disrespect for Apple and it users over all the years with the dropped calls, no tethering on iPhones, throttling BS and now this hot spot nonsense. I suggest everyone hit them where it hurts the mo$t. Even "Rethink Possible" blatantly mimics Apple without any actions of theirs to back that slogan up.
Lol- are you wasting or time or what? That SX guy must be receiving his pension from AT&T for all that BS. Just look at the coverage maps or maybe he's map illiterate.
There are so many obvious reasons why he is in denial- I quote the following and post the link afterwards:
"If you want to keep costs down, Verizon is the way to go. If you intend to use a lot of data, Verizon is also the better choice. If you plan to stick to 2GB or 3GB, AT&T wins out. But Verizon at least gives you more options. And then there’s this:"
Don't you mean "carrier fanboys" or "telecom fanboys"? I'm a cell phone fanboy, but that doesn't mean I like anywhere near every phone. I'm more a fanboy of the concept, not most of the implementations.
Don't you mean "carrier fanboys" or "telecom fanboys"? I'm a cell phone fanboy, but that doesn't mean I like anywhere near every phone. I'm more a fanboy of the concept, not most of the implementations.
I do. Thanks.
I'm not even an iPhone fanboy. I think it's the best overall smartphone on the market and certainly the best option for my needs but I test out other phones. I've even stated on multiple occasions how much I like WinPh. If something came out that I thought was better than the iPhone I would jump on that in a second. I have no loyalty to any organization that I pay money to. I will use Apple to make my life more enjoyable for as long as that is the best option.
Or if you want to stick to under 250MB AT&T is cheaper.
You telecom fanboys are pathetic. I'll repeat this one more time: There is no one carrier that will fit everyone's needs for every location.
Now it's name calling by the sophistic AT&T barker. Man you just can't stop can u? Tell us again how u plan to use your incompatible LTE AT&T iPad in Europe. And then justify how 250mb @$15 is cheaper than 1Gb at $20. Do you have any idea what 250mb can or will get u? How much more will AT&T require you to drop if u exceed 250mb? Flunk math much?
Either you're an AT&T employee or a pension holder- which is it?
Btw - does anyone know why AT&T's iPhones now say 4G with iOS 5.1? Is this an Apple error or AT&T gimmick? I would think Steve would have gone ballistic with this either way.
Tell us again how u plan to use your incompatible LTE AT&T iPad in Europe.
Tell us again when I said I wanted to use LTE in Europe.
Quote:
And then justify how 250mb @$15 is cheaper than 1Gb at $20.
Simply math will tell you that it's $5 cheaper than the $20 plan. COme on, at least work a little of that gray matter.
Quote:
Do you have any idea what 250mb can or will get u?
It's stated right in the plan: Get's you 250MB.
Plus, as previously noted it's just for Find My iPad. And the occasional use of TomTom which only needs cell tow data to keep the location updates fast.
Quote:
How much more will AT&T require you to drop if u exceed 250mb?
That, too, is right in the plans I posted. Seriously, Dude, read a little before posting.
Quote:
Flunk math much?
Quite excellent at math as plenty of posts on this forum will attest.
Quote:
Either you're an AT&T employee or a pension holder- which is it?
Try to learn something today:
A false dilemma is a type of logical fallacy that involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are additional options.
I need very little data but want to keep enable every month and AT&T offers the best speeds in my area. That would clear to a rational person. I'm also not a stockholder of AT&T or Apple though I think Verizon is one of the stocks in an old mutual fund.
PS: Your lack of objectivity and pragmatism are bad enough but to exclude stockholder in favour of pensioner is just insulting. Learn to troll better or don't wait my time.
Btw - does anyone know why AT&T's iPhones now say 4G with iOS 5.1? Is this an Apple error or AT&T gimmick? I would think Steve would have gone ballistic with this either way.
Try a google search for once. After first AT&T was upset with T-Mobile USA for using that moniker for its HSPA+ devices in 2009. This brought the situation to the attention of the ITU that had previously considered only IMT-Advanced to be 4G but in late 2010 loosened the definition to include technologies such as HSPA+ and LTE. AT&T's phones have stated 4G for awhile now save for the iPhone. Thus, HSPA+ shows up as 4G in iOS 5.1, something that will only be seen on the iPhone 4S and new iPad
Comments
Yes - I think that was pretty clear from the start, and I've been expecting it to happen too.
But I was responding to the comment that they would not remove the tethering monthly charge while there are unlimited data plans, and pointing out that the tethering part is not unlimited, so it shouldn't be a factor.
I should have added the 'Off topic:' qualifier. Hopefully people won't be nonplussed when they finally drop the hammer but I think that's inevitable.
I should have added the 'Off topic:' qualifier. Hopefully people won't be nonplussed when they finally drop the hammer but I think that's inevitable.
Personally, I'd much rather pay per GB since I'm not a heavy data user, but cell phone providers have never liked that model for voice or data.
Personally, I'd much rather pay per GB since I'm not a heavy data user, but cell phone providers have never liked that model for voice or data.
I wonder if it's more cost effective for many to just tether your phone. It's $20 for 2GB, right?I will just connect it to the minimum plan. I don't expect many (if any) months will go over 250MB. Plus I mainly want it for Find My iPad and care about the convenience of having it always connected. Just have to make sure I'm not downloading 50MB apps or syncing to iCloud over cellular.
1) This isn't rocket science. It's says right there in the text you copy and pasted. "700MHz and 2100MHz LTE bands" How could have possibly missed the Verizon iPad only has 700MHz for LTE.
2) I have no idea you'd include text about the LTE bands for Europe it doesn't include. Are you sill under the impression that the Verizon iPad includes them or is it something more bizarre like Europe is the only place outside the US to travel.
You may travel overseas a lot, but the fact of the matter is you reside in the U.S. and that is where you will use your iPad the most. would you at least be willing to admit that not having the hotspot functionality would be a disadvantage to most people? The same question for the size of the LTE networks currently in place. Unless you are irrationally married to defending AT&T at al costs, surely you can admit that having an LTE network in over 3x as many cities as AT&T could be an advantage for most people that travel domestically.
In terms of overseas usage. The AI story confirms the 2100MHz will not be LTE compatible overseas. And as the previous poster pointed out, even if it were it would only be in a handful of places. By and large, they are essentially the same for foreign travel. The main differences being when used in the U.S. and in that scenario Verizon clearly wins.
You may travel overseas a lot, but the fact of the matter is you reside in the U.S. and that is where you will use your iPad the most. would you at least be willing to admit that not having the hotspot functionality would be a disadvantage to most people? The same question for the size of the LTE networks currently in place. Unless you are irrationally married to defending AT&T at al costs, surely you can admit that having an LTE network in over 3x as many cities as AT&T could be an advantage for most people that travel domestically.
In terms of overseas usage. The AI story confirms the 2100MHz will not be LTE compatible overseas. And as the previous poster pointed out, even if it were it would only be in a handful of places. By and large, they are essentially the same for foreign travel. The main differences being when used in the U.S. and in that scenario Verizon clearly wins.
If you can't stick with the original debate at least don't change yours around. To restate, for the last time, the person who commented to me said the "Verizon model has every capability the AT&T model has" and that "verizon wins" in reference to being used outside the US. As I've pointed out ad nauseum 1) it's not exactly as the AT&T model has 2x the LTE bands, and as I queried 2) if they are exactly the same then how can Verizon win in regards to being used outside the US.
PS: Tip for next time... Trying using logical instead of emotion and you may have saved yourself this embarrassment.
If you can't stick with the original debate at least don't change yours around. To restate, for the last time, the person who commented to me said the "Verizon model has every capability the AT&T model has" and that "verizon wins" in reference to being used outside the US. As I've pointed out ad nauseum 1) it's not exactly as the AT&T model has 2x the LTE bands, and as I queried 2) if they are exactly the same then how can Verizon win in regards to being used outside the US.
PS: Tip for next time... Trying using logical instead of emotion and you may have saved yourself this embarrassment.
Charlie Sheen is that you? You are definitely winning!
I didn't change the argument. What you were debating with the other guy has nothing to do with my arguments. Am I not allowed to add additional points to the discussion? This is not a trial where I am not allowed to bring in new evidence after closing arguments. I simply pointed out and expounded on the fact that having hotspot capability, which is the premise of the article btw, would be a huge advantage for Verizon iPad owners. You chose to ignore that. I also pointed out that Verizon has a far larger LTE network which you also chose to ignore.
Face it, your AT&T iPad is inferior stateside and at best on par outside the country. Caveat emptor.
I wonder if it's more cost effective for many to just tether your phone. It's $20 for 2GB, right?I will just connect it to the minimum plan. I don't expect many (if any) months will go over 250MB. Plus I mainly want it for Find My iPad and care about the convenience of having it always connected. Just have to make sure I'm not downloading 50MB apps or syncing to iCloud over cellular.
So you mean that you will mostly tether the iPad to the iPhone's data connection? That works, except you lose the LTE speeds - if they matter or are available in your area. Depends how much you care about saving $15 per month. What's another $15 etc...
You may travel overseas a lot, but the fact of the matter is you reside in the U.S. and that is where you will use your iPad the most. would you at least be willing to admit that not having the hotspot functionality would be a disadvantage to most people? The same question for the size of the LTE networks currently in place. Unless you are irrationally married to defending AT&T at al costs, surely you can admit that having an LTE network in over 3x as many cities as AT&T could be an advantage for most people that travel domestically.
In terms of overseas usage. The AI story confirms the 2100MHz will not be LTE compatible overseas. And as the previous poster pointed out, even if it were it would only be in a handful of places. By and large, they are essentially the same for foreign travel. The main differences being when used in the U.S. and in that scenario Verizon clearly wins.
I wonder if Apple considered just making one version that would work on both. Presumably a bit more in component costs, but there ought to be some economy in designing and manufacturing fewer versions.
From my experience with an ATV2 over 802.11n WiFi via "high speed" cable modem internet connection, I can't even imagine how painful the experience would be with an ATV3 via cellular modem connection.
Thanks for that. I guess there's always connecting the iPad to the TV via a cable, though.
Anyway, I haven't committed yet, but will still be looking into the possibility that this new device may be a step towards needing only one data plan for all one's computing needs. The worst I can do is waste $129 on a radio in my new Pad that I won't really need, and on the other hand, I could save many times that much if it pans out.
"This guy" would like to state that NEITHER model will work on LTE outside of North America... so your point is simply moot, brutha. Verizon wins... spectrum-wise. Period. Done. Seeya!!!
["This guy" would like to state that NEITHER model will work on LTE outside of North America... so your point is simply moot, brutha. Verizon wins... spectrum-wise. Period. Done. Seeya!!!
North America isn't a country. Where do you kids go to school? Or rather, do you go to school?
Charlie Sheen is that you? You are definitely winning!
I didn't change the argument. What you were debating with the other guy has nothing to do with my arguments. Am I not allowed to add additional points to the discussion? This is not a trial where I am not allowed to bring in new evidence after closing arguments. I simply pointed out and expounded on the fact that having hotspot capability, which is the premise of the article btw, would be a huge advantage for Verizon iPad owners. You chose to ignore that. I also pointed out that Verizon has a far larger LTE network which you also chose to ignore.
Face it, your AT&T iPad is inferior stateside and at best on par outside the country. Caveat emptor.
Hello everyone- just joined.
Lol- are you wasting or time or what? That SX guy must be receiving his pension from AT&T for all that BS. Just look at the coverage maps or maybe he's map illiterate.
There are so many obvious reasons why he is in denial- I quote the following and post the link afterwards:
"If you want to keep costs down, Verizon is the way to go. If you intend to use a lot of data, Verizon is also the better choice. If you plan to stick to 2GB or 3GB, AT&T wins out. But Verizon at least gives you more options. And then there’s this:"
http://www.gottabemobile.com/2012/03...erizon-4g-lte/
The "Telephone Company"- Begone from my iSight!
Hello everyone- just joined.
Lol- are you wasting or time or what? That SX guy must be receiving his pension from AT&T for all that BS. Just look at the coverage maps or maybe he's map illiterate.
There are so many obvious reasons why he is in denial- I quote the following and post the link afterwards:
"If you want to keep costs down, Verizon is the way to go. If you intend to use a lot of data, Verizon is also the better choice. If you plan to stick to 2GB or 3GB, AT&T wins out. But Verizon at least gives you more options. And then there’s this:"
http://www.gottabemobile.com/2012/03...erizon-4g-lte/
Or if you want to stick to under 250MB AT&T is cheaper.
You telecom fanboys are pathetic. I'll repeat this one more time: There is no one carrier that will fit everyone's needs for every location.
You cell phone fanboys are pathetic…
Don't you mean "carrier fanboys" or "telecom fanboys"? I'm a cell phone fanboy, but that doesn't mean I like anywhere near every phone. I'm more a fanboy of the concept, not most of the implementations.
Don't you mean "carrier fanboys" or "telecom fanboys"? I'm a cell phone fanboy, but that doesn't mean I like anywhere near every phone. I'm more a fanboy of the concept, not most of the implementations.
I do. Thanks.
I'm not even an iPhone fanboy. I think it's the best overall smartphone on the market and certainly the best option for my needs but I test out other phones. I've even stated on multiple occasions how much I like WinPh. If something came out that I thought was better than the iPhone I would jump on that in a second. I have no loyalty to any organization that I pay money to. I will use Apple to make my life more enjoyable for as long as that is the best option.
Or if you want to stick to under 250MB AT&T is cheaper.
You telecom fanboys are pathetic. I'll repeat this one more time: There is no one carrier that will fit everyone's needs for every location.
Now it's name calling by the sophistic AT&T barker. Man you just can't stop can u? Tell us again how u plan to use your incompatible LTE AT&T iPad in Europe. And then justify how 250mb @$15 is cheaper than 1Gb at $20. Do you have any idea what 250mb can or will get u? How much more will AT&T require you to drop if u exceed 250mb? Flunk math much?
Either you're an AT&T employee or a pension holder- which is it?
Tell us again how u plan to use your incompatible LTE AT&T iPad in Europe.
Tell us again when I said I wanted to use LTE in Europe.
And then justify how 250mb @$15 is cheaper than 1Gb at $20.
Simply math will tell you that it's $5 cheaper than the $20 plan. COme on, at least work a little of that gray matter.
Do you have any idea what 250mb can or will get u?
It's stated right in the plan: Get's you 250MB.
Plus, as previously noted it's just for Find My iPad. And the occasional use of TomTom which only needs cell tow data to keep the location updates fast.
How much more will AT&T require you to drop if u exceed 250mb?
That, too, is right in the plans I posted. Seriously, Dude, read a little before posting.
Flunk math much?
Quite excellent at math as plenty of posts on this forum will attest.
Either you're an AT&T employee or a pension holder- which is it?
Try to learn something today:I need very little data but want to keep enable every month and AT&T offers the best speeds in my area. That would clear to a rational person. I'm also not a stockholder of AT&T or Apple though I think Verizon is one of the stocks in an old mutual fund.
PS: Your lack of objectivity and pragmatism are bad enough but to exclude stockholder in favour of pensioner is just insulting. Learn to troll better or don't wait my time.
Btw - does anyone know why AT&T's iPhones now say 4G with iOS 5.1? Is this an Apple error or AT&T gimmick? I would think Steve would have gone ballistic with this either way.
Try a google search for once. After first AT&T was upset with T-Mobile USA for using that moniker for its HSPA+ devices in 2009. This brought the situation to the attention of the ITU that had previously considered only IMT-Advanced to be 4G but in late 2010 loosened the definition to include technologies such as HSPA+ and LTE. AT&T's phones have stated 4G for awhile now save for the iPhone. Thus, HSPA+ shows up as 4G in iOS 5.1, something that will only be seen on the iPhone 4S and new iPad
PS: I know who you are.